No abstract

No abstract

Twenty existing case studies of state decision making on education issues from 1971 to 1991 are analyzed to portray the changing nature of Minnesota's education policy system and to consider whether Iannaccone's oft-used "structural linkage" typology retains explanatory power. Minnesota's system has become more pluralistic, politicized, and bureaucratized. It is buffeted by state revenue fluctuations and by national-and global-forces. But its reformist tradition continues as does its considerable capacity for policy innovation. Reformulations of the Iannaccone typology find some support in Minnesota data. Other perspectives, however, clearly hold more promise for policy process research in education.

No abstract

Case study findings on the politics of public school choice in Minnesota are used to explore an arena perspective on how state governments might legislate controversial school restructuring initiatives. The initial conceptual model, which posits a shift from the subsystem arena to the macro arena as being fundamental to policy breakthroughs, proved to be too narrow. It ignored the innovative potential of the commission arena and particularly the leadership arena. Minnesota findings suggest that it is in the latter arena where strategically placed lawmakers can exploit their power resources to exert significant leverage on restructuring legislation for American public schools.