Search

Purpose - The paper aims to develop a case for re-considering the role of schools in education policy. The argument is made that considerable amounts of the variation in pupil performance may in fact derive from factors based on variations in parents' ability to buy-in support and enrichment of various kinds for their children. Design/methodology/approach - The argument of the paper is developed using secondary sources to make the case for non-school explanations of variations in pupil performance and then offers a set of illustrations of the variety of types of bought-in support and enrichment now being used in some families. Findings - The paper concludes with the point that two contradictory education policy discourses are in play under New Labour. One, the discourse of standards/achievement, which works through testing, benchmarks, league-tables, ''coasting'' schools, special measures, etc. totalises, individualises and commodifies the student as an ''ability'' - a cluster of performances. And in turn gives rise to ''local economies of student worth'' that ''value'' students differently within the processes of ''school choice''. The other, the discourse of choice and active parenting, totalises, individualises and commodifies parents and families as ''consumers'' of education and investors in cultural capital. Research limitations/implications - The paper is discursive, exploratory and wide-ranging. It sets out to make a plausible case that would merit further research rather than to establish at this stage a set of firm conclusions. Practical implications - If the argument is taken seriously then the focus of education policy would be decisively shifted. There is some evidence of a shift of emphasis towards more intervention and individual attention but achievement differences remain firmly located within schools. Originality/value - Little attention has been focused on this kind of argument and there has certainly been no attempt to map the variety of and growth in private educational services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The role and activities of national advisers engaged in the translation of globally mobile ideas on effective teacher education has received little attention. Drawing on in-depth semi-structured interviews, this article explores how government-appointed advisers acted as intermediaries in the translation of policy ideas in national reviews of teacher education in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (2010–2015). Three themes are addressed: (1) the localisation of international good practice; (2) the significance of time and temporality in local policy deliberation; and (3) the autonomy–engagement dynamic in government-commissioned reviews of public policy fields. The article reports how advisers exhibited transgressive competence in the re-assembly of policy ideas in local spaces. With attention to time, space and positionality, the article concludes by emphasising the significance of localised political strategies in shaping policy choices and prospects for enactment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]