Reterritorializing as Community Activism in an Urban Community-School Transformation Initiative

  • Nancy Ares
Part of the Breakthroughs in the Sociology of Education book series (BSE)


A resident-driven school and community transformation initiative in upstate New York, the Coalition for the Children of Lakeview (CCL), is the site for this chapter’s critical geography analysis. A Planning Panel1 (PP) of approximately 116 individuals representing residents (51%) and social service and governmental agency representatives (non-residents) (49%) was formed in 2005 to make critical decisions regarding the content of the CCL plan (e.g., specific foci such as k-16 education, employment, housing, public safety).


Urban Space Idealize Image Social Service Agency Local Entity Street Corner 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ares, N., & Buendía, E. (2007). Spatialized and spatializing practices: Commodifying literacy programs. In J. Larson (Ed.), Literacy as snake oil (2nd ed.). Germany: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  2. Ares, N., Larson, J., O’Connor, K. C., & Carlisle, J. (2007, April). Getting started: First stages of community reform. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  3. Ares, N., Larson, J., & O’Connor, K. (2008, March). Rochester children’s zone ethnography: Understanding school/community relationships in an urban change initiative. Paper presented at the Penn Ethnography Forum, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  4. (2016). The great migration (1915–1960). Retrieved from
  5. Brenner, N. (1995). Remaking scale: Competition and cooperation in prenational and postnational. In H. Eskelinen & F. Snickars (Eds.), The limits to scale? Methodological reflections on scalar structuration (pp. 59–74). Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  6. Burke, K. J., Greene, S., & McKenna, M. K. (2016). A critical geographic approach to youth civic engagement: Reframing educational opportunity zones and the use of public spaces. Urban Education, 51(2), 143–169. doi: 10.1177/0042085914543670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hubbard. P., Kitchin, R., Bartley, B., & F’uller, D. (2002). Thinking geographically: Space, theory and contemporary human geography. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  8. Jessop, B. (1994). Post-Fordism and the state. In A. Amin (Ed.), Post-Fordism: A reader (pp. 251–259). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jonas, A. E., & Ward, K. (2002). A world of regionalisms: Towards a US-UJK urban and regional policy framework comparison. Journal of Urban Affairs, 24(4), 377–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Latino Education Network Service. (2016). The great migration. Retrieved from Scholar
  11. Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  12. Lefebvre, H. (2003). The urban revolution. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  13. Martin, D., McMann, E., & Purcell, M. (2003). Space, scale, governance, and representation: Contemporary geographical perspectives on urban politics and policy. Journal of Urban Affairs, 25(2), 113–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. McCann, E. J. (2003). Framing space and time in the City: Urban policy and the politics of spatial and temporal scale. Journal of Urban Affairs, 25(2), 159–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Purcell, M. (2002). Excavating Lefebvre: The right to the city and its urban politics of the inhabitant. GeoJournal, 58(2–3), 99–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Soja, E. W. (2010). Seeking spatial justice. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minneapolis Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Swyngedouw, E. (1997). Neither global or local: “Globalization” and the politics of scale. In K. R. Cox (Ed.), Traces of globalization: Reasserting the power of the local (pp. 137–166). New York, NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
  18. Tasker, M. (2008). Smaller schools: A conflict of aims and purposes? FORUM: For Promoting 3–19 Comprehensive Education, 50(2), 177–184.Google Scholar
  19. Tyack, D., & Tobin, W. (1994). The ‘grammar’ of schooling: Why has it been so hard to change? American Educational Research Journal, 31(3), 453–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wakefield, S. (2007). Reflective action in the academy: Exploring praxis in critical geography using a “food movement” case study. Antipode, 39(2), 331–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Sense Publishers 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nancy Ares
    • 1
  1. 1.University of RochesterNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations