State-led educational initiatives have gained prominence across the nation. In this study, the authors examine two very different types of reform-state adoption of charter school legislation and state implementation of school district take-over-to explore the proposition that the type of education reform a state chooses will be significantly affected by a state's electoral dynamics, that is, the extent to which there is political competition or party dominance in a given state. The authors examine charter schools and school district takeover with the expectation that the factors leading to charter schools in a state will be different than the political climate in which takeover reform is realized. To test various hypotheses on the role of electoral dynamics in state-led reform, the authors use an event history analysis using pooled cross-sectional time-series and a traditional cross-sectional model using ordinary least square regression techniques.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allison, P. D.
(1984). Event history analysis: Regression for longitudinal event data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
2.
Berry, E. S.
(1994). Sizing up state policy innovation research. Policy Studies Journal, 22(3), 442-456.
3.
Berry, F. S.
, & Berry, W. D. (1990). State lottery adoptions as policy innovations: An event history analysis. American Political Science Review, 84, 395-416.
4.
Berry, F. S.
, & Berry, W. D. (1992). Tax innovation in the states: Capitalizing on political opportunity. American Journal of Political Science, 34, 714-742.
5.
Bibby, J. F
, & Holbrook, T. M. (1999). Parties and elections. In V. Gray, R. Hanson, & H. Jacob, (Eds.), Politics in the American states: A comparative analysis (7th ed.). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
6.
Bushweller, K.
(1998, August). Do state takeovers work?American School Board Journal.
7.
Center for Education Reform. (2001). About Charter Schools. Retrieved May 2001 from http://www.edreform.com/charter_schools/
8.
Cibulka, J.
(1999). Moving toward an accountable system of K-12 education: Alternative approaches and challenges. In G. Cizek (Ed.), Handbook of educational policy. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
9.
Cobb, C. D.
, & Glass, G. V. (1999). Ethnic segregation in Arizona charter schools. Education Policy Analysis, 7(1). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v7nI/
10.
Council of State Governments
. (1977-1999). Book of the states. Lexington, KY: Council of State Governments.
11.
Education Week
. (1999). Quality counts 1999: Rewarding results, punishing failure. Retrieved May 2001 from http://www.edweek.com/sreports/
12.
Education Week
. (2000). Quality counts 2000: Who should teach? Retrieved May 2001 from http://www.edweek.comlsreports/
13.
Education Week
. (2001). Quality counts 2001: A better balance. Retrieved May 2001 from www.edweek.com/sreports/
14.
Finn, C. E.
, Manno, B. V., & Vanourek, G. (2000). Charter schools in action: Renewing public education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
15.
Fiske, E.
, & Ladd, H. (2000). When schools compete: A cautionary tale. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
16.
Gray, V.
(1973). Innovation in the states: A diffusion study. American Political Science Review, 67(4), 1174-1185.
17.
Greene, J. P.
(2000, September). The Education Freedom Index (Civic Report No. 14). Prepared for the Center for Civic Innovation at the Manhattan Institute.
18.
Haider-Markel, D. P.
(2001). Policy diffusion as a geographical expansion of the scope of political conflict: Same-sex marriage bans in the 1990s. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 1(1), 5-26.
19.
Hassel, B. M.
(1999). The charter school challenge: Avoiding the pitfalls, fulfilling the promise. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
20.
Karch, A.
(2001). The new politics of policy innovation. Paper presented at the 59th Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
21.
Key, V. O.
(1949). Southern politics in state and nation. New York: Random House.
22.
Maranto, R.
, Milliman, S., Hess, F., & Gresham, A. (Eds.) (1999). School choice in the real world: Lessons from Arizona charter schools. Boulder, CO: Westview.
23.
McLendon, M. K.
, Heller, D. E., & Young, S. P. (2001). State postsecondary policy innovation: Politics, competition, and the interstate migration of ideas. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
24.
Mintrom, M.
(1997). Policy entrepreneurs and the diffusion of innovation. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 738-770.
25.
Mintrom, M.
(2000). Policy entrepreneurs and school choice. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
26.
Mooney, C. Z.
(2001). Modeling regional effects on state policy diffusion. Political Research Quarterly, 54(1), 103-124.
27.
Mooney, C. Z.
, & Lee, M. H. (1995). Pre-Roe abortion regulation reform in the U.S. states: Diffusion, reinvention, and determination. American Journal of Political Science, 39,599-627.
28.
Nathan, J.
(1996). Charter schools: Creating hope and opportunity for American education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
29.
Peterson, P. E.
(1981). City limits. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30.
Peterson, P. E.
(1995). The price of federalism. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
31.
Seder, R. C.
(2000). Balancing accountability and local control: State intervention for financial and academic stability (Policy Study No. 268). Prepared for the Reason Public Policy Institute.
32.
U.S. Department of Education
. (1997). Dropout rates in the United States: 1995 (NCES Publication No. 97-473). Washington, DC: Author.
33.
U.S. Department of Education
. (1999). Private school universe survey, 1997-98 (NCES Publication No. 1999319). Washington, DC: Author.
34.
U.S. Department of Education
. (2000). The state of charter schools 2000: National study of charter schools, fourth-year report. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
35.
U.S. Department of Education
. (2001). Common core of data: Information on public schools and school districts in the United States. Retrieved May 2001 from http://www.nces.ed.gov/ccd/ccddata.html
36.
Walker, J. L.
(1969). The diffusion of innovations among the American states. American Political Science Review, 63(3), 880-899.
37.
Wells, A. S.
(2000). Beyond the rhetoric of charter school reform: A study of ten California school districts. Los Angeles: UCLA Charter School Study.
38.
Witte, J. F
(2000). The market approach to education: An analysis of America's first voucher program. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
39.
Wong
(1992). The politics of urban education as a field of study: An interpretive analysis. In J. Cibulka, R. Reed, & K. Wong (Eds.), The politics of urban education in the United States: The 1991 yearbook of the politics of education association. Washington, DC: Falmer.
40.
Wong, K. K.
(1999). Funding public schools: Politics and policy. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
41.
Wong, K. K.
, & Shen, F. X. (2000). School district takeover as a school reform model. Paper presented at the 2000 research conference of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, Seattle, WA.
42.
Wong, K. K.
, & Shen, F. X. (2001). Institutional effects of charter schools: Innovation and stratification. Paper presented at the 82nd Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
43.
Yamaguchi, K.
(1991). Event history analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
44.
Ziebarth, T.
(2001). State takeovers and reconstitutions policy brief. Prepared for the Education Commission of the States. Retrieved from http://www.ecs.org
