The purpose of this article is to bring attention to the illustrative power and capacity of qualitative longitudinal research within the context of the urban educational “reform churn.” In this article, we draw upon longitudinal ethnographic data collected over 3 years in four low-performing, urban secondary schools in Buffalo, New York, to illuminate the power of the methodology behind our findings. Our research provides an example of the ways in which qualitative longitudinal research can reveal the temporal mechanisms of stabilization and destabilization that develop within urban schools and districts in and through time.
AllensworthE.PonisciakS.MazzeoC. (2009). The schools teachers leave: Teacher mobility in Chicago Public Schools. Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research, The University of Chicago.
2.
Aviles de BradleyA. (2015). Homeless educational policy: Exploring a racialized discourse through a critical race theory lens. Urban Education, 50, 839-869.
3.
BalfanzR.HerzogL.Mac IverD. (2007). Preventing student disengagement and keeping students on the graduation path in urban middle-grades schools: Early identification and effective interventions. Educational Psychologist, 42, 223-235.
4.
BrykA. S.SebringP. B.AllensworthE.LuppescuS.EastonJ. Q. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
5.
BurasK. L.RandelsJ.ya SalaamK.Students at the Center. (2010). Pedagogy, policy, and the privatized city: Stories of dispossession and defiance from New Orleans. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
6.
BurawoyM. (2003). Revisits: An outline of a theory of reflexive ethnography. American Sociological Review, 68, 645-679.
7.
BurksJ.HochbeinC. (2015). The students in front of us: Reform for the current generation of urban high school students. Urban Education, 50, 346-376.
8.
CarterP.WelnerK. G. (2013). Closing the opportunity gap: What America must do to give every child an even chance. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
9.
CordenA.MillarJ. (2007). Time and change: A review of the qualitative longitudinal research literature for social policy. Social Policy and Society, 6, 583-592.
10.
CorwinZ. B.VenegasK. M.OliverezP. M.ColyarJ. E. (2004). School counsel: How appropriate guidance affects educational equity. Urban Education, 39, 442-457.
11.
CostiganA. T. (2013). New urban teachers transcending neoliberal educational reforms: Embracing aesthetic education as a curriculum of political action. Urban Education, 48, 116-148.
12.
CubanL. (2010). As good as it gets: What school reform brought to Austin. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13.
Darling-HammondL. (2010). The flat world and education: How America’s commitment to equity will determine our future. NY: Teachers College Press.
14.
Darling-HammondL. (2013). Inequality and school resources: What it will take to close the opportunity gap. In CarterP. L.WelnerK. G. (Eds.), Closing the opportunity gap: What America must do to give every child an even chance (pp. 77-97). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
15.
Darling-HammondL.HightowerA.HusbandsJ. L.LaForsJ. R.YoungV. M.ChristopherC. (2005). Instructional leadership for systemic change: The story of San Diego’s reform (Vol. 3). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Education.
16.
DatnowA.BormanG. D.StringfieldS.OvermanL. T.CastellanoM. (2003). Comprehensive school reform in culturally and linguistically diverse contexts: Implementation and outcomes from a four-year study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25, 143-170.
17.
EberleK. (2013). College Board schools: What makes them different? (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Buffalo, NY: State University of New York at Buffalo.
18.
EisenhartM.WeisL.AllenC. D.CipolloneK.StichA.DominguezR. (2015). High school opportunities for STEM: Comparing inclusive STEM-focused and comprehensive high schools in two US cities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52, 763-789. doi:10.1002/tea.v52.6
19.
ElmoreR. F. (2004). School reform from the inside out: Policy, practice, and performance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
20.
GadsdenV. L.Dixon-RománE. J. (2017). “Urban” schooling and “urban” families: The role of context and place. Urban Education, 52, 431-459. doi:10.1177/0042085916652189
21.
HenigJ. R.HulaR. C.OrrM.PedescleauxD. S. (2001). The color of school reform: Race, politics, and the challenge of urban education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
22.
HessF. M. (1999). Spinning wheels: The politics of urban school reform. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
23.
HillP. T.CampbellC.HarveyJ. (2000). It takes a city: Getting serious about urban school reform. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
24.
HollandJ.ThomsonR.HendersonS. (2006). Qualitative longitudinal research: A discussion paper. London, England: Families and Social Capital ESRC Research Group, London South Bank University. Retrieved from www.lsbu.ac.uk/families/workingpapers/familieswp21.pdf
25.
HonigM. I. (Ed.). (2013). New directions in education policy implementation: Confronting complexity. Albany: State University of New York Press.
26.
JohnsonA. W. (2012). “Turnaround” as shock therapy: Race, neoliberalism, and school reform. Urban Education, 48, 232-256.
27.
LareauA. (2011). Unequal childhoods: Class, race, and family life (2nd ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press.
28.
LiouD. D.Rotheram-FullerE. (2019). Where is the real reform? African American students and their school’s expectations for academic performance. Urban Education, 54, 397-429. doi:10.1177/0042085915623340
29.
LipmanP. (2011). Neoliberal education restructuring: Dangers and opportunities of the present crisis. Monthly Review: An Independent Socialist Magazine, 63(3), 114-127.
30.
LipmanP. (2013). Economic crisis, accountability, and the state’s coercive assault on public education in the USA. Journal of Education Policy, 28, 557-573.
31.
McDonoughP. M.KornJ. S.YamasakiE. (1997). Access, equity, and the privatization of counseling. The Review of Higher Education, 20, 297-317.
32.
MeansB.ConfreyJ.HouseA.BhanotR. (2008). STEM high schools: Specialized science technology engineering and mathematics secondary schools in the U.S. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
33.
MilesM.HubermanM.SaldanaJ. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34.
MilnerH. R.IV. (2012a). But what is urban education?Urban Education, 47, 556-561.
35.
MilnerH. R.IV. (2012b). Challenges in teacher education for urban education. Urban Education, 47, 700-705.
36.
MilnerH. R.IVLomoteyK. (2014). Introduction. In MilnerH. R.LomoteyK. (Eds.), Handbook of urban education (pp. xv-xxiii). New York, NY: Routledge.
37.
National Research Council. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
38.
OakesJ. (2015). Social theory, evidence, and activism: Challenging educational inequality in an unequal society. In TierneyW. G. (Ed.), Rethinking education & poverty (pp. 117-136). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
39.
PeckC.ReitzugU. C. (2014). School turnaround fever: The paradoxes of a historical practice promoted as a new reform. Urban Education, 49, 8-38.
40.
PernaL. W.Rowan-KenyonH. T.ThomasS. L.BellA.AndersonR.LiC. (2008). The role of college counseling in shaping college opportunity: Variations across high schools. The Review of Higher Education, 31, 131-159.
41.
RavitchD. (2011). The death and life of the great American school system: How testing and choice are undermining education. New York, NY: Basic Books.
42.
RowanB.CamburnE.BarnesC. (2004). Benefiting from comprehensive school reform: A review of research on CSR implementation. In CrossC. (Ed.), Putting the pieces together: Lessons from comprehensive school reform research (pp. 1-52). Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Comprehensive School Reform.
43.
SaldanaJ. (2003). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
44.
SaltmanK. J. (Ed.). (2007). Schooling and the politics of disaster. New York, NY: Routledge.
45.
ScottK. A.SolyomJ. A. (2011). Stories for educational leadership programs: Research at its best. In ScottK. A.BlanchettW. J. (Eds.), Research in urban educational settings: Lessons learned and implications for future practice (pp. 3-18). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
46.
SimonN. S.JohnsonS. M. (2013). Teacher turnover in high-poverty schools: What we know and can do (Working paper: Project on the Next Generation of Teachers). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education.
47.
StringfieldS.Yakimowski-SrebnickM. E. (2005). Promise, progress, problems, and paradoxes of three phases of accountability: A longitudinal case study of the Baltimore City public schools. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 43-75.
48.
StuitD. A. (2010). Are bad schools immortal? The scarcity of turnarounds and shut-downs in both charters and district sectors. Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Institute.
ThomsonR.PlumridgeL.HollandJ. (2003). Longitudinal qualitative research: A developing methodology. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 6, 185-187.
VallanceR. J. (2005, September21-23). Working with longitudinal qualitative data: Using NVivo as an analytic tool. Paper Presented at the 6th International Strategies in Qualitative Research Conference, Durham University, Durham, UK.
53.
WeisL. (2004). Class reunion: The remaking of the American white working class. New York, NY: Routledge.
54.
WeisL.EisenhartM.CipolloneK.StichA. E.NikischerA. B.HansonJ.. . . DominguezR. (2015). In the guise of STEM education reform: Opportunity structures and outcomes in inclusive STEM-focused high schools. American Educational Research Journal, 52, 1024-1059. doi:10.3102/0002831215604045
