Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis is useful to explain and interpret the relationships between education policy discourse to the social meanings. Nevertheless, Fairclough‘s critical discourse analysis has not been actually vastly underutilized in Korean education policy analysis. This study starts in the critical mind that Fairclough‘s critical discourse analysis has not been introduced as research method of education policy. Thus this study is focus on the introduction of Fairclough's critical discourse analysis as one of the research methods of education policy. Fairclough's critical discourse analysis has developed as one of the critical discourse analysis approaches since 1990s. By 2000s, Fairclough introduced an analytical framework of 5 stages: stage 1: A social problem in its semiotic aspect, stage 2: Identify obstacles to it being tackled, stage 3: Does the social order 'need' the problem? stage 4: Possible ways past the obstacles, stage 5: Reflection on the analysis. Fairclough analysed the Green Paper on Welfare Reform to show how to use this analytical framework. Fairclough's critical discourse analysis is appropriate for critical policy analysis because it allows a detailed investigation of the relationships of policy discourse to social processes, power and ideology. Education policy analysis has been concentrated in 'the study for policy' in Korea. I expect that Fairclough‘s critical discourse analysis plays a role stimulating 'the study of policy'. But we also must try to get over limits of Fairclough‘s critical discourse analysis.