CAJ | 학술논문

＂学校选择运动＂是20世纪80年代美国保守主义教育改革的重要组成之一,发端于保守主义者对进步主义者构建的＂单一的最优制度＂的反思,蕴含着保守主义阵营中新保守主义与传统派对公共教育政策文本中＂选择＂符号的不同理念,体现了专业化与市场化两大逻辑对＂选择＂这一政策符号解释权的争夺,并在特许学校的制度实践中达成妥协。由此,创立并强化了一套由保守主义意识形态主导的公共教育体系。
＂학교선택운동＂시20세기80년대미국보수주의교육개혁적중요조성지일,발단우보수주의자대진보주의자구건적＂단일적최우제도＂적반사,온함착보수주의진영중신보수주의여전통파대공공교육정책문본중＂선택＂부호적불동이념,체현료전업화여시장화량대라집대＂선택＂저일정책부호해석권적쟁탈,병재특허학교적제도실천중체성타협。유차,창립병강화료일투유보수주의의식형태주도적공공교육체계。
Focusing on the rebuilding of the public school system that emerged in the late 1980s to the early 1990s, the research addresses the power redistribution in the U.S. school system and its expression in policy texts. The process is actually the production and the reinterpretation of the mainstream symbol of education policy texts -- ＂Choice＂ in the 1980s by neoconservatives and traditionalists. Starting from questioning and exposing the low efficiency crisis of the ＂One Best System,＂ i. e. , the public school system, the neoconservatives and the traditionalists criticized the direct democratic control and hierarchical bureaucracy structure in contemporary public schools and proposed the ＂bottom-up＂ reform and rebuilding scheme, or the realization of the ＂Choice. ＂ They proceeded to concretize the abstract symbol of ＂Choice.＂ The neoconservatives believed that the schools controlled by professional authority had the maximum efficiency and the ＂Choice＂ was to grant authority to teachers, while the traditionalists thought that the schools controlled by the market had the maximum efficiency and the ＂Choice＂ was to grant an authority to market. Duringthe shift from the inexplicable to the explicable, although there emerged conflicts in ideology between the neoconservatives and the traditionalists, they compromised in policy text writing. As a result, ＂charter school＂ became one of the most highly recommended plans for school reform at that time. While conducting the text design for ＂charter schools,＂ both the neoconservatives and the traditionalists tried to incorporate professionalization and marketization. They introduced the marketized competition mechanism and the concept of ＂consumer＂ to the public schools while guaranteeing public funds and actualizing professional autonomy in schools, thus realizing the combination of professionalization, vocationalization and marketization. In this way, they completed the whole production process of the symbol ＂Choicer＂ in their text compromise and got fully prepared for its entry into the field of symbol transmission. As a result of this, the policy texts and their symbol ＂Choice,＂ proposed in the ＂School Choice Movement,＂ were reduced to self-flattering political tools for the two groups of ideology. When the abstract ＂Choice＂ was materialized into specific policy texts, the original idea and concept of ＂Choicer＇ were completely lost and were replaced by the value and the interest that the neoconservatives and the traditionalists desired. And the ＂School Choice Movement＂ thus became an elaborately-designed and inevitable ＂political performance. ＂ This merits our critical reflection.