Introduction

Thompson, Greg; Savage, Glenn C.; Lingard, Bob

doi:10.1007/s13384-015-0195-y

Cited by 26 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(47 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Specialization in these areas works up a version of authority and expertise that competes with other more traditional indicators. Unfortunately, neither this market nor ''edubusinesses'' in general are well regulated (Thompson, Savage, & Lingard, 2016). Meanwhile, claims about the nature of dyslexia and the effectiveness of programs are far-ranging and often fantastical.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Converting to Privatization: A Discourse Analysis of Dyslexia Policy Narratives

Gabriel¹

2019

American Educational Research Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, I analyze written testimony submitted to the state legislature regarding Connecticut’s 2014 Act Concerning Dyslexia and Special Education (PA-14-39), in order to engage with the discourse and rhetoric occasioned by the policy-making process and investigate the phenomenon of dyslexia in contemporary education policy. Drawing on critical discursive psychology, positioning theory, and narrative policy analysis, I examine how dyslexia advocacy discourse forms a cohesive, compelling policy narrative. I argue that this narrative can be understood as a conversion narrative, which drives a privatization agenda in which public schools become mandated consumers for a growing dyslexia industry, and in which the nature of instruction for students with reading difficulties is narrowly prescribed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Converting to Privatization: A Discourse Analysis of Dyslexia Policy Narratives

Gabriel¹

2019

American Educational Research Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the contemporary effect of this has a politically aligned shift in what Kelkar (2019) has described as the media ecosystem: in the USA, for example, the journalists and academics who might conventionally describe themselves as 'experts' on the basis of their commitment to objectivity are predominantly left-of-centre in their own politics; the conservative response to this systemic bias has been to create an alternative array of think tanks and media to provide other kinds of information that address their preferred public. In the context of educational policy, in the UK, USA and Australia, think tanks and 'edu-business' have had a growing influence, while that of academic expertise and evidence has declined (Thompson, Savage and Lingard 2016).…”

Section: Post-truth and The Political Demise Of Academic Expertisementioning

confidence: 99%

Infrastructure and the Post-Truth Era: is Trump Twitter’s Fault?

Oliver¹

2019

Postdigit Sci Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores the relationship between social media and political rhetoric. Social media platforms are frequently discussed in relation to ‘post-truth’ politics, but it is less clear exactly what their role is in these developments. Specifically, this paper focuses on Twitter as a case, exploring the kinds of rhetoric encouraged or discouraged on this platform. To do this, I will draw on work from infrastructure studies, an area of Science and Technology Studies; and in particular, on Ford and Wajcman’s analysis of the relationships between infrastructure, knowledge claims and politics on Wikipedia. This theoretical analysis will be supplemented with evidence from previous studies and in the public domain, to illustrate the points made. This analysis echoes wider doubts about the credibility of technologically deterministic accounts of technology’s relationship with society, but suggests however that while Twitter may not be the cause of shifts in public discourse, it is implicated in them, in that it both creates new norms for discourse and enables new forms of power and inequality to operate.

show abstract

“…The G20 and T20 as new education policy actors and with varying degrees of independence from government, political parties, or corporations (McGann et al, 2014); and the rising influence of think tanks and their role in framing domestic and international discourse on foreign policy and geopolitics (Abelson, Brooks, & Hua, 2016), social development policy (McGann et al, 2014) and global and domestic education policy (Lubienski, Brewer, & La Londe, 2016;Thompson, Savage, & Lingard, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This may be a fruitful exercise but is outside the scope. Mobilising and articulating ideas and discourse are central to understanding the potential of any new policy actor (Lingard & Sellar, 2013;Thompson et al, 2016). Thus, the unique self-articulation of the T20 as "the ideas bank" of the G20 as distinct from other engagement groups prompts its analysis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The G20 and the Think 20 as new global education policy actors? Discursive analysis of roles and policy ideas

Matovich

Srivastava²

2023

JICE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe Group of Twenty (G20) has substantial influence in global economic policy but has been peripheral in global education governance. There is intensification of education policy-relevant engagement within the Think 20 (T20), the “ideas bank” and official engagement group of the G20. The authors analyse the evolution of education as a policy domain within the T20, the ideas and discursive framing of education and global education policy “solutions” and assumptions about the G20 in education policy engagement.Design/methodology/approachThe authors view the T20 as an external actor that can mobilise policy-relevant ideas to G20 actors responsible for internal policy selection and translation. The analysis covers the period 2018–2021 when education became an explicit T20 policy area. The authors screened all 461 T20 policy briefs across all domains. Of these, 32 briefs and four final T20 Summit communiqués were reviewed using critical discourse analysis. Data were supplemented via organisational websites and tacit professional knowledge.FindingsThree assumptions on the G20 as an actor prevailed: (1) policymaker, (2) policy shaper and (3) knowledge mobiliser. The framing ideas on education were linked to assumptions on drivers of education system reform as intertwined with, or to enable: (1) economic adaptation, (2) technical adaptation and (3) socio-political adaptation of individuals and societies.Originality/valueAccelerated education engagement within the T20 and its direct reach to G20 leaders makes it, and the G20, analytically unique and new unexamined actors of potential influence. The authors conclude that the T20 is positioned as a unique actor, both that can mobilise education policy-relevant ideas to G20 leaders, and legitimised as the actor from which G20 leaders and policymakers should adopt ideas.

show abstract

Introduction

Cited by 26 publications

References 24 publications

Converting to Privatization: A Discourse Analysis of Dyslexia Policy Narratives

Converting to Privatization: A Discourse Analysis of Dyslexia Policy Narratives

Infrastructure and the Post-Truth Era: is Trump Twitter’s Fault?

The G20 and the Think 20 as new global education policy actors? Discursive analysis of roles and policy ideas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About