Revoke the Charters: A Critical Reevaluation of Charter Schools

IF 1 4区 社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Polity Pub Date : 2023-11-14 DOI:10.1086/727906
Jeremy Kingston Cynamon, Sonia Maria Pavel
{"title":"Revoke the Charters: A Critical Reevaluation of Charter Schools","authors":"Jeremy Kingston Cynamon, Sonia Maria Pavel","doi":"10.1086/727906","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper develops a critical normative analysis of charter schools. It categorizes and evaluates the main arguments in defense of charters: market competition, improved learning outcomes, autonomy and innovation, and their potential to function as “counterpublics.” After finding each argument wanting, the paper proposes a tripartite critique of charters based on (i) their deleterious effects on social solidarity, (ii) the procedural injustice involved in access, and (iii) their substantively unjust outcomes. We show how charter schools undermine social and political solidarity by fragmenting communities into more homogenous subsets. Although they purport to be equally open to all, charters covertly rely on morally arbitrary characteristics such as class, race, and disability in admissions. Finally, we argue that they unfairly reduce the quality of education for some students, thus resulting in substantively unjust outcomes.","PeriodicalId":46912,"journal":{"name":"Polity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/727906","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper develops a critical normative analysis of charter schools. It categorizes and evaluates the main arguments in defense of charters: market competition, improved learning outcomes, autonomy and innovation, and their potential to function as “counterpublics.” After finding each argument wanting, the paper proposes a tripartite critique of charters based on (i) their deleterious effects on social solidarity, (ii) the procedural injustice involved in access, and (iii) their substantively unjust outcomes. We show how charter schools undermine social and political solidarity by fragmenting communities into more homogenous subsets. Although they purport to be equally open to all, charters covertly rely on morally arbitrary characteristics such as class, race, and disability in admissions. Finally, we argue that they unfairly reduce the quality of education for some students, thus resulting in substantively unjust outcomes.
撤销特许:对特许学校的重新评估
本文对特许学校进行了批判性的规范分析。它对捍卫宪章的主要论点进行了分类和评估:市场竞争、改进的学习成果、自主和创新,以及它们作为“反公众”的潜力。在发现每个论点都有不足之处之后,本文提出了对宪章的三方批评,基于(i)它们对社会团结的有害影响,(ii)涉及获取的程序不公正,以及(iii)它们实质上不公正的结果。我们展示了特许学校是如何通过将社区分裂成更同质的子集来破坏社会和政治团结的。尽管他们声称对所有人平等开放,但特许学校在招生时却暗地依赖于道德上武断的特征,如阶级、种族和残疾。最后,我们认为他们不公平地降低了一些学生的教育质量,从而导致了实质上不公正的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Polity
Polity POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
61
期刊介绍: Since its inception in 1968, Polity has been committed to the publication of scholarship reflecting the full variety of approaches to the study of politics. As journals have become more specialized and less accessible to many within the discipline of political science, Polity has remained ecumenical. The editor and editorial board welcome articles intended to be of interest to an entire field (e.g., political theory or international politics) within political science, to the discipline as a whole, and to scholars in related disciplines in the social sciences and the humanities. Scholarship of this type promises to be highly "productive" - that is, to stimulate other scholars to ask fresh questions and reconsider conventional assumptions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信