Education Policy as a Practice of Power

Abstract

This article outlines some theoretical and methodological parameters of a critical practice approach to policy. The article discusses the origins of this approach, how it can be uniquely adapted to educational analysis, and why it matters—not only for scholarly interpretation but also for the democratization of policy processes as well. Key to the exposition is the concept of appropriation as a form of creative interpretive practice necessarily engaged in by different people involved in the policy process. Another crucial distinction is made between authorized policy and unauthorized or informal policy; it is argued that when nonauthorized policy actors appropriate policy they are in effect often making new policy in situated locales and communities of practice.

Inclusive education in schools in rural areas

“…Concerning our research objectives and results obtained, our data reaches similar conclusions to that of other t international studies (Ainscow, 2001;Levison, Sutton & Winstead, 2009;Jeffery & Troman, 2013;Adderley et al, 2015), and many other national studies (Arranz Márquez, 2008, Llorent García & López Azuaga, 2012. Greater teacher implication is necessary in order to apply inclusive education on a wider scale.…”

Toward Common Ground: The Uses of Educational Anthropology in Multicultural Education

“…Educational policy research can also explain the mechanisms by which power is distributed, wielded, and maintained by using an anthropological approach to expose how these hidden cultural assumptions drive the development of legislative mandates and their implementation. Understanding such power dynamics is essential to defining what policy does rather than merely what policy is and to investigating processes of policy appropriation, or ways that particular actors use policy to promote or advance their own interests (Levinson & Sutton, 2001, Levinson, Sutton & Winstead, 2009). …”

Practising equity: the activation and appropriation of student equity policy in Queensland higher education

“…The study is aimed at providing 'thick descriptions' (Denzin, 1989) of equity outreach practices, and mapping from that standpoint how those practices are being coordinated by and in turn constitute these textually (policy) mediated ruling relations. By taking a standpoint alongside equity outreach practitioners, the aim is to discover how their social practices are both constrained by, but also critically appropriate (Levinson, Sutton & Winstead, 2009), these wider ruling relations. In doing so, I aim to contribute to knowledge of how institutional relations impact equity practices within the Australian higher education.…”

“…My primary interlocutors are Bourdieu (Bourdieu, 1977(Bourdieu, , 1990Bourdieu & Johnson, 1993;Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992), Fairclough (Chouliarki & Fairclough, 1999;) and Dorothy Smith (Smith, 2005(Smith, , 2007(Smith, , 2006b). I also draw on Levinson and colleagues' (Levinson et al, 2009;Sutton & Levinson, 2001) view of policy as appropriation and practices of power, and work this together with Smith's insight into the textual mechanisms for the local activation of ruling power relations, so that policy is conceived as textually-mediated practices of power. My thesis is that federal student equity policy (HEPPP) enactment is a textually-mediated practice of power articulating local student equity practices to the ruling neoliberal policy discourses.…”

“…My thesis is that federal student equity policy (HEPPP) enactment is a textually-mediated practice of power articulating local student equity practices to the ruling neoliberal policy discourses. Yet the local policy practices of staff from UQ, Griffith and The Group do not simply reproduce these ruling relations, but also simultaneously appropriate (Levinson et al, 2009) them, within limits to be explored, according to local field and institutional imperatives.…”