In this paper the distinction between subjective and objective concepts is used to analyse and evaluate the preferred form of policy implementation utilised in English post compulsory education and training sector (PCET). Drawing on the interpretation of Nagel offered by Gilbert and Lennon, the paper presents an account of experience that reminds us of the different implications of subjective and objective concepts. Avoiding objectiving accounts of mind, experience is defined in terms of reason giving role of its concepts. The distinction is drawn between experiences that are judged reasonable in terms of their conformity of rational norms and, crucially, experiences that are appropriate simply because they are the kind of things we do. The normality of the world we bring under the later kind of experiential concepts is brought to the fore. The contribution these concepts make to establishing and maintaining open conversation is discussed. The paper then applies this analytic account of experience to the task of analysing and evaluating policy implementation in the PCET sector. Drawing on systematic research into practitioner’s experience in this area the paper identifies a theme of practitioner disorientation, a sense of disengaged-engagement. A explanation for this state of affairs is offered in terms of the ubiquity of, what Ball has called, new public management (NPM) approaches to policy implementation. The way in which these NPM approaches encourage us to organise discussion is explored with reference back to the philosophical consideration of experience. It is argued that these strategies tend to promote objective approaches toward experience and thereby distort the nature of the conversational space. Specifically, they overlook the importance of subjective concepts and their role in making sense of the world. For example, expressions of feeling, mutually understandable, have a contribution to the conversation but are hard to accommodate within the conversational setting associated with NPM. And in so doing they misconstrue the way in which decisions are to be reached. That is, attending to subjective concepts draws on different resources when seeking to reach a decision. In summary, it is argued that the qualitative character of experience is insufficiently addressed in these NPM models. Practical ways in which practitioner experience could make a more substantial contribution to policy implementation are briefly discussed.

Philosophical treatment of experience. This treatment is applied to sociological research into practitioner experience of policy implementation in the Post Compulsory and and Education Sector. The systematic review process that identified the practitioner experiences considered was framed and quality assured by the EPPI Centre, University of London.

It is argued that new public management (NPM) approaches to policy implementation misconstrue the nature of experience. Consequently, the potential contribution of practitioners to local policy implementation is not being realised.