Schools have long been involved in political battles with local, state, and federal governments. They have also had disagreements with so-called scribblers (professors who write about schools). Two decades of research on school politics have proven only that school conflict is inevitable and that it has both positive and negative effects on the community. In 1957 Coleman summarized several studies in which disagreements over education caused conflict between school boards and communities. He further hypothesized that conflict over basic political issues (including school-related issues) has the potential to disrupt and fractionalize a community. In 1962 Bailey et al. asserted that there will always be conflict in the schools over the 3 R's: race, religion, and Reds (a slang term for world communism). More recently, Michel and Woodbury (1987) have shown that political tensions in a community emerged because school administrators, local parents, and state officials disagreed about the control of public education. Spring (1988, pp. 93-110) also describes instances in which bitter school politics in a community was caused by local economic issues and political fractionalism. One theory of political conflict in a school district is that it develops in the local environment, taking its shape from the economy, the characteristics of its constituent population, and the political tensions created by different groups who seek to control the schools (Wirt & Kirst, 1989). Wirt and Kirst maintain that all school issues involve political control and are the result of one group or another's attempts to control school policies and practices. They identify seven areas of political control that have the potential to create political conflict between the school and its community, namely, issues of (1) parent control (i.e., parents seek to exert some control over the schools and share that control with administrators); (2) student control (i.e., students seek broader guarantees of their civil rights from school administrators); (3) teacher control (i.e., teachers seek greater control of the schools through collective bargaining); (4) taxpayer control (i.e., taxpayers seek to reduce the fiscal load they pay for public schools); (5) minority control (i.e., racial/ethnic and political minority groups seek solutions to issues related to discrimination in the schools); (6) federal control (i.e., the federal government variously
Read full abstract