There has been little research examining how decentralized Catholic diocesan systems have worked toward their stated system-wide goal of keeping urban Catholic schools sustainable. Through a new qualitative analysis of interviews with Catholic school and system leaders, we demonstrate in this article how leaders agreed about the issues preventing urban Catholic elementary schools from becoming operationally sustainable but disagreed about potential solutions to this problem. Our findings indicate these leaders believed decentralized systems constrained their ability to pursue coherent system-wide reforms. We connect these findings to broader calls for decentralization in large urban systems attempting to pursue educational equity initiatives.
AltonjiJ. G.ElderT. E.TaberC. R. (2005a). An evaluation of instrumental variable strategies for estimating the effects of Catholic schooling. Journal of Human Resources, 40(4), 791–821. https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.XL.4.791
2.
AltonjiJ. G.ElderT. E.TaberC. R. (2005b). Selecting on observed and unobserved variables: Assessing the effectiveness of Catholic schools. Journal of Political Economy, 113(1), 151–184. https://doi.org/10.1086/426036
3.
BerendsM. (2020). Social perspectives on school choice. In BerendsM.PrimusA.SpringerM. G. (Eds.), Handbook of research on school choice (2nd ed., pp. 32–45). Routledge.
4.
BerendsM.WaddingtonR. J. (2018). School choice in Indianapolis: Effects of charter, magnet, private, and traditional public schools. Education Finance and Policy, 13(2), 227–255. https://doi.org/10.1162/edfp_a_00225
5.
BrinigM. F.GarnettN. S. (2014). Lost classroom, lost community: Catholic schools’ importance in urban America. University of Chicago Press.
6.
BrykA. S.LeeV. E.HollandP. B. (1993). Catholic schools and the common good. Harvard University Press.
7.
BulkleyK. E.MarshJ. A.StrunkK. O.HarrisD. N.HashimA. K. (2020). Challenging the one best system: The portfolio management model and urban school governance. Harvard Education Press.
8.
BulkleyK. E.TorresA. C.HashimA. K.WoodwardS.MarshJ. A.StrunkK. O.HarrisD. N. (2021). From central office to portfolio manager in three cities: Responding to the principal-agent problem. American Journal of Education, 127(4), 597–626. https://doi.org/10.1086/715034
9.
CattaroG. M.CooperB. S. (2007). Developments in Catholic schools in the USA: Politics, policy, and prophesy. In GraceG. R.O’KeefeJ. (Eds.), International handbook of Catholic education: Challenges for school systems in the 21st century (pp. 61–83). Springer.
10.
ColemanJ.HofferT.KilgoreS. (1982). Cognitive outcomes in public and private schools. Sociology of Education, 55(2), 65–76. https://doi.org/10.2307/2112288
11.
CookT.FussellR.SimondsT. (2022). Turnover and retention of Catholic school superintendents in the United States: Averting a crisis. International Studies in Catholic Education, 14(2), 144–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/19422539.2021.1942685
12.
DallavisJ. W.PonisciakS. M. (2023). Catholic and public schools compared: Examining achievement growth in an urban center. Religion & Education, 1–23. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/15507394.2023.2268486
13.
DaviesS. (2013). Are there Catholic school effects in Ontario, Canada?European Sociological Review, 29(4), 871–883. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcs065
14.
DiemS.SampsonC. (2023). Goals, rhetoric, and (in)equity: The rationales behind decentralizing a large, diverse school district. Urban Education, 58(2), 191–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085920908915
15.
DornerL. M.SpillaneJ. P.PustejovskyJ. (2011). Organizing for instruction: A comparative study of public, charter, and Catholic schools. Journal of Educational Change, 12(1), 71–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-010-9147-5
16.
EdwardsD. B.Jr.DeMatthewsD. (2014). Historical trends in educational decentralization in the United States and developing countries: A periodization and comparison in the post-WWII context. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(40), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v22n40.2014
17.
EvansS. A. (2024). “I wanted diversity, but not so much:” Middle-class white parents, school choice, and the persistence of anti-black stereotypes. Urban Education, 59(3), 911–940. https://doi.org/10.1177/00420859211031952
FreemanK. J.BerendsM. (2016). The Catholic school advantage in a changing social landscape: Consistency or increasing fragility?Journal of School Choice, 10(1), 22–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/15582159.2015.1132937
21.
GoldschmidtE. P.WalshM. (2013). Urban Catholic elementary schools: What are the governance models?Journal of Catholic Education, 17(1), 110–134. https://doi.org/10.15365/joce.1701072013
22.
GreenT. L.GermainE.CastroA. J.Latham SikesC.SanchezJ.HorneJ. (2022). Gentrifying neighborhoods, gentrifying schools?: An emerging typology of school changes in a gentrifying urban school district. Urban Education, 57(1), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085920974090
23.
GroomeT. H. (2022). What makes education Catholic: Spiritual foundations. Orbis Books.
24.
GrossR. N. (2018). Public vs. private: The early history of school choice in America. Oxford University Press.
25.
HallinanM. T.KubitschekW. N. (2012). A comparison of academic achievement and adherence to the common school ideal in public and Catholic schools. Sociology of Education, 85(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040711431586
HarrisD. N. (2020). Charter school city: What the end of traditional public schools in New Orleans means for American education. University of Chicago Press.
28.
HenigJ. E. (2010). Portfolio management models and the political economy of contracting regimes. In BulkleyK. E.HenigJ. E.LevinH. M. (Eds.), Between public and private: Politics, governance, and the new portfolio models for urban school reform (pp. 27–52). Harvard Education Press.
29.
HillC. (2012). Consensual qualitative research: A practical resource for investigating social science phenomena. American Psychological Association.
30.
HillC.KnoxS.ThompsonB. J.WilliamsE. N.HessS. A.LadanyN. (2005). Consensual qualitative research: An update. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 196–205. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.196
31.
HonigM. I.HatchT. C. (2004). Crafting coherence: How schools strategically manage multiple, external demands. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 16–30. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033008016
32.
HorsfordS. D.ScottJ. T.AndersonG. L. (2019). The politics of education policy in an era of inequality: Possibilities for democratic schooling. Routledge.
33.
IrwinV.De La RosaJ.WangK.HeinS.ZhangJ.BurrR.RobertsA.BarmerA.Bullock MannF.DiligR.ParkerS. (2022). Report on the condition of education 2022 (NCES 2022-144). U.S. Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2022144
34.
JabbarH.FongC. J.GermainE.LiD.SanchezJ.SunW.-L.DevallM. (2022). The competitive effects of school choice on student achievement: A systematic review. Educational Policy, 36(2), 247–281. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904819874756
35.
Ladson-BillingsG. (2021). I’m here for the hard re-set: Post pandemic pedagogy to preserve our culture. Equity and Excellence in Education, 54(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2020.1863883
36.
MarksH. M. (2009). Perspectives on Catholic schools. In BerendsM.SpringerM. G.BallouD.WalbergH. J. (Eds.), Handbook of research on school choice (1st ed., pp. 479–500). Routledge.
37.
MarshJ. A.AllbrightT. N.BrownD. R.BulkleyK. E.StrunkK. O.HarrisD. N. (2021). The process and politics of educational governance change in New Orleans, Los Angeles, and Denver. American Educational Research Journal, 58(1), 107–159. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831220921475
38.
MarshJ. A.AllbrightT. N.BulkleyK. E.KennedyK. E.DhaliwalT. K. (2020). Institutional logics in Los Angeles schools: Do multiple models disrupt the grammar of schooling?American Journal of Education, 126(4), 603–651. https://doi.org/10.1086/709516
39.
MehtaJ. (2013). The allure of order: High hopes, dashed expectations, and the troubled quest to remake American schooling. Oxford University Press.
40.
MerriamS. B.TisdellE. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation.
41.
MeyersC. V. (2024). An urban district’s struggle to preserve school turnaround change. Urban Education, 59(1), 300–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085920966031
42.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M.SaldañaJ. (2018). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). Sage.
43.
MillerJ. M. (2007). Challenges facing Catholic schools: A view from Rome. In GraceG. R.O’KeefeJ. (Eds.), International handbook of Catholic education: Challenges for school systems in the 21st century (pp. 449–480). Springer.
44.
MillerA. F.BurkeK. J. (2023). Making Catholic schools research relevant: Assessing contemporary trends in the field of Catholic education. Educational Researcher, 52(1), 39–47. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X221136560
45.
MillerA. F.ParkY.ConwayP.CownieC. T.ReyesJ.Rosen-ReynosoM.SmithA. (2022). Examining the legacy of urban Catholic schooling in the U.S.: A systematic literature review. The Urban Review, 54(3), 481–508. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-021-00619-w
46.
MillerA. F.ReyesJ.WyttenbachM.EzeugwuG. (2023). The limits of the “system of schools” approach: Superintendent perspectives on change efforts in U.S. Catholic school systems. Journal of Educational Change, 24(4), 943–970. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-022-09475-1
47.
MillerA. F.SmithA.GiuncoK.FriedmanA.Rosen-ReynosoM.CownieC. (2023). Tracking the legacy of inner-city Catholic schools: An analysis of U.S. elementary Catholic school organizational and demographic data. Journal of Catholic Education, 26(2), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.15365/joce.2602012023
MilnerH. R.LomoteyK. (2021). Introduction. In MilnerH. R.IVLomoteyK. (Eds.), Handbook of urban education (pp. 1–6). Routledge.
50.
MiserandinoA. (2019). The funding and future of Catholic education in the United States. British Journal of Religious Education, 41(1), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/01416200.2017.1352484
51.
MurnaneR. J.ReardonS. F. (2018). Long-term trends in private school enrollments by family income. AERA Open, 4(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858417751355
NeumerskiC. M.CohenD. K. (2019). The heart of the matter: How reforms unsettle organizational identity. Educational Policy, 33(6), 882–915. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904819866918
54.
O’KeefeJ. M.GoldschmidtE. P. (2014). Courageous, comprehensive, and collaborative: The renewal of Catholic education in the twenty-first century. In BauchP. A. (Ed.), Catholic schools in the public interest: Past, present, and future directions (pp. 221–244). Information Age Publishing.
55.
O’KeefeJ. M.GreeneJ. A.HendersonS.ConnorsM.GoldschmidtE.SchervishK. (2004). Sustaining the legacy: Inner-city Catholic elementary schools in the United States. NCEA.
56.
O’KeefeJ.ScheopnerA. (2007). No margin, no mission: Challenges for Catholic urban schools in the USA. In GraceG. R.O’KeefeJ. (Eds.), International handbook of Catholic education: Challenges for school systems in the 21st century (pp. 15–35). Springer.
57.
PayneC. M. (2008). So much reform, so little change: The persistence of failure in urban schools. Harvard Education Press.
58.
PeurachD. J.CohenD. K.YurkofskyM. M.SpillaneJ. P. (2019). From mass schooling to education systems: Changing patterns in the organization and management of instruction. Review of Research in Education, 43(1), 32–67. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18821131
59.
RamlackhanK.WangY. (2024). Urban school district performance: A longitudinal analysis of achievement. Urban Education, 59(3), 849–877. https://doi.org/10.1177/00420859211044947
60.
RyanA. M. (2022). American Catholic schools in the twentieth century: Encounters with public education policies, practices, and reforms. Rowman & Littlefield.
61.
SarokiS.LevenickC. (2009). Saving America’s urban Catholic schools: A guide for donors. The Philanthropy Roundtable.
62.
SchneiderJ.BerkshireJ. (2020). A wolf at the schoolhouse door: The dismantling of public education and the future of school. The New Press.
63.
SchuelerB. E.AsherC. A.LarnedK. E.MehrotraS.PollardC. (2022). Improving low-performing schools: A meta-analysis of impact evaluation studies. American Educational Research Journal, 59(5), 975–1010. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312211060855
64.
ScottJ.HolmeJ. J. (2016). The political economy of market-based educational policies: Race and reform in urban school districts, 1915 to 2016. Review of Research in Education, 40(1), 250–297. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X16681001
65.
SmithA.HuberS. (2023). U.S. Catholic elementary and secondary schools 2022–2023. NCEA.
66.
SpillaneJ. P.BlaushildN. L.NeumerskiC. M.SeeligJ. L.PeurachD. J. (2022). Striving for coherence, struggling with incoherence: A comparative study of six educational systems organizing for instruction. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 44(4), 567–592. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737221093382
67.
SpillaneJ. P.SeeligJ. L.BlaushildN. L.CohenD. K.PeurachD. J. (2019). Educational system building in a changing educational sector: Environment, organization, and the technical core. Educational Policy, 33(6), 846–881. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904819866269
68.
TyackD.CubanL. (1997). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Harvard.
69.
U.S. Department of Education (2008, September). Preserving a critical national asset: America’s disadvantaged students and the crisis in faith-based urban schools. U.S. Department of Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED503755.pdf
70.
WalchT. (2014). The past before us: Historical models for future parish schools. In BauchP. A. (Ed.), Catholic schools in the public interest: Past, present, and future directions (pp. 3–19). Information Age Publishing.
71.
WelshR. O.SwainW. A. (2020). (Re)defining urban education: A conceptual review and empirical exploration of the definition of urban education. Educational Researcher, 49(2), 90–100. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20902822
YurkofskyM. (2022). Environmental, technical, and representational uncertainty: A framework for making sense of the hidden complexity of educational change. Educational Researcher, 51(6), 399–410. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X221078590
74.
YurkofskyM. M. (2020). Technical ceremonies: Rationalization, opacity, and the restructuring of educational organizations. Harvard Educational Review, 90(3), 446–473. https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-90.3.446
