Abstract
While the impact of school bureaucracy has been recognized over time as critical to understanding how schools work and assessing the capacity of public schools to educate the populace (Bidwell 2001; Payne 2008; Rogers 2009; Rogers and Chung 1983), how bureaucratic structures impact on students and parents has not been well articulated. As Honig (2009, p. 418) pointed out, much of this work does not go beyond broad-brush portraits of district bureaucracy. More research is needed that goes beyond the “impersonal reference to ‘districts’ as actors and toward uncovering the human dimensions” of the bureaucracy. In particular, the literature on economic integration has not examined the institutional factors that facilitate or suppress middle-class participation in mixed-income schools. Using ethnographic data collected from the Darcy school (a pseudonym), I provide a detailed account of the way district policies pushed middle-class parents away from an urban public school.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In addition to using pseudonyms, in some cases, I have also changed identifying information to protect the confidentiality of our informants.
- 2.
The definition of “middle class” is contentious. Class definitions are extremely complicated and are the subject of a large body of sociological research (e.g., Lareau and Conley 2008; Weeden and Grusky 2005; Wright 2005). One common (but not universal) way of determining middle-class status involves a combination of income, education, and occupation. Here, I categorize a family as middle class if at least one of the parents is college-educated and at least one of the parents is employed in a professional or creative capacity or is the owner of a business. Families were categorized as working class if neither parent was college-educated or employed in a professional or creative capacity or owned his or her own business.
- 3.
- 4.
Street-level bureaucracies are those bureaucracies in which the individuals in the bureaucracy interact on a daily basis with citizens, have some autonomy, and have the potential for impact on the people served.
- 5.
The “catchment area” for a school refers to the geographic region surrounding a school from which students are assigned to attend the school. Students who reside in the catchment area of a school in this city are automatically accommodated at the school once proof of residence is established, usually by providing the school secretary with a gas or electric bill from the residence.
- 6.
If parents had more than one child, as many did, the story usually began with their eldest child. It was not uncommon for the second child in a family to simply follow their first to the school selected by parents. However, it was also the case that, at times, parents made decisions for the first child based on the needs of the second or third child. We sought to understand how the family as a system made school decisions for their children.
- 7.
In order to enroll a child, parents bring in the required paperwork—the child’s birth certificate and proof of residence—and school staff complete district paperwork.
References
Ball, S. J. (2003). Class strategies and the education market: The middle classes and social advantage. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Bazelon, E. (2008, July 20). The next kind of integration. New York Times.
Bidwell, C. E. (2001). Analyzing schools as organizations: Long-term permanence and short term change. Sociology of Education, 74(Extra Issue), 100–114.
Crozier, G., Reay, D., James, D., Jamieson, F., Beedell, P., Hollingworth, S., & Williams, K. (2008). White middle-class parents, identities, educational choice and the urban comprehensive school: Dilemmas, ambivalence and moral ambiguity. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 29(3), 261–272.
Cucchiara, M., & Horvart, E. M. (2009). Perils and promises: Middle-class parental involvement in urban schools. American Educational Research Journal, 46(4), 974–1004.
Edelberg, J., & Kurland, S. (2009). How to walk to school: Blueprint for a neighborhood renaissance. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.
Gottlieb, A. (2004, November). Denver foundation takes lead pushing for mixed-income schools. Catalyst Ohio.
Grant, G. (2009). Hope and despair in the American city: Why there are no bad schools in Raleigh. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice and loyalty. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Honig, M. I. (2009). No small thing: School district central office bureaucracies and the implementation of new small autonomous schools initiatives. American Educational Research Journal, 46(2), 387–422.
Horvat, E. M., Weininger, E., & Lareau, A. (2003). From social ties to social capital: Class differences in the relation between school and parent networks. American Educational Research Journal, 40(2), 319–351.
Kahlenberg, R. D. (2001). All together now: Creating middle-class schools through public school choice. Washington, DC: Brookings.
Kahlenberg, R. D. (2007). Tough liberal: Albert Shanker and the battles over schools, unions, race and democracy. New York: Columbia University Press.
Lareau, A. (2000). Home advantage: Social class and parental intervention in elementary education. Second Edition. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.
Lareau, A. (2003). Unequal childhoods. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Lareau, A., & Conley, D. (2008). Social class: How does it work? New York: Russell Sage.
Lareau, A., & Horvat, E. M. (1999). Moments of social inclusion and exclusion: Race, class, and cultural capital in family–school relationships. Sociology of Education, 72(1), 37–53.
Lewis, A. E., & Forman, T. A. (2002). Contestation or collaboration? A comparative study of home-school relations. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 33(1), 60–89.
Lipsky, M. (1976). Toward a theory of street-level bureaucracy. In W. D. Hawley & M. Lipsky (Eds.), Theoretical perspectives on urban politics (pp. 196–211). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Payne, C. M. (2008). So much reform, so little change. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.
Reay, D. (2004). Exclusivity, exclusion, and social class in urban education markets in the United Kingdom. Urban Education, 39(5), 537–560.
Rogers, D. (1968). 110 Livingston Street: Politics and bureaucracy in the New York city school system. New York: Random House.
Rogers, D. (2009). Mayoral control of the New York city schools. New York: Springer.
Rogers, D., & Chung, N. M. (1983). 110 Livingston Street revisited. New York: New York University Press.
Wake Education Partnership. (2008). Striking a balance: In support of diversity in the Wake County public school system. Raleigh: Author.
Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Weeden, K. A., & Grusky, D. B. (2005). The case for a new class map. American Journal of Sociology, 111(1), 141–212.
Wright, E. O. (2005). Approaches to class analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Acknowledgments
The author gratefully acknowledges the Spencer Foundation and Temple University for their financial support. The author would like to thank the parents, teachers, and administrators from the Darcy school community for their generous participation in this study as well as colleagues who reviewed previous drafts of this chapter: Maia Cucchiara, Annette Lareau, Demie Kurz, Joshua Klugman, Kim Goyette, Douglas Downey, and Yasko Kanno.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Horvat, E.M. (2012). Pushing Parents Away: The Role of District Bureaucracy in an Urban School. In: Richter, M., Andresen, S. (eds) The Politicization of Parenthood. Children’s Well-Being: Indicators and Research, vol 5. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2972-8_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2972-8_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-2971-1
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-2972-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)