AARE President’s Address - Towards a Theory and Practice of Policy Engagement - Higher Education Research Policy in the Making

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Elsa

Academic engagement with higher education research policy in Australia—and education policy more broadly—faces a crisis driven by blunt theoretical tools and an equally inadequate political stance. Attention has been consumed by disputing what policy is, neglecting the imperatives to engage in how policy is produced. Escaping this impasse requires renewed cooperation, new conceptual and political tools, and a field of education that resists fragmentation and defensive postures.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages14

Reading Time35 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Introduction

Policy engagement crisis and neglected imperatives

Anecdotes illustrating patterns in engagement

Questions about what counts as policy contribution

Need for new conceptual and political tools

AARE President’s Address, AARE, 2005 Towards a Theory and Practice of Policy Engagement: Higher Education Research Policy in the Making Trevor Gale Monash University Abstract Academic engagement with higher education research policy in Australia, and with education policy more generally, is in crisis. This time around, it is not just that our theoretical tools are blunt and irrelevant (Ball 1990), so are our politics. It seems our attention has been so consumed by ‘what is policy’(Ball 1994a) and with challenging its claims to authority, that we have missed or ignored imperatives to engage with its production. Even though some have attempted contributions, for the most part we have been ‘coerced into an era of cooperation’. Getting ourselves out of this mess will take more than just better theories and new politics. It will require a degree of cooperation, to advance a theory and practice of policy engagement and to re-establish a field of education that resists the tendency to fragment and/or the temptation to defend itself‘against’ policy. In this paper I attempt an assessment of where we are theoretically and politically with regard to education policy and where we need to look to find new forms of policy engagement. By way of illustration, I draw on examples from AARE (the Australian Association for Research in Education) and the Australian RQF (Research Quality Framework) although the analysis is by no means restricted to these. Introduction I want to begin by sharing with you two short anecdotes, which focused my thoughtson the matters I plan to raise here. For me, they are critical incidents that ‘exemplify underlying patterns and values’(Tripp 1993, p. 97) in our collective engagement with The Australian Educational Researcher, Volume 33, Number 2, August 2006 •1 TREVOR GALE education policy, including policy in the higher education field. Here I am using engagement to mean description and analysis as well as prescription and advocacy, as will become apparent. Both incidents occurred in quick succession, indeed at the same location – the National Stakeholders Forum held in Canberra in June 2005 as part of the RQF consultation process – to which I was invited as President of AARE. Of the 94 representatives that attended the Forum, AARE was the only representative from the disciplinary field of education. This in itself is cause for reflection but I want to focus for the moment on the two incidents in question, which both occurred during the morning and afternoon breaks while I was lining up for coffee. The first arose while introducing myself to a fellow stakeholder with a background in the physical sciences. Squinting first at my nametag, he subjected us to his microscopic gaze: “AARE? Who are they? Where are they located? Are they in the higher education sector? Do they conduct research on education?” The second incident involved a more knowledgeable couple: two past education academics, both now in university administration. However, their acquaintance with current AARE activities was not a lot better. In the course of the usual introductory exchanges, one commented: “I haven’t heard of AARE making any contribution to the RQF debate.”In hindsight, I am inclined to ask: what constitutes a contribution? Is this the kind of work that Australian education researchers are good at? Are our ways of engaging with education policy adequate? These are questions I hope to explore here, through an examination of the contemporary policy literature and by focusing on the potential for AARE’s political involvement in educational policy making. In his now well-known 1990 monograph, Politics and policy making in education, Stephen Ball begins with the claim that ‘the basis for description of education policy has changed significantly and the established conceptual tools seem blunt and irrelevant’ (Ball 1990, p. 8) . Some fifteen years on, and in light of my experiences in 2005 as AARE President, I want to make

FAQs

What is Trevor Gale’s main claim about engaging education policy?

Current and singular discursive approaches have contributed to an unfavourable repositioning of education researchers in the field. Meaningful engagement requires new conceptual and political tools to build a theory and active politics for policy engagement.

Why does the paper argue that engagement with policy production has been missed or ignored?

Attention has been consumed by debates about what policy is and challenges to its claims to authority, so imperatives to engage with policy production were overlooked despite attempts at contributions.

How do the 2005 anecdotes relate to the paper’s questions?

The anecdotes show stakeholders not recognizing AARE’s role or contributions to RQF debate. They prompt questions about what constitutes a contribution and whether researchers’ ways of engaging are adequate.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Elsa