The policy narrative

Reading various articles, blogs etc over the past week has made me think once more of the narrative that we tell about education in this country. There are, of course, various narratives, but the dominant one is that which is being harnessed by the government to drive through their various initatives in schools. It varies from the narrative told in Wales and Scotland, and it fascinates me that we take so  little account of these near neighbours and what they are achieving. I digress. The narrative that dominates seems to me to be all about children and young people as passive consumers of schooling, with nothing else happening in their lives. It looks back to a golden age where 'things were better', and where the accountablity frameworks put in place by various governments are ignored as playing a part in the way heads, and others, run schools. If only we could get the structure right, the children dressed properly and ready to be taught, then, says the narrative, we could live happily ever after. After all, isn't that what happened in Finland? Another part of the narrative is its selective use of research and also of policy making in other cultures. The second narrative I hear out there is similar in that it is devoted to change and re-structuring but it is much more Plowden/Comprehensive focused, having at its heart a belief in a fair chance for every child whatever their background. This narrative is often cried down by lovers of narrative 1 as it doesn't, they argue, give children the proper access to success and the 'curriculum'. Many tellers of narrative 2 are also seduced by the re-structure and change argument, or they tell the tale so loosely that much criticism is rained on their heads for being lovers of the 60s narrative (let children do what they like). I want to look at narrative three. What that is, I will blog about later!