“All Students Matter”: The Place of Race in Discourse on Student Debt in a Federal Higher Education Policymaking Process

Eric R. Felix, Denisa Gándara, Sosanya Jones
{"title":"“All Students Matter”: The Place of Race in Discourse on Student Debt in a Federal Higher Education Policymaking Process","authors":"Eric R. Felix, Denisa Gándara, Sosanya Jones","doi":"10.1177/01614681241247915","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Nearly two decades have passed since the last successful reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. Since then, student loan debt and the accumulation patterns based on race have become a pressing issue to address in U.S. society. Student debt is one of the key issues on the federal higher education policy agenda. The purpose of this paper is to examine how race is addressed in a congressional hearing held to discuss the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. Specifically, we examined one congressional policy markup hearing to understand how members frame student debt and the racialized dynamics embedded within. We combined critical race theory and racial frames to discursively analyze 14 hours of congressional hearings on the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. Through critical discourse analysis, we interrogated the racialized discourse among policymakers as they proposed solutions and alternatives to address the issue of student debt during the policy markup process. Our findings highlight four types of discourse within a policy markup hearing: “All Students” Matter, Paternalistic, Race-Evasive, and Explicit Racial Discourse. We offer recommendations for policymakers and researchers to contend with ahistoricism and race-evasiveness prevalent in policy markup hearings and ways for future policy proposals to be more explicit in naming the groups facing disproportionate negative impact, the mechanisms that produce such inequities, and interventions that can address them.","PeriodicalId":22248,"journal":{"name":"Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681241247915","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Nearly two decades have passed since the last successful reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. Since then, student loan debt and the accumulation patterns based on race have become a pressing issue to address in U.S. society. Student debt is one of the key issues on the federal higher education policy agenda. The purpose of this paper is to examine how race is addressed in a congressional hearing held to discuss the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. Specifically, we examined one congressional policy markup hearing to understand how members frame student debt and the racialized dynamics embedded within. We combined critical race theory and racial frames to discursively analyze 14 hours of congressional hearings on the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. Through critical discourse analysis, we interrogated the racialized discourse among policymakers as they proposed solutions and alternatives to address the issue of student debt during the policy markup process. Our findings highlight four types of discourse within a policy markup hearing: “All Students” Matter, Paternalistic, Race-Evasive, and Explicit Racial Discourse. We offer recommendations for policymakers and researchers to contend with ahistoricism and race-evasiveness prevalent in policy markup hearings and ways for future policy proposals to be more explicit in naming the groups facing disproportionate negative impact, the mechanisms that produce such inequities, and interventions that can address them.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
"所有学生都重要":种族在联邦高等教育决策过程中有关学生债务的讨论中的地位
自上一次成功重新授权《高等教育法》以来,已过去了近二十年。从那时起,学生贷款债务和基于种族的积累模式已成为美国社会亟待解决的问题。学生债务是联邦高等教育政策议程上的关键问题之一。本文旨在研究国会为讨论《高等教育法》重新授权而举行的听证会是如何处理种族问题的。具体而言,我们研究了一次国会政策评估听证会,以了解议员们是如何界定学生债务以及其中蕴含的种族化动态的。我们结合批判性种族理论和种族框架,对 14 个小时的国会听证会进行了话语分析,内容涉及《高等教育法》的重新授权。通过批判性话语分析,我们探究了政策制定者在政策标注过程中为解决学生债务问题提出解决方案和替代方案时的种族化话语。我们的研究结果凸显了政策讨论听证会中的四种话语类型:"所有学生 "都重要、家长制、种族入侵和明确的种族话语。我们为政策制定者和研究人员提供了建议,以应对政策评估听证会中普遍存在的非历史主义和种族侵扰,并为未来的政策提案提供了方法,以更明确地指出面临过度负面影响的群体、产生这种不平等的机制以及可以解决这些问题的干预措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Pride Flags in Public Schools: Evolving Legal Issues to Consider “It’s Going to Go Beyond These Walls”: Toward a More Expansive Vision of Civic Learning Taking Seriously Campus Debates Surrounding Invited Speakers: Open-Mindedness and the Ethics of Inquiry in Higher Education From a Spark, a Mighty Flame: How Germinal Networks Support Teachers of Color to Promote Change in Activist Organizations and Beyond Avenues for Engagement? Testing the Democratic Nature of Library Book Challenge Processes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1