Suchergebnisse

AbstractIn this essay we argue that the ideology of colorblind justice has made resisting the retreat from public school desegregation a hard sell in postracial America. We do not believe that desegregation is the silver bullet for solving all the problems with public education. Nor do we believe that it alone can close the racial achievement gap. Yet there is convincing evidence regarding the potential benefits of desegregation and evidence on its negative consequences is weak. Therefore we believe that it is a policy still worth pursuing. Our hope is that by casting light on the anatomy of colorblind justice and its limits we can contribute to ongoing efforts to ensure that desegregation remains in the conversation about how to address the unfinished business of racial justice.

School boards have received little attention in sociology of education. Drawing on organizational sociology, a model of school board social capital is proposed that treats brokerage (external ties) and closure (internal ties) as the key dimensions of board functioning. The model brings together insights from limited research on school boards concerning members' internal and external ties and recasts them as the building blocks of a unifying theoretical framework. It also proposes specific performance outcomes at the district level. The model is tested using the data from a representative sample ofPennsylvania districts. The analysis not only explores brokerage and closure patterns among school boards, but also examines their implications for academic outcomes. Findings suggest that eighth grade reading and mathematics performance are highest in districts, where boards exhibit high levels of both brokerage and closure, and lowest in districts, where brokerage and closure are both low.

This study addresses changes in the public conversation on school desegregation since the early 1970s. It applies the concept of discursive opportunity structure to the debates on desegregation in order to illustrate how a dynamic and balanced conversation, which involved both positive and negative views on the policy, has evolved into an anemic and overly negative one. The study relies on insights from social movement research on political opportunity structures for debates on contentious issues and on interpretive framing processes. Several inferences are offered on the nature of the discursive turn in desegregation at the national level, followed by a detailed analysis of desegregation and resegregation in Cleveland from 1973 to 1998. This involves the systematic examination of local newspaper coverage and also draws on court documents, administrative student records, and census information. The findings suggest that political and social structural factors that have restricted the chances for a balanced conversation have also complicated desegregation implementation and may have undermined the policy's intended student benefits. By the 1990s even the most dedicated advocates had withdrawn from the debate, allowing the conversation to atrophy and become dominated by critical views. As a result, public education has risked failing to address the ill effects of resegregation and to produce reforms that foster quality schools for all.

Management education programs often rely on collaborative learning, which requires high levels of openness and interpersonal support. We describe how one program accomplishes this and offer a theory to explain why it works. We propose that the activity is successful because it addresses in a repeating sequence (a) the alignment of affect with cognition within members' subjective worlds, (b) the integration of cognition across members, (c) the use of shared cognition to generate new affect-rich activities, and (d) the alignment of affect across members. We believe this four-stage cycle enhances management education wherever collaborative learning is important.

Under the high‐stakes accountability regime, narrower curricula and/or teaching to narrower tests can restrict the range of skills students acquire. We develop a theory of skill range restriction at the state level. The analysis focuses on math and reading skills in fourth and eighth grade between 2003 and 2009. At both grade levels, the average student's range of math and reading skills expanded, but there was considerable between‐state variation. In fourth grade, math and reading skills were affected in different ways by percentages of African American and Hispanic students in the state, average class size, and political conservatism. In eighth grade, math and reading skills were restricted, respectively, by lower per‐pupil revenue and lower average adult income. Skill range restriction was associated with greater proficiency gains, since students needed to demonstrate proficiency in fewer skills. An exception was in fourth‐grade reading, for which we observed the opposite pattern.