The Australian Educational Researcher

, Volume 33, Issue 2, pp 1–14 | Cite as

Towards a theory and practice of policy engagement: Higher education research policy in the making

  • Trevor Gale
AARE President’s Address, AARE, 2005


Academic engagement with higher education research policy in Australia, and with education policy more generally, is in crisis. This time around, it is not just that our theoretical tools are blunt and irrelevant (Ball 1990), so are our politics. It seems our attention has been so consumed by “what is policy” (Ball 1994a) and with challenging its claims to authority, that we have missed or ignored imperatives to engage with its production. Even though some have attempted contributions, for the most part we have been “coerced into an era of cooperation”. Getting ourselves out of this mess will take more than just better theories and new politics. It will require a degree of cooperation, to advance a theory and practice of policy engagement and to re-establish a field of education that resists the tendency to fragment and/or the temptation to defend itself “against” policy. In this paper I attempt an assessment of where we are theoretically and politically with regard to education policy and where we need to look to find new forms of policy engagement. By way of illustration, I draw on examples from AARE (the Australian Association for Research in Education) and the Australian RQF (Research Quality Framework) although the analysis is by no means restricted to these.


Education Policy Policy Text Australian High Education Change Power Relation Research Quality Framework 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Apple, M. W. (1982)Education and Power, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  2. Ball, S. (1990)Politics and Policy Making in Education: Explorations in policy sociology, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, S. (1994a)Education Reform: A critical and post-structural approach, Open University Press, Buckingham, UK.Google Scholar
  4. Ball, S. (1994b) Researching inside the state: Issues in the interpretation of elite interviews,Researching Education Policy: Ethical and methodological issues, in D. Halpin and B. Troyna, Falmer Press, London, pp. 107–120.Google Scholar
  5. Beilharz, P. (1987) Reading politics: Social theory and social policy,Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 388–406.Google Scholar
  6. Bourdieu, P. and L. Wacquant (1992)An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology, Polity Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  7. Bowe, R., S. Ball & A. Gold (1992)Reforming Education and Changing Schools: Case studies in policy sociology, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  8. Dale, R. (1989)The State and Education Policy, Open University Press, Milton Keynes.Google Scholar
  9. De Bono, E. (1971)The Use of Lateral Thinking, Penguin, Harmondsworth.Google Scholar
  10. de Certeau, M. (1984)The Practice of Everyday Life, University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  11. Expert Advisory Group (EAG) (September 2005)Research Quality Framework: Assessing the quality and impact of research in Australia — The Preferred Model, AGPS, Canberra.Google Scholar
  12. Foucault, M. (1972)The Archaeology of Knowledge, Tavistock, London.Google Scholar
  13. Freeland, J. (1986) Australia: The search for a new educational settlement,Capitalist Crisis and Schooling: Comparative studies in the politics of education, in R. Sharp, pp. 212–236, Macmillan, Melbourne.Google Scholar
  14. Gale, T. (1994) Story-telling and policy making: The construction of university entrance problems in Australia,Journal of Education Policy, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 227–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gale, T. (1997)Policy Production and the Australian State: Higher education entry in Queensland, 1987–1996, Unpublished PhD thesis, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia.Google Scholar
  16. Gale, T. (1999) Policy trajectories: Treading the discursive path of policy analysis,Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 393–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gale, T. (2003) Realizing policy:The who andhow of policy production,Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 51–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gale, T. & K. Densmore (2003)Engaging Teachers: Towards a Radical Democratic Agenda for Schooling, Open University Press, Buckingham, UK.Google Scholar
  19. Giddens, A. (1994)Beyond Left and Right: The Future of Radical Politics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  20. Gordon, I., J. Lewis and R. Young (1977) Perspectives on policy analysis.Public Administration Bulletin, vol. 25, pp. 26–35.Google Scholar
  21. Henry, M. (1993) What is policy? A response to Stephen Ball,Discourse, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 102–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lakoff, G. (2004)Don’t Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate, Scribe Publications, Melbourne.Google Scholar
  23. Latour, B. (1983) Give me a laboratory and I will raise the world, in K. Knorr-Cetina & M. Mulkay, eds.,Science Observed, pp. 141–170, Sage, London.Google Scholar
  24. Lawn, M. (1987) The spur and the bridle: Changing the mode of curriculum control,Journal of Curriculum Studies, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 227–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lingard, B. (1993) The changing state of policy production in education: Some Australian reflections on the state of policy sociology,International Studies in Sociology of Education, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 25–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Luke, A. (2005a) Evidence-based state literacy policy: A critical alternative, in N. Bascia, A. Cumming, K. Leithwood & D. Livingstone, eds.,International Handbook of Educational Policy, pp. 661–677, Springer, Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Luke, A., P. Freebody, L. Shun & S. Gopinathan (2005b) Towards Research-based Innovation and Reform: Singapore Schooling in Transition,Asia-Pacific Journal of Education, vol. 25, no. 1, May, pp. 7–29.Google Scholar
  28. Luke, A. & D. Hogan (2006) Steering educational research in national contexts: the Singapore model, in D. Coulby, J. Ozga, T. Popkewitz & T. Seddon, eds.,World Yearbook of Education: Educational Research and Policy, Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Nelson, B. (2 June 2005) Opening Address to the National Stakeholders Forum, /research_quality_framework/nsf.htmGoogle Scholar
  30. Prosser, T. (1981) The politics of discretion: Aspects of discretionary power in the Supplementary Benefits Scheme,Discretion and Welfare, in M. Adler and S. Asquith, pp. 148–170, Heinemann, London.Google Scholar
  31. Riseborough, G. (1992) Primary headship, state policy and the challenge of the 1990s,Journal of Education Policy, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 123–142.Google Scholar
  32. Rizvi, F. & S. Kemmis (1987)Dilemmas of Reform, Deakin University Press, Geelong.Google Scholar
  33. Sachs, J. (2003)The Activist Teaching Profession, Open University Press, Buckingham, UK.Google Scholar
  34. Schön, D. (1979) Generative Metaphor: A Perspective on Problem-Setting in Social Policy, in A. Ortony, ed.,Metaphor and Thought, pp. 254–83, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  35. Tripp, D. (1993)Critical Incidents in Teaching: Developing professional judgement, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  36. Troyna, B. (1994) Critical social research and education policy,British Journal of Educational Studies, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 70–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yeatman, A. (1998)Activism and the Policy Process, Allen & Unwin, Sydney.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Australian Association for Research in Education 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Trevor Gale
    • 1
  1. 1.Monash UniversityAustralia

Personalised recommendations