Neoliberal reform and family engagement in schools: An intersectional gender analysis

Abstract

This article presents an exploration of the work of family engagement in a racially- and linguistically-diverse, high-poverty, urban school district in a state of continuous neoliberal reform. Drawing from qualitative research methods, it is argued that family engagement is being reshaped by the imperatives of educational neoliberalization while, at the same time, remaining out of touch with the needs and concerns of families who are racially stigmatized, linguistically diverse, and experiencing extreme economic insecurity. It is further argued that school personnel charged with family engagement carry out exploited, invisible, and emotional tasks that increase in quantity and intensity as the social safety net declines under neoliberalism. Applying an intersectional gender analysis of emotional labor and the re-privatization of social reproduction offers an illustration of how family engagement in neoliberal schools both exploits and reinforces hierarchies of race–class–gender while obscuring these processes through neoliberal discourses of individual responsibilization.

Searching for equity-centered change agents: An investigation of family and community engagement in teacher evaluation frameworks

“…Conceptualizations of FCE within the literature have evolved over the last several decades. Two of the primary aims of NCLB were to close achievement gaps and increase parental involvement (Nygreen, 2019), typically through parent-teacher meetings, volunteer opportunities, and attendance at school-directed events and activities (Jeynes, 2014). Policies designed with involvement as the end goal typically "did not allow for any variability or meaningful interactions" (Ishimaru, 2020, p. 19) other than mere presence in the school.…”

Ensuring Future Resilience beyond ICT and Online Teaching and Learning of Social Studies in Ghanaian Senior High Schools: Lessons from COVID-19 Pandemic

“…Student, 2022 These remarks support the claim that parents carried the burden of educational duty during the period when only online education was accessible. Parents were required not only to provide appropriate digital resources to their children, but also to support and encourage them in using the resources appropriately for educational purposes, as well as to protect them from online threats and other forms of abuse (Nygreen, 2019). However, many people believe that everyone uses digital resources in the same way (Dimopoulos et al, 2021).…”

Women pay their way on income contingent student debt

“…As a result, some of these individuals, including women, may be making repayments for the first time as a result of the introduction of a lower minimum repayment threshold. Addressing this income inequality, however, is not the role of the higher education loans system (Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018: 6–7).In an era of rising awareness of a gender pay gap and its economic and societal impacts, policy reform that dismisses its impact on women seems ill-considered and ignores social justice factors (Chang and McLaren, 2018; Nygreen, 2018). While, as Norton (2016) argues, many women live in couple households with household incomes that can afford the AUD$9 per week, the remainder may comprise lone people and lone parent households trying to work and support dependents.…”

“…The private rate of return has been quantified to be as high as 21.1% in Australia (Borland et al., 2000). Such benefits are seen to justify shifting the higher education costs from taxpayers to students, particularly in the neoliberal environment (Chang and McLaren, 2018; Nygreen, 2018; Tesar, 2019).…”