On Matters of Market-Oriented Models of School Governance How Democracy Fares in the School District of Philadelphia's Experiment in Diverse Providers
Date
2013
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Producer
Director
Performer
Choreographer
Costume Designer
Music
Videographer
Lighting Designer
Set Designer
Crew Member
Funder
Rehearsal Director
Concert Coordinator
Advisor
Moderator
Panelist
Alternative Title
Department
Haverford College. Department of Political Science
Type
Thesis
Original Format
Running Time
File Format
Place of Publication
Date Span
Copyright Date
Award
Language
eng
Note
Table of Contents
Terms of Use
Rights Holder
Access Restrictions
Haverford users only
Terms of Use
Tripod URL
Identifier
Abstract
This thesis asks what is the most effective model of school governance for both academic achievement and democratic citizenship. By examining the Philadelphia School District’s portfolio of diverse providers, this thesis aims to highlight how certain governance structures – i.e. profit‐making motive and degree of centralization – affects the ability of school managers to cultivate values of democratic citizenship in students amidst pressure to improve student outcomes. Philadelphia’s market‐oriented model for school governance is legitimated by its propensity to channel self‐interest and choice in ways that predictably contribute to financial stability and academic progress for a more secure, robust, and learned democratic present and future. Market‐oriented models are characterized by the introduction of neoliberal doctrines of competition, choice and privatization to the domain of public education. A subschool, portfolio management models (PMM) refer to a system of privatization whereby a district is reconfigured such that schools are contingently provided via high‐stakes accountability contracts with an array of external managers in order to create a true educational marketplace. The diverse provider model represents an unprecedentedly complex privatization scheme.This thesis aims to answer the central research question by conducting a case study of three schools in the Philadelphia School District ‐‐ Constitution High School, Maritime Academy Charter High School, and Mastery Charter High School Lenfest. The research seeks to shed light on whether certain types of governance approaches in charge of managing Philadelphia schools can simultaneously improve academic achievement and cultivate practices and habits of political and civic engagement. At Constitution High School, a site‐selective, social studies themed high school managed by the district, students’ comparative fluency in democratic citizenship rank Constitution second according to figures derived from the student survey. At the Maritime Academy, a charter high school managed by a for‐profit provider, what is the most “democratic”, decentralized governance structure and academic program translates into the least politically and civically engaged student populace. Finally, Mastery Lenfest, a charter high school managed by a nonprofit provider, has the most centralized governance structure and academic program, and quizzically the most politically and civically engaged students. This study shows that though certain reform models and governance structures can be “democratic”, this does not mean that such structures necessarily succeed in cultivating values of democratic citizenship.