youssra
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
Chapter Two The background
The literature review and description of the conceptual framework
A policy is sometimes the outcome of a political compromise among policy makers, none of whom had in mind quite the problem to which the argued policy is the solution. …and sometime policies, are not decided upon, nevertheless they ‘happen’ (Lindblom 1968).
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to present a critical review of the pertinent literature that anchors this research and to describe the conceptual framework that emerged from this literature. My case study, White Paper 6, is a policy document that is designed to transform the education system so that it will reflect an “inclusive” approach to education provision and facilitate access of all learners to a common curriculum. Education White Paper 6, Special Needs Education: Building an Inclusive Education and Training System, was issued by the national Department of Education in 2001. This policy document was published four years after the combined and final report of the National Commission on Special Needs in Education and Training (NCSNET) and the National Committee for Education Support Services (NCESS) was submitted in 1997. What were the reasons for the delay?
The literature review is organised into six sections. Section one provides the conceptualisation of a policy by engaging that part of literature that explains the various roles of policy. This helped to analyse and define the Special Needs Education policy and its political context within the transformation agenda after 1994. Section two explores the relationship between policy and change; it scrutinises policy intentions and the conditions under which the Special Needs Education policy was formulated, and how the outcomes surfaced whether or not they matched the initial intentions. Sections three and four provide an outline of the factors that influence or cause policy delays and draw from international and local research which elucidate the concepts of “non-reform” and “political symbolism”. This elaboration advances the construct of “non-reform” in transitional societies. Section five describes the policy-making process as part of the conceptual framework in a traditional policy process. An additional example is included of a more complex process as described by a case study of policy development in Namibia. Using these examples I aim to clarify the various steps in the policy-making process, which will in turn inform the design of this study. In Section six, I examine the use of tools that can be applied to analysing policy in this context.
The last section presents the conceptual framework that has been extracted from this literature.
The conceptualisation of policy
According to Longest (1998:4), public policies can be defined as “authoritive decisions that are made in legislative, executive or judicial branches of government” and are intended to direct or influence the actions, behaviours or decisions of others. Longest (ibid.) cautions that the mere existence of laws does not ensure that there are sufficient funds to implement them. The laws themselves serve as “powerful building blocks towards system reform”.Smith et al. (2004:2) define policy as nothing else “but a rule (sometimes tacit and informal but more often formal, written and official) that regulates how a polity must conduct itself.” Another perspective on policy development comes from theorists such as Lowi (1964:677), who believe that different types of policy each generate a distinctive political arena. Fowler (2000:239) shares this understanding. He believes that the “different forms that policies take” will increase the understanding of “how likely this policy will be able to work, how various stakeholders would react and what problems are likely to arise”. Each kind of policy, distributive or regulatory, “introduces its own aspects to be taken into consideration during an examination of education policies” (ibid.). Fowler (2000:242) also states “that types of policies reduce or expand the alternatives available to those regulated, such as laws, rules, regulations and guidelines”.De Clerq (1997:128) argues that regulatory policies are formalised rules, expressed in general terms and applied to large groups of people, whereas redistributive policies are more likely to be used in education (1997:128). De Clerq (ibid.) maintains that most of the new education polices in South Africa are symbolic, substantive and redistributive. Redistributive policies can be sub divided into two categories i.e. those that shift economic resources and those that shift power (Fowler 2000:242).Peterson (1986) argues that redistributive policies are complex and eventually implemented only if those “who direct the programmes, are highly skilled”. He believed that in the USA the regulatory polices of the 1960s and 1970s were easier to implement.Smith et al. (2004:8-9) differentiate between instrumental policies and symbolic policies. The former are policies whose effects “are consonant with the original intentions and the ideals behind them”. Whereas the latter may have no effect at all, because they “function primarily as a symbol, without any substantive instrument that logically could be expected to lead to policy goals”. Sometime policies “start out instrumental and later become symbolic because the government agency failed to provide the means to the ends …policy effects may be unintentionally deleterious when the policy produces unanticipated effects or costs contrary to the policy goals” (ibid:9-10).
The relationship between policy and change and theories of change
‘Change’ is a powerful symbol, for people disconcerted with existing conditions, not a declaration of improvement in well-being for the diverse sectors of society (Edelman 2001:19).The literature on change theories invoke the notions of “theory of action” and “theory in use” to describe the relationship between policy and change.Argyris and Schön (1974) classified theories of action into two sub-theories, namely “theory in use” and “espoused theory”. “Theory of action” grew from earlier research into the relationships between individuals and organisations.“Theories in use” are theories that are implicit in what we do as practitioners and are those on which we call to speak of our actions to others. “Theories in use” govern actual behaviour and tend to be tacit structures. “Espoused theory” is what we use to convey “what we do” or “what we would like others to think we do”.The model used by Argyris and Schön (1974:30) is composed of three elements i.e. governing variables, action strategies and consequences. Where the consequences of the strategy used, are what the person intended, then, “theory in use” is confirmed. This is because there is a “match” between intention and outcome. If, however, there is a “mismatch” between intention and outcome, the consequences may be unintended (ibid.). See Table 2.1: 23. The “theory of action” tends to local context such as the conditions under which the model will work (Fullan 2001a:187).
Factors that influence policy or cause policy delay
What makes policy fail?
Several postulations why policies do not get off the ground or are subject to “implementation slippage” (Garn 1999:15) are to be found in the literature. I present several of these in Figure 2.1: 27. These reasons demonstrate a clear break from the traditional view that policy implementation fails simply because there are no resources (McLaughlin 1998:70).Some authors provide a multi-causal model for implementation failure. Garn (1999:439) states that the “the realisation of intention” is both constrained and enabled by the “organisational context, linkages between multiple sites, phases of the policy process, the mobilisation of resources and a multifaceted conceptualisation of power”.It is also clear that political perspectives manifest themselves in education change reforms, such as policy-making. This phenomenon will be considered in depth in this study, as there was a need to establish whether the policy development process for the Special Needs Education policy, had been subject to similar “political crafting”. Wohlstetter (1991:279) found that:However, I became more intrigued by my readings and growing understanding of issues related to “non-reform” and was led to the phenomenon of “political symbolism”. Iexplored them to deepen my understanding on issues related to policy reform.In the following sections I will firstly discuss very broadly the international experiences of “non-reform” within the education context. Thereafter I describe “political symbolism” as it pertains to South African policy making within the explanatory framework of “non-reform”.
“Non-reform” as an explanatory device for policy failure: international experience
Ball (1990:10) holds that “in investigating the political aspects of policy-making, one will deliberate the forms of governance of education, the politics of education and the changing role and nature of influential groups and constituencies in the policy process inside the educational state”. I will be guided by what Ball (ibid.) describes as the political influence in policy-making. He suggests that multiple approaches may be needed to address the different facets of a given problem, such as technical problems of resource allocation, moral or religious issues, and political problems arising from the demands on teachers’ time and autonomy, or a combination of all of these factors.Levin and Young (2000:191) examined the official Canadian discourse around educational reforms and found that the official rhetoric was “primarily symbolic and intended to create or support particular definitions and solutions”. They assert that the historical context, institutional structure and political culture of each setting also shape policy. They suggest that many scholars, who work within the political theory arena, take the view that politics should be understood to be as much a symbolic activity as a practical one. In fact they suggest that “political talk and action are intended to shape and respond to people’s ideas as much as to their practical interests” (ibid.). Murray Edelman argues that politics is a symbolic activity, where actions are intended to have psychological consequences:Practically every political act that is controversial or regarded as really important is bound to serve in part as a condensation symbol. Because the meaning of the act in these cases depends only part or not at all upon its objective consequences, which the mass public cannot know, the meaning can only come from the psycho- logical needs of the respondents; and it can only be known from their responses (Edelman 1964:7).
The very concept of ‘fact’… becomes irrelevant because every meaningful political object and people is an interpretation that reflects and perpetuates an ideology. Taken together, they comprise… a meaning machine; a generator of points of view and therefore perceptions, anxieties, aspirations and strategies (Edelman 1988:10).Levin and Young (2000:191) reason that words and other symbolic activities are of critical importance, but not in a straightforward sense. Rather, “words” are designed to achieve emotional and symbolic purposes as much as anything else. They argue further that precision of meaning is not necessarily desirable and that words are intended to be ambiguous to allow a range of people to identify with what has been said. They endorse Edelman’s (1964:137) view that:
Abstract
Key words
Dedication
Acknowledgements
Declaration of Originality
The Artist’s Way
List of acronyms
Chapter One The outline
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Purpose of this study
1.3 The explanatory framework – in brief
1.4 The Special Needs Education policy context
1.5 Key proposals in the White Paper
1.5.1 Time frames and goals
1.5.2 Strategic areas targeted for change
1.5.3 Funding
1.6 Research design and methods
1.7 Key terms and concepts
1.8 Limitations of the study
1.9 Organisation of the study
1.10 Chapter summary
Chapter Two The background
2.1 Introduction
2.2 The conceptualisation of policy
2.3 The relationship between policy and change and theories of change
2.4 Factors that influence policy or cause policy delay
2.5 “Non-reform” as an explanatory device for policy failure: international University of Pretoria etd – Laauwen, H M (2004) experience
2.6 The South African Context
2.6.1 The policy-making process as part of the conceptual framework
2.6.2 An iterative cyclical model of the policy development process
2.7 Tools for policy analysis
2.7.1 Forward mapping
2.7.2 Backward mapping
2.7.3 Dual approach
2.8 Conceptual framework
2.9 The research question
2.10 Chapter summary
Chapter Three The technique
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Research problem
3.3 Research process
3.4 Research design
3.5 Research format
3.6 Sampling
3.7 Procedures, methods of data collection and processing
3.8 Data analysis, consolidation and interpretation
3.9 Data verification, reduction and cleaning
3.10 Validity concerns
3.11 Limitations of the study
3.12 Ethical considerations
3.13 Chapter summary
Chapter Four The composition
4.1 Introduction
4.2 The Special Needs Education policy in the South African context
4.2.1 An overview of the external factors
4.2.2 An overview of the internal factors
4.2.3 Nomenclature University of Pretoria etd – Laauwen, H M (2004)
4.2.4 Re-structuring of the National Department of Education and the Special Needs Education unit
4.2.5 Human resource development within the Directorate: Inclusive Education
4.2.6 Socio-economic
4.3 Theory of action
4.4 Chapter summary
Chapter Five Adding variety
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Major role-players
5.3 Summary of stakeholder responses
5.4 Chapter summary
Chapter Six Adding colours
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Issue identification and agenda setting
6.3 Policy formulation
6.3.1 Paradigm shift to inclusion, terminology and constructs
6.3.2 Major stakeholders, dominant ideas, positions and pressure groups
6.3.3 Special Schools, Resource Centres and Full Service Schools
6.4 Policy adoption, implementation and evaluation
6.5 Chapter summary
Chapter Seven Adding depth
7.1 Introduction
7.2 A delay or not?
7.3 The possible reasons for the delay of the Special Needs Education Policy
7.4 Policy vacuum
7.5 Reaching for the stars
7.6 “Political symbolism”
7.7 Chapter summary University of Pretoria etd – Laauwen, H M (2004)
Chapter Eight Adding detail
8.1 Introduction
8.2 Funding mechanisms of the State
8.3 Analysis of provincial expenditure for education
8.3.1 The sum of educational programmes per province
8.3.2 Actual spending on Special Schools
8.3.3 Total expenditure per province for Special Schools from 2000-2003
8.3.4 Increase in percentage allocation per year for Special Needs Education
8.4 Demographic factors pertaining to Special Needs Education in South Africa
8.4.1 Human resources
8.4.2 Comparison between learners and educators per province
8.4.3 Demographic spread of learners per race and gender per province
8.5 Chapter summary
Chapter Nine The finishing touches
9.1 Introduction
9.2 Revisiting the conceptual framework
9.3 Reasons for the non-emergence of the Special Needs Education policy between 1997-2001
9.3.1 Summary of findings on reasons for policy delay
9.4 Revisiting my theoretical lens
9.5 Review of assumptions
9.5.1 Summary of assumptions
9.6 Implications for further research in Special Needs Education
9.7 Theoretical contribution
9.8 Chapter summary
References
Appendices
