“Sometimes giving up is the strong thing:” How women charter school teachers remain resilient in an educational marketplace

$50=,9:0;@6-#,55,::,,56?=033,$50=,9:0;@6-#,55,::,,56?=033,

#!#,55,::,,!,:,(9*/(5+9,(;0=,#!#,55,::,,!,:,(9*/(5+9,(;0=,

?*/(5.,?*/(5.,

6*;69(30::,9;(;065: 9(+<(;,"*/663



B"64,;04,:.0=05.<70:;/,:;965.;/05.C6>>64,5*/(9;,9B"64,;04,:.0=05.<70:;/,:;965.;/05.C6>>64,5*/(9;,9

:*/663;,(*/,9:9,4(059,:030,5;05(5,+<*(;065(34(92,;73(*,:*/663;,(*/,9:9,4(059,:030,5;05(5,+<*(;065(34(92,;73(*,

9,;*/,5662

$50=,9:0;@6-#,55,::,,56?=033,

.*662=63:<;2,+<

6336>;/0:(5+(++0;065(3>692:(;/;;7:;9(*,;,55,::,,,+<<;2'.9(++0::

 (9;6-;/,"6*0(3(5+ /036:67/0*(36<5+(;065:6-+<*(;06564465:

!,*644,5+,+0;(;065!,*644,5+,+0;(;065

6629,;*/,5B"64,;04,:.0=05.<70:;/,:;965.;/05.C6>>64,5*/(9;,9:*/663;,(*/,9:

9,4(059,:030,5;05(5,+<*(;065(34(92,;73(*, /+0::$50=,9:0;@6-#,55,::,,

/;;7:;9(*,;,55,::,,,+<<;2'.9(++0::

#/0:0::,9;(;0650:)96<./;;6@6<-69-9,,(5+67,5(**,::)@;/,9(+<(;,"*/663(;#!#,55,::,,

!,:,(9*/(5+9,(;0=,?*/(5.,;/(:),,5(**,7;,+-6905*3<:065056*;69(30::,9;(;065:)@(5(<;/690A,+

(+4050:;9(;696-#!#,55,::,,!,:,(9*/(5+9,(;0=,?*/(5.,69469,05-694(;06573,(:,*65;(*;

;9(*,<;2,+<

#6;/,9(+<(;,6<5*03

(4:<)40;;05./,9,>0;/(+0::,9;(;065>90;;,5)@9,;*/,5662,5;0;3,+B"64,;04,:.0=05.

<70:;/,:;965.;/05.C6>>64,5*/(9;,9:*/663;,(*/,9:9,4(059,:030,5;05(5,+<*(;065(3

4(92,;73(*,/(=,,?(405,+;/,D5(3,3,*;9650**67@6-;/0:+0::,9;(;065-69-694(5+*65;,5;

(5+9,*644,5+;/(;0;),(**,7;,+057(9;0(3-<3D334,5;6-;/,9,8<09,4,5;:-69;/,+,.9,,6-

6*;696- /036:67/@>0;/(4(16905+<*(;065

:/3,,5+,9:65(169 96-,::69

&,/(=,9,(+;/0:+0::,9;(;065(5+9,*644,5+0;:(**,7;(5*,

:/3,,5+,9:65,0((05!(1(">(4@9(5*,:(97,9

**,7;,+-69;/,6<5*03

0?0,#/647:65

%0*, 96=6:;(5+,(56-;/,9(+<(;,"*/663

90.05(3:0.5(;<9,:(9,65D3,>0;/6E*0(3:;<+,5;9,*69+:

“Sometimes giving up is the strong thing:” How women charter school

teachers remain resilient in an educational marketplace

A Dissertation Presented for the

Doctor of Philosophy

Degree

The University of Tennessee, Knoxville

Gretchen N. Cook

May 2024

iii

DEDICATION

This dissertation is dedicated to all women teachers. Especially, those who entered the

field with hopes to make serious change. I see you, and know your struggles. I also dedicate this

to all the students who have been willing to be members of my classroom, challenge my

thinking, and push me to be a better teacher. I love you all and knowing that you are the soon to

be leaders of this world gives me hope!

Most importantly, this is dedicated to my two beloved dog sons—Dylan and Otis. While

these two are not physically on this earth to witness this accomplishment, they sat by my side for

three years as I worked towards this milestone. Otis, you reminded me to stay sane and that

caring for you was more important than any type of work. Dylan, you changed my life. You

taught me patience, empathy, and how to accept love. Dylan, you healed me from pain.

I also dedicate this to my cat children—Maisy and Sanders. These two little sneaks have

added paragraphs of nonsense to my dissertation as they run across my keyboard each time I

refill my coffee. I also dedicate this to my dog son Truman. Truman and I went through teething,

potty training, and his “teen” years as I worked on this behemoth. Truman you are a constant

reminder that I can do anything, and to be confident in myself.

I also dedicate this to the girl I once was. I was lost. Re-storied my life to survive. To

young Gretchen, thank you for bearing the burden so I could become the woman I am today.

While some folks might argue what is chronicled here is fiction, it is my non-fiction and my

reality. As a reader, it is your responsibility to interpret it and choose what meaning you shall

take from it.

“There is fiction in the space between

The lines on your page of memories

Write it down but it doesn’t mean

You’re not just telling stories

There is fiction in the space between

You and reality

You will do and say anything

To make your everyday life seem less mundane.”

-Tracy Chapman

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I owe my devotion and love of academia to Dr. Nicholas and Ms. Baron. I experienced a

pivotal turning point in my educational journey in Dr. Nicholas’s eleventh-grade philosophy and

Ms. Baron’s advanced placement English classes. Prior to this point, I was a good writer and

student but did not particularly enjoy or value school. The teachers of these classes made

learning real-world applicable, differentiated assignments, infused me with a thirst for

knowledge, and made visible to me how the knowledge I was gaining would benefit my life. To

this day, I remember everything I learned in those classes and try to model my own professional

practices on those teachers. These teachers gave me an incredible gift—a passion for learning—

and in my naïve teens I could not fully comprehend this privilege. This “gift” inspired a desire

to pass this on to others.

I would be remiss in not thanking my powerful and compassionate committee members.

Thank you to Dr. Anderson for giving me the first opportunity to produce and publish scholarly

writing. You literally held me by the hand throughout the publication process. Thank you to Dr.

Harper for advancing my academic writing, and continuously pushing me to improve through

feedback. Thank you to Dr. Swamy for introducing me to Wacquant and changing my life with

Bourdieu and Practice Theory. Most of all, Dr. Cain I would not have the experience, writing

ability, and interview experience that I exit UTK with, had it not been for you taking me under

your wing and providing a very inexperienced student with a wealth of opportunities. Also, thank

you for always being willing to chat about Mothman. I also wish to thanks Dr. Barbara Thayer-

Bacon, who without, I would not have found my place here at UTK, and I thank her for always

being there to put my obsessive thoughts at ease.

To the dedicated friends and former students who helped me bring the ethnodrama to life,

thank you. I am forever grateful to life you brought to this research and the Saturday you

sacrificed for me. Thank you to Caleb Cho, Cross Fuller, Jessica Summers, and Amelia Zahn.

To my parents, thank you for making school a priority. I did not appreciate it at the time

but this is where I have found my place.

To my wonderful husband, Chris, thank you for calming me down when I was stressed

out about due dates five months down the road. Thank you for moving across the state to support

my dream, and carrying our financial burden. Most of all, thank you for sending me funny

ChatGPT stories when I needed them the most, and being the best partner and animal dad I could

have ever dreamed of for 29 years.

vii

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this three manuscript dissertation is to explore the habits and enduring

patterns created by neoliberal structures that dictate how women teachers should behave within

the culture of a charter school and uncover how participants resist and describe their own

resiliency within the charter school institution. Specifically, this work is grounded in the

assumption that teacher success in the labor force is inhibited by institutional rules that are

ultimately harmful, and cause teachers to leave the field of teaching (Boe et al., 1997; Olsen &

Anderson, 2007; Peske et al., 2001; Standeven, 2022; Wenk & Rosenfled, 1992). To critique the

culture of charter schools, and to interrogate systemic inequities I will explain how Practice

Theory can add insight to the education process, and how agents have the possibility to change

their habitus and resist (Bourdieu, 1977). The research questions that will guide this dissertation

include the following: How can documentary narrative analysis be used to allow a researcher,

with insider knowledge, to give voice to the stories of participants, in order to examine the

neoliberal structures, inherent in charter schools, that create a habitus?; How did I use agentive

action, as a woman teacher, to remake the social structure of the charter school institution?; Do

women teachers resist the hidden rules of the charter school institution? If so, how?; and How do

women who work as charter school teachers describe the techniques they have developed to in

order to remain working as teachers?

This application will add nuance to the current research landscape, but on a broader level

it introduces a new approach to considering educational policies through the bodies and fields of

women teachers. This approach has the potential to provide insights into how women charter

school teachers might maintain resilience in the field, and highlight the ways in which teachers

who have become disillusioned with the field can make sense of their role within the charter

viii

school field which could lead to retention in the field, and recreation and disruption of ways of

policy embodiment.

Keywords: autoethnography, Practice Theory, charter school, ethnodrama, narrative

 
 
ix 
   
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
CHAPTER I .................................................................................................................................. 1 
Theoretical Framework .......................................................................................................... 17 
Research Questions ................................................................................................................. 26 
Manuscript Overviews............................................................................................................ 29 
Manuscript 1........................................................................................................................ 30 
Manuscript 2........................................................................................................................ 36 
Manuscript 3........................................................................................................................ 40 
Positionality ............................................................................................................................. 47 
References .................................................................................................................................... 53 
CHAPTER II ............................................................................................................................... 73 
Abstract .................................................................................................................................... 74 
Review of Literature ............................................................................................................... 77 
Theoretical Framework .......................................................................................................... 83 
The Study: The Educational Labor of Women Charter School Teachers ........................ 90 
Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 91 
Findings .................................................................................................................................... 97 
Discussion................................................................................................................................. 99 
References .................................................................................................................................. 102 
CHAPTER III ........................................................................................................................... 112 
Abstract .................................................................................................................................. 113 
Review of Literature ............................................................................................................. 115 
Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................................ 121 
Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 127 
Findings .................................................................................................................................. 131 
Discussion............................................................................................................................... 143 
References .................................................................................................................................. 151 
CHAPTER IV............................................................................................................................ 159 
Abstract .................................................................................................................................. 160 
Review of Literature ............................................................................................................. 161 
Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................................ 165 

Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 168

Findings .................................................................................................................................. 178

Discussion............................................................................................................................... 186

References .................................................................................................................................. 193

CHAPTER V ............................................................................................................................. 203

References .................................................................................................................................. 211

APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................... 213

Appendix A ............................................................................................................................ 213

Appendix B ............................................................................................................................ 215

Appendix C ............................................................................................................................ 225

VITA........................................................................................................................................... 226

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Ever since the landmark introduction of the 1983 report “A Nation at Risk

,” politicians

and the public have viewed the United States education system as failing. To remedy this, U.S.

education has been targeted by neoliberal education reform efforts (Hunt & Staton, 1996).

Neoliberal or neoliberalism is a political approach that favors free-market capitalism,

privatization, deregulation, and reduction in government spending (Spring, 2015). The education

sector is introduced to neoliberalism through applying an economic theory, or marketizing, to

curricular reform and schooling (Sturges, 2015). Schools are destabilized by such reforms

(Sturges, 2015) and hegemonized

, in that educators cannot separate their actions from

institutions and the neoliberal ontological commitments that dominate the education sector

(Apple, 2012). These efforts aim to privatize public education and create competition between

the private and public sector, while claiming to promote excellence, efficiency, and

accountability (Spring, 2015). Examples of destabilizing, privatizing reforms include school

choice, voucher programs, and charter schools (Hursh & Martina, 2016). Ultimately, critics

argue that neoliberalism fails to achieve its goals of efficiency and excellence because markets

never work as intended and are never neutral (Hursh & Martina, 2016).

The birth of charter schools represents a great neoliberal impact on the education field.

Charter schools did not emerge as a U.S. phenomenon until the mid-2000’s (Noguera & Syeed,

2020). To early charter advocates, educators could establish new schools that would disrupt and

This report from the United States Commission on Excellence in Education is considered a turning point in

education. It implied that the American education system was failing, and was the spark for local and national

education reforms (Spring, 2015).

Gramsci (1971) introduced the concept of hegemony. The foundation for Gramsci’s theory begins with the idea

that parties have been where leaders emerge, and parties serve as an arm of the “state.” Even so, every party is

representative of a social group and they function by balancing and executing their interests onto other groups. With

these parties working in service to the head of the state they help give consent to state action, but there is more

power in consent than in exertion on the part of the leader. However, cultural concerns are often disguised under

political concerns. In simple terms, hegemony is control exerted by the dominant group and won through ideological

consent.

promote innovation, and create competition in the education (Nathan, 1997). There were high

hopes for charter schools to be laboratories for innovation that would develop and share new

educational practices that would move the field of education forward at a rate correlating with

changes occurring in the business and industrial fields (Welsh, 2006). Supporters of charter

schools claim these institutions undermine the monopoly of public school districts and better

serve marginalized families and communities (Chubb & Moe, 1990), which falls under the basic

assumption of neoliberalism that privileges the private sector over the public.

Educators are also destabilized, and become disposed with the field by the institutional

trauma inflicted by neoliberal school reforms (Standeven, 2022). Legislators put measures, such

as school choice or No Child Left Behind, in place to control and surveil teachers. These

measures work against teachers because they serve to control and surveil them. Teachers are

negatively impacted by such surveillance, and this may cause some teachers to leave the

profession (Standeven 2022; Sloan 2007). Teachers are de-skilled through accountability

measures, and are viewed as mere technicians. Of course not all accountability measures are

harmful, teacher practice and student performance is quantified through these efforts (Spring,

2015). However, some advocates acknowledge that these accountability measures ensure that

teachers are delivering a standard curriculum to all students, but this can have negative results in

added pressures for teachers, who fear they are losing control over their own curriculum and

personal autonomy (Hubbard & Kulkami, 2009; Sloan, 2007). Ultimately, teachers ask less of

their students to avoid student resistance and the act of following these measures leads to a

narrow proficiency-based curriculum (Sloan, 2007).

To set the foundation for my work I will chronicle the impact of neoliberalism on

education, provide contextualization for charter schools, illustrate the gendered experience of

teaching in the U.S., and address how Practice Theory (Bourdieu, 1977) can provide a tool to

analyze how charter schools alter educational work and embody structures of labor discipline. I

will complete a three manuscript dissertation, and what follows provides a basis for this work.

Across this research, I will explore the habits and enduring patterns created by school institutions

that dictate how teachers, particularly women teachers, should behave within the culture of a

charter school and uncover how women teachers describe their own resiliency within the charter

school institution. My aim is not to solve a problem but to critique the culture of charter schools,

interrogate systemic inequities, and utilize Practice theory to uncover how agents have the

possibility to change their habitus and resist (Bourdieu, 1977)—all in service to retain teachers in

the field.

The Impact of Neoliberalism

Tenets of neoliberalism or the neoliberal state include individual property rights, the rule

of law, and free markets and free trade in order guarantee individual freedoms (Harvey, 2005).

Researchers have noted that neoliberalism includes the naturalization of the temporary (Sturges,

2015), a weak state (Apple, 1993), and a constant cycle of attempting to save and revamp the

system (Aalbers, 2013). Additionally, the idea of neoliberalism is associated with fiscal austerity,

deregulation, and reduction in government spending.

It has been criticized for posing a threat to democracy, workers’ rights, self-

determination, and giving too much power to corporations (Stedman Jones, 2012). Neoliberalism

is not to be confused with liberalism, in the political sense. An invisible hand is extended upon

the free market by guiding all forms of social action through neoliberalism, under the premise

that it promotes efficiency, but it is guided by control over politics of the body, standards, values,

and conduct (Apple, 1993). Public infrastructures are viewed to breed dependency and

bureaucracy, and competition offers a solution to inspire creativity and efficiency (Wilson,

2018). In theory, the construct of neoliberalism supposes that through competition, individuals,

the government, and companies will desire innovation and create a better social world, where the

very best people and ideas emerge (Wilson, 2018).

Hursh and Martina (2016) further clarified neoliberalism by calling it a dominant world

view that favors market-based decisions and individual competition. However, they argued that

neoliberalism fails to achieve these goals because markets never work as intended and are never

neutral (Hursh & Martina, 2016). At a social and community level, neoliberalism acts in direct

opposition to the common good (Hursh & Martina, 2016). In other words, the good or welfare of

the community is replaced by the welfare of the individual. Consequently, society embraces the

idea that decision making based on markets is superior to making decisions based upon

individual community needs (Block & Somers, 2014). Similarly, Wilson (2018) viewed

neoliberalism as a set of social, cultural, and political and economic forces that places

competition at the center of the social world. The ideological project of neoliberalism masks its

actual intentions. In reality, education is not deregulated but re-regulated (Aalbers, 2012).

Neoliberalism in Education

Policy makers introduce neoliberalism to the education sector by economizing education,

which means school outcomes are now judged in economic terms (Spring, 2015). Broadly, the

introduction of corporate structures to education permits corporate influence over school

policies, quantitative measures to judge school effectiveness, curriculum based on workplace

skills, and shaping behaviors in schools to meet the needs of a free market (Spring, 2015). At the

micro level, the introduction of neoliberalism in America’s schools creates a primarily economic

function, where students are not valued for their cognitive abilities but, rather, their ability to be

future workers, rewarded by the economic system (Tyack, 1976). Fine and Fox (2013) claimed

that neoliberalism diminished investments in the schools of low income communities, and, on a

more traumatic level, threatened schools by navigating public resources away from youth and

toward the criminalization of communities of color and poverty. The economization of education

impacts teaching practice, as now the aims of teachers should be to teach skills for students to be

future contributors to the workforce (Spring, 2015).

Changes in educational policy have not benefitted students and have caused harm.

Hursch and Martina (2016) argued that private actors like Bill Gates have greater influence over

education than the U.S. Secretary of Education. Through his funding, the Common Core

standards have been adopted in over 40 states, and he has influence over politicians, despite

possessing no formal background in education, nor expertise in global initiatives (Hursh, 2011).

Multi-national corporations like Pearson now develop most standardized tests in the U.S.,

thereby having influence over curriculum and student learning (Hursh & Martina, 2016). This

testing data is misused to promote corporate reformers and charter schools by putting

competition structures in place (Hursh & Martina, 2016).

“Consumers” use quality measures, established through testing, to select the best school

(Apple, 1993). Members of marginalized communities are disempowered by this process,

because they already to not possess a lot of “consumer” power. Apple (1993) warned that these

same quality measures for consumers, to select the best school, will create a system where

children are ranked. By legislators, policy makers, education systems, and families granting

legitimacy to market-oriented approaches, in education, it creates a situation where those who

deem what is appropriate in education actually mark and rank people, thereby turning the school

institution into a determinant of class (Apple, 1993). This leads to competition and national

testing that quantifies school outcomes, in order for families or consumers to choose schools

based on quality, and grants free market forces full operation (Apple, 1993). Inevitably, people

grant legitimacy to free market practices and this leads to an exacerbation of existing class and

race divisions.

This type of social segregation could depower students, and Apple (1993) identified this

as an act of hegemony. Testing data directly impacts students in another way, as it is in the

interest of reformers to prove increase in student learning by manipulating standardized test

passing rates (Hursh & Martina, 2016). Reformers utilize low testing scores among urban

students as justification for the establishment of more charter schools and school choice, and

they use this data to argue the ineffectiveness of teachers (Hursh & Martina, 2016). Students are

punished rather than rewarded by accountability reform, as these reforms undervalue diversity

(including learning, racial, and socioeconomic) (Graham & Jahnukainen, 2011). Reformers,

enmeshed in a culture of accountability reform, consider learner diversity a threat to standardized

performance indicators (Liasidou & Symeou, 2018). This is of great consequence for students

who do not conform to the standard, and they are viewed as not integrable into a neoliberal

society. Black and LatinX students are mostly pathologized as low-performers (Waitoller, 2020).

The education climate is negatively impacted by neoliberalism through competition,

exacerbated inequities, and the de-professionalization of education. The introduction of charter

schools further worsens inequities and bolsters neoliberal ideology. However, the most harmful

effect of neoliberalism is on student learning and teacher quality and retention. The most obvious

impact to student learning is the introduction of standardized tests, but in serving a competitive

structure these do not produce gains in student learning and data is manipulated to blame

teachers for ineffectiveness (Hursh & Martina, 2016). No longer are teachers crafting curriculum

tailored to meet the needs of individual students, but they must follow standardized curriculum

where learning is quantified. Through neoliberalism, an education system that values the

quantifying of student knowledge rather than providing care and developing a holistic learner has

been established. If a student is deemed unfit by test scores or cannot learn with a given

curriculum, they are pathologized and this impacts students of color the most (Golann et al.,

2019). Social inequities are merely reproduced through neoliberalism, rather than using

education to overcome them.

Through neoliberal reform, teacher quality is measured through quantitative data in the

form of test scores and evaluations in an effort to make teaching more professional. Gotz (1990)

warned against this and argued that professionalization of teaching is a cover for the

reproduction of capitalism. How teachers think and act has been transformed by neoliberal

education reform, due to increased accountability measures (Lipman, 2011b). In the U.S. teacher

quality is determined by performance on teacher certification exams, possession of advanced

degrees, and test scores (Boyd et al., 2005; Feng, 2014; Imazeki, 2005). Still, there is little

correlation between these measures of teacher quality and student learning outcomes (Betts et al.,

2003). Advocates for the neoliberal education reform movement believe that teacher quality will

improve through more regulations, and more stringent certification and licensing measures

(Angrist & Guryan, 2007). Despite more measures of quality, Berger and Toma (1994) found

that states with stricter teacher quality measures had students with lower SAT scores. However, I

adopt bell hooks’s conception of teacher quality. Quality educators know their students, know

their families, their economic status, their community, and how they are treated. They make

learning joyful and their classroom a place of pleasure. They also challenge students to think

outside their own values and beliefs. Quality teachers create a place where students can reinvent

themselves through knowledge (hooks, 1994).

Neoliberalism and Teacher Retention

No longer are schools a place of collaboration between teachers and students where they

make sense of the world, but are now places where teachers must focus on teaching to a test and

standardized curriculum (Hursh & Martina, 2016). A patriarchal tradition of authority relations

in education is replicated through reform quality measures (Apple, 1993). The school is

organized around a principal beholden to standards of the neoliberal state. With this structure,

teachers lose control over their own work (Apple, 1993). The trend in rationalizing curricula,

with created/prescribed curriculum, mostly impacts teachers. Apple (1993) addressed the state by

noting that the day-to-day interests of teachers contradict the interests of the state. Just because

the state wants to enact more efficient ways to organize and measure teaching, does not

necessarily mean that teachers will act upon these ways. The concept of intensification sheds

further light on this argument. The work privileges of educational workers and their sociability is

eroded through intensification (Apple, 1993). Intensification introduces new, technical skills that

a worker must adopt to keep up with the field, but results in less time to maintain one’s craft.

Intensification can reduce the quality of services (Apple, 1993). The use of pre-packaged

curriculum is growing in the U.S. (Sturges, 2015), and as a result teachers are just getting the

prescribed objectives completed rather than going above the norm and they do not have enough

time to be creative. Acceptance of intensification will generate different kinds of resistance, in

the form of quality of teaching (Apple, 1993).

Just because some neoliberal reform efforts look good on paper, it does not mean they are

effective (Sturges, 2015). Often neoliberal measures in education are manipulated to displace

blame for unemployment and the breakdown of values from the state or government to

ineffective teachers (Apple, 1993). If we examine neoliberal policy as a social practice, elements

of power emerge (Levinson et al., 2009), and these social processes serve as a way to change

what it means to be a teacher (Lipman, 2011b). Eventually educators who enter the field wanting

to provide quality education to students, embody neoliberal policy. Actors, who did not create

policy, participate and give consent to policy via actions that inform the societal norms of the

school (Spillane et al., 2002). Policy embodiment is iterative and impacts individual sense-

making.

Those that resist policy embodiment, leave the field of education. Currently, teachers

leave the profession at high rates nationally; 44% of teachers leave the field of education within

their first five years of teaching (Ingersoll et al., 2018). Not only does this have real

consequences for students, who are then exposed to a constant, new set of inexperienced

teachers, but the profession as a whole becomes largely de-professionalized (Darling-Hammond

et al., 2005). Bendixen et al. (2022) suggested that teacher perceptions of leadership, reform

policy, and safety in the school can impact teacher retention, both positively and negatively.

Charter Schools

The birth of charter schools is a significant example of neoliberal impacts on education

(Waitoller, 2020; Fabricant & Fine, 2012; Giroux, 2012). Although the future of charter schools

is vulnerable with politicians beginning to shift away from advocating for them (Berkshire,

2021), charter schools remain a topic in the education sphere, especially in Southern urban cities

rife with failing public school districts, gentrification, fiscal instability, reform, and racial

inequalities (Buras, 2015; Gabor, 2013). According to neoliberal ideology, before education can

be marketized, a range of alternatives must be established, and charter schools serve this purpose

(Lipman, 2011b). An added benefit for neoliberal and charter school advocates, individual

school choice is advantageous in that it shifts blame away from the institution or reform, to the

individual who has acted autonomously to select a school for their student (Hursh & Martina,

2016).

Reform-oriented individuals or organizations run charter schools, and these schools are

publicly funded but operated by private entities (Lipman, 2011b). These schools still function as

public schools and are beholden to follow federal laws to serve students with disabilities (Mac,

2022). In the 1980’s charter schools were seen as a means to create an education alternative in

poor communities of color, but this original conception was appropriated by philanthropic and

corporate entities (Fabricant & Fine, 2012). Explicitly, charter leaders established charter schools

to give voice to groups that have been marginalized or silenced (i.e. people of color or low

socioeconomic status) (Nathan, 1997), and advocates argue that the act of shopping for schools

empowers marginalized families (Mac, 2022). While charter schools introduce competition and

school choice into the educational marketplace, they also follow neoliberal ontologies of

competition and meritocracy with their enrollment of students with disabilities, while not being

able to provide adequate services and having high suspension rates (Mac, 2022), thereby creating

inequitable conditions for students. Charter schools play into tenets of neoliberalism by pushing

out unwanted students by withholding services and implementing severe disciplinary practices

(Collins, 2014). Therefore, the best rise to the top and this facilitates competition amongst

students. In short, competition is emphasized and not student learning or satisfaction (Waitoller,

2020).

Charter schools and school choice measures create competition structures that directly

impact urban families of color. These families often encounter poor public school choices in

their neighborhoods and are forced to seek out charter schools (Collins, 2014). The practices of

neoliberal school reform described, demand an education marketplace where schools act as

businesses competing for customers (i.e. students). Charter schools do so by promoting their

competitive advantage over public schools (Mac, 2022). Even with charter schools, this structure

forces students in under-resourced areas to compete for scarce resources, and this still leaves a

gap. A charter school might foresee a competitive advantage but the reality is they cannot afford

to actually provide service to all in the competitive education market (Mac, 2022).

School choice and charter schools also create re-segregation. Diamond and Gomez

(2004) examined how middle-class Black families and white families viewed school choice as

positive, as it promoted social inclusion, but working-class Black families developed a more

critical view of their neighborhood schools. Through competition, only a small portion of high-

performing public schools receive funding and this maintains the capital of white families in

gentrifying neighborhoods and schools (Lipman 2011a, 2011b).

Historically, charter schools have marketed themselves to families of color and justified

harsh disciplinary protocols, “no excuses” policies, and white-washed practices that may counter

a student’s home culture as a support to student academics (Golann et al., 2019; Johnson et al.,

2001). Because the charter school model is privatized, there is little room for community and

parent voice, and these schools, primarily serving students of color, hire white teachers or silence

the voices of teachers of color (Riley & Moore Mensah, 2022). Those few charters established

by Black individuals are more likely to close due to state-imposed standards (Kingsbury et al.,

2022). While scholars argue that opportunities in education must be redistributed, so those who

have previously been denied, have access, this does not occur in reality. Charter schools have

fewer access to resources and supports for students, and competition between schools results in

few to little gains in education quality (Waitoller & Kozleski, 2013).

Those who work in charter schools are impacted. Charter school teachers, particularly

women, exit high-poverty, high-minority schools not because of the students they teach but

because of a lack of support from the charter school, job dissatisfaction, better paying career

opportunities, and lack of control over decision making (Allensworth et al., 2009; Boyd et al.

2011; Buckley et al., 2004; Gulosino et al, 2019; Ingersoll, 2001; Kelsey, 2006). Teachers

remain in charter schools that provide administrative and collegial support, mentoring, and

professional development (Ingersoll, 2001; Kirby et al., 1999). Newly hired charter school

teachers are more likely to leave the teaching profession instead of transferring to another school

(Gulosino et al., 2019).

The Experience of Women in Teaching

Prior to the 1850’s, teaching in the U.S. was a vocation held primarily by men, but the

cultural and social changes prevalent in the nineteenth century brought women into the teaching

field and feminized teaching (Blount, 1999; Hoffman, 1981). By feminized, I mean an

overrepresentation of women in the field and the movement toward socially ascribed gender

norms (Blount, 1999). The industrial era ushered in labor shifts and the common school. With

this shift, men took jobs in more prestigious forms of economic productivity and women began

to take jobs in the common schools (Goldstein 2014; Griffin, 1997). As formal schooling gained

traction, the governess naturally transitioned to the role of teacher (Clifford, 2014). Although

these women were unprepared and unsupported for the discipline of urban schools and were

underpaid, the education industry welcomed women (Goldstein 2014; Griffin, 1997). A major

motivation for their admittance into the field was their willingness to accept less pay than men

(Tyack & Hansot, 1990), and the idea that women were the most desirable teachers because

formal education should be modeled upon the mother’s nurturing and instructive activities

(Clifford, 2014). Since then, the prominence of women as teachers remains, as 76% of public

school teachers in the U.S. are women (Walker, 2016).

Education in the nineteenth century focused on the delivery of rewards and punishment

and not the relationship between teacher and student (Clifford, 2014; Rousmaniere, 1994). At the

time reformers thought that to create a more humanized school, punishment needed to be more

gentle and not include physical force, in other words teachers were responsible for modifying

student behavior. Not only were women teachers responsible for this, but they were expected to

model self-discipline by following expectations from administration (Rousmaniere, 1994). These

teachers were expected to teach overcrowded classrooms, complete clerical work, manage

discipline and do so without complaint (Clifford, 2014; Rousmaniere, 1994). However, the

working conditions in urban schools in the 1920’s provided challenges for teachers to live up to

this expectation. Teachers experienced large class sizes, teaching in portables, and a lack of

resources. Students struggled transitioning from their communities into a classroom, and it was

challenging for teachers to impose middle-class values and teach academics, while students were

struggling to adjust to the culture shift (Rousmaniere, 1994). The chaos in schools at the time

was attributed to a teaching deficit, and not the class sizes, diversity of students, or working

conditions, despite this teachers were not provided with supports to address classroom

management (Rousmaniere, 1994).

In the current education climate, Pivovarova and Powers (2022) found that teacher

attrition is 54% higher in charter schools when compared to public schools. The gender make-up

of charter schools also mirrors that of public schools, according to the U.S. Department of

Education 2020 data 76.5% of charter school teachers are women (Will, 2020). Some scholars

argue that teacher attrition in charter schools is due to the charter school organization’s inability

to meet the needs of their teachers and lack of investment in human capital (Harris, 2007; Stuit &

Smith, 2012), and to lack of experience as many charter school teacher enter the field through

alternative licensure programs (Boyd et al., 2011; Fry, 2009).

In general, women teachers (charter or public) lament the lack of autonomy over their

lesson plans, and report having their lesson plans monitored by administrators. When they

deviate from these plans, they are reprimanded (Spencer, 1986). Women believe they have no

influence in school decisions, and report that they are not asked for input and do not feel

respected (Griffin, 1997; Noguera & Syeed, 2020; Valli & Buese, 2007).

Women teachers perceive that male administrators have too much control over their lives,

both at work and home. Work time is no longer confined to school spaces but is subjective, and

is a form of social time. Snyder (2016) defined social time as the rhythms humans create as they

interact in social institutions. Since work time now extends to projects outside the confines of the

space of the charter school, this poses constraints for teachers who now have work invade

multiple social spaces or fields, like the home. This explicitly impacts women teachers, who

report that the intense workload of charter schools causes them to leave because they feel like

they cannot start their own families (Olsen & Anderson, 2007). In this new labor market, work

time is conflated with social time as the lines become further blurred between work and home

life (Snyder, 2016), and the only way to meet the high-stakes expectations of urban public and

charter schools is sacrificing personal time (Griffin, 1997; Olsen & Anderson, 2007; Singer,

2020; Torres, 2014). Women teachers also report feeling isolated and perceive the establishment

of cliques based on administrator favoritism (Griffin, 1997), and bullying (Kezar, 2011).

In a study of four women teachers at a charter school in the Midwest, Singer (2020)

found these women met to discuss workplace hostility and issues of equity in hopes to challenge

the school’s policies. Ultimately, the opposition they faced from administrators caused them to

be disaffected from the school (Singer, 2020). These women were concerned about the high

work load, the hostile interactions with school leadership, and racial disparities in discipline at

the school (Singer, 2020). The women took their concerns to administration but were faced with

false promises and a non-inclusive culture. All four women chronicled that they worked late into

the night, had no work life balance, and felt judged when they did not conform to a culture of

workaholism (Singer, 2020). The school performatively advocated for self-care for teachers, but

one teacher felt shamed for taking time for herself and recalled a story of crying in the bath after

a full day of work. In another story, the women recalled how the school made the choice to

renovate a new building to maintain prestige, despite the women voicing that it seemed unwise

financially since the school was understaffed and under-resourced (Singer, 2020). The women

lamented that the school culture was reflective of that of the school’s CEO and principal—one of

white, middle and upper class ideals (Singer, 2020). This led to a culture of white, upper class

competition and messaged that a successful teacher would be a hyper competitive, white woman

(Singer, 2020).

Gender is directly tied to teacher attrition, with women 1.3 times more likely to leave

teaching than men (Borman & Dowling, 2008). While, many women teachers enter the urban

and charter school fields wishing to make teaching a lifelong career, they end up leaving the field

altogether due to policy, high work demands that detract from their personal life, burnout, and a

feeling of stagnation (Boe et al., 1997; Olsen & Anderson, 2007; Peske et al., 2001; Wenk &

Rosenfled, 1992). Society expects women teachers to meet high-stakes accountability demands

while maintaining a subordinate role within the teaching field (Lightfoot, 1978), and women

report that the intense workload of these schools cause them to leave because they feel like they

cannot start their own families (Olsen & Anderson, 2007).

Further complicating matters, many teachers enter the charter school field through

alternative licensure programs, and they are more likely to leave the field (Boyd et al., 2011). In

25 states, charter school teachers are not required to be certified and a large population of these

teachers have no teacher certification (Education Commission of the States, 2018).

Compounding this issue is Teach for America (TFA). TFA is a private-sector teacher

training/leadership organization that recruits, trains, and places its corps members (CMs) in low-

income urban and rural schools for two years (Teach for America, 2020). In 2018, TFA sent 40%

of its CMs to teach in charter schools (Waldman, 2019), and as of 2015 over 74% of CMs were

women (Del Ciello, 2016). This exacerbates the already high charter turnover rates, as TFA does

not envision teaching as a long-term career; rather, teaching is one stop on the path to a more

meaningful and/or lucrative career at higher levels of school administration/leadership, charter

school management, education policy, etc. (e.g., Anderson et al., 2022; Brewer et al., 2016;

Cersonsky, 2013; Jacobsen & Linkow, 2014; Trujillo et al., 2017).

Theoretical Framework

Analyzing Bourdieu’s Practice Theory (1977). Bourdieu

argued that culture is not the

product of free will or underlying principles, but social actors (humans with agency) construct

culture from dispositions structured by previous events. With this in mind, Bourdieu’s theory

Bourdieu was part of the poststructuralist movement. He began from a structuralist stance but his work moved

beyond this by challenging traditional notions of symbolic power (Robson & Sanders, 2009).

involves three major concepts-- habitus, field, and capital (Bourdieu, 1977). They converge in

practice.

Bourdieu conceived of capital as a toolkit, including cultural, social, and economic

capital (1977). For the aims of this work, I will not focus on economic capital because I am

interested in exploring the social and cultural rules that guide the ways of being for women

teachers within the field of the charter school, therefore I will only define social and cultural

capital. Of note, Bourdieu believed that all forms of capital incorporate economic capital, and

social and cultural capital are ultimately convertible to economic (Bourdieu, 1986). Social capital

references the quality and amount of resources within an individual’s network, and depending on

the characteristics of the network, social capital can give access to economic or cultural capital

(Bourdieu, 1984). Cultural capital is made up of social and cultural competencies, or knowledge,

of a particular field. It is bound to time and location, so context is important when applying

cultural and capital theories to an educational issue (Tichavakunda, 2019). In order to engage

with said context, Bourdieu turned to the concept of field.

The field is comprised of complex relationships that have specific forms of cultural and

social capital, and Bourdieu linked this to social worlds, with their own implicit rules. A field

can be any social world, including classrooms, charter schools, etc. One’s cultural and social

capital also depends on the field. Both Bourdieu and Wacquant (1992) noted that capital does not

exist without relation to a field. Finally, the field links to habitus in that one’s behavior in the

field is shaped by the socialized norms reproduced in their habitus. I further explain the

interaction of these concepts in Figure 1.

Figure 1

Practice Theory Visualization

Note. Adapted from “Project-as-Practice: Applying Bourdieu’s Theory of Practice on Project

Managers,” by T. Kalogeropoulos et al., 2020, Project Management Journal, 51(6), 599-616.

The habitus is created through a social, rather than individual, process. This leads to

enduring patterns or habits, where society becomes deposited into agents to manifest lasting

dispositions or structured capacities that train social actors to believe and perform in determinant

ways that guide their actions (Wacquant, 2005). Of particular note to my research, the habitus is

created by the neoliberal structures of charter schools.

Within the structure of the habitus, individuals may not have identical experiences but

they share relational variants. The habitus can give birth to the integration of common

experiences, but personal and individual differences arise. Ultimately, for Bourdieu (1977), the

habitus served as a structure to unite these experiences into some position such as class. He

contended that the hallmark of practice is when something is performed through the body, in a

socially constructed space, to embody the structures of the world. As such, agents must abandon

notions of simple freedom or determinism. The practices of such habitus are self-regulated by the

agents, and these practices are developed to cope with unforeseen circumstances. Bourdieu

(1977) reasoned that agents are unconscious of these practices since the habitus is hidden under

its subjective nature. Habitus creates a commonsense world, and this theory provides the

framework to analyze how actors perform within the structures of habitus. This process is

bidirectional, as agents are not only influenced by the structure but influence the structure as well

(Bourdieu, 1977). Within the habitus, agents are constantly remaking their practices, conditions,

and the self (Skeggs, 2004).

Bourdieu (1977) challenged stagnant views of culture and institutional structure by

noting that culture constantly changes (Holland et al., 1998). While an institution, like the charter

school, might create behavioral expectations, these moments of constraint, caused by

expectations are not fully actualized until an entire interaction is complete. In simpler terms, no

matter how much ritual is involved, an agent still has control and agency in how they choose to

meet or resist expectations (Bourdieu, 1977). Covert forms of agency are introduced by

Bourdieu’s (1977) concepts of the rules of the game and playing the game. The “rules of the

game” are the cultural and social expectations created by the habitus, but agents might

consciously play by the rules in order to participate or survive in a system of power

(Smitherman, 2000). In doing so, playing the game becomes a performance of power and a

critical perpetuation of the process of inculcation (Bourdieu, 1977). At times, there might be

more to gain by obeying a rule or practice than resisting it, and it is in the best interest of the

agent to obey the rule. As long as playing the game is not the normalized practice, and the agent

is conscious of their agency, then they retain power (Bourdieu, 1977).

Under the new labor conditions created by neoliberal reform and charter schools, teachers

can have agency, power, and serve their own interests by engaging in serious games as they

pursue educational projects under these new conditions (Ortner, 2006). Ortner provided more

insight to the milieu involved in Practice Theory as subjects produce their world through practice

(Ortner, 2006). Following this theory, the structures of the habitus direct players how to perform

and act, however do not displace agency. Ortner (2006) focused on the agentive action that

remakes social structure, and brings into focus more complex forms of social relations like

power and subjectivity. To Ortner, the agent is always enmeshed within relations of power and

inequality, which she felt was ignored by Bourdieu (1977).

In serious games, social life is seen as something that is always played, according to

cultural goals, and focuses on complex forms of social relations like relations of power (Ortner,

2006). Ortner (2006) problematized agentive action and recognized its limits. She argued that

agents are always involved in social relations and can never act outside the relations with which

they are enmeshed. With this idea, all agents or social actors have the potential for agency, but,

while they are engaged with others in the act of serious games, it is impossible to imagine them

as completely free (Ortner, 2006). In serious games, power trumps acts of social solidarity

(Ortner, 2006). While agency is universal, it is also culturally and historically constructed, so at

different points in time it could look different.

Further complicating the education world, much like neoliberalism, the concept of

flexible capitalism refers to the economic transformations that hit the U.S. between the 1970’s

and 1990’s. Flexible capitalism introduced new forms of production, exchange, and human

resources to change the structure of the workplace (Snyder, 2016). A tenet of flexible capitalism

is that it focuses on uprooting the traditional chain of production, much like how the introduction

of charter schools uprooted traditional systems of education with the introduction of competition

and educational marketplace. This phenomenon is the work of the elites and policymakers in

order to innovate and promote the abstract over the concrete (Snyder, 2016). New ways of

production that can adapt and re-tool to an ever dynamic economy are promoted, with the intent

to push out the old way of doing things (Boltanksi & Chiapello, 2005; Cappelli, 1995).

I can tie flexible capitalism’s concept of core employees to Bourdieu’s concepts of social

and cultural capital as well as habitus. Employers invest a lot of capital into their core

employees—permitting them perceived decision-making power. However, core employees are

presented with this illusion of autonomy so they will align with the company’s mission and work

towards it. This creates a habitus where overworking is the norm and a sign of dedication. In the

charter school, the same culture is created where the expectation is workaholism and teachers

feel judged when they do not conform to this standard (Singer, 2020). Adding to this burden, the

flexibility of actual work stuff has changed. In a world where a work project can be completed

virtually or on a computer screen, this means workers can take work with them wherever they go

and that becomes the expectation (Snyder, 2016). Work time is no longer confined to space but is

subjective, and is a form of social time. Snyder (2016) defined social time as the rhythms

humans create as they interact in social institutions. This could be compared to the habitus or

ways of being that are created within the space of a charter school. However, since work time

now extends to projects outside the confines of the space of the charter school, teachers are

constrained as they now have work invade multiple social spaces or fields.

While other scholars have taken up Bourdieu’s Theory of Practice, there is a gap in the

literature surrounding Practice Theory and techniques teachers develop to remain in the field and

the educational process, and, undoubtedly, a hole when it comes to the charter school setting. In

educational research, the majority of literature centers around Bourdieu’s theory of cultural

reproduction and the role of habitus in socially constructed realities. Practice Theory can help

teachers become aware of how the field and habitus create social norms, and that they have

agentive action to change and disrupt these norms from within. Other education scholars have

dismissed Bourdieu’s theory of cultural reproduction, found the concept of habitus incoherent,

and have argued that it is unhelpful in educational research (Beckman et al., 2018; Sullivan,

2002). Sullivan (2002) contended that the concept of habitus is incoherent and too nebulous and

ambiguous. What this ignores is the possibility for habitus to be a valuable tool for teachers in

making institutional changes from within, and the agency that they possess to do so. Like

Sullivan, Beckman, et al. (2018) viewed Practice Theory as a challenge for educational

researchers, as its methodology is difficult to comprehend. These authors saw value in using

Practice Theory as a new approach to investigating technology practice across students’ lives.

However, this research only incorporated Practice Theory as it relates to students. It has been

proposed that a discourse between Practice Theory and Critical Race Theory

(CRT) is needed to

study inequities in education, as CRT has never fully engaged with Practice Theory

(Tichavakunda, 2019). Tichavakunda (2019) found value in Practice Theory’s use in educational

research in that it can inform CRT, and open up possibilities for discourse between other theories

and CRT to better understand racialized realities of education.

Just as Practice Theory is valuable to understand the realities of students, it is also for

teachers. As noted, Bourdieu contended that the hallmark of practice is when something is

performed through the body, and my research will illustrate how teaching and institutional

practices become embodied practice. More time is spent in practice than actually in the social

world, and I propose that my research might illustrate the burden of spending more time with the

field of institutional politics rather than in the field of the classroom.

Through Practice Theory, how individual sense-making is developed is deconstructed,

and this can be utilized as counternarrative. Broadly, this application introduces a new approach

to considering educational policies through the bodies and fields of women teachers. Snyder

(2016) argued that good work and a good life might be difficult to reckon in an era of flexible

capitalism. With this in mind, I argue that resisting the charter school field might not result in

overt acts of violent opposition, still may contribute to institutional projects, but agentive

resistance can be minimal and transformative if teachers analyze all projects for which they are a

part (Ortner, 2006). Teachers may be creative with their resistance by having a trusted mentor,

choosing to independently alter their curriculum, or simply stopping work at the end of their paid

Critical Race Theory in education places both race and racism in historical and modern contexts through

interdisciplinary methods. This theory challenges the discourse on race in education by analyzing how education

theory, policy, and practice have been used to marginalize certain ethnic and racial groups (Teranishi, 2010).

work hours. These covert ways disrupt oppressive power structures and creating possibilities for

new structures.

My research will represent an important counternarrative to the literature, which

characteristically focuses on policy, culture, or students; not the individuals who teach in

schools. For women, academic work is emotional labor (Cummins & Huber, 2022; Selberg,

2020). Furthermore, our understanding of the realities of surviving in a charter school, controlled

by neoliberal policies that impact teacher experience and practice, is expanded. Scholars have

suggested that charter schools fail to take advantage of their autonomy when it comes to practice,

and there is a trend toward standardization of practice rather than innovation in charter schools

(Hubbard & Kulkami, 2009). This indicates that Practice Theory is well-suited to analyze

outlying incidents of autonomy in the field. Analyzing Practice Theory has the potential to offer

insights into how women charter school teachers could uphold legitimacy and resilience in the

field. It can also spotlight how teachers comprehend their roles within the charter school domain,

potentially fostering retention, as well as reconfiguring and challenging the embodiment of

policies and the structures of educational work.

While few scholars take up Practice Theory (1977) with arts-based (ABR), narrative, or

autoethnographic methods, there is a natural connection to Bourdieu and arts-based

methodologies. Some researchers in the arts utilize Practice Theory to explain how practice is

embodied (e.g. Banks, 2012; Rimmer, 2017), and I argue that methods like autoethnography,

narrative, and ABR viscerally capture the experiences and practice of actors (Bochner & Ellis,

2016). Some researchers have used Practice Theory in conjunction with ethnographic methods

(e.g. Ghaffari et al., 2019; Thomas & Epp, 2019; Svensson, 2007), and these studies noted that

ethnography is a method well-suited to work with Practice Theory to capture the culture and

social ways of being in a particular field (Hackley, 2019).

ABR used in tandem with Practice Theory relies on the embodied exploration of social

practices, and performance methods embody and bring to life the practice that is the

phenomenon of research (Barone & Eisner, 2012; Leavy, 2015). Narrative and autoethnographic

methods also reveal cultural meaning and values and how these are negotiated in the field of

study. Ultimately, these methods, when paired with Practice Theory, can offer a creative way to

examine the complexities of social life and how practices are shaped by culture and power (Hui,

2015).

Research Questions

The purpose of my dissertation is to explore the habits and enduring patterns created by

neoliberal structures that dictate how women teachers should behave within the culture of a

charter school and uncover how my participants resist and describe their own resiliency within

the charter school institution. Specifically, my work is grounded in the assumption that teacher

success in the labor force is inhibited by institutional rules that are ultimately harmful, and cause

teachers to leave the field of teaching (Boe et al., 1997; Olsen & Anderson, 2007; Peske et al.,

2001; Standeven, 2022; Wenk & Rosenfled, 1992). To critique the culture of charter schools, and

to interrogate systemic inequities I will explain how Practice Theory can add insight to the

education process, and how agents have the possibility to change their habitus and resist

(Bourdieu, 1977). I want to uncover what hidden rules are deposited into teachers and how

teachers might resist these rules and alter their habitus. The research questions that will guide

this dissertation include the following:

1. How can documentary narrative analysis be used to allow a researcher, with

insider knowledge, to give voice to the stories of participants, in order to examine

the neoliberal structures, inherent in charter schools, that create a habitus?

2. How did I use agentive action, as a woman teacher, to remake the social structure

of the charter school institution?

3. Do women teachers resist the hidden rules of the charter school institution? If so,

how?

4. How do women who work as charter school teachers describe the techniques they

have developed to in order to remain working as teachers?

This application will add nuance to the current research landscape, but on a broader level it

introduces a new approach to considering educational policies through the bodies and fields of

women teachers. This approach has the potential to provide insights into how women charter

school teachers might maintain resilience in the field, and highlight the ways in which teachers

who have become disillusioned with the field can make sense of their role within the charter

school field which could lead to retention in the field, and recreation and disruption of ways of

policy embodiment.

Philosophical Commitments

My epistemological and ontological beliefs are influenced by the concept that power

pervades every level of social relationships (Barker & Jane, 2016). My work utilizes both critical

and post-structuralist paradigmatic orientations (Harris, 2001). I adopt these orientations because

many critical post-structuralists acknowledge that policy does impact gender and racial groups

(e.g., Bohrer, 2019; Foley, 2019; Harris, 2001), and recognize neoliberalism as manifestation of

power (Apple, 2012; Kincheloe & Mclaren, 2002). Particularly, critical researchers view

research as a vehicle for empowerment and social change (Kincheloe & Mclaren, 2011), and

Kincheloe and Mclaren (2011) pose a call to action that researchers must resist neoliberalism. I

do seek to empower women charter school teachers, but I know that I will not be bias free

because this work is inspired by my own teaching experiences.

I take the ontological stance that there is no objective truth and any supposed truth

contains contradictions (Sipe & Constable, 1996). Epistemologically, I believe that reality is

subjective and constructed on the basis of issues of power, and it is, ultimately, unknowable. I do

not abandon critique, and ultimately know that discourse, particularly my discourse, is

inseparable from myself as a researcher. My discourse is vulnerable and contingent upon time

and place. Adopting this orientation is most appropriate for this research as I seek to construct

meaning through reflexivity toward my experiences and those of my participants, and I wish to

make meaning from these experiences to decipher how participants viewed occurrences

(Richardson & Adams St. Pierre, 2005). I also accept that conversations with participants are

incomplete and partial (Jackson & Mazzei, 2011).

Language is systematized by structuralism, but my focus is not on the structure but upon

what is left over, which can birth to readers garnering their own interpretations from participant

stories (Lather, 1992). As my methodology involves interviewing, my belief that the charter

school institution is harmful will be ever-present. Having, myself, been oppressed by power in

the charter system, it is impossible to mask my values as a researcher, and they are always

present in my work. I am not neutral. As a former woman charter school teacher, I attempted to

recreate my social world and resist the culture of the charter school institution, both consciously

and unconsciously. I also left the charter school field because I felt it harmed my development as

an educator, so this certainly is a bias I possess. I accept that my experiences and feelings toward

the charter school institution will influence my research. Personally, I feel some guilt leaving the

charter school teaching field, because of the students I left behind. I entered the field thinking

this would be my lifetime craft, and when I faced challenges I left. Maybe to alleviate my own

guilt, I pursue this work to change conditions so that women teachers do not have to feel

beholden by institutional structures, can perform their craft, and will remain in the field.

In my research, my aim is not to diagnose or prescribe a problem because I do not believe

in an absolute truth or solution. Rather, I will provide a conduit to share the experiences of those

who have worked in the charter school culture. My hope is to share stories that others might find

connection to or help them reflexively explore their own realities within the charter school

institution.

My critical leanings recognize that the values of the researcher are present, I know this

will influence the research. Most importantly, this paradigm examines systems of power and I

will explore the realities of these teachers within the cultural context of the charter school. Like

Vennes (2022), Brunner (2003), and Buras (2011), I strongly believe that charter school

institutions are patriarchal in nature and their very existence and rhetoric, used within these

spaces, is rooted in power and domination.

Manuscript Overviews

I will complete a three manuscript dissertation (see Appendix A for individual manuscript

details), and what follows outlines my methodological considerations for each manuscript.

Details of each manuscript are followed by my positionality. Collectively, I use general

qualitative research methods because I am seeking to explore a topic of inquiry through

conducting social research (Saldaña, 2011), and I believe in multiple truths (Sipe & Constable,

1996). I use interviewing and journaling as the data collection methods across all manuscripts,

both because of their appropriateness and they are the data collection methods with which I have

the most experience. Interviewing is well-suited to answer my research questions, as I want to

understand how the participants themselves describe their resiliency and experiences. In the past

I have conducted over 22 interviews with marginalized populations, and have been able to reflect

on my practice and learn from previous interviews to improve my interview style. I value

listening and connection with participants (Roulston, 2010), and interviewing captures a true

picture of the experiences of my participants and the culture of the charter school setting.

Manuscript 1

The purpose of this study is to explore a methodological and analysis technique that

allows a researcher, with insider knowledge of their participants, to share their stories to

empower (Kincheloe & Mclaren, 2011). I ground this work in the theoretical frameworks of

Bourdieu’s Practice Theory (1977) and Ortner’s (2006) serious games. In my own research

experience, I have been forced to follow traditional ways of research where I must follow a

specific format, impose my interpretations upon data to conduct an analysis, and have been told

that narrative or “newer” methodologies (e.g. autoethnography, poetry, or ethnodrama) are not

rigorous. Because I believe that there are no objective truths, I do not deem that researchers need

to provide a discussion of an analysis (Cook & Bublitz, 2023). I present the usefulness of using a

documentary narrative analysis, formed from narrative methods, in order to attempt to inspire

change and empower my participants. Furthermore, this approach expands understanding of the

realities of surviving in a charter school, controlled by neoliberal policies and tenets of

capitalism that impact teacher experience and practice (Boe et al., 1997; Olsen & Anderson,

2007; Peske et al., 2001; Wenk & Rosenfled, 1992). The research question that guides this study

is as follows: How can documentary narrative analysis be used to allow a researcher, with insider

knowledge, to give voice to the stories of participants, in order to examine the neoliberal

structures, inherent in charter schools, that create a habitus?

I begin with a review of literature that highlights neoliberal reform efforts that alter

educational work (Olsen & Anderson, 2007), the structure of charter schools, and flexible

capitalism and its impact on core employees and work time (Snyder, 2016). Next, a presentation

of the theoretical framework of Practice Theory and serious games provide the lens and

foundation by which to understand the habitus and enduring patterns created by school

institutions that dictate how women teachers should behave within the culture of a charter

school. I follow this with a description of my documentary narrative methodology and analysis,

and conclude that this is a valuable tool when conducting research with participants with whom I

share knowledge. I conclude with my findings and a discussion rooted in how researchers may

use this methodology to subvert the tradition set forth by the academy and to consider how

educational policies manifest in the bodies and fields of women teachers.

Methodology

I used narrative methodologies and my own background in documentary film to build a

framework I label documentary narrative (Cook & Bublitz, 2023). I did so to help explore how

my participants might describe the impact of neoliberal structures on their work habitus.

I interviewed two women charter school teachers from the Southeast United States. I

label my sampling as critical opportunistic (Miles et al., 2020). I taught in the school site and

worked with the teachers that were interviewed. I had easy access to these teachers and my prior

knowledge of their experiences fits well with my purpose. Both participants have taught English

language arts for at least three years in the charter school setting. My participants both worked in

a 6-12 Title I charter school. I interviewed each participant twice using an interview guide where

I asked them about the rules that govern their practice, how they remained resilient in the

teaching field, and how they were supported by administrators. In addition to interviewing, I

engaged in deep hanging out, when the researcher spends time with participants in informal

settings to lessen the role of being an outsider (Geertz, 1998; Woodward, 2008). To do so, I

immersed myself in my participants’ culture, observed participants in informal settings outside

of the charter school, attended after-school happy hours, and engaged in short phone and text

message exchanges. I recognize the limitations of the selection in that my familiarity with the

site and participants brings with it multiple assumptions and a priori knowledge to the work. My

tacit and external cultural knowledge (Spradley, 1980) of the school site precludes the ability to

note unfamiliar patterns of behavior. It is important for ethnographers to recognize how personal

experience is important in the process and that it can often be misused. Personal experience

should not distract from the ethnographic story, but enhance (Lassiter, 2005). In order to gain

better context of the participants’ culture, I collected charter school employee handbooks, notes

and texts written to me by the participants, photographs, and engaged in reflexive journaling.

Through these methods, I was able to gain further contextualization of the experiences of my

participants.

Documentary Narrative.

In narrative, the sharing of stories by participants conveys knowledge that is embodied

within individuals and the cultures of which they are a part (Clandinin et al., 2013). Further,

narrative methods seek to provide deep descriptions of participant experiences as well as the

meaning that an individual gained from their experiences (Wang & Geale, 2015).

Documentary narratives are written or visual adaptations of research data in film form

(Cook & Bublitz, 2023). Performance challenges researchers to review their data and select the

best medium (e.g. film, documentary, television, ethnodrama) to tell their story (Saldaña, 2003).

However, the process for creating documentary narratives from data is significantly different

than creating narratives, as what works in narrative structure might not work in documentary

structure. This documentary narrative structure worked for my study because it did not demand

significant adaptation, where I might have been tempted to overly color the story with my own

experiences. This structure, like a documentary film, presents my participants’ words directly

without edits or distortion (Menning & Murris, 2023). There are technical writing elements

(Eisner, 2001) necessary for critical artistic analysis. Such elements include story lining, shot

descriptions, character development, scripting, and visual aesthetics.

In research, the use of narrative, specifically documentary narrative, permits the

researcher to embrace uncertainty and ethically share participant stories with the mask of

characters, camera shots, and visual descriptions (Given, 2008; Saldaña, 2003). These analyses

see truth as subjective and are vehicles to present complex stories with wider social ramifications

that could inspire change for the readers or audience. While data does not speak for itself, this is

queered in documentary narratives, as I must ponder who the story belongs to, and characters

may speak for themselves (Saldaña, 2003). Therefore, while research reflexivity is crucial it is

unnecessary in the final product because the story belongs to the participant (Saldaña, 2003).

Traditional forms of qualitative analysis, like coding or thematic analysis, might force data into

themes and categories inevitably influenced by the researcher, to help avoid this documentary

narrative captures and presents the data as it occurred in its original form. While technical

elements are added, they serve to enhance the story and add cinematic effect (Saldaña, 2003).

This method also recognizes that there can never be a finite representation of the data (Denzin,

2013), and what is presented is just a snapshot in time. It is my intention with this new

framework to reveal how researchers, with insider status and external cultural knowledge

(Spradley, 1980), can approach working with a population with whom they are familiar.

Analysis

I first read through all of my interview transcripts without the aid of additional literature,

and set aside my research question. I drew upon MacRae’s (2021) work and approached my

analysis as watching the data to see rather than just reading. My focus was to look at it

holistically, and entangle myself in it to allow the words of my participants to transform my

thinking and inspire thought (Koro-Ljungberg, 2015; MacLure, 2013; MacLure et al., 2010).

This also put me in a position where I no longer held control of the data, rather the transcripts

guided my thinking and analysis. The data was not inert but alive (Menning & Murris, 2023). In

my second cycle of entanglement with the data, I read for inflection and emotional emphasis

from my participants, of which I was not previously attuned. In my third engagement, I imagined

how that might be presented in documentary form. Finally, I analyzed the data to reimagine the

whole of my data as an individual with whom I was conducting a documentary film interview.

With this new orientation, I was forced to listen to participant words, reflect on my own

responses and connections to their stories, and reconceptualize what my participants were trying

to tell me in order to craft a collective character to represent both Emma and Kameron (Saldaña,

2003). Paradigmatically, this approach to analysis aligns with my beliefs because I value

combining multiple ways of knowing in research (Kincheloe & Mclaren, 2002).

After my entanglements with the data, I began to craft the documentary “character” of

Maisy, in order to further bring life to the data. Maisy is solely based upon the actual

personalities of my participants, and represents the data set as a whole (Saldaña, 2003). Although

characters might be a new re-imagining of an individual, Maisy’s dialogue is a reflection of my

participants’ actual words.

As a former documentary filmmaker, it is not random that I am drawn to this method and

analysis. It aligns with the cinema vérité film style, and promotes embodied analysis (Cook &

Bublitz, 2023; Menning & Murris, 2023) . Cinema vérité documentary attempts to cast light on

dark places, in my research the habitus of the charter school, by only portraying reality and

avoiding editorializing (Barnouw, 1993). Much like critical research, cinema vérité practitioners

view this method as a vehicle for empowerment and social change (Barnouw, 1993; Kincheloe &

Mclaren, 2011). This style does not view the camera, or in this case me, as a device that inhibits

humans. Rouch, one of the fore-fathers of this cinematic style in documentary, believed that the

camera made people act in ways truer to their nature (Barnouw, 1993; Menning & Murris, 2023).

In my work, my shared experience with the participants made them vulnerable and comfortable

to chronicle their experiences in the charter school, and while I believe truth is elusive I do think

my participants were transparent in what they revealed (Sipe & Constable, 1996). I know taking

the orientation of a cinema vérité documentarian allows me to reorient myself and play the role

of filmmaker. By approaching the data as a documentarian, I am able to embrace uncertainty.

With this analysis, I hope that one can understand the complicated relationship I had with my

data as a researcher.

Entering my data collection process, I was fixated on following my interview guide, and

constantly found myself recollecting my own personal knowledge of working in the charter

school. Rather than actually listening to my participants, I became preoccupied with seeing my

own experience reflected in their stories. While I do not proclaim an overall message that one

should garner from this analysis, because the beauty of art or documentary is that readers form

their own interpretations (Saldaña, 2003), I do hope that a reader realizes that the habitus of the

charter school constrained and caused harm to my participants.

I deliberately chose to include long passages from the transcripts in my analysis because I

did not want my participants’ stories to be edited. I chose not to edit language or words, but

have reordered blocks of my participants’ words to form a more linear story (Saldaña, 2003). To

attend to documentary script form, I took some creative liberties by including shot descriptions

that capture the emotion, stage directions to capture moments of reflection, and scene locations

to give the reader a better picture of where my participants were located during our time (Eisner,

2001). As an added safety measure, the act of presenting data as a performance can serve as a

shield, and present participant experiences in a form that avoids jeopardizing their safety and

current positions (Chugani, 2016). I crafted my findings as a new configuration of the data in the

form of a documentary script.

Manuscript 2

With this autoethnographic research, I explore the habits and enduring patterns created by

school institutions, rooted in neoliberal reforms and Practice Theory (Bourdieu, 1977), that

dictate how women teachers should behave within the culture of a charter school. The purpose of

this research is to show how the hidden rules of the charter school habitus were deposited into

me as a teacher and how I resisted these rules and altered my habitus. The specific research

question that guides this study is as follows: How did I use agentive action, as a woman teacher,

to remake the social structure of the charter school institution?

Methodology

I engaged in autoethnographic research. I wrote from my own perspective (Ellis, 2004;

Fraser & MacDougall, 2017), and autoethnography is a method that values subjectivity and self-

expression (Pitre et al., 2013). This is an appropriate conduit for my story and research, as it

allowed me the space to express my story, and provide readers with a singular case study to

convey the embodied knowledge of one woman in a charter school setting (Clandinin et al.,

2013). In general, autoethnography is a personal form of writing and research that uncovers the

researcher’s unconscious and connects the personal to the cultural and political (Ellis & Bochner,

2000). Through this methodology, I used self-reflection and writing to explore my personal

experiences in connection to broader political, cultural, and social meaning.

Additionally, autoethnographers demand the intertwining of theory and story—theories

are not simply adopted for the purposes of fitting a story; rather, theory provides a framework to

reflect upon and analyze a personal experience (Bochner, 2012; Bochner & Riggs, 2014; Jones,

2016). As such, autoethnography becomes a mechanism by which to illustrate the nuances of

theory where the body rather than analysis is an agent in making meaning. Spry (2009) suggested

that autoethnographic story comes from a critically reflexive location, and personal story permits

researchers the reflexivity to think critically about truth, to contextualize the personal, and to

center their own epistemologies and ontologies, all necessary concomitants in the construction of

meaning (Ellis, 2004; Hughes & Pennington, 2017).

Autoethnography illuminates a rich diversity of voice and story, especially those

representing marginalized experiences, and story permits the author to reveal hidden details and

foregrounds emotional experiences to challenge the tradition of social science (Bochner & Riggs,

2014). Although history is hegemonic in that it is primarily written by the victors,

autoethnography’s capacity to link experience with institutions, and thus the personal with the

political, foregrounds the perspectives of the oppressed and makes space for important analyses

of existing power relations.

Certainly, there is danger in the institutionalization of a single story, as those

characteristically legitimate master narratives at the expense of marginal perspectives that are

effectively disempowered and made illegitimate. In contrast, multiple perspectives are

emphasized in autoethnography, and these perspectives can increase understanding and empower

(Jones, 2016), thus disrupting the status quo and, through disruption, restoring agency and

dignity. Furthermore, although autoethnography is inherently personal, its positioning is not

authoritative; rather, it facilitates experiential meaning-making and readers have the agency to

determine if a story speaks to them and provide theoretical validation by comparing their lives to

the author (Ellis, 2004; Spry, 2011). I used this method to express my own embodiment and

attempt to make meaning and recreate my habitus as a means of resistance.

Methods

Regarding specific methods, I generated a research journal, based upon past journals, that

outline my own traumatic experiences and those working in a charter school. Within this journal,

I relay events, which were anonymized

, emotional ties to such events, past experiences, and

general positional commitments. In order to validate and triangulate this data, I gathered

additional artifacts to help check my story. These artifacts include daily planners kept from

2002-2018, social media posts on Facebook, conversations between trusted friends via Facebook

Messenger and Google Chat, a copy of The Catcher in the Rye where I document instances of

physical abuse, and old diaries. These artifacts aid in situating the truth within my data, and it is

important to provide representations of multiple sources (Denzin, 1978). In order to protect

myself, I choose not to conduct member checks so as not to re-traumatize myself nor my student

(Ellis, 2004; Ellis & Bochner, 2000). I acknowledge that there are no innocent representations

All names used in my story are pseudonyms to protect the identities of any individuals to whom I refer.

since all are organized within relations of power (Adams St. Pierre, 1999). Once the reflective

journal was generated, I searched for themes and wrote my story.

Analysis

My process of data analysis occurred through the writing process (Adams St. Pierre,

1999). As I wrote, autoethnography allowed me to be reflexive. The thinking that occurred while

writing, produced the analysis because this is an entangled process where I connected personal

experiences to broader cultural themes within the charter school (Adams St. Pierre, 1999;

Guttorm et al., 2015). Haddix (2015) claimed that our words and stories are legitimate sources of

knowledge. I approached my analysis in a way that showcases my story in order to bring into

view conditions that shaped my experiences and gave rise to my agency, voice, and reflexivity

(Pitre et al., 2013). Within my story, I identified themes and opted to include vignettes of my

story that exemplified each theme. In manuscript two, I detail the following thematic elements,

paying particular attention to how these themes manifest in the personal narratives I share. The

major themes that emerged in the writing of my story are as follows:

1) Hiding: describes my experience conforming to the habitus created that was

intertwined with a culture of secrecy and avoidance.

2) Resistance: describes my way of resisting an oppressive habitus in attempt to recreate

and remake it.

3) Coping: describes the ways, both healthy and unhealthy, in which I attempted to cope

with my current habitus in order to survive.

To illustrate each of these themes, I included vignettes of my story, which are accompanied by

my own analysis of the happenings. I intentionally chose to include stories from my young

adulthood to provide a holistic view of how I developed across a lifespan, how the habitus

influenced me across different social worlds (Baker-Bell, 2017), and the individual experiences I

brought to the habitus. These vignettes are followed by my analytical interpretation of the

contents. I do so in an effort to both showcase the story, as well as position it within the larger

research and theoretical landscape.

Manuscript 3

With this final manuscript, I explore how women teachers within the charter school

system describe their coping techniques to remain resilient and survive working in the charter

school culture. The purpose of this study is to uncover how teachers within the charter school

system describe their own resiliency, specifically, two women teaching at a charter school in the

Southeast United States. Techniques for resiliency are generally defined as any practice or

support that aides a teacher in developing a teacher identity and remaining in the charter school

field. The research questions that guide this study are as follows: How do women who work as

charter school teachers describe the techniques they have developed in order to remain in the

field?; and Do women teachers resist the hidden rules of the charter school institution, and if so,

how?

Methodology

I used ethnodrama (Given, 2008; Saldaña, 2003) with interviewing and deep hanging out

(Geertz, 1998) as the research data collection methods.

Participants

My population consists of two women charter school teachers in the Southeast United

States, with at least three years teaching experience. I label my sampling as critical opportunistic

(Miles et al., 2020). I taught in the school site and worked with the teachers that were

interviewed. I had easy access to these teachers and my prior knowledge of their experiences fits

well with my purpose. I have obtained a consent form for each of the two participants in the

study, and this study has received Institutional Review Board approval.

Inclusion criteria for this study includes the following: participants must have at least

three years teaching experience, identify as a woman, taught in a charter school, and live in the

Southeast United States. There were no exclusion criteria outside of those created through the

existence of inclusion criteria.

Participant one, Kameron Freeman

, has been teaching for eight years, five within the

charter school setting. She has taught 5

, 6

, and 8

grades and all content areas. She is a straight,

white, cisgender woman. Participant two, Emma Granger

, has been teaching for four years, all

of these years teaching 6

grade English language arts in the charter school setting. Like

Freeman, she is a straight, white, cisgender woman. Both participants identify as Christian in

their religious beliefs, and have experienced what it is like to teach in the charter school setting,

which is the experience which I want to explore (Creswell & Creswell Báez, 2021).

Setting

The school site where my participants worked is a Title I charter school in a Southern

metro area of the United States. The School

is a 6-12 charter school. The new school flooded

with natural light and freshly painted walls is filled with about 700 students. Of these students,

the majority are Black and share the same zip code with the school. The inviting, modern look of

the school is in sharp contrast with the rigid management culture. Students line the hallways,

with two feet placed in each tile square, and silently transition between classes as talking is not

A pseudonym to protect the identity of the participant.

A pseudonym.

permitted. A large administrative team manages student behavior through a merit and demerit

system.

Data Collection

I conducted scheduled interviews via Zoom, and developed an interview guide, but

focused on the words of the teachers so they could guide the conversation. I conducted two 45-

60 minute interviews with each participant, for a total of 195 minutes of interview data. After

interviews, I journaled to practice reflexivity and note my subjectivities. However, I resisted

trying to divorce myself from our previous relationship, and this permitted me to be my authentic

self in our interviews, which put both myself and my participants more at ease (Roulston, 2010).

Prior to interviewing the teachers, I worked in the school setting alongside the teachers,

so I possess knowledge of the culture and have previous relationships with the teachers. I

engaged in deep hanging out, when the researcher spends time with participants in informal

settings to lessen the role of being an outsider (Geertz, 1998; Woodward, 2008). To do so, I

immersed myself in my participants’ culture, observed participants in informal settings outside

of the charter school, attended after-school happy hours, and engaged in short phone and text

message exchanges. I recognize the limitations of the selection in that my familiarity with the

site and participants brings with it multiple assumptions and a priori knowledge to the work.

Conducting fieldwork and interviews in a place we know is problematic. My tacit and external

cultural knowledge (Spradley, 1980) of the school site precludes the ability to note unfamiliar

patterns of behavior. It is important for ethnographers to recognize how personal experience is

important in the process and that it can often be misused. Personal experience should not distract

from the ethnographic story, but enhance (Lassiter, 2005). In order to gain better context of the

participants’ culture and mitigate previous connections, I collected charter school employee

handbooks, notes and texts written to me by the participants, photographs, and engaged in

reflexive journaling. Through these methods, I was able to gain further contextualization of the

experiences of my participants.

Analysis

Finally, in order to shift my role from a researcher to a dramatist and to share my

participants’ experiences with an audience (Grbich, 2013), I created an ethnodramatic

performance as my primary method of analysis. Ethnodrama is a written adaptation of research

data in a play script (Given, 2008; Saldaña, 2003, 2005). With this form of analysis, while

research reflexivity is crucial it is unnecessary in the final product because the story belongs to

the participant (Saldaña, 2003). I acknowledge that it is not entirely their story, as I selected

interview quotes to use, but I did not edit their words and only reconstructed them to form a

more linear story (Saldaña, 2003). Traditional forms of qualitative analysis, like coding or

thematic analysis, might force data into themes and categories inevitably influenced by the

researcher, to help avoid this ethnodrama captures and presents the data as it occurred in its

original form. While theatrical elements are added, they serve to enhance the story and add

dramatic effect (Saldaña, 2003). This method also recognizes that there can never be a finite

representation of the data (Denzin, 2013), and what is presented is just a snapshot in time.

In the following section, I detail my method of analysis. I developed themes that manifest

in the words of my participants and provided insights to their personal experiences.

The ethnodrama script is based upon the major themes that manifested throughout

ethnodrama creation. The first theme refers to charter school teachers not receiving enough

encouragement in the culture of a charter school. In the artifacts, participants noted feeling

trusted, seen, spoiled, and safe as positive aspects and factors that contributed to being

encouraged. However, there are contradictions that emerged, where if these needs are not met, it

may lead to feeling harmed, forced to treat students poorly, and not feeling safe enough for

teachers to be their authentic self.

The second theme describes both the fruitful elements of feeling supported and

developing a friendship with a teacher mentor. However, this relationship is complicated. At

times, a mentoring relationship can feel collaborative, but also demeaning to the mentee.

The final theme describes the burden and expectations inflicted on participants as a result

of teaching in a charter school. The very specific teaching practices of a charter school could be

an aid to new teachers or could feel evaluative and intimidating. To illustrate each of these

themes, I outlined the process for presenting the data in dramatic form. Each of the

aforementioned themes emerge in the ethnodrama through selected acts of the play performance.

I chose ethnodrama in order to further highlight the cultural aspects within the charter

school my participants worked at and to spotlight participant perspectives (Given, 2008). As an

added safety measure, the act of performance can serve as a shield, and present participant

experiences in a form that avoids jeopardizing their safety and current positions (Chugani, 2016).

Through using only the words of the participants, I prioritized dialogue in order to center

perspectives that have been silenced in order to bring awareness and open up possibilities for

change. As I analyzed the data using the previous methods, I found my participants expressed

both changes in their own behavior and powerful stories that challenged beliefs about teaching

and education (Grbich, 2013). Considering my paradigmatic leanings, research aims, and the

belief that all truth is subjective, ethnodrama is an excellent vehicle to both present stories with

wider social ramifications and inspire change in the audience (Given, 2008; Saldaña,

2005). Ethnodrama disrupts tradition and reaches a wider audience, as most individuals are not

reading academic journals, and through reaching an academic and general audience I engage in

audience blurring (Barone, 2002). Most importantly, I recognize that the entirety of this work is

inspired by my own experiences, and that will color the play, but will serve to empower teachers

and audience members (Kincheloe & Mclaren, 2011).

Much like traditional research, playwrights must collect data in order to answer a

question and the performance represents the findings (Salvatore, 2018). To engage in this

analysis, first I developed a plot, centered around the three major themes. I returned to the

interview transcripts and read through them to find particularly salient quotes that supported each

of the themes. McCoy (2006) referred to this process as reinterviewing the transcript. By

reinterviewing, I was able to understand the deeply personal and embodied experience of my

participants and synthesize these experiences to highlight the charter school habitus. To prepare

the quotes, I began merging them in a manner that made sense to be presented in a dialogical

play format (Saldaña, 2003). As I engaged in this process, I struggled to determine from whose

perspective the story would be told (Saldaña, 2003). As it is crafted, the audience is first

introduced to Emma, but I also wanted equal representation of Kameron’s voice. To ease this

imbalance, I chose to craft this ethnodrama in four acts that include monologues from both

Emma and Kameron as well as small group scenes spliced in between. While some context needs

to be provided, I intentionally did not want to re-craft participant words. To accommodate this, I

added the role of a narrator to provide an omniscient voice, and Saldaña (2003) suggested that

the researcher must select their role in the play . Of course this brings the researcher into the

play, but it aligns with my philosophical commitments because I know I cannot be neutral and

Denzin (2017) called the creation of an ethnodrama a reflexive interview where both the

researcher and participants are in dialogue and connected. I do acknowledge my researcher bias

does remain as I am the instrument and hold the power in selecting which words to use in the

ethnodrama, and reorder participant words to form a more linear script (Saldaña, 2003). I do this

in an effort to make the text accessible to the audience, and attempt to allow my own personal

experience to only enhance and not distract from the ethnography (Lassiter, 2005).

I attend to traditional theatrical components by adding stage directions and minimal

props. I include emotional descriptions in the stage directions that reflect the tone of my

participants from our original interviews. I made the choice to keep the characters in the same

costume throughout in order to focus on the story rather than distracting elements. I rely on

lighting, PowerPoint slides, and music to indicate transition within the performance. I

intentionally chose to use a typewriter font to further align with a traditional script format. Of

import, the music selection was a song directly mentioned by Emma in the interview transcript.

While I have critical intentions with this piece, I chose to play with the absurdity by introducing

each act like a Law and Order: SVU episode. While this might seem antithetical to the serious

message of my participants, it highlights the absurdity of charter school rules, expectations, and

the lack of encouragement Emma and Kameron received.

In both interviews, Kameron and Emma reveal information about one another or

interactions with students, where I could not gain the perspective of the other. While the

interaction in Act I Scene II is not a realistic depiction, all of the words came from my

participants. Emma expresses the complicated mentor relationship she has with Kameron, but

shares that she would never express how Kameron actually makes her feel. I chose to portray this

scene dramatically as I envision it might occur according to Emma’s recollection of events. I

made the choice in Act II Scene I to reveal Kameron’s feelings of a successful mentor

relationship, which differ from Emma’s view, through the holiday card. While this card does not

exist in reality, it is completely crafted from Kameron’s words from the transcript. Similarly, in

Act III Scene II I want the audience to gain an understanding of Kameron’s interaction with

students and why she holds such strong beliefs around treating students with dignity. I did take

liberties in crafting Kameron’s monologue, but the majority of the words come from her

transcript. The note from Mia is entirely fictional, but I base it on a story Kameron recollects

about how she poorly handled a student interaction. Act III Scene is the turning point in this

drama. I acknowledge that this interaction feels like a drastic shift for Kameron, but that is

intentional. I want to convey how feelings change so much over the course of a school year, and

show Kameron’s humanity.

Positionality

As a self-identified critical post-structuralist, taking up Bourdieu’s (1977) Practice

Theory, aligns well with my philosophical beliefs. Although Bourdieu moved beyond the post-

structural paradigm by challenging symbolic power, he was originally a part of the post-

structuralist movement (Robson & Sanders, 2009). Bourdieu crafted his theories and work in

opposition to staunch structuralist like Levi-Strauss (Grenfell, 1996). Despite not widely

discussed alongside poststructuralists like Lacan, Derrida, and Foucault, Bourdieu and other

poststructuralists are concerned with language and power. Like Bourdieu and these

poststructuralists, I am not concerned with structure but upon what is left over, and this allows

readers to form their own interpretations (Lather, 1992). Practice Theory (1977) also aligns with

my own personal experiences in the charter school. I felt oppressed by power in the charter

system, and felt as though I became indoctrinated to the determinant ways of being of the charter

school culture through following rules. Despite coming to the charter school habitus with my

own experiences, that certainly influenced my experience, the ways of being in the charter school

field became intertwined with my ways of being as I executed the charter school ways of being

and these became so embedded in my body through practice.

Language is systematized by structuralism, but my focus is not on the structure but upon

what is left over, which can birth to readers garnering their own interpretations from participant

stories (Lather, 1992). As my methodology involves interviewing, my belief that the charter

school institution is harmful will be ever-present. Having, myself, been oppressed by power in

the charter system, it is impossible to mask my values as a researcher, and they are always

present in my work. Scholars have suggested that charter schools fail to take advantage of their

autonomy when it comes to practice, and there is a trend toward standardization of practice

rather than innovation in charter schools (Hubbard & Kulkami, 2009). This indicates that

Practice Theory is well-suited to analyze outlying incidents of autonomy in the field. Analyzing

Practice Theory has the potential to spotlight how teachers comprehend their roles within the

charter school domain, potentially fostering retention, as well as reconfiguring and challenging

the embodiment of policies and the structures of educational work. Practice Theory tries to

capture the situated location of humans as they work through seemingly everyday interactions in

their social world (Hackley, 2019), and I work to achieve this by examining the work of teachers.

Personally, I had an immediate connection to Bourdieu’s (1977) Practice Theory. I first

developed this connection when reading Wacquant’s (2004) work about how the habitus of a

Chicago boxing gym provided the conditions for the athletes to develop their skill through

practice, and how the ways of being in the gym created a habitus where practice was performed

through the body. Immediately, I felt as though I finally had a theoretical construct that

explained many of my actions in my own life. As a child my parents stressed the importance of

keeping secrets, and this became habit and part of my daily practice. As a teen, I felt control and

safety in the habitus created by my karate studio, and embodying discipline and physical actions

became habits through repeated practice through the body. As a teacher, methods from Lemov’s

(2015) Teach Like a Champion 2.0

, promoted by the administration of the charter school, had

me physically embody and bring life to the charter school habitus. Very specific movements like

tracking

, control the game

, and strong voice

became embodied practice that developed into

unconscious actions in this field.

While gender plays a significant role in my work, I do not label myself a feminist. This is

important to note because I am not wholly epistemologically aligned with feminist scholars, and

my work should not be interpreted as a feminist piece. While I agree with post-structural

feminists in that gender is socially constructed, I do not align with most feminists. My

epistemology differs from their knowledge building standpoint that the world should be viewed

through the lens and experiences of oppressed women (Davies & Gannon, 2005). I also wish to

provide a disclaimer regarding the participants of my study—women—and gender. I believe that

gender is socially constructed (Tuerk et al., 2003) and too often society segregates by gender and

applies fabricated gender norms (Jones et al., 2016). In western society, human actors produce

the concept of gender and legitimize it (Lorber, 2013), and I believe confining individuals to

gender labels and norms creates structured inequality (Lorber, 2013). When I refer to the

Doug Lemov is the author of Teach Like A Champion and Teach Like A Champion 2.0. These texts feature

strategies, vocabulary, and practices employed by effective teachers observed by Lemov. Teach Like A Champion

outlines 49 specific techniques teachers should use to prioritize rigor and what matters most in the classroom. Both

texts are widely utilized among charter schools and new teacher professional development. Lemov works for

Uncommon Schools, a nonprofit organization that manages K-12 charter schools in Massachusetts, New York, and

New Jersey.

Tracking is Teach Like A Champion 2.0 technique #4. With this technique teachers are intentional about how they

scan their classrooms in order to prevent distractions.

Control the game is Teach Like A Champion 2.0 technique #23. With this technique teachers ask students to read

aloud frequently, but manage the process to ensure fluency, accountability, and engagement.

Strong voice is Teach Like A Champion 2.0 technique #56. With this technique teachers affirm authority through

intentional verbal and nonverbal habits, especially at moments when control is needed.

“gendered” experience of teaching, I refer to the impacts on any individual who identifies as a

woman (Catalpa & McGuire, 2018).

A tenet of my research is centering the voices of all marginalized groups, and I believe

that truth in discourse is contingent upon the individual. I believe that any marginalized

population—be it women, people of color, the queer community, or animals—deserve to have a

place in research. I do align myself with feminist scholars like Mayo, Grumet, and Chernin,

because I can personally identify with some of their claims.

Mayo (1999) argued that women disidentify with gender because they perceive the world

as being post-gender. In forming identity, women experience disidentification because they feel

old problems of gender do not exist. With this belief, disidentification denies and refuses to

acknowledge history, but this is not false consciousness but merely a way of survival (Sculz,

2020). Women, who disidentify, blame harm on their own deficits. In my own experience, I

disidentified and blamed poor working conditions or oppression within the school on my

inadequacies as a teacher. As a result, I was unable to connect with my colleagues over shared

experiences, and formed an identity against gender rather than combating power (Mayo, 1999;

McClain & Cokley, 2017).

I also align with Grumet (1988), who posited that the structure of schools mimics the

patriarchal structure of the family, and constrains the freedom of women. During my time as a

middle school teacher and middle school administrator in a charter school I did not always feel

as though I was supported, especially as a woman. As a teacher at the aforementioned school, I

had three male administrators. My “coach” was one of these administrators. I could not describe

our relationship as one of coach and coachee. A coach fosters the talents someone already has

and motivates. A coach takes natural talent and shapes it. A coach is respected. A coach knows

they are only as successful as their players. My coach was more of a manager. He told me what

to do and came into my classroom to check that I had completed his directives. He had a hidden

list of rules, and, like a father, made sure I followed them.

Despite my distaste for these fatherly rules, I desperately sought to follow them and to be

praised for doing so as a teacher. According to Chernin (1985), women recognize their mother’s

unfulfilled ambitions and lean to the patriarchy in an attempt to escape the maternal and make up

for her mother’s disappointments. By continuing to seek male or leadership approval at a school,

women give consent to be dominated by the male patriarchy and assimilate to the dominant or

required culture of the school.

My own mother is a former teacher, and, if I’m honest with myself, I never respected my

mother. I thought she was a teacher because she liked kids, and I felt that she was good at

teaching 8-year-olds how to do crafts but was not intelligent enough to be a scholar or to wrestle

with the big ideas like I did. I thought she threw away her life when she left the teaching field

upon my birth. I always viewed her as a bit of a freeloader. She had the benefit of my father’s

money and could just hang out at home doing nothing, I guess I forgot that she homeschooled me

and cared for her father when he developed Alzheimer’s. When she would tell me about her time

in graduate school, I always thought she wasted her life, abandoned academia, and valuable work

to just be a mother. The resentment I held toward my mother solidified my constant need for

approval and workaholism.

Twenty years later and with adult eyes, I think my loathe for my mother has transformed

to self-loathing. I set out to be the best teacher. I attended every professional development

opportunity, engaged in research, and was determined to not just be a teacher but to be a teacher

and scholar. I wanted to have quantifiable indicators of my success as a teacher and to be praised

by my administrators. Although I was a good teacher, I abandoned my craft. I stayed up until the

wee hours of the morning crafting lesson and coaching plans, and never saw my partner and

friends. Teaching was all-consuming and not sustainable. I see now that perhaps my mother left

teaching for the same reasons I did, and this is why I engage in this work. I want teaching to be

sustainable. Excellent educators should not feel as though their only option is to leave the

classroom due to reforms, institutional rules, and exhaustion.

Please see Appendix A for individual manuscript details.

References

Aalbers, M. B. (2012). Subprime cities and the twin crises. In M. B. Aalbers (Ed.) Subprime

cities: The political economy of mortgage markets. Wiley-Blackwell.

Aalbers, M. B. (2013). Neoliberalism is dead…Long live neoliberalism! International Journal of

Urban and Regional Research, 37(3), 1083-1090.

Adams St. Pierre, E. (1999). The work of response in ethnography. Journal of Contemporary

Ethnography, 28(3), 266-287.

Allensworth, E., Ponisciak, S., & Mazzeo, C. (2009). The schools teacher leave. University of

Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research.

Anderson, A., Thomas, M. A. M., & Brewer, T. J. (2022). Teach For America influence on non-

TFA teachers in TFA-hiring schools. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 30(98), 1-26.

https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.30.6163

Angrist, J. D., & Guryan, J. (2007). Does teacher testing raise teacher quality? Evidence from

state certification requirements. Economics of Education Review, 27(2008), 483-503.

Apple, M. W. (1993). The politics of official knowledge: Does a national curriculum make

sense? Teachers College Record, 95(2), 222-241.

Apple, M. W. (2012). Controlling the work of teachers. In M.W. Apple (author), Knowledge,

power, and education: The selected works of Michael W. Apple (pp. 116-131). Routledge.

Baker-Bell, A. (2017). For Loretta: A black woman literacy scholar’s journey to prioritizing self-

preservation and black feminist-womanist storytelling. Journal of Literacy Research,

49(4), 526-543.

Banks, M. (2012). MacIntyre, Bourdieu and the practice of jazz. Popular Music, 31(1), 69-86.

Barker, C., & Jane, E. A. (2016). Cultural studies theory and practice (5

ed.). Sage Publications

Inc.

Barnouw, E. (1993). Documentary a history of the non-fiction film (2

ed.). Oxford University

Press.

Barone, T. (2002). From genre blurring to audience blending: Reflections on the field emanating

from an ethnodrama. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 33(2), 255-267.

Barone, T. & Eisner, E. W. (2012). Arts based research. Sage Publications.

Beckman, K., Apps, T., Bennett, S., & Lockyer, L. (2018). Conceptualising technology practice

in education using Bourdieu’s sociology. Learning, Media, and Technology, 43(2), 197-

210.

Bendixen, L. D., Plachowski, T., & Olafson, L. (2022). Criticalizing teacher perceptions of urban

school climate: Exploring the impact of racism and race-evasive culture in a

predominately white teacher workforce. Education and Urban Society, 00(0), 1-26.

Berger, M. C., & Toma, E. T. (1994). Variation in state education policies and effects on student

performance. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 13(3), 477-491.

Berkshire, J. C. (2021, September 10). Charter schools’ scary future. The New Republic.

https://newrepublic.com/article/163507/charter-schools-scary-future

Betts, J. R., Zau, A. C., & Rice, L. A. (2003). Determinants of student achievement: New

evidence from San Diego. Public Policy Institute of California.

Block, F., & Somers, M. R. (2014). The power of market fundamentalism: Karl Polanyi’s

critique. Harvard University Press.

Blount, J. (1999). Manliness and the gendered construction of school administration in the USA.

International Journal of Leadership in Education, 2(2), 55-68.

Bochner, A. P. (2012). On first-person narrative scholarship: Autoethnography as acts of

meaning. Narrative Inquiry, 22, 155-164.

Bochner, A. P., & Riggs, N. A. (2014). Practicing narrative inquiry. In P. Leavy (Ed.). The

Oxford handbook of qualitative research (pp. 195-222). Oxford University Press.

Bochner, A. P., & Ellis, C. (2016). Evocative autoethnography writing lives and telling stories.

Routledge.

Boe, E., Bobbitt, S. A., Cook, L. H., Whitener, S. D., & Weber, A. L. (1997). Why didst thou

go? Predictors of retention, transfer, and attrition of special and general education

teachers from a national perspective. The Journal of Special Education, 30, 390-411.

Bohrer, A. J. (2019). Response to Barbara Foley’s ‘Intersectionality: A Marxist critique.’ New

Labor Forum, 28(3), 14-17.

Boltanski, L., & Chiapello, E. (2005). The new spirit of capitalism. Verso.

Borman, G. D., & Dowling, N. M. (2008). Teacher attrition and retention: A meta-analytic

and narrative review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 367-409.

Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge University

Press. (Original work published 1972).

Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Harvard University

Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and

research for the sociology of education (pp. 241-258). Greenwood.

Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. University of

Chicago Press.

Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Ing, M., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2011). The influence of

school administrators on teacher retention decisions. American Educational Research

Journal, 48(2), 303-333.

Brewer, T. J., Kretchmar, K., Sondel, B., Ishmael, S., & Manfra, M. (2016). Teach For

America’s preferential treatment: School district contracts, hiring decisions, and

employment practices. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 24(15), 1-38.

https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.24.1923.

Brunner, C. C. (2003). Invisible, limited, and emerging discourse: Research practices that restrict

and/or increase access for women and persons of color to the superintendency. Journal of

School Leadership, 13, 428-450.

Buckley, J., Schneider, M., & Yi, S. (2004). The effects of school facility quality on teacher

retention urban school districts. National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities.

Buras, K. (2011). Race, charter schools, and conscious capitalism: On the spatial politics of

whiteness as property (and the unconscionable assault on Black New Orleans). Harvard

Educational Review, 81(2), 296-331.

Buras, K. L. (2015). Charter schools, race, and urban space: Where the market meets grassroots

resistance. Routledge.

Cappelli, P. (1995). Rethinking employment. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 33(4), 563-

602.

Catalpa, J. M. & McGuire, J. K. (2018). Family boundary ambiguity among transgender youth.

Family Relations, 67, 88-103. DOI:10.1111/fare.12304

Cersonsky, J. (2013). The hidden truth behind Teach For America’s political empire. Salon.

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/17/the_truth_behind_teach_for_americas_political_empir

Chernin, K. (1985). The hungry self: Women, eating, and identity. Times Books.

Chubb, J. E., & Moe, T. M. (1990). Politics, markets, and America’s schools. Brookings

Institution.

Chugani, C. D. (2016). Recovered voices: Experiences of borderline personality disorder. The

Qualitative Report, 21(6), 1016-1034.

Clandinin, D. J., Steeves, P., & Caine, V. (Eds.). (2013). Composing lives in transition: A

narrative inquiry into the experiences of early school leavers. Emerald Group Publishing.

Clifford, G. J. (2014). Those good Gertrudes: A social history of women teachers in America.

Johns Hopkins University Press.

Collins, K. M. (2014). A disability studies in education (DSE) analysis of corporate based

educational reform: Lessons from New Orleans. In D. Connor, J. Valle, & C. Hale (Eds.),

Practicing disability studies in education: Acting toward social change (pp. 217 – 233).

Peter Lang Publishing.

Cook, G. N., & Bublitz, S. R. (2023). The Ship of Theseus: Unsilencing and methodological

considerations when working with queer populations. Departures in Critical

Qualitative Research, 12(4), 77-101.

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell Báez, J. (2021). 30 essential skills for the qualitative researcher (2

ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.

Cummins, M. W., & Huber, A. A. (2022). Documenting emotional labor: An exercise in

critical communication pedagogy. Journal of Autoethnography, 3(2), 187-202.

Darling-Hammond, L., Holtzman, D. J., Gatlin, S. J., & Vasquez Heilig, J. (2005). Does teacher

preparation matter? Evidence about teacher certification, teach for America, and teacher

effectiveness. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(42), 1-51.

Davies, B., & Gannon, S. (2005). Feminism/Post-structuralism. In B. Somekh & C. Lewin

(Eds.), Research methods in the social sciences (pp. 318-325). Sage.

Del Ciello, D. (2016, January 20). Teach for America: Growing more diverse. Education Week.

https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/teach-for-america-growing-more-diverse

Denzin, N. K. (1978). Sociological methods: A sourcebook (2nd ed.). McGraw Hill.

Denzin, N. K. (2013). “The death of data?”. Cultural Studies-Critical Methodologies, 13(4),

353-356.

Denzin, N. K. (2017). Qualitative inquiry under fire: Toward a new paradigm dialogue.

Routledge.

Diamond, J. B., & Gomez, K. (2004). African-American parents’ education orientations: The

importance of social class and parents’ perceptions of schools. Education and Urban

Society, 36(4), 383-427.

Education Commission of the States. (2018). Charter schools: Do teachers in a charter school

have to be certified? https://ecs.securo.force.com/mbdata/mbquestNB2C?rep=CS1720

Eisner, E. (2001). Concerns and aspirations for qualitative research in the new millennium.

Qualitative Research, 1(2), 135-145.

Ellis, C. (2004). The ethnographic I a methodological novel about autoethnography. Alta Mira

Press.

Ellis, C., & Bochner, A. P. (2000). Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity:

Researcher as subject. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative

research (2nd ed., pp. 733-768). Sage.

Fabricant, M., & Fine, M. (2012). Charter schools and the corporate makeover of public

education: What’s at stake? Teachers College Press.

Feng, L. (2014). Teacher placement, mobility, and occupational choices after teaching.

Education Economics, 22(1), 24-47.

Fine, M., & Fox, M. (2013). Accountable to whom? A critical science counter-story about a city

that stopped caring for its young. Children and Society, 27(2013), 321-335.

Foley, B. (2019). Intersectionality: A Marxist critique. New Labor Forum, 28(3), 10-13.

Fraser, H. & MacDougall, C. (2017). Doing narrative feminist research: Intersections and

challenges. Qualitative Social Work, 16(2), 240-254.

Fry, S. (2009). Characteristics and experiences that contribute to novice elementary teachers’

success and efficacy. Teacher Education Quarterly, 36(2), 95-110.

Gabor, A. (2013, September 20). The great charter tryout: Are New Orleans’s schools a model

for the nation—or a cautionary tale? Newsweek. Available:

http://mag.newsweek.com/2013/09/20/post-katrina-the-great-new-orleans-charter-

tryout.html

Geertz, C. (1998, October 22). Deep hanging out. The New York

Review. https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1998/10/22/deep-hanging-out/

Ghaffari, M., Hackley, C., & Lee, Z. (2019). Control, knowledge, and persuasive power in

advertising creativity: An ethnographic practice theory approach. Journal of Advertising,

48(2), 242-249.

Giroux, H. (2012). Education and the crisis of public values: Challenging the assault on

teachers, students, and public education. Peter Lang Publishing.

Given, L. M. (Ed.) (2008). The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. SAGE.

Golann, J. W., Debs, M., & Weiss, A. L. (2019). “To be strict on your own”: Black and Latinx

parents evaluate discipline in urban choice schools. American Educational Research

Journal, 56(5), 1896-1929.

Goldstein, D. (2014). The teacher wars: A history of America’s most embattled profession.

Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.

Gotz, I. (1990). Zen and the art of teaching. J.L. Wilkerson Publishing Company.

Graham, L. J., & Jahnukainen, M. (2011). Wherefore art though, inclusion? Analysing the

development of inclusive education in New South Wales, Finland and Alberta. Journal of

Education Policy, 26(2), 263-288.

Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. (Q. Hoare & G.

Nowell Smith Trans.). International Publishers.

Grbich, C. (2013). Qualitative data analysis an introduction (2

ed.). SAGE.

Grenfell, M. (1996). Bourdieu and initial teacher education: A post-structuralist approach.

British Educational Research Journal, 22(3), 287-303.

Griffin, G. (1997). Teaching as a gendered experience. Journal of Teacher Education, 48(1), 7-

18.

Grumet, M. R. (1988). Conception, contradiction, and curriculum. In B. Thayer-Bacon, L. Stone,

& K. M. Sprecher (Eds.). Education feminism classic and contemporary readings (pp.

87-109). State University of New York Press.

Gulosino, C., Ni, Y., & Rorrer, A. K. (2019). Newly hired teacher mobility in charter schools

and traditional public schools: An application of segmented labor market theory.

American Journal of Education, 125(4), 547-592.

Guttorm, H., Hohti, R., & Paakkari, A. (2015). “Do the next thing”: An interview with Elizabeth

Adams St. Pierre on post-qualitative methodology. Reconceptualizing Educational Research

Methodology, 6(1), 15-22.

Hackley, C. (2019). Qualitative research in marketing and management. Routledge.

Haddix, M. (2015). Cultivating racial and linguistic diversity in literacy teacher education:

Teachers like me. Routledge.

Harris, P. (2001). Towards a critical post-structuralism. Social Work Education, 20(3), 335-350.

Harris, D. (2007). Should I stay or should I go? Comparing teacher mobility in Florida’s charter

and traditional public schools. Peabody Journal of Education, 82(2/3), 274-310.

Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford Academic.

Hoffman, N. (1981). Woman’s “true” profession: Voices from the history of teaching. Feminist

Press.

Holland, D., Lachicotte, W., Jr., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural

worlds. Harvard University Press.

hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. Routledge.

Hubbard, L., & Kulkarni, R. (2009). Charter schools: Learning from the past, planning for

the future. Journal of Educational Change, 10(2–3), 173–189.

Hughes, S. A., & Pennington, J. L. (2017). Autoethnography process, product, and possibility for

critical social research. Sage Publications Ltd.

Hui, A. (2015). Theorizing art/design and intervention in practice theory: A visual ethnographic

inquiry into the work of a Hong Kong artist and designer. The Design Journal, 18(4),

625-645.

Hunt, S. L., & Staton, A. Q (1996). The communication of educational reform: A nation at risk.

Communication Education, 45(4), 271-292.

Hursh, D. (2011). The Gates Foundation’s interventions into education, health, and food policies:

Technology, power, and the privatization of political problems. In P. E. Kovacs (Ed.),

The Gates Foundation and the future of U.S. “public” schools (pp. 39-52). Routledge.

Hursh, D., & Martina, C.A. (2016). The end of public schools? Or a new beginning? The

Educational Forum, 80(2), 189-206.

Imazeki, J. (2005). Teacher salaries and teacher attrition. Economics of Education Review, 24(4),

431-449.

Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis.

American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499-534.

Ingersoll, R. M., Merrill, E., Stuckey, D., & Collins, G. (2018). Seven trends: The transformation

of the teaching force. Updated October 2018.

Jackson, A. Y., & Mazzei, L. A. (2011). Thinking with theory in qualitative research viewing

data across multiple perspectives. Routledge.

Jacobsen, R., & Linkow, T. W. (2014). National affiliation or local representation: When TFA

alumni run for school board. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(69), 1-28.

Johnson, T., Boyden, J. E., & Pittz, W. J. (2001). Racial profiling and punishment in US public

schools: How zero tolerance policies and high stakes testing subvert academic excellence

and racial equity. Applied Research Center.

https://www.racefoward.org/sites/default/files/pdf/208cpdf.pdf

Jones, S. H. (2016). Living bodies of thought: The ‘critical’ in critical autoethnography.

Qualitative Inquiry, 22(4), 228-237.

Jones, T., Smith, E., Ward, R., Dixon, J., Hillier, L., & Mitchell, A. (2016). School experiences

of transgender and gender diverse students in Australia. Sex Education Sexuality, Society,

and Learning, 16(2), 156-171. DOI:10.1080/14681811.2015.1080678

Kalogeropoulos, T., Leopoulos, V., Kirytopoulos, K., & Ventoura, Z. (2020). Project-as-practice:

Applying Bourdieu’s Theory of Practice on project managers. Project Management

Journal, 51(6), 599-616.

Kelsey, K. D. (2006). Teacher attrition among women in secondary agricultural education.

Journal of Agricultural Education, 47(3), 117-129.

Kezar, A. (2011). Grassroots leadership: Encounters with power dynamics and oppression.

International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 24(4), 471-500.

Kincheloe, J. L., & Mclaren, P. (2002). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In K.

Hayes, S. R. Steinberg, & K. Tobin (Eds.). Key works in critical pedagogy (pp. 285-386).

Springer.

Kincheloe, J. L., & Mclaren, P. (2011). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In K.

Hayes, S. R. Steinberg, & K. Tobin (Eds.), Kew works in critical pedagogy. Bold visions

in educational research (pp. 285-326). Sense Publishers.

Kingsbury, I., Maranto, R., & Bradley-Dorsey, M. (2022). Charter school closing inequities: Do

automatic closures target Black charter entrepreneurs and Black students? Race Ethnicity

and Education, DOI: 10.1080/13613324.2022.2088721

Kirby, S. N., Berends, M., & Naftel, S. (1999). Supply and demand of minority teachers in

Texas: Problems and prospects. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(1), 47-

66.

Koro-Ljungberg, M. (2015). Reconceptualizing qualitative research methodologies without

methodology. Sage.

Lassiter, L. E. (2005). The Chicago guide to collaborative ethnography. The University of

Chicago Press.

Lather, P. (1992). Critical frames in education research: Feminist and post-structural

perspectives. Theory Into Practice, 31(2), 87-89.

Leavy, P. (2015). Method meets art: Arts-based research practice. Guilford Press.

Lemov, D. (2015). Teach like a champion 2.0: 62 techniques that put students on the path to

college (2

ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Levinson, B. A. U., Sutton, M., & Winstead, T. (2009). Education policy as a practice of power

theoretical tools, ethnographic methods, democratic options. Educational Policy, 23(6),

767-795. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904808320676

Liasidou, A., & Symeou, L. (2018). Neoliberal versus social justice reforms in education policy

and practice: Discourses, politics and disability rights in education. Critical Studies in

Education, 59(2), 149-166.

Lightfoot, S. L. (1978). Worlds apart: Relationships between families and schools. Basic Books.

Lipman, P. (2011a). Contesting the city: Neoliberal urbanism and the cultural politics of

education reform in Chicago. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education,

32(2), 217-234.

Lipman, P. (2011b). The new political economy of urban education: Neoliberalism, race, and the

right to the city. Routledge.

Lorber, J. (2013). “Night to his day”: The social construction of gender. In M. Adams, W. J.

Blumenfeld, C. Castañeda, H. W. Hackman, M. L. Peters, & X. Zúñiga (Eds.). Readings

for diversity and social justice (3

ed.) (pp. 323-329). Routledge.

Mayo, C. (1999). Gender disidentification: The perils of the post-gender condition. In R. Curren

(Ed.), Philosophy of education (pp. 356-364). Philosophy of Education Society.

Mac, S. (2022). Neoliberalism and inclusive education: A critical ethnographic case study

of inclusive education at an urban charter school. Critical Education, 13(2), 1-21.

MacLure, M. (2013). Researching without representation? Language and materiality in post-

qualitative methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education,

26(6), 658-667.

MacLure, M., Holmes, R., MacRae, C., et al. (2010). Animating classroom ethnography:

Overcoming video-fear. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 23(5),

543-556.

MacRae, C., & MacLure, M. (2021). Watching two-year-olds jump: Video method becomes

‘haptic’. Ethnography and Education, 16, 263-278.

McClain, S., & Cokley, K. (2017). Academic disidentification in black college students: The role

of teacher trust and gender. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 23(1),

125-133.

McCoy, L. (2006). Keeping the institution in view: Working with interview accounts of

everyday experience. In D. Smith (Ed.), Institutional ethnography as practice (pp. 109-

126). Rowman & Littlefield.

Menning, S. F., & Murris, K. (2023). Reconfiguring the use of video in qualitative research

through practices of filmmaking: A post-qualitative cinematic analysis. Qualitative

Research, 0(0), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941231206755

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis a methods

sourcebook (4

ed.). SAGE.

Miron, G., & Applegate, B. (2007). Teacher attrition in charter schools. The Great Lakes Center

for Education Research and Practice.

Nathan, J. (1997). Charter schools: Creating hope and opportunity for American education.

Jossey-Bass.

Noguera, P. A., & Syeed, E. (2020). City schools and the American dream 2: The enduring

promise of public education. Teachers College Press.

Olsen, B., & Anderson, L. (2007). Courses of action: A qualitative investigation into urban

teacher retention and career development. Urban Education, 42(1), 5-29.

Ortner, S. B. (2006). Anthropology and social theory culture, power, and the acting subject.

Duke University Press.

Peske, H. G., Lieu, E., Johnson, S. M., Kauffman, D., & Kardos, S. M. (2001). The next

generation of teachers: Changing conceptions of a career in teaching. Phi Delta Kappan,

83(4), 304-311.

Pitre, N. Y., Kushner, K. E., Raine, K. D., & Hegadoren, K. M. (2013). Critical feminist

narrative inquiry advancing knowledge through double-hermeneutic narrative analysis.

Advances in Nursing Science, 36(20), 118-132.

Pivovarova, M. & Powers, J. M. (2022). Staying or leaving? Teacher professional characteristics

and attrition in Arizona traditional public and charter schools. Education Policy Analysis

Archives, 30(19), 1-23.

Richardson, L., & Adams St. Pierre, E. (2005). Writing a method of inquiry. In N. K. Denzin &

Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3

ed.) (pp. 959-978).

Sage Publications, Inc.

Riley, A. D., & Moore Mensah, F. (2022). “My curriculum has no soul!”: A case study of the

experiences of Black women science teachers working at charter schools, Journal of

Science Teacher Education, 34(1), 86-103.

Rimmer, R. (2017). Negotiating the rules of engagement: Exploring perceptions of dance

technique learning through Bourdieu’s concept of doxa. Research in Dance Education,

18(3), 221-236.

Robson, K. & Sanders, C. (2009). Quantifying theory: Pierre Bourdieu. Springer Dordrecht.

Roulston, K. (2010). Considering quality in qualitative interviewing. Qualitative Research, 10,

199-228.

Rousmaniere, K. (1994). Losing patience and staying professional: Women teachers and

the problem of classroom discipline in New York City schools in the 1920s. History of

Education Quarterly, 34(1), 49-69.

Saldaña, J. (2003). Dramatizing data: A primer. Qualitative Inquiry, 9(2), 218-236.

Saldaña, J. (Ed.) (2005). Ethnodrama: An anthology of reality theatre. AltaMira.

Saldaña, J. (2011). Fundamentals of qualitative research. Oxford University Press.

Salvatore, J. (2018). Ethnodrama and ethnotheatre. In P. Leavy (Ed.), Handbook of arts-based

research (pp. 267-287). Guilford Press.

Selberg, R. (2020). The ‘crisis of care’ and the neoliberal restructuring of the public sector: A

feminist Polanyian analysis. In K. Fakier, D. Mulinari, & N. Räthzel (Eds.). Marxist-

feminist theories and struggles today: Essential writings on intersectionality, labour and

ecofeminism (pp. 167-186). Zed Books.

Singer, J. (2020). Oppressive staff dynamics at an intentionally diverse urban charter school.

Educational Studies, 56(3), 248-268.

Sipe, L., & Constable, S. (1996). A chart of four contemporary research paradigms: Metaphors

for the modes of inquiry. Taboo: The Journal of Culture and Education, 1(1996), 153-

163.

Skeggs, B. (2004). Exchange, value and affect: Bourdieu and ‘the self’. The Sociological Review,

52(2), 75-95.

Sloan, K. (2007). High-stakes accountability, minority youth, and ethnography: Assessing the

multiple effects. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 38(1), 24-41.

Smitherman, G. (2000). Black talk: Words and phrases from the hood to the amen corner.

Houghton Mifflin.

Snyder, B. H. (2016). The disrupted workplace: Time and the moral order of flexible capitalism.

Oxford University Press.

Spencer, D. A. (1986). Contemporary women teachers: Balancing school and home. Longman.

Spillane, J., Reiser, B., & Reimer, T. (2002). Policy implementation and cognition: Reframing

and refocusing policy implementation research. Review of Educational Research, 72,

387-431. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543072003387

Spradley, J. P. (1980). Ethnography and culture. In J. P. Spradley (Ed.)., Participant observation.

Waveland Press.

Spring, J. H. (2015). Globalization of education: An introduction (2

ed.). Routledge.

Spry, T. (2009). Bodies of/as evidence in autoethnography. International Review of Qualitative

Research, 1(4), 603-610.

Spry, T. (2011). Performative autoethnography: Critical embodiments and possibilities. In N.

K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4

ed.)

(pp. 497-511). SAGE Publications Inc.

Standeven, K. (2022). Predestined failure and systemic trauma in neoliberal school reforms; A

story of institutional dispossession [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of

California Santa Cruz.

Stedman Jones, D. (2012). Masters of the universe: Hayek, Friedman, and the birth of neoliberal

politics. Princeton University Press.

Stuit, D. A., & Smith, T. M. (2012). Explaining the gap in charter and traditional public school

teacher turnover rates. Economics of Education Review, 31(2), 268-279.

Sturges, K. M. (2015). Curriculum testing on the persistent fringes: Neoliberal policy and

the new regime of Title I high school reform. Anthropology & Education Quarterly,

46(2), 129-146.

Sullivan, A. (2002). Bourdieu and education: How useful is Bourdieu’s theory for researchers?

The Netherlands’ Journal of Social Sciences, 38, 144-166.

Svensson, P. (2007). Producing marketing: Towards a social-phenomenology of marketing work.

Marketing Theory, 7(3), 271-290.

Szulc, L. (2020). Digital gender disidentifications: Beyond the subversion versus hegemony

dichotomy and toward everyday gender practices. International Journal of

Communication [Online], 5436+. https://link-gale-

com.utk.idm.oclc.org/apps/doc/A644651640/LitRC?u=knox61277&sid=bookmark-

LitRC&xid=4fe89b7f

Teach for America. (2020). About TFA. Teach for America.

https://www.teachforamerica.org/what-we-do/our-work.

Teranishi, R. T. (2010). Asian Pacific Americans and critical race theory: An examination of

school racial climate. Equity & Excellence in Education, 35(2), 144-154.

Thomas, T. C., & Epp, A. M. (2019). The best laid plans: Why new parents fail to habituate

practices. Journal of Consumer Research, 46(3), 564-589.

Tichavakunda, A. A. (2019). An overdue theoretical discourse: Pierre Bourdieu’s Theory of

Practice and Critical Race Theory in education. Educational Studies, 55(6), 651-666.

Torres, A. C. (2014). Is this work sustainable? Teacher turnover and perceptions of workload in

charter management organizations. Urban Education, 51(8), 891-914.

Trujillo, T., Scott, J., & Rivera, M. (2017). Follow the yellow brick road: Teach For America and

the making of educational leaders. American Journal of Education, 123, 353-391.

Tuerk, C., Menvielle, E., & de Jesus, J. (2003). If you are concerned about your child’s gender

behaviors: A guide for parents. Retrieved from

http://www.childrensnational.org/files/PDF/

DepartmentsandPrograms/Neuroscience/Psychiatry/GenderVariantOutreachProgram/

GVParentBrochure.pdf

Tyack, D. B. (1976). Ways of seeing: An essay on the history of compulsory schooling.

Harvard Educational Review, 46(3), 355-389.

Tyack, D. B., & Hansot, E. (1990). Learning together: A history of coeducation in American

public schools. Yale University Press.

Valli, L., & Buese, D. (2007). The changing roles of teachers in an era of high-stakes

accountability. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 519-558.

Vennes, H. (2022). Overcoming self-sabotage: The self-sabotaging behaviors that impact the

career development of female charter school superintendent/CEOs [Unpublished doctoral

dissertation]. University of Massachusetts Global.

Wacquant, L. (2004). Body and soul notebooks of an apprentice boxer. Oxford University Press.

Wacquant, L. (2005). Habitus. In J. Beckert & M. Zafirovski (Eds.). International encyclopedia

of economic sociology (p. 316). Routledge.

Waitoller, F. R. (2020). Excluded by choice: Urban students with disabilities in the education

marketplace. Teacher College Press.

Waitoller, F. R., & Kozleski, E. B. (2013). Working in boundary practices: Identity

development and learning in partnerships for inclusive education. Teaching and Teacher

Education, 21(1), 35-45.

Walker, T. (2016). Snapshot of the teaching profession: What’s changed over a decade? NEA

Today, 1199. Retrieved from https://www.nea.org/advocating-for-change/new-from-

nea/snapshot-teaching-profession-whats-changed-over-decade

Wang, C. C. & Geale, S. K. (2015). The power of story: Narrative inquiry as a methodology in

nursing research. International Journal of Nursing Sciences, 2(2), 195-198.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnss.2015.04.014

Welsh, J. A. (2006). Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world.

Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Wenk, D., & Rosenfeld, R. A. (1992). Women’s employment exit and reentry. Research in

Social Stratification and Mobility, 11, 127-150.

Will, M. (2020, April 14). Still mostly white and female: New federal data on the teaching

profession. Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/still-mostly-white-and-

female-new-federal-data-on-the-teaching-profession/2020/04

Wilson, J. A. (2018). Neoliberalism: Key ideas in media and cultural studies. Routledge.

Woodward, K. (2008). Hanging out and hanging about: Insider/outsider research in the sport of

boxing. Ethnography, 9(4), 419-560.

CHAPTER II

INTENSE AND FURIOUS: THE EDUCATIONAL LABOR OF WOMEN

CHARTER SCHOOL TEACHERS

Abstract

Neoliberal structures, flexible capitalism, and educational labor create a charter school habitus

that is potentially harmful for women teachers. In this work, I explore a methodological and

analysis technique to support a researcher working with participants of whom they have extreme

insider knowledge and shared experiences. I highlight neoliberal reform efforts that alter

educational work, the structure of charter schools, and flexible capitalism and its impact on core

employees and work time. I use Practice Theory and serious games to analyze the habitus and

enduring patterns created by school institutions that dictate how women teachers should behave

within the culture of a charter school. I follow this with usefulness of using a documentary

narrative analysis, formed from narrative methods, to share participant stories with the goal of

empowerment. Practice Theory and serious games is explored through my documentary narrative

analysis that presents findings in the form of a documentary script. I conclude with

recommendations for future research and a discussion that presents the usefulness of the

documentary narrative methodology.

Key Words: Documentary narrative analysis, charter schools, teachers, flexible

capitalism, neoliberalism

“I feel like I’ve texted you this a thousand times, but I don’t think you realize how

incredible a boss you are/were. I was so spoiled to work under someone kind, gracious,

intelligent, and who mostly didn’t sexually harass me (I’m joking). I’m so grateful for

who you made me as a teacher and how you changed me as a person. I seriously think of

you every day. You are so smart that you could be incredibly prideful, but you’re not; and

so hard-working that you could be incredibly demanding and unforgiving, but you’re

not.”- Kameron

This is an excerpt of a note written to me by a former co-worker and teacher I coached. It

always feels great to receive outright praise like this, especially in a field like education where

authentic praise, not in the form of test scores, is rare. However, why does a teacher have to

thank me for just being a good human? Why does a teacher have to thank me for not sexually

harassing her? Why is it rare in education to receive authentic praise? In my old years I fear I am

becoming crotchety but, pessimistically, I feel like I know the answer to all the above

questions—because the system is set up to benefit old, white, men. Sadly, this is becoming my

answer more and more frequently. Like in most institutional realms, an examination of the

neoliberal structures embedded within charter school institutions is desperately required

homework.

The purpose of my study is to explore a methodological and analysis technique that

allows a researcher, with insider knowledge of their participants, to share their stories to

empower (Kincheloe & Mclaren, 2011). I ground this work in the theoretical frameworks of

Bourdieu’s Practice Theory (1977) and Ortner’s (2006) serious games. In my own research

experience, I have been forced to follow traditional ways of research where I must follow a

specific format, impose my interpretations upon data to conduct an analysis, and have been told