Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Education Administrators in Wonderland: Figuring Out Policy-Making and Regulatory Compliance When Making Decisions

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of Education Law for Schools

Abstract

This chapter offers administrators an approach to making sense of the legal landscape when making decisions. Philosophies and their stakeholder coalitions impact legislation and administrative follow-through; understanding this causal relationship helps contextualise a byzantine maze of regulations and rules setting obligations and prohibitions. This, in turn, assists in determining responsibilities, defining sanctions and remedies and providing procedural due process to ensure fairness and equity. Much depends on the eye of the beholder and the beholder’s understanding of context, events, policy developments and their enactment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aman, A. C., & Mayton. (2014). Administrative law (3rd ed.). St. Paul: West Academic Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ávila, H. (2007). Theory of legal principles. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, J. (2010). Towards a third generation of administrative procedure. In S. Rose-Ackerman & P. L. Lindseth (Eds.), Comparative administrative law (pp. 336–356). Cheltenham/Northampton: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, J. (2008). Constructing and contesting legitimacy and accountability in polycentric regulatory regimes. Regulation & Governance, 2, 137–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, J., & Baldwin, R. (2010). Really responsive risk based regulation. Law and Policy, 32, 181–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B. (2002). Public-value failure: When efficient markets may not do. Public Administration Review, 62(2), 145–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burrows, V. K., & Garvey, T. (2011). A brief overview of rulemaking and judicial review. CRS report for congress – Prepared for members and committees of congress. Washington, DC: U.S. Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callahan, R. E. (1959). An introduction to education in American society. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter, D. P., Weible, C. M., Siddiki, S. N., Brett, J., & Chonaiew, S. M. (2015). Assessing policy divergence: How to investigate the differences between a law and a corresponding regulation. Public Administration, 93(1), 159–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. R. (1983). The higher education system: Academic organization in cross-national perspective. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Bakker, F. G. A., & den Hond, F. (2008). Introducing the politics of stakeholder influence: A review essay. Business & Society, 47(1), 8–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Figueiredo, R. J. P., Jr., & Vanden Bergh, R. G. (2004). The political economy of state-level administrative procedure acts. The Journal of Law & Economics, 47(2), 569–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Degani, A., & Wiener, E. L. (1991). Philosophy, policies and procedures: The three P’s of flight deck operations. Paper presented at the sixth international symposium on aviation psychology, April 1992, Columbus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dicey, A. V. (1982/1915). Introduction to the study of the law of the constitution (8th ed.). Indianapolis: Liberty Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunleavy, P. (1980). Urban politics analysis: The politics of collective consumption. London: The Macmillan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Eisner, E. W. (1979). The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school programs. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, R. A. (2016). The role of guidance in modern administrative procedure: The case for de novo review. Journal of Legal Analysis, 8(1), 47–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esman, M. J. (1967). The institution building concepts: An interim appraisal. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farazmand, A. (2005). Role of government in an era of Total Quality Management (TQM) and globalization: Challenges and opportunities. Public Organization Review: A Global Journal, 5, 201–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fassin, Y. (2009). The stakeholder model refined. Journal of Business Ethics, 84, 113–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flew, T. (2014). Six theories of neoliberalism. Thesis Eleven, 122(1), 49–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (2000). Governmentality. In J. D. Faubion (Ed.), Michel Foucault: Power (trans: Hurley, R. and others). (pp. 201–222). New York: The New Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (2007/1978). Security, territory, population: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977–1978. (trans: Burchell, G.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (2008/1979). The birth of biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France 1979–1979. In M. Sellenart (Ed.), (trans: Burchell, V.). New York: Picador.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1955). The role of government in education. In R. A. Solo (Ed.), Economics fox, C., and the public interest (pp. 123–144). New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frooman, J., & Murrell, A. J. (2005). Stakeholder influence strategies: The roles of structural and demographic determinants. Business & Society, 44(1), 3–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, L. L. (1969). The morality of law (Revised ed.). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gersen, J. (2007). Overlapping and underlapping jurisdiction in administrative law. Supreme Court Review, 2006(1), 201–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, A. W. H., & Schlesinger, L. A. (1995). Realize your customers’ full profit potential. Harvard Business Review, 73(5), 59–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamann, T. H. (2009). Neoliberalism, governmentality, and ethics. Foucault Studies, 6, 37–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, J., Pigozzi, G., & van der Torre, L. (2007). Ten philosophical problems in deontic logic. In G. Boella, L. van der Torre, & H. Verhagen (Eds.), Normative multi-agent systems Dagstuhl seminar proceedings (Vol. 07122, p. 26). Waden: Schloss Dagstuhl Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik GmbH (IBFI). Retrieved from http://icr.uni.lu/pubs/han07a.pdf

  • Harpwood, V. (2009). Modern Tort law (7th ed.). London: Routledge-Cavendish.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, H. L. A. (1997). The concept of law (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, L. (1995). Quality assurance systems, TQM, and the new collegialism. Birmingham: Centre for Research into Quality, University of Central England.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, F. A. (2011/1960). The constitution of liberty. In R. Hamowy (Ed.), The collected works of F.A. Hayek, Volume 17: The constitution of liberty. The definitive edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Head, M. (2012). Administrative law: Context and critique (3rd ed.). Anndale: Federation Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofferbert, R. (1974). The study of public policy. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, S. H. (2007). Current trends in the process and methods of regulatory impact assessment: Mainstreaming RIA into policy processes. In C. Kirkpatrick & D. Parker (Eds.), Regulatory impact assessment: Towards better regulation? (pp. 17–35). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M., Felps, W., & Bigley, G. A. (2007). Ethical theory and stakeholder-related decisions: The role of stakeholder culture. The Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 137–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelsen, H. (1967). Pure theory of law (Revised ed.). (trans: Knight, M.). Clark: The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keynes, J. M. (1936). The general theory of employment, interest, and money. London: Macmillan & Co. Retrieved from http://cas2.umkc.edu/economics/people/facultypages/kregel/courses/econ645/winter2011/generaltheory.pdf

  • Khemani, R. S., & Shapiro, D. M. (1993). Glossary of industrial organisation economics and competition law. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J.-N., Grunig, J. E., & Ni, L. (2010). Reconceptualizing the communicative action of publics: Acquisition, selection, and transmission of information in problematic situations. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 4(2), 126–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick, C. (2014). Assessing the impact of regulatory reform in developing countries. Public Administration and Development, 24, 161–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landecker, W. S. (1952). Integration and group structure: An area for research. Social Forces, 30, 394–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell, H. D. (1971). A preview of policy sciences. New York: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, L. H. (1977). Elements of the administrative process: Formal, semi-formal, and free-form models. The American University Law Review, 26, 872–941.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindahl, L. (1977). Position and change. Dordrecht: Reidel Publishing Company.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lorini, E., Longin, D., Gaudou, B., & Herzig, A. (2009). The logic of acceptance: Grounding institutions on agents’ attitudes. Journal of Logic and Computation, 19(6), 901–940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowi, T. J. (1972). Four systems of policy, politics, and choice. Public Administration Review, 32(4), 298–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowi, T. J. (1985). The state in politics: The relationship between policy and administration. In R. G. Noll (Ed.), Regulatory policy and the social sciences (pp. 67–104). Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowi, T. J. (2002). Law vs. public policy: A critical exploration. Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy, 12(3), 493–501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1995) Social systems. (trans: Bednarz, J. Jr. & Baecker, D.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mark, E. (2013). Student satisfaction and the customer focus in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 35(1), 2–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, J., & Prudham, S. (2004). Neoliberal nature and the nature of neoliberalism. Geoforum, 35, 275–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Machlup, F. (1962). The production and distribution of knowledge in the United States. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. The Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noll, R. G. (1985). Government regulatory behaviour: A multidisciplinary survey and synthesis. In R. G. Noll (Ed.), Regulatory policy and the social sciences (pp. 9–63). Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (1991). Institutions. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 97–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2008). Introductory handbook for undertaking regulatory impact analysis (RIA). Version 1.0. Paris: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2009). Regulatory impact analysis: A tool for regulatory coherence. Paris: Author. Retrieved from http://www.keepeek.com/Digital-Asset-Management/oecd/governance/regulatory-impact-analysis_9789264067110-en#.WSIbNH2-YSk#page4

  • Oliver, R. L. (1997). Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the consumer. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2013). Education today 2013: The OECD perspective. Paris: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Padró, F. F. (1988). Quality circles and their existence in present-day high schools. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Padró, F. F. (2004). Statistical handbook on the social safety net. Westport: Greenwood Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Padró, F. F. (2015). Quality in primary and secondary education. In S. M. Dahlgaard-Park (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of quality and the service economy (pp. 592–596). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parent, M. M., & Deephouse, D. L. (2007). A case study of stakeholder identification and prioritization by managers. Journal of Business Ethics, 75, 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, D., & Kirkpatrick, C. (2005). Privatisation in developing countries: A review of the evidence and the policy lessons. The Journal of Development Studies, 41(4), 513–541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R. (2003). Stakeholder legitimacy. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(1), 25–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, K. (2001/1944). The great transformation: The political and economic origins of our times. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, T., & Ronit, K. (2006). Self-regulation as policy process: The multiple and criss-crossing stages of private rule-making. Policy Sciences, 39, 41–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Power, M. (2010). Organized uncertainty: Designing a world of risk management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raz, J. (1999). Practical reasons and norms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, W. V. H. (2010). Winfield & Jolowicz Tort (18th ed.). London: Sweet & Maxwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, P. A. (1986). Top-down and bottom-up approaches to implementation research: A critical analysis and suggested synthesis. Journal of Public Policy, 6(1), 21–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, P. A. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences, 21, 129–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seymour, D. T. (1993). On Q: Causing quality in higher education. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siaroff, A. (1999). Corporatism in 24 industrial democracies: Meaning and measurement. European Journal of Political Research, 36, 175–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamanaha, B. Z. (2012, December). The history and the elements of the rule of law. Singapore Journal of Legal Studies, 232–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorsen, D. E. (2010). The neoliberal challenge: What is neoliberalism? Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice, 2(2), 188–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanderstraeten, D. (2002). Parsons, Luhmann and the theorem of double contingency. Journal of Classical Sociology, 2(1), 78–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Hayek, F. (1944). The road to serfdom. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, M. F. (2015). Defense asymmetries: Distortions in the evolution of regulatory law. Texas Law Review, 93, 625–679.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilder, M. (2016). Whither the funnel of causality? Canadian Journal of Political Science, 49(4), 721–741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2011). Learning for all: Investing in people’s knowledge and skills to promote development: World Bank group education strategy 2020. Washington, DC: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zierkel, P. A. (2006). Paralyzing fear? Avoiding distorted assessments of the effect of law on education. Journal of Law and Education, 35(4), 461–495.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD, Australia

    Fernando F. Padró & Jonathan H. Green

Authors
  1. Fernando F. Padró
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jonathan H. Green
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fernando F. Padró .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Business, Law, Education & Arts, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD, Australia

    Karen Trimmer

  2. School of Education, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, Australia

    Roselyn Dixon

  3. Faculty of Business, Law, Education & Arts, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD, Australia

    Yvonne S. Findlay

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Padró, F.F., Green, J.H. (2018). Education Administrators in Wonderland: Figuring Out Policy-Making and Regulatory Compliance When Making Decisions. In: Trimmer, K., Dixon, R., S. Findlay, Y. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Education Law for Schools. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77751-1_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77751-1_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-77750-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-77751-1

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation