State lottery policies have been created to generate additional funds to support public initiatives, such as higher education scholarships. Through 18 participant interviews and document analysis, this study examined how decision makers in Arkansas socially constructed citizens while forming lottery policy. The social construction of target populations theory provides a framework for better understanding how social constructions became embedded into the policy design process. Participants noted that beneficiaries included higher education students and the retail and vendor community. In addition, discussion centered on burdens being placed on people who derive from low income and people who have gambling addiction.
AckermanR.YoungM.YoungR. (2005). A state-supported merit-based scholarship program that works. NASFAA Journal of Student Financial Aid, 35(3), 21-34.
2.
Arkansas Department of Higher Education. (2010). Comparison of scholarship awards and lottery ticket sales by county. Little Rock: Arkansas Department of Higher Education Archives.
ArnoneM. (2003). States once again look to lotteries for scholarship dollars. Chronicle of Higher Education, 49(37), A22.
6.
BerryW. S.BerryW. D. (1990). State lottery adoptions as policy innovations: An event history analysis. American Political Science Review, 84, 395-415.
7.
BinderM.GandertonP. T.HutchensK. (2002). Incentive effects of New Mexico’s merit-based state scholarship program: Who responds and how? In HellerD. E.MarinP. (Eds.), Who should we help? The negative social consequences of merit scholarships (pp. 41-55). Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.
8.
BobbittR. (2007). Lottery wars: Case studies in bible belt politics, 1986-2005. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
9.
BowdenR. G.ElrodH. E. (2004). State lotteries: Their effect on equal access to higher education. The Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 3, 73-85. doi:10:1177/1538192703259339
10.
BradyK. P.PijanowskiJ. C. (2007). Maximizing state lottery dollars for public education: An analysis of current state lottery models. Journal of Educational Research and Policy Studies, 7(2), 20-37.
11.
CampbellN.FinneyR. (2005). Mitigating the combined distributional consequences of the Georgia lottery for education and the HOPE scholarship. Social Science Quarterly, 86, 746-758. doi:10.1111/j.0038-4941.2005.00327.x
12.
College Foundation of North Carolina. (2013). North Carolina Education Lottery Scholarship (ELS). Retrieved from http://www.cfnc.org/els
13.
CornwellC.MustardD. B. (2007). Merit-based college scholarships and car sales. Education Finance and Policy, 2, 133-151.
14.
CornwellC.MustardD. B.SridharD. J. (2006). The enrollment effects of merit-based financial aid: Evidence from Georgia’s HOPE program. Journal of Labor Economics, 24, 761-786.
15.
CresswellJ. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
16.
DavisA.OmanN. E. (2009, September28). Lottery players try for the first jackpot: Scratch-off ticket sales kick off today. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (Little Rock, AR), p. 7. Retrieved from NewsBank on-line database (America’s News).
17.
DuffourcD. (2006). State-funded college scholarships: General definitions and characteristics. Review of Policy Research, 23, 235-248.
18.
DynarskiS. (2000). Hope for whom? Financial aid for the middle class and its impact on college attendance. National Tax Journal, 53, 629-661.
19.
DynarskiS. (2002). Race, income, and the impact of merit aid. In HellerD. E.MarinP. (Eds.), Who should we help? The negative social consequences of merit scholarships (pp. 71-91). Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.
20.
FarrellP. L. (2004). Who are the students receiving merit scholarships? In HellerD. E.MarinP. (Eds.), State merit scholarship programs and racial inequality (pp. 49-75). Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
24.
GubaE. G.LincolnY. S. (1981). Effective evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
25.
HalterB. (2008, October20). Guest columnist Lt. Gov. Bill Halter: New hope and opportunity. Pine Bluff Commercial (AR), p. 2. Retrieved from NewsBank on-line database (America’s News).
26.
HellerD. E.MarinP. (Eds.). (2002). Who should we help? The negative social consequences of merit aid scholarships (Research Report for the Civil Rights Project). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
27.
HellerD. E.MarinP. (Eds.). (2004). State merit scholarships and racial inequality (Research Report for the Civil Rights Project). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
28.
HenryG. T.RubensteinR. (2002). Paying for grades: Impact of merit-based financial aid on educational quality. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 21, 93-109.
29.
IngleW. K.Cohen-VogelL.HughesR. (2007). The public policy process among southeastern states: Elaborating theories of regional adoption and hold-out behavior. The Policy Studies Journal, 35, 607-628.
30.
IngramH.SchneiderA. (1993). Constructing citizenship: The subtle messages of policy design. In IngramH.SmithS. R. (Eds.), Public policy for democracy (pp. 68-94). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institute.
31.
IngramH.SchneiderA.deLeonP. (1995). Social construction and policy design. In SabatierP. A. (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 65-93). Cambridge, MA: Westview Press.
32.
LincolnY. S.GubaE. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
McCraryJ.CondreyS. E. (2003). The Georgia lottery: Assessing its administrative, economic, and political effects. Review of Policy Research, 20, 691-711.
35.
MerriamS. B. (1998a). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
36.
MerriamS. B. (1998b). Qualitative research in higher education: Expanding perspectives. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
37.
MerriamS. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
38.
NelsonM.MasonJ. L. (2003). The politics of gambling in the south. Political Science Quarterly, 118, 645-669.
39.
NessE. C. (2008). Merit aid and the politics of education. New York, NY: Routledge.
40.
NessE. C. (2010). The politics of determining merit aid eligibility criteria: An analysis of the policy process. Journal of Higher Education, 81(1), 33-60.
41.
NessE. C.MistrettaM. A. (2009). Policy adoption in North Carolina and Tennessee: A comparative case study of lottery beneficiaries. The Review of Higher Education, 32, 489-514.
42.
NessE. C.TuckerR. (2008). Eligibility effects on college access: Under-represented Student Perceptions of Tennessee’s Merit Aid Program. Research in Higher Education, 49, 569-588. doi:10.1007/s11162-008-9096-5
PattonM. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
45.
PierceP. A.MillerD. E. (1999). Variations in the diffusion of state lottery adoptions: How revenue dedication changes morality politics. Policy Studies Journal, 27, 696-706.
46.
RubensteinR.ScafidiB. (2002). Who pays and who benefits? Examining the distributional consequences of the Georgia lottery for education. National Tax Journal, 15, 223-238.
47.
SchneiderA.IngramH. (1993). The social construction of target populations. American Political Science Review, 87, 334-346.
48.
SchneiderA.IngramH. (2005). Deserving and entitled: Social constructions and public policy. Albany: State University of New York Press.
49.
SchneiderA.IngramH. (2008). Social constructions in the study of public policy. In HolsteinJ.GubriumJ. (Eds.), Handbook of constructionist research (pp. 189-212). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
50.
SimpsonS. (2005, December2). Education: More students look to state for scholarships—Tuition program is in jeopardy. The Daily Oklahoman (OK), p. 17A.
51.
StakeR. E. (1992). Case studies. In RaginC.BeckerH. (Eds.), What is a case?: Exploring the foundations of social inquiry (pp. 435-444). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
52.
SunsteinB. S.Chiseri-StraterE. (2007). Field working: Reading and writing research. New York, NY: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
53.
TreadwellD. (2014). Introducing communication research: Paths to inquiry (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
54.
WarrenC. A. B.KarnerT. X. (2010). Discovering qualitative methods: Field research, interviews, and analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
55.
WicklineM. R. (2007, September21). Halter antes up, unveils lottery proposal. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: Northwest Edition (AR), p. 13. Retrieved from NewsBank on-line database (America’s News).
56.
WicklineM. R. (2008, November4). Lottery, foster-care initiatives come to day of reckoning. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (Little Rock, AR), p. 1. Retrieved from NewsBank on-line database (America’s News).
57.
WicklineM. R. (2013, March19). Halter unveils plan to grow financial aid—He seeks up to $75 million to augment lottery program. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: Northwest Edition (AR), p. 7. Retrieved from NewsBank on-line database (America’s News).
58.
YinR. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
