Education & The American Political System
“The Major Education Policy Actors” by Frances Fowler made me think of the many debates and discussions over the roles and responsibilities of those involved in education and education policy. I believe every adult citizen in the United States is responsible for the education that the student receives, and every student is responsible for how the education is utilized. From the resources that are made available to educators to provide quality instruction to student attendance are serious factors when it comes to achieving the goal of bridging, or eliminating, the achievement gap. I started to consider who the people are who are currently coming up with the policies, programs, and projects that affect those in public schools on a daily basis.
Fowler starts by defining policy actors as those who are involved in the development, adoption, and implementation of policy. She makes the statement that the state policy actors are more important than local or federal actors in terms of education policy. I would agree that policy at the state level has significant say in many things such as the standards that should be taught and the qualifications for teachers, principals, and administrators. However, I think that local policy actors and those in the school buildings, namely principals and teachers, should have a greater say since they have the most interaction with the implementation of the policies. Fowler’s description of the hierarchy of the “more important” policy actors denoted them as state legislators with backgrounds in either the legal or business professions. Are principals and teachers not considered professional enough for a voice in legislation, at least when it comes to education policy. Why not have current principals and teachers, of inner-city schools, voice concerns, and ideas during policy development and adoption? It seems backward to not have a more significant representation of those working in schools and teaching students every day at the state level in policymaking.
As I considered the truth of the problems that exist such as a lack of funds and lack of people to shoulder the responsibility of helping American public schools progress, I recalled Bogenschneider and Corbett’s article which states that legislators are always up for reelection and legislators were more interested in quick fixes than long-term solutions in order to appear as if they are working and making forward progress so the chance for reelection would be greater. Because I recalled this statement, I began to question the ethics and motives of those that we elect to voice our concerns, and even the fascination with which the American people seem to perceive swift change even if it means that things will get worse before they start to get better.
Discussion Questions:
- With states moving towards the common core standards, might this lessen the impact or strength of state government with regard to individual state departments of education and their power to shape policy?
- If the career representation in the legislature was to be more varied to include current educators and principals and blue-collared workers, instead of just lawyers and businesspeople, how might that change the access to resources for better or worse?
- Is it asking too much for teachers to also be policymakers?
- How would we ensure that all teachers have an equal say in policy or how representatives will be decided?
- Considering suburban district schools will have different needs and goals than innercity schools, and vice versa, would it be feasible to ask for universal long-term solutions for different social needs, or will it be region specific dependent on the educators' suggestions?
