Skip to main content

'What do we know? What should we do?' Melding research validity and rhetoric in the analysis of policy making

Buy Article:

$33.70 plus tax (Refund Policy)

'Evidence-based policy and practice' was proposed to usher in an era where explicit use was made of evidence ('what we know') to inform decisions made about policy and practice ('what we should do'). Critics have focused on its allegedly technocratic nature, motivating some to develop analyses of policy making that take account of inherent social processes. One example is rhetorical analysis, which focuses on the use of discourse and argumentation in the policy-making process (Russell et al, 2008). In this paper, I welcome the insights that can be attained using rhetorical analysis, but argue that too dramatic a swing towards an interpretivist approach risks jettisoning valuable work on research validity. I argue, with reference to the work of social research methodologist Donald Campbell and colleagues, that it is both possible and desirable to meld research validity and rhetoric in furthering our understanding of the policy-making process.
No Reference information available - sign in for access.
No Citation information available - sign in for access.
No Supplementary Data.
No Data/Media
No Metrics

Keywords: DONALD CAMPBELL; POLICY-MAKING PROCESS; RESEARCH VALIDITY; RHETORIC

Document Type: Short Communication

Publication date: 2010-01-01

More about this publication?
  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
UA-1313315-21
Cookie Policy
X
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more