This article was downloaded by: [University of Ulster Library]

On: 25 November 2014, At: 06:57

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,
UK

Comparative Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors
and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cced20

Big Policies/Small World: An

introduction to international
perspectives in education policy
STEPHEN J. BALL
Published online: 28 Jun 2010.

To cite this article: STEPHEN J. BALL (1998) Big Policies/Small World: An introduction
to international perspectives in education policy, Comparative Education, 34:2,
119-130, DOI: 10.1080/03050069828225

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03050069828225

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the
information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.
However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,
or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views
expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the
Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,
and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the
Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,
 sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is
expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 06:57 25 November 2014
 C om parative Education Volum e 34 N o. 2 1998 pp. 119± 130

Big Policies/Sm all W orld: an

introduction to international
perspectives in education policy
STEPHEN J. BALL
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 06:57 25 November 2014

ABS TR AC T In this paper the primary em phasis is upon the general and comm on elements in
contem porary, international education policy, but nonetheless the discussion also considers the
processes of translation and recontextualisation involved in the realisation or enactment of policy in
speci® c national and local settings. A set of generic `problems’ which constitute the contem porary
social, political and econom ic conditions for education and social policy m aking are adum brated. T he
emergence of ideological and `magical’ solutions to these problems is identi® ed and the m eans of the
dissemination of these solutions are discussed. A relationship between the global m arket and the
marketisation of education is suggested and explored.

Introdu ction

O ne of the tensions which runs thro ugh all varieties of policy analysis is that between the need
to atte nd to the local particularities of policy m aking and policy enactm ent and the need to
be aw are of general patte rns and appare nt comm onalities or convergence across localities (see
W hitty & Edwards (1998) for further discussion). That tension is central to this paper and
this special issue. In this paper m y primary em phasis is upon the general and com m on
elements in contem porary, international education policy but I will also address the processes
of translation and recontextu alisation involved in the realisation or enactm ent of policy in
sp eci® c national and local settings. H ow ever, one imm ediate limitation upon the generality
of m y discussion is its focus upon W estern and Northern developed econom ies, although a
great deal of what I have to say has considerable relevance to countries such as C olombia,
C hile, Portugal, Japan and som e of the ex-W arsaw Pact nations of Eastern Europe. The
paper has three m ain sections. The ® rst sketches in a set of generic `problem s’ which
constitute the contem porary social, political and econom ic conditions for education and
social policy m aking. The second discusses the idea of ideological and `m agical’ solutions to
these problem s and the dissemination of these solutions. The third and last returns to the
issue of recontextualisation.

Post-m odernity and the Global E conom y

As Brown & Lau der (1996) explained, `T he signi® cance of globalisation to questions of
national educational and econom ic developm ent can be sum m arised in term s of a change
in the rules of eligibility, engagem ent and wealth creation’ (p. 2). As regards eligibility,

Correspondence to: Stephen J. Ball, CPR, School of Education, King’ s College London, C ornwall H ouse Annex,
W aterloo R oad, London SE1 8WA , UK; e-mail , stephen.ball@kcl.ac.uk . .

0305-0068/98/020119-12 $7.00 Ó 1998 C arfax Publishin g Ltd

 120 S. J. Ball

individual go vernm ents, even th e apparently m ost pow erful, have experienced a reduction in
their ability to control or supervise th e activities of m ultinational corporations (M NC s) and
m aintain the integrity of their econom ic borders. This results in the loss of `Keynesian
capacity’ , th at is the ability to pursue independent re¯ ationary policies. However, it is
im portant not to overstate the case here and succum b to what W eiss (1997) called th e `m yth
of the pow erless state’ . She argu ed that within the processes of globalisation `dom estic state
capacities differ’ (W eiss, 1997, p. 26) and that `the proliferation of regional agreem ents
sugge st that we can expect to see m ore and m ore of a different kind of state taking shape in
the world arena, one that is reconstituting its pow er at the centre of alliances form ed either
within or outside the state’ (W eiss, 1997, p. 27) (see also Taylor et al., 1997, C hapte r 4). In
other wo rds, we need to be wary of what H arvey (1996) called `globaloney’ . The `globalisa-
tion thesis’ can be used to explain almost anything and everything and is ubiquitous in
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 06:57 25 November 2014

current policy docum ents and policy analysis.

W e also need to acknowledge here the national changes in the form and scope of state
activities in m any W estern econom ies. Contracting, deregulation and privatisation have
reduced, in both practical and ideological term s, the capacity for direct state intervention.
That is not to say that these devices do not provide new form s of state steering and regulation
(see below). The rules of engage m ent describe the relationship betw een governm ents,
employers and workers. The key change here, at least in th e W est, is from a Fordist, welfare
corporatism to a `m arket m odel’ wh erein `the prosp erity of workers will depend on an ability
to trade their skills, know ledge and entrepreneurial acum en in an unfettered global m arket
place’ (Brown & Lau der, 1996, p. 3). A nd the new rules of wealth creation are replacing the
logic of Fordist m ass production with new `know ledge-based ’ system s of ¯ exible production.
However, there are three crucial caveats to the last point. First, Fordist production
system s in the W est have not so m uch been replaced as `exp orted’ , cheap labour and
unregulated conditions of labour in som e developing econom ies m ake the relocation of m ass
production an attrac tive proposition to M NC s. Furtherm ore, while M NC s are increasingly
dom inant, a great deal of capital activity rem ains `nationalistic’ . Second, even within the
developed W estern and A sian Tiger econom ies the new logic of ¯ exible specialisation and
`just-in-tim e’ production (Swynegedouw, 1986) is not an inclusive oneÐ low-skill, insecure
jobs, particularly in the service sectors, are the m ain areas of expan sion of work in all of these
econom ies. And th ese `new’ jobs are also bringing ab out th e fem inisation of the labour
m arket. H arvey (1989) m ade the key point that `U nder conditions of ¯ exible accum ulation,
it seems as if alternative labour system s can exist side by side within the sam e space in such
a way as to enable capitalist entrepreneurs to choose at will betw een them ’ (p. 187). Thus,
thirdly, th e polarisations of Fordist/post-F ordistÐ m odernist/post-m odernist econom ies are
not so m uch alternative form s of capital and regulation as `a com plex of oppo sitions
expressive of the cultural contradictions of capitalism ’ (H arvey, 1989, p. 39).
The two general points then that I want to m ake here are (1) that things have changed
but not abso lutely and (2) that while these changes have produced new `® rst-order’ problem s,
in term s of the demand for new skills for exam ple, they have also produced new `second-
order’ problem s, such as threats to the m aintenance of political legitim acy and auth ority. Not
everyone has an equal `stak e’ in the success of the new econom ic order. The core± periphery
structure of the global econom y and global and national labour m arkets app ears to be closely
paralleled in the em erging `star’ /`sink’ school polarisations within `m arket-reform ed’ edu-
cation system s.
There is no way that I can follow thro ugh prop erly all aspects of this account of the role
of globalisation on education in th e space available here (see H arvey, 1989; Brown & Lauder,
1996; Taylor et al., 1997; Jones, 1998). A nd, indeed, I am not concerned with conveying the
 Big Policies/Small W orld 121

full com plexity of these global changes but rather with isolating som e of th ose aspects of
change which m ight allow us to understand th e struggles taking place over education policy.
However, I do want to pick out tw o further speci® c and related asp ects of global change
which I will sugge st have particular signi® cance in m aking sense of th e current `tu rn’ in
education and social policy m aking. They are, in short uncertainty and congestion.
Harvey (1989) suggested th at the rhythm and content of daily life has becom e both m ore
ephemeral and volatile. C om m odity production increasingly em phasises `the values and
virtues of instantaneity and disposability’ (p. 286) and is increasingly focused upon `sign
system s rather than with com m odities them selves’ (p. 287). The latter, am ong m any other
factors, has contributed to a `crisis of representation’ (Harvey, 1989, p. 298). A ll of this
provides a context for the `crack-up of consensus’ (Harvey, 1989, p. 286). It constitutes, in
part, wh at Pfeil (1988) called the `p ostm odern structure of feeling’ and forbears `the terror
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 06:57 25 November 2014

of contingency from which all possibility of eventful signi® cance has been drained’ (p. 386).

The central value system , to which capitalism has always appe aled to validate and
gau ge its actions, is dem aterialized and shifting, tim e horizons are collapsing, and it
is hard to tell exactly what space we are in when it com es to assessing causes and
effects, m eanings or values. (H arvey, 1989, p. 298)

In other words `disorganised capitalism’ (Lash & U rry, 1987) m ay be beginning to dissolve
the conditions of consensus and social cohesion upon which it depends in order to continue.
O ne particular and very m aterial aspect of the new politics of uncertainty is th e very dram atic
change in the trajectory of econom ic grow th and patte rns of em ploym ent which provided the
basis for the m assive post-w ar expansion in the m iddle classes and th e creation of the
so-called `new m iddle class’ . Their `im agined futures’ and those of their offspring are now
under threat from the `unm anaged congestion’ in the old and new professions and in
m anagem ent positions (Jordon, et al., 1994). O ne effect of this has been a loss of support
am ong the new m iddle classes for efforts to dem ocratise education and social policy.
Education is being `transfo rm ed back into an ª oligarchicº goo d’ (Jordon et al., 1994, p. 212)
and progressive experim entation in educational m ethod s is being replaced by a set of
reinvented traditional pedagogies.

M agical Solutions?

If these various `po licyscap es’ (Appad urai, 1990) of global change adum brate a set of
`pro blem s’ and challenges for education and social policy, what then are the `solutions’ in
play from which m akers of policy m ight `choose’ as m odes of respo nse? As I shall go on to
sugge st choose is an inappropriate word here. B rown & Lauder (1996) sugge sted tw o ideal
types of respo nse: neo-Fordism, which `can be characterised in term s of creating greater
m arket ¯ exibility thro ugh a reduction in social overheads and the pow er of trade unions, the
privatisation of public utilities and the welfare state, as well as the celebration of com petitive
individualism’ (p. 5) and post-F ordism, which can `b e de® ned in term s of the developm ent
of the state as a ª strate gic traderº shapin g the direction of the national econom y throu gh
investm ent in key econom ic sectors and in th e developm ent of hum an capital’ (p. 5). This
latter is close to H utto n’ s (1995) Rhineland m odel of capitalism. In practice, as is ever the
case, the differences between states or political parties in these term s often seem to be m ore
a m atter of emphasis than any `clear blue wate r’ . W hile super® cially at least the neo-Fordist
`solution’ seem s to be in the ascendant in education policy m aking, aspects of the post-
Fordist scenario are clearly in evidence even in the practices of the m ost neoliberal of
governm ents. H aving said that, the differences between the positions are not insigni® cant.
 122 S. J. Ball

This policy dualism is well represented in contem porary education policies which tie
together individual, consum er choice in education m arkets with rhetorics and policies aim ed
at furthering national econom ic interests. C arter & O ’ Neill (1995) sum m arised evidence on
the state of education policy m aking in their tw o-vo lum e collection on international perspec-
tives on educational reform by identifying what th ey called `the new orthod oxy’ Ð `a sh ift is
taking place’ they said in the relationship between politics, governm ent and education in
com plex W esternised post-in dustrialised countries at least (p. 9). They cited ® ve m ain
elements to this new orthod oxy.

(1) Im proving national econom ics by tighten ing the connection betw een schooling, em ploy-
m ent, productivity and trade.
(2) Enhancing student outcom es in employm ent-related skills and com petencies.
(3) A ttaining m ore direct control over curriculum content and assessm ent.
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 06:57 25 November 2014

(4) R educing th e costs to go vernment of education.

(5) Increasing com m unity input to education by m ore direct involvem ent in school decision
m aking and pressure of m arket choice.

I shall return to the substanc e of this reform package below. Avis et al. (1996) m ade a
similar claim abou t post-com pulsory education and training and what they call the `new
consensus’ . Indeed, the European U nion (1995) W hite Paper on Education and Training:
towards the learning society announced `T he end of the debate on educational principles’
(p. 22). C oncepts such as the `learning society’ , the `know ledge-based econom y’ , etc., are
potent policy condensates within this consensus. They serve and sym bolise th e increasing
colonisation of education policy by econom ic policy imperatives. Levin, (1998) sugge sts that
it is som etim es the politics of the sign rather th an the substan ce of policies that m oves across
national borders.
It would be ridiculous to claim that there is one or even one set of key ideas or in¯ uences
which underpin this package. H ow ever, it would be equally ridiculous to ignore the links and
correspo ndences which run thro ugh it. Five elements or sets of in¯ uences are identi® able. I
will adum brate these very crudely. Som e of th ese have an analytic statu s, while oth ers are
m ore substantive. O ne is neoliberalism or what m ight be called the ideologies of th e m arket.
These set the spo ntaneous and unplanned but innovative respo nses of the m arket form over
and against th e partisan, inef® cient bureaucracy of planned chan ge. This has been of
particular importan ce in the U K in the form ation of tho se policies often referred to as
`T hatc herism’ (see Ball, 1990) and th e U K education reform s certainly provided a test-be d
to which other governm ents at least atten ded when contem plating their own reform s (see
W hitty & Edwards, 1998).
A second is new institutional econom ics, `which sought to explain the workings of social
life and its various institutions, and the construction of relationships and co-ordination of
individual and collective behaviour, in term s of the choices and actions of the rational actor’
(Seddon, 1997, p. 176). This involves the use of a com bination of devolution, targets and
incentives to bring abo ut institutional redesign. It draws both on recent econom ic th eory and
various industrial practices, som etimes referred to as M itsubishi-ism Ð the replacement of
task speci® cation by targe t setting (see below). In education the impact of such ideas is
evident in the m yriad of `site-based m anagem ent’ initiatives in countries and states around
the world and th e social psychology of institutional reinvention proselytised in texts on `the
self-m anaging school’ and `school improvem ent’ . Chubb & M oe (1990) also articulated what
they described as `a theoretical perspective linking th e organ isation and perform ance of
schools to their institutional environm ents’ (p. 185).
A third in¯ uence, which interweaves with both of the above, is what Lyo tard (1984)
called perform ativityÐ `be operational (that is, com m ensurable) or disappear’ (p. xxiv).
 Big Policies/Small W orld 123

`Perform ativity is a principle of governance which establishes strictly functional relations

between a state and its inside and outside environm ents’ (Yeatm an, 1994, pp . 111). In other
words perform ativity is a steering m echanism. A form of indirect steering or steering at a
distance wh ich replaces intervention and prescription with target setting, accountability and
com parison. Furtherm ore, as part of th e transform ation of education and schooling and the
expan sion of the pow er of capital, perform ativity provides sign system s which `represent’
education in a self-referential and rei® ed form for consum ption. A nd, indeed, m any of the
sp eci® c technologies of perform ativity in education (total quality m anagem ent, hum an
resources m anagem ent, etc.) are borrow ed from com m ercial settings.
Num ber four, is public choice theory. This is a particularly important com ponent of U S
attem pts at education reform (see again C hubb & M oe, 1990), but choice is a key aspect of
Hayekian neoliberalism as well (see O rganization for Econom ic Co-operation and Develop-
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 06:57 25 November 2014

m ent (1994) for a review of choice policies in six countries).

Fifth and ® nally, there is new m anagerialism, that is the insertion of the theories
and techniques of business m anagem ent and the `cult of excellence’ into public sector
institutions. M anagerialism is, in this sense, both a delivery system and a vehicle
for change. This `new’ m anagerialism stresses constan t atten tion to `qu ality’ , being
close to the custom er and the value of innovation (Newm an & C larke, 1994, p. 15).
In the education sector the headteacher is the m ain `carrier’ and em bodiment of new
m anagerialism and is crucial to the transform ation of the organ isational regim es of schools
(Grace, 1995), that is the dismantling of bureau-p rofessional organ isational regim es and their
replacem ent with m arket-entrepreneurial regimes (Clarke & Newm an, 1992).
New m anagem ent also involves `new’ form s of em ployee involvem ent, in particular
throu gh the cultivation of `corporate culture’ by m eans of which m anage rs `seek to delineate,
norm alize and instrum entalize the conduct of persons in order to achieve the ends they
postu late as desirable’ (D u Gay, 1996, p. 61). Such developm ents are deeply parad oxical. O n
the one han d, they represent a m ove away from Taylorist, `low-trust’ m ethods of employee
control. M anagerial respo nsibilities are delegated and initiative and problem solving are
highly valued. O n the other hand, new form s of surveillance and self-monitoring are put in
place, e.g. appraisal system s, targe t-settin g, and outpu t com parisons (see M uller (1998) for
a discussion of different form s of self-regulationÐ com petence based and perform ance
based). This is what Peters & W aterm an (1982) referred to as `sim ultaneously loose and
tight’ or what Du G ay (1996) called `controlled de-control’ .
The dissem ination of these in¯ uences internationally can be understood in at least tw o
ways. Firstly and m ost straightforw ardly, there is a ¯ ow of ideas throu gh social and political
netw orks; the `inter-national circulation of ideas’ (Popkewitz, 1996). For exam ple, by
processes of policy borrow ing (H alpin & Troyna, 1995)Ð both the U K and New Zealand
have served as `political laboratories’ for reformÐ and the activities of groups such as the
Heritage Foundation, the M ont Pelerin Society and the Institute of Econom ic Affairs,
alth ough the effects here should not be over estim ated. The m ovem ent of grad uates, in
particular from U S universities, is also im portant (see Vanegas & Ball, 1996). In som e
contexts this m ovem ent `carries’ ideas and creates a kind of cultural and political dependency
which works to devalue or deny the feasibility of `local’ solutions. As M ax-N eef et al. (1991)
put it
If as a Latin A m erican econom ist I wish to becom e an expert in Latin A m erican
development problem s, it is necessary to study in the United State s or in Europe to
be respectable in the eyes of both m y Southern and Northern colleagu es. It goes
witho ut saying that it is not only dangerous but ab surd. (p. 98)
 124 S. J. Ball

There is also th e activity of various `policy entrepreneurs’ , groups and individuals who `sell’
their solutions in th e academ ic and political m arket-placeÐ the `self-m anaging school’ and
`school effectiveness’ and `choice’ are all current exam ples of such entrepreneurship which
takes places thro ugh academ ic channelsÐ journals, books, etc.Ð and via the perform ances of
charism atic, travelling academ ics. (See Levin (1998) for an epidemiological account of the
`spread’ of policy.)
Lastly, there is the spo nsorsh ip and, in som e respects, enforcem ent of particular policy
`solutions’ by m ultilateral agencies (see Jones, 1998). The W orld Bank is particularly
im portant here, as Jones (1998) puts it: `T he bank’ s preconditions for education can only be
understood as an ideological stance, in prom oting an integrate d world system along m arket
lines’ (p. 152). However, it is equally important to understan d a second aspect of the
dissem ination or institutionalisation of these in¯ uences upon reform ; their establishm ent as
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 06:57 25 November 2014

the new orthod oxy, that is as a discursive fram ework within which and limited by which
solutions are `thou ght’ . There is a concom itance if not a correspondence here between the
logic of globalisationÐ as a wo rld free-trading system Ð and th e new terrain of thinking abo ut
social policy. Jones (1998) again notes that `N otions of the public go od shift in order to
accom m odate reduced expectations abou t accountability, regulation and taxation, which in
turn lead to not only reduced but transfo rm ed expectations abou t what public services and
infrastructure consist of’ (p. 146). This concom itance is m ost obvious in what Brown &
Lau der (1996) called neo-Fordism: `the route to national salvation in the context of the
global knowledge wars is th rough th e survival of the ® ttest, based on an extension of parental
choice in a m arket of com peting schools, colleges and universities’ (pp. 6± 7). That is,
`education system s have been m ade objects of m icro-econom ic reform with educational
activities being turned into saleable or corporatised m arket products as part of a national
ef® ciency drive’ (Taylor et al., 1997, p. 77; (see W elch (1998) on `ef® ciency’ ). Such reforms
rest upon two starkly oppo sed chronotop icsÐ the grey, slow bureaucracy and politically
correct, com m ittee, corridor grim ness of the city hall welfare state as against the fast,
adventurous, carefree, gung-ho, open-p lan, com puterised, individualism of choice, auton-
om ous `enterprises’ and sudden oppo rtunity.
This last point serves to remind us that policies are both system s of values and sym bolic
system s; ways of representing, accounting for and legitim ating political decisions. Policies are
articulated both to achieve m aterial effects and to m anufacture support for those effects. In
particular, I want to suggest here that advocacy of the m arket or com m ercial form for
educational reform as the `so lution’ to educational problem s is a form of `po licy m agic’ or
what Stronach (1993) called `w itchcraft’ : `a form of reassurance as well as a rational respo nse
to econom ic prob lem s’ (p. 6). O ne of th e attractions here is the simplicity of the form ula on
which the m agic is based.

social m arkets/institutional devolution 5 raising stan dards (of educational perform -

ance) 5 increased international com petitiveness

Such simplicities have a particular attrac tion wh en set within the `conditions of uncertainty’
or what Dror (1986) called `ad versity’ . In Stronach’ s (1993) term s the repetitive circularities
of `the m arket solution’ display `the logics of witchcraft and the structures of ritual’ (p. 26).
It links individual (choice) and institutional (autonom y/responsiveness) transform ation to
universal salvation: a transform ation from m undane citizen to archetype, from dependent
subject to active consum er/citizen, and from dull bureaucracy to innovative, entrepreneurial
m anagem ent (of course the policies of welfarism can be subjected to a sim ilar sort of
analysis). `Ritual typically asso ciates a personal with a cosm ic pole, around which prosperity,
m orality and civilization are clustered’ (Stronach, 1993, p. 23). M inor personal and physical
 Big Policies/Small W orld 125

changes are linked to large scale transform ation. Again then, all of this is founded upon the
play of opposites, order against chaos and the redress of crisis. Em ploying a similar language,
Hughes & Tight (1995) argued that concepts such as `th e stak eholder’ and the `learning
society’ represent pow erful m yths for projecting futuristic visions which determ ine the on
going principles on which education policy and practice are based. And, as N ewm an (1984)
put it, `T he libertarian revolt against the m odern state is ® rst and forem ost a cam paign for
the hearts and m inds of the Am erican people’ (p. 159).
For politicians th e `m agic’ of the m arket works in several senses. O n the one hand , it is
a `hand s off’ reform , a non-interventionary interventionÐ a basic trope of th e conjurer, now
you see it now you don’ t!. It distances the reformer from th e outcom es of reform. Blame and
responsibility are also devolved or contracted out (see below). And yet, by use of target
setting and perform ative techniques, `steering at a distance’ can be achieved, what Kikert
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 06:57 25 November 2014

(1991) called `a new parad igm of public go vernance’ (p. 1). O n the other hand , these policies
also carry with them political risks, in so far, as noted already, as they m ay disable direct
form s of control and can leave the politician `in of® ce’ but not `in power’ .
As indicated above, one key facet of the policy process and the form ulation of new
ortho doxies is critique. N ew policies feed off and gain legitim acy from the deriding and
dem olition of previous policies (see Ball, 1990) which are th us rendered `unthinkable’ . The
`new’ are m arked out by and gain credence from their qualities of difference and contrast. In
education in particular, part of the attrac tion of a new policy often rests on the speci® c
allocation of `blam e’ from wh ich its logic derives. Blame m ay either be located in the
m alfunctions or heresies embedded in the policies it replaces and/or is redistributed by the
new policy within the education system itself and is often personi® edÐ currently in the U K
in the `incom petent teacher’ and `failing school’ (see Thrupp (1998) on the politics of
blam e).
State d in m ore general term s, tw o com plexly related policy agendas are discernible in all
the heat and noise of reform . The ® rst aim s to tie education m ore closely to national
econom ic interests, while the second involves a decoupling of education from direct state
control. The ® rst rests on a clear articulation and assertion by the state of its requirem ents
of education, while the second gives at least the appearance of greater autonom y to
educational institutions in the delivery of th ose requirem ents. The ® rst involves a
reaf® rm ation of th e state functions of education as a `public good ’ , while the second subjects
education to the disciplines of th e m arket and the m ethod s and values of business and
rede® nes it as a com petitive private good . In m any resp ects educational institutions are now
being expected to take on th e qualities and characteristics of `fast cap italism’ (Gee &
Lan kshear, 1995) and this involves not only changes in organisational practices and m ethod s
but also th e adoption of new social relationships, values and ethical principles.
W e can see these tw o political agendas being played out in a variety of countries in term s
of an ensem ble of generic policiesÐ parental choice and institutional com petition, site-based
auto nom y, m anagerialism , perform ative steering and curricula fundam entalism Ð which
nonetheless have local variations, tw ists and nuancesÐ hybridityÐ and different degrees of
applicationÐ intensity. The purest and m ost intense versions of this ensem ble are evident in
places such as England, New Zealand and Alberta (Canada). M ixed and low-intensity
versions are evident in places such as France, C olombia and m any U S and Australian states.
Places such as Portugal and Sw eden display hyb rid but low-intensity versions. (See the
discussion of recontextualisation below.)
W hile previous regim es of unthinkability derived rhetorical energy from the critique of
e litism, one of the m echanisms involved in the establishm ent of the new orthod oxy in
education has been a critique of the press for equity and social justice as part of the diagnosis
 126 S. J. Ball

of the existing `inadequacies’ of educationÐ what I have elsewhere called `the discourse of
derision’ (Ball, 1990; see also below). The W orld Bank sees equity as one of the residual
concerns of go vernm ents in m arketised education system s. H ow ever, as a part of the logic of
the new orthod oxy the social and welfare purposes of education are system atically played
down directly (as in the W orld Bank) or, in effect, education is increasingly subject to
exchange value criteria. That is, education is not simply m odelled on the m ethods and values
of capital, it is itself draw n into th e com m odity form . W ithin all this equity issues do not so
m uch disappear entirely as becom e `fram ed and reframed’ ; `com peting discourses are
ª stitched togetherº in the new policies’ (Taylor, 1995, p. 9). The m eanings of equity are
refracted, reworked and realised in new ways `glossing over the different perspectives of key
players’ (Taylor, 1995, p. 10).
In effect, in education and social policy generally the new ortho doxy, the m arket
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 06:57 25 November 2014

solution, is a new m aster narrative, a deeply ® ssured but primary discourse encom passing `the
very nature of econom ics and therefore the potential range and scope of policies th emselves’
(Cerny, 1990, p. 205). The discourse constructs the top ic and, as with any discourse, it
appears across a range of texts, form s of conduct and at a num ber of different sites at any one
tim e. Discursive events `refer to the one and the sam e object ¼ there is a regular style and
¼ constan cy of concepts ¼ and ª strate gyº and a com m on institutional, adm inistrative or
political drift and patte rn’ (Cousins & H ussain, 1984, pp. 84± 85). This discourse can be seen
at work as m uch in the 1980s Hollywood `m ale-ram page ’ m ovies (Pfeil, 1995), part of what
Ross (1990) described as `the desperate attem pts, under R eagan, to reconstruct the insti-
tution of national heroism, m ore often than not in the form of white m ale rogue outlaw s for
whom the liberal solution of ª softº state -regulated law enforcement was presented as having
failed’ (p. 33). Equally it can be seen in the U K in the com m odi® cation of academ ic research,
in th e celebration of the parent± chooser± hero of so m any m arket policy texts in education, in
the refurbished, custom er-friendly, com petitive school, th e `qu ality-guru’ educational consul-
tants and quick-® x policy entrepreneurs, C hann el O ne television in U S schools and `de-
signer-label’ uniforms in Japanese high schools, `early-learning’ educational gam es shops and
niche m arketing, `hot-ho use’ , nursery schools. `E ducational democracy is rede® ned as con-
sum er dem ocracy in the educational m arketplace. Buying an education becom es a substitu te
for getting an education’ (Kenway et al., 1993, p. 116). It is not sim ply that publicly provided
school system s are being inducted into quasi-m arket practices but that education in its
various form s, at m any points, and in a variety of ways is inducted into the m arket
epistem eÐ a non-uni® ed, m ultiple and com plex ® eld of play wh ich realises a dispersion of
relationships, subjectivities, values, objects, operations and concepts.

Localis m and R econtextualisation

W hile it m ay well be possible to discern a set of principles or a theoretical m odel underlying

policyÐ neoliberalism, new institutional econom ics, public choice theory or whate verÐ these
rarely if ever translate into policy texts or practice in direct or pristine form . National policy
m aking is inevitably a process of bricolage: a m atte r of borrow ing and copying bits and pieces
of ideas from elsewhere, drawing upon and am ending locally tried and tested approaches,
cannibalising theories, research, trends and fashions and not infrequently ¯ ailing around for
anything at all that looks as th ough it m ight work. M ost policies are ram shackle, com prom ise,
hit and m iss affairs, that are rewo rked, tinkered with, nuanced and in¯ ected throu gh com plex
processes of in¯ uence, text production, dissem ination and, ultimately, re-creation in contexts
of practice (Ball, 1994).
Policy ideas are also received and interpreted differently within different political archi-
tectures (Cerny, 1990), national infrastru ctures (Hall, 1986) and national ideologiesÐ a
 Big Policies/Small W orld 127

national ideology is `a set of values and beliefs that fram es th e practical thinking and action
of agents of the m ain institutions of a nation-state at a given point in tim e’ (van Zanten, 1997,
p. 352) and business cultures (H am pden-T urner & Trom penaars, 1994). The latter conduc-
ted research on 15,000 business m anagers in seven different countries and identi® ed distinct
contrasts in the m ind-sets and ideologies of their resp ondents. U nfortunately, com parative
educational research on the form ation, reception and interpretatio n of policy in these term s
is thin on the ground (see Dale and O zga (1993) on the new right in the U K and New
Zealand and van Zan ten (1997) on th e education of imm igrants in France).
In our attem pts to understan d education policies com paratively and globally the com plex
relationships betw een ideas, the dissemination of ideas and the recontextu alisation (see
Bernstein, 1996) of ideas rem ain a central task. A s Bernstein (1996) put it, `E very tim e a
discourse m oves, there is space for ideology to play’ (p. 24). Recontextualisation takes place
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 06:57 25 November 2014

within and between both `of® cial’ and `pedagogic’ ® elds, the form er `created and dom inated
by the state ’ and the latter consisting of `pedagogu es in schools and colleges, and departm ents
of education, specialised journals, private research foundations’ (Bernstein, 1996, p. 48).
These ® elds are constituted differently in different societies. The new orth odoxies of edu-
cation policy are grafte d onto and realised within very different national and cultural contexts
and are affected, in¯ ected and de¯ ected by them . See, for exam ple, Taylor et al.’ s (1997) case
studies of Papua New G uinea, M alaysia and A ustralia. They concluded that `there is no
essential determ inacy to the ways in which globalisation pressures wo rk, since for various
globalisation pressures there are also sites of resistance and counter m ovem ents’ (Taylor et
al., 1997, p. 72). (See C olclough & Lewin (1993, p. 256) for a similar argum ent).
The ® elds of recontextu alisation are, as M uller (1998) puts it, `® elds of contest’
involving `various social fractions with different degrees of social pow er sponsoring’ different
`pedagogic regim es’ (p. 190). Th e ® ve generic policies adum brated ab ove are polyvalent; they
are translated into particular interactive and sustainable practices in com plex ways. They
interact with, interrupt or con¯ ict with other policies in play and long-stan ding indigenous
policy traditions. They enter rather than simply change existing power relations and cultural
practices. W e can generalise here from O ffe’ s (1984) com m ent that
¼ the real social effects (`impact’ ) of a law or institutional service are not deter-
m ined by the wording of the laws and statutes (`policy out’ ), but instead are
generated primarily as a consequence of social disputes and con¯ icts, for which state
policy m erely establishes the location and tim ing of the contest, its subject m atters
and `the rules of the gam e’ . (p. 186)
Such disputes and con¯ icts take place at a num ber of levelsÐ national, local and institutional.
Policy analysis requires an understan ding that is based not on the generic or local, m acro-
or m icro-constraint or agency but on the chan ging relationships betw een them and their
inter-penetration.

Conclusion

W hat I have tried to do in th is paper is to take several th ings seriously, but also take them
together.

(1) To recognise the `prob lem s’ of globalisation which fram e and `p roduce’ the contem por-
ary `problem s’ of education.
(2) To identify a set of generic `solutions’ to these problem s and acknow ledge their effects
in educational reform and restructuring.
(3) H ow ever, to sugge st that these `so lutions’ also have a m agical form and ritual function.
 128 S. J. Ball

(4) That they becom e an inescapable form of reassurance; they discursively constrain the
possibilities of response and are borrowed, enforced and adopted throu gh various
patterns of social contact, political and cultural deference and supranational agency
requirements.
(5) Finally, to register nonetheless the importance of local politics and culture and tradition
and the processes of interpretation and struggle involved in translating these generic
solutions into practical policies and institutional practices.

I wan t to end by returning to the side of m y argu m ent which is concerned with the
generic asp ects of education policy rath er than its speci® cs and to O ffe’ s (1984) `real social
effects’ . M y point is th at careful investigation of local variations, exceptions and hybridity
sh ould not divert atte ntion from the general patterns of practical and ideological, ® rst-an d
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 06:57 25 November 2014

second-order effects achieved by the ensem ble of in¯ uences and policy m echanism s outlined
above. That is to say, even in th eir different realisations, this ensem ble chan ges the way that
education is organ ised and delivered but also changes the m eaning of education and what it
m eans to be educated and what it m eans to learn. O ne key aspect of the reworking of
m eanings here is the increasing com m odi® cation of knowledge (which again parallels changes
in the role of knowledge in the econom y). Educational provision is itself increasingly m ade
susceptible to pro® t and educational processes play their part in the creation of the enterprise
culture and the cultivation of enterprising subjects (see K enway et al., 1993). The fram ework
of possibilities, the vocabularies of m otives and the bases of legitim ation (including values
and ethics) within which educational decisions are m ade are all discursively reform ed. But
crucially th ese m echanisms and in¯ uences are also not just abou t new organisational form s
or `w orker incentives’ or rearticulated professional ethics; they are abou t access to and the
distribution of educational oppo rtunity in term s of race, class, gender and physical ability.
The diversi-® cation and re-hierarchisation of schooling in various educational m arket-places
display an uncanny concom itance with widespread m iddle-class concerns abo ut m aintaining
social advantage in the face of national and international labour m arket congestion. Thus,
both in relation to patterns of convergence in education policy and the recontexualisation of
policy, we need to be ask ing the question, `wh ose interests are served?’ .

A cknow ledgem ents

I am gratefu l to Alan Cribb, Ben Levin and C arol Vincent for their com m ents on previous
drafts of this pape r.

REFERENC ES

A PPADU RAI , A. (1990) Disjuncture and difference in the Global Cultural Economy, M . F EATHERSTONE (Ed.) G lobal
Culture: nationalism , globalizatio n and modernity (Special Issue of Theory, Culture and Society) (London, Sage).
A VIS , J., B LOOM ER , M ., E SLAND , G., G LEESON, D. & H ODKINSO N , P. (1996) Know ledge and N ationhood: education ,
politics and work (London, C assell).
B ALL , S.J. (1990) Politics and Policymak ing in Education (London, R outledge).
B ALL , S.J. (1994) Education Reform: a critical and post-structural approach (Buckingham, O pen University Press).
B ERNSTEIN , B. (1996) Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity (London, Taylor & Francis).
B ROWN , P. & L AUDER , H. (1996) Education, globalisation and economic development, Journal of Education Policy , 11,
pp. 1± 25.
C ARTER , D.S.G . & O ’ N EILL , M .H. (1995) International Perspectives on Educational Reform and Policy Implementation
(Brighton, Falm er).
C ERNY , P. (1990) The Changing Architecture of Politics: structure, agency and the future of the state (London, Sage).
C HUB B , J. & M OE , T. (1990) Politics, M arkets and America’ s Schools (W ashington, DC , Brookings Institution).
C LARKE , J. & N EWM AN , J. (1992) Managing to survive: dilem mas of changing organisational forms in the public sector,
in: Social Policy Association Conference (U niversity of Nottingham, unpublished conference paper).
 Big Policies/Small W orld 129

C OLCLOUG H , C. & L EW IN , K. (1993) Educating all the Children (New York, O xford University Press).
C OUSINS , M. & H USSAIN, A. (1984) Michel Foucault (London, Macmillan).
D ALE, R. & O ZGA , J. (1993) Two hemispheresÐ both new right?, in: R. L ING ARD , J. K NIGHT & P. P ORTER (Eds)
Schooling Reform in H ard Times, pp. 63± 85 (London, Falmer).
D ROR , Y. (1986) Policy Making under Adversity (New Brunswick, Transaction Books).
D U G AY , P. (1996) Consumption and Identity at W ork (London, Sage).
E UROPEAN U NION (1995) W hite Paper on Education and Training, Teaching and Learning: towards the learning society
(Brussels, European Union).
G EE , J. & L ANKSHEAR , C . (1995) The new work order: critical language awareness and `fast capitalism’ texts, Discourse,
16, pp. 5± 20.
G RACE , G. (1995) School Leadership : beyond education manageme nt: an essay in policy scholarship (London, Falmer).
H ALL , P. (1986) G overning the Economy (Cambridge, Polity Press).
H ALPIN , D . & T ROYNA , B. (1995) The politics of education policy borrowing, Comparat ive Education , 31
pp. 303± 310.
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 06:57 25 November 2014

H AM PDEN-T URNER , C. & T ROMPENAARS , F. (1994) The Seven C ultures of Capitalism ; value systems for creating wealth in
the United States, Britain, Japan, Germany, France, Sweden and The N etherlands (London, Piatkus).
H ARVEY , D. (1989) The Condition of Postmodernity (Oxford, Basil Blackwell).
H ARVEY , D. (1996) Justive, Nature and the G eography of D ifference (Oxford, Basil Blackwell).
H U GHES , C. & T IGHT , M. (1995) The myth of the learning society, British Journal of Education al Studies, 45,
pp. 290± 304.
H U TTON , W . (1995) The State We’ re In (London, Jonathan Cape).
J ONES , P.W . (1998) Globalisation and Internationalism : democratic prospects for world education, Comparat ive
Education , 34, pp. 143± 155.
J ORDON , B., R EDLEY , M. & J AMES , S. (1994) Putting the Family First: identities, decisions and citizenship (London, UCL
Press).
K ENW AY , J., B IGU M , C. & F ITZCLARENCE , L. (1993) M arketing education in the post-modern age, Journal of Education
Policy , 8, pp. 105± 122.
K IKERT , W . (1991) Steering at a D istance; a new paradigm of public governance in D utch Higher Education (European
Consortium for Political Research, University of Essex).
L ASH , S. & U RRY, J. (1987) The End of O rganised Capitalism (Cambridge, Polity).
L EVIN , B. (1998) An epidem ic of education policy: (w hat) can we learn from each other?, Comparati ve Education, 34,
pp. 131± 141.
L YOTARD , J. -F. (1984) The Postmodern Condition : a report on know ledge (M anchester, Manchester University Press).
M AX- N EEF , M.A., E LIZADLE , A. & H OPENHAYN , M . (1991) H uman Scale Developme nt: conception , application and further
re¯ ections (New York, The A pex Press).
M U LLER , J. (1998) The well-tem pered learner: self-regulation, pedagogical models and teacher education policy,
Comparat ive Education, 34, pp. 177± 193.
N EWM AN , S. (1984) L iberalism at Wits End (Ithaca, NY, Cornell University Press).
N EWM AN , J. & C LARKE , J. (1994) Going about our business? The managerialization of public services, in: J. C LARKE ,
A. C OCHRANE & E. M CLAUGHLIN (Eds) Managing Social Policy (London, Sage).
O FFE , C. (1984) Contradict ions of the W elfare State (London, Hutchinson).
O RGANISATION FOR E CONOMIC C O-OPERATION AND D EVELOPMENT (1994) School, a M atter of Choice (Paris, Organiza-
tion for E conomic Co-operation and Development).
P ETERS, T. & W ATERMAN , R. (1982) In Search of Excellence (London, Harper Row).
P FEIL , F. (1988) Postmodernism as a `structure of feeling’ , in: L. G ROSSBERG & C. N ELSON (Eds) Marxism and the
Interpretation of Culture (London, Macmillan).
P FEIL , F. (1995) W hite G uys: studies in postmoder n domination and difference (London, V erso).
P OPKEWITZ, T. (1996) R ethinking decentralisation and state/civil society distinctions: the state as a problem atic of
governing, Journal of Education Policy, 11, pp. 27± 52.
R OSS , A. (1990) Ballots, bullets or batman: can cultural studies do the right thing, Screen , 31, p. 17± 35.
S EDDON , T. (1997) Markets and the English: rethinking educational restructuring as institutional design, British
Journal of Sociology of Education, 18, pp. 165± 186.
S TRONACH , I. (1993) Education, vocationalism and economic recovery: the case against witchcraft, British Journal of
Education and Work, 3, pp. 5± 31.
S W YNEGEDOUW , E. (1986) The Socio-spa tial Implication s of Innovatio ns in Industrial O rganisation (Lille, Johns H opkins
European Centre for Regional Planning and R esearch).
T AYLOR, S. (1995) Critical Policy Analysis: exploring contexts, texts and consequences, D iscourse, 18, pp. 23± 36.
T AYLOR, S., R IZVI, F., L ING ARD , B. & H ENRY , M. (1997) Education al Policy and the Politics of Change (London,
Routledge).
 130 S. J. Ball

T HRU PP , M. (1998) Exploring the politics of blam e: school inspection and its contestation in New Zealand and
England, Comparati ve Education, 34, pp. 195± 209.
VAN Z ANTEN , A. (1997) Schoolin g im migrants in France in the 1990s: success or failure of the republican model of
integration?, Anthropology and Education Q uarterly , 28, pp. 351± 374.
V ANEG AS , P. & B ALL , S.J. (1996) The teacher as a variable in education policy, in BERA Annual Meeting (Lancaster,
unpublis hed conference paper).
W EISS , L. (1997) Globalization and the myth of the powerless state, N ew L eft Review 225, pp. 3± 27.
W ELC H , A.R. (1998) The cult of ef® ciency in education: comparative re¯ ections on the reality and the rhetoric,
Comparat ive Education, 34, pp. 157± 175.
W HITTY , G. & E DW ARDS , T. (1998) School choice policies in England and the United States: an exploration of their
origins and signi® cance, Comparati ve Education , 34, pp. 211± 227.
Y EATM AN , A. (1994) Postmodern Revisionin gs of the Political (New York, Routledge).
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 06:57 25 November 2014