Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Policy Sciences
Erschienen in: Policy Sciences 4/2015

26.09.2015 | Research Article

Policy logics, framing strategies, and policy change: lessons from universal pre-k policy debates in California and Florida

verfasst von: Linda A. White, Adrienne Davidson, Heather Millar, Milena Pandy, Juliana Yi

Erschienen in: Policy Sciences | Ausgabe 4/2015

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This article examines the dynamics underpinning universal pre-kindergarten policy debates in California and Florida in light of theories of policy investment, policy change, and sustainability of policy reforms. Because the expansion of prekindergarten raises key considerations about the appropriate role of the state in education and educational socialization experiences for young children, and because these investments involve significant budgetary outlays, they trigger two logics: a policy investment logic that leverages the power of evidence-based arguments and instrumentally rational calculations about costs and benefits of early years investments; and a cultural logic that rests on societal and policymakers’ views about and trust in the state vis-à-vis the family and market. Media analysis of public debates in California reveals that instrumentally rational arguments about the benefits of universal pre-k were trumped by arguments based on appeals to principled beliefs about appropriate levels of state involvement. It also finds that this policy area is particularly susceptible to challenges to the legitimacy of political leaders. These cases thus provide important insights into the kinds of complex political factors that go into getting and sustaining social policy investments over the long term.
Nächster Artikel Social constructions of obesity target population: an empirical look at obesity policy narratives

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Fußnoten
1
Ballot initiatives are a common form of participatory democracy in the USA and allow citizens to put forward petitions signed by a certain number of registered voters to force either a public vote or a legislative vote on a piece of legislation. In the case of the Preschool for All initiative, the question posed to voters was: “Should the California Constitution and state law be amended to create and support a new, publicly funded, voluntary preschool program for children to attend in the year prior to kindergarten, to be funded by an increase in personal income tax rates for high income individuals?” (Ballotpedia 2015b). Program funding was to be generated from a 1.7 per cent state income tax on the wealthiest Californians.
 
2
Spearheaded by Alex Penelas, then-Democratic mayor of Miami-Dade County, and officially sponsored by the Pre-K Committee, the 2002 proposed amendment to the state constitution gained enough signatures to be placed on the ballot for the November 2002 election (Bassok et al. 2014).
 
3
Using NVIVO, four researchers analyzed and coded articles from LA Times, Orange County Register, San Diego Union-Tribune, San Francisco Chronicle, and San Jose Mercury News from May 2004–December 2006. This date range encompasses the period one-year prior to the introduction of the proposition to six months after its defeat. The research team added codes inductively throughout the coding process and also automatically populated several nodes based on automatic text searches within NVIVO. After all sources were coded, all nodes were reviewed for consistency and were aggregated into broader themes where appropriate, or expanded into more detailed nodes where possible. Researchers also pulled and coded approximately 320 newspaper articles from five Florida newspapers using the same methods, but that analysis is not included in this case analysis.
 
4
In Florida, the majority of the public debate occurred after the ballot vote during legislative debates following the public acceptance of the ballot initiative while in California, policy discussion mostly occurred in the lead-up to the ballot.
 
5
Squires (2014) lists Florida, Georgia, Illinois, New York, Oklahoma, Vermont, and West Virginia.
 
6
Although those studies do not address a number of policy questions including optimal “dosage”, that is, length of school day, or whether programs should be targeted or made universally available (see White et al. 2015).
 
7
Policy instruments (Hall 1993) are the techniques used to attain UPK goals, such as teacher credentials, curriculum standards, or the types of permissible providers. Settings refer to distinct levels of instruments, for example, specific student–teacher ratios, or whether teachers need a B.Ed. or simply a certificate in child development.
 
8
As reported in circulation data from the Alliance for Audited Media.
 
9
To this effect, a court challenge was launched to force the state to include the cost of program on the ballot initiative, but it could not be retroactively applied to Amendment 9 or the UPK initiative.
 
10
Currently parents have an option of enrolling their children in either a 300 h summer program or a 540 h school year program (Barnett et al. 2015, p. 45).
 
Literatur
Ackerman, D. J., Barnett, W. S., Hawkinson, L. E., Brown, K. & McGonigle, E. A. (2009). Providing preschool education for all 4-year-olds: Lessons from six state journeys. Preschool Policy Brief 18 (March). New Brunswick, NJ: NIEER.
Banks, G. (2004). Use of Prop. 10 Funds Faulted. Los Angeles Times, 16 July.
Barnett, W. S., Carolan, M. E., Squires, J. H., Brown, K. C., & Horowitz, M. (2015). The State of Preschool 2014: State Preschool Yearbook. New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research.
Bassok, D., Miller, L. C., Galdo, E., & Johnson, A. J. (2014). Florida’s voluntary pre-kindergarten program: An overview of the largest State Pre-school Program in the Nation. EdPolicy Works Report. Chartlottesville: Curry School of Education, University of Virginia.
Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Belfield, C. R., Nores, M., Barnett, S., & Schweinhart, L. (2006). The High/Scope Perry Preschool Program: Cost-benefit analysis using data from the age-40 follow up. Journal of Human Resources, 41(1), 162–190.CrossRef
Boskin, M. (2006). Off and running; quit taxing the rich to fund your pet projects. Los Angeles Times (28 May).
Brennan, D. (1998). The politics of Australian child care: Philanthropy to feminism and beyond. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Brennan, T. (2006). Wars of position: The cultural politics of left and right. New York: Columbia University Press.
Bushouse, B. K. (2009). Universal preschool: Policy change, stability, and the Pew Charitable Trusts. New York: SUNY Press.
Cohen, S. S. (2001). Championing child care. New York: Columbia University Press.
Colavecchio-Van Sickler, S. (2002). Free preschool proposal touted for long-term benefits. West Palm Beach Post (October 30).
Collier, D., & Messick, R. E. (1975). Prerequisites versus diffusion: Testing alternative explanations of social security adoption. The American Political Science Review, 69(4), 1299–1315.CrossRef
DiCamillo, M., & Field, M. (2006a). Feinstein well ahead of mountjoy in U.S. Senate race. Field Research Corporation. Release #2184, 7 March.
DiCamillo, M. & Field, M. (2006b). Prop. 82 (pre-school education) leads but by a smaller margin than two months ago. Field Research Corporation. Release #2196, 19 April.
DiCamillo, M., & Field, M. (2006c). Voters moving to the no side on prop. 82 (Pre-school Education). Field Research Corporation. Release #2199, 3 June.
Druckman, J. (2010). What’s it all about? Framing in political science. In G. Keren (Ed.), Perspectives on framing (pp. 279–302). New York: Psychology Press/Taylor and Francis.
Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy: Discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Fuller, B. (2007). Standardized childhood: The political and cultural struggle over early education. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Hall, P. A. (1993). Policy paradigms, social learning and the state: The case of economic policy-making in Britain. Comparative Politics, 25, 175–196.CrossRef
Hull, D. (2005). Study supports measure’s claims: Preschool seen as cutting crime, limiting dropouts. San Jose Mercury Times (15 December).
Jacobs, A. (2011). Governing for the long term: Democracy and the politics of investment. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Jones, B. D., & Baumgartner, F. R. (2005). The politics of attention: How government prioritizes problems. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Karch, A. (2010). Policy feedback and preschool funding in the American states. The Policy Studies Journal, 38(2), 217–234.CrossRef
Karch, A. (2013). Early start: Preschool politics in the United States. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Karoly, L. A., & Bigelow, J. H. (2005). The economics of investing in universal preschool education in California. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Kingdon, John. (1984). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. New York: Longman.
Kinsler, L. & Steele, K. (2002) Class-size amendment slips in poll. Tampa Tribune (October 23).
Kirp, D. L. (2007). The sandbox investment: The preschool movement and kids-first politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
LeFevre, A. T. (2006). Report card on American education: A state-by-state analysis, 1983–1984 to 2004–2005. Washington, DC: American Legislative Exchange Council.
Lewis, J. (2003). Developing early years childcare in England, 1997–2002: The choices for (working) mothers. Social Policy and Administration, 37(3), 219–238.CrossRef
McGuinn, P. (2006). No child left behind and the transformation of federal education policy 1965–2005. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.
Morain, D. (2006a). TV ads put focus on Reiner. Los Angeles Times (20 February).
Morain, D. (2006b). Reiner takes a leave from panel on children. Los Angeles Times (25 February).
Morain, D. (2006c). Reiner Quits First 5 Panel. Los Angeles Times (30 March).
Mucciaroni, G. (2011). Are debates about ‘morality policy’ really about morality? Framing opposition to gay and lesbian rights. Policy Studies Journal, 39(2), 187–216.CrossRef
N.A. (2005). Business group backs preschool initiative. Los Angeles Times (28 July).
North Jones, A. (2004). Bush Vetoes ‘Flawed’ Pre-K Bill. Tampa Tribune (10 July).
OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development). (2006). Starting strong II. Paris: OECD.
Patashnik, E. M. (2008). Reforms at risk: What happens after major policy changes are enacted. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Patashnik, E. M., & Zelizer, J. E. (2013). The struggle to remake politics; liberal reform and the limits of policy feedback in the contemporary American state. Perspectives on Politics, 11(4), 1071–1087.CrossRef
Raden, A. (1999). Universal prekindergarten in Georgia: A case study of Georgia’s lottery-funded Pre-K program. Working Paper Series. New York: Foundation for Child Development.
Reynolds, A. J., Rolnick, A. J., Englund, M. M., & Temple, J. A. (Eds.). (2010). Childhood programs and practices in the first decade of life: A human capital integration. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rose, E. (2010). The promise of preschool: From Head Start to universal pre-kindergarten. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Shipan, C. R., & Volden, C. (2008). The mechanisms of policy diffusion. American Journal of Political Science, 52(4), 840–857.CrossRef
Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (Eds.). (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Skelton, G. (2006). Schwarzenegger’s after-school plan needs more study. Los Angeles Times (6 March).
Steele, K. (2002). Voters support 4 of 6 amendments. Tampa Tribune (September 5).
Sylvester, K. (2001). Caring for our youngest: Public attitudes in the United States. The Future of Children, 11(1), 52–61.CrossRefPubMed
Vinovskis, M. (2009). From a nation at risk to no child left behind: National education goals and the creation of federal education policy. New York: Teachers College Press.
Waldfogel, J. (2010). Britain’s war on poverty. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
White, L. A. (2012). Must we all be paradigmatic? Social investment policies and liberal welfare states. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 45(3), 657–683.CrossRefADS
White, L. A., & Prentice, S. (2015). Understanding policy changes in early childhood education and care in Canadian Provinces. Forthcoming Canadian Public Administration.
White, L. A., Prentice, S., & Perlman, M. (2015). The evidence base for early childhood education and care program investment: What we know, what we don’t know. Evidence and Policy (fast track 12 January 2015).
Zimmerman, J. (2002). Whose America? Culture wars in the public schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Metadaten
Titel
Policy logics, framing strategies, and policy change: lessons from universal pre-k policy debates in California and Florida
verfasst von
Linda A. White
Adrienne Davidson
Heather Millar
Milena Pandy
Juliana Yi
Publikationsdatum
26.09.2015
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Policy Sciences / Ausgabe 4/2015
Print ISSN: 0032-2687
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-0891
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-015-9234-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2015

Policy Sciences 4/2015 Zur Ausgabe

Research Article

Using insights from pragmatism to develop reforms that strengthen institutional competence for conserving biodiversity

Research Article

Tracing the sources of legitimacy: the impact of deliberation in participatory natural resource management

Research Article

Social constructions of obesity target population: an empirical look at obesity policy narratives

Discussion and Commentary

The political use of knowledge in the policy process