Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Minow, M. (2011). Confronting the seduction of choice: Law, education, and…

- - - - “In the second, the rise of private school options and "freedom of choice" plans used by whites to bypass court ordered racial desegregation in the 1950s and 1960s associated school choice with self-segregation by whites” (Minow, 2011, p. 818).
        
        “In the third moment, federal courts and local school systems turned to magnet schools and other forms of public-school choice in pursuit of voluntary dimensions of racial desegregation from the 1970s until the Supreme Court curbed such efforts” (Minow, 2011, p. 818).
        
        “In the fourth moment, longstanding constitutional campaigns to enable publicly financed vouchers to pay for religious schooling reached fruition in 2002” (Minow, 2011, p. 818).
        
        “And, finally, during the early decades of this new century, proliferating experiments with charter schools, magnet schools, and other forms of choice present occasions for local, state, and national debate over whether to renew commitments to integration within schools across lines of race, religion, class, and other student differences or to promote plural kinds of schools that enable variety and competition as well as permit increasing separation of different kinds of students into different schools” (Minow, 2011, p. 818).
- - - - “These concerns should be coupled with the question: whose choice are we talking about?” (Minow, 2011, p. 847).
        
        “School choice itself is not bad. It can be a vehicle for valuable reform for parental and community engagement, and for educational innovation” (Minow, 2011, p. 848).
- - - - “The temptation to use school choice to produce racial integration not only failed legally but also fueled campaigns against affirmative action” (Minow, 2011, p. 828).
- - - - “Second, the use of school vouchers risks skimming the most engaged families of whatever color or class from public schools, while leaving the rest of the students in inadequate schools without the political clout and active monitoring of engaged parents” (Minow, 2011, p. 832).
        
        “Third, school vouchers risk pressuring students to attend schools not of their own religion and pressuring religious schools to modify their practices to suit the government funder” (Minow, 2011, p. 832).
        
        “Fourth, school voucher programs offer the illusion of choice but in fact remain confined to district lines —stopping at the border of suburbs where strong public and private school options remain off-limits to poor urban students” (Minow, 2011, p. 832)