From Awareness to Action: Institutional Agents Attempt to (Re)imagine College Readiness and Success at a No-Excuses Charter High School

Abstract

Background/Context:

The “college-for-all” movement has guided education reform efforts over the last few decades. Of college-for-all adopters, the “no-excuses” charter school model is arguably the most successful and controversial. Schools that use this model produce high standardized test scores and four-year college acceptance rates for marginalized students. However, questions regarding whether the ends of college-for-all justify the practices utilized by these schools to achieve such outcomes are prevalant. Few studies have investigated how institutional agents—critical actors in the college preparation process for marginalized youth—seek to reflect on and change potentially problematic college-for-all approaches in a no-excuses charter high school context.

Purpose:

The purpose of this study is twofold: (1) to understand how institutional agents perceive the ways in which the economic, social, and political drivers of the college-for-all ethos have shaped their “no-excuses” charter high school and (2) to uncover how institutional agents are attempting to (re)imagine and transform traditional “no-excuses” beliefs and practices related to college readiness and success in their high school context.

Research Design:

This study followed a qualitative case study design bound by a single no-excuses charter high school located in a city on the East Coast. Drawing on interviews with 14 institutional agents, in-person school observations, and document review, this study integrates Perna and Thomas’s (2006) college success model with Stanton-Salazar’s (2011) social capital framework to understand how institutional agents within a no-excuses charter high school context are shaped by, and have the power to shape, their school’s organizational habitus.

Conclusion:

This study highlights how institutional agents within a “successful” no-excuses charter high school grapple with changing one-size-fits-all college expectations and white and middle-class norms associated with the college-for-all ethos that have been intertwined with the no-excuses model since its inception. Because no-excuses charter schools are shaped by external pressures as well as their own longstanding habitus, findings highlight the tensions, complexity, and tradeoffs that institutional agents encountered when attempting to make change in spaces that they themselves are entrenched in. This study suggests, however, that institutional agents, when acting as empowerment agents, can resist assimilationist college preparation practices and (re)shape their school’s organizational habitus to facilitate marginalized students’ empowerment. Recommendations for policy, practice, and theory are discussed.

Keywords

no-excuses charter schools college-for-all college readiness college success institutional agents empowerment agents

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Acevedo-Gil

(2017). College-conocimiento: Toward an interdisciplinary college choice framework for Latinx students. Race Ethnicity and Education, 20(6), 829–850. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2017.1343294

Angrist

J. D.

Cohodes

S. R.

Dynarski

S. M.

Pathak

P. A.

Walters

C. R.

(2016). Stand and deliver: Effects of Boston’s charter high schools on college preparation, entry, and choice. Journal of Labor Economics, 34(2), 275–318. https://doi.org/10.1086/683665

Arnold

Fleming

De Anda

Castleman

Wartman

K. L.

(2009). The summer flood: The invisible gap among low-income students. Thought and Action, 23–34.

Baldridge

B. J.

(2018). On educational advocacy and cultural work: Situating community-based youth work[ers] in broader educational discourse. Teachers College Record, 120(2), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811812000206

Birt

Scott

Cavers

Campbell

Walter

(2016). Member checking: A tool to enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to validation? Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1802–1811. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316654870

Bourdieu

(1986). The forms of capital. In Richardson

(Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood.

Cahalan

Perna

L. W.

Yamashita

Wright-Kim

Jiang

(2019). 2019 indicators of higher education equity in the United States: Historical trend report. The Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education, Council for Opportunity in Education (COE), and Alliance for Higher Education and Democracy of the University of Pennsylvania (PennAHEAD).

Castillo

(2020). A neoliberal grammar of schooling? How a progressive charter school moved toward market values. American Journal of Education, 126(4), 519–547. https://doi.org/10.1086/709513

Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO). (2013). National charter school study. https://credo.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/ncss_2013_final_draft.pdf

10.

Cheng

Hitt

Kisida

Mills

J. N.

(2017). “No excuses” charter schools: A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence on student achievement. Journal of School Choice, 11(2), 209–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/15582159.2017.1286210

11.

Cipollone

Stich

A. E.

(2017). Shadow capital: The democratization of college preparatory education. American Sociological Association, 90(4), 333–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040717739071

12.

Clemens

R. F.

(2019). “College for all? These kids can’t dig ditches”: Confronting the leadership challenges for justice-based reform in underperforming schools. Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 22(1), 95–111. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555458918799129

13.

Cohodes

(2018). Charter schools and the achievement gap. The Future of Children, Princeton-Brookings.

14.

Cohodes

Parham

(2021). Charter schools’ effectiveness, mechanisms, and competitive influence (Working Paper 28477). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w28477

15.

Conley

D. T.

(2007). Toward a more comprehensive conception of college readiness. Educational Policy Improvement Center.

16.

Convertino

Graboski-Bauer

(2018). College readiness versus college worthiness: Examining the role of principal beliefs on college readiness initiatives in an urban U.S. high school. The Urban Review, 50(1), 45–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-017-0429-6

17.

Cox

R. D.

(2016). Complicating conditions: Obstacles and interruptions to low-income students’ college “choices.” The Journal of Higher Education, 87(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2016.11777392

18.

Davis

Heller

(2019). No excuses charter schools and college enrollment: New evidence from a high school network in Chicago. Education Finance and Policy, 14(3), 414–440. https://doi.org/10.1162/edfp_a_00244

19.

Domina

Conley

Farkas

(2011). The case for dreaming big. Sociology of Education, 84(2), 118–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040711401810

20.

Engberg

M. E.

Gilbert

A. J.

(2014). The counseling opportunity structure: Examining correlates of four-year college-going rates. Research in Higher Education, 55(3), 219–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-013-9309-4

21.

Ferrare

J. J.

Setari

R. R.

(2017). Converging on choice: The interstate flow of foundation dollars to charter school organizations. Educational Researcher, 47(1), 34–45. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X17736524

22.

Freire

(1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum.

23.

Glaser

B. G.

(1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems, 12(4), 436–445. https://doi.org/10.2307/798843

24.

Glass

Nygreen

(2011). Class, race, and the discourse of “college for all.” A response to “schooling for democracy.” Democracy and Education, 19(1), 1–8.

25.

Golann

J. W.

(2015). The paradox of success at a no-excuses school. Sociology of Education, 88(2), 103–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040714567866

26.

Golann

J. W.

(2018). Conformers, adaptors, imitators, and rejecters: How no-excuses teachers’ cultural toolkits shape their responses to control. Sociology of Education, 91(1), 28–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040717743721

27.

Golann

J. W.

(2021, August 9). Why are no-excuses schools moving beyond no excuses? Princeton University Press. https://press.princeton.edu/ideas/why-are-no-excuses-schools-moving-beyond-no-excuses

28.

Golann

J. W.

Torres

A. C.

(2018). Do no-excuses disciplinary practices promote success? Journal of Urban Affairs, 42(4), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2018.1427506

29.

Goodman

Hurwitz

Smith

(2017). Access to 4-year public colleges and degree completion. Journal of Labor Economics, 35(3), 829–867. https://doi.org/10.1086/690818

30.

Hammack

F. M.

(2016). Schooling for social mobility: High school reform for college access and success. Journal of School Choice, 10(1), 96–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/15582159.2015.1132935

31.

Harrison

M. H.

(2022). Nuance in “no excuses”: Unexpected progressive pedagogy and policy. Education and Urban Society, 55(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/00131245221076096

32.

Ishimaru

A. M.

Lott

J. L.

Torres

K. E.

O’Reilly-Diaz

(2019). Families in the driver’s seat: Catalyzing familial transformative agency for equitable collaboration. Teachers College Record, 121(11), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811912101108

33.

Jayakumar

Vue

Allen

(2013). Pathways to college for young Black scholars: A community cultural wealth perspective. Harvard Educational Review, 83(4), 551–579. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.83.4.4k1mq00162433l28

34.

Kolluri

(2019). Reconsidering organizational habitus in schools: One neighborhood, two distinct approaches to Advanced Placement. Harvard Educational Review, 89(1), 109–131. https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-89.1.109

35.

Kolluri

Jacobson

Maruco

Corwin

(2020). The curious role of teachers in college guidance: Are teachers institutional agents of college access? Journal of School Counseling, 18(5), 3–32.

36.

Kolluri

Tierney

(2018). College for all in capitalist America: The post-secondary emphasis in the neoliberal age. Tertiary Education and Management, 24(3), 242–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2018.1440417

37.

Ladson-Billings

(2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: A.k.a. the remix. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 74–84. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.1.p2rj131485484751

38.

Lamboy

(2017). The pursuit of college for all: Ends and means in ‘no excuses’ charter schools. Theory and Research in Education, 15(2), 202–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878517716443

39.

Levy

Lopez-Perry

(2021). The school counselor’s role in anti-racist college counseling and advising, Journal of College Access, 6(3), 8–14.

40.

Lipman

(2015). Urban education policy under Obama. Journal of Urban Affairs, 37(1), 57–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/juaf.12163

41.

Lopez Kershen

Weiner

J. M.

Torres

. (2018). Control as care: How teachers in “no excuses” charter schools position their students and themselves. Equity & Excellence in Education, 51(3–4), 265–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2018.1539359

42.

Marsh

L. T. S.

(2021). “Raw intelligence does not help you”: Exploring teachers’ conceptualizations of success at one “no-excuses” charter school. Urban Education, 56(7), 1106–1136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085920979677

43.

Martinez

G. F.

Deil-Amen

(2015). College for all Latinos? The role of high school messages in facing college challenges. Teachers College Record, 117(3), 1–50.

44.

McDonough

(1997). Choosing colleges: How social class and school structure opportunity. State University of New York Press.

45.

McDonough

Abrica

E. J.

(2021). Toward a (re)integrated application of Bourdieuan theory. Urban Education, 58(7). https://doi.org/10.1177/00420859211016517

46.

McDonough

P. M.

Calderone

(2006). The meaning of money: Perceptual differences between college counselors and low-income families about college costs and financial aid. American Behavioral Scientist, 49(12), 1703–1718. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764206289140

47.

Melguizo

(2010). Are students of color more likely to graduate from college if they attend more selective institutions?: Evidence from a cohort of recipients and nonrecipients of the Gates Millennium Scholarship Program. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 32(2), 230–248. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373710367681

48.

Merriam

(1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education: Revised and expanded from case study research in education. Jossey-Bass.

49.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2022). Undergraduate retention and graduation rates. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/ctr.

50.

National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. U.S. Government Printing Office.

51.

National Student Clearinghouse. (2021). High school benchmarks: National college progression rates. https://nscresearchcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2021_HSBenchmarksReport.pdf

52.

Noll

L. A.

(2021). Accountability and (in)congruence in a no-excuses school college-going culture. American Educational Research Journal, 59(1), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312211057303

53.

Patton

M. Q.

(2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Sage.

54.

Perez-Felkner

(2015). Perceptions and resilience in underrepresented students’ pathways to college. Teachers College Record, 117(8). http://dx.doi.og/10.1177/016146811511700806

55.

Perna

L. W.

(2006). Studying college access and choice: A proposed conceptual model. In Smart

J. C.

(Ed.), Higher education (Vol. 21, pp. 99–157). Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4512-3_3

56.

Perna

L. W.

Thomas

S. L.

(2006). A framework for reducing the college success gap and promoting success for all. Commissioned Report for the National Symposium on Postsecondary Student Success: Spearheading a Dialog on Student Success. National Postsecondary Education Cooperative.

57.

Quartz

K. H.

Murillo

M. A.

Trinchero

Neri

R. C.

Jacobo

(2019). Framing, supporting, and tracking college-for-all reform: A local case of public scholarship. The High School Journal, 102(2), 159–182. https://doi.org/10.1353/hsj.2019.0004

58.

Saldaña

(2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Sage.

59.

Saunders

Sim

Kingstone

Baker

Waterfield

Bartlam

Burroughs

Jinks

(2018). Saturation in qualitative research: Exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality & Quantity, 52(4), 1893–1907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8

60.

Savitz-Romer

Rowan-Kenyon

H. T.

(2020). Noncognitive skills, college success, and career readiness: What matters and to whom? About Campus, 25(1), 4–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086482220906161

61.

Sondel

(2015). Raising citizens or raising test scores? Teach for America, “no excuses” charters, and the development of the neoliberal citizen. Theory & Research in Social Education, 43(3), 289–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2015.1064505

62.

Stanton-Salazar

(1997). A social capital framework for understanding the socialization of racial minority children and youths. Harvard Educational Review, 67(1), 1–41. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.67.1.140676g74018u73k

63.

Stanton-Salazar

R. D.

(2011). A social capital framework for the study of institutional agents and their role in the empowerment of low-status students and youth. Youth & Society, 43(3), 1066–1109. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X10382877

64.

Welton

A. D.

Martinez

M. A.

(2014). Coloring the college pathway: A more culturally responsive approach to college readiness and access for students of color in secondary schools. The Urban Review, 46(2), 197–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-013-0252-7

65.

Whitman

(2008). Sweating the small stuff: Inner-city schools and the new paternalism. Thomas B. Fordham Institute.

66.

Yosso

T. J.

(2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000341006