By examining market pressures experienced by parents and other stakeholders, we can understand better some consequences of expanding school choice policies and programs on those experiencing educational reforms in local settings.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In the United States, long-standing school choice policies and practices in Arizona have developed into a market-based system of schooling for many residents in the state, especially in the larger cities.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, I analyze qualitative data gathered from school leaders and parents in one Arizona district public school who discussed marketing pressures and various notions of accountability and whose perceptions related to rapidly growing school choice reforms and increasing testing demands.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:By examining market pressures experienced by parents and other stakeholders, we can understand better some consequences of expanding school choice policies and programs on those experiencing educational reforms in local settings.
In the United States, long-standing school choice policies and practices in Arizona have developed into a market-based system of schooling for many residents in the state, especially in the larger cities. In this study, I analyze qualitative data gathered from school leaders and parents in one Arizona district public school who discussed marketing pressures and various notions of accountability and whose perceptions related to rapidly growing school choice reforms and increasing testing demands. I also describe the ways in which many members of the school team (e.g., school administrators, teachers, staff) were affected by ever-increasing competitive expectations. By examining market pressures experienced by parents and other stakeholders, we can understand better some consequences of expanding school choice policies and programs on those experiencing educational reforms in local settings.
POTTERTON, A. U. (2018). Market Pressure and Arizona Public School Leaders: “That Package is Like a Brand New Cadillac!”. Research in Educational Administration and Leadership (REAL), Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 2, 284–309. https://ajindex.com/articles/139208
Ball, S. J., Bowe, R., & Gewirtz, S. (1996). School choice, social class and distinction: The realization of social advantage in education. Journal of Education Policy, 11(1), 89-112. Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0268093960110105
Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Department for Education. (2017). Schools, pupils and their characteristics: January 2017 (Publication No. SFR 28/2017).
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Fox, R. A., & Buchanan, N. K. (Eds.) (2014). Proud to be different: Ethnocentric niche charter schools in America. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Garcia, D. R. (2010). School enrollment: Choosing to stay. Policy Points, 2(4), 1-3.
Garn, G., & Cobb, C. (2008, March). School choice and accountability. Tempe, AZ: Education Policy Research Unit, Arizona State University. Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Holme, J. J., Carkhum, R., & Rangel, V. S. (2013). High pressure reform: Examining urban schools’ response to multiple school choice policies. The Urban Review, 45(2), 167-196. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11256-012-0216-3