(2006)
An analytical framework for policy engagement: The contested case of 14-19 reform in England.
Journal of Education Policy
, 21
(6)
pp. 679-696.
10.1080/02680930600969233.
Preview |
Text
HodgsonSpours2007Analytical679.pdf - Accepted Version Download (160kB) | Preview |
Abstract
This article attempts to construct an analytical framework to reflect upon the deeply contested area of 14-19 education and training policy in England following the publication of the Government's White Paper 14-19 education and skills. We argue that the evolution of 14-19 policy over the last 15 years, culminating in the publication of the Tomlinson Final Report on 14-19 reform and then its rejection by the Government, might be better understood by looking at this area through the application of four related conceptual tools-political eras, the education state, the policy process and the operation of political space. These concepts or tools are used here both to narrate historical and recent 14-19 developments, to critique current policy-making in this area, and to identify opportunities and challenges facing researchers seeking to engage with the policy process. We suggest that this analytical framework might not only be applied to reform in the 14-19 phase but also to education policy more widely. © 2006 Taylor & Francis.
| Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Title: | An analytical framework for policy engagement: The contested case of 14-19 reform in England |
| Open access status: | An open access version is available from UCL Discovery |
| DOI: | 10.1080/02680930600969233 |
| UCL classification: | UCL UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Education UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Education > UCL Institute of Education UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Education > UCL Institute of Education > IOE - Education, Practice and Society |
| URI: | https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1505587 |
Loading...
Loading...Loading...| 1. |  United Kingdom | 6 |
| 2. |  China | 6 |
| 3. |  United States | 4 |
| 4. |  France | 1 |
| 5. |  Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 |
| 6. |  Korea, Republic of | 1 |
| 7. |  Bangladesh | 1 |
| 8. |  Isle of Man | 1 |
| 9. |  Australia | 1 |
| 10. |  Tanzania, United Republic of | 1 |
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
