Suchergebnisse

published_or_final_version ; Comparative Asian Studies ; Master ; Master of Arts

Acknowledgments -- Contents -- Contributors -- Introduction: Evidence and Public Good in Educational Policy, Research, and Practice -- Evidence and Public Good in Educational Policy, Research, and Practice -- Focus of the Book -- Guiding Questions of the Book -- Chapter Contributions in the Book -- References -- Chapter 1: Understanding Public Good in the Context of Evidence Discourse in Education -- Introduction -- What Is Evidence? and What Constitutes Scientific Evidence? -- Practitioners and Policymakers' Definition and Use of Evidence -- Practitioners Definition and Use of Evidence -- Policymakers and Administrators' Definition and Use of Evidence -- Understanding Public Good in the Context of Evidence Discourse -- Conclusion and Recommendations -- References -- Chapter 2: Capturing the 'Evidence' and 'What Works' Agenda in Education: A Truth Regime and the Art of Manoeuvring Floating Signifiers -- Introduction -- Discourses, Genealogies and Floating Signifiers -- The Genealogy of 'Evidence' and 'What Works' Discourse in Education -- 'Evidence', 'What Works' and the Reconfiguration of Dominant Policy -- Thinking 'Evidence' and 'What Works' Differently: Exploring the Potentials of a Floating Signifier -- Evidence-Based or Evidence-Informed Knowledge and Professional Discretion -- Global Versus Local Forms of Evidence: Which Kind of Knowledge Is Relevant? -- External or Internal Evidence: Who Has the Decision-Making Powers to Require Which Knowledge Should Be Applied? -- Join the Struggle to Expand 'Evidence' and 'What Works'! -- References -- Chapter 3: What Is Evidence Required for and Who Generates That Evidence in the Finnish Educational System? -- Introduction: Public or Common Good and Evidence in the Finnish Context -- What Is Evidence for in the Finnish Context? -- The National Enhancement-Led Evaluation Policy

Pluralism, decentralization, deregulation, school autonomy, greater diversity and parent empowerment in education are among the new guiding principles in educational policy in numerous industrial countries. Whereas this paradigm shift reflects the advance of the market ideology into the education sector in other (particularly English-speaking) countries, the driving force behind this movement in Germany is rather the political system's loss of legitimation and the conflict-ridden state of educational policy. The first part of the article takes a retrospective view which links up to the analyses of Weiler. It shows that the former strategies for securing legitimation and regulating conflicts -involving science in the educational reform process, legalization and judicialization -have only been effective temporarily. Using the new Education Act of Hesse as example, the hypothesis is developed that the strategy of increasing parent empowerment and partially transferring regulatory powers and decision-making competence to individual schools will also not bring about the expected effects since this will not solve the structural problems of the German school system. In the second part of the article this thesis is elaborated within the framework of a differentiated analysis of the consequences of the structural problems as manifested in individual school types on local educational markets. (DIPF/Orig.) ; Pluralismus, Dezentralisierung, Deregulierung, Schulautonomie, größere Differenzierung und Stärkung der Eltern sind einige der neuen Leitprinzipien der Bildungspolitik in zahlreichen Industriestaaten. Während aber dieser Paradigmenwechsel in anderen Ländern das Eindringen der Marktideologie in den Bildungssektor widerspiegelt, ist in Deutschland die treibende Kraft hinter dieser Bewegung eher der Legitimationsverlust des politischen Systems und der konfliktbeladene Zustand der Bildungspolitik. Der erste Teil des Aufsatzes zeigt retrospektiv, dass die früheren Strategien der Legitimitätssicherung und Konfliktregulierung - nämlich die Wissenschaft in den Prozess der Bildungsreform einzubeziehen sowie die Verrechtlichung - nur zeitweise wirksam waren. Am Beispiel des neuen hessischen Schulgesetzes wird die Hypothese entwickelt, dass die Strategie der Stärkung der Elternrechte und die Strategie, Regelungsbefugnisse und Entscheidungskompetenzen teilweise auf die einzelne Schule zu verlagern, ebenfalls nicht die erwarteten Wirkungen zeigen wird, weil dies nicht die strukturellen Probleme des deutschen Schulsystems lösen wird. Im zweiten Teil des Aufsatzes wird diese These im Rahmen einer differenzierten Analyse der Folgen der Strukturprobleme ausgebreitet, wie sie sich in einzelnen Schularten auf den lokalen Bildungsmärkten manifestieren. (DIPF/Abstr. a. d. Engl. übers.)

In this article, we regard inclusive education as a policy phenomenon that contains a range ofideas about the purpose of education, the content of education and the organization ofeducation. As a political ideal expressed in policy, inclusive education competes with otherpolitical ideals regarding education, for instance economic discourses that prioritize effectivityand attainment as educational goals. Thus, inclusive education has to be realized in contextswhere available options for action are restricted by several and often contradictory educationalpolicies on different levels of the education system. We argue that while research anddebate about inclusive education are important, both are insufficient without analyses of thecontext of national educational policy. Any interpretation of inclusive education is necessarilysituated in a general education policy, and measures of what˜inclusive schools" aredependent upon for instance, political interpretation(s) of inclusive education, resourceallocation and political discourse on both local and national educational level. Here, we willprovide support for this argument through presentation of both research on inclusiveeducation, an alignment of prior analyses of Swedish national education policies and ourown analyses of government statements.

The articles in the International Journal of Education Development?s Special Edition facilitate critical policy dialogue about educational change in South Africa. Educational change in South Africa is of special interest for many reasons. First, it provides, as Soudien and Gilmour (1999) point out, an analysis of large-scale reform in Africa. Second, it furnishes much needed critical commentary about educational policy change in South Africa during the first fiver years of democratic rule (1994?1999). Finally, the review highlights valuable lessons for countries engaged in similar processes of large-scale educational change. Noting the instructive value of the Special Edition, I wish to, in this response, highlight a few aspects of educational change which complement and further the analysis provided in the various articles. I consider, in particular, the notion of the ?educational policy gap?, different policy phases, and issues the articles raise for debate. I conclude by suggesting the need for ?joined-up? policy analyses in South Africa, more and different voices to be heard in educational policy dialogue.

The purpose of this paper is to study the role of European and international organizations in educational policy and the governance of the European education space. It is argued that the influence of transnational and supranational organizations on the discourses and practices of education systems in the European Union contributes to the creation of a "Globally Structured Educational Agenda" whose main purpose is the linking of education systems to the services of the global economy. The educational policy of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) especially plays a crucial role in shaping the European education space by exploiting policy by numbers as a tool and way of governance. Special attention is given to the class of experts / technocrats who as policy actors that shape educational policy transform the European education space. It is also claimed that the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), a key policy tool with strong international influence, is considered to be an extremely important hub for the governance of European education by numbers, aiming to improve the quality of education systems. Additionally, it is argued that governing by data establishes the idea of Europe as a Knowledge Economy, an idea expressed in the strategic goal set out in 2000 by the European Council of Lisbon, "making the European Union the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world". On the other hand, this paper examines skepticism expressed by researchers over the increasing use of numbers for evaluating education systems, for they lead to the establishment of an audit culture and the creation of a global Panopticon in a "measurable" Europe of Knowledge, governed by numbers. Prospects for further research in the field of comparative education are examined, aiming to create different schemes for measuring the quality of education systems, where humanitarian values will be at the forefront.

As education becomes increasingly global, the processes and politics of transfer have become a central focus of research. This study provides a comprehensive analysis of contemporary theoretical and analytical work aimed at exploring international educational reform and reveals the myriad ways that globalization is now fundamentally altering our dominant conceptions. It illustrates how transfer has emerged to play a central part in policy formation processes worldwide, but also reveals critical differences between developed countries and aid-dependent developing states. This substantial breadt