Collaborative Research: School Segregation and Resegregation: Using Case Studies and Public Polls to Understand Citizen Attitudes

合作研究：学校隔离和重新隔离：利用案例研究和公众民意调查来了解公民的态度

• 批准号: 1527762
• 负责人: Stephen Smith
• 金额: $ 5.7万
• 依托单位: Winthrop University
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2015
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2015-07-15 至 2021-06-30
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1527762&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Collaborative; Research; Segregation; Resegregation; Using; Collaborative; Research; Segregation; Resegregation; Using

Why are some school districts able to sustain school desegregation while others are not? Although social scientists have been active in studying the effects of school racial composition on student achievement, relatively neglected is the inclusion of variation among districts in the social factors that lead to school district segregation itself. Using five case studies and public opinion polls, the research team will study the relationship between citizen characteristics and their attitudes and values supporting (or failing to support) school desegregation. This study increases the value of five strategically chosen case studies including those of Wake County, NC (Raleigh); Davidson County, TN (Nashville); Jefferson County, KY (Louisville); Charlotte-Mecklenburg, NC and Rock Hill, SC by fielding an opinion poll in each location, where the polls contain mostly common questions across sites. These polls will reveal similarities and differences in adult attitudes that track to differences in how long these districts have sustained desegregated schools. Study findings have implications for other school districts beyond the five studied here in terms of formulating policy that will better support socioeconomic mixing of students, which enhances diversity by promoting educational attainment and upward mobility in society, especially for at-risk students. Some school districts sustain desegregation over many years while others do not. Existing research is largely based on case studies. Case studies have limited external validity and are often heterogeneous in approach because researchers frame questions and invoke theory differently. The data obtained from in-depth interviews, participant observation, and document analyses are rarely triangulated with data from theoretically-driven surveys of the school district's adult population. These attitudes and values play an important part in explaining districts' current school assignment policies and inform future policies as well. This study addresses gaps in existing social science literature on desegregation by using a common theoretical perspective and fielding a largely common questionnaire via Interactive Voice Response, supplemented by cell phone samples, across five school districts. The research will produce poll data on a minimum of 5000 adult respondents. Analysis will (1) embed each poll within the existing qualitative data on each case; and (2) use the poll data to analyze both commonalities and differences in values and attitudes across sites.

为什么一些学区能够维持学校的种族隔离，而另一些学区则没有？尽管社会科学家一直积极研究学校种族组成对学生成就的影响，但相对忽略的是在社会因素中包括差异，导致学区隔离本身。使用五个案例研究和公众舆论民意调查，研究小组将研究公民特征与其态度和价值观支持（或不支持）学校种族隔离之间的关系。这项研究增加了五个战略性选择的案例研究的价值，包括北卡罗来纳州韦克县（罗利）的案例研究；田纳西州戴维森县（纳什维尔）；肯塔基州杰斐逊县（路易斯维尔）；北卡罗来纳州夏洛特·梅克伦堡（Charlotte-Mecklenburg）和南卡罗来纳州洛克希尔（Rock Hill），通过在每个地点进行民意调查，在该地点进行民意调查，其中大多数地方都包含跨站点的常见问题。这些民意测验将揭示成人态度的相似性和差异，这些态度跟踪了这些地区持续种族隔离学校多长时间的差异。研究结果对在制定政策方面所研究的五个研究的其他学区具有影响，这些政策将更好地支持学生的社会经济混合，从而通过促进社会中的教育成就和向上的流动性来增强多样性，尤其是对高危学生。一些学区多年来维持种族隔离，而另一些学区则没有。 现有的研究主要基于案例研究。 案例研究的外部有效性有限，并且在方法中通常是异质的，因为研究人员对问题进行了质疑，并以不同的方式引用理论。从深入的访谈，参与者观察和文件分析中获得的数据很少与学区成人人群的理论驱动调查有关的数据进行三角测量。这些态度和价值观在解释地区当前的学校任务政策并为未来政策提供信息方面起着重要作用。这项研究通过使用共同的理论观点来解决有关种族隔离的现有社会科学文献差距，并通过互动语音反应在很大程度上提出了一份很大程度上的调查表，并在五个学区中补充了手机样本。该研究将对至少5000名成人受访者产生民意调查数据。分析将（1）将每个民意调查嵌入每种情况的现有定性数据中； （2）使用民意调查数据分析跨站点的价值和态度的共同点和差异。