482Forward and the Coalition for the Future of Detroit Schoolchildren Context of the issue and policy. In March 2015, the coalition released their recommendations, which included, but were not limited to, the creation of the Detroit Education Commission (DEC) to help coordinate education functions in the city of Detroit. The state of Detroit's schooling has long been recognized as underperforming, compared to the schooling offered in the rest of the state of Michigan.
The strength of the Coalition for the Future of Detroit School Students (CFDS) policy community in many respects came from its internal diversity and broad network of groups with a range of policy experiences. I will investigate the policy process undertaken by 482Forward as a member of the Coalition for the Future of Detroit's Students. Angela Reyes, Executive Director of the Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation, serves as a founding member of 482Forward and as a founding member and co-chair of the Coalition for the Future of Detroit's Students.
Education in Detroit has long been recognized as inefficient compared to education in the rest of the state of Michigan. Although the policy community has had a diverse, broad coalition of experts working inside and outside of government and advocating for Detroit Education Commission (DEC) legislation, the policy experts are the Coalition for the Future of Detroit's Schoolchildren (CFDS). According to all members of the Coalition for the Future of Detroit's Schoolchildren (CFDS), in March 2015, The Choice is Ours (TCIO), a timeline and policy recommendation document, was authored by the CFDS, a seminal policy recommendation document delivered to the Governor from.
By analyzing documents and media footage, members of the Coalition for the Future of Detroit Schoolchildren (CFDS) tested several variations of framing specifically for an audience of legislators to appeal to their values.
Policy Stream
A majority of respondents cited diversity and alignment around a shared purpose as the coalition's key strengths. 49 The problem was defined by a diverse group of stakeholders during the formation of the Coalition for the Future of Detroit Schoolchildren (CFDS). Similarly, other respondents mentioned specific members of the coalition who represented the bipartisan nature of the coalition: “John Rakolta, Jr.
50 A few respondents provided more detail about the bipartisan nature of stakeholder groups working as part of the coalition. For example, one respondent said, “the governor had a connection as part of the coalition...the mayor had a connection…” Other participants similarly emphasized the bipartisan representation of the coalition: “We had Goeff Hansen, who at the time was a Den Republican senator ... who was the main person carrying the legislation Despite the majority of the coalition being Democrats, the general perception was that the coalition had diverse representation.
Democrats, but we made sure we had people from both sides of the aisle in the coalition." To what extent was the specific legislation aligned or misaligned with certain values of the legislators who considered the policy (and/or their constituents). The framing used in this introductory remark at the launch of the advertising campaign for.
Based on the perspective of several other respondents, members of the Coalition for the Future of Detroit Schoolchildren (CFDS) "came to the table already having hard lines in the sand that they were unwilling to cross." And as evidenced by the responses, a pro-accountability Detroit Education Commission (DEC) was a hard line for some of the coalition members. Several respondents specifically referred to the political entrepreneurs both locally in the mayor's office and in Lansing at the state capital who worked as part of the coalition. 58 said “the governor had a connection as part of the coalition…the mayor had a connection…” Another respondent similarly emphasized the support the coalition received from a senator.
However, the political nature of the DQZ legislation jeopardized the resolution of the central DPS debt crisis. As can be seen from Table 2, the creation of the Detroit Education Commission was not included in the final legislation. 64 advocacy for the CEC as a solution due to the different ideologies and value systems within this diverse coalition.
Political Stream
Were there changes in political alignments that occurred at/around the time that affected the failure/passage of the policy? The majority of respondents interviewed (fifteen out of seventeen) named pressure groups as a primary reason that the Detroit Commission of Education (DEC) legislation was repealed. Similarly describing the activities that took place on the voting day, another respondent stated.
Regarding these interest groups as political forces behind the blocking of Senate Bill 710 and behind what respondents perceived as a "strong charter lobby," six in seventeen said the Coalition for the Future of Detroit Schoolchildren (CFDS) had the power of the charter sector miscalculated. in Michigan. For example, one respondent said, "We underestimated the capacity of the charter sector in Michigan ... the charter lobby is much more robust." This respondent went on to describe the strategy behind the pro-charter movement that speaks directly to DeVos as the leader in the movement. Were there political events that occurred at/around the time that influenced the failure of the Detroit Education Commission.
A majority of respondents stated that the Detroit Education Commission (DEC) legislation and perceived mayoral control created controversy. The same respondent went on to explain this historical context for the mayor's office: "The mayor's office has been very supportive of the traditional district. This respondent explained that because of the mayor's office's history of being critical of charters, charters and charter authorizers had a hard time trusting in the office with the amount of.
After we got the package from the Senate, we had this investment ready…the authority charged twelve to thirteen administrators with stealing from the school district. This recommendation addresses some of the reasons why the Detroit Commission of Education (DEC) model was rejected by internal parties—lack of autonomy, lack of local control, and the need for self-determination—and eventually dropped by the Coalition for Detroit's Future. . The Detroit Charter Collaborative would be a more feasible, self-governing future version or version 3.0 of the Detroit Education Commission.
The collaborative model takes into account several themes from the interviews: (1) It allows charters to maintain a degree of autonomy; (2) it allows charters to have control over how they coordinate and how best to coordinate; (3) it provides time for diverse membership within the charter sector to build trust; and (4) it ensures that the community voice is present and engaged through community leadership teams. I would like to note here that I am also aware that the GLEP and other pro-charter lobbying organizations also support charter footprint expansion, which is not a priority of the CFDS and has other positions that are not aligned with 482Forward or the Coalition for the Future. of Detroit schoolchildren. The DPS debt crisis caught the attention of Michigan's governor, who had to solve the problem.
The organized interest group pressure of GLEP had a negative impact on the CFDS decision-making agenda and was attributed to being the main barrier to successfully passing the legislation that required the creation of the DEC. In addition to the overwhelming influence of the external pressure groups, the lack of buy-in from the internally fragmented CFDS itself also affected the ultimate fate of the DEC legislation.
Is the definition of the problem recognized as an urgent problem to gain a prominent place on the policy agenda. What political events, political forces or other governmental phenomena influenced the CFDS policy agenda in 2016.
