The Translation of Transitions Policies into School Enactment

  • Cheryl Sim
  • Stephen Hay
  • Greer Johnson
  • Sue Thomas
Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

This chapter presents a synthesis of the themes and issues emerging from the contributions across this section, each of which focused on the transition to post-school life for young people in Queensland, Australia. In particular, it applies a curriculum enactment perspective to this synthesis. The enactment of education policy is held to involve ‘interpretation because implementers must figure out what a policy means and whether and how it applies to their school to decide whether and how to ignore, adapt, or adopt policy locally’ (Spillane J, Diamond J, Burch P, Hallett T, Loyiso L, Zoltners J, Educ Policy 16(5):733, 2002). As a consequence, beyond the policy prescriptions provided earlier in this book, here the consideration turns to issues of enactment and an appraisal of nexus between intentions and enactments. In doing so, the chapter is presented in three parts. It commences by revisiting the policies relating to post-school transitions in Queensland and Australia and locating policy prescriptions in turn within the international context. The second part draws on the case study evidence to identify the characteristics and consequences of the curriculum decision-making associated with the implementation of transition policies, as discussed in the case studies. This section draws out similarities and differences amongst the various approaches to managing transitions across the three case study schools. In the third section, conclusions are identified from the study’s findings for informing productive transition policy and enactment more widely. In all, it is concluded that factors extending from global sentiment, federal schooling funding priorities, state government policies and local preference and requirements shaped what is done in three Queensland schools to facilitate student’s post certification transitions from school to further learning or work.

Keywords

Career Counsellor Academic Curriculum Transition Policy Curriculum Approach Curriculum Decision 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the support of the Australian Research Council, through its Discovery scheme funding for the project ‘Towards a transformative model: reshaping transitions between school and post-school life’ (2008–2010). The authors also acknowledge the contributions of the school communities and the support of their research colleagues in the project.

References

  1. Ball, S. J. (2008). The education debate. Bristol, UK: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
  2. Braun, A., Maguire, M., & Ball, S. (2010). Policy enactments in the UK secondary school: Examining policy, practice and school positioning. Journal of Education Policy, 25(4), 547–560. doi: 10.1080/02680931003698544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dawkins, J. S. (1988). Strengthening Australia’s schools: A consideration of the focus and content of schooling. Canberra, Australia: A.G.P.S.Google Scholar
  4. Dusseldorp Skills Forum (Ed.). (1998). Australia’s youth: Reality and risk. Glebe, Australia: Dusseldorp Skills Forum.Google Scholar
  5. Dusseldorp Skills Forum. (2007). How young people are faring 2007: At a glance. Glebe, Australia: Author.Google Scholar
  6. Eisner, E., & Vallance, E. (Eds.). (1974). Conflicting conceptions of curriculum. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.Google Scholar
  7. Hay, S. (2009). Transforming social and educational governance: Trade training centres and the transition to social investment politics in Australia. British Journal of Educational Studies, 57(3), 285–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Henry, M., Lingard, B., Rizvi, F., & Taylor, S. (2001). The OECD, globalisation and education policy. New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  9. Kemmis, S., Cole, P., & Suggett, D. (1983). Orientations to curriculum and transitions: Towards the socially-critical school. Melbourne, Australia: Victorian Institute of Secondary Education.Google Scholar
  10. Maroy, C. (2009). Convergences and hybridization of educational policies around ‘post-bureaucratic’ models of regulation. Compare, 39(1), 71–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Peters, M. (2001). National education policy constructions of the ‘knowledge economy’: Towards a critique. Journal of Educational Enquiry, 2(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
  12. Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalizing education policy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Rose, N. (1999). Inventiveness in politics. Economy and Society, 28(3), 467–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rose, N. (2000). Community, citizenship, and the third way. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(9), 1395–1411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Shawer, S. (2010). Classroom-level curriculum development: EFL teachers as curriculum developers, curriculum-makers and curriculum transmitters. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(2), 173–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Spillane, J., Diamond, J., Burch, P., Hallett, T., Jita, L., & Zoltners, J. (2002). Managing in the middle: School leaders and the enactment of accountability policy. Educational Policy, 16(5), 731–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Stenhouse, L. (1975). An introduction to curriculum research and development. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  18. Sweet, R. (1987). Australian trends in skill requirements. In G. B. R. W. Rumberger (Ed.), The future impact of technology on work and education. Lewes, UK: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  19. Teese, R. (2007). Structural inequality in Australian education: Vertical and lateral stratification of opportunity. In R. Teese, S. Lamb, & M. Duru-Bellat (Eds.), International studies in educational inequality, theory and policy (Vol. 2, pp. 39–61). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  20. Teese, R., Polesel, J., O’Brien, K., Jones, B., Davies, M., Walstab, A., & Maughan, A. (2000). Early school leaving: A review of the literature. Brisbane, Australia: Australian National Training Authority.Google Scholar
  21. Vallance, E. (1986). A second look at conflicting conceptions of curriculum. Theory into Practice, 25(1), 24–30. doi: 10.1080/00405848609543194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Wolf, A. (2004). Education and economic performance: Simplistic theories and their policy consequences. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 20(2), 315–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cheryl Sim
    • 1
  • Stephen Hay
    • 1
  • Greer Johnson
    • 2
  • Sue Thomas
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Education and Professional StudiesGriffith UniversityBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.Griffith Institute of Educational ResearchGriffith UniversityBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations