Using Feminist Critical Policy Analysis in the Realm of Higher Education: The Case of Welfare Reform as Gendered Educational Policy

Journal of Higher Education

Volumn 75, Issue 1, 2004, Pages

  Shaw, Kathleen M ^a  

^a TEMPLE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 1642270842     PISSN: 00221546     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00221546.2004.11778896     Document Type: Review

References (57)

1. Acker, S., & Feuerverger, G. (1997). Enough is never enough: women's work in academe. In C. Marshall (Ed.), Feminist critical policy analysis: A perspective from postsecondary education (pp. 122-140). London: Falmer Press.
2. Adams, N. (1997). Toward a curriculum of resiliency: Gender, race, adolescence and schooling. In C. Marshall (Ed.), Feminist critical policy analysis: A perspective from primary and secondary schooling (pp. 153-164). London: Falmer Press.
3. Anderson, G. L. (1989). Critical ethnography in education: Origins, current status, and directions. Review of Educational Research, 59(3), 249-270.
4. Apple, M. (1994). Texts and contexts: The state and gender in educational policy. Curriculum Inquiry, 24(3), 349-359.
5. Applied Research Center. (2001). Welfare reality. Oakland, CA: author.
6. Bensimon, E., & Marshall, C. (1997). Policy analysis for postsecondary education: Feminist and critical perspectives. In C. Marshall (Ed.), Feminist critical policy analysis: A perspective from postsecondary education (pp. 1-22). London: Falmer Press.
7. Blackmore et al. (1993). What's working for girls? The reception of gender equity policy in two Australian schools. In C. Marshall (Ed.), The new politics of race and gender. London: Falmer Press.
8. Carnevale, A., & Desrochers, D. (1999). Getting down to business: Matching welfare recipients' skills to jobs that train. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
9. Center for Law and Social Policy. (2002). Forty states likely to cut access to postsecondary training under House-passed bill, www.clasp.org/pubs/jobseducation/post-sec_survey_061902.htm.
10. CNN. (2002a). Bush welfare plan promotes marriage, work. www.cnn.com, February 27, 2002.
11. CNN. (2002b). Bush pushes stricter welfare rules, www.cnn.com, June 3, 2002.
12. Cox, K. L., & Spriggs, W. E. (2002). Negative effects of TANF on college enrollment. Washington, DC: National Urban League Institute for Opportunity and Equality.
13. Fine, M. (1991). Framing dropouts: Notes on the politics of an urban public high school. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
14. Friedman, P. (1999). Postsecondary education options for low-income adults. Welfare Information Network Issue Notes v. 3. http://www.welfareinfo.org/postseced2.htm.
15. Gittell, M. (1990). From welfare to independence: The college options. New York: The Ford Foundation.
16. Glazer, J. (1997). Affirmative action and the status of women in the academy. In C. Marshall (Ed.), Feminist critical policy analysis: A perspective from postsecondary education. London: Falmer Press.
17. Glazer, J. (1999). Shattering the myths: Women in academe. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
18. Gordon, L. (1994). Pitied but not entitled: Single mothers and the history of welfare. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
19. Greenberg, M. (2002). Bush's blunder. American Prospect, July 15, 2002.
20. Greenberg, M., Strawn, J., & Plimpton, L.(2002.) State opportunities to provide access to postsecondary education under TANF. Washington, DC: Center for Law and Social Policy.
21. Harding, S. (1986). The science question in feminism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
22. Hernnstein, R. J., & Murray, C. (1994). The bell curve: Intelligence and class structure in American life. New York: The Free Press.
23. Hollingsworth, S. (1997). Feminist praxis as the basis for teacher education: A critical challenge. In C. Marshall (Ed.), Feminist critical policy analysis: A perspective from primary and secondary schooling (pp. 165-182). London: Falmer Press.
24. Jacobs, J., & Winslow, S. (2003). Welfare reform and enrollment in postsecondary education. In the Annals of the American Academy of Behavioral and Political Science, Volume 586. Special issue: Community Colleges: New Environments, New Directions. Kathleen M. Shaw & Jerry A. Jacobs (Eds.).
25. Kahne, J. (1994). Democractic communities, equity and excellence: A Deweyan reframing of educational policy analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 16(3), 233-248.
26. Kittay, E. F. (1998). Dependency, equality and welfare. Feminist Studies, 24(1), 32-43.
27. Lipsky, M. (1983). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
28. Loprest, P. (1999). Families who left welfare: Who are they and how are they doing? Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
29. Luke, C. (1997). Feminist pedagogy theory in higher education: Reflections on power and authority. In C. Marshall (Ed.), Feminist critical policy analysis: A perspective from postsecondary education (pp. 189-211). London: Falmer Press.
30. Luker, K. (1985). Abortion and the politics of motherhood. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
31. Luker, K. (1997). Dubious conceptions: The politics of teenage pregnancy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32. Marshall, C. (1995). Imagining leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31(3), 484-492.
33. Marshall,C. (Ed.). (1997a). Feminist critical policy analysis: A perspective from primary and secondary schooling. London: Falmer Press.
34. Marshall, C. (Ed.). (1997b). Feminist critical policy analysis: A perspective from postsecondary education. London: Falmer Press.
35. Marshall, C. (1999). Researching the margins: Feminist critical policy analysis. Educational Policy, 13, (Jan/March), 59-76.
36. Murray, C. (1980). Losing ground: American social policy, 1950-1980. New York: Basic Books.
37. National Center for Education Statistics. (1997). National postsecondary student aid study, 1995-96 (NPSAS:96): Methodology report. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
38. National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). National postsecondary student aid study, 1999-2090 (NPSAS:2000): Methodology report. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
39. Pillow. W. (1997). Decentering silences/troubling irony: Teen pregnancy's challenge to policy analysis. In C. Marshall (Ed.), Feminist critical policy analysis: A perspective from primary and secondary schooling (pp. 134-152). London: Falmer Press.
40. Piven, F. F., Acker, J., & Hallock, M. (2002). Work, welfare and politics. Portland: University of Oregon Press.
41. Sassen, S., & Appiah, K. A. (1999). Globalization and its discontents: Essays on the new mobility of people and money. New York: New Press.
42. Sherman, A. (1998). Welfare to what? Early findings on family hardship and well-being. Washington, DC: Children's Defense Fund & National Coalition for the Homeless.
43. Singh, P. (1997). From software design to classroom practice: An Australian case study of the gendered production, distribution and acquisition of computing knowledge. In C. Marshall (Ed.), Feminist critical policy analysis: A perspective from primary and secondary schooling (pp. 109-33). London: Falmer Press.
44. Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. (1999). Academic capitalism: politics, policies and the entrepreneurial university. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
45. Seguino, S., & Butler, S. (1998). Struggling to make ends meet in the Maine economy: A study of former and current AFDC/TANF recipients. Joint Project of the Women's Development Institute and the Maine Center for Economic Policy.
46. Spalter-Roth, R., & Hartmann, H. (1991). Increasing working mothers' earnings. Washington, DC: Institute for Women's Policy Research.
47. Stagner, M., Kortenkamp, K., Reardon-Anderson, I. (2002). Work, income and well-being among long-term welfare recipients. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute. Assessing the New Federalism Discussion Paper No. 02-10.
48. Stromquist, N. (1997). Gender policies in American education: Reflections on federal legislation and action. In C. Marshall, (Ed.), Feminist critical policy analysis: A perspective from primary and secondary schooling (pp. 54-72). London: Falmer Press.
49. Urban Institute. (2002). Long-term welfare recipients are more likely to face barriers to work than other welfare recipients. Washington, DC: author.
50. U.S. General Accounting Office. (1999). Welfare reform: Information on former recipients' status (GAO/HEHS-99-48). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
51. Weaver, R. K. (2000). Ending welfare as we know it. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute Press.
52. Weil, A., & Finegold, K. (Eds.). (2002). Welfare reform: The next act. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
53. Weis, L. (1988). High school girls in a de-industrializing economy. In L. Weis (Ed.), Class, race and gender in American education. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
54. Weis, L. (1995). Gender and the reports: The case of the missing piece. In R. Ginsberg & D. Plank (Eds.), Commissions, reports, reforms, and educational policy. Westport, CT: Praeger.
55. Weiss, C. H. (1980). Social science research and decision making. New York: Columbia University Press.
56. Weiss, C. H. (1992). Organizations for policy analysis: Helping government think. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
57. Yates, L. (1997). Gender, ethnicity and the inclusive curriculum: An episode in the policy framing of Australian education. In C. Marshall (Ed.), Feminist critical policy analysis: A perspective from primary and secondary schooling (pp. 43-53). London: Falmer Press.