Education Inequality: Broadening Public Attitudes through Framing

Abstract

Research over the last 50 years have been remarkably consistent when it comes to addressing education inequality: background factors like family and socioeconomics matter to school success. Yet policies remain narrowly focused on schoolbased reforms like testing, standards, and charter schools due in large part to the American public's limited understanding of education and inequality. I argue that scholars, as the experts, are ultimately responsible for changing how policymakers and the public think about these issues-a duty they have yet to embrace. In this connection, the use of framing can help education researchers broaden attitudes and stimulate political will. Drawing mainly from disciplines outside education, this article explores the potential of framing as a communication tool for education scholars. Specifically, I examine how it has been used in science, political, and marketing communication to broaden public opinion. I also offer ways to frame the issue of education inequality to help the public, including decision makers and influencers, conceive of solutions and opportunities beyond the status quo.

The future of education equity policy in a COVID-19 world: a qualitative systematic review of lessons from education policymaking

“…On what policy concepts and theories do they draw (and cite)? Compared to HiAP, we found (a) a greater focus on critical policy analysis to problematise how policymakers define problems and seek solutions, and (b) almost no equivalent to the instrumental use of policy theories (except Eng, 2016 ).…”

“… Eng (2016: 676–7) highlights the major disconnect between: (1) research showing that social determinants are more important to attainment than school performance; and, (2) the US public and policymaker tendency to see this issue in terms of individual merit and school or teacher performance. Eng’s (2016: 683–6) recommendation is to emphasise the benefits of a ‘systems approach’ and ‘collective action’ to counter ‘individualistic thinking’.…”

“…Further, advocates of the non-governmental ‘Common Core’ initiative (designed so that ‘higher, common standards will yield universal college-and-career readiness’) describe intense opposition by ‘parents, members of local communities and school boards, and educators’ who saw it as back-door for federal government ‘3 rd wave’ reforms based on ‘performance management via testing for educational outcomes’ ( Kornhaber et al, 2017 : 404). Eng (2016: 681) argues that this outcome resulted from poor framing by advocates.…”

Commentary

“…As one strategy for moving in that direction, he urges policy makers to engage students directly in the process of school transformation. The other paper is by Eng (), who calls for a reframing on the education endeavor to put les emphasis on gaps and more on the broader goal of opportunity. In particular, he urges researchers to frame their studies within the broader frame as a way for them to increase their impact on public opinion and policy.…”

“…Finally, in his paper “Education inequality: Broadening Public Attitudes Through Framing,” Eng () draws on the framing literature outside of education to promote the importance of communication and framing for policy debates and actions related to educational inequality. In particular, he would like education researchers to avoid framing their research in terms of gaps or disparities.…”