Volume 3 - Issue 1 - DBU Journal for K-12 Educational Research - Page 10

8 categorized response data into several sub nodes that helped identify how superintendents view the idea of Association. These nodes are Inclusivity and Identity. The Inclusivity node contains participant responses that identify Association particularly in terms of involving stakeholders in the work they do. The Identity node contains responses in which superintendents speak to the dimension of Association as the establishment of a shared or communal identity that includes the school. The Democracy dimension Communication showed strong alignment with superintendents. With 57 references, the Communication dimension represents the largest of all eight dimensions suggesting that Communication is a topic that is especially pertinent to the superintendent. With all 57 references indicating an alignment with the Communication dimension, the researcher chose to further categorize participant responses in order to yield deeper insight into the superintendents' perceptions of Communication. The researcher created sub nodes Collaboration, Engagement, Internal, Responsiveness, and Transparency. These nodes reflected the vast majority of intent for Communication among superintendents. The Democracy dimension Connection showed marginal alignment with superintendent responses. This dimension did require the creation of additional sub nodes to explore the alignment of responses. The purpose of the sub nodes was to differentiate between connections that only benefitted the organization, versus connections that benefitted a variety of stakeholders. The contrast between these two types of connections helped further identify superintendent alignment with the dimension of Connection. Respectively, the Pro and Against categories correspond to the following percentages, 57% and 43%, representing a 14% disparity in responses. The Democracy dimension Growth showed significant levels of alignment with superintendent responses. This dimension necessitated the creation of sub nodes for further exploration of respondent data. These sub nodes differentiate between Growth as a purely organizational effort and growth for the sake of internal and external shareholders. This contrast provided the Pro and Against dynamic necessary for alignment analysis. The breadth and frequency of responses in the Pro sub node indicate that, in general, superintendents characterize Growth in very diverse terms as opposed to the singular nature of the Against sub node. This diversity in definition falls into alignment with ideals of growth in a Deweyan democracy. All of the metaphor dimensions are presented in Table 1 with percentages of Pro and Against. Implications Conservative educational researchers in the 1990s expressed their concern about dominant reform metaphors in the realm of public education (Cookson, 1994; Engel, 2000; Henig, 1994; Tyack & Cuban, 1994). These concerns revolved around the notion that the American public education system would continue to embrace market ideals and practices in search of greater efficacy and public satisfaction. This pursuit would come, in the minds of these researchers, at significant cost, namely the loss of democracy in the public education arena. Contemporary researchers and advocates for traditional public education express similar concern in their research (Black, 2017; Ravitch, 2010, 2014; Vasquez Heilig, Williams, McNeil, & Lee, 2011). The current study highlights that despite 25 years of criticism by conservative reformers, market-based practices and ideologies are ever present and expanding among North Texas superintendents. The findings of the current study complement previous research frequency of responses in the Pro sub node indicate that in general superintendents characterize Growth in very diverse terms as opposed to the singu r natu e of the Ag inst sub node. This diversity in definition falls into alignment with ideals of growth in a Deweyan Democracy. All of the metaphor dimensions are presented in Table 1 with percentages of Pro and Against. Table 1. Metaphor Dimension Alignment Table 1. Metaphor Dimension Alignment Paul Cook, Ed.D.