Policy Analysis in Philadelphia and Kansas District Schools - Case Study Example

Po1icy ana1ysis in district schools is a very imperative venture. This is considering the fact that different district schools have different policies altogether. Such policies act as a guide1ine to school management. This is especially in the overall running of the schools. There are different district schoo1s in U.S. This paper therefore carries out an analysis of two policies in two U.S schools. These two policies are addressing the same issue. This paper also explores the similarities and the differences between the two policies. The two schools are Philadelphia and Kansas district schools. Analysis of the two schools shows that both of them have a policy against discrimination. Analysis of the policy reveals that there was need for it because of the discriminative practices that were taking place within the schools. This was after the management of the two schools received complains from different stakeholders. It was very clear that many students were being discriminated during admission because of race, color, disability, religion and even age. (Fred and Allan, 2006) Further research in the two schools indicates that even the new staffs were facing discrimination on the basis of age and sex. In this case, those that were very young could not get promotions easily. There were times when the women were not given equal opportunities as men. These were also acts of discrimination that were adversely affecting performance of stakeholders within the schools. With complains from affected people, it was necessary that a policy be enacted to ensure that nobody would face such discriminative actions in the future. Research shows that United States as a nation has got very many immigrants from other nations. These groups of people moved into U.S for various purposes. Some of them were slaves from nations which U.S was a colony. Others migrated to U.S due to trade and search of other greener pastures. The children of the immigrants therefore had to access education. With time the natives started feeling that the immigrants were enjoying their facilities. This hard hearted feeling soon found a dwelling in the district schools in U.S. (Howell, 2002) There was also discrimination during marking of student examinations. This was such that the favored group of students was given better grades as compared to others. This was carried out irrespective of their performance. This issue demoralized very many bright students in the two schools. Very many parents complained to the school administrator that their children were being denied admission chances because of their color, race etc. It was therefore very necessary to put in place measures to avoid the repetition of such mistakes in the future. (Fred and Allan, 2006) These two policies are similar in various ways. First of all, the policies are dealing with the same issue. They were also put in place in different schools to solve a common problem. All these policies were put in place in order to stop discrimination from taking place within the school set up. They are similar in the sense that any person that witnesses discrimination can have the right and the confidence to face the management and question why the action took place. There are also a number of differences between the two policies. This is especially in the way the policies have been explained. Kansas district school has clearly explained the various aspects of discrimination that are not allowed within the school. These aspects on the other hand have not been highlighted in Philadelphia district school. Kansas district school clearly says that the staff and other stakeholders should not carry out discrimination on the basis of color, religion, race, age, gender identity, sexual orientation and disability. (Fowler, 2008) The policy also further says that any factor that is prohibited by the law is also included in the policy. Analysis of the Philadelphia district school policy shows that it does not explain the different aspects that are covered. In this case, a person that faces discrimination on the basis of sex may not be aware that the policy also covers this aspect. There are chances that stakeholders may assume that that the policy only covers discrimination on the basis of color and race. This is especially in relation to the different scripts in people’s minds about discrimination. (Fowler, 2008) The Kansas district school policy further elaborates that if any person believes that he or she has been subject to discrimination should report to the relevant school authorities. This on the other hand has not been included in the Philadelphia district school policy. There are various strengths and shortcomings of the policies. The Philadelphia district school policy’s strength is in the fact that it is brief and can therefore be read easily. On the other hand, Kansas district school policy’s strength is in the fact that it elaborates on the different aspects of discrimination included. This gives stakeholders the confidence to report the actions that fall among different aspects included. The shortcoming in Kansas school policy is the fact some of the highlighted aspects are not self explanatory. For instance the issue on sexual orientation is not quite clear and one wonders what it really means. The other shortcoming is in the fact that the policy has been written in a very long paragraph therefore making it hard for concerned people to easily read through. There are various aspects that I would change in the two policies. First of all, I would ensure that the Philadelphia district school policy included various aspects of discrimination. This would include discrimination against age, sex, race, color, religion and disability. This would enable concerned parties to clearly identify their situations with the named aspects. In relation to Kansas district school policy, I would put the aspects in point form so that they would be easily read. I would also have short explanations on the mentioned aspects so that they are clear in the reader’s mind. I would also include the repercussions that any person who violates the policy would face. This would be clear to stakeholders even when it comes to punishment measures. This would also enable individuals shun away from discriminative actions. (Parkerson, 2001) In conclusion, district schools in United States have different policies that act as a guideline to stakeholders therein. Kansas and Philadelphia district schools have a policy that deals with discrimination. This policy was necessary because of the discriminative actions that were taking place within the schools. The two policies are similar in that they are dealing with the same issue and therefore solving a common problem. The difference between the two policies is in the fact that Kansas district school policy is more elaborate as compared to district school policy. The two also have their own strengths and shortcomings. Philadelphia’s school policy’s strength is that it is brief and easy to read. Kansas district school policy on the other hand shows aspects included. Philadelphia district school policy is limited in that it does not highlight aspects included. Kansas policy is limited since it does not explain the aspects mentioned. I would change Philadelphia school policy to ensure all aspects are included. I would ensure all aspects in Kansas school policy are well explained. Read More