这跟“公平”有什么关系?关于安大略私立学校公共资金的话语联盟、争论和话语斗争

IF 1.8 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Paul McDermid, Sue Winton
{"title":"这跟“公平”有什么关系?关于安大略私立学校公共资金的话语联盟、争论和话语斗争","authors":"Paul McDermid, Sue Winton","doi":"10.1080/00220620.2022.2137479","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The establishment of the Commission on Private Schools in Ontario in 1984 renewed long-standing debate over public funding of the Canadian province’s public schools. Engaging Maarten Hajer’s discourse coalition approach and argumentative discourse analysis, we demonstrate how actors with disparate – sometimes even competing – goals and values nevertheless formed coalitions to advocate for (or against) the policy. We also show that the debate at this time was about much more than school funding; it reflected foundational disputes over the appropriate role of government in relation to minoritized groups in Canada. In the struggle to define the meaning of a policy to fund private schools with public money, both coalitions mobilised arguments informed by discourses of Equality and Multiculturalism. However, each coalition ascribed different meanings to these discourses. That is, actors on both sides argued their policy solution promoted equality and supported multiculturalism based on different ideological understandings of these values.","PeriodicalId":45468,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Educational Administration and History","volume":"23 1","pages":"341 - 357"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What’s ‘fairness’ got to do with it? Discourse coalitions, arguments, and discursive struggles over public funding of Ontario’s private schools\",\"authors\":\"Paul McDermid, Sue Winton\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00220620.2022.2137479\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The establishment of the Commission on Private Schools in Ontario in 1984 renewed long-standing debate over public funding of the Canadian province’s public schools. Engaging Maarten Hajer’s discourse coalition approach and argumentative discourse analysis, we demonstrate how actors with disparate – sometimes even competing – goals and values nevertheless formed coalitions to advocate for (or against) the policy. We also show that the debate at this time was about much more than school funding; it reflected foundational disputes over the appropriate role of government in relation to minoritized groups in Canada. In the struggle to define the meaning of a policy to fund private schools with public money, both coalitions mobilised arguments informed by discourses of Equality and Multiculturalism. However, each coalition ascribed different meanings to these discourses. That is, actors on both sides argued their policy solution promoted equality and supported multiculturalism based on different ideological understandings of these values.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45468,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Educational Administration and History\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"341 - 357\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Educational Administration and History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2022.2137479\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Educational Administration and History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2022.2137479","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

1984年安大略省私立学校委员会的成立再次引发了长期以来关于加拿大公立学校公共资金的争论。利用Maarten Hajer的话语联盟方法和争论性话语分析,我们展示了具有不同-有时甚至是竞争-目标和价值观的行动者如何形成联盟来支持(或反对)政策。我们还表明,当时的辩论不仅仅是关于学校的资金;它反映了关于政府对加拿大少数群体的适当作用的根本争议。在界定一项用公共资金资助私立学校的政策的意义的斗争中,两个联盟都动员了平等和多元文化主义的论述。然而,每个联盟赋予这些话语不同的含义。也就是说,双方的行动者都认为,基于对这些价值观的不同意识形态理解,他们的政策解决方案促进了平等,支持了多元文化主义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What’s ‘fairness’ got to do with it? Discourse coalitions, arguments, and discursive struggles over public funding of Ontario’s private schools
ABSTRACT The establishment of the Commission on Private Schools in Ontario in 1984 renewed long-standing debate over public funding of the Canadian province’s public schools. Engaging Maarten Hajer’s discourse coalition approach and argumentative discourse analysis, we demonstrate how actors with disparate – sometimes even competing – goals and values nevertheless formed coalitions to advocate for (or against) the policy. We also show that the debate at this time was about much more than school funding; it reflected foundational disputes over the appropriate role of government in relation to minoritized groups in Canada. In the struggle to define the meaning of a policy to fund private schools with public money, both coalitions mobilised arguments informed by discourses of Equality and Multiculturalism. However, each coalition ascribed different meanings to these discourses. That is, actors on both sides argued their policy solution promoted equality and supported multiculturalism based on different ideological understandings of these values.
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 Educational Administration and History
Journal of Educational Administration and History EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.60%
发文量
25
×
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