Reciprocal Relationships: Advancing Equity Through Democratic Engagement and Finance Reform

• In Event: 63.018 - Examining Efforts to Achieve More Inclusive and Equitable Engagement in District Decision Making

Abstract

Purpose
As equity, or justice in societal conditions, is an ambiguous concept (Stone, 2011), it is perhaps not surprising that education policymakers have adopted a broad variety of strategies in pursuit of equity goals (Bulkley, 2013). As a result, educators in schools and districts are typically tasked with carrying out multiple equity-oriented policy mechanisms simultaneously. However, little research considers how local actors respond to the intersection of multiple policy levers with equity intent.

California’s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) offers an opportunity for examining the simultaneous implementation of two such strategies: finance reform and democratic engagement. LCFF seeks to promote equity both by providing greater funding to districts serving “targeted” students (low-income students, English learners, and foster youth), and by requiring districts to engage stakeholders in decisions about district goals and spending.

We explore how district actors implemented these two intersecting policy mechanisms, posing the question, How does the implementation of stakeholder engagement relate to the enactment of LCFF’s broader equity mandate?

Theoretical Framework
We are guided by scholarship on sensemaking (Spillane, Reiser, & Reimer, 2002), which suggests that implementers’ beliefs inform policy enactment, and are particularly salient when policy goals are ambiguous. Given the policy’s broad focus, actors’ beliefs about equity may be particularly influential in LCFF implementation. To clarify the different equity beliefs that may inform the sensemaking process, we use literature on multiple conceptions of equity, including Libertarian, Liberal, Democratic Liberal, and Transformative perspectives (Dowd & Bensimon, 2015; Guiton & Oakes, 1995). To illuminate various forms of community engagement, we utilize concepts from democratic theory (Fung, 2006; Marsh & Hall, 2017; Pateman, 1970).

Method
We use a multiple case study (Yin, 2013) of eight California districts in 2016-17. Data sources include semi-structured interviews (n=118) and documents (n=24). We used multiple cycles of coding, within- and across-case memos, and matrix displays (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014) to analyze data and develop findings.

Findings
We found that the two “outlier” districts—featuring deep and broad engagement practices (i.e., attracting wide participation with two-way exchanges between district and community stakeholders)—had coherent conceptions of equity (i.e., a district-wide understanding that equity meant closing outcome gaps) and resource allocation strategies that strategically targeted funds based on perceptions of student need (i.e., providing additional resources to schools with low performance). In contrast, the six “non-outlier” districts, demonstrating relatively shallow and narrow engagement practices, had vague or competing conceptions of equity, and resource allocation approaches that prioritized district-wide spending. These patterns suggest that the enactment of stakeholder engagement and resource allocation inform one another and relate to districts’ conceptions of equity, and these three phenomena may be mutually reinforcing.

Significance
Despite extensive policy reforms in pursuit of justice in education, equity remains an elusive goal. This study sheds light on how multiple equity-oriented policy levers, interpreted through the lens of local actors’ beliefs, interact in implementation. These findings offer lessons for researchers and policymakers seeking to disrupt long-standing inequities in American education.

Authors

• Taylor N. Allbright, University of Southern California

• Julie A. Marsh, University of Southern California

• Laura Tobben, University of California - Berkeley