Advertisement

Policy Sciences

, Volume 48, Issue 4, pp 395–413 | Cite as

Policy logics, framing strategies, and policy change: lessons from universal pre-k policy debates in California and Florida

  • Linda A. White
  • Adrienne Davidson
  • Heather Millar
  • Milena Pandy
  • Juliana Yi
Research Article

Abstract

This article examines the dynamics underpinning universal pre-kindergarten policy debates in California and Florida in light of theories of policy investment, policy change, and sustainability of policy reforms. Because the expansion of prekindergarten raises key considerations about the appropriate role of the state in education and educational socialization experiences for young children, and because these investments involve significant budgetary outlays, they trigger two logics: a policy investment logic that leverages the power of evidence-based arguments and instrumentally rational calculations about costs and benefits of early years investments; and a cultural logic that rests on societal and policymakers’ views about and trust in the state vis-à-vis the family and market. Media analysis of public debates in California reveals that instrumentally rational arguments about the benefits of universal pre-k were trumped by arguments based on appeals to principled beliefs about appropriate levels of state involvement. It also finds that this policy area is particularly susceptible to challenges to the legitimacy of political leaders. These cases thus provide important insights into the kinds of complex political factors that go into getting and sustaining social policy investments over the long term.

Keywords

Policy investment theory Policy framing Policy change Universal pre-kindergarten California Florida 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This article was originally presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, Illinois, 29 August – 1 September 2013. The authors wish to thank Steven Bernstein and Grace Skogstad for their very helpful comments on earlier drafts of this article. Financial support for this research was provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada grant # 410-2008-0630.

References

  1. Ackerman, D. J., Barnett, W. S., Hawkinson, L. E., Brown, K. & McGonigle, E. A. (2009). Providing preschool education for all 4-year-olds: Lessons from six state journeys. Preschool Policy Brief 18 (March). New Brunswick, NJ: NIEER.Google Scholar
  2. Ballotpedia. (2015a). California Proposition 10, “First Five” Early Childhood Cigarette Tax (1998). http://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_10,_%22First_5%22_Early_Childhood_Cigarette_Tax_%281998%29.
  3. Ballotpedia. (2015b). California Proposition 82, Free Half-Day Public Preschool Program (June 2006). http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_82,_Free_Half-Day_Public_Preschool_Program_%28June_2006%29.
  4. Ballotpedia. (2015c). Florida universal pre-kindergarten, amendment 8 (2002). http://ballotpedia.org/Florida_Universal_Pre-Kindergarten,_Amendment_8_%282002%29.
  5. Banks, G. (2004). Use of Prop. 10 Funds Faulted. Los Angeles Times, 16 July.Google Scholar
  6. Barnett, W. S., Carolan, M. E., Squires, J. H., Brown, K. C., & Horowitz, M. (2015). The State of Preschool 2014: State Preschool Yearbook. New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research.Google Scholar
  7. Bassok, D., Miller, L. C., Galdo, E., & Johnson, A. J. (2014). Florida’s voluntary pre-kindergarten program: An overview of the largest State Pre-school Program in the Nation. EdPolicy Works Report. Chartlottesville: Curry School of Education, University of Virginia.Google Scholar
  8. Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  9. Belfield, C. R., Nores, M., Barnett, S., & Schweinhart, L. (2006). The High/Scope Perry Preschool Program: Cost-benefit analysis using data from the age-40 follow up. Journal of Human Resources, 41(1), 162–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boskin, M. (2006). Off and running; quit taxing the rich to fund your pet projects. Los Angeles Times (28 May).Google Scholar
  11. Brennan, D. (1998). The politics of Australian child care: Philanthropy to feminism and beyond. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brennan, T. (2006). Wars of position: The cultural politics of left and right. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Bushouse, B. K. (2009). Universal preschool: Policy change, stability, and the Pew Charitable Trusts. New York: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  14. Cohen, S. S. (2001). Championing child care. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Colavecchio-Van Sickler, S. (2002). Free preschool proposal touted for long-term benefits. West Palm Beach Post (October 30).Google Scholar
  16. Collier, D., & Messick, R. E. (1975). Prerequisites versus diffusion: Testing alternative explanations of social security adoption. The American Political Science Review, 69(4), 1299–1315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. DiCamillo, M., & Field, M. (2006a). Feinstein well ahead of mountjoy in U.S. Senate race. Field Research Corporation. Release #2184, 7 March.Google Scholar
  18. DiCamillo, M. & Field, M. (2006b). Prop. 82 (pre-school education) leads but by a smaller margin than two months ago. Field Research Corporation. Release #2196, 19 April.Google Scholar
  19. DiCamillo, M., & Field, M. (2006c). Voters moving to the no side on prop. 82 (Pre-school Education). Field Research Corporation. Release #2199, 3 June.Google Scholar
  20. Druckman, J. (2010). What’s it all about? Framing in political science. In G. Keren (Ed.), Perspectives on framing (pp. 279–302). New York: Psychology Press/Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  21. First Five Years Fund. (2013). Early childhood education is a top priority for voters, second only to increasing jobs and economic growth. http://edsource.org/wp-content/uploads/Poll-Fact-Sheet.pdf.
  22. Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy: Discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Florida Department of State, Division of Elections. (2013). Voluntary universal pre-kindergarten education. Accessed August 5, 2013. http://election.dos.state.fl.us/initiatives/initdetail.asp?account=34708&seqnum=1.
  24. Fuller, B. (2007). Standardized childhood: The political and cultural struggle over early education. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Hall, P. A. (1993). Policy paradigms, social learning and the state: The case of economic policy-making in Britain. Comparative Politics, 25, 175–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hull, D. (2005). Study supports measure’s claims: Preschool seen as cutting crime, limiting dropouts. San Jose Mercury Times (15 December).Google Scholar
  27. Jacobs, A. (2011). Governing for the long term: Democracy and the politics of investment. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jones, B. D., & Baumgartner, F. R. (2005). The politics of attention: How government prioritizes problems. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  29. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453–458.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefPubMedADSGoogle Scholar
  30. Karch, A. (2010). Policy feedback and preschool funding in the American states. The Policy Studies Journal, 38(2), 217–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Karch, A. (2013). Early start: Preschool politics in the United States. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  32. Karoly, L. A., & Bigelow, J. H. (2005). The economics of investing in universal preschool education in California. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.Google Scholar
  33. Kingdon, John. (1984). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  34. Kinsler, L. & Steele, K. (2002) Class-size amendment slips in poll. Tampa Tribune (October 23).Google Scholar
  35. Kirp, D. L. (2007). The sandbox investment: The preschool movement and kids-first politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  37. LeFevre, A. T. (2006). Report card on American education: A state-by-state analysis, 1983–1984 to 2004–2005. Washington, DC: American Legislative Exchange Council.Google Scholar
  38. Lewis, J. (2003). Developing early years childcare in England, 1997–2002: The choices for (working) mothers. Social Policy and Administration, 37(3), 219–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. McGuinn, P. (2006). No child left behind and the transformation of federal education policy 1965–2005. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
  40. Morain, D. (2006a). TV ads put focus on Reiner. Los Angeles Times (20 February).Google Scholar
  41. Morain, D. (2006b). Reiner takes a leave from panel on children. Los Angeles Times (25 February).Google Scholar
  42. Morain, D. (2006c). Reiner Quits First 5 Panel. Los Angeles Times (30 March).Google Scholar
  43. Mucciaroni, G. (2011). Are debates about ‘morality policy’ really about morality? Framing opposition to gay and lesbian rights. Policy Studies Journal, 39(2), 187–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. N.A. (2005). Business group backs preschool initiative. Los Angeles Times (28 July).Google Scholar
  45. North Jones, A. (2004). Bush Vetoes ‘Flawed’ Pre-K Bill. Tampa Tribune (10 July).Google Scholar
  46. OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development). (2006). Starting strong II. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  47. Patashnik, E. M. (2008). Reforms at risk: What happens after major policy changes are enacted. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Patashnik, E. M., & Zelizer, J. E. (2013). The struggle to remake politics; liberal reform and the limits of policy feedback in the contemporary American state. Perspectives on Politics, 11(4), 1071–1087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pew Research Center. (2013). Breadwinner Moms. Pew Social and Demographic Trends Report (29 May). http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/29/breadwinner-moms/.
  50. Raden, A. (1999). Universal prekindergarten in Georgia: A case study of Georgia’s lottery-funded Pre-K program. Working Paper Series. New York: Foundation for Child Development.Google Scholar
  51. Reynolds, A. J., Rolnick, A. J., Englund, M. M., & Temple, J. A. (Eds.). (2010). Childhood programs and practices in the first decade of life: A human capital integration. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Rose, E. (2010). The promise of preschool: From Head Start to universal pre-kindergarten. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Shipan, C. R., & Volden, C. (2008). The mechanisms of policy diffusion. American Journal of Political Science, 52(4), 840–857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (Eds.). (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  55. Skelton, G. (2006). Schwarzenegger’s after-school plan needs more study. Los Angeles Times (6 March).Google Scholar
  56. Squires, J. (2014). One state’s bold step toward the future. Preschool Matters Today NIEER Blog (6 June). http://preschoolmatters.org/2014/06/06/one-states-bold-step-toward-the-future/.
  57. Steele, K. (2002). Voters support 4 of 6 amendments. Tampa Tribune (September 5).Google Scholar
  58. Sylvester, K. (2001). Caring for our youngest: Public attitudes in the United States. The Future of Children, 11(1), 52–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Universal Prekindergarten Education Advisory Council. (2003). Report and recommendations to the Florida State Board of Education. http://www.fldoe.org/board/meetings/Oct_21_03/UPK_Report.pdf.
  60. Vinovskis, M. (2009). From a nation at risk to no child left behind: National education goals and the creation of federal education policy. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  61. Waldfogel, J. (2010). Britain’s war on poverty. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  62. White, L. A. (2012). Must we all be paradigmatic? Social investment policies and liberal welfare states. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 45(3), 657–683.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  63. White, L. A., & Prentice, S. (2015). Understanding policy changes in early childhood education and care in Canadian Provinces. Forthcoming Canadian Public Administration.Google Scholar
  64. White, L. A., Prentice, S., & Perlman, M. (2015). The evidence base for early childhood education and care program investment: What we know, what we don’t know. Evidence and Policy (fast track 12 January 2015).Google Scholar
  65. Zimmerman, J. (2002). Whose America? Culture wars in the public schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Linda A. White
    • 1
  • Adrienne Davidson
    • 1
  • Heather Millar
    • 1
  • Milena Pandy
    • 1
  • Juliana Yi
    • 1
  1. 1.University of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations