Purpose
The purpose of this PLE is to develop participants’ understanding of the role of governance and decision-making systems in influencing issues and problems and provide avenues for addressing these. To advocate or act on behalf of historically marginalized groups and students, and all children generally, leaders must know how decisions are and were made, the key governance and policy making bodies, and how different policy options create or constrain opportunities and optimizing learning conditions. While effective leaders need to understand and be able to navigate various decision-making systems and differentiate among policy levers, diversity-responsive leaders must be aware and able to investigate and act on how these impact opportunities for historically marginalized groups and students.
This PLE uses an inquiry process to engage participants in identifying, mapping and contrasting the governance and decision making systems that pertain to their selected issues and problems. By identifying and comparing, they will gain understanding of how different types of policy instruments shape their issues and problems and what policy alternatives might be pursued through advocacy.
Essential question
How do we investigate and analyze policy making and influences on an issue or priority and how these issues are experienced by historically marginalized groups and students?
Activity
This PLE draws on the issue identification work in PLE 2a. In this PLE, participants will explore the policy context and decision making systems for the identified issue or problem. This PLE takes approximately 2 hours to complete, in walking participants through the steps of identifying relevant policy making systems and influences as they currently exist and potential policy levers for positively influencing the issue or problem. Through this PLE, participants will learn about the policy making process, policy levers, and examples of policy influences for different issues.
Pre-session work
To complete this PLE, participants must come with an issue, preferably as it has been identified in PLE 2a, and some understanding of a specific local or state context for the issue. Participants should do some exploratory work to identify relevant policies that frame their issue and the governmental or other decision-making bodies that are responsible for these. Exploratory questions to use can include:
Learning environment
This PLE is designed to be completed in a large classroom or other large setting, where there are Smart boards or newsprint available for small groups to work. The room should also be flexible enough to allow participants to post their political group maps and enable a gallery walk among all participants.
Primary activities
This PLE consists of four inter-related activities: brainstorming how to identify policy making systems and influences; mapping these out for selected issues and identifying patterns among multiple issues; identifying types of policy levers, their use for different types of issues and problems, and potential differential effect on historically marginalized groups of students; and reflection on the relationship among decision making processes, policy levers, issues and their effects on different student groups.
1. brainstorm sources of evidence to identify the primary policy making systems and influences on an issue or problem
To ascertain participants’ knowledge and understanding of policy making systems, the instructor will ask participants to first identify how they might uncover the primary policy making systems and influences on an issue or problem. Using their own issues or problems, participants will be asked first to identify what sources they might investigate, and then use these to identify primary policy making systems and influences.
The instructor can probe by asking them to look at:
The instructor can ask participants to pool what they have learned by doing one of the following:
2. Mapping the decision making systems for an issue or problem
Next, once participants have identified the policy making systems for their issue or problem, they can map out how decisions are made within this system to influence the issue or problem (e.g. administrative action; laws; or regulations). This will enable the participants to identify the sources of decision making and the processes for decision making and influence. By hearing about these sources and processes of decision-making for multiple issues—as participants share with each other in small and large groups—they will learn about multiple decision making systems and analyze patterns.
Using the same strategies as outlined in the first activity, the instructor will now help participants to map the system(s) of decisions that contribute to a problem or issue (or could be used for its solution).
The instructor will encourage participants to compare and contrast their findings and probe for:
The instructor will then guide the participants to discover:
3.Identify the policy levers that undergird your issue or problem and the potential levers that could be used to influence opportunity
Using their findings from the first two activities, the participants will then examine the policy levers/instruments that have created the problem or issue or present opportunities for action. Participants will work in small groups, of 4-5 participants each, using post-it notes to label the types of policy levers (based on McDonnell and Elmore’s categories of policy instruments) that undergird their issues or problems. They will also investigate how and in what ways the policy levers and decision-making processes differentially affect historically-marginalized groups of students, particularly racial-ethnic minority and low-income students.
Small groups will report out on the relationship between the policy instruments and issues that they find and the whole group will synthesize for pattern identification among the policy instruments and their differential impact on marginalized groups.
4. Reflection
The instructor will facilitate a whole group discussion about the nature of policy instruments, the underlying assumptions around their use, and the patterns that the group finds. The instructor and group will then explore how alternative policy instruments/levers might be beneficial. They will also explore the following questions:
Assignment
In a one-page memo, each participant is to map out the decision making systems and primary policy levers that shape the issue or problem each has selected and provide a rationale for advocating change within one system and through one policy lever on behalf of a specified issue or problem. The memo should include a discussion of the how marginalized groups of students are differentially affected. The memo should include internet links to relevant policies and governmental or other agencies.
This assignment will demonstrate participants’ understanding of decision-making systems and policy levers and provide background for subsequent action.
Field work extension
To extend this analysis further for field work application, the participant would expand the analysis to two or more decision-making systems (e.g. school and building, or local and state) and two or policy levers for possible action. The participant would then share his or her analysis and proposed change with an internship supervisor and evaluate the feasibility of the participant’s recommendations for further action and change.
Assessment
The instructor could use the following rubric to assess the participants’ memos and provide feedback.
Elements |
Beginning |
Developing |
Achieving |
Exceeding |
---|---|---|---|---|
Identifies the primary policy system influencing (or could) the identified issue or problem |
|
|
|
|
Identifies how the primary policy system influence how these issues are experienced by historically marginalized groups and students |
|
|
|
|
Identifies a primary policy lever/instrument that frames the identified issue or problem |
|
|
|
|
Identifies how the primary policy lever/instrument influences how these issues are experienced by historically marginalized groups and students |
|
|
|
|
Identifies a possible policy lever or instrument that could positively affect the identified issue or problem |
|
|
|
|
Explains how a possible policy lever or instrument that could positively affect the identified issue or problem to benefit historically marginalized groups and students |
|
|
|
|
Takes the context into consideration in proposing a policy lever, particularly for historically marginalized groups and students |
|
|
|
|
Uses the course readings to inform the selection of policy systems and instruments |
|
|
|
|
Includes relevant internet links to policies and decision making agencies |
|
|
|
|
Required reading
Anderson, G.L. (2009) Advocacy Leadership: Toward a Post-Reform Agenda in Education. New York: Routledge (Chapter 6). “Toward a post-reform agenda.
Fowler, F. (2008). Policy Studies for Educational Leaders. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. (Chapter 2) “Power and Education Policy”
McDonnell, L. M., & Elmore, R. F. (1987). Getting the job done: Alternative policy instruments. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 9(2), 133-152.
Suggested readings
Barry, B. (2005) Why social justice matters. Cambridge, England: Polity
Callan, P. M., Ewell, P. T., Finney, J. E., & Jones, D. P. (2007). Good policy, good practice. Improving outcomes and productivity in higher education: A guide for policy makers. San Jose, CA: The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. http://www.highereducation.org/reports/Policy_Practice/GPGP.pdf
Freire, P. (1999). Education is politics. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.
Fullan, M. (2003). The moral imperative of school leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Fuller, B. (2007). Standardized childhood: the political and cultural struggle over early education. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Haycock, K. (2002). State policy levers: Closing the achievement gap. State education standard, 6(Winter) http://www.closingtheachievementgap.org/cs/ctag/view/resources/28
Kerchner, C. T. (January 2010). There’s lots to learn from L.A.: Policy levers for institutional change. PACE Policy Brief. http://www.stanford.edu/group/pace/PUBLICATIONS/PB/PACE_BRIEF_JAN_2010.pdf
Polakow, V. (2007) Who cares for our children? NYC: TC Press
Robinson, A. & D. R. Stark (2002), Advocates in action. Washington DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Romero, M. (July 2010). Key readings policy levers to promote social inclusion and respect for diversity in early childhood New York City, NY: National Center for Children in Poverty, Columbia University. http://nccp.org/publications/pdf/text_953.pdf
Theoharis, G. (2009). The school leaders our children deserve. NYC, NY: Teachers College Press.
Suggested readings related to special education
School Law (revised biennially, latest should be 2010). New York State School Board Association, New York State Bar Association. Distributed by Lexis Nexis.
Wright, Peter, Wright Pamela, (2010). Special Education Law second edition. Harbor House Law Press, Virginia
Wright, Peter, Wright, Pamela, O’Connor, Sandra (2010). All About IEPs. Harbor House Law Press, Virginia.
Website: Wrightslaw.com