Document Analysis

With a temporal nature to this research examining a process of educational reform that has now concluded, any form of analysis would be historical in nature. While this is certainly the recent past (with nothing relating to the reforms existing prior to 2010), an approach is suggested involving the materials produced in three key stages: those that frame the reforms, presenting a rationale for them or suggest what elements may need to be considered by them; those that are generated by the reform process or because of the reform process taking place; and those that are produced by the conclusion of the reform process

While most of the materials that can be used to examine the reform process specifically relate to education, the nature of the process (and at times the controversial aspects of it) suggests that historical framing of the documents is required, a framing that is not usually part of wider analytical frameworks pertaining to discourse.

While one of the aims of this research is the analysis of the discourses relating to educational reform, an evaluation and analysis of the historical aspects of the reform process can also be used to consider the process. For example,

3 _{Assumptions about the nature of the world, philosophical assumptions and stances, how we understand the}

world, the warrants we use, etc.

4 _{Data collection and analyses, reporting, methodologies of research, etc.} 5 _{How to mix the methods chosen}

Figure 3: A document chronology

A chronology such as this, resulting in a ‘document’ timeline, can not only demonstrate the process of various reform stages but also allow the temporality of the reform to be

considered as a factor in of itself. For example, the March 2012 letter marked ‘Restricted Policy’ was published publicly by Ofqual only four days later. In April 2014, a letter from Ofqual to the DfE suggested that the planned reforms should be delayed from the originally planned, “ambitious”, September 2014 accreditation and commencement of study

proposed for six months’ time7_.

The analysis of documents and texts has been the most characteristic and traditional method by which modern historical research has been separated from social research (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2011), but with a drive towards the transparency of decision- making processes and accountability in politics, more documents than ever are in the public domain, either through Freedom of Information requests, press releases, uploaded

statements, and letters sent between individuals.

While this is not a new avenue of analysis in educational research, the use of documents and texts has tended to appear less significant in social research than interviews,

questionnaires, and techniques of direct observation (Burton, 2000). Here, the benefit of a

7 _{The document timeline that was produced during the thesis can be found in Appendix two.}

October 2010

• The Government produces a White Paper entitled 'The Importance of Teaching' where they mention A levels and that they will become terminally assessed

December 2011

• An incident involving exam-board 'cheating' causes the DfE to announce that they will 'redevelop requirements' for A levels

March 2012

• A letter is sent to Ofqual entitled 'Reform of GCE levels' that is marked 'Restricted Policy'

April 2012

• A response to the letter is published suggesting that Universities could play a larger role in Further Education qualifications, and that views were being sought in a soon-to-be-published report

documentary analysis (in conjunction with other analytical methods) affords a level of insight into some of the decision-making processes that would not previously have been possible, and allows a fuller picture of the reform process to be built8_.

Some of the documents highlighted above form part of the analysis. However, for the purposes of the research, a document is defined using Cohen’s description as “a record of an event or process, produced by an individual or a group, though not always following rigid typologies” (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2011). For example, some of the key individuals involved in the reform process are public figures who, as well as contributing to written documents, would be interviewed in the print media and on television. While reports produced by official organisations have an element of assumed authenticity, in education such sources tend to record the approaches adopted or held by policy makers (Timutimu, Simon, & Matthews, 1998). As such Cohen (1999) suggests that documents should be analysed and understood in relation to:

“the semiotics of text production, how meaning is made in text, the status of authorial intention versus the reader’s interpretation, the role of the community of discourse in the reception of the text.”

(ibid, p. 81)

This feeds into further justification for a mixed methods approach given the analytical techniques that are suggested for use in the thesis.

Jupp and Norris (1993) suggest that there are three types of documentary analysis – positivist, interpretive, and critical. Positivist approaches assert an objective, systematic, rational, or quantitative nature of a study; interpretive approaches, as discussed previously, consider that documents have an element of social construction; while critical approaches involve considerations of social conflict, power, control and ideology. Codd’s (1988)

8 _{This is, however, not without its own potential challenges. For example, in communiques between the}

Secretary of State for Education and the Chief Regulator of Ofqual, the dates on the letters nor their recorded dates on their respective websites are not possible, as the Secretary of State thanks the Chief Regulator for a letter he received two days before it was sent. While a simple error, such quick turnarounds during the reform process make building a full chronology of who knew what, and when, both important and challenging.

discussion of educational policy documents includes interpretive and critical elements, arguing in favour of theories of discourse relating the use of language to the exercise of power, and seeking to deconstruct the official discourse of policy documents accordingly. In treating the outcome of the educational reform process as ‘policy’ it is my intention to combine such methods of analysis, as well as using Critical Discourse Analysis when considering the reform process itself.