In 2013 the California Legislation passed a new K-12 School accountability mandate. The Local Control Accountability Plan was sought to increase the educational equity for targeted student groups in addition to allowing school districts to mine a diverse set of local school data to develop goals in the 8 priority areas that speak to the needs of their local students. A requirement of the LCAP was that school districts include a diverse set of stakeholders to work in a collaborative manner to develop, critique, and refine local goals. Stakeholder groups are required to consist of district-level administrators, teachers, staff, students, parents, and community stakeholders. This qualitative study focused on the experiences and insights of district and community stakeholders as they participated in the development of LCAPs. To answer the questions and understand the experience of stakeholders interviews, document analysis, and observations were used. The results of the study revealed that while the intent of bringing a diverse set of stakeholders is noble there is a need to build trust amongst stakeholders. Findings also show the need to build community stakeholder understanding of the purpose, promises, and limits of the LCAP. The study revealed the need for school districts to examine and dismantle historic practices in order to fully embrace and implement the LCAP mandates.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This thesis focuses on service utilisation among children with mild ID and their families, their needs for support and their experiences of support. Aims The overall aim of the thesis was to explore and describe service utilisation patterns among families of children with mild ID from a systems perspective. Methods A cross-sectional, descriptive and comparative quantitative design was used to describe the extent of service utilisation among 84 children with mild ID and their families (paper I and II). The types and number of services utilised were investigated in relation to the child’s age, gender and school setting. Data concerning the services utilised were collected from the organisational records of social services and paediatric habilitation units. In paper III, a descriptive questionnaire design was used to describe the support needs of families of 38 children with mild ID. A confirmatory design was used to examine the relation between family needs for support and (a) parental self-efficacy and (b) parents’ control over services. A confirmatory design was also used to examine the relation between parents’ experiences of the helpfulness of the support and (a) parental self-efficacy and (b) parents’ control over services. In paper IV a longitudinal, comparative and confirmatory design was used to investigate whether social service utilisation patterns differ over time when children with mild ID in self-contained classes are compared with those integrated into mainstream classes (n=405). Results In total, 60% of the families utilised paediatric habilitation services, and 40% of the families used disability-related services provided by social services. The most commonly utilised services were services concerned support outside of the home, such as respite care and services to improve children’s participation in society. Approximately 25% of the families utilised social problems-related services provided by social services. The most commonly utilised services concerned those to support parents in their parenting roles and financial assistance. In contrast to older children, younger children were more likely to utilise paediatric habilitation services. Older children utilised a higher number of disability-related service types provided by social services. Few differences were found between males and females. The majority of families did not utilise such services that are provided by social services. It was rare for families to use both disability-related services and those that address social problems during the same year. Commonly reported family needs concerned information about what services are available for their child, their child's impairment, how to respond to their child's behaviour and how to teach their child skills. Other common needs included access to parent support networks, to find suitable leisure activities for the child, and more alone time for parents. In contrast to families with mothers who did not participate in paid work, families with mothers who were employed expressed a lower requirement for support such as counselling, contact with other parents of children with impairments, more friends and more alone time for parents. Similar results werefound for families with mothers with higher levels of education. Parents with higher levels of perceived self-efficacy reported a lower need for information, as did also parents with higher levels of control over services. Parents with higher levels of control over services experienced the support as being more helpful. Children with mild ID who attended self-contained classes were more likely to utilise paediatric habilitation services than children integrated in mainstream classes. The same pattern was found for utilisation of disability-related services provided by social services. Integrated children who changed school setting to attend self-contained classes were more likely to begin to utilise disability-related services in comparison with those children who continued to be integrated. The former also had a higher likelihood of increasing the number of disability-related service types utilised. Conclusions In addition to disability-related problems, families of children with mild ID may also be at a higher risk of experiencing social problems when compared with the general population. Furthermore, very few families utilised both disability-related services and services addressing social problems. This implies that collaboration flaws exist between those professionals concerned with child welfare services and those concerned with disability-related services. A strong predictor of service utilisation was the type of school setting: children attending self-contained classes had a higher rate of service utilisation than those attending mainstream classes. This indicates that service systems outside of school are designed to collaborate with groups of pupils in special classes rather than individual children in mainstream classes. The strong need for information by families indicates that an ecological framework should be used to identify those factors that affect information availability and effectiveness. To increase parents’ perceived level of control over services, HSO professionals need to work in a capacity building manner with the explicit goal to enhance parental self-efficacy.

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was first passed in 1965 and has since been reauthorized several times, including as No Child Left Behind in 2001 and the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015. The ESEA seeks to address the needs of low-income students; however, decades of reform efforts and government reports documenting inequality have done little to close gaps in educational resources or outcomes for marginalized groups. Accountability systems based on standardized testing are seen by policymakers on the Left and Right as the best way to improve education for marginalized groups, improve students’ economic preparedness, hold schools accountable for the funds they spend, and maintain an objective meritocracy. This paper argues that testing is a flawed tool to achieve the goal of education equality as accountability systems rely on flawed assumptions influenced by conservative and neoliberal economic ideologies.