Alex Elwick

In pursuit of quality: early childhood qualifications and training policy

Abstract This paper aims to critique policy discourses around the pursuit of quality in early years education. Taking England as a focal point, it problematizes the use of the term ‘quality’ and attempts to standardise its meaning; highlighting the disconnect that exists between policy and practice. The paper combines discourse analysis of a small number of key government documents with a series of interviews with early years stakeholders in order to identify issues that will have resonance and can inform a much needed continuation of debates about what quality might mean. Over the course of the research it became apparent that there was considerable disquiet amongst early years practitioners with regards the current qualifications and training landscape, particularly with regards to what many viewed as ideologically-driven policy-making, not informed by proper dialogue with the sector.

New forms of government school provision – an international comparison

Abstract Driven by a desire to improve academic outcomes and transform ‘failing’ schools, governments around the world have often turned to the development of new forms of state-funded school. This paper looks at three such instances of the introduction of new forms of schooling, within three urban localities (academy schools in London; charter schools and small schools of choice in New York City; and Schools of Tomorrow in Rio de Janeiro). It considers the extent to which these types of school did improve academic outcomes for their students and draws comparisons across each case study in order to understand their similarities and differences. It concludes that although the quasi-marketisation of school systems through the introduction of new (often private) providers might improve outcomes, this is not the only means by which improvement can be attained; and that instead the introduction of new forms of school may be successful because this enables certain other changes to happen. It highlights the limited nature of impact evidence available in all instances, which restricts our ability to properly evaluate the effect of new school types on outcomes.

Education reform in New York City (2002-2013)

Abstract In 2002 Michael Bloomberg took office as Mayor of New York City and, over the next 12 years of his administration, oversaw a series of sweeping reforms in order to ‘fix’ the broken education system which he believed he had inherited. This paper details the key policy reforms in New York City’s public school system during this period, assessing the extent to which the reforms were successful and what can be learnt from a policy perspective for other urban education systems. It outlines the radical programme of school closure, structural reform, and the introduction of new measures of accountability and autonomy, concluding that reform in New York City can be grouped into four categories: leadership; structure and schools; accountability; and teachers. While a lack of targeted evaluation means that it is not possible to prove causation, it nonetheless shows that there is a correlation between this set of reforms and the fact that by 2013 New York City’s performance on national tests placed it amongst the best urban school districts in America when compared with other cities serving similar populations.

Identifying an Educational Response to the Prevent Policy: Student Perspectives on Learning about Terrorism, Extremism and Radicalisation

ABSTRACT School responses to the Prevent agenda have tended to focus primarily on ‘safeguarding’ approaches, which essentially perceive some young people as being ‘at risk’ and potentially as presenting a risk to others. In this article, we consider evidence from secondary school students who experienced a curriculum project on terrorism, extremism and radicalisation. We argue that a curriculum response which addresses the acquisition of knowledge can build students’ critical capacity for engagement with radicalisation through enhanced political literacy and media literacy. We further argue this represents a genuinely educational response to Prevent, as opposed to a more restrictive securitised approach.