Despite the central role schools have played in the resettlement of refugees, we know little about how principals, teachers, parents, and staff at community-based organizations interpret and negotiate national immigration policy and state education policies. Combing critical discourse analysis (CDA) and actor-network theory (ANT), we capture how these actors work together and against each other to enact supports with regard to these newcomer students. Data includes a 36-month ethnography of refugee networks in Arizona. We argue that policies around English language acquisition and academic support further isolate refugee students and diminish their formal learning experiences in the United States.

This ethnographic case investigates the relationship between the daily organizing work of one education technology “intermediary organization” (IO) in Silicon Valley, California and federal education technology policies. I argue that the IO constructed policy knowledge that reified discourses of “digital meritocracy”: a belief in digital technologies as a means of evaluating individual success, regardless of historic, place-based material inequities. To develop this concept, I trace themes of “personalization” and “everywhere” as they emerge in the IO’s daily work and in federal education technology policies. This study extends research on IOs as “brokers” of information, resources, and social ties between public schools and private service providers and argues that IOs also construct “policy knowledge,” or “definitions of what counts as education.”

No abstract

No abstract

In this critical ethnography, Ethan Chang investigates how white parent-activists organized an oppositional movement to ethnic studies. Drawing on critical whiteness studies, cultural studies, and studies of countermovements, he argues that these parents crafted an oppositional narrative that positioned white, Christian, American boys as victims of ethnic studies curricula. Chang then traces how the parents leveraged this narrative to forge a coalition with disability advocates and to “digitally suture,” or bind, their local ethnic studies countermovement to broader right-wing populist activism. Data includes eleven months of participant observation, 146 public school board testimonies, and twenty ethnographic interviews. The article concludes with a discussion of how studies of curricular countermovements might inform scholarly and activist attempts to divest from whiteness and make ethnic studies available to all students.