Interpreting public policy dilemmas: discourse analytical insights

The article addresses the significant challenge of 264 million children and young people lacking schooling in 2015, despite the largely unquestioned dominance of a liberal model in international education. This highlights a need to understand the underlying ideas and beliefs shaping this model. The study uses discourse analysis to interpret the construction and resolution of policy dilemmas in this field. It has two main objectives: empirically, to demonstrate how a dominant liberal orthodoxy is discursively constructed as a grand narrative; and methodologically, to argue for the value of discourse analysis despite criticisms, showcasing its ability to reveal the subtle influence of ideas on policy practices. The empirical contribution uniquely frames the liberal model as a grand narrative, uncovering conflicts and shifts that challenge the perceived harmony. The methodological contribution introduces an Interpretive Discourse Analysis (IDA) approach tailored to the policy challenges in international education, offering a credible alternative to mainstream policy research.

The literature review critiques positivist approaches to policy analysis, such as Weimer and Vining's rationalist model and cost-benefit analysis, which are frequently used but often lack contextual understanding. It contrasts these with interpretive discourse approaches, which analyze how elite beliefs shape policy practices. Examples are provided from various fields, including environmental studies, analysis of racism, New Labour politics, and the UK's relationship with the EU. These examples demonstrate the effectiveness of discourse analysis in uncovering hidden meanings and beliefs driving policy decisions, moving beyond simple causal explanations. The review highlights previous discourse research on international development in education, including studies on the World Bank and IMF policies, and the influence of dominant narratives on education quality in aid-receiving countries. This sets the stage for the introduction of the IDA approach.

The article introduces Interpretive Discourse Analysis (IDA), a hybrid approach combining Yanow's Interpretive Policy Analysis (IPA) and Wodak's Discourse-historical approach (DHA). IDA emphasizes the two-way relationship between discourse (language, objects, actions) and meaning (values, ideas, beliefs). It follows a six-step process: 1) identifying research objects; 2) collecting and coding data; 3) establishing context; 4) refining coding and interpreting meaning; 5) categorizing data and identifying narratives; 6) widening the interpretive lens for policy interventions. The study uses a corpus of official documents from 2000 to 2018, categorized into core policy, intermediary, and periphery levels. A pilot study was conducted to refine the coding scheme and research questions focused on the vision, process, and outcomes of the liberal education model. The analysis involved iterative movement between data and theory, refining categories through three coding phases, eventually developing a grand narrative framework. Thematic analysis, while potentially criticized as descriptive, is justified by the complexity of the policy dilemma. It reveals the evolution of the narrative in terms of themes, actor positions, and framings.

The IDA approach revealed the dominant liberal model of international education (2000-2018) as a three-act grand narrative: Vision, Process, and Outcomes. The Vision theme explored actors' aspirations for education, revealing tensions between education as an economic good (human capital) and a social good (human rights). Key topics included economic prosperity, social progress, human development, national security, and inclusion. The Process theme analyzed the management system, highlighting debates around New Public Management (NPM) and the tension between marketization and humanization. Topics included value for money, partnerships, evidence-based policy, measurement, and accountability. The Outcomes theme examined policy evaluations and beliefs, focusing on the tension between the commodification of education and the progressive realization of the right to education. Topics included lifelong learning, teaching and assessment, low-fee private schools, autonomy and participation, and finances and resources. The analysis identified continuities (the role of technology and the Knowledge-Based Economy (KBE)) and changes (the increasing dominance of management processes over outcomes, and the weakening of human capital theory). The KBE is shown to be a central point of interdependency linking outcomes and aspirations. Specific extracts from the analyzed documents are presented to illustrate these themes and the different ideological positions (neoliberal, liberal, anti-neoliberal, and humanist) of the actors involved.

The discussion section reflects on the abductive nature of IDA, where interpretations are based on plausible explanations derived from the interplay of theory and data. The study used a two-tier model of grand and mid-range theories to understand the liberal narrative, with meso-theories guiding the analysis of specific themes and binaries. The analysis employed legitimation and argumentation strategies to reveal tensions, arguments, and contradictions within the discourse. The use of legitimation (e.g., personal authority) and argumentation (e.g., rhetoric of numbers) is discussed. The limitations of interpretive methods are addressed, referencing criteria for trustworthiness (credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability), and responding to criticisms of CDA's subjectivity and bias. The study emphasizes the importance of systematic procedures and empathetic analysis in addressing these concerns.

IDA offers a valuable approach to understanding the discursive construction of international development in education. The analysis of the liberal model as a grand narrative revealed hidden tensions and contradictions, highlighting the importance of discourse analysis in uncovering policy dilemmas. The systematic and transparent analytical toolkit presented can be applied to other policy areas. The study’s findings offer policy recommendations by illuminating previously obscured aspects of the liberal education narrative, and contribute to a broader understanding of how ideational factors shape the interplay between education and capitalism.

While IDA offers valuable insights, it is important to acknowledge its inherent limitations. The study’s focus on specific documents from particular organizations may limit generalizability. The interpretation of meaning is inherently subjective, although the systematic approach and use of multiple theoretical frameworks help to mitigate this. Future research could expand the corpus of documents, include diverse perspectives, and employ further analytical tools to broaden understanding.