Loading…
Policy Dynamics and the Evolution of State Charter School Laws
Baumgartner and Jones (1993) showed how radically new policies emerge on government agendas as a consequence of exogenous shocks to policy subsystems displacing privileged interests. But how do these policies evolve post-punctuation? In this paper, we present three different models of policy change....
Saved in:
Published in: | Policy sciences 2009-02, Vol.42 (1), p.33-55 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-8722e7060c0c7c32c6feff506cc0fda8f1d784f48f836002724ee260ee1b08923 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-8722e7060c0c7c32c6feff506cc0fda8f1d784f48f836002724ee260ee1b08923 |
container_end_page | 55 |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 33 |
container_title | Policy sciences |
container_volume | 42 |
creator | Holyoke, Thomas T. Henig, Jeffrey R. Brown, Heath Lacireno-Paquet, Natalie |
description | Baumgartner and Jones (1993) showed how radically new policies emerge on government agendas as a consequence of exogenous shocks to policy subsystems displacing privileged interests. But how do these policies evolve post-punctuation? In this paper, we present three different models of policy change. Policies may revert to the old status quo if displaced interests re-assert themselves, or they may be "locked-in" by new interests now reaping the benefits. Alternatively, they may incrementally change as lawmakers "learn" how to better meet target population needs, particularly by witnessing how other jurisdictions address similar problems. We test these models with data on change in state charter schools laws over time. We find that whether old status quos are overthrow, and the fate of charter policies when they are enacted, is influenced more by competing political interests, especially interest groups, than elite and public perceptions of broad systemic crises. Yet, we also find that changing demands on the state and learning from the successes and failures of neighboring states also play significant roles. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11077-009-9077-3 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_59869677</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>40270980</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>40270980</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-8722e7060c0c7c32c6feff506cc0fda8f1d784f48f836002724ee260ee1b08923</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE1LAzEQhoMoWKs_wIMQPHhbnSS7SfYiSK0fUFConkNME7tlu6lJVum_d5cVBQ96mjk87zvMg9AxgXMCIC4iISBEBlBmZb-wHTQihWAZyJLsohEAoxnlUuyjgxhXAMAFFSN0-ejrymzx9bbR68pErJsFTkuLp---blPlG-wdniedLJ4sdUg24LlZel_jmf6Ih2jP6Trao685Rs8306fJXTZ7uL2fXM0ykzNImRSUWgEcDBhhGDXcWecK4MaAW2jpyELI3OXSScYBqKC5tZSDteSle4CyMTobejfBv7U2JrWuorF1rRvr26iKUvKSC_EvyATksixJB57-Ale-DU33hKKU0AIk7SEyQCb4GIN1ahOqtQ5bRUD13tXgXXXeVe9dsS5Dh0zs2ObVhp_iv0InQ2gVkw_fV_JOBZQS2CeH54zK</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>221250821</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Policy Dynamics and the Evolution of State Charter School Laws</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>Business Source Ultimate</source><source>EBSCOhost Econlit with Full Text</source><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><source>ABI/INFORM Global</source><source>Politics Collection</source><source>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Springer Link</source><creator>Holyoke, Thomas T. ; Henig, Jeffrey R. ; Brown, Heath ; Lacireno-Paquet, Natalie</creator><creatorcontrib>Holyoke, Thomas T. ; Henig, Jeffrey R. ; Brown, Heath ; Lacireno-Paquet, Natalie</creatorcontrib><description>Baumgartner and Jones (1993) showed how radically new policies emerge on government agendas as a consequence of exogenous shocks to policy subsystems displacing privileged interests. But how do these policies evolve post-punctuation? In this paper, we present three different models of policy change. Policies may revert to the old status quo if displaced interests re-assert themselves, or they may be "locked-in" by new interests now reaping the benefits. Alternatively, they may incrementally change as lawmakers "learn" how to better meet target population needs, particularly by witnessing how other jurisdictions address similar problems. We test these models with data on change in state charter schools laws over time. We find that whether old status quos are overthrow, and the fate of charter policies when they are enacted, is influenced more by competing political interests, especially interest groups, than elite and public perceptions of broad systemic crises. Yet, we also find that changing demands on the state and learning from the successes and failures of neighboring states also play significant roles.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0032-2687</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-0891</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11077-009-9077-3</identifier><identifier>CODEN: PLSCBZ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Boston: Springer</publisher><subject>Change ; Charter schools ; College admission ; Economic Policy ; Education ; Education systems ; Equilibrium ; Interest groups ; Jurisdiction ; Law ; Law schools ; Legislators ; Legislatures ; Multiculturalism & pluralism ; Pluralism ; Policy ; Policy making ; Political interest groups ; Political parties ; Political Science ; Political Science and International Relations ; Political Science and International Studies ; Politics ; Power ; Public Administration ; Public policy ; Schools ; State legislation ; States (Political Subdivisions) ; Studies ; U.S.A ; United States environmental policy</subject><ispartof>Policy sciences, 2009-02, Vol.42 (1), p.33-55</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2009 Springer</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2009</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-8722e7060c0c7c32c6feff506cc0fda8f1d784f48f836002724ee260ee1b08923</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-8722e7060c0c7c32c6feff506cc0fda8f1d784f48f836002724ee260ee1b08923</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/221250821/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/221250821?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,11688,12845,12847,21387,21394,27866,27924,27925,33223,33224,33611,33612,33985,33986,36060,36061,43733,43948,44363,58238,58471,74221,74468,74895</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Holyoke, Thomas T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henig, Jeffrey R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Heath</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lacireno-Paquet, Natalie</creatorcontrib><title>Policy Dynamics and the Evolution of State Charter School Laws</title><title>Policy sciences</title><addtitle>Policy Sci</addtitle><description>Baumgartner and Jones (1993) showed how radically new policies emerge on government agendas as a consequence of exogenous shocks to policy subsystems displacing privileged interests. But how do these policies evolve post-punctuation? In this paper, we present three different models of policy change. Policies may revert to the old status quo if displaced interests re-assert themselves, or they may be "locked-in" by new interests now reaping the benefits. Alternatively, they may incrementally change as lawmakers "learn" how to better meet target population needs, particularly by witnessing how other jurisdictions address similar problems. We test these models with data on change in state charter schools laws over time. We find that whether old status quos are overthrow, and the fate of charter policies when they are enacted, is influenced more by competing political interests, especially interest groups, than elite and public perceptions of broad systemic crises. Yet, we also find that changing demands on the state and learning from the successes and failures of neighboring states also play significant roles.</description><subject>Change</subject><subject>Charter schools</subject><subject>College admission</subject><subject>Economic Policy</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Education systems</subject><subject>Equilibrium</subject><subject>Interest groups</subject><subject>Jurisdiction</subject><subject>Law</subject><subject>Law schools</subject><subject>Legislators</subject><subject>Legislatures</subject><subject>Multiculturalism & pluralism</subject><subject>Pluralism</subject><subject>Policy</subject><subject>Policy making</subject><subject>Political interest groups</subject><subject>Political parties</subject><subject>Political Science</subject><subject>Political Science and International Relations</subject><subject>Political Science and International Studies</subject><subject>Politics</subject><subject>Power</subject><subject>Public Administration</subject><subject>Public policy</subject><subject>Schools</subject><subject>State legislation</subject><subject>States (Political Subdivisions)</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><subject>United States environmental policy</subject><issn>0032-2687</issn><issn>1573-0891</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>DPSOV</sourceid><sourceid>M0C</sourceid><sourceid>M2L</sourceid><sourceid>M2R</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkE1LAzEQhoMoWKs_wIMQPHhbnSS7SfYiSK0fUFConkNME7tlu6lJVum_d5cVBQ96mjk87zvMg9AxgXMCIC4iISBEBlBmZb-wHTQihWAZyJLsohEAoxnlUuyjgxhXAMAFFSN0-ejrymzx9bbR68pErJsFTkuLp---blPlG-wdniedLJ4sdUg24LlZel_jmf6Ih2jP6Trao685Rs8306fJXTZ7uL2fXM0ykzNImRSUWgEcDBhhGDXcWecK4MaAW2jpyELI3OXSScYBqKC5tZSDteSle4CyMTobejfBv7U2JrWuorF1rRvr26iKUvKSC_EvyATksixJB57-Ale-DU33hKKU0AIk7SEyQCb4GIN1ahOqtQ5bRUD13tXgXXXeVe9dsS5Dh0zs2ObVhp_iv0InQ2gVkw_fV_JOBZQS2CeH54zK</recordid><startdate>20090201</startdate><enddate>20090201</enddate><creator>Holyoke, Thomas T.</creator><creator>Henig, Jeffrey R.</creator><creator>Brown, Heath</creator><creator>Lacireno-Paquet, Natalie</creator><general>Springer</general><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88F</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M1Q</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090201</creationdate><title>Policy Dynamics and the Evolution of State Charter School Laws</title><author>Holyoke, Thomas T. ; Henig, Jeffrey R. ; Brown, Heath ; Lacireno-Paquet, Natalie</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-8722e7060c0c7c32c6feff506cc0fda8f1d784f48f836002724ee260ee1b08923</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Change</topic><topic>Charter schools</topic><topic>College admission</topic><topic>Economic Policy</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Education systems</topic><topic>Equilibrium</topic><topic>Interest groups</topic><topic>Jurisdiction</topic><topic>Law</topic><topic>Law schools</topic><topic>Legislators</topic><topic>Legislatures</topic><topic>Multiculturalism & pluralism</topic><topic>Pluralism</topic><topic>Policy</topic><topic>Policy making</topic><topic>Political interest groups</topic><topic>Political parties</topic><topic>Political Science</topic><topic>Political Science and International Relations</topic><topic>Political Science and International Studies</topic><topic>Politics</topic><topic>Power</topic><topic>Public Administration</topic><topic>Public policy</topic><topic>Schools</topic><topic>State legislation</topic><topic>States (Political Subdivisions)</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><topic>United States environmental policy</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Holyoke, Thomas T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henig, Jeffrey R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Heath</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lacireno-Paquet, Natalie</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Military Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Military Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Policy sciences</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Holyoke, Thomas T.</au><au>Henig, Jeffrey R.</au><au>Brown, Heath</au><au>Lacireno-Paquet, Natalie</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Policy Dynamics and the Evolution of State Charter School Laws</atitle><jtitle>Policy sciences</jtitle><stitle>Policy Sci</stitle><date>2009-02-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>42</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>33</spage><epage>55</epage><pages>33-55</pages><issn>0032-2687</issn><eissn>1573-0891</eissn><coden>PLSCBZ</coden><abstract>Baumgartner and Jones (1993) showed how radically new policies emerge on government agendas as a consequence of exogenous shocks to policy subsystems displacing privileged interests. But how do these policies evolve post-punctuation? In this paper, we present three different models of policy change. Policies may revert to the old status quo if displaced interests re-assert themselves, or they may be "locked-in" by new interests now reaping the benefits. Alternatively, they may incrementally change as lawmakers "learn" how to better meet target population needs, particularly by witnessing how other jurisdictions address similar problems. We test these models with data on change in state charter schools laws over time. We find that whether old status quos are overthrow, and the fate of charter policies when they are enacted, is influenced more by competing political interests, especially interest groups, than elite and public perceptions of broad systemic crises. Yet, we also find that changing demands on the state and learning from the successes and failures of neighboring states also play significant roles.</abstract><cop>Boston</cop><pub>Springer</pub><doi>10.1007/s11077-009-9077-3</doi><tpages>23</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0032-2687 |
ispartof | Policy sciences, 2009-02, Vol.42 (1), p.33-55 |
issn | 0032-2687 1573-0891 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_59869677 |
source | International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); Business Source Ultimate; EBSCOhost Econlit with Full Text; JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection; ABI/INFORM Global; Politics Collection; Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3); PAIS Index; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Springer Link |
subjects | Change Charter schools College admission Economic Policy Education Education systems Equilibrium Interest groups Jurisdiction Law Law schools Legislators Legislatures Multiculturalism & pluralism Pluralism Policy Policy making Political interest groups Political parties Political Science Political Science and International Relations Political Science and International Studies Politics Power Public Administration Public policy Schools State legislation States (Political Subdivisions) Studies U.S.A United States environmental policy |
title | Policy Dynamics and the Evolution of State Charter School Laws |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T15%3A35%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Policy%20Dynamics%20and%20the%20Evolution%20of%20State%20Charter%20School%20Laws&rft.jtitle=Policy%20sciences&rft.au=Holyoke,%20Thomas%20T.&rft.date=2009-02-01&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=33&rft.epage=55&rft.pages=33-55&rft.issn=0032-2687&rft.eissn=1573-0891&rft.coden=PLSCBZ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11077-009-9077-3&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E40270980%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-8722e7060c0c7c32c6feff506cc0fda8f1d784f48f836002724ee260ee1b08923%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=221250821&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=40270980&rfr_iscdi=true |