Critically Examining Policy Workers and Policy Work Within State Boards of Education

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Education, Equity, Economy book series (EEEC, volume 4)

Abstract

This chapter outlines a set of critical policy studies focused on State Boards of Education, a policy entity that has received extremely little attention from the research community, traditional and critical alike. The chapter opens with an overview of research that has been conducted on state boards, the majority of which is offered through a traditional perspective. The remainder of the chapter is divided into three sections that outline inquiry projects focused on state boards. The first sub-section outlines a critical historical analysis, a core strategy of critical theorists interested in the historical roots and evolution of institutions, norms, and beliefs. The second sub-section explores how critical feminist theory could be used to examine the power and authority of state boards and individual members. The third sub-section suggests an analysis of state boards as policy actors, including governing models, policy roles, responsibilities and authorities, and policy actor interactions and networks.

Keywords

Methods Theory Data sources Historical analysis Critical feminism Critical ethnography 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Agranoff, R., & Maguire, M. (2001). Big questions in Public Network Management Research. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11, 295–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Badarak, G. W. (1990). Recapturing the policymaking function of state boards of education. Charleston: Policy and Planning Center of the Appalachia Educational Laboratory.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, S. J. (1994). Education reform: A critical and post-structural approach. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Ball, S. J. (2008). New philanthropy, new networks and new governance in education. Political Studies, 56, 747–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ball, S. J., & Junemann, C. (2012). Networks, new governance and education. Bristol: Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bell, C. S. (1988). Organizational influences on women’s experience in the superintendency. Peabody Journal of Education, 65(4), 31–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bevir, M., & Rhodes, R. A. W. (2003). Searching for civil society: Changing patterns of governance in Britain. Public Administration, 81(1), 41–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blackmore, J. (1997). Level playing field? Feminist observations on global/local articulations of the re-gendering and restructuring of educational work. International Review of Education, 43(5–6), 439–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bowe, R., Gewirtz, S., & Ball, S. J. (1994). Captured by the discourse? Issues and concerns in researching ‘parental choice’. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 15(1), 63–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Braun, A., Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Hoskins, K. (2011). Taking context seriously: Towards explaining policy enactments in the secondary school. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(4), 585–596.Google Scholar
  11. Brewer, C. A. (2014). Historicizing in critical policy analysis: The production of cultural histories and microhistories. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(3), 273–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Campbell, R. F., & Mazzoni, T. L. (1974). State policy making for the public schools: A comparative analysis (Bureau of Elementary and Secondary Education Grant OEG-0-73-0499). Ohio State University, Educational Governance Project. Retrieved from files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED095666.pdf
  14. Carpenter, B. W. (2011). (Re) Framing the politics of educational discourse: An investigation of the Title I School Improvement Grant Program of 2009. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway, PO Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106.Google Scholar
  15. Carpenter, B. W., Diem, S., & Young, M. D. (2014). The influence of values and policy vocabularies on understandings of leadership effectiveness. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(9), 1110–1113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Council of Chief State School Officers. (1953). Our system of education: A statement of some desirable policies, programs and administrative relationships in education. Council of Chief State School Officers.Google Scholar
  17. Council of Chief State School Officers. (1983). Educational governance in the states: A status report on state boards of education, chief state school officers, and state education agencies. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Education. Retrieved from http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/003003501
  18. Crenshaw, K., Gotanda, N., Peller, G., & Thomas, K. (1995). Critical race theory: The key writings that formed the movement. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
  19. deLeon, P., & Vogenback, D. M. (2007). The policy sciences at a crossroads. In F. Fischer, G. J. Miller, & M. S. Sidney (Eds.), Handbook of public policy analysis: Theory, politics and methods (pp. 3–14). Boca Raton: Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  20. Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2005). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. Diem, S., & Young, M. D. (2015). Considering critical turns in research on educational policy. International Journal of Educational Management, 29(7), 838–850. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-05-2015-0060
  22. Diem, S., Young, M. D., Lee, P., Mansfield, K., & Welton, A. (2014). Understanding critical policy analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(9), 1068–1090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  24. Ferguson, K. E. (1984). The feminist case against bttreaucracy. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy: Discursive politics and deliberative practices. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Flax, J. (1990). Thinking fragments: Psychoanalysis, feminism, and postmodernism in the contemporary West. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  27. Grogan, M. (2003). Laying the groundwork for a reconception of the superintendency from feminist postmodern perspectives. In M. D. Young & L. Skrla (Eds.), Reconsidering feminist research in educational leadership (pp. 9–34). Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  28. Hajer, M. A. (2006). The living institutions of the EU: Analysing governance as performance. Perspectives on European Politics and Society, 7(1), 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Henig, J. R. (2013). The end of exceptionalism in American education: The changing politics of school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  30. Kendall, G., & Wickham, G. (1998). Using Foucault’s methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Klein, R. (2015, June 8). These biased ideas are presented as fact in Texas curriculum standards. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/22/texas-social-studies-standards_n_6029224.html
  32. Kysilko, D. (2011). State boards: A critical link to quality education. Policy Update (NASBE), 18.Google Scholar
  33. Maguire, M. (2007). Gender and movement in social policy. In C. Skelton, B. Francis, & L. Smulyan (Eds.), The sage handbook of gender and education (pp. 109–124). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  34. Manna, P. (2012). State education governance and policy: Dynamic challenges, diverse approaches, and new frontiers. Peabody Journal of Education, 87, 627–643. http://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2012.723508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mansfield, K. W., Welton, A. D., & Grogan, M. (2014). ‘Truth or consequences’: A feminist critical policy analysis of the STEM crisis. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(9), 1155–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Marshall, C. (1994). The new politics of race and gender: The 1992 yearbook of the Politics of Education Association. Bristol: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  37. Marshall, C. (1997). Dismantling and reconstructing policy analysis. In C. Marshall (Ed.), Feminist critical policy analysis: A perspective from primary and secondary schooling (pp. 1–39). London: The Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  38. Marshall, C. (1999). Researching the margins: Feminist critical policy analysis. Educational Policy, 13(1), 59–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Marshall, C., & Young, M. D. (2013). Policy inroads undermining women in education. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 16(2), 205–219. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13603124.2012.754056#preview.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. McCarthy, M., Langdon, C., & Olson, J. (1993). State education governance structures (Research No. EG-93-1) (pp. 124). Denver: Education Commission of the States. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED369167.pdf
  41. Mehta, H. (2016, February 13). Texas State Board of Education candidate is a creationist who thinks Obama was a “male prostitute.” Patheos. Retrieved from: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/02/13/texas-state-board-of-education-candidate-is-a-creationist-who-thinks-obama-was-a-male-prostitute/
  42. Morrow, R. A., & Brown, D. D. (1994). Critical theory and methodology. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  43. National Association of State Boards of Education. (2016). State boards of education [Web page]. Retrieved from http://www.nasbe.org/about-us/state-boards-of-education/
  44. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997). Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Rochefort, D. A., & Cobb, R. W. (Eds.). (1994). The politics of problem definition: Shaping the policy agenda. Lawrence: University of Kansas.Google Scholar
  46. Scheurich, J. J. (1994). Policy archeology: A new policy studies methodology. Journal of Educational Policy, 9, 297–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Scheurich, J., & McKenzie, K. (2005). Foucault’s methodologies: Archeaology and genealogy. In N. Denzing & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research (pp. 841–868). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  48. Shober, A. F. (2012). Governors make the grade: Growing gubernatorial influence in state education policy. Peabody Journal of Education, 87, 559–575. http://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2012.723494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Skrla, L., & Young, M. D. (2003). Introduction: Reconsidering Feminist Research in Educational Leadership. In M. D. Young & L. Skrla (Eds.), Reconsidering feminist research in educational leadership (pp. 1–6). Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  50. Slevin, P. (2005, November 9). Kansas Education Board first to back’ Intelligent Design. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/08/AR2005110801211.html
  51. Stout, K. E., & Stevens, B. (2002). A state board’s demise: The case of the failed diversity rule. The State Education Standard, 3, 14–19. National Association of State Boards of Education retrieved from http://www.nasbe.org/wp-content/uploads/Governance-The-Demise-of-Minnesota-state-board.pdf
  52. Taylor, S. (1997). Critical policy analysis: Exploring contexts, text and consequences. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 18, 23–35.Google Scholar
  53. Timar, T. B. (1997). The institutional role of state education departments: A historical perspective. American Journal of Education, 105, 231–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Winton, S., & Brewer, C. A. (2014). People for education: A critical policy analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(9), 1091–1109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Young, M. D. (1999). Multifocal educational policy research: Toward a method for enhancing traditional educational policy studies. American Educational Research Journal, 36(4), 677–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Young, M. D. (2003). The leadership crisis: Gender and the shortage of school administrators. In M. D. Young & L. Skrla (Eds.), Reconsidering feminist research in educational leadership. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  57. Young, M. D., & Marshall, C. (2013). Critical feminist theory. In B. Irby, G. Brown, R. Lara-Alecio, & S. Jackson (Eds.), The handbook of educational theories (pp. 975–984). Charlotte: Information Age Press.Google Scholar
  58. Sayer, A. (1992). Method in social science: A realist approach (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society, 4, 249–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Weis, L., & Fine, M. (2004). Working method: Research and social justice. New York/London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Data Sources

  1. Badarak, G. W. (1990). Recapturing the policymaking function of state boards of education (Policy Issues). Charleston: Appalachia Educational Lab, Policy and Planning Center. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED325947
  2. Beach, F. F., & Will, R. F. (1955). The State and education: The structure and control of public education at the State level (Misc. No. 23). US Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education.Google Scholar
  3. Council of Chief State School Officers. (1953). Our system of education: A statement of some desirable policies, programs and administrative relationships in education. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  4. Deffenbaugh, W. S., & Keesecker, W. S. (1940). State boards of education and chief state school officers: Their status and legal powers (Bulletin 1940, no. 6; Monograph no. 1). Washington, DC: United States Office of Education, Federal Security Agency.Google Scholar
  5. Education Commission of the States. (2004, April). Models of state education governance (State Notes: Governance). Denver: Author.Google Scholar
  6. Education Commission of the States. (2006, January). Models of state education governance (State Notes: Governance, State Boards/Chiefs/Agencies). Denver: Author.Google Scholar
  7. Education Commission of the States. (2011, January). Models of state education governance (State Notes: Governance, State Boards/Chiefs/Agencies). Denver: Author.Google Scholar
  8. Education Commission of the States. (2013, August). State Education Governance Models (State Notes: State Boards/Chiefs/Agencies). Denver: Author.Google Scholar
  9. Fuller, E., & Pearson, J. B. (1969a). Education in the states: Historical development and outlook. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.Google Scholar
  10. Fuller, E., & Pearson, J. B. (1969b). Education in the states: Nationwide development since 1900. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.Google Scholar
  11. Harris, S. P. (1973). State departments of education, state boards of education, and chief state school officers: Including reference to legally created statewide coordinating agencies for higher education (DHEW Publication No. (OE) 73–07400). Washington, DC: US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.Google Scholar
  12. Howerth, I. W. (1913). State boards of education (Bulletin no. 1). Berkeley: Department of Information and Social Welfare, University of California Publications, University California Press.Google Scholar
  13. Keesecker, W. S. (1950). State boards of education and chief state school officers: Their status and legal powers (Bulletin 1950, no. 12). Washington, DC: United States Office of Education, Federal Security Agency.Google Scholar
  14. National Association of State Boards of Education. (2012, April). State education governance: State-by-state chart of essential governance information. Alexandria: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nasbe.org/
  15. National Association of State Boards of Education. (2013a, March). State education governance models. Alexandria: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nasbe.org/
  16. National Association of State Boards of Education. (2013b, March). State education governance: State-by-state chart of essential governance information. Alexandria: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nasbe.org/
  17. National Association of State Boards of Education. (2014, July). State education governance models. Alexandria: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nasbe.org/
  18. National Association of State Boards of Education. (2015a, August). State education governance models. Alexandria: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nasbe.org/
  19. National Association of State Boards of Education. (2015b, January). State education governance: State-by-state chart of essential governance information. Alexandria: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nasbe.org/
  20. Sanchez, R. L. V. T., & Hall, G. C. (1987). Models for selecting chief state school officers (Policy Memo series, no. 1). Bloomington: Indiana University, Consortium on Educational Policy Studies.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Curry School of EducationUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations