Why Fundraise and for Whom?: A Critical Historiography of Ontario’s School Fundraising Policy

• In Event: Poster Session: Education for global citizenship and competence: Comparing policies, practices and outcomes

Abstract

Why Fundraise and for Whom?: A Critical Historiography of Ontario’s School Fundraising Policy

Purpose: The purpose of the proposed paper is to present an overview of the history of Ontario’s school fundraising policy from 1996 until 2014 and to explore how the policy benefits some groups and not others.
Theoretical Framework: A critical interrogation of education policy is fundamental as policy is understood as a “political and value-laden process” (Allan, Iverson, & Roper-Huilman, 2010 cited in Chase, Pazich, & Bensimon, 2012, p. 674). Critical policy analysts view policy as a practice of power that can benefit some and disadvantage others by reproducing “existing structures of domination and inequality” (Levinson, Sutton, & Winstead, 2009, p. 769). The policy process is complex, messy, and contested and policy problems and policy solutions are socially constructed so as to support dominant discourses and purposes (Chase et al., 2012; Monkman & Hoffman, 2013; Ozga, 2000; Scheurich, 1994). Finally, policy involves negotiation and struggle between those who lie within and outside of the formal arena of policy-making (Monkman & Hoffman, 2013; Ozga, 2000).
Methodology: By employing a critical historiographical methodology, the aim is to “trace the processes of educational change and to expose the possible relationships between the socio-educational present and the socio-educational past” (Kincheloe, 1991, p. 234). A critical historiography is also appropriate when aiming to provide a “systemic account of selected past events” (Gale, 2001, p. 385) so as to script a narrative of the past to understand the present (Brewer, Gasko, & Miller, 2011). Furthermore, this approach is also useful when analyzing how policies are produced and interpreted (Brewer, 2014) and when assessing how policies benefit some and not others (Gale, 2001).
Data Sources: Primary data sources include: 58 media articles and 2 videos; 12 documents including reports and surveys produced by advocacy groups; 5 provincial party platforms; 8 transcriptions of government debates; and the Fundraising Guideline (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2012). Secondary sources include approximately 20 academic articles and books. The range of the data is between 1996 and 2014.
Preliminary Results: School fundraising practices within Ontario emerged in the late 1990s and have increasingly become a means of augmenting government funding shortfalls (Froese-Germain et al., 2006; People for Education, 2008). Some Ontario elementary and secondary public schools fundraise over half a million dollars annually, others fundraise as little as two hundred dollars, and some raise nothing at all (TVO Parents, 2012). School fundraising has become common-practice within nearly all of Ontario’s elementary and secondary schools and funds raised are used to support school programs, activities, and resources (People for Education, 2008, 2013). While publicly funded schooling is based on the principle that quality education must be provided to all students despite their socio-economic statuses, this democratic concept is being challenged by school fundraising as some students are provided with enhanced resources and opportunities not afforded to other students (Horwath, 2011; Ontario Ministry of Education, 2008; People for Education, 2013; Ricci, 2009; TVO Parents, 2012). Thus, the inequity in school fundraising is increasing the gap between ‘have’ and ‘have not’ schools and despite growing public concern about the overuse of fundraising, the practice continues within schools (Fundraising Fever…, 2012; People for Education, 2013).
Significance: This paper is significant as it will provide the first historical account of Ontario’s school fundraising policy. The paper will shed light on how policies are influenced by those within and outside of the formal arenas of policy-making and it will also explore the various influences, texts, and practices involved in school fundraising in Ontario (Bowe, Ball, & Gold, 1992). Finally, the paper will critically analyze the various power differentials that emerge from the policy by examining who the policy has and continues to serve (Gale, 2001).

Author

• Michelle Milani, York University