124 to Seattle." Washington Education, November 1970. pp. 21-22. A New York Times editorial entitled "Premature Discard' severely criticized the experiment on March 2, 1972. A lengthy rebuttal from Thomas Glennan of OEO appeared in the Times letters to the editor on April 4, 1972. VI. OTHER CONTRACTS In addition to OEO's experiment, Texarkana, Gary, and Grand Rapids, more than two dozen performance contracts have been implemented elsewhere, among them— Virginia an experiment sponsored by the state of Virginia in- Polly Carpenter. Case Studies in Educational Performance 1971. The project produced poor test results. Three articles relate the history of the seven-county experiment and the several interpretations given the test scores: Carolyn Rice. "Will Performance Contracts Really Produce?" Virginia Journal of Education, January 1971. pp. 6-10. "Evaluating Virginia's Performance Contract Program." Virginia Journal of Education, September 1971. pp. 13-15. Frank E. Barham and others. 'Lost' Children Find Their Way in Performance Contracting." Virginia Journal of Education, March 1972. pp. 8-11. 66 Cherry Creek, Colorado-several contracts, including one with a team of teachers to salvage potential high school dropouts: James A. Mecklenburger and John A. Wilson. "Performance Contracting in Cherry Creek?!" Phi Delta Kappan, September 1971. pp. 51-53. Gilroy, California—a small and little-known performance contract chronicled in M. L. Rapp. Case Studies in Educational Performance Contracting, #5. Santa Monica, Calif.: Rand Corporation 1971. VII. TESTING Beginning with the Texarkana project, the use of testing in performance contracts has undergone continual criticism. Anyone who wishes to contract in a defensible manner should heed several or all of the following: Robert E. Stake. "Testing in Performance Contracting." Stephen P. Klein. "The Uses and Limitations of Standard- Ralph W. Tyler. "Testing for Accountability." Nation's Roger Farr, J. Jaap Tuinman, and R. Elgit Blanton. "How VIII. GENERAL STUDIES OF PERFORMANCE CONTRACTING Ed Willingham. "Performance Contracting in Schools Tests Administration's 'Accountability' Idea." National Journal, October 24, 1970. pp. 2324-32. An excellent survey of events, including quotations from all important participants, which concentrates on the political context of performance contracting. Harold V. Webb. "Performance Contracting: Is It the New Tool for the New Boardsmanship?" American School Board Journal, November 1970. pp. 27-36. An explanation of the significance and popularity of this idea for school board members. IDEA Reporter. "Performance Contracting: The Issue." IDEA Reporter, Winter 1971. pp. 1-12 [entire issue]. Concise, highly readable survey of events. Very sympathetic account. Girard D. Hottleman. "Performance Contracting Is a Hoax!" The Massachusetts Teacher, April 1971. pp. 4-10. Insightful (if incredible) article-the most hostile survey of the subject in print. James A. Mecklenburger and John A. Wilson. "Learning C.O.D.: Can the Schools Buy Success?" Saturday Review, September 18, 1971. pp. 62-65, 76-79. Findings and conclusions of two observers' year-long study of performance contracting, emphasizing both the flaws and the opportunities in this new practice. Kenneth Gehret. "Performance Contracting: How Does It Score?" The Christian Science Monitor, January 3, 1972. p. 9. Another long-time student of the phenomenon adds his own insights to the Rand study of performance contracting. Efrem Sigel. Accountability and the Controversial Role of the Performance Contractor: A Critical Look at the Performance Contracting Phenomenon. White Plains, N.Y.: Knowledge Industry Publications, 1971. This book was the most comprehensive study available until Rand's studies. It remains the most perceptive treatment of the politics beneath the surface of the phenomenon. 125 126 Conference on Educational Accountability. Proceedings. Princeton, N.J.: Educational Testing Service, March and June, 1971. This book and the one above, equally divided in discussions of accountability and performance contracting, remain the most literate short anthologies available, bringing spokesmen from many perspectives to explain the significance of these new emphases in education. John W. Adams and Karen H. Hitchak. A Guide to Performance Contracting. Madison: Interstate Project for State Planning and Program Consolidation, Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, September 1971. The most thorough yet concise explanation of the negotiation and implementation of performance contracts. Polly Carpenter and George R. Hall. Case Studies in Educational Performance Contracting, #1—Conclusions and Implications. Santa Monica, Calif.: Rand Corporation, 1971. The distillation of Rand's year-long study of contracts in Gary, Grand Rapids, Norfolk, Texarkana, and Gilroy, California, this book speaks to school administrators about the advantages and the disadvantages of performance contracting. It is particularly subtle and effective in its explanation of the testing and measurement problems in performance contracting. There are, in all, six volumes in this series. G. R. Hall, Polly Carpenter, S. A. Haggart, M. L. Rapp, and G. C. Sumner. A Guide to Educational Performance Contracting. Santa Monica, Calif.: Rand Corporation, 1972. Prepared under an HEW contract, this is the third element in Rand's study of performance contracting. It is intended as a guide to school board members, administrators, and other decision makers and constitutes an excellent companion piece for this AASA guidebook. A Technical Appendix to the volume contains a more detailed consideration of problems of measuring student achievement and of program and resource analysis. The last section (Appendix C) contains eight illustrative contracts between LEAS and contractors, reprinted from the six Rand volumes noted above. James A. Mecklenburger. Performance Contracting in American Education, 1969-1971. Doctoral dissertation. Bloomington: Indiana University, 1972. (Also published by Charles Jones Publishing Company in Worthington, Ohio.) This study stresses the Jekyll and Hyde quality of performance contracts from Texarkana through Gary and the OEO experiment, and places the entire performance contracting phenomenon in historical and political perspective. James A. Mecklenburger. Performance Contracting in Schools: Profit Motive Tested as Incentive to Learning. Washington, D.C.. National School Public Relations Association, 1972. A comprehensive, readable, and analytic look at the phenomenon, including a very useful concluding chapter for administrators, "How To Enter a Performance Contract." James A. Mecklenburger, John A. Wilson, and Richard W. Hostrop. Learning C.O.D.: Can the Schools Buy Success? A Book of Peadings on Performance Contracting. Hamden, Conn.: Linnet Books, 1972. The most comprehensive anthology of materials vailable, from Texarkana to Gary to OEO to Grand Rapids to Dallas Virginia, the testing issue, and the controversy that has surrouned performance contracting. 127 |