Michael Musheno – författare

Urban schools are often associated with violence, chaos, and youth aggression. But is this reputation really the whole picture? In Navigating Conflict, Calvin Morrill and Michael Musheno challenge the violence-centered conventional wisdom of urban youth studies, revealing instead the social ingenuity with which teens informally and peacefully navigate strife-ridden peer trouble. Taking as their focus a multi-ethnic, high-poverty school in the American southwest, the authors complicate our vision of urban youth, along the way revealing the resilience of students in the face of carceral disciplinary tactics.Grounded in sixteen years of ethnographic fieldwork, Navigating Conflict draws on archival and institutional evidence to locate urban schools in more than a century of local, state, and national change. Morrill and Musheno make the case for schools that work, where negative externalities are buffered and policies are adapted to ever-evolving student populations. They argue that these kinds of schools require meaningful, inclusive student organizations for sustaining social trust and collective peer dignity alongside responsive administrative leadership. Further, students must be given the freedom to associate and move among their peers, all while in the vicinity of watchful, but not intrusive adults. Morrill and Musheno make a compelling case for these foundational conditions, arguing that only through them can schools enable a rich climate for learning, achievement, and social advancement.

Urban schools are often associated with violence, chaos, and youth aggression. But is this reputation really the whole picture? In Navigating Conflict, Calvin Morrill and Michael Musheno challenge the violence-centered conventional wisdom of urban youth studies, revealing instead the social ingenuity with which teens informally and peacefully navigate strife-ridden peer trouble. Taking as their focus a multi-ethnic, high-poverty school in the American southwest, the authors complicate our vision of urban youth, along the way revealing the resilience of students in the face of carceral disciplinary tactics. Grounded in sixteen years of ethnographic fieldwork, Navigating Conflict draws on archival and institutional evidence to locate urban schools in more than a century of local, state, and national change. Morrill and Musheno make the case for schools that work, where negative externalities are buffered and policies are adapted to ever-evolving student populations. They argue that these kinds of schools require meaningful, inclusive student organizations for sustaining social trust and collective peer dignity alongside responsive administrative leadership. Further, students must be given the freedom to associate and move among their peers, all while in the vicinity of watchful, but not intrusive adults. Morrill and Musheno make a compelling case for these foundational conditions, arguing that only through them can schools enable a rich climate for learning, achievement, and social advancement.

This book breaks new ground in interpreting how identity informs the judgements of State workers, as normative orientations coincide with identities and authority. At all levels, legal ordering becomes entangled with moral orientations and the micropolitics of identification, as workers interact with one another and their clients. The result is neither law nor order, but a fragile cultural politics of workers acting on citizens as they act out their identities. Using case studies in the field, the book conducts an exploration of the State, whilst holding on to the strong notions of identity, power and normative orientation. It introduces a unique notion of rights by arguing that workers assert identity and power as they make judgements about who gets what from the State.

This book breaks new ground in interpreting how identity informs the judgements of State workers, as normative orientations coincide with identities and authority. At all levels, legal ordering becomes entangled with moral orientations and the micropolitics of identification, as workers interact with one another and their clients. The result is neither law nor order, but a fragile cultural politics of workers acting on citizens as they act out their identities. Using case studies in the field, the book conducts an exploration of the State, whilst holding on to the strong notions of identity, power and normative orientation. It introduces a unique notion of rights by arguing that workers assert identity and power as they make judgements about who gets what from the State.

This book breaks new ground in interpreting how identity informs the judgements of State workers, as normative orientations coincide with identities and authority. At all levels, legal ordering becomes entangled with moral orientations and the micropolitics of identification, as workers interact with one another and their clients. The result is neither law nor order, but a fragile cultural politics of workers acting on citizens as they act out their identities. Using case studies in the field, the book conducts an exploration of the State, whilst holding on to the strong notions of identity, power and normative orientation. It introduces a unique notion of rights by arguing that workers assert identity and power as they make judgements about who gets what from the State.

This book breaks new ground in interpreting how identity informs the judgements of State workers, as normative orientations coincide with identities and authority. At all levels, legal ordering becomes entangled with moral orientations and the micropolitics of identification, as workers interact with one another and their clients. The result is neither law nor order, but a fragile cultural politics of workers acting on citizens as they act out their identities. Using case studies in the field, the book conducts an exploration of the State, whilst holding on to the strong notions of identity, power and normative orientation. It introduces a unique notion of rights by arguing that workers assert identity and power as they make judgements about who gets what from the State.