praxis-teacher-research.org · Web viewThe first phase consists of the generation of a word cloud, ... Discourse and Politics. In Teun A. Van Dijk (Ed.) Discourse Studies, London:

Researching Educational Policies and Professional Identities: Essay assignmentStudent number: 15970153

"The best that has been thought and written": an analysis of the representation of high expectations in the White Paper 'Educational Excellence Everywhere'.

Introduction

The White Paper ‘Educational Excellence Everywhere’ (DfE, 2016) sets out the policy agenda for the

government from the present to 2020. Lumby and Muijs (2014) remind us that in the UK, a

government White Paper is intended to set out legislation and to invite response to it. The suggested

legislation presented in the 2016 White Paper proposes some controversial initiatives, including a

radical reshaping of educational structure in which schools will become academies, directly funded

by the secretary of state for education.

Context

The ongoing marketisation of the English state education system, exemplified by the current growth

of academies and free schools, is not a new phenomenon. The Education Reform Act (1988)

introduced the concept of the National Curriculum, and this standardisation of the content of the

curriculum of all state schools enabled uniformed assessment of students. League tables allowed the

quality of education to be measured and compared, and the Education Act (1992) created a further

device for measurement of quality in the form of national school inspection body Ofsted. The chosen

policy lever for the structural reform proposed in this White Paper is the Multi Academy Trust -

clusters of schools with combined purchasing power, operating models and brands.

Although the structural reform outlined in the White Paper is highly significant, proposed reforms to

the curriculum are arguably equally so. Therefore, this essay intends to analyse the chapter in the

document concerned with curriculum and pedagogy. Chapter 6, entitled ‘High expectations and a

world leading curriculum for all’, builds on reforms to the curriculum announced in the document

1


‘The Importance of Teaching’ (DfE, 2010), in which the previous Coalition government set out its

agenda for education reform shortly after it came to power in 2010.

Methodology

In order to deconstruct the discourse of Chapter 6 of the 2016 White Paper, ‘Educational Excellence

Everywhere’, I intend to use a blended approach of content analysis and discourse analysis to

systematically analyse the text. This approach will include quantitative data on the content of the

text, and qualitative data on the literary strategies used within it.

Daniel (2011) suggests that content analysis is useful for describing trends, but used with discourse

analysis, content analysis facilitates a robust triangulation of key themes within the data set.

Although content analysis and discourse analysis are derived from different philosophical bases, they

are both concerned exploring social reality and can be complementary. Lumby and Muijs (2013)

combine content and discourse analytic methods, believing that the blending of these methods

leads to a more rounded insight into texts, and to uncovering what a text is aiming to achieve. Thus,

in my analysis of Chapter 6 of this White Paper, I also intend to use a blended approach, with the

aim of fully deconstructing the discourse of this text.

Discourse analysis and politics

Chilton and Schaffner (2011) claim that the increased mediation of political messages in the twenty-

first century, and our increased exposure to them, has important implications, including the need for

awareness and critical evaluation. Furthermore, Woods (2006) suggests that it is frequently unclear

where to draw the line between the discourses of politics, media and advertising. Although we now

have greater opportunity to examine the language used by politicians due to rapid media expansion,

we tend only to have the opportunity to observe the business of politics through the carefully

managed filters of the media. This stage-managed approach to political discourse is exacerbated by

the employment of unelected policy-making advisers and consultants. As politics has as its central

aim the acquisition and retention of power, and the authority to control the accumulation and

2


distribution of a society’s economic wealth and good, the linguistic devices the political world

employs can have far-reaching effects, and therefore warrants detailed and critical examination.

Concerns such as these give us moral and ethical reasons for analysing political discourse.

Discourse analysis is not solely the linguistic analysis of texts: texts should be seen in terms of the

different discourses, genres and styles they draw upon and articulate together. Fairclough (2003)

sees discourses as ways of representing aspects of the world: different discourses are different

perspectives. They are associated with the different relations people have to the world, which in

turn depends on their position, identity and social relationships. In terms of educational policy,

neoliberal and neoconservative trends are transforming many aspects of social life, and therefore

transforming language. It is impossible to make sense of these transformations without thinking

about the language dialectically interconnected with them. Taylor (2013) similarly proposes a

definition of discourse analysis as “the close study of language and language use as evidence of

aspects of society and social life” (Taylor, 2013, p.7). The study of language is evidence of a system

or formation of meanings, and the connection of those meanings to society, including the power

relations within it. Moreover, meaning is dependent on, and changes with context, and meanings

are constituted through practices and processes.

Discourse analysis: a caveat

It is important to note that there is no such thing as a definitive analysis of a text. Fairclough (2003)

suggests any analysis will inevitably be partial. It is also selective: we ask certain questions about the

text, and not others, therefore, an objective approach to text analysis cannot exist. Fairclough (2003)

explains that discourse is a particular way of subjectively representing the world; there are

alternative and often competing discourses, which differ according to what is excluded or included.

Hence, it is important to consider what is missing from the chapter as much as to analyse what is

admitted. Taylor (2013) agrees that discourse analysis is interpretive, but suggests that part of its

3


theoretical foundation consists of “challenges to the notion of a simple, objective truth” (Taylor,

2013, p.83).

Content analysis

According to Drisko and Maschi (2015), content analysis is best known as a methodology for

empirically identifying and describing themes or content, as well as the devices used to deliver this

content. It is widely used to detail the proportion or percentage of a text devoted to specific topics,

allowing researchers to establish emphasis within the materials. The results of content analysis are

often used to document a perceived problem, and as evidence from which to advocate for change.

In this instance, the content analysis is in two phases. The first phase consists of the generation of a

word cloud, an image composed of words used in the text, whereby the size of each word indicates

its frequency or importance.

Table 1: Word frequency findings

Word Frequency Collocation

Curriculum 20 Juxtaposed with knowledge, national, ambitious

Knowledge 15 Juxtaposed with curriculum 6 times

Teachers 12 N/A

National 7 Juxtaposed with curriculum 7 times

Ambitious 5 Juxtaposed with curriculum 3 times

The initial stage of the content analysis suggests that the authors of the White Paper equate high

expectations with an ambitious knowledge-based national curriculum, delivered by teachers in the

state sector.

Weber (1990) suggests that a central idea in content analysis is that words of the text are classified

into content categories; these may be based on words sharing similar connotations. Therefore, the

4


second phase of the content analysis utilises the qualitative research software Nvivo to systemically

code the text, and uncover the discourses present, as well as to identify the percentage of coverage

the White Paper gives to these discourses.

Table 2: Content analysis findings

Discourses % coverage

Support for teachers 20.73

Knowledge-based curriculum 18.82

Autonomy 16.96

Ambition and challenge 11.24

Academic rigour 9.53

Social mobility 8.03

21st Century Britain 5.44

Funding for initiatives 5.14

International competition 1.99

The second stage of the content analysis reveals further themes inherent within the text. References

to support for teachers is given coverage of a fifth of the chapter, with references to a knowledge-

based curriculum being given marginally less coverage. The third most common discourse is that of

teacher autonomy. Additional discourses revealed by this stage of the content analysis are those of

social mobility, 21st century Britain, funding and international competition.

5


Although content analysis has determined the presence of these discourses within the text, the

method could be seen as reductive, and disregarding of the text’s context. Therefore, this essay will

analyse these discourses, deconstructing the language in the White Paper, and therefore its

representation of the world. There will be an emphasis on highlighting how the text is ideologically

shaped, with a focus on exploring trends in policy, and partial interpretations of these trends. I will

mainly examine the words in the text, in addition to commenting on whole text organisation, clause

combination and grammatical and semantic features (Fairclough, 2001).

Overview and chapter opening

The aim of the DfE (2016) strategy overview from 2015-2020 is “to provide world-class education

and care that allows every child and young person to reach his or her potential, regardless of

background” (DfE, 2016). The problem being presented here is the need to create a “world-class”

education in concurrence with the social democratic discourse that “every child and young person

should reach his or her potential, regardless of background” (ibid.). The structure of the opening of

the chapter uses a text box and listing to highlight and summarise the key points to be made. These

structural devices can be seen as reader-friendly, but they also tend to be reader directive rather

than discursive (Taylor, 2004).

Social mobility and democracy

The discourse of social mobility and democracy is evident in the chapter summary. The chapter

begins with a brief vision statement, suggesting there is a need for change: “we want every child,

wherever they live and whatever their background and needs, to receive a 21st century education”

(DfE, 2016, p.88). The repetition of the inclusive pronoun “we” presents an argument for change,

emphasised by the use of the imperatives “want” and “will”. The text is written using a

problem/solution structure, expressing a necessity for change; it outlines a solution (an ambitious,

knowledge-based curriculum) and explains how this solution will be achieved (through evidence-

6


based teaching materials, text books and resources). To suggest goals of social justice and fairness,

the author uses the determiner “every” in reference to children to reinforce the use of “wherever”

and “whatever”.

However, the discourse of social mobility and democracy is not exclusive to the present Conservative

government. Characterised by a belief in the power of markets, neoliberalism displaced the

Keynesian consensus which dominated the West following the end of the Second World War to the

end of the 1970s. Neoliberal influences have since been evident throughout contemporary British

politics, including state education in England. The ongoing marketisation of state education in

England represents one facet of Thatcher’s neoliberal legacy. Wright (2012) suggests that New

Labour sought out ways of rearticulating social democracy so that they were compatible with a

market society, believing that the government could intervene and build on the neoliberal market

society, but with strong communitarian values. This centralised stance led to a stipulation of a one-

dimensional model of educational success, and to the seemingly incompatible goals of social justice

and fairness being subsumed by market logics. Goldthorpe (2012) similarly suggests that a focus on

social mobility had attractions for New Labour as a means of appealing to aspirational families, while

appropriating a Conservative emphasis on greater equality of opportunity. However, for any

government, attempts at increasing equality of opportunity are unlikely to be effective unless the

class-linked inequalities of condition are themselves significantly reduced.

Ball (1997) suggests the rhetoric of reform couples improvements in social justice with the

maximisation of social, educational and economic participation. He explains that “equity and

enterprise, technological change and economic progress are tied together within the efforts, talents

and qualities of individual people and the national collective” (Ball, 1997, p.17). This allows for a

reimagining of the public sector. Alternative ideas and differing narratives to those deemed

acceptable by the state are marginalised and new narratives are promoted. One example of a new

narrative inherent in this chapter of the White Paper is the promotion of ‘evidence-informed’ policy.

7


In this chapter, all academic references are to Willingham (2009), whose guide to cognitive

psychology has been feted by various politicians (Gove, 2012; Gove, 2014; Gibb, 2015; Cameron,

2016). Willingham himself expresses reservations that the science will be applied in schools in the

way politicians expect: “I can confidently say this - hard as it is, good science is easier than good

policy” (Willingham, 2012).

A knowledge-based curriculum, ambition and challenge, and academic rigour

The title of the chapter, ‘High expectation and a world-leading curriculum for all’ presents

expectation presented as inextricably linked with the curriculum through the conjunction “and” (DfE,

2016, p.88). This can be seen as ideological dominance as politicians manipulate education systems

to pursue political goals or ideals (Kelly, 1999). Conservative politicians may be seeking a curriculum

that is perceived to be traditional, driving up moral and educational standards. Cannadine, Keating

and Sheldon (2011) refer to the influence of neoconservative policies espoused by Thatcher who, as

Prime Minister had sought to restore Britain to the perceived greatness of Victorian values. It was

deemed necessary to outline what schools should teach, and ensure they did so to a testable,

comparable standard. Apple (1990) posits that cultural capital in schools is an effective filtering

device in the reproduction of a hierarchical society, and that any society which increases the gap

between rich and poor in the control of and access to cultural capital should be questioned in terms

of the legitimacy of this inequality. This happens because the cultural capital of the middle class is

taken as natural, and employed as if all children have equal access to it.

The chapter summary includes the verb “equip” in reference to “knowledge” and “character”. There

is a sense of urgency and necessity created here: the reception of this interpretation of education is

the only possible pathway to “success” (DfE, 2016, p.88). Children are portrayed a tabula rasa, a

blank slate, ready and willing to be moulded. Friere (2014) suggests that this view of education is

8


comparable to the “act of depositing, in which the students are the depositories and the teacher is

the depositer” (Friere, 2014, p.72). Knowledge can be seen as a “gift by those who consider

themselves knowledgeable upon those whom they consider to know nothing” (ibid.). Thus, this

characteristic of the ideology of oppression negates education and knowledge as processes of

enquiry. The concept of ambition is presented “unapologetically”, the adverb challenging the reader:

there can be no counter-argument (DfE, 2016, p.88). Ball (2003) suggests that discourses mobilise

truth claims, and constitute rather than reflect social reality: within the processes of policy discourse

credibility and truthfulness are established, providing ways of thinking and talking about policies that

make them sound as if they are reasonable solutions to social and economic problems.

The discourse of social justice is used to justify change and present a solution to the problem of

social inequality. The world is “rapidly changing”: the agency for change is explicit, as is the need to

prepare our students for these challenges, helping them to “navigate” this brave new world with

“confidence” (DfE, 2016, p.88). The colonial language here is perhaps a reference to the discourse of

international competition. In order to prepare young people for a world of precarious employment

and ruthless individualism, students must experience schooling in the same terms: society, and

therefore education, is portrayed as a race that must be won.

In economic terms, this can also be seen as part of the ‘welfare to work’ discourse. Brine (2011)

reminds us that during the 2010 election campaign, all three major parties in England spoke in

threatening terms of deep economic cuts and hard times to come. Against this economic backdrop,

the concept of the deserving and undeserving poor has become more prevalent, as has the

pathologization of the undeserving recipient of state benefit. To adequately equip our young people

for the future they face is to help them avoid becoming part of the contemporary discourse of

‘benefit cheats’. The aim is to avoid social exclusion and instead “interrupt the experience of deficit

and disadvantage” (Ball, 1997, p.153).

9


The repetition of the adjective “ambitious” is also a rationale for curriculum change, and justification

of increased teacher workload. An example of intertextuality can be seen in the statement “the new

national curriculum…equips children with core knowledge about the best that has been thought and

written” (DfE, 2016, p.89). This refers to the title of Arnold’s (1869) essay “The best that has been

thought and written”. In his collection of essays ‘Culture and Anarchy’, Arnold proposes that “study

of the best which has been thought and said in the world” is the “best hope for our present

difficulties” (Arnold, 1869, Preface). This reference to the Victorian cultural agenda could be a

further example of neoconservative trends evident in this chapter of the White Paper.

The vision of the curriculum presented in this chapter also owes much to the work of Hirsch. Gibb

explains that Hirsch’s (1999) work provides a “compelling social justice case with which to argue for

a knowledge-rich curriculum” (Gibb, 2015, p. 14). Hirsch (1999) argues that the goal of building

knowledge and developing cultural capital is to achieve social justice. However, it is important to

consider who decides what knowledge matters, and whether cultural literacy can be objectively

identified. We could hypothesise that a body of knowledge can never truly be value free. Apple

(2004) interprets Hirsch’s work as a condemnation of progressivism, which is seen as being in the

dominant position in educational policy and practice, and which is portrayed as destroyed a valued

past. Hirsch’s view implies that it is only by tightening control over curriculum and teaching, and by

making education more disciplined and competitive that we can have effective schools.

Teacher autonomy and support offered to teachers

The chapter offers teachers the promise of “stability”: beleaguered teachers will soon be able to

focus on “delivering” the reforms (DfE, 2016, p.90). Kelly (1999) explains that the use of the verb

“deliver” is appropriated from business terminology, and comments that its use encourages us to

view curriculum as content and product. The concept of quality, borrowed from the private sector, is

10


part of “the rhetoric of organisational improvement which has been a key feature of government

reforms since the early 1980s” (Ball, 1997, p.260).

Metaphors of growth, development, caring, tending and nurturing are absent in this discourse of

corporate culture. Kelly (1999) suggests that the values of competition, productivity,

instrumentalism and value for money implicit in the commercial metaphor now dominates the

teaching profession, and the values of caring, human development and intrinsic value have been

replaced, despite the fact that it is these values that are more appropriate to education in a

democratic society.

This discourse can be seen as oxymoronic: teachers are provided with a “core body of knowledge”,

and this in turn gives teachers “professional autonomy” (DfE, 2016, p.90). There is reference to

“autonomy” and “school-led” change throughout the chapter, but mechanisms are in place for the

state’s control of every aspect of the education of children in state schools. The White Paper

intensifies the drive for schools to perform as businesses, and the school system as a market place.

Academies are presented here as the highest performing schools, and the elite: education is

portrayed as a commodity and schools as rival outlets. Apple (2013) refers to the neoliberal

assumption that choice, competition and markets will lead to efficient and effective schools, but

warns us that these forces many create even more inequalities than previously existed. These values

are in contrast to those of the post-war welfare state, which was established to ensure that basic

citizenship rights were removed from the insecurities of market forces. The reference to academies

as using their “freedoms to innovate and build more stretching and tailored curricula” (DfE, 2016,

p.90) can be seen as the creation of a socially divisive system in which class privilege will be imposed

by market forces.

Apple (2004) suggests that middle-class parents have become skilled in exploiting market

mechanisms in education, and in bringing their social, economic and cultural capital to bear in them.

11


They can also afford to provide hidden cultural resources such as extra-curricular classes. Affluent

parents are also more likely to be able to decode and use marketised forms to their own benefit.

Furthermore, Ball (2008) reminds us there are profits to be made from the privatisation of

education: the phrase “we are working with the publishing industry…and others” (DfE, 2016, p.90)

refers to private contracts providing public services.

In this section of the chapter, the author is positioned as empathetic and supportive, perhaps to aid

policy enactment. The use of dead metaphor “we are saving teachers…from having to reinvent the

wheel” (DfE, 2016, p. 90) positions the authors as supportive, benevolent and helpful, although this

could also be interpreted as deprofessionalising.

21st Century Britain and international competition

Ball (1997) suggests that the public sector needs to be remade in response to the trend of

globalisation, and to play its part in the economics of international competition. Individuals are tied

to the fate of the nation within the global economy. In response to this trend, in the chapter

summary, the phrases “21st Century” and “modern Britain” position the curriculum as innovative and

dynamic (DfE, 2016, p.88).

Additionally, the chapter outlines the need to adopt the “mastery” approach of Far East, possibly as

Shanghai has been lauded as an educational success story following the findings of PISA (2012). The

importance of context may be underestimated by politicians here; Ball (1997) warns us that the

“flow and influence of policies between nations needs to be addressed with care” (Ball, 1997, p.267).

The OECD Education Policy Outlook report (2015) advises policy makers to keep the context of

education systems in mind in order to implement policy effectively, although Ball (1997) refers to the

think-tank OECD as “crude and lumbering…bulldozing over human dignity without pause for

thought” (Ball, 1997, p.33). The increasingly complex and significant global influences evident here

are embedded in national systems of educational policy making. Policies are formed and developed

12


in relation to international competition, which in turn changes the meaning of education and what it

means to be educated.

Conclusion

‘The New Statesman’ (2015) reports that by 2020, child poverty will have increased by one-third to

one in four children. As Apple (2004) explains, school systems are driven by the assumption that

putting in place higher standards will somehow solve deep-seated educational and social problems.

The state shifts the blame from itself onto individual schools, parents, and children. Wright’s (2012)

findings are in agreement that policy entails a shift in responsibility for social problems from the

state to individuals. Goldthorpe (2012) compares the political accomplishment of increased social

fluidity in Scandinavian societies, and suggests that the political emphasis here has been less on

educational policy and more on the reduction of class differences in incomes and levels of living

through redistributive fiscal and welfare policies, strong trade unionism and employment protection

to maintain the security and stability of incomes, as well as prioritising full employment.

Furthermore, the discourse of social democracy can be seen as defunct in a competitive market

environment. In a market-driven school-led system, the privileged will be protected: as Apple (2004)

suggests, middle-class parents have become skilled in exploiting market mechanisms in education,

and in utilising their social, economic and cultural capital to move their children around the system.

It could therefore be suggested that the proposals outlined in Chapter 6 of the White Paper are

undemocratic: the reassertion of neoconservative values combined with neoliberal ideology is

intended to dismantle the welfare state. The White Paper embeds the notion of education as a

private consumption good, to be traded in a market in which class privilege is imposed through

market forces, and which reproduces rather than challenges existing inequalities.

References

Arnold, M. (1869) Culture and Anarchy Oxford: OUP

Apple, M. (2013) Can Education Change Society? New York: Routledge

13


Ball, S. (2008) The Education Debate Bristol: Policy Press

Ball, S. (1997) Policy Sociology and Critical Social Research: a personal review of recent education policy and policy research British Education Research Journal 23 (3), pp.257-274

BBC (2016) David Cameron pledges 'assault on poverty' with social reforms Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35276854 [Accessed June 1st, 2016]

Bernstein B. (1970) Education cannot compensate for society New Society 15 (387), pp. 344-347

Brine, J. (2011) Disciplining the undeserving: education and training in welfare-to-work policy. In R. Hatcher and K. Jones (Eds) No country for the young: education from New Labour to the Coalition, London: Tuffnell Press.

Chilton, P. and Schaffner, C (2011) Discourse and Politics. In Teun A. Van Dijk (Ed.) Discourse Studies, London: SAGE

Conservative Home (2015) The Prime Minister’s Party Conference speech in full Available from: http://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2015/10/david-camerons-party-conference-speech-in-full-2.html [Accessed June 1st, 2016]

Daniel, B. (2011) Handbook of Research on Methods and Techniques for Studying Virtual Communities US: Information Science Reference

DfE (2012)Secretary of State for Education Michael Gove gives speech to IAA Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/secretary-of-state-for-education-michael-gove-gives-speech-to-iaa [Accessed June 1st, 2016]

DfE (2014) Michael Gove speaks about the future of education reform Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/michael-gove-speaks-about-the-future-of-education-reform [Accessed June 1st, 2016]

DfE (2015) Nick Gibb speech on government’s maths reforms Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/nick-gibb-speech-on-governments-maths-reforms [Accessed June 1st, 2016]

DfE (2016) Prime Minister's speech on life chances Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/prime-ministers-speech-on-life-chances [Accessed June 1st, 2016)

DfE (2016) Educational excellence everywhere Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/educational-excellence-everywhere [Accessed June 1st, 2016]

DfE (2016) Strategy overview 2015-2020 Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/508422/DfE_Strategy_overview.pdf [Accessed June 1st, 2016]

Drisko, J. and Maschi, T. (2015) Content Analysis Oxford Scholarship Online [Accessed August 1st, 2015]

Fairclough, N. (2001) The Discourse of New Labour: critical discourse analysis, in: M. Wetherall, S. Taylor and S. Yates (Eds) Discourse as data. A guide for analysis (London, Sage/Open University), pp.229-266

Fairclough, N. (2003) Analysing discourse – textual analysis for social research Abingdon: Routledge

14

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/508422/DfE_Strategy_overview.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/508422/DfE_Strategy_overview.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/educational-excellence-everywhere

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/prime-ministers-speech-on-life-chances



https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/nick-gibb-speech-on-governments-maths-reforms

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/michael-gove-speaks-about-the-future-of-education-reform

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/michael-gove-speaks-about-the-future-of-education-reform

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/secretary-of-state-for-education-michael-gove-gives-speech-to-iaa



http://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2015/10/david-camerons-party-conference-speech-in-full-2.html

http://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2015/10/david-camerons-party-conference-speech-in-full-2.html


Forrester, G. and Garratt, D. (2012) Education Policy Unravelled London: Continuum

Friere, P. (2014) The Pedagogy of the Oppressed New York, London: Bloomsbury

Goldthorpe, J. (2013) Understanding – and Misunderstanding – Social Mobility in Britain: The Entry of the Economists, the Confusion of Politicians and the Limits of Educational Policy Journal of Social Policy, 42 (3), pp. 431-450

Hirsch, E. D., Jr. (1999) The schools we need and why we don’t have them New York: Doubleday

Kelly, A.V. (1999) The Curriculum: Theory and Practice London: SAGE

Lingard, B., Rawolle, S. and Taylor, S. (2005) Globalizing policy sociology in education: working with Bordieu Journal of Education Policy, 20 (6), pp. 759-777

Lumby, J and Muijs, D. (2014) Corrupt language, corrupt thought: the White Paper The importance of teaching British Educational Research Journal, 40 (3), pp.423-438

Malen,B. and Knapp, M (1997) Rethinking the multiple perspectives approach to education policy analysis: implications for policy‐practice connections, Journal of Education Policy, 12 (5),pp. 419-445

OECD (2012) PISA 2012 Results Available from: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-2012-results.htm [Accessed May 27th, 2016]

OECD (2015) Making Reforms Happen Available from: http://www.oecd.org/edu/EPO%202015_Highlights.pdf [Accessed May 27th, 2016]

Symons, J. and Porter, N. (Eds) (2015) Knowledge and The Curriculum Available from: http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/images/publications/knowledge%20and%20the%20curriculum.pdf [Accessed July 25th, 2016]

Taylor, S. (2004) Researching educational policy and change on ‘new times’: using critical discourse and analysis Journal of Education Policy, 19 (4), pp.433-451

The New Statesman (2015) David Cameron has retreated from his promises on child poverty – but will it cost him? Available from: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/06/david-cameron-has-retreated-his-promises-child-poverty-will-it-cost-him [Accessed May 28th, 2016]

Weber, R. (1990) Basic Content Analysis London: SAGE

Willingham, D. (2009) Why Don’t Students Like School? A cognitive scientist answers questions about how the mind works and what it means for the classroom CA: Jossey-Bass

Willingham, D. (2012) Did Michael Gove Get the Science Right? Available from: http://www.danielwillingham.com/daniel-willingham-science-and-education-blog/did-michael-gove-get-the-science-right [Accessed May 28th, 2016]

Woods, N. (2006) Describing Discourse London: Hodder Education

Wright, A. (2012) Fantasies of empowerment: mapping neoliberal discourse in the coalition government’s schools policy Journal of Education Policy, 27 (3), pp.279-294

15

http://www.danielwillingham.com/daniel-willingham-science-and-education-blog/did-michael-gove-get-the-science-right

http://www.danielwillingham.com/daniel-willingham-science-and-education-blog/did-michael-gove-get-the-science-right

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/06/david-cameron-has-retreated-his-promises-child-poverty-will-it-cost-him

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/06/david-cameron-has-retreated-his-promises-child-poverty-will-it-cost-him

http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/images/publications/knowledge%20and%20the%20curriculum.pdf

http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/images/publications/knowledge%20and%20the%20curriculum.pdf

http://www.oecd.org/edu/EPO%202015_Highlights.pdf

http://www.oecd.org/edu/EPO%202015_Highlights.pdf

http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-2012-results.htm

http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-2012-results.htm

Documents

praxis-teacher-research.org · Web viewThe first phase consists of the generation of a word cloud, ... Discourse and Politics. In Teun A. Van Dijk (Ed.) Discourse Studies, London: