Search results

Cover -- Endorsement -- Half Title -- Series Information -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Dedication -- Table of Contents -- List of Figures -- List of Tables -- Foreword -- Series Editor's Preface -- Acknowledgements -- Abbreviations and Acronyms -- 1 Introduction -- 1.1 What this Book Is About -- 1.2 Methodological Notes -- 1.3 The Organisation of the Book -- References -- Part I Context and Concepts -- 2 African Refugees in Australia: Resettlement and Representation -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 Resettlement -- 2.2.1 Global Initiatives -- 2.2.2 Australian Context -- 2.2.3 The Arrival of African Refugees -- 2.3 Representation -- 2.3.1 Racial Prejudice as Anchoring -- 2.3.2 From Anchoring to Othering -- 2.4 Conclusion -- Notes -- References -- 3 Education and Refugee Integration: A Capability Approach -- 3.1 Introduction -- 3.2 Educational Capability -- 3.2.1 Substantive Opportunities -- 3.2.2 Conversion Ability -- 3.2.3 Navigational Capacity -- 3.2.4 Conditioned Choice -- 3.3 Implications for Policy, Practice, and Further Research -- 3.4 Conclusion -- References -- Part II Educational Attainment -- 4 School Education: Aspirations, Engagement, and Transition -- 4.1 Introduction -- 4.2 Aspirations -- 4.3 Engagement -- 4.4 Transition -- 4.5 Persisting Challenges -- 4.6 Conclusion -- Note -- References -- 5 Higher Education Opportunities: Policy Visibility of Refugees -- 5.1 Introduction -- 5.2 National Initiatives -- 5.3 Sectoral Policies -- 5.4 Institutional Translation -- 5.5 Problematising the Equity Provisions -- 5.5.1 Disconnection: Scalar Misalignment -- 5.5.2 Omission: Policy Silence -- 5.5.3 Distortion: Issue Misframing -- 5.6 Conclusion -- References -- 6 Higher Education Participation: Access, Experience, and Success -- 6.1 Introduction -- 6.2 Access -- 6.3 Experiences -- 6.4 Success -- 6.5 Overlooked Factors of Disadvantage.

This paper presents an overview of critical policy scholarship (CPS) in education. Historically, policy research has been dominated by what is commonly referred to as the policy science tradition, which is positivist in its philosophical stance and instrumentalist in its purpose—it focuses on producing knowledge relevant for policy decisions. However, with the rise of interpretive social inquiry in the 1970s and against the backdrop of unique political developments in the 1980s, CPS emerged as an alternative policy research perspective. This review discusses the scope and foci of CPS in education under four themes: methodological assumptions, interdisciplinary roots, enduring analytical goals, and emerging empirical contexts. Implications of the prevalence of inequality, Big Data and digital panopticon for educational policymaking and policy research are also briefly discussed. The paper concludes that although its foci of analysis have shifted considerably in the last four decades, analytical interest and tools of CPS remain largely unchanged. ; Este artículo presenta una descripción general de la investigación de políticas críticas (CPS) en educación. Históricamente, la investigación de políticas ha estado dominada por lo que comúnmente se conoce como la tradición de la ciencia de las políticas, que es positivista en su postura filosófica e instrumentalista en su propósito: se enfoca en producir conocimiento relevante para las decisiones políticas. Sin embargo, con el auge de la investigación social interpretativa en la década de 1970 y en un contexto de desarrollos políticos únicos en la década de 1980, la CPS surgió como una perspectiva alternativa de investigación de políticas. Esta revisión discute el alcance y los focos de CPS en la educación bajo cuatro temas: supuestos metodológicos, raíces interdisciplinarias, metas analíticas perdurables y contextos empíricos emergentes. También se discuten brevemente las implicaciones de la prevalencia de la desigualdad, el Big Data y el panóptico digital para la formulación de políticas educativas y la investigación de políticas. El documento concluye que aunque sus focos de análisis han cambiado considerablemente en las últimas cuatro décadas, el interés analítico y las herramientas de CPS permanecen prácticamente sin cambios. ; Este artigo apresenta uma visão geral dos estudos sobre políticas críticas (CPS) na educação. Historicamente, a pesquisa política tem sido dominada pelo que é comumente referido como tradição da ciência política, que é positivista em sua postura filosófica e instrumentalista em seu propósito - ela se concentra na produção de conhecimento relevante para decisões políticas. No entanto, com o surgimento da investigação social interpretativa na década de 1970 e em um cenário de desenvolvimentos políticos únicos na década de 1980, o CPS emergiu como uma perspectiva de pesquisa política alternativa. Esta revisão discute o escopo e os focos da CPS na educação sob quatro temas: pressupostos metodológicos, raízes interdisciplinares, objetivos analíticos duradouros e contextos empíricos emergentes. As implicações da prevalência da desigualdade, Big Data e pan-óptico digital para a formulação de políticas educacionais e pesquisa de políticas também são brevemente discutidas. O artigo conclui que, embora seus focos de análise tenham mudado consideravelmente nas últimas quatro décadas, o interesse analítico e as ferramentas do CPS permanecem praticamente inalterados.

Increasingly national policy processes are intersected with and affected by global policy actors and ideas. In aid-recipient countries such as Ethiopia, donors use financial and non-financial means to influence national policy decisions and directions. This paper is about the non-financial influence of the World Bank (WB) in the Ethiopian higher education policy reform. Using Pierre Bourdieu's concept of symbolic power as a 'thinking tool', the paper aims to shed light on forms of symbolic capital that the Bank uses to generate a 'misrecognisable' form of power that regulates the HE policy process in Ethiopia. The findings show that the WB transforms its symbolic capital of recognition and legitimacy to establish a 'shared misrecognition' and thereby make its policy prescriptions implicit and hence acceptable to local policy agents. The Bank uses knowledge-based regulatory instruments to induce compliance to its neoliberal policy prescriptions. The paper therefore underscores the value of symbol power as an analytical framework to understand elusive but critical role of donors in policy processes of aid recipient countries.

Africa is being re-imagined as a knowledge economy, and higher education (HE) systems have been propelled into the centre of national economic plans and strategies. This paper provides an analysis of four recent major initiatives directed to the revitalisation of HE in sub-Saharan Africa: the Pan African University (2010), the Africa Higher Education Centers of Excellence Project (2014), The Kigali Communiqué on Higher Education for Science, Technology and Innovation (2014), and the Dakar Declaration and Action Plan on Revitalising Higher Education for Africa's Future (2015). Guided by critical frame analysis, we examined assumptions and expectations of these regionally/globally structured HE development agendas. The findings show that, while there is a convergence of thinking on the promise for economic transformation held by invigorated HE sectors in Africa, there are uncritically adopted premises about how this transformation is to be achieved. In particular, we find that the promise held out for economic transformation through HE is at risk of failing through the inadequate contextualisation of global policy orthodoxies to African conditions, and that some of the premises about the nature and scale of the economic transformation required to make the re-imagined Africa a reality need to be reconsidered.

This article reflects on what doing critical policy sociology means in shifting theoretical, empirical and methodological contexts of education. We focus our analytical lens on two primary considerations. First, we reflect on the politics of criticality, examining differing claims and debates about what it means to do critical research and be a critical researcher of education policy, paying particular attention to how critical policy sociologists position their work in relation to elite power and policy networks. Second, we build on these foundations to consider the trend towards researching mobilities within critical policy sociology, arguing that contemporary 'follow the policy' research risks orienting researchers to the problems and agendas already established by elite policy agents and organisations, while obscuring the not-so-mobile forces that continue to define education policy and practice. We also raise questions about the elite networks and privileged levels of resourcing typically required to conduct this kind of research. In conclusion, we invite further discussion on the politics of knowledge production and challenges for policy sociologists seeking to be critical in shifting contexts.