Conference Agenda

This is part one of two of the book launch to mark the publication of two books edited by Craig Skerritt and published by Bloomsbury in July 2026: Advising on and Making Education Policy: New Perspectives on Past and Present Procedures and Opportunities and Challenges for Policy Advice and Policy Making in Education: Future Possibilities.

The education policy literature is replete with commentaries on and critiques of policies. It often concerns, for example, sociopolitical climates, the ideologies underpinning policies, the impacts of policies, and it frequently makes recommendations for policy makers to take on board going forward. However, readers of this literature would be forgiven for having less knowledge about how policies are created. Literature explicitly about the making of education policy is dispersed, and as has often been acknowledged over the past twenty years (see Saunders 2007; Bangs et al. 2011; Gorard et al. 2020; Ribbins and Sherratt 2022), a paucity of knowledge exists. It greatly remains the case within the literature that, as Gewirtz and Ozga wrote over thirty years ago, ‘there is a great deal we do not yet know about current policy-making processes’ and what goes on ‘behind the policy-making scenes’ (Gewirtz and Ozga 1994: 199).

As part of this book launch, an eclectic mix of contributors come together from around the world to share important insights about policy advice and policy making in education; to give informed details about what policy creation can entail, and who might be and how they might be involved. Coming from a range of jurisdictions, they are people with important insights to share from their experiences of doing and researching policy advice and policy making in education in their roles as civil servants, teachers, teacher educators and university-based researchers.

In this first part, the authors of four chapters present on their experiences and knowledge of policy advice and policy making in education at the national level, each focusing on a specific education system: England, Scotland, Wales, and Germany. Nonetheless, given that contemporary education systems are transnationally connected (Grek et al. 2013) the lessons that can be gleaned will likely have wider relevance and applicability.

The first presentation comes from Huw Morris who was Director of Skills, Higher Education and Lifelong learning in the Welsh Government (2013-2022). Morris provides an account of how he experienced policy being developed, outlining six key influences on policy development.

There is then a presentation from a university-based researcher discussing how they, as an academic, were able to influence national policy in their respective jurisdiction. Through a first-hand account of a researcher in Scotland engaging with the media, government, and the public, Rachel Shanks demonstrates how academic research can contribute to the making of national policy, and advice is offered on how academic researchers can work towards achieving policy impact.

The third presentation comes from Germany in the form of the Standing Scientific Commission on Education Policy. Christine Becks, Susanne Farwick, and Isabell van Ackeren-Mindl, introduce this mechanism, which van Ackeren-Mindl is a member of, discussing its genesis, structure and functioning and its role and significance within the broader national debate on German education policy.

In the fourth presentation, Clare Brooks and Joanna McIntyre draw on their experiences as university academics engaging with civil servants during the development of a high-profile national policy. Through their account, Brooks and McIntyre share concerns about the development of the policy, such as the façade of consultation, the lack of relevant experience and expertise among the civil servants. They finish by highlighting learning points for other academics who might find themselves in similar positions with policy makers.

This presentation provides an overview of the author’s experiences of policy making in higher education in Wales between 2013 and 2023. It provides an account of how higher education policy is shaped by developments at different levels from the international to the UK state, devolved nations, regions and constituent institutions. Here it is shown that the final form of policy in practice emerges from the interplay between ministerial priorities, party politics and lobbying, policy legacy, events, ideological influences and financial constraints. It demonstrates there is dynamic and continual interplay between these different pressures on politicians, policy makers and the wider population they seek to influence and have an impact with and upon.

Bagshaw, A.,, & McVitty, D. (2019). Influencing Higher Education Policy A Professional Guide to Making an Impact. London: Routledge. Barber, M. (2016). How to Run A Government So That Citizens Benefit and Taxpayers Don’t Go Crazy. London: Penguin. Brown, R. (2023). Neoliberalism in UK Higher Education: The English Higher Education Neo-Market. Oxford: Higher Education Policy Institute. Evans, A. (2024). The Intimacy of Power: An Insight into the Private Office, Whitehall’s Most Sensitive Network. London: Biteback Publishing. Evans, G. (2015). A Class Apart: Learning the Lessons of Education in Post-Devolution Wales. Cardiff: Welsh Academic Press. Freedman, S. (2024). Failed State: Why Nothing Works and How We Fix It. London: Macmillan. Grube, D. (2022). Why Governments Get It Wrong: And How They Can Get It Right. London: Macmillan. Hallsworth, M., Parker, S. & Rutter, J. (2011). Policy Making in the Real World: Evidence and Analysis. London: Institute for Government. Rhodes, R. (2011). Everyday Life in British Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rhodes, R. (2021). Autoethnography and Political Studies. In R. A. W. Rhodes & S. Hodgett (eds.), Autoethnography and What Political Science Can Learn from the Humanities : Blurring Genres. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

National guidance on school uniform and clothing was issued for the first time in Scotland in 2024. This contrasts with the rest of the UK where there has been statutory and non-statutory guidance on school uniform policies and costs for many years. This presentation provides an account of the author’s first-hand experiences of policy advice which culminated in this first national guidance on school uniform and clothing in Scotland. The presentation outlines how findings from the author’s research were issued in a policy briefing and how this led to initial engagement with policy makers that then led to continued research and engagement with policy makers and other stakeholders involving further briefings and policy events and public engagement activities. As part of this work, the author engaged with key actors, such as Scottish Government officials, members of the Scottish Parliament’s Education & Skills Committee, education spokespeople of different political parties, national organisations such as Child Poverty Action Group Scotland, as well as with the media. The presentation provides insights into how academic research can influence national policy.

Friedrich, J., & Shanks, R. (2023). ‘The prison of the body’: school uniforms between discipline and governmentality. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 44(1), 16-29. Reidy, J. (2021). Reviewing school uniform through a public health lens: Evidence about the impacts of school uniform on education and health. Public Health Reviews, 42. Ryan, M., Ricardo, L.I.C., Nathan, N., Hofmann, R., and van Sluijs, E. (2024) Are school uniforms associated with gender inequalities in physical activity? A pooled analysis of population-level data from 135 countries/regions, Journal of Sport and Health Science, 13(4), 590-598. Shanks, R. and Dike, N. (2023). School Clothing in Scotland Research Brief. Aberdeen: University of Aberdeen. Shanks, R. and Dike, N. (2024). School Clothing Grant and School Uniform Policies in Aberdeen. Aberdeen: University of Aberdeen. Shanks, R. Ovington, J., Cross, B. and Carnarvon, A. (2023) School Uniforms: New Materialist Perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan. Stephenson, K. (2021) A Cultural History of School Uniform. Exeter: University of Exeter Press.

Against the backdrop of Germany’s federal structure and its longstanding efforts to create a viable, scientifically sound and politically sustainable body of expert policy advice in education, this presentation will discuss the Standing Scientific Commission on Education Policy (SWK) as a case in point. Germany’s 16 states act formally independently, however, the increasing willingness to coordinate and cooperate on cross-cutting policy has released new political potential. The SWK’s aims, structure and work program revolve around its founding purpose of providing state ministers with condensed evidence and policy advice on urgent issues. The presentation discusses the SWK’s genesis, its structure and functioning, including its integration of external expertise and the reception and impact of its reports. Finally, it examines the SWK’s role and significance within the broader national debate on education policy, addresses critique from the field and from the public, and marks its relevance to countries beyond Germany.

Pielke, R. (2007). The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics. Cambridge University Press. Skerritt, C. (2023). Towards a mechanism for expert policy advice in education. British Educational Research Journal, 49, 749–765.

Teacher education policy in England has been unusual in the degree of centralised control it has sought to exert over an already highly regulated field of activity. Through first-hand accounts, this presentation reflects the experiences of the authors who found themselves deep in discussions with government policy advisers about recent teacher education policy reforms. Drawing on interviews with each other about their respective experiences, and upon contemporaneous notes and document archives, this presentation presents an account of how policy makers sought to drive home fundamental changes to teacher education, and the challenges experienced in seeking to minimise potential damage. The presentation concludes with reflections on the authors’ positionality, that of the policy actors in question, and looking forward, it highlights learning points for others including implications for how expertise in policy making contrasts with the expertise of those in the field in question.

Department for Education (DfE). (2021b). Initial teacher training (ITT) market review report. Available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/initial-teacher-training-itt-market-review-report. Accessed 29.7.24. Department for Education (DfE) (2021c). Annex B- Initial teacher training (ITT) review – draft Quality Requirements for ITT providers. Available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/initial-teacher-training-itt-market-review-report. Accessed 29.7.24. Department for Education (DfE). (2022). Initial teacher training (ITT) market review: overview. Available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/initial-teacher-training-itt-market-review/initial-teacher-training-itt-market-review-overview#expert-advisory-group. Accessed 29.7.24. Ellis, V. (2023). After the crisis: towards teacher development 3.0. In: V. Ellis ed. Teacher education in crisis: The state, the market and the universities in England (pp. 213–227). London: Bloomsbury. Hardy, I., & Woodcock, S. (2024). Inclusive education policies–objects of observance, omission, and obfuscation: ten years on…. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 28(13), 3234-3252. Hordern, J., & Brooks, C. (2023). The core content framework and the ‘new science’of educational research. Oxford Review of Education, 49(6), 800-818. Hordern, J., & Brooks, C. (2024). Towards instrumental trainability in England? The ‘official pedagogy’of the Core Content Framework. British Journal of Educational Studies, 72(1), 5-22.