Let us decide: An analysis of educational equity indicator systems and the radical notion of community power

Abstract

Using Qualitative Content Analysis (QCA), this study examines educational equity indicator systems in the United States to understand how equity indicators have been defined, the degree to which community members have meaningfully participated in educational equity indicator projects, and the impact of local educational equity indicator systems on communities. We ground our analysis in standards for educational equity to assess the quality of each municipality’s indicator system, and we used a framework for community-based research to examine the role of community members in equity indicator development. Findings show that indicator systems did not involve the community in the leadership of indicator system development; most indicator systems that appear to be community-derived engage community members superficially; and indicator systems appear to have an indirect impact on communities. We conclude that indicator systems need to privilege community participation at each phase of indicator development. Without such engagement, indicator development projects risk reinscribing existing inequities and power dynamics.

Keywords

Educational equity equity indicator system community engagement qualitative content analysis standards of educational equity

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Barker

Bonell

Melendez-Torres

(2024) ‘They don’t even teach you how to make money!’ what insights can marginalised young people provide into developing inclusive education policy? Equity in Education and Society 27526461241293160. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/27526461241293160

Barnum

Belsha

(2020) Protests, Donations, Lesson Plans: How the Education World is Responding to George Floyd’s Killing. Chalkbeat. Available at: https://www.chalkbeat.org/2020/6/2/21278591/education-schools-george-floyd-racism/.

Beloved Community (n.d.) Research: Our Approach. New Orleans, LA: Beloved Community. Available at: wearebeloved.org/our-approach.

Cardichon

Darling-Hammond

(2017) Advancing Educational Equity for Underserved Youth: How New State Accountability Systems Can Support School Inclusion and Student Success. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute.

Carnegie

McKinnon

Gibson

(2019) Creating community-based indicators of gender equity: a methodology. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 60(3): 252–266.

Center on Education Policy (2017) The Legacy of More & Better Learning Time: Grantee and Stakeholder Reflections. Washington, DC: The George Washington University. Available at: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED597200.pdf.

City of Bozeman, MT (2021) Gaps Analysis for Equity Indicators Project. Bozeman, MT: City of Bozeman. Available at: https://www.tpma-inc.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Bozeman-Equity-Indicators-Gap-Analysis-Report.pdf.

City of Dallas (2021) Dallas Equity Indicators.

Dallas, TX: City

of Dallas. Available at: https://dallascityhall.com/departments/pnv/dallas-equity-indicators/Pages/default.aspx

City of Fort Collins (2020) Equity Indicators Project. Fort Collins, CO: City of Fort Collins. Available at: https://ourcity.fcgov.com/equityindicatorsproject.

10.

City of Oakland (2018) Oakland Equity Indicators: Measuring Change Toward Greater Equity in Oakland. Oakland, CA: City of Oakland. Available at: https://cao-94612.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/2018FullReport-12021edit.pdf.

11.

City of Pittsburgh (2017) Pittsburgh Equity Indicators: A Baseline Measurement for Enhancing Equity in Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh, PA: City of Pittsburgh. Available at: https://www.rand.org/pubs/external_publications/EP67846.html.

12.

City of San Antonio (2019) 2019 Racial Equity Indicator Report. San Antonio, TX: City of San Antonio. Available at: https://sanantonio.gov/Portals/0/Files/Equity/IndicatorReport.pdf.

13.

City of St. Louis (2018) Equity Indicators: Toward a St. Louis Region that Works for us All. St. Louis, MO: City of St. Louis. Available at: https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/archives/resilience/equity/documents/upload/Equity-Indicators-Baseline-2018-Report-Document.pdf.

14.

City of Tacoma (2020) Realizing Equity in Tacoma. Tacoma, WA: City of Tacoma. Available at: https://www.cityoftacoma.org/cms/One.aspx?portalId=169&pageId=175030.

15.

City of Tulsa (2018) Tulsa Equality Indicators. Tulsa, OK: City of Tulsa. Available at: https://okvetunited.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Tulsa_Equality_Indicators_Annual_Report_2018_Web.pdf

16.

Community Asset Development Re-Defining Education (CADRE), Mental Health Advocacy Services, Inc., & Public Counsel Law Center (2010) Redefining Dignity in Our Schools: A Shadow Report on School-wide Positive Behavior Support Implementation in South Los Angeles, 2007-2010. Los Angeles, CA: CADRE. Available at: https://www.cadre-la.org/core/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/4488_RedefDignityFullLengthReport_FINAL.pdf.

17.

CUNY Institute for State and Local Governance (ISLG) (2022) 2018 Score: 48.52 out of 100: Measuring Progress Toward Greater Equality in New York City. New York, NY: Institute for State and Local Governance. Available at: https://nyc.equityindicators.org/.

18.

Del Razo

Saunders

Renée

, et al. (2014) Leveraging Time for Equity: Indicators to Measure More and Better Learning Time. Providence, RI: Annenberg Institute for School Reform, Brown University.

19.

Fine

(2013) On Participatory Policy Research in Times of Swelling Inequality Gaps. Society for Community Research and Action Biennial Conference Keynote Presentation [Video]. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EKXvb_Tf7g.

20.

Fiske

Ladd

(2004) Elusive Equity: Education Reform in Post-apartheid South Africa. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

21.

Forte

(2021 May 25) The Impact of George Floyd’s Murder: One Year Later. Washington, DC: EdTrust. Available at: https://edtrust.org/blog/the-impact-of-george-floyds-murder-one-year-later/.

22.

Foucault

(1978) Governmentality. In: Burchell

Gordon

Miller

(eds). The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 87–104.

23.

Freire

(2018) Pedagogy of the Oppressed: 50^Th Anniversary Edition. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic.

24.

Goldstein

(2014) The Teacher Wars: A History of America’s Most Embattled Profession. New York: Doubleday.

25.

Goss

(2017) A simple, revolutionary idea. Currere Exchange Journal 1(2): 58–65.

26.

Hearing Youth Voices . (n.d.) Schools that Work for Us. New London, CT: Hearing Youth Voices. https://www.hearingyouthvoices.com/schoolsthatworkforus

27.

Jackson

Andrews

(2021) Listening to Black parents. Stanford Social Innovation Review 19(3): A17–A20.

28.

Kahnawake Schools Diabetes Prevention Program (2023) Code of Research Ethics, Kahnawake, QC, ksdpp.org. Copyright 1199888. Kahnawake, Quebec: KSDPP.

29.

Kim

Flack

Parham

, et al. (2021) Equity in secondary career and technical education in the United States: a theoretical framework and systematic literature review. Review of Educational Research 91(3): 356–396.

30.

King County (2015) The Determinants of Equity: Identifying Indicators to Establish a Baseline of Equity in King County. Seattle, WA: King County. Available at: https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/executive/governance-leadership/equity-social-justice/office-of-equity-racial-social-justice/resources/determinants-of-equity.

31.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2019) Monitoring Educational Equity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

32.

National Equity Project (n.d.) Educational Equity Definition. Oakland, CA: National Equity Project. https://www.nationalequityproject.org/education-equity-definition

33.

National Ethics Advisory Committee (2023) National Ethical Standards. Wellington, New Zealand: National Ethics Advisory Committee. Available at: https://neac.health.govt.nz/.

34.

New Orleans Equity Index (n.d.). New Orleans Deserves Educational Equity. New Orleans, LA: New Orleans Equity Index. https://neworleansequityindex.org/

35.

Oliva

Martinez

(2021) What Were the Unintended Consequences of SBR Particularly on Students of Color? Standards-based Reform Evidence Synthesis Series, RQ2. Chicago, IL: EduDream. Available at: https://edudream.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/2021-Research-Brief-RQ2.v11.pdf.

36.

Olson

Heyward

(2020) Putting Families at the Center: The Role of Parent Advocacy Groups During COVID-19. Seattle, WA: Center on Reinventing Public Education. Available at: https://crpe.org/wp-content/uploads/report-parent_advocacy_groups_brief_dec_2020.pdf.

37.

Ranson

(2003) Public accountability in the age of neo-liberal governance. Journal of Education Policy 18(5): 459–480.

38.

Schreier

(2012) Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice. Los Angeles: Sage.

39.

Seattle Office of Planning and Community Development (2020) Equitable Development Community Indicators Report. Seattle, WA: Office of Planning and Community Development. Available at: https://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/OPCD/Demographics/communityinndicatorsreport2020.pdf.

40.

Seven

Foss

(2024) Proposed measures to enhance equity: a study of Swedish superintendents’ emerging power. Equity in Education and Society 27526461241256966. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/27526461241256966

41.

Sousa

(2023) Community members as facilitators: reclaiming community-based research as inherently of the people. Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and Engagement 14(2): 1–14.

42.

Stoecker

(2003) Community-based research: from practice to theory and back again. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning 9: 35–46.

43.

Warren

Mapp

(2011) A Match on Dry Grass: Community Organizing as a Catalyst for School Reform. New York: Oxford University Press.