特许学校法学与民主理想

IF 0.2 4区 社会学 Q4 LAW
Tara Raam
{"title":"特许学校法学与民主理想","authors":"Tara Raam","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2778653","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This note will explore the implications of recent charter school legislation. The Washington Supreme Court recently held, in League of Women Voters of Washington et al v. State, that charter schools are not “common schools,” and therefore, state funds designated for “common schools” can’t be applied towards supporting charter schools. Part I provides background on the development of charter schools and describes the Washington Supreme Court’s decision in League of Women Voters, particularly the Court’s reliance on its 1909 interpretation of the Washington constitution’s “common schools” principle in School District No. 20 v. Bryan. Part II argues that evolving views of school governance necessitate a reading of the Bryan requirements that is more sensitive to the democratic ideals of participation, deliberation, and accountability underlying Bryan. Allowing the League of Women Voters interpretation of Bryan as the only appropriate means of voter control of public schools would have harmful and far-reaching effects not contemplated by the Bryan court on public schools across the United States. Part III addresses whether a system of state-authorized charter schools can achieve the democratic ideal and considers one possible solution.","PeriodicalId":43291,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems","volume":"13 1","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2016-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Charter School Jurisprudence and the Democratic Ideal\",\"authors\":\"Tara Raam\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2778653\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This note will explore the implications of recent charter school legislation. The Washington Supreme Court recently held, in League of Women Voters of Washington et al v. State, that charter schools are not “common schools,” and therefore, state funds designated for “common schools” can’t be applied towards supporting charter schools. Part I provides background on the development of charter schools and describes the Washington Supreme Court’s decision in League of Women Voters, particularly the Court’s reliance on its 1909 interpretation of the Washington constitution’s “common schools” principle in School District No. 20 v. Bryan. Part II argues that evolving views of school governance necessitate a reading of the Bryan requirements that is more sensitive to the democratic ideals of participation, deliberation, and accountability underlying Bryan. Allowing the League of Women Voters interpretation of Bryan as the only appropriate means of voter control of public schools would have harmful and far-reaching effects not contemplated by the Bryan court on public schools across the United States. Part III addresses whether a system of state-authorized charter schools can achieve the democratic ideal and considers one possible solution.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43291,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"1\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-05-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2778653\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2778653","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文将探讨最近特许学校立法的影响。华盛顿最高法院最近在华盛顿妇女选民联盟等人诉州一案中裁定,特许学校不是“普通学校”,因此,国家为“普通学校”指定的资金不能用于支持特许学校。第一部分提供了特许学校发展的背景,并描述了华盛顿最高法院对妇女选民联盟一案的裁决,特别是法院对1909年第20学区诉布莱恩案中华盛顿宪法“公立学校”原则的解释的依赖。第二部分认为,不断发展的学校治理观点需要对布莱恩要求进行解读,这种解读对参与、审议和负责任的民主理想更为敏感。允许妇女选民联盟将布莱恩案解释为选民控制公立学校的唯一适当手段,将对美国各地的公立学校产生有害和深远的影响,这是布莱恩案法院没有考虑到的。第三部分讨论了国家授权的特许学校系统是否能够实现民主理想,并考虑了一个可能的解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Charter School Jurisprudence and the Democratic Ideal
This note will explore the implications of recent charter school legislation. The Washington Supreme Court recently held, in League of Women Voters of Washington et al v. State, that charter schools are not “common schools,” and therefore, state funds designated for “common schools” can’t be applied towards supporting charter schools. Part I provides background on the development of charter schools and describes the Washington Supreme Court’s decision in League of Women Voters, particularly the Court’s reliance on its 1909 interpretation of the Washington constitution’s “common schools” principle in School District No. 20 v. Bryan. Part II argues that evolving views of school governance necessitate a reading of the Bryan requirements that is more sensitive to the democratic ideals of participation, deliberation, and accountability underlying Bryan. Allowing the League of Women Voters interpretation of Bryan as the only appropriate means of voter control of public schools would have harmful and far-reaching effects not contemplated by the Bryan court on public schools across the United States. Part III addresses whether a system of state-authorized charter schools can achieve the democratic ideal and considers one possible solution.
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
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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