Governing through parents: a genealogical enquiry of education policy and the construction of neoliberal subjectivities in England

In this paper we explore the various spaces and sites through which the figure of the parent is summoned and activated to inhabit and perform market norms and practices in the field of education in England. Since the late 1970s successive governments have called on parents to enact certain duties and obligations in relation to the state. These duties include adopting and internalizing responsibility for all kinds of risks, liabilities and inequities formerly managed by the Keynesian welfare state. Rather than characterize this situation in terms of the ‘hollowing of the state’, we argue that the role of the state includes enabling the functioning of the parent as a neoliberal subject so that they may successfully harness the power of the market to their own advantage and (hopefully) minimize the kinds of risk and inequity generated through a market-based, deregulated education system. In this paper we examine how parents in England are differently, yet similarly, compelled to embody certain market norms and practices as they navigate the field of education. Adopting genealogical enquiry and policy discourse analysis as our methodology, we explore how parents across three policy sites or spaces are constructed as objects and purveyors of utility and ancillaries to marketisation. This includes a focus on how parents are summoned as 1) consumers or choosers of education services; 2) governors and overseers of schools; and 3) producers and founders of schools.

Meeting the challenges of globalisation in legal education

The focus of this paper is a critical review of the impact of globalisation on international higher education at my own institution, the University of East London (UEL), where I am Programme Leader for LLB (Hons) Law, an undergraduate qualifying law degree. Globalisation, along with internationalisation, has been one of the forces that have most changed the educational landscape in this country over the last two decades. Although closely related to each other, globalisation and internationalisation are usually regarded as distinct forces – the former being defined as the economic, political, and societal forces pushing twenty-first-century higher education towards greater international involvement, while the latter describes the policies and practices of higher education developed to deal with this. Whilst these phenomena have wide implications for higher education as a whole, they present opportunities and challenges that are very specific both to an institution like UEL, which has a high proportion of students from international backgrounds, and to my own discipline, law, which has an increasingly global profile in terms of both legal education and professional practice.

The role of PCCs

Dr Mark Roycroft, Senior Lecturer in Criminology at the University of East London, provides the first of two articles containing insights from his forthcoming book on "The role of PCCs". This accepted manuscript was published as two articles for Policing Insight, "What do PCCs and chief constables REALLY think of each other?" (07.03.16) and "What do PCCs REALLY think about Panels, HMIC and the IPCC?" (10.03.6).

The Well London program - a cluster randomized trial of community engagement for improving health behaviors and mental wellbeing: baseline survey results

Background The Well London programme used community engagement, complemented by changes to the physical and social neighbourhood environment, to improve physical activity levels, healthy eating and mental wellbeing in the most deprived communities in London. The effectiveness of Well London is being evaluated in a pair-matched cluster randomised trial (CRT). The baseline survey data are reported here. Methods The CRT involved 20 matched pairs of intervention and control communities (defined as UK census lower super output areas; ranked in the 11% most deprived LSOAs in London by Index of Multiple Deprivation) across 20 London boroughs. The primary trial outcomes, sociodemographic information and environmental neighbourhood characteristics were assessed in three quantitative components within the Well London CRT at baseline: a cross-sectional, interviewer-administered adult household survey; a self-completed, school-based adolescent questionnaire; a fieldworker completed neighbourhood environmental audit. Baseline data collection occurred in 2008. Physical activity, healthy eating and mental wellbeing were assessed using standardised, validated questionnaire tools. Multiple imputation was used to account for missing data in the outcomes and other variables in the adult and adolescent surveys. Results There were 4107 adults and 1214 adolescent respondents in the baseline surveys. The intervention and control areas were broadly comparable with respect to the primary outcomes and key sociodemographic characteristics. The environmental characteristics of the intervention and control neighbourhoods were broadly similar. There was greater between cluster variation in the primary outcomes in the adult population compared to the adolescent population. Levels of healthy eating, smoking and self-reported anxiety/depression were similar in the Well London population and the national Health Survey for England. Levels of physical activity were higher in the Well London population but this is likely to be due to the different measurement tools used in the two surveys. Conclusions Randomisation of social interventions such as Well London is acceptable and feasible and in this study the intervention and control arms are well balanced with respect to the primary outcomes and key sociodemographic characteristics. The matched design has improved the statistical efficiency of the study amongst adults but less so amongst adolescents. Follow-up data collection will be completed 2012.