Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: I argue that changes within the UC Children's Bureau reflect both adoption of and resistance to the crime-centered governance that emerged during the last thirty years. Originally concerned with the "whole child", the Bureau helped create and sustain attention to child abuse within a larger social movement concerned with victims of crime, while other child welfare concerns gradually disappeared from the Bureau’s agenda. At the present time, the Bureau concerns itself solely with the issue of child abuse, operating as a national resource center and a distributor of federal funds relating to child abuse intervention and treatment. However, the Bureau to a significant degree retains a social work model of child abuse intervention rather than a criminal justice model. Ultimately, I try to answer two related questions. The first is how the Bureau’s activities throughout the century reflect shifting notions of childhood and shifting concerns about the problems faced by children. The second asks more specifically how and why responses to child abuse have both reflected and resisted contemporary discourses of crime and victimization. While the Bureau’s general concern with child abuse is consistent with the crime victims' movement, its actual responses largely contradict the leanings of other crime victim constituencies and their accomplishments.

Publication Type: Single Paper Format
Abstract: Teachers must be prepared for this diverse world and understand the impact partnerships and collaboration play in educating the whole child.

Publication Type: Single Paper Format
Abstract: Presenters will discuss the results of a study of student teachers’ use of descriptive and collaborative frameworks for child study. Project frameworks and action research materials will be distributed.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Democrats and Republicans declared the day that George W. Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2002 an end to the education crisis. Why then has America failed to see the achievement gap decline and instead seen opposition grow to NCLB? This paper answers two questions. First, why did so much support exist within the federal government to pass NCLB? Second, why does so much opposition among many actors exist to such a supported bill? Content analysis of the New York Times and Washington Post from 1999 through 2007 is used to explain actors’ involvement (or lack of involvement) in both the passage and implementation efforts. Not only are actors considered, but also time pressures pre- and post-passage. Political pressures to ensure bipartisanship existed before passage as well as education pressures because the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) needed to be re-authorized; however, NCLB needs to be re-authorized again in 2007 and political opinions and pressures have shifted. There are multiple reasons why NCLB faces opposition, including concerns over funding, accountability, states rights’, expectations for qualified teachers and a failure to show improvements in the schools. NCLB serves as a case study of the political process by showing that to create successful policy, politicians must listen to actors involved in the implementation process and plan for successful enforcement while balancing political pressures.

Publication Type: Poster
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: According to the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act (2003), child custody arrangements should be in the “best interest” of the child. This “best interest” standard requires consideration of the child’s wishes regarding the custody arrangement, yet there is little guidance about the degree of influence the child’s interest should have on the custody decision. This poster presents findings from an empirical study of approximately 130 child custody evaluation reports, examining the role played by and weight given to child preference in the evaluation process.