“It’s Like Cutting Down a Beautiful Tree and Putting it in Concrete”: Examining the Logics Shaping a School Merger Debate

• In Event: AERA Roundtable Session Wednesday 11:45 am - Gold 1
  In Roundtable Session: School Boards as Sites of Discourse, Legitimation, and Racialized Institutional Logics Amid Democratic Unrest

Abstract

Objectives
Despite increasing diversity in U.S public schools, many remain racially and economically segregated (GAO, 2022). School boards play a crucial role in shaping policies that can promote racial and economic integration (Diem et al., 2015; Taylor & Frakenberg, 2021). However, school boards, which answer to multiple constituencies, may face pushback from White and economically privileged parents as they attempt to design and implement equity-minded enrollment policies (Diem et al., 2015).

Few studies have examined how public debate around integration policy may shape how school boards approach these processes. Thus, we examine the policy debate that emerged around the merger of two schools within Echeverria Unified School District (EUSD) in 2019, which proposed a plan to merge two under-enrolled elementary schools. Under the plan, Washington Elementary, a high-performing and racially diverse school—but predominantly White and high socioeconomic status—would be merged with Napenda Elementary, a lower-performing and predominantly Black school.

We apply a Critical Race Institutional Logics (CRIL) lens to school board data to examine the Washington-Napena merger. We ask:
What racial logics (i.e., racialized values and norms) undergird the arguments for and against the Washington-Napenda merger at EUSD school board meetings?
To what extent are these logics embodied in the EUSD’s board policy decisions?

Theoretical Framework
CRIL places the theories of Critical Race Theory (CRT) and institutional logics in conversation (Squire, 2015). CRT research establishes racism as a set of structures embedded into our society that privilege Whiteness (i.e., Delgado & Stefancic, 1993; Tate, 1997). The theoretical perspective of institutional logics illuminates how institutional forces shape organizational processes and individual decision-making (i.e., Thornton et al., 2012). Placed together, the CRIL perspective enables the examination of how racial structures become embedded within organizational processes (e.g., public school board meetings) and shape decision-making.

Methods
We employ ethnographic case study methods to examine the debate surrounding the Washington-Napenda merger (Fusch et al., 2017). We observed video recordings of four EUSD school board meetings (n= 20 hours). We also draw on district policy documents (n = 13), newspaper articles (n = 9), and media sources to provide additional context (n = 6). All of the data for the study were publicly available.

Analysis for this study was theoretically driven and iterative. We engaged in rounds of deductive coding, matrix analysis, and memo writing (Bush-Mecenas & Marsh, 2018; Miles et al., 2014).

Preliminary Findings
Preliminary findings indicate that racialized logics of equity (school board & Napenda community), multiculturalism as a positive (Washington community), and antiblackness (Washington community & school board) influenced the debate surrounding the merger. Ultimately, the school board designed the merger policy in a way that allowed Washington parents to avoid enrolling in the merged school, Napenda United.

Significance
Our work highlights the difficult position school board members are placed in as they mediate community responses to integration policies. Furthermore, the study raises questions about the most effective approaches to promote racial and economic integration when schools have lost the support of federal or state desegregation mandates, offering valuable lessons for practitioners, policymakers, and researchers.

Authors

• Esi Bissah, University of California - Irvine

• Jomar M. Lopes, University of California - Irvine

• Eupha Jeanne Daramola, University of California - Irvine