ABSTRACT
Introduction This paper draws on a 3-year study of the English Education Action Zones (EAZs) policy.1 This policy was one of a number of area-based initiatives introduced in England by the New Labour2 Government in their first term of office (1997-2001). The initial Government publicity suggested that EAZs would be ‘standard bearers in a new crusade uniting business, schools, local education authorities3 and parents to modernize education in areas of social disadvantage’ (DfEE, 1998). Allocated via a process of competitive bidding, 25 ‘first-round’ EAZs were introduced between September 1998-January 1999, followed by a further 48 ‘second-round’ EAZs in the period September 1999-April 2000. The zones, resourced by a combination of state and private funding, were established in a mixture of urban and rural locations. The policy was short-lived, however, and has since been eclipsed by other initiatives. The purpose of this paper is not to provide an analysis or evaluation of the EAZ policy. Rather, we intend to use the case of EAZs to explore issues around the role of impression management in educational governance and the policy process. In particular, the paper is concerned with processes of governance which attempt to manage, contain or render invisible potential controversies that relate to policy development and implementation by impression management, or what has become known as ‘spin’.
