# data[].attributes.body
The system of choice only works if we have relative equality, both in terms of school and wealth, and people can genuinely choose from schools they like;

Eliminate parental choice, within reason, subject to reasonable grounds (e.g. geography, specialist facilities);

Introduce randomised Ofsted inspections, but have them done on a more rounded basis, based on collegiality and improvement, not raw measurement, reward and punishment;

Abolish faith schools, private schools, grammar schools;

Abolish sets/streams, up to a point, until we have a better sense that background is not an influencing factor and 'ability' comes through;

Inclusion of SEN pupils, as much as possible;

Better teacher training and lifelong development around SEN;

Pupils are allocated to schools to enhance social diversity, subject to geographical differences in local demographics;

Centralise teacher recruitment and allocation, allocating teachers to increase the range of diversity and experience in schools ;

You don't abolish school choice, you simply make it irrelevant.

# data[].attributes.headline
Freedom in Policy Creation and Implementation

# data[].attributes.subject
Freedom in Policy Creation and Implementation

# data[].attributes.body
Politicians have a lot of control over policy creation - they design it but they are also influenced by lobbyists, the public, etc. They have relatively little control over what happens on the ground - the implementation - unless the policy is very strict.

Students have some power over policy creation  through voting, and also through union membership. Over implementation of policy

At the local level, there is more control. Head teachers create policies within their schools, within government guidelines, but they do have a degree  of autonomy.

# data[].attributes.headline
Key Points from the Policy Block Weeks 4-7

# data[].attributes.subject
Key Points from the Policy Block Weeks 4-7

# data[].attributes.body
Week 5:

People's views of history gives a policy context;

Education wasn't seen as a policy problem until the early 19th Century;

EMAs were introduced to try and broaden participation in education;

Week 6:

Shift from industrial economy created moves towards a service economy and the idea that we live in a knowledge economy;

Policy is not always implemented as planned;

Week 7:

The system doesn't account for Gypsy, Roma and Traveller pupils;

They also suffer from high media - and social  - discrimination

# data[].attributes.body
Week 1:

Wicked problems can be solved, but they are complex and involve multiple different policy fields. Poverty: education, benefits, taxation, social attitudes;

Super-wicked problems come with an additional urgency, they need to be sorted out quickly;

Week 2:

FSM addresses a widespread problem: 2.5 million people are in poverty, over 50% of children are entitled to FSM;

Korean schools' attainment scores are higher, but this is in a very competitive, high pressure environment.

Week 3:

Philosophy offers two different approaches for analysing policy - terms and meanings, and morality;

Parents' values and beliefs are seen as a risk, not part of the world we live in;

Week 4:

Nudge policy - influence from behavioural economic, seen as common sense;

Psychology is seen as a science to justify policies' effectiveness;

# data[].attributes.body
For a range of reasons, Gypsy, Roma & Traveller - and other nomadic/semi-nomadic social groups - tend not to fare well in education. Issues include:

Low attainment

Low attendance

High exclusion rates

High risk of being bullied

Different (i.e. not 'middle class') attitudes to education

A school system which is based on fixed addresses

In order to ensure that these groups are more included in education, there needs to be a change in attitudes, training for staff (and in the public and media),  flexible provision by schools and LEAs, and different thinking around attendance records, among other things.

# data[].attributes.body
Diversity and Inclusion

Diversity covers a lot of potential social characteristics, from class and gender to ability and immigration status;

Inclusion is broadly about admitting - and, crucially,  making welcome - diverse groups of people.

Positive Discrimination

'Positive discrimination', or positive action, is an attempt to redress some of the social inequalities by promoting those who have disadvantaged, and discriminating against those who are more advantaged;

In short, it tries to fix some of the problems that meritocracy doesn't;

Policy

Implementing diversity an inclusion, even at an organisational level (e.g. school, university) involves doing much more than simply altering your admissions system;

It also requires a range of other, pre- and post-admission strategies to ensure that everyone has an equal chance of engaging and thriving;

If you then expand that to the national level, it is incredibly complex - and may also be politically unpopular with voters.

# data[].attributes.headline
Our Solution to the Tuition Fee Question

# data[].attributes.subject
Our Solution to the Tuition Fee Question

# data[].attributes.headline
Summary of Discussions around different perspectives on Fees

# data[].attributes.subject
Summary of Discussions around different perspectives on Fees

# data[].attributes.body
Clarity

Agree what your main points are, and lay them out in an introduction and conclusion. This requires close coordination, and staying on the points.

Try to keep your slides simple. Have lots of notes, but keep detail on presentations to a minimum;

Strategy

Box clever - think about what the other group is likely to say, and try to undermine their arguments. Psychologists call this ''innoculation';

The Question

Answer it - policies are implemented as planned is not the same as turn out as planned.

Turn it round if you can, and if it might be more effective than addressing it straight on.

You could argue, for example,  that the aim of policy is not to prescribe precise behaviour, but to steer more general changes.

# data[].attributes.body
Policies can't be implemented exactly as planned for a range of reasons:

People are involved, and they're not robots!

A lot of organisations are also involved - not all LEAs, schools (etc) are the same, and they therefore implement things in a way that is unique to them;

They are open to interpretation, misinterpretation, resistance and subversion;

They often address - or sit within wicked problems - that are changing and incredibly complex;

Contexts change, society moves, and the setting of a policy varies nationally (or internationally), sometimes very quickly;

Politicians Change, parties come and go...

If you were to have a policy that was implemented exactly as planned, it would have to be:
Very clear and uniformly understood and accepted. UNLIKELY!!
Heavily prescribed in detail, monitored, and followed up. This is unrealistic as it would be unpopular and cost/labour -intensive to implement.

You could argue that the purpose of policy is not exact implementation, but a general steering of behaviour within certain parameters. If you took this argument, it might provide a slightly savvier way of winning what is a harder side of the debate to defend, the 'implemented as planned' side.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Education Policies are implemented by educators_administrators exactly as planned by politicians

# data[].attributes.body
It's obvious that politics and policy are closely related. In some languages, like German, the words are the same: Politik.

Who is in power, what their underlying ideologies/values are, make an enormous difference to the flavour of policy making - and what policy outcomes are sought;

Also, context is key:

What are the issues of the times, what is the Zeitgeist as to the most pressing questions? These change, in part driven by informal education, in part by formal education and politicians etc;

what policies or political situations is a party inheriting? Are they adding to someone else's policy, extending it, changing it, or is it a previously ignored/neglected aspect?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
History of Education Policy Seminar 2018-19 (1)

# data[].attributes.body
1. Economic Rationality
People and organisations are completely logical, strategic decision-making
Behavioural economics is a bit mote nuanced - so not fully rational
Policies are often based on this economic model, which is problematic

2. Characteristics of the Nudge Unit

Tweaks to existing policies, rather than major changes

Public and transparent

Presented as common sense, not science (or pseudoscience)

3. Ethical Perspective

It's persuasion, rather than manipulation - potentially

There are questions about whether changing what people think/do is ethical;

This is a thorny question...

4. Nudge Theory's contributions to policy
Adaptable by context and scale - and timescale
Can make policies more effective
Makes small changes  - it's not shove theory
Can run experiments to see what works
5. Implications of this for pro-social citizenry
Forces policy makers to think more carefully about human behaviour and the varied outcomes of their policies

.

# data[].attributes.body
It's not as simple as it first appears.

Policy assumes that parents are to 'blame', and that absences are costing people (and schools/the system) grades;

There is a connection between attendance and attainment, but it's not a direct one. You could be very engaged and not present, or very present and not engaging.

As it's not just about parents, the solutions need to be directed at different groups:

Parents

Pupils

Schools

LEAs

Other social policies (like funding for carers)

# data[].attributes.headline
Additional Note on Videogames, Education, and Policy. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Additional Note on Videogames, Education, and Policy. 

# data[].attributes.body
They're informal education, could even be formal if they are educational games, and are an area that needs some legislation. Some app/games development etc could also be funded by the government...

# data[].attributes.body
RCTs are based on a model that is used in medical research, and some people assume that you can just carry the model over to social research.

RCTs require:

Large Samples;

An intervention or treatment (a drug, a treatment course, an educational scheme);

Two groups: an Intervention (treated) and Control (untreated) groups;

Treatment is randomly allocated to avoid the influence of chance/bias influencing the outcomes and therefore producing misleading data;

Measuring the before and after effects;

Probably works well with simple or easily controlled interventions (medicine, text messages, letters etc), more problematic with things like teaching;

# data[].attributes.headline
TUTORIAL 4: Framing Policy Psychologically

# data[].attributes.subject
TUTORIAL 4: Framing Policy Psychologically

# data[].attributes.body
The idea that every interaction you have with (your) children impacts their brain chemistry, and that you can - and should - therefore interact with (your) children in particular ways.

This is attractive to governments for several reasons:

It is science, and therefore authoritative truth, and points to simple cause and effect models - if this (neuroparenting) is done, the outcomes will be x, y, and z (social progress)

It shifts responsibility for social progress away from the government, more (or solely) towards parents and educators;

The prevalence of neuroparenting in policy has been criticised for several reasons:

It assumes that early parenting has particular effects on life trajectories and development - without evidence (because this is hard to prove);

It assumes a 'parenting deficit' in society, that somehow parents are not raising their children in an optimised way;

There is a lot of evidence which offers alternative, social expert perspectives on neuroparenting and aspects of parenting and education;

Philosophical Perspectives

Moral: is it appropriate that the government dictates how we raise our children?

Epistemological: Is a partial evidence base the best foundation for policy on parenting?

Ontological: We don't actually know what the real effects of these parenting styles are - there's an assumption that it has positive effects on the brain AND later life;

Pedagogical: How do/should we interact with children, how do/should we teach them? What should the outcomes of (early years) education be?

# data[].attributes.headline
TUTORIAL 3: NEUROSCIENCE AND RAISING CHILDREN

# data[].attributes.subject
TUTORIAL 3: NEUROSCIENCE AND RAISING CHILDREN

# data[].attributes.body
Philosophy offers two different approaches to policy analysis:

Analytical - terms and meanings

Continental - in/-appropriateness

How you define a term is important because it affects how a policy is understood and implemented

Free will and morals are connected, in that people choose more or less moral actions;

Educationalisation: education being given the responsibility for solving social problems

Parenting has become a policy problem - one that the government is therefore making policy about

Should the government police parenting?

In parenting (and education), praise the process (effort) and not the product/outcome (achievement);

How parents offer approval affects how children perform

The child/adult relationship is key

# data[].attributes.body
Across the social and political spectrum, it is impossible to address the FSM - if not any - policy problem in a way that everyone is happy with.

Critiques will always exist, related to questions around:

Cost

Equity

Practicality

Free choice

Depending on someone's political and personal perspective, each of these is more or less important...

# data[].attributes.body
Pros

Targets those who need help - children who otherwise would be hungry, and unable to concentrate (and be healthy);

Cons

The eligibility criteria are quite low, so some people might need them but be ineligible;

There may a be a stigma associated with being poor/receiving FSM;

The application process - and eligibility criteria - may not be accessible;

Food from schools may be poor quality, in low quantities, socially inappropriate (vegan, vegetarian, kosher, halal);

Dining conditions may not be conducive to eating socially/properly

# data[].attributes.body
Education in South Korea

High pressure, authoritarian, competitive environment;

Good for society/economy, not necessarily socially good, high personal risks associated with it;

High-performing on PISA scores;

PISA and Education

Not necessarily accurate or fair, favours wealthier countries with (or to adopt) high-pressure education systems;

Limited view of the value/purpose of education, reduced to science/maths, economic purposes;

Too much impact on national policy;

# data[].attributes.body
People

Policy is influenced by a range of people;

It is implemented in various ways across/down through the system;

it affects millions of people in different ways.

Places

Is policy global, national, or local?

It plays out differently, depending on where you are in the country/world;

Benefits (and downsides) are therefore felt unevenly in different areas;

Outcomes

Do the outcomes meet the intentions - was the policy effective?

Are there any unexpected outcomes?

Where is the implementation more or less effective - and why?

# data[].attributes.body
Governments like/want to be seen like they're doing something;

Market and societal failures require state intervention to problems which are considered 'undesirable';

Policies don't always work;

Policies are much more complicated than we think;

The state is very important in providing policy solutions;

Education can be linked to everything;

Policy are a very important issue, and impact all areas of social life;

Problems within education exist, and the government to some extent is trying to solve them;