Right Cause, Wrong Method? Examining the Politics of State Takeover in Georgia

• In Event: Hilton Roundtable Session 9
  In Roundtable Session: Is State Takeover the Path to School Improvement? Examining the Politics of State Takeover

Abstract

Using the proposed OSD in Georgia as a case study, this article examines the politics of state takeover. First, we identify interest groups for and against the state-run school district for failing schools. Then, we use social network analysis to link groups in Georgia to national reform players and interest groups in other states. Our analysis is guided by the following research questions: What interest groups support and oppose the statewide turnaround district?, and to what extent are these groups connected to (a) the charter school movement and (b) national actors in the education reform landscape?

We use two theoretical frameworks to unpack the politics of state takeover: advocacy coalition framework (ACF) and Kingdon’s multiple streams framework. We utilize the ACF to examine how and why the proposed policy changes occurred. Specifically, we focus on the ways in which the supporting and opposing coalitions exercised different forms of power and/or strategies to produce and influence policy outcomes that reflected their shared beliefs and interests.

We used document and observation analysis to develop an understanding of the positions of interest groups on the OSD. We also used these documents to provide information about interest groups and the policy process, triangulate evidence, and either confirm or probe further data acquired from other sources (Merriam 1998). We reviewed a range of sources, including the enabling legislation, the proposal and the preamble as it appeared on the ballot in the general election, statements released by Governor Nathan Deal’s office, and newspaper articles. We also used observations of campaign videos and flyers, brochures, and other print materials released by both proponents and opponents of the OSD.

Based on the document analysis, we capture the positionality of interest groups and classify them into two main groups: (a) Pro-OSD or supporting a yes vote on Amendment 1 and (b) anti-OSD or supporting a no vote on Amendment 1.We use social network analysis to address our second research question. We pay particular attention to two types of data on each organization or individual actor. First, we collected data on whether or not each subject publicized their position on the OSD. Subjects’ positions were revealed by way of advertisements, written statements, interviews, and newspaper articles. Second, once we confirmed that a position had been made public, we collected data on the subjects’ position on charter schools and school choice.

We find that state takeover is supported and opposed by contrasting coalitions with typically divergent views on charter schools. Our findings show that corporate interests, the governor, and nonprofit organizations supported state takeover, whereas educators, parents, and community organizations opposed state takeover. There was bipartisan support across coalitions and a crisscrossing of interests regarding local control and the path to school improvement.

Our study contributes to the politics of education literature by focusing on the campaign for constitutional amendments to create state turnaround districts. We also contribute to the school takeover literature by shedding light on a relatively understudied topic—the political processes at play in school takeover policy decisions.

Authors

• Richard Welsh, University of Georgia

• Sheneka M. Williams, University of Georgia

• Shafiqua Hill, University of Georgia

• Jerome Graham, University of Georgia - Athens