exam 1 Flashcards
fearless forecast from Preface (5)
- continuing conflict between the federal role and state/local responsibilities
- continuing political challenges to established bureaucratic institutions and funding patterns, as well as to established professional autonomy and authority
- growing political mobilization to challenge social and educational inequality and its impact on educational opportunities and outcomes
- debates over testing, its expenditures, and impacts on children, teaching, and schools will expand in the coming decade as will debate over efforts to rate and evaluate teachers and schools
- continued proliferation of groups mobilizing around ideas, ideologies, and interests
politics
the process of making collective decisions in a community, society, or group through the application of influence and power
government
the people or organizations that make, enforce, and implement political decisions for a society
public policy
what public officials within government, and by extension the citizens they represent, choose to do or not to do about public problems
why study public policy? (3)
- scientific understanding
- professional advice
- policy recommendations
why study education policy? (3)
- ensure the continuation of US democracy
- assimilate large numbers of immigrants
- primary mechanism for social mobility
why provide public education?
moral, political, and economic reasons (education is a positive externality; society benefits from a well-educated populace)
common functions of most governments (5)
- governments try to maintain their sovereignty
- governments try to maintain order within a society
- governments provide services for their citizens
- governments socialize their citizens (especially the young) to be supportive of the system
- governments collect taxes from their citizens
changing role of the federal government in education policy (4)
- shifted the policy focus from inputs to outcomes
- opened service delivery to diverse providers
- required local and state agencies to publicly report on student performance
- the role changed from permissive, “layer cake” federalism to “marble cake” federalism
why the federal government must address issues of poverty
it has both the fiscal capacity and the political justification to take a more active redistributive role
institutional characteristics of federal redistributive grants (5)
- grants-in-aid arrangement (federal provides $ and framework, delivery of services is up to state/local)
- categorical or single-purpose grants (well-defined eligible students are the intended beneficiaries)
- supplementary and non-supplanting guidelines (guard against any local tendency to shift federal resources away from the disadvantaged)
- bipartisan support (special-needs programs)
- incentives for local government to meet antipoverty objectives (federal funds are widely distributed to ensure broad political support)
challenges implementing federal accountability agenda (5)
- federalism allows for varying degrees of policy specification in meeting the federal expectations
- political negotiations among key stakeholders within a state tended to slow the pace of initial implementation in NCLB
- the federal agenda encountered social constraints
- the federal agenda on accountability may not have aligned effectively with the federal system or formula-based grant allocation
- federal reform generates new conflicts in the management and delivery of educational services
Wong’s ideas for aligning accountability and equity (3)
- the federal goal on accountability can be effectively promoted with a focus on equity (federal government needs critically to reassess categorical federalism)
- presidential leadership can improve policy coherence on issues that affect education and children
- school reform will benefit from federal investment to promote long-term research on major educational challenges (commitment of our intergovernmental system fully to address income and racial/ethnic disparity)
4 eras of education policy in the US
- The Young Republic (1783-1830)
- The Rise of the Common School (1831-1900)
- The Scientific Sorting Machine (1901-1982)
- In Search of a New Paradigm (1983-Present)
Young Republic era (1783-1830) (3)
- most citizens wanted at least a basic education for all children
- wide variety of schools (dame schools, private venture schools, religious, district schools, private academies/boarding schools, charity schools)
- governmental education policy characterized as policy inaction
The Rise of the Common School (1831-1900) (3)
- lots of changes to society, including education (explosion of population growth in cities)
- Mann’s Common Schools would unify the country
- governmental education policy characterized as regulatory policy
The Scientific Sorting Machine (1901-1982) (5)
- people felt that government had become corrupt, specifically in schools
- extension of the Common Schools to secondary education
- differentiated secondary curriculum/tracks
- IQ/standardized achievement tests and ability grouping
- governmental education policy can be seen as regulatory and redistributive policy
In Search of a New Paradigm (1983-Present)
huge dissatisfaction with public education
reform features of the Common School movement (4)
- regular attendance (required)
- longer school year
- creation of state education agencies/superintendents
- teacher training
types of reform categories after A Nation At Risk (3)
- intensifying the bureaucracy (doing things that would help improve the educational system)
- restructuring (creating more professionalism)
- redesigning (change education from a government monopoly to a market)
what does A Nation At Risk say is wrong with public education (4)
declines in educational performance are in large part the result of disturbing inadequacies in the way the educational process itself is often conducted
1. content (curricula have been homogenized, diluted, and diffused to the point that they no longer have a central purpose)
2. expectations (hw amount has decreased, high school diploma requirements vary)
3. time (American students spend less time on schoolwork and in school)
4. teaching (shortage of teachers in key fields, teacher preparation programs need substantial improvement)
policy process model (6)
- problem identification (defining issues)
- agenda setting (getting problems seriously considered by policymakers
- policy formulation (proposed policy actions/inactions to address problems
- policy legitimation (providing legal force to decisions and/or justifying the policy actions
- policy implementation (putting policy into action; seeing real consequences for society)
- policy evaluation (assessment of policy or programs)
conditions vs. problems
conditions constitute the “way things are;” they only become problems when people judge them to be threatening, harmful, disruptive, or otherwise unacceptable
2 types of agenda
- systemic agenda (the public is aware of and may be discussing)
- institutional agenda (issues to which policymakers are giving active and serious consideration)
outcome vs. process evaluation
process evaluations: how is the program doing in practice and procedure?
outcome evaluations: is the program reaching the goals it was set out to accomplish?
2 approaches to implementation studies before the 1990s
- first wave (1973-1978): focused on describing and explaining failures to implement policy
- second wave (1978-1985): built on the case studies of the first wave to posit more comprehensive theoretical models that explained both implementation failure and success (top-down vs. bottom-up approaches)
Peter’s 3 levels of policymaking
- policy choices (who is making these choices? policy actors)
- policy outputs (putting the choice into action/effect)
- policy impact (what is the effect of a policy? how well is the policy working?)
Multiple Streams Model (3)
- seeks to explain change in the issue agenda of the government; how and why some issues gain prominence before policymakers, while others don’t
- 3 policy streams (problem, policy, and political streams)
- issues achieve agenda status when these streams intersect and create a policy window
punctuated equilibrium framework (2)
- policies tend to be processed quietly within policy subsystems, but occasionally attract considerable attention when struggles are played out on the macropolitical agenda
- this process reside the twin notions of policy venues and policy images and their intersection
advocacy coalition framework (2)
- focuses on the interactions of competing advocacy coalitions within policy subsystems
- 3-tiered belief system (deep core beliefs, policy core beliefs, secondary beliefs)
policy innovation and diffusion theory (4)
- policy innovation: a policy that is new to the jurisdiction adopting it, without regard to the number of other states that may already have adopted the policy
- innovation diffusion: the process by which a public policy or program spreads among the members of a social system
- intrastate determinants: state governments innovate when their political, economic, and social environments are favorable
- interstate diffusion: policies arise because states emulate the policy behaviors of their neighbors
political culture (2)
- attitudes, values, beliefs, and orientations that individuals in a society hold regarding their political system
- to understand the relationship of a government to its people, and how those people are going to act toward that government and others, it is necessary to study what those people believe about themselves and government
moralistic political culture (3)
- society is held to be more important than the individual
- government is seen as a positive force
- serving the community is the core of the political relationship, even at the expense of individual loyalties and political friendships
individualistic political culture (2)
- private concerns are more important than public concerns (dirty politics)
- government should be largely restricted to those areas which encourage private initiative
traditionalistic political culture (3)
- social and family ties are prominent
- political leaders play a largely conservative/custodial role rather than being innovative
- limited government is viewed as best because that is all that is required to meet the needs of those in power
4 limits of IG Theory
- selecting on the dependent variable (politics of education scholars should consider a wider range of issues)
- focusing on a single state of the process (education researchers must expand our focus beyond any single stage of the policy process)
- wrong assumptions about what it is interest groups do (politics of education scholars need to take a contextually rich, long-term perspective to explaining the relationship between interest group lobbying and mischaracterizing the policy process)
- wrong assumptions about how policy works
how political culture applies to North Carolina’s accountability system
traditionalistic: decision-making authority was centralized with its elites and policy innovation confines largely to mandates and incentives to support increased testing and accountability
how political culture is applied to Nebraska’s accountability system
individualistic: educational policies were designed to empower local-level stakeholders and promote local innovation
administrative policy (4)
- low ambiguity, low conflict
- clear policy means and goals
- success is determined by having sufficient resources
- top-down approach
political policy (4)
- low ambiguity, high conflict
- goals are understood but under dispute
- success is determined by the power of policy actors to force the policy on stakeholders
- top-down approach
experimental policy (3)
- high ambiguity, low conflict
- successful implementation depends on contextual conditions
- bottom-up approach
symbolic policy (3)
- high ambiguity, high conflict
- success depends on the strength of local actors (coalition strength)
- bottom-up approach
why governments are necessary
to address social redistributive needs and maintain law and order
the reason or purpose of using policy models
to better understand the policy process and make better policy
evolution of IG theory (3)
- substantial increase in education IGs
- growth of influence of private-sector actors; philanthropists and foundations
- IG theory literature is underdeveloped
