Interpreting the Fraser Institute Ranking of Secondary Schools in British Columbia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INTERPRETING THE FRASER INSTITUTE RANKING OF SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA: A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF HOW THE MECHANICS OF SYMBOLIC CAPITAL MOBILIZATION SHAPES, MANAGES, AND AMPLIFIES VISIBILITY ASYMMETRIES BETWEEN SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL SYSTEMS by Michael John Simmonds M.Ed., Columbia University, 1998 M.A., McGill University, 1991 Diploma in Secondary Science Education, McGill University, 1989 B.P.E., University of New Brunswick, 1985 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION in The Faculty of Graduate Studies (Educational Leadership and Policy) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) February 2012 © Michael John Simmonds, 2012 Abstract In the discourse on how to improve British Columbia’s secondary schools two prevailing epistemological tensions exist between two competing rationalities: (1) an instrumental rationality that privileges sense-making born out of data-gathering, and (2) a values- rationality that is discernibly more context-dependent. The seeds for public discord are sown when a particular kind of logic for capturing the complexity of any problematic is privileged over a competing (counter) logic attempting to do the same thing. The Fraser Institute proposes to the public a particular vision on how to improve secondary schools by manufacturing annual school report cards that are published in newspapers and online. Proponents of school report cards believe that school improvement is predicated on measurement, competition, market-driven reform initiatives, and choice. They support the strategies and techniques used by the Fraser Institute to demarcate the limits and boundaries of exemplary educational practice. Critics of school report cards object to the way ranking rubrics highlight and amplify differences that exist between schools. They believe that the rankings devised by the Fraser Institute rewards certain kinds of schools while statistically sanctioning others. Drawing principally on published media accounts and the Fraser Institute’s own documents this project shows how the Fraser Institute has mounted an effective public critique on the state of public secondary schools. It describes how statistical revisions made to the ranking matrix from 1998-2010 resulted in a marked redistribution of top-ranked schools in British Columbia that privileged certain kinds of private schools over public schools. School rankings designed to locate and fix their respective subjects in this way call on agents to compete for, acquire, and leverage different kinds of symbolic capital on the field of power, which they use to promote their respective political agendas. When the kinds of stories that can be told about schools become narrated through a statistical régime of truth they may negate capital disparities that exist between schools and the population of students they serve. At stake is the emancipatory belief that different kinds of schools operate to serve the diverse educational needs of different kinds of students in different kinds of ways. ii Table of Contents Abstract ...................................................................................................................... ii Table of Contents ........................................................................................................ v List of Tables .............................................................................................................. vi List of Figures ............................................................................................................ vii Acknowledgements ................................................................................................. viii CHAPTER 1: School Rankings Contextualized ............................................................... 1 The Problem and its Significance ........................................................................................ 7 What’s at Stake? ............................................................................................................... 11 Problematic ................................................................................................................... 13 Polemical Models .............................................................................................................. 16 Tout Court—“The Only World” ..................................................................................... 18 Dissertation Roadmap ...................................................................................................... 25 CHAPTER 2: Theoretical Framework .......................................................................... 29 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 29 Foucault and School Rankings .......................................................................................... 33 The Panopticon ............................................................................................................. 39 Systems of Accountability ................................................................................................. 41 Disclosure ...................................................................................................................... 42 Transparency ................................................................................................................. 42 Redress .......................................................................................................................... 44 Bourdieu and School Rankings .......................................................................................... 45 Limitations of Foucault and Bourdieu in Explaining School Rankings .............................. 53 An Integrative Approach of Foucault and Bourdieu ......................................................... 55 Research Questions .......................................................................................................... 61 CHAPTER 3: Methodology ......................................................................................... 63 Research Design—Case Study ........................................................................................... 63 Triangulation ................................................................................................................. 64 Data Gathering ............................................................................................................. 65 Critical Discourse Analysis ................................................................................................. 66 Data Sources Contextualized ........................................................................................ 73 Limitations of Critical Discourse Analysis ...................................................................... 76 iii CHAPTER 4: A Changing School Ranking Rubric .......................................................... 78 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 78 The Epistemology of Seeing .............................................................................................. 80 Iteration #1 (1998-2000): Five Key Performance Indicators ............................................ 84 Descriptive Indicators: Enrolment Data, Trend Indicators, and Parents‘ Education .... 95 Iteration #2 (2001-2002): Gender Matters ..................................................................... 100 Descriptive Indicator: Dropout Rate ........................................................................... 116 Iteration #3 (2003-2006): Refining the Student Cohort ................................................. 118 Descriptive Indicator: Extracurriucular Activities ........................................................ 124 Iteration #4 (2007): A Revised Graduation Program ...................................................... 126 Iteration #5 (2008-2010): Revised University Admission Policy Changes ...................... 128 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 135 CHAPTER 5: Discursive Practices and the Mechanics of Capital Mobilization ............ 138 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 138 Knowledge Discourses .................................................................................................... 139 Common Sense Discourses ............................................................................................. 152 Expanding the Surveillance Gaze .................................................................................... 154 Alberta School Rankings ............................................................................................. 154 Elementary School Rankings ....................................................................................... 156 New Brunswick School Rankings ................................................................................. 160 Aboriginal Report Card................................................................................................ 161 School Improvement Discourses .................................................................................... 164 Economic Discourses .....................................................................................................