Positing behavior as interest driven insufficiently explains why
reform is difficult. This article draws on experiences with school reform
to argue that ideas in the form of purposes play a part. Purposes,
however, are erratic sources of motivation, sometimes generating intense
commitments but often functioning in a mercurial manner. They operate in
conjunction with the character and strength of supports. Purposes that are
compatible in principle may nevertheless compete for time, resources, and
especially attention. Because human beings are creatures of bounded
rationality, any given purpose is susceptible to attention shift.
Interpersonal and interorganizational networks can serve as counterweights
by bolstering identity with the reform goal, providing cognitive
reinforcement for it, and enhancing the credibility of a reform goal as
achievable. In an assessment of the role of ideas, it is important to
remember that they come in a variety of scopes and levels of abstractness.
As forces in the politics of reform, ideas have a part shaped by context.
The role of ideas in the local setting is quite different from their role
in media-infused battles at the national level. Local arenas are
frequently nonpartisan, with actors focused on immediate concerns, daily
demands, and scarce resources. Because concrete actions may be more
important than ideological posture, mass persuasion may be of less concern
than enlistment of scattered cadres of task-specific activists.Clarence Stone is Research Professor of
Political Science and Public Policy at George Washington and Professor
Emeritus, University of Maryland (cstone@gvpt.umd.edu). Marion Orr is
Frederick Lippitt Professor of Public Policy and Professor of Political
Science and Urban Studies, Brown University (Marion_Orr@brown.edu). Donn
Worgs is Assistant Professor of Political Science and Director of
Metropolitan Studies, Towson University (dworgs@ towson.edu). The authors
wish to thank three anonymous reviewers for extraordinarily helpful
comments.