Although educational reform approaches have varied from state to state, most efforts have shared some common elements: (1) concentration of educational policymaking in state capitols by state-level officials; (2) a widespread conviction that schools of education, local school officials, and teachers are unwilling or unable to "reform" themselves; and (3) duplication of managerial practices used in the private sector. This paper discusses three traditional kinds of reforms (minimum standards, merit pay, and career ladders) sharing the three common elements, outlines some basic dilemmas confronting school administrators, and presents a new perspective on school system management. Stiffer minimum standards for teachers may be needed, but such an approach reinforces the notion that reform must be imposed from outside. Merit pay and career ladders, meant to encourage self-improvement, merely reinforce hierarchical educational structures most in need of change. Administrators often resort to top-down controls to reform their systems. Teachers are allowed a fair amount of discretion not by design, but by default. Trying to bribe or coerce teachers is self-defeating, since they will further insulate their classrooms from outside interference. Resolving the discretion/coordination dilemma demands a new perspective (adopted by effective schools) that maximizes program coordination and increases teacher discretion simultaneously. Effective school districts are tapping the wealth of expertise, information, and eagerness to improve lying trapped and underutilized in isolated classrooms across the United States. (MLH)