Reading, Writing, and Privatization: the Narrative That Helped Change the Nation’S Public Schools

READING, WRITING, AND PRIVATIZATION: THE NARRATIVE THAT HELPED CHANGE THE NATION’S PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Merrie Elyn Meyers, APR, Fellow PRSA

A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of

The Dorothy F. Schmidt College of Arts and Letters

in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Florida Atlantic University

Boca Raton, Florida

May 2013

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Following the death of my husband, I spent some time pondering the question,

“What now?” I found the answer in this doctoral program. Despite many personal and professional hurdles, the goal of completing the program kept me on an even keel. It was the light at the end of the tunnel. Thanks, FAU College of Arts and Letters.

I am truly grateful to so many people, but I want to offer a special thank you to

Kimberly Ann Crockett. Kim is a fabulous proofreader, writing coach, and Socratic style editor. She has been my sounding board from the application to the dissertation.

As an editor, she helped me by gently asking, “What the heck are you talking about?” without getting my hackles up. Also, I would like to thank my counselor and guidepost,

Dr. Hilda Besner. She encouraged me to apply to the Comparative Studies doctoral program and move forward toward graduation. She never stopped cheering me on, even on my crankiest days.

I would be remiss if I did not thank my committee chair, Dr. Ann Branaman for her constant encouragement, even on my days of total self doubt. Ann always has many balls in the air, but she never said no to my request for her time. My other committee members; Dr. Susan Love Brown, Dr. Becky Mulvaney, Dr. Phyllis Schiffer-Simon, and Dr. Jay Rayburn, also are to be thanked, both for their willingness to travel this path with me and for the inspiration they provided during my participation in the program.

iv ABSTRACT

Author: Merrie Elyn Meyers

Title: Readings, Writing, and Privatization: The Narrative That Changes the Nation’s Public Schools

Institution: Florida Atlantic University

Dissertation Advisor: Dr. Mary Ann Branaman

Degree: Doctor of Philosophy

Year: 2013

The face of North America’s public education system is changing. Across the

United States, hundreds of thousands of students have migrated away from traditional public school into charter schools. While both are considered public schools, often that is where the similarity ends.

Claims and counter claims have been made about the virtues and advantages of a charter school versus the traditional public school. This study, focused on the nation’s sixth-largest school system in Broward County, Florida, compares comments from stakeholders involved in charter programs to feedback from those still involved in the traditional public system.

Three hypotheses are evaluated including: whether traditional schools are not adequately serving the needs of students; whether charter schools are better at serving student needs; or people believe that charter schools are doing a better job at serving the needs of students. Evidence suggests that while each model of education has its

v advantages and disadvantages, neither clearly provides a “better” opportunity for students. Conclusions are that consumer perceptions are driving the shift in enrollment.

This is attributed to the narrative about “choice” created by charter school advocates that aligns with American ideologies of liberty, freedom and independence.

Ultimately, it is argued that the deconstruction of the traditional public education system is part of a larger effort to shift selected rights and privileges out of the public sphere and back into private control. For traditional public schools to regain momentum, they must learn to control the narrative and ultimately public policy and public opinion about our nation’s public schools.

vi DEDICATION

This manuscript is dedicated to my family by birth and my family by choice; relatives and friends who have lent their support and extended their kindness throughout the years of coursework, research, and self-exploration. I also dedicate this work to my late husband, Tom Kershaw, a career librarian, who fostered my sense of curiosity. He would be quite pleased to know that I’ve finally learned to do research, without his assistance.

READING, WRITING, AND PRIVATIZATION: THE NARRATIVE THAT HELPED CHANGE THE NATION’S PUBLIC SCHOOLS

LIST OF TABLES ...... xii

I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1

Public Schools as a “Dys-Function” of Public Policy ...... 2

Broward County: A Case Study ...... 9

Statement of the Problem ...... 10

II. EDUCATION IN AMERICA ...... 14

Public Schools: A New Idea in Governance ...... 14

The Early Years ...... 15

The South ...... 20

The Twentieth Century ...... 21

A Focus on Science and Other Issues ...... 26

Education in Florida: A Twentieth Century Institution ...... 34

Broward Schools: A History of Separate and Unequal ...... 37

III. REALITY AND PERCEPTION: THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TRADITIONAL PUBLIC AND CHARTER SCHOOLS ...... 46

Methodology ...... 49

Testing the Hypotheses ...... 51

The Truths about Charter Schools ...... 52

vii Class Size ...... 52

Overhead ...... 54

School Boundaries ...... 57

Citizen Involvement ...... 59

Community Involvement ...... 67

Home-school Communication ...... 68

Specialized Courses and Programs ...... 70

Sports ...... 72

Understanding Racial and Cultural Sensitivity ...... 72

Special Needs ...... 75

Perceptions About Charter Schools ...... 76

Measuring Customer Satisfaction ...... 79

Stakeholder Opinions ...... 80

Comparing Stakeholder Responses ...... 85

Stakeholder Assessments in Other Communities ...... 87

Summarizing the Discussion ...... 92

IV. STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESS ...... 99

The Narrative of Choice ...... 103

Discourse in the Public Sphere ...... 104

Issue Evolution and Policy Metaphors ...... 107

Issue Evolution ...... 107

Policy Metaphors ...... 109

Creating a Public Agenda ...... 110

viii Agenda Setting and Framing ...... 115

The Components of Mobilizing Public Will ...... 117

Mass Communication ...... 118

Spiral of Silence ...... 119

Social Capital ...... 122

Social Marketing ...... 123

V. THE HISTORY OF SCHOOL CHOICE ...... 129

Government Expansion into Education ...... 129

Vouchers as Public Policy ...... 130

Private Schools as Public Policy ...... 132

Charter Schools as Public Policy ...... 133

State Legislation ...... 134

Charters as Empowerment ...... 135

Charters Gain Presidential Support ...... 137

Business Opportunities ...... 138

Refining Public Perception ...... 138

Changing Tides ...... 139

Me vs. We ...... 141

The Decline of Social Capital ...... 143

The Backlash Movement ...... 143

Declining Engagement, Increasing Privatization ...... 145

The Diversity of Choice Supporters ...... 145

Summarizing the Discussion ...... 148

ix VI. THE BATTLE OF SCHOOL REFORM ...... 150

Education: Why Change? ...... 150

Parallel Experiences ...... 151

Railroads ...... 151

Established Media ...... 152

Healthcare ...... 152

Outcomes ...... 152

Taking Action ...... 155

A Case Study ...... 156

VII. CONSIDERING THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC EDUCATION ...... 159

Overview ...... 160

Historical Perspective ...... 160

National Public Policy ...... 160

Court Decisions and Legislation ...... 161

Local History ...... 161

Public Perception ...... 162

Statistical Perspective ...... 163

Literature ...... 163

Stakeholder Satisfaction ...... 163

Parent Perceptions ...... 164

Rhetorical Perspective ...... 164

Establishing a Narrative ...... 165

Developing Awareness Among Elites ...... 165

x Mobilizing Public Will ...... 166

The Relationship between The Public Sphere, Communication, and Democracy ...... 166

Communication in the Public Sphere ...... 166

The Role of Media in Perpetuating Communication ...... 167

The Relationship between Democracy and the Public Sphere ...... 168

Engaging Public Will ...... 169

Using Social Capital as a Platform for Recovery ...... 169

Understanding Social Capital ...... 169

Social Capital, Lost and Regained ...... 172

Developing Social Capital in Our Schools ...... 174

Parent Involvement as Social Capital ...... 176

Enhancing Home-School Communication ...... 178

Using Social Capital to Create Momentum ...... 180

Looking Forward ...... 181

Where Will The Public Go To School? ...... 181

Interpreting Change on Several Levels ...... 183

The Integration of Education and Government ...... 184

Civic Engagement ...... 185

Personal Engagement ...... 186

APPENDIXES ...... 188

WORKS CONSULTED ...... 244

xi LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Broward County Population ...... 42

Table 2. Broward County Public Schools Historical Twentieth Day Enrollment ...... 42

Table 3. Data Reviewed ...... 51

Table 4. Total SAC Meetings Conducted 2008-2009 ...... 61

Table 5. SAC Meetings Achieving Quorum ...... 62

Table 6. Strong Field Framework Model ...... 65

Table 7. Charter Schools Vs. Traditional Public Schools ...... 77

Table 8. School Grades Assigned by Respondent Groups ...... 80

Table 9. Listing of Highest and Lowest Loss Schools Expressed in Absolute Numbers and as a Percent ...... 83

Table 10. Survey Questions ...... 84

Table 11. Charter School Stakeholder Surveys from Other Communities ...... 96

Table 12. Comparison of Challenges and Opportunities ...... 98

Table 13. Mobilizing Public Will ...... 128

Table 14. Adaptation of Common Myths for Failure Model to Education ...... 154

xii I. INTRODUCTION

“We are now at a point where we must educate our children in what no one knew yesterday, and prepare our schools for what no one knows yet.” --- Margaret Mead (qtd. in Blackwell n.p.)

America’s system of a public education is at a crossroads. Publicly funded, traditional neighborhood school programs no longer represent the only opportunity for a free education. Alternative education models, including voucher programs,1 virtual education,2 and charter schools3 provide families with additional choices for a “free” public education. Increasingly, students are opting out of traditional programs and into one of these other education models.

As America’s traditional public schools lost enrollment, they also lost resources

– both teachers and programs – thus impacting their ability to deliver programs effectively and to serve a diverse group of students. This has become a catch-22, creating additional reasons for families to opt out of neighborhood public schools, with the largest number of students enrolling in charter schools.

1 A school voucher is a certificate issued by the government that parents can apply toward tuition 2 Virtual education is a program that typically is conducted in the virtual arena, using technology to create the learning environment. Virtual education can be an add-on to the traditional school program or can comprise the entire learning experience. 3 Charter schools are nonsectarian public schools of choice that operate with freedom from many of the regulations that apply to traditional public schools. The charter establishing each such school is a performance contract detailing the school’s mission, program, goals, students served, methods of assessment, and ways to measure success. The length of time for which charters are granted varies, but most are granted for three to five years. At the end of the term, the entity granting a charter may choose to renew it. 1 Charter schools, first established 20 years ago in Minnesota, are publicly funded schools run by private for-profit, government, or not-for-profit organizations. They operate under less restrictive rules than those required of traditional public programs.

During the last 15 years, the number of charter schools has grown exponentially, fueled by state and federal policies that favor this education model. Even though charter schools generally lack sports, specialized academics, or extra-curricular programs, parents still are signing their children up in record numbers. Why?

Public Schools as a “Dys-Function” of Public Policy

Throughout the history of public schools in the United States, federal and state education policy developed as a function of political will. Education reforms, innovations, and/or changes enacted into legislation reflected and imposed the ideology of the dominant political party. Candidates and politicians gave speeches and convened study groups based on the appeal these issues had with the electorate.

Rarely did policy changes come about through individual or organizational leadership focused on improving public schools, the one exception being the legislative reforms pushed through by the National Parent Teacher Association (PTA). No other group has been so committed to changing and supporting our public schools.4 The hallmark of the PTA’s success is reflected in the influence they wield with thousands of willing and active voters.

4 Founded in Washington, DC in 1897 by Alice McLellan Birney and Phoebe Apperson Hearst as the National Congress of Mothers, the PTA is an organization that has been woven into the very fabric of American life. The PTA provides support, information, and resources to families focused on the health and education of children. Some of the education reforms for which the PTA is responsible include adoption of kindergarten as a part of public schooling in the United States, child labor laws, school lunch programs, and mandatory immunization. Additional information on the PTA’s legislative accomplishments can be found at www.pta.org.

In the mid-twentieth century, social movements such as racial equality/civil rights, gender equality/women’s rights, and accessibility/disability rights, had an undeniable impact on education.

As national education policy moved back and forth across an ideological continuum parallel to shifts in political power, local school districts tried to respond to the changes like swinging pendulums and develop programs that followed suit. Because many pieces of federal legislation bring financial incentives, or penalties if prescribed standards are not met, local school districts constantly are jumping through hoops to follow the money and achieve compliance.

Florida’s evolution of public education did not occur until a semi-solid source of funding, property tax, was identified to underwrite school operations. State funds never have been an adequate resource for supporting public education, and over time state legislators have attempted to establish other revenue streams to help fund public education, such as the Florida Lottery or other forms of gambling. Historically, once additional sources of funding are created, money previously earmarked for education in the state budget is shifted to pay for other core services, such as roads and prisons, often negating projected funding increases.

The repetitive history of proposed federal legislative reforms suggests that the desired achievements in key areas of instruction are not being met. As far back as 100 years ago, political leaders were citing the need to improve instruction in science and math, now referred to as STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math).

Recommendations to fund programs and strengthen instruction were made repeatedly, suggesting that previous efforts never came to fruition or were initiated but

unsuccessful. Students continued to fall behind in these key areas, as measured by national and international standards5. Legislative initiatives and appropriation bills to support the teaching of this material were passed time after time, with each effort attempting to close achievement gaps between American students and students from other countries.

Other issues, such as the accountability of teachers and students also are a recurring theme. Depending on the political ideology and the definition of student achievement being used, standardized testing is seen simultaneously as a way to improve or to diminish student-learning gains.

Another issue that has been in and out of favor is that of school choice. Choice was originally presented as a way to avoid the mandates of the federal government. It has become part of federal policy create healthy competition and stimulate innovation in the traditional public education system.

In addition to legislation, the courts and the momentum created by sweeping social movements affected the development of public policy. It could be argued that social concerns, the legal system, and political platforms have formed a triad that work in concert to establish/maintain equilibrium.

5 The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) provides statistical data for international comparison of student achievement. Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) are systems that measure student achievement in key academic areas. While U.S. student math scores are high at the fourth grade level, successive measures at eighth grade and again at 15 years of age are lower than many Asian, Western, and Eastern Europe nations (Institute of Education Sciences-National Center for Education Statistics-U.S. Department of Education, 2011). 4

Interest in alternative education systems, including private and parochial schools,6 participation in home schooling7 or on-line programs,8 and attendance in charter schools increased across the country after the 1983 publication of A Nation At

Risk, a report authored by the National Commission on Excellence in Education. The report suggested that the American education system was in a state of crisis, alleging that U.S. students were not on par with their counterparts in other Western nations in key areas such as science and math.

A Nation At Risk noted the failings of public schools across the country and provided the impetus for the school reform movement that continues to this day. Among the outcomes of the report are: the school effectiveness movement, structural changes in the management and funding of public schools, and attempts to provide “choice” options within the public system through such policies as open boundaries and creation of Magnet Schools. Attempts to restructure schools were based on the idea that market forces such as school choice options would use the pressure of competition to improve school effectiveness, reduce inefficiencies, and improve overall student achievement.

O’Reilly and Bosetti argue that this belief led to greater support for tuition

6 Private and parochial schools predate the establishment of public schools in the United States, while home schooling and charter school programs were established fairly recently. Laws protecting these latter types of education were passed in Florida in 1985 and 1996, respectively. On-line programs were developed in several communities around the turn of the century, and then mandated by the Florida Legislature in 2007. They can be used to compliment any of these education models or as a stand-alone program. 7 Home education is a parent-directed educational option that satisfies the requirement for regular school attendance. Florida laws protecting home education became effective in 1985. Parents have the freedom to determine their child’s educational path and academic goals. Students have the opportunity to explore and learn at their own pace, in any location, or at any time. Students can earn academic credit by successfully passing year-end subject exams. 8 Many states, including Florida, require districts to have a virtual education program that allows students to participate in classes online. The benefit to this is that a student who needs or wants a certain curriculum can access it, regardless of whether it is available at the home school. Virtual school credits count towards high school graduation requirements the same way as in-school credits. 5

vouchers, as well as for private schools, home schooling, and the establishment of charter schools (19-20). They find our society characterized by postmodern attributes such as cultural pluralism and a population that is increasingly mobile with a lack of common vision or identity. They suggest that this results in a lack of consensus about education goals and purpose. They argue that parents have rejected a generic school system:

Parents are drawn to schools that reject a value-neutral, “one-size-fits-

all” approach to public schooling. Instead, they are seeking schools that

resonate with their particular values and beliefs regarding the goals of

education and what constitutes good teaching and learning. They are

seeking schools that are safe and caring, that are free of drugs and

violence, and that provide a sense of community where their children are

accepted and feel they belong. (20)

Supporters of public choice suggest it provides the answers to many dilemmas in education (Levin). National reports on public education cast doubt on the education standards as presently delivered by the public system, and create uncertainty as to whether the system can meet future challenges. Choice advocates suggest that student achievement is higher in private schools. And while the methodology used in these studies has been under debate, the discourse serves another purpose, which is to introduce the idea of adding private school models into the public delivery system.

Supporters of choice argue that by adding competition, a more efficient delivery system is created in the marketplace.

In 1955, Nobel Prize winning economist Milton Friedman wrote The Role of

Government in Education, which argued for limiting the government’s role to enforcing rules, eliminating coercion, and keeping markets free. Friedman claimed government intervention is warranted only when competition is impossible to achieve, when the cost of services to one individual would put an undue burden on the others in a neighborhood. Friedman believed that supporting a free market would reduce the cumbersome bureaucracy that government often creates. He believed that parents and communities should create the funding that would support the schools. He responded to the argument that parents living in poverty would not be able to afford a fee-based education for their children; that individuals in a community, not the government, should cover the cost of education for children in the community. Even in cases where such an objective cannot be achieved, Friedman argued that state subsidies should be provided only for a basic level of education, where benefits to all are the greatest and the most similar.

Friedman also made the distinction between financing and administering education. He suggested that while some financial assistance might be needed for communities to promote literacy and instill citizenship and other core values, the state does not have to be in the business of overseeing these activities. He believed in local standards for what and how things should be taught. Friedman was perhaps the first choice advocate, arguing that parents should be able to choose how and where their children are educated without government dictates.

In addition to his views on administration, Friedman believed that instructional content and policies on attendance and behavior decisions should be local ones. He

argued that the family is the responsible unit for children, and state intervention should allowed only be when the need to provide resources conflicts with the freedom of responsible individuals.

A case for allocating additional government funding to local school districts can be made for the purpose of educating special needs students. The cost of serving these children is very high, and individual families of these children would be handed an undue burden if they had to pay the actual dollar costs for service.

Choice programs do not address the original purpose of public education as developed by our founding fathers – to foster social or public good through an informed, literate, skilled citizenry. Instead, advocates of private-style choice see education as an extension of their family values, with the benefits derived as a sum of private benefits earned. This is important consideration for families whose values conflict with those taught in traditional public school programs or for the family who believes values should not be shared in the classroom at all9 (Levin 629).

Levin argues that public education offers both public and private benefits, and parents can find what they want in the public system. He defines public benefits as providing all children with cultural knowledge as well as a sense of social, economic, and political opportunities. Private benefits include the enhancement of opportunities and access to specialized information for specific students. He argues that participation in the public system is vital to building a sense of awareness about a diverse group of people. Schools can equalize opportunities for children of different racial and social

9 One only has to look at the debates that occur when states add requirements that school districts provide sex education, gun safety, HIV awareness, and character education programs in school curriculum to understand the clash between public and private good. 8

classes, as well as prepare students for the workforce, cultural appreciation, and scientific research as well as for national defense (630). Levin suggests that it would be challenging to accomplish this mission within a private school where parents gravitate to like-minded programs. He suggests that the common experience of mandatory schooling until age 16 provides a shared experience that is vital to the democratic process (630).

In 2010, there were more than 5,000 charter schools in the United States, serving

1.6 million children. Research shows that student achievement scores for charter programs are no better and often worse than traditional public programs. A study of a large comprehensive data set of student math achievement indicated that when comparing like students, controlling for differences such as language and demographics, traditional public schools rank higher than either charter schools or private schools in student scores (Lubienski and Lubienski).10 Yet, the numbers of charter schools continue to grow and parents continue to enroll their children in these programs in record numbers.

Broward County: A Case Study

This dissertation investigates the possible reasons for the shift in school enrollment in Broward County Public Schools (BCPS) located in greater Fort

Lauderdale, Florida. Since 2005, as the county’s population has continued to grow, student enrollment in BCPS has decreased. In the same period charter school enrollment grew exponentially. In the fall of 2011, there were 69 charter schools operating in

Broward County with an enrollment of nearly 30,000 (Harrison Preliminary).

10 Math was selected because it is more reflective of school influence versus home influence. 9

BCPS was used as a case study because of its size and diversity. As the nation’s

6th largest school system, the District serves a large and diverse student population, representing 150 nationalities and 56 language groups. Black and Hispanic students account for two-thirds of the student population. BCPS also serves a socio- economically diverse community. More than half the students in the district qualify for free and reduced lunch because their family income is below a specified level.11

Statement of the Problem

The research question (R1) addressed in this dissertation is: “Why are traditional public schools in Broward County, Florida, losing enrollment to charter schools?”

Several hypotheses were investigated:

• H1. Traditional schools do not serve the needs of students. Specifically,

some parents have expressed dissatisfaction with the traditional public

system, citing cookie cutter programs that treat all students the same, a lack

of transparency with decision making, no local input in decisions, and a lack

of nimbleness when addressing emerging issues.

• H2. Charter schools are better than traditional schools at serving the

needs of students. Research suggests parents generally hold positive

opinions about charter schools. The literature reflects beliefs among parents

that charter school classes are smaller in size, promote innovation as a

school wide philosophy, employ teachers committed to change, and offer a

culturally competent curriculum (Kunjufu 51, 101).

11 The United States Department of Agriculture’s guidelines for free meals and milk and reduced price meals were obtained by multiplying the year 2011 Federal income poverty guidelines by 1.30 and 1.85, respectively, and by rounding the result upward to the next whole dollar. The Department of Health and Human Services publishes poverty “thresholds” annually. In 2011, the threshold for a family of four was $22,350. 10

• H3. Parents perceive that charter schools are better than traditional

schools at serving the needs of students. Public schools were established in

the United States for a specific purpose—to improve literacy, instill a sense

of citizenship, and prepare students to enter the workforce, objectives

considered vital to supporting a democracy. Since 1800, public policy and

federal and state resources have been focused on meeting and adhering to

these principles. Today, public sentiment seems to be shifting away from the

need to meet these objectives. Charter school advocates suggest that many

schools are underperforming. They argue that education models used in the

traditional public schools do not meet the needs of today’s students, citing

numbers of students leaving school unprepared to enter the workforce or

higher education. They suggest that education could become a more nimble

process if others besides the state were involved.

Each hypothesis represents a different perspective on the role of traditional public schools in society, and the relationship between these schools and other models for education. The first hypothesis focuses on what is wrong with traditional public schools. The second hypothesis addresses what is right about charter schools. The third hypothesis questions whether perceptions about charter schools and their educational effectiveness are driving the change.

Education typically represents the largest allocation within the Florida state budget. School funding initiatives often jockey for position against other first-tier needs such as health care, prisons, roads, and economic development. To create an understanding of the change/reform environment, qualitative and quantitative analyses

will be used and data will be reviewed from an historical, statistical, and rhetorical perspective. The succeeding chapters will provide the reader with:

• The history of public education in the United States, Florida, and Broward

County,

• A summary of the political discourse relating to U.S. education policy

during the last 200 years of the electoral process,

• Stakeholder comments about charter schools as reflected in two surveys,

• Stakeholder comments from traditional Broward County public schools that

lost the most and the least number of students to charters in the 2009-2010

school year,

• A comparison of the two sets of comments to determine if there are gaps in

perceptions,

• A review of the charter school movement as compared to other political

traditions,

• A review of how the charter movement has been reflected in the media, and

• Discussion of rhetorical theory illustrating how the charter school movement

has been effective in developing strong support in both grassroots and elite

segments of society.

While it is unknown just how far the charter movement will go or whether, as proponents advocate, school governance will be changed on a wholesale level, it is clear, however, that alternatives to the neighborhood public school are here to stay. The state is no longer a sole source provider of publically funded education. This shift in governance and delivery parallels changes in other segments of society including the

privatization of prisons and the deregulation of the energy, transportation, communications, and finance industries.

13 II. EDUCATION IN AMERICA

“That which seems the height of absurdity in one generation often becomes the height of wisdom in the next.” --- John Stuart Mill (qtd. in Stevenson 102)

Public Schools: A New Idea in Governance

Our system of government is based on core values that include the right to a free education. The nature of that education is a topic that has evoked ongoing debate. Until the mid 1800s, education in America was only available to the wealthy or the very religious. In the 1600s “public” schools were established in New England to provide religious education. In 1635, the Boston Latin School, the first “public” school, was established for the sons of elite families. It had an enrollment of less than 10 students.

The curriculum was rigorous and not designed to appeal to the interests or needs of the general population. During the 1700s, private schools were established to instruct young men without infusing the prevailing religious beliefs of the region. Benjamin Franklin established Philadelphia’s American Academy in 1735. This eventually replaced the

Latin Grammar schools as the popular model for education.

In 1791, 7 of the 14 states with constitutions established specific provisions for education. Many of the leaders of the day such as Jefferson, Webster, and Washington believed that government should control the schools to foster religious freedom and access for all. However in the midst of other political issues that dominated at the time, that objective was not achieved. Private and religious and elitist schools remained dominant. 14 At the turn of the nineteenth century, creating an education system became part of the national conversation. Starting with the 1800 Presidential race and continuing to the present day, education has had a plank in each campaign platform; Appendix A outlines the history of education and rhetoric as reflected in these campaigns.

The political process became a driver for public education funding. Throughout the history of public schools in our country, financial support designated for education by state and federal governments has been a function of public sentiment and political will. The interplay between legislation, court decisions, and social movements resulted in public policy that at times whipsawed the direction and priorities of public schools.

During the second half of the twentieth century, conversation about the characteristics of a “free education” led to shifts in public policy, significant legislation, and, eventually, the creation of several new delivery systems for free education.

The Early Years

In the 1800s, a small group of “reformers” including Horace Mann in

Massachusetts, Henry Barnard in Connecticut, and John Dewey in Vermont, advocated for greater access to schooling. They argued that such a system would improve citizenship, unite society with common values, prevent crime, and eliminate poverty. As a result of their efforts, free public education was available for all children in America by the end of the nineteenth century. Massachusetts passed the first compulsory attendance law in 1892, followed a year later by New York.

The Emancipation Proclamation issued by President Abraham Lincoln in 1863 allowed Black children to begin attending school. During the next 50 years, the literacy rate among Black children rose to 70% from 5%. In 1867, President Andrew Johnson

established the federal Department of Education, creating a mechanism for the development of the first formal federal education policy.12 President Ulysses S. Grant was the first president to ask Congress for financial support, largely for primary education. This was the first time there was a major political focus on education. The bill did not pass, but education became a Republican campaign issue in the 1870 election. During the 1876 campaign, Democrats argued that establishing and supporting schools was a privilege accorded to the states. Republicans countered that this should not be the case and vowed to support a constitutional amendment to prohibit using public money to support sectarian schools. Throughout the next 10 years, all of the

Republican presidents (Rutherford B. Hayes, James A. Garfield, Chester A. Arthur, and

Benjamin Harrison) backed national support for education.

Towards the turn of the century, the Supreme Court upheld the Plessy v.

Ferguson 163 U.S. 537 (1896) decision,13 allowing segregated schooling to continue.

Exclusion from schooling was not limited to race. Poor children also had limited access to an education. Although the law provided for a free education for all children, enforcement often was difficult if not impossible. However, what the federal government would not do, the private sector could. Jane Adams opened Hull House in

Chicago in 1889. Modeled on Tonybee Hall in London, Hull House established the first kindergarten program for the children of the poor in the nineteenth ward, one of

12 The Department of Education was quickly downgraded to the “Office of Education” in 1869, and subsumed into the Department of the Interior where it remained until 1939. In that year, authority for education policy and programs was shifted to the Federal Security Agency, which was elevated to a cabinet post in 1953 and renamed the Department of Health Education and Welfare (HEW). Education did not become an independent cabinet level department until 1980, when President Carter signed the order designating it once again as the “Department of Education.” Today, the DOE is the smallest of all federal Cabinet agencies with about 5,000 employees. 13 Plessy v. Ferguson was a landmark Supreme Court decision, which established the doctrine of “separate but equal.” Plessy legitimized the move towards segregation that had begun earlier in the South and remained the standard until the 1954 “Brown v. Board of Education.” 16

Chicago’s poorest neighborhoods. By the turn of the century, Hull House had been replicated more than 100 times throughout the county and Adams received the Nobel

Prize in 1931 for her efforts.

The Progressive Era Movement, 1880s-1920s, saw the modernization of business and industry. These changes had a major impact on education. Schools were viewed as workplaces for children and measured in terms of productivity. This was also the time period where schools were used as a primary tool to assimilate new immigrants.14

Meyer, Tyack, Nagel, and Gordon argue that this expansion of American public education during the nineteenth century represented an effort to build the institution of public schools to support a series of “nation-building social movements” that were partly religious and partly political.15 These movements were tied closely to public policy at that time regarding voter registration, as well as labor laws for adults and children. They suggest that in the Northeast, the spread of public schools paralleled the rise of new cities and the needs of business and industry (591). Studies in Massachusetts indicate that urban education gave support to industrial capitalism and was promoted by capitalist elites who gained from this economic and educational paradigm. Schools were used to socialize workers, to provide them with basic skills in language and citizenship, and to solve problems of social unrest and labor control (593).

14 Using a manufacturing analogy, children who could not assimilate were considered “scraps” in the production of knowledge and “dropped” from the line, coining the term “drop out.” 15 This tradition of schools reflecting the prevailing philosophy has continued to present day. Sex education, drug education, character education, and gun safety programs, all legislated into public school curriculum, represented the prevailing issues in society in the 1980s and 1990s. In Florida, Holocaust education, women’s studies, African-American studies, and Hispanic education also are required. 17

As new groups of immigrants continued to enter the country, public schools were used to socialize, democratize, and organize individuals into a new and compliant work force. A regression analysis of educational expenditures and length of schooling in years suggests a high correlation between the level of education and the productivity of the labor force in manufacturing or per capital manufacturing in urban and industrial areas (593-594). Public school enrollment accomplished other objectives than just preparing the labor force. They also prepared students to be contributing members of the community. Students learned the importance of voting in a democracy – often a novel concept to new immigrants – and students from various background and nationalities learned about each other.

In 1917, the Smith-Hughes Act created vocational programs in high schools, reinforcing the use of public school programs as a vehicle for job-skills training. During

World War I, the U.S. military complained that many recruits were illiterate and could not receive and read their orders. This prompted calls for greater emphasis on school attendance. By 1918, all states passed laws requiring elementary school attendance, with Democrats taking credit for this effort. Catholics, however, opposed the idea of children attending a non-religious school and formed their own schools.

At the same time that schools were expanding in urban communities, data on

Northern and Western state school enrollments showed that attendance also was high in rural schools because they provided a focus for the community and socialization of the individual (Meyer, Tyack, Nagel, and Gordon 596-598). Lyda Hanifan, Superintendent of Rural Schools in West Virginia, suggested that the school was the center of the community and through it resources could be delivered and public good would be

achieved. Hanifan suggested it was the school’s obligation to build a relationship, which he called social capital, with its community.

The research compiled by Meyer, Tyack, Nagel, and Gordon suggests that in the

North and the West, rural communities built schools and passed laws requiring attendance to create a platform for reinforcing the philosophy of capitalism. This paralleled the national movement in both rural and urban communities to sustain long standing religious values and political ideology. Schools reinforced a national culture and economy that glorified the components of capitalism, property, rational investment, technology, free labor, and open markets, along with the Victorian values of thrift in time and money, sobriety, temperance, competition, and order (599).

During the 1920 elections, the two parties reversed their positions on education.

Democrats advocated for federal aid to reduce literacy and increase citizenship instruction and the Republicans supported funding for only vocational and agricultural training. Conversations about education policy in the 1924 election were comparatively low-key, with Democrats suggesting that the federal government should only advise and counsel the states. President Calvin Coolidge largely ignored the issue and left the discussion to Congress. Ironically, though the Republicans took a laissez faire position towards education during the Coolidge administration, in 1928 they touted increased enrollment in colleges and technical schools as a sign of their policy success.

A 1925 Supreme Court ruling, Pierce v. Society of Sisters 268 U.S. 510

(1925),16 held that as long as a child attended school, the state could not compel that

16 At the conclusion of World War I, some states were concerned about the influence of foreign immigrants. States passed laws to promote a common American culture. In Oregon, voters amended the compulsory education act to require all children to attend a public school. The law primarily was 19

child to attend public school. This was important to the Catholic Church and other organizations that offered a religious education program and to other private schools that offered a varied curriculum (Thattai).

The South

The exception to the expansion of education was the South, which was embedded in a slavery and subsequent caste economy until almost the twentieth century. On the eve of the Civil War, the South provided White children with only 10.6 days of public school as compared to 63.5 in New England and 49.9 in the north central states. A regression analysis of variables that might account for the disparity in enrollment (i.e., ratio of adults to children, fewer urban centers, less industrial production industry, lower percentages of Catholics and other immigrants) did not balance the differences. Eliminating the data concerning the southern Black population did make up some of the difference. However, the south was still an agrarian economy and education was a distant second to that for most families of any color. Meyer, Tyack,

Nagel, and Gordon argue that the South represented a different type of political economy and social system; the culture of the northern freeholder capitalism was based on individual opportunity, while the plantation culture of the South controlled by wealthy Whites was based on the premise of the inferiority of all others (600).17

To leaders in every part of the country except the South, it was critical to link individuals to national values through education. Those involved in this effort had more of a moral than official authority to do this. To accomplish this objective, they

designed to eliminate parochial schools. Through a series of court cases and appeals, the U.S. Supreme Court found the Oregon law to be unconstitutional. 17 Meyer’s research suggests that a slave-based economy was designed to restrict access to education and other resources in society. 20

combined into associations that mirror what today would be considered a social movement. This social movement to create the common school was the result of individuals and groups acting for the sake of their own children as well as for all children in the society (Meyer, Tyack, Nagel, and Gordon 602).

By the end of the nineteenth century, despite the Pierce decision, every state passed legislation extending the requirement for school attendance to age 16. From the turn of the century to about 1996, the percentage of teenagers who completed high school rose to 85% from 6%.

The Twentieth Century

As the twentieth century progressed, momentum for the movement increased.

Herbert Hoover was the first president to call for a committee to study public education programs. Even though he acknowledged that education was a right of the state, he advocated for high standards. The first comprehensive national survey of issues surrounding education was presented in 1931. Recommendations included the establishment of a Department of Education and the continued study on whether federal aid was needed or whether it could be allocated to states through a series of “block” grants that would be reallocated as the states saw fit.

As Franklin Roosevelt took office, he tried to limit funding for vocational education. Congress challenged this effort, passing legislation to expand funding.

Roosevelt signed the bill but then appointed a committee on vocational education, and then expanded it to pursue his agenda. Throughout his New Deal administration,

Roosevelt did not support expansion of funding for education, but was pressured into it

by Congress. Ironically, Republicans claimed that Roosevelt’s administration usurped states’ rights. They argued that the federal government should stay out of schools.

The start of World War II created a teacher shortage. Able-bodied men were recruited to serve in the military and as many as 115,000 teachers left their classrooms to become part of the war effort. These recruits offered something other recruits did not

– they could read instructions and follow plans.

In addition to thinning out the ranks of teachers, college students majoring in education also left to join the armed forces or to fill government and civilian jobs associated with the war effort. Writing about this “Crisis in Education” in 1942, U.S.

Commissioner of Education John W. Studebaker suggested that this was a not a criticism of teachers but rather an indication that many realized not only their patriotic duty, but also that they could be paid more in other industries. In 1944, 30 out of 100 teachers were paid less than $1,200 annually, with 5 out of 100 receiving less than $600 a year. “In practically every instance, they have left teaching for jobs with higher salaries. This may make teachers seem like a mercenary lot but let me point out that even in peace time teachers receive the lowest pay of any professional group,” (sic) he added (“Missing,” 65). Studebaker argued that the responsibility placed on teachers for training the nation for future success far exceeded their compensation.

In October 1939, there were practically no teaching jobs vacant. In October

1943 there were 7,700. In addition to this gap, approximately 57,000 more positions were filled by teachers who could not meet the “regular certification requirements”

(Studebaker 45-47). Even with this significant number of teachers hired under the emergency war certification, vacancies still existed. Classrooms of the remaining

teachers became over crowded, with thousands of teachers quickly, and poorly, becoming certified in second and third subjects.

Significant shortages remained in the teaching of math and science, which were subjects most needed by the military.18 Studebaker worried that this lack of rigorous instruction would end up having a broad impact on the future leaders of society and their ability to solve post war problems. He argued that the country should (1) prioritize the importance of teaching, (2) improve salaries for top notch teachers, (3) re-engage former teachers and consider eliminating the restriction against married women being teachers, and (4) encourage young people to become teachers because of the strong nation that came through a well educated society.19

Following the end of World War II, the Democratic Party renewed its efforts to increase funding for education. However, rather than increasing the salaries of public school teachers, legislation passed provided funding for veterans re-entering the workforce. Originally known as the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944, the GI

Bill offered members of the military money to seek additional training and education.

This noble sounding bill had another objective, which was to alleviate the possibility of a postwar depression brought on by an estimated 15 million men and women returning to the country without jobs. The legislation was crafted by the American Legion and signed into law just days after the invasion of Normandy.

During the next seven years, the number of degrees awarded by colleges and universities doubled. By the time the tuition portion of the bill expired in 1956, more

18 Oddly, the same situation exists today; math and science remain a critical shortage area, exacerbating the shortage of engineers in the country. 19 These arguments are reiterated by political candidates and elected officials annually. 23

than $14.5 million had been disbursed to veterans. Increased education also resulted in better paying jobs and increased prosperity throughout the country. After the war, veterans bought almost 20% of all new homes built. The GI Bill has been extended several times since its original passage, benefitting colleges and universities and the individual veteran. However, the original plea made by Commissioner Studebaker to restore strength to the nation’s public schools through the reinstatement of rigorous standards and increasing teacher pay was not addressed.

In 1945, President Harry S. Truman took over leadership of the country and pledged to make education one of his priorities. During the 1948 presidential campaign, he advocated for providing $300 million in federal aid to the states for public schools.

Truman believed that a strong moral foundation, coupled with a solid education would reduce crime. Speaking at the 1950 Attorney General’s Conference on Law

Enforcement Problems, his speech could have been given today, as is evidenced by this excerpt:

There has been a substantial postwar increase in crime in this country,

particularly in crimes of violence. This is disturbing, but it is one of the

inevitable results of war, and the dislocations that spring from war. It is

one of the many reasons why we must work with other nations for a

permanent peace….It is important, therefore, that we work together in

combating organized crime in all its forms. We must use our courts and

our law enforcement agencies, and the moral forces of our people, to put

down organized crime wherever it appears.

At the same time, we must aid and encourage gentler forces to do

their work of prevention and cure. These forces include education,

religion, and home training, family and child guidance, and wholesome

recreation.

The most important business in this Nation–or any other nation,

for that matter–is raising and training children. If those children have the

proper environment at home, and educationally, very, very few of them

ever turn out wrong. I don’t think we put enough stress on the necessity

of implanting in the child’s mind the moral code under which we live….

I think every child in the Nation, regardless of his race, creed, or

color, should have the right to a proper education. And when he has

finished that education, he ought to have the right in industry to fair

treatment in employment. If he is able and willing to do the job, he ought

to be given a chance to do that job, no matter what his religious

connections are, or what his color is. (Truman)

In the 1950s, R. Freeman Butts and Lawrence Cremin published A History of

Education in American Culture, based on the belief that “that history should see education in vital relationship to the culture of its times.” They argued that the role of education as an institution among other social institutions should be studied, along with underlying ideas, beliefs, values, and attitudes that motivate behavior in and out of school (Ment 308).

The 1952 presidential election saw the beginning of the baby boom era.

Although Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower strongly opposed federal support

for education, he did establish the White House Conference on Education to consider some of the issues schools were facing. Recommendations from the conference included endorsement of federal support for education and construction programs to address the shortage of classrooms. Eisenhower, however, changed his position on education funding; he supported funding for school construction during the 1956 campaign because it limited the role of the federal government in schools.

Concurrent with this tremendous shift in the federal government’s education platform was the shift in the structure of public school enrollment. In 1954, the Supreme

Court found in Brown v. The Board of Education 347 U.S. 483 (1954)20 that segregated public schools did not offer an equal education experience to all children. This overturned Plessy and gave a legal voice to a growing social movement. Over the next

20 years, federal civil rights laws, coupled with public demonstrations, helped insure that all schools and colleges moved towards a national standard of equity. During the latter part of the century, this model of social movement, legal interdiction, and legislative muscle was one that would be repeated for women’s rights and the rights of special needs children. However, for some school districts, change was slow, arriving in incremental steps. School districts in the South used a variety of methods to integrate their schools, often at the continued detriment of minority children.

A Focus on Science and Other Issues

In 1957, the Russians launched Sputnik, causing great concern over national defense and science education. President Eisenhower advocated moving federal funding

20 Brown v. The Board of Education was a landmark decision that dictated that separate educational facilities were inherently unequal. The ruling furthered the shift towards integration and empowered those involved in the Civil Rights movement. 26

away from school construction and towards legislation that would expand the federal role in education. The Defense Education Act received bi-partisan support and supported programs in math, science, and foreign language instruction.

Education became a major platform issue in the 1960 election. Both parties supported education funding, but for vastly different purposes. Democrats wanted the government to provide a wide range of assistance, including support for educational programs; school construction, which was forgotten in the Sputnik era; and teacher salaries, something not discussed since the 1940s. Republicans argued that responsibility for education rests primarily with the local community, and only advocated limited support for school construction and greater vocational programs.

With the election of John F. Kennedy, the administration was able to push through measures that provided schools with considerable federal aid. Kennedy is considered the first president to support federal aid to education as a major element of domestic policy.

After President Kennedy was assassinated in 1963, President Lyndon B.

Johnson carried on his legacy of support for public education. He signed two pieces of legislation in December of that year: The Vocational Education Act to strengthen and expand training programs, and The Higher Education Act to support construction of college facilities. Republicans criticized this amount of federal aid, saying there was no precedent for this level of support. A sitting member of Congress, Representative Edith

Green,21 refuted that claim, publishing The Federal Government and Education, which

21 Representative Green played a significant role in the development of education policy. During her 20 years in Congress, she authored several bills benefitting education, including the Landmark Title IX legislation, which prohibited federally funded education programs from discriminating against women. 27

highlighted the aid provided to public schools since the Civil War 100 years earlier

(Hoenisch “Education Policy of the Republican”).

Securing the Presidency outright through the 1964 election, Lyndon Johnson continued to advocate for a strong role of the federal government in education. Senator

Barry Goldwater, a leading Republican and Johnson’s challenger in the election, argued that federal involvement in education was the first step to subordinating state and local governments. Johnson created his own legacy in education through passage of the

Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, also known as “The War on Poverty” bill. The legislation included money for jobs training and vocational rehabilitation.

Other legislation designed to help level the playing field for low-income families was passed during the Johnson administration. The Elementary and Secondary

Education Act (ESEA) of 1965 includes programs such as Title I and Head Start, which are designed to expand educational opportunities for poor children. They continue to be a mainstay of education policy today. The legislation also included support for reinforcing instruction in math, science, and foreign language.

The popularity of these programs with the American people prompted the

Republican Party to shift its position on education during the 1968 campaign. Citing inadequate education in urban areas, the Republicans pledged to bring about high quality education for everyone. Richard Nixon’s platform backed grants, loans, and work student programs, and advocated for expanding programs for preschool children.

Both parties advocated for the establishment of commissions to study issues in education.

After his re-election in 1972, President Nixon ordered a halt to court ordered busing, which was a key compliance element in many school district desegregation plans. Instead, Nixon suggested that federal money be used to improve the quality of neighborhood schools.22 In 1972, Representative Green actively advocated for and succeeded in the passage of Title IX, which prohibited discrimination based on sex.

This legislation was met with mixed reactions as it had far reaching impact on public school programs. Opponents argued that public schools would have to let girls play on sports teams, and/or not offer a sport. Supporters argued that the legislation meant that school districts needed to take a critical look at whether girls were recruited into science and math programs in the same proportion as boys.

Neither President Gerald Ford nor President Jimmy Carter did much to expand or contract the federal government’s role in education during their time in office. All that changed when Ronald Reagan was elected. Reagan was a true conservative, and ended 30 years of federal support for public schools. He decreased the government’s role in education and decentralized many programs.

Reagan may be best known for his desire to eliminate the Department of

Education. However, he changed his mind after commissioning A Nation At Risk, which warned of “a rising tide of mediocrity.” Reagan used the findings of this report to advance his education agenda, which included a call for standardized testing that continues today. Rising test scores became a requirement to secure federal aid. In a

2011 retrospective, on what would have been President Ronald Reagan’s 100th birthday,

22 Although Nixon passed no significant legislation during his administration, Representative Claiborne Pell is credited with the successful passage of Pell grants, which provide low-income students with grants to defray much of the cost of college tuition.

Washington Post education writer Valerie Strauss took a look at the impact of Reagan’s education policy.23 She reported that requirements for standardized testing did not result in improved schools, just more testing.

President Reagan’s Secretary of Education, William Bennett, was perhaps one of the most outspoken of all Education cabinet members. Bennett announced that he would use the post as a “bully pulpit” to advocate for a core curriculum based on conservative values, and against multicultural and other liberal programs (“Education

Policy). Bennett advocated for competency testing for teachers, the opening of the profession to non-educators, performance-based pay, the accountability of educators for how much children learn, a national examination, and parental choice of schools.

Despite the fact that Bennett’s abrasive style made him a lightening rod for controversy, much of what he advocated, which seemed heretical at the time, is now part of the current administration’s education policy.

Following the election of George H. W. Bush in 1988, education policy became more relaxed and money was earmarked for Drug Free Schools and Magnet Programs, which were used to help districts continuing to struggle with the integration of traditionally Black schools.

Political ideology and cultural norms have had a strong impact on public schools. Erosion of the two-parent household created a need to legislatively require schools to address social and cultural issues such as sex education, drug abuse prevention, awareness about HIV, AIDs and other sexually transmitted diseases, and

23 Reagan also suggested other reforms, none of which were achieved during his terms. These included merit pay for teachers, mandatory prayer in schools, and tuition tax credits for private schools. Currently, merit pay and tuition tax credits are favored.

gun education, among others. One of the differences between the United States and other western societies is that the responsibility for funding education rests with the states and the responsibility for implementation of programs exists at the local school district level. Beyond the state statutes governing funding and operations, each local school district sets policy that reflects local values and norms for attendance, behavior, high school graduation, participation in sports, and everything in between. This framework served to reinforce values such as the “separate but equal” doctrine of

Plessy.24

The election of President Bill Clinton in 1992 signified another revitalization of federal involvement in education. Clinton signed the Goals 2000: Education America

Act, which provides a national framework for education reform. He also extended the

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965. After the 1994 mid-term elections, Republicans gained control of Congress and House Majority Leader Newt

Gingrich led a repeal of education funding. Citing his “Contract with America,”

Gingrich targeted education and job training funds.

By 2000, many in Congress did not want to work on critical legislation including reauthorization of the ESEA; consideration was tabled until after the election.

Following the election of George W. Bush, Senator Edward Kennedy led a bi-partisan group to help author the legislation and No Child Left Behind, the most recent version of the ESEA, was reauthorized in 2002. Implementation of the legislation became

24 The Supreme Court legalized racial segregation in Plessy v. Ferguson (163 U.S. 537 in Florida Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights 1) when it determined that separate but equal facilities were acceptable under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. 31

contentious and, with the Republicans in control of the administration, guidelines and interpretation of the bill’s provisions quickly fell along partisan lines.

In the latter part of the twentieth century, continuing into present day, the concept of choice in education gained support. This ideology is based on the concept of individual rights, providing parents with the opportunity to choose schools and reduce regulation from the state (Wells, Slayton, and Scott 337). Two choice options currently exist on a large scale, vouchers and charter schools.25 Charter schools are perhaps the largest reflection of this philosophy. Supporters of the choice model claim that the government monopoly on education has led to a culture of mediocrity, unresponsiveness, and indifference to student achievement. They say competition for enrollment and funding will require the state to deliver a quality product to survive

(Lacireno-Paquet, Holyoke, Moser, and Henig 145).

The election of President Barack Obama in 2008 was reported to be about

“Change.” The President’s view of education has moved the platform of the Democratic

Party toward a centrist position. He does not advocate for standardized testing as the litmus test of educational success, but as one of many tools in the box. President Obama does not support vouchers that let parents use public money for private school tuition, but he does encourage the development of charter schools, calling them “important

25 Charter schools are accountable to their sponsor, which is usually a state or local school board, to produce positive academic results and adhere to the charter contract. The basic concept of charter schools is that they exercise increased autonomy in return for this accountability. They are accountable for both academic results and fiscal practices to several groups: the sponsor that grants them, the parents who choose them, and the public that funds them. Part of the autonomy of charter schools in Florida is that they can choose not to offer special programs that are costly, such as programs that support special needs students. They also can send a student back to the traditional public system if they are not successful in the eyes of the charter school. Traditional public schools have neither option.

innovators” and healthy competition for traditional public schools. Obama is a supporter of programs that level the playing field, and has been an advocate for funding voluntary universal pre-school, also known as Voluntary Pre-Kindergarten (VPK). He wants to make science and math a national priority, citing the fact that 80% of the fastest- growing occupations depend on a base of knowledge in science and math.

On July 18, 2011, President Obama announced a four-point plan to improve education that takes advantage of industry leaders’ involvement. The “Educate to

Innovate” campaign is designed to improve student performance in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) with the help of the federal government and leading companies, foundations, and non-profits. The American Recovery and Reinvestment

Act (ARRA) also invested heavily in education, with the hope of providing jobs and providing the seed for long-term prosperity. Funding through ARRA includes $5 billion for early learning programs and $77 billion for strengthening ESEA, including money to support state departments of education and encourage states to address teacher effectiveness, to move towards college and career ready high school graduates, to use intensive intervention to improve low performing schools, and to collect data. ARRA also provides $5 billion in competitive funds to incent school district to become innovative in their efforts to close student achievement gaps.

Critics argue that traditional public schools no longer meet the needs and interests of parents and voters or the needs of today’s students. They suggest that alternative models should be funded and made available to the public. Many of these needs include preparing a child for higher education or the workforce, limiting the

amount of social issues that are addressed through curriculum, and offering a culturally competent curriculum.

Educators such as Sarah Lawrence Lightfoot, Ruby Payne, and Jawanza

Kunjufu suggest that American schools are built on the idea of serving of a White, middle class student. Today, many ethnic groups are enrolled in America’s schools.

Kunjufu argues that rather than trying to get everyone to blend into this educational mold, schools should reflect a curriculum that provides space for all cultures.

Education in Florida: A Twentieth Century Institution

The history of public schools in Florida dates back to 1822, the year that state was organized as a territory by Congress. At that time, it was decided that every sixteenth section of land would be reserved for a primary school. Until around 1831, there was no interest in developing schools, with the exception of the Spanish mission schools for Catholics.

On January 22, 1931, the Florida Education Society (FES) was organized in

Tallahassee. Its objective was to “collect and diffuse” information about education and to develop a system of education as needed for each territory (Cochran 1). The Society had membership dues and met once every three months, with directors meeting monthly. Auxiliary chapters formed across the state. FES made efforts to establish a free school in St. Augustine, but there was no citizen interest. Development of a Swiss model featuring agricultural and mechanical education with an emphasis on manual labor was attempted, but again there was no interest and the FES died out (Cochran 2-

4).

Several other attempts were made to organize the funding for Florida’s public schools, including legislative mandates for forming school committees. In the 1830s, another effort was made, using 2% of the territorial tax to fund education programs for poor and orphan children. In 1836, the net proceeds from the probate of estates were used to pay for schools. In 1844, money for education was obtained from the U.S.

Treasury and, in 1845, the legal organizations of public schools in Florida finally began with territorial judges acting as superintendents. However, the process did not provide for the care of the facilities, textbooks, certification of teachers, or any other materials needed to operate the schools. Laws providing for public school funding never were fully executed. School lands were rented and the funds were collected but never were dispersed to the jurisdictions where the schools were located (Cochrane 9-12).

Florida’s constitution was adopted in 1845, containing no provisions for the establishment of an education system. The Act of 1849 established common schools for

White children ages 5-18. In 1850, investment laws were changed allowing the state to accrue interest in school funds. In 1853, laws were passed that finally addressed the control of school lands and the supervision of schools (Cochrane 17-20).

Prior to 1850, there were few public schools and no measureable gains among the children attending. Between the 1850 and 1860 censuses, total population and school population increased by 65%, with the number of schools and school enrollment increasing 41% and 80%, respectively (Cochrane 24). The 1860 census listed 97 schools with slightly less than 28% attendance (8,494 of the 30,461 eligible White children were enrolled), signifying a great press was being made to persuade parents to allow their children to attend school.

In 1865, the Northern Benevolent Societies began to establish schools for

“Negroes” and founded 30 by the end of that year. Prior to that time Black children could not be educated at school. An 1832 law made it illegal for Blacks to gather other than for work or worship. In 1866, children of freedmen could attend schools if they paid tuition of 50 cents per pupil. A tax on all adult males of color between 18 and 45 also was levied. Despite these barriers, the number of schools grew, teaching students to read, write, spell, and add. Most people saw this as the foundation of “colored” education. The Reconstruction Act of 1867 provided for the operation of public schools complete with a state and local tax levied to fund them. Dual systems were established for Black and White children (Cochrane 30, 31, 35).

The state’s present day school system was established in 1869. The state constitution established the State Board of Instruction, State Superintendent of Schools,

County School Boards, and Superintendents of Public Instruction. Counties were organized into school boards and superintendents. Elementary, or primary schools, were open a minimum of three months, for six hours a day. Although Floridians were very supportive of their public schools, there was no guideline for instruction, a lack of money for textbooks, and concern about mixing races in schools (Cochrane 49).

Despite these deficiencies, Florida schools continued to thrive because of the growing population and development of real estate throughout the state. As property was developed, the tax base for funding schools increased, as did public opinion in favor of universal education.26 By the 1920s, the state dictated that the time and term of

26 Although presented as a key element for a democratic society by Thomas Jefferson in the early 1800s, the concept of universal education (in literacy) for all children was not a popular belief until after 1950. 36

the school year would be no less than four months, with compulsory attendance for children between the ages of 7 and 16 years of age, with certain exceptions for special needs27 (Cochrane 226-228).

Broward Schools: A History of Separate and Unequal

Broward County, Florida, always has been a difficult place to categorize. A half sister to Miami and its beaches, and the ugly step sister to the beautiful set in Palm

Beach, Broward County’s government and public school district was created in 1915 when the northern section of the greater Miami area, known as Dade County, and the southern section of Palm Beach County were cobbled together to form a new unit of government. Early Broward County was known as a trading post, agricultural community, and, eventually, a tourist destination.

The county’s early years were hard ones. Fort Lauderdale, Broward’s county seat, began as a military fort and trading post (Miner 10). There were no White people living in Fort Lauderdale before 1800. Even at that time, Whites were traders and transient. The area’s first permanent White settler, Frank Stranahan, arrived in Fort

Lauderdale in 1893 and lived in a tent at Coolee Hammock. In the next few years, he built a small store and several one-room huts on the bank of the New River. His was the only trading post between Lemon City, now a forgotten Miami landmark, and Palm

Beach. He traded mostly with Indians, and their families often came to visit (Miner).

In 1899, Stranahan established a school for the children of the handful of families now living in the area and hired Lemon City schoolteacher, Miss Ivy Cromartie

27 Exceptions included if the child was home or private schooled, had mental defects, was needed at home to support the family, already had completed the school work, lived too far from the schools, or could not provide the resources from his or her family to attend school, or if unusual circumstances as specified by officers of the law existed (Cochrane 228). 37

(who ultimately became Mrs. Stranahan in 1900). Her first class contained nine students. Another school, built in Pompano was presided over by teacher Mary Butler.

She also had nine students in her class. Because the students were needed to work in the fields, the school year was only four to six months long. In 1899, these schools still were part of the Dade County Public School System. By 1901, there were only 26 schools in all of Dade County, which included the schools in Fort Lauderdale and

Pompano, with enrollments of 18 and 28 students, respectively.

In concert with the social mores of the South at that time, the schools were segregated. In 1901, 20 schools provided education for White children and 6 served

Blacks (“History of Broward”). School districts throughout Florida used the Plessy decision to maintain segregated schools.

With the completion of rock roads the population began to grow. The drainage of the Everglades made southern Florida even more desirable. In 1911, a land lottery was held and 3,500 purchasers from all over the country moved into the area. Several new schools were built to serve these families. When Broward County finally was established in 1915, the community was named in gratitude for Governor Napoleon

Bonaparte Broward, the man who initiated the drainage of the Everglades during his tenure as governor. As the nation moved towards World War I, South Florida became a tourist destination. The more people who visited the area, the more people moved here.

Because Fort Lauderdale and the surrounding areas were used for military training during World War II, many servicemen got a first hand look at the area’s mild weather and beautiful beaches. It was not long after the end of the war that GIs and their families began moving down to Broward County.

The 1950s also began the end of racial segregation in Florida as a result of

Brown v. Board of Education (347 U.S. 483 in Florida Advisory Committee to the U.S.

Commission on Civil Rights 1, 2). This case created problems for Florida’s all White school boards. Ten years later, less than 2% of the “formerly” segregated school districts had made any effort to desegregate their schools. Some attempts were made through a “freedom of choice”28 plan; however a 1968 Supreme Court decision, Green v. School Board of New Kent County 391 U.S. 430 (1968),29 found that this process generally was ineffective (Florida Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on

Civil Rights 3).

As a result of the Green decision, standards were adopted to determine if desegregation was achieved. The “Green” factors, as they became known, include student assignment, faculty assignment, staff assignment, transportation, extracurricular activities, and facilities. In addition, Green also set forth the process for a school district to be declared a “unitary” or desegregated system. Of the 67 school districts in Florida,

34 were involved in litigation in federal court to eliminate racial desegregation and 33 were not. Those latter school districts have voluntary compliance agreements with the

U.S. Department of Education. As of 2006, only 18 of the 34 school districts had achieved “unitary status,”30 with the rest still under court jurisdiction or operating under voluntary agreement. Only in recent years, have the courts granted this distinction.

Broward County achieved unitary status in 1996, after the resolution of a series of court

28 Freedom of choice plans gave students the right to choose between Black and White schools regardless of race. Most schools remained segregated. 29 The Green decision held that freedom of choice plans did not constitute adequate compliance with a school board’s responsibility to determine school admission on a non-racial basis. 30 A unitary school system is one in which the courts have decided that a school district has eliminated the old, racially segregated dual school system. 39

cases, starting in 1970 with Allen v. Board of Public Instruction of Broward County 432

F.2d 362 5th Cir. (1970) cert. denied (402 U.S. 952 in Florida Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights 13).

Some researchers argued that school districts no longer under court supervision might lapse back into a de facto desegregated system. In districts, such as those in

Florida, where boundaries are based on neighborhoods, schools located in communities populated largely by one racial group could become re-segregated. Broward County’s answer to this dilemma was to “starburst”31 the Black neighborhoods. In this scenario,

Black students were reassigned into White schools. Students living in these areas often rode school buses past schools closer to their home to balance racial enrollment. This practice eliminated neighborhood schools in the Black community. Because transportation is one of the Green factors, while racial parity was achieved in the school district, it did not allow the district to qualify for unitary status.32

Prior to integration, mid-twentieth century Broward County had two, very distinct school systems. White students received new textbooks every year and attended school on a traditional nine and one-half month calendar. Black students received hand- me-down books and equipment from White schools. Black families were asked to pay for their books. Principals of Black schools, generally Black educators themselves, were told to go door-to-door to collect money each week.33

31 “Star bursting” was the euphemistic name the school board used to describe the process of carving up Black neighborhoods and sending students to schools in suburban, largely White, areas. On the negative side, star bursting also conjured up the vision of a star exploding. 32 Unitary status was awarded only when a school enrollment was racially diversified without the use of artificial factors such as busing children past their neighborhood school to other schools in another part of the area. 33 The late Dr. Ulysses Horne, former principal of North Fork Elementary in Fort Lauderdale, often spoke of his responsibility to visit families every week to collect ten cents for each book. 40

In the 1980s the federal government began to fund grants to school districts for the purpose of establishing Magnet Schools.34 Magnet Schools were thought to be an effective strategy for decreasing desegregation. In the 1980s, Broward County gradually decreased it reliance on star bursting and increased the variety and locations of Magnet

Programs in historically Black schools. District leaders hoped that Magnet Programs would entice White, Asian, and Hispanic families from outside designated minority communities to enroll in these schools.35 One of the interesting facets of the district’s magnet policy was to initially create a school within a school so that out-of-boundary students did not attend classes with in-boundary students. This created its own backlash and frustration among Black community leaders who wanted their children to be able to participate in the special programs located within their child’s own school.

The practice of scheduling magnet students into separate classes created a school-within-a-school, exacerbating feelings among minority parents who believed that the district once again was focusing its resources on White students. In 2000, the district agreed to a settlement in the equity lawsuit filed by Concerned Citizens about

Our Children (CCC). The settlement specifies nine conditions intended to insure diversity and equity throughout all schools. The school board’s Diversity Committee meets annually to review district progress at meeting and maintaining the conditions defined in the settlement.

Overall, Broward County’s population continued to grow. As the area experienced an increase in population, the public schools experienced a decrease in

34 Magnet Schools are public schools that offer specialized programs that can draw students from outside of a school’s normal boundaries. 35 Magnet Schools today still struggle with trying to attract students. 41

enrollment. Table 1 provides information on overall population growth in Broward

County.

Table 1 Broward County Population

BROWARD COUNTY POPULATION

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

1,739,487 1,748,153 1,753,272 1,756, 087 1,762,285 1,772,060 1,785,667 Source: Broward County Government, Environmental Protection and Growth Department, 2009

Table 2 reflects student enrollment during the same time period.

Table 2 Broward County Public Schools Historical Twentieth Day Enrollment BROWARD COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS HISTORICAL TWENTIETH DAY ENROLLMENT Year 2005- 2006- 2007- 2008- 2009- 2010- 2011- 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Pre-K-12 Enrollment 255,799 246,516 241,783 237,040 234,601 233,598 229,314 Enrollment (Decrease) (3,331) (9,283) (4,733) (4,743) (2,439) (1,003) (4,284) Charter Enrollment 15,136 16,100 17,122 18,698 20,602 23,274 29,489 Charter Enrollment Increase 1,575 964 1,022 1,576 1,904 2,672 6,215 Total Enrollment 270,935 262,616 258,905 255,738 255,203 256,872 258,803 Total Increase or (Decrease) (1,756) (8,319) (3,711) (3,167) (535) 1,699 1,931 Source: Broward County Public Schools, School Boundaries Department, 2011.

Enrollment in Broward’s private and parochial schools declined as well. In

2009, the Catholic Archdiocese consolidated or closed several parochial schools if a local parish was not able to support the school financially36 (Devaney).

At the same time, student enrollment in non-traditional, publicly funded programs has increased. Broward County used to report its enrollment based on only those students attending traditional public schools. However, as the enrollment of charter schools became significant in the total enrollment numbers, the school district changed its reporting system to include charter students in its enrollment numbers.

Charter schools represent the largest segment of students beyond the traditional public school enrollment. While Broward’s public school enrollment has decreased by 29,816 students since an all time high of 259,130 in 2004, charter school enrollment topped

29,489 in 2011-2012.37 Tables 1 and 2 reflect these changes. Broward County’s population has grown by 2.6% since 2005, while traditional public school enrollment has declined by 11.5% during the same period.

As the number of charter schools has increased in the county more and more students are gravitating to them, leaving more and more empty seats sprinkled throughout the traditional schools in the district. Appendix B provides a map of the charter schools in the county by level of education. Not coincidentally, the earliest charter schools were established in minority communities where distrust remained high and access to resources remained scarce.

36 In 2007, the Catholic News Service reported that Catholic school enrollment had declined 160,000 in the past three years. 37 While many of the students enrolled in charter schools have migrated from the traditional public schools, additional enrollment came from the parochial schools that closed, from families priced out of private school tuition, and from new residents. 43

District demographers calculated that there are about as many empty seats throughout the district as there are students enrolled in charter schools.38 Critics argue that the district should consolidate students by closing some of the under-enrolled schools. However, the numbers are deceiving because they do not take into account the constitutional amendment governing class size that voters approved in 2002. Initially, schools could achieve the goal by averaging enrollment in various classes throughout the day. When final provisions of the bill took effect in 2009-2010, public school districts were required to calculate enrollment in every class during every period of the day. Schools, even those that are under-enrolled, are challenged to find enough classrooms to be able to create the required classroom settings.

Once a rural community, Broward County is now largely “built out.” The total area of the county is 1,197 square miles, but 65% of the land is part of a conservation area that by law cannot be developed. All of Broward’s 31 municipalities are located on

410 square miles of land east of the L 33, L 35 A, and L 38 levees, bordered by the

Sawgrass Expressway and State Road 84/I-595. When Hurricane Andrew demolished part of Miami-Dade County in 1992, migration to Broward accelerated. There was strong demand for single-family homes, creating a housing shortage by 2003.

Despite the cry for more housing, county officials are under pressure to moderate development. In past years there were more buyers than units on the market, but the housing slump that began in 2008 created a lot of inventory and currently the

38 The Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) estimates the capacity of a school, based on its number of classrooms. However, within FISH calculations, there are no provisions for the class size restrictions that now are in place. 44

county has many homes in foreclosure. The continuous growth represents opportunities for all types of education models to increase their share of the market.

45 III. REALITY AND PERCEPTION:

THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TRADITIONAL PUBLIC AND CHARTER

SCHOOLS

“In my opinion, what changed the situation eventually - and, of course, it took a lot of time to change it, things like that don’t change in a week or a fortnight - was the new educational system.” --- John Hume (qtd. in “John Hume Quotes,” n.p.)

The facts are clear. Over the last decade, students have left the public system in record numbers. With more enrolling in charter schools, it suggests that charters are attracting students from both traditional public and private/parochial schools (Figuero and Isensee). In the Fall of 2011, charter school enrollment in Broward edged towards

30,000, an increase of 6,000 over 2010, while traditional public school enrollment

39 decreased by 4,284 (Harrison 2010-11 Twentieth Day).

Charter schools have captured the public’s attention. The 2010 Phi Delta

Kappa/Gallup poll reported that 68% of respondents said they support charter schools, an increase from 42% in 2000. There are several possible explanations to consider as to why students are migrating to charter schools.

One explanation is that public schools simply are not making the grade anymore. Critics of the public system argue that traditional public schools are too large and too clogged with regulations and labor management issues to meet student needs.

39 This number also reflects the closing of some parochial schools. With more students enrolling in charter schools than just those lost by public schools, it is likely that additional students came from these schools. 46 Writer Jodi Morse reported in Time magazine, “Arizonan medical transcriptionist,

Carrie Roan, was more than ready when she heard a radio ad for Paramount two summers ago. With 30-plus kids per class and unbending teachers, the public schools had failed her daughter Staci in most of the familiar ways. After a year at Paramount,

Staci was thriving. With the help of the school’s performing-arts program, the once shy fourth-grader had found her voice and performed a Beach Boys medley in a charity concert at the Phoenix airport.”

Parents also argue that charter schools offer other advantages, including safety and smaller school and class sizes; both are seen as desirable alternatives to what they perceive as school district problems. Dina Miller, principal of Somerset Academy Davie

(Florida) Charter, said her parents like the school’s small size and academic excellence.

The A-rated charter school, with just 141 students in kindergarten to fifth grade, also was named a Blue Ribbon school, a prestigious federal honor based on high academic performance. “It’s that small student enrollment that really makes the difference,”

Miller said (Fitzpatrick and Williams).

But public schools have resources to offer as well. Broward County is a B-rated school district40 and a three-time finalist for the Broad Prize for Urban Education.41 The district has 47 Magnet Programs in fields such as computer technology, architecture, and performing arts. The resources and training provided through these programs often result in honors and student scholarships. Dillard High School’s Jazz Band won first place in the Duke Ellington National Jazz Competition two years in a row. “There’s

40 Broward had been an A-rated school district until 2012, when the state changed its testing and grading system, causing many schools in the district as well as many districts in the state to decline a letter grade. 41 A school district must be invited to apply for the Broad Prize. School districts are selected to apply based on their ability to improve achievement among minority students. 47

some amazing things going on as far as the school district is concerned,” said Catherine

Kim Owens, a parent and member of district advisory committees. But “it’s a well-kept secret because they don’t ever market it,” she said (Fitzpatrick and Williams).

Is it that the public schools are bad? Are charter schools good? Or is there some other explanation? In 2008, the Center for Education Reform (CER) conducted a survey on charter schools. The poll found that while Americans are unclear about the nature, purpose, and mandate of charter schools, they support key principles, including:

• Community formation of schools that meet the needs of local children,

• Linking teacher pay to performance,

• Granting schools the flexibility to set educational standards, and

• Giving parents the option of sending their children to various schools, not

just their assigned school.

The three words that sum up the CER survey results are “accountability, standards and innovation” (“America’s Attitudes,” 4).

Throughout all segments of our society, there are calls for greater accountability and the need to do more with less. The ability of education to respond to these concerns will determine the long-term viability of the many institutions within it. Reflecting on the experiences of other industries, it is clear that not every organization can respond to these challenges effectively. Railroads lost their status as the primary means of transporting goods in favor of trucking’s interstate highways and the television networks lost their ability to dictate American tastes through their “one size fits all” programming, yielding to cable and narrow casting. These experiences raise the question whether shifts in school enrollment are simply the natural outgrowth of

oversaturation by a “single source” provider and its unwillingness to consider the interests and differentiated needs of its customers.

This study used both formative and summative information to attempt to find answers to the research question: “Why are traditional public schools in Broward

County, Florida, losing enrollment to charter schools?” To truly understand the shift in enrollment, the information selected for review addresses some of the major claims being made against traditional public schools, for charter schools, and/or about changes in society in general. In this chapter, three possible answers to the research question will be evaluated:

• H1: Traditional schools do not serve the needs of students.

• H2: Charter schools are better than traditional schools at serving the needs of

students.

• H3: Parents perceive that charter schools are better than traditional schools

at serving the needs of students.

Essentially, data was used to determine if it is a reality or myth that charter schools offer students better options for their education.

Methodology

This dissertation research matched information about traditional and charter schools collected from other school systems and the local community. A literature search was conducted, gathering articles that address stakeholder engagement in traditional and charter schools. The school system’s data on student enrollment, parent involvement, and stakeholder opinions also was reviewed.

The school system conducts numerous studies throughout the year to measure the effectiveness of specific education initiatives, programs, and processes against the metrics of student achievement and drop out and graduation rates. In addition, for the last 15+ years, the school system has measured stakeholder perceptions of the school climate. All of the data used are in the public domain and readily available on the

District’s website. Each data source is created to address a specific purpose, i.e., either calculating drop out rates and causative factors or determining whether block scheduling contributes to increased student achievement. Quantitative data is collected and tracked. However, school districts rarely use qualitative data to monitor trends and determine stakeholder concerns early on. Further, no studies were found that integrated quantitative and qualitative data with the intent of profiling stakeholder perceptions about school climate, parent involvement in school organizations, and parent and community attendance of governance meetings.

Reports about customer satisfaction in local charter schools are largely anecdotal. Information about stakeholder perceptions about charter schools comes from research studies in other communities (O’Reilly and Bosetti; Schneider and Buckley).

In 2010-2011, Imagine Schools, with four Broward locations, initiated a parent satisfaction survey. However, there is no customer satisfaction study among the county’s charter schools similar to the studies in other communities. Table 3 reflects the data reviewed for purposes of this study.

50 Table 3

Data Reviewed

DATA REVIEWED Key Words and Topics Data Reviewed School Bureaucracy- • School Web Sites42 Demographic Information: Class Size, • Surveys of Stakeholders in other Testing, Cost of Goods and Services, charter systems43 and Boundaries and other School Board • Review of Local Stakeholders Policies. • Parent Involvement in meetings School Responsiveness- • PTA Membership Access and Involvement: Parent Involvement, Home-School Communication, And Special Programs. Customer Satisfaction- Annual Assessment: Comparing Stakeholder Responses.

Higher quality- • Case studies of other Charter Something beyond, Value added. Systems Graduation Rates- Employability, Continued Education

Influences outside of Education- • News Clippings44

Testing the Hypotheses

Parents say they are they are pulling their children out of traditional public schools because they are too difficult to navigate and do not offer the programs and courses they want their children to experience. Surveys conducted with participants in other charter systems found that families wanted more for their children than excessive

42 Web sites for corporate charter groups, independent charters, and the school system were compared. 43 Opinion surveys conducted among stakeholders in two other charter systems, Alberta, Canada, and Washington, D.C., describe general attitudes among stakeholders. 44 A LexisNexis search was conducted, compiling news clippings about charter schools, over the 10-15 year period that charter schools were developing in Florida. 51

bureaucracy and regulation, a lack of responsiveness on the part of the school, and the absence of racial and cultural sensitivity (Schneider and Buckley; O’Reilly and Bosetti).

But what are the facts?

The Truths about Charter Schools

Charters originated from the premise that traditional public schools were inefficient, and given a choice, parents would opt for alternatives to traditional public programs. Critics and supporters alike agree that traditional public schools must comply with many of the rules that diminish their effectiveness. Advocates believed that choice would drive a reduction in bureaucracy, and in the increased efficiency and effectiveness of publicly funded schools. They also argued that the market would take care of ineffective charters.

Some of the key issues that contribute to perceptions of bureaucracy are: class size, the cost of purchasing and construction, and school board policies, including perhaps the most controversial, school boundaries.

Class Size

In 2002, the state of Florida defined overcrowded on the basis of class enrollment, without regard to the space or activity involved. That year, voters approved an amendment to the state constitution that designated the number of students who could be enrolled in a class, with non-compliance resulting in financial penalties.

Parents and critics often assume that the more students a teacher has to teach, the less instructional time each student will receive.45 When voters approved the class size

45 This assumption is based on the traditional model of teaching and preaching at the head of the class. The use of technology and other interactive teaching methods has changed the way how students learn and teachers teach. As interactive learning has replaced teacher lectures, assumptions about a quiet classroom being optimal also have been largely discarded. 52

amendment, they also approved a schedule for phasing in the statute. Due to funding shortages, the state gave school districts several “extensions”46 for meeting conditions of the statute. In 2011-2012, Broward County paid a fine for exceeding class size caps, in some cases by one student in a class. The initial fee estimate was $66 million; however, once the district presented its plan to meet the cap in the future it was lowered to $16 million.47 In 2010-2011 and 2011-2012, the Broward County public school system did not meet class size because it could not afford to hire all of the teachers needed to stay within class size caps. The school district rolled the dice and gambled that the state’s penalties would be less than the cost of additional personnel.

As traditional public schools struggled to meet class size requirements, the

Florida legislature exempted charter schools from this obligation. If a charter school fails to meet individual class size caps, there are no penalties, nor are they required to develop a remediation plan if they exceed class-by-class enrollment numbers.

Newspaper headlines cover traditional public school penalties, but do not explain that charter schools were given a waiver from this standard. The uninformed reader might assume that only traditional public schools are unable to meet class size caps.48

46 First, the deadline was delayed, then the state used overall school enrollment divided by the number of classes at each grade level to determine average enrollment. But, by 2010, school districts had to meet the standard for each class in each period at each school. Broward paid non-compliance penalties in 2010-2011 and 2011-2012. 47 Districts that submit a plan for remedying student enrollment issues can have their penalties significantly reduced; Broward’s penalty was reduced by $50 million. 48 Critics say that charters were given a pass on meeting individual class size caps because they were favored by former Florida Governor Jeb Bush who is a strong charter school advocate and strong force behind overhauling Florida’s traditional public school system through programs such as vouchers. While Bush’s voucher plan, which was approved while he was in office, was thrown out by the courts because it was unconstitutional, Bush continues to have tremendous sway over Florida’s Republican- controlled Legislature and often is cited as a thought leader in this area. 53 Overhead

Education receives 27% of Florida’s budget, the largest segment of the budget.49

The budget is based on projections for income from taxes on goods and services

(anything from gas to hotel rooms), entitled revenue from the federal government, and property tax. School districts hold public hearings to set their millage rate, which is the education portion of the property tax each homeowner pays, and also hold additional meetings to discuss how this money will be spent. These meetings are poorly attended.

Those who do attend often leave shaking their heads. Conversations are held at the highest level, chock full of abstractions and jargon that Jane or Joe Public usually strain to understand.

In recent years as the economy has faltered, there has been a huge backlash against the cost of public employees, especially the cost of benefits and pension plans.

Other concerns often raised touch on costs of school construction, renovation, and purchasing. Business leaders, interest groups, and the media have questioned the cost of traditional public school construction as compared to commercial and other types of government construction. Newspaper headlines focus on the high cost of building schools (Greene; O’Matz). Traditional public schools must comply with a host of regulations that private or commercial buildings do not need to consider, including

49 The Florida Office of Budget Management estimates the 2012-2013 Florida budget at $70 Billion, with education’s share just shy of $20 billion. State budget calculations are based on estimated collections and earnings in taxes and investments, respectively. Budget estimations rarely are accurate and state agency funding is adjusted every quarter. Once the state’s budget is approved, local district budgets are set. When projections and actual income do not coincide, the state reduces its “drawdown” to local tax-supported organizations, putting almost every publically funded budget in jeopardy. 54

OSHA guidelines for air quality50 and building strength.51 These requirements layer additional expenses into traditional school construction.

Overhead for charter schools is considerably lower because of a flexibility that traditional public schools do not enjoy. Charter schools are not required to meet this standard because they can be located in non-traditional settings such as strip malls, churches, or vacant office buildings. Few charter schools have constructed their own facilities. Even the City of Coral Springs, Florida, with one of the first city-run charter schools, converted a vacant department store into classroom space.

While it could be argued that children can learn anywhere with a good teacher, the state has other designs on its schoolhouses besides just instruction. They also serve as public safety facilities and hurricane shelters for the general public and, in selected locations, for pets.

Since the late 1980s after the first asbestos scare, school air quality also has been a concern. Media coverage has addressed “sick building” issues with traditional schools52 and other government buildings, with few news stories about charter school environmental issues.53 Generally, charter schools lease their facility and depend on the property owner to maintain it, and therefore they can deflect responsibility for building

50 The Environmental Protection Agency has instituted “Tools for Schools” to help schools improve indoor air quality. In Florida, keeping schools free of mold and mildew can save millions of dollars in facility and equipment replacement, as well as improve the health of those working inside the school. 51 Florida statute S.252.38(1)(d) requires that public schools serve as enhanced hurricane protection areas (EHPA), known as hurricane shelters. Statute requirements include but are not limited to roof and facility and floor strength; the type of electrical system required; number and location of exits, and entrances; and the number of sinks and toilets. Each of the elements in the statute adds to the cost of school construction. 52 In response to concerns about mold and mildew in traditional public schools, the school district rolled out “Tools for Schools” communication campaign to help parents understand what actions the district was taking to improve air quality. 53 The LexisNexis search of articles about education found no stories about sick building concerns among charter schools. 55

maintenance onto their landlords. Sometimes, these two entities are one and the same.

Management companies for larger charter schools often own the property on which these schools operate (McGrory and Hiaasen “Audit”). An investigative series published throughout the month of December, 2011 by the Tampa Bay Times, The

Miami Herald, and WLRN Public Radio revealed that charter schools often lease their facilities from management companies, which may in fact have overlapping directorates with the charter school governance body.

Unlike the charter schools they operate, charter school management companies operate outside the oversight of the state and, as the investigation has shown, often become profitable through managing the charter’s lease and other facets of operation such as purchasing materials and supplies, catering school lunches, and selling uniforms to the school’s students. Critics are concerned that charter school boards of directors are so closely embedded with these management companies that, in some cases, they have ceded their ability to independently govern the school.54

To further increase their operating revenue, in 2010 charter schools successfully lobbied to reduce the amount of funds from 5% to 3% that traditional school districts could hold back to pay for required services such as data collection. While this does not seem like a great deal of money, it runs into the millions. School district administrators say that the 3% does not cover the cost of complying with the law, which includes providing oversight for the charter school and warehousing its data.

54 Often, the membership team of the landholder and a charter school’s management are overlapping, with a significant segment of the school’s budget going to the landlord. This has raised some concerns that decisions made by a charter’s governance group are not independent as required by law (McGrory and Hiaasen, Miami Herald, December 11, 14, 16, 2011). As a result of this six-month media investigation, the Florida Legislature is now looking into this issue. 56 School Boundaries

Boundaries are the most sacred and controversial issue for parents. In Broward

County, and throughout most of the country, each traditional public school draws its students from a set of specific geographic boundaries. Being boundaried in or out of a school can determine student access to specific academic and athletic programs, as well as scholarship opportunities. Also, boundaries determine the availability of bus transportation.55 The only time students can attend an out-of-boundary school is when they are accepted into a magnet program, require special services not available at the home school, or they are experiencing a hardship such as being bullied.

Boundary changes are controversial. The school board can shift school boundaries to attempt to equalize school enrollment between facilities. Over the years,

Broward County’s school board has tried to find ways to repopulate schools in the east to reduce overcrowding in western schools; this attempt generally has been unsuccessful.

To a parent, equalizing the head count between schools is not always a benefit.

Schools often carry with them a reputation or image, which also can be a euphemism for demographics, based on perceptions of the community in which they are located or on academic honors achieved by the school or individual students, rather than the caliber of the programs delivered.56

A case in point: In 2009, the school district’s demographers proposed narrowing the boundaries for Seminole Middle School, which would have moved several hundred

55 The state statute only will fund bus transportation for students who live more than two miles away from the assigned school, have special needs, or must travel across hazardous walking conditions. 56 During my tenure as the spokesperson for the school district, every time a crime occurred on Sunrise Boulevard, news organizations would report it as being near Dillard High School, as opposed to giving the street location or tagging it to another business. Although the incidents occurred “near” not “in” the high school, the predominantly Black school developed a “crime-ridden” image. Even today, faculty are challenged to attract students into its world-class computer and arts magnet programs. 57

students into the attendance zone for Driftwood Middle School. This change was suggested as a logical way to adjust student enrollment overall, and class size specifically. The affected students would be drawn primarily from Cooper City, a middle-to-upper income community. Historically, Cooper City residents always have attended schools located within the city limits. It was one of the city’s selling points when promoting their “home town” image. Driftwood has a different economic and academic status than Seminole. It is a low-to-middle income area, which was a concern to some parents. City leaders and parents rejected this suggestion and started a lobbying campaign57 to persuade the school board to reject the proposal. Ultimately, school board members sided with the residents and the change was not approved.

Charter schools have no set boundaries. Like most businesses, charter schools use marketing programs to accomplish their objectives, using multiple strategies for student recruitment and sophisticated tracking systems to monitor prospects and attendees. One former charter school principal who returned to the school district said that since her salary was dependent in part on student enrollment, she made it her business to know who was coming and going and why.

School boards are required to set school attendance areas each year.58 In a work environment that is highly mobile, parents often work in one end of the county and live in another, making it challenging for parents to visit school to pick up a sick child, or to participate in a school activity or meeting. Families requesting changes in their child’s assigned school must go through a “hardship” process to plead their case and receive a

57 The campaign was the first to make heavy use of social media as a way to galvanize local residents. Because of its effectiveness, it has set a standard for parent engagement. 58 Boundaries are considered a school board policy and therefore have to be voted on by the board corporate annually. 58

“reassignment.”59 In the past, few, if any, BCPS staff granted few waivers as administrators attempted to create a stable population in each school. Presented with these challenges, it is no wonder that the open enrollment feature of charter schools is appealing. Some school districts have tried to address this challenge by creating zones whereby families can send their children to any school in a zone, but that process has met with limited success. Ironically the same process is used when a school does not make yearly progress as defined by the federal government. Parents of children in those

“failing”60 schools within the traditional system automatically get a choice of where to send their children.

Citizen Involvement

The State of Florida and BCPS both were early believers in the importance of parent involvement. Broward County has a history of establishing citizen advisory committees at the school, area, district, and interest level. This structure for community involvement was established by the school district in the late 1970s. In the late 1980s, the state followed suit and passed legislation requiring all schools to have school advisory councils (SACs) to address issues of school governance.

As accountability and finance have become important components in education policy, the emphasis in parent involvement has moved from support in the classroom to participation in the governance process. At the state and county level, traditional public schools are evaluated based on the level of parent participation, which is documented as

59 It is unknown if the names of these processes were selected as a deterrent or to intimidate parents. Another name for the process might present a positive, more engaging, less bureaucratic, image to parents. For example, the “hardship” committee/application process could be called the “transfer” process and a “reassignment” could be called an “assignment or school selection.” 60 A school may be an “A” school on the basis of test scores and other indicators. However if one of six sub groups does not make “Adequate Yearly Progress” (AYP) similar to all other subgroups, the school is considered to be failing overall. 59

a function of attendance at school advisory meetings. Florida Statute 1001.452 and

Policy 1403, which is local school board policy addressing school advisory councils, have established standards to determine whether schools are successful in achieving parent involvement.

SACs are charged with approving the school’s budget and, if incentive money is earned for student achievement, with approving how that money will be spread among faculty and staff, school needs, and programs. These are important issues. Responding to concerns that educators were dominating this process, in the 1990s, legislation governing

Florida’s school advisory process was tightened up to describe who could serve on these committees and their specific responsibilities, including approving the school improvement plan and budget. One of the recent revisions (2005) to the legislation includes the requirement that more than half of those serving on SACs are non- employees.

In 2007, Broward County revised its policy governing SACs to a requirement that is more restrictive than the state’s by adding the requirement that in addition to the majority of the membership being comprised of non-employees, the majority of those members attending the meeting also must be non-employees. This would have been a positive step for school governance; however, since most meetings are held during the working day, it makes it difficult for working parents, especially those working hourly jobs, to attend.

Not willing to discard its policy, the Broward school board directed principals to focus on attracting non-employees (parents) to SAC meetings. Principals were provide with tips and tactics designed to help with this process during the school year. However,

no assessment was conducted to determine if schools used these materials to help attract parents into this “school-driven” activity.61

Tables 4 and 5 reflect a recent study of SAC meeting attendance. Table 4 charts the number of schools holding SAC meetings and at what time these meetings were held.

While a large number, 421, were held in the evening, an even greater number, 766, were held during the workday.

Table 4

Total SAC Meetings Conducted 2008-2009

TOTAL SAC MEETINGS CONDUCTED 2008-2009 EXPRESSED IN NUMBERS OF SCHOOLS 8:30- 2:00- 5:00- < 8:30 2:00 5:00 6:30 > 6:30 TOTAL ES 78 175 337 203 69 862 MS 62 37 35 36 44 214 CENTERS 9 34 24 8 0 75 HS 0 46 78 52 9 185 (ALL) 149 292 474 299 122 1336 Source: Broward County Public Schools, Office of School Improvement and Accountability 2009.

The adoption of the local policy had a chilling effect on most schools’ ability to conduct required business. Table 5 illustrates that while 88% of SACs could meet the state’s requirement for committee membership,62 only 49% of school SACs could meet

61 Some strategies included holding the meetings at night, on weekends, or in conjunction with other student-focused activities as well as off-campus, perhaps at a fast food restaurant or public library. 62 The state requirement was that 50% of the committee included non-employees (parents, community partners, students, etc.). The district requirement was that 50% of those attending the meeting had to be non-employees. 61 the county’s requirement for membership attendance at local meetings. Slightly more than 84.4% of scheduled SAC meetings met the criteria for a quorum (a majority of SAC members present at the meeting). Less than half, 49%, of scheduled SAC meetings met the non-employee quorum set by SB Policy 1403. The data suggest that many SACs would be unable to meet the policy requirement to conduct school business during 2009-

2010 unless an intervention occurred. The school board ended up eliminating the requirement and reverting back to the less restrictive state rule.

Table 5

SAC Meetings Achieving Quorum

SAC MEETINGS ACHIEVING QUORUM

QUORUM 8:30- 2:00- 5:00- As Percent < 8:30 2:00 5:00 6:30 > 6:30 ES Broward 80.8 49.7 45.5 52.7 50.7 MS Criteria 54.8 38.6 31.4 38.9 43.2 CENTERS 22.2 41.2 8.3 37.5 HS 43.5 52.6 34.6 100.0 (ALL) 66.4 47.6 43.7 47.5 51.6

ES State 100.0 89.7 94.4 84.2 88.4 MS Criteria 96.8 73.8 100.0 63.9 75.0 CENTERS 66.7 79.4 33.3 50 HS 93.5 97.4 76.9 100.0 (ALL) 96.6 88.4 92.2 79.6 84.4 Source: Broward County Public Schools, Office of School Improvement and Accountability, 2009.

62 In the traditional model, the school advisory council (SAC), one of those required groups, must approve the school’s budget and school improvement plan. As discussed earlier, in charter schools, the community involvement is reflected in selected parents serving as members on the school’s governance board.

One of the most prevalent urban legends is that class/income has an impact on home-school communication and parent participation in school programs, and that hourly-wage working class parents are the least likely to come to meetings. Appendix C offers an analysis of parent involvement at Title I63 schools, which dispels the myth that low-income parents cannot or will not get involved.

The federal government funds Title I programs for low-income schools. Within the guidelines for Title I funding is a fairly prescriptive outline of how many parent meetings must be held a well as strategies for achieving attendance at these meetings.

Schools know that not achieving the meeting measure, as tied to student achievement outcomes, can affect their ability to continue to receive this funding. Review of the data in Appendix C also indicates that a school’s ability to meet or exceed state requirements and to meet the county’s requirements for meetings is not related to class.

The Parent Teacher Association suggests that creating a welcoming environment is critical for parents to gain a sense of comfort with the school, and perhaps move on to other forms of involvement; the Broward data does not address that issue. While participation in SAC meetings was a challenge for parents, other parent involvement organizations are thriving in Broward County’s public schools. Both charter and

63 Title I, Part A (Title I) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended, provides financial assistance to local educational agencies (LEAs) and schools with high numbers or high percentages of children from low-income families to help ensure that all children meet challenging state academic standards. Federal funds currently are allocated through four statutory formulas that are based primarily on census poverty estimates and the cost of education in each state. 63

traditional public schools can form a PTA or PTO (Parent Teacher Organization). In

Broward County most of the PTA membership is in traditional schools; currently, there are more than 150 PTAs and about a dozen PTOs in local public schools.

The Strong Field Framework, a tool developed by the Bridgespan Group and the

James Irvine Foundation, spotlights five components that must be aligned in order to create synergy between groups. They are shared identity, standards of practice, knowledge base, leadership and grassroots support, and funding and supporting policy.64

Shared identity reflects common definitions; standards of practice reports existing programs and processes; knowledge base represents the data; leadership and grassroots support indicate the flow of involvement; and funding and supporting policy represents engagement among funding partners. Table 6 compares the model framework to what exists in Broward County, and suggests that the best practices reflected in the top of the table are apparent in Broward County’s PTAs.

The advisory organizations in the traditional public system are linked together through a hierarchy that starts at the school level, advances to an area advisories and special interest advisories such as exceptional student education, English for speakers of other languages (ESOL), and on to a district level advisory that deals directly with school board members and the superintendent. These groups form coalitions to advance and advocate for change. Although local and state charter school leaders have formed a consortium to share best practices and lobby legislators, there is no parallel organization for the parent organizations.

64 The Strong Field Framework is a tool designed to assess major elements on a field of study using a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, threats, and opportunities) analysis. The framework requires the gathering of objective data via primary and secondary research methods such as surveys, interviews, focus groups, organizational profiling, and the analysis of existing information. This process allows the researcher to assess the state of evolution in a field as well as it strengths and needs. 64

Table 6

Strong Field Framework Model

STRONG FIELD FRAMEWORK MODEL

Shared Identity Groups must agree on the definition for Parent Involvement.

Model for Effectiveness Standards of Leadership and Funding and Practice Schools Knowledge Base Grassroots Support Supporting Policy Standards of Evidence does not Leadership must be Mandates should be Practice must be suggest that multi directional supported with codified in legislation can drive funding legislation successful outcomes Input and consensus is required prior to Exemplary models Best practices must drafting and or guides are needed be recognized and approving local shared policy and/or School leaders or passing state volunteers must be Evidence suggests legislation. trained that these standards are effective in Literature review enhancing home- confirms that school characteristics communication described in PTA standards are “field effective.” Broward County Standards adopted PTA collects PTA has a hierarchy PTAs/PTOs raise by County and empirical data on of training, starting money to support National PTA local membership locally and moving training and parent through national up to the national involvement, assembly District working on level including provision developing of food and child District provides resources and District offers care as part of minimal school training training through training administrator SAC training Current data does Title I schools also not include variables provide food and Local PTA offers that might assist in child care at training for local improving meetings groups 2X a year involvement Source: Chart based on Strong Field Framework, James Irvine Foundation, and Bridgespan Group (5). 65 The Florida Department of Education Office of Independent Education and

School Choice cites only one reference to parent involvement in charter school governance process on its website:

Every charter school’s governing board is required to appoint a

representative to facilitate parental involvement, provide access to

information, assist parents and others with questions and concerns, and

resolve disputes. The representative must reside in the school district. The

representative may be a governing board member, employee, or

individual contracted to represent the governing board.

Contact information for the representative must be provided in

writing to parents each year, and must be posted prominently on the

charter school’s web site if a web site is maintained by the charter school.

Also, each charter school’s governing board must hold at least two public

meetings per school year in the school district. The meetings must be

noticed, open, and accessible to the public. Attendees must be provided an

opportunity to offer input regarding the schools operations and receive

information about the school. The representative appointed by the

governing board must be physically present at the two required meetings.

(State of Florida)

Charter schools are supposed to engage parents in the development of school policy. Many charters adhere to the law and include parents as members of the school’s governance committee. Traditional public schools advertise any discussion of policy at least seven days in advance of the meeting. During a six-month review of public notices

posted in local newspapers by other tax supported entities including hospital districts, cities, and even committees of the school district, no public notices of charter school meetings were found. A charter school might argue that public notices in a general circulation newspaper are not needed because a charter school has a set population.

Traditional public schools could make the same argument, but both would be flawed.

When public money is spent, everyone has the right to know how it is spent.

The FDOE website does not include any reports on whether charter schools are meeting this standard or what, if any, penalties will be applied if they do not. A 2010 study of school governance councils in Connecticut found inadequate participation by parents in parent-teacher groups (Bailey). Without a level of accountability or at least measurement of progress, it is unknown if Florida’s charter schools are faring any better.

Community Involvement

Neither Florida nor Broward County is unique in the development of a process for citizen involvement in education. South Carolina preceded Florida’s efforts in the early 1980s. Chicago public schools followed suit in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

Research conducted by Diamond and Gomez with Chicago school parents and community members found that they perceived their involvement in school governance as contributing to their increased knowledge of school functioning, their ability to affect school change, and their personal sense of efficacy in helping to make schools better educational environments (397).

There are differences in parent and community involvement programs between traditional public schools and charter schools. Broward County Public Schools has multiple types of outreach programs designed to attract parent involvement as well as

additional programs designed to engage local businesses and community organizations.

With guidance from staff, the district backs these programs that support volunteers, mentors, partnerships, and parent involvement. Program coordinators provide training and resources for school administrators. Programs are orchestrated at the school level with tremendous success. The school district tracks the hours of its community volunteers hours and receives more than 1 million hours of donated time each year.

Charter schools also encourage volunteerism. While parents volunteer in their child’s charter school in droves, a former charter school principal reported that parents were told that they had to volunteer as part of their child’s acceptance into the school; this is not true. Publically funded schools cannot mandate volunteerism. However, volunteering is largely at the classroom level and few, if any, governance organizations exist that enable parents to directly impact the operation of their child’s charter school.

Home-school Communication

In addition to what goes on in the classroom, home-school communication is an important ingredient for student achievement. Educators have written extensively about the home-school relationship, acknowledging parent-teacher communication as the key partnership to reinforce learning strategies. Epstein, Coates, Salinas, Sanders, and

Simons suggest that the relationship between a parent and his or her child’s school is perhaps the most important one in determining the success of the child. The National

PTA cites family engagement as a practice that helps children reach the academic

standards. No Child Left Behind, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 2002, directs schools to develop meaningful parent involvement to aid students.65

One finding among those researching this issue is that home-school relationships are limited, particularly in minority communities with low household income (Barton,

Drake, Perez, St. Lewis, and George). Some of the barriers to developing this relationship include time and space, the latter involving creating a welcoming environment (Barton, Drake, Perez, St. Lewis, and George 6,11). Ruby Payne argues that educators, typically from middle to upper income backgrounds, often create barriers because they do not understand the challenges faced by poor families.

In his keynote address to the Council of Urban Boards of Education (CUBE)

2008 Issues Seminar, former Miami-Dade Schools Superintendent and 2008

Superintendent of the Year, Dr. Rudy Crew, a long time parent advocate, summed up the situation:

We need to create a wider pathway and a more expansive menu of

opportunities for parents. Currently, there is a very narrow pathway for

the parent-school relationship, which does not invite all the different

kinds of conversations that are needed and does not ask parents to operate

in any actionable way with schools.

If we want parents to take action, we need to help build their

knowledge about education and the importance of family involvement.

(Bouffard 20-21)

65 Although the Act hopefully will be reauthorized next year, with multiple revisions, it is anticipated that the requirement for schools to engage parents at some “meaningful” level will be maintained. 69

Broward County’s efforts to create a transparent environment makes use of traditional and contemporary methods of communication. Teachers continue to send or mail notes home, make phone calls to parents, and schedule parent-teacher conferences.

In addition, new web-enabled strategies have been developed. Teachers can be reached by email and often set up web pages specifically for their classrooms. Parents can access information about their child’s grades, attendance, and other classroom information by logging into the Broward Education Enterprise Portal (BEEP). Attendance, mid-term progress reports, and semester grades are posted online and sent home. In addition, traditional public schools and charter schools communicate via school newsletters and websites promoting school programs, although some schools are better at it than others.

Specialized Courses and Programs

Broward schools also have developed extensive offerings of culturally relevant curricula and sports, along with a wide variety of portals through which these programs can be accessed. The advent of virtual and distance learning66 has equalized access to specialized courses available to traditional public schools and charter schools. The 2011

Florida Legislature passed a law requiring every school to have a virtual education program by 2014.67 Broward County Public Schools was an early forerunner in this area, creating “Broward Virtual” several years before the state’s virtual education program was established. Broward’s program is homegrown and is based on the needs of the local

66 Virtual learning and distance learning often are used interchangeably. Both use a web-based platform and web 2.0 tools for interactivity. While both can be used in conjunction with the live classroom environment, there is a distinction. Virtual learning generally is categorized as using technology as an instructional resource. Distance learning offers instruction to students from a remote location. Distance learning was better known in the early and mid-twentieth century as “correspondence courses.” 67 Coincidentally, virtual education business has become a lucrative cottage industry. For smaller school districts, and those not very tech-savvy, commercial packages are available. Some are even customizable down to the classroom level, such as the program offered by V-Schools, a nationally recognized, locally based instructional technology company. The state also offers a virtual education program, which is provided by the successful bidder, Florida Virtual. 70

student population. Florida Virtual is a program purchased by the state from one of the many vendors that have sprung up to meet the needs of the new on-line education industry.

A myriad of thematic, gifted, and advanced placement programs (AP) programs are available for traditional public school students. High schools offer as many as 18 different AP classes. Students interested in classes not offered on site can attend them via distance learning programs offered by the district or the state. Some charter schools take advantage of the district’s distance learning classes through BECON (Broward

Education Communications Network), the district’s instructional and community television networks, or by dial in to the district’s digital portal BEEP to pick up teacher lesson plans and instructional videos. They also can enroll students in Florida Virtual to pick up courses that they do not offer onsite.

The traditional public school district also offers thematic instruction through its innovative programs department. Magnet Schools, also a by-product of the choice movement, offer specialized and/or rigorous instruction. Core courses are modified to address the theme of the school’s magnet or innovative program. Although many of the magnet areas of instruction also are offered in traditional comprehensive schools, magnet and innovative programs offer student unique, in-depth, and authentic experiences in specific areas of study.

Currently, the school district offers Magnet Programs at 47 schools with another

10 schools featuring innovative programs, including specific themes such as STEM

(science, technology, engineering, and math). Approximately one in five students in the school district participates in a magnet or innovative program. Magnet Schools have an

enrollment of 35,429 and innovative schools have another 9,899 students enrolled, representing 19.7% of the district’s enrollment. Among the 79 charter schools currently operating programs in the county, 6 school groups, representing 15 schools, offer a thematic instruction program ranging from language to technology to the arts.

Sports

In the Fall of 2011, there were 459 charter schools in the state of Florida, with a total enrollment of more than 154,000. With the exception of the very large charter schools, most charters had an average enrollment of 335 students. In Broward, charter school enrollment averages about 375 per school. This enrollment is not large enough for charter schools to be able to fund sports programs. But then, they do not have to offer sports. The state allows students to go back to their assigned school to participate in sports programs, and many do. The precedent for this practice was set with Florida’s home schooling legislation, which also allows students who are home schooled to participate in sports at their home school.68

Understanding Racial and Cultural Sensitivity

The state of Florida designated four specific curriculum areas that must be included in academic programs: Hispanic studies, African American studies, women’s studies, and Holocaust education.69 These four content areas represent the four major population groups in Florida. The Broward schools believe that direct interaction with

Holocaust survivors benefits South Florida students. They hold a special Holocaust

68 Perhaps the most well known beneficiary of this legislation is New York Jets Quarterback, Tim Tebow who was home schooled, but was able to participate in public school athletics, earning him greater notice by college sports team scouts. 69 While most people are aware of the racial and ethnic groups located in the state, few are aware of the large congregation of Holocaust survivors. South Florida is home to one of the largest populations of survivors outside of Israel. 72

Awareness event each year in conjunction with the Holocaust Memorial, providing high school students with the chance to meet and learn from those who lived through the horrific event.

In addition to this specialized instruction, most schools also focus on the ethnic groups that are represented by their student population by holding special events that feature historic or cultural activities. In the early 2000s, the Brazilian community located in Pompano, Florida hosted a cultural program for the students in conjunction with the

Brazilian consulate. Members of the Haitian community speak regularly in area schools, often serving as interpreters when needed. North Side elementary, located in the heart of one of Ft. Lauderdale’s predominantly Haitian neighborhoods, runs a food pantry and literacy programs and serves as a gathering site, in conjunction with the local Haitian church.

From 1995-2005 the school district also worked closely with several non-profit organizations to develop programs that improved racial harmony and understanding.

Programs were provided by the Anti-Defamation League, NCCJ (also known as the

National Council on Community Justice or by its original name, the National Conference of Christians and Jews) and other groups including the Gay and Lesbian Alliance

Against Defamation (GLAAD) and were used to train students to become peer mentors, role models, and ambassadors. Students were asked to identify tensions in the school and establish forums to diffuse them, reducing cases of ethnic and racial discrimination. Even though Florida requires its public schools to have programs that promote racial and cultural sensitivity, it could be argued that these programs are delivered from a middle

class framework. Community groups involved hope that the training will reduce categorizing those who are different as “other.”

Many charter schools, such as Ben Gamala Charter School and the International

School, specialize in language and cultural instruction and even use that as a sales and marketing push when recruiting students. Charter school websites promote the ethnic and cultural programs that celebrate the local community. Charter schools focus their marketing and recruitment efforts on a specific group of students, for example, those interested in learning the Hebrew language and culture, or on a specific community of students, such as those living within a particular zip code. These schools contain a somewhat homogeneous population. Fewer disparities among students lessen the need for diversity awareness programs. Charter schools with a more diverse group of students take another approach to reducing school tension, working hard on branding the school and creating a sense of school pride among students and parents.

The investigative study had better findings with regard to race and poverty. Half of all charter school students on Broward are classified as “Black,” while only 43% of the district’s enrollment is “Black.”70 Using qualification for “free or reduced lunch” as an indicator of poverty, 51% of charter students receive this service while the district enrollment in the program tops out at 59%.

A map of charter school locations in Broward County suggests that many charter school sites serve predominantly Black communities. These are areas that have deep distrust of the school district because they were divided up for purposes of achieving desegregation in the 1970s and 1980s. Traditional school enrollment in Broward County

70 In Miami-Dade County, the statistics are much higher for Black students, but closer on Hispanic students, which is the dominant racial group in Miami-Dade. 74

is 26.5% non-Hispanic White, compared to charter school enrollment of 20.4% non-

Hispanic White students. Similarly, traditional school enrollment among non-Hispanic

Black students is 38.8%, while charter schools are 41.5% non-Hispanic Black. A total of

13 charter schools have enrollments that range between 80% and 98% non-Hispanic

Black (Harrison 2010-2011 Twentieth Day).

This concentration of charter schools operating in proximity to the district’s historically Black schools has led to under enrollment in traditional public schools, such as Dillard High School. Dillard, nationally recognized for its arts and technology programs, once served as a focal point in the community. Currently, it is having trouble attracting students. This creates another dilemma and, ultimately, a self-fulfilling prophecy. As traditional public schools lose enrollment, they also lose funding, impacting their ability to deliver those programs that serve a diverse group of students, and, as a result, creating additional reasons for families to “opt out” of their neighborhood public school.

Although Dillard has a strong parent teacher student association (PTSA) and an alumni association that goes back generations, it still has needs beyond what the community can provide. High tech and Master arts classes in music, theater, and dance are expensive to maintain. The school has been aggressively partnering with professional groups and writing grants, but low enrollment takes its toll on the school’s budget as well as the programs and faculty.

Special Needs

Charter schools do not serve students with exceptionalities at the same rate as traditional public schools. The FDOE School Choice website indicates that only 10% of

charter students are classified as exceptional student education (ESE) students. In

Broward County, only 7.2% of charter school students are categorized as ESE students, compared to the traditional school ESE population of 12.4%. While all public schools are required to serve special needs students, the six-month investigation conducted by journalists from the Miami Herald and Tampa Bay Times newspapers and WLRN Public

Radio, as well as data from local charter schools, found that 87% of the charter schools in the state do not serve special needs children.

Anecdotal data from parents indicated that when calling to enroll their child in a charter school they were discouraged from doing so because they could not provide appropriate staffing or services, both of which legally are required (Kathleen McGrory and Scott Hiaasen “The Poverty Gap,” 33A). According to the Miami Herald analysis,

9% of Broward County charter schools enroll students with the greatest support needs, as compared to 80% of traditional public schools.

So what are the facts about charter schools? Table 7 summarizes how charters stack up against traditional public schools.

Perceptions About Charter Schools

Perhaps, more important that the facts about charter schools are the perceptions about charter schools held by the parents that enroll their children in them. Although the traditional public school system measures customer satisfaction annually, charter schools, on the whole, do not. Only the Imagine Schools conduct stakeholder surveys.

Imagine represents only 4 of the 76 charters currently operating in Broward County.

Results for these schools, which indicate a high customer satisfaction, cannot be considered as a representative sample of all charter school stakeholders.

Table 7

Charter Schools vs. Traditional Public Schools

CHARTER SCHOOLS VS. TRADITIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Class Size Charter schools do not necessarily have smaller classes and if they exceed class-by-class enrollment, the state does not levy any financial penalties. Operations: The cost of running and maintaining charter schools is lower than Construction that of traditional public schools, due in part to additional safety and and Purchasing security requirements placed on traditional school facilities. Boundaries Charter schools do not have boundaries. They offer a convenient option for parents wanting their children to access alternative programs or a location that is in greater proximity to work sites, other family members and/or other activities. Community Traditional public schools have many opportunities for community Involvement involvement. Charter schools seem to limit parent involvement to the classroom. Communication Charter and traditional public schools communicate the good news via newsletters, websites, and ongoing measures such as notes home and parent- teacher conferences. Instructional Charter schools and traditional public schools can provide additional Resources instructional resources to students through distance and virtual learning programs. Sports and Charter schools do not offer sports and other enrichment programs, Enrichment depending instead on “home school” opportunities for students that are interested in participating. Racial and Charter schools address cultural disparities by focusing on Cultural developing a school culture that celebrates the ethnicity of its Sensitivity students. Serving Special Charter schools do not serve special needs students in the same Needs Students proportion as traditional public schools. A six-month investigation indicates that some charter schools shy away from serving this population because it is costly and labor intensive.

Charter school operators say that parents vote with their feet, that charter school enrollment is voluntary. If they do not like it they can leave and go to another charter,

private, or even public school, or enroll in virtual education or home school programs.

And while this is true about school enrollment, other factors such as Festinger’s Theory of Cognitive Dissonance could be keeping families from leaving.

In 1957, communication theorist Leon Festinger proposed the Theory of

Cognitive Dissonance, on the premise that we have an inner drive to create harmony between our beliefs and our behavior (McLeod; Griffin). When our actions, such as in the case of enrolling a child in a charter school, are in discord with our beliefs, for example that traditional public schools offer children a better learning environment, we are driven to change our beliefs to be in accord with our behavior. Festinger’s study about the relationship between attitudes and behavior demonstrated that when these two elements within our cognition clash, the resulting discrepancy is termed “cognitive dissonance.” Shifting our opinions offers increased satisfaction and is an automatic outcome of the mind’s need to create alignment between beliefs and actions.

Cognitive dissonance is a powerful force that is used effectively in marketing, public relations, and advertising. Brand loyalty, or in this case, commitment to the idea of “specialness” about a charter school, is acquired through the choice to enroll a child in a charter school and is maintained through a thoughtful and aggressive combination of retention programs, including engaging the parents in “required” volunteer hours and having ongoing communication to keep families enthused and committed to continuing their child’s enrollment in the school. Parents, students, and teachers maintain their enthusiasm for charter schools in part to reinforce their choices, reducing conflict and tension between beliefs and action. Understanding specific stakeholder concerns helps to determine if satisfaction is based on real experiences or perceptions.

78 Measuring Customer Satisfaction

Broward County Public Schools’ annual Customer Satisfaction Survey (CSS) captures student, parent, and teacher opinions about home-school communication, classroom teachers, school administrators, and school facilities and programs. The CSS monitors attitudes about 40+ aspects of the school environment. All students and faculty are surveyed online, using a survey portal at school. Parents also are surveyed using a combination of mail and online contact. The CSS is conducted using statistically valid procedures, with a 95% reliability rate.

The survey is administered to all students in Grades 3 through 12, all full-time instructional staff, and a random sample of one third of parents of students in grades pre-

Kindergarten through Grade 12. All students and instructional staff are surveyed online through a district based technology portal. Parent surveys are distributed on paper forms, with parents also receiving the option of logging in to the portal to complete the survey electronically. Only 3.1% of parents responded online for the survey administered in

2010. As would be expected, based on the mode of delivery for the survey, response rates for students and staff are twice as high as those of parents.

Only student responses reached the target of 80%, with 83.2 percent of students responding, followed by 78% of staff. Parent responses of 34.2% are considered high for a direct mail survey (School Board of Broward County 16th Annual).71

All respondents were asked to give their school a grade. Data is largely used to gauge overall satisfaction, which is defined as a grade of “C” or higher. Table 8 shows

71 Although the district’s research department indicates that a response rate of 34.2% is not sufficient to determine validity of responses, the Direct Marketing Association’s 2010 Response Rate Trend Report suggests that response rates for direct mail, which have held steady over the last four years, average 3.42%. The district’s rate of response is ten times that level. 79

that in this survey 95% of parents and staff and 89% of students indicated satisfaction with their school.

Table 8

School Grades Assigned by Respondent Groups

SCHOOL GRADES ASSIGNED BY RESPONDENT GROUPS

School Group Grade Elementary % Middle % High % Overall % Parent* A 69.8 48.3 38.1 60.4 B 23.7 35.3 35.2 28.0 C 5.3 12.6 20.5 9.1 D 0.9 2.9 4.9 1.9 F 0.3 0.9 1.4 0.6 Student A 64.9 31.4 25.0 39.6 B 23.9 35.0 34.2 31.1 C 7.2 20.1 26.8 14.1 D 2.1 7.2 9.0 3.6 F 2.0 6.3 5.0 0.6 Instructional A 63.6 40.7 32.9 50.2 Staff B 26.0 35.6 37.9 31.4 C 8.2 18.0 22.1 14.1 D 1.9 4.8 5.9 3.6 F 0.2 0.9 1.2 0.6 Source: Sixteenth Annual Customer Survey, Broward County Public Schools, 2010. Note: * Parent response rate is very low; therefore, these results may not adequately represent the perceptions of all parents.

Stakeholder Opinions

Once respondents rate/grade their school, they are asked to respond to a series of questions using a Likert Scale. These questions gauge respondent perceptions about the

school, and pinpoint opinions on key issues such as bullying.72 Each respondent group was asked a minimum of 35 questions, with additional questions about graduation asked of those at the high school level, and follow up questions asked of those who had children bullied or were bullied at school.

Once the district reports the data in aggregate, each school receives its own survey results. School level surveys are used as one metric in a principal’s evaluation. As part of this process, school leaders are required to review their data, determine if weaknesses exist, and develop plans to address them. It is unknown if this occurs. In some schools concerns seem to persist over several years without remediation.

The 2009-2010 CSS responses were collected from the stakeholders in the 15 schools that lost the most students to charter schools by the beginning of the following school year (2010-2011), and were compared to the same population in the 15 schools that lost the least number of students during same period to determine if satisfaction levels differ between the two groups of respondents. Among the 30 schools studied, 5 were reviewed at each of the three educational levels: elementary, middle, and high school73 on both the high and low loss side. This comparison of the responses between the high and low loss groups was conducted to determine if there was a differential in customer satisfaction among these two groups of schools and if any of the concerns expressed were factors that could explain the shift in enrollment.

72 During this year, district researchers reported that over 94% of instructional staff indicated they had been trained on the district’s anti-bullying policy and more than 91% agreed or strongly agreed that they could handle a bullying situation effectively. 73 Because the school district is responsible for warehousing information on these students, tracking their migration was possible. 81

To select the schools for study from the CSS, the district’s previously discussed

20-day count of enrollment74 was used to identify the schools used for the comparison.

Because charter schools are also public schools, each student retains his or her student number and the school district can track the student enrollment and transition from traditional to charter sites. Table 9 shows the schools that experienced the highest and lowest loss of enrollment to charter schools in 2010-2011.

The CSS uses a five-point Likert Scale to measure beliefs, using the terms strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, and strongly disagree. To determine levels of satisfaction, the percentage “in favor” of a question or statement were calculated. For purposes of this study, “in favor” was defined as those responses that were recorded as

“strongly agree” or “agree.” A gap analysis of the summed responses for students, teachers, and parents was conducted between high and low loss schools. For purposes of this study, a percentage response of greater than 5% was selected as indicative of a

“gap.” Appendix D includes the summaries. Table 10 reflects a sampling of the questions reviewed for each population.

74 The State of Florida requires all school districts to report their official enrollment on the twentieth day of the school year. This figure is used as the official enrollment count for all districts, and is the basis on which annual district funding is generated. This per pupil spending is something that elected officials cite annually to discuss how they are increasing spending for education. What is often not shared is that much of the money has strings attached to it, and can only be used for specific purposes. 82 Table 9

Listing of Highest and Lowest Loss Schools Expressed in Absolute Numbers and as a Percent

LISTING OF HIGHEST AND LOWEST LOSS SCHOOLS EXPRESSED IN ABSOLUTE NUMBERS AND AS A PERCENT Highest Loss # of % of Lowest Loss # of % of School Students Enrollment School Students Enrollment

North 536 85.76 Bayview 2 .36

Lauderdale

Elementary Park Lakes 442 36.83 Floranada 3 .42 Coral Cove 413 48.76 Meadowbrook 5 .84 Palm Cove 286 30.88 Heron Heights 6 .73 Gator Run 276 21.73 Bennett 9 .22

Glades 770 42.28 Tequesta 9 .58 Trace

New 540 39.35 West Glades 12 .78 Middle Renaissance Silver Lakes 363 80.48 Rickards 14 1.59 Forest Glen 322 21.25 New River 17 1.59 Pines 278 15.84 Pompano 19 1.17 Beach

Everglades 887 31.65 Deerfield 10 .41 Beach High Flanagan 661 9.93 Cypress Bay 14 .34 West Broward 550 20.40 Blanche Ely 20 1.02 Miramar 492 17.82 Monarch 25 1.17 Coral Springs 360 15.52 Northeast 34 1.54 Source: Harrison, 2010-2011 Twentieth Day Enrollment Report Breakdown.

83 Table 10

Survey Questions

SURVEY QUESTIONS

Stakeholder Areas of Interest Parents • My child’s school has adequate resources for the instructions of my child. • My child is safe at school. • Rules are applied fairly to all students at my child’s school. • When I contact my child’s school or the school district, I feel welcomed and I am treated with courtesy. • My child’s school is kept in good condition. • My input on school decisions is solicited and valued. • I am satisfied with the learning environment at my child’s school. • My child is accepted and feels like he/she belongs at this school.

Students • My teacher(s) believe I can succeed. • My teacher(s) answer(s) my questions in a way that I can understand. • My teacher(s) treat(s) me with fairness. • I feel safe at my school. • Rules are applied fairly to all students at my school. • My school is kept clean and in good condition. • I am accepted and feel like I belong at this school.

Teachers • The school provides adequate resources for me to teach my students. • I work with each student to explain material in a way that he/she can understand. • I treat all my students with fairness. • The students are safe at school. • I feel safe at my school. • Rules are applied fairly to all students at my school. • The training I have received through staff development activities has enabled me to become a better teacher. • My input on school decisions is solicited and valued. • I am satisfied with the learning environment at my school. • I am satisfied with the working conditions at my school. • All students are accepted and feel like they belong at this school. • My colleagues share effective, innovative approaches with me to try in my classroom.

84 Comparing Stakeholder Responses

Traditional public school stakeholder satisfaction remains high. Comparison of stakeholder responses from schools with a high and low loss of enrollment from the CSS reveals that parent and student attitudes between the two cohort groups are similar. If there was great dissatisfaction among parents and students at schools where enrollment was lost to charter schools it should have been evident in the responses. However, between the schools with high and low enrollment loss, parents and students responses to the 40+ survey questions were close, within five percentage points, well within the margin of error.

The one exception to that statement was the teacher response data. While teacher scores were not as consistent between the two cohort groups, it is not known how much the contentious relationships with the school district impacted these responses. It should be noted that the Broward Teachers’ Union (BTU) and the school district were engaged in a multi-year contract impasse that included the involvement of judges and court mediators during the time that the survey was administered. It is not known if that situation impacted the teacher opinions expressed or whether the union advised teachers to respond accordingly.75

Large gaps were found in teacher responses to selected issues. Questions addressing the availability of adequate resources and work conditions, school safety, bullying, awareness of school recycling, and whether parents and students accept responsibility for part of the learning process had gaps between responses of 10% or

75 Immediately following the departure of five-year Superintendent James F. Notter in July 2011, the union and the district were able to resolve their differences and come to closure on their contentious contract negotiations. 85

more76. For example, elementary teacher responses had a ten percentage point gap in 13 out of 43 responses, middle school teacher responses expressed a greater than 10 percent gap in 11 out of 43 questions, but high school teachers only had 1 response that charted a gap of more than 10 percentage points.

Although education scholars such as Sarah Lawrence-Lightfoot and Jawanza

Kunjufu suggest that teachers have a significant impact on student learning experiences and parent satisfaction, parent responses did not seem to be affected by teacher dissatisfaction. In fact, other than the concerns mentioned by teachers, the responses between high and low loss schools did not vary more than 5 percentage points anywhere in the survey results, suggesting that schools losing students to charter schools are reporting similar levels of customer satisfaction as schools retaining their students.

It should be noted that while local charter schools (other than the Imagine schools as already noted) do not publish assessments of their stakeholder satisfaction, they are keenly aware of customer satisfaction through the students that remain enrolled in charter schools. With charter school enrollment growing at numbers that exceed losses by the traditional public schools, it is likely that these schools have a strong retention rate, and are picking up additional students from both public and private schools.

Because participation is voluntary, charter school administrators work hard throughout the year to insure parents re-enroll their children each spring for the coming school year.

76 Teacher responses with large gaps between high and low loss schools included: the school provides adequate resources for me, students are safe, I feel safe, rules are applied fairly, I am proud of my school, my school is clean and kept in good condition, my students can meet with a guidance counselor when they need to, parents and guardians share responsibility for their child’s academic success, and I can rely on parents to help with academic or behavior problems, among others. 86 Stakeholder Assessments in Other Communities

Charter school customer satisfaction information has been measured in other communities. Focus groups were conducted and surveys administered with charter school parents, students, and teachers to identify the reasons why each group chose to be involved with charter schools. These studies, conducted in Alberta, Canada and the

District of Columbia, communities with a robust charter system, suggest that parents, students, and teachers believe that charter schools are better for all concerned because they provide local control, an opportunity to shape curriculum and innovate on a wider scale, attend to the specific needs of students, and offer smaller class sizes and greater academic challenges. These findings make a strong case for customer satisfaction.

Alberta, Canada

A three-year study of 10 charter schools in the Province of Alberta, Canada profiled the families that select charter schools and why; levels of satisfaction; and teacher, parent, and student perceptions of success. The teachers responding to the survey acknowledged that despite earning less than traditional public school teachers, even with advanced degrees, they generally were pleased with their work environment.

Specifically, they cited teaching small classes, working with like-minded colleagues, alignment with the school philosophy, and having a voice in decision-making (O’Reilly and Bosetti 27).

As the reasons for their satisfaction with the charter environment, teachers felt their schools were effective (in order of importance) because of a high performing staff, increased student achievement, the use of appropriate assessment tools, a safe

environment, and the ability to retain failing students (28). Teachers also praised innovation in curriculum and organizational structure.

Most of the parents who responded to the survey had some experience with public schools before enrolling their child in a charter school. Most parents stated that their child did not have a problem with learning (only 5% expressed a knowledge of their child having behavioral or discipline problems), although some parents expressed the belief that their children were underachievers in public schools. Primary reasons expressed choosing a charter school for their child were smaller class sizes and greater academic challenges. Other reasons include individualized curricula and discipline (29).

Parents responding to this survey were well educated. A total of 77% of both mothers and fathers had some post-secondary education, with 52% of fathers and 45% of mothers having advanced degrees or some professional certification. Parents expressed satisfaction with charter schools, and specifically cited academic standards and the quality of teaching, class size, and access to teachers and individualized instruction. Parents were very pleased with the level of communication between the school and the home, especially relating to student achievement. They also were pleased with school management, values, and their ability to have a say in decision-making

(30).

A small sample of students in Grades 3 through 9 also was included in the survey. Students offered positive comments about teachers and fellow students, the curriculum, and school culture. In one school, 94% of those questioned would recommend their school. In other responses, between 61% and 79% of the students, depending on grade level, would do so. While students said there generally were no

differences in relationships between themselves and their teachers or their peers, most said they had done the same or a little worse in their other (traditional) public school.

They said that their teachers were “better” in the charter schools because they treated them with respect. They described their charter school as challenging academically while providing a sense of belonging with a safe and caring environment (30).

Findings from the Alberta Study

O’Reilly and Bosetti conclude that the Alberta, Canada, charter schools are successful, citing high levels of satisfaction expressed by everyone surveyed and increasing enrollment as proof. They also cite evidence of student achievement as an endorsement of the model, but offer the caveat that, in part, achievements can be explained by the targeting/recruitment of specific students,77 by socio-economic factors, and by parents who actively are involved in their child’s education seeking an alternative to public education (31). The dominant theme in their research is the relationship between the parents, teachers, and the school as well as a redefined role of school administration that includes parent input in decisions (33). They suggest that this is no different than parents who enroll their children in Magnet Programs in traditional public schools (34). The mythology of “specialness” is not limited to charter schools.

They argue that it can be achieved whenever parents and teachers engage with each other.

The stakeholder responses from the study are summarized:

77 In their study of charter schools in the Washington D.C. area, Lacireno-Paquet, Holyoke, Moser and Henig suggest that while there is little evidence that market-orientated charter schools are “cream-skimming,” that is picking only elite students, there is evidence that they are less likely to serve some high need populations. They argue that market-oriented charter schools may be “cropping-off” services to students with costly language or special education needs. 89

• Teachers report that they are very satisfied with their teaching positions

because they work in small classes, have a voice in shaping school policies,

and can work with like-minded colleagues that share their beliefs about

teaching and learning.

• Parents of charter school students, of which two-thirds attended public

schools prior to enrolling in charters, reported their satisfaction stems back

to smaller classes, greater academic challenges for the students, and

specialized programs, e.g., discipline, phonics, etc.

• Students viewed the charter school as a safe and caring environment, and

they felt they belonged. Attitudes about their charter school being better or

worse than the traditional public school were mixed. However, they believed

they were academically challenged in their new schools (27-28).

The dominant theme of the study was that new relationships generate new hope for a positive educational experience and that a new relationship could be developed between the school and its various publics. Parents expressed positive attitudes about charter schools because of nostalgia for smaller schools where their children are well known. Parents of students in Magnet School programs in the traditional system also viewed themselves as part of a special environment because their choice of the school represents a break from the neighborhood schools and their generic programs (28-30).

Charter Schools in Washington, D.C.

To evaluate customer satisfaction in Washington, D.C. charter schools,

Schneider and Buckley used a telephone survey to measure opinions about charter teachers and principals as compared to their traditional counterparts. A telephone survey

of more than 500 parents in the District of Columbia found that parents with children in charter schools rated teachers, principals, facilities, and schools higher than their traditional public school peers. Parents and students believe that the charter schools with which they are involved are better than their former traditional schools with respect to class size, school size, teacher attentiveness, and the quality of instruction and curriculum (204).

Parents with children in traditional public and charter schools were asked to assign a letter grade between A and F to three dimensions of their child’s school teacher, principal, and facility, as well as an overall grade to the school. Schneider and

Buckley used a variety of techniques to control for the self-selection process of enrolling in charter schools. The data was compared three ways. First, a “naïve” model was used, comparing grades without controlling for any influencing factors. The second comparison used a regression model, where factors such as parent education, class size, and the child’s grade level were taken into account. The third method incorporated a propensity score matching procedure78 that controls for natural selection. That is to say, people who choose a charter school naturally will be more inclined to rate it favorably.79

Findings from the Washington, D.C. Study

After controlling for self-selection, Schneider and Buckley found that parents rated charter educators higher, and that this difference could not be attributed solely to the act of parental choice. They found evidence that DC charter school parents rate their

78 The logic behind propensity score matching is to create a matched set of observations that can be treated as if a true random sample was used to conduct the research (Schneider and Buckley 209). 79 Phi Delta Kappa asks a sample of parents to grade their child’s school each year. Annual results suggest that parents will grade their child’s school higher than the grade they give to schools as a whole (Schneider and Buckley 206). 91

schools higher in every dimension studied, including the school culture, their child’s teacher, the facility, and the school principal (211). Although these differences withstood tests for “self-selection” (i.e., the possibility that parents choosing charter schools would be more enthusiastic than parents with children remaining in traditional schools simply because they made the choice), Schneider and Buckley suggest that additional research is needed to determine whether the act of choice might increase satisfaction.

Although there are no community-wide customer satisfaction surveys of charter school stakeholders in Broward County, one can look at survey findings from Alberta,

Canada and Washington, D.C., to gain some insight into stakeholder perceptions.

Summarizing the Discussion

This study questions whether charter schools are simply better schools. Or whether stakeholders simply believe that charter schools are better. Is it reality or perception? Yes, traditional public schools clearly are rule-heavy, but they have additional standards to meet beyond those expected of their charter peers. There seems to be a general misunderstanding of what the rules are and what they are designed to do.

For example, some of the rules that parents complain about, such as consequences for discipline, have been put into place to provide the types of things that parents say they want: anti-bullying, zero-tolerance against drugs and firearms, and approval processes that allow parents to “opt out” of discussing material that may conflict with a family’s religious beliefs. Charter schools also receive waivers from other rules, such as those that address caps on meeting class sizes. Yet, despite the release from these significant

penalties, charter schools do not seem to be using the saved funds to create a superior educational delivery system.

Charters have been given greater flexibility by the state as to where they locate, whom they serve, and how they operate. This is not an apples-to-apples comparison.

Parents only know that traditional public schools seem to have more rules than charter schools. In addition, charter schools have significantly smaller enrollment, creating a closer-knit community in many respects. In addition to having greater flexibility, charters also can take advantage of the services that traditional public schools offer without having to provide their own. As discussed, students can attend charter schools and go back to their home traditional public schools to participate in sports.

The traditional system offers greater academic variety, a broader array of resources, and more opportunities for parent involvement in programs and decision- making. The district has a more than 75-year history of supporting parent-teacher association programs and has established a model for citizen involvement in school governance more than 30 years ago. Parents can participate in the decision making process for their school and geographic area, as well as their child’s area of interest, such as magnets, special needs, gifted education, etc. Traditional schools, with a more diverse student population, also offer structured programs to address and celebrate that diversity. This is not to say that the traditional schools would not benefit from a fresh look at how they go about telling their story.

Perhaps the best indicator of whether traditional public schools are in and of themselves the problem can be found in the data from the district’s annual assessment of customer satisfaction (CSS). The comparison of schools with high and low

enrollment loss suggests that parent and student attitudes between the two cohort groups are similar. If there was great dissatisfaction among parents and students at schools where enrollment was lost to charter schools, it should have been evident in the responses. However, between the schools with high and low enrollment loss, parents and students responses to the 40+ survey questions are close, within five percentage points and well within the margin of error. On the other hand, teacher scores are not as consistent between the two cohort groups; but it is not known how much the contentious relationships with the school district impacted these responses. CSS data does not suggest that parents and students are drawn to the charter schools because of a huge dissatisfaction gap. As noted previously, the closeness of parent and student responses suggests that other factors might be guiding the migration to charter schools.

As families withdraw their children from a traditional public school, they must pass through the office to pick up student records. While principals are encouraged to interview exiting families, it is not mandatory. Students retain their identification numbers when they transfer to another public (charter or traditional) school, allowing the district to track student enrollment locations. So, there is no incentive for school staff to talk with the departing family to understand why they are leaving or to collect anecdotal information. Without a longitudinal study that follows a specific group of families, all of the information available within the district about the reasons for leaving or returning to the system is anecdotal. While individual schools may track student withdrawals, enrollment, and re-enrollments on a longitudinal basis, they are the

exception rather than the rule,80 and the district as a whole does not address this issue. If this process were to be developed, it might provide district administrators with an

“ideology map” of sorts that could help point out areas of weakness or vulnerability as expressed by departing members of the traditional system.

Stakeholder responses to the Alberta, Canada, and Washington D.C., surveys suggest that students, parents and teachers believe these schools offer a “value added” experience. Table 11 summarizes the responses from the two studies.

It is impossible to tell if Broward County’s charter schools offer a similar type of experience. A content review of charter school websites did not reveal the existence of innovative or “special” programs like those mentioned by respondents in Alberta or

Washington D.C. In addition to the inability of an outsider to determine if there are similarities between Broward County’s charter schools and other communities, the charter schools themselves have not presented information stating that they offer something to parents beyond standard educational programs and the convenience of being able to choose a school location. To date, there is no published research on the stakeholders involved in Broward County charter school programs. If such surveys exist, the schools and their management companies have not published the data.

Because charter schools receive other sources of funds beyond the state funds generated through full time enrollment, they could be paying for this research through private sources and keeping the findings private.

80 While doing research, I encountered a few Broward schools that track the data of exiting and returning students. However, these schools are exceptions to the rule, often are located in suburban areas, and typically have fewer students to track. 95 Table 11 Charter School Stakeholder Surveys from Other Communities

CHARTER SCHOOL STAKEHOLDER SURVEYS FROM OTHER COMMUNITIES

Stakeholder Alberta, Canada Washington D.C. Surveys Survey 3-year study of 10 Charter schools, using Random Telephone survey of 500 Method field observation and interviews. Parents with school aged children. This survey used three different research models; one with no controls, one that considered participant modifiers such as education, and one that assumed that the positive comments were due to self-selection into these schools. Teachers • Teachers said they earned less than traditional school counterparts. • They liked working in smaller classes. • Having a voice in decision making. • Working with like-minded colleagues. • Innovative curriculum and organizational structure. • Schools are effective because they have a high performing staff, increased student achievement, use appropriate assessment tools, provide a safe environment, and are able to retain failing students. Parents • While learning was not a negative • Charter schools are better with experience in traditional schools, respect to class size, school size, charter schools offered smaller class teacher attentiveness, and sizes and greater academic challenges. instruction and curriculum. • Parents felt that the curricula and discipline were more individualized. • Home school communications is good. • Parents have a role in decision-making. • School management and values are good. Students • Learning was about the same or a little better in charters. • Teachers were better because they treated students respectfully. • Charters provided challenging academics, a sense of belonging, and a safe and caring environment.

In general, the public has gravitated away from the cornerstone institutions of

our society. The segments of society that understood this change in public sentiment

responded by developing new facets of their business enterprise. For example, in

response to the rising tide of traffic on the Internet and the growth of “citizen

journalism,” established media organizations created interactive websites and virtual

versions of their products.

Because traditional public schools were only somewhat effective at recognizing and responding to this issue, charter schools were able to capitalize on disenchantment with the country’s educational delivery system as it existed and present an attractive alternative. While there is no data that charter schools in Broward County offer a better product than traditional public schools, parents continue to enroll their children in charter schools in increasing numbers.

Parent comments reflected in the Alberta, Canada and Washington, D.C. surveys express dismay over the bureaucracy embedded in the traditional system and the challenges to navigating it, while at the same time being enamored by the simplicity in getting involved in a charter school. Despite these comments, responses gathered in

Broward County’s CSS do not seem to indicate that there is overriding dissatisfaction with the way traditional schools operate. Appendix D reflects this lack of concern, both in general and as a comparison between the two cohort groups. While the school district itself can make things complex, a level playing field does not exist. Table12 details some of the challenges faced by the traditional public system and some of the opportunities that have been created for charter school operators.

Table 12 Comparison of Challenges and Opportunities

COMPARISON OF CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES Issue Traditional Public Charter Bureaucracy • Class size is required class by • Charters can use school averages. class. Non-compliance No impact for non-compliance. requires a financial penalty. • Can open/lease in any type of • Must comply with OSHA facility. requirements and hurricane • School enrollment is driven by shelter standards. marketing, no geographic • Schools enrollment is driven restrictions. by boundaries. • Requested changes must go to a committee. Responsiveness • Parent Involvement at school • Few charters have PTA/PTO occurs through SACs and organizations. Parent reps sit on PTA/PTOs and groups that school governance boards. focus on interests (Magnets, • Parents are told they must ESE). volunteer their time. • Parent participation can be • Charters are more homogeneous, achieved when in a format and focus on ethic and racial that parents can relate to (Title groups that are served. I). • Students can go back to their • Schools have a heterogeneous home school to participate in population, and provide sports of after school activities. special programs for ethnic • 87% of charters do not serve ESE and racial sensitivity. students. In Broward only 7.4% • A full array of sports and of the students are ESE. extra curricular programs are offered. • All schools are set up to serve special needs students, 12.4% of the district’s students are ESE. Customer • The district surveys • Local charters do not publish Satisfaction stakeholders every year to satisfaction surveys. Stakeholders determine perceptions and can choose to stay at the school opinions. or move to another if they are • Parents and students are unhappy. similar in their levels of high • Surveys in Alberta, Canada, and satisfaction. Teachers express Washington D.C. found that concerns. parents and teachers believe that they have more control and opportunities for innovation.

98 IV. STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESS

“Public sentiment is everything. With public sentiment, nothing can fail. Without it, nothing can succeed. Consequently, he who molds public sentiment goes deeper than he who enacts statutes or pronounces decisions. He makes statutes or decisions possible or impossible to be executed.” --- Abraham Lincoln (qtd. in Angle 128)

The Backlash movement was a revival of conservatism among some in the middle class. Although it started with fringe groups, it moved into the mainstream of

American politics. The election of Ronald Reagan was a high point for the movement.

Backlash supporters were mostly White and middle-class who felt they had been left in the dust in the civil rights and women’s right movements of the previous decades. In responding to what they believed was a government too big to function effectively, backlashers advocated for a new system of education, among other institutions, that would be regulated by market forces, the ideology laid out by Milton Friedman twenty years earlier.

Initial support for the Backlash philosophy was limited to extreme conservative groups such as the John Birch Society (Kakutani). To accomplish their conservative reform objectives, backlash leaders had to appeal to a wider margin of the public.

Although there was a resurgence of liberalism during the Clinton era, support for privatization and diminishing the size, scope, and power of government never has really

99 gone away.81 With the election of George W. Bush, conservatives had another ear and opportunity to pursue their agenda. Again, the challenge was how to solidify a large segment of the American population to support their objectives. They did so by creating a narrative that other members of the conservative community could understand and support. This chapter will discuss how Backlash leaders used the constructs of key communication theories to shift public opinion effectively, and consequently, move the

American ideal of education from the neighborhood school, a cornerstone of our national character, to advocacy for school choice. A critical first step was the integration of the idea/language of “choice” into the national narrative about schools.

“Choice” has positive connotations within our culture. Most people see choice as a good thing; America was founded on the beliefs that citizens had the right to choose their church, their neighborhood, and their leaders. There are several definitions for “choice.” Webster’s Dictionary defines it succinctly as “the opportunity, right or power to choose” (“Choice,” Webster’s Dictionary). Each of these definitions suggests that choice provides a level of control within a situation. For those who believed that government was out of control, as exemplified by 1980s legislation that required schools to teach sex education, drug education, and gun control, the opportunity to choose a school and its curriculum offered two levels of control. Using such a powerfully charged word to drive the transition of the nation’s public schools from highly regulated public entities to a less regulated system of entities appealed to those believing the institution of education had become too complicated and unwieldy.82

81 The current resurgence of the Tea Party with the 2008 and 2010 elections demonstrates that there is still a strong extremely conservative element in the Republican and Libertarian parties. 82 This practice continues to be used effectively by privatization advocates, most recently in 2011 when politicians issued a call for pension “reform” for state workers. The conversation centered 100

McLuhan’s Theory of Media Ecology addresses the relationship between communication and power, media, and culture. This theory is based on the idea that the infusion of technology into society has altered the environment, including the way in which we socially construct meaning (Griffin First Look (8th ed.), 321). In the modern era, development of a public opinion campaign would be impossible if one were to exclude the use of technology, specifically social media. Not only does it provide us with more direct access to a desired population, it also provides us with real time opportunities to communicate.

The charter school movement has been successful due in large part to the ability to reach desired audiences: government, elites, and the general public using social media. Numerous organizations dedicated to the establishment and expansion of the charter school movement, including the CATO Institute, the Heartland Institute, the

Charter Friends National Network, the Thomas Fordham Institute, and the Friedman

Foundation for Educational Choice all have built and maintain outstanding websites designed to provide the reader with the information they need to become knowledgeable about charter concerns as well as the tools needed to start up a charter organization in their community. Many of these same organizations and others have built pages on

Facebook, posted information videos on You Tube, and reached out to constituents via email blasts and Twitter.

Traditional public school districts, which have to deal with the ongoing operation of local schools and which have limited and fragmented resources they can

around the idea of that the public sector pension system was underfunded, unsustainable, and a ticking time bomb, claims that ultimately were disproven by both the media and the State Board of Administration (SBA) (Williams 2011). 101

devote to building a constituency, have approached the issue using old school thinking.

Historic allies have softened to the idea that charter schools are “the enemy.”

Teachers unions, once hostile to the idea of charters, now see them as fertile ground to recruit new members. Larger systems are especially good environment for unions, since negotiating with a union is simpler than negotiating with individual staff. Teachers working in the Pembroke Pines Charter School System, which includes four schools run by the city of Pembroke Pines, can join the Broward Teachers Union (BTU).

Liberals opposed to the idea of draining funds from traditional public schools have had limited success in stemming the shifting tide of legislation and funding. They, too, can read opinion polls, such as those conducted by the Gallup organization each year, which suggest that most of the electorate favors giving parents a choice of where they send their children to school.

Data from the 2011 Phi Delta Kappa (PDK)-Gallup (“What Americans Said”) poll suggests that parents trust their child’s classroom teacher and have high levels of confidence in their child’s school. Beyond that there is little identity and connection with higher levels of administration and the school district. Parents have been overheard to say, “I love my kid’s teacher and the school is really child-focused; but those

‘Yahoos’ down at the school board, they don’t know what they are doing.”

Media coverage of school board actions typically frames district-level deliberations and decisions as cumbersome and wasteful. For example, a story appearing in the Sun-Sentinel about the repurposing of a bus depot that was built but never completed began, “An unused multimillion-dollar bus compound, long a symbol of government waste, will be transformed into a vocational school next year, providing

102

adult job training and freeing up money to hire teachers, Broward Schools

Superintendent Robert Runcie announced Tuesday” (Fitzpatrick). The decision to do more for the adults seeking employment, a good one in a fragile economy, was overshadowed by portrayal of the building as “a waste.” The explanation that approval for the building was given at a time when the district was expanding rapidly and needing more space for its vehicle maintenance was buried in the middle and at the end of the article.

The Narrative of Choice

Fisher suggests that creating a narrative paradigm through a word gives meaning and depth to an issue (Griffin First Look (8th ed.), 321). Charter school advocates effectively have “put a face” on the issue, by moving the discourse from the abstract to the specific, promulgating stories of individuals and families who are hampered by education bureaucracy or helped by the advent of choice. Hall adds to this dynamic through his Theory of Encoding and Decoding. He believes that language choice creates a dynamic that can either perpetuate or revolutionize a culture. Hall argues that media plays a central role in the production of news and our reactions to it. The earliest studies about media influence were published in the earliest years of the twentieth century and demonstrated a correlation between media coverage of an issue and development of public opinion toward it (Andina-Diaz 66). A LexisNexis83 search of articles appearing in major U.S. news sources reflected this is the case with charter schools. Out of 997 articles appearing in school choice that appeared in newspapers, newswires, and press

83 LexisNexis is a global provider of online information. The company began as a legal publisher, eventually providing on-line access to full text legal documents and, in 1979, access to text from major U.S. daily news publications. 103

releases, aggregate news sources, newsletters, magazines and journals, transcripts, blogs, industry trade press, and web-based publications between 1994 and 2010, identified 997 articles referencing charter schools, 996 articles were published about

“school choice.”

McLuhan suggests that a symbiotic relationship exists between media and messages. He argues that the medium used determines acceptance of the message among the mass audience (Griffin First Look (8th ed.), 321-322). While building awareness through other communication channels such as direct contact is important, coverage of issues via television and newspapers creates a tipping point in public acceptance of the message (Burstein News That Matters). Accordingly, charter school advocates choose to focus on consumer-orientated publications as a way to make their case. Academics have studied various aspects of charter schools and their findings have been published in academic journals. However, to sway policy makers and parents toward the expansion of charter school programs, charter school advocates make use of communication channels with broad distribution, including conventional media such as

TV newscasts and morning newspapers, non-traditional media such as movie theater ads, and social media such as email, websites, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube.

Discourse in the Public Sphere

Habermas sees development of the public sphere as the force that moved civil society forward; it is the domain in which such things as public opinion can be formed in a rational and logical process (55). He believes that the public sphere is the realm of society where citizens can freely and openly discuss issues, and use collective opinions to critically address or oppose government action and structure (Thomas 230).

104

In 1962, Habermas conceptualized the “public sphere” as the setting in which discussion of issues and the formation of the public’s opinion should occur. In 1987,

Jacoby cites the declining role of the intellectual as an agenda builder in society

(Robbins 254). They both argue that without this type of discourse, public opinion/public policy will form through other means. With the decline of intellectualism in our society, Habermas and Jacoby suggest that citizens will defer to other agents to help them formulate ideas. Charter school supporters have effectively built a narrative that resonates with the public, through use of the media, and drives opinions about education.

Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) provides a framework through which public discourse is understood. CDA questions relationships between the power in social structures and everyday practices, focusing on the communication strategies that legitimize power, create social identities, and establish relationships (Thomas 231).

There are several ways that CDA can help develop an understanding of the dynamics that surround the issue of school choice. By mapping the interrelationships between policy makers, the media, and government agencies involved in the school reform process, we can see the nature of the discourse that has occurred in the public sphere.

Advocates for charter schools are able to influence public opinion, which in turn has influenced and furthered public policies. Paul Burstein argues, “Public policy that is influenced by public opinion indicates that the democratic process is working as designed” (36). Critics argue congruence between public policy and public opinion necessarily does not indicate the presence of democracy because of the many non- democratic processes involved in the shaping of public opinion.

105

CDA also can be used to map out the discussion in the public sphere to assess content and the impact of the discourse. For traditional public schools, public opinion is a moderating force for political action. Elites, who are elected officials or those appointed by other elected officials, govern traditional public schools. They are dependent on public support for continued funding and acceptance of policy decisions.

Programs deemed unpopular can translate into diminished funding and/or a lack of voter support. Capturing sufficient voter commitment is becoming increasingly difficult. Voter support, along with citizen participation in the political process and civic activities in most democracies, has declined during the last 40 years (Patterson). The example provided in a previous chapter about the involvement of Cooper City residents and elected officials to defeat proposed boundary changes and keep residents in city centered schools reflects the fact that school board members often will acquiesce to public pressure to insure community support, even when it may create additional hardships elsewhere.

It is difficult to analyze discourse about the decision-making process for charter schools and/or the companies that manage them because of the privacy of the discourse that exists between parties. Management decisions by charter school executives rarely are covered by the media or monitored by the public with the same fervor as decisions made by traditional public school leaders. It is only when a charter school has significant financial or managerial problems that the media sheds a light on these issues.84 Instead, liberal and conservative media alike have covered, critiqued, and

84 Even though charter schools receive public funds, the media does not cover meetings between charter schools and their parents, somewhat of a double standard when it comes to monitoring the actions of private concerns using public funds. 106

praised charter schools and the opportunity for parents to have both “a choice” and “a change” in their child’s education.

Issue Evolution and Policy Metaphors

Issue Evolution

In 1986, Carmines and Stimson categorized the process of issue evolution, including the relationship between elite involvement and mass behavior (901). They suggest that most issues begin with policy debates among elected and appointed members of government with no notice by the public. After the issue moves to a larger stage, either through advocacy or promotion, elites become aware of it and begin to frame the issue in a way that benefits them. After the issue is framed, elite positions are transmitted to the masses and, hopefully, result in mass polarization and support for an issue. Carmines and Stimson suggest that partisan support and electoral mobilization can bring rapid change as new linkages are created and issues are clarified or redefined

(902).

According to our construct for democracy, social movement organizations

(SMO) and interest groups should not have a direct impact in the development of public policy or public opinion (Giugni and Passy 5). However, we know that this is not the case. In our system of government, elites and influencers are hard at work building an agenda that will result in action by government agencies and/or support.

Efforts to change public opinion about the role of government in education have been successful. The annual PDK-Gallup Poll on Education has been conducted since

1969. The poll measures what Americans think about their public schools. The 2011 poll revealed that while most Americans believe in the viability of the local public

107

school, a significant portion also believe in giving parents the right to choose where they enroll their child in school. In a survey of more than 1,000 Americans, Gallup found that more than 70% of the respondents have trust and confidence in public school teachers, an all time high, and 51% of those taking the survey would grade their local school as an A or B. Scores are even higher, 62%, for those under the age of 40.

Over the past 10 years, Gallup poll results have noted increasing support for charter schools and school choice in general, although voucher support is declining.

Support for charters is growing, from 60% in 2007 to 70% expressing backing in 2011.

Conversely, support for vouchers is declining. Almost half, 46%, of respondents expressed interest in vouchers in 2002. By 2011, the percentage of those surveyed in favor of vouchers had declined to 34%. Questions about choice addressed parents being able to choose a school for their child to attend. Questions about charters asked for opinions about schools that can be free from regulations and operate independently.

Voucher questions asked whether it is appropriate to allow children to attend a private school at public expense (“What Americans Said”).

Aggregate public opinion, as measured by surveys, is both a reflection of sentiment and response to external events. With more than 80% of all states legislatively supporting the creation of publicly funded charter schools, expressing support for charter schools could be both a reflection of common practice and/or of true sentiment. According to Benjamin Page and Robert Shapiro, public opinion may lead or follow development of public policy, sometimes both. Page and Shapiro caution that sometimes respondents provide answers they think they should give, regardless of how they actually feel about an issue (Kuklinski). However, responses and behavior do not

108

always coincide. For example, most voters say they are for gun reform, but few laws have been passed or approved that curtail our ability to own and use guns (Roig-

Franzia). Similarly, within public education, while parents say they want less add-ons to the school curriculum, support remains high for schools providing for social modeling through delivery of sex education, drug education, and anti-bullying activities among other instructional programs.

Policy Metaphors

In Policy Frames, Metaphorical Reasoning, and Support for Public Policies,

Richard Lau and Mark Schlesinger introduce the concept of “policy metaphors,” a method of cognitive framing that works through social institutions to form models or standards against which policy solutions are measured. Lau and Schlesinger suggest that considering how people communicate about social issues and how those collective perceptions are gathered and pooled is an important connection between establishing public opinion and developing public policy. They define a policy metaphor as the understanding and perceptions of the effectiveness of social institutions, based on personal experiences and culturally transmitted stories, images, and frames (narratives), which are translated by inference into metaphors (79).

When a new problem or issue is identified, proposed solutions are measured against these metaphors. Generally we rely on shared social institutions to receive information and develop judgments. This process allows policy metaphors to then become accessible to the public, which previously had little knowledge or interest in the issue (Lau and Schlesinger 79). Using policy metaphors to establish cognitive frames builds beliefs and opinions about general types of solutions. Cognitive frames help

109

shape public support (Lau and Schlesinger 105). Charter school advocates have used communication campaigns effectively to create policy metaphors and build cognitive frames first among the elite, and then the larger public. The goal of these campaigns is to alter the perceived social value of charter schools as an alternative delivery model for education from a low traction, vaguely defined issue to one with a higher profile that is more concretely framed as the issue of “choice.”

Creating a Public Agenda

From an historical perspective, public opinion campaigns are not new phenomena in the United States. During the early twentieth century, such campaigns helped move the public’s sentiment towards intervention in the European conflict that became World War I. The work of early public relations practitioners Edward Bernays and George Creel is well documented. President Woodrow Wilson established the

Committee on Public Information, also known as the Creel Committee, to develop strategies for shaping public opinion and building public support for U.S. involvement in the war.

Bernays coined a phrase for this process in 1947, calling the ability to shape and mobilize the public as the “engineering of public consent,” (Salmon, Post, and

Christensen 5). Bernays believed that the public fundamentally was irrational and could not be trusted. He believed that people could be influenced or persuaded to want things they did not need. Throughout his career, Bernays was highly successful at building a base of support for products and businesses that the American public had no knowledge of or use for prior to that time, including the fluoridation of drinking water, the use of hair nets in food preparation, and the acceptance of women smoking cigarettes in

110

public. Bernays applied to the masses the Freudian concepts and techniques developed for use with individuals. His success at positioning products and services as part of a lifestyle for consumers was the foundation for what eventually became the commodification of culture during the twentieth century.

Agenda building has been defined as the process used by media organizations to select, feature, or emphasize issues or events. In context of this theory, news coverage is not a reflection of reality but, instead, a manufactured product (Nisbet 1). Media tend to focus on issues and activities that perpetuate the status quo. Media agendas serve the purpose of maintaining the hegemony in society, and that agenda building helps create legitimacy for issues. Salmon, Post, and Christensen believe that groups that form around issues work to make them more attractive to gatekeepers, helping to increase prominence and salience in the media, courts, and legislatures (11).

Agenda building involves recognizing differences of opinion and policy options, the scarcity of resources, and the reinterpretation of information. Conflicts can be used to increase visibility and access to the issue. As more people are involved in issue discourse, the level of involvement increases from awareness to interest to commitment.

As intensity increases, so does visibility. Experts in agenda building have been able to use conflict and the exchange of ideas effectively to create a desired effect (Salmon,

Post, and Christensen 12).

Salmon, Post, and Christensen developed a model for agenda building that is comprised of five dimensions:

• Specificity and definition of the issue,

• Social significance - the number of people impacted,

111

• Temporal relevance - the length of time that the issue will have an impact,

• Complexity - how technical or complicated the issue is, and

• Precedence - whether the issue is new or old, with new issues attracting

more attention. (13)

Within the framework of both the agenda building and policy metaphor theoretical models, a continuum exists that moves issues from a narrow to broad span of awareness and, hopefully, acceptance. Cobb, Keith-Ross, and Ross have established a similar policy framework to the Salmon, Post, and Christensen one, using two terms, the formal agenda and the public agenda, to reflect the process of issue development.

The formal agenda consists of those issues that have been selected by decision and policy makers for consideration. The public agenda reflects issues that are subject to widespread attention, require action on the part of the public and are involved with some unit of government (127). The types of issues that would be included in a Cobb,

Keith-Ross, and Ross public agenda would change from culture to culture and from community to community. Every local community would have a public agenda, but if that agenda intersects with the public agenda from a larger political community and there is some overlap, the smaller agenda may yield to the larger one.85

Cobb, Keith-Ross, and Ross identify three different models of agenda building that can be used, with each serving a slightly different purpose based on the maturity of the issue. The first is the outside initiative model, which tracks issues surfacing through non-government groups and then expands to reach the public agenda and then the

85 This is a common occurrence in politics where the ultimate objective of passing legislation may generate some “strange bedfellows.”

112

formal agenda. The mobilization model involves issues that are developed inside of government and quickly move to the formal agenda and often the public agenda. The inside initiative model also comes through the government but does not move outward to the public arena. In this model, supporters use the existing base of support to exert pressure on the formal agenda. Often supporters of the inside initiative model do not want broad public awareness of an issue.

To develop support for charter schools, advocates came together in the late

1990s and, using the outside initiative model, shared their successes and failures. They learned from each other, sharing legislation templates, sample charter agreements, and even talking points with state-level activists to help achieve the objective of legalizing the establishment of charter schools in each state and the authorization of public funding. By harnessing this momentum, national organizations and venture capitalists created and funded think tanks dedicated to advocacy and policy change. Charter school management companies were also a by-product of this process. They took advantage of the financial resources provided by funders and the political know how offered by the national associations and policy strategists to expedite the agenda development process.

Today, the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, National Charter Schools

Institute, and the Center for Education Reform, among others, provide tips and tactics to organizing groups and new charter school companies. Today, 42 states have authorized the development of charter schools as a publicly funded alternative to traditional public schools.

Often, an issue is elevated in salience and importance among members of the public if it addresses a source of frustration or irritation for the public. Kay suggests that

113

public opinion influences public policy in two ways. First, public opinion impacts policy makers because of public dissatisfaction with the status quo. As dissatisfaction is expressed, support for the existing public policy position begins to shift. The second way in which public opinion influences development of public policy is the constraint of options due to a public lack of tolerance for some solutions. Policymakers, and especially elected officials, are hesitant to take unpopular positions (2).

In the case of education, critics have expressed general concerns about continued increases in public funding for education without having comparable levels of student achievement to justify it. Conservatives, interested in reducing the role of government in education, focused on this gap between spending and achievement to create a case against traditional public schools. They capitalized on a sense of frustration with prior legislative and judicial actions that resulted in disruption to the neighborhood school.

Those not in the groups benefitted by these changes were concerned that meeting the obligations established by these laws would take dilute resources.

Discussion moved from serving the public good (i.e., improving literacy, instilling a sense of citizenship, and preparing students for entry-level jobs) to the supporting private good (i.e., providing enrichment programs, a path to continuing education, and career opportunities).

The idea of privatizing education, which started with Friedman in the 1950s, gained traction during the Reagan administration, and included all the options of home schooling, vouchers, and charter schools, provided a frame in which the discourse could occur.

114

Agenda Setting and Framing

One of the ways that conservatives were able to build a base of support was by framing the issue in a way that could be conveyed easily through the media. Bernard

Cohen tells us that the media cannot tell us what to think, but can tell us what to think about. Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw suggested that the media’s real role is to create salience for a topic through prominent placement in the communication process

(Griffin 378-386). This Theory of Agenda Setting describes the process that the media use to position issues and establish national priorities. Walter Lippmann first articulated the idea of media influence in Public Opinion. In this 1922 classic, Lippmann suggested that the media is the primary source for the “pictures of the world that we carry in our heads,”86 and that what we know about the world—even in today’s global marketplace—is largely through the information we receive from the media

(McCombs).

Media outlets have a symbiotic relationship with their publics (readers or watchers). While they may bring forward issues that they feel require public awareness, they also focus on issues in which the public is interested. In a survey of 37,000 newspaper readers and non-readers in 100 newspaper markets, The Readership Institute at Northwestern University found that consumers wanted more coverage of education

(“Newspaper Content”).

National news organizations including the New York Times, NBC News, and the

Associated Press have spent considerable time praising the role that charter schools play within the public education arena. A positive or neutral headline can generate favorable

86 When defining public opinion, many communication theorists repeat Lippmann’s expression, “pictures of the world that we carry in our head.” 115

opinions. Headlines offer a snapshot of the issue, but may not convey the focus of the story accurately (Dor).

Weaver’s concept of framing builds on McCombs and Shaw’s work. Framing and agenda setting both address how information is conveyed using mass media.

Framing also looks at using a broad array of cognitive processes and establishing relevance to the individual. Erbring, Goldenberg, and Miller argue that there are selected issues that contain their own modulators that trigger an audience response and a level of salience on the part of the public. Education is one such issue. Because school attendance is mandatory, everyone goes to school and has an opinion about whether the experience is relevant to their place and success in life.

A community’s political agenda is not likely to be independent of those issues identified by political and interest group leaders and the media. However, specific audience characteristics (personal experiences, group perspectives, and real world conditions) have an important impact on the development of an agenda (Erbring,

Goldenberg, and Miller 18). Erbring, Goldenbberg, and Miller tell us that people tend to seek out information that they consider relevant to their welfare (28). Education is one of three issues that appeal to a broad spectrum of people in the community, along with crime and unemployment.

In addition to attending school as children, as adults we are impacted by the taxes we pay to fund education. A significant percentage of local, state, and federal budgets are used to fund education.87 Some communities even require residents to

87 State and local governments provide most education funding in the United States. For elementary and secondary education, federal spending of $68.3 billion for FY 2011 accounted for between 9% and 10% of total funding. In FY 2013, the State of Florida has allocated $17.2 billion of its approximately $70 billion budget to education, approximately 24.5% of the budget. 116

approve teacher raises at the ballot box.88 Erbing, Goldenberg, and Miller call this the audience effects model, suggesting that the media are able to capitalize on the audience’s pre-existing sensitivities to produce changes in public opinion (45).

Creating a constituency around an issue helps us to create a mental framework and perspective. Often the credibility of the constituency is transferred to the issue at hand. In Florida, former Governor Jeb Bush has used the credibility he acquired during his tenure in office to drive his supporters towards the idea of privatizing education through vouchers89 and charter schools. Governor Bush has come out loudly in favor of charter school education, serving as a founder of one charter school and funding others through his foundation.

The Components of Mobilizing Public Will

Framing an issue helps to create a recognizable pattern (Salmon, Post, and

Christensen 14), similar to “issue characteristics” in agenda building. Framing makes issues accessible for gatekeepers such as politicians and the media. It defines and encapsulates the narrative and parameters for the discourse and the arena in which development of public policy occurs. Framing influences consumer perceptions.

Salmon, Post, and Christensen have identified the facets of framing that mobilize public will; these include mass communication, a spiral of silence, social capital, and social marketing. They suggest that the process of mobilizing social will is not linear, but instead is a product of complex interrelated factors that ebb and flow (19).

88 In New Hampshire, local school districts must go to the voters for any increases to the education budget. This makes it very difficult to give employees raises or change programs without voter support. In Florida, the voters are only asked to approve changes to the state constitution. Currently, changes to the state constitution require a “super majority” support of 60%. 89 The Florida Supreme Court ruled the McKay Scholarship, the voucher program enacted during Bush’s term as governor, as unconstitutional. 117

Mass Communication

McCombs and Shaw discuss three types of agenda setting involving mass communication: the Public Agenda, the Policy Agenda, and the Media Agenda.

The Public Agenda describes the relationship between the media’s coverage of issues and the public’s perceptions of the importance of those issues. The public’s agenda usually is measured through opinion polls. A comparison of media coverage prior to the poll and the answers given by survey respondents helps to measure the media’s ability to set agendas for the public. Since 1968, more than 300 studies have been published that document the media’s influence on public opinion (McCombs 3).

Each year, the Gallup Organization conducts a poll about education for the education honorary, Phi Delta Kappa (PDK), and poll results are broadly publicized. Recent results indicate that support for charters continues to grow (“What Americans Said”).

The Policy Agenda is the relationship between media coverage and the agenda of political bodies responding to that exposure. Similar to the Public Agenda, media attention to an issue can have a dramatic effect on the Policy Agenda. A clear example of this is the shift that occurred when Cooper City residents objected to the boundary changes proposed for schools in their community. Although the school board generally supports staff’s recommendations for boundary changes, once city officials framed the discussion through the use of traditional and social media, the school board backed down and overturned staff recommendations to shift school boundaries. Similarly, when the Ben Gamala charter school wanted to expand its operation to a second location, the

Broward school board was hesitant to approve the request because of concerns about the school’s curriculum, which is focused heavily on teaching Hebrew. School board

118

members were concerned that the school had a religious versus cultural focus. However, as soon as the Ben Gamala Company started challenging this in public hearings, the board quickly approved the application.

The Media Agenda, a review of gate keeping, is the editorial process of defining and selecting issues that receive media coverage. Media agendas are set over a period of time and are contingent on the length of stories and the prominence given to these stories in the publication, usually on the front page (Nisbit). Bad news seems to consistently make the front page; we are fascinated and horrified by tragic events. This intellectual rubbernecking has unintended consequences. For example, the Dillard High

School community was saddled with a reputation as a crime-plagued school. This was due, in part, to media using the school as a geographic marker for any incident in proximity to the school.

There is growing evidence that public relations practitioners have an impact on the media’s agenda. A 1986 study of the connection between PR practices and news coverage revealed that 51% of news releases and handouts led to media produced stories.90 In addition, the study found a downward flow of salience, with national and prestigious regional media setting the agenda for smaller news organizations (Salmon,

Post, and Christensen 17). As referenced earlier, pro charter school organizations provide local charter schools with communication tool kits to help them establish positive messages.

Spiral of Silence

Tonnies argues that public opinion is a force that serves as a mechanism of

90 In the current era, it is estimated that the number is likely much higher with the severe cutbacks that all news organizations have faced. 119

social control. Noelle-Neumann suggests that mass media enhances this level of control by providing a view of our society that largely reflects a homogeneous body of thought, influencing those with minority or alternate opinions to remain silent (Salmon, Post, and

Christensen 18). Noelle-Neumann regards public opinion as a tangible force for keeping people in line (Griffin First Look (6th ed.), 408). She defines the Spiral of Silence

Theory as the increasing pressure that is felt when an individual believes his or her opinion is in the minority. Noel-Neumann suggests that people can sense the momentum of changing public opinion, but that it takes a lot of energy to determine which positions are becoming widely held and which are declining in popularity.

However, the energy required to monitor social trends seems to be worth it when compared to isolation. Noelle-Neumann argues “The effort spent in observing the environment is apparently a smaller price to pay than the risk of losing the goodwill of one’s fellow human beings - of becoming rejected, despised and alone” (Griffin First

Look (6th ed.), 409).

Noel-Neumann differs with Cohen, arguing that the media goes beyond agenda setting by providing an approved view of what everyone else is thinking or saying

(Griffin First Look (6th ed.), 409). She concurs with theorist Stuart Hall and his pessimistic view of the role that media plays in the democratic process. Hall sees media unification of support for an issue as the key question relating to power, and argues that the media maintains support for “hegemony,” a term associated with Italian activist and politician Antonio Gramsci who suggested that leaders maintain their dominance through subordination of others. Hall suggests that agenda setting is used to maintain

th the position of those already in power (Griffin First Look (6 ed.), 371, 372). Hall

120

argues that “democratic pluralism,” which suggests that society is held together by an accepted collection of norms, is a myth.

Hall sees himself not as a communication theorist but as a cultural theorist because he believes that the two cannot be disconnected. His work draws on the

Frankfurt School, an analysis of semiotics, and discussion of the work of Michel

Foucault (Griffin First Look (6th ed.), 372). While Frankfurt School theorists were the first to suggest that public discourse had been taken over by private interests, they were not the last. In addition to Hall, cultural critics Habermas and Gramsci and contemporary writers have weighed in on the relationship between the public sphere and private concerns.

Communication theorist and University of Colorado professor Stanley Deetz presents a critical communication theory that argues businesses are a dominant force in society and more powerful than the traditional institutions such as church, state, or family. He observed that the media’s preoccupation with business welfare makes

President George W. Bush’s equation of consumer spending with patriotism after the

9/11 tragedies as almost logical. Deetz argues that perpetuation of corporate dominance can occur through strategic word choice. He views communication as the ongoing production of meaning (Griffin First Look (8th ed.), 344-346). Like Hall, Deetz believes that power is inherent in all communication.

Hall argues that the media choose words and construct stories to have a deliberate effect on the listener/reader. Foucault believes that the framework used reflects the dominant discourse of the day (Griffin First Look (8th ed.), 347). He

121 suggests that the power structure of a society could alter or modify definitions of words to accommodate changing needs.

Charter school advocates have continued to focus on the word “choice” because of the perceived connection between choice and freedom (to choose). They have positioned “school choice” as an option to better and more abundant education opportunities, aligning the idea with the view that our nation is a country of rugged individualists, dedicated to the ideals of independence and liberty.91 This narrative for choice makes it hard to speak out and object to an idea that has been crafted to be perceived as so characteristically “American.”

Social Capital

Lyda Hanifan, Superintendent of Rural Schools in West Virginia provided the modern day definition of social capital in 1916. Hanifan believed that the school should create a sense of community for the families they served. He advocated for the cultivation of goodwill fellowship, sympathy, and exchange among community members and between those families and the school.92 Hanifan suggested that the creation of social capital would result in the ability of communities to use collective action to solve problems.

Coleman (1988) and Putnam (1993) suggest that social capital consists of those features of social organization, such as networks of secondary associations, high levels

91 This is the same strategy that has been used repeatedly in presidential campaigns. Successful candidates such as Teddy Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln both presented themselves as rugged individualists. Even more recent candidates, such as John McCain, capitalized on a persona as a survivor and patriot. 92 In rural communities, education often took second place to the importance of agriculture. Hanifan envisioned the school as a setting for the instruction of adults on everything from crop issues to literacy. He saw the school’s involvement in the community as a way to increase family support for the school. Over the years, schools have reduced their involvement in local community issues but many still serve as community centers. In Broward County, many schools quietly have established food pantries and clothing banks to serve the needs of families. 122

of interpersonal trust, and norms of mutual aid and reciprocity, which act as resources for individuals and facilitate collective action. Lin (31) defines social capital as an investment in social relations with an expected return in the market place. Informal networks, a form of social capital, can be viewed as a resource and as a means to influence public will. He argues that social capital is essential to changing public will

(Salmon, Post, and Christensen 20, 21).

Within the education community, non-profit organizations, school alumni associations, and education foundations have effectively created on-line communities and face-to-face gatherings dedicated to building support for elected leaders, adoption of public policy, and fundraising. Proponents of charter schools are able to tap into the network of social relationships in a community to undermine public schools and build support for privatization. Using earlier examples of the creation of support for choice in

Milwaukee and Cleveland, choice advocates were able to leverage the credibility of locally elected Black leaders to galvanize community support for the issue.

Social Marketing

Social marketing is the process of creating and executing programs that are designed to bring about social change, using generally accepted marketing practices.

Social marketing began as a discipline in the 1970s when Kotler and Zaltman realized that the same marketing principles that were being used to sell corn flakes could be used to sell ideas. Social marketing differs from other types of marketing only in the desired objective,93 with the ultimate objective of social marketing being to change or influence

93 The field of public relations also is based on the idea that the same practices should be used for each endeavor, regardless of the nature of the objective. The Public Relations Society of America (PRSA), the world’s largest organization for public relations practitioners with 22,000 professional members and 5,000 students, requires all members to adhere to the ethical standards and to the 123

behavior.

Social marketing has been used to achieve objectives that impact society at large. Social marketing can contribute to changes in public opinion and help adapt behaviors both at the individual and macro levels through use of communication channels at multiple levels and the establishment of communication and social networks

(Salmon, Post, and Christensen 37). While product marketing might be concerned with product placement into contemporary entertainment enterprises, such as the use of name-brand cars in popular shows, social marketing examples include the infusion of salient topics such as interracial dating or HIV/AIDS in the plot lines of television shows and movies. Social marketing is used effectively by government agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to create public acceptance of an idea and ultimately to influence policy makers (Gardner).

Charter school advocates have used social marketing successfully to influence policy makers. They have employed a structured and strategic planning process: building a political base for their agenda. Some charter school firms have developed strategic partnerships with community organizations such as churches within the community to help them with their advocacy efforts. Collecting endorsements from influential groups or creating advocacy groups to put forth ideas has a tremendous impact on policy makers. In some instances, charter school entrepreneurs have created

fundamental principals of good communication: transparency, accuracy, and effectiveness. The practice of public relations also is based on the idea that the same four-step process of research, planning, implementation, and evaluation (RPIE), which should be used for all communication, regardless of the nature of the project or the organization. 124

their own associations to offer talking points and promote ideas through letters to elected officials, articles in consumer publications, and op-ed pieces in newspapers.94

Social marketing practices also have been used to attract, recruit, and retain students. Charter school management companies are now big businesses. Nationally based corporations, such as Academica, Charter Schools USA, Excel, and K12 Inc., have effectively built a case for the continuous expansion of funding and programs for charter programs. In the last two years the Florida Legislature has approved additional funds for charters while decreasing the amount provided to traditional K12 systems.

Specifically, the 2011 Legislature reduced from 5% to 3% the amount of money a traditional school district can retain for providing management and oversight of charters. The 2012 Legislature is considering allocating capital funds for charter schools to be able to build or renovate facilities, while allocating none for traditional public schools.

The methods used by charter firms to argue their case are on par with the strategies and tactics used by any Fortune 500 company. The emphasis on “ choice,” as discussed earlier, has been a big impetus for attracting support from both sides of the political aisle. However, that is not the only rhetoric that has been employed to build support. One of the other ways that a constituency has been formed has been through the positioning of charter school enterprises as a viable business venture. Sophisticated

94 These practices are not new. Edward Bernays was well known for creating “advocacy” groups to help further the causes of his clients. Many of his clients’ concerns were health-related. To push or defend against pending legislation, he would create a doctor’s committee or related health association dedicated to putting the issues into the public agenda, publishing articles, providing media with studies, or creating events to promote awareness of various issues (Tye 1998).

125 communication plans have been developed, which include public polling and the development of communications materials based on public likes and dislikes.

Charter school advocates have built public policy agendas and significant corporate partnerships that are equal or better than the efforts of any other thriving

Florida industry sector, including automotive, marine, hospitality, and health care. On

February 16, 2012, the News Journal, a Wilmington, Delaware publication, reported that Bank of America is donating a 282,000 square foot building to support existing as well as fledgling charter schools (Dobo and Ruth)

In Florida, records show that Academica, one of the nation’s largest charter management companies, has more than 60 schools with annual revenue of $158 million, serving over 20,000 students in 38 counties. As landlords for these schools, the management company controls more than $115 million in real estate holdings, all exempt from property tax, while collecting about $19 million in lease payments, with some schools paying more than 20% of their revenue to the management company.

Academica’s owners have established themselves as friendly to elected officials:

Florida State Senator Anitere Flores has been hired to run the new college proposed by the company; State Representative Erik Fresen is married to a family member who serves as an executive in the firm; and another state Representative was hired to monitor

“quality control” for the firm at $5,000 per month. Since 2007, Academica’s owners have contributed more than $150,000 to legislative campaigns through their real estate firms, with an additional $75,000 donated by family members and $54,000 by school vendors. Academica is not unique. Other charter companies also have ties to elected officials (McGrory and Hiaasen “Bill Would Reveal”).

126

Table 13 demonstrates some of the ways that charter management companies and charter advocate groups have used traditional communication practices to mobilize public will in favor of charter schools, although charter school supporters argue that a presentation of the facts would convince the public to support the idea of providing families with options to enroll their children in charter schools. Charter school critics offer the counter argument that data suggests charter schools offer no new educational strategies or enrichment programs. In fact, charter students often go back to their home school to participate in after school programs. Critics suggest that without the use of the communication practices shown in the table, charter schools would not have created such a strong following.

127 Table 13

Mobilizing Good Will

MOBILIZING PUBLIC WILL

Component General Premise Charter School Advocates Mass Communication- Media coverage of issues and Promotion of PDK-Gallup poll Public Agenda the public’s perceptions, about growing public support for usually measured through charter schools. opinion polls. Mass Communication- The relationship between Challenging concerns in public Policy Agenda media coverage and the forums to create a broader platform agenda of political bodies for their agenda/arguments. responding to that exposure. Mass Communication- The editorial process of Providing charter schools with Media Agenda defining and selecting issues professional communication tools that receive media coverage. to help them effectively present Evidence suggests that public their information to/through the relations professionals have a media. significant impact on editorial content. Spiral of Silence Mass media provides a view “School choice” is positioned of our society that largely better, offering more abundant reflects a homogeneous body education opportunities and of thought, influencing others aligning the idea with the view that to remain silent. Businesses our nation is a country of rugged are a dominant force in individualists, dedicated to the society and more powerful ideals of independence and liberty. than the traditional institutions. Social Capital Cultivation of goodwill Non-profit organizations have fellowship, sympathy, and created on-line communities and exchange among community face-to-face gatherings dedicated to members used to problem building support for elected leaders, solve. adoption of public policy, and fundraising. Social Marketing The process of creating and Sophisticated communications executing programs that are plans have been developed that designed to bring about social include public polling as well as the change using generally development of communications accepted marketing practices. materials based on public likes and dislikes.

128 V. THE HISTORY OF SCHOOL CHOICE

“Every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and choice, is thought to aim at some good; and for this reason the good has rightly been declared to be that at which all things aim.” --- Aristotle (Nicomachean Ethics n.p.)

“It is our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities.” --- J. K. Rowling (333)

To understand why charters are so wildly popular, despite concrete data suggesting that they offer students and parents fewer academic opportunities, one has to understand the history of “choice” in education.

Government Expansion into Education

The effects of the Great Depression convinced Americans that greater involvement of their government was needed to get the country back on steady economic footing. In addition, as the country moved towards war, the size and scope of government expanded to meet growing military and political needs. By the end of the

1940s the cost of government had risen to 20% from 3% of the Gross Domestic Product

(GDP). Education was no exception. Although the federal government already was involved in guiding programs at the state and local level, additional legislation such as the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944 and court rulings such as Brown v. the

Board of Education (1954) had a strong imprint on education programs and funding. In

129 1965, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA),95 further standardized education services and entrenched government in the operation of public schools.

Not everyone has agreed that this was the best way to provide an education. In

1962, economist Milton Friedman published Capitalism and Freedom. He argued that while educating children promoted a strong society, he was critical of government involvement in the process (Privuznak 1). He believed that schools had become bureaucracies and that these organizations often had goals different than that of parents.

Vouchers as Public Policy

Friedman was concerned specifically about the ability of low-income families to access the best resources for their children. He advocated using a market system to meet the objectives of families. He proposed offering parents a voucher for the cost of one year of their child’s education, which they could apply to the tuition of any school of their choosing. This system would actively involve parents in the process of selecting the best education programs for their children.

Friedman’s suggestion evoked strong criticism. Unlike the 1925 Pierce v.

Society of Sisters decision, which held that parents could take children out of the public system and educate them in a private or parochial school at their own expense,

Friedman’s voucher idea would create a market economy in education, perhaps even moving money out of the public system and into the private programs. He cited public education as an example of the failure of socialism, with government experts subsuming the decision-making role of parents. In almost every case he believed that parental

95 Now known as “No Child Left Behind” or NCLB. 130

choice, with parents choosing the teachers and monitoring the schooling would result in a better model than a centrally planned program.

Initially, the idea of vouchers for low-income families had a strong appeal among liberals, especially when the proposal required participating schools to accept students without religious or racial bias (Privuznak 2). A federally funded pilot program was implemented in Alum Rock County, California. However, it was modified to accommodate issues surrounding teacher salaries and parochial programs. In 1976, federal funding ceased and so did the program. An evaluation by the RAND

Corporation found results to be mediocre at best in meeting objectives (Privuznak 2).

Interest in vouchers diminished until Ronald Reagan took office in the 1980s.

Twenty-five years after his first essay, Friedman wrote another essay on the subject that was well received by President Reagan. The central theme of his treatise was “freedom to choose.” Friedman outlined what was becoming a large gap in resources between suburban and urban schools.

Reagan saw an alignment between his free market philosophy and school choice.96 Although Reagan liked Friedman’s central argument, he unsuccessfully focused his efforts on eliminating the Department of Education. He eventually formulated legislation that addressed school choice, but it failed to receive support in

Congress.

Poor families, who Friedman argued would benefit most from the ability to choose through a voucher system, stood firm against the elimination of the public

96 Reagan was under pressure to do something to bolster education in the United States after his U.S. Secretary of Education, Terrence Bell, brought forth a report “A Nation At Risk,” which demonstrated that American students had fallen behind their Western peers in critical areas such as science and math. 131

school system, which they closely associated with other social services they felt were sorely in the welfare state (Viteritti, Walberg, and Wolf 139). The market concept was an abstract idea for these people. For the wealthy, whose children could access private schools easily, the idea gained little traction either. Since the market responds to people with money and the people with money were not interested in this idea yet, the idea languished.

Private Schools as Public Policy

In the 1980s, Coleman, Hoffer, and Kilgore published a study demonstrating that private schools outperformed public schools. Chubb and Moe repeated the study in

1990, using Friedman’s market model. Chubb and Moe argued that poor public school performance was the result of the need for schools to conform to political pressures.

They suggested that private schools outperformed public schools because they were responsive to parent and student needs and not subject to public scrutiny (Privuznak 3).

The book received a positive reception among those advocating that more resources be given to minority and low-income families to provide greater access to scholastic opportunities and to improve the inadequate delivery of services in poor neighborhoods.97 This argument revived the voucher and school choice debate.

Originally designed as a way to offer low-income families greater access to education resources, charter schools offered middle-income families a way to address other nagging problems such as school boundaries, class size and racial disparity.

97 Since property tax rolls provide funding for public schools, and low-income neighborhoods have lower tax revenues, school districts serving these areas often are challenged to provide adequate resources. 132 Charter Schools as Public Policy

During the 1990s several states passed legislation authorizing charter schools.

President George H. W. Bush praised the idea, but it also had many critics. Some attacked the idea of choice schools as a way to escape desegregation. Some criticized broad scale choice as a tool to empty out the public schools. Chubb and Moe argued that “one of the problems the market could fix was that of democracy; in their minds, the democratic process allowed educational policy to be captured by organized interests bent on protecting the status quo” (Viteritti, Walberg, and Wolf 140-141). Challenging what was still a cherished institution (public schools) and combining it with disparaging remarks about democracy resulted in tremendous animosity towards the idea. Other researchers, including Schneider and Buckley and O’Reilly and Bosetti, point out the obvious, that private schools had a self-selected population, often with higher achievement goals in the first place.

As part of his 1992 re-election campaign, President Bush suggested that Choice

Scholarships of $1,000 be offered to 2,000 low and middle income families to assist with educational expenses at public, private, and religious schools. Bush was not re- elected and the idea of choice and vouchers continued to build opposition. In an attempt to reach out to Democratic minority voters, Senator Bob Dole, running against Bill

Clinton in 1996, promoted the voucher idea again, citing a $2.5 billion annual fund for poor families. School choice still was an idea with a lot of baggage. Two states rejected referendums on the topic in 2000, but in the Midwest changes were underway.

133 State Legislation

The nation’s first voucher law was passed in 1990 in Wisconsin to benefit the poor families in Milwaukee. This new effort included better verbal and non-verbal messaging than either of the previous attempts. First, the effort was lead by a coalition of African American community leaders, Annette “Polly” Williams, an African

American assemblywoman, Howard Fuller, a Black Democrat, and former superintendent of Milwaukee’s schools, who all represented the people who could benefit from the change.

Then, in 1995, Cleveland followed suit, aided by leadership from Fannie Lewis, a Black city council member from Cleveland. Cleveland’s Mayor Michael White and

Milwaukee’s Mayor John Norquist, both Democrats, also endorsed the respective plans.

The 1990 and 1995 campaigns was successful in part because organizers avoided using the term “vouchers” in any of their messaging. Instead, the campaign focused on the idea of equality for poor children.

Charter school legislation quickly followed vouchers and was approved in 1991 in Wisconsin and 1997 in Ohio. The Milwaukee and Cleveland experiences were symbolic of changes that can occur when the discourse is modified to appeal to the interests of the audience. To illustrate how much these two elements achieved broad community acceptance, when the issue of charter schools came up again in the 2004

Milwaukee mayoral race, the two Democratic contenders both argued that the plan should be expanded.

134 Charters as Empowerment

By the late twentieth century, the civil rights movement, which began with a sense of promise for minority parents, carried a lot of disappointment for failing to deliver equity in education or in employment. Proponents of the voucher systems capitalized on this. Instead of using Friedman’s favored term, “the free market,” embraced by economic conservatives, this group capitalized on the idea of “choice,” which was appealing to a nation that perceives itself as independent thinkers. Advocates used “choice” as a form of political empowerment (Viteritti, Walberg, and Wolf 142).

Choice was consistent with the ideas posited by liberals involving the redistribution of resources and the restructuring of the public agenda. Conservatives also joined the movement because they understood that “choice” would allow minority and low-income families to use public funds to purchase private goods. Since middle- income families already enjoyed educational choice as a function of family income that allowed them to choose between public and private school options, allowing disadvantaged families the same opportunity cast school choice as a moral issue as well as one of equality (Viteritti, Walberg, and Wolf 143).

Wisconsin and Ohio were not the only states involved in reforming public education. In 1991, Minnesota was the first state to pass a charter school law. This was six years after Minnesota’s approval of a choice attendance policy plan for traditional public schools in 1985, which allowed students to attend schools outside of their district on a space available basis. Initially charter legislation seemed less controversial to policy makers because education funding at a state level remained the same; the only change was which public schools received the funding. However, as charter school

135

legislation increased in popularity across the country, the impact on existing public school districts became evident. Today, charter schools have the lion’s share of redirected funds. In 2005, 40,000 students were eligible to receive vouchers while

750,000 were enrolled in charter schools (Viteritti, Walberg, and Wolf 143).

States that passed charter school legislation followed the same course of

Wisconsin and Ohio, building broad based, bi-partisan coalitions. Hispanics joined the movement in Florida, which, as in other states, was also heavily supported by the

African-American community. The grassroots support was critical because teachers’ unions initially opposed charter school legislation.98

In the 1970s and early 1980s school choice was little more than the wishful thinking of a few select civil libertarians who believed that the state monopoly on education was robbing American families of their right to make the best possible choices for their children. The ethic of supporting the neighborhood public school was a time honored tradition and a core value in our collective consciousness. For most of us, the juxtaposition of personal liberty and collective effort did not seem to be in conflict.

Public schools existed to create a common culture, and private and parochial schools offered an alternative, if one was desired. Generally, our system of public education seemed to be working fairly well for most folks, and criticism focused on gaps in the curriculum and/or teacher training (Cookson 1).

By the end of the 1980s, school choice was the hottest reform idea in education.

Today, school choice is a crusade for those who believe that without educational liberty

98 Today, teachers unions do not oppose the establishment of charter schools. They often establish active bargaining units in bigger systems, such as the charter system in the City of Pembroke Pines, located in southwest Broward County. 136

there can be no educational justice or innovation (Cookson 1). On the surface, discussion centers around giving parents options that can better serve their needs; however, the debate has deeper underpinnings that are anchored in a political and moral context.

Charters Gain Presidential Support

While every U.S. president since George H. W. Bush has publically supported charter schools, only President Bush and his son George W. Bush supported vouchers.

Democratic presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama have gone on record opposing vouchers because “they are bad for public schools.” With mounting concern about the ability of America’s public schools to develop students who are academically competitive in a global arena, every president in the last 20+ years has supported charter schools as a way for low-income parents to receive the same “choices” other parents have. This belief was codified into federal law with the reauthorization of the

Elementary and Secondary Education Act in 2001, known as NCLB. The law allows parents to withdraw their children from failing schools and choose other schools that they can attend.99 In the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections, while none of the

Democratic candidates supported vouchers, every one supported charter schools.

Most parents would prefer to have good neighborhood schools. The country’s practice of busing for desegregation has had a devastating effect on minority

99 The method used for evaluating schools under NCLB has been quite controversial. A school that is rated “A” by the state can be considered failing under federal standards. Despite a negative evaluation, many parents maintain their child’s enrollment in a school with a failing grade because they believe supporting the school is equivalent to supporting the child. 137

communities.100 Charter laws were readily accepted because in most cases, charter programs offered a way to receive a public school education at a location of the family’s choice.

Business Opportunities

Parallel with growing appeal to parents, the business community saw a market for charter school management. Initially perceived as solely a non-profit enterprise, charter schools quickly attracted the interest of professional for-profit management companies that determined that a profit could be made from these ventures.

Throughout the evolution of the choice movement, debate continued about how to bolster America’s failing schools. Using Friedman’s arguments as the foundation, conservatives saw charter schools as the opportunity to restructure education, reducing government involvement in the delivery of services. Advocates for charter schools began a thoughtful effort to broaden the appeal of charter schools to a broader segment of society.

Refining Public Perception

Media coverage in the first 10 years of the charter school movement was sparse.

From the mid 1980s through the mid 1990s, most of the news stories on charter schools reported on efforts to approve legislation that would provide funding for charter schools. Twenty-five years later, news organizations report on charter schools on a regular, almost daily, basis. Stories range from a failed legislative proposal effort to enhance charter resources by providing access to school construction funds to the

100 Busing policies destroyed the idea of the neighborhood school in Broward County’s minority neighborhoods. To achieve court ordered desegregation goals, children as young as 5 years of age were bused to predominantly White schools. 138

expansion of programs, beyond the scope of traditional public schools, which can be offered.

Charter school management represents big business opportunities. With education receiving a lion’s share of the public funding in Florida, shifting of funds away from the traditional public school districts and into schools controlled by self appointed organizers creates a new playing field in many ways. For example, one 2012

Florida legislative proposal would have allowed charter schools to establish high school athletic leagues separate from those currently serving public, private, and charter programs. The idea was scrapped for lack of initial support. However, the stage was set to continue debate in the future. Typically, the legislative cycle involves bringing an idea forward one year while securing ample media coverage, following up with key constituencies, and forging alliances throughout the year. Debate resumes during the next legislative session the following year, often meeting with success.

Changing Tides

In School Choice: The Struggle for the Soul of American Education, sociologist

Peter Cookson writes, “The context is about school improvement, but the subtest is about values, identity and freedom. Undoubtedly, school choice has become infused with emotion because it is an educational reform that goes directly to the heart of an

American dilemma. Thus it is not surprising that school choice has become a kind of

Rorschach test into which people read their own feelings about the relationship between school and society” (1-2).

Cookson believes that in addition to the political dilemma there is also an intellectual crisis facing education. He suggests that our materialistic culture is one that

139

focuses more on creating consumers than developing the intellectual capacity of our children. “We are living in society in which spiritual and moral purpose seems like an educational policy-making by a rising tide of conservatism that swept up from the

Southwest, where free enterprise and antigovernment sentiments dominated public discourse” (3-4).

Frank suggests that the conservative movement, which he called “The

Backlash,” was first evidenced in the heartlands, where the poor felt as though they were overlooked by the middle class. Frank describes the movement as a response to the partying and protests of the late 1960s. Proponents were able to harness anger against the Cultural Revolution to achieve economic objectives. They mobilized voters to rally against everything from school busing to contemporary artwork, and then married this momentum to pro-business economic policies.

The Cultural Revolution mantra of “do your own thing” transitioned into a standard of ambition and acquisition, as moral codes of saving money for the future and adhering to family values gave way for consumption and personal fulfillment. In 1979,

Christopher Lasch coined the phrase, “the culture of narcissism,” a phenomenon he described as an obsession with self-realization and self-fulfillment. The exodus of the middle and upper middle class from the public sphere enabled this self-involved culture.

Beginning in the 1970s, the popularity of suburbs allowed those with means to be cut off from the larger community. Shopping replaced town squares as the most common place for gathering (Cookson 10).

140 Me vs. We

Rhetorician Richard Weaver predicted the decline of Western society following

World War II. He pointed to indicators such as high divorce rates, dehumanizing effects of technology, and the destruction of civil communities (Foss, Foss, and Trapp 179).

Surveys conducted by the Roper Organization illustrate our diminished interest in community affairs. According to one Roper survey, the number of Americans who attended a public meeting on town or school affairs declined from 22% in 1973 to 13% in 1993 (Putnam “Social Capital,” 5-6).

Despite increasing levels of education, measures of individual participation in community affairs declined by 1 million citizens each year from the mid 1980s to the mid 1990s. Putnam (“Bowling Alone: America”) suggests that declining PTA membership is one of the strongest indicators of a decline in social capital. During the last decade, parent involvement has declined in public schools. A review of National

PTA’s annual reports reveals that membership dues from local members decreased by more than 10% between 2007 and 2010, reflecting a decrease in membership by that same amount.

As we disengaged from politics and civic affairs, our trust in government also declined. After 1960, involvement of the federal government had increased significantly. It impacted every element of our community. Despite an expansion in the number of programs and the benefits they provided, governments in general were losing legitimacy in the eyes of public (Mathews Reclaiming, 31). The percentage of survey respondents who said they only trust their government some of the time rose from 30% in 1966 to 75% in 1992. While scandals such as Watergate, Vietnam, Iran, the Contras,

141

etc., understandably may have contributed to frustrations and lack of trust in government, support for other institutions in society, such as church membership and attendance, also is declining. Membership in organized labor also is on the downswing.

This is due in part because many of the formerly unionized jobs have moved overseas.

However, with a troubled economy those employed in remaining union shops may not be able to afford union dues, or may not feel that their union can deliver sufficient benefits. Rothstein and Stolle argue that generalized trust is important because it reduces our uncertainty about the future (3).

During the school reform movements of the 1980s and 1990s, many of the initiatives gave only lip service to citizen involvement (Mathews Reclaiming, 31).

Reform efforts were based on the idea that improvements would come largely from school administrators who were supported by business and civic leaders. However, these reforms failed. Only later, did reformers recognize that their failure was due, in part, to a lack of community buy-in that comes with the opportunity to get involved in the process and give input (Mathews Reclaiming, 35). A study by Public Agenda found that differences in goals among the key drivers in these reform movements limited their ability to come to consensus on what should be done. Turf battles occurred and adversarial tactics were used. Failures disillusioned these communities. Many of the individuals became inattentive to education issues, dropped out of the conversation, or felt they had been shut out. Those parents who remained involved were concerned about advances for their child, not the community as a whole (Mathews Reclaiming).

142 The Decline of Social Capital

Putnam suggests that as we have disengaged further from civic affairs, we also have limited our involvement in personal or social activities as well. He sees this as a decline in social capital, the synergy that is derived from interaction between the individual and other individuals or between the individual and groups in his or her community. The General Social Survey (GSS), administered by the National Opinion

Research Center every year since 1972, measures, among other things, how often we socialize with neighbors and friends. This, too, is declining. Cumulative data from

1972-2006 suggests that 42.1% of those surveyed spend an evening with friends once a month, only 35.2% report spending an evening with neighbors more than once a month, and 26.8% indicated they never spend time with their neighbors (Putnam “Social

Capital,” 5-6).

Putnam suggests that one of the reasons for this decline in participation in the public sphere is a lack of trust. The percentage of Americans who believe that people can be trusted fell dramatically from 58% in 1976 to 37% in 1993. This is true across all demographic strata. There is also a strong correlation between trust and civic engagement. Although the bulk of Putnam’s work was initiated in the early 1990s before the explosion of the Internet and the development of social media, it is clear that our ability to connect with one another in group and team forms has not improved as a function of greater access to communication.

The Backlash Movement

Frank argues that the Backlash movement, through privatization, deregulation, and de-unionization, is what made the movement towards an international free-market

143

mindset possible (5). Backlash leaders accomplished this by downplaying the politics of economics and promoting the cultural controversies as public concerns. “Backlash leaders may talk Christ, but they walk corporate. Values may ‘matter most’ to voters, but they always take a backseat to the needs of money once the elections are won” (6).

In addition to their campaign against a perceived cultural and moral abyss,

Backlash leaders also promoted a loss of faith in public institutions, which often were portrayed as expensive, self-perpetuating, and incompetent. Conservatives argued that social welfare policies actually created more problems than they solved. Cookson offers as evidence the fact that few people chose to vote in local, state, and national elections between the 1970s and the 1990s (4).

The Vanishing Voter Project, funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts, reviewed voter behavior in the 2000 national election. In the study, Patterson offered reasons why voter participation has declined. He reminisced that elections used to be a time of activity and wonder. Parents voted and children wore their campaign buttons proudly to school. Summer nights were spent watching national conventions:

Since 1960, the United States has had its longest sustained period of

decline in election participation including but not limited to the vote.

Elections were once bottom-up affairs that thrived on the interest

and effort of ordinary folks. Today’s elections are unmistakable top-

down affairs, conducted in ways that suit candidates, pundits and

journalists. The gap between the practitioner and the citizen has never

been greater. (ix, x)

144 Declining Engagement, Increasing Privatization

The loss of faith in public institutions and the democratic groups that supported them created an opportunity to move public opinion away from social metaphors of collaboration, cooperation, and community and towards economic metaphors of individual interest and competition. The movement is strongly aligned with American ideals of individualism, autonomy and competition (Cookson 9).

Without the ascendency of Ronald Reagan into the White House, school choice as a movement for education reform would never have reached the national stage.

Reagan and his supporters legitimized the conservative movement and its companion political philosophy (Cookson 6,7). By the early 1990s privatizing public education had become credible in the eyes of policy makers (Cookson 5). School choice advocates believe in market competition and argue that if we are to prepare children to be globally and economically competitive, we must redesign public education from the ground up

(Cookson 5).

The Diversity of Choice Supporters

Today, the school choice movement includes groups and individuals who have little in common except a distrust of the current public education system. The movement includes evangelicals, alternative public school advocates, free market thinkers, civil rights advocates, civil libertarians, some Catholic educators, and even some maverick school superintendents with a desire to transform the current system into one that is answerable to consumers. This group argues that in a world where choice is an essential element of “the good life,” the idea of children being required to attend a designed public school is antiquated.

145

Political orientations within the movement are mixed. Choice advocates from the left favor the most common model, public school choice, while advocates from the right are more supportive of private school vouchers (Cookson 6). Supporters of school choice understand the importance of building momentum. While the advocates of traditional public schools emphasize the importance of virtue and doing the right thing, choice supporters are working the movement like a finely tuned military operation. In the minds of backlash leaders, we are in a constant state of civil war. On their side are millions of authentic Americans; on the other side are the powerful liberals who run the country but who are not attuned to the beliefs of its people. Newt Gingrich once described Democrats as “the enemy of normal Americans” (Frank 13).

Multiple resources have been accessed or created to further the goals of the choice movement. Foundations such as the one established by the Koch Brothers have funneled millions of dollars into political races at the highest level, in the hope of influencing policy development and decision-making. Think tanks such as the Hoover

Institute, the Cato Institute, and American Enterprise are helping conservative pundits stay in business by supporting their publications and promoting their books. Grassroots organizers are going door-to-door and working with other grassroots organizations to promulgate the ideology of the movement. Grassroots efforts address another fundamental need of the movement; through their communication vehicles and those of partner organizations, they speak to their supporters constantly, which their opposition does not (Frank 247, 248).

Hofstadter suggests that the movement is not an example of a political pendulum, but reflective of the founding fathers, whom he categorizes as the first in a

146

series of opportunists who played a dual role in America’s ideological conflicts, promoting business interests while at the same time rhetorically denouncing then in the name of grassroots democracy (10-11, 18).

He added:

Later generations, finding certain broad resemblances between their own

problems and those of an earlier age, will implicitly take sides with the

campaigners of former years, historians, who can hardly be free of

partisanship, reconstruct the original conflict from the surviving ideas

that seem most intelligible in the light of current experience and current

conviction. Hence the issues of the twentieth century are still debated in

the language of Jefferson’s time, and our histories of the Jefferson era

are likewise influenced by twentieth-century preconceptions that both

Jefferson and his opponents might have found strange. While the

conflicts of Jefferson’s day are constantly reactivated and thus constantly

brought to mind, the commonly shared convictions are neglected.101

(xvii-xviii)

Cookson believes that we are in the midst of a cultural transition. He argues that the consensus that united public opinion since the Great Depression has evaporated.

One of the elements of public sentiment that has eroded is the belief that public schools are the foundation of democracy.

At the same time that the base of support for choice expanded, the country underwent a transformation in the currency of education. A high school degree, which

101 This is actually a quote from the original 1948 text presented by Christopher Lasch in the Foreward added in 1973. Both are included in the 1989 edition used for this paper. 147

was once a guaranty of employment, is no longer a passport to a job. A college degree, once a sure fire path to employment, barely opens the door. Coupled with the loss of social power provided by education, the current credit crunch has had a negative impact on the value of diplomas. There are close ties between economic conditions and what is considered to be an adequate education. Cookson suggests that in a highly mobile, service-oriented economy, it is no wonder that the neighborhood school has lost its appeal (9).

Summarizing the Discussion

During the past 30 years, events occurring throughout the country resulted in charter schools gaining traction. The political and philosophical shift within the population could not have occurred if America’s schools had been perceptive enough to understand this evolution of sentiment. The Kettering Foundation has dedicated 15 years to studying this issue. Both in Is There A Public for Public Schools? and in the

2003 addendum, Reclaiming Public Education by Reclaiming Our Democracy,

Foundation President David Mathews laments the gap in understanding between educators and the citizenry (Reclaiming, iv- v).

Insight among charter school advocates enabled them to capitalize on these changes by appealing to state and national legislators with promises of streamlining bureaucracy and decreasing inefficiency, and by building a base of support among voters through discussions about regaining control of their children’s education and providing them with more choices on where and when that education could be provided.

With more than 80% of the country’s states approving laws to allow “choice,” it is clear that charter schools are here to stay. These are changes that will have broad impact, well

148

beyond education. Mathews is certain of one thing: “Whatever happens to public education will certainly affect America’s ongoing experiment in self-rule” (Reclaiming, viii).

With the exception of grant dollars and federal entitlements such as Title I, every dollar in the budget of a publically funded school is a function of student enrollment. Students drive the funding a school receives. Charter schools have successfully developed and executed marketing programs geared to capture enrollment.

However, Schneider and Buckley (2003) and O’Reilly and Bosetti (1998) suggest that gravitation to charters may be a move away from traditional public schools, rather than a move towards something special. How did it get to this point? The question should be asked as to how charter school proponents were able to create a preferential business environment. The next chapter will offer a discussion of communication theory to illustrate how public opinion and market conditions were refined.

149 VI. THE BATTLE OF SCHOOL REFORM

“The debate over whether charter schools are ‘better’ than regular public schools will never dissipate. But going from zero schools and zero students to a size that rivals the enrollment in the mammoth Los Angeles Unified School District, in just 11 years, is something unheard of in public education. Graded on a curve of previous education reforms, charter schools are already an unqualified success.” --- Michael Antonucci (n.p.)

Education: Why Change?

When the first volley in the battle for school reform shot across the bow of the good ship “traditional education,” educators basically shrugged their shoulders at what they thought was simply another political trend. Who could blame them for thinking this was only another item on the conservative agenda that would be dismantled when liberals regained legislative control? Other efforts to dismantle the traditional public system, such as the state’s voucher system, already had been thrown out by the courts because it was deemed unconstitutional (Leary and Matus).

In the beginning, Broward County educators thought it was sufficient to offer a quality program to students. Several schools throughout the county were overcrowded and the small drain in enrollment seemed like a positive opportunity to go back to smaller classes in the traditional public school. However, as increasing numbers of charter school applications were filed and approved, increasing charter school enrollment started to impact the enrollment of specific traditional public schools and on the district overall (Harrison). As charter school popularity continues to grow, with

150 supporters on both sides of the aisle, educators continue to rethink the role that charter schools and traditional schools will play in education. Location and program flexibility of charter schools has generated high level of interest in the public. Charter schools are a reality in more than four-fifths of the country. In addition, legislation at the state level continues to favor charter schools.102

Parallel Experiences

Education is not the first industry to lose market share because of a misunderstanding of the interest of its public. Other industries have had similar experiences. Had traditional public school supporters looked at their situation from an analytical perspective, they may have understood what was happening as or before it occurred. Instead they now are trying to recapture their position as the primary and most effective provider of service. The experiences of the railroads, established media, and healthcare, all of which faced a similar situation, can provide some insight into the path that traditional public school advocates might take.

Railroads

The rail lines falsely believed that customers were wedded to the railroad industry, when in fact what customers wanted was a convenient transportation system.

Train schedules, set for the convenience of the railroads, took second place to trucking schedules that got goods to their destination point on the customer’s timeline.

In Marketing Myopia, Theodore Levitt suggests that the railroads neglected to ask themselves about the nature of their business. Levitt argues that railroad executives

102 See previous notes about successful legislative efforts to decrease the maximum percentage of funds withheld by traditional public schools, and current efforts to increase charter school access to capital improvement funds. 151

mistakenly believed that the growth forecast for personal and freight transportation would be enough to maintain their success. They saw themselves as delivering a product, and failed to consider the needs of the customer. Ultimately, customer needs and a high demand for service led to the development of alternative modes for personal travel and shipping, to which the market gravitated.

Established Media

Media consumption went through changes in both the entertainment and news and information side. As television became fairly common in American homes, movie studios lost their position as the source of serial storytelling entertainment. The “studio system” underwent major reorganization to become competitive with the growing television industry. Similarly, television later was forced to revise its programming standards to compete with the broad array of offerings available first through cable television, and then with the popularity of the home entertainment industry. In addition, established news organizations have developed interactive, 24/7, on-line formats to counteract the populist nature of citizen journalism on the Internet (Grabowicz).

Healthcare

Healthcare moved from a doctor-centered profession to a managed care, market- driven industry. Competition to lock in revenue has changed the business side of healthcare. Insurance providers now determine what services will be funded and at what rate. Moreover, many medical practices are now owned by larger healthcare concerns such as hospitals (Elliott).

Outcomes

The challenges faced by these industries and the subsequent changes that

152 occurred can provide insight for those who believe that traditional public schools offer the best educational experience for our children. Each of these industries is service based, and each believed they were a “sole source” for that service. Ultimately, business technology created other options for accomplishing the same objective. These new methods were more attuned to customer interests and provided greater benefits. When reflecting on the transitions that occurred in these other industries, one might ask: What will happen to our traditional public schools? Can they rebuild their position in the public sphere, or has the role of the traditional public school changed for good?

Opinions expressed in the annual Gallup-Phi Delta Kappa (“What Americans

Said”) Poll on Education during the last 10 years reflect growing support for choice in school attendance. Now that parents have experienced the convenience of enrolling their child at a school near their workplace, it is difficult to conceive of the public willingly giving up the opportunity to choose convenience over convention.103

Levitt presents four myths that risk obsolescence if they are accepted as truth:

• An ever-expanding and more affluent population will ensure our growth,

• There is no competitive substitute for our industry’s major product,

• We can protect ourselves through mass production, and

• Technical research and development will ensure our growth. (3)

Table 14 uses Levitt’s myths to demonstrate the education-think mentality present when charter schools were established in Broward County.

103 In other communities where there are generations of family members who attended a specific school, a legacy exists. In south Florida, the high transience rate resulted in few families or communities developing a sense of allegiance to a particular neighborhood school. 153 Table 14

Adaptation of Common Myths for Failure Model to Education

ADAPTATION OF COMMON MYTHS FOR FAILURE MODEL TO EDUCATION

Myth Explanation Education Myth Outcome 1. An ever- When markets are expanding, 1. Student As the population expanding and we often assume we do not enrollment in grew, schools more affluent have to think imaginatively traditional public became over population will about our businesses. Instead, schools will crowded. Parents ensure our we seek to outdo rivals parallel the started to look for growth. simply by improving on what population and more student- we are already doing. The continue to grow. centered options. consequence: We increase the efficiency of making our products, rather than boosting the value those products deliver to customers. 2. There is no Believing that our products 2. There is no Convenient competitive have no rivals makes our substitute for the locations and substitute for companies vulnerable to neighborhood flexible hours, our industry’s dramatic innovations from public school. coupled with major product. outside our industries—often strong outreach by smaller, newer companies efforts to recruit that are focusing on customer and retain students needs rather than the made charter products themselves. schools popular. 3. We can Few of us can resist the 3. All students can High stakes, protect prospect of the increased benefit from standardized ourselves profits that come with steeply standard testing does not through mass declining unit costs. But instructional provide room for production. focusing on mass production content. innovation. emphasizes our company’s needs—when we should be emphasizing our customers. 4. Technical When R&D produces 4. The number of Focus is placed on research and breakthrough products, we students passing student development may be tempted to organize high stakes testing achievement in will ensure our our companies around the is a measure of testing because of growth. technology rather than the success. financial consumer. Instead, we should incentives remain focused on satisfying awarded. customer needs. Source: Based on Levitt, 2004.

154 Taking Action

With the increasing decline in traditional public school enrollment, attitudes among the district’s leadership began to change. Publicly, school enrollment numbers, previously stated as the head count in traditional public schools, now included the category “charter school enrollment” in population counts. This was done as a public relations strategy to reflect a stable overall enrollment in Broward County.

At the same time that the district was trying to dispel the perception that overall enrollment was declining and people were leaving the community, the superintendent started speaking frankly to principals about the loss of market share. In 2009, an internal project was initiated to identify a way to keep enrollment from shifting.104 Appendix E and Appendix F provide an overview of that project.

Principals were urged to strongly pursue marketing opportunities and develop outreach programs to expose parents to the benefits of the local neighborhood school.

Schools were allowed to repackage their required curriculum, reformatting required courses into instructional themes such as science or international studies. These programs, offered only to in-boundary students, gave the school a new and innovative feel. The Magnet Programs office developed themes based on high skill, high demand jobs.

In 2009-2010, the district received a small federal grant to assist six middle schools developing a new STEM themed program for the following year. A marketing plan, including specialized marketing tools, a timeline, and on-site assistance, was developed for these schools. The plan included holding events for parents and for

104 This assignment was the basis for considering this issue as a topic for a dissertation. 155

students and developing strategic partnerships with local organizations to market the school. Schools were required to organize a high impact open house event for parents of

Grade 5 students. The marketing involved in promotion of the open house included sending flyers home with students (Appendix G), mailing invitations to every home, and calling every household with a reminder, as well as following up with those who attended the open house event. Articulation field trips also were scheduled so that the fifth graders could see what the program would include. These field trips typically were held before the open house so that students could encourage their parents to attend the event.

Strategic partnerships with local businesses and city officials also were developed to expand the visibility of the marketing materials. Additional businesses connected to the program content were recruited to serve as academic partners, assisting teachers by providing industry specific experiences for students. All of these programs also were promoted as a value-added feature of the STEM middle school program.

A Case Study

One school, Silver Lakes Middle School, faced typical challenges. The school serves a lower middle-income, working class community. When trying to rebuild their enrollment, which was down by more than 200 students, Silver Lakes administrators encountered several problems, some which were created by other departments in the school district, and some which were the result of actions by community partners.

Children whose parents work two jobs often get to school or to the school bus stop early so that parents can get to work on time. The district’s own transportation program had established bus stops for high school students and charter schools right in

156

front of the middle school, and, for the most part, refused to move them. This resulted in the younger ones being hassled by a contingent of older kids as they waited for the school bus each day.

In addition, many of the students enrolled in Silver Lakes were over age for their grade level.105 These older students, often 15 and 16 years of age, both roaming the halls of the school and lounging at the bus stop, intimidated sixth graders who were 10 or 11 years old.106

City support also was lacking. A few years earlier, the city commission sponsored a charter school that failed. Ironically, the Miami-Dade Public Schools employed the mayor during his time on the city commission. A staunch advocate of charter schools, he strongly advocated putting resources into local charter schools serving his community, but refused to do the same for traditional public schools located in the city.107

To combat the perception among elementary school parents that Silver Lakes was a troubled school with a lackluster academic program, the school’s staff worked for three months on creating outreach programs. They developed marketing materials that were used for direct mail and drop offs at schools and businesses, including grocery stores, banks, and churches, and they often worked on Sundays to distribute the materials. They planned an open house and personally called every prospective family

105 This occurs when a child has failed one or two grades either at the elementary or middle school level. Without competency based academic programs it is difficult for these children to catch up with their peers; as a result, they often spend time as outcasts in their own school because they do not “fit in.” In schools such as Silver Lakes, the older students had caused discipline problems when attending class with younger students. 106 As of June 2011, the bus stops have not been moved. However, a separate academy for the older middle school students was established to help them catch up and move on to high school. 107 Because of the bus stop situation, public safety was a huge issue for Silver Lakes. With the retirement of the police chief, the school principal was able to develop a more positive relationship with the police department and secure a police presence at the bus stops during pick up and drop off times. 157

to invite them to attend. They also distributed flyers to area elementary schools. As a result, the school went from two people attending two open houses (one in the afternoon and one in the evening) the year before to more than 100 attending the evening open house in 2009-2010 and 60 students enrolling in the STEM program for 2010-2011.

This level of outreach on the part of traditional public school staff represented a departure from the status quo practices of the immediate past. Schools had not marketed their programs aggressively since the late 1980s, the last period of declining enrollment.

Although Title I schools use community outreach with the families of students already enrolled in the school, traditional public schools were not using marketing programs to reach out to families before students enrolled in the school.

158 VII. CONSIDERING THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC EDUCATION

“In large states public education will always be mediocre, for the same reason that in large kitchens the cooking is usually bad.” --- Friedrich Nietzsche (qtd. in “Friedrich Nietzsche Quotes,” n.p.)

“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” --- Thomas Jefferson (qtd. in Padover 89)

Previous discussion has addressed the reasons why students are leaving traditional public schools and migrating to charter schools. The myths about these two education models persist. Opinions expressed by charter school parents, students, teachers, and advocates suggest that charter schools have smaller classes, more innovation, and a more rigorous curriculum. However, the facts do not confirm these widely held beliefs. Despite legislative advantages, including waivers from some statutory requirements and the elimination of others, charter schools do not seem to have risen above the caliber of traditional public schools when it comes to academic rigor or enrichment.

Critics of traditional public schools suggest that these institutions are too bureaucratic and unresponsive. Surveys of traditional public school parents, students, and teachers suggest that customer satisfaction remains high. In addition, parent opinion surveys indicate that there is no statistical difference in customer satisfaction between schools with high and low student migration. And yet, the shift to charter schools continues.

159 What is evident is that charter school advocates have a well-orchestrated communication program designed to control the discourse. Proponents of privatization were able to capitalize on the historic zigzag of federal and state education policy, local distrust of the institution, and a changing sentiment about the role we see government playing in our society. A summary of the evidence presented follows.

Overview

Historical Perspective

National Public Policy

Education policy and program funding have been part of presidential campaign rhetoric since 1800. As the country established public schools, there was interest at the federal level in providing some oversight and direction for education. However, in the last 200 plus years, neither political party has been able to build ongoing, consistent support for education policy initiatives or, more recently, programs that will establish

American students as globally competitive workers. Any initiatives that did gain traction often were the byproduct of external events. For example, mandatory elementary school attendance became law because of complaints from the military that young World War I recruits could not read basic combat or artillery instructions.

There has been significant discussion about the need to foster higher levels of interest in math and science, with a regular show of support from presidential candidates and elected officials. However, funding for these important programs comes in the form of competitive grants, often leaving those schools and school districts that are less capable of writing strong grant proposals in the lurch. Even with this funding,

160

data suggests that American students still lag behind their counterparts in math and science achievement, as measured by standardized tests108 (Dillon “Top Test Scores”).

Court Decisions and Legislation

Brown v. Board of Education had a significant effect on school enrollment, student busing, and desegregation, and the re-segregation of schools through White flight. A 20-year period of civil rights legislation and litigation following the Brown decision established rules for parity in student services without regard to race, language, gender, or disability.

NCLB and Title I programs were designed to expand educational opportunities for children with limited resources. Title IX programs provided female athletes with equal opportunities to compete in sports programs. Exceptional education programs have removed some of the stigma of this classification by offering parents the opportunity to move children from “special education centers” to “mainstream” classes in traditional public schools. Despite all of these efforts, Magnet Schools and other special programs designed to help achieve integration and meet other parity goals did not work to the extent that education leaders had hoped.

Local History

Florida and Broward County’s history with education policy followed the same patterns of inequality for minority students, and provided only limited resources to

108 One test, the Program for International Student Assessment, known as PISA, is given to 15- year-old students by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a Paris-based group that includes the world’s major industrial powers. The test is given in about 65 countries. The 2010 results indicate that students in Shanghai have outscored counterparts in dozens of countries, in reading, math, and science. The United States came in 23rd or 24th in most subjects (Dillon “Top Test Scores”). 161

serve all students.109 As a result, alternatives to traditional public education, including home schooling and private and parochial schools, have always been popular in

Broward County with parents who felt that their children were disenfranchised from the school system.110 Despite the continued popularity of charter schools, graduation rates and support services, especially for special needs students, are often weaker among charter schools than traditional public schools.

Public Perception

Beginning with Milton Friedman in the 1950s, thought leaders began to express concerns that public schools had become ineffective. They posited that by transferring educational activities to privately-run institutions greater efficiency and economies of scale would occur (Levin 627). Discussions focused not on education as a public good for strengthening democracy, but instead spotlighted education primarily as a private good dedicated to supporting student achievement and reinforcing family values.

Privatization advocates also argued that a market driven system would create a more compelling and efficient delivery system for public services (Levin 629). This argument occurred over and over, as advocates made the case that outsourcing provided efficiencies that government could not.

109 Pro-education Florida legislators and school board members often cite Florida as the 49th or 50th in per capita education funding. The Public Policy Institute of New York listed Florida as 48th in education funding in 2005, a time when the economy and education funding was healthier than present day. A New York Times analysis of the data lists Florida as 36th in funding, but 48th in funding in relation to personal income (Chan). 110 Florida’s homeschooling movement began in Broward County in 1985. Today, Broward has the sixth largest number of students enrolled in home schooling, after the more politically conservative counties of Duval, Palm Beach, Hillsborough, Polk, and Orange. Currently, more than 60,000 students from 42,000 families are homeschooled in Florida, with 3,357 students from 2,183 families attending home schooling programs in Broward County (Florida Department of Education [FDOE] “Florida’s Charter Schools”). 162 Statistical Perspective

Literature

Research conducted in other communities focused on responses from parents, students and teachers involved with charter schools. Comments were exceedingly positive. Festinger’s Theory of Cognitive Dissonance suggests that the need to remain consistent between actions and opinions drives charter school stakeholders to become strong advocates for their choice of this education program (McLeod).111 To control for this effect, comments found in the literature were only used as a guidepost to help identify areas of interest and concern used for the analysis of stakeholder responses in

Broward County’s Customer Satisfaction Survey (CSS).

Stakeholder Satisfaction

Review of CSS data does not pin point the source of the problems with the public schools or identify the factors that would cause so many people to transfer their children to a charter school. The 2010 CSS measured traditional public school stakeholder responses. This study compares the responses from schools that with the greatest loss of student enrollment to schools with the least loss of student enrollment during the 2010-2011 school year. Stakeholder responses, including those from parents, the primary decision makers about student enrollment, do not show gaps in perceptions between the high and low enrollment loss groups about the delivery of service to students, including safety, support, and home-school communication.

111 Festinger’s Theory of Cognitive Dissonance holds that behavior and attitudes must be in alignment, and that the mind will change beliefs to support actions. 163 Parent Perceptions

Parent volunteers recently visited all of the district’s schools and determined that more than 70% of the traditional public schools were unfriendly to visitors, while all charter school and private schools were welcoming (Fitzpatrick). At the conclusion of these site visits, the school district’s Parent-Community Task Force published a 300 page report. The report was presented to school board members on February 28, 2012.

Task force findings were based on more than 12,000 parent surveys, 3,000 teacher surveys, and forums held in middle and high schools and in non-profit and business organizations.

Parents said that the biggest barrier to getting involved in their child’s education was the fact that many activities occurred while they were working. Although the district has a policy requiring all schools to engage parents in the decision making process, earlier (2009) research on the process used to schedule and engage parents in school meetings indicated that the process excludes, rather than includes, a majority of working parents. The 2011-2012 parent volunteer task force found that still to be the case. They reported that many meetings are scheduled during the day when most parents find it difficult to attend. Respondents also reported that there was not good communication from schools, with automated telephone notices often coming at the last minute or after an event.

Rhetorical Perspective

These findings suggest that the factual pros and cons between traditional public and charter schools are not the causative factors in creating the shift. Instead, perceptions seemed to be the driving force for charter schools attracting students on a

164

continuous basis. Broward County’s charter school enrollment, as shown in Table 2, has grown from just over 11,000 in 2002 to nearly 30,000 students a decade later (Harrison

2010-2011 Twentieth Day). These perceptions have been created through a skillful discourse about “choice.”

Establishing a Narrative

An analysis of the communication theories involved with attitude and behavior change provides insight as to how advocates were able to develop support for the idea of privately managed public schools. The first step is to establish the narrative.

Advocates selected the concept of choice because it offers tremendous concordance with our national ideology of the American culture of independence and self-destiny, as well as the idea that giving consumers a choice would create a market driven solution to bureaucratic inefficiencies. Fisher, Hall, and McLuhan offer proof that defining and controlling the discourse can achieve this objective.

Developing Awareness Among Elites

Next, charter school advocates brought the discussion into the public policy sphere to create a constituency and to legitimize the power relationships between charter school proponents and policy makers, the federal and state departments of education, and the media. As they were able to define and develop these relationships, charter school advocates were able to bring the issue into policy and communication frameworks through the use of agenda setting and framing. These theories, the work of

Cohen, McCombs and Shaw, Lippmann, and Weaver, demonstrate the effectiveness of creating an environment in which such issues are given high levels of salience. The

165

work becomes a policy metaphor used to develop a framework to establish standards and measure policy solutions.

Mobilizing Public Will

Proponents were able to mobilize public will by using a series of communication tactics, including employing mass communication and social media channels, developing social capital with the target public, and applying other social marketing techniques. These efforts led to increased frequency and reach of information about the benefits of charter schools to members of the general public, and resulted in a growing enrollment. As a result of engaging policy makers and the media, charter school advocates were able to build an agenda that garnered public support. The relationship between the media, policy makers, and the public becomes symbiotic, with movement in of the entities one driving movement within the other two.

The Relationship between The Public Sphere, Communication, and Democracy

Communication in the Public Sphere

Jurgen Habermas articulated the critical relationship between the issues of publicness, communication, and democracy. These three items form a triangular relationship between human interaction, ethics, and deliberative politics. In Structural

Transformation of the Public Sphere, Habermas offers a historical analysis of the rise and fall of the “bourgeois” public sphere. He introduces a “principle of publicity,” writing about the impact of publicness and communication on democracy (Turan 147).

In the 1970s and 1980s, Habermas developed the idea of the theory of communicative action, focusing on the idea of language and communication as a means for egalitarian participation in politics. He suggests that one of the main reasons for

166

miscommunication is the interpretation and rationalization of communication by society. During this period, he spent time outlining the path towards undistorted communication (Turan 147-148). Finally, in the 1990s, Habermas moved from just looking at issues of language/communication to the impact of these concepts on law and institutions. He found fault with the current system of politics, suggesting that it should provide opportunities for people to be engaged in the production of laws through the relationship between communication and law. He felt that discourse and public dialogue was the proper way to develop laws. He considered that morality developed as the result of public dialogue (Turan 147-148). Habermas makes the assumption that this discourse will take place in the public sphere of a de-centered society, with opportunities for everyone to participate. He defined this as his normative model of democracy (Turan

148).

The Role of Media in Perpetuating Communication

Modern American journalists consider their profession a safeguard of democracy. They are committed to reporting on issues so that the public can participate in crucial conversations that select politicians, develop public policy, and provide guidance on important issues (Gans 8). Despite the commitment to serve the public interest, many news organizations have been forced to take on a more commercial/bottom line focus due to the economy and trends towards more immediate and accessible sources for news and information. Many well-established news organizations have ceased operations or downsized due to dwindling funds. Others have become units of larger conglomerates that are more focused on their profit margins than in serving as a watchdog over society, including the judiciary, government, and

167

business (Gans 15).

The revolution of technology and data in the twentieth century provided consumers with communication on demand. However, these inventions also have threatened the viability of traditional media. In 2008, the percentage of Americans using the Internet for their primary source of national and international news jumped to 40% from 24% (Sagan and Leighton 123). And the Internet is not just reaching more people; it is reaching them quicker (Sage and Leighton 120).

Social media, bloggers, and the 24/7-news cycle have challenged established media. Some publications, such as the Christian Science Monitor, have changed completely the way in which they present their message, eliminating their print edition and going to a totally online publication in 2012. Because of the expansion and diffusion of traditional and web-enabled media outlets, it is increasingly difficult to focus and engage the public in discourse (Fuller 110). In addition, the audience for

“hard” news has been shrinking for decades. Today’s consumers are drawn increasingly to the lurid or the comedic, limiting interest in serious journalism (Fuller 111). A 15- month study by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism found that a growing number of users are turning to the video-sharing site YouTube to get their news (Washington Business Journal).

The Relationship between Democracy and the Public Sphere

Alexis de Tocqueville perceived Americans’ interest in forming associations as the link he found between democracy in and civil society (Putnam). In Democracy in

America, he chronicled the phenomena, writing that Americans at all stages and stations of life took part in associations for business and for personal endeavors. Putnam argues

168

that there is a wide range of data that demonstrates that the quality of our (public) life and the health of our social institutions are affected by the norms of civic engagement.

He posits that successful outcomes in field such as education, crime prevention, and health, among others, are more likely in communities that are engaged civically (1).

Engaging Public Will

The model for mobilizing public will suggests that privatization advocates have expended significant resources to engage elites and policy makers in the decision making process as it relates to the privatization of education. Proponents have built the agenda for discussion, brought forth legislative proposals, and provided elites and policy makers with the tools to “sell” these proposals to the public through strong communication programs. Charter school advocates have worked hard to reach out at every level. Traditional public school advocates have not. While some may argue that this method of mobilizing public does not offer the opportunity for two-way dialogue or use of the public sphere for public discourse, the process has worked to a great extent, convincing millions of parents across the country to enroll their children in charter schools.

Using Social Capital as a Platform for Recovery

Understanding Social Capital

When Hanifan provided the first contemporary definition of “social capital,”112 his definition built on earlier work. In the second volume of Rhetoric, Aristotle spoke

112 James Farr from the University of Minnesota argues that Marx actually was the first to write about social capital in 1867 in his critique of the classic political economy. Farr also suggests that Dewey introduced the tradition of critical pragmatism. However, Hanifan was the first to use it in the context in which it now is generally thought - developing access to additional resources through personal networks and association. Michael Woolcock of the World Bank says that there are several traditional components 169

about the importance of a common space, or publicness, where people could come together to discuss the issue of the day (Virno; Ogren). Writing about the strengths of our nation, Tocqueville wrote in Democracy in America about civicness and our ability to work in associations for the common good (Dekker; Hoenisch “Education Policy of the Democratic”). In 1962, Habermas reinforced the importance of the public sphere as a place where public interests and citizenship combined.

Many authors and scholars have devoted a considerable amount energy to discussing the social characteristics of society, but it was Hanifan who first looked at the accumulation of networks and relationship from an economic perspective. Hanifan wrote a journal article about social capital in 1916 and elaborated on it in The

Community Center published in 1920. He specifically argued that social capital was an essential element in the production of education, that much could be derived from it both by the institution and the individual. In 1916, Hanifan defined social capital as follows:

In the use of the phrase ‘social capital’ no reference here is made to the

usual acceptation of the term ‘capital,’ except in a ﬁgurative sense. We

not refer to real estate or to personal property or to cash, but rather to that

in life which tends to make those tangible substances count for most in

the daily lives of people: namely good will, fellowship, sympathy, and

social intercourse among the individuals and families who make up a

social unit, -the rural community, whose logical center is in most cases

the school. In community building, as in business organization, there

within social capital and all are tied to theorists of economic sociology, including Marx, Weber, Simmel, Durkheim, and Bentham (Farr 7,8) 170

must be an accumulation of capital before the constructive work can be

done....

Now we may easily pass from the business corporation over to

the social corporation, the community, and ﬁnd many points of

singularity. The individual is helpless socially, if left by himself. Even

the association of the members of one’s own family fails to satisfy that

desire which every normal individual has of being with his fellows, of

being a part of a larger group than the family. If he comes into contact

with his neighbors, there will be an accumulation of social capital, which

may immediately satisfy his social needs and which may bear a social

potentiality sufficient for the substantial improvement of life in the

whole community. The community as a whole will beneﬁt by the

cooperation of all its parts, while the individual will ﬁnd in his

associations the advantages of the help, the sympathy, and the fellowship

of his neighbors. First, then, there must be an accumulation of

community social capital. Such accumulation may be effected by means

of public entertainments, picnics, and a variety of other community

gatherings. When the people of a given community have become

acquainted with one another and have formed a habit of coming together

occasionally for entertainment, social intercourse, and personal

enjoyment, then by skillful leadership this social capital may easily be

directed towards the general improvement of the community well-being.

(130-131)

171

In this quote, Hanifan compares engagement between individuals and the idea of community building to business production. He suggests that individuals build up their resources through interaction with each other to provide the raw materials needed to achieve the production of, in this case, good will and community support. Hanifan’s use of the term “social capital” was deliberate. He hoped to initiate a discussion about the exchange that makes up the social unit in society.

Hanifan distinguishes between social capital and other forms of capital, suggesting that social capital is the intangible commodity in our lives - good will, fellowship and sympathy - that occurs as a by-product of social intercourse between individuals who make up a social unit. Hanifan believes the accumulation of social capital to be the critical element needed to improve the quality of life in a community.

As an educator, Hanifan feels strongly that social capital is a necessary part of the relationship that schools must build with their community. He sees schools as a focal point in the community. While Hanifan views this idea from his perspective as a rural schools superintendent, later scholars have identified that social capital is an important element in all types of communities.

Social Capital, Lost and Regained

Despite Hanifan’s efforts to promote the benefits of social capital, the idea fell into obscurity until much later in the twentieth century. Social capital was “discovered” independently five more times during the remainder of the century. The concept began to gain interest among sociologists when French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu and

American sociologist James Coleman began to write about it in the 1980s and 1990s.

Since that time, several definitions of social capital have emerged. Each is

172

distinct but complimentary. Bourdieu addresses the issue from a macro perspective: how social capital works in relation to other forms of capital within the dynamics of society and how the dominant group in a society can use social capital to maintain hegemony. He wrote, “Social capital is the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition” (“Social Capital”).

Coleman has a functionalist perspective, looking at social capital from the micro level and focusing on interaction between entities facilitated through social networks and common interests. Coleman suggests that social capital is the result of trust, access to information, and the establishment of social norms. “Social capital is defined by its function. It is not a single entity, but a variety of different entities, having two characteristics in common: they all consist of some aspect of a social structure, and they facilitate certain actions of individuals who are within the structure” (Dika and Singh

33). These perspectives compliment the other by providing two different ways to view the benefits derived from the production of social capital, which come from relationships between individuals and from relationships between individuals and organizations.

Eighty-four years later, Robert Putnam (Bowling Alone: The Collapse) is credited with re-popularizing the idea. He says that Hanifan largely anticipated all of the major elements that appeared in later interpretations. Hanifan calls the process of engagement between individuals “community building.” He suggests that individuals build up resources through interaction with others to provide the raw materials needed to achieve the production of good will and community support.

173

Putnam argues that social capital is critical for building and maintaining democracy. He believes that social capital is declining in the United States and suggests that this has contributed to lower levels of trust in government and declining civic participation. Although no one suggests that social capital is a “cure all” for modern society, research shows that it clearly offers benefits and provides value added resources.

Because of the popularization of his writings, Putnam’s definition of social capital is perhaps most well known:

Whereas physical capital refers to physical objects and human capital

refers to the properties of individuals, social capital refers to connections

among individuals – social networks and the norms of reciprocity and

trustworthiness that arise from them. In that sense social capital is

closely related to what some have called “civic virtue.” The difference is

that “social capital” calls attention to the fact that civic virtue is most

powerful when embedded in a network of reciprocal social relations. A

society of many virtuous but isolated individuals is not necessarily rich

in social capital. (Bowling Alone: The Collapse, 19)

Developing Social Capital in Our Schools

Educator and sociologist James Coleman’s original concept of social capital is based on a derivative of the production of human capital, defined as knowledge. From that perspective, social capital is the result of interpersonal networking that occurs during the exchange of knowledge, which requires time and effort to develop (Dasgupta

26).

174

Leading organizations in social services, public health, and global finance all have incorporated measurement of social capital into their business practices. The

World Bank uses a community’s willingness to come together and form bonds as a measurement of credit worthiness. Ironically, traditional school educators have not.

Putnam suggests that social capital can improve the efficiency of a society by building trust, norms and networks (“Bowling Alone: America,” 67), “... social capital refers to connections among individuals, social networks, and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them” (Bowling Alone: The Collapse, 19).

The Kettering Foundation, one of the foremost thought centers on the future of public education, has been researching the changes in the public for public education for nearly 20 years. Foundation president David Matthews suggests that schools as well as other institutions earn public support by “contracting” to reach public objectives. He argues that by engaging the public to work on areas of mutual interest, the public will begin to view schools as a means to broader educational objectives of a community (Is

There a Public, 7). If traditional public school supporters hope to fortify their position with the public, they will need to follow a game plan to develop social capital similar to the one used successfully by charter school advocates.

How can traditional public schools create social capital? They can start by revising existing processes, such as those used to engage parents in the governance process. Volunteer programs should be built on a broad process for two-way interactive communication. The school district’s own studies on parent involvement in 2008-2009 and 2011 found that schools used a vertical decision making process to engage parents.

Studies detailed the challenges schools faced in attracting attendance at school

175

activities. Meeting times were determined by school administrators and communicated to parents, which generally was ineffective.

Putnam suggests a vertical network cannot sustain social trust and cooperation, no matter how important it is to its members (“Bowling Alone: America,” 74). Trust is seen as a key ingredient in successful networks. In vertical networks, subordinates often withhold information to give themselves an advantage. On the other hand, members of horizontal networks typically have similar interests and background. They work together to benefit individual members and the network as a whole. Social capital is seen as a means for building trust (Dasgupta 35). Mutual trust is based on the beliefs individuals have about one another. Epstein, Coates, Salinas, Sanders, and Simon suggest that the relationship between a parent and his or her child’s school is perhaps the most important one in determining the success of the child.

Parent Involvement as Social Capital

John Diamond and Kimberly Gomez studied the involvement of working-class and middle-class African-American parents, and identified race and social class as factors consistently linked to successful involvement of the family in the education process (383, 384). Diamond and Gomez determined that middle class parents were more likely than working-class parents to be involved in programs for their children and respond favorably to them. They suggest that school policies have a tendency to accentuate inequalities rather than reduce them. Parent with resources are in a better position to take advantage of choices and programs offered by the school (399, 405).

They argue that the educational environment should change so that the playing field is leveled.

176

In a 2004 study of parent engagement in urban elementary schools, Barton,

Drake, Perez, St. Louis, and George suggest that parent involvement is driven by activities affected by concepts of space and capital. They argue that parent involvement is an ecological system based on the mediation between space and capital. Diamond and

Gomez concur with this observation, suggesting, “Social class influences resources parents possess that can be converted into forms of capital in support of children’s education,” (390). They define types of family capital: human capital, economic capital, and social capital, that serve as a resource for social action (390). Diamond and Gomez suggest that cultural capital is another factor that enhances parent abilities, with parents in different social class securing different access to resources. They cite research that indicates that white middle class and upper class families are able to convert their cultural resources into capital within a school (391).

Barton, Drake, Perez, St. Louis, and George used ethnographic studies to assess how immigrant parents build these relationships in high-poverty urban schools. This study revealed several discrepancies between researchers and parents. Each group held a different definition of parent involvement. While parents defined involvement as a largely informal presence, researchers defined parent involvement as a formal process.

Literature erroneously described parents as a homogenous group, limiting accommodations for culture and diversity.

Researchers concluded that parental involvement should be understood as a presence of parents, regardless of whether it is a formal or informal process. They suggest that parents be considered as agents in the education process with involvement as a dynamic, interactive process that draws on experiences and resources. A new data-

177

driven model for parent engagement, the Ecology of Parental Engagement (EPE), offers a way to understand the connections between parents and schools (Barton, Drake,

Perez, St. Louis, and George 3).

Barton, Drake, Perez, St. Louis, and George argue that parent involvement needs to be framed as an ecology, or whole framework of system of relationships within the environment, ideas similar to the definition of social capital. They suggest that parents be allowed to find their own “space and place” within the school, which meet individual values and expectations. They argue that the life experiences and cultural capital of parents be integrated into the school culture. By creating a space for dialogue between parents and schools, the researchers noted that parents felt valued and were more inclined to participate in school programs. “Yo se lo que esta pasando porque estoy ahi”

(I know what is going on because I am there) (3,4).

Enhancing Home-School Communication

Drawing from her own experience as a mother of two, coupled with a three-year study of parent engagement in varied school settings, Sarah Lawrence-Lightfoot analyzed the communication surrounding parent-teacher meetings as a keystone of the relationship between home and school. She suggests that the conferences become awkward and confrontational because parents and teachers often hold opposing perspectives and become adversaries, losing an opportunity to develop an alliance.

Ruby Payne does not make distinctions about race, nor does she seek to suggest that one racial group has a larger or smaller road to climb. What she does say is that poverty is caused by a series of circumstances that in turn creates a series of obstacles for the student, family, and home-school communication.

178

Harvard educator Karen Mapp has designed an assessment matrix that details the characteristics of four versions of a family school partnership, where she categorizes schools as fortress schools, come-if-we-call schools, open-door schools, and partnership schools, with the last being the most desired. She looks at each school from the perspective of five dimensions: building relationships, linking to learning, addressing differences, supporting advocacy, and sharing power. Schools can review the matrix and determine where their outreach efforts fall on the continuum. Understanding where the school lies on the continuum, from both the parent and the school perspective, is critical to finding a middle ground in ongoing communication so that participation can occur.

Joyce Epstein, one of the earliest academic scholars to study the impact of parent involvement on student and school success, describes six types of involvement or six types of caring that reflect a framework for school, family, and community partnerships. These include parenting, communicating, volunteering, learning at home, decision making, and collaborating with community (Epstein, Coates, Salinas Sanders, and Simon 7).

Epstein, Drake, Perez, St. Louis, and George describe each type of involvement and offer sample practices that can be used to develop social capital through home- school communication. Further, they describe the challenges and redefinitions of involvement that are needed to achieve this level of involvement as well as the expected outcomes that can occur if these metrics are met (8-9). Each type of involvement is horizontal and family and parent centered, focusing on what the school can do to engage the parent and the family in the student. Epstein, Drake, Perez, St. Louis, and

179

George advocate for action teams comprised of principals, teachers, parents, and community members to guide partnerships and communication and keep both on track.

The action team guides the development of partnerships that include all six types of involvement and can build effective networks (13). Epstein, Drake, Perez, St. Louis, and George suggest that engagement of parents and other family members, regardless of education and income levels, can compensate for the lack of other family resources

(178).

Using Social Capital to Create Momentum

Salmon, Post, and Christensen have identified social capital as an important strategy to be used for mobilizing public sentiment. They suggest that social capital, along with other communication tactics, are elements effective in the process of creating and framing an issue.

Because they have no set boundaries, charter schools employ relationship- building techniques to recruit and retain students. They work throughout the year to maintain parent engagement in the school. In essence, they are building a public where none existed previously. By creating a constituency that supports school goals, charter schools are able to set expectations for parent participation in school programs. The schools suggest that family volunteer hours are required and offer opportunities designed to help family members fulfill commitments. For the most part, parents meet expectations, perhaps both to fulfill a perceived requirement as well as to reinforce the reasons they chose to enroll their child in the school. Research is mixed on whether parents participate at higher levels in charter schools because they want to support their

180

choice to enroll their child in the school113 and/or whether parents are volunteering because they were asked.114

Early definitions of social capital describe it as a resource that can be used for public good and benefit to individuals. Putnam suggests that social capital generates cooperation and supportive relationships that could be used in communities, large and small, to solve social problems. As the production of social capital by traditional public schools has declined, there also has been diminished identification with these schools by the community. Losing that connection also has resulted in eliminating opportunities for traditional public schools to demonstrate the importance of the original purpose of public education: to foster social or public good through an informed, literate, skilled citizenry. Advocates of private-style choice have filled the gap with their own production of social capital, providing them with an opportunity to present a charter school education as an opportunity to select a school that better reflects personal family values and to reinforce the idea of privatization of another segment of society (Levin

629). Traditional public schools can create social capital by reducing barriers to meaningful parent involvement in school programs and by strengthening home-school communication.

Looking Forward

Where Will The Public Go To School?

Throughout the twentieth century, conservatives have advocated for market forces to drive what previously were government-based segments of the economy. This

113 See earlier footnote about Festinger’s Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. 114 Information provided in previous chapters about parent involvement at traditional public schools only measured voluntary participation. With the exception of securing attendance of “official” committee members, parent recruitment programs were not used to secure attendance at school advisory meetings. 181

was the rationale to justify the idea of privatizing government-controlled markets in education, mail delivery, prisons, space exploration, and healthcare. Specifically, they argue that government has become too large and too invasive, and that using the private sector to manage certain functions can provide a more nimble and effective way of problem solving and competing in a world economy. While even the staunchest government advocates would not condone a $1200 toilet seat or a three-year road paving project, modern day problems in the financial industry and housing market suggest that privatization also has its problems.

The agenda for school choice has been played out carefully in real time. The effort to persuade policy makers and parents to support the concept of choice has been crafted carefully to occur in consumer-oriented publications and the daily news, at town hall meetings, in community churches and other houses of worship, in neighborhood movie theaters, and in speeches given in the public sphere. Media ranging from liberal to conservative have covered, critiqued, and/or praised charter schools and the opportunity for parents to have both “a choice” and “a change” in their child’s education. National news outlets with disparate ideologies, such as the New York Times,

The Nation, NBC News, and FOX News, as well as various association websites accessible to the general public, carry the message that from the standpoint of choice and change charter schools are a good thing for students. “Putting a face” on the issue helps people to see it in a way that reflects their own interest (Matthews 33).

With a growing sentiment that government is inefficient, and the increasing attractiveness of asserting more control in our lives, what role will traditional public schools place in our society as we move forward? While earlier discussion has

182

demonstrated that charter schools neither are more fiscally sound115 nor do they deliver a more academically proficient student than the traditional public school, parents continue to move towards these schools.

Interpreting Change on Several Levels

On the most basic level, the history of education and public schools in Broward

County offered, at best, varied opportunities for advancement. As discussed earlier, throughout most of the district’s history, White children and/or children in middle to upper income neighborhoods received more capital and instructional resources than minority and/or children in lower income communities. And, for a time, staffing patterns favored higher income schools as well.116 Such experiences, while no longer true, still are recent memories for many of the parents. They have become urban legends, fostering a sense of mistrust in the system.

At yet another level, there is the question about too much government and whether privatization offers answers to containing costs and creating a nimble response to market conditions. As discussed earlier, supporters of the conservative movement strongly advocate this position. Organizations such as the Cato Institute are working hard to make the case about efficiency with legislators. Since the inception of charter schools, Cato has used such notables as Milton Friedman (1995) to advocate their positions. Similarly, other charter advocates such as the Center for Education Reform published “America’s Attitudes Towards Charter Schools” in 2008 to advance the

115 It could be argued that charter schools managed by large corporate concerns are profitable for their management companies. 116 There have been several efforts to create bonuses for teachers teaching in low achieving (which often are low income) schools. 183

position that charter schools offer students better service and attention.117 Privatization advocates argue that while education is critical to our future, the source of the service is not an absolute. They suggest that this is negotiable, and that any entity that meets selected standards should be able to service the community in this way.

Finally, at the highest level, the shift from a traditional public model for education to a privately managed education system concerns the vision we have as a nation of ourselves. How do we define democracy? What role should we give our public schools? Is there a forum for coming together to develop a consensus or at least a preference for governance?

The Integration of Education and Government

Thomas Jefferson believed education is the foundation of democracy. He could not separate the roles of education and government. Jefferson believed that only an enlightened public could successfully carry out self-government. “ . . . Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government; that, whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them right” (Jewett 38) President Ronald Reagan, credited with initiating modern day efforts to reduce government, said “Government tends to grow, government programs take on weight and momentum as public servants say, always with the best of intentions. But the truth is that outside of its legitimate function, government does nothing as well or economically as the private sector of the economy” (Jewett).

117 Privatization is already common in other aspects of government including trash collection and other utility services. Aspects of our international defense efforts also have been parsed out quietly to civilian contractors such as Blackwater, Xe, Triple Canopy, and Halliburton, among others. While significant human rights abuses and the financial irregularities on the part of private defense contractors have received significant national press coverage, the practice continues.

184

These quotes represent opposing points of view. There this is no majority opinion on this issue. While not every citizen has to be an expert on every question that challenges democracy, it is clear that concerning this issue of the role of government, the majority of the public is not engaged actively in the dialogue.

Civic Engagement

Although the notion of participatory politics stands as a cornerstone of democracy, Americans do not have a history of being highly involved in their governance. In an analysis of voter turnout in 140 countries between 1945 and 1998, the

Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) notes that Italians were first in voter participation, with 92.5% of all eligible citizens voting, while only 48.1% of eligible Americans voted in elections during that time, a rank of 114 out of 140

(“Turnout in the World”). Members of the public are opting out of the process, regardless of their beliefs, leaving decisions in the hands of policy makers and elites.

In South Florida, voter participation also is low. In the 2010 election,

Republicans swept into office throughout the state. In Broward County, more than half of all Broward County Republicans voted, while voter turnout among Democrats was less than 40%, the lowest turnout in a gubernatorial election in a dozen years. Because

South Florida is a Democratic Party stronghold, low voter turnout enabled conservative candidates to take races. In a state of 19 million people, with 11.2 million registered voters, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Alex Sink lost by only 68,000 votes. A gap, experts said, that could have been filled easily if more Democratic Party voters went to the polls (M. Johnson).

185 Personal Engagement

Laissez faire attitudes are common in our society. We look for others to define the issues and develop solutions. In a country where advertising both defines our problems and provides solutions, it is not unusual to see the public look to others to form their opinions. Putnam categorized this phenomenon in a series of journal articles, culminating with the 2000 publication of Bowling Alone. He cites this behavior as proof that we are withdrawing into ourselves and no longer pursuing a sense of civicness that

Tocqueville said was the secret to our success.

It is only when threatened close to home, after the tragedy of 9/11, that the majority of Americans demonstrated visible signs of patriotism. However, even with such a dramatic event, our attention was kept for only so long. The need for a public sphere and rich debate seems to have evaporated and, with it, the strength of our democracy.

Now that charter schools are a reality in our society, it is unlikely that they are going to disappear into the sunset, at least not any time soon. While it is inevitable that some charter schools will fail, because of poor management, a lack of finances, or poor student achievement, it is certain that the idea of choice and convenience will remain.

And new ideas certainly will be presented. Advocates now promote virtual charter schools so that students can receive their entire education in front of their computer, without ever having to worry about being late to school, missing the bus, or having difficulty seeing or hearing in class. The need for school construction, transportation, and student safety would be eliminated. Textbooks could be delivered online and teachers could instant message students for immediate feedback.

186

No matter what other modes of delivery are available, it is important that we insure that the traditional public school still has relevance as a provider of education and socialization, leading to the production of social capital. The development of social capital can be a strategy for our economic regeneration and increased social cohesion

(Avis 308).

Perhaps traditional school supporters will take a cue from Lyda Hanifan and

John Dewey who argued that the school should serve as the focal point for a community. It is important that we provide schools with the encouragement to do so. By using schools to develop social capital, we can find a way to build effective social and political institutions, strengthen democracy, and help governments perform effectively; and in turn, build confidence in civic institutions.

187 APPENDIXES

188 Appendix A

History of Education Rhetoric in the United States

HISTORY OF EDUCATION RHETORIC IN THE U.S Date Issue/Event Democrats Republicans Outcome 1600s Public schools for religious education in New England. 1635 First publicly Few attended supported because Secondary School, curriculum was Boston Latin specialized and School. hard. 1700s Private schools the norm to avoid religious beliefs. 1735 Benjamin Franklin This school model established eventually American replaced Latin Academy in Grammar Schools. Philadelphia. 1791 7/14 states with constitutions included specific provisions for education. Although Jefferson, Webster, Washington and others believed govt. should control schools, to free them from religious bias and provide to all people of any social status, this did not happen because of political upheaval. Private, charitable and religious schools dominated.

189 1840s Until this time, Led to free public schools highly education at the localized, and elementary level available only to was available for the wealthy. all American Reformers Horace children by the Mann in Mass. and end of the 19th Henry Barnard in century. Mass. Conn. argue that all passed first children should compulsory school gain the benefits of attendance laws in education. The 1852, followed by common-school New York in reformers argued 1853. for the case on the belief that common schooling could create good citizens, unite society and prevent crime and poverty. 1857-1862 Morrill Acts Vetoed (1857) Signed (1862) donating land to by Democratic by Republican states and President James President territories for Buchanan, Abraham colleges. because it Lincoln. interferes with state’s rights. 1863 Lincoln issues Allowed for black Emancipation children to be Proclamation. educated. Literacy rate rose from 5 percent in the 1860s to 70 percent in 1910. 1867 Federal status for First formal Education: federal focus on President Andrew education policy; Johnson Approved ultimately Dept. of Education. demoted to Office of Education in 1870, became part of Federal Security Agency and then HEW.

190 1870 Ulysses Grant asks Rep. George F. First time federal Congress for grants Hoar govt. actively to support primary introduces bill backed federal aid. education. to provide Hoar’s bill general aid to focused attention schools. Did on federal aid for not pass. education. 1872 Presidential Federal aid to Campaign. education is part of campaign literature. 1876 Presidential Establishment Party includes Campaign. and support of a vow to public schools support a belongs to the constitutional states. amendment forbidding use of public funds for sectarian education. 1879/1888 Presidential policy. Republican presidents Rutherford B. Hayes, James A. Garfield, Chester Arthur and Benjamin Harrison back national support for education. 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson. Supreme Court upholds racially divided schools in the South. Segregated schools still exist in the North as well.

191 1889 Jane Adams, Hull House purchases Hull replicated House, creates first Tonybee Hall, a Kindergarten for similar facility in children of working London. Hull mothers in one of house offered Chicago’s poorest activities and basic areas, the 19th health services in ward. a clean environment. By 1900 there were 100 similar houses in the US. In 1931, Adams received the Nobel Peace Prize for her efforts. 1890s-1920s Modernization of Schools became “Progressive business and the vehicle to Education industry had a assimilate new Movement” major impact on immigrants. The education during children who this era. Schools could not be were perceived as a processed to workplace for completion were children and considered as viewed in terms of scraps. Therefore productivity. they were Historian Elwood considered to be Cubberly suggested dropped out of the that teachers were production line factory workers and which is where we students were the get our most raw materials. accurate definition of “drop outs.” Large immigrant families preferred to send their children to work, to benefit from the income. This led to compulsory attendance and child labor laws. 20th century Increase in high From 1900 to school graduation. 1996, graduation rates increased from 6 percent to 85 percent.

192 20th Century Most states enact This contributed compulsory to the increase in education laws (to high school age 16). graduation. 1917 Smith-Huges Act. Created Vocational programs in high schools. 1918 WWI-- Prompted new Military complains demands for that recruits are not support for coming into service education. qualified (literate). 1918 All states had Democrats took Catholics passed laws credit for opposed, and requiring children helping children formed their own to attend stay in school. schools. elementary school. 1920s John Dewey leads Develops growing national recognition of the movement to importance of the oppose separation emotional, artistic of academics for and creative the few and aspects of human vocational training development. for the masses. Movement falls apart during the Cold War’s cultural conservatism. 1920 Presidential Advocated for Supported only This was a total campaign Federal Aid for vocational and reversal of the education. agricultural positions the two Called for co- training. parties held during operative federal Republican the prior century. assistance to the Warren G. It lined them up states to reduce Harding for continuing illiteracy, opposed conflict. increase teacher’ cabinet level salaries and Department of provide Education. instruction in citizenship.

193 1924-1928 Presidential Party offers low President Most of the Elections. key support for Calvin discussion occurs education, Coolidge in Congress. saying the reverses party’s federal position and government largely ignores should counsel, the issue. advice, and aid if available through the federal agencies for the general improvement of our schools. 1925 Pierce v. Society of Supreme Court Sisters. rules that children can attend private schools. 1928 Presidential Touted Campaign. enrollment increases in colleges and technical schools as a sign of success. 1930 First committee Herbert Hoover Interior Secretary established to study acknowledges rejects federal aid Education that education and establishing a programs. is a state right, DOE. Hoover but advocates appointment for national National interest in high Committee on standards. Education (first comprehensive survey of federal education activities. 1931 Report from Panel recommends National creating DOE, and Committee on continued study Education. whether federal aid is needed and eliminating direct grants for vocational education (suggesting first “block” grants to state to reallocate.

194 1932 Presidential President Congress rejected Campaign. Franklin D. his efforts and Roosevelt tried passed measured to continue to expand the Republican program. Hoover’s efforts Roosevelt signed to limit funding the bill, but for vocational appointed a education. Committee on Vocational Education, then expanded the committee’s scope. 1936-1944 Presidential Roosevelt did Claimed that Advisory Campaigns. not overt New Deal Committee on support administration Education expansion of usurped states recommended a education rights and multi-million funding, but he failed America. dollar education- was pressured Suggested that assistance into it by Federal program. Post war Congress. government involvement in should stay out education of schools. expanded the federal government’s role in education beyond all previous limits. 1940s Teacher Shortage. Inspired aid proposals to encourage people to become teachers. 1944 Presidential Democratic GI Bill, passed in Campaign. party took up 1944 under the WWII winds down. Education name Service Legislation passed Funding with Man’s to supplement renewed force. Readjustment Act. education in communities affected by the war. 1945 Harry S. Truman . Truman made takes over as education aid one president. of his priorities.

195 1948 Presidential President Taft-Hartley Truman budgets Campaign. Truman plank in set aside money advocated for campaign for education. $300 million in platform federal aid to advocates for states. equal opportunities and promotion of educational facilities. 1952 Presidential Called for aid Advocated for President Dwight Campaign and for school state D. Eisenhower beginning of Baby construction, responsibility. (Republican) Boom. teacher’s Strongly opposed salaries and federal support. school repair. Created White House Conference on Education. 1954 Report from White Shifted House Conference Eisenhower’s on Education position on endorsed federal education funding. education aid and a large majority recommended construction aid to meet a shortage of classrooms. 1955-1957 Funding for School Eisenhower Construction. supported this type of funding because it limited the amount of funding and federal control of schools. 1956 Presidential Lessened Campaign. differences with Democrats. Called for creation of department of HEW. Praised funding school construction.

196 1957/1958 Sputnik is Eisenhower Helped spur Launched. urged revoking passage of Bi-artisan concern of school National Defense over national construction Education Act, defense and science funding and which received bi- education. passage of partisan support, National and signaled an Defense expanded role of Education Act. the federal government in education. Supported math, science and foreign language programs. 1954 Brown v. The S.C. rules that Board of public school Educatio.n segregation is unconstitutional. 1960s-1970s Federal Civil Required all Rights Laws and schools and Public colleges to Demonstrations. conform to national standards of equality. 1960 Presidential Advocated for Advocated Education became Campaign. wide-ranging primary a major domestic Partisanship assistance, responsibility issue. After the returns. Both generous for education election, the parties supported financial support rests with local Democratic funding for for educational community, but administration education, but in programs, advocated for pushed through very different teachers’ selected school measures that ways. salaries and construction provided schools construction of funding and with federal aid. classroom and stronger Kennedy is other facilities. vocational considered the education. first president to make federal aid to education as a major element of domestic policy and strongly support this belief.

197 1963 President Kennedy President President Johnson assassinated, Johnson carries signed two pieces President Johnson on President of legislation in sworn in to office. Kennedy’s December 1963; legacy of the Vocational support for Education Act, public aimed at education. strengthening and expanding vocational education, and the Higher Education Facilities Act dedicated to help colleges build facilities. 1963 Representative Study refuted Republican Enabled passage Edith Green Republic claims criticism of of the Higher published The by highlighting federal aid Education Federal that aid was based on a lack Facilities Act. Government and provided to precedent. Education schools 100 years prior.

198 1964 Presidential President Goldwater Johnson pushed Campaign. Lyndon B. argues federal for additional and Johnson aid to expanded aid advocated for education is beyond those the fortified role first step to enacted by the of federal subordinating “Education government and state and local Congress of federal aid. governments; 1963.” says there is Major legislation no problem in included the education that Economic requires federal Opportunity Act aid. But of 1964, also platform known as the allowed for tax “War on Poverty” credits for Bill. Legislation higher included money education. for jobs training and vocational rehabilitation. Other legislation included helping children from low- income families through Title I, Project Head Start, the Job Corps, Neighborhood Youth Corps and Upward Bound. 1965 Elementary and Congress Secondary expanded Education Act. educational opportunity for poor children and improving instruction in pivotal but usually neglected subjects, such as science, mathematics, and foreign languages. 1966 International Funded Education Act; international study approved grants to and research. colleges.

199 1968 Presidential This bill to Republican President Richard Campaign. create the Party again M. Nixon National shifted to a advocated for Institute of more moderate Congress to Education, was position, citing establish a introduced by inadequate National Institute the democrats. education in of Education, Later, urban areas and which it did in Representative pledging to 1972. Claiborne Pell bring about Pell grants become proposes grants high-quality law in 1969. to undergraduate education for students. all. Platform backed grants, loans, and work-study programs as well as continuing to favor tax credits to help offset the cost of college . Advocated expanded programs for preschool children and suggested the establishment of a commission to study educational quality. 1972 Presidential Democratic Party is Nixon orders a Campaign. members of opposed to halt to court Congress busing for ordered busing worked hard to racial balance, and proposes pass legislation. also boasts 60 allocating $2.5 percent million to improve spending school quality and increase for preserve office of neighborhoods. Education Nixon did little during Nixon’s else for education. first term.

200 1972 Women’s Rights Boost against Movement. sexual Title IX Prohibited discrimination. discrimination on Adds sports and the sex. other programs to create equity. 1977/1978 Tuition Tax Credits Countered Sought to President Carter vs. financial aid. proposal to expand tuition suggests a tuition tax credit tax credits to compromise to tax bill with bill to students credits, and provide students wanting to Financial aid bill with financial attend private passes, but tuition aid. elementary and tax credits come secondary up again in later schools. years. 1980 Presidential President Ended 30 years of Campaign. Ronald extensive support. Reagan, Focused education redefines policy away from education funding programs policy of and toward moral federal suasion. government. Decreased government’s role in education, decentralized many programs. 1983 A Nation At Risk, States take more suggested that responsibility and American students involvement in had low academic their public achievements and schools. Most were outperformed states implement on international reform strategies academic tests. that involve testing and mandated curriculum.

201 1985 William Bennett is Bennett announces appointed Secretary he will use the of Education. post as a “bully pulpit. “ Pushes conservative policies and values, argues for a Western Civilization-based core curriculum and against multicultural and other liberal programs. 1988 Presidential Bush pledges Bush, less Election. to continue conservative than Reagan’s Reagan, earmarks education money for Drug policies. Free Schools and for Magnet School Programs. 1992 Presidential President Clinton signs Campaign. Clinton, first Goals 2000: Democrat in the Educate America White House Act, which passes since Carter, with strong bi- takes aggressive partisan support. action. Using Providing national threat of vetoes, framework for Clinton fought education reform. various Signs America’s Republican Schools Act of efforts to slash 1994, extending education the Elementary funding. and Secondary Act of 1965. 1994 Republican’s gain Representative Education funding control of Newt is slashed. Congress. Gingrich’s Contract with America targets education and job training funds.

202 1996 Presidential School Campaign. vouchers become a keystone of the party’s platform. 2000 Presidential Presidential Senator Kennedy Campaign. campaign was was able to engage contentious and liberal many in organizations in congress did not the development want to work of the legislation. with the president on critical legislation, including the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. 2002 Reauthorization of Senator Edward President Bush Also known as Elementary and Kennedy saw saw Senator “No Child Left Secondary President Bush Kennedy as a Behind,” the Education Act. as being major ally. legislation passes interested in a with strong bi- major overhaul partisan support. of the ESEA. However, support quickly retreats to partisan issues, with varying interpretation of the legislation’s provisions. 2004 Presidential States continue to Campaign. grapple with NCLB. 2008 Presidential Senator Obama Senator Economic Campaign. pledges to move McCain downturn results to reauthorizing suggests that in “stimulus” and revising some of the funds being NCLB. federal awarded to states legislation to short up should be crippled education overhauled to budgets. give states more control.

203 2010 Obama legislative initiatives stymied by the conservative majority that takes hold in 2010. Department of Education begins giving waivers to “work around” existing legislation. DOE also established Race to the Top Grants which service as a stimulus for States and Local communities to adopt more stringent accountability measures.

204 Appendix B

Maps

205

B1. Elementary Map

Existing Elementary Schools within Two Miles of New Charter Elementary Schools Note: Map depicts existing schools within two miles of new charter schools on target to open in the 2010-11 school year.

Actual enrollment impact of individual schools can not be projected as charter schools are open to students districtwide.

O L

Heron Heights ES Riverglades ES #$"95 Legend Park Trails ES W HILLSBORO BLVD Deerfield BeaY ch ES Quiet Waters ES W H Broward Community Charter Tradewinds ES

d Broward Community Charter W. R New Charters (Elementary) SW 10TH ST Deerfield E D

Park ES E

F Imagine at BrowaSrAdWGRASS EXPRESSWAY ! ! N ! Coral Park ES Winston Park ES Park Ridge ES Charter Schools (Elementary) Eagle Ridge ES Country Hills ES Park Springs ES

! Tedder ES Elementary Schools Norcrest ES

Bright Coral Springs ES Hunt, James S. ES SAMPLE RD W S Horizons ! PreK-8 Schools AMPLE RD Paragon ! Forest Hills ES 7 Palmview ES

Parkside ES R

D N Cresthaven ES Liberty ES COPANS RD

# E

Centers (Elementary) WestcheG ster ES

D Cypress Run I Margate ES

R Alternative

Sanders

L Park ES

A R

2 mile radius around O Ramblewood ES Cross C Markham, C. Robert ES Maplewood ES Creek new charter schools Pompano Drew, Somerset Pines Beach ES Coconut Academy Eagles' Nest ES Charles ES d ! Atlantic West ES Creek ES W ATLANTIC BLVD

Riverside ES R

Y Morrow ES Y

T I

X Somerset Bay Academy S E d 1

Cypress ES R

S S E

S U V

I Ch. Sch. of Excell. CSE06_10 A McNab ES

North Lauderdale ES d N

R Tamarac ES Ch. Sch. of Excell. CSE7_10 U G Imagine at N. Lauderdale W ! 95

S #$" !Excelsior Charter of Broward N. Broward Acad. of Excell. ES Pinewood ES ! Broadview ES !Charter Sch. of Excell. @ Tamarac 1 Charter Sch. of Excell. @ Tamarac 2 North Andrews Gardens ES Challenger ES W COMMERCIAL BL VD ! Discovery ES Floranada ES Charter Inst. Training Ctr. COMMERCIAL BLVD

Banyan ES Central Charter School !

D Lloyd Estates ES R

Park Lakes ES

L L

SandpipI er ES Oriole ES

B Oakland Park ES O Welleby ES OAKLAND PARK BLVD PARK BLVD Y N OAKLAND Somerset Village Academy W H Ch. Sch. of Excell. CSE8_10 ! Castle Hill ES d L Ch. Sch. of Excell. CSE09_10 Somerset Neighborhood A Endeavour PLC R

1 d Wilton Manors ES E 4 D

4 E

F Nob Hill ES Royal Palm ES S Rock Island ES

Horizon ES U RISE Acad. Sci. & N

Village ES / R

7 Tech. @ Tamarac

D R W SUNRISE BLVD Lauderdale Bennett ES

S RISE Acad. Sci. and Tech.

Y ! Manors ES T I Dillard ES Marshall, Thurgood ES

S Mirror Lake ES Lauderhill Paul

R Turner ES Wingate

E Oaks Bayview ES V ! I ! Ben Gamla NoEr tShU CNamRpISusE BLVD Larkdale ES Sawgrass ES N d North Side ES

Imagine at Weston U Ben Gamla Charter Sunland Park ES King, Martin Luther ES

N Peters ES Sch. S. Broward Gator Run ES Eagle Point ES Central Park ES Walker ES Broward Estates ES ! Henry McNeal Turner Young, Virginia S. ES LVD

BROWARD B Plantation ES North Fork ES Learning Acad. Y

Indian Trace ES 75 95 W

" " H #$ #$ Westwood Heights ES

Plantation Park ES L A

CharR ter School of Excellence

Flamingo ES Pine Ridge Riverland ES ! E Tropical ES ! D Harbordale ES

Fox Trail ES Charter Sch. of Excell. @ Riverland E

Sunset School S Country Isles ES 595 D #$" Meadowbrook

Croissant Park ES

D ES Foster, Stephen ES

L N I

I Broward Virtual Education

Everglades ES B

Nova Blanche Forman S ES Silver Ridge ES Davie ES !Somerset Academy Davie Manatee Bay ES Nova Eisenhower ES

GRIFFIN RD Cooper City ES

Griffin ES R

. Collins ES

I N

U Bethune, Mary M. ES Dania ES Stirling ES Hawkes Bluff ES STIRLING RD

The Quest Center

S U 75 N ST #$" Charter Sch. of ! Driftwood ES SHERIDA City of Pembroke Pines ES Embassy Creek ES Sheridan Hills ES Excell. @ Davie DAN ST Central Campus SHERI ! Sheridan Park ES Hollywood Hills ES Pasadena Lakes ES Oakridge ES Pembroke Lakes ES ! Chapel Trail ES Florida Intercultural Acad. Kidz Choice Charter Silver Palms ES ! Hollywood Park ES Beachside Montessori ! !Somerset Academy ES MS HS Pines Lakes ES Boulevard Heights ES Village Lakeside ES Sunshine Elem. Charter LVD E HOLLYWOOD B !

INES BLVD d! V P West Hollywood ES

A Ben Gamla Charter

Panther Run ES Hollywood Art & Sci. MS M

R Ben Gamla Hallandale L

D Hollywood Central ES

Palm Cove ES A

. Pembroke Pines ES

P V

Orange Brook ES

I Colbert ES R

O R

U S

G 7 95

City of Pembroke Pines ES U

N #$"

I ! ! West Campus Somerset Academy East ! Lanier-James

M Pembroke Pines ES Education Center A

Silver Shores ES L East Campus F Sunshine ES

D Miramar ES W HALLANDALE BEACH BLV S Sea Castle ES Silver Lakes ES Coconut Palm ES MIRAMAR PKY Sunset Lakes ES Watkins ES ± Perry, Lake Forest ES Dolphin Bay ES Fairway ES Annabel C. ES Hallandale ES

N Whispering Pines IO S Somerset Academy N E Miramar 75 T #$" X MIAMI-DADE COUNTY E Coral Cove ES E IK P N ! R U T

School Boundaries Department Broward County Public Schools May 2010 www.browardschools.com

This map is for display purposes only.

206

B2. Middle School

Existing Middle Schools within Two Miles of New Charter Middle Schools Note: Map depicts existing schools within two miles of new charter schools on target to open in the 2010-11 school year.

Actual enrollment impact of individual schools can not be projected as charter schools are open to students districtwide.

O L

#$"95 Legend W HILLSBORO BLVD

Broward Community Charter MS L Deerfield A

d R Beach MS Lyons Creek MS New Charters (Middle) Discovery Middle Charter SW 10TH ST E D

Imagine MS @ Broward E

Westglades F SAWGRASS EXPRESSWAY

MS N ! d ! Charter Schools (Middle)

Coral Springs MS ! Middle Schools Forest Glen MS

SAMPLE RD Bright W SAMPLE RD Horizons Crystal Lake MS ! Sawgrass !

PreK-8 Schools Springs MS ! City of Coral Springs Pompano Charter MS

D N

COPANS RD

# E

Centers (Middle) G

D Cypress Run I

R Alternative

A R

2 mile radius around O Cross C Dave Thomas Creek Education Center, West Campus CharlesDrew new charter schools Ramblewood MS Family Resouce Somerset Pines Margate MS Center Pompano Academy Beach MS d !Eagles' Nest MS W ATLANTIC BLVD

R Dave Thomas D

Education Center

Y Y

T I

X Somerset Bay Academy S E d 1

S S E

S U

V I

A N

R U

W Silver Lakes MS ! 95 A Imagine at N. Lauderdale MS

S ! #$" Touchdowns4Life !N. Broward Acad. of Excell. MS Rickards, James S. MS

Millennium MS

W COMMERCIAL BLVD

COMMERCIAL BLVD

Westpine MS

L Lauderdale Lakes MS

O OAKLAND PARK BLVD PARK BLVD Y N OAKLAND Eagle Academy W

H ! dSomerset Acad. Village MS L A

1 Dandy, William E. MS E 4 D

4 PACE Center for Girls E

F S

U RISE Acad. Sci. & N Lauderhill M S

/ Ashe, Arthur R. MS R

7 Tech. @ Tamarac

D R

W SUNRISE BLVD Bair MS S

Y ! T

I Smart School Sunrise MS S

R Wingate

E Plantation MS Oaks V I Ben Gamla NoEr tShU CNamRpISusE BLVD

N d

N Parkway MS

BROWARD BLVD Broward Juvenile

Detention Center Y

75 95 W

" " H

#$ #$

A R

Pine Ridge E

D E

Tequesta Trace MS F

Sunset School S Indian Ridge MS 595

D #$" Seminole MS

L Seagull School

L N I

I Broward Virtual Education Whiddon-Rogers H

M New River MS

L O

F Florida Ocean

7 Sciences Institute

S R

Nova MS S

GRIFFIN RD

Falcon Cove MS

Pioneer MS V

N U

STIRLING RD

The Quest Center Attucks MS 7 2 Olsen MS S Intl. School of Broward U ! Driftwood MS #$"75 SHERIDAN ST SHERIDAN ST ! Silver Trail MS City of Pembroke Pines MS Central Campus Apollo MS Florida Intercultural Acad. MS Beachside Montessori ! ! ! Village Paragon Acad. of Tech. Pines MS LVD E HOLLYWOOD B !

Young, Walter C. MS INES BLVD d! Hollywood Art & Sci. V P

A Ben Gamla Charter

R Ben Gamla Hallandale

. D

P Thompson Academy V

I R

O R McNicol MS

U S

G 7 95 U

N #$" ! I Lanier-James

M d Education Center

City of Pembroke Pines MS A Somerset Prep. MS

L F

West Campus W HALLANDALE BEACH BLV S New Renaissance MS Gulfstream MS MIRAMAR PKY Perry, Henry D. MS Hallandale Adult ±

N Whispering Pines Glades MS IO S N E 75 T #$" X Somerset Academy MIAMI-DADE COUNTY E E Miramar MS IK P N ! R U T

School Boundaries Department Broward County Public Schools May 2010 www.browardschools.com

This map is for display purposes only.

207

B3. High School

Existing High Schools within Two Miles of New Charter High Schools Note: Map depicts existing schools within two miles of new charter schools on target to open in the 2010-11 school year.

Actual enrollment impact of individual schools can not be projected as charter schools are open to students districtwide.

O L

#$"95 W HILLSBORO BLVD Legend Y W

R d SW 10TH ST E dD New Charters (High) E Mavericks HS of

F Stoneman Douglas SAWGRASS EXPRESSWAY N. Broward Co. HS N Deerfield ! Charter Schools (High) Beach HS

! High Schools Monarch HS Coral Springs HS SAMPLE RD Bright W SAMPLE RD Horizons # ! City of Coral Springs

Centers (High) 7 R

Coral Glades HS S

N D

COPANS RD

E G

D Cypress Run 2 mile radius around I

R Alternative

A Coconut new charter schools R O Creek HS Cross C Dave Thomas Creek Education Center, West Campus CharlesDrew Ely, Blanche HS Atlantic Family Resouce Technical Center Pompano VD W ATLANTIC BL Beach HS

Taravella, J.PR . HS Dave Thomas D

Education Center

Y Y

T I

X S E d 1

S Somerset Prep. HS - Broward S E

S U

V I

A N

R U

A 95

S #$"

W COMMERCIAL BLVD Northeast HS

COMMERCIAL BLVD North University High !

Anderson, Boyd HS

L Piper HS

B Life Skills O OAKLAND PARK BLVD PARK BLVD Y N OAKLAND Eagle Academy ! W H ! L A

1 E

4 D

4 PACE Center for Girls E F S

U Fort LauderdaNle HS

7 D

Lauderhill High R W SUNRISE BLVD

Plantation HS ! S

I S

R Wingate

E Oaks Mavericks HS of C. Broward Co.

V Dillard HS

I E SUNRISE BLVD d

BROWARD BLVD Broward Juvenile Detention Center

Stranahan HS Y 75 95 W

#$" #$" H

A R

Pine Ridge E

Western HS D

South Plantation HS Sunset School S 595

D #$"

L Seagull School

L I

I Broward Virtual Education Whiddon-Rogers

B McFatter, William T. Technical

L O

F Florida Ocean

N Nova HS

7 Sciences Institute S

College Academy @ BCR C

Cypress Bay HS

GRIFFIN RD

I N

Lighthouse U

STIRLING RD Cooper City HS Hollywood Hills HS

The Quest Center

7 2

S Intl. School of Broward U ! #$"75 SHERIDAN ST Sheridan City of Pembroke Pines High SHERIDAN ST Technical South Broward HS ! Center

Flanagan, Charles W. HS ! Somerset Conservatory WOOD BLVD

E HOLLY PINES BLVD

V McArthur HS

West Broward HS R

D Thompson Academy

P V

I Mavericks HS of R

S 1 N

S. Broward Co. O

U S

G 7 95 U

N #$" I Lanier-James Hallandale HS

M Education Center

L F

W HALLANDALE BEACH BLV S MIRAMAR PKY Fl. HS College d! Hallandale Adult Dolphin Park High ± and Career Success Miramar HS ! Parkway Academy N Whispering Pines IO S N E 75 T #$" X Everglades HS E MIAMI-DADE COUNTY E IK P N R U T

School Boundaries Department Broward County Public Schools May 2010 www.browardschools.com

This map is for display purposes only.

208

B4. Combined Map

Existing Schools within Two Miles of New Charter Schools Note: Map depicts existing schools within two miles of new charter schools on target to open in the 2010-11 school year.

Actual enrollment impact of individual schools can not be projected as charter schools are open to students districtwide.

O L

Heron Heights ES Riverglades ES "#$95 Park Trails ES W HILLSBORO BLVD Deerfield BeaY ch ES Quiet Waters ES W H Broward Community Charter Tradewinds ES Legend L Broward Community Charter MS Deerfield A

Broward Community Charter W. R Beach MS

Lyons Creek MS E Discovery Middle Charter SW 10TH ST Deerfield dD Imagine MS @ Broward Park ES E Mavericks HS of

Westglades F d Stoneman Douglas Imagine at BrowaSrAdWGRASS EXPRESSWAY N. Broward Co. MS N New Charter Schools ! HS d! Coral Park ES Winston Park ES Deerfield Park Ridge ES Eagle Ridge ES Country Hills ES Park Springs ES Beach HS ! Charter Schools Coral Springs MS Tedder ES Forest Glen MS Monarch HS Norcrest ES

Bright ! Coral Springs ES Hunt, James S. ES Coral Springs HS SAMPLE RD Elementary Schools W SAMPLE RD Horizons Crystal Lake MS Sawgrass Paragon ! Springs MS ! City of Coral Springs Pompano Charter MS Forest Hills ES 7 Palmview ES Parkside ES R

Coral Glades HS S

R N

D Cresthaven ES Liberty ES COPANS RD

! E

Middle Schools WestcheG ster ES

D Cypress Run I

R Margate ES Alternative Sanders

L Park ES

A Coconut R

O Ramblewood ES Creek HS Cross C Dave Thomas Markham, C. Robert ES Maplewood ES Creek ! Education Center, PreK-8 Schools West Campus CharlesDrew Ely, Blanche HS Pompano Ramblewood MS Atlantic Drew, Family Resouce Somerset Pines Beach ES Margate MS Technical Coconut Center Pompano Academy Eagles' Nest ES Charles ES Pompano Creek ES VDBeach MS d !Eagles' Nest MS Atlantic West ES W ATLANTIC BL Beach HS

Riverside ES Taravella, J.PR . HS Dave Thomas D

! Education Center

Y Morrow ES Y

High Schools P

T I

X Somerset Bay Academy S E d 1

Cypress ES R

S Somerset Prep. HS - Broward S E

S U V

A I d Ch. Sch. of Excell. CSE06_10 McNab ES

Tamarac ES N North Lauderdale ES Ch. Sch. of Excell. CSE7_10 U G Imagine at N. Lauderdale # W Silver Lakes MS ! Centers A Imagine at N. Lauderdale MS 95 S "#$ !Excelsior Charter of Broward N. Broward Acad. of Excell. ES Touchdowns4Life Pinewood ES!N. Broward Acad. of Excell. MS Broadview ES Rickards, James S. MS Millennium MS !Charter Sch. of Excell. @ Tamarac 1 Two Mile Radius around Charter Sch. of Excell. @ Tamarac 2 North Andrews Gardens ES W COMMERCIAL BLVD Northeast HS Challenger ES ! Discovery ES Floranada ES New Charter Schools Charter Inst. Training Ctr. COMMERCIAL BLVD Westpine MS North University High Banyan ES ! Central Charter School ! Anderson, Boyd HS

D Lloyd Estates ES R

Park Lakes ES

L Lauderdale Lakes MS

L Piper HS

SandpipI er ES Oriole ES

B Life Skills Oakland Park ES O Welleby ES OAKLAND PARK BLVD K BLVD Y N Eagle Academy OAKLAND PAR ! Somerset Village Academy W ! H Ch. Sch. of Excell. CSE8_10 !Somerset Acad. Village MS Castle Hill ES d L Ch. Sch. of Excell. CSE09_10 Somerset Neighborhood A Endeavour PLC R

1 Dandy, William E. MS d Wilton Manors ES E 4 D

4 PACE Center for Girls E

F Nob Hill ES Horizon ES Royal Palm ES S Rock Island ES U RISE Acad. Sci. & N Lauderhill M S Fort Lauderdale HS

Village ES / Ashe, Arthur R. MS R

7 Tech. @ Tamarac

D R W SUNRISE BLVD Bair MS Lauderhill High Lauderdale Bennett ES

Plantation HS ! S RISE Acad. Sci. and Tech. Y !

T Manors ES I Smart School Dillard ES Marshall, Thurgood ES Sunrise MS

S Mirror Lake ES Lauderhill Paul

R Turner ES Wingate

E Plantation MS Oaks Mavericks HS of C. Broward Co. Bayview ES V ! I ! Ben Gamla NoEr tSh UCNamRpISusE BLVD Larkdale ES Dillard HS d

N d North Side ES Imagine at Weston Sawgrass ES Ben Gamla Charter U Sunland Park ES King, Martin Luther ES

N Peters ES Sch. S. Broward Gator Run ES Eagle Point ES Central Park ES Parkway MS Walker ES Broward Estates ES ! Henry McNeal Turner Young, Virginia S. ES BROWARD BLVD Plantation ES Broward Juvenile Learning Acad. Detention Center North Fork ES

Stranahan HS Y

Indian Trace ES 75 95 W H

"#$ "#$ Westwood Heights ES

Plantation Park ES L A

CharR ter School of Excellence Flamingo ES Pine Ridge Riverland ES ! E

Western HS D Tropical ES !

Fox Trail ES Charter Sch. of Excell. @ Riverland E Harbordale ES F

Tequesta Trace MS

South Plantation HS Sunset School S Indian Ridge MS 595 Country Isles ES D "#$ Seminole MS Meadowbrook

Croissant Park ES

D ES Foster, Stephen ES

G Seagull School

L I

I Broward Virtual Education Whiddon-Rogers H

M New River MS

Everglades ES B McFatter, William T. Technical

L O

F Florida Ocean

N Nova HS

7 Sciences Institute S College Academy @ BCR C

Nova MS S

Nova Blanche Forman S ES Silver Ridge ES Davie ES !Somerset Academy Davie Manatee Bay ES Nova Eisenhower ES

Cypress Bay HS GRIFFIN RD Falcon Cove MS Cooper City ES

Griffin ES R

. Collins ES

Pioneer MS V

I N

Lighthouse U Bethune, Mary M. ES Dania ES Stirling ES Hawkes Bluff ES STIRLING RD Cooper City HS Hollywood Hills HS

The Quest Center Attucks MS

7 2

S Olsen MS Intl. School of Broward U ! Driftwood MS 75 ST "#$ Charter Sch. of Driftwood ES SHERIDAN City of Pembroke Pines ES ! Sheridan Sheridan Hills ES Embassy Creek ES Excell. @ Davie ST City of Pembroke Pines High Central Campus SHERIDAN Technical South Broward HS ! ! Sheridan Park ES Center Hollywood Hills ES City of Pembroke Pines MS Silver Trail MS Pasadena Lakes ES Oakridge ES Central Campus Pembroke Lakes ES ! Chapel Trail ES Flanagan, Florida Intercultural Acad. Kidz Choice Charter Apollo MS Silver Palms ES Charles W. HS Florida Intercultural Acad. MS ! Hollywood Park ES Beachside Montessori ! !Somerset Academy ES MS HS Pines Lakes ES Boulevard Heights ES Village Paragon Acad. of Tech. Lakeside ES Pines MS Sunshine Elem. Charter Somerset Conservatory WOOD BLVD

E HOLLY

Young, Walter C. MS PINES BLVD ! ! Hollywood Art & Sci. V d

McArthur HS West Hollywood ES A Ben Gamla Charter

Panther Run ES Hollywood Art & Sci. MS M

West Broward HS R Ben Gamla Hallandale

L D Hollywood Central ES

Palm Cove ES A

d. Pembroke Pines ES

D P Thompson Academy

V S

Orange Brook ES Colbert ES

I Mavericks HS of R

N 1

S. Broward Co.

O McNicol MS

U S

7 G 95

City of Pembroke Pines ES U

N ! "#$ !! West Campus I Somerset Academy East d! Lanier-James Hallandale HS M Pembroke Pines ES Education Center City of Pembroke Pines MS A Somerset Prep. MS Silver Shores ES L East Campus

F Sunshine ES

D West Campus Miramar ES W HALLANDALE BEACH BLV S Sea Castle ES Silver Lakes ES Coconut Palm ES New Renaissance MS Perry, Henry D. MS Gulfstream MS Sunset Lakes ES MIRAMAR PKY Fl. HS College d! Watkins ES Hallandale Adult Dolphin Park High Perry, Lake Forest ES Dolphin Bay ES and Career Success Fairway ES Annabel C. ES Miramar HS Hallandale ES ! Parkway Academy N Whispering Pines Glades MS IO S Somerset Academy N E Miramar 75 T ± "#$ X Somerset Academy Everglades HS E Coral Cove ES E Miramar MS IK P N ! R U T MIAMI-DADE COUNTY

School Boundaries Department Broward County Public Schools May 2010 www.browardschools.com

This map is for display purposes only.

209

Appendix C

SAC Attendance for Title 1 Schools x PTA Membership 2008-2009

SAC Attendance For Title One Schools x PTA Membership, 2008-2009 School Level PTA State Comp Broward Comp

Apollo M Y Ashe, Arthur M Y 2/9 1/9 Atlantic West E Y 6/6 1/6 Attucks M Y Bair M N 0/2 0/2 Banyan E Y 7/7 0/7 Bennett E Y 0/0 0/0 Bethune E Y 1/2 1/2 Boulevard E Y 8/9 6/9 Heights Broadview E N 8/8 8/8 Broward E Y 2/2 2/2 Estates Castle Hill Challenger E Y 6/6 6/6 Coconut E Y 16/16 1/16 Creek Coconut H Y 6/9 2/9 Creek Colbert E Y 4/4 2/4 Collins E Y 0/1 0/1 Coral Cove E Y 9/9 8/9 Coral Springs E Y 9/9 1/9 Coral Springs H N 8/9 1/9 Cresthaven E Y 5/5 0/5 Croissant E Y Park Crystal Lake M Y 7/7 1/7 Cypress E Y 9/9 2/9 Dandy M Y 3/8 3/8 Dania E N 6/7 0/7 Davie E N Deerfield Bch E Y 9/9 5/9 Deerfield Bch H Y 9/10 9/10 Deerfield Bch M Y 1/3 0/3 Deerfield E Y 0/6 0/6 Park Dillard E Y 13/13 12/13 Dillard H Y 5/6 1/6 Drew, Charles E Y Driftwood E Y 3/3 3/3 Driftwood M Y 7/7 1/7 Ely H N 10/10 8/10 210

Endeavour E Y 5/5 5/5 Forest Glen M Y 10/10 3/10 Forest Hills E N 10/10 5/10 Foster, S E Y 4/4 0/4 Ft. Lauderdale H N 2/3 0/3 Gulfstream M Y Hallandale E N 2/3 1/3 Hallandale H N Hollywood E Y Central Hollywood H N 4/7 2/7 Hills Hollywood E N Park Horizon E Y Hunt E Y 7/7 6/7 King, M.L. E Y 9/10 9/10 Lake Forest E N Larkdale E Y 1/6 0/6 Lauderdale M Y 2/2 0/2 Lakes Lauderhill M Y Lauderhill P T E Y 2/9 1/9 Liberty E Y 6/8 3/8 Lloyd Estates E N 3/8 0/8 Lyons Creek M Y 8/8 4/8 Maplewood E N 6/6 4/6 Margate E Y 5/5 5/5 Margate M Y 9/12 9/12 Markham E N 6/7 1/7 Marshall, T E N 8/8 2/8 McNab E Y 7/9 0/9 McNicol M Y 6/9 5/9 Meadowbrook E Y Miramar E Y 6/6 6/6 Miramar H N Mirror Lake E Y 8/8 8/8 Morrow E Y 4/5 0/5 Millennium M Y New M Y 5/5 5/5 Renaissance New River M Y 3/8 3/8 Nob Hill E Y 9/9 9/9 Norcrest E Y 1/1 0/1 N. Andrews E Y 9/9 1/9 Gardens North Fork E Y 2/2 0/2 N. Lauderdale E Y 0/5 0/5 North Side E Y 3/3 0/3 Nova Blanche E Y 8/9 5/9 Nova E Y 1/1 1/1 Eisenhower Nova M Y 4/4 0/4 211

Northeast H N 8/8 3/8 Oakland Park E Y Oakridge E Y 2/2 2/2 Olsen M N 1/1 0/1 Orangebrook E Y 8/8 3/8 Oriole E N 7/7 0/7 Palm Cove E Y 8/8 3/8 Palmview E Y 5/5 2/5 Park Lakes E N 7/9 4/9 Park Ridge E N 6/9 4/9 Parkside E Y 10/10 8/10 Parkway M Y Pasadena E Y 7/7 3/7 Lakes Pembroke E Y 9/9 1/9 Pines Perry, A.C. E Y 8/8 8/8 Perry H.D. M Y 2/4 2/4 Peters E Y 9/9 3/9 Pines M Y Pines Lakes E Y 6/6 5/6 Pinewood E N 9/9 9/9 Plantation E N 1/7 1/7 Plantation M N 9/9 1/9 Pompano Bch E Y 9/9 1/9 Pompano Bch M Y 7/7 7/7 Quite Waters E Y 8/8 8/8 Ramblewood E Y 8/8 8/8 Rickards M Y 9/9 2/9 Riverland E N 7/9 0/9 Rock Island E Y 4/6 2/6 Royal Palm E Y 7/8 7/8 Sanders Park E Y 10/10 8/10 Sandpiper E Y 4/4 4/4 Seminole M Y 1/1 1/1 Sheridan Hills E N 6/6 1/6 Sheridan Park E Y 11/11 10/11 Silver Lakes M Y 5/7 0/7 South H N 11/12 1/12 Broward South H N 8/8 3/8 Plantation Stirling E Y 11/11 3/11 Sunland Park E Y 4/6 3/6 Sunshine E N 5/7 0/7 Sunrise M Y Stranahan H N Tamarac E Y 9/9 2/9 Tedder E Y 4/4 4/4 Village E Y 9/9 7/9 Walker E Y Watkins E Y 2/9 1/9 Welleby E Y 8/8 8/8 212

West E Y 1/2 1/2 Hollywood Westwood E Y 7/7 7/7 Heights Westpine M N Wilton E Y 2/2 2/2 Manors

KEY: Shaded areas represent Title I schools.

213

Appendix D

Complete Responses to Customer Satisfaction Survey 2010-2011

COMPLETE RESPONSES TO CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2010-2011 Elementary Students Highest Lowest Loss Loss Average Average # Question 1 My teacher(s) believe I can succeed. 95.1 92.7 2 My school provides all of the resources I need for learning. 9 0.7 90.3 3 My teacher(s) inform(s) my parents about my progress. 84.9 84.1 4 My teacher(s) regularly tell(s) me how I am doing in school. 80.1 79.2 5 My teacher(s) answer(s) my questions in a way that I can understand. 87.8 88.1 6 My teacher(s) treat(s) me with fairness. 80.6 85.1 7 I show respect to my teacher(s). 91.3 92.9 8 I feel safe at my school. 80.5 87.1 9 Rules are applied fairly to all students at my school. 81.3 76.3 10 I am proud of my school. 81.9 83.7 11 My school is kept clean and in good condition. 71.5 81.5 12 There is an adult at school I can talk to about my personal problems. 76.1 76.9 13 My homework assignments help to reinforce what I am learning at school. 88.9 90.0 14 I can meet with a guidance counselor when I need assistance in school. 73.1 71.8 15 When I have homework, someone at home makes sure I work and understand the assignments. 87.7 84.4 16 The principal at my school helps me when I have concerns. 62.6 68. 8 17 My principal is effective at running my school. 77.1 86.7 18 I see the school staff members around my school. 87.3 91.7 19 I am aware of the purposes and goals of my school. 85.1 82.3 20 Students bring drugs or alcohol to my school. 9.1 20.0 21 Students carry weapons at my school. 14.8 22.5 22 I am responsible for what I learn. 90.9 90.9 23 I enjoy learning at my school. 85.2 85.6 24 I am accepted and feel like I belong at this school. 77.8 67.0 25 My school has after-school activities/programs for students. 86.2 71.5 26 This year I have discussed my recent test scores with a guidance counselor, teachers, or other school staff. 51.0 62.0 27 I have sufficient access to computers and technology at school to do my schoolwork. 77.5 79.7 28 My current teachers have taught me how to use technology (computers and Internet) to do my schoolwork. 80.0 83.6 29 My school contacts my parents when I have behavior problems in school. 78.2 80.9 30 This year, school staff has helped me to select high level courses that challenge my abilities. 61.3 64.3 31 (High School Only) I have used the district’s BEEP Web site, during this school year, to access study guides or to log into Virtual Counselor to review my school records. 0.0 0.0 32 Students at school bully me. 22.5 29.7 33 Teachers or another adult at school told our class about bullying this school year. 84.9 87.0 34 I know how to report a bullying incident. 81.6 83.5 35 (High School Only) This year, school staff has helped me to plan for life after graduation. 0.0 0.0

214

Highest Lowest Loss Loss Average Average

Middle Students Questions My teacher(s) believe I can succeed. 85.3 86.9 My school provides all of the resources I need for learning. 75.9 79.2 My teacher(s) inform(s) my parents about my progress. 59.1 58.0 My teacher(s) regularly tell(s) me how I am doing in school. 58.7 55.9 My teacher(s) answer(s) my questions in a way that I can understand. 67.7 70.6 My teacher(s) treat(s) me with fairness. 60.7 64.2 I show respect to my teacher(s). 85.4 86.9 I feel safe at my school. 51.3 62.7 Rules are applied fairly to all students at my school. 57.3 61.1 I am proud of my school. 48.3 59.9 My school is kept clean and in good condition. 46.5 57.5 There is an adult at school I can talk to about my personal problems. 65.8 68.8 My homework assignments help to reinforce what I am learning at school. 78.8 77.2 I can meet with a guidance counselor when I need assistance in school. 70.3 71.9 When I have homework, someone at home makes sure I work and understand the assignments. 76.8 77.1 The principal at my school helps me when I have concerns. 35.0 43.0 My principal is effective at running my school. 5 6.4 67.3 I see the school staff members around my school. 88.9 90.6 I am aware of the purposes and goals of my school. 78.1 78.3 Students bring drugs or alcohol to my school. 33.6 33.0 Students carry weapons at my school. 22.5 19.6 I am responsible for what I learn. 85.2 85.3 I enjoy learning at my school. 56.5 59.4 I am accepted and feel like I belong at this school. 62.2 69.7 My school has after-school activities/programs for students. 80.6 81.2 This year I have discussed my recent test scores with a guidance counselor, teachers, or other school staff. 45.2 48.0 I have sufficient access to computers and technology at school to do my schoolwork. 69.2 73.9 My current teachers have taught me how to use technology (computers and Internet) to do my schoolwork. 66.8 73.0 My school contacts my parents when I have behavior problems in school. 72.8 73.1 This year, school staff has helped me to select high level courses that challenge my abilities. 53.3 60.5 (High School Only) I have used the district’s BEEP Web site, during this school 0.0 0.0 year, to access study guides or to log into Virtual Counselor to review my school records. Students at school bully me. 13.0 13.3 Teachers or another adult at school told our class about bullying this school year. 77.3 79.8 I know how to report a bullying incident. 78.8 82.6 (High School Only) This year, school staff has helped me to plan for life after graduation. 0.0 0.0

215

Highest Lowest Loss Loss Average Average

High Student Questions My teacher(s) believe I can succeed. 85.3 86.9 My school provides all of the resources I need for learning. 75.9 79.2 My teacher(s) inform(s) my parents about my progress. 59.1 58.0 My teacher(s) regularly tell(s) me how I am doing in school. 5 8.7 55.9 My teacher(s) answer(s) my questions in a way that I can understand. 67.7 70.6 My teacher(s) treat(s) me with fairness. 60.7 64.2 I show respect to my teacher(s). 85.4 86.9 I feel safe at my school. 51.3 62.7 Rules are applied fairly to all students at my school. 57.3 61.1 I am proud of my school. 48.3 59.9 My school is kept clean and in good condition. 46.5 57.5 There is an adult at school I can talk to about my personal problems. 65.8 68.8 My homework assignments help to reinforce what I am learning at school. 78.8 77.2 I can meet with a guidance counselor when I need assistance in school. 70.3 71.9 When I have homework, someone at home makes sure I work and understand the assignments. 76.8 77.1 The principal at my school helps me when I have concerns. 35.0 43.0 My principal is effective at running my school. 56.4 67.3 I see the school staff members around my school. 88.9 90.6 I am aware of the purposes and goals of my school. 78.1 78.3 Students bring drugs or alcohol to my school. 33.6 33.0 Students carry weapons at my school. 22.5 19.6 I am responsible for what I learn. 85.2 85.3 I enjoy learning at my school. 56.5 59.4 I am accepted and feel like I belong at this school. 62.2 69.7 My school has after-school activities/programs for students. 80.6 81.2 This year I have discussed my recent test scores with a guidance counselor, teachers, or other school staff. 45.2 48.0 I have sufficient access to computers and technology at school to do my schoolwork. 69.2 73.9 My current teachers have taught me how to use technology (computers and Internet) to do my schoolwork. 66.8 73.0 My school contacts my parents when I have behavior problems in school. 72.8 73.1 This year, school staff has helped me to select high level courses that challenge my abilities. 53.3 60.5 (High School Only) I have used the district’s BEEP Web site, during this school 0.0 0.0 year, to access study guides or to log into Virtual Counselor to review my school records. Students at school bully me. 13.0 13.3 Teachers or another adult at school told our class about bullying this school year. 77.3 79.8 I know how to report a bullying incident. 78.8 82.6 (High School Only) This year, school staff has helped me to plan for life after graduation. 0.0 0.0

216

Highest Lowest Loss Loss Elementary Teacher Average Average Item # Question 1 I believe all students can succeed. 96.4 98.5 2 The school provides adequate resources for me to teach my students. 68.0 84.2 3 I inform parents about their children’s progress in school on a regular basis. 98.0 98.1 I regularly assess students and inform them of their academic 4 progress. 98.9 97.5 5 I work with each student to explain material in a way that he/she can understand. 100.0 99.6 6 I treat all my students with fairness. 100.0 100.0 7 My students show me respect. 87.9 94.7 8 The students are safe at school. 86.8 98.5 9 I feel safe at my school. 86.4 99.6 10 Rules are applied fairly to all students at my school. 77.1 89.8 11 I am proud of my school. 86.9 97.0 12 My school is kept clean and in good condition. 80.3 82.3 13 There is an adult at school that students and parents can talk to about students’ problems. 88.2 96.8 14 I give challenging homework assignments. 8 6.4 85.7 15 My students can meet with a guidance counselor when they need assistance in school. 79.3 87.0 16 Parents or guardians share responsibility with the school for the students’ academic progress. 53.7 70.5 17 I respond quickly to parents’ requests. 98.8 100.0 18 The principal at my school responds to my concerns. 83.0 93.4 19 I can rely on parents to help when achievement or behavior problems occur with their child. 55.5 69.2 20 The principal does an effective job of running my school. 82.5 92.3 21 Administrators are highly visible throughout my school. 83.8 95.7 22 I am aware of the purposes and goals of my school. 91.2 97.4 23 Students bring drugs or alcohol to this school. 3.2 1.2 24 Students carry weapons at this school. 6.8 1.9 25 Students bear responsibility for what they learn. 62.0 77.5 26 The training I have received through staff development activities has enabled me to become a better teacher. 86.5 93.1 27 My input on school decisions is solicited and valued. 66.0 81.0 28 I am satisfied with the learning environment at my school. 76 .7 87.9 29 I am satisfied with the working conditions at my school. 75.4 87.9 30 All students are accepted and feel like they belong at this school. 83.2 90.7 31 My school provides adequate after-school activities/programs for students. 77.3 93.0 32 This year I have discussed my students’ recent test scores with guidance or other school staff. 86.2 91.7 33 My students have sufficient access to computers and technology at school to do their schoolwork. 73.0 64.8 34 I have taught my current students how to use technology (computers and Internet) to do their schoolwork. 89.8 77.6 35 This school contacts parents when behavior problems occur at school. 84.4 90.7 36 (High School Only) This year, school staff has helped my students to select high level courses that challenge their abilities. 0.0 0.0

217

37 I have used information from the BEEP Web site to plan instructional activities for my students this year. 92.5 90.2 38 My colleagues share effective, innovative approaches with me to try in my classroom. 88.9 92.4 39 My school has provided me with information about energy conservation. 73.8 81.9 40 My school has an active recycling program. 45.4 75.9 41 I have been trained on the Anti-Bullying policy this school year. 92.3 93.0 42 I can effectively handle a bullying situation. 93.0 94.6 43 Students at school bully one another. 43.3 25.5 44 (High School Only) This year, school staff has helped students to plan for life after graduation. 0.0 0.0

Highest Lowest Loss Loss Middle teacher Average Average Item Question # 1 I believe all students can succeed. 96.4 98.5 2 The school provides adequate resources for me to teach my students. 68.0 84.2 I inform parents about their children’s progress in school on a regular 3 basis. 98.0 98.1 4 I regularly assess students and inform them of their academic progress. 98.9 97.5 5 I work with each student to explain material in a way that he/she can understand. 100.0 99.6 6 I treat all my students with fairness. 100.0 100.0 7 My students show me respect. 87.9 94.7 8 The students are safe at school. 86.8 98.5 9 I feel safe at my school. 86.4 99.6 10 Rules are applied fairly to all students at my school. 77.1 89.8 11 I am proud of my school. 86.9 97.0 12 My school is kept clean and in good condition. 80.3 82.3 13 There is an adult at school that students and parents can talk to about students’ problems. 88.2 96.8 14 I give challenging homework assignments. 86.4 85.7 15 My students can meet with a guidance counselor when they need assistance in school. 79.3 87.0 16 Parents or guardians share responsibility with the school for the students’ academic progress. 53.7 70.5 17 I respond quickly to parents’ requests. 98.8 100.0 18 The principal at my school responds to my concerns. 83.0 93.4 19 I can rely on parents to help when achievement or behavior problems occur with their child. 55.5 69.2 20 The principal does an effective job of running my school. 82.5 92.3 21 Administrators are highly visible throughout my school. 83.8 95.7 22 I am aware of the purposes and goals of my school. 91.2 97.4 23 Students bring drugs or alcohol to this school. 3.2 1.2 24 Students carry weapons at this school. 6.8 1.9 25 Students bear responsibility for what they learn. 62.0 77.5 26 The training I have received through staff development activities has enabled me to become a better teacher. 86.5 93.1 27 My input on school decisions is solicited and valued. 66.0 81.0

218

28 I am satisfied with the learning environment at my school. 76.7 87.9 29 I am satisfied with the working conditions at my school. 75.4 87.9 30 All students are accepted and feel like they belong at this school. 83.2 90.7 My school provides adequate after-school activities/programs for 31 students. 77.3 93.0 32 This year I have discussed my students’ recent test scores with guidance or other school staff. 86.2 91.7 33 My students have sufficient access to computers and technology at school to do their schoolwork. 73.0 64.8 34 I have taught my current students how to use technology (computers and Internet) to do their schoolwork. 89.8 77.6 35 This school contacts parents when behavior problems occur at school. 84.4 90.7 36 (High School Only) This year, school staff has helped my students to select high level courses that challenge their abilities. 0.0 0.0 37 I have used information from the BEEP Web site to plan instructional activities for my students this year. 92.5 90.2 38 My colleagues share effective, innovative approaches with me to try in my classroom. 88.9 92.4

Highest Lowest High Teacher Loss Loss Average Average Questions 1 I believe all students can succeed. 89.4 91.1 2 The school provides adequate resources for me to teach my students. 78.0 69.3 3 I inform parents about their children’s progress in school on a regular basis. 89.8 89.3 4 I regularly assess students and inform them of their academic progress. 98.2 98.2 5 I work with each student to explain material in a way that he/she can understand. 96.2 97.4 6 I treat all my students with fairness. 99.5 99.7 7 My students show me respect. 84.2 88.8 8 The students are safe at school. 80.5 75.5 9 I feel safe at my school. 85.7 81.2 10 Rules are applied fairly to all students at my school. 65.2 56.9 11 I am proud of my school. 85.1 79.5 12 My school is kept clean and in good condition. 85.5 75.2 13 There is an adult at school that students and parents can talk to about students’ problems. 93.5 92.8 14 I give challenging homework assignments. 88.2 79.5 15 My students can meet with a guidance counselor when they need assistance in school. 90.9 87.6 16 Parents or guardians share responsibility with the school for the students’ academic progress. 54.1 52.2 17 I respond quickly to parents’ requests. 98.5 98.6 18 The principal at my school responds to my concerns. 82.4 76.8 19 I can rely on parents to help when achievement or behavior problems occur with their child. 52.0 52.9 20 The principal does an effective job of running my school. 84.5 77.2 21 Administrators are highly visible throughout my school. 82.6 77.1 22 I am aware of the purposes and goals of my school. 95.4 89.8 23 Students bring drugs or alcohol to this school. 38.8 38.0 24 Students carry weapons at this school. 22.9 16.9 219

25 Students bear responsibility for what they learn. 58.0 57.7 26 The training I have received through staff development activities has enabled me to become a better teacher. 75.5 74.2 27 My input on school decisions is solicited and valued. 61.3 59.6 28 I am satisfied with the learning environment at my school. 71.3 67.4 29 I am satisfied with the working conditions at my school. 76 .5 71.2 30 All students are accepted and feel like they belong at this school. 67.8 64.5 31 My school provides adequate after-school activities/programs for students. 88.1 89.7 32 This year I have discussed my students’ recent test scores with guidance or other school staff. 87.7 84.4 33 My students have sufficient access to computers and technology at school to do their schoolwork. 79.8 75.6 34 I have taught my current students how to use technology (computers and Internet) to do their schoolwork. 83.5 78.4 35 This school contacts parents when behavior problems occur at school. 84.6 81.3 36 (High School Only) This year, school staff has helped my students to select high level courses that challenge their abilities. 76.8 73.5 37 I have used information from the BEEP Web site to plan instructional activities for my students this year. 72.8 72.4 38 My colleagues share effective, innovative approaches with me to try in my classroom. 87.2 86.2 39 My school has provided me with information about energy conservation. 63.7 48.6 40 My school has an active recycling program. 80.2 73.2 41 I have been trained on the Anti-Bullying policy this school year. 93.1 89.1 42 I can effectively handle a bullying situation. 91.0 86.4 43 Students at school bully one another. 37.3 40.9 44 (High School Only) This year, school staff has helped students to plan for life after graduation. 74.6 69.3

Elementary Parent High Low Loss Loss Average Average

# Question 1 My child’s teacher(s) believe(s) that he/she can succeed 96.3 93.3 2 My child’s school has adequate resources for the instructions of my child. 85.6 86.7 3 My child’s teacher(s) inform(s) me about my child’s progress on a regular basis. 91.3 89.0 4 My child’s teacher(s) inform(s) him/her about his/her academic progress. 91.6 86.8 5 My child’s teacher(s) present(s) material in a way appropriate for my child. 92.2 90.1 6 My child’s teacher(s) treat(s) him/her with fairness. 88.6 91.1 7 My child shows respect to his/her teacher(s). 97.9 97.0 8 My child is safe at school. 89.1 90.7 9 This year, school staff has helped my child to select high level courses that challenge his/her abilities. 65.9 65.6 10 Rules are applied fairly to all students at my child’s school. 81.9 81.8 11 When I contact my child’s school or the school district, I feel welcomed and I am treated with courtesy. 87.8 90.9 12 I am proud of my child’s school. 89.6 92.8 13 My child’s school is kept in good condition. 93.3 97.0 14 There is an adult at school I can talk to about my child’s problems. 89.0 86.6 15 My child’s homework assignments are challenging. 79.5 80.7 220

16 My child can meet with a guidance counselor when he/she needs assistance in school. 74.6 66.2 17 I share responsibility with the school for my child’s academic progress. 96.6 96.1 18 The teachers respond quickly to my requests. 88.9 91.5 19 The principal at my child’s school responds to my concerns. 71.9 76.0 20 I help school staff when academic or behavioral problems occur with my child. 86.6 86.3 21 The principal does an effective job of running my child’s school. 84.9 88.4 22 Administrators are highly visible throughout my child’s school. 84.9 82.0 23 I am aware of the goals of my child’s school. 85.0 83.1 24 Students bring drugs or alcohol to my child’s school. 5.0 3.8 25 Students carry weapons at my child’s school. 6.1 5.2 26 My child takes responsibility for learning. 94.6 94.3 27 My input on school decisions is solicited and valued. 67.4 58.7 28 I am satisfied with the learning environment at my child’s school. 88.5 91.6 29 My child is accepted and feels like he/she belongs at this school. 90.8 91.6 30 My child’s school provides adequate after-school activities/programs for students. 60.3 68.4 31 (Middle and High Schools Only) My child’s teacher(s) effectively use(s) a Web site to communicate assignments and classroom activities. 0.0 0.0 32 This year I have discussed my child’s recent test scores with a guidance counselor, teacher(s), or other school staff. 62.4 68.7 33 My child has sufficient access to computers and technology at school to do his/her schoolwork. 79.6 78.7 34 My child’s current teachers have taught him/her how to use technology (computers and Internet) to do his/her schoolwork. 85.1 74.3 35 My child’s school contacts me when behavior problems occur at school. 85.0 84.5 36 I have used the district’s BEEP Web site, during this school year, to access Virtual Counselor or information about my child’s education. 42.5 43.5 37 My child’s school informed me about the Anti-Bullying policy this school year (e.g., parent meetings, newsletters, other communications). 80.3 80.2 38 Students at school bully my child. 15.2 14.3 39 (If Strongly Agree or Agree to Item 38 only) After my child was bullied, I contacted school staff. 83.9 80.4 40 (If Strongly Agree or Agree to Item 39 only) After I contacted school staff, the bullying behavior against my child stopped. 72.6 59.2 41 (High School Only) This year, school staff has helped my child to plan for life after graduation. 0.0 0.0

Middle parent High Low Loss Loss Average Average

7 My child shows respect to his/her teacher(s). 97.9 97.0 8 My child is safe at school. 89.1 90.7 9 This year, school staff has helped my child to select high level courses that challenge his/her abilities. 65.9 65.6 10 Rules are applied fairly to all students at my child’s school. 81.9 81.8 11 When I contact my child’s school or the school district, I feel welcomed and I am treated with courtesy. 87.8 90.9 12 I am proud of my child’s school. 89.6 92.8 13 My child’s school is kept in good condition. 93.3 97.0 14 There is an adult at school I can talk to about my child’s problems. 89.0 86.6 15 My child’s homework assignments are challenging. 79.5 80.7 16 My child can meet with a guidance counselor when he/she needs assistance in school. 74.6 66.2 17 I share responsibility with the school for my child’s academic progress. 96.6 96.1 18 The teachers respond quickly to my requests. 88.9 91.5 19 The principal at my child’s school responds to my concerns. 71.9 76.0 20 I help school staff when academic or behavioral problems occur with my child. 86.6 86.3 21 The principal does an effective job of running my child’s school. 84.9 88.4 22 Administrators are highly visible throughout my child’s school. 84.9 82.0 23 I am aware of the goals of my child’s school. 85.0 83.1 24 Students bring drugs or alcohol to my child’s school. 5.0 3.8 25 Students carry weapons at my child’s school. 6.1 5.2 26 My child takes responsibility for learning. 94.6 94.3 27 My input on school decisions is solicited and valued. 67.4 58.7 28 I am satisfied with the learning environment at my child’s school. 88.5 91.6 29 My child is accepted and feels like he/she belongs at this school. 90.8 91.6 30 My child’s school provides adequate after-school activities/programs for students. 60.3 68.4 31 (Middle and High Schools Only) My child’s teacher(s) effectively use(s) a Web site to communicate assignments and classroom activities. 0.0 0.0 32 This year I have discussed my child’s recent test scores with a guidance counselor, teacher(s), or other school staff. 62.4 68.7 33 My child has sufficient access to computers and technology at school to do his/her schoolwork. 79.6 78.7 34 My child’s current teachers have taught him/her how to use technology (computers and Internet) to do his/her schoolwork. 85.1 74.3 35 My child’s school contacts me when behavior problems occur at school. 85.0 84.5 36 I have used the district’s BEEP Web site, during this school year, to access Virtual Counselor or information about my child’s education. 42.5 43.5 37 My child’s school informed me about the Anti-Bullying policy this school year (e.g., parent meetings, newsletters, other communications). 80.3 80.2 38 Students at school bully my child. 15.2 14.3 39 (If Strongly Agree or Agree to Item 38 only) After my child was bullied, I contacted school staff. 83.9 80.4 40 (If Strongly Agree or Agree to Item 39 only) After I contacted school staff, the bullying behavior against my child stopped. 72.6 59.2 41 (High School Only) This year, school staff has helped my child to plan for life after graduation. 0.0 0.0

222

Highest Lowest High Parent Loss Loss Average Average Questions 1 My child’s teacher(s) believe(s) that he/she can succeed 86.1 85.4 2 My child’s school has adequate resources for the instructions of my child. 77.1 77.3 3 My child’s teacher(s) inform(s) me about my child’s progress on a regular basis. 48.3 56.1 4 My child’s teacher(s) inform(s) him/her about his/her academic progress. 71.0 68.6 5 My child’s teacher(s) present(s) material in a way appropriate for my child. 76.1 77.4 6 My child’s teacher(s) treat(s) him/her with fairness. 77.4 81.1 7 My child shows respect to his/her teacher(s). 92.6 93.5 8 My child is safe at school. 65.5 67.6 9 This year, school staff has helped my child to select high level courses that challenge his/her abilities. 72.0 72.1 10 Rules are applied fairly to all students at my child’s school. 60.8 65.3 11 When I contact my child’s school or the school district, I feel welcomed and I am treated with courtesy. 77.4 77.4 12 I am proud of my child’s school. 68.8 72.2 13 My child’s school is kept in good condition. 73.3 70.2 14 There is an adult at school I can talk to about my child’s problems. 74.7 74.2 15 My child’s homework assignments are challenging. 67.7 70.1 16 My child can meet with a guidance counselor when he/she needs assistance in school. 81.7 79.6 17 I share responsibility with the school for my child’s academic progress. 89.7 85.3 18 The teachers respond quickly to my requests. 63.3 60.6 19 The principal at my child’s school responds to my concerns. 50.0 53.6 20 I help school staff when academic or behavioral problems occur with my child. 73.0 69.1 21 The principal does an effective job of running my child’s school. 73.7 70.4 22 Administrators are highly visible throughout my child’s school. 75.2 73.4 23 I am aware of the goals of my child’s school. 72.6 75.8 24 Students bring drugs or alcohol to my child’s school. 34.7 21.6 25 Students carry weapons at my child’s school. 23.4 12.5 26 My child takes responsibility for learning. 94.6 92.0 27 My input on school decisions is solicited and valued. 53.2 53.2 28 I am satisfied with the learning environment at my child’s school. 73.8 74.3 29 My child is accepted and feels like he/she belongs at this school. 80.6 79.3 30 My child’s school provides adequate after-school activities/programs for students. 75.5 74.8 31 (Middle and High Schools Only) My child’s teacher(s) effectively use(s) a Web site to communicate assignments and classroom activities. 77.5 75.7 32 This year I have discussed my child’s recent test scores with a guidance counselor, teacher(s), or other school staff. 42.5 38.0 33 My child has sufficient access to computers and technology at school to do his/her schoolwork. 82.9 80.2 34 My child’s current teachers have taught him/her how to use technology (computers and Internet) to do his/her schoolwork. 72.8 70.2 35 My child’s school contacts me when behavior problems occur at school. 72.0 65.8 36 I have used the district’s BEEP Web site, during this school year, to access Virtual Counselor or information about my child’s education. 57.5 57.6

223

37 My child’s school informed me about the Anti-Bullying policy this school year (e.g., parent meetings, newsletters, other communications). 64.2 57.8 38 Students at school bully my child. 7.3 9.0 39 (If Strongly Agree or Agree to Item 38 only) After my child was bullied, I contacted school staff. 71.4 71.5 40 (If Strongly Agree or Agree to Item 39 only) After I contacted school staff, the bullying behavior against my child stopped. 91.3 75.2 41 (High School Only) This year, school staff has helped my child to plan for life after graduation. 60.4 54.0

224

Appendix E

Marketing Flyer

225

Appendix F

Project Plan

226

227

228

229

230

231

232

233

234

235

236

237

238

239

240

241

242

243

WORKS CONSULTED

“2011 HHS Poverty Guidelines.” Federal Register. The Office of the Federal Register,

20 Jan. 2011. Web. 11 Sept. 2011.

Achinstein, Betty, Rodney T. Ogawa, and Anna Speiglman. “Are We Creating Separate

and Unequal Tracks of Teachers? The Effects of State Policy, Local Conditions,

and Teacher Characteristics on New Teacher Socialization.” American

Educational Research Journal 41.3 (Autumn, 2004): 557-603. Web. 20 March

2010.

Adger, W. Neil. “Social Capital, Collective Action, and Adaptation to Climate

Change.” Economic Geography 79.4 (Oct. 2003): 387-404. Web. 4 April 2010.

Alexander, Karl L. “Public Schools and the Public Good.” Social Forces 76.1 (Sept.

1997): 1-30. Web. 4 Dec. 2010.

Allen, Jeanne. “Don’t Look to Reform Education.” The Daily Caller. The Daily Caller,

19 Feb. 2010. Web. 2 April 2010.

Allen, Jeanne, Kevin P. Chavous, John M. Engler, Richard Witmire, and Juan Williams.

“Mandate for Change: A Bold Agenda for the Incoming Government.” The

Center for Education Reform. The Center for Education Reform, Jan. 2009. 1-43.

Web. 2 April 2010.

Altman, Katie. “Stanley Deetz’ Theory on Genuine Conversation.” Essay for Human

Communication Theory Class. University of Colorado Boulder. University of

Colorado Boulder, Fall 2006. Web. 14 Sept. 2011. 244

“Amendment 9 on Class Size Reduction Is Structurally Unsound: Putting Great Risk

Revenues, Costs, Quality Teachers and Florida’s Future.” Florida Tax Watch.

Florida TaxWatch, Oct. 2002. Web. 7 Aug. 2008.

“America’s Attitudes Towards Charter Schools.” The Center for Education Reform.

The Center for Education Reform, 25 Aug. 2008. Web. 2 April 2010.

“America’s Charter Schools: Results from the 2003 NAEP Pilot Study.” National

Assessment of Educational Progress. Institute of Education Sciences and National

Center for Educational Statistics, 2003. Web. 5 Dec. 2010.

Anderson, Rob, and Kenneth N. Cissna. “Criticism and Conversational Texts:

Rhetorical Bases of Role, Audience and Style in the Buber-Rogers Dialogue.”

Human Studies 19.1 (Jan. 1996): 85-118. Web. 15 Sept. 2011.

Andina-Díaz, Ascensión. “Reinforcement vs. Change: The Political Influence of the

Media.” Public Choice 131.1/2 (Apr. 2007): 65-81. Web. 10 June 2011.

Angle, Paul, ed. Abraham Lincoln: The Complete Lincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991. 128. Print.

Antonucci, Michael. Home page. Education Intelligence Agency. Education Intelligence

Agency, n.d. Web. 2 April 2012.

Arango, Tim, and Brian Stelter. “Messages With a Mission, Embedded in TV Shows.”

The New York Times. The New York Times Company, 2 April 2009. Web. 2

April 2009.

Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics (Book 1). The Internet Classics Archive. Web Atomics,

n.d. Web. 11 October 2011.

245

---. On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. Trans. George A. Kennedy. New York:

Oxford University Press, 1991. 1-335. Print.

Arn, Chip. “How People Adopt New Ideas.” The Spence Network. The Spence

Network, 2000. Web. 27 Nov. 2010.

Arneil, Barbara. Diverse Communities: The Problem with Social Capital. New York:

Cambridge University Press, 2006. 1-267. Print.

Arnett, Jeffrey Jensen. “Broad and Narrow Socialization: The Family in the Context of

a Cultural Theory.” Journal of Marriage and Family 57.3 (Aug. 1995): 617-628.

Web. 20 March 2010.

Arsen, David, Courtney Bell, and David N. Plank. “Who Will Turn Around Failing

Schools? A Framework for Institutional Choice.” Perspectives 10 (Fall 2004): 1-

20. Print.

Avis, James. “Social Capital, Collective Intelligence and Expansive Learning: Thinking

Through The Connections. Education and The Economy.” British Journal of

Educational Studies 50.3 (Sept. 2002): 308-326. Web. 4 April 2010.

Axelrod, Robert. “The Structure of Public Opinion on Policy Issues.” The Public

Opinion Quarterly 31.1 (Spring, 1967): 51-60. Web. 9 April 2011.

Bailey, Melissa. “Parent-Teacher ‘School Governance Council’ Requirement Divides

Connecticut, New Haven.” HuffingtonPost.com. Huffington Post. 8 March 2012.

Web. 4 July 2012.

Baker, Bruce, and William Mathis. “A Second Look at New York City Charter

Schools.” National Education Policy Center. University of Colorado, 27 Jan.

2011. Web. 27 January 2011.

246

Ballantine, Jeanne. The Sociology of Education: A Systematic Analysis. Upper Saddle

River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1997. 80-81. Questia. Web. 20 March 2010.

“Ballot Initiatives as Policy Alternatives.” Education Policy Fellowship Program.

Institute for Educational Leadership, 26 Feb. 2004. Web. 7 Aug. 2008.

Barclay, Scott, and Susan S. Silbey. “Understanding Regime Change: Public Opinion,

Legitimacy, and Legal Consequences.” Oxford Handbook of Law and Politics.

Ed. K. Whittington. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. 663-678. MIT

Anthropology. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

Barret, Edith J. “Evaluating Education Reform: Students’ Views of Their Charter

School Experience.” Journal of Educational Research 96.6 (July-Aug. 2003):

351-358. Web. 5 Jan. 2010.

Barry, Bruce, and Ingrid Smithey Fulmer. “The Medium and the Message: The

Adaptive Use of Communication Media in Dyadic Influence.” The Academy of

Management Review 29.2 (Apr. 2004): 272-292. Web. 10 June 2011.

Bartels, Larry M., Rev. of Public Opinion in America: Moods, Cycles, and Swings, by

James A. Stimson. Political Science Quarterly 107.2 (Summer, 1992): 364-365.

Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

Barton, Angela Calabrese, Corey Drake, Jose Gustavo Perez, Kathleen St. Louis, and

Magnia George. “Ecologies of Parent Engagement in Urban Education.”

Educational Researcher 33.4 (2004): 3-12. Web. 15 Nov. 2009.

Bast, Joseph L. “How Do We Change Public Policy? A Brief Overview of The

Heartland Institute’s Choices of Tactics and Strategies.” The Heartland Institute.

The Heartland Institute, April 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

247

Baumgartner, Frank R., and Bryan D. Jones. “Agenda Dynamics and Policy

Subsystems.” The Journal of Politics 53.4 (Nov. 1991): 1044-1074. Web. 10

June 2011.

Beard, Charles A. “The Myth of Rugged American Individualism.” Harper’s Monthly

Magazine. Scribd Inc., Dec. 1931. Web. 15 Sept. 2011.

Bell, Allan. “Language Style as Audience Design.” Language in Society 13.2 (June

1984): 145-204. Print.

Berinsky, Adam J. “The Two Faces of Public Opinion.” American Journal of Political

Science 43.4 (Oct. 1999): 1209-1230. Web. 9 April 2011.

Bernays, Edward L. “The Engineering of Public Consent.” JSTOR: Annals of the

American Academy of Political and Social Science 250 (Mar. 1947): 113-120.

Print.

Best, Billy. Rev. of Values and Public Interest: Counterbalancing Economic

Individualism, by Barry Bozeman. Ezine Articles. EzineArticles.com, 27 Oct.

2011. Web. 15 Sept. 2011

“Better Fix for Failing Schools.” Philly.com. Philadelphia Media Network, Inc., 16

March 2011. Web. 16 March 2011.

Bettig, Ronald V. “Copyright and the Commodification of Culture.” World Association

for Christian Communication (WACC). World Association for Christian

Communication, Jan. 2003. Web. 28 Feb. 2012.

Bilfulco, Robert. “ConnCAN Can’t Support Its Claims.” National Education Policy

Center. University of Colorado, 10 March 2010. Web. 10 March 2010.

248

Birnbaum, Michael. “Graduation Rate Drops at D.C. Charter Schools.” Washington

Post. The Washington Post, 16 Jan. 2010. Web. 11 Sept. 2011.

Blackwell, Les. Blog. “Teachers and Teaching.” Teachersarepeople.blogspot.com.

Blogger, 12 April 2012. Web. 10 May 2012.

Blasik, Katherine. “Broward County Public Charter Schools Status Report, 2007-2008.”

Fort Lauderdale, FL: Broward County Public Schools, 28 Feb. 2008. Print.

---. “Profile of Mobile Students 2004-2005 to 2006-2007.” Fort Lauderdale, FL:

Broward County Public Schools, 25 June 2007. Print.

Boaz, David, and R. Morris Barret. “What Would a School Voucher Buy? The Real

Cost of Private Schools.” Cato Institute. Cato Institute, 26 March 1996. Web. 27

April 2010.

Booker, Kevin, Tim R. Sass, Brian Gill, and Ron Zimmer. “The Unknown World of

Charter High Schools.” Educationnext. Harvard Kennedy School, Spring 2010.

Web. 11 Sept. 2011.

Bouffard, Suzanne. “A Conversation with Rudy Crew.” The Evaluation Exchange

14.1&2 (Spring 2008): 20–21. Print.

Boulton, Pam, and John Coldron. “Does the Rhetoric Work? Parental Responses to

New Right Policy Assumptions.” British Journal of Educational Studies 44.3

(Sept. 1996): 296-306. Web. 9 April 2011.

Brandsen, Taco, Paul Dekker, Bernard Enjolras, and Adalbert Evers. “The Civicness of

the Third Sector.” Cinefogo. Cinefogo Network of Excellence, July 2009. Web.

22 Nov. 2011.

249

Brewer, Mark D. Rev. of Tides of Consent: How Public Opinion Shapes American

Politics, by James A. Stimson. The Public Opinion Quarterly 69.4 (Winter

2005): 632-634. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

Bridgespan Group. “The Strong Field Framework: A Guide and Toolkit for Funders and

Nonprofits Committed to Large-Scale Impact.” The James Irvine Foundation.

The James Irvine Foundation, June 2009. Web. 16 Nov. 2009.

“A Brief Overview of Catholic Schools In America.” National Catholic Education

Association. National Catholic Education Association, 2 April 2010. 1-2. Web. 5

April 2010.

Brock Johnson, Norris. “The Material Culture of Public School Classrooms: The

Symbolic Integration of Local Schools and National Culture.” Anthropology &

Education Quarterly 11.3 (Autumn 1980): 173-190. Web. 20 March 2010.

Brokaw, Tom. “Let’s Join the Crusade.” The Miami Herald 25 Sept. 2011: 3 L. Print.

“Broward County Components of Population Growth 2000-09.” South Florida Regional

Planning Council. South Florida Regional Planning Council, 23 March 2010.

Web. 6 Feb. 2012.

“Broward County Public Charter Schools, Status Report, 2007-08.” Broward County

Public Schools. Broward County Public Schools, 28 Feb. 2008. Web. 5 April

2010.

Broward County Public Schools. 14th Annual Customer Satisfaction Survey. Fort

Lauderdale: Broward County Public Schools, 2008a. 1-1830. Print.

Broward County Public Schools. 15th Annual Customer Satisfaction Survey. Fort

Lauderdale: Broward County Public Schools, 2009. 1-65. Print.

250

Broward County Public Schools. 16th Annual Customer Satisfaction Survey. Fort

Lauderdale: Broward County Public Schools, 2010a. 1-66. Print.

Broward County Public Schools. 2010-2011 Title I Schools. Fort Lauderdale: Broward

County Public Schools, 2010b. Print.

Broward County Public Schools. Black Male Graduation Rate Update. Fort Lauderdale,

FL: Broward County Public Schools, 28 Oct. 2010. Print.

Broward County Public Schools. Strategic Plan, Goals and Objectives: 2008-2011. Fort

Lauderdale: Broward County Public Schools 2008. Print.

“Broward’s Population through the Year 2035.” Broward.org. Broward County Board

of County Commissioners, July 2009. Web. 6 Feb. 2012.

Buckley, Jack, and Mark Schneider. “Are Charter School Students Harder to Educate?

Evidence from Washington, D.C.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

27.4 (Winter 2005): 365-380. Web. 20 March 2010.

Bulliet, Richard W. “Rhetoric, Discourse, and the Future of Hope.” Annals of the

American Academy of Political and Social Science 588 (Jul. 2003): 10-17. Web.

10 June 2011.

Burstein, Paul. “The Impact of Public Opinion on Public Policy: A Review and an

Agenda.” Political Research Quarterly 56.1 (Mar. 2003): 29-40. Web. 22 Nov.

2011.

---. Rev. of Law in the Sociological Enterprise: A Reconstruction, by Lisa J. McIntyre.

American Journal of Sociology 101.3 (Nov. 1995): 769-771. Web. 22 Nov 2011.

251

---. Rev. of News That Matters? The Sound of Leadership: Presidential Communication

in the Modern Age, by Roderick P. Hart; Rev. of News That Matters: Television

and American Opinion, by Shanto Iyengar and Donald R. Kinder. Sociology 18.3

(May 1989): 374-375. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

---. Rev. of The Organizational State: Social Choice in National Policy Domains, by

Edward O. Laumann and David Knoke. Social Forces 60.1 (Sept. 1990): 289-290.

Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

---. “Policy Domains: Organization, Culture, and Policy Outcomes.” Annual Review of

Sociology 17 (1991): 327-350. Web. 10 June 2011.

---. Rev. of “Public Opinion, Public Policy, and Democracy: Old Expectations and

New.” Handbook of Politics, eds. Kevin Leicht and Craig Jenkins. New York:

Spriner, 2008. Google scholar. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

---. Rev. of Representatives and Represented: Bases of Public Support for the American

Legislatures, by Samuel C. Patterson, Ronald D. Hedlund, and G. Robert

Boynton. Contemporary Sociology 7.5 (Sept. 1978): 618. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

---. Rev. of “Why Estimates of the Impact of Public Opinion on Public Police Are Too

High: Empirical and Theoretical Implications.” Social Forces 84.4 (June 2006):

2273-2289. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

Burstein, Paul, and William Freudenburg. “Changing Public Policy: The Impact of

Public Opinion, Antiwar Demonstrations, and War Costs on Senate Voting on

Vietnam War Motions. The American Journal of Sociology 84.1 (July 1978): 99-

122. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

252

Burstein, Paul, and C. Elizabeth Hirsh. “Interest Organizations, Information, and Policy

Innovation in the U.S. Congress.” Sociological Forum 22.2 (June 2007): 174-199.

Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

Burstein, Paul, and April Linton. “The Impact of Political Parties, Interest Groups, and

Social Movement Organizations on Public Policy: Some Recent Evidence and

Theoretical Concerns.” Social Forces 18.2 (Dec. 2002): 381-408. Web. 22 Nov.

2011.

Carmines, Edward G., and James A. Stimson. “On the Structure and Sequence of Issue

Evolution.” The American Political Science Review 80.3 (Sept. 1986): 901-920.

Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

Carreon, Gustavo Perez, Corey Drake, and Angela Calabrese Barton. “The Importance

of Presence: Immigrant Parents School Engagement Experiences.” American

Educational Research Journal 42.3 (2005): 465-498. Web. 15 Nov. 2009.

Chan, Sewell. “Highest Per-Pupil Spending in the U.S.” The New York Times. The New

York Times Company, 24 May 2007. Web. 10 April 2011.

“Charter Schools Face Challenge of Recruiting Top Teachers.” National Charter

School Resource Center. U.S. Department of Education, 31 Dec. 2010. Web. 17

Feb. 2012.

“Charter Schools Score Big on Maintenance Funding.” Editorial. Sun Sentinel 31 July

2011: 4F. Print.

“Charter Schools Today: Changing the Face of American Education.” The Center for

Education Reform. The Center for Education Reform, 2008. Web. 2 April 2010.

253

“Charter vs. Public Schools: Behind the Numbers.” Washington Post. The Washington

Post, 5 Dec. 2010. Web. 5 Dec. 2010.

Chatterji, Madhabi, and William Mathis. “Campaign to Market Florida’s Grab-bag of

Reforms Is an Exercise in Misused Data.” National Education Policy Center.

University of Colorado, 30 Nov. 2010. Web. 30 Nov. 2010.

“Choice.” Webster’s Dictionary. Ashland, Ohio: Landoll, Inc., 1993. Print.

“Citing Records in the National Archives of the United States: General Information

Leaflet 17.” National Archives. U.S. National Archives and Records

Administration, 2010. Web. 14 Aug. 2011

“The Civicness of the Third Sector.” Cinefogo. Cinefogo Network of Excellence, July

2009. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

Claridge, T. “Social Capital and Natural Resource Management.” Thesis. University of

Queensland, Brisbane, Australia, 2004. Google scholar. Web. 8 March 2010.

Clark-Madison, Mike. “Readings.” The Houston Chronicle at Chron.com. Hearst

Communications Inc., 8 Nov. 2002. Web. 17 Jan. 2011.

Cobb, Roger, Jennie Keith-Ross, and Marc Howard Ross. “Agenda Building as a

Comparative Political Process.” The American Political Science Review 70.1

(Mar. 1976): 126-138. Web. 14 Sept. 2011.

Cochran, Thomas Everette. “The History of Public Schools in Florida.” Thesis.

University of Pennsylvania, 1921. Google books. Web. 3 Jan. 2012.

Cody, Anthony. “Why I Am Not Opposed to Charters But Still Don’t Think They Are

the Answer.” Education Week Teacher. Editorial Projects in Education, 7 March

2010. Web. 7 March 2010.

254

Cohen, Rick. “How to Be a Charter School That Pays No Rent in New York City.”

NPQ NonProfit Quarterly. NonProfit Quarterly, 26 April 2011. Web. 26 April

2011.

Coleman, James S. “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.” Supp. issue of

The American Journal of Sociology 94 (1988): S95-S120. Web. 12 April 2010.

Compass Learning, Inc. Parent Involvement: School Guide, Trainer’s Guides and

Activity Book. Austin: Compass Learning, Inc., 2001. Print.

Connor, Mike. “Maximizing Marketing to Advance Your School’s Mission.”

Blackbaud. Blackbaud, Inc., Nov. 2004. Web. 8 Feb. 2011.

Contemporary Rhetorical Theory: A Reader. Eds. John Louis Lucaites, Celeste

Michelle Condit, and Salluy Caudill. New York: Guilford. 1999. 1-627. Print.

Converse, Philip E. “Changing Conceptions of Public Opinion in the Political Process.”

50th anniv. supp. of Public Opinion Quarterly 51.2. (1987): S12-S24. Web. 22

Nov. 2011.

Cook, Fay Lomax. Rev. of Tides of Consent: How Public Opinion Shapes American

Politics, by James A. Stimson. Political Science Quarterly 120.4 (Winter,

2005/2006): 685-686. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

Cook, Fay Lomax, and Jeff Manza. “Policy Responsiveness to Public Opinion.”

Institute for Policy Research. Northwestern University, July 2001. Web. 22

Nov. 2011.

Cookson, Peter W. School Choice: The Struggle for the Soul of American Education.

Binghamton: Yale University Press, 1994. Print.

255

Cruz, Gilbert. “Looking for Solutions to the Catholic-School Crisis.” Time. U.S. Time

Inc., 12 Oct. 2009. Web. 4 May 2010.

Dasgupta, Partha. “Social Capital and Economic Performance: Analytics.” Social

Capital: A Reader. Eds. Elinor Ostrom and Toh-Kyeong Ahn. Cheltenham, UK:

Edward Elgar, 2002. 1-41. Print.

Decker, Larry, Virginia A. Decker, Mary Richardson Boo, Gloria A. Gregg and Joanne

Erickson. “Engaging Families and Communities: Pathways to Educational

Success.” National Community Education Association. Data.ed.gov, 2000. Web.

15 Nov. 2009.

Deetz, Stanley. “Putting the Community into Organizational Science: Exploring the

Construction of Knowledge Claims.” Organizational Science 11.6 (Nov.-Dec.

2000): 732-738. Web. 10 Oct. 2011.

“Definitions of Social Capital in Literature.” “Analytictech.com. Analytic Technologies,

n.d. Web. 5 April, 2010.

Dekker, Paul. “Civicness: From Civil Society to Civic Services. The Civicness of the

Third Sector.” Cinefogo. Cinefogo Network of Excellence, July 2009. Web. 22

Nov. 2011. de Leonardis, Ota. “Organization Matters. Contracting for Service Provision and

Civicness.” In: T. Brandsen, P. Dekker, A. Evers, Eds., “Civicness in the

Governance and Delivery of Social Services.” NOMOS (2010): 125-152.

European Research Network. Web. 6 March 2012.

256

Devaney, Laura. “Hard Times Push Schools Towards Crisis: Economic Troubles Leave

Many Families Unable to Pay Tuition, Forcing Catholic Schools to Close and

Endangering U.S. Parochial Education.” eSchool News. eSchool Media &

eSchools News, 16 July 2009. Web. 4 May 2010.

Diamond, John B., and Kimberley Gomez. “African American Parents’ Educational

Orientations: The Importance of Social Class and Parents’ Perceptions of

Schools.” Education and Urban Society 36 (2004): 383-427. Web. 15 Nov. 2009.

DiCarlo, Matthew. “What Does ‘Charterness’ Mean Exactly?” Washington Post. The

Washington Post, 5 Dec. 2010. Web. 5 Dec. 2010.

Dika, Sandra L., and Kusum Singh. “Applications of Social Capital in Educational

Literature: A Critical Synthesis.” Review of Educational Research 72.1 (Spring,

2002): 31-60. Print.

Dillon, Sam. “Top Test Scores from Shanghai Stun Educators.” The New York Times.

The New York Times Company, 7 Dec. 2010. Web. 4 March 2012.

---. “Behind Grass-Roots School Advocacy, Bill Gates.” The New York Times 22 May

2011: 1,4A. Print.

DiMaggio, Paul. “Cultural Capital and School Success.” American Sociological Review

47 (April 1982): 189-201. Web. 1 May 2010.

Dobo, Nichole, and Eric Ruth. “Bank of America to Hire 500, Donate Building for

Charter Schools.” Delawareonline.com. Gannett, 16 Feb. 2012. Web. 17 Feb.

2012.

Dor, Daniel. “On Newspaper Headlines as Relevance Optimizers.” Journal of

Pragmatics 35 (2003): 695-72. Web. 16 Feb. 2012.

257

Dorfman, Lori, Joel Ervice, and Katie Woodruff. “Voices for Change: A Taxonomy of

Public Communications Campaigns and Their Evaluation Challenges.” Berkeley

Media Studies Group. Berkeley Media Studies Group, Nov. 2002. Web. 21 Feb.

2012.

Dutro, Elizabeth, William Tate, and William Mathis. “Two Thumbs Down: Education

Documentaries Fictionalize Research.” National Education Policy Center.

University of Colorado, 24 Jan. 2011. Web. 27 Jan. 2011.

Dwyer, Liz. “KIPP’s Graduation Rate Stats Spark Charter School Debate.” Good

Education. Good Worldwide LLC, 29 April 2011. Web. 11 Sept. 2011.

“Education.” Ballot Initiative Strategy Center. Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, 2011.

Web. 1 June 2011.

“Education Ballot Initiatives.” Triangle Coalition Blogspot. Triangle Coalition for

Science and Technology Education, 13 Nov. 2008. Web. 1 June 2011.

“Education Quotes.” ETNI - English Teachers Network. ETNI, n.d. Web. 3 June 2011.

Elliott, Victoria Stagg. “Ownership loses its luster: Physicians less likely to go solo.”

amednews.com. American Medical Association, 19 Oct. 2006. Web. 21 Feb.

2012.

Epstein, Joyce L., Lucretia Coates, Karen Clark Salinas, Mavis G. Sanders, and Beth S.

Simon. School Family and Community Partnerships: Your Handbook for Action.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc. 1997. Print.

Erbring, Lutz, Edie N. Goldenberg, and Arthur H. Miller. “Front-Page News and Real-

World Cues: A New Look at Agenda-Setting by the Media.” American Journal

of Political Science 24.1 (Feb. 1980): 16-49. Web. 10 June 2011.

258

Evers, Adalbert. “Shaped by Historical Discourses – The Civicness of Social Services.”

Cinefogo. Cinefogo Network of Excellence, July 2009. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

Farber, Daniel A. Rev. of Revitalizing Regulation: Review of Reinvent Government or

Rediscover It? Review of Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial

Spirit Is Transforming The Public Sector, by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler.

Michigan Law Review 91.6 (May 1993): 1278-1296. Web. 23 March 2010.

Farr, James. “Social Capital: A Conceptual History.” Political Theory 32.1 (Feb. 2004):

6-33. Web. 1 July 2010.

Felts, Arthur A. Rev. of Entrepreneurial Government: Review of Reinventing

Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit Is Transforming The Public

Sector, by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler. Public Productivity & Management

Review 16.3 (Spring 1993): 315-320. Web. 23 March 2010.

Figueroa, Laura, and Laura Isense. “South Florida Public Schools Losing Students as

Charter Enrollment Increases.” The Miami Herald. Miami Herald Media Co., 20

Sept. 2011. Web. 21 Sept. 2011.

Fineout, Gary. “Court Blocks Florida Ballot Measures Intended to Help School

Vouchers.” The New York Times. The New York Times Company, 4 Sept. 2008.

Web. 4 Sept. 2008.

Finn, Chester E., Bruno V. Manno, and Greg Vanourek. Charter Schools in Action:

Renewing Public Education. Princeton: University Press, 2000. Pioneer

Institute. Web. 21 Jan. 2010.

Finn, Chester E., and Michael J. Petrilli. “The Elixir of Class Size.” The Weekly

Standard. The Weekly Standard LLC, 9 March 1998. Web. 13 March 2012.

259

---. “One Size Does Not Fit All.” Education Week Teacher. Editorial Projects in

Education, Jan. 1999. Web. 13 March 2012.

Fitzpatrick, Cara. “Broward Schools Get Poor Marks for Customer Service.”

SunSentinel. Sun Sentinel, 28 Feb. 2012. Web. 4 March 2012.

Fitzpatrick, Cara, and Dana Williams “Broward School District Loses Students Even as

Charter Schools Grow.” SunSentinel. Sun Sentinel, 20 Sept. 2011. Web. 21 Sept

2011.

“Florida’s Funding Lawsuit Moves Forward.” Rural Policy Matters. The Rural School

and Community Trust, Sept. 2010. Web. 1 June 2011.

“Florida’s Supreme Court Rejects Ballot Initiatives Seeking School Vouchers.” The

Christian Century. The Christian Century, 7 Oct. 2008. Web. 7 October 2008.

Foss, Sonja K., Karen A. Foss, and Robert Trapp. Contemporary Perspectives on

Rhetoric: Chapter 6, Richard M. Weaver. Prospect Heights, Ill: Waveland Press,

2002. 155-186. Print.

Frank, Thomas. What’s the Matter with Kansas? How Conservatives Won the Heart of

America. New York: Owl Books, 2004. Print.

Franke, Sandra. “Measurement of Social Capital: Reference Document for Public

Policy Research, Development and Evaluation.” Policy Horizons Canada.

Government of Canada, Sept. 2005. Web. 5 April 2010.

“Friedrich Nietzsche Quotes.” goodquotes.com. goodquotes.com, n.d. Web. 02 Feb.

2012.

Friedman, Milton. “Public Schools: Make Them Private.” Cato Institute. Cato Institute,

23 June 1995. Web. 27 April 2010.

260

---. “The Role of Government in Education.” Economics and the Public Interest. Ed.

Robert A. Solo. Rutgers: University Press, 1955. Cato Institute. Web. 20 March

2010.

Fukuyama, Francis. “Social Capital and Civil Society.” IMF Conference on Second

Generation Reforms. George Mason University, Washington, D.C., 1 Oct. 1999.

Imf.org. Web. 12 April 2010.

---. “Social Capital and Development: The Coming Agenda.” SAIS Review 22.1

(Winter-Spring 2002): 23-37. Web. 12 April 2010.

Fuller, Jack. “What’s Happening to News?” Daedalus (Spring 2010): 110-118. Web. 13

April 2010.

Funkhouser, Janie E., and Miriam Gonzales. Family Involvement in Children’s

Education: Successful Local Approaches, An Idea Book. Washington, D.C.:

National Institute on the Education of At-Risk Children, U.S. Department of

Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, 1998. Print.

Gabriel, Trip. “G.O.P. Anti-Federalism Aims at Education.” The New York Times 9 Oct.

2011: 20A. Print.

---. “Many Charter Schools, Varied Grades.” The New York Times 2 May 2010: 1, 22A.

Print.

Gannett, Robert T. Jr. “Bowling Ninepins in Tocqueville’s Township.” The American

Political Science Review 97.1 (Feb. 2003): 1-16. Web. 9 April 2011.

Gans, Herbert J. “News & the News Media in the Digital Age: Implications for

Democracy.” Daedalus (Spring 2010): 8-17. Web. 13 April 2010.

261

Gardner, Howard. Changing Minds. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2006. 1-

244. Print.

Garonna, Paolo, and Roberto Triacca. “Social Change: Measurement and Theory.”

International Statistical Review 67.1 (April 1999): 49-62. Web. 4 April 2010.

Geer, John G. “Critical Realignments and the Public Opinion Poll.” The Journal of

Politics 53.2 (May 1991): 434-453. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

“General Social Survey.” NORC at the University of Chicago. NORC, 2010. Web. 1

June 2011.

Giugni, Marco, and Florence Passy. “Social Movements and Policy Change: Direct,

Mediated, or Joint Effect?” University of Geneva. University of Geneva, n.d.

Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

Glaeser, Edward, Giacomo Ponzetto, and Andrei Shleifer. “Why Does Democracy Need

Education?” Journal of Economic Growth 12.2 (June 2007): 77-99. Web. 11

Sept. 2011.

Goodlad, John I., Corinne Mantle-Bromley, and Stephen John Goodlad. Education for

Everyone: Agenda for Education in a Democracy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,

2004. Google books. Web. 9 June 2010.

Goodsell, Charles T. Rev. of Reinvent Government or Rediscover It? Review of

Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit Is Transforming the

Public Sector, by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler. Public Administration

Review 53.1 (Jan.-Feb. 1993): 85-87. Web. 23 March 2010.

262

Grabowicz, Paul. “Tutorial: The Transition to Digital Journalism.” Knight Digital

Media Center. The Regents of the University of California, 2012. Web. 21 Feb.

2012.

“Graduation And Dropout Rates For Broward County Public Schools, 2006-07 To

2010-11.” Broward County Public Schools. Broward County Public Schools, 12

Dec. 2011. Web. 12 Dec. 2011.

Greene, Jay. “Why Are School Construction Costs So High?” Jay P. Greene’s Blog. Jay

P. Greene, 27 Oct. 2008. Web. 4 July 2012

Greenhouse, Steven, and Sam Dillon. “A Wholesale School Shake-Up Is Embraced by

President, and Divisions Follow.” The New York Times 7 March 2010: 18 A.

Print.

Griffin, Em. A First Look at Communication Theory. 6th ed. New York: McGraw Hill,

2006. 1-526. Print.

---. A First Look at Communication Theory. 8th ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 2012. 1-

486. Print.

Grootaert, Christiaan, Deepa Narayan, Veronica Nyhan Jones, and Michael Woolcock.

Measuring Social Capital: An Integrated Questionnaire. World Bank Working

Paper No. 18. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank, 2004. 1-53. Print.

Gulosino, Charlisse. “A Half-Broken Promise.” National Education Policy Center.

University of Colorado, 26 May 2010. Web. 17 Sept. 2010.

Haag, Robert. “Charter Schools: Numbers Show Education is Excellent.” Sun Sentinel 4

Sept. 2011: 2F. Print.

263

Habermas, Jurgen. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: an Inquiry into

a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge: Polity, 1962/1989.

Hanifan, Lyda. J. (1916). “The Rural School Community Centre.” Annals of the

American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 67: 130-38. Web. 10 April

2011.

Harrison, Joanne. 2010-11 Twentieth Day Enrollment Report Breakdown. Fort

Lauderdale, FL: Broward County Public Schools, 28 Sept. 2010. Print.

---. Graduation and Dropout Rates for Broward County Pubic Schools, 2004-2005 to

2008-2009. Fort Lauderdale, FL: Broward County Public Schools, 9 Dec. 2009.

Print.

---. Graduation and Dropout Rates for Broward County Pubic Schools, 2006-07 to

2010-11. Fort Lauderdale, FL: Broward County Public Schools, 12 Dec. 2011.

Print.

---. Preliminary 2011-12 Twentieth Day Enrollment Report. Fort Lauderdale, FL:

Broward County Public Schools, 19 Sept. 2011. Print.

---. State of Education in Broward County Public Schools. Fort Lauderdale, FL: County

Public Schools, 8 Oct. 2011. Print.

Henderson, Anne T., and Karen Mapp. A New Wave of Evidence: The Impact of School,

Family and Community Connections on Student Achievement. Austin, TX:

National Center for Family and Community Connections with Schools, Southwest

Educational Development Laboratory, 2002. Print.

Hill, Paul T., Christopher T. Cross, and Sally Kilgore. “The Federal Role in Education.”

Brookings Papers on Education Policy 3 (2000): 11-57. Web. 15 Sept. 2011.

264

“History of Broward County Public Schools, 1899-Present.” Broward County Public

Schools. Broward County Public Schools, n.d. Web. 10 April 2011.

Hoenisch, Steve. “Education Policy of the Democratic Party, July 30, 2004.

Criticism.com. Steve Hoenisch and Criticism.com, 29 July 2004. Web. 9 April

2011.

---. “Education Policy of the Republican Party.” Criticism.com. Steve Hoenisch and

Criticism.com, 29 July 2004. Web. 9 April 2011.

---. “The Relation Between Civic Society and Newspapers in the Writings of Alexis de

Tocqueville and Robert Putnam.” Criticism.com. Steve Hoenisch and

Criticism.com, 2 Nov. 2005. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

Hofferth, Sandra L., and John F. Sandberg. “How American Children Spend Their

Time.” Journal of Marriage and Family 63.2 (May 2001): 295-308. Web. 20

March 2010.

Hofstadter, Richard. The American Political Tradition. New York: Vintage Books,

1989. Print.

Holyoke, Thomas T., Jeffrey R. Henig, Heath Brown, and Natalie Lacireno-Paquet.

“Institution Advocacy and the Political Behavior of Charter Schools.” Political

Research Quarterly 60.2 (June 2007): 202-214. Web. 20 March 2010.

Howell, William G., Patrick J. Wolf, David E. Campbell, and Paul E. Peterson. “School

Vouchers and Academic Performance: Results from Three Randomized Field

Trials.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 21.2 (Spring 2002): 191-

217. Web. 4 Dec. 2010.

265

“How Far Should Florida School District’s Go in Pushing Ballot Measures?” Tampa

Bay Times. Tampa Bay Times, 21 Oct. 2010. Web. 21 Oct. 2010.

Hu, Winnie. “Battle over Charter Schools Shifting to Affluent Suburbs.” The New York

Times 17 July 2011:1, 4A. Print.

Hume, Robert J. “The Use of Rhetorical Sources by the U.S. Supreme Court.” Law and

Society Review 40.4 (Dec. 2006): 817-843. Web. 9 April 2011.

Jacoby, Susan. “The Dumbing of America.” The Washington Post. The Washington

Post, 17 Feb. 2008. Web. 17 Jan. 2011.

Jacoby, William G. Rev. of Tides of Consent: How Public Opinion Shapes American

Politics, by James A. Stimson. Perspectives on Politics 4.1 (March 2006): 198-

199. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

Jaffe, Alexandra. “The Decline of News Media and the Decline of Democracy.”

Huffpost Media. TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc., 4 May 2010. Web. 21 Feb. 2012.

Jamieson, Kathleen Hall. “Academe and the Decline of News Media.” The Chronicle of

Higher Education. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 15 Nov. 2009. Web. 21

Feb. 2012.

Jensen, Robert. “Florida’s Fear of History: New Law Undermines Critical Thinking.”

CommonDreams. CommonDreams, 17 July 2008. Web. 10 April 2011.

Jensen Arnett, Jeffrey. “Broad and Narrow Socialization: The Family in the Context of

a Cultural Theory.” Journal of Marriage and Family 57.3 (Aug. 1995): 617-628.

Web. 20 March 2010.

“John Hume Quotes.” WinWisdom Quotations. WinWisdom.com, n.d. Web. 02 Feb.

2012.

266

Johnson, Michael. “How Low Voter Turnout in South Florida Impacted the Election.”

Miami Civil Rights Examiner. Clarity Digital Group LLC, 6 Nov. 2010. Web. 20

Jan. 2011.

Johnson, Norris Brock. “The Material Culture of Public Social Classrooms: The

Symbolic Integration of Local Schools and National Culture.” Anthropology &

Education Quarterly 11.3 (Autumn 1980): 173-190. Web. 20 March 2010.

Jones, Donna. “School Finance Primer: Courts and Ballot Initiatives Helped Create

Complex Finance System.” Santa Cruz Sentinel. Santa Cruz Sentinel, 27 Aug.

2010. Web. 27 August 2010.

Kakutani, Michiko. “The Engine Of Right-Wing Rage, Fueled by More Than Just

Anger.” The New York Times. The New York Times Company, 14 Sept. 2010.

Web. 4 July 2012.

Kapferer, Judith L. “Socialization and the Symbolic Order of the School.” Anthropology

& Education Quarterly 12.4 (Winter 1981): 258-274. Web. 20 March 2010.

Kay, Ward. “The Role of Salience on the Relationship between Public Policy and

Public Opinion.” Student Paper. George Mason University. George Mason

University, 12 Dec. 2008. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

Keeney, Ralph L. Detlof von Winterfeldt, and Thomas Eppel. “Eliciting Public Values

for Complex Policy Decisions.” Management Science 36.9 (Sept. 1990): 1011-

1030. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

Klein, Alyson. “Ballot Measures Reflect States’ Shaky Economies.” Education Week.

Editorial Projects in Education, 20 Oct. 2010. Web. 20 Oct. 2010.

267

Klein, Ezra. “The Trouble with School Choice: Navigating School Choice in New York

City.” The Washington Post. The Washington Post, June 2009. Web. 27 Sept.

2011.

Kline, Elana. “Genuine Dialogue: Stanley Deetz.” Essay for Human Communication

Theory Class. University of Colorado Boulder. University of Colorado Boulder,

Spring 2007. Web. 10 Oct. 2011.

Knack, Stephen, and Philip Keefer. “Does Social Capital Have an Economic Payoff? A

Country Investigation.” Center for Institutional Reform and the Informal Sector.

University of Maryland, June 1997. Web. 5 April 2010.

Kolankiewicz, George. “Social Capital and Social Change.” British Journal of

Sociology 47.3 (Sept. 1996): 427-441. Web. 4 April 2010.

Kolker, Robert. “Unchartered: The Fate of Ross Global Academy Show That Charter

Schools Are Suddenly Susceptible to the Rules of Political Gravity.” New York

Magazine. New York Media LLC, 10 Dec. 2010. Web. 10 Dec. 2010.

Kotler, Philip and Gerald Zaltman. “Social Marketing: An Approach to Planned Social

Change.” Journal of Marketing 35 (July 1971): 8-12.

Kuklinski, James H. Rev. of The Rational Public: Fifty Years of Trends in Americans’

Policy Preferences, by Benjamin I. Page and Robert Y. Shapiro; Rev. of The

Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns, by

Samuel L. Popkin; Rev. of Public Opinion in America: Moods, Cycles, and

Swings, by James A. Stimson. The American Political Science Review 86.4 (Dec.

1992): 1069-1071. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

268

Kunjufu, Jawanza. An African Centered Response To Ruby Payne’s Poverty Theory.

Chicago: African American Images, 2006. Print.

Lacireno-Paquet, Natalie, Thomas T. Holyoke, Michele Moser, and Jeffrey R. Henig

“Creaming Versus Cropping: Charter School Enrollment Practices in Response

to Market Incentives.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 24.2

(Summer 2002): 145-158. Web. 20 March 2010.

Lane, Marcia. “Politics Not What Is Right Drive Florida’s Education Reforms.”

StAugustine.com. St. Augustine Record, 14 March 2011. Web. 10 April 2011.

Lankford, Hamilton, Susanna Loeb, and James Wyckoff. “Teacher Sorting and the

Plight of Urban Schools: A Descriptive Analysis.” Educational Evaluation and

Policy Analysis 24.1 (Spring 2002): 37-62. Web. 20 March 2010.

Lareau, Annette, and Elliot B. Weininger. “Cultural Capital in Educational Research: A

Critical Assessment.” Theory and Society 32.5/6 (Dec. 2003): 567-606. Web. 4

April 2010.

Lau, Richard R., and Mark Schlesinger. “Policy Frames, Metaphorical Reasoning, and

Support for Public Policies.” Political Psychology 26.1 (Feb. 2005): 77-114. Web.

22 Nov. 2011.

Lawrence-Lightfoot, Sarah. The Essential Conversation: What Parents and Teachers

Can Learn From Each Other. New York: Ballantine Books, 2003. Print.

Leary, Alex, and Ron Matus. “Tax Cut, Voucher Plans Tossed.” The St. Petersburg

Times. The St. Petersburg Times, 4 Sept. 2008. Web. 8 March 2012.

269

Lee, Jung-Sook, and Natasha K. Bowen. “Parent Involvement, Cultural Capital, and the

Achievement Gap among Elementary School Children.” American Educational

Research Journal 43.2 (Summer 2006): 193-218. Web. 1 July 2010.

Levin, Henry M. “Education as a Public and Private Good.” Journal of Policy Analysis

and Management 6.4 (Summer 1987): 628-641. Web. 20 March 2010.

Levitt, Theodore. “Marketing Myopia.” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business

Publishing, July 2004. Web. 2 Feb. 2012.

Lichterman, Paul. “Social Capital or Group Style? Rescuing Tocqueville’s Insights on

Civic Engagement.” Theory and Society 35.5/6 (Dec. 2006): 529-563. Web. 1

July 2010.

Liddington, Jill. “What Is Public History? Publics and Their Pasts, Meanings and

Practices.” Oral History 30.1 (Spring 2002): 83-93. Print.

Lin, Nan. “Building a Network Theory of Social Capital.” Connections 22(1): 28-51.

Web. 5 April 2010.

Lochner, Kimberly, Ichiro Kawachi, and Bruce P. Kennedy. “Social Capital: A Guide

to Its Measurement.” Health & Place 5 (1999): 259-270. Web. 5 April 2010.

Lopez, Shane J. “Americans’ Views of Public Schools Still Far Worse Than Parents’:

Parents Rate Own C School Far Better Than Americans Rate U.S. Public

Schools.” Gallup. Gallop, Inc., 25 Aug. 2010. Web. 17 Jan. 2011.

Lubienski, Christopher. “Innovation in Education Markets: Theory and Evidence on the

Impact of Competition and Choice in Charter Schools.” American Educational

Research Journal 40.2 (Summer 2003): 395-443. Web. 20 March 2010.

270

Lubienski, Christopher, and Sarah Theule Lubienski. “Charter, Private, Public Schools

and Academic Achievement: New Evidence from NAEP Mathematics Data.”

National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education. Columbia

University, Jan. 2006. Web. 4 July 2010.

Manno, Brunno V., Chester E. Finn, Jr., and Gregg Vanourek. “Beyond the

Schoolhouse Door: How Charter Schools Are Transforming Public Education.”

The Phi Delta Kappan 81.10 (June 2000): 736-744. Web. 4 Dec. 2010.

Mapp, Karen. “Family Engagement as a Means of Sustaining Reform.” Achieve

Hartford! Achieve Hartford!, 2010. Web. 14 Feb. 2012.

Marshall, Melissa J. “Citizen Participation and the Neighborhood Context: A New Look

at the Coproduction of Local Public Goods.” Political Research Quarterly 57.2

(June 2004): 231-244. Web. 4 Dec. 2010.

Matheson, Kathy. “Teachers Face Consequences, Support Reform at Failing Schools.”

USAToday. Gannett Satellite Information Network, Inc., 24 Feb. 2010. Web. 24

February 2010.

Mathis, William. “They Counted WHAT? Cato Report Inflates School Spending by

Double-Counting Capital Costs.” Education and Public Interest Center and

Education Policy Research Unit. University of Colorado, 5 May 2010. Web. 5

May 2010.

Matthews, David. Is There a Public For Public Schools? Dayton: Kettering Foundation

Press, 1996. Print.

---. Reclaiming Public Education by Reclaiming Our Democracy. Dayton: Kettering

Foundation Press, 2006. Print.

271

Matus, Ron, and Jeffery S. Solochek. “Redesigning Florida’s Education System,

Again?” The Miami Herald 7 March 2010: 1, 2B. Print.

Matus, Ron, Jeffery S. Solochek, and Steve Bosquet. “Is the Next Step Vouchers for

All?” The Miami Herald 23 April 2010: 1-2L. Print.

Mayer, Gerald. “Union Membership Trends in the United States.” Congressional

Research Service. Library of Congress, 31 Aug. 2004. Web. 20 Feb. 2011.

Mayer, Nonna. “Social Capital, Trust and Civicness.” Sciences Po. CEVIPOF CNRS.

CEVIPOF, May 2001. Web. 30 July 2010.

Mazzei, Patricia. “Florida Lawmakers Close to Lifting Barriers for Charter Schools.”

The St. Petersburg Times. The St. Petersburg Times, 28 April 2011. Web. 28

April 2011.

McCombs, Maxwell. “The Agenda Setting Role of the Mass Media in Shaping Public

Opinion.” Online essay. Google scholar, n.d. Web. 14 May 2011.

McCombs, Maxwell, and Donald Shaw. “The Agenda-Setting Function of the Mass

Media.” Public Opinion Quarterly 36 (1972): 176-187. Web. 14 May 2011.

McDaniel, Judith Kay. Tool Kit for School-Family-Community Partnerships. Rockville:

National School Public Relations Association, 2001. Print.

McGrory, Kathleen, and Scott Hiaasen. “Bill Would Reveal Charter School Ties.” The

Miami Herald 23 Dec. 2011: 1-2B. Print.

272

McGrory, Kathleen, and Scott Hiaasen. “Audit: Coconut Grove Charter School Has

Conflicts of Interest with Founder: The Academy of Arts & Mind’s Conflicts

with Founder-landlord Manuel Alonso-Poch Could Threaten the School’s Non-

profit Status, School District Auditors Found.” The MiamiHerald. The Miami

Herald, 23 June 2012. Web. 23 June 2012.

---. “Cashing in on Kids.” The Miami Herald 11 Dec. 2011: 1, 20A. Print.

---. “Cashing in on Kids: Cultivating Links with Lawmakers.” The Miami Herald 14

Dec. 2011: 19A. Print.

---. “Cashing in on Kids: How Some States Rein In Abuses.” The Miami Herald 11

Dec. 2011: 22A. Print.

---. “Cashing in on Kids: A World of Insider Deals.” The Miami Herald 11 Dec.2011:

20-22A. Print.

---. “Charter Schools Try to Tap Building Fund.” Miami Herald/Sun-Sentinel 19 Feb.

2012: 4B. Print.

---. “Education Inc.” The Miami Herald 14 Dec. 2011: 1, 18-19A. Print.

---. “Parents Irked with Charter School.” The Miami Herald 9 Oct. 2011: 1A. Print.

---. “The Poverty Gap.” The Miami Herald 16 Dec. 2011: 1, 32-33A. Print.

---. “Special Needs, Limited Options.” The Miami Herald 16 Dec. 2011: 32A. Print.

---. “State to Take Second Shot at Education Cash.” The Miami Herald 23 April 2010:

1-2B. Print.

273

McKerrow, Raymie E. “Critical Rhetoric and the Possibility of the Subject.” The

Critical Turn: Rhetoric and Philosophy in Post Modern Discourse. Eds. Ian

Angus and Lenore Langsdorf. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press,

1993. 51-67. Print.

McLean, Scott L., David A. Schultz, and Manfred B. Steger. Social Capital: Critical

Perspectives on Community and “Bowling Alone.” New York: New York

University Press, 2002. 1-295. Print.

McLeod, Saul. “Cognitive Dissonance.” Simply Psychology. Simply Psychology, 2008.

Web. 19 Sept. 2011.

Medina, Jennifer. “In Harlem, Epicenter for Charter Schools, A Senator Wars against

Them.” The New York Times 7 March 2010: 21A. Print.

Ment, David M. Rev. of Public Education in the United States: From Revolution to

Reform, by R. Freeman Butts. Teachers College Record 83.2 (1981): 308-310.

Web. 20 March 2010.

Merelman, Richard M. “Democratic Politics and the Culture of American Education.”

The American Political Science Review 74.2 (June 1980): 319-332. Web. 9 April

2011.

Meyer, John W., David Tyack, Joane Nagel, and Audri Gordon. “Public Education as

Nation-Building in America: Enrollments and Bureaucratization in the

American States, 1870-1930.” The American Journal of Sociology 85.3 (Nov.

1979): 591-613. Web. 20 March 2010.

Meyers, Merrie. 30-Day SAC Planning Calendar. 2 Dec. 2008. Print.

274

---. 30-Day SAC Time Line: Steps for Increasing Parents Involvement in School

Advisory Councils. 5 Dec. 2008. Print.

---. Getting Involved in Your School: Building an Interest in Classroom Activities.

Powerpoint presentation for selected Broward County Public Schools. 2 Dec.

2009. Print.

---. Increasing Community Involvement In The School Governance Process. 1 Dec.

2008. Print.

---. “Mind Mapping School Characteristics.” Meeting with Administrative Staff of

Dillard High School. Ft. Lauderdale. 2 Feb. 2011. Meeting.

---. “Planning Meeting.” Meeting with Enrollment Loss Subcommittee. Ft. Lauderdale.

15 Sept. 2010. Meeting.

---. “Planning Meeting 2.” Meeting with Enrollment Loss Subcommittee. Ft. Lauderdale.

30 Sept. 2010. Meeting.

---. “Planning Meeting 3.” Meeting with Enrollment Loss Subcommittee. Ft. Lauderdale.

22, 28 Oct. and 3 Nov. 2010. Meeting.

---. “Project Agreement, Sections 1-4: Attracting, Retaining and Reclaiming New

Students.” 18 November 2009; 26 January, 22 February, 23 March, and 15 April

2010. Print.

---. Steps for Increasing Involvement in School Advisory Councils. 14 Nov. 2008. Print.

Milbrath, Lester W. “The Context of Public Opinion: How Our Belief Systems Can

Affect Poll Results.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social

Science 472 (March 1984): 35-49. Web. 9 April 2011.

275

Miller, Carolyn. “The Polis as Rhetorical Community.” Rhetorica 11.3 (Summer 1993):

211-240. Web. 9 April 2011.

Miller, Joanne M. “Examining the Mediators of Agenda Setting: A New Experimental

Paradigm Reveals the Role of Emotions.” Political Psychology 28.6 (Dec.

2007): 689-717. Web. 10 June 2011.

Miner, Frances. History of Broward County. Ed. James A. Findlay. Fort Lauderdale:

Broward County Libraries Division, Broward County Government, 2006. 1-35.

Print.

Miron, Gary. “Charter School Funding: Less Money for Fewer Obligations.” National

Education Policy Center. University of Colorado, 29 June 2010. Web. 17 Sept.

2010.

Miron, Gary and William Mathis. “Brookings Report Distorts Research to Support

Shortsighted Federal Agenda on Charter Schools.” National Education Policy

Center. University of Colorado, 9 Dec. 2010. Web. 16 Feb. 2012.

---. “For-Profit Firms Fall Short Under Federal Education Law.” National Education

Policy Center. University of Colorado, 20 Jan. 2011. Web. 16 Feb. 2012.

Miron, Gary, and Kevin Weiner. “Escalating Evidence on Charter Segregation.”

National Education Policy Center. University of Colorado, 9 Feb. 2010. Web.

22 June 2010.

---. “New KIPP Study Underestimates Attrition Effects.” National Education Policy

Center. University of Colorado, 22 June 2010. Web. 22 June 2010.

Moffatt, Mike. “Are Private Schools More Cost Effective Than Public Ones?”

About.com Economics. About.com, 28 Oct. 2007. Web. 27 April 2010.

276

Mora, Jill Kerper. “From the Ballot Box to the Classroom.” Educational Leadership

(April 2009): 14-19. Print.

Morse, Jodie. “Do Charter Schools Pass The Test?” Time. Time Inc., 4 June 2001. Web.

27 Sept. 2011.

Moschis, George P., and Gilbert A. Churchill, Jr. “Consumer Socialization: A

Theoretical and Empirical Analysis.” Journal of Marketing Research 15.4 (Nov.

1978): 599-609. Web. 20 March 2010.

National Education Service. Building Successful Partnerships: A Guide for Developing

Parent and Family Involvement Programs. Bloomington, IN: National Education

Service, 2000. Eric.ed.gov. Web. 15 Nov. 2009.

“National Leaders Urge Obama to Address Education Crisis.” The Center for Education

Reform. The Center for Education Reform, 26 Jan. 2009. Web. 2 April 2010.

National PTA. State Laws on Family Engagement in Education Reference Guide.

Chicago: National PTA, 2009. 1-256. Print.

---. PTA National Standards for Family-School Partnerships: An Implementation

Guide. Chicago: National PTA, 2009. Print.

“A Nation At Risk.” Ed.gov. U.S. Department of Education, April 1983. Web. 18 Nov.

2009.

Nelson, Thomas E., and Jennifer Garst. “Values-Based Political Messages and

Persuasion: Relationships among Speaker, Recipient and Evoked Values.”

Political Psychology 26.4 (Aug. 2005): 489-515. Print.

Nisbet, Matthew C. “Agenda Building.” International Encyclopedia of Communication.

International Encyclopedia of Communication Online, n.d. Web. 23 Feb. 2012.

277

“New Poll: Indiana Voters Support Choice in Education, Substantially Underestimate

Public Education Spending.” The Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice.

The Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice, 10 Jan. 2011. Web. 10

Jan.2011.

“New Report Shows Vouchers Benefit Public and Private School Students.” The

Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice. The Friedman Foundation for

Educational Choice, 23 March 2011. Web. 23 March 2011.

“Newspaper Content: What Makes Readers More Satisfied.” Readership Institute.

Northwestern University, June 2001. Web. 16 Feb. 2012.

“Nine Lies About School Choice: Proving the Critics Wrong.” The Center for

Education Reform. The Center for Education Reform, 1 Sept. 2005. Web. 2

April 2010.

“Obama Defends Education Policies to Critics.” USA Today. Gannett Satellite

Information Network, Inc., 30 Sept. 2010. Web. 6 October 2011.

O’Brien, Stephen, and Mairtin O Fathaigh. “Bringing in Bourdieu’s Theory of Social

Capital: Renewing Learning Partnership Approaches to Social Inclusion.” ESAI

Annual Conference, National University of Ireland, Maynooth, 1-3 April 2004.

UCC, Web. 5 April 2010.

O’Connor, John. “How One Charter School Serves the Disabled. The Miami Herald 12

Feb. 2012: 1,4L. Print.

Ogren, Brian. “Aristotle’s Rhetoric and the Cognition of Being: Human Emotions and

the Rational-Irrational Dialectic. Minerva - An Internet Journal of Philosophy 8

(2004). Web. 6 March 2012.

278

Olmeda, Rafael A. “Broward Schools Keep Unused Portable Classrooms in Limbo.

SunSentinel. Sun Sentinel, 25 July 2010. Web. 14 Feb. 2012.

O’Matz, Megan. “Broward Schools Build Pools (Total Price: $8 Million Plus) But

Don’t Teach Their Students How to Swim.” Sun Sentinel 11 April 2011: 1 B.

Print.

O’Reilly, Robert R., and Lynn Bosetti. “Charter Schools: The Search for Community.”

Peabody Journal of Education 75.4 (2000): 19-36. Web. 20 March 2010.

Ostrom, Elinor, and T.K. Ahn. Foundations of Social Capital. Northampton. MA:

Edward Elgar, 2003. 1-590. Print.

Otterman, Sharon. “Charter Controversies and Elephant Dung.” The New York Times.

The New York Times Company, 14 Sept. 2010. Web. 17 Sept. 2010.

Padover, Saul K. Jefferson: A Great American’s Life and Ideas. New York: Harcourt,

Brace & World, 1952. Archiving Early America. Web. 10 April 2011.

---. Thomas Jefferson on Democracy. New York: Appleton-Century Company, Inc.,

1939. 89. Print.

Patterson, Thomas E. The Vanishing Voter: Public Involvement in an Age of

Uncertainty. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2002. Print.

Pawlowski, Brett. “How Partnership Leaders Handle Retention: A Survey of District-

level Practitioners Points to Effective Retention Strategies.” Partners in

Education. Partners in Education, Inc., Aug 2010. Web. 7 Aug. 2010.

279

---. Unlocking the Full Spectrum of Community Support: A Briefing for School and

District Leaders. Charlotte: DeHavilland and Associates, June 2009. Association

of School Business Officials Maryland and the District of Columbia. Web. 28 July

2009.

Payne, John. “Charter Schools Boost Graduation Rates and College Attendance.” Show-

Me Daily. Show-Me Institute, 25 March 2011. Web. 11 Sept. 2011.

Payne, Ruby K. A Framework For Understanding Poverty. Highlands, Texas: Aha

Process, Inc., 2005. Print.

Pearce, Kimberly A., and W. Barnett Pearce. “The Public Dialogue Consortium’s

Approach to Enhance Citizenship Skills and Enhance School Climate.”

Communication Theory 11 (Feb. 2001): 105-123. Public Dialogue Consortium.

Web. 10 Oct. 2011.

Peterson, Merrell D. The Jefferson Image in the American Mind. New York: Oxford

University Press, 1960. Archiving Early America. Web. 15 Sept. 2011.

Porter, James E., Patricia Sullivan, Stuart Blythe, Jeffrey T. Grabill, and Libby Miles.

“A Rhetorical Methodology for Change College Composition and

Communication.” College Composition and Communication 51.4 (June 2000):

610-642. Web. 9 April 2011.

Portes, Alejandro. “The Two Meanings of Social Capital.” Sociological Forum 15.1

(March 2000): 1-12. Web. 1 July 2010.

“Private Schools in the United States: A Statistical Proﬁle, 1993-1994/Catholic-

Parochial Schools.” National Center for Education Statistics. National Center for

Education Statistics, 1994. 1-10. Web. 2 April 2010.

280

Privuznak, Jamie. “School Choice and the Voucher Movement.” National Association

of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA). National

Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration, n.d. Web. 23 Feb.

2012.

“Progress on Graduation Rate Stalls; 1.3 Million Students Fail to Earn Diplomas.

Report Identifies Epicenters of the Dropout Crisis, Examines Data-Driven

Strategies to Boost Graduation.” Show-Me Daily. Show-Me Institute, 25 March

2011. Web. 11 Sept. 2011.

“Public Schools Have to Adapt to Choice or Die.” The Miami Herald. Miami Herald

Media Co., 16 Aug. 2011.Web. 16 Aug. 2011.

Putnam, Robert D. “Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital” Journal of

Democracy (Jan. 1995): 65-78. Web. 20 Dec. 2010.

---. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York:

Simon and Shuster, 2000. Print.

---. “Social Capital: Measurement and Consequences.” Isuma: Canadian Journal of

Policy Research 2 (Spring 2001): 41-51. Web. 5 April 2010.

---. “Tuning In, Tuning Out: The Strange Disappearance of Social Capital in America.”

PS: Political Science and Politics 28.4 (Dec. 1995): 664-683. Web. 26 Aug.

2009.

---. “You Gotta Have Friends.” Time. Time Inc., 25 June 2006. Web. 7 March 2012.

Rahn, Wendy M., Brian Kroeger, and Cynthia M. Kite. “A Framework for the Study of

Public Mood.” Political Psychology 17.1 (March 1996): 29-58. Web. 22 Nov.

2011.

281

Ravitch, Diane. “The Myth of Charter Schools.” Brookings. The Brookings Institute, 11

Nov. 2010. Web. 8 Feb. 2011.

---. “Obama Grants Waivers to NCLB and Makes a Bad Situation Worse: The President

Correctly Sees That No Child Left Behind Forces Teaching to the Test. But So Do

His Solutions to That Problem.” The Daily Beast. The Newsweek/Daily Beast

Company LLC, 10 Feb. 2012. Web. 11 Feb. 2012.

Reinhardt, Mark. “ Look Who’s Talking: Political Subjects, Political Objects, and

Political Discourse in Contemporary Theory.” Political Theory 23.4 (Nov.

1995): 689-719. Web. 9 April 2011.

Renzulli, Linda A. “Organizational Environments and the Emergence of Charter

Schools in the United States.” Sociology of Education 78.1 (Jan. 2005): 1-26.

Web. 20 March 2010.

Renzulli, Linda A., and Lorraine Evans. “School Choice, Charter Schools, and White

Flight.” Social Problems 52.3 (Aug. 2005): 398-418. Web. 20 March 2010.

Renzulli, Linda A., and Vincent J. Roscigno. “Charter School Policy, Implementation,

and Diffusion across the United States.” Sociology of Education 78.4 (Oct.

2005): 344-365. Web. 20 March 2010.

Richtel, Matt. “In the Classroom of Future, Stagnant Scores.” The New York Times 4

Sept. 2011: 1,16 A. Print.

Robbins, Bruce. Rev of. The Last Intellectuals: American Culture in the Age of

Academe, by Russell Jacoby. Social Text 25/26 (1990): 254-259. Print.

282

Robinson, John P., and John A. Fleishman. “Ideological Trends in American Public

Opinion.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 472

(March 1984): 50-60. Web. 9 April 2011.

Roig-Franzia, Manuel. “A Battle of Goliaths: Michael Bloomberg and His Gun Control

Group Take on the NRA.” The Washington Post. The Washington Post, 5 Aug.

2009. Web. 27 Sept. 2011.

Rosenthal, Donald B. “Power, Politics & Public Policy in American Urban Research.”

Polity 5.4 (Summer 1973): 531-546. Web. 9 April 2011.

Rotherham, Andrew J. “Charter Schools: The Good Ones Aren’t Flukes.” Time. Time

Inc., 14 Oct. 2010. Web. 27 Sept. 2011.

Rothstein, Bo, and Dietlind Stolle. “How Political Institutions Create and Destroy

Social Capital: An Institutional Theory of Generalized Trust.” Project on

Honesty and Trust: Theory and Experience in the Light of Post-Socialist

Experience. Collegium Budapest, Budapest, 22-23 November 2002. Yale Law

School. Web. 21 July 2010.

Rowling, J. R. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. New York: Scholastic Press,

Arthur A. Levine Books, 1999. 333. Print.

Rudolph, Lloyd I. “The Media and Cultural Politics.” Economic and Political Weekly

27/28 (July 1992): 1489-1491,1493-1496. Web. 9 April 2011.

Rury, John L. Education and Social Change: Themes in the History of American

Schooling. Mahwah, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum, 2002. 1-255. Print.

Sagan, Paul, and Tom Leighton. “The Internet & the Future of News.” Daedalus

(Spring 2010): 119-125. Web. 13 April 2010.

283

Salinas, Karen Clark, Natalie Rodriquez Jansorn, and Jameel Nolan, eds. Promising

Partnership Practices, National Network of Partnership Schools. Baltimore:

Johns Hopkins University, 2001. Print.

Salmon, Charles T., L.A. Post, and Robin E. Christensen. “Mobilizing Public Will For

Social Change.” Communications Consortium Media Center. Communications

Consortium Media Center, June 2003. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

Samples, John. “Setting the Record Straight Concerning Low Voter Turnout.” Society

for the Advancement of Education. SAHE, 2004. Web. 17 Jan. 2011.

Santeramo, Pat. “Education Reform- Political Rhetoric.” SunSentinel. Sun Sentinel, 6

March 2011. Web. 10 April 2011.

Saporito, Salvatore, and Annette Lareau. “School Selection as a Process: The Multiple

Dimensions of Race in Framing Educational Choice.” Social Problems 46.3

(Aug. 1999): 418-439. Web. 4 Dec. 2010.

Sass, Tim R., and Rom Zimmer. “Charter Schools Show Increased Rates of High

School Graduation and College Enrollment, According to New Study.”

Educationnext. Harvard Kennedy School, 10 Feb. 2010. Web. 11 Sept. 2011.

Saul, Stephanie. “Profits and Questions at Online Charter Schools.” The New York

Times. The New York Times Company, 12 Dec.2011. Web. 17 Feb. 2011.

Saxon, Burt. “Charter Schools: Education’s Fox in the Henhouse?” Education Week 22

(Dec. 2009). Web. 22 Dec. 2009.

Scahill, Jeremy, Susan Burke, and Scott Horton. “Presentation on Military Contractors

at Columbia Law School.” YouTube. YouTube, LLC, 18 Nov. 2009. Web. 22

Sept. 2011.

284

Schaeffer, Adam B. “They Spent WHAT? The Real Cost of Public Schools: Policy

Analysis.” Cato Institute. Cato Institute, 10 March 2010. Web. 22 Sept. 2011.

Schemo, Diana Jean. “Failing Schools Strain to Meet U.S. Standard.” The New York

Times. The New York Times Company, 16 Oct. 2007. Web. 16 Oct. 2009.

Schneider, Jo Anne. “The Role of Social Capital in Building Healthy Communities.”

The Annie E. Casey Foundation. The Annie E. Casey Foundation, Nov. 2004.

Web. 12 Sept. 2010.

---. “Social Capital and Social Geography.” The Annie E. Casey Foundation. The Annie

E. Casey Foundation, 2010. Web. 12 Sept. 2010.

Schneider, Mark, and Jack Buckley. “Making the Grade: Comparing DC Charter

Schools to Other DC Public Schools.” Educational Evaluation and Policy

Analysis 25.2 (Summer 2003): 203-215. Web. 5 Jan. 2010.

---. “What Do Parents Want From Schools? Evidence from the Internet.” Educational

Evaluation and Policy Analysis 25.2 (Summer, 2003): 203-215. Web. 5 Jan.

2010.

Schrag, Peter. “The Near Myth of Our Failing Schools.” The Atlantic. The Atlantic

Monthly Group, Oct.1997. Web. 27 Sept. 2011.

Sen, Amartya. “The Three R’s of Reform.” Economic and Political Weekly 40.19 (May

2005): 1971-1974. Web. 9 April 2011.

“Servicemen’s Readjustment Act (1944).” National Archives. U.S. National Archives

and Records Administration, n.d. Web. 14 Aug. 2011.

285

Shanker, Albert. “Education as a Public and Private Good: Comment.” Journal of

Policy Analysis and Management 6.4 (Summer 1987): 643-647. Web. 20 March

2010.

Shimahara, Nobuo K. “Polarized Socialization in an Urban High School.” Anthropology

& Education Quarterly 14.2 (Summer 1983): 109-130. Web. 20 March 2010.

Siisiainen, Martti. “Two Concepts of Social Capital: Bourdieu vs. Putnam.” ISTR

Fourth International Conference, Dublin, 5-8 July 2008. dlc.dlib.indiana.edu.

Web. 5 April 2010.

Simon, Stephanie. “Hard-Hit Schools Try Public-Relations Push.” The Wall Street

Journal. Dow Jones Company Inc., 17 Aug. 2009. Web. 25 Aug. 2009.

Smith, M. K. (2000-2009). “Social Capital: Civic Community and Education.” Infed.

Infed, 2009. Web. 5 April 2010.

Snell, Lisa. “Proven Policies to Fix Failing Schools.” Reason.com. Reason Magazine,

March 2010. Web. 15 March 2010.

“Social Capital: Civic Community and Education.” Infed. Infed, n.d. Web. 5 April

2010.

“Social Marketing.” Social Marketing Institute. Social Marketing Institute, 14 Feb.

2012. Web. 14 Feb. 2012.

Soler, Eileen. “A Sense of History: Some Old Schools Have Been Transformed into

Historic Museums.” The Miami Herald 3 Oct.2011: 3 BE. Print.

Soler, Eileen, and Howard Cohen. “Old School.” The Miami Herald 2 Oct. 2010: 1,

3BE. Print.

286

Solnet, Rita. “How Rick Scott and the Florida Legislature Have Harmed Public

Education.” Education Matters. Education Matters, 4 April 2011. Web. 10 April

2011.

Solomon, Lewis D. “The Role of For-Profit Corporations in Revitalizing Public

Education: A Legal and Policy Analysis.” University of Toledo Law Review 883

(Summer 1993): 24. Web. 21 March 2010.

State of Florida. Advisory Committee to the United States Commission on Civil Rights.

“Desegregation of Public School Districts in Florida: 18 Public School Districts

Have Unitary Status. 16 Districts Remain Under Court Jurisdiction.” U.S.

Commission on Civil Rights. U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 2006. Web. 3

June 2010.

---. Department of Education. “Florida’s Charter Schools: School Choice.” Florida

Department of Education. Florida Department of Education, Aug. 2011. Web.

23 Aug. 2011.

---. Department of Education. Office of Independent Education & Parental Choice.

“Charter School-FAQs/General Information.” Florida Department of Education.

Florida Department of Education, n.d. Web. 28 Feb. 2012.

---. Supreme Court of Florida. “Advisory Opinion to the Attorney General re: Florida’s

Amendment to Reduce Class Size.” State of Florida. No. SC01-2421. 25 April

2002. Web. 7 Oct. 2008.

---. Supreme Court of Florida. “Florida Education Association, et al., vs. Florida

Department of State, et al.” State of Florida. No. SC10-1784. 7 Oct. 2010. Web.

10 October 2010.

287

Stauber, John, and Sheldon Rampton. Rev. of The Father of Spin: Edward L. Bernays

and the Birth of PR, by Larry Tye. PR Watch. Center for Media and Democracy,

1999. Web. 27 Nov. 2010.

Strauss, Valerie. “Ronald Reagan’s Impact on Education Today.” The Washington Post.

The Washington Post, 6 Feb. 2011. Web. 6 Feb. 2011.

Stuart Wells, Amy, Julie Slayton, and Janelle Scott. “Defining Democracy in the

Neoliberal Age: Charter School Reform and Educational Consumption.”

American Educational Research Journal 39.2 (Summer 2002): 337-361. Web.

20 March 2010.

Studebaker, John W. “Missing, 115,000 Teachers.” Click Magazine 7(12): 65. Print.

---. “War and the Schools: High School And College Curricula.” Washington Star

Forum Program. WMAL, Washington, D.C. 2 Sept. 1942. Vital Speeches of the

Day. Web. 9 April 2011.

Suddaby, Roy, and Royston Greenwood. “Rhetorical Strategies of Legitimacy.”

Administrative Science Quarterly 50.1 (March 2005): 35-67. Print.

Summers, Anita A. “Education as a Public and Private Good: Comment.” Journal of

Policy Analysis and Management 6.4 (Summer 1987): 641-643. Web. 20 March

2010.

“Supreme Court Did Voters a Favor by Throwing Out School Funding Proposal.”

Editorial. HeraldTribune.com. HeraldTribune.com, 7 Sept. 2008. Web. 7

September 2008.

Teproff, Carli. “Failure on Class Sizes Could Cost $10 Million.” The Miami Herald 8

Jan. 2012: 1-2B. Print.

288

Thattai, D. “A History of Public Education In The United States.” ServIntFreeNet.

ServIntFreeNet, n.d. Web. 10 April 2011.

Thomas, Sue. “Reconfiguring the Public Sphere: Implications for Analyses of

Educational Policy.” British Journal of Educational Studies 52.3 (Sept. 2004):

228-248. Web. 22 Nov. 2011.

Throgmorton, J. A. “The Rhetorics of Policy Analysis.” Policy Sciences 24.2 (May

1991): 153-179. Web. 9 April 2011.

Toulmin, Stephen. The Uses of Argument. New York: Cambridge University Press,

1958. 1-247. Print.

Truman, Harry S. Address. Attorney General's Conference on Law Enforcement

Problems, Washington, D.C. 15 Feb. 1950. The American Presidency Project.

Web. 9 April 201

Turan, Omer. “The Triangle of Publicness, Communication and Democracy In

Habermas’ Thought.” Thesis. Middle East Technical University, July 2004.

etd.lib.metu.edu. Web. 8 March 2012.

“Turnout in the World - Country by Country Performance (1945-98).” Idea.

International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, 7 March 2005.

Web. 20 Feb. 2012.

Tyack, David, and Aaron Benvaot. “Courts and Public Schools: Educational Litigation

in Historical Perspective.” Law and & Society Review 19.3 (1985): 339-380.

Web. 9 April 2011.

Tye, Larry. The Father of Spin: Edward L. Bernays and the Birth of PR. New York:

Henry Holt and Company, LLC, 1998. Print.

289

“U.S. Catholic School Student Numbers Continue Decline, Drop Tops 160,000 over 3

Years.” Catholic News Service. Catholic News Service/U.S. Conference of

Catholic Bishops, 16 April 2007. Web. 4 May 2010.

United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. College Enrollment and Work Activity of

2010 High School Graduates. 8 April 2011. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Web. 4

March 2012

---. Census Bureau. Broward County, Florida QuickLinks. N.d. United States Census

Bureau. Web. 4 May 2010.

---. Census Bureau. Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates. 18 Nov. 2009. United

States Census Bureau. Web. 27 Nov. 2010.

---. Department of Education, Office of Innovation and Improvement. Innovations in

Education: Successful Charter Schools. 2004. Ed.gov. Web. 27 Nov. 2010.

Valelly, Rick. “Unsolved Mysteries: The Tocqueville Files.” The American Prospect.

The American Prospect, Inc., Mar. 1996. Web. 30 July 2010.

Ventura, Stephanie J., Joyce C. Abma, William D. Mosher, and Stanley K. Henshaw.

“Estimated Pregnancy Rates for the United States, 1990–2005: An Update.”

National Vital Statistics Reports 58.4 (14 Oct. 2009). Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention. Web. 11 Sept. 2011.

Viadero, Debra. “More on Charters; Debates and New Findings.” Education Week.

Editorial Projects in Education, 14 Oct. 2009. Web. 14. Oct. 2009.

---. “Study Gives Charters an Edge.” Education Week. Editorial Projects in Education,

10 Feb. 2010. Web. 10 Feb. 2010.

290

Virno, Paolo. “Publicness of the Intellect Non-State Public Sphere and the Multitude.”

Trans. Isabella Bertoletti, James Cascaito, and Andrea Casson. A Grammar of

the Multitude: For an Analysis of Contemporary Forms of Life. New York:

Semiotext (e), 2001. Republicart. Web. 6 March 2012.

Viteritti, Joseph P., Herbert J. Walberg, and Patrick J. Wolf. “School Choice: How an

Abstract Idea Became a Political Reality.” Brookings Papers on Education

Policy 8 (2005): 137-173. Web. 15 Sept. 2011.

Von Mises, Ludwig. The Anticapitalistic Mentality. Grove City, PA: Libertarian Press,

1972. 1-97. Web. 29 June 2010.

“A Voter’s Guide to Public Education Ballot Initiatives and Referenda.” Public

Education Network. Public Education Network, 2008. Web. 7 Aug. 2008.

“Voters in Six States Favor Expanding Choice, Underestimate Education Spending.”

The Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice. The Friedman Foundation

for Educational Choice, 29 Nov. 2010. Web. 29 Nov. 2010

Vroman, H. William. Rev. of Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit

Is Transforming the Public Sector, by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler. The

Academy of Management Executive 8.1 (Feb. 1994): 91-93. Web. 23 March

2010.

Warner, Michael. “Publics and Counterpublics.” Public Culture 14.1 (2002): 49-90.

Print.

Wasieleski, David. “Agenda-building Theory: A Stakeholder Salience Approach for

Determining Agenda Placement.” The Journal of Behavioral and Applied

Management 2.2 (Winter/Spring 2001): 113-130. Web. 23 Feb. 2012.

291

Weimer, David L. Rev. of Reinvent Government or Rediscover It? Review of

Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit Is Transforming the

Public Sector, by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler. Journal of Policy Analysis

and Management 13.1 (Winter 1994): 187-192. Web. 23 March 2010.

Weiss, Janet A. Rev. of Reinvent Government or Rediscover It? Review of Reinventing

Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit Is Transforming The Public

Sector, by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler. The Academy of Management

Review 20.1 (Jan. 1995): 229-235. Web. 23 March 2010.

Wells, Amy Stuart, Julie Slayton, and Janelle Scott. “Defining Democracy in the

Neoliberal Age: Charter School Reform and Educational Consumption.”

American Educational Research Journal 39.2 (Summer 2002): 337-361. Web.

20 March 2010.

“What Americans Said about the Public Schools: Highlights of the 2011 Phi Delta

Kappa/Gallup Poll.” Phi Delta Kappa International. Phi Delta Kappa

International, 2011. Web 12 Jan. 2012.

“What Work Requires of Schools: Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary

Skills (SCANS).” United States Department of Labor. U.S. Department of

Labor, June 1991. 1-61. Web. 18 Nov. 2009.

Wingert, Pat. “An Offer They Wouldn’t Refuse. How One District Lured Top

Principals to Rescue Its Failing Schools.” Newsweek. The Newsweek/Daily

Beast Company LLC, 12 Oct. 2010. Web. 12 Oct. 2010.

292

“Winning the Future with Education: Responsibility, Reform and Results: Oral

Testimony of U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan.” Ed.gov. U.S.

Department of Education, 9 March 2011. Web. 12 Oct. 2010.

Wittenstein, Rebecca. “Progress on Graduation Rate Stalls; 1.3 Million Students Fail to

Earn Diplomas. Report Identifies Epicenters of the Dropout Crisis, Examines

Data-Driven Strategies to Boost Graduation.” Education Week. Editorial

Projects in Education, 10 June 2010. Web. 11 Sept. 2011.

Woolcock, Michael. Culture and Development: Rethinking Implications for Policy

Research. Comments. World Bank “Culture and Public Action” Conference.

Boston, July 2002. Web. 5 April 2010.

The World Bank. Social Capital - Measurement Tools. Washington, DC: The World

Bank Group, 2009. Print.

Wu, H. Denis, and Renita Coleman. “Advancing Agenda-Setting Theory: The

Comparative Strength and New Contingent Conditions of the Two Levels of

Agenda-Setting Effects.” J&MC Quarterly 86.4 (Winter 2009): 775-789. Web.

15 May 2-11.

Yack, Bernard. “Rhetoric and Public Reasoning: An Aristotelian Understanding of

Political Deliberation.” Political Theory 34.4 (Aug. 2006): 417-438. Print.

Yankelovich, Daniel. “The Magic of Dialogue.” The Nonprofit Quarterly 12 (Jan.

2011). Web. 12 Jan. 2011.

Zehr, Mary Ann. “Study Finds High Dropout Rates for Black Males in KIPP Schools.”

Education Week. Editorial Projects in Education, 31 March 2011. Web. 31

March 2011.

293