A STUDY OF A SCHOOL SYSTEM'S RESPONSE TO PENNSYLVANIA'S SPECIAL EDUCATION AUDIT
The purposes of my study are to determine ways in which a school district takes steps to comply with the mandates of special education, in terms of remediation, as well as examine the issues behind lack of compliance to the mandates and determine what could be changed in order to attain compliance. There is related literature on corrective measures taken on compliance, the change process, the evaluative and school improvement process, and the program audit process and results thereof.^ The methodology used in the study was that of the face-to-face interview technique, observation and substantiation of information through documentation. Data were collected as a result of interviewing top administrative, middle management, and teacher personnel.^ Program audits are being conducted periodically throughout various states in the nation to determine compliance to state and federal mandates. The school system audited in Pennsylvania described the noncompliance issues cited by the state program auditors. Basic questions asked personnel were the following: (A) How did the noncompliance arise from the onset? (B) Has the problem that caused the noncompliance been remediated? If not, why not? (C) Has the actual noncompliance been remediated? If so, what alternatives were explored? Why were they chosen? If noncompliance were remediated, were they remediated as a result of teacher's, principal's, superintendent's leadership or responsiveness of state's insistence? (D) If noncompliance have not been remediated, why not? Are there constraints? If so, describe; i.e., are teachers, principals, superintendents or state department personnel impeding progress in an attempt to remediate noncompliance?^ Conclusions from the study revealed that remediation of noncompliance issues is not as important to a school district as understanding the underlying problems or issues that may make remediation impossible or at least improbable and the program audit process seems to have made little impact or change at the local level. In general, the school system will continue to have their problems with or without the audit system. Attitudinal, administrative, fiscal, philosophy, space, and problems of lack of understanding on the part of the state are problems that will probably remain within the system unless there is some effort or means of effective communication by the state education agency and local education agency in an attempt to resolve some of the problems. . . . (Author's abstract exceeds stipulated maximum length. Discontinued here with permission of author.) UMI^
BERNIE H MANNING,
"A STUDY OF A SCHOOL SYSTEM'S RESPONSE TO PENNSYLVANIA'S SPECIAL EDUCATION AUDIT"
(January 1, 1983).
Dissertations available from ProQuest.