Democratic policy production requires the input of citizen voices, ideally through a process that actively engages a broad range of stakeholders in decision-making. This article describes Ontario's curriculum policy formulation process during the 1990s, based on archival documents and interviews with 16 policy actors. The privatization of curriculum policy production resulted in a politicized environment that silenced citizens' voices. Though contracting writers through a bidding process allowed the government to produce a vast amount of policy in a relatively short period of time, findings reveal how policy actors' roles were reduced to ‘potted plants' charged with carrying out a predetermined agenda rather than active participants in a robust democratic process.
References
1.
AppleM.W. (1993) The Politics of Official Knowledge: Does a national curriculum make sense?Teachers College Record, 95(2), 222–241.
2.
AppleM.W. (1996) Cultural Politics and Education. New York: Teachers College Press.
3.
AppleM.W. (2001) Educational and Curricular Restructuring and the Neo-Liberal and Neo-Conservative Agendas: Interview with Michael Apple, Currículo sem Fronteiras, 1(1), i–xxvi.
BaiocchiG. (2001) Participation, Activism, and Politics: The Porto Alegre experiment and deliberative democratic theory. Politics and Society, 29(1), 43–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0032329201029001003
6.
BallS.J. (1998) Big Policies/Small World: An introduction to international perspectives in education policy, Comparative Education, 34(2), 119–130. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03050069828225
7.
BallS.J. (2009) Privatising Education, Privatising Education Policy, Privatising Educational Research, Network Governance and the ‘Competition State’, Journal of Education Policy, 24(1), 83–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02680930802419474
8.
BallS.J.YoudellD. (2007) Hidden Privatization in Public Education: Preliminary report. Paper given at Education International 5th World Congress, July 21–26 in Berlin.
9.
BedardG.J.LawtonS.B. (2000) The Struggle for Power and Control: Shifting policy-making models and the Harris agenda for education in Ontario, Canadian Public Administration, 43(3), 241–269. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-7121.2000.tb01848.x
10.
BergA.BergE. (1997) Methods of Privatization, Journal of International Affairs, 50(2), 357–391.
11.
BeyerL.E. (1993) Pursuing Social Justice through Education: Schooling for a critical democracy, Synthesis/Regeneration 5. http://www.greens.org/s-r/05/05-14.html
BlizzardC. (1995) How the Tories Took Ontario. Toronto: Dundurn Press.
15.
BurakR. (2000) The Challenges Facing the Ontario Public Service. Paper given at Governing Ontario: New Mandate – New Challenges Symposium sponsored by the Public Policy Forum, February 8, in Ottawa. http://www.ppforum.com/english/publications/publications
16.
BurchP.E. (2006) The New Educational Privatization: Educational contracting and high stakes accountability, Teachers College Record, 108(12), 2582–2610. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00797.x
17.
BurchP.E. (2009) Hidden Markets: The new education privatization. New York: Routledge.
18.
ButtonM.MattsonK. (1999) Deliberative Democracy in Practice: Challenges and prospects for civic deliberation, Polity, 31(4), 609–637. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3235238
19.
CarrW. (1998) The Curriculum in a Democratic Society, Curriculum Studies, 6(3), 323–339.
20.
EarlL.M.FreemanS.LaskeyS.SutherlandS.TorranceN. (2002) Policy, Politics, Pedagogy and People: Early perceptions and challenges of large-scale reform in Ontario secondary schools. Report prepared under a research contract for the Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation for the International Centre for Educational Change.
21.
FieldingJ. (2002) Tales from the Crypt or Writing the Ontario Canadian World Studies Curriculum, Our Schools/Our Selves, 11(3), 77–84.
22.
FieldsA.B.FeinbergW. (2001) Education and Democratic Theory: Finding a place for community participation in public school reform. New York: SUNY Press.
23.
GualminiE. (2008) Restructuring Weberian Bureaucracy: Comparing managerial reforms in Europe and the United States, Public Administration, 86(1), 75–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00691.x
24.
HefetzA.WarnerM. (2004) Privatization and Its Reverse: Explaining the dynamics of the government contracting process, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(2), 171–190. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muh012
25.
IbbitsonJ. (1996). The New Blue Machine: Mike Harris's Right Young Things are setting the political agenda in Ontario, The Ottawa Citizen, February 3, B1, Final Edition.
26.
IbbitsonJ. (1998) Ontario Rushes to New High-School Curriculum: Tories are about to launch the country's biggest curriculum rewrite ever. And they've given themselves 17 months to do it, The Hamilton Spectator. January 31, B2, Final Edition.
27.
KincheloeJ.L. (1999) Critical Democracy in Education, in HendersonJ.G.KessonK.R. (Eds) Understanding Democratic Curriculum Leadership, pp. 70–83. New York: Teachers College Press.
28.
MallanC. (2002) Rehired, at Twice the Rate of Pay; Ministers question findings; 40 ministry staff leave, then return in private roles; Auditor uncovers wild spending at Queen's Park, Toronto Star, December 4, A01, Ontario Edition.
29.
O'FarrellL. (2001) Writing Arts Curriculum in a Public Sector–Private Sector Partnership. Paper given at the UNESCO Meeting of Experts, Arts Education in Latin America and the Caribbean, October 16–19, University of Uberaba, Brazil.
30.
O'NeillS. (2000) The Politics of Inclusive Agreements: Towards a critical discourse theory of democracy, Political Studies, 48, 503–521. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9248.00272
31.
ParkerL.GouldG. (1999) Changing Public Sector Accountability: Critiquing new directions, Accounting Forum, 23(2), 109–135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6303.00007
32.
PattonM. (1990) Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, 2nd edn.Thousand Oaks: Sage.
33.
PerlA. (2000) Can the State Think for Itself? Implications of Consultants' Rise in Policy Analysis. Paper given at the 2000 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, September 3, in Chicago.
34.
PerlA.WhiteD.J. (2002) The Changing Role of Consultants in Canadian Policy Analysis, Policy Organisation and Society, 21(1), 49–73.
35.
PortelliJ.P. (2001) Democracy in Education: Beyond the conservative or progressivist stances, in HareW.PortelliJ.P. (Eds). Philosophy of Education: Introductory readings, 3rd edn, pp. 279–294. Calgary: Detselig.
36.
PortelliJ.P.SolomonR.P. (2001) The Erosion of Democracy in Education. Calgary: Detselig.
37.
RamirezM.D. (2003) Privatization in Mexico and Chile: A critical perspective, in ParkerD.SaalD.S. (Eds) International Handbook on Privatization, pp. 262–290. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
38.
Saint-MartinD. (1998) The New Managerialism and the Policy Influence of Consultants in Government: An historical-institutionalist analysis of Britain, Canada, and France, Governance, 11(3), 319–356. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0952-1895.00074
39.
SchneiderA.L.IngramH. (1997) Policy Design for Democracy. Lawrence: Kansas: University Press of Kansas.
40.
SclarE. (2000) You Don't Always Get What You Pay For: The economics of privatization. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
WeeksE.C. (2000) The Practice of Deliberative Democracy: Results from four large-scale trials, Public Administration Review, 60(4), 360–372. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0033-3352.00098
43.
WernerW. (1991) Curriculum and Uncertainty, in GhoshR.RayD. (Eds) Social Change and Education in Canada, 2nd edn, pp. 105–113. Toronto: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
44.
WhiteG. (1997) Transition: The Tories take power, in NoelS. (Ed.) Revolution at Queen's Park: Essays on governing Ontario, pp. 139–150. Toronto: James Lorimer.
45.
WhiteG. (2000) Revolutionary Change in the Ontario Public Service, in LindquistE. (Ed.) Government Restructuring and Career Public Service, pp. 310–345. Toronto: IPAC.
WolfeD.A. (1997) Queen's Park Policy-Making Systems, in NoelS. (Ed.) Revolution at Queen's Park: Essays on governing Ontario, pp. 151–164. Toronto: James Lorimer.
