User:Tendhadul43/sandbox

Education Policy Introduction

There was a time when educational policy as policy was taken for granted. Clearly that is no longer the case. Today, educational policies are the focus of considerable controversy and public Contestation. Educational policy-making has become highly politicized. Nevertheless, to explore in detail the extensive philosophical and ideological underpinnings that have shaped educational policy over time although it does consider briefly liberalism, Neo liberalism and the emergence of the new right. It matters are not ignored. Indeed, it provides a coherent framework for considering policy at a range of different levels and developing an international perspective, albeit a limited one, on educational policy, its themes and its impact. Two main themes, human capitalism and citizenship and social justice are linked with a third set of themes, markets, choice and accountability, to provide an analysis of the dominant discourses that have shaped educational policy in many countries across the world. Within this context, aspects of school leadership and management will be considered in order to establish the extent to which the work of school leaders is shaped by such themes and how far school leaders can interpret, modify or create policy at an institutional level. Policy studies in education have tended to take one of three forms:- 1- The development of broad analytical models through which the policy process can be understood and interpreted. 2- Analyses of a range of policy issues. 3- Critiques of specific policies. These relatively fragmented approaches often fail to provide a cogent account of the policy process within a clearly articulated framework for analysis. It is often difficult, therefore, for those studying policy and for those working in schools that are subject to educational policies to make sense of the policy contexts within which they have to operate. Nevertheless, it is important to recognize that those working in schools are not merely passive receivers and implements of policy decisions made elsewhere. In many cases, they are able to shape the policy process, especially at institutional level. The main purpose is to analyse such policy issues and policy implementation. It is based on the assumption that the policy process may pass through a variety of stages and can take place at a number of different levels. Policy development therefore is not a simple case of understanding the priorities, or indeed the whims, of governments or individual school leaders. Policy must be seen as a dialectic process in which all those affected by the policy will be involved in shaping its development. Policy development is therefore both a continuous and a contested process in which those with competing values and differential access to power seek to form and shape policy in their own interests. To this end, a model for analyzing policy formulation and implementation is established which informs the analysis throughout the world. Policy analysis as the study of policy:- The central concern of this volume, policy analysis, can take a number of forms, for example the development of broad analytical models through which the policy process can be understood and interpreted, analyses of a range of policy issues or critiques of specific policies. In some cases policy advocates argue from their findings toward a particular conclusion, which is offered as a recommendation. In other cases, where a very strong commitment to a particular course of action predates the research, whatever analysis was conducted may have been designed, consciously or unconsciously, to support the case to be argued. the highly politicized environment within which policy evaluation research takes place can present very distinct methodological challenges. Analysis of policy determination – here the emphasis is very much on the policy process – not on the impact of policy, but on how policy developed in the precise way that it did. Such research can give a vital insight into explaining how and why specific policies emerged in the final form they adopted. Analysis of policy content – which argue that more for academic interest rather than public impact and here the emphasis is on understanding the origin, intentions and operation of specific policies. The common approach to this is to utilize a case study format and this raises important questions about the appropriateness of methods in policy. These distinctions can be helpful in identifying approaches to policy research, but they do not, on their own, shed light on the complexity of policy development processes. Policy analysis within education must be capable of recognizing the many different levels at which policy development takes place, the myriad range of educational institutions involved and the importance of specific cultural contexts. For example, legislation passed by a central state is clearly an example of ‘government policy’. A policy developed at an individual state school may fall within a broader heading of public policy, but what of policy developed in a private school, independent from, but regulated by, the central state? A model of policy analysis must be capable of illuminating policy development in all these diverse and various contexts. a simple summary of policy analysis is the study of what governments do, why and with what effects. This can be a helpful starting point as long as it is recognized that such analyses must embrace institutions at all levels of the education system and must be capable of including institutions that are effectively part of a public system, even if they are not formally in the public sector.

Perspective on Education policy:-

It may be attractive and convenient to be able to offer short and succinct definitions of the concepts being analysed but this is seldom possible or helpful, and a discussion of policy is no exception. The range of conceptual issues embraced by the term policy are too broad to be confined to a single, pithy definition – rather it is necessary to develop an understanding of policy that reflects the breadth and complexity that the reality of policy analysis entails. One common approach is to conceptualize policy as a Programs of action, or a set of guidelines that determine how one should proceed given a particular set of circumstances. it is important to recognize that policy is systematic rather than random. It is goal-oriented and it is complex – it is the co-ordination of several courses of action, and not one discrete activity. policy is ‘made’ it is constantly being re-contextualized and therefore rather than policy development as a linear process it should be seen as a cycle, made up of ‘policy contexts’. This critique points to a wider conceptualization of policy that takes as its starting point the notion of policy as the Operationalization of values, but recognizes that there is no automatic consensus around what those values might be.

Policy as the Operationalization of values – understanding the nature of power:-

Understanding the link between educational leaders and the development of policy is a central concern of this volume. It has already been argued that policy development is not a neat process in which educational leaders simply digest policy from above and translate it into practice in the institution. Rather, policy development is fuzzy, messy and complex. It is the product of compromise, negotiation, dispute and struggle as those with competing, sometimes conflicting, values seek to secure specific objectives. Educational leaders are not simply faced with making sense of policy ‘from above’, but also the demands and aspirations from those below. Individuals and collectivities within organizations will naturally seek to shape policy and these pressures create a pincer movement in which educational leaders must seek to reconcile both external and internal pressures for, or in opposition to, change. In such circumstances the capacity of organizational leaders to secure policy changes, or resist them, will reflect a complex balance of power between the leader and those from within and outside the organization. It is important therefore to set out a broader conceptualization of power that can be helpful in explaining policy development processes at micro and macro levels. Policy can therefore be presented in part as the analysis of change and the way in which change is managed. Change may be inevitable – but there is no inevitability about how change is experienced. Those with power are often able to shape the way the ‘real world’ is perceived – to define the problem, to set the limits within which solutions might be acceptable and even to select and impose specific solutions. The value of the analyses presented above is to link policy and change, but to recognize that change is not neutral. Policy, as one of the ways in which people experience change, will inevitably be contested, and its outcomes shaped by the consequences of macro and micro-political processes in which competing groups seek to shape and influence policy.

Conclusion:-

The highlighted the complex nature of policy, and pointed to the inadequacy of overly simple definitions of policy and descriptions of the policy process. What is understood by ‘policy’, how it is conceptualized, requires a broad understanding of a range of inter-related processes. What is often presented as policy is frequently no more than a statement of intent, a plan of action or a set of guidelines. At one level the purpose of such policies may appear clear, but it is important to locate policy within a wider context. Policy is about the power to determine what gets done, or not done. These are profoundly political issues. Those presenting policy will interpret its content differently, and those receiving policy will do similarly – a single ‘policy’ may be better understood therefore as a plurality of policies that emerge and develop as the policy process moves from formulation to implementation and applied throughout this volume, identifies a four-stage process that begins by recognizing the importance of the wider socio-political environment in shaping the discourse within which policy debate is conducted. From within this discourse, a strategic direction develops in which specific educational policies become more clearly defined, and success criteria are established. As policy texts emerge with greater clarity this in turn shapes the organizational principles, and ultimately the operational practices, that shape the experience of policy at an institutional level. In reality this is not a tidy linear process in which policy progresses obediently from one stage to the next. Differences in emphasis, differences in interpretation and differences in attitudes to policy are ever present and will in large part large reflect the differences in values that underpin policies policy being seen, Conflicts over policy represent struggles between opposing values sets. So the highlighted the centrality of values to an understanding of policy and the need to see policy as both product and process. Policy therefore can be seen as both operational statements of values, and as the capacity to operationalize values through the ability to exert influence at key points in the four stages of policy development. Those values are clearly the values of individuals – values are, after all, those beliefs and principles that individuals hold most dear. it provides both a lens through which the world is viewed, and they provide a moral compass that shapes actions and responses to the environment. However, values do not float free of the environment in which they are enacted. Values are constantly being shaped, formed and re-formed. Pluralist approaches to policy development emphasize the extent to which values are able to shape policy, but it is also important to recognize how policy can shape values. This is an iterative process that raises important questions about where power lies. To what extent are individuals free to shape policy, or to what extent might the influence of individuals be shaped 24 Policy and education by more powerful structural factors? so it identified a number of concepts relating to the nature of power that help develop an understanding of policy as both a product and a process in which access to resources of power can decisively shape the development of policy. The centrality of power in the policy process highlights the need to explore further the sites of policy development – principally the state and the institution. What is the relationship between the two and how does the relative balance of power impact on the development of policy at both state.