2004
Volume 1, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 2212-4810
  • E-ISSN: 2212-6465

Abstract

The paradigm of American K–12 education is shifting as the institution of local educational polities, each responsible for its own “common schools,” faces competition from programs of school choice. Although charter schools and related reforms are generally studied in terms of quality and equity, the rise of consumer sovereignty as an alternative to political sovereignty as an organizing principle for educational governance has much wider rami­fications. Paradigms of choice have already begun dramatically to alter religious education and its relationship to public schooling. Moreover, because these paradigms rely upon consumer preferences and the aggregation of those preferences by markets, the shape of religious activity in state-subsidized schools will be determined increasingly by consumers and producers – parents and schools – rather than by political actors. Government is likely to find its ability to limit and guide religion/school interactions substantially, and increas­ingly, constrained. In making this argument, this paper draws primarily upon examples from a small but instructive religious sector in American K–12 education, that of Jewish education. It discusses the direct deployment of the charter-school form to provide Jewish education. It then assesses ways in which shifts in the public framing of education from one of politics to one of markets has transformed public school politics in school districts dominated by Orthodox Jews.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/22124810-00102001
2012-01-01
2026-01-30
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/22126465/1/2/22124810_001_02_S05_text.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1163/22124810-00102001&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1.  Tyack, supra note 2, at 6–7, 16. In some states, Progressive dominance was achieved substantially earlier. See, e.g., Ohio ex rel. Ohio Cong. of Parents & Teachers v. State Bd. of Educ., 857 N.E.2d 1148, 1157 ¶28 (Ohio 2006).
  2.  Tyack, supra note 2, at 6–7, 16.
  3.  374 U.S. 203, 223 (1963).
  4.  Associated Press, “Foundations Help Charter Network Secure Bonds”, Educ. Wk. (May 12, 2010), at 4.
    [Google Scholar]
  5.  Hillman, supra note 67, at 569.
  6.  Mayer Fertig, “Tuition or Mortgage: Choosing Public School over Homelessness”, Jewish Star(Aug. 21, 2009), available athttp://thejewishstar.wordpress.com/2009/08/18/tuition-or-mortgage-choosing-public-school-over-homelessness.
    [Google Scholar]
  7.  Sikkink, supra note 114, at 277.
  8.  Larry Gordon, “Campaign of Deception”, Five Towns Jewish Times(April 4, 2007) (Lawrence); Josh Nathan-Kazis, “In N.Y. Town, Orthodox and Locals View for School Control”, Jewish Daily Forward (May 6, 2011) (East Ramapo).
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1163/22124810-00102001
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error