'Keeping up the good fight': The said and unsaid in Flores v. Arizona

Melinda Hollis Thomas, Dinny Risri Aletheiani, David Carlson, Ann Dutton Ewbank

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The authors' purpose in this article is to interrogate the mediated and political discourses that emerged alongside the Flores v. Arizona case. The authors endeavor to offer another voice, framework and approach that may help sustain a continuous, paramount conversation concerning the educational rights of English language learners and the ways in which the public rationalizes appropriate state provisions for such students. Therein, the manuscript operationalizes the rationalities that appear across pro-Flores data (which consists of public opinion rhetoric positioned in support of the plaintiffand therefore in favor of appropriate state support for English language learners). The analysis of this data lays bare the echoes of the discursive regime surrounding the Flores case, a regime which unmasks neo-liberal rationalities for supporting English language learners. For example, the findings indicate that neo-liberal rationalities such as commodification, competition, risk, security, insurance and entrepreneurialism dominate the discursive landscape and eclipse alternative ways of arguing in support of students' rights to equitable and appropriate education, including social justice, pluralism and democracy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)242-261
Number of pages20
JournalPolicy Futures in Education
Volume12
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

rationality
English language
regime
pluralism
social justice
insurance
public opinion
rhetoric
conversation
student
democracy
discourse
education

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education

Cite this

'Keeping up the good fight' : The said and unsaid in Flores v. Arizona. / Thomas, Melinda Hollis; Aletheiani, Dinny Risri; Carlson, David; Ewbank, Ann Dutton.

In: Policy Futures in Education, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2014, p. 242-261.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Thomas, Melinda Hollis ; Aletheiani, Dinny Risri ; Carlson, David ; Ewbank, Ann Dutton. / 'Keeping up the good fight' : The said and unsaid in Flores v. Arizona. In: Policy Futures in Education. 2014 ; Vol. 12, No. 2. pp. 242-261.
@article{9ae8a5a74e254e47986c99f4b7204f15,
title = "'Keeping up the good fight': The said and unsaid in Flores v. Arizona",
abstract = "The authors' purpose in this article is to interrogate the mediated and political discourses that emerged alongside the Flores v. Arizona case. The authors endeavor to offer another voice, framework and approach that may help sustain a continuous, paramount conversation concerning the educational rights of English language learners and the ways in which the public rationalizes appropriate state provisions for such students. Therein, the manuscript operationalizes the rationalities that appear across pro-Flores data (which consists of public opinion rhetoric positioned in support of the plaintiffand therefore in favor of appropriate state support for English language learners). The analysis of this data lays bare the echoes of the discursive regime surrounding the Flores case, a regime which unmasks neo-liberal rationalities for supporting English language learners. For example, the findings indicate that neo-liberal rationalities such as commodification, competition, risk, security, insurance and entrepreneurialism dominate the discursive landscape and eclipse alternative ways of arguing in support of students' rights to equitable and appropriate education, including social justice, pluralism and democracy.",
author = "Thomas, {Melinda Hollis} and Aletheiani, {Dinny Risri} and David Carlson and Ewbank, {Ann Dutton}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.2304/pfie.2014.12.2.242",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "12",
pages = "242--261",
journal = "Policy Futures in Education",
issn = "1478-2103",
publisher = "Symposium Journals Ltd",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - 'Keeping up the good fight'

T2 - The said and unsaid in Flores v. Arizona

AU - Thomas, Melinda Hollis

AU - Aletheiani, Dinny Risri

AU - Carlson, David

AU - Ewbank, Ann Dutton

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - The authors' purpose in this article is to interrogate the mediated and political discourses that emerged alongside the Flores v. Arizona case. The authors endeavor to offer another voice, framework and approach that may help sustain a continuous, paramount conversation concerning the educational rights of English language learners and the ways in which the public rationalizes appropriate state provisions for such students. Therein, the manuscript operationalizes the rationalities that appear across pro-Flores data (which consists of public opinion rhetoric positioned in support of the plaintiffand therefore in favor of appropriate state support for English language learners). The analysis of this data lays bare the echoes of the discursive regime surrounding the Flores case, a regime which unmasks neo-liberal rationalities for supporting English language learners. For example, the findings indicate that neo-liberal rationalities such as commodification, competition, risk, security, insurance and entrepreneurialism dominate the discursive landscape and eclipse alternative ways of arguing in support of students' rights to equitable and appropriate education, including social justice, pluralism and democracy.

AB - The authors' purpose in this article is to interrogate the mediated and political discourses that emerged alongside the Flores v. Arizona case. The authors endeavor to offer another voice, framework and approach that may help sustain a continuous, paramount conversation concerning the educational rights of English language learners and the ways in which the public rationalizes appropriate state provisions for such students. Therein, the manuscript operationalizes the rationalities that appear across pro-Flores data (which consists of public opinion rhetoric positioned in support of the plaintiffand therefore in favor of appropriate state support for English language learners). The analysis of this data lays bare the echoes of the discursive regime surrounding the Flores case, a regime which unmasks neo-liberal rationalities for supporting English language learners. For example, the findings indicate that neo-liberal rationalities such as commodification, competition, risk, security, insurance and entrepreneurialism dominate the discursive landscape and eclipse alternative ways of arguing in support of students' rights to equitable and appropriate education, including social justice, pluralism and democracy.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84901806608&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84901806608&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2304/pfie.2014.12.2.242

DO - 10.2304/pfie.2014.12.2.242

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84901806608

VL - 12

SP - 242

EP - 261

JO - Policy Futures in Education

JF - Policy Futures in Education

SN - 1478-2103

IS - 2

ER -