Pushing For Privileged Passage A grounded theory of guardians to middle mathematics students
Main Article Content
Abstract
This grounded theory research identified conflict over decisions about placement into high ability mathematics classes. A theory termed pushing for privileged passage emerged from data collected from parents and educators in the Northwest United States as well as international literature. Pushing occurs following a break down of trust among parents and/or educators over various facets of the school and over student ability grouping decisions in mathematics specifically. Subsequently they try to circumvent the system to gain advantaged placement for specific students. Those who push use investing strategies to insure a child’s future success. They use pressuring techniques on decision-makers to garner advanced mathematics access. Finally, those who push use strategic lobbying for program changes.
Downloads
Article Details
The Grounded Theory Review is an open-access journal, which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the international Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition of open access.
References
Adams, K. & Christenson, S. (2000). Trust and the family-school relationship: Examination of parent-teacher differences in elementary and secondary grades. Journal of school psychology, 38(5), pp. 477-497. http://www.aare.edu.au/index.htm/ARC99491.
Ballantyne, P. (2002). Psychology, society and ability testing: transformative alternatives to mental Darwinism and interactionism. Retrieved January 15, 2004 at http://www.comnet.ca/~pballan/Index.html.
Barrett, K. (2006, March 10) Ohio State University and Former Men’s Basketball Coaches Penalized for Infractions National collegiate athletics Association News Release. Retrieved March 20, 2006 at http://www2.ncaa.org/portal/media_and_events/press_room/2006/march/20060310_osu_infractions_rls.html.
Benveniste, L., Cornoy, M. & Rothstein, R. (2003) All else equal: are public and private schools different? Routeledge Falmer Publishers; New York, NY.
Boaler, J. (2002) Experiencing School Mathematics: Traditional and Reform Approaches to Teaching and their Impact on Student Learning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ.
Boaler, J., Wiliam, D. & Brown, M. (2001) Students’ experiences of ability grouping: disaffection, polarization and the construction of failure. British Educational Research Journal, 26(5), 631-648.
Braddock, J.H. & McPartland, J.M. (1990) Alternatives to tracking. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Research on the Effective Schooling of Disadvantaged Students.
Camblin, S. (2003). The middle grades: putting all students on track for college. A pacific resources for education and learning product retrieved November 12, 2004 at http://www.prel.org/products/pn_/middle-grades.pdf’.
Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development. (1989). Turning points: preparing American youth for the 21 st century. Carnegie Corporation. New York, NY.
Celis, W. (2005, October 30) Schools crack down on academic overload. The Boston Globe retrieved march 20, 2006 at http://www.boston.com/news/education/k_12/articles/2005/10/30/schools_crack_down_on_academic_overload.
Citizenship through sports alliance (CTSA) 2005 youth sports national report card. Retrieved March 12, 2006 at http://www.sportsmanship.org/News/1105%20Report%20Card-Fgrade.pdf
Crozier, G. (1997) Empowering the powerful: a discussion of the interrelation of government policies and consumerism with social class factors and the impact of this upon parent interventions in their children’s schooling. British journal of sociology of education 18(2), pp. 187-200.
Doherty, W. & Peskay, V. (1992) Family systems and the school. Home-school collaboration: enhancing children’s academic and social competence. Edited by Christenson, S. and Conoley, J. the national association of school psychologists. Silver Springs, MD.
Fields-Meyer, T., Bowers, M., Clark, C., Dodd, J., Fowler, J., Frey, J. & Lang, A. (2003) Baby’s a Star. People, 60(9), 131-134.
Fullan, M. (1995) The school as a learning organization: distant dreams. Theory into practice, 34(4). Pp. 230-235.
Fullan, M., Bertani, A., & Quinn, J.. (2004). New lessons for districtwide reform. Change forces education in motion. Ontario, CA.
Glaser, B. (1978) Theoretical sensitivity. Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.
Glaser, B. (1992) Basics of grounded theory analysis. Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.
Glaser, B. (1996) Gerund grounded theory: the basic social process dissertation. Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.
Glaser, B. (1998) Doing grounded theory. Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.
Glaser, B. (2001) The grounded theory perspective: conceptualization contrasted with description. Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.
Glaser, B. (2005) The grounded theory perspective III: theoretical coding. Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.
Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967) The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research, Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.
Hatton, E. (1985) Equality, class and power: a case study. British journal of sociology of education; 6(3), pp.255-272.
Harrington-Leuker, D. (1998) Retention vs. Social Promotion. The School Administrator, 55(7), 6-12.
Hellstedt, Jon C. (1988, April) Kids, Parents and Sport: Some Questions and Answers. The Physician and Sports Medicine, 16(4), 59-71.
Jing, L. & Chen, Q. (1995). Academic pressure and impact on students’ growth in China. McGill Journal of Education, 30(2), 149-168.
Johnston, T. (2006). Pushing into advanced mathematics classes: a grounded theory study of ability grouping in middle level mathematics classes .Unpublished dissertation, Oregon State University.
Kezemi, E. & Stipek, D. (2001). Promoting conceptual thinking in four upper-elementary mathematics classrooms. Elementary school journal, 102, pp. 58-80.
Kohn, A. (1998). Only for my kid: how parents undermine school reform. Phi Delta Kappan. 79(8), 569-577.
Leonard, Wilbert Marcellus. (1988) A Sociological Perspective of Sport (Third Edition). Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, NY.
Lees-Marshment, J. (2006). Political marketing theory and practice: a reply to Ormrod’s critique of Lees-Marshment market-oriented party model. Politics, 26(2), 119-125.
Mann, H. (1848) 12th Annual report as secretary of Massachusetts state board of education. Retrieved Jan, 12, 2006 http://www.tncrimlaw.com/civil_bible/horace_mann.htm.
McGrellis, S. (2005) Pushing the boundaries in Northern Ireland: Young People, violence, and sectarianism. Contemporary Politics, 11(1), 57-71.
McKenzie, J. (2004). The great question press: Squeezing import from content. The educational technology journal, pp. 1.
Mills, R. (2001) Grouping Students for Instruction in Middle Schools. ERIC Digest, retrieved January 1, 2005 at http://www.ericdigests.org/19991/grouping.html.
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory (2007). Not just participants but partners. Northwest education, retrieved September 28, 2007 at http://www.nwrel.org/nwedu/12-03/brief/print/.
Oakes, J., (1985). Keeping track: how schools structure inequality; Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
Oakes, J., Quartz, K., Ryan, S., & Lipton, M. (2000) Becoming good American schools: the struggle for civic virtue in education reform. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, CA.
Oakes, J., & Wells, A. (1998) Detracking for high student achievement. Educational Leadership, 55(1), 38-41.
Ormrod, R. (2006) A Critique of the Lees-Marshment Market-Oriented Party Model. Politics, 26 (2), 110-118.
Osborne, J. (2000). Advantages of hierarchical linear modeling. Practical assessment , research and evaluation, 7(1).
Pallis, A. (2006) Institutional dynamism in EU policy-making: the evolution of the EU maritime safety policy. Journal of European Integration, 28(2), 137- 157.
Palumbo, G. (2006) Optimal duplication of effort in advocacy systems. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 60(1), 112-128.
Peteski, P. (2006) Are you Pushing your child too far. Parenting article retrieved April 7, 2006 at http://www.drphil.com/articles/article/171.
Poliakoff, A. (2006) Closing the gap: and overview. The Association of Curriculum and Development, 44, 1-9.
Pope, D. (2006) Addressing stressed out students: conferences and research to alleviate academic stress. Stanford University School of Education. Retrieved April 12, 2006 at http://sosconference.stanford.edu/sos-fact-sheet.pdf.
Raymond, C. (1989) New study reveals pitfalls in pushing children to succeed academically in preschool years. Chronicle of Higher Education, 36(9), A4-6
Reyes, P., Scribner, J. & Scribner, A. (1999). Lessons from high performing Hispanic schools: creating learning communities. Teachers college press, VT.
Slavin, R. (1990) Ability grouping and student achievement in secondary school: a best evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 57, 293-336.
Slavin, R. (1995) Detracking and its detractors: flawed evidence, flawed values. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(3), 220-226.
Spear, C. (1994)Teacher perceptions of ability grouping practices in middle level schools. Research in Middle Level Education, 18(1), 117-130.
Stevenson, D., Schiller, K. & Schneider, B. (1994) Sequences and opportunities for learning. Sociology of Education. 67(3), 184-198.
Taylor, J. (2002) Positive pushing: how to raise a successful and happy child. Hyperion press, New York.
Wheelock, A. (1992). Crossing the tracks: how untracking can save America’s schools, The New Press. New York, NY.
Wordnet 2.1 Vocabulary Helper. (2006). Definition of pushing. Retrieved March 15, 2006 at http://poets.notredame.ac.jp/cgi-bin/wn.