Education Reform Journal - Volume 4 - Number 2 - Democratic Proceduralism in Education Reform: No Child Left Behind and Common Core State Standards

Oct 15, 2026

This study frames democratic proceduralism in education reform by deconstructing democracy and civil society through legitimacy, representation, liberty discourse and naturalization, voting, and transactional discourse. A literary review organizes the factors most relevant to education reform, then examines democracy in reforms shaped by market influence. The study analyzes the uptake and critiques two reforms, No Child Left Behind and Common Core State Standards, using a theoretical basis for legitimate democratic proceduralism to evaluate how these procedures operate.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages9

Reading Time23 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Background

Framing Legitimate Democracy

Legitimacy

Representation

Exclusion and Coercion in Policy

Education Reform Journal Volume 4 Number 2 , 2019 e-ISSN: 2602-3997 [http://dx.doi.org/10.22596/erj2019.04.02.26.34](http://dx.doi.org/10.22596/erj2019.04.02.26.34) Framing Democratic Proceduralism in Education Reform: No Child Left Behind and Common Core State Standards Anton Vegel 1 Submitted: July 14, 2019; Accepted: December 28, 2019; Published Online: December 31, 2019 Abstract This study aims to frame democratic proceduralism in education reform by deconstructing elements of democracy and civil society along aspects of legitimacy, representation, the discourse of liberty and naturalization, voting, and transactional discourse. This deconstruction is accomplished by providing a literary review of these factors and organizing aspects that are particularly relevant to education reform. Democracy in education reform is then explored through the relevance of market influence and the uptake of two recent education reforms, No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Common Core State Standards (CCSS) . Using the theoretical background constructed to frame legitimate democratic proceduralism, the uptake of this reform is then explored and critiqued. Overall this study explores the issue of democratic proceduralism in education reform, generates a necessary and robust theoretical background to frame legitimate democratic proceduralism, and finally evaluates how these procedures are utilized in the uptake of education reform. Keywords: Education Policy, Democratic Proceduralism, Civil Society Introduction This paper aims to show the importance and necessity of legitimate democratic practice in education policy. This is shown by giving a background of research on how a robust civil society is contingent on an inclusive citizenship and further why the public sphere must be in balance with the state and market spheres. The democratic process of deliberation is presented as a representational, inclusive, and non-coercive democratic process. The process of deliberation is then used to investigate the uptake of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Common Core State Standards (CCSS) . It is shown that neither policy initiative followed a deliberative process, and the implications that this might hold for future reform are discussed. Background Framing Legitimate Democracy Legitimacy. Legitimate democratic practice with egalitarian goals must consider the voices of civil society to properly represent the needs and desires of the public sphere. This representation is necessary to solve issues through a legitimate process that considers plurality as a means within 1 Kent State University, [ORCID 0000-0003-1961-8954], [avegel@kent.edu](avegel@kent.edu) democratic proceduralism. Somers (2008) argues that the quality of democracy is contingent on socially inclusive citizenship comprising civil society and civil society’s balance in accordance with the state sphere and the market sphere (p. 2) . When civil society or any other sphere holds disproportionate power within democratic proceduralism, other spheres will not be legitimately represented. In such a case the weakest sphere’s needs and desires will be imagined and predicted by the power holder based on presuppositions (not the actual voice of the constituents of the sphere) . However, this disproportionate power holding has been historically maintained. As spheres within this triadic system struggle for power, the public sphere has particularly faced the biggest risk of becoming victim to disproportionate power as it has been historically the most fragile sphere, and the sphere’s contributions are often viewed as elective and not necessarily “right” based (p. 32) . For egalitarian rights to be met, constant regulation within this triadic system is necessary to secure rights for civil society and maintain legitimate democratic proceduralism. Representation. As each sphere needs substantive representation, the quality of the intragroup voices will provide democratic legitimacy

FAQs

What does the study aim to frame in education reform?

It frames democratic proceduralism in education reform by deconstructing elements of democracy and civil society across legitimacy, representation, voting, and transactional discourse.

How does the paper examine democracy in the two education reforms?

It explores democracy through the relevance of market influence and evaluates the uptake of No Child Left Behind and Common Core State Standards, then critiques those implementations.

Why does the paper argue legitimacy depends on civil society voices?

Legitimate democratic practice with egalitarian goals must consider civil society voices to properly represent public needs, and disproportionate power among spheres prevents legitimate representation.

Oct 15, 2026

Upload by CatatanPagi