Education Reform and the Politics of 2000

Educational Restructuring from a Community Viewpoint: A Case Study of School Closure from Invercargill, New Zealand

“…This`devolutionary' paradox is a central feature of neoliberal states and their underpinning reasoning (Etzioni, 1997;Rose, 1999;Schick, 1996) and the abolition of school zones is a specific (and highly geographical) expression of the paradox (Robertson, 1999). Dezoning and the forms of parental choice introduced in its place (from charter schools throughout the United States, to trials with voucher schemes in Milwaukee, Cleveland, New York, and Washington, to grant-maintained schools in the United Kingdom) are fiercely contested in political and academic spheres (Fiske and Ladd, 2000;Godwin and Sheard, 2001;Hogan, 1997;Teddlie and Reynolds, 2000). Designed to encourage a competitive education market, dezoning has disturbed the relations between schools and their geographic communities and recomposed these in more voluntaristic, self-interested terms (Bradford, 1995;Robertson, 1999).…”

“…Designed to encourage a competitive education market, dezoning has disturbed the relations between schools and their geographic communities and recomposed these in more voluntaristic, self-interested terms (Bradford, 1995;Robertson, 1999). Researchers are divided on the effectiveness of dezoning in terms both of equity and of performance (Godwin and Sheard, 2001;Hsieh and Jianping, 2001). Proponents argue that greater choice (whether marketised through vouchers, or exercised through free parental choice) gives parents the opportunity to`escape from place'.…”

“We’re kind of at a pivotal point”: Opt Out’s vision for an ethic of care in a post-neoliberal era

“…Since the 1950s, the US government has played a growing role in determining US educational policy. In 1983, A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform , a widely publicized document outlining a perceived crisis in public education, “forced education onto the political agenda of the local, state, and federal governments” (Godwin and Sheard, 2001: 111) and encouraged a variety of policy reforms. Godwin and Sheard note that these initial measures largely failed, allowing “a more radical reform idea to reach the political agenda: school accountability” (Godwin and Sheard, 2001: 112).…”

“…In 1983, A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform , a widely publicized document outlining a perceived crisis in public education, “forced education onto the political agenda of the local, state, and federal governments” (Godwin and Sheard, 2001: 111) and encouraged a variety of policy reforms. Godwin and Sheard note that these initial measures largely failed, allowing “a more radical reform idea to reach the political agenda: school accountability” (Godwin and Sheard, 2001: 112). Hursh illustrates this drastic transformation “based on a corporate model of market competition, with quantitative evaluations of students, teachers, schools, and school districts based on students’ scores on standardized tests” (Hursh, 2016: 2).…”

“…Hursh illustrates this drastic transformation “based on a corporate model of market competition, with quantitative evaluations of students, teachers, schools, and school districts based on students’ scores on standardized tests” (Hursh, 2016: 2). Indeed, the movement toward school accountability, marked by high-stakes testing, school choice, and vouchers (Hursh, 2013), encourages schools “to produce the best possible outcomes at the lowest possible costs” (Godwin and Sheard, 2001: 113), reducing teachers’ autonomy and placing an overwhelming focus on education’s technical aspects (Apple, 1986).…”