Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study investigated educational leaders’ critical evaluations of California's landmark contemporary school equity legislation Williams v. the State of California. Qualitative interview analysis indicated that leaders perceived the equity measure to be necessary but insufficient in advancing the larger project of educational justice. Hence, policy directives governed by political expediency ultimately fall short in ushering disruptive change. Renorming the privileged hierarchy of the leadership class was central to fomenting change. Participants argued that leadership practice for educational justice required leaders to transgress normative structures that hurt the children and the communities they serve, whether those norms resided within the school, within themselves, or within the dominant power structure. Critical issues and leadership implications are forwarded.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

ACLU of Southern California & Public Advocates. (2007). Williams v. California: The statewide impact of two years of implementation. Retrieved from www.decentschools.org

Anderson

G. L.

(2009). Advocacy leadership: Towards a post-reform agenda in education. New York: Routledge.

Anyon

(2005). Radical possibilities. New York: Routledge.

Apple

M. W.

(1995). Education and power (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

Baldwin

J. A.

(1985). The price of the ticket. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Boyte

H. C.

(2004). Everyday politics: Reconnecting citizens and public life. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).

Bureau of Economic Analysis. (2007). Regional account information on Marin County. Retrieved from http://www.bea.gov/regional/bearfacts/action.cfm

Burns

J. M.

(2003). Transforming leadership: A new pursuit of happiness. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press.

10.

California Budget Project. (2009). How California's schools get their money. Retrieved from http://www.cbp.org/pdfs/2009/090202_SFF_HowSchools-GetTheirMoney.pdf+School+finance+California&hl=en&gl=us

11.

California Department of Education. (2009). Specific waiver request. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/lr/wr/

12.

Cosner

(2009). Building organizational capacity through trust. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45, 248–291.

13.

EdSource. (n.d.). Proposition 13. Retrieved from http://www.edsource.org/1255.html

14.

Education Data Partnership. (2007). A guide to California's school finance system. Retrieved from http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us

15.

Elmore

R. F.

, & McLaughlin

M. W.

(1982). Reform and retrenchment: The politics of California school finance reform. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.

16.

Fowler

F. C.

(2004). Policy studies for educational leaders: An introduction (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

17.

Freire

(1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.

18.

Freire

(1998). Pedagogy of freedom: Ethics, democracy, and courage. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

19.

Fullan

(2003). The moral imperative of school leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

20.

Giroux

H. A.

(1988). Teachers as intellectuals: Toward a critical pedagogy of learning. Granby, MA: Bergin & Garvey.

21.

Giroux

H. A.

(2001). Theory and resistance in education: Towards a pedagogy for the opposition. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.

22.

Grubb

, & Goe

(2002). The unending search for equity: California policy, the “new” school finance, and the Williams case. Retrieved from http://www.schoolfunding.info/litigation/legal_documents/

23.

Hooks

(1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge.

24.

Johnston

R. C.

(2000). S.F. schools becoming more segregated. Education Week, 20(1), 22.

25.

Kincheloe

J. L.

(2004). Critical pedagogy. New York: Lang.

26.

Kincheloe

J. L.

, & McLaren

(2000). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In Denzin

, & Lincoln

Y. S.

(Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 279–313). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

27.

Lopez

G. R.

, Gonzalez

M. L.

, & Fierro

(2010). Educational leadership along the U.S.–Mexico border: Crossing borders/embracing hybridity/building bridges. In Marshall

, & Oliva

(Eds.), Leadership for social justice: Making revolutions in education (2nd ed., pp. 100–119). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

28.

Madigan

(2004, August 13). California will spend more to help its poorest schools. New York Times, p. A12.

29.

Maloney

(2008, June 24). Deep poverty limiting La.'s student performance. New Orleans City Business.

30.

Martin

, Karabel

, & Jaquez

S. W.

(2005). High school segregation and access to the University of California. Educational Policy, 19(2), 308–330.

31.

Matthews

(2008, June 9). Charter schools’ big experiment. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com

32.

McLaren

(1997). Revolutionary multiculturalism: Pedagogies of dissent for the new millennium. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

33.

McLaren

, & Farahmandpur (2005). Teaching against global capitalism and the new imperialism: A critical pedagogy. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

34.

McLaren

, & Gutierrez

(1997). Global politics and local antagonisms: Research and practice as dissent and policy. In McLaren

(Ed.), Revolutionary multiculturalism: Pedagogies of dissent for the new millennium (pp. 192–222). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

35.

Meyerson

(2009). How the golden state got tarnished. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/27/AR2009052702904.html

36.

Nor

, Pihie

, & Ali

(2008). Instructional leadership practices of rural school principals. International Journal of Learning, 15, 231–238.

37.

Oakes

(2004). Investigating the claims in Williams v. State of California: An unconstitutional denial education's basic tools? Teachers College Record, 106, 1889–1906.

38.

Oakes

, & Lipton

(2004). Schools that shock the conscience: Williams v. California and the struggle for education on equal terms fifty years after Brown. Berkeley La Raza Law Journal, 15(1), 234–258.

39.

Oakes

, Rogers

, & Lipton

(2006). Learning power: Organizing for education and justice. New York: Teachers College Press.

40.

Office of the Governor. (2004). Governor Schwarzenegger signs landmark education reforms into law [press release]. Retrieved from http://gov.ca.gov/index.php?/text/press-release/2745/

41.

Patton

M. Q.

(2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

42.

Post

(1979). Effects of Proposition 13 on the state of California. National Tax Journal, 32, 381–385.

43.

Powers

J. M.

(2004). High-stakes accountability and equity: Using evidence from California's Public Schools Accountability Act to address the issues in Williams v. State of California. American Educational Research Journal, 41, 763–795.

44.

Prins

(2007). Interdistrict transfers, Latino/White school segregation, and institutional racism in a small California town. Journal of Latinos and Education, 6(4), 285–308.

45.

Public Advocates. (2004). Williams settlement highlights. Retrieved from http://www.publicadvocates.org

46.

Ravitch

(2000). Left back: A century of failed school reforms. New York: Simon & Schuster.

47.

Rebell

M. A.

(2008). Equal opportunity and the courts. Phi Delta Kappan, 89, 432–439.

48.

Ritea

(2006, November 27). Public schools’ makeup similar: Student demographics change little post-K. Times Picayune. Retrieved from http://www.nola.com/education/t-p/index.ssf?/bsenews-3/1164609870293240.xml&coll=1

49.

Rodriguez

G. M.

, & Fabionar

J. O.

(2010). The impact of poverty on students and schools: Exploring the social justice leadership implications. In Marshall

, & Oliva

(Eds.), Leadership for social justice: Making revolutions in education (2nd ed., pp. 55–73). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

50.

Rosenbaum

M. D.

, Lhamon

C. E.

, Eliasberg

P. J.

, Cordoba

R. L.

, Londen

J. W.

, Jacobs

M. A.

(2000). First amended complaint for injunctive and declaratory relief: Papers filed with the Superior Court of the State of California. Retrieved from http://www.decentschools.org

51.

Schlesinger

A. M.

Jr. (1991). The disuniting of America: Reflections on a multicultural society. New York: Norton.

52.

Sergiovanni

T. J.

(2006). The principalship: A reflective practice perspective (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

53.

Theoharis

(2007). Social justice educational leaders and resistance: Toward a theory of social justice leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(2), 221–258.

54.

Timar

T. B.

(1994). Politics, policy, and categorical aid: New inequities in California school finance. Educational Evaluation & Policy Analysis, 16, 143–160.

55.

Turque

(2008, August 21). Enrollment at charters soaring; schools’ scores aren't. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com

56.

Williams

H. W.

(2008). Characteristics that distinguish outstanding urban principals. Journal of Management Development, 27(1), 36–54.

57.

Wills

J. S.

, & Sandholtz

J. H.

(2009). Constrained professionalism: Dilemmas of teaching in the face of test-based accountability. Teachers College Record, 111(4), 1065–1114.

Forty Acres and a Mule: A Critical Audit of California's Williams Legislation Implementation and the Implications for Educational Leaders

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References