Democratization of decision-making processes and increased local involvement are mentioned regularly as desirable ways to proceed in education policy reform. Nevertheless, the limited publications examining reforms for more democratic organization of school districts have tended to focus on isolated examples and very specific aspects of that reform; and while, more recently, scholars have argued for the democratization of education generally in response to global trends, what is missing from the debate is a comparison of specific reforms in education designed to allow for system-wide democratization and authentic participation. This article reviews the existing literature investigating democratic school system reform in Porto Alegre, Brazil and Chicago, USA – both chosen because they were uniquely able to achieve system-wide reform for more democratic involvement. The article discusses the reforms in terms of their context, specific policy mechanisms, successes, and limitations.
References
1.
AbersR. (1998) From Clientelism to Cooperation: Local government, participatory policy, and civic organizing in Porto Alegre, Brazil, Politics and Society, 26(4), 511–537. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0032329298026004004
2.
AndrewsC.W.de VriesM.S. (2007) High Expectations, Varying Outcomes: Decentralization and participation in Brazil, Japan, Russia and Sweden, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 73(3), 424–451. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0020852307081151
3.
AppleM.W. (2000) Official Knowledge, 2nd edn.New York: Routledge.
4.
BaiocchiG. (2003) Participation, Activism, and Politics: The Porto Alegre experiment, in FungA.WrightE.O., Deepening Democracy: Institutional innovations in empowered participatory governance, 45–76. New York: Verso.
5.
BermanE.H.MarginsonS.PrestonR.ArnoveR.F. (2007) The Political Economy of Educational Reform in Australia, England, and the United States, in ArnoveR.F.TorresC.A. (Eds) Comparative Education: The dialectic of the global and the local, 3rd edn, 217–256. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
6.
BorgesA. (2007) From Patronage Politics to Community Deliberation: The recent experience of democratic school management in Brazil, Public Administration and Development, 27(4), 273–282. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pad.464
7.
BorgesA. (2008) State Government, Political Competition and Education Reform: Comparative lessons from Brazil, Bulletin of Latin American Research, 27(2), 235–254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-9856.2008.00265.x
8.
de MoraesS. CamposVitóriaM.I. CôrteCôrtesH. Sporleder (2007) Políticas públicas da educação ao sul do continente sul-americano: Um estudo do caso no município de Porto Alegre, Brasil, Revista Lusófona de Educação, 9, 125–138.
9.
CrockerD. (2008) Ethics of Global Development: Agency, capability, and deliberative democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
10.
EdwardsD.B.Jr. (2009) Trends in Governance and Decision-Making: A democratic analysis with attention to application in education. Paper presented at Washington Consortium for International and Comparative Education, American University, February 21.
11.
EdwardsD.B.Jr. (2010) Trends in Governance and Decision-making: A democratic analysis with attention to application in education, Policy Futures in Education, 8(1), 111–125. http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2010.8.1.111
12.
EpsteinN. (Ed.) (2004) Who's in Charge Here? The Tangled Web of School Governance and Policy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
13.
FischmanG.E.GandinL.A. (2007) Escola cidada and Critical Discourses of Educational Hope, in McLarenP.KincheloeJ.L. (Eds) Critical Pedagogy: Where are we now?209–221. New York: Peter Lang.
14.
FuhrmanS.LazersonM. (Eds) (2005) The Public Schools. New York: Oxford University Press.
15.
FungA. (2003) Deliberative Democracy, Chicago Style: Grassroots governance in policing and public education, in FungA.WrightE.O., Deepening Democracy: Institutional innovations in empowered participatory governance, 111–143. New York: Verso.
16.
FungA.WrightE.O. (2003) Deepening Democracy: Institutional innovations in empowered participatory governance. New York: Verso.
17.
GandinL.A.AppleM.W. (2002) Challenging Neo-liberalism, Building Democracy: Creating the citizen school in Porto Alegre, Brazil, Journal of Education Policy, 17(2), 259–279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02680930110116570
18.
DerquiJ.M. Gorostiaga (2001) Educational Decentralization in Argentina and Brazil: Exploring the new trends, Journal of Education Policy, 16(6), 561–583. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02680930110087825
19.
GrosskopfS.MoutrayC. (2001) Evaluating Performance in Chicago Public High Schools in the Wake of Decentralization, Economics of Education Review, 20(1), 1–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-7757(99)00065-5
20.
KleesS. (1993) Resource Allocation and Social Choice in Education: The need for alternative criteria and processes. Unpublished paper commissioned by Education and Employment Division, World Bank.
21.
KleesS. (2008a) Presidential Address: Reflections on theory, method, and practice in comparative and international education, Comparative Education Review, 52(3), 301–328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/589978
22.
KleesS. (2008b) A Quarter-Century of Neoliberal Thinking in Education: Misleading analyses and failed policies, Globalization, Societies, and Education, 6(4), 311–348. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14767720802506672
23.
McGinnN.PereiraL. (1992) Why States Change the Governance of Education: An historical comparison of Brazil and the United States, Comparative Education, 28(2), 167–180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0305006920280205
24.
MitchellS. (1996) Tidal Waves of School Reform: Types of reforms, government controls, and community advocates. Westport: Praeger.
25.
MyersJ.P. (2008) Democratizing School Authority: Brazilian teachers' perceptions of the election of principals, Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(4), 952–966.
26.
National Commission on Excellence in Education (1984) A Nation at Risk: The full account. Cambridge, MA: USA Research; Office of the Whitehouse.
27.
RollowS.G. (1996) Parents' Participation and Chicago School Reform: Issues of race, class and expectations. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Educational Resources Information Center, US Department of Education.
28.
RollowS.G.YanguasM.J. (1996) The Road to Emergent Restructuring and Strong Democracy: One Chicago school's experience of reform. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Educational Resources Information Center, US Department of Education.
29.
SenA. (1999) Development as Freedom. New York: First Anchor Books.
30.
SmylieM.A.CrowsonR.L. (1994) The Principal and Community–School Connections in Chicago's Radical Reform, Educational Administration Quarterly, 30(3), 342–365. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013161X94030003007
31.
SugiyamaN.B. (2008) Theories of Policy Diffusion: Social sector reform in Brazil, Comparative Political Studies, 41(2), 193–216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0010414007300916
32.
RochaC. Vasconcelos (2003) Anatomia de uma reforma: Descentralização da educação pública de Minas Gerais e mudança institucional, Dados, 46(3), 557–592.
33.
WirtF.M.KirstM.W. (2005) The Political Dynamics of American Education, 3rd edn.Richmond, CA: McCutchan.
34.
ZajdaJ.DaviesL.MajhanovichS. (Eds) (2008) Comparative and Global Pedagogies: Equity, access and democracy in education. Dordrecht: Springer.
