Transcript Education & Social Stratification Lecture 9 The Marxist

PEDU 6209
Policy Study in Education
Topic 9
Policy Process Study:
Policy Formulation and Making
Perspectives and Processes in Policy Studies
Analytic-Technical
Perspective
Policy
Making
Policy
Implementation
Policy
Evaluation
Interpretive-Political Discursive-Critical
Perspective
Perspective
Theories of the Policy-making Process
 The first generation of policy-making process
theories
Scientific-rational model
Incrementalist model
Garbage can model
 The second generation of policy-making
process theories
Comprehensive rational model
The stages heuristic model
New Institutionalism model
The multiple stream model
The discourse model
Comprehensive Rationalist Perspective in
Policy Making Theory
 Comprehensive rational framework: The
ideal-typical framework
 Problem analysis
Pathology control approach
Desirability striving approach
 Comprehensive information gathering
 Solution analysis
Best solution approach
Satisfice and good enough resolution approach
Comprehensive Rationalist Perspective in
Policy Making Theory
 Harold Lasswells’ intelligence system for policy making
 Intelligence: The stage of intelligence collection, which
consists of
 Information of the status quo of the phenomenon to be
intervene
 Information of causal relations among vital constituents in
operation within the policy phenomenon
 Information of the feasibility of candidate solutions
 Cost-benefit analysis of candidate solutions
(Weimer & Vining, 1992)
PROBLEM ANALYSIS
SOLUTION ANALYSIS
1. Understanding the
problem
4. Choosing evaluation
criteria
(a) Receiving the problem:
assessing the
symptoms.
(b) Framing the problem:
analyzing market and
government failures.
(c) Modeling the problem:
identifying policy
variables.
2. Choosing and explaining
relevant goals and
constraints.
5. Specifying policy
alternatives
6. Evaluating: predicting
impacts of
alternatives and
valuing them in
terms of criteria
COMMUNICATION
Conveying useful
Advice to clients
7. Recommending
actions.
3. Choosing a solution
method.
INFORMATION GATHERING
Identifying and organizing relevant data,
theories and facts; using facts as
evidence about future consequences of
current and alternative policies.
Figure 8.1:
A summary of
Steps in the
Rationalist Mode
Comprehensive Rationalist Perspective in
Policy Making Theory
 Harold Lasswells’ intelligence system for policy making
 Promotion: The stage of considering the pros and cons of
candidate solutions
 Prescription: The stage of making decision on the
prescription of the course of action to be taken
 Invocation: The stage of laying down the rules and
regulations based upon which the policy prescriptions can be
invoked
 Application: The stage of carrying out the course of action
stipulated in the policy by the designated authority.
 Termination: The stage of bringing the course of action to a
close as designed
 Appraisal: The stage of evaluating the effectiveness or/even
efficiency of the policy measures.
Political Perspective in Policy Making
Theory
 Criticism on comprehensive rational framework by
incrementalism and the introduction of political
rationality into the policy process study
 Conceptual difference between political rationality
and means-end rationality
 Means-end rationality refers to agency that a person acts
in a conscious and knowledgeable “way in which the
attainment of his goal can be maximized in the real world.”
(Dahl & Lindblom, 1992, p.57)
 Political rationality refers to the agency that the person
will make conscious and knowledgeable consideration of
the political reality and its entailed constraints and
opportunities, within which the maximization of the
means-to-an-end / satisfice project is carried out.
Political Perspective in Policy Making
Theory
Pluralism: The simple institutional model
The general political system model: Pluralism as a theory
of policy making or politics in general is generated from
the political system model. In political system model,
political process is characterized as input-process-outputfeedback model.
Pluralistic model characterizes the policy making with the
following attributes
• Plurality of interest groups each with equal capacities in
inputting political demands into the polity
• The polity processes the plurality of political demands in
impartial and indiscriminant manner
• Plurality of administrative output to meet with plurality of
political demands
Political Perspective in Policy Making
Theory
 Advocacy coalition model
This model further specifies that the networking
among policy actors in policy making process by
put forth the concept of advocacy coalition. It
indicates that policy actors will form coalition in
order to advocate a particular policy choice.
These coalitions will subsequently constitute a
stabilizing parameter or institutional inertia within
a policy area.
Political Perspective in Policy Making
Theory
 The state theory
State theorists criticize pluralism and political system
of treating the state as a blackbox or an impartial
arbitrator of political demands. In replacement, they
put forth different thesis on the natures and features
of the modern state




The instrumental-state perspective
The corporatist-state perspective
The derivative-state perspective
Competition-state perspective
Simon and March’s Contribution to the
New–institutionalism
The contribution of Herbert Simon: Herbert A.
Simon, the Nobel laureate in Economics 1978, in
his now-classic Administrative Behavior
(1997/1945) has made to important distinctions,
Distinction between economic man and administrative
man: Simon underlined that " The model of economic
man was far more completely and formally developed
than the model of the satisficing administrator.
…limited rationality was defined largely as a residual
category—as a departure from rationality." (P. 118)
Simon and March’s Contribution to the
New–institutionalism
Nobel laureate
In Economics
1978
(1916-2001)
Simon and March’s Contribution to the
New–institutionalism
The contribution of Herbert Simon: …
Distinction between the maximization principle (best
solution) and satisfice principle (good-enough
solution): "Whereas economic man supposedly
maximizes—selects the best alternative from among
all those available to him—his cousin, the
administrator, satisfices—looks for course of action
that is satisfactory or "good enough". (P.119)
Simon and March’s Contribution
to the New–institutionalism
James March’s conception of logic of
appropriateness: James G. March, who once
coauthored with Simon in another now-classic,
Organizations (1958/1993) and has since then
become one of the representative figures in
new-institutionalism, underlines that
Simon and March’s Contribution
to the New–institutionalism
James March’s logic of appropriateness…
 Policy making process is not simply a rational
calculation of means-end and/or cost-benefit
analyses but should be conceived predominantly as
institutional processes; hence they are by definition
influenced if not determined by the features,
structures and cultures of the institutions, in which
the policy making processes are supposed to
undergo.
Simon and March’s Contribution
to the New–institutionalism
 Accordingly, he makes the distinction between the
logics of consequence and that of appropriateness.
 Logic of consequence: “The idea is that a reasoning
decision maker will consider alternatives in terms of their
consequences for preferences.” In other words, it assumes
that “decision processes …are consequential and
preference-based. They are consequential in the sense that
action depends on anticipation of the future effects of
current actions. Alternatives are interpreted in terms of their
expected consequences. They are preference-based in the
sense that consequences are evaluated in terms of
personal preferences. Alternatives are compared in terms of
the extent to which their expected consequences are
thought to serve the preferences of the decision make.
(March, 1994, P. 2)
Simon and March’s Contribution
to the New–institutionalism
James March’s logic of appropriateness…
 Logic of appropriateness: “When individuals and
organizations fulfill identifies, they follow rules or
procedures that they see as appropriate to the situation in
which they find themselves. Neither preferences as they are
normally conceived nor expectations of future
consequences enter directly into the calculus.” (March, 1994,
p. 57)
Simon and March’s Contribution
to the New–institutionalism
James March’s logic of appropriateness…
Accordingly, decision makers are no longer based
on the choices solely on consequences of actions
and the extent that their preferences are satisfied by
the consequences of actions. Instead they would
base their choices on the follows: (p.58)
“1. The question of recognition: What kind of situation is this?
2. The question of identity: What kind of person am I? Or what
kind of organization is this?
3. The question of rules: What does a person such as I, or an
organization such as this, do in a situation as this?” (March,
1994, P. 58)
Simon and March’s Contribution
to the New–institutionalism
 Taking together, Simon and March’s conceptions on
decision making process, policy making processes are
no longer conceived as simple rational, consequential
and preference-based calculations taking places in
some socio-cultural vacuum. Policy-making processes
must be studied against the institutional contexts and
situations in which they are embedded. Decision
makers, who recognized in these institutional contexts,
are embodied with particular identities. And deriving
from these institutional contexts and identities are
rules that these decision makers would find themselves
obliged to follow.
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
Elinor Ostrom, one of the co-winners of the
2009 Nobel Prize in economic science, has
developed the IAD framework to analyze how an
aggregate of rational decision makers come to
reciprocal decision of mutual benefits. (Ostrom,
1990; 1999; 2005)
Elinor Ostrom
(1933-2012)
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
Elinor Ostrom, one of the co-winners of the
2009 Nobel Prize in economic science, has
developed the IAD framework to analyze how an
aggregate of rational decision makers come to
reciprocal decision of mutual benefits. (Ostrom,
1990; 1999; 2005) The framework is made up of
three tiers of conceptual units, namely (1) the
action arena, (2) the exogenous variables, and
(3) the interaction patterns and their outcomes.
This framework can be represented as follows.
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
(Source: Ostrom, 2005, P. 13)
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 The action arena: The core conceptual unit of the IAD
framework is what Ostrom called the action arena. The
action arena of made up of two units, namely the actors
and action situation
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
Action situation: “The structure of an action situation
includes
 the set of participants,
 the specific positions to be filled by participants Roles
expectation
 the set of allowable actions and their linkage Roles
to outcomes,
 the potential outcomes that are linked to individual sequence
Roles performance
of actions,
Social Control
 the level of control each participant has over choice,
 the information available to participants about the structure of
the action situation, and
 the cost and benefits―which serve as incentive and
deterrents―assigned to actions and outcomes.” (Ostrom,
1999, P. 43)
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 Action situation: …
In addition, an action situation can further be
characterized as recursive or non-recursive. This
conceptual unit can be represented as follows.
(Source: P. 33)
Recursive
Situation
Nonrecursive
Situation
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 The actors: Actors in the action arena can either be
“a single individuals or a group functioning as a
corporate actor.” (Ostrom, 1999, P. 44) This actors
are assumed to possess
meanings and values imputed to the situations;
resources, information, and beliefs;
information-processing capacities; and
decision-making strategies brought to the situation.
With these possessions, Ostrom suggested that
actors can further be characterized into for examples
as “Homo economicus”, “Fallible learner”,
“opportunist”, etc
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 The exogenous Variables: The second tier of conceptual
unit consists of three exogenous variables, each of
which will asset its effect on the dependent variable, i.e.
action arena. These exogenous variables include
The rules in use:
 The concept of rules: Ostrom defines rules as “shared
understanding among those involved that refer to enforced
prescriptions about what actions are required, prohibited, or
permitted. All rules are the results of implicit or explicit
efforts to achieve order and predictability among humans by
creating classes of persons (positions) that are then
required, permitted, or forbidden to take classes of persons
in relation to required, permitted, or forbidden states of the
world.” (Ostrom, 1999, P. 49, original emphases)
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 The exogenous Variables: …
The rules in use: …
 Rule configurations: Ostrom differentiates seven types of
working rules each of which affect one aspect of the
structure of the respective action arena. These rules are
represented as follows. (Source: Ostrom, 2005, P. 189)
 Accordingly, these seven types of rule will configure into a
set of “rules-in-use” in a particular action arena and
subsequently in an institution.
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 States of the world: It refers to the
biophysical/material condition, in which the action
arena is embedded. Ostrom has specified the
attributes of the states of the world with two
dimensions, namely excludability and subtractability.
 Excludability refers to the extent that whether the goods
and/or services available in a given state of the world are
difficult and costly to exclude those who are not entitled to
consume the respective goods and/or services.
 Subtractability refers to the extent that whether numbers of
consumers consuming the goods and/or service in a given
state of the world will subtract the quantity and quality of the
respective goods and/or services.
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 States of the world: …..Accordingly, goods and services
available in a given state of the world can be categorized as
follows. (Source: Ostrom, 2005, P. 25)
Subtractability of use
High
Excludability
of potential
beneficiaries
Low
High
Private goods
Toll goods
Low
Common-pool
resources
Public goods
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 Attributes of community: The third set of exogenous
variables affecting the structure of the action arena is
the community and its attributes. It is the least
development conceptual unit in the IAD model. This
underdevelopment of the conceptual unity of
community is understandable given the academic
background of Ostrom, who is a political scientist
focusing on rational-choice institutionalism. She has
specifically assigned the task of developing the
conceptual unit of community to sociologists, who
“tend to be more interested in how shared value
system affect the ways human organize their
relationships with one another.” (Ostrom, 1999, P. 50)
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 Attributes of community: …
Ostrom has simply outlined five attributes of
community, namely (Ostrom, 2005, P. 26-27)
 “values (and norms) of behavior generally accepted in the
community;
 the level of common understanding that potential
participants share (or do not share) about the structure of
particular types of action arenas;
 the extent of homogeneity in the preferences of those living
in a community;
 the size and composition of the relevant community; and
 the extent of inequality of basic assets among those
affected.”
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
The interaction patterns and outcomes: Ostrom,
as an institution analyst, underlines that the
accuracy of institutional analysts’ inference of
interaction patterns (i.e. institutions) and
outcomes generated in a given action arena
depends on the empirical attributes of the
exogenous variables, the actors and the action
situations in the IAD models at point.
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 Market Institution: Prefect competitive market
Types of goods
Private goods:
high excludability
and high
subtractability
Rules in use
Community culture
Action arena
- Free entry,
- Equal position,
- Rational
maximize,
- Prefect
information,
- Price takers,
- Equal cost and
benefit for all,
- Market
equilibrium
- Norm & value of
profit-maximizatio
n
- Money as the
common
language
- homogenous
preference
- infinite numbers
of participants
- One type of
actors: Homo
economicus
- Action situation:
Free
transaction of
homogeneous
goods or
service;
Non-recursive/
Recursive
Interaction
pattern /
institution
Prefect
Competitive
Market
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 Tragedies of the Common
Types of goods
Rules in use
Community
culture
Action arena
Common-pool
resources: Low
excludability and
high
subtractability
- Free entry,
- Equal position,
- Rational
maximize,
- Incomplete
information,
- The sooner &
more the better,
- Costless
benefit,
- Detrimental
effects on
resources,
which run out
quickly
Zero-sum game:
You gain is my
loss, and my gain
is your loss
- The actors: The
self-interest
oriented
“common”
- Action situation:
Egocentric
appropriation
of
common-pool
resources;
Non-recursive/
recursive
Interaction
pattern /
institution
Tragedy of the
Common
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 Application of tragedy of the common on the impact
of Direct-Subsidized Scheme (DSS) on the commonpool of schools and schoolplaces in the publicschool sector of Hong Kong.
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 Prisoner’s dilemma: Ostrom conceives prisoner’s
dilemma model in game theory as a particular case of
common-pool resource (CPR) situation. Instead of
numerous participants, in prisoner dilemma model there
are only two participants. However, under the
assumption of rational calculation of maxcimizattion of
bebefit, the situation would only encourage defect and
discourage cooperation. Hence, the results of the
prinsoners’ rational choices are the same as CPR
situation, i.e. tragedy of the common.
Prisoner B stays silent
(cooperates)
Prisoner B betrays
(defects)
Prisoner A stays
silent (cooperates)
Each serves 1 year
Prisoner A: 3 years
Prisoner B: goes free
Prisoner A betrays
(defects)
Prisoner A: goes free
Prisoner B: 3 years
Each serves 2 years
《表六》香港小學校方及家長的兩難
你
進行學能測驗操練
不進行學能測驗操練
進行學能測驗
操練
（A）
（C）
 雙方均承受操練帶來的惡果  我需承受操練帶來的惡果，
 雙方在 SSPA 的成績調節機制  我在 SSPA 的成績調節機制中取
中均沒有優勢
得優勢
不進行學能測
驗操練
（B）
（D）
 我可避免操練帶來的惡果，  雙方均可避免操練帶來的惡果，
 我在 SSPA 的成績調節機制中  雙方在 SSPA 的成績調節機制中
陷於劣勢
均沒有優勢
我
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 Evaluating outcomes: The final conceptual unit of the
IAD framework is the evaluating the outcomes being
achieved. Ostrom proposes that the outcomes can be
evaluated under six criteria. These evaluative criteria
are:
 Economic efficiency: “Economic efficiency is determined by
the magnitude of the change in the flow of net benefits
associated with an allocation or reallocation of resources.”
(Ostrom, 1999, P. 48)
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 Evaluating outcomes: …
 Fiscal equivalence: “There are two principal means of
assessing equity: (1) on the basis of the equality between
individuals’ contributions to an effort and benefits they
derive and (2) on the differential abilities to pay. The concept
of equity that underlies an exchange economy holds that
those who benefit from a service should bear the burden of
financing that service.” (Ostrom, 1999, P. 48)
 Redistributional equity: “Policy that redistribute resources to
poorer individuals are of considerable important. …The
provision of facilities that benefit particularly needy groups
…may conflict with the goal of achieving fiscal equivalence.”
Ostrom, 1999, P. 48)
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 Evaluating outcomes: …
 Accountability: “In democratic polity, officials should be
accountable to citizens concerning the development and use
of public facilities and natural resources. Concern for
accountability need not conflict greatly with efficiency and
equity goals.” (Ostrom, 1999, P. 48)
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 Evaluating outcomes: …
 Conformance to general morality: This criterion refers to
evaluate the level of general level of general morality
fostered by a particular set of institutional arrangements.”
And Ostrom has suggested two of such general morality.
One is honesty, which concerns with issues such as “are
those who are able to cheat and go undetected able to obtain
very high payoffs? Are those who keep promises more likely
to be rewarded and advanced in their careers?” Another
general morality is sustainability of reciprocal interaction, i.e.
“How do those who repeatedly interact within a set of
institutional arrangements learn to relate to one another over
the long term?” (Ostrom, 1999, P. 49)
Elinor Ostrom’s Institutional Analysis &
Development in Rational-Choice Institutionalism
 Evaluating outcomes: …
 Adaptability: Lastly, Ostrom underlines that “unless
institutional arrangements are able to respond to everchanging environments, the sustainability of resources and
investment is likely to suffer.” (Ostrom, 1999, P. 49)
Taken as a whole, Ostrom reminds us “trade-off are often
necessary in using performance criteria as a basis for selecting
from alternative institutional arrangements. It is particularly
difficult to choose between the goals of efficiency and
redistributional equity.” (Ostrom, 1999, P. 49)
Policy-Making Theory III: Multiple
Stream Approach
 The approach grows out of the Garbage Can Model, which
is another alternate policy-process model to the scientificrational model in the 1970s. The primary assumption of the
model is the emphasis on the ambiguity nature of the
policy phenomena.
 By ambiguity, it refers to “a state of having many way of
thinking about the same circumstances or phenomena.”
(Feldman, 1989, quoted in Zahariadis, 1999, p.74) The
concept of ambiguity differs from the concept of
uncertainty, which is one of the constituent concept in
rational model, is that uncertainty can be reduced or even
eliminated by information and analysis of it, while
ambiguity on policy phenomena cannot be reduced by
information but in some case may even enhance it.
Policy-Making Theory III: Multiple Stream
Approach
 Another essential assumption of the approach is that
policy issues or even problems are not attended in an
analytic-rational way as the scientific-rational model
assumes. The garbage-can and multiple-stream models
stress that the logic of approaching policy issue is
temporal sorting and not rational choice.
“Who pays attention to what and when is critical. Time is a
unique, scarce resource. Because the primary concern of
decision-makers …is to manage time effectively rather than
manage tasks. It is reasonable to pursue a lens (approach)
that accords significance to time rather than to rationality.”
(Zahariadis, 1999, p.74)
Policy-Making Theory III: Multiple Stream
Approach
 John Kingdon’s three streams in policy making
 Problem: It refers to the conditions or mechanism on which policy
makers identify, define and take action on a policy problem. They
include
 Indicators
 Dramatic events or crisis
 Feedback of existing programs
 Policy: It refers to the conditions spawned from the policy issues or
phenomena themselves. They include
 Policy ideas generated from policy communities
 The prospect of technical feasibility and value acceptability of the policy
itself
 Politics: It refers to the conditions grow out of the political
environment. They include
 National mood
 Legislative and executive turnover
Policy-Making Theory III: Multiple Stream
Approach
 John Kingdon’s three streams in policy making

The conception of the coupling of the streams and the
formation of “policy window”. Kingdon signifies that when
the three streams are joined together at critical moments in
time, they will constitute a “policy window”. As a “policy
window” opens, it indicates that the policy issue will elevate
into a policy agenda and sequent policy-making steps will
materialized.
Policy-making Theory IV: Discourse
Perspective
In discursive perspective, policy making is construed as
language game of persuasion and argumentation. Hence,
policy-making studies are analyses of how different
parties concerned frame, organize and possibly win the
argumentation in a policy discourse.
 Formal argument model in policy analysis
Constituents in formal argument model (William Dunn)
Claim
Information
Warrant
Backing
Qualifier
Rebuttal
I
therefore
C
Policy-relevant
Information is the
beginning of a
policy argument
Claim affirms that
the policy
conclusion
is true
since
W
Warrant justifies
the movement
from I to C
C becomes I
in a sequent
argument
The Logical Structure of Policy Argument
therefore
I
C
Mother tongue
Instruction (MTI)
enhance learning
effectiveness
MTI for all
in compulsory
education
since
W
Findings of
International Studies
in Educational Achievement (IEA)
for Science
C becomes I
in a sequent
argument
The Logical Structure of Policy Argument
I
therefore
Q
Qualifier indicates
that the claim has
a given plausibility
Policy-relevant
Information is the
beginning of a
policy argument
C
Claim affirms that
the policy
conclusion is
true as qualified
unless
since
W
R
Warrant justifies
the movement
from I to C
Rebuttal indicates
that special conditions,
exceptions, or
qualifications to
W, or I reduce the
plausibility of C
because
C becomes I
in a sequent
argument
B
Backing
justifies W
The Logical Structure of Policy Argument
I
therefore
Q
On what subjects?
At what levels?
MTI enhance
learning
effectiveness
C
MTI for all
in compulsory
education
unless
since
W
R
Findings of
IEA
for Science
Not in English
Not at more advanced
levels
C becomes I
in a sequent
argument
because
B
Backing
justifies W
The Logical Structure of Policy Argument
I
therefore
Q
Most of independent
States adopt
MTI
MTI enhance
learning
effectiveness
C
MTI for all
in compulsory
education
unless
since
W
R
UNESCO
1953 Document
Not in most of
post-colonial
states
C becomes I
in a sequent
argument
because
B
Backing
justifies W
The Logical Structure of Policy Argument
Policy Argumentation: Interpretive
Approach
Formal argument model in policy analysis
Constituents in formal argument model (William Dunn)
Claim
Information
Warrant
Backing
Qualifier
Rebuttal
Types of argumentative claims
Designative claims on facts
Evaluative claims on values
Advocative claims on actions
Policy Argumentation: Interpretive
Approach
Interpretive approach to policy argument
 Deep description of arguments of different interpretive
communities
 Constituents of the architecture of argumentation and the
textuality of argumentative/persuasive texts
Genre
Frame
Rhetoric
Narrative
The Conception of Genre in Critical
Discourse Analysis
 Concept of genre
“A genre is a group of texts that share specific discursive
features.” (Gill & Whedbee, 1997, p.163).
Genre means “distinctions within convention …between text
types.” (Fairclough, 1995, p. 13) More specifically, Fairclough
defines “genre as socially ratified way of using language in
connection with a particular type of social activities,”
(Fairclough, 1997, p. 14) e.g. interview, narrative, exposition,
argumentation, persuasion.
Accordingly policy text and/or discourse can mainly be
construed as argumentative and/or persuasive genre of text
and/or discourse.
The Conception of Genre in Critical
Discourse Analysis
 Concept of genre
According to Richard Edwards and his associates persuasive
text may take the following forms
Deliberative genre: It refers to policy discourse which is
“associate with policy and its future orientated and speculative.”
(Edwards et al., 2004, p.19) For example, in documents relating to
recent education reform, they commonly refer to the future of
global-informational economy and network society and how
education reform should prepare students to fit into new species
of flexible and workers and/or networkers.
Forensic genre: It refers to policy discourse which “focuses on
past events and attempt to provide an account that is taken to be
true.” (ibid) For example, the rhetoric of presenting data of
declining standards in comparative educational research and
statistics of falling competitiveness of national economy in
global market can be construed as a kind of forensic genre.
The Conception of Genre in Critical
Discourse Analysis
 Concept of genre
According to Richard Edwards and his associates persuasive
text may take the following forms
Epideictic genre: It refers to policy discourse which focuses on
the contemporary. However, in epideictic genre one can usually
find “the notion of ‘naming and shaming’, publicly denouncing
organizations and individuals who fail to meet the quality
standards and inspection criteria to which they are subject.” (ibid)
For example, blaming on teachers, naming negative value-added
schools, and shaming failing schools.
Conception of Frame in Policy Studies
 Law and Rein define frame “as a way of representing
knowledge, and as the reliance on (and development of)
interpretative schemas that bound and order a chaotic
situation, facilitate interpretation and provide a guide
for doing and acting.” (Law and Rein, 2003, p.173)
Conception of Frame in Policy Studies
 The concept of frame finds its scholarly resonance in
the well-documented concept of “definition of situation”
in symbolic interactionism. As Law and Rein quote in
length of Goffman’s exposition
“I assume that when individuals attend to any current
situation, they face the question: ‘What is going on
here?’ Whether asked explicitly, as in times of
confusion and doubt, or tacitly, during occasions of
usual certitude, the question is put and the answer to it
is presumed by the way the individual then proceeds to
get on with the affairs at hand.” (Quoted in Law & Rein,
p. 175)
Conception of Frame in Policy Studies
 The functions of frames in policy argumentation are to
(Law & Rein, p. 174)
 “note a special type of story that focuses attention”
 “provide stability and structure by narrating a problemcentred discourse as evolves over time,”
 “define the boundary between evidence and noise”,
 “wed fact and value into belief about how to act”
Conception of Frame in Policy Studies
Types of policy frame
Rhetoric frame
Action frame
Policy action frame: It refers to “the frame an institutional
actor uses to construct the problem of a specific policy
situation.”
Institutional action frame: It indicates the frame held by
institutions. This signifies that as agents of thought and
action, institutions possess characteristics point of view,
prevailing system of beliefs, category scheme, images,
routines and styles of argument and action, all of which
inform their action frames.” (Schon & Rein, 1994, p.33)
Conception of Frame in Policy Studies
Framing HKSAR education reform
Lifelong learning for employability and competitiveness
Lifelong learning for social inclusion and political empowerment
Framing Quality Education
Quality for analytic-technical control
Quality for communal understanding of trust and care
Quality for potential emancipation
Framing MOI policy
MOI policy as issue of learning effectiveness
MOI policy as issue of nation-building
MOI policy as issue of social capital formation
MOI policy as issue of human right
Conception of Rhetoric in Policy Studies
 Meanings of rhetoric: Rhetoric has a long history in
Western literary as well as philosophical traditions. It
can be traced back to Aristotle.
 Aristotle defines rhetoric as “the ability to see, in any given
case, the available means of persuasion.” (Aristotle, 1991,
quoted in Gill & Whedbee, 1997, p. 155)
 Wharley defines it as “the findings of suitable arguments to
prove a given point, and the skillful arrangement of them.”
(Whately, 1963, quoted in Gill & Whedbee, 1997, p. 155)
Conception of Rhetoric in Policy Studies
 Meanings of rhetoric:
 A dictionary definition of rhetoric is that it is “the art of using
language so as to persuade or influence others.” (Edwards et
al. 2004, p.3) Hence, Rhetorical analysis involves the study of
the ways in which we attempt to persuade or influence in our
discursive, textual and gestural practices. (Edwards et al.,
2004, p.13) Hence, “part of the job of the rhetoric analyst is to
determine how constructions of ‘the real’ are made persuasive”
(Simon, 1990; quoted in Edwards et al., 2004, p. 13) “Here the
question is not so much about whether reality matches
rhetoric or not, but which fabrications of the real are more
persuasive and why.” (Edwards, et al., 2004, p.13)
 As for the case of educational discourse, rhetoric analysis
aims to explore and reveal “hidden rhetoric aspect to
educational discourse.” (Edwards et al., 2004, p. 9)
Conception of Rhetoric in Policy Studies
 Constituents of rhetoric performance: It has been
identified by analysts of rhetoric that there are several
essential constituents for a rhetoric performance, i.e. to
make rhetoric persuasive. They are
 Context: Rhetoric by definition is pragmatic in nature, i.e. it
“responds to or interacts with societal issues or problems,
and it produces some action upon or change in the world.”
(Gill & Whedbee, 1997, p.161). Therefore, in order to be
comprehended and/or critically analyzed the rhetoric in a
policy text, it must be set against the context (temporal, sociocultural and/or pragmatic contexts), in which it is derived.
Conception of Rhetoric in Policy Studies
 Constituents of rhetoric performance:
 Exigence: It refers to the way the issue and/or problem to be
addressed in the rhetoric of a policy text are defined and
formulated. For example, in recent education reforms, the
most commonly used exigencies are either the decline of
standards of students and school leavers or the threat of
losing national competitiveness in global economic
competitions.
Conception of Rhetoric in Policy Studies
 Constituents of rhetoric performance:
 Audience: It signifies the actual or figurative audience, whom
the rhetoric of a policy text suppose to address or appeal to.
For example, in recent education-reform documents, the
audiences to be addressed are usually employers and/or
parents rather than teachers and education professions. It
indicates a sense of distrustfulness to professionals, who
usually been depicted as the sourced of falling standard in
education and/or falling competitiveness in national economy.
Even within the audience of parents, they has been defined as
consumers striving for individual gains rather than as citizens
constituting common will and good for the society as a whole.
Conception of Rhetoric in Policy Studies
 Constituents of rhetoric performance:
 Rhetor credibility: It indicates the authorities of the speakers
or writers of the texts, and/or the authorities that the rhetoric
of a policy documents try to appealed to. For example, appeal
to concepts as well as authorities of neo-liberal economists,
such as Milton Friedman, in policy texts of education reform
of liberalization is one of the most common practices in recent
education reforms.
 Absence: It has been underlined that one of the essential
components in analyzing rhetoric is “what is absent from or
silenced by the text.” (Gill & Whedbee, 1997, p.169).
Conception of Rhetoric in Policy Studies
 Constituents of rhetoric performance:
 Metaphor: “The essence of metaphor is understanding and
experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another.” (Lakoff
and Johnson, 1980; quoted in Edwards, 2004, p.25) In
metaphoric analysis, it is claimed that “human understanding
is a metaphoric process; the mind grasps an unfamiliar idea
only by comparison to or in terms of something already
known. Thus the metaphoric language in a text presents a
particular view of reality by structuring the understanding of
one idea in terms of something previously understood.” (Gill
& Whedbee, 1997, p.173)
 For example, in the rhetoric of the neo-liberalism the
education system is metaphorically prescribed as a market
mechanism, a school as a input-output factory, students as
materials to be processed and added on value, parents as
choosing consumers, school principals as CEO, etc.
Conception of Rhetoric in Policy Studies
 Constituents of rhetoric performance:
 Iconicity: “Iconicity functions in a way that is similar to
metaphor, iconicity ‘rests on the intuitive recognition of
similarities one field of reference (the form of language) and
another.’” (Gill & Whedbee, 1997, p.174) For example, HK
school like to use celebrity graduates as rhetoric to indicate
the quality of the school.
Conception of Narrative in Policy Studies
Conception of narrative in policy study
 Narrative can be defined as literal representation
which takes the form of a storyline, i.e. with clear
beginning, development, and end.
 It refers to the ‘storyline’ that each interpretive
community constructs, follows and put fore in a
policy argumentation. It is a representation schema a
interpretive community used to define their situation
in the policy reality and organize their arguments.
Conception of Narrative in Policy Studies
 The structure of narrative: Numbers of scholars have tried to
summarize the structure of a narrative. Here Hyden White’s
formulation will be adopted
 Central subject: The narrator or the main character in the story. In the
case of policy argumentation, the central subject is a particular
interpretive community/interest group.
 Plot:
 It refers to the sequence of events selectively organized into a narrative
by an interpretive community in the policy argumentation.
 It represents “a structure of relationships by which the events contained
in the account are endowed with a meaning by being identified as parts
of an integrated whole” (P.9)
 “The plot of a narrative imposes a meaning on the events that make up
its story level by revealing at the end a structure that was immanent in
the events all along.” (p.20)
Conception of Narrative in Policy Studies
 The structure of narrative:
 Closure:



It refers to the resolution, evaluation and even moral meaning elicited
from the precedent sequence of events, i.e. plots.
As White indicates “a proper historical narrative … achieves narrative
fullness by explicitly invoking the idea of a social system to serve as a
fixed reference point by which the flow of ephemeral events can be
endowed with specifically moral meaning. … (Hence), the chronicle must
approach the form of an allegory, moral or analogical as the case may be,
in order to achieve both narrativity and historicality.” (p. 22)
As in the case of policy narrative, the closure performs the function of
resolving the policy alternatives and/or conflicts, evaluating the policy
choices, and attributing moral meanings to the policy conclusion. But
most importantly these resolution, evaluation and attribution are all
constructed according to the worldview and/or vested interest of the
interpretive community concerned.
Conception of Narrative in Policy Studies
 The structure of narrative:
 Authority: Narratives will usually be present in
authoritative manner as if they are the establishment
of facts, order and even truth
Conception of Narrative in Policy Studies
 Narrative identity and decision-making by rule
following
By relating James March’s institutionist thesis of
decision-making by rule following with the interpretive
approach to narrative identity of interpretive
communities
Conception of Narrative in Policy
Studies
 Narrative identity and decision-making by rule
following
 The conception of interpretive community can be
construed as a community with a particular narrative
identity on a policy issue
 As a result members of an interpretive community will
follow the logic of appropriateness in making decision
on policy issue
 Hence, they are most unlikely to approach the policy
decision at hand in self-interest calculation orientation
but to base the decision on the narrative identity of the
interpretive community to which they have identified.
Perspectives and Processes in Policy Studies
Policy
Making
Analytic-Technical
Perspective
Interpretive-Political Critical-Discursive
Perspective
Perspective
Comprehensive
Rational Model
Political Approach


New
institutionalism
State Theory
Multi-Stream &
Policy window
Approach
Discourse
Approach

Argumentation

Frame

Rhetoric

Narrative
7
Policy Process Study: Policy-Making Study
END