-
Notes
- Rutgers University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
141 NOTES INTRODUCTION 1. Deshawn is not his real name. I use pseudonyms for all students, teachers, and schools mentioned in this book. 2. On achievement ideology, see Jay MacLeod, Ain’t No Makin’ It: Leveled Aspirations in a Low-Income Neighborhood (Boulder: Westview, 1987); and Hugh Mehan, Lea Hubbard, and Irene Villanueva. “Forming Academic Identities: Accommodation without Assimilation among Involuntary Minorities,” Anthropology and Education Quarterly 25, no. 2 (1994): 91–117. On American dream ideology, see Jennifer L. Hochschild, Facing Up to the American Dream: Race, Class, and the Soul of the Nation (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1995); Jennifer L. Hochschild and Nathan Scovronick, The American Dream and the Public Schools (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003); Heather Beth Johnson, The American Dream and the Power of Wealth: Choosing Schools and Inheriting Inequality in the Land of Opportunity (New York: Routledge, 2006); and Steven Brint and Jerome Karabel, The Diverted Dream: Community Colleges and the Promise of Educational Opportunity in America,1900–1985 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989). 3. For scholarship that shows school cultures’ local meanings, see Gerald Grant, The World We Created at Hamilton High (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1988); Reba Page, “The Uncertain Value of School Knowledge: Biology at Westridge High,” Teachers College Record 100, no. 3 (1999): 554–601; and Julie McLeod and Lyn Yates, Making Modern Lives: Subjectivity, Schooling, and Social Change (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2006). See also Amy Binder and Kate Wood, Becoming Right: How Campuses Shape Young Conservatives (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2012), which demonstrates how school culture shapes students’ ideological discourse and political action. 4. For an introduction to inhabited institutions scholarship, see Tim Hallett, “The Myth Incarnate: Recoupling Processes, Turmoil, and Inhabited Institutions in an Urban Elementary School,” American Sociological Review 75, no. 1 (2010): 52–74; Amy Binder, “For Love and Money: Organizations’ Creative Responses to Multiple Environmental Logics,” Theory and Society 36, no. 6 (2007): 547–72; and Ann Westenholz, Jesper Pedersen , and Frank Dobbin, “Introduction: Institutions in the Making: Identity, Power, and the Emergence of New Organizational Forms,” American Behavioral Scientist 49, no. 7 (2006): 889–96. 5. For work that analyzes how teachers make sense out of their classroom experiences and pedagogical training in ways that shape the institutional functioning of their schools, see Judson G. Everitt, “Teacher Careers and Inhabited Institutions: Sense Making and Arsenals of Teaching Practice in Educational Institutions,” Symbolic Interaction 35, no. 2 (2012): 203–20; and his “Inhabitants Moving In: Prospective Sense 142 NOTES TO PAGES PAGES 8—10 Making and the Reproduction of Inhabited Institutions in Teacher Education,” Symbolic Interaction 36, no. 2 (2013): 177–96. 6. Tim Hallett and Marc Ventresca, “Inhabited Institutions: Social Interactions and Organizational Forms in Gouldner’s Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy,” Theory and Society 35 (2006): 229. 7. Organizational scholars from both traditions have recently engaged one another directly in dialogue on how the two perspectives might be bridged. See the extensive set of paired conversations published in the Journal of Management Inquiry 21, no. 1, which includes Karen Aten, Jennifer Howard-Grenville, and Marc Ventresca; Mary Jo Hatch; Tammar Zilber; Bob Hinings; Maijken Schultz; and Calvin Morill. Inhabited institutionalism in general, and my study in particular, establish the kinds of links that these scholars call for in their dialogue. 8. See Hallett, “The Myth Incarnate”; Tim Hallett, “Between Deference and Distinction : Interaction Ritual through Symbolic Power in an Educational Institution,” Social Psychology Quarterly 70, no. 2 (2007): 148–71; John Meyer and Brian Rowan, “Institutionalized Organization: Formal Structure As Myth and Ceremony,” American Journal of Sociology 83 (1977): 340–63; Charles Bidwell, “Analyzing Schools As Organizations: Long-Term Permanence and Short-Term Exchange,” Sociology of Education, extra issue (2001): 100–14; Everitt, “Teacher Careers and Inhabited Institutions”; Everitt, “Inhabitants Moving In”; Janice Danielle Aurini, “Patterns of Tight and Loose Coupling in a Competitive Marketplace: The Case of Learning Center Franchises,” Sociology of Education 85, no. 4 (2012): 373–87; as well as Heinz-Dieter Meyer and Brian Rowan, eds., The New Institutionalism in Education (Albany: State University of New York, 2006). 9. Hallett, “The Myth Incarnate.” 10. Everitt, “Teacher Careers and Inhabited Institutions.” 11. Mary Blair-Loy, Competing Devotions: Career and Family among Women Executives (Cambridge , Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2003), 5. 12. See William Sewell, Jr., “Theory of Structure: Duality, Agency, and Transformation,” American Journal of Sociology 98, no. 1 (1992): 1–29; and Roger Friedland and John Mohr, “The Cultural Turn in...