Abstract
Parent trigger laws have gained momentum nationally under the premise that they will increase local authority by amplifying parental voice in the decision to turn around “failing” schools. Using Hirschman’s exit, voice, and loyalty framework we create two conceptual models of voice and evaluate the promise of voice in California, home of the only attempts to enact the parent trigger law. We find that parent trigger laws, as presently constructed, provide only tangential voice—marginal voice that is temporary in nature. Policy suggestions are given to enact an infused voice model, embedding parental voice throughout the educational decision making process.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
