美国教育市场的强制和同意:种族化财政监督下的社区参与政策

IF 2.8 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
R. Kissell
{"title":"美国教育市场的强制和同意:种族化财政监督下的社区参与政策","authors":"R. Kissell","doi":"10.1080/02680939.2022.2112759","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In response to growing pushback to decades of privatization and disinvestment in high-poverty communities of color, elected officials and business leaders in the United States have turned to ‘community-engaged strategies’ to advance education reform. This qualitative case study of a California school district, the Oakland Unified School District, from 1989 to 2019 uses a Gramscian analysis of hegemony to illuminate the shift from coercive practices of financial audits to building consent through the district’s formal engagement strategies as tools to manage public dissent around divisive decisions. Findings reveal that a manufacturedscrisis facilitated the 2003 state takeover of OUSD to further advancesausterity measures and audit processes that served as racialized formssof fiscal surveillance. When local resistance to these measures intensified, district actors shifted tactics to ‘engage’ community members through a portfolio strategy to manage school choice options and other public-private partnerships. Oakland public schools are a prime case of how democratic mechanisms serve as the vehicle to manufacture public consent for district redesign by way of marketization. This paper contributes new insights into local and global debates on educational privatization by critically examining the role of parastatal audit agencies in shaping community support for public-privateeducation governance along with tracing the shifting tactics of elite policy actors.","PeriodicalId":51404,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Education Policy","volume":"38 1","pages":"738 - 760"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Coercion and consent for the U.S. education market: community engagement policy under racialized fiscal surveillance\",\"authors\":\"R. Kissell\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02680939.2022.2112759\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT In response to growing pushback to decades of privatization and disinvestment in high-poverty communities of color, elected officials and business leaders in the United States have turned to ‘community-engaged strategies’ to advance education reform. This qualitative case study of a California school district, the Oakland Unified School District, from 1989 to 2019 uses a Gramscian analysis of hegemony to illuminate the shift from coercive practices of financial audits to building consent through the district’s formal engagement strategies as tools to manage public dissent around divisive decisions. Findings reveal that a manufacturedscrisis facilitated the 2003 state takeover of OUSD to further advancesausterity measures and audit processes that served as racialized formssof fiscal surveillance. When local resistance to these measures intensified, district actors shifted tactics to ‘engage’ community members through a portfolio strategy to manage school choice options and other public-private partnerships. Oakland public schools are a prime case of how democratic mechanisms serve as the vehicle to manufacture public consent for district redesign by way of marketization. This paper contributes new insights into local and global debates on educational privatization by critically examining the role of parastatal audit agencies in shaping community support for public-privateeducation governance along with tracing the shifting tactics of elite policy actors.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51404,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Education Policy\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"738 - 760\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Education Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2022.2112759\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Education Policy","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2022.2112759","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

数十年来,在高度贫困的有色人种社区,私有化和撤资日益受到抵制,为此,美国民选官员和商界领袖转向“社区参与战略”来推进教育改革。本文对1989年至2019年加州奥克兰联合学区(Oakland Unified school district)的定性案例进行了研究,使用葛兰西式的霸权分析,阐明了从财务审计的强制性实践到通过学区的正式参与策略作为管理公众对分歧决策的异议的工具来建立共识的转变。调查结果显示,一场人为制造的危机促进了2003年国家对OUSD的收购,从而进一步推进了财政监督的种族化形式的紧缩措施和审计程序。当当地对这些措施的抵制加剧时,地区行为者改变了策略,通过组合战略来管理学校选择和其他公私伙伴关系,“吸引”社区成员。奥克兰的公立学校是一个典型的例子,说明民主机制是如何通过市场化的方式使公众同意重新设计地区的。本文通过批判性地考察半国有审计机构在塑造社区对公私教育治理的支持方面的作用,以及追踪精英政策参与者的转变策略,为当地和全球关于教育私有化的辩论提供了新的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Coercion and consent for the U.S. education market: community engagement policy under racialized fiscal surveillance
ABSTRACT In response to growing pushback to decades of privatization and disinvestment in high-poverty communities of color, elected officials and business leaders in the United States have turned to ‘community-engaged strategies’ to advance education reform. This qualitative case study of a California school district, the Oakland Unified School District, from 1989 to 2019 uses a Gramscian analysis of hegemony to illuminate the shift from coercive practices of financial audits to building consent through the district’s formal engagement strategies as tools to manage public dissent around divisive decisions. Findings reveal that a manufacturedscrisis facilitated the 2003 state takeover of OUSD to further advancesausterity measures and audit processes that served as racialized formssof fiscal surveillance. When local resistance to these measures intensified, district actors shifted tactics to ‘engage’ community members through a portfolio strategy to manage school choice options and other public-private partnerships. Oakland public schools are a prime case of how democratic mechanisms serve as the vehicle to manufacture public consent for district redesign by way of marketization. This paper contributes new insights into local and global debates on educational privatization by critically examining the role of parastatal audit agencies in shaping community support for public-privateeducation governance along with tracing the shifting tactics of elite policy actors.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Education Policy
Journal of Education Policy EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
8.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The Journal of Education Policy publishes original, critically and theoretically informed research that discusses, analyses and debates policymaking, policy implementation and the impact of policy at all levels and in all facets of formal and informal education. The journal is interested in analysis and theorisation of policy that is transposable, that has generic interest and relevance - national policy case studies would need to be conceptually and/or methodologically generalisable. The journal also publishes work that presents new methods of research and research studies that are experimental and innovative. The journal offers a forum for theoretical debate, as well as historical, philosophical and comparative studies, across different countries, contexts and levels of education. A valuable resource for academics, researchers, educators and policy makers, Journal of Education Policy provides rigorous and original insights into educational policy development, implications and global impact.
×
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