Educational Change and the Political Process

Dana L. Mitra

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2022
• eBook ISBN: 9781000576108
• Edition: 2
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

Educational Change and the Political Process brings together key ideas on both the system of educational policy and the policy process in the United States. It provides students with a broad, methodical understanding of educational policy. No other textbook offers as comprehensive a view of the US educational policy procedure and political systems. Section I discusses the actors and systems that create and implement policy on both the federal and the local level; Section II walks students through the policy process from idea to implementation to evaluation; and Section III delves into three major forces driving the creation of educational policies in the current era—accountability, equity, and market-driven reforms. Each chapter provides case studies, discussion questions, and classroom activities to scaffold learning, as well as a bibliography for further reading to deepen exploration of these topics. This new edition will explore recent Trump-era and post-Trump era US politics and policy changes as well as the politics of race.

Section 1

Ideals of the U.S. Educational System

DOI: 10.4324/9781003212294-1

This section examines how deeply held beliefs transform into creative solutions to address long-standing concerns. This section explores what ideals are central within the U.S. political structure and the beliefs of the major political parties. It focuses on the two dominant paradigms that structure how we view schools through market and equity lenses.

1 Understanding U.S. Ideals

DOI: 10.4324/9781003212294-2

Political scientists have observed increasing polarization between political perspectives since the new millennium. With the advent of a broader range of media channels, people are choosing to listen increasingly to viewpoints most like their own. The media often have sought to amplify discord because of the increase in ratings that it can bring (Mutz, 2015). While the workplace is often one of the few places where people speak across political differences (Mutz & Mondak, 2006), the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 decreased interaction in public and workplace settings, further exacerbating the isolation of political viewpoints.

The 2016 Trump presidency symbolized the increase of intentional political dissonance, rather than the traditional presidential focus that seeks compromise and accommodation (Martin, 2017). In the United States, the recent turn toward divisive political trends can be traced back to the Gingrich Revolution in 1994 that took place in the first Congressional election following the election of President Bill Clinton into office. Spurred on in part by the rhetoric of Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and colleagues, the Congress and the Senate moved from a body focused on compromise to one of partisan stagnation (Chafetz & Pozen, 2018).

Within the expanding polarization in U.S. and global contexts, it is increasingly important to understand the range of ideals that have been at the heart of politics historically. Policy is a struggle over ideals. It involves how deeply held beliefs transform into creative solutions to address longstanding concerns. Drawing on the previous work of core ideals of U.S. politics (Fowler, 2013; Fuhrman et al., 2020; Wirt & Kirst, 2009), this chapter focuses on political ideas more broadly. Subsequent chapters show how these ideas have created two polarized camps in U.S. politics. The chapter also considers ways that populist presidents across the globe are stoking distrust and divisiveness and pulling away from the expectation that leaders must even follow ideals at all.

Equity

One set of longstanding ideals in U.S. policy in the 1960s and 1970s focused on equity. Included in this idea is the belief of helping all to achieve a minimal standard of living and opportunity, even if it might mean some personal sacrifice. This cluster of concepts also views the needs of the most struggling individual as important or more important than economic gain after a minimal level of growth is sustained. A principal rationale for governmental intervention is the belief that only the state can ensure equity and standardization of instruction and resources.

Equity consists of giving everyone the means to be successful, focusing on a minimum floor or standard. It focuses on fairness with recognition that we do not start out with equal opportunities, and thus policies must adjust to compensate for deficits that individuals did not control. If all students are to reach the level of literacy, for example, some students come into kindergarten already fluently reading and others have never learned their letters. Relating to test scores, the metaphor of a track race has been used—for all students to reach the same level of proficiency in reading, for some it is a quick sprint, for others it is a marathon, and some have already won the race before it has started. Equal results would mean varying levels of input depending on need.

The concept of social justice is highly related to equity. It consists of efforts to look out for underprivileged groups when the majority does not do so. The exact belief of how much individual opportunities should be sacrificed for the broader good varies. Policies such as quotas, immigration, affirmative action, and marriage equality all fit within this concept.

Equality of opportunity is a lower standard than equity. It consists of giving everyone the chance to compete for the same goals but does not consider the varying beginning points of any group. It is much less controversial because it opens future systems without regard to what has already occurred. Allowing anyone to apply to a college is an example of equality of opportunity, but it does not guarantee equality of admission.

Fraternity is a related idea that consists of common bonds and allegiance between members of a society that can lead to social policies that are based on the interest of supporting others. These ties encourage putting the collective above individuals, such as Nordic nations and Japan, with the belief that all members of a society possess fundamental rights to basic needs that may include as housing, food, health care, education, and care of those in need of support, including children, the elderly, and those with special needs. Policy that demonstrates strong levels of fraternity tends to be higher in countries that are highly homogenous. For example, the famed Swedish model of social policy includes a broad safety net of childcare, schooling, health care, elderly care, and paid leave. These policies are paid for by a high taxation rate.

Often in the United States, policies related to equity were created through the judicial system, including: desegregation of schools in the 1950s; financial support of schools supporting low-income students in the 1960s; attempts at finance equalization in the 1970s, and minimum teacher and facility standards in the 1980s. Rationale is contested by local control advocates, who contend that flexibility is needed to adjust to diverse circumstances and local preferences (Wirt & Kirst, 2009). Efforts to desegregate schools since Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954) have been ineffective. In fact, districts are more segregated along race and class lines than ever before (Frankenberg et al., 2019; Reardon et al., 2019). Chapter 2 will explore equity in greater depth.

Neoliberalism and Market-Driven Ideals

In the United States, the term neoliberalism is not embraced as such by its proponents, but its tenets align with those of the moderate wing of the Republican party. Instead, these concepts are discussed as a market-driven approach that focuses on values aligned with laissez-faire capitalism, including an emphasis on decentralized control, and increased economic efficiency. Chapter 3 discusses market-driven policy in greater depth. In short, this market-driven approach includes the following values:

• Economic growth values the strength of financial and employment indicators as a metric for the health of a nation.
• Productivity values the intensity of production based on the workforce and hours engaged in activity.
• Efficiency focuses on cost savings, such as district consolidation and standardization of teacher accreditation and curricula (Tyack & Cuban, 1995).

Those politicians embracing market ideals (often identifying as Republican, but also as moderate Democrats) still harken back to Ronald Reagan’s presidency in the 1980s as an ideal conception of U.S. society. Reagan embraced the conservative viewpoint that social welfare spending of the 1960s and 1970s was excessive. His presidency focused on cutting social welfare support and increasing military spending (Morgan, 2019).

Reagan touted supply-side economics—so much so that this concept has been redubbed “Reaganomics”—a belief that the economy could be strengthened by decreasing taxes, increasing free trade, and reducing regulation. These policies led to increased federal deficits that led future Republican presidents to raise taxes. Studies by leading economists have not found support for the premise—that reducing the federal income tax rate would lead to increased tax revenue—including Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman (2020), who critiqued Reaganomics as a set of policies that failed in their attempts to achieve sustained economic growth.

New forms of public schooling encourage market-driven ideals. These forms include charter schools, vouchers, and home schooling also show unending interest in families and local communities controlling educational change. Language within this set of policies uses concepts such as excellence, competition, and quality. In all such instances, the ideas concentrate on the notion that competition with global forces necessitates a focus on developing the best and brightest to assure innovation, creativity, and growth, as well as national security. Often this focus on excellence might come at the cost of equity. Policy ideas might include financial support for educational development, such as science development in the post-Sputnik era.

Isolationism

Isolationists offer a more extreme version of political and military order. This viewpoint seeks to keep others out of nations, including stronger immigration laws and border policies. Economic reasons have been presented as arguments for such need for secure borders, with the perception that people from other nations will come in to “take over jobs” and increase unemployment of citizens. Evidence of isolationist policies can mostly be seen with ethnic and racial differences existing between those wanting to preserve borders and those seeking entrance. Since the collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the creation of the European Union, Eastern European immigrants have greatly increased the population of nations willing to host them.

Trump’s 2016 presidency exhibited the strongest support of isolationist tactics in recent decades. Elaborating a libertarian perspective, Trump’s “America First” agenda included an isolationist stance on international affairs. With the promise to “build a wall” along the Southern border of the United States, and even to cage refugees, Trump sought to prevent refugees from arriving from Mexico and Central American nations and to separate children from families until they could be expelled from the United States. These families were returned mostly to El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras (Carcamo, 2021). The Trump administration also favored an isolationist approach to foreign affairs, removing the United States from international treaties, including the Paris Climate Accord and the arms deal with Iran.

The Refugee Crisis and Isolationist Politics Internationally

A context that increased isolationist sentiment in Europe was a more recent wave of immigration, known as the Refugee Crisis or the European Migrant crisis (...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• List of illustrations
• Introduction to the Second Edition
• The Structure of the Book
• Putting It All Together
• SECTION 1: Ideals of the U.S. Educational System
• SECTION 2: The Structure of the U.S. Educational System
• SECTION 3: The Policy Process
• Index