Leslie & Berdahl: The Politics of Restructuring in VA

This article discussed the changes that happened as a result of the "Big 3"- VA Tech, W&M, and UVa- wanted to become less dependent on the state.  They were looking for deregulation, privatization, and using the market.  Nevertheless, the state seems these institutions in particular as ways for the state to receive some revenue.

In 2005, the state allowed public schools to apply for this as long as they met 11 goals (it is not 12 and could be more over time depending on the legislature's wants).  Pg. 321 discusses that this could be part of some future "legislative mischief" by having options for additional amendments-- could this make the decentralization to hard to upkeep or make it just a pretense with all the check boxes schools might have to fill?

Garbage Can Model- three separate streams:  problems, policies (ideas/solutions), politics-- pg 311.  These streams come in with a window of opportunity for policy makers.

Here are some of the different streams that the Big 3 wanted to fix/have more control over:

• regulations from state bureaucracy-- rigid and inflexible
• competition for control over setting tuition
• inconsistent state appropriations (I am still working without a budget and have been doing this since July-- I hope I have the same funding as last year....)
• ambiguous strategic priorities
• incremental interdependence from state funds (but the schools want more interdependence 

Decentralization has been happening over the past 15 years, and having a new political player-- Gov Warner and his business background-- influence the legislature to think about this 2005 act. 

Nevertheless, this didn't work out for the Big 3 as intended-- but it did provide opportunities for all of the VA public four-year and community college institutions-- with those 11 clauses as indicated above.   

The schools were not completely unhappy with the 11 points, but I doubt anyone was entirely happy.

• "We also got something very different than we thought we were asking for...But we take the result as a fundamental state commitment to decentralization, and we feel all sides have entered new territory in good faith so far"  (pg. 319)
• More focused on output-- process can be intentional for each school

One of the continuing arguments/discussions is the ability for each school to determine tuition costs.  Schools have the authority to do this, in theory, but some of the proceeds go from the school directly to the state.  As a compromise, schools can set tuition, with six year projections.  I think this is good in theory; however, things can change during the course of the six year projections that might require an individual school or program not to increase tuition (like the intense competition between law schools-- some public like WM can't scholarship as well, but we can keep tuition low!)

A big thing with more decentralization is that each school can manage their own capital projects, human resources, etc all on their own, and allows each school to decide how to use state appropriations and to try to make individual institutions more efficient and stretch their budgets further. (pg. 317)

So what will ultimately happen with the decentralization?  Will quality and efficiency increase, better revenue streams?

The article starts and ends with questioning if this model can work for other states.  The authors don't want to say one example means it can be overarching for other state systems, and VA school admins also don't want to say this could work everywhere since each public system has such a different infrastructure.

DeBray & Houch: A Narrow Path

This article looks acts the possibility of reauthorizing ESEA, with an emphasis on traditional party politics, entrance of new players, and the stresses on the groups that normally would support education reform.

• Party politics- parties are traditionally highly polarized
• divided/unified party government-- seeing how this will affect party politics
• 2010 elections-- Republicans gained and bipartisanship with educ policy decresed.  Authors believe this will stay the same until after the 2012 election (assuming that Obama would have to win and Democrats would win the legislative branch....or vice versa)
• NCLB only passed during temporary partisanship due to 9/11 (we've talked about that in class before)
• RTTT-- says that it's fairly noncontroversial....this doesn't seem to be in line with what we heard in DC-- seems like there is more controversy  especially how this affects or has been affected by CCS
• with RTTT, creates competition and winners and losers.  The math coordinator from Isle of Wight (can't remember her name...) made some fantastic points about how this is beneficial for better for wealthier school districts and those that can hire grant writers, already have responsible incomes, etc
• graphs show that there is a growing divide between democrats and republicans, which makes a bipartisan effort even more difficult
• Mayhew-- 324-- suggests that partianship is not the only thing that matters.  For Obama, for example, other things are taking the forefront, like health care, foreign policy, financial/economy, etc.
• New players- increase in think tanks and other groups
• leadership changed in the HELP committee-- long time legislatures no longer in charge-- new people with different political ideologies have become the critical players
• More think tanks exist now-- more research, ton of more data available
• Stress on traditional coalition- policy landscape has changed
• Democrats are no longer seeing spending more money on education a safe bet, they are becoming more reform/market-oriented
• Pressure from teacher unions-- becoming more challenging

Very interesting!!!  They say that CCS aren't from the federal government, but (pg. 332) Pres Obama said that "Title I allocations to their adoption of the CCS".  This doesn't seem to fit what we heard from Margaret on Friday :(

• now talks about opposition-- Mike Enzi (Wyoming-- Kelly's old employer)

Conclusion-- educational arena more fluid and diverse!

Fowler Chapter Four

The Political System and Political Culture

We have a distinctive political system-- "clumsier" than parliamentary system, which is still considered to be more efficient.

pg. 63-- Political culture- particular pattern of orientation to political action in which a political system is embedded

Federalism-- several governments share sovereign powers among themselves.  It's a pendulum over time where more power is given to states than the federal government and vice versa.  With new federalism, "the overall effect...was to reduce the relative importance of the federal government in education policymaking, while increasing the relative importance of the states" (pg. 69)

--Although states normally give power to local school districts for education policy implementation and curriculum-- sometimes, state governments step in to take over for floundering school districts.  Of course, when the state gives money to local districts, they want to know where the money goes.  This struck a chord with what Kelly Hastings said (from Lou Baretta's office).  One of her complaints about Race for the Top is that money was given to states without having to account for it back with the federal government.

--Competition among governance bodies-- everyone wants money and power and will jockey to get more.  What else is new?

Elections- this compared the US (in constant state of election) to Parliamentary systems (elected officials serve as long as their party has public support).  I don't know which one is better-- I guess parliamentary systems make the party stronger than any individual-- do officials have to stay directly along party lines to stay in favor?
--Windows of opportunity- often with a change of administration there is an opportunity for innovative policy.  Know this will happen if Romney is elected-- what/will anything change if Obama is re-elected?  Networking is key-- taking advantage of windows of opportunity

Three political cultures (can be grouped by states in general but always pockets of different groups in an individual state)

• Individualistic
• dominant in south
• ambivalence toward market and unrestrained commercial enterprise
• government positive source in society
• local elite involved
• Moralistic
• New England
• favor activist government
• believe education is part of the common good
• also seen in college towns, more educated communities
• Traditionalistic  
• Mid Atlantic
• politics is a type of marketplace-- businesslike, pragmatic, economic orientation

Reflection from Class Trip

I am exhausted-- I had such an amazing time yesterday, but I am tired.  I wish DC was closer, and the metro temperatures weren't so temperamental :)  My drive to/from the train station was fascinating since I had the opportunity to travel with Aliaksandr.  Some of our conversation was lost in the language barrier-- or at least, I had a bit of a hard time understanding him.  I can only imagine the hardships that he and his family went through and now to be working for a university in exile-- it's hard to wrap my head around it.  International convergence is certainly seen with Aliaksandr traveling to the US and visiting WM, Oberlin, and Earlham (which is where Fran Branford went).  I hope I have a chance to talk to him more before he leaves!

The first speaker was Chris Mullin from the Association of Community Colleges.  I learned so much from him and even had some of my views changed by getting more information (my viewpoints were similar but not as harsh as Kelly from Lou Baretta's office prior to this talk).  Highlights from his talk:

• His job is to inform, educate, and advise
• 26.4% of cc students already have a completion degree
• 7% of the student body is under the age of 18-- dual enrollment (this was 1.7% in 1993)
• The for-profit schools are not part of "the six"-- Chris doesn't know why, but I think it's a great thing!
• Chris believes that HS GPA is a higher predictor that tests since the diagnostics are better with consistent, repeated measures.  I don't agree fully.  I think there is a correlation between GPA, test scores, and student success.  Although tests are biased in how they constructed, I think they should still be considered to a point

Next up was Margaret Reed Miller.  I had never heard of the Common Core Standards until hearing Margaret talk.  Takeaways:

• curriculum is NOT equal to standards.  This is state led, state adopted, and teacher/school control the curriculum
• intentional design that is about outcomes, not teacher inputs.  CCS is a floor, not a ceiling.
• 45 states have adopted/in the process.
• Exceptions-- VA (SOL very high quality), AK and MN (very similar/adopted part), NE (lower standards), TX (Texas is Texas and dropped out of virtually all common state organizations)
• CCS are college and career ready standards.  Federal law (Race to the Top) states that states need to have college and career ready standards.  Doesn't say that they need to adopt CCS but many states have opted for this
• Why Common Standards?  Consistency, equity, opportunity, clarity, economies of scale.  This is creating a marketplace focused on quality.  With military children, for example, quality increases or decreases depending on location.
• I learned a lot about why the opposition exists-- CCS seems great to me, but I can understand how there is opposition-- could appear to be fed gvt overreaching instead of coming from the outside
• LOVED the graph with how the US teaches math-- we do everything in math every year-- a mile wide, inch deep.  Thought it was really interesting that China is switching to our model-- happy that Hong Kong is sticking with the no tricks, just learn the math.

Lunch with Alumnae.

• I thought Christen Cullum Hairston was fantastic- she was so down to earth, and it was great to hear how her undergrad connects to her dissertation and then on to what she does at work on a daily basis.  A big plug for the liberal arts!  I also appreciated how her dissertation is taking a little longer than expected.  She got her stuff together, so it gives me hope that I will get my thesis in gear soon.
• I'm sure Cristin Toutsi is very nice, but she seemed a little too corporate for me.  I know we all work for the man in some way shape or form, but the ultimate "man" is college presidents and trustees.  I interned for my college president for a year, and I don't know if I could play that political game in education.  She was a little drier than the other Christen, and you could tell she worked at a corporate non-profit-- lots of money (ie-- she talked about all of her cab fares to be reimbursed-- I think it's the metro for almost all other groups).  
• The two were good for information but also for juxtaposition.  I don't mean to knock anyone, but it helped me frame that I would rather go toward student services than administration.  The hard thing though is in admissions, it's harder to get to more student services.  I want to be less like "the man" if I can.

Department of Ed.  For all the travel that we did there, I was sadly underwhelmed.  For all the travel, we went though, I was hoping for a little more....whatever that might be.  First of all, dress was surprisingly casual.  Second, none of their backgrounds were as strong with on the ground teaching or even policy as I would want the people making larger educational decisions.  The second speaker was stuck in the political machine.  He did not seem passionate about his work and was only placed in his position due to his political connections.  That was disappointing.  The third speaker-- focus on K-12-- was the best of the three.  Stronger background-- taught in a private school and then instructional aid (most likely-- no teaching certification ).  He at least was passionate and excited about his work and well-informed.  Will things change come January or will it be more of the same in the Dept of Ed?

It was wonderful to hear Ilana Brunner and Kelly ___ back to back.  Ilana represents Bobby Scott (Democrat) and Kelly represents Lou Baretta (Republican).  I wouldn't think that both ladies are not from the districts or event states that their bosses represent...but I guess you can believe in the people and find attachment to a geographic area while working with the constituents.  I really liked how Ilana talked about her background and how she wanted to work with the intersection between civil rights and education.

• Ilana was soft-spoken and addresses us in what seemed like more facts.  Kelly probably had facts on her side, but because she was speaking so impassioned, it almost seemed like she was doing a sales pitch.  But Kelly did want to hear more from us and our opinions and Ilana was just telling us stories.
• Different ideas on NCLB re-authorization
• Kelly- Congress set aside, Exec and Dept of Ed overreaching.  NCLB went through right process.
• Ilana- NCLB- "soft bigotry of low expectations". 
• Race to the Top and CCS
• Kelly- does not agree-- process concern.  states should decide own goals and receive funding once evidence of goal attainment.  She would prefer funded focuses on existing things, like IDEA and Title 1 school funding.  CCS came mostly from the outside and wishes employers were at the table.  She would be fine with CCS if it went through the right legislatively process.
• Ilana talked more about education in general and how education beginning at birth is too late-- she spend a lot of time talking about teen mothers and educating them to be better parents; therefore, things would be better for their children.  The Youth Promise Act seems like a great for more activities during the afternoon hours (most crime happens between 3-6 pm and 2/3 prisoners are HS dropouts).  She talked about future savings by investing money now-- I say let's do it :)  HS jobs are definitely much cheaper and more beneficial than incarceration.

GREAT TRIP!  Loved having a day full of speakers and on the ground policy makers!

Class Reflection- Week 6

I have a new favorite person, and her name is Fran Bradford.  I love that she is an outspoken woman who just says what's on her mind.  I imagine that she can't do that all the time, but I could see her saying what this thinks over what is necessarily pc/business, and I really respect that.

Thanks to Jess for asking Fran about her background because I always find it interesting to see the circular paths people take to get where they are.  A degree in art-- like my degree in political science and history-- I know how to "think" but it took some help to figure out how studying what I was interested in could help me find a job that I enjoy.  Also shows again that who you know is helpful-- yes, you need to make opportunities for yourself but a foot in the door never hurt.

Fran provided a great framework and discussion of the 2011 Higher Education Opportunity Act of Virginia and the 2005 Restructuring Act.  Language plays such a large role in these laws, especially who was initiating it and why.  Big differences—Restructuring was a ground up initiative while Higher Ed was top down  and much more political.   As a top down act, 100,000 more degrees are wanted from VA, and this comes from grow by degrees (if you multiply this number by 50, this is the amount of graduates encouraged by some federal law
• Mass differences across the state schools what they need to do—help with retention and grad (comm colleges) to take more students in (WM, already high graduation rates)

She also gave us some background into the process and the different laws-- to test drive the language of these acts before going in for a vote, public meetings were held.  I'm really interested in this.  In class and in the readings, we have talked about different laws and how the laws provide the framework but not the money or infrastructure to enact these laws.  Do the people at the public meetings know this?  That the law may not actually be enacted as written due to vague language and no funding?

My last bit of my notes from Fran's talk is:
SCHEV is drowning in data—great dissertation, would love to help.  THESIS topic??  SCHEV data compared to the student satisfaction survey that college seniors complete (would be interesting to compare the SCHEV data and graduation/job placement to college satisfaction from one school in the Commonwealth to the other, especially for WM as liberal arts school-- Fran's comment that WM grades don't make more than other recent grads in Commonwealth but have higher growth potential, potentially, but take advantage of opportunities of gap year, Peace Corp, etc).  I think I'm getting a little ahead of myself....

From the Fowler reading, here is my order of my social values:

1. Liberty
2. Equality
3. Efficiency
4. Individualism
5. Order
6. Quality
7. Fraternity
8. Economic Growth

I'm not sure why economic growth is last (since it drives so much of life around us), but I have somehow been okay when the economy has not been.  I guess I care about the other things more, but I imagine my list would change as my life circumstance alter.

Timmers, Willemsen, & Tijdens

Gender diversity policies in universities: a multi-perspective framework of policy measures

The article aimed to discover if policies utilized to increase women as university professors is effective.  They utilized a literature review and then a survey (questionnaire and interviews) to see what policies were used and how effective they are.

One method was using a gender equality policy for hiring.  As students, more females are enrolled than males in undergraduate institutions, and it is even said they graduate faster and with better grades (p. 720).  The how when it comes to becoming professors are there so little females in the profession?  Again, one answer is the gender equality policy.


Theory- three factors used to explain under-representation of women- individual, cultural, structural/institutional influences

• Individual- men and women are basically the same
• ImpoCultural- org's culture, history, ideology, and politics are related to women's limited success
• in some cases, gender discrimination still exists
• Company is not welcoming to women-- several studies suggest that having more women on the search committee helps with barriers limiting women in the hiring process
• affirmative action plans, equality committees and task forces are effective

Research Questions Authors are Trying to Answer

1. Can gender equality in academics fit within above factors?
2. Gender equality policy-- random or patterns?
3. Gender equality policies lead to more females in academia?

Case Study- 14 universities in Netherlands- mostly with HR

• Yes, the policies fit in with individual, cultural, and structural perspective
• Helpful-- mentoring and coaching female staff, women's network
• good to have it sponsored by university
• Important to note!! Does not include women working part time, pregnancy or maternity leave
• Also, exit interviews were not used on how to make things better for women, but they should be in future
• many initiatives- too short in duration, departments didn't comply with suggestions or even directives
• ex- "it doesn't fit our way of thinking, this policy is outdated" (p. 731)-- this makes me sad :(
• buy in is needed from everyone!  if not, doomed to not succeed 
• 
  

individual, cultural, and structural perspective correlations

-cultural and structural highest

-individual and structural lowest

Week Five, "Class" Reflection

Fowler- Chapters 2 and 5

Chapter 2- Power and Education Policy

What is power?-- the ability to affect the behavior of another actor.  Power is not absolute.  Someone with power in one setting can then be powerless in another setting.

Discourse- the language and talking in order to reach a policy decision (or just having a discussion)

• text
• social events
• social practice

Three Dimensional Model of Power- explicit uses of power, mobilization of bias, shaping of consciousness

Explicit use of Power- if not directly observable, then readily deduced from observable evidence

• Types of power- force (physical or psychic force to damage a self-concept), economic dominance, authority (authority depends on legitimacy), and persuasion (convincing that the desired behavior is good

Mobilization of Bias- in regards to race, parental involvement, gender, class, etc

Shaping of Consciousness

• Many social constructs are important in shaping this-- family, language, media, school, religion

Important quote-- "Achieving a policy goal often requires building power.  People build power by obtaining more, or different, power resources" (p. 38)

There are certainly dangers in power, and Fowler recommends discursive power ethically with respect, commitment to valid information, and freedom of choice.  

Chapter 5- Values and Ideology

This chapter focuses on the importance of people's own ideas, but recognizes that leaders in today's schools have to understand the surrounding politics, so they can think intelligently about education policy.

Ideas, beliefs, and values are important

1. shape how people define policy problems
2. constrain people's ability to perceive possible solutions (limit)

General Social Values

1. Order
2. Individualism
3. liberty
4. equality
5. fraternity
6. efficiency
7. economic growth
8. quality

Values in US Politics

• 1950s-1980s- everyone acted in self-interest
• Self-interest values- economic, power
• 1980s- present- act in both self-interest and other values like personal principles-- ideological, philosophical, or religious.  Fowler believes people are more like this, but it may, unfortunately, be too optimistic.  
• Social values- order, individualism
• Democratic values- liberty (freedom, choice), Equality (opportunity and./or results), fraternity (perceive closeness with others, sense of responsibility for them, can turn to others for help)
• Economic values- efficiency and economic growth

There are cyclical shifts in dominant values-- Low's policy type perspectives.  There is a constant search for balance.

Ideology certainly affects policy, particularly with politics

• Conservatism
• Business- motivated by self/economic interest
• Religious- resurgence of religious fundamentalism 
• Tea Party- less government, lower taxes, greatly reduced national debt
• Liberalism
• New Democrats- skeptical of entitled groups, especially those designed to give help to disadvantaged-- addressing symptoms instead of causes
• Progressive Democrats- suspicious of bug business and large companies, want to enhance power of ordinary citizens

Another section discusses how school leaders are caught in the ideological crossfire.  This is highly problematic at every level-- and in many cases, politics (particularly religion) does not have its place in the school system (my opinion...)  I don't know how to keep it out, but it always seems to seep in...