In this article, we argue that ESSA provides a unique policy window for district-level leaders to advance an equity agenda by working closely with local community advocates. Drawing from a larger qualitative, multiple case study on the role of school boards in three U.S. Mountain West school districts, we focus on community advocacy committed to expanding educational equity and opportunity for underserved Black, Latinx, and English learner students Guided by community equity literacy as an organizing framework grounded in the literature on school–community relations, partnerships, and collaboration, we find that community advocates, who in some cases became school board members, identified educational inequities through various forms of knowledge, and then took deliberate actions to dismantle inequities in their respective school districts. We conclude with recommendations for how district-level leaders might leverage community advocacy and education leadership at the local level under ESSA.
AndersonG. L. (2009). Advocacy leadership: Toward a post-reform, agenda in education.New York, NY: Routledge.
2.
AndersonG. L., & DoncikL. M. (2016). Privatizing schooling and policy making: The American Legislative Exchange Council and new political and discursive strategies of education governance. Educational Policy, 30(2), 322–364.
3.
AnyonJ. (2014). Radical possibilities: Public policy, urban education, and anew social movement (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
4.
BailerB. (2016, July 13). TUSD seeks to lease or sell closed schools. Arizona Public Media, Retrieved from https://www.azpm.org.
5.
BaxterP., & JackS. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544–559.
6.
BenavidesA. D., & MedinaF. (2014). Representation and Hispanic school boards in North Central Texas: Confirming a lack of representation. Journal of Public Management & Social Policy, 20(1), 67–83.
7.
BertrandM., & FordA. (2015). “Planting the seeds”: The influence of the Council of Youth Research on education policy. In ConnerJ., & Ebby-RosinR. (Eds.), Student voice in American education policy (Vol. 114, pp. 189–202). New York, NY: Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Teachers College Press.
8.
Brown v. Board of Education (1954). 347. U.S. 483.
9.
ChingosM. M., & WestM. R. (2015). The uneven performance of Arizona's charter schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37(1), 120–134S. doi: 10.3102/0162373715576077.
10.
Clark County School District. (2010). 2010–11 comprehensive annual budget report.Budget Department. Retrieved from http://www.ccsd.net/
11.
Clark County School District. (2013). 2013–14 comprehensive annual budget report.Budget Department. Retrieved from http://www.ccsd.net/
12.
Clark County School District. (2014). 2014–15 comprehensive annual budget report.Budget Department. Retrieved from http://www.ccsd.net/
Council of the Great City Schools. (2014, Fall). Urban school superintendents: Characteristics, tenure, and salary. Eight Survey and Report. Urban Indicator, 1–10.
15.
CreswellJ. W., & CreswellJ. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches.Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
16.
CrossC. (2004). Political education: National policy comes of age.New York: Teachers College Press.
17.
DantleyM. E. (2005a). African American spirituality and Cornel West's notions of prophetic pragmatism; restructuring educational leadership in American urban schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(4), 651–674.
18.
DelagardefleM. L. (2008). The Lighthouse Inquiry: Examining the role of school board leadership in the improvement of student achievement. In AlsburyT. L. (Ed.), Relevancy and revelation: The future of school board governance, (pp. 191–223). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
19.
Education for All Handicapped Children Act. (1975). Public L. No. 94–142. § 89 Stat. 773.
20.
ESSA (2015). Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015, Pub. L. No. 114–95 § 114 Stat. 1177(2015 2016).
21.
FuentesE. H. (2012). On the rebound: Critical race praxis and grassroots community organizing for school change. Urban Review, 44(5), 628–648.
22.
FreyW. H., & TeixeiraR. A. (2012). America's new swing region: The political demography and geography of the mountain west. In TeixeiraR. A. (Ed.) (2012). America's new swing region: Changing politics and demographics in the mountain west (11–68). Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.
23.
GinwrightS., NogueroP., & CammarotaJ. (eds) (2005). Beyond resistance: Youth activism and community change: New democratic possibilities for policy and practice for America's youth.Oxford, U.K.: Routledge.
24.
GreenT. L. (2017). From positivism to critical theory: School community relations toward community equity literacy. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 30(4), 370–387. doi: 10.1080/09518398.2016.1253892.
25.
GreenT. L. (2015). Leading for urban school reform and community development. Educational Administration Quarterly, 51(5), 679. doi:10.1177/0013161X15577694.
26.
GoldE., HenigJ. R., & SimonE. (2011). Calling the shots in public education: Parents, politicians, and educators clash. Dissent, 58(4), 34–39.
27.
HessF. M., & EdenM. (2017). The Every Student Succeeds Act: What it means for schools, systems, and states.Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
HochschildJ. L. (2005). What school boards can and cannot (or will not) accomplish. In In HowellW. (Ed.), Besieged: School boards and the future of education politics (pp. 324–338). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
30.
HorsfordS. D. (2012). Should the role of the judicial branch of government be reduced in the governance of public education? In HunterR.C., BrownF., & DonahooS. (Eds.), School governance: Debating issues in American education, Volume 7. (pp. 67–74). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
31.
HorsfordS. D. (2016). Race and education in the Mountain West: Charting new territory in America's racial frontier. In NogueraP. A., PierceJ., and AhramR. (Eds.), Race, equity, and education: Sixty years from Brown, (pp. 155–173). New York: Springer Publishing.
HorsfordS. D., & SampsonC. (2014). Promise Neighborhoods: The politics and promise of community capacity building as urban school reform. Urban Education, 49(8), 955–991.
34.
HorsfordS. D., SampsonC., & ForlettaF. M. (2013). School resegregation in the Mississippi of the West: Community counternarratives on the return to neighborhood schools in Las Vegas, Nevada, 1968–1994. Teachers College Record, 115(11), 1–28.
35.
IrizarryJ.G., & WeltonA. J. (2014). Latino/a youth researchers as teacher educators: Implications for teaching and learning in urban schools. In MilnerH., & LomoteyK. (Eds)., Handbook of Urban Education. Urban Education.New York: Routledge, 239–255.
36.
HuicocheaA. (2012a, December 21). TUSD to close 11 schools to chip away at $17 million shortfall. Arizona Daily Star. Retrieved from http://tucson.com/news
37.
IrizarryJ. G., & WeltonA. D. (2014). Latina/o youth as educational researchers: Implications for teaching and learning in urban schools. In MilnerH. R.IV, & LomoteyK. (Eds.), Handbook of Urban Education (pp. 239–255). New York: Routledge.
38.
Jean-MarieG., RuffinV., & BurrK. (2010). Leading across boundaries: The role of community schools and cross-boundary leadership in school reform. In HorsfordS. (Ed.), New perspectives in educational leadership: Exploring social, political, and community contexts and meaning (pp. 217–238). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
39.
KirsherB. (2015). Youth activism in an era of education inequality.New York University Press: New York and London.
40.
KnoxA. (2016, August 2016). Board worries federal education law will ding Utah for number of students who serve Mormon missions straight out of high school. The Salt Lake Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.sltrib.com/
41.
Lau v. Nichols (1974). 414 U.S. 563.
42.
LiB. (2007). From bilingual education to OELALEAALEPS: How the no child left behind act has undermined English language learners’ access to a meaningful education. Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law & Policy, 14(3), 539–572.
43.
MaeroffG. I. (2010). School boards in America: A flawed exercise in democracy.New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.
44.
MedirattaK., ShahS., & McAlisterS. (2009). Community organizing for stronger schools: Strategies and successes.Cambridge, Mass: Harvard Education Press.
45.
MeierK., JuenkeE., WrinkleR., & PolinardJ. (2005). Structural choices and representational biases: The post-election color of representation. American Journal of Political Science, 49(4), 758–768.
46.
MilesM. B., & HubermanM. A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. 2nd ed. Sage Publications Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
47.
MillerP. (2008). Examining the work of boundary spanning leaders in community contexts. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 11, 353–377.
48.
National Education Association. (2015). Rankings of the states 2012 and estimates of school statistics 2013. Retrieved from http://www.nea.org
OakesJ., RogersJ., & LiptonM. (2006). Learning power: Organizing for education and justice.New York: Teachers College Press.
53.
OlavesonB. (2015, July 13). Top 10 states with the most Mormons. Utah Valley 360. Retrieved from http://utahvalley360.com
54.
PluckiM. L., McCleeryJ., & KnappM. S. (2006). Redefining and improving school district governance. Retrieved from Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy: University of Washington website: www.ctpweb.org.
55.
RamirezT. L., & BlayZ. (2016). Why people are using the term ‘Latinx.’The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com
56.
RavitchD. (2010). Why public schools need democratic governance. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(6), 24–27.
57.
RogersM. (2012, August 4). Demand high for dual immersion programs in Utah. The Salt Lake Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.sltrib.com/
58.
SaldañaJ. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
59.
SampsonC. R. (2017). So it ‘Became white activists fighting for integration?’ Community organizations, intersectional identities, and education reform. The Urban Review, 49(1), 72–95. doi:10.1007/s11256-016-0382.
60.
SampsonC., & HorsfordS. D. (2015). Beyond legal remedies: Toward funding equity and improved educational opportunities for English language learners. In BonS., BradyK., MikschK., & SunJ.C. (Eds.), Law & educational inequality: Removing barriers to educational opportunities.North Carolina, NC: Information Age Publishing.
61.
ScottJ., & FruchterN. (2009). Community resistance to school privatization: The case of New York City. In FisherR. (Ed.), The people shall rule: ACORN, community organizing, and the struggle for economic justice.Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
62.
Serrano v. Priest. (1971). 5 Cal.3d 584
63.
ShirleyD. (2009). Community organizing and education change: A reconnaissance. Journal of Education Change, 10, 229–337.
64.
StoneD. A. (2012). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making (3rd ed.). New York: W.W. Norton & Co.
65.
StovallD. (2005). A challenge to traditional theory: Critical race theory, African- American community organizers, and education. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 26(1), 95–108.
66.
SungK. K. (2017). “Accentuate the positive; eliminate the negative”: Hegemonic interest convergence, racialization of Latino poverty, and the 1968 Bilingual Education Act. Peabody Journal of Education, published online May 3, 0–20.
67.
TerriquezV., FlashmanJ., Schuler-BrownS., & OrfieldG. (2009, June 01). Expanding student opportunities: Prime 6 Program review, Clark County School District, Las Vegas, Nevada Civil Rights Project at UCLA Retrieved from http://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu.
68.
TuckE., & YangK. W. (2014). Youth resistance research and theories of change.New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
69.
Tucson Unified School District. (2015, January 21). Gov. Ducey's budget includes deep cuts to public education TUSD Superintendent Sanchez says students will suffer. Press Release. Retrieved from http://www.tusd1.org/contents/news/press1415/01-20-15g.html.
70.
Trujillo, (2013). The disproportionate erosion of local control: Urban school boards, high-stakes accountability, and democracy. Education Policy, 27(2), 334–359.
71.
U.S. Department of Education. (2017). Every Student Succeeds Act: Fact sheet, Retrieved from https://www.ed.gov.
72.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (1997). Common Core of Data (CCD), “Local Education Agency (School District) Universe Survey,” 1997–98 v.1a.
73.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). Common Core of Data (CCD), “Local Education Agency (School District) Universe Survey,” 2013–14 v.1a.
74.
UsdanM. D. (2010). School boards: A neglected institution in an era of school reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(6), 8–10.
75.
WalchT. (2014, July 2). LDS missionary numbers to peak at 88,000; more to use and pay for digital devices. Desert News. Retrieved from http://www.deseretnews.com.
76.
WarrenM. R., & MappK. L. (2011). A match on dry grass: Community organizing as a catalyst for school reform, New York: University Oxford Press.
77.
WeltonA., BrockB., & PerryM. (2014). Building a youth leadership fortress: High school women of color as visible activists. In NewcombW. S., & MansfieldK. C. (Eds.), Women interrupting, disrupting, and revolutionizing educational policy and practices (pp. 79–98). Charlotte, N.C.: Information Age Publishing.
78.
WilsonC. M., & HorsfordS. D. (Eds.) (2013). Advancing equity and achievement in America's diverse schools: Inclusive theories, policies, and practices.New York, NY: Routledge.
79.
WongK. K. (2007). The education mayor: Improving American's schools.Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
80.
YinR. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
