This study assessed policy actors' influence on state reading policy and compared the structure of reading policy networks across eight states. Data for the study came from structured interviews and archival documents and were analyzed using social network analysis methods. This study found that state reading policy networks were heterogeneous in terms of both composition and policy actor influence, with government actors occupying significantly more central and more prestigious network positions than nongovernment actors. The analyses failed to confirm, however, that teacher organizations were the most central interest groups in state reading policy networks as hypothesized. Implications of this study for education policy actors were discussed and directions for future research suggested.
Allington, R. L. (1999). Critical issues: Crafting state educational policy: The slippery role of research and researchers. Journal of Literacy Research, 31 (4), 457-482.
2.
American Federation of Teachers. (2002). Mobilizing for action. Retrieved April 4, 2002, from http://www.aft.org/fpe/mobilizing/index.html
3.
Baumgartner, F. R.,& Leech, B. L. (1998). Basic interests: The importance of groups in politics and in political science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4.
Berry, J. M. (1977). Lobbying for the people: The political behavior of public interest groups. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
5.
Berry, J. (1997). The interest group society (3rd ed.) New York: Longman.
6.
Boje, D. M.,& Whetten, D. A. (1981). Effects of organizational strategies and constraints on centrality and attributions of influence in interorganizational networks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 378-395.
7.
Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G.,& Freeman, L. C. (1999). UCINET 5.0 Version 1.00. Natick, MA: Analytic Technologies.
8.
Brass, D. J. (1984). Being in the right place: A structural analysis of individual influences in an organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 518-539.
9.
Brass, D. J. (1985). Men's and women's networks: A study of interaction patterns and influence in an organization. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 327-343.
10.
Brass, D. J., & Burkhardt, M. E. (1993). Potential power and power use: An investigation of structure and behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 518-539.
11.
Browne, W. P. (1998). Groups, interests, and U.S. public policy. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
12.
Burkhardt, M. E.,& Brass, D. J. (1990). Changing patterns or patterns of change: The effect of a change in technology on social network structure and power. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 104-127.
13.
Burt, R. S. (1992). The social structure of competition. In N. Nohria& R. G. Eccles (Eds.), Networks and organizations: Structure, form and action (pp. 57-91). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
14.
Bush, G. W. (2001). No child left behind: Improving literacy by putting reading first. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved from www.whitehouse.gov/news/reports/no-child-left-behind
15.
Coleman, J. (1961). The adolescent society. New York: Free Press.
16.
Cook, K. S. (1977). Exchange and power in networks of interorganizational relations. The Sociological Quarterly, 18, 62-82.
17.
Degenne, A., & Forse, M. (1999). Introducing social networks. London: Sage.
18.
Elmore, R. F.,& Fuhrman, S. H. (1994). Education professionals and curriculum governance. In R. F. Elmore & S. H. Fuhrman (Eds.), The governance of curriculum: 1994 yearbook of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (pp. 210-215). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
19.
Ennett, S. T., & Bauman, K. E. (1996). Adolescent social networks: School, demographic, and longitudinal considerations. Journal of Adolescent Research, 11 (2), 194-215.
20.
Etzioni, A. (1964). Modern organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
21.
Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks: I. Conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1, 215-239.
22.
French, J. R. P.,& Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. InD. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150-167). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Institute for Social Research.
23.
Fuhrman, S. H. (1994). Legislatures and education policy. In R. F. Elmore & S. H. Fuhrman (Eds.), The governance of curriculum: 1994 yearbook of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (pp. 30-55). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
24.
Galaskiewicz, J. (1979). Exchange networks and community politics. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
25.
Galaskiewicz, J., & Wasserman, S. (1994). Introduction: Advances in the social and behavioral sciences from social network analysis. In S. Wasserman& J. Galaskiewicz (Eds.), Advances in social network analysis: Research in the social and behavioral sciences (pp. xi-xvii). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26.
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 481-510.
27.
Hallinan, M. T. (1979). Structural effects of children's friendships and cliques. Social Psychology Quarterly, 42, 3-54.
28.
Heclo, H. (1978). Issue networks and the executive establishment. In A. King (Ed.), The NEW American political system (pp. 87-124). Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.
29.
Heinz, J. P., Laumann, E. O., Nelson, R. L., & Salisbury, R. H. (1993). The hollow core: Private interests in national policy making. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
30.
Hrebenar, R. J. (1997). Interest group politics in America (3rd ed.) Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
31.
James, T. (1991). State authority and the politics of educational change. In G. Grant (Ed.), Review of research in education (pp. 169-224). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
32.
Karper, J. H., & Boyd, W. L. (1988). Interest groups and the changing environment of state educational policymaking: Developments in Pennsylvania. Educational Administration Quarterly, 24 (1), 21-54.
33.
Kingdon, J. W. (1995). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. (2nd ed.) New York: Harper Collins.
34.
Kirst, M. W., Meister, G., & Rowley, S. (1984). Policy issue networks: Their influence on state policymaking. Policy Studies Journal, 13 (1), 247-264.
35.
Knoke, D. (1986). Associations and interest groups. Annual Review of Sociology, 12, 1-21.
36.
Knoke, D. (1990). Political networks: The structural perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press.
37.
Knoke, D., & Burt, R. S. (1983). Prominence. In R. S. Burt & M. J. Minor (Eds.), Applied network analysis (pp. 195-222). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
38.
Knoke, D., & Kuklinski, J. H. (1982). Network analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
39.
Knoke, D., & Laumann, E. O. (1982). The social organization of national policy domains. In N. Lin& P. V. Marsden (Eds.), Social structure and network analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
40.
Kollman, K. (1998). Outside lobbying: Public opinion and interest group strategies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
41.
Krackhardt, D. (1990). Assessing the political landscape: Structure, cognition, and power in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 342-369.
42.
Laumann, E. O. (1979). Network analysis in large social systems: Some theoretical and methodological problems. In P. W. Holland & S. Leinhardt (Eds.), Perspectives on social network analysis (pp. 379-402). New York: Academic Press.
43.
Laumann, E. O.,& Knoke, D. (1987). The organizational state: Social choice in national policy domains. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
44.
Laumann, E. O., & Pappi, F. U. (1976). Networks of collective action: A perspective on community influence systems. New York: Academic Press.
45.
Lewis, D. A.,& Maruna, S. (1999). The politics of education. InV. Gray, R. Hanson,& H. Jacob (Eds.), Politics in the American states: A comparative analysis (7th ed., pp. 393-433). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
46.
Lusi, S. F. (1994). Systemic school reform: The challenges faced by state departments of education. In R. F. Elmore & S. H. Fuhrman (Eds.), The governance of curriculum (pp. 109-130). Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.
47.
Malen, B. (2001). Generating interest in interest groups. Educational Policy, 15 (1), 168-186.
48.
March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1984). The new institutionalism: Organizational factors in political life. American Political Science Review, 78, 734-749.
49.
Marsden, P. V., & Laumann, E. O. (1977). Collective action in a community elite: Exchange, influence processes, and issue resolution. In R. J. Liebert& A. Imershein (Eds.), Power, paradigms, and community research (pp. 199-250). London: Sage.
50.
Marshall, C., Mitchell, D., & Wirt, F. (1989). Culture and education policy in the American states. New York: Falmer.
51.
Mawhinney, H. B. (2001). Theoretical approaches to understanding interest groups. Educational Policy, 15 (1), 187-214.
52.
Mazzoni, T. L. (1993). The changing politics of state education policy making: A20-year Minnesota perspective. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 357-379.
53.
Mazzoni, T. L. (1995). State policy-making and school reform: Influences and influentials. In J. D. Scribner& D. H. Layton (Eds.), The study of educational politics (pp. 53-73). Washington, DC: Falmer.
54.
McDaniel, J. E. (2001). The shaping of national reading policy: Using the structural approach to examine the politics of reading. Unpublished dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
55.
McDaniel, J. E., Sims, C. H., & Miskel, C. G. (2001). The national reading policy arena: Policy actors and perceived influence. Education Policy, 15 (1), 92-114.
56.
McFarland, A. S. (1992). Interest groups and the policymaking process: Sources of countervailing power in America. In M. P. Petracca (Ed.), The politics of interests (pp. 58-79). Boulder, CO: Westview.
57.
Miller, J. (1980). Access to interorganizational networks as a professional resource. American Sociological Review, 45, 479-496.
58.
Miskel, C. G., & Song, M. (2002). Elite policy actors and reading first: Network structure, involvement, and beliefs. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the International Reading Association, San Francisco.
59.
Molm, L. D. (1990). Structure, action, and outcomes: The dynamics of power in social exchange. American Sociological Review, 55, 427-447.
60.
Murphy, J. T. (Ed.). (1980). State leadership in education: On being a chief state school officer. Washington, DC: George Washington University, Institute for Educational Leadership.
61.
Nownes, A. J.,& Freeman, P. (1998). Interest group activity in the states. The Journal of Politics, 60 (1), 86-112.
62.
Opfer, V. D. (2001). Beyond self-interest: Educational interest groups and congressional influence. Educational Policy, 15 (1), 135-152.
63.
Perrucci, R., & Lewis, B. L. (1989). Interorganizational relations and community influence structure: A replication and extension. Sociological Quarterly, 30, 205-223.
64.
Peters, B. G. (1999). Institutional theory in political science: The “new institutionalism.” New York: Continuum.
65.
Petracca, M. P. (1992). The rediscovery of interest group politics. In M. P. Petracca (Ed.), Politics of interests: Interest groups transformed (pp. 3-31). Boulder, CO: Westview.
66.
Porter, L. W., Allen, R. W.,& Angle, H. L. (1981). The politics of upward influence in organizations. In L. L. Cummings& B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 3, pp. 109-149). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
67.
Riker, W. H.,& Ordeshook, P. C. (1973). An introduction to positive political theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
68.
Rosenthal, A. (1993). The third house: Lobbyists and lobbying in the states. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
69.
Rosenthal, A. (1998). The decline of representative democracy: Process, participation, and power in state legislatures. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
70.
Rosenthal, A., & Fuhrman, S. (1983). State legislatures and education policy. The Education Digest, 48, 22-25.
71.
Rowley, T. J. (1997). Move beyond dyadic ties: A network theory of stakeholder influences. Academy of Management Review, 22 (4), 887-910.
72.
Sabatier, P. A. (1999). The need for better theories. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theoretical lenses on public policy (pp. 3-17). Boulder, CO: Westview.
73.
Salisbury, R. (1990). The paradox of interest groups in Washington: More groups, less clout. In A. King (Ed.), The new American political system (2nd ed., pp. 203-229). Washington, DC: AEI Press.
74.
Salisbury, R. H. (1991). Putting interests back into interest groups. In A. J. Cigler& B. A. Loomis (Eds.), Interest group politics (3rd ed., pp. 371-384). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
75.
Schlozman, K., & Tierney, J. (1986). Organized interests and American democracy. New York: Harper & Row.
76.
Scientific Software Development. (2001). ATLAS.TI: The knowledge workbench Version WIN 4.2 (Build 059). Berlin, Germany: Scientific Software Development.
77.
Sipple, J. W., Miskel, C. G., Matheney, T. M.,& Kearney, C. P. (1997). The creation and development of an interest group: Life at the intersection of big business and education reform. Educational Administration Quarterly, 33 (4), 440-473.
78.
Song, M., & Miskel, C. G. (2002). Interest groups in national reading policy: Perceived influence and beliefs on teaching reading. Theory and Research in Educational Administration, 1, 77-96.
79.
Song, M., Miskel, C. G., Young, T. V.,& McDaniel, J. E. (November, 2000). Perceived influence of interest groups in national reading policy. Paper presented at the University Council of Educational Administration, Albuquerque.
80.
Song, M., Miskel, C. G., Young, T. V., Osguthorpe, R., & Shepley, T. (2001, April). Interest groups in national reading policy: Perceived influence and beliefs on reading instructional approach. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association, Seattle.
81.
Spring, J. (1998). Conflicts of interests: The politics of American education (3rd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
82.
Thomas, K. C. (1982). The influence of race on adolescent friendship patterns. Educational Studies, 8, 175-183.
83.
Thomas, C. S., & Hrebenar, R. J. (1991). Nationalization of interest groups and lobbying in the states. In A. J. Cigler & B. A. Loomis (Eds.), Interest group politics (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
84.
Thomas, C. S.,& Hrebenar, R. J. (1992). Changing patterns of interest group activity: Aregional perspective. In M. P. Petracca (Ed.), The politics of interests: Interest groups transformed (pp. 150-174). Boulder, CO: Westview.
85.
Thomas, C., & Hrebenar, R. (1999). Interest groups in the states. In V. Gray, R. Hanson, & H. Jacob (Eds.), Politics in the American states: A comparative analysis (7th ed., pp. 113-143). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
86.
Valencia, S. W., & Wixson, K. K. (2000). Policy-oriented research on literacy standards and assessment. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 909-936). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
87.
Walker, J. L. (1991). Mobilizing interest groups in America. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
88.
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications: New York: Cambridge University Press.
89.
Wirt, F. M., & Kirst, M. W. (2001). The political dynamics of American education (2nd ed.). Richmond, CA: McCutchan.
