Prioritization Practices in Central Office Administrative Decision-Making for Standards-Based Elementary Arts Education: An Issue of Equity

Prioritization Practices in Central Office Administrative Decision-Making for Standards-Based Elementary Arts Education: An Issue of Equity By Connie Covert Doctor of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies The purpose of this study was to explore factors affecting administrative prioritization practices in decision-making regarding the implementation of standards-based elementary arts education curriculum and instruction. The problem is there is inconsistent program implementation and inequitable access to elementary arts education curriculum and instruction, especially for racially and economically minoritized students in urban public elementary schools. The rationale for this study is that all students should have access to an education that develops cognition, improves literacy, and creates learner agency, such that a student can participate actively in their community. Conducted in a grounded theory tradition, this qualitative study included interviews with seven central office administrators, a focus group of five arts education coordinators, observations of strategic planning meetings, and a document review that examined administrators' perceptions and practices when prioritizing decision-making in relation to elementary arts education. There is a gap in the research examining the experiences of administrators or arts education coordinators/designees in central offices of instruction, especially as it relates to decision-making for elementary arts education as evidenced by the lack of published research. An integrative literature review generated a focus on three conceptual theories, Value Theory, Critical Race Theory, and Behavioral Descriptive Decision Theory, which formed the conceptual framework that guided the development of the research questions. The central thematic domain revealed by this study contends with equitable access to elementary arts education. There were six, supportive key findings revealed by the data; 1) Arts education coordinators influence student access to elementary arts education; 2) Three of fifteen participants spoke of their existing elementary arts education programming using instructional terminology, explicitly when referring to the right to access or the quality of instruction; 3) Decision-making steps are guided by well-intentioned personal bias and only occasionally intentionally guided by state policy or standards, data, instructional practice, or student entitlement; 4) Most decision-making about elementary arts education is done by group consensus; 5) Central office administrators aim to create a dependable baseline of expected instruction; 6)All study participants claim they want to do what is best for students, but only three of fifteen explicitly spoke of equity in their decision-making. It is hoped that the findings will provide an understanding of administrative practices that heretofore have limited and/or diminished elementary student access and offer insight into improved administrative behaviors.