LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Languages: English
Types: Doctoral thesis
Subjects: LB1603, NX, LB1501
This thesis offers the first and most comprehensive re-evaluation of the UK\ud government’s Creative Partnerships education policy (2002-11) by drawing\ud together my seven contemporaneous evaluation reports about Creative\ud Partnerships and applying a retrospective and reflexive commentary to them.\ud The term of reference explicitly named or implied in all seven evaluation briefs\ud was to measure the ‘impact,’ of the policy. The principal contribution to new\ud understanding in the thesis is the deconstruction and conceptual analysis of\ud impact in the context of Creative Partnerships, drawing on hermeneutics, critical\ud linguistics and policy analysis (Ozga, 2000; Fairclough, 1989). This clarifies and\ud illustrates the ways in which impact was interpreted by those enacting Creative\ud Partnerships, and proposes a fuller understanding of the term. I identify two\ud contrasting approaches to impact adopted by Creative Partnerships’ national\ud leadership: the politically motivated public relations approach and the substantive\ud approach. I argue that the former approach was driven by the zeitgeist of its time:\ud the political party in power (Ward, 2010; Buckingham and Jones, 2001), the\ud recession after 2010 and the contemporary preference for evidence-based\ud practice (Hargreaves, 2007). Research into ‘logical frameworks’ (Harley, 2005;\ud Rosenthal, 2000) reveals them to be an essential corollary to the latter,\ud substantive approach and shows how the lack of a full logical framework for\ud planning and evaluating Creative Partnerships, impoverished the extent to which\ud its impact was recognised and monitored by those enacting the policy.\ud The thesis shows how the imperatives of the political cycle demanded evidence\ud of the policy’s impact well before more valid and reliable longitudinal impact\ud studies could, in principle, be completed. As a possible solution to this\ud conundrum, the thesis argues that my ‘predictive impact model’ offered plausible\ud predictions about the legacy of Creative Partnerships (Wood and Whitehead,\ud 2012). I suggest that this could be further investigated and applied to similar\ud education policies.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Lipsky, M. (1980) Street Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
    • Long, J. and Bramham, P. (2006) 'Joining Up Policy Discourses and Fragmented Practices: The Precarious Contribution of Cultural Projects to Social Inclusion?', Policy and Politics, 34(1), pp. 133-151.
    • MacIntyre, A. (1981) After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. London: Duckworth.
    • MacLure, M. (2003) Discourse in Educational and Social Research. Buckingham: Open University Press.
    • Mercer, J. (2007) 'The Challenges of Insider Research in Educational Institutions: Wielding a Double Edged Sword and Resolving Delicate Dilemmas', Oxford Review of Education, 33(1), pp. 1-17.
    • Michel, J., Shen, Y., Aiden, A., Veres, A., Gray, M., The Google Books Team, Pickett, J., Hoiberg, D., Clancy, D., Norvig, P., Orwant, J., Pinker, S. and Nowak, M. (2011) 'Quantitative Analysis of Culture Using Millions of Digitised Books.' Science, 331 (614), pp. 176-182.
    • Morris, E. (2003) 'Creative Journeys: Creative Partnerships, Linking Schools with Artists, Has Been a Great Success, Says the New Arts Minister.', The Guardian (June 24th edn).
    • NACCCE. (1999). 'All Our Futures: Creativity, Culture and Education'. Sudbury: DfEE Publications.
    • OfSTED (2002a) Continuing Professional Development for Teachers in Schools. London: HMSO.
    • OfSTED (2002b) The Curriculum in Successful Primary Schools. London: HMSO.
    • OfSTED (2006) Creative Partnerships: Initiative and Impact. London: Crown Copyright.
    • OfSTED (2009) The Framework for School Inspection (Maintained Schools). London: Crown Copyright.
    • OfSTED (2010) Learning: Creative Approaches that Raise Standards. London: Crown Copyright.
    • OfSTED. (2011). 'The Framework for School Inspection'. London: Crown Copyright. Available at: http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/publications/090019 (Accessed: 14.5.2013).
    • Ollsen, M., Codd, J. and O'Neill, A.-M. (2004) Education Policy Globalization Citizenship and Democracy. London: Sage.
    • Owen, R. (2008) A Search for Creative Partnerships:Constructing Pedagogies for Artists and Educators working Together. Ph.D. University of Hull.
    • Ozga, J. (2000) Policy Research in Educational Settings: Contested Terrain. Buckingham: Open University Press.
    • Palmer-Wolf, D. (1989) 'Artistic Learning as Conversation', in Hargreaves, D. (ed.) Children and the Arts. Milton Keynes: Open University Press, pp. 22-39.
    • Parsons, W. (1996) Public Policy. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.
    • Patton, M. Q. (1990) Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. London: Sage.
    • Phillips, R. and Harper-Jones, G. (2003) 'Whatever Next? Education Policy and New Labour: the First Four Years, 1997-2001', British Educational Research Journal, 29(1), pp. 125-132.
    • 20 Nov 2012
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article