Description: The topic of the paper is the formation of a policy on personalized learning in England and attempts to export it to other European nations. The phrase, 'personalized services', a meta concept linked with the 'knowledge economy' and post-Fordism, began to be used in a policy context in England in 1998. It was seen by New Labour as means to reform public services. At the same time there was a revival in the use of individual learning in ministerial speeches and education policy documents. This had strong but not exclusive Information and Communication Technology (ICT) connotations. During 2003, individual learning was replaced by personalized learning, which was held to have some connections to the broader aim of personalized services. Personalized learning was a top-down initiative formulated by ideologists of the knowledge economy who held a normative version of post Fordism but who had no experience of or base within the education system. The reaction from many within the education system to personalized learning was one of bemusement. It was articulated by Ministers to strategies as diverse as enabling classroom assistants to teach classes in schools and to gaining acceptance for identity cards. The policy appeared to have no content. It was an empty sign with many connotations but it denoted nothing. Into this vacuum have entered a number of diverse groups ranging from headteachers who saw it as a way to gain more autonomy from the state educational apparatus to de-schoolers who would abolish the state educational apparatus altogether. ICT companies like Apple and Microsoft have joined the debate along with ICT oriented organizations like BECTA and Futurelab. The OECD has participated in a conference on it and it now has support in the Netherlands. The Personalized learning is analysed in terms of a political spectacle. This is Murray Edelman's notion that politics and policy are matters of symbol, myth, and spectacle constructed for the public. While the policy is now producing material effects, budgets and posts amongst them, the public are at best actors in a spectacle written by powerful others. Methodology: The methods employed are content analysis and critical discourse analysis of documents many of which are only on-line. these include Parliamentary debates, ministerial speeches, speeches by the Prime minister, and publications of think tanks like DEMOS and organisations like the National College for School Leadership. For the attempt to export the notion to Europe, OECD documents, particularly those of the Scenarios Project, have beeen analysed alongside those of the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust and its International Networking for Education Transformation (iNet) arm. In addition, documents from various other organizations, teacher unions, interest groups and the professional press have been examined. Conclusions: It is concluded that personalised learning will probably disappear from policy discourse on education fairly rapidly but that it will enter the European educational lexicon where it will be read in multiple ways. Before it does so in england its meanings will congeal around attempts to introduce more differentaition into the school system under the banner of choice and flexibility.