Suchergebnisse

First published in 1982, Education and Power remains an important volume for those committed to critical education. In this text Michael Apple first articulated his theory on educational institutions and the reproduction of and resistance to unequal power relations, and provided a thorough examination of the ways in which race-gender-class dynamics are embedded in, and reflected through, curricular issues. While many of the theories set forward in this book are now taken for granted by the left in education, they were nothing short of revolutionary when first proposed. In this newly reissued c

One of the key ways that state governments pursue better higher education performance is through performance funding. It ties state funding directly to specific indicators of institutional performance, such as rates of graduation and job placement. This study considers the ways that performance funding systems in states with long-lasting systems have changed over time and what political and social conditions explain the changes. We analyze the experiences of two states: Tennessee, which pioneered performance funding in 1979; and Florida, which launched it in 1994. Funding for Tennessee's system has steadily increased over the years, whereas Florida's funding history has been more volatile and now provides much fewer dollars than when it was at its peak. Both Tennessee and Florida have changed their performance indicators substantially. But Florida added nine and dropped two in 12 years, while Tennessee added only six and dropped four over 31 years. Moreover, in Tennessee, performance indicators are added at the end of a regular five-year review, whereas in Florida they have been added irregularly, with no tie to a cyclical process of program reappraisal. Overall, Tennessee's performance funding system has been considerably more stable than Florida's because its initial policy design delineated much more clearly how the system was to be governed and changed over time, and provided for regular and systematic evaluation. Moreover, Tennessee's state legislature has played a smaller role in the ongoing development of performance funding than Florida's. These differences in policy process carry important implications. A system where funding levels do not oscillate greatly and indicators change more gradually and systematically is more likely to allow institutions to plan effectively. Further, such a system will have a more secure base of consent from institutions if it comes under attack.

Performance funding is a method of funding public institutions based not on inputs, such as enrollments, but on outcomes, such as retention, degree completion, and job placement. The principal rationale for performance funding has been that performance funding will prod institutions to be more effective and efficient, particularly in a time of increasing demands on higher education and increasingly straitened state finances. Critics of performance funding have warned that it could potentially provide state officials with an excuse to cut back on the regular state funding of higher education and at the same time provide college officials with an incentive to raise their retention and graduation rates by becoming more selective in their admissions. This report examines in detail the origins of state performance funding in six states: Florida, Illinois, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Washington. These states were chosen for analysis because they have considerably different state performance funding systems and histories as well as higher education governance arrangements, political systems, political cultures, and social characteristics—all of which enables the authors to look at the formation of state performance funding systems from a wide variety of angles. Interestingly, analysis reveals that there are striking similarities among these six states, particularly in terms of who were the main supporters and opponents, what beliefs animated them, and what political openings allowed policy entrepreneurs to put performance funding on the decision making agendas of state governments. This analysis yields some important lessons for policymakers, which are discussed at the conclusion of this paper.

Offering the first systematic, comparative examination of the origins of teachers' unions in two countries-France and the United States-Teaching Marianne and Uncle Sam shows how teachers' unions came into existence not because of the willful efforts of particular actors, but over the course of decades of conflict over the proper role of professional educators in public politics. Nicholas Toloudis traces teacher unionism back to the first efforts of governments to centralize public education. He carefully documents how centralization created new understandings of the role of teach.

AbstractIn this paper I show how modern democratic states are likely to be inimical to traditional liberal education. Drawing on theoretical considerations and recent history I show how any attempt to promote traditional educational values through state interventions, such as national curricula or state regulation, is bound to be illusory. The preservation of liberal education will best be served by the wholesale removal of education from the progressive state and its bureaucracies.

One of the key ways that state governments pursue better higher education performance is through performance funding. It ties state funding directly to specific indicators of institutional performance, such as rates of graduation and job placement. This report considers the ways that performance funding systems in states with long-lasting systems have changed over time and what political and social conditions explain the changes. We analyze the experiences of two states: Tennessee, which pioneered performance funding in 1979; and Florida, which launched it in 1994. Funding for Tennessee's system has steadily increased over the years, whereas Florida's funding history has been more volatile and now provides much fewer dollars than when it was at its peak. Both Tennessee and Florida have changed their performance indicators substantially. But Florida added nine and dropped two in 12 years, while Tennessee added only six and dropped four over 31 years. Moreover, in Tennessee, performance indicators are added at the end of a regular five-year review, whereas in Florida they have been added irregularly, with no tie to a cyclical process of program reappraisal. Overall, Tennessee's performance funding system has been considerably more stable than Florida's because its initial policy design delineated much more clearly how the system was to be governed and changed over time, and provided for regular and systematic evaluation. Moreover, Tennessee's state legislature has played a smaller role in the ongoing development of performance funding than Florida's. These differences in policy process carry important implications. A system where funding levels do not oscillate greatly and indicators change more gradually and systematically is more likely to allow institutions to plan effectively. Further, such a system will have a more secure base of consent from institutions if it comes under attack.

The eleventh in the 12-volume book series Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research, this work sets out to explore the interrelationship between ideology and education reforms, setting it in a global context. The book draws upon recent studies in the areas of globalisation, equity, and the role of the State. It explores conceptual frameworks and methodological approaches applicable in the research covering the State, globalisation, and education reforms.

The book represents a contribution to policy formulation and design in an increasingly knowledge economy in Zimbabwe. It challenges scholars to think about the role of education, its funding and the egalitarian approach to widening access to education. The nexus between education, democracy and policy change is a complex one. The book provides an illuminating account of the constantly evolving notions of national identity, language and citizenship from the Zimbabwean experience. The book discusses educational successes and challenges by examining the ideological effects of social, political and economic considerations on Zimbabwe's colonial and postcolonial education. Currently, literature on current educational challenges in Zimbabwe is lacking and there is very little published material on these ideological effects on educational development in Zimbabwe. This book is likely to be one of the first on the impact of social, political and economic meltdown on education. The book is targeted at local and international academics and scholars of history of education and comparative education, scholars of international education and development, undergraduate and graduate students, and professors who are interested in educational development in Africa, particularly Zimbabwe. Notwithstanding, the book is a valuable resource to policy makers, educational administrators and researchers and the wider community. Shizha and Kariwo's book is an important and illuminating addition on the effects of social, political and economic trajectories on education and development in Zimbabwe. It critically analyses the crucial specifics of the Zimbabwean situation by providing an in depth discourse on education at this historical juncture. The book offers new insights that may be useful for an understanding of not only the Zimbabwean case, but also education in other African countries. Rosemary Gordon, Senior Lecturer in Educational Foundations, University of Zimbabwe Rangingin temporal scope from the colonial era and its elitist legacy through the golden era of populist, universal elementary education to the disarray of contemporary socioeconomic crisis; covering elementary through higher education and touching thematically on everything from the pernicious effects of social adjustment programmes through the local deprofessionalization of teaching, this text provides a comprehensive, wide ranging and yet carefully detailed account of education in Zimbabwe. This engagingly written portrayal will prove illuminating not only to readers interested in Zimbabwe's education specifically but more widely to all who are interested in how the sociopolitical shapes education- how ideology, policy, international pressures, economic factors and shifts in values collectively forge the historical and contemporary character of a country's education. Handel Kashope Wright, Professor of Education, University of British Columbia

State appropriations have historically been the most important source of funding for higher education, but over the past two decades that support has waned. Between 1990 and 2010, real appropriations per full time equivalent student (FTE) declined by 26.1 percent, putting funding today at its lowest level since 1990. This report analyzes patterns in state appropriations for higher education across all 50 states for the 20-year period from 1988 to 2009, looking at a broad array of factors that influence budgetary decisions. This study evaluates the importance of those factors, grouping them into three categories of influence on the outcome of state funding for higher education: economic, political, and cultural. ; Demos ; Policy Brief

This paper investigates the role of government in providing education, especially at the regional and local level. The public (or semi-public) good nature of education and the presence of externalities in the production and consumption process can lead to situations of market failure. Consequently the market can be driven to solutions that are not socially efficient and that's the fundamental reason to defend the public provision of education. But there is also a role to be developed by the private school, in this market. Locally, the economic analysis points to an important public role in the provision of educational services, especially at the level of basic education. The justification is based mainly on grounds of fairness, that is, the more or less universal access to the benefits of education being the central issue. ; peer-reviewed