Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-7ccbd9845f-4v6tc Total loading time: 0.33 Render date: 2023-01-31T19:41:49.267Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true
  • English
Journal of Public Policy Journal of Public Policy

Article contents

Public information, public learning and public opinion: democratic accountability in education policy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 January 2015

Joshua D. Clinton Open the ORCID record for Joshua D. Clinton[Opens in a new window]  and
Jason A. Grissom
Joshua D. Clinton
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Vanderbilt University, USA E-mail: josh.clinton@vanderbilt.edu
Jason A. Grissom
Affiliation:
Peabody College of Education and Human Development, Vanderbilt University, USA E-mail: jason.grissom@vanderbilt.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Theories of political accountability assume citizens use information about the performance of government to hold public officials accountable, but whether citizens actually use information is difficult to directly examine. We take advantage of the importance of citizen-driven, performance-based accountability for education policy in Tennessee to conduct a survey experiment that identifies the effect of new information, mistaken beliefs and differing considerations on the evaluation of public officials and policy reforms using 1,500 Tennesseans. Despite an emphasis on reporting outcomes for school accountability policies in the state, mistaken beliefs are prevalent and produce overly optimistic assessments of the institutions responsible for statewide education policy. Moreover, individuals update their assessments of these institutions in an unbiased way when provided with objective performance data about overall student performance. Providing additional information about race-related performance differences does not alter this relationship, however. Finally, support for specific policies that are intended to improve student performance is unchanged by either type of performance information; opinions about policy reforms are instead most related to race and existing partisan commitments.

Keywords

accountabilityeducation policypublic opinionsurvey experiment
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Public Policy , Volume 35 , Supplement 3 , December 2015 , pp. 355 - 385
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press, 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achen, C. H. (1992) Social Psychology, Demographic Variables, and Linear Regression: Breaking the Iron Triangle in Voting Research. Political Behavior 14: 195–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Achen, C. H. and Bartels, L. M. (2002) Blind Retrospection: Electoral Responses to Droughts, Flu, and Shark Attacks. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, September 2002.Google Scholar
Achen, C. H. and Bartels, L. M. (2006) It Feels Like We’re Thinking: The Rationalizing Voter and Electoral Democracy.Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia, August 2006.Google Scholar
Ashworth, S. (2012) Electoral Accountability: Recent Theoretical and Empirical Work. Annual Review of Political Science 15: 183–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, L. M. (1996) Uninformed Votes: Information Effects in Presidential Elections. American Journal of Political Science 40: 194–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, L. M. (2002) Beyond the Running Tally: Partisan Bias in Political Perceptions. Political Behavior 24(2): 117–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berelson, B., Lazarsfeld, P. F. and McPhee, W. N. (1954) Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation and Presidential Campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Berkman, M. B. and Plutzer, E. (2005) Ten Thousand Democracies. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Berry, C. R. and Howell, W. G. (2007) Accountability and Local Elections: Rethinking Retrospective Voting. Journal of Politics 69(3): 844–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, S. E. (1999) Do Better Schools Matter? Parental Valuation of Elementary Education. Quarterly Journal of Economics 114(2): 577–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullock, J. G. (2009) Partisan Bias and the Bayesian Ideal in the Study of Public Opinion. Journal of Politics 71(3): 1109–1124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, A., Converse, P., Miller, W. and Stokes, D. (1960) The American Voter. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Carnoy, M. and Loeb, S. (2002) Does External Accountability Affect Student Outcomes? A Cross-State Analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 24(4): 305–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chingos, M. M., Henderson, M. and West, M. R. (2012) Citizen Perceptions of Government Service Quality: Evidence from Public Schools, Washington, DC. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 7(4): 411–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, D. and Druckman, J. N. (2007) Framing Theory. Annual Review of Political Science 10(1): 103–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, D. and Druckman, J. N. (2010) Dynamic Public Opinion: Communication Effects over Time. American Political Science Review 104(4): 663–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, R. A. (1989) Democracy and Its Critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Delli Carpini, M. X. and Scott, K. (1996) What Americans Know about Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Dewey, J. (1916) Democracy and Education. New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dorn, S. (1998) The Political Legacy of School Accountability Systems. Education Policy Analysis Archives 6(1): 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egan, P. J. and Mullin, M. (2012) Turning Personal Experience into Political Attitudes: The Effect of Local Weather on Americans’ Perceptions about Global Warming. Journal of Politics 74(3): 796–809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, R. S. and Stoker, L. (2011) Caught in the Draft: The Effects of Vietnam Draft Lottery Status on Political Attitudes. American Political Science Review 105(2): 221–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Favero, N. and Meier, K. J. (2013) Evaluating Urban Public Schools: Parents, Teachers, and State Assessments. Public Administration Review 73(3): 401–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figlio, D. and Loeb, S. (2011) School Accountability. In Hanushek E. A., Machin S. and Woessmann L. (eds.) Handbooks in Economics, Vol. 3. The Netherlands: North-Holland, 383–421.Google Scholar
Figlio, D. N. and Ladd, H. F. (2008) School Accountability and Student Achievement. In Ladd H. F. and Edward B. F. (eds.), Handbook of Research in Education Finance and Policy. New York and London: Routledge, 166–182.Google Scholar
Figlio, D. N., Maurice, E. L. (2004) What’s in a Grade? School Report Cards and the Housing Market. American Economic Review 94(3): 591–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. (1981) Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Fryer, R. G. Jr. and Levitt, S. D. (2004) Understanding the Black-White Test Score Gap in the First Two Years of School. Review of Economics and Statistics 86(2): 447–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, A., Green, D. (1999) Misperceptions about Perceptual Bias. Annual Review of Political Science 2: 189–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilens, M. (2001) Political Ignorance and Collective Policy Preferences. American Political Science Review 95: 379–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, D., Palmquist, B. and Schickler, E. (2002) Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Guttman, A. (1987) Democratic Education. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Guillermo, C., Truglia, R. P. and Tetax, M. (2011) Biased Perceptions of Income Distribution and Preferences for Redistribution: Evidence from a Survey Experiment. Working Paper of the Centro de Estudios Distributivos Laborales y Sociales [Center for Social, Labor and Distributional Studies] (CEDLAS), National University of La Plata.Google Scholar
Hanushek, E. A. and Raymond, M. E. (2005) Does School Accountability Lead to Improved Student Performance? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 24(2): 297–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healy, A. J., Malhotra, Neil and Mo, C. H. (2010) Irrelevant Events Affect Voters’ Evaluations of Government Performance. Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences 29(107): 12804–12809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, M. B., Howell, W. G. and Peterson, P. E. (2014) Information Fuels Support for School Reform. Education Next 14(2): 27–35.Google Scholar
Hibbing, J. R. and Alford, J. R. (1981) The Electoral Impact of Economic Conditions: Who is Held Responsible? American Journal of Political Science 25(3): 423–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Highton, B. and Kam, C. D. (2011) The Long-Term Dynamics of Partisanship and Issue Orientations. Journal of Politics 73(1): 202–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hochschild, J. L. and Shen, F. X. (2012) Race, Ethnicity, and Education Policy. Oxford Handbook of Racial and Ethnic Politics in America. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hutchings, V. L. (2003) Public Opinion and Democratic Accountability: How Citizens Learn about Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Jacoby, W. G (1988) The Impact of Party Identification on Issue Attitudes. American Journal of Political Science 32(3): 643–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, O. (2011) Performance Measures and Democracy: Information Effects on Citizens in Field and Laboratory Experiments. Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory 21(3): 399–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Key, V.O. (1966) The Responsible Electorate: Rationality in Presidential Voting 1936–1960. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuklinski, J. H., Quirk, P. J., Jerit, J. and Rich, R. F. (2001) The Political Environment and Citizen Competence. American Journal of Political Science 45(2): 410–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ladd, J. M. and Lenz, G. S. (2009) Exploiting a Rare Communication Shift to Document the Persuasive Power of the News Media. American Journal of Political Science 53(2): 394–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenz, G. S. (2009) Learning and Opinion Change, Not Priming: Reconsidering the Priming Hypothesis. American Journal of Political Science 53(4): 821–837.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lodge, M., Steenbergen, M. R. and Brau, S. (1995) The Responsive Voter: Campaign Information and the Dynamics of Candidate Evaluation. American Political Science Review 89(2): 309–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loeb, S. and Strunk, K. O. (2007) Accountability and Local Control: Response to Incentives with and without Authority over Resource Generation and Allocation. Education Finance and Policy 2(1): 10–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKuen, M. (1984) Exposure to Information, Belief Integration, and Individual Responsiveness to Agenda Change. American Political Science Review 78(2): 372–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malhotra, N. and Kuo, A. G. (2008) Attributing Blame: The Public’s Response to Hurricane Katrina. The Journal of Politics 70(1): 120–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, G. B. (1992) The Impact of Personal and National Economic Conditions on Presidential Voting, 1956-1988. American Journal of Political Science 36(3): 829–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGuire, W. J. (1969) The Nature of Attitudes and Attitude Change. In Lindzey G. and Aronson E. (eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 136–314.Google Scholar
Noel, H. (2013) Political Ideologies and Political Parties in America. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popkin, S. L. (1994) The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persusasion in Presidential Campaigns. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Prior, Markus (2007) Post-Broadcast Democracy. NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahn, W. M. (1993) The Role of Partisan Stereotypes in Information Processing about Political Candidates. American Journal of Political Science 37(2): 472–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudolph, T. J. (2003) Who’s Responsible for the Economy? The Formation and Consequences of Responsibility Attributions. American Journal of Political Science 47(4): 698–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, M., Teske, P. and Marschall, M. (2002) Choosing Schools: Consumer Choice and the Quality of American Schools . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sher, A. (2011) Governor Haslam, Tennessee Education Commissioner Defend Teacher Evaluation System. Chattanooga Times Free Press, http://timesfreepress.com/news/2011/sep/29/governor-education-commissioner-defend-teacher/?news (accessed 14 May 2012).Google Scholar
Sides, J. and Citrin, J. (2007) European Opinion About Immigration: The Role of Identities, Interests and Information. British Journal of Political Science 37: 477–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, R. M. (1990) Economic Voting for Governor and U.S. Senator: The Electoral Consequences of Federalism. Journal of Politics 52(1): 29–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stroud, N. J. (2009) Media Use and Political Predispositions: Revisiting the Concept of Selective Exposure. Political Behavior 30(3): 341–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woon, J. (2012) Democratic Accountability and Retrospective Voting: A Laboratory Experiment. American Journal of Political Science 56(4): 913–930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaller, J. R. (1992) The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaller, J. and Feldman, S. (1992) A Simple Theory of the Survey Response: Answering Questions Versus Revealing Preferences. American Journal of Political Science 36: 579–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zechman, M. J. (1979) Dynamic Models of the Voter’s Decision Calculus: Incorporating Retrospective Considerations into Rational Choice Models of Individual Voting Behavior. Public Choice 34(3–4): 297–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Clinton and Grissom supplementary material

Appendix

Download Clinton and Grissom supplementary material(File)
File 45 KB
14
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Public information, public learning and public opinion: democratic accountability in education policy
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Public information, public learning and public opinion: democratic accountability in education policy
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Public information, public learning and public opinion: democratic accountability in education policy
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *