Social Construction Is Racial Construction: Examining the Target Populations in School-Choice Policies.

IF 2 3区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
American Journal of Education Pub Date : 2022-05-01 Epub Date: 2022-04-04 DOI:10.1086/719159
Huriya Jabbar, Eupha Jeanne Daramola, Julie A Marsh, Taylor Enoch-Stevens, Jacob Alonso, Taylor N Allbright
{"title":"Social Construction Is Racial Construction: Examining the Target Populations in School-Choice Policies.","authors":"Huriya Jabbar, Eupha Jeanne Daramola, Julie A Marsh, Taylor Enoch-Stevens, Jacob Alonso, Taylor N Allbright","doi":"10.1086/719159","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We examine policy influencers' perceptions of the targets of school-choice policy across five states, exploring how constructions varied for White and racially minoritized families, whether policy actors conceived of the \"target\" of policy as the child or the parent, and how these racialized constructions varied across different types of school-choice policies.</p><p><strong>Research methods/approach: </strong>We conducted 56 semistructured interviews in 2019 with state-level stakeholders across five states.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We found that policy actors generally viewed White families as strong and racially minoritized families as weak. However, for both groups, we found variation in whether these constructions were positive or negative and differences between students and parents. We find that social constructions are fluid, with varying, sometimes conflicting and contradictory views of racially minoritized and White parents in the same period, within the same state context. Despite the salience of race throughout social constructions of the target population, policy actors primarily used color-evasive references. In general, we found little variation in policy components at the state level.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>Our work demonstrates how racialized social constructions matter for equity in school-choice policy, with implications for local, state, and federal policy and for future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":47629,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Education","volume":"128 1","pages":"487-518"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11178037/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/719159","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/4/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: We examine policy influencers' perceptions of the targets of school-choice policy across five states, exploring how constructions varied for White and racially minoritized families, whether policy actors conceived of the "target" of policy as the child or the parent, and how these racialized constructions varied across different types of school-choice policies.

Research methods/approach: We conducted 56 semistructured interviews in 2019 with state-level stakeholders across five states.

Findings: We found that policy actors generally viewed White families as strong and racially minoritized families as weak. However, for both groups, we found variation in whether these constructions were positive or negative and differences between students and parents. We find that social constructions are fluid, with varying, sometimes conflicting and contradictory views of racially minoritized and White parents in the same period, within the same state context. Despite the salience of race throughout social constructions of the target population, policy actors primarily used color-evasive references. In general, we found little variation in policy components at the state level.

Implications: Our work demonstrates how racialized social constructions matter for equity in school-choice policy, with implications for local, state, and federal policy and for future research.

社会建构即种族建构:择校政策目标人群检视
目的:我们研究了五个州的政策影响者对择校政策目标的看法,探讨了白人和少数种族家庭的结构是如何变化的,政策参与者是将政策的“目标”视为孩子还是父母,以及这些种族化的结构在不同类型的择校政策中是如何变化的。研究方法/方法:2019年,我们对五个州的州级利益相关者进行了56次半结构化访谈。研究结果:我们发现,政策制定者通常认为白人家庭是强大的,而少数族裔家庭是弱小的。然而,对于两组,我们发现这些结构是积极的还是消极的,以及学生和家长之间的差异。我们发现社会结构是流动的,在同一时期,同一国家背景下,少数种族和白人父母的观点是不同的,有时是相互冲突和矛盾的。尽管种族在目标人群的社会结构中十分突出,但政策制定者主要使用回避肤色的参考资料。总的来说,我们发现各州的政策成分变化不大。启示:我们的工作证明了种族化的社会结构如何影响择校政策的公平性,对地方、州和联邦政策以及未来的研究都有启示。
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
American Journal of Education
American Journal of Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
4.00%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Founded as School Review in 1893, the American Journal of Education acquired its present name in November 1979. The Journal seeks to bridge and integrate the intellectual, methodological, and substantive diversity of educational scholarship, and to encourage a vigorous dialogue between educational scholars and practitioners. To achieve that goal, papers are published that present research, theoretical statements, philosophical arguments, critical syntheses of a field of educational inquiry, and integrations of educational scholarship, policy, and practice.
×
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