Few powerful arguments exist to counter the logic of systemic reform and accountability reform models that have a virtual monopoly in U.S. education today. Jeannie Oakes, Karen Quartz, Steve Ryan, and Martin Lipton offer such an argument, contextualized in the contradictory American traditions of individualism and democracy. The authors see systemic reform as based in individualism and market-based values that perpetuate inequities by creating or reifying differential access to resources. They urge institutional and political practice to support and ultimately favor the democratic strain in American culture civic participation to forge a common, public good. Currently, market models have the upper hand in this struggle.
Markets appeal widely.
Conservatives use accountability as a threat leading to takeover and privatization. Oakes and associates believe that reformers need to take on the tensions in American society directly. The book has several strengths. In addition to providing counterarguments to the dominant reform models, the book benefits from being grounded in a historical and cultural context through the fights of four significant historical figures for democratic cultural ideals. The historical grounding leads the authors to coin the term betterment as an alternative to reform, now overused and virtually meaningless.