Pub Date : 2024-04-18DOI: 10.1177/01614681241247915
Eric R. Felix, Denisa Gándara, Sosanya Jones
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.
{"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":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681241247915","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":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140688934","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-09DOI: 10.1177/01614681241244934
Angela Johnson
Dual language education aims to foster the development of bilingualism, biliteracy, sociocultural competence, and academic skills in all school subjects. Early correlational research suggests that participation in dual language education is associated with higher achievement. Recent studies leveraged more comprehensive sets of baseline characteristics and found that dual language students improved their achievement status more than other students. A major limitation to these studies is their lack of ability to model within-student growth. Thus, we lack evidence on the relationship between dual language education and growth trajectories within and across grades. This paper reports academic achievement and growth in grades 2 through 8 for Hispanic participants and nonparticipants of a Spanish–English dual language program. It extends the literature by providing novel evidence on seasonal patterns of learning for multilingual students across the elementary and middle grades. Applying a piecewise multilevel model to rich assessment data on a large sample of Hispanic students in a district in the Midwest, I compare the math and English reading growth rates of participants to nonparticipants of a dual language (DL) program. By separately specifying growth terms for each school year and summer, I test whether any differences in growth rates between DL and non-DL students expand, stay the same, or diminish across grade levels. Dual language participants started second grade with lower achievement than nonparticipants. In math, dual language participants grew more than nonparticipants during each year in grades 2 to 5 but lost more learning during summers. In English reading, dual language participants grew more during some school years. These findings suggest summer learning opportunities are crucial for addressing achievement disparities.
{"title":"Dual Language Education and Academic Growth","authors":"Angela Johnson","doi":"10.1177/01614681241244934","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681241244934","url":null,"abstract":"Dual language education aims to foster the development of bilingualism, biliteracy, sociocultural competence, and academic skills in all school subjects. Early correlational research suggests that participation in dual language education is associated with higher achievement. Recent studies leveraged more comprehensive sets of baseline characteristics and found that dual language students improved their achievement status more than other students. A major limitation to these studies is their lack of ability to model within-student growth. Thus, we lack evidence on the relationship between dual language education and growth trajectories within and across grades. This paper reports academic achievement and growth in grades 2 through 8 for Hispanic participants and nonparticipants of a Spanish–English dual language program. It extends the literature by providing novel evidence on seasonal patterns of learning for multilingual students across the elementary and middle grades. Applying a piecewise multilevel model to rich assessment data on a large sample of Hispanic students in a district in the Midwest, I compare the math and English reading growth rates of participants to nonparticipants of a dual language (DL) program. By separately specifying growth terms for each school year and summer, I test whether any differences in growth rates between DL and non-DL students expand, stay the same, or diminish across grade levels. Dual language participants started second grade with lower achievement than nonparticipants. In math, dual language participants grew more than nonparticipants during each year in grades 2 to 5 but lost more learning during summers. In English reading, dual language participants grew more during some school years. These findings suggest summer learning opportunities are crucial for addressing achievement disparities.","PeriodicalId":22248,"journal":{"name":"Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140722667","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-03-23DOI: 10.1177/01614681241238886
Dorothy E. Hines
Educational researchers have widely used the term “racial microaggressions” as a theoretical framework for examining everyday and subtle forms of discrimination predicated against people of color. However, there are historical and contemporary differences in how Black people experience schools and other social institutions that a racial microaggressions lens does not fully embrace. Using a new frame termed “antiblack aggressions,” I discuss the history and damage of using racial microaggressions to examine the experiences of Black students. Furthermore, this piece calls for a paradigm shift that aligns with the original conceptualization of the term “microaggressions,” re-centers the Black experience, and fosters Black epistemological futures in educational research.
{"title":"Toward Black Epistemological Futures: Centering Antiblack Aggressions in Educational Research","authors":"Dorothy E. Hines","doi":"10.1177/01614681241238886","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681241238886","url":null,"abstract":"Educational researchers have widely used the term “racial microaggressions” as a theoretical framework for examining everyday and subtle forms of discrimination predicated against people of color. However, there are historical and contemporary differences in how Black people experience schools and other social institutions that a racial microaggressions lens does not fully embrace. Using a new frame termed “antiblack aggressions,” I discuss the history and damage of using racial microaggressions to examine the experiences of Black students. Furthermore, this piece calls for a paradigm shift that aligns with the original conceptualization of the term “microaggressions,” re-centers the Black experience, and fosters Black epistemological futures in educational research.","PeriodicalId":22248,"journal":{"name":"Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140210650","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-03-20DOI: 10.1177/01614681241240283
Aaron M. Pallas, Cami Touloukian
Federal and state reforms have expanded accountability systems for school districts, schools, and teachers. However, there is little evidence that the implementation of new teacher evaluation systems relying on measures of student learning and measures of teaching practice, with differentiated performance categories and rewards and sanctions, have had broad positive influences on teaching practice and student learning. We seek to contribute to an understanding of the modest influence of teacher evaluation systems by focusing on the targets of the policies—teachers—and how they experience the evaluation systems. Drawing on principal-agent theory and control-value theory, each of which suggests that teacher control over their performance evaluations influences their behavioral responses to them, we develop a taxonomy of teachers’ narratives of their subjective control of their evaluations. We interviewed 141 New York City teachers working in 27 traditional elementary, middle, and high schools in the 2015–16 school year, asking about their experiences with Advance, the New York City annual teacher evaluation system. We developed a thematic analysis system for coding and analyzing the interviews that began with a set of categories reflective of the larger project’s research questions and prior research on performance evaluation in general and teacher evaluation in particular. All told, we coded 4,077 excerpts from the 141 teacher interviews, an average of about 29 excerpts per interview. Seventy-one percent of the teachers in our sample indicated that they had no control over some aspect of their teacher evaluation ratings. Teachers noted three areas in their ratings that they deemed out of their control: other people’s behaviors, notably students, teachers, and the administrators observing and rating their classroom practice; the technology of teacher evaluation, especially the features of observation rubrics and student assessments, and for some teachers, statistical models; and the broader social context of the school, particularly the resources available to support teachers and students and the uncertainties of students’ home lives. A small number of teachers noted their control over their teaching practices and control over their own thoughts and behaviors. This study was situated in New York City at a time when many teachers believed the teacher evaluation system was designed to be punitive. Under these circumstances, teachers’ responses to the evaluation system hinge on their trust in school leadership and their perceptions of how much voice they have in the design and implementation of the system. This trust is enhanced when teachers have confidence that principals are able to observe their practice accurately and consistently.
{"title":"A Taxonomy of Subjective Control: Teachers‘ Narrative Accounts of a Teacher Evaluation System","authors":"Aaron M. Pallas, Cami Touloukian","doi":"10.1177/01614681241240283","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681241240283","url":null,"abstract":"Federal and state reforms have expanded accountability systems for school districts, schools, and teachers. However, there is little evidence that the implementation of new teacher evaluation systems relying on measures of student learning and measures of teaching practice, with differentiated performance categories and rewards and sanctions, have had broad positive influences on teaching practice and student learning. We seek to contribute to an understanding of the modest influence of teacher evaluation systems by focusing on the targets of the policies—teachers—and how they experience the evaluation systems. Drawing on principal-agent theory and control-value theory, each of which suggests that teacher control over their performance evaluations influences their behavioral responses to them, we develop a taxonomy of teachers’ narratives of their subjective control of their evaluations. We interviewed 141 New York City teachers working in 27 traditional elementary, middle, and high schools in the 2015–16 school year, asking about their experiences with Advance, the New York City annual teacher evaluation system. We developed a thematic analysis system for coding and analyzing the interviews that began with a set of categories reflective of the larger project’s research questions and prior research on performance evaluation in general and teacher evaluation in particular. All told, we coded 4,077 excerpts from the 141 teacher interviews, an average of about 29 excerpts per interview. Seventy-one percent of the teachers in our sample indicated that they had no control over some aspect of their teacher evaluation ratings. Teachers noted three areas in their ratings that they deemed out of their control: other people’s behaviors, notably students, teachers, and the administrators observing and rating their classroom practice; the technology of teacher evaluation, especially the features of observation rubrics and student assessments, and for some teachers, statistical models; and the broader social context of the school, particularly the resources available to support teachers and students and the uncertainties of students’ home lives. A small number of teachers noted their control over their teaching practices and control over their own thoughts and behaviors. This study was situated in New York City at a time when many teachers believed the teacher evaluation system was designed to be punitive. Under these circumstances, teachers’ responses to the evaluation system hinge on their trust in school leadership and their perceptions of how much voice they have in the design and implementation of the system. This trust is enhanced when teachers have confidence that principals are able to observe their practice accurately and consistently.","PeriodicalId":22248,"journal":{"name":"Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140225079","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-03-18DOI: 10.1177/01614681241240287
Kevin J. Dougherty
Choice is a key part of the culture of the United States. Americans believe deeply in the personal and social usefulness of being able to make many choices. Hence, all sorts of efforts have been made to increase students’ options, whether by creating many different kinds of schools and colleges, offering a great array of majors and degree programs, or allowing multiple modes of attending higher education. However, this proliferation of choices reproduces social inequality in two crucial ways. First, the provision of many options produces social inequality: people often make choices that do not serve their interests as well as they might wish, particularly if they are faced with many options and do not have adequate information. Second, the provision of many choices legitimates social inequality: the more one thinks in terms of choices in the context of a highly individualistic culture such as that of the United States, the easier it is for dominant groups to blame nondominants as creating their own troubles through feckless choices. This paper focuses on one particularly important realm of choice—higher education—because it has come to play a central role in the transmission and legitimation of social inequality. Four higher education choices are of particular interest: whether to enter higher education, which college to attend, what major to choose, and what modality to attend college (for example, part time versus full time or in person versus online). Analyzing this choice-making process, the paper focuses on the impact of inequitable access to high-quality information. Beyond analyzing how choice proliferation and information inequity join to produce and legitimate educational inequality, the paper lays out detailed recommendations for what can be done to reduce this inegalitarian impact. The paper draws on a wide variety of social science literatures including sociology of education, critical race theory, behavioral economics, and cognitive and social psychology. More particularly, the paper synthesizes sociology of education research inspired by Pierre Bourdieu and work drawing on critical race theory. Although there are major tensions between these two bodies of work, they can be fruitfully combined to both illuminate and overcome the ways information inequity produces and legitimates educational inequality. To reduce the role of information inequity in producing and legitimating educational inequality, the paper recommends four strands of change. One strand involves providing high-quality information more equitably through restructured and much more pervasive school counseling and other forms of information provision during middle school, high school, and higher education. A crucial component of this more equitable information provision is drawing on the community cultural wealth of nondominant communities. Second, it is important to design an “architecture of choice” that simplifies choice making and nudges students toward better choices
{"title":"Choice, Information Inequity, and the Production, Legitimation, and Reduction of Educational Inequality","authors":"Kevin J. Dougherty","doi":"10.1177/01614681241240287","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681241240287","url":null,"abstract":"Choice is a key part of the culture of the United States. Americans believe deeply in the personal and social usefulness of being able to make many choices. Hence, all sorts of efforts have been made to increase students’ options, whether by creating many different kinds of schools and colleges, offering a great array of majors and degree programs, or allowing multiple modes of attending higher education. However, this proliferation of choices reproduces social inequality in two crucial ways. First, the provision of many options produces social inequality: people often make choices that do not serve their interests as well as they might wish, particularly if they are faced with many options and do not have adequate information. Second, the provision of many choices legitimates social inequality: the more one thinks in terms of choices in the context of a highly individualistic culture such as that of the United States, the easier it is for dominant groups to blame nondominants as creating their own troubles through feckless choices. This paper focuses on one particularly important realm of choice—higher education—because it has come to play a central role in the transmission and legitimation of social inequality. Four higher education choices are of particular interest: whether to enter higher education, which college to attend, what major to choose, and what modality to attend college (for example, part time versus full time or in person versus online). Analyzing this choice-making process, the paper focuses on the impact of inequitable access to high-quality information. Beyond analyzing how choice proliferation and information inequity join to produce and legitimate educational inequality, the paper lays out detailed recommendations for what can be done to reduce this inegalitarian impact. The paper draws on a wide variety of social science literatures including sociology of education, critical race theory, behavioral economics, and cognitive and social psychology. More particularly, the paper synthesizes sociology of education research inspired by Pierre Bourdieu and work drawing on critical race theory. Although there are major tensions between these two bodies of work, they can be fruitfully combined to both illuminate and overcome the ways information inequity produces and legitimates educational inequality. To reduce the role of information inequity in producing and legitimating educational inequality, the paper recommends four strands of change. One strand involves providing high-quality information more equitably through restructured and much more pervasive school counseling and other forms of information provision during middle school, high school, and higher education. A crucial component of this more equitable information provision is drawing on the community cultural wealth of nondominant communities. Second, it is important to design an “architecture of choice” that simplifies choice making and nudges students toward better choices","PeriodicalId":22248,"journal":{"name":"Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140231936","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-03-11DOI: 10.1177/01614681241238882
Daniel Friedrich, James Shanahan
During the first months of the COVID pandemic, teachers were forced to move to online instruction without the appropriate resources. They resorted to social media to gather expertise and ideas. This study is grounded in an analysis of the questions posed by K–12 teachers on popular Facebook groups. The authors argue that a close analysis of what K–12 educators are asking and wondering about in online teacher groups at a moment in which much of what they know and trust has been disrupted can be generative as a novel feedback loop to engage in conversations about some common practices in teacher education. Specifically, they ask: How can an analysis of questions posed by educators on public Facebook groups in the early pandemic enter into a productive conversation with teacher education programs beyond the specificities of that context? The study performs a thematic analysis based on categories that were inductively coded from 752 questions posed between March and June 2020 by educators in the three most popular public Facebook groups dedicated exclusively to K–12 teaching during the pandemic. The goal is to consider the underlying assumptions and ideas embedded in the questions being asked in these groups, and to place them within the context of the authors’ political understandings of the role of teacher education. Four themes emerged from the analysis: an expanding notion of community, tensions in the understandings of “context,” new positionings of expertise, and a questioning of what counts as legitimate schooling. The themes led to a need for teacher education programs to always consider their students’ professional identities as collectively constructed and to find ways to disrupt universal models of the mind. The authors also invite programs to rethink the location of expertise by taking into account the practices that young teachers are already engaged in when seeking professional knowledge. This opening could potentially lead to perhaps the hardest thing to do within teacher education programs: to provide the conditions to reimagine schooling.
{"title":"An Analysis of Questions from Teachers' Online Groups: Turning the Lens Back to Teacher Education","authors":"Daniel Friedrich, James Shanahan","doi":"10.1177/01614681241238882","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681241238882","url":null,"abstract":"During the first months of the COVID pandemic, teachers were forced to move to online instruction without the appropriate resources. They resorted to social media to gather expertise and ideas. This study is grounded in an analysis of the questions posed by K–12 teachers on popular Facebook groups. The authors argue that a close analysis of what K–12 educators are asking and wondering about in online teacher groups at a moment in which much of what they know and trust has been disrupted can be generative as a novel feedback loop to engage in conversations about some common practices in teacher education. Specifically, they ask: How can an analysis of questions posed by educators on public Facebook groups in the early pandemic enter into a productive conversation with teacher education programs beyond the specificities of that context? The study performs a thematic analysis based on categories that were inductively coded from 752 questions posed between March and June 2020 by educators in the three most popular public Facebook groups dedicated exclusively to K–12 teaching during the pandemic. The goal is to consider the underlying assumptions and ideas embedded in the questions being asked in these groups, and to place them within the context of the authors’ political understandings of the role of teacher education. Four themes emerged from the analysis: an expanding notion of community, tensions in the understandings of “context,” new positionings of expertise, and a questioning of what counts as legitimate schooling. The themes led to a need for teacher education programs to always consider their students’ professional identities as collectively constructed and to find ways to disrupt universal models of the mind. The authors also invite programs to rethink the location of expertise by taking into account the practices that young teachers are already engaged in when seeking professional knowledge. This opening could potentially lead to perhaps the hardest thing to do within teacher education programs: to provide the conditions to reimagine schooling.","PeriodicalId":22248,"journal":{"name":"Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140251664","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-03-06DOI: 10.1177/01614681241235484
Vincent Cho, Decoteau J. Irby, Katrina Borowiec
In thousands of classrooms throughout the United States and internationally, behavior management apps have become an integral part of schools’ discipline machineries. Such apps are designed to help teachers enforce rules, especially when it comes to rewards and punishments within school token economies. To understand how these apps are beginning to shape and reshape schooling, research is needed that sheds light on the values and beliefs underpinning their use. The purpose of this study is to describe and analyze three schools’ discipline practices involving behavior management apps. Our two research questions focused on the paradigms underpinning schools' discipline models and on the influence of these paradigms on schools’ app uses. Our investigation is informed by the scholarship on classroom management, as well as key concepts from Foucault’s (1977) Discipline and Punish. This qualitative, comparative case study drew on data gathered at three urban schools. In total, 34 interviews were conducted with campus administrators and teachers. Within-case portraits described paradigms and practices at each school, and cross-case analyses addressed patterns across the schools. Schools’ behavior app uses were underpinned by differing school discipline paradigms. Although all three schools saw behavior apps as fostering orderly classroom environments, schools’ practices were underpinned by differing sets of values and beliefs (e.g., accountability/social control; neoliberalism; positivity and fun). In this way, the look and feel of app practices, and, ultimately, schools’ overarching discipline systems, also varied. This study examines a widespread, yet understudied, educational technology. By problematizing the values and beliefs underpinning teachers’ behavior app practices, the present study invites scholars and practitioners to question how rewards, punishments, and relationships manifest in schools. In doing so, it highlights opportunities to join with students, parents, and other stakeholders in broader conversations about schooling and discipline.
{"title":"Technology and Discipline: Examining the Use of Apps for Classroom Behavior Management","authors":"Vincent Cho, Decoteau J. Irby, Katrina Borowiec","doi":"10.1177/01614681241235484","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681241235484","url":null,"abstract":"In thousands of classrooms throughout the United States and internationally, behavior management apps have become an integral part of schools’ discipline machineries. Such apps are designed to help teachers enforce rules, especially when it comes to rewards and punishments within school token economies. To understand how these apps are beginning to shape and reshape schooling, research is needed that sheds light on the values and beliefs underpinning their use. The purpose of this study is to describe and analyze three schools’ discipline practices involving behavior management apps. Our two research questions focused on the paradigms underpinning schools' discipline models and on the influence of these paradigms on schools’ app uses. Our investigation is informed by the scholarship on classroom management, as well as key concepts from Foucault’s (1977) Discipline and Punish. This qualitative, comparative case study drew on data gathered at three urban schools. In total, 34 interviews were conducted with campus administrators and teachers. Within-case portraits described paradigms and practices at each school, and cross-case analyses addressed patterns across the schools. Schools’ behavior app uses were underpinned by differing school discipline paradigms. Although all three schools saw behavior apps as fostering orderly classroom environments, schools’ practices were underpinned by differing sets of values and beliefs (e.g., accountability/social control; neoliberalism; positivity and fun). In this way, the look and feel of app practices, and, ultimately, schools’ overarching discipline systems, also varied. This study examines a widespread, yet understudied, educational technology. By problematizing the values and beliefs underpinning teachers’ behavior app practices, the present study invites scholars and practitioners to question how rewards, punishments, and relationships manifest in schools. In doing so, it highlights opportunities to join with students, parents, and other stakeholders in broader conversations about schooling and discipline.","PeriodicalId":22248,"journal":{"name":"Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140262668","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-01-17DOI: 10.1177/01614681241227040
J. Rury
This article considers how the history of education has been represented in Teachers College Record over the course of its own history. Almost from the begining it has featured articles dealing with historical questions and the future of the field, as well as serving as a forum for the work of many historians of education. This has included notable scholars from the Teachers College faculty, and a wide variety of other historians, continung to the present.
{"title":"Education History in the History of Teachers College Record: A Long and Distinguished Record","authors":"J. Rury","doi":"10.1177/01614681241227040","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681241227040","url":null,"abstract":"This article considers how the history of education has been represented in Teachers College Record over the course of its own history. Almost from the begining it has featured articles dealing with historical questions and the future of the field, as well as serving as a forum for the work of many historians of education. This has included notable scholars from the Teachers College faculty, and a wide variety of other historians, continung to the present.","PeriodicalId":22248,"journal":{"name":"Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139527028","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-20DOI: 10.1177/01614681231219307
Rick Lybeck
This critical narrative study analyzes the discursive means by which the educational nonprofit AVID acculturates teacher educators and teacher preparation programs to its ideological network. Through scenes reconstructed from Cornell notes taken at an AVID Summer Institute, the author examines his double identity as an AVID for Higher Education (AHE) trainee, simultaneously alienated as a social justice educator but complicit in co-constructing AVID’s target white neoliberal identity. This article aims to encourage resistant risk-taking among critically leaning educators who may find themselves either avoiding white neoliberal educational reform activities taking place in their programs or complying with them against their better judgment. By co-conspiring to carry out critical interventions during white neoliberal reform activities, or by conducting critical “underground” research as this article exemplifies, white neoliberal educational reform may be decentered and more space opened for anti-oppressive pedagogies in teacher education. This study combines autobiographical and arts-informed methods from narrative inquiry to examine the double identity that emerged for the author during AHE training. Beginning with critical Cornell notes taken and kept “underground” during training, the author turns to Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s novella Notes From Underground as a guide to analysis, showing that critical resistance to the culture of positivism white neoliberalism promotes is both long-standing and not won by working alone. The article recommends that, in the struggle to center racial and social justice in teacher education, critical educators should co-conspire and actively seek out white neoliberal reform activities, prepared to intervene with knowledge not only from critical theories but from the histories of race that drive the discourses reform organizations use to acculturate teacher educators to their ideological networks.
{"title":"Cornell Notes from Underground: Whiteness, Neoliberalism, and AVID for Higher Education","authors":"Rick Lybeck","doi":"10.1177/01614681231219307","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681231219307","url":null,"abstract":"This critical narrative study analyzes the discursive means by which the educational nonprofit AVID acculturates teacher educators and teacher preparation programs to its ideological network. Through scenes reconstructed from Cornell notes taken at an AVID Summer Institute, the author examines his double identity as an AVID for Higher Education (AHE) trainee, simultaneously alienated as a social justice educator but complicit in co-constructing AVID’s target white neoliberal identity. This article aims to encourage resistant risk-taking among critically leaning educators who may find themselves either avoiding white neoliberal educational reform activities taking place in their programs or complying with them against their better judgment. By co-conspiring to carry out critical interventions during white neoliberal reform activities, or by conducting critical “underground” research as this article exemplifies, white neoliberal educational reform may be decentered and more space opened for anti-oppressive pedagogies in teacher education. This study combines autobiographical and arts-informed methods from narrative inquiry to examine the double identity that emerged for the author during AHE training. Beginning with critical Cornell notes taken and kept “underground” during training, the author turns to Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s novella Notes From Underground as a guide to analysis, showing that critical resistance to the culture of positivism white neoliberalism promotes is both long-standing and not won by working alone. The article recommends that, in the struggle to center racial and social justice in teacher education, critical educators should co-conspire and actively seek out white neoliberal reform activities, prepared to intervene with knowledge not only from critical theories but from the histories of race that drive the discourses reform organizations use to acculturate teacher educators to their ideological networks.","PeriodicalId":22248,"journal":{"name":"Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138955661","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-13DOI: 10.1177/01614681231217580
Jen Stacy, Miguel Casar Rodriguez
The onset of the COVID-19 disrupted schools’ conventional architecture, making its once invisible infrastructure hyper-visible. Given the opportunity to reconfigure pervasive educational injustice amid school closures, the frenzy of a pandemic permitted the undercurrents of power to go unquestioned as educators contemplated how to move schooling into students’ homes. As a result, virtual schooling during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic was conceived and operated through neoliberal logics of power. To preserve the structural, ideological, and reproductive function of schools, panoptic power surveilled people in their homes, raising concerns about antidemocratic practices of publicly regulating private spaces, especially for people of color. In this essay, we theorize a new articulation of the panopticon that emerged during virtual schooling by examining the experiences of mothers of color across greater Los Angeles during spring 2020. We first explore Foucault’s (1977) original theory of the panopticon as a tool to regulate and enforce institutional ideologues through an omnipresent gaze executed by myriad technologies. Then, we theorize how these technologies have become reconfigured during virtual schooling in the COVID-19 pandemic. To do so, we delineate how novel forms of surveillance reformed private space, rearticulated people and their roles, and reconstituted value and misdistributed shame. Most worrisome, our research highlights how these emerging forces disproportionally function to exacerbate epistemological and ontological violence impacting the lives and educational experiences of children and families of color. Findings stem from a three-year ethnography about undergraduate students who were also parents studying education at a Hispanic-serving institution in Los Angeles. Thirteen mothers, all women of color, elected to continue participating in research during the onset of the pandemic. The authors conducted virtual observations and interviews were conducted while the mothers documented their virtual schooling experiences through photos, videos, and journaling. Recognizing that participants’ experiences were situated amid broader societal discourse, we also analyzed relevant news and social media posts that codified their realities. We argue that a nuanced understanding of how institutionalized power operates within and through schools is urgent and invite critical educationalists to further study this most current variant of Foucault’s panopticon. We raise critical questions that have largely gone unasked, and especially unanswered, since COVID-19 transformed educational landscapes, and turn to critical researchers and educators to further interrogate panoptic operations within the identified domains, to expose others, and to work toward liberation. Assuming an abolitionist lens, we argue that better understanding of this nuanced, institutionalized power permits purposeful dismantlement in pursuit of schools’ liberatory potentia
{"title":"A Reconfigured Panopticon: COVID-19, Virtual Schooling, and Regulation of Our Homes","authors":"Jen Stacy, Miguel Casar Rodriguez","doi":"10.1177/01614681231217580","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681231217580","url":null,"abstract":"The onset of the COVID-19 disrupted schools’ conventional architecture, making its once invisible infrastructure hyper-visible. Given the opportunity to reconfigure pervasive educational injustice amid school closures, the frenzy of a pandemic permitted the undercurrents of power to go unquestioned as educators contemplated how to move schooling into students’ homes. As a result, virtual schooling during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic was conceived and operated through neoliberal logics of power. To preserve the structural, ideological, and reproductive function of schools, panoptic power surveilled people in their homes, raising concerns about antidemocratic practices of publicly regulating private spaces, especially for people of color. In this essay, we theorize a new articulation of the panopticon that emerged during virtual schooling by examining the experiences of mothers of color across greater Los Angeles during spring 2020. We first explore Foucault’s (1977) original theory of the panopticon as a tool to regulate and enforce institutional ideologues through an omnipresent gaze executed by myriad technologies. Then, we theorize how these technologies have become reconfigured during virtual schooling in the COVID-19 pandemic. To do so, we delineate how novel forms of surveillance reformed private space, rearticulated people and their roles, and reconstituted value and misdistributed shame. Most worrisome, our research highlights how these emerging forces disproportionally function to exacerbate epistemological and ontological violence impacting the lives and educational experiences of children and families of color. Findings stem from a three-year ethnography about undergraduate students who were also parents studying education at a Hispanic-serving institution in Los Angeles. Thirteen mothers, all women of color, elected to continue participating in research during the onset of the pandemic. The authors conducted virtual observations and interviews were conducted while the mothers documented their virtual schooling experiences through photos, videos, and journaling. Recognizing that participants’ experiences were situated amid broader societal discourse, we also analyzed relevant news and social media posts that codified their realities. We argue that a nuanced understanding of how institutionalized power operates within and through schools is urgent and invite critical educationalists to further study this most current variant of Foucault’s panopticon. We raise critical questions that have largely gone unasked, and especially unanswered, since COVID-19 transformed educational landscapes, and turn to critical researchers and educators to further interrogate panoptic operations within the identified domains, to expose others, and to work toward liberation. Assuming an abolitionist lens, we argue that better understanding of this nuanced, institutionalized power permits purposeful dismantlement in pursuit of schools’ liberatory potentia","PeriodicalId":22248,"journal":{"name":"Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139005085","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：