Skip to main content

Mobile Navigation

  • National
    • Policy
      • High Expectations
      • Quality Choices
      • Personalized Pathways
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Gadfly Newsletter
      • Flypaper Blog
    • Events
    • Scholars Program
  • Ohio
    • Policy
      • Priorities
      • Media & Testimony
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Ohio Education Gadfly Biweekly
      • Ohio Gadfly Daily
  • Charter Authorizing
    • Application
    • Sponsored Schools
    • Resources
  • About
    • Mission
    • Board
    • Staff
    • Career
Home
Home
Advancing Educational Excellence

Main Navigation

  • National
  • Ohio
  • Charter Authorizing
  • About

Ohio Menu

  • Topics
    • Accountability & Testing
    • Advanced Education
    • Career & Technical Education
    • Charter Schools
    • Curriculum & Instruction
    • ESSA
    • Evidence-Based Learning
    • Governance
    • Personalized Learning
    • Private School Choice
    • School Finance
    • Standards
    • Teachers & School Leaders
  • Research
  • Policy
  • Commentary
    • Ohio Gadfly Newsletter
    • Ohio Gadfly Blog
    • Events

Modernizing the State Education Agency: Different Paths Toward Performance Management

Theda Sampson
9.25.2012

This report analyzes the change from compliance to performance management in eight state education agencies (SEAs). The researchers analyzed these SEAs purposely, because they  are each taking greater responsibility for the education outcomes of students in chronically poor performing schools. The SEAs under analysis were Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Tennessee.

These states shared some common elements including using data, restructuring their SEAs, use of clear and transparent communication, establishing a sense of urgency, leveraging federal funding threats, and relying on strong leadership. The states differ in their approach to implement the change and, most importantly, how they view the role of local education agencies (LEAs). 

Some other characteristics that determine the state strategy for making dramatic changes  include how the SEA leader  and state boards are selected, if they receive federal money from school improvement or innovation funds and if they have the legislative authority to take over low performing schools.

The SEAs studied have shifted their emphasis from federal regulation monitoring and compliance to organizations focused toward achieving goals and strengthened accountability in troubled LEAS. The researchers group the SEAs’ reform strategies into three descriptors:

  • The most disruptive (All-In):  The SEA moves failing schools and districts to a new system. Louisiana’s  Recovery School District, for example, fits into this reform strategy.
  • Some disruption and change (Bounded Disequilibrium): The SEA uses a carrot and stick to move LEAs to implement changes in failing schools. SEAs using this reform include Florida and Tennessee.
  • Acting as a partner with districts (Results Without Rancor): The SEA drives reform by increasing LEA capacity. SEAs using this model include Minnesota and Rhode Island.

Which SEA organization transformations succeed, in the future, is yet to be seen. It will be dependent on their abilities to maintain strong leaders and recruit the human capital able to make significant improvements in the most troubled schools.

SOURCE: Patrick Murphy and Lydia Rainey, Modernizing the State Education Agency: Different Paths Toward Performance Management (Seattle: Center for Reinventing Public Education, September 2012).

Tags: Indiana Louisiana Michigan Minnesota New Jersey Recovery School District Rhode Island Seattle Tennessee
+4 More Show Less

Theda Sampson is the Director for Applications and Contracts for the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation. Prior to this role, she worked providing business-management services to schools and was involved in the first charter school turnaround in Ohio. Following a career in restaurant management, development, and ownership, she became actively involved in the formation of a local 501(c)(3) teen center with a music venue…

View Full Bio
Fordham Logo

© 2026 The Thomas B. Fordham Institute
Privacy Policy
Usage Agreement

National

P.O. Box 110
Burke, VA 22009

202.223.5452

[email protected]

Ohio

P.O. Box 82291
Columbus, OH 43202

614.223.1580

[email protected]

Sponsorship

130 West Second Street, Suite 410
Dayton, Ohio 45402

937.227.3368

[email protected]