This article seeks to deepen our understanding of the nature and quality of democratic participation in educational reform by examining the first-year implementation of California’s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) mandating civic engagement in district decision-making. Drawing on democratic theory, empirical literature, and data from 10 districts, we find that even when district leaders committed to involving stakeholders in decision-making, achieving this vision was often constrained by power imbalances, deeply engrained institutional habits, and limited capacity. We also find that climates of trust, support from external organizations, and homogeneity appeared to provide the foundation for deeper, broader democratic engagement in a few cases. The article concludes with implications for policy, practice, and future research.
AbramsL. S.GibbsJ. T. (2002). Disrupting the logic of home-school relations: Parent involvement strategies and practices of inclusion and exclusion. Urban Education, 37, 384–407.
2.
AllensworthE. M.BrykA. S.SebringP. (2010, August). The influence of community context and social capital on urban school improvement, evidence from Chicago. Paper presented at the Meetings of the American Sociological Association, Atlanta, GA.
3.
AlmondG. A.VerbaS. (1989). The civic culture revisited. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
4.
AndersonG. L. (1998). Toward authentic participation: Deconstructing the discourses of participatory reforms in education. American Educational Research Journal, 35(4), 571–603.
5.
ArnsteinS. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of planners, 35(4), 216–224.
6.
AuerbachS. (2007). From moral supporters to struggling advocates reconceptualizing parent roles in education through the experience of working-class families of color. Urban Education, 42(3), 250–283.
7.
AverillJ. B. (2002). Matrix analysis as a complementary analytic strategy in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 12(6), 855–866.
8.
BachrachP.BaratzM. S. (1962). Two faces of power. American Political Science Review, 56(04), 947–952.
9.
BarberB. R. (2003). Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. Berkeley: University of California Press.
10.
BersinA.KirstM. W.LiuG. (2008). Getting beyond the facts: Reforming California school finance. Issue brief. The University of California, Berkeley, the Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Race, Ethnicity and Diversity.
11.
BessetteJ. M. (1994). The mild voice of reason: Deliberative democracy and American national government. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
12.
BohmanJ.RehgW. (1997). Essays on reason and politics: Deliberative democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13.
BrackertzN.ZwartI.MeredythD.RalstonL. (2005). Community consultation and the ‘Hard to Reach3: Concepts and practice in Victorian local government. Report. Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia: Institute for Social Research, Swinburne University of Technology.
14.
BrykA. S. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(7), 23.
15.
BrykA. S.SebringP. B.KerbowD.RollowS.EastonJ. Q. (1998). Charting Chicago school reform: Democratic localism as a lever for change. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
CooperT. L.BryerT. A.MeekJ. W. (2006). Citizen-centered collaborative public management. Public Administration Review, 66(s1), 76–88.
19.
CroningerR. G.MalenB. (2002). The role of school governance in the creation of school community. In LeithwoodK.et al. (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 281–320). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
20.
DahlR. A. (1989). Democracy and its critics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
21.
DaviesD. (1981). Citizen participation in decision making in the schools. In DaviesD. (Ed.), Communities and their schools (pp. 83–119). New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
22.
DeweyJ. (1927). The public and its problems. Athens, GA: Swallow Press.
ESSA. (2015). Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015, Pub. L. No. 114-95 § 114 Stat. 1177 (2015–2016).
25.
EversoleR. (2011). Community agency and community engagement: Re-theorizing participation in governance. Journal of Public policy, 31(1), 51–71.
26.
FarrellyC. (2003). Introduction to contemporary political theory. London: Sage.
27.
FindersM.LewisC. (1994). Why some parents don’t come to school. Educational Leadership, 51, 50–54.
28.
FiorinaM. P. (1999). Extreme voices: A dark side of civic engagement. In SkocpolT.FiorinaM. P. (Eds.), Civic engagement in American democracy (pp. 395–426). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
29.
FungA. (2001). Accountable autonomy: Toward empowered deliberation in Chicago schools and policing. Politics & Society, 29(1), 73–103.
30.
FungA. (2003). Survey article: Recipes for public spheres: Eight institutional design choices and their consequences. Journal of Political Philosophy, 11(3), 338–367.
31.
FungA. (2004). Deliberation’s darker side: Six questions for Iris Marion Young and Jane Mansbridge. National Civic Review, 93(4), 47–54.
32.
FungA. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review, 66(s1), 66–75.
33.
FungA.WrightE. O. (2001). Deepening democracy: Innovations in empowered participatory governance. Politics and Society, 29(1), 5–42.
34.
FungA.WrightE. O. (2003). Deepening democracy: Institutional innovations in empowered participatory governance (Vol. 4). London: Verso.
35.
GambettaD. (1998). “Claro!”: An essay on discursive machismo. In ElsterJ. (Ed.), Deliberative democracy (pp. 19–43). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
36.
GilesC. (2006). Transformational leadership in challenging urban elementary schools: A role for parent involvement?Leadership and Policy in Schools, 5(3), 257–282.
37.
Gonzales-DeHassA.WillemsP.HolbeinM. (2005). Engaging African American parents in the schools: A community-based consultation model. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 17, 99–123.
38.
GutmannA.ThompsonD. F. (1996). Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
39.
GyurkoJ.HenigJ. R. (2010). Strong vision, learning by doing, or the politics of muddling through? In BulkleyK. E.HenigJ. R.LevinH. M. (Eds.), Between public and private: Politics, governance, and the new portfolio models for urban school reform (pp. 91–126). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
40.
HabermasJ. (1996). The European nation state. Its achievements and its limitations. On the past and future of sovereignty and citizenship. Ratio Juris, 9(2), 125–137.
HeadB. W. (2007). Community engagement: Participation on whose terms?Australian Journal of Political Science, 42(3), 441–454.
43.
HeinN. P. (2003). Mexican American participation and administrative leadership. Journal of Latinos and Education, 2, 109–115.
44.
HenryM. (1996). Parent-school collaboration: Feminist organizational structures and school leadership. Albany: State University of New York Press.
45.
HessG. A.Jr. (1999). Community participation or control? From New York to Chicago. Theory Into Practice, 38(4), 217–224.
46.
HeymannS.EarleA. (2000). Low-income parents: How do working conditions affect their opportunity to help school-age children at risk?American Educational Research Journal, 37, 833–848.
47.
Hiatt-MichaelD. B. (2006). Reflections and directions on research related to family-community involvement in schooling. School Community Journal, 16(1), 7.
48.
HillP. T.BonanJ. (1991). Decentralization and accountability in public education. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
International Association for Public Participation (IAP2). (2007). IAP2 spectrum of public participation. Louisville, CO: Author.
51.
JohnsonM. J.PajaresF. (1996). When shared decision making works: A 3-year longitudinal study. American Educational Research Journal, 33(3), 599–627.
52.
KooningsK. (2004). Strengthening citizenship in Brazil’s democracy: Local participatory governance in Porto Alegre. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 23(1), 79–99.
53.
KruseS.LouisK. S.BrykA. (1994). Building professional community in schools. Issues in Restructuring Schools, 6(3), 67–71.
54.
LeCompteM. D.SchensulJ. J. (1999). Analyzing & interpreting ethnographic data. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.
55.
LernerJ. (2011). Participatory budgeting: Building community agreement around tough budget decisions. National Civic Review, 100(2), 30–35.
56.
LevinH. M.DaschbachJ.PerryA. (2010). A diverse education provider. In BulkleyK. E.HenigJ. R.LevinH. M. (Eds.), Between public and private: Politics, governance, and the new portfolio models for urban school reform (pp. 55–90). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
57.
LopezG. R.ScribnerJ. D.MahitivanichchaK. (2001). Redefining parental involvement: Lessons from high-performing migrant-impacted schools. American Educational Research Journal, 38(2), 253–288.
58.
MacedoS. (Ed.). (1999). Deliberative politics: Essays on democracy and disagreement. New York: Oxford University Press.
59.
MalenB. (1994). The micropolitics of education: Mapping the multiple dimensions of power relations in school polities. Journal of Education Policy, 9(5), 147–167.
60.
MalenB.OgawaR. T. (1988). Professional-patron influence on site-based governance councils: A confounding case study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 10(4), 251–270.
61.
MalenB.OgawaR. T.KranzJ. (1990). Evidence says site-based management hindered by many factors. The School Administrator, 47(2), 30–32.
62.
MansbridgeJ. J. (1983). Beyond adversary democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
63.
MarshJ. A. (2007). Democratic dilemmas: Joint work, education politics, and community. Albany: State University of New York Press.
64.
MarshJ. A.StrunkK. O.Bush-MecenasS. C.HuguetA. (2015). Democratic engagement in district reform: The evolving role of parents in the Los Angeles Public School Choice Initiative. Educational Policy, 29(1), 51–84.
65.
McDonnellL.WeatherfordM. S. (2000a). Practical deliberation in local school districts: A South Carolina experiment. Los Angeles: Center for the Study of Evaluation, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, Graduate School of Education & Information Studies, University of California.
66.
McDonnellL. M.WeatherfordM. S. (2000b). Seeking a new politics of education. In McDonnellL. M.TimpaneP. M.BenjaminR. (Eds.), Rediscovering the democratic purposes of education (pp. 174–206). Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
67.
Menefee-LibeyD. (2010). Neoliberal school reform in Chicago? In BulkleyK. E.HenigJ. R.LevinH. M. (Eds.), Between public and private: Politics, governance, and the new portfolio models for urban school reform (pp. 55–90). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
68.
MeyerJ.RowanB. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363.
69.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
70.
MurphyJ.BeckL. G. (1995). School-based management as school reform: Taking stock. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
71.
MussoJ.WeareC.ElliotM.KitsuseA.ShiauE. (2007). Toward community engagement in city governance: Evaluating neighborhood council reform in Los Angeles. Los Angeles: Neighborhood Participation Project, School of Policy, Planning, and Development, University of Southern California.
72.
NabatchiT. (2012). Putting the “public” back in public values research: Designing participation to identify and respond to values. Public Administration Review, 72(5), 699–708.
73.
OrrM. (1996). Urban politics and school reform: The case of Baltimore. Urban Affairs Review, 31, 314–345.
PatemanC. (1975). Participation and democratic theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
76.
PhillipsA. (1995). The politics of presence. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
77.
PosnerR. A. (2009). Law, pragmatism, and democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
78.
RawsthorneM.ChristianF. (2004, August). Making it meaningful: Government-community sector relations. Western Sydney Community Forum, 1, 3–7.
79.
RobertsN. (2004). Public deliberation in an age of direct citizen participation. The American Review of Public Administration, 34(4), 315–353.
80.
RollowS. G.BennettM. I. J. (1996). Parents’ participation and Chicago school reform: Issues of race, class and expectations. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Educational Resources Information Center.
81.
SandersL. M. (1997). Against deliberation. Political Theory, 25(3), 347–376.
82.
SchneiderA.IngramH. (1990). Behavioral assumptions of policy tools. The Journal of Politics, 52(02), 510–529.
83.
SchumpeterJ. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism, and democracy. New York: Harper.
84.
ScottW. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
85.
ShahA. (Ed.). (2007). Participatory budgeting. Washington, DC: World Bank Publications.
86.
ShirleyD. (1997). Community organizing for urban school reform. Austin: University of Texas Press.
87.
SkocpolT. (2003). Diminished democracy: From membership to management in American civic life. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
88.
SouzaC. (2001). Participatory budgeting in Brazilian cities: Limits and possibilities in building democratic institutions. Environment and Urbanization, 13(1), 159–184.
89.
StelmachB. L. (2004). Unlocking the schoolhouse doors: Institutional constraints on parent and community involvement in a school improvement initiative. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 31: 1–13.
90.
StoneC. N. (2001). Civic capacity and urban education. Urban Affairs Review, 36(5), 595–619.
91.
Tschannen-MoranM. (2001). Collaboration and the need for trust. Journal of Educational Administration, 39(4), 308–331.
WaandersC.MendezJ. L.DownerJ. T. (2007). Parent characteristics, economic stress and neighborhood context as predictors of parent involvement in preschool children’s education. Journal of School Psychology, 45(6), 619–636.
94.
WalzerM. (1999). Deliberation, and what else? In MacedoS. (Ed.), Deliberative politics: Essays on democracy and disagreement (pp. 58–69). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
WarrenM. (1999). Democracy and trust. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
97.
WeissC. H.CamboneJ. (1994). Principals, shared decision making, and school reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 16(3), 287–301.
98.
WeissH. B.MayerE.KreiderH.VaughanM.DearingE.HenckeR.PintoK. (2003). Making it work: Low-income working mothers’ involvement in their children’s education. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 879–901.
YangK.PandeyS. K. (2011). Further dissecting the black box of citizen participation: When does citizen involvement lead to good outcomes?Public Administration Review, 71(6), 880–892.
101.
YanguasJ.RollowS. G. (1996). The rise and fall of adversarial politics in the context of Chicago school reform: Parent participation in a Latino school community. Madison, WI: Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools.
102.
YoungI. M. (1997). Difference as a resource for democratic communication. In BohmanJ.RehgW. (Eds.), Deliberative democracy: Essays on reason and politics (pp. 383–406). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
