Thesis (Ph.D.) - Indiana University, Education, 2015Education choice and standards-based accountability have been the two most dominant movements in U.S. education policy over at least the last quarter century. The integration of the two movements has become increasingly common in education policy frameworks, but the theoretical tension between the curricular autonomy and curricular alignment fundamental to the respective movements has never been fully resolved. This research explores the theoretical curricular tension between education choice and standards-­‐based accountability through an analysis of the public discourse over the consideration, adoption, and implementation of Indiana’s 2011 statewide voucher policy, the Choice Scholarship Program [CSP], as represented through two state newspapers. The dissertation begins with a reflection on the meaning of “curriculum,” an overview of the U.S. education choice and standards-based accountability movements, and an explanation of the theoretical curricular tension between choice and standards-based accountability policies. The Indiana CSP, unique among U.S. voucher programs in the standards‐based accountability policy mechanisms it includes, is then reviewed within a discussion of why it could lead to curricular tension in participating schools. I then discuss the discourse analysis methodologies used to examine (a) who participated in the public discourse over the state voucher policy; (b) what kinds of discursive frames participants used; and (c) how concepts related to education choice and standards and potential curricular tension between the two were framed. Research findings include a discussion of sixteen identified discourse actor groups and the nature and frequency of over twenty conceptual frames employed to define education vouchers, curriculum, and standards. I conclude with a proposed theory of contemporary curriculum diversity and ideas for future research.