中国 "双减 "政策的批判性话语问题化框架(CDPF)分析

IF 1.3 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Chenyi Zhao
{"title":"中国 \"双减 \"政策的批判性话语问题化框架(CDPF)分析","authors":"Chenyi Zhao","doi":"10.1177/14782103241228902","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines the “Double Reduction” policy issued by the Chinese government in 2021 by using a Critical Discourse Problematization Framework (CDPF) that combines Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and what’s the problem represented to be (WPR) approach. The study points out that the changing discourse of equality and equity in China is crucial for understanding the assumptions and presuppositions that lie behind and shape the “Double Reduction” policy. The analysis of the policy text conveys that the government views the privatization of education in China as being responsible for the lowered quality of public education, the competitive learning environment, and financial and mental pressure on families and parents. However, this study reveals the silent part of the “Double Reduction” policy through the WPR approach, which demonstrates that privatization of education is not the root cause of educational inequality/injustice in China. The work of this critical policy analysis aims to better understand the dilemma of education in China and provide insights to the policymakers, educators, and related stakeholders from the perspective of changing policy discourse.","PeriodicalId":46984,"journal":{"name":"Policy Futures in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Critical Discourse Problematization Framework (CDPF) analysis of “Double Reduction” policy in China\",\"authors\":\"Chenyi Zhao\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14782103241228902\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper examines the “Double Reduction” policy issued by the Chinese government in 2021 by using a Critical Discourse Problematization Framework (CDPF) that combines Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and what’s the problem represented to be (WPR) approach. The study points out that the changing discourse of equality and equity in China is crucial for understanding the assumptions and presuppositions that lie behind and shape the “Double Reduction” policy. The analysis of the policy text conveys that the government views the privatization of education in China as being responsible for the lowered quality of public education, the competitive learning environment, and financial and mental pressure on families and parents. However, this study reveals the silent part of the “Double Reduction” policy through the WPR approach, which demonstrates that privatization of education is not the root cause of educational inequality/injustice in China. The work of this critical policy analysis aims to better understand the dilemma of education in China and provide insights to the policymakers, educators, and related stakeholders from the perspective of changing policy discourse.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46984,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Policy Futures in Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Policy Futures in Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103241228902\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy Futures in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103241228902","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文采用批判性话语分析(CDA)和问题所在(WPR)相结合的批判性话语问题化框架(CDPF),对中国政府于 2021 年发布的 "双减 "政策进行了研究。研究指出,中国不断变化的平等与公平话语对于理解 "双减 "政策背后的假设和预设至关重要。对政策文本的分析表明,中国政府认为教育民营化是造成公立教育质量下降、学习环境竞争激烈、家庭和家长承受经济和精神压力的原因。然而,本研究通过 WPR 方法揭示了 "双减 "政策中沉默的部分,表明教育民营化并非中国教育不平等/不公正的根本原因。这项批判性政策分析工作旨在更好地理解中国教育的困境,并从政策话语变革的角度为政策制定者、教育工作者和相关利益方提供启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Critical Discourse Problematization Framework (CDPF) analysis of “Double Reduction” policy in China
This paper examines the “Double Reduction” policy issued by the Chinese government in 2021 by using a Critical Discourse Problematization Framework (CDPF) that combines Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and what’s the problem represented to be (WPR) approach. The study points out that the changing discourse of equality and equity in China is crucial for understanding the assumptions and presuppositions that lie behind and shape the “Double Reduction” policy. The analysis of the policy text conveys that the government views the privatization of education in China as being responsible for the lowered quality of public education, the competitive learning environment, and financial and mental pressure on families and parents. However, this study reveals the silent part of the “Double Reduction” policy through the WPR approach, which demonstrates that privatization of education is not the root cause of educational inequality/injustice in China. The work of this critical policy analysis aims to better understand the dilemma of education in China and provide insights to the policymakers, educators, and related stakeholders from the perspective of changing policy discourse.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Policy Futures in Education
Policy Futures in Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
13.30%
发文量
76
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信