Policy Anylsis: The Solution For The Policy Problems (Essay Sample)

Policy analysis
Student’s name
Institutional Affiliation
Introduction
In the field of policy analysis, several influential structures acknowledges that the primary role of policy ideas is as significant as the role of those actors in analyzing as well as understanding the policy as well as the changes in the policies. An important aspect of the key principal interest in analyzing the body of policy revolves around the existing interaction between the actors and ideas. The definition of policy is independent of that of given domain, and hence, a policy may either be applied to or incorporated to describe a domain (Dunn, 2004). Hence, according to Dunn (2004), the policy is induced to influence a change within a given problematic situation or to influence the process of change and those who are managed or those who are concerned. Therefore, in this paper will concentrate on policy analysis by analyzing a speech by Theresa May M.P. Through the policy analysis, the paper will concentrate on extracting the policy problems, make a comparison with previous policies, if available, and identify if there are any policy silence from the extract. Then later; the paper will draw a conclusion on the same.
Discourse policy
The context of the speech that was given by Theresa is concerned about making the society a place where each person is treated fairly and every person has an opportunity to engage him or herself in any activity that will lead him or her to success. Notably, the context revolve mainly to the equality of education to the people. Though difficult, several measures are raised to oversee this problem.
The text is a section of a speech that was given by Theresa May a member of parliament on 9 September, this year, 2016. The speech delivered by Theresa outlines her vision to make Britain be the best’s world great meritocracy; a country where each person will have a fair opportunity to proceed as much as they would want in line with their ability (Theresa, 9 September 2016). This forms the basis of our policy problem. The speech also revealed that she wanted or desired a nation that each individual was treated fairly; and where ordinary, working class individual had the ability to control their lives and have the opportunity to share fairly in the existing prosperity in their country. Here, I will present the details of the overall speech given, and commence on a discourse analysis for the purpose of identifying dominant policy ideas as well as themes and assess how they both work to restructure or shape reforms presented by Theresa. As the paper will argue, there are at least two separate but interrelated ideologies at work in the text or in the speech delivered; that is neoconservatism and neoliberalism.
Previous policy underneath education
From previous policies, the current suggested policy differs greatly in terms ensuring the success of the states through efficient education for all (Studies in Poverty & Inequality Institute, 2007). Firstly, there is an assumption that the nation of Britain does not offer equal opportunities for all its citizens and as such, there is a need for reforms. Theresa states that she wanted a country that would turn out to be the great meritocracy of the world; a nation where each person will be treated fairly and will be allowed to go, as far they want in line with their talent as well as hard work. She want a nation where each person played by the same rule; where an ordinary, working person will more control over his or her life and the opportunity to share equally the success of the nation (Theresa, 9 September 2016). Yes, this is ambitious. However, honestly, in today’s world, we all have to be ambitious. We have to proceed on with it, and there is no other time allowed for us to lose (Adams, 2014).
It is not common for policy to prompt an urgent need for reform. Dunn (2004) denote that policy is a concept of enlightenment; it is about the progress; it is about moving from the inadequacies of the current circumstances to some prevalent future state that is full of perfection where all things work in the perfect way as they are supposed to (Adams, 2014). Fair treatment and the opportunity to resources is a central factor, and as such, it is vital to the future of the Economy of our country, and for the future of each person in Britain. It is significant to highlight as it demonstrates the way that the text is aligning to the issue of fair treatment and equal opportunity, and the pressures for the survival created by the economy. However, most politicians argue that is promising in that to turn Britain into a great meritocracy nation, then we as a state must move beyond the set agendas and deliver the actual social reforms or changes across every aspect of the society so that those the system plans to miss would currently miss are given the assistance they require. The reforms policy prescribed by Theresa, in which, this paper will argue later, comprise of both neoconservative and neoliberal reforms.
It is important to notice also the use of pronouns like ‘we’ and ‘our.’ They are strategies incorporated in policy texts to comprise the reader as well as to create a sense of common purpose and that of consensus. Notably, pronouns can as well be incorporated to incorporate some individuals as it excludes others. For instance, there is the constructing an ‘us’ and ‘them’ relationship within a policy. In the text, Theresa is referring to ‘we’ to symbolize the citizens of Britain who need to rise and induced the change that will benefit them.
Hence, the speech is constructing an image of a political system that is key or crucial to the success and prosperity of the nation and all of its citizens, yet a nation that needs to undergo the process of reforms. What are the policy problems, then? What do the people of Britain require to undergo reforms? What are the different kinds of reforms required? To answer and validate the solution to these questions, we need to identify the dominant discourse as well as themes in the text, and afterward, interrogate how they both relate and coherent the broader political ideologies or philosophies. Importantly, discourses do not simply reflect social reality; they help to constitute it.
First, the paper has identified a dissertation of selfishness as well as a dissertation of competitiveness. We have to be more ambitious to fit in this competitive world. We need to strategize when other states such the United States of America are going through a recovery of ethical repairs and have to treat each other equally, despite their gender. Where the Muslim culture has begun treating women with dignity despite their ancient cultures; and when the entire world is focusing on finding ways to which, it will ensure their citizens are sustainable in their lives despite the changing world technologies (Dunn, 2004). The apparent pressure of globalization in line to remain globally competitive, are constructed as central policy problems. Other nations have strategies new ways that will ensure equal opportunities for everyone. Failure to compete with other nations in this changing technology, then it will be fatal to our economic projections. Equal opportunities and fair treatment for all citizens, and therefore the government and its ministries, will not only have a problem, or be turned into a problem in need of a solution; they are being positioned as the main propellers in ensuring that every person in the nation remains economically advantaged. In other words, every person will see to it that he or she is treated fairly has is exposed to various opportunities available with the economy.
The solution for the policy problems
Now, we can consider the policy solutions proposed in the text. These policies will eventually solve the problems presented in the texts very strongly. Consider the following extracts by Theresa: “that this was the change the Nation need. It will simply mean altering some of the philosophy underpinnings of how the government acts and thinks. This will mean recalibrating how the government and policy makers approach the policy development and ensure that everything they do as the proprietors of education will lead to a fair treatment and opportunity for all. We can now look at the policy solutions proposed in the text. These solutions are apparently going to tackle educational equality very strongly (Theresa, 9 September 2016). Al of these will work.
Therefore, we are doing three very bold things. First, ramping up the standards and bringing back the values of a good education. Second, changing the policies of education and allow new providers in to start schools, providing more choice, more competition, and giving schools greater independence (Nilsen, 2001). Lastly, we are confronting educational equality strongly. There exist two interrelated thoughts at play in the policy in solving these problems, both of which are significant in the recent history of educational equality for all individuals, which I looked at earlier.
Firstly, there is a neo-liberal ideology articulated through dominant policy discourses like standards, diversification or marketization school choice, school autonomy, as well as competition. Neo-liberalism in educational reform, according to Stern (2014), simply means introducing the kind of competition, which makes a private business successful. Equality in education becomes a commodity, which can be bought and sold. Schools are the providers, whereas, the parents and children are the consumers. This is one aspect of ‘equality’ in education, and that is the interpret...