The chapter explores the intriguing world of framing, demonstrating how societal perceptions of individuals and groups can be dramatically altered through the strategic application of narrative techniques. This chapter delves into the nuanced process by which certain entities are morally repainted, transforming perceived ‘sinners’ into ‘saints’ and vice versa, effectively reshaping public opinion. It sheds light on the psychological underpinnings and societal mechanisms that make these shifts possible, such as our inherent in-group biases and the persuasive power of media narratives. Through a series of compelling case studies, the chapter reveals the dual nature of framing: its ability to redeem the tarnished images of some while casting shadows on the reputations of others. This analysis raises important questions about the ethical boundaries of such practices, highlighting the thin line between legitimate persuasion and manipulative propaganda. By the end of the chapter, readers are encouraged to critically assess the framing narratives encountered in daily life, recognizing the complexity and ethical considerations inherent in categorizing individuals or groups as morally ‘good’ or ‘bad.’ The chapter serves as a call to be more mindful of the framing effects that shape our perceptions and judgments, urging a balanced and informed approach to understanding the moral landscapes we navigate

The chapter explores the intriguing phenomenon where individuals and societies are drawn towards ‘rough’ frames, challenging the conventional preference for ‘smooth’ frames associated with positivity and desirability. The chapter delves into the psychological and social underpinnings that make the rough, the rebellious, and the unconventional appealing, suggesting that such attractions can stem from a quest for authenticity, a desire to signal individuality, or a response to societal monotony. By examining various examples, including cultural shifts towards embracing the grittier aspects of life and the rise of movements that glorify the raw and unrefined, the chapter demonstrates how rough frames can catalyse significant social change and foster deep connections among individuals rallying against the status quo. It further explores the role of media and popular culture in amplifying the allure of the rough, while also cautioning against the potential for manipulation and the blurring of ethical boundaries. Ultimately, the chapter suggests that the fascination with rough frames reveals much about human complexity, signalling a deeper yearning for meaning, authenticity, and belonging in an increasingly sanitized world. The narrative encourages readers to engage with the frames that shape their perceptions critically, recognizing the power of rough textures to inspire, challenge, and transform. Top of Form Bottom of Form

The chapter serves as a comprehensive reflection on the multifaceted nature of framing, addressing key questions raised throughout the book. This chapter explores whether framing merely simplifies reality or can both enlighten and deceive. It discusses the common practice of binary categorization, such as labelling products as eco-friendly or not, and the implications of such framing for consumer behaviour and environmental impact. Additionally, it delves into the framing of psychological and psychiatric variations, challenging traditional binary classifications of mental health. The chapter emphasizes the complexity of framing, highlighting its role in simplifying or complicating reality depending on the context and the observer’s perspective. By examining the esoteric nature of some discussions and the role of art in transcending factual accuracy to evoke deeper emotions, the chapter showcases framing’s dual function at both overt and subtle levels. Through engaging narratives and critical analysis, it underscores the importance of mastering framing mechanisms to navigate the complexities of communication and social interaction, advocating for a nuanced understanding that goes beyond the dichotomy of truth and falsehood.

The chapter explores the strategic influence of narrative levels to subtly alter the perception and importance of topics within the public discourse. This chapter introduces the concept of up–down positioning as a framing technique that either elevates the significance of certain issues or diminishes their perceived importance. Detailed analysis showcases how this method is employed across various spheres, including politics, media, and social movements, to spotlight or sideline specific topics. By manipulating the narrative focus, actors can obscure critical underlying issues or trivialize significant ones, effectively shaping public awareness and engagement. The chapter further examines the dual aspect of up–down positioning: obscuring the underlying level to draw attention away from foundational concerns and obscuring the surface level to minimize the apparent relevance of pressing issues. It argues that understanding and critically evaluating these framing tactics is essential for navigating the complex landscape of modern information and for fostering a more informed and engaged public discourse. Through engaging examples and a critical examination of framing’s power, the chapter calls for a more nuanced engagement with the narratives that shape our perception of the world.

This chapter explores the transformative potential of metaframing in bridging divergent perspectives to foster a shared understanding and collaboration across various domains. The chapter delves into metaframing as a higher-order process that transcends traditional boundaries, whether disciplinary, ideological, or cultural, to uni commonalities and synergies that might not be apparent at first glance. Illustrating examples from science, religion, and interdisciplinary fields demonstrates how metaframing can lead to innovative collaborations and novel insights, particularly in addressing complex global challenges like climate change and public health. This process, as highlighted through initiatives that combine scientific inquiry with religious and moral frameworks, emphasizes the mutual enrichment that can arise from such engagements. The chapter argues for the necessity of metaframing in today’s increasingly interconnected and complex world, where the capacity to integrate diverse viewpoints and knowledge systems is crucial for generating comprehensive solutions and fostering a more inclusive and understanding global community. Through a critical examination of metaframing practices, the chapter advocates for a deliberate and respectful approach to engaging with difference, suggesting that the path to collective progress and ethical action lies in our ability to construct and navigate these higher-order frames.

This chapter investigates the framing technique of sideways positioning, which shifts the narrative focus across different dimensions or aspects of an issue, altering its perceived relevance and significance. This strategy involves moving discussions from one domain to another – for example, from economic to ethical considerations or from environmental impact to personal health benefits – thereby changing the frame through which an issue is viewed. Through this lateral shift, the chapter illustrates how public attention is redirected to different facets of a topic, influencing perceptions and actions in subtle yet profound ways. The technique is particularly effective in sustainable consumption, where arguments might shift between the moral imperatives of ethical consumption and the aesthetic appeal of eco-friendly products. The chapter underscores the potency of sideways positioning in framing debates, highlighting its ability to reshape the narrative landscape and alter the grounds upon which discussions are based. By examining various case studies, including the strategic repositioning of issues within supply chains and the intersection of aesthetics and ethics, the chapter emphasizes the nuanced, multidirectional nature of framing and its significant impact on public discourse and decision-making.

This introduction explores the evolution and exponential growth of the academies programme as both a policy and social intervention over past 12 years. The chapter covers the development of the Multi-Academy Trust framework and how Local Authorities are remade. Through this process, historical moral panics around education provision and Thatcherite reforms are revisited and tied to an increasingly authoritarian present. The rationales used to support academisation are fluctuating and highly contingent, as the chapter explores how academisation ties to neoliberalism as it relocates schools from the public sphere to a less accessible patchwork of privatised spaces while also claiming to promote social justice. England displays a hyper-realised version of a wider international policy reform movement, whereby this reform strategy relies on evidencing continual progress through comparable quantifiable data presented as objective and neutral. This chapter emphasises how the book steers away from reductive quantitative measures to train its focus on a careful qualitative attention to the everyday life of academy schools across England. The chapter interrogates how knowledge is produced and attempts to destabilise dominant narratives by highlighting how critical qualitative and ethnographic methodologies can yield crucial insights into the project of academisation.

England has long been a ‘laboratory’ for experimenting with structured incentives to compel, among other configurations, the organisation of schools as businesses. The focus of this chapter concerns a recent market-based experiment in education in England called the academies programme. The academies programme makes it possible for schools to operate outside their Local Education Authorities (LEAs) as private enterprises or ‘state-funded independent schools’ with significant responsibility for management and accountability delegated to school leaders and governors. From this perspective, the academies programme is a continuation of the idea of ‘co-steering’ or ‘co-governance’ inasmuch as academy status removes the requirement for the administration of ‘needs’ through the bureaucratic centralism of LEAs and instead empowers schools to consensually work with stakeholders to produce flexible, responsive models of service delivery. Yet, as this chapter shows, school autonomy among academies is conditional on the attraction of suitably skilled school leaders and governors who can effectively deploy prescriptions and solutions for ‘effective governance’, which includes conditioning certain people to stay out of governance. In some cases, academy structures resemble the same techno-bureaucratic settlements they were meant to replace and improve, namely LEAs, albeit lacking the mandate or incentives to provide strong democratic accountability based on principles of citizen participation and community voice (Wilkins, 2016, 2019a). The suggestion here is that the academies programme has become a target of political control from the centre and business saturation despite claims that academy status works to depoliticise and deregulate schools.

Inclusion has been a key concern for researchers exploring the impact of free schools in England since their introduction in 2010. However, discussions of inclusion have mostly centred on structural issues of social justice and equality, more specifically whether free schools are located in disadvantaged neighbourhoods, whether schools operate fair and inclusive admission policies, and whether parents and children of disadvantaged backgrounds are equally able to access the schools. Not much has been written about what actually happens at the schools in terms of more micro-level day-to-day practices and interactions. This chapter reports on a project carried out at a secondary free school in 2016–2018, using qualitative and ethnographic methods to examine the views and experiences of teachers, school staff, parents and children, particularly in relation to inclusion and children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND). With reference to social capital theory, the chapter discusses the extent to which the school was able to use its free school status and particular ‘freedoms’ to foster inclusive practice and strategies. The chapter critically considers the free school programme in relation to the inclusion of SEND students, but also explores the possibility that mainstream schools may draw on experiences developed within free schools to strengthen inclusive practices and strategies. The chapter furthermore outlines the main challenges experienced by staff in developing an inclusive school and reflects on some of the difficulties of fostering inclusion within an increasingly competitive and performance based educational system.