Pub Date : 2024-02-13DOI: 10.1177/14782103241233081
Kerstin Löf Catini, Susanne Westman, E. Alerby
Public pressure on evaluation has influenced educational projects and national evaluation systems for many decades. This article extends the ongoing discussions in the field, offering a problematising exploration of evaluation as an educational policy phenomenon, thinking with the notion of rhythm in the analysis. Approaching educational evaluation with the notion of rhythm has, for us, implied a philosophical exploration of the dynamics between evaluation and education, drawing on the writings of Henri Lefebvre and Anna L. Tsing. Rolling of chairs between computers, with the policy documents spread out on a table alongside the original philosophical texts, in a material sense, placed us, as researchers, in an embodied analytical process between human and non-human agency. The turns and returns, back and forth, between policy, philosophy, and previous research enabled unexpected frictions to emerge and prompted us to view issues central to evaluation in surprisingly new ways. ‘Striving towards goals and orientations’, ‘goal-in-between’, ‘striving-in-between’, and ‘results of and for results’ are with inspiration from Anna L. Tsing presented as a rush of troubled stories.
几十年来，公众对评价的压力一直影响着教育项目和国家评价体系。本文对这一领域正在进行的讨论进行了延伸，将评价作为一种教育政策现象进行了问题探究，并在分析中使用了节奏的概念。对我们来说，用节奏的概念来进行教育评价，意味着对评价与教育之间的动态关系进行哲学探索，我们借鉴了亨利-列斐伏尔（Henri Lefebvre）和安娜-青（Anna L. Tsing）的著作。椅子在电脑之间滚动，政策文件与哲学原著一起摆放在桌子上，从物质意义上讲，我们作为研究人员，置身于人与非人之间的具体分析过程中。在政策、哲学和以前的研究之间来回的转折和回归，使我们产生了意想不到的摩擦，并促使我们以令人惊讶的新方式来看待评估的核心问题。努力实现目标和方向"、"介于两者之间的目标"、"介于两者之间的努力 "以及 "结果的结果和为结果而结果 "是在 Anna L. Tsing 的启发下，以匆忙的麻烦故事的形式呈现出来的。
{"title":"Educational evaluation as a rhythmical policy phenomenon","authors":"Kerstin Löf Catini, Susanne Westman, E. Alerby","doi":"10.1177/14782103241233081","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103241233081","url":null,"abstract":"Public pressure on evaluation has influenced educational projects and national evaluation systems for many decades. This article extends the ongoing discussions in the field, offering a problematising exploration of evaluation as an educational policy phenomenon, thinking with the notion of rhythm in the analysis. Approaching educational evaluation with the notion of rhythm has, for us, implied a philosophical exploration of the dynamics between evaluation and education, drawing on the writings of Henri Lefebvre and Anna L. Tsing. Rolling of chairs between computers, with the policy documents spread out on a table alongside the original philosophical texts, in a material sense, placed us, as researchers, in an embodied analytical process between human and non-human agency. The turns and returns, back and forth, between policy, philosophy, and previous research enabled unexpected frictions to emerge and prompted us to view issues central to evaluation in surprisingly new ways. ‘Striving towards goals and orientations’, ‘goal-in-between’, ‘striving-in-between’, and ‘results of and for results’ are with inspiration from Anna L. Tsing presented as a rush of troubled stories.","PeriodicalId":46984,"journal":{"name":"Policy Futures in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139781575","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 : 2024-02-13DOI: 10.1177/14782103241233081
Kerstin Löf Catini, Susanne Westman, E. Alerby
Public pressure on evaluation has influenced educational projects and national evaluation systems for many decades. This article extends the ongoing discussions in the field, offering a problematising exploration of evaluation as an educational policy phenomenon, thinking with the notion of rhythm in the analysis. Approaching educational evaluation with the notion of rhythm has, for us, implied a philosophical exploration of the dynamics between evaluation and education, drawing on the writings of Henri Lefebvre and Anna L. Tsing. Rolling of chairs between computers, with the policy documents spread out on a table alongside the original philosophical texts, in a material sense, placed us, as researchers, in an embodied analytical process between human and non-human agency. The turns and returns, back and forth, between policy, philosophy, and previous research enabled unexpected frictions to emerge and prompted us to view issues central to evaluation in surprisingly new ways. ‘Striving towards goals and orientations’, ‘goal-in-between’, ‘striving-in-between’, and ‘results of and for results’ are with inspiration from Anna L. Tsing presented as a rush of troubled stories.
几十年来，公众对评价的压力一直影响着教育项目和国家评价体系。本文对这一领域正在进行的讨论进行了延伸，将评价作为一种教育政策现象进行了问题探究，并在分析中使用了节奏的概念。对我们来说，用节奏的概念来进行教育评价，意味着对评价与教育之间的动态关系进行哲学探索，我们借鉴了亨利-列斐伏尔（Henri Lefebvre）和安娜-青（Anna L. Tsing）的著作。椅子在电脑之间滚动，政策文件与哲学原著一起摆放在桌子上，从物质意义上讲，我们作为研究人员，置身于人与非人之间的具体分析过程中。在政策、哲学和以前的研究之间来回的转折和回归，使我们产生了意想不到的摩擦，并促使我们以令人惊讶的新方式来看待评估的核心问题。努力实现目标和方向"、"介于两者之间的目标"、"介于两者之间的努力 "以及 "结果的结果和为结果而结果 "是在 Anna L. Tsing 的启发下，以匆忙的麻烦故事的形式呈现出来的。
{"title":"Educational evaluation as a rhythmical policy phenomenon","authors":"Kerstin Löf Catini, Susanne Westman, E. Alerby","doi":"10.1177/14782103241233081","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103241233081","url":null,"abstract":"Public pressure on evaluation has influenced educational projects and national evaluation systems for many decades. This article extends the ongoing discussions in the field, offering a problematising exploration of evaluation as an educational policy phenomenon, thinking with the notion of rhythm in the analysis. Approaching educational evaluation with the notion of rhythm has, for us, implied a philosophical exploration of the dynamics between evaluation and education, drawing on the writings of Henri Lefebvre and Anna L. Tsing. Rolling of chairs between computers, with the policy documents spread out on a table alongside the original philosophical texts, in a material sense, placed us, as researchers, in an embodied analytical process between human and non-human agency. The turns and returns, back and forth, between policy, philosophy, and previous research enabled unexpected frictions to emerge and prompted us to view issues central to evaluation in surprisingly new ways. ‘Striving towards goals and orientations’, ‘goal-in-between’, ‘striving-in-between’, and ‘results of and for results’ are with inspiration from Anna L. Tsing presented as a rush of troubled stories.","PeriodicalId":46984,"journal":{"name":"Policy Futures in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139841469","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 : 2024-02-10DOI: 10.1177/14782103241232839
Derek R. Ford
The antagonism between “class” and “race” have plagued educational theory for decades. As a communist organizer seeking to move Marxist educational theory out of the stagnant waters of theoretical debates, I turn to recent CRT scholarship, which I find much more in line with the communist project. Yet, this literature omits world-historic and ongoing transformations inaugurated particularly since the beginning of the 20th century by erasing, discounting or, denouncing them. I argue the primary factors inhibiting educational researchers: Anticommunism. The global revolutionary era led largely by revolutionary communists contains the most fruitful explanations of those conditions and connections (and the historical legacies accounting for mass movements in the U.S. today, like the historic 2020 uprising against the War on Black America). This rich and dynamic legacy is what can get educational scholarship beyond the cages of academia. After outlining the interconnection between anticommunism and anti-Black racism as the contours of master narratives, I demonstrate how anticommunism continues to hold education’s potential contributions to the struggle back while accounting for the material conditions responsible for the absence of revolutionary theory and practice and the overwhelming surplus of theories critical of revolution in the university today. I demonstrate how anti-Black racism in the U.S. is tethered to anticommunism and how Leninism provides the theoretical and practical link uniting the global struggle of the oppressed and creating the Black and indigenous-led communist movement, contending struggles against white supremacy, capitalism, and imperialism depend on a rejection of anticommunism by turning to Black communist Claudia Jones.
{"title":"What’s so Marxist about Marxist Educational Theory?","authors":"Derek R. Ford","doi":"10.1177/14782103241232839","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103241232839","url":null,"abstract":"The antagonism between “class” and “race” have plagued educational theory for decades. As a communist organizer seeking to move Marxist educational theory out of the stagnant waters of theoretical debates, I turn to recent CRT scholarship, which I find much more in line with the communist project. Yet, this literature omits world-historic and ongoing transformations inaugurated particularly since the beginning of the 20th century by erasing, discounting or, denouncing them. I argue the primary factors inhibiting educational researchers: Anticommunism. The global revolutionary era led largely by revolutionary communists contains the most fruitful explanations of those conditions and connections (and the historical legacies accounting for mass movements in the U.S. today, like the historic 2020 uprising against the War on Black America). This rich and dynamic legacy is what can get educational scholarship beyond the cages of academia. After outlining the interconnection between anticommunism and anti-Black racism as the contours of master narratives, I demonstrate how anticommunism continues to hold education’s potential contributions to the struggle back while accounting for the material conditions responsible for the absence of revolutionary theory and practice and the overwhelming surplus of theories critical of revolution in the university today. I demonstrate how anti-Black racism in the U.S. is tethered to anticommunism and how Leninism provides the theoretical and practical link uniting the global struggle of the oppressed and creating the Black and indigenous-led communist movement, contending struggles against white supremacy, capitalism, and imperialism depend on a rejection of anticommunism by turning to Black communist Claudia Jones.","PeriodicalId":46984,"journal":{"name":"Policy Futures in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139787063","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 : 2024-02-10DOI: 10.1177/14782103241232839
Derek R. Ford
The antagonism between “class” and “race” have plagued educational theory for decades. As a communist organizer seeking to move Marxist educational theory out of the stagnant waters of theoretical debates, I turn to recent CRT scholarship, which I find much more in line with the communist project. Yet, this literature omits world-historic and ongoing transformations inaugurated particularly since the beginning of the 20th century by erasing, discounting or, denouncing them. I argue the primary factors inhibiting educational researchers: Anticommunism. The global revolutionary era led largely by revolutionary communists contains the most fruitful explanations of those conditions and connections (and the historical legacies accounting for mass movements in the U.S. today, like the historic 2020 uprising against the War on Black America). This rich and dynamic legacy is what can get educational scholarship beyond the cages of academia. After outlining the interconnection between anticommunism and anti-Black racism as the contours of master narratives, I demonstrate how anticommunism continues to hold education’s potential contributions to the struggle back while accounting for the material conditions responsible for the absence of revolutionary theory and practice and the overwhelming surplus of theories critical of revolution in the university today. I demonstrate how anti-Black racism in the U.S. is tethered to anticommunism and how Leninism provides the theoretical and practical link uniting the global struggle of the oppressed and creating the Black and indigenous-led communist movement, contending struggles against white supremacy, capitalism, and imperialism depend on a rejection of anticommunism by turning to Black communist Claudia Jones.
{"title":"What’s so Marxist about Marxist Educational Theory?","authors":"Derek R. Ford","doi":"10.1177/14782103241232839","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103241232839","url":null,"abstract":"The antagonism between “class” and “race” have plagued educational theory for decades. As a communist organizer seeking to move Marxist educational theory out of the stagnant waters of theoretical debates, I turn to recent CRT scholarship, which I find much more in line with the communist project. Yet, this literature omits world-historic and ongoing transformations inaugurated particularly since the beginning of the 20th century by erasing, discounting or, denouncing them. I argue the primary factors inhibiting educational researchers: Anticommunism. The global revolutionary era led largely by revolutionary communists contains the most fruitful explanations of those conditions and connections (and the historical legacies accounting for mass movements in the U.S. today, like the historic 2020 uprising against the War on Black America). This rich and dynamic legacy is what can get educational scholarship beyond the cages of academia. After outlining the interconnection between anticommunism and anti-Black racism as the contours of master narratives, I demonstrate how anticommunism continues to hold education’s potential contributions to the struggle back while accounting for the material conditions responsible for the absence of revolutionary theory and practice and the overwhelming surplus of theories critical of revolution in the university today. I demonstrate how anti-Black racism in the U.S. is tethered to anticommunism and how Leninism provides the theoretical and practical link uniting the global struggle of the oppressed and creating the Black and indigenous-led communist movement, contending struggles against white supremacy, capitalism, and imperialism depend on a rejection of anticommunism by turning to Black communist Claudia Jones.","PeriodicalId":46984,"journal":{"name":"Policy Futures in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139847116","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 : 2024-02-09DOI: 10.1177/14782103241232527
Glenn Toh
As part of my work as an educator, I see the need to surface for discussion what might indeed be considered as acts of oppression on the part of peer reviewers when certain aspects of knowing and meaning are misrecognized, obscured, or suppressed. Drawing on observations concerning coercive and oppressive relational and educational practices found in Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed as well as scholarly works in Critical Discourse Analysis critiquing inequitable practices within academic and social domains, I argue that a more academically (and socially) accountable, conscionable and humanizing alternative is one which engenders greater openness to questions concerning: (1) who it might be that gets to determine what counts as (publishable) knowledge; and (2) how such formulations of knowledge may be tied to powerful or ideologized ways of knowing and meaning making. This article is also an appeal for greater awareness that acts which work directly or indirectly to silence earnest attempts to highlight inequitable and/or dehumanizing educational beliefs and practices are also acts which will disadvantage, marginalize, or silence people directly or indirectly involved, including parents and children who may be placed at the receiving end of such inequities and inhumanities.
作为教育工作者工作的一部分，我认为有必要将同行评议者在认知和意义的某些方面被误认、掩盖或压制时，可能确实被视为压迫行为的问题拿出来讨论。根据保罗-弗莱雷（Paulo Freire）的《被压迫者教育学》（Pedagogy of the Oppressed）以及批判性话语分析（Critical Discourse Analysis）中批判学术和社会领域中不公平做法的学术著作中有关胁迫性和压迫性关系和教育做法的观点，我认为，一个在学术上（和社会上）更负责任、更有良知和更人性化的替代方案，是一个对以下问题具有更大开放性的方案：(1) 由谁来决定什么是（可发表的）知识；(2) 这些知识的表述如何与强大的或意识形态化的知识和意义创造方式联系在一起。本文还呼吁人们进一步认识到，那些直接或间接地压制人们为强调不公平和/或非人性化的教育理念和实践而做出的真诚努力的行为，也会使直接或间接参与其中的人处于不利地位、边缘化或沉默，其中包括可能处于这种不公平和非人道行为的接收端的父母和儿童。
{"title":"A tale of two reviews: Examining the content and ideology of two single-blind reviews","authors":"Glenn Toh","doi":"10.1177/14782103241232527","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103241232527","url":null,"abstract":"As part of my work as an educator, I see the need to surface for discussion what might indeed be considered as acts of oppression on the part of peer reviewers when certain aspects of knowing and meaning are misrecognized, obscured, or suppressed. Drawing on observations concerning coercive and oppressive relational and educational practices found in Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed as well as scholarly works in Critical Discourse Analysis critiquing inequitable practices within academic and social domains, I argue that a more academically (and socially) accountable, conscionable and humanizing alternative is one which engenders greater openness to questions concerning: (1) who it might be that gets to determine what counts as (publishable) knowledge; and (2) how such formulations of knowledge may be tied to powerful or ideologized ways of knowing and meaning making. This article is also an appeal for greater awareness that acts which work directly or indirectly to silence earnest attempts to highlight inequitable and/or dehumanizing educational beliefs and practices are also acts which will disadvantage, marginalize, or silence people directly or indirectly involved, including parents and children who may be placed at the receiving end of such inequities and inhumanities.","PeriodicalId":46984,"journal":{"name":"Policy Futures in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139789785","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 : 2024-02-09DOI: 10.1177/14782103241232527
Glenn Toh
As part of my work as an educator, I see the need to surface for discussion what might indeed be considered as acts of oppression on the part of peer reviewers when certain aspects of knowing and meaning are misrecognized, obscured, or suppressed. Drawing on observations concerning coercive and oppressive relational and educational practices found in Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed as well as scholarly works in Critical Discourse Analysis critiquing inequitable practices within academic and social domains, I argue that a more academically (and socially) accountable, conscionable and humanizing alternative is one which engenders greater openness to questions concerning: (1) who it might be that gets to determine what counts as (publishable) knowledge; and (2) how such formulations of knowledge may be tied to powerful or ideologized ways of knowing and meaning making. This article is also an appeal for greater awareness that acts which work directly or indirectly to silence earnest attempts to highlight inequitable and/or dehumanizing educational beliefs and practices are also acts which will disadvantage, marginalize, or silence people directly or indirectly involved, including parents and children who may be placed at the receiving end of such inequities and inhumanities.
作为教育工作者工作的一部分，我认为有必要将同行评议者在认知和意义的某些方面被误认、掩盖或压制时，可能确实被视为压迫行为的问题拿出来讨论。根据保罗-弗莱雷（Paulo Freire）的《被压迫者教育学》（Pedagogy of the Oppressed）以及批判性话语分析（Critical Discourse Analysis）中批判学术和社会领域中不公平做法的学术著作中有关胁迫性和压迫性关系和教育做法的观点，我认为，一个在学术上（和社会上）更负责任、更有良知和更人性化的替代方案，是一个对以下问题具有更大开放性的方案：(1) 由谁来决定什么是（可发表的）知识；(2) 这些知识的表述如何与强大的或意识形态化的知识和意义创造方式联系在一起。本文还呼吁人们进一步认识到，那些直接或间接地压制人们为强调不公平和/或非人性化的教育理念和实践而做出的真诚努力的行为，也会使直接或间接参与其中的人处于不利地位、边缘化或沉默，其中包括可能处于这种不公平和非人道行为的接收端的父母和儿童。
{"title":"A tale of two reviews: Examining the content and ideology of two single-blind reviews","authors":"Glenn Toh","doi":"10.1177/14782103241232527","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103241232527","url":null,"abstract":"As part of my work as an educator, I see the need to surface for discussion what might indeed be considered as acts of oppression on the part of peer reviewers when certain aspects of knowing and meaning are misrecognized, obscured, or suppressed. Drawing on observations concerning coercive and oppressive relational and educational practices found in Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed as well as scholarly works in Critical Discourse Analysis critiquing inequitable practices within academic and social domains, I argue that a more academically (and socially) accountable, conscionable and humanizing alternative is one which engenders greater openness to questions concerning: (1) who it might be that gets to determine what counts as (publishable) knowledge; and (2) how such formulations of knowledge may be tied to powerful or ideologized ways of knowing and meaning making. This article is also an appeal for greater awareness that acts which work directly or indirectly to silence earnest attempts to highlight inequitable and/or dehumanizing educational beliefs and practices are also acts which will disadvantage, marginalize, or silence people directly or indirectly involved, including parents and children who may be placed at the receiving end of such inequities and inhumanities.","PeriodicalId":46984,"journal":{"name":"Policy Futures in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139849657","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 : 2024-02-08DOI: 10.1177/14782103241232721
Nevbahar Ertas, Andrew N McKnight
Critical Race Theory (CRT) has recently been positioned as a serious problem requiring urgent policy response among partisan media outlets. Making a case for pressing policy demands, several policy makers have proposed federal, state, and local level legislation and other measures to restrict how race, racism, or American history in general can be taught in K-12 schools, higher education institutions, and state agencies. Anti-CRT rhetoric in media and policy proposals have also propagated the notion of CRT as being divisive as well as ubiquitous in public education. Given this, it is critical to examine whether policy opinions regarding reactionary legislation is based on a real understanding of CRT. We conduct a conceptual and theoretical inquiry into anti-CRT rhetoric relying on the sociological concepts of moral panics and folk devils. Then, we examine familiarity, knowledge, ideology, policy beliefs, and policy opinions regarding CRT in education using nationally representative survey data. The analysis showed that most parents are not familiar with CRT, and the average parent neither opposes nor supports teaching of CRT. The opposition to teaching of CRT is largely driven by political affiliation and related ideological beliefs and positions.
{"title":"Policy opinions regarding the teaching of Critical Race Theory in schools","authors":"Nevbahar Ertas, Andrew N McKnight","doi":"10.1177/14782103241232721","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103241232721","url":null,"abstract":"Critical Race Theory (CRT) has recently been positioned as a serious problem requiring urgent policy response among partisan media outlets. Making a case for pressing policy demands, several policy makers have proposed federal, state, and local level legislation and other measures to restrict how race, racism, or American history in general can be taught in K-12 schools, higher education institutions, and state agencies. Anti-CRT rhetoric in media and policy proposals have also propagated the notion of CRT as being divisive as well as ubiquitous in public education. Given this, it is critical to examine whether policy opinions regarding reactionary legislation is based on a real understanding of CRT. We conduct a conceptual and theoretical inquiry into anti-CRT rhetoric relying on the sociological concepts of moral panics and folk devils. Then, we examine familiarity, knowledge, ideology, policy beliefs, and policy opinions regarding CRT in education using nationally representative survey data. The analysis showed that most parents are not familiar with CRT, and the average parent neither opposes nor supports teaching of CRT. The opposition to teaching of CRT is largely driven by political affiliation and related ideological beliefs and positions.","PeriodicalId":46984,"journal":{"name":"Policy Futures in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139852188","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 : 2024-02-08DOI: 10.1177/14782103241232721
Nevbahar Ertas, Andrew N McKnight
Critical Race Theory (CRT) has recently been positioned as a serious problem requiring urgent policy response among partisan media outlets. Making a case for pressing policy demands, several policy makers have proposed federal, state, and local level legislation and other measures to restrict how race, racism, or American history in general can be taught in K-12 schools, higher education institutions, and state agencies. Anti-CRT rhetoric in media and policy proposals have also propagated the notion of CRT as being divisive as well as ubiquitous in public education. Given this, it is critical to examine whether policy opinions regarding reactionary legislation is based on a real understanding of CRT. We conduct a conceptual and theoretical inquiry into anti-CRT rhetoric relying on the sociological concepts of moral panics and folk devils. Then, we examine familiarity, knowledge, ideology, policy beliefs, and policy opinions regarding CRT in education using nationally representative survey data. The analysis showed that most parents are not familiar with CRT, and the average parent neither opposes nor supports teaching of CRT. The opposition to teaching of CRT is largely driven by political affiliation and related ideological beliefs and positions.
{"title":"Policy opinions regarding the teaching of Critical Race Theory in schools","authors":"Nevbahar Ertas, Andrew N McKnight","doi":"10.1177/14782103241232721","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103241232721","url":null,"abstract":"Critical Race Theory (CRT) has recently been positioned as a serious problem requiring urgent policy response among partisan media outlets. Making a case for pressing policy demands, several policy makers have proposed federal, state, and local level legislation and other measures to restrict how race, racism, or American history in general can be taught in K-12 schools, higher education institutions, and state agencies. Anti-CRT rhetoric in media and policy proposals have also propagated the notion of CRT as being divisive as well as ubiquitous in public education. Given this, it is critical to examine whether policy opinions regarding reactionary legislation is based on a real understanding of CRT. We conduct a conceptual and theoretical inquiry into anti-CRT rhetoric relying on the sociological concepts of moral panics and folk devils. Then, we examine familiarity, knowledge, ideology, policy beliefs, and policy opinions regarding CRT in education using nationally representative survey data. The analysis showed that most parents are not familiar with CRT, and the average parent neither opposes nor supports teaching of CRT. The opposition to teaching of CRT is largely driven by political affiliation and related ideological beliefs and positions.","PeriodicalId":46984,"journal":{"name":"Policy Futures in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139792121","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 : 2024-02-06DOI: 10.1177/14782103241227484
Gavin Duffy, Gareth Robinson, Michelle Templeton
This paper offers analysis of the policy drivers and legal frameworks associated with school exclusion in Northern Ireland. This activity is timely given limited analysis in this area in recent decades. The research is an element of an UK-wide, multi-strand, ESRC Large Grant project, examining the Political Economies of School Exclusion and their Consequences across the UK, informally referred the Excluded Lives Project. The paper examines representation and discourse surrounding school exclusion from the perspective of three domains: government, media and civil society. Bacchi’s, ‘ What’ s the problem?’ (2009; 2012) approach was used to critically interrogate a range of documentation produced by the aforementioned domains and a range of key questions relating to the representation, discourse, gaps and solutions in the policies associated with school exclusion are addressed. Key findings reveal how school exclusion represented over time has changed. In the 1990s and early 2000s, exclusion was represented as an extreme measure in response to serious behavioural problems; as a school improvement measure which ensured positive learning experience of other pupils and as a measure that maintained school safety and order. Towards the present day an inclusive, rights and needs based discourse has emerged influenced by community organisations. The findings also point to an overly legalistic and procedural tone coming from government when communicating with schools. The authors argue that the current policies are dated and new and explicit policies on school exclusion should be developed. There is also an opportunity for the development of a single common scheme for all grant-aided schools which was legislated for but not commenced. Lastly, schools need more support and the development of new, evidenced based guidance and training is required to assist schools in managing exclusions and in the development of inclusive environments that reduce the likelihood of exclusions.
{"title":"An analysis of the policy drivers and legal frameworks associated with school exclusion in Northern Ireland","authors":"Gavin Duffy, Gareth Robinson, Michelle Templeton","doi":"10.1177/14782103241227484","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103241227484","url":null,"abstract":"This paper offers analysis of the policy drivers and legal frameworks associated with school exclusion in Northern Ireland. This activity is timely given limited analysis in this area in recent decades. The research is an element of an UK-wide, multi-strand, ESRC Large Grant project, examining the Political Economies of School Exclusion and their Consequences across the UK, informally referred the Excluded Lives Project. The paper examines representation and discourse surrounding school exclusion from the perspective of three domains: government, media and civil society. Bacchi’s, ‘ What’ s the problem?’ (2009; 2012) approach was used to critically interrogate a range of documentation produced by the aforementioned domains and a range of key questions relating to the representation, discourse, gaps and solutions in the policies associated with school exclusion are addressed. Key findings reveal how school exclusion represented over time has changed. In the 1990s and early 2000s, exclusion was represented as an extreme measure in response to serious behavioural problems; as a school improvement measure which ensured positive learning experience of other pupils and as a measure that maintained school safety and order. Towards the present day an inclusive, rights and needs based discourse has emerged influenced by community organisations. The findings also point to an overly legalistic and procedural tone coming from government when communicating with schools. The authors argue that the current policies are dated and new and explicit policies on school exclusion should be developed. There is also an opportunity for the development of a single common scheme for all grant-aided schools which was legislated for but not commenced. Lastly, schools need more support and the development of new, evidenced based guidance and training is required to assist schools in managing exclusions and in the development of inclusive environments that reduce the likelihood of exclusions.","PeriodicalId":46984,"journal":{"name":"Policy Futures in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139800333","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 : 2024-02-06DOI: 10.1177/14782103241227484
Gavin Duffy, Gareth Robinson, Michelle Templeton
This paper offers analysis of the policy drivers and legal frameworks associated with school exclusion in Northern Ireland. This activity is timely given limited analysis in this area in recent decades. The research is an element of an UK-wide, multi-strand, ESRC Large Grant project, examining the Political Economies of School Exclusion and their Consequences across the UK, informally referred the Excluded Lives Project. The paper examines representation and discourse surrounding school exclusion from the perspective of three domains: government, media and civil society. Bacchi’s, ‘ What’ s the problem?’ (2009; 2012) approach was used to critically interrogate a range of documentation produced by the aforementioned domains and a range of key questions relating to the representation, discourse, gaps and solutions in the policies associated with school exclusion are addressed. Key findings reveal how school exclusion represented over time has changed. In the 1990s and early 2000s, exclusion was represented as an extreme measure in response to serious behavioural problems; as a school improvement measure which ensured positive learning experience of other pupils and as a measure that maintained school safety and order. Towards the present day an inclusive, rights and needs based discourse has emerged influenced by community organisations. The findings also point to an overly legalistic and procedural tone coming from government when communicating with schools. The authors argue that the current policies are dated and new and explicit policies on school exclusion should be developed. There is also an opportunity for the development of a single common scheme for all grant-aided schools which was legislated for but not commenced. Lastly, schools need more support and the development of new, evidenced based guidance and training is required to assist schools in managing exclusions and in the development of inclusive environments that reduce the likelihood of exclusions.
{"title":"An analysis of the policy drivers and legal frameworks associated with school exclusion in Northern Ireland","authors":"Gavin Duffy, Gareth Robinson, Michelle Templeton","doi":"10.1177/14782103241227484","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103241227484","url":null,"abstract":"This paper offers analysis of the policy drivers and legal frameworks associated with school exclusion in Northern Ireland. This activity is timely given limited analysis in this area in recent decades. The research is an element of an UK-wide, multi-strand, ESRC Large Grant project, examining the Political Economies of School Exclusion and their Consequences across the UK, informally referred the Excluded Lives Project. The paper examines representation and discourse surrounding school exclusion from the perspective of three domains: government, media and civil society. Bacchi’s, ‘ What’ s the problem?’ (2009; 2012) approach was used to critically interrogate a range of documentation produced by the aforementioned domains and a range of key questions relating to the representation, discourse, gaps and solutions in the policies associated with school exclusion are addressed. Key findings reveal how school exclusion represented over time has changed. In the 1990s and early 2000s, exclusion was represented as an extreme measure in response to serious behavioural problems; as a school improvement measure which ensured positive learning experience of other pupils and as a measure that maintained school safety and order. Towards the present day an inclusive, rights and needs based discourse has emerged influenced by community organisations. The findings also point to an overly legalistic and procedural tone coming from government when communicating with schools. The authors argue that the current policies are dated and new and explicit policies on school exclusion should be developed. There is also an opportunity for the development of a single common scheme for all grant-aided schools which was legislated for but not commenced. Lastly, schools need more support and the development of new, evidenced based guidance and training is required to assist schools in managing exclusions and in the development of inclusive environments that reduce the likelihood of exclusions.","PeriodicalId":46984,"journal":{"name":"Policy Futures in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139860107","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：