ABSTRACT
Chapter four examines forms of disorder that have emerged since the education revolution period. I identify three dominant forms of disorder. First, I examine tensions between the aims of policy alignment and the design and principles underpinning Australia's federal system. While policy actors generally reflected faith in the power of national policy alignment through data, evidence and standards, they had much more antagonistic views when it came to aligning government roles, responsibilities and processes. This was especially the case among state policy actors, who expressed significant concerns that attempts to align such dimensions were really about aligning states and territories to federal agendas. Second, while policy actors viewed reforms stemming from the education revolution period as generating valuable forms of policy sharing, learning and collaboration, concerns were expressed by policy actors who said it is sometimes difficult to know who is steering the ship of national reform. State policy actors said attempts to forge collaboration and co-design have in some cases led to the further muddying of lines of responsibility and accountability, new forms of contestation and questions about who is in control. Third, I examine tensions regarding an apparent disconnect between what policy actors perceived to be the ‘ideal’ division of labour between governments and the ‘actually existing’ arrangements that now underpin schooling reform. Central here was that the national vision and governance processes generated since the education revolution grate uncomfortably against the realpolitik of Australian federalism and how policy actors imagine roles and responsibilities to ideally be arranged.
