“The Schools Lost Their Isolation”: Interest Groups and Institutions in Educational Policy Development in the Jim Crow South

Malczewski, Joan

doi:10.1017/s0898030611000133

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 35 publications

(18 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…104 However, the organizational repertoires of schooling, which were assumed by whites to be based primarily in an industrial training context, were both perceived as nonthreatening to southern whites and often supported by them. 105 Schooling in general, and agricultural extension programs specifically, provided an institutional framework for rural blacks to participate in policy and political development.…”

Section: Vocational Education Extension Programs and Political Opportmentioning

confidence: 99%

Philanthropy and Progressive Era State Building through Agricultural Extension Work in the Jim Crow South

Malczewski

2013

Hist. educ. q.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the process of promoting an agricultural appropriation bill in the 1914 legislative session, members of Congress engaged in a vigorous debate about the appropriateness of public-private collaboration in the federal government. They had discovered that the Department of Agriculture had been receiving funding directly from the General Education Board (GEB), a philanthropy established with funds from the Rockefeller family, for staff hired to engage in agricultural extension services. Representative William Kenyon of Iowa explained to his fellow Congressmen that employees “were on the pay roll of the Government; and, as I understand, the man who is at the head of the farm demonstration work received $1 per month from the Government and $625 per month from the Rockefeller Fund.” While Senator John Sharp Williams of Mississippi generally supported the use of private funding, he expressed the sentiments of many of his colleagues with his concern that it was “a very bad thing to get the employees of the Federal or of the State or of a city government in the habit of relying upon rich men and corporations for aid and assistance, because it brings around… a certain, perhaps dominating, influence upon the officials themselves that might be and probably would be finally detrimental to the public service or to self-respect and interest of the masses.”

show abstract

Section: Vocational Education Extension Programs and Political Opportmentioning

confidence: 99%

Philanthropy and Progressive Era State Building through Agricultural Extension Work in the Jim Crow South

Malczewski

2013

Hist. educ. q.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Interstitial Collaboration: Education Reform in the Jim Crow South

Malczewski

2017

Stud. Am. Pol. Dev.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Board of Trustees of the Negro Rural School Fund convened in the office of the president of the United States on December 14, 1911. The mission of the fund was to assist Southern black schools, supplying black supervising teachers to rural areas.1President William Howard Taft presided over the meeting, which included members from banking, industry, philanthropy, higher education, and the clergy, demonstrating the importance of associated action in policy and political development in the early twentieth century.2These elite reformers hoped to guide policymaking in education reform, and their work was just one part of a far-reaching agenda for education in the Jim Crow South, based on the premise that public schooling was important to a strong national state.3Yet, it was difficult for elite actors to implement national policy goals in state and local areas, particularly for education. Local control was an important characteristic of American schooling, and Southern education reform was a particularly complicated terrain, dominated by rural areas committed to states’ rights, local control, and the racial state.4While the fund's trustees hoped to direct efforts from their lofty White House venue, foundation efficacy required extensive collaboration with organizations and actors across the South. This work, referred to here asinterstitial collaboration, included a set of initiatives tailored to state and local regions, supported by cooperative relationships between governmental and nongovernmental organizational entities and with citizens across the political spectrum.

show abstract

Introduction: Understanding Mississippi as a Particular Site of Oppression in Education

Strunk

Locke

Martin³

2017

Oppression and Resistance in Southern Higher and Adult Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“The Schools Lost Their Isolation”: Interest Groups and Institutions in Educational Policy Development in the Jim Crow South

Cited by 5 publications

References 35 publications

Philanthropy and Progressive Era State Building through Agricultural Extension Work in the Jim Crow South

Philanthropy and Progressive Era State Building through Agricultural Extension Work in the Jim Crow South

Interstitial Collaboration: Education Reform in the Jim Crow South

Introduction: Understanding Mississippi as a Particular Site of Oppression in Education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About