Search

This paper draws on material generated from a qualitative study of educational impacts of a British welfare reform affecting housing rent subsidy, size and location commonly known as "the bedroom tax" (Bragg et al., 2015), which was partly taken as a topic for study specifically because of its iconic status as a controversial and unpopular welfare "reform" (or cut). The analysis draws on Foucauldian understandings of subjectification or subject-formation--as elaborated both from within and in relation to the social (Foucault, 1970; 1983; Ball, 1990; Olssen, 2006; Popkewitz & Brennan, 1998), read through new and newly available perspectives (Allen, 2015; Pêcheux, 2014). This approach is applied to discuss how those addressed by educational policy, and also as research participants, are both subject to prevailing political and practice-oriented discourses (of educational "problems", and of the neoliberal frameworks by which poverty and welfare cuts are discussed), but also--at times--how they can become the subject of--in the sense of reformulating--these discourses in their accounts of everyday activities. After outlining our approach and the context for the study, we focus on four examples drawn from the narratives of the various stakeholders in the study--parents/carers, school staff and other community-based organisations as illustrations of how this discursive approach can provide rich readings of relevance to educational policy debates. From these we not only take further discussions of the production and regulation of subjectivities via social and educational policy practices, but also offer indicative glimpses of resistance to this as expressed by those who are its primary subjects, and where in one case such resistance brings our own research commitments under critical scrutiny. As such, the contribution of this article is both topic-related (concerning the educational impacts of policy) but, crucially, also conceptual and methodological, in motivating for a Foucauldian-influenced discursive approach that is sensitive to struggle and resistance.

This paper presents a novel conceptualisation of the school context by examining the 'personal' (emotional wellbeing), the 'political' (everyday political actions and power relations) and the 'Political' (the Political system, including electoral politics and governmental policy) and how these interrelate. Informed by literatures from a range of disciplines, the authors use this conceptual lens to consider data from two projects which explored the impact of austerity on schools. In their qualitative analysis of data from interviews with 82 participants they illustrate connections between the personal, the political and the Political. They conceptualise the work schools are doing in response to the impacts of the Political as quiet political activism, which appears to have knock-on effects for staff wellbeing. They consider the implications of this, concluding that the 'quiet politics' occurring in schools may bring a sense of control and create opportunities for community activism, but also has potentially worrying consequences.

The paper examines variations in the extent of special education needs (SEN) in different socio-economic contexts, drawing on data from 46 English primary schools. It examines the implications of variations in SEN for individual pupils and for school organisation and processes. It reviews funding allocations for SEN and what they mean for the provision of support in different settings. (Contains 3 tables and 9 notes.)

Since 2005, the English government has adopted a policy of regenerating disadvantaged neighbourhoods by reconstructing them as mixed communities, in which schools appealing to higher income residents are a key feature. This creates some difficulties for those concerned with social justice, who support the notion of integrated schools and neighbourhoods, but are concerned that the re-modelling of neighbourhoods and schools in this way could further disadvantage existing populations. Mix is supported but mixing is opposed. This article interrogates this "social justice dilemma" by analysing the origins and development of the mixed communities policy. It demonstrates the distinction between the principle of mix and the policy of mixed communities, while illuminating the political and discursive processes that conflate the two. Finally the authors indicate how research can be mobilised in support of neoliberal discourses about neighbourhoods and schools and draw some broader conclusions for education research and policy. (Contains 1 figure and 4 notes.)

Social justice in education demands, at the very least, that all students should have access to the same quality of educational processes, even if their outcomes turn out to be unequal. Yet schools in the poorest neighbourhoods are consistently adjudged to provide a lower quality of education than those in more advantaged areas. Based on a qualitative study of four such schools, this article explores links between the contexts in which they were operating and the quality of education provided. It concludes that high-poverty contexts exert downward pressures on quality, and that consistently high levels of quality in schools in the poorest neighbourhoods need to be assured by policy measures that alter their context or, through greater funding, improve their organisational capacity to respond. Social justice will not be achieved by managerialist policies that seek to improve schools by addressing the performance of managers and staff, without a recognition of the context in which this performance takes place.

The article builds on prior arguments that research on issues of social justice in education has often lacked constructive engagement with education policy-making, and that this can be partly attributed to a lack of clarity about what a socially just education system might look like. Extending this analysis, this article argues that this lack of clarity is perpetuated by a series of contradictions and dilemmas underpinning ‘progressive’ debate in education, which have not been adequately confronted. At the heart are dilemmas about what constitutes a socially just negotiation of the binarised hierarchy of knowledge that characterises education in the UK, Australia and elsewhere. Three exemplar cases presented from contemporary education curriculum policy in England and Australia are used to illustrate these dilemmas. We then extend this argument to a series of other philosophical dilemmas which haunt education and create tensions or contradictions for those concerned with social justice. It is maintained that we need to confront these dilemmas in efforts to extend conceptual clarity in what it is we are seeking to achieve, which in turn can better equip us to provide the empirical and conceptual information necessary to effectively engage policy-making to remediate inequalities in education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Education Policy Analysis Archives / Archivos Analíticos de Políticas Educativas / Arquivos Analíticos de Políticas Educativas is the property of Educational Policy Analysis Archives & Education Review and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Residential mobility (or 'moving home') is a common and often desired occurrence for families with young children. Many seek upward moves, to homes that better suit expanding households and areas that are deemed good for children. Families will seek to avoid 'disadvantaging moves' (those which are involuntary, frequent or which take them to less good housing or neighbourhoods), although much less attention is given to these kinds of moves in the housing policy literature. In this paper, I explore how advantaging moves could be facilitated and disadvantaging ones minimized, through housing policy. Drawing on a review of policy in the UK since 1980 and particularly in England since 2010, I develop a schema for considering kinds of policies that might impact on different kinds of moves for families in different housing tenures, as well as looking at the ways in which policies not explicitly designed to impact on mobility might nevertheless have this effect. This provides a framework for policy development and evaluation which should be applicable in different national contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The reduction of socio-economic inequalities in school outcomes was a major priority of the Coalition Government in England from 2010-15. In this paper we examine the Coalition's policies and spending, including an analysis of the distributional effect of its pupil premium policy. We also look at trends in outcomes up to 2014. We find that although the pupil premium had a modest overall effect of distributing more money to schools with poorer intakes, this was nested within a wider set of policies which have disadvantaged low income families and children, and that there is evidence of socio-economic gaps widening on some indicators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are substantial variations in labour market outcomes between neighbourhoods. One potential partial explanation is that residents of some neighbourhoods face discrimination from employers. Although studies of deprived areas have recorded resident perceptions of discrimination by employers and negative employer perceptions of certain areas, until now there has been no direct evidence on whether employers treat job applicants differently by area of residence. This paper reports a unique experiment to test for a neighbourhood reputation effect involving 2001 applications to 667 real jobs by fictional candidates nominally resident in neighbourhoods with poor and bland reputations. The experiment found no statistically significant difference in employer treatment of applicants from these areas, indicating that people living in neighbourhoods with poor reputations did not face ‘postcode discrimination’ in the labour market, at the initial selection stage. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article reviews Bernard Barker's claims that ‘the pendulum is swinging’, in relation to school markets and competition. Barker's arguments are complex in this regard. He rejects markets and competition as a means of improving outcomes and equity, but supports some of the system features that are often associated with marketisation, such as school autonomy and differentiation. With this in mind, the article reviews the underpinning ideology and design of market and competition policies in England under different governments since 1988, as well as the evidence on the impact of these policies. It argues that the pendulum is not swinging away from markets and competition, although ideological shifts are discernible in the policies of the new Coalition government. One reason for this is that the evidence for the damaging effects of marketisation is not nearly as conclusive as Barker suggests. The pendulum is, however, swinging away from central regulation, including from regulatory mechanisms to protect against the worst effects of market policies on social justice. This may accelerate demands for a progressive post-market alternative, although the article concludes by pointing to the difficulties in practice of reconciling the values of equity, opportunity, social mobility, choice and community within system design. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The paper examines variations in the extent of special education needs (SEN) in different socio-economic contexts, drawing on data from 46 English primary schools. It examines the implications of variations in SEN for individual pupils and for school organisation and processes. It reviews funding allocations for SEN and what they mean for the provision of support in different settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the adoption, by the New Labour government, of a mixed communities approach to the renewal of disadvantaged neighbourhoods in England. It argues that while there are continuities with previous policy, the new approach represents a more neoliberal policy turn in three respects: its identification of concentrated poverty as the problem; its faith in market-led regeneration; and its alignment with a new urban policy agenda in which cities are gentrified and remodelled as sites for capital accumulation through entrepreneurial local governance. The article then draws on evidence from the early phases of the evaluation of the mixed community demonstration projects to explore how the new policy approach is playing out at a local level, where it is layered upon existing policies, politics and institutional relationships. Tensions between neighbourhood and strategic interests, community and capital are evident as the local projects attempt neighbourhood transformation, while seeking to protect the rights and interests of existing residents. Extensive community consultation efforts run parallel with emergent governance structures, in which local state and capital interests combine and communities may effectively be disempowered. Policies and structures are still evolving and it is not yet entirely clear how these tensions will be resolved, especially in the light of a collapsing housing market, increased poverty and demand for affordable housing, and a shortage of private investment. Résumé Le gouvernement New Labour a adopté une démarche de mixité des communautés dans le cadre de la rénovation des quartiers défavorisés anglais. Si certains aspects de la politique antérieure persistent, la nouvelle approche prend une tournure plus néolibérale à trois titres: en identifiant les concentrations de pauvreté comme étant le problème, en se fiant à une régénération par le marché, et en s'associant à un nouveau programme de politiques urbaines dans lequel les villes sont ‘gentrifiées’ et remodelées en tant que lieux d'accumulation de capital à travers une gouvernance locale de type entrepreneurial. En s'appuyant sur les premières phases d’évaluation de ces projets de démonstration sur la mixité, il est possible d’étudier l'exécution de la nouvelle approche à un niveau local, où elle s'ajoute aux actions, politiques et relations institutionnelles existantes. Des tensions entre intérêts des quartiers et intérêts stratégiques, entre communauté et capital, sont manifestes, tandis que les projets locaux s'efforcent de transformer les quartiers tout en cherchant à protéger les droits et intérêts des résidents en place. D'importants efforts de consultation des communautés se déroulent pendant qu'apparaissent les structures de gouvernance dans lesquelles les intérêts du capital et des autorités territoriales se combinent et où les communautés risquent bien de perdre toute capacité. Actions publiques et structures continuant d’évoluer, on ne peut pas encore voir comment ces tensions vont être réglées, compte tenu notamment d'un effondrement du marché du logement, d'une progression de la pauvreté, d'un accroissement de la demande d'habitations accessibles financièrement, et d'un manque d'investissement privé. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Focuses on Labour Party's efforts to improve schools in disadvantaged areas in Great Britain. Goal of raising educational standards; Improvement of workforce knowledge and skills; Role of education in social inclusion and cohesion.