The concepts of ‘expansive and restrictive’ and ‘restrictive and expansive’ continua: a clarification in relation to a recent article in the Journal of Education Policy

This article refers to:

Restrictive and expansive policy learning – challenges and strategies for knowledge exchange in upper secondary education across the four countries of the UK

The context

The concept of ‘restrictive-expansive’ approaches to policy and governance plays a central organising role in a recent JEP article on policy borrowing and policy learning across the four countries of the UK (Hodgson and Spours 2016). Our formulation of this continuum was inspired by the work of Fuller and Unwin (2003, 2004, 2010, 2016a, 2016b) and in this corrigendum, we wish to make more clear these intellectual origins. At the same time, however, in discussions since it has become evident that not only do we apply the continuum in different settings to Fuller and Unwin; the conceptual couplet is constructed in a different way due to the reversal of the terms from ‘expansive/restrictive’ (Fuller and Unwin) to ‘restrictive/expansive’ (Hodgson and Spours).

Fuller and Unwin’s original expansive/restrictive continuum is used in support of their argument that apprenticeship constitutes a distinct model of skill formation that should be protected from the policy effects of successive governments that have moved to dilute its ‘core meaning’ (Fuller and Unwin 2016b). As a result of their research of working life over the past two decades, the Fuller and Unwin concept of ‘expansive’ in their continuum has evolved as a set of criteria by which workplaces can judge whether they constitute the expansive workplace learning environments that also promote the distinctive and core meaning of apprenticeship.

Using their continuum as a starting point, our reversal of the terms to ‘restrictive/expansive’ is used to develop a conceptual tool to examine policy and governance, and to suggest possibilities for policy learning. Using this concept, we have analysed, across a number of dimensions, the types of policies and actions required to move from restrictive to more expansive approaches to policy learning. In the case of this article, we sought specifically to identify the conditions under which policy learning across the four countries of the UK might be possible. This way of conceptualising reform trajectories of policy and governance can, however, potentially be applied in a variety of state settings both within the UK and beyond.

The replacement statement

Arising from these discussions and reflections, we would ask readers of JEP when engaging with the article to recognise the following textual change and to use the replacement statement if citing this particular part.

The original text in JEP Volume 31, Number 5, page 514 reads:

Drawing on the work of Raffe and Spours (2007), Lange and Alexiadou (2010), Philipps and Ochs, (2010), and Raffe (2011) we have created a theoretical framework along a ‘restrictive-expansive continuum’. In Fuller and Unwin’s work (2008) this type of continuum has been used to analyse the experience of apprenticeships in relation to company policy and practice. Here we apply this concept to situate different types of policy learning in relation to national and global ideological and governance environments. 

The replacement text reads as follows:

In order to better understand the distinction between policy borrowing and policy learning in practice and the process of reform, we utilise a conceptual framework – a ‘restrictive-expansive’ continuum. These two terms have been used and developed by Fuller and Unwin as an ‘expansive-restrictive’ continuum (2003, 2004, 2010, 2016a, 2016b). In their work, the expansive end of the continuum functions as a means of evaluating whether workplaces are ready and able to provide rich and diverse learning experiences for apprentices. Drawing on the work of Raffe and Spours (2007), Lange and Alexiadou (2010), Philips and Ochs (2010), and Raffe (2011), we have adapted Fuller and Unwin’s original conceptual framework by reversing the key terms in the continuum in order to provide a way of understanding the type of changes required to move from one condition to another in the reform of post-compulsory education and training. This adapted restrictive-expansive continuum is used to situate different types of policy learning in relation to national and global ideological and governance environments.