Urban Regimes, Intermediary Organization Networks, and Research Use: Patterns Across Three School Districts

Scott, Janelle; DeBray, Elizabeth; Lubienski, Christopher; Londe, Priya Goel La; Castillo, Elise; Owens, Stephen D.

doi:10.1080/0161956x.2016.1264800

Cited by 22 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The studies that do examine the politics of district reform largely focus on the ways in which political forces influence policy development (e.g., Marsh, 2016; Scott et al, 2017). The academic literature is short on strategies for implementing politically viable district improvement, although the navigation of politics appears to be a key ingredient of success (Honig & Coburn, 2008; Johnson et al, 2015) and positive stakeholder response to reform is arguably an important end in itself.…”

Section: School District Turnaroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Third Way: The Politics of School District Takeover and Turnaround in Lawrence, Massachusetts

Schueler¹

2018

Educational Administration Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

School district superintendents say politics is the number one factor limiting their performance, yet research provides limited guidance on navigating the political dynamics of district improvement. State takeovers and district-wide turnaround efforts tend to involve particularly heated and polarized debates. Massachusetts' 2012 takeover of the Lawrence Public Schools provides a rare case of state takeover and district turnaround that both resulted in substantial early academic improvements and generated limited controversy. Method: To describe the stakeholder response and learn why the reforms were not more contentious, I analyzed press coverage of the Lawrence schools from 2007 to 2015, public documents, and two secondary sources of survey data on parent and educator perceptions of the schools. I also interviewed turnaround and stakeholder group leaders at the state and district level regarding the first 3 years of reform. Findings: I find that the local Lawrence context and broader statewide accountability system help explain the stakeholder response. Furthermore, several features of the turnaround leaders' approach improved the response and reflected a "third way" orientation to transcending polarizing political disagreement between educational reformers and traditionalists. Examples include leaders' focus

show abstract

Section: School District Turnaroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Third Way: The Politics of School District Takeover and Turnaround in Lawrence, Massachusetts

Schueler¹

2018

Educational Administration Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In several urban school systems (e.g., Denver, New Orleans, New York City), in particular, intermediary organizations were central in network hierarchies of research information, often acting as "hubs" that brokered policy expertise and analysis between many unconnected "spokes" . Intermediaries include research consortia, foundations and philanthropies, think tanks, education and charter management organizations, as well as organizations that focus on educational reform advocacy and civil rights (Scott et al, 2017). These organizations used research strategically within and across issue networks to build coalitions and influence the policy discourse to expand charter school reforms.…”

Section: Example 2: Charter Schools Intermediary Organizations and mentioning

confidence: 99%

Using policy network analysis to understand ideological convergence and change in educational subsystems

Galey-Horn

Ferrare

2020

EPAA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, education policy scholars have begun to utilize social network concepts and methods to describe contemporary policy changes across P-16 levels. While many insights have emerged from this growing literature base, we argue that a more formal network approach rooted in policy network analysis (PNA) is needed to fulfill its conceptual and analytical ambitions. Policy network analysis integrates concepts from social network analysis with theoretical assumptions developed in the field of political science. Toward this end, we first argue that a more rigorous treatment of policy beliefs is needed to analyze the impact of ideas on the policy agenda. Existing literature on the ideological dimensions of market-based reform movements tends to define them largely within the bounds of neo-liberalism and thus far has failed to systematically explain how policy beliefs emerge and converge in this context. Second, we contend that previous work has generally lacked theoretical grounding in formal policy network analysis (PNA). Although there are clear links between the concepts and findings in traditional PNA literature and educational research – particularly the use of networked governance as a concept for understanding the interconnectedness of educational reform networks – a more diligent application of PNA theory and methods would enable educational policy scholars to gain deeper insights into the explanatory processes of policy change. We pay particular attention to the usefulness of these approaches for examining two-mode network data and for modeling ideological policy change.

show abstract

“…Wohlstetter, Houston, and Buck (2015) conducted an exploratory study of New York City educational networks in the implementation of the Common Core State Standards. Scott and colleagues (2017) focused on the contexts in which networks of nongovernmental actors promoted their agendas, revealing how networks are “formed, structured, and operate” and how education policy is “produced, promoted, and utilized” (p. 16). Anderson and colleagues (2017) asserted that networks represent “new forms of governance and governmentality” because think tanks and other knowledge brokers “operate largely outside the state and its democratic structures” and yet are “essentially making public policy” (p. 11).…”

Section: Critical Policy Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…“Advances in conceptualizing structures of influence in education policy making have emphasized the role of non-governmental actors working in networks to promote their agendas” (Scott et al, 2017, p. 16). These actors are ideological, proactive, goal-oriented, flexible, and work across sectors to support and garner support from other actors (Anderson, De La Cruz, & Lopez, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

State Boards of Education: Lesser Known Policy Actors

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Few scholars have engaged in close examinations of state boards of education (SBOEs), their make-up, or the broader implications of their influence over time. SBOE membership, authority, and impact differ significantly across the 50 states. This article reports findings from an exploratory study of three SBOEs and their role as policy actors. Thinking about SBOEs as policy actors focuses attention not only on the power, authority, and policy-making functions of SBOEs, but also on the individuals who serve on SBOEs, their actions, and the discourses constructed through the performance of their policy work.

show abstract

Urban Regimes, Intermediary Organization Networks, and Research Use: Patterns Across Three School Districts

Cited by 22 publications

References 8 publications

A Third Way: The Politics of School District Takeover and Turnaround in Lawrence, Massachusetts

A Third Way: The Politics of School District Takeover and Turnaround in Lawrence, Massachusetts

Using policy network analysis to understand ideological convergence and change in educational subsystems

State Boards of Education: Lesser Known Policy Actors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About