Representative Bureaucracy,Institutional Support,and Clientele Need: The Case of Undocumented Students

Abstract

The theory of representative bureaucracy posits that passive representation is associated with improvements in policy outcomes for represented groups. This research examines the institutional conditions under which representative bureaucracy is enhanced or limited. It posits that the benefits of representation will be enhanced when institutional supports are stronger and when clientele need is greatest. Using a unique longitudinal, multi-level dataset, this paper tests competing theoretical conditions (including resource constraints, and task difficulty) under which representative bureaucracy is enhanced or constrained. The analysis tracks student-level performance of 400,000 undocumented students in Texas public schools from 2003 to 2011 providing a powerful empirical test as well as practical policy implications for administrators. It finds that the effects of representation are strongest when resources are abundant and clientele need is greatest. This suggests representative may be even more valuable to organizations than previously thought.

Keywords

representative bureaucracy immigration multi-level panel data undocumented students education

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aria

M. B.

(1986). The context of education for Hispanic students: An overview. American Journal of Education, 95, 26–57.

Bean

F. D.

Leach

M. A.

Brown

S. K.

Bachmeier

J. D.

Hipp

J. R.

(2011). The educational legacy of undocumented migration: Comparisons across U.S.-immigrant groups in how parents’ status affect thier offspring. International Migration Review, 45, 348–385.

Brambor

Clark

W. R.

Golder

(2006). Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analyses. Political Analysis, 14, 63–82.

Brown

Harris

C. C.

(1993). The Implications of Work Force Diversification in the US Forest Service. Administration & Society, 25, 85–113.

Brudney

J. L.

Hebert

F. T.

Wright

D. S.

(2000). From organizational values to organizational roles: Examining representative bureaucracy in state administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10, 491–512.

Crosnoe

Turley

R. N. L.

(2011). K-12 educational outcomes of immigrant youth. Future Child, 21, 129–152.

Dee

Murphy

(2020). Vanished classmates: The effects of local immigration enforcement on student enrollment. American Educational Research Journal, 57, 694–727.

Dhillon

Meier

K. J.

(2020). Representative bureaucracy in challenging environments: Gender representation, education, and India. International Public Management Journal, https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2020.1802633

Dolan

(2000). The senior executive service: Gender, attitudes and representative bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10, 513–530.

10.

Dozier

S. B.

(1993). Emotional concerns of undocumented and out-of-status foreign students. Community Review, 13, 33–38.

11.

Gade

D. M.

Wilkins

V. M.

(2013). Where did you serve? Veteran identity, representative bureaucracy, and vocational rehabilitation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(2), 267–288.

12.

Garcia

E. E.

(2001). Latino education in the United States. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

13.

Gibson

M. A.

Carrasco

(2009). The education of immigrant youth: Some lessons from the US and Spain. Theory into Pracice, 48, 249–257.

14.

Herd

Moynihan

D. P.

(2019). Administative burden: Policymaking by other means. Russell Sage Foundation.

15.

Hill

G. C.

Hawes

D. P.

(2011). Managing undocumented students: Do undocumented students hinder student performance? State and Local Government Review, 43, 183–195.

16.

Hindera

J. J.

(1993a). Representative bureaucracy: Further evidence of active representation in the EEOC district offices. Social Science Quarterly, 74, 95–108.

17.

Hindera

J. J.

(1993b). Representative bureaucracy: Further evidence of active representation in the EEOC district offices. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 3, 415–430.

18.

Hong

(2016). Representative bureaucracy, organizational integrity and citizen coproduction: Does an increase in police ethnic representativeness reduce crime? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 35, 11–33.

19.

Keiser

L. R.

Wilkins

V. M.

Meier

K. J.

Holland

C. A.

(2002). Lipstick and logarithms: Gender, institutional context, and representative bureaucracy. American Political Science Review, 96, 553–564.

20.

Lewis

G. B.

Pitts

D. W.

(2011). Representation of lesbians and gay men in federal, state, and local bureaucracies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21, 159–180.

21.

Meier

K. J.

(1975). Representative bureaucracy: An empirical analysis. American Political Science Review, 69(2), 526–542.

22.

Meier

K. J.

(1993). Latinos and representative bureaucracy: Testing the Thompson and Henderson hypotheses. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 3(4), 393–414.

23.

Meier

K. J.

(1993b). Representative bureaucracy: A theoretical and empirical exposition. Public Administration Research, 2, 1–35.

24.

Meier

K. J.

(2019). Theoretical frontiers in representative bureaucracy: New directions for research. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 2(1), 39–56.

25.

Meier

K. J.

Nicholson-Crotty

(2006). Gender, representative bureaucracy, and law enforcement: The case of sexual assault. Public Administration Review, 66, 850–860.

26.

Meier

K. J.

Nigro

L. G.

(1976). Representative bureaucracy and policy preferences: A study in the attitudes of federal executives. Public Administration Review, 36(4), 458–469.

27.

Meier

K. J.

Polinard

J. L.

Wrinkle

R. D.

(1999). Politics, bureaucracy, and Farm credit. Public Administration Review, 59, 293–302.

28.

Meier

K. J.

Stewart

Jr. (1991). The politics of Latino education. SUNY Press.

29.

Meier

K. J.

Stewart

Jr. (1992). Active representation in educational bureaucracies: Policy impacts. The American Review of Public Administration, 22, 157–171.

30.

Meier

K. J.

Stewart

Jr England

(1989). Race, class and education. University of Wisconsin.

31.

Menchaca

V. D.

(2003). Ensuring success for Latino migrant students. In Kloosterman

(Ed.), Latino students in American schools: Historical and contemporary views (pp. 129–139). Praeger Publishers.

32.

Mosher

(1968). Democracy and the public service. Oxford University Press.

33.

Nicholson-Crotty

Grissom

J. A.

Nicholson-Crotty

Redding

(2016). Disentangling the causal mechanisms of representative bureaucracy: Evidence from assignment of students to gifted programs. J Public Adm Res Theory, 26, 745–757.

34.

Oberfield

(2014). Becoming bureaucrats: Socialization at the front lines of government service. University of Pennsylvania Press.

35.

Ochoa

(2003). The struggle of access: The achievement trends of Latino youth in middle and high school. In Kloosterman (Ed.), Latino students in American schools (pp. 47–61). Praeger.

36.

Rocha

R. R.

Hawes

D. P.

(2009). Racial diversity, representative bureaucracy, and equity in multiracial school districts. Social Science Quarterly, 90, 326–344.

37.

Saltzstein

(1979). Representative bureaucracy and bureaucratic responsibility: Problems and prospects. Administration & Society, 10, 465–475.

38.

Selden

(1997). The promise of representative bureaucracy. M.E. Sharpe Publishers.

39.

Thompson

(1976). Minority groups in public bureaucracies: Are passive and active representation linked? Administration and Society, 8, 201–226.

40.

Wilkins

V. M.

Keiser

L. R.

(2006). Linking passive and active representation by gender: The case of child support agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16, 87–102.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.20 MB