Search results

The prevalence and drawbacks of policy borrowing in teacher education are widely acknowledged. In England, there has been extensive use of research conducted in the United States as justification for a prescriptive approach to teacher education nationwide. This raises questions about evidence borrowing from different contexts as a key facet of policy making, with inherent concerns about how the contextual influences on that research influence its effectiveness in transitioning to new spaces. Through the use of spatial theory, this chapter examines this phenomenon and highlights how inferences made from research undertaken in one context, but applied in another, can be detrimental to the established practices and expertise of teacher educators.

England is a clear example of a country where government has imposed a stranglehold over curriculum development over the last 30 years, driven by a belief in the power of markets and testing to improve education. We provide an account of the evolution of a national curriculum in England, along with the growing importance of the school inspection system, which has served as a form of surveillance and as a constraint on curriculum development in schools, resulting in a very subject dominated curriculum. This has been exacerbated by demise of many traditional meso level curriculum actors and the emergence of a different assemblage of support. We give particular attention to the prominence given to interventions in pedagogy and curriculum, set within a school effectiveness paradigm. We explain that within government rhetoric there is encouragement to innovate but we show through research evidence that accountability pressures overwhelm this message and that younger teachers have not been introduced to or trained in curriculum development processes. In the final section of the chapter, we describe some schools which are going against the grain and innovating, but they do stand very much as oases in a curriculum desert.

This paper is a critical reflection on the linguistic conservatism as found within current curriculum policies and assessment regimes in the UK, arguing that they represents a form of linguicism which serves to entrench linguistic social injustices. This paper aims to trace the “trajectory” of policy across different levels, discourses and settings, with a particular focus on how linguicism is conceptualised, defended and resisted by teachers. The author draws connections between language ideologies within policy discourse, language tests and teacher interviews.

This study adopts a critical approach to examining educational language policies and assessments. It begins with the assumption that policies and tests are powerful political and ideological tools, which can steer teachers into making certain decisions in the classroom, some of which they may not believe in or agree with. Data are drawn from policy documents, test questions and teacher interviews, with a focus on how teachers talk about language and pedagogies in their classrooms. In total, 22 teachers were interviewed, with this data being transcribed and thematically indexed.

The findings reveal how linguicism is embedded within UK education policy, and how this comes to be replicated within teachers’ discourse and practice. There are three main findings: that teachers can come to operate under a form of “pedagogical coercion”, whereby language policies and tests have a powerful hold on their practice; that teachers see current policy as championing standard English at the expense of non-standardised varieties, and that teachers often see and talk about language as a proxy for other social factors such as education and employability.

This study provides a critical perspective on language education policies in the UK, arguing for greater awareness about the nature and dangers of linguicism across all levels of policy. Data generated from classroom interaction would be a useful avenue for future work.

This paper offers an original, discursively critical examination of language education policy in the UK, with a particular focus on the current curriculum and using original data generated from teacher interviews and associated policy documents.

This paper analyses the radical reorganisation of English school sport by the coalition government, a move that led to the emergence of a significant discourse of dissatisfaction amongst school sport advocacy coalition groups.

This paper utilises Sabatier’s (Sabatier & Jenkins-Smith, 1999) Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) to identify how the coalition government’s decision to abolish the successful Physical Education School Sport and Club Links (PESSCL) programme has specifically weakened the power of formerly influential advocacy coalitions within the school sport arena. Weber’s (1947) conceptualisation of charisma, in particular, the concept of charismatic rhetoric, is used to explain how these historically extensive policy changes were communicated by the coalition government, and particularly, by Michael Gove, the Secretary of State.

Locating the government’s rhetoric within the charismatic literature allowed the exploration of how a disempowerment of advocacy coalition groups and centralisation of power towards the state might have been partly achieved via the use of charismatic rhetoric (Weber, 1947).

Javidan and Waldman (2003) identified a lack of rigorous empirical study of the role of charismatic leadership and its consequences in public sector leadership, a critique that has been addressed by this paper.

The purpose of this paper is to consider and explore the principles that should inform a positive and progressive approach to conceptualising and delivering youth justice.

Critical literature review, incorporating primary research and evaluation conducted by the authors.

A children first model of positive youth justice should cohere around the promotion of four key principles: children’s rights and adults’ responsibilities; desistance and inclusion; diversion and systems management; relationship-based partnerships between children and practitioners.

The child-friendly, child-appropriate and legitimacy-focused nature of the Children first, offender second (CFOS) model can encourage diversion from formal system contact, can enhance levels of participation and engagement with formal youth justice interventions and promotes positive behaviours and outcomes for children in trouble.

The principles outlined progress youth justice into positive forms antithetical to the negative elements of the “new youth justice” and will have relevance to other jurisdictions, rooted as they are in universality, child development and children’s rights.

The purpose of this paper is to describe and discuss current challenges for citizenship education in England.

This paper provides a relatively brief overview of the reasons for the introduction of citizenship education into the National Curriculum. Then, it describes the different versions (in 2002, 2008 and 2014) of the National Curriculum for citizenship. Finally, this paper draws attention to the issues that explain the reasons for the radical change in status and nature of citizenship education evidenced by the 2014 version of the subject.

Following the period 1998-2010 in which citizenship education became research informed and professionally developed, policy makers now since 2014 seem to be involved in the development of citizenship education in the National Curriculum in the form of promoting knowledge about civics, willingness to volunteer and a commitment to manage responsibly personal finances. In 2014 policy makers have confirmed the place of citizenship education in the National Curriculum but its nature, the relative lack of attention devoted to it and the growing official commitment to character education which emphasises personal morality rather than citizenship education suggests that it has lost a lot of ground. This paper argues that there are parallels between what we felt had happened at earlier points, principally, the early 1990s, when political education had been rejected in favour of a particular form of citizenship education (i.e. volunteering); and the situation in 2014 when volunteering and character education are now officially preferred.

This paper argues for a need to address key current challenges in citizenship education in the context of earlier development.