Search results

L'article analyse l'intérêt de la recherche en éducation pour la formation des élites qui se manifeste depuis la fin du XXe siècle. Sans méconnaître l'influence de la pensée néoconservatice portée par les pays anglo-saxons, il essaie de situer le débat dans une perspective plus longue, remontant au moins aux Lumières. La question « Comment l'école peut-elle assurer à la fois la formation de tous et la promotion des meilleurs ? » constitue un classique de la philosophie politique de l'éducation. Pour y répondre, chaque période a élaboré des compromis en fonction de la représentation que la société a d'elle-même et des dynamiques qu'elle souhaite promouvoir. Le texte s'attache particulièrement à la manière dont la tension est gérée aujourd'hui dans la perspective de « sociétés intégratrices » et au déclin d'une définition de l'élite liée à la tradition culturelle au profit d'une philosophie managériale du projet.

Le but de l'article est de déplacer les interrogations sur la crise du modèle de démocratisation en place depuis la fin de la Deuxième Guerre mondiale. Ce modèle est fondé sur une séparation de l'école et de la société. Ce qui était prôné comme une protection devient une perte de sens : les élèves d'origine populaire ne retrouvent pas leurs enjeux dans les « épreuves en papier » de l'école. Cette idée est illustrée par une analyse de la situation française et en particulier des résultats de la politique visant à amener 80 % d'une génération au niveau du baccalauréat. La croissance des résultats a été spectaculaire de 1985 à 1995. Depuis, la courbe flotte et tend même à décroître. Cette crise peut être interprétée dans un cadre plus large : le déclin de l'État-providence et la montée de l'État managérial. Celui-ci relève d'un nouveau modèle de démocratisation : plus de séparation entre le temps des études et le temps de la production, mais une formation tout au long de la vie ; une gouvernance en réseau qui fait une large place aux intérêts économiques... Paradoxalement, ce nouveau modèle qui correspond à la nouvelle organisation du capitalisme pourrait peut-être répondre plus adéquatement au désengagement des classes populaires que l'ancienne forme scolaire.

La France a vécu entre 1981 et 2003 une révolution copernicienne dans la conception de sa politique d'éducation. Elle a abandonné une conception où la justice et l'efficacité passaient par la centralisation et même la standardisation du système pour passer à une autre qui repose sur la prise en compte des spécificités locales et l'autonomie des établissements. L'article analyse la mise en place de ce nouveau référentiel. Il n'est certes pas de pure rhétorique mais l'ancienne culture demeure très forte. Quelle est donc sa puissance de mise en forme de la réalité? Quels sont aussi ses effets? Différents indicateurs montrent que les inégalités entre les établissements s'accroissent. Estce une conséquence de cette politique? Il introduit aussi une réflexion sur un glissement de sens. Au début des années 1980, l'autonomie des établissements a été présentée comme un moyen de rendre plus réelle la promesse d'égalité des chances portée par l'État-Providence. À la fin des années 1990, elle apparaît comme la base d'un mode de management qui s'inspire de celui qui a permis au capitalisme de sortir de la crise de 1973: des unités déconcentrées, une régulation locale par gouvernance, une structuration en réseau reposant sur des normes de qualité internationales. (DIPF/Orig.) ; Frankreich erlebte zwischen 1981 und 2003 eine kopernikanische Wende in der Konzeption der Bildungspolitik. Die Konzeption, in der Gerechtigkeit und Wirksamkeit durch Zentralisation, ja durch Standardisierung des Systems hergestellt werden sollte, wurde zugunsten einer anderen aufgegeben, die auf lokalen Spezifitäten und der Schulautonomie basiert. Der vorliegende Beitrag analysiert die Schaffung dieses neuen Referenzrahmens. Es ist sicher keine reine Rhetorik, dass die alte Kultur sehr stark geblieben ist. Aber wie gross ist ihr Einfluss noch, und welches sind die Wirkungen des neuen Referenzrahmens? Verschiedene Indikatoren zeigen, dass die Ungleichheiten zwischen den Schulen grösser werden. Ist das eine Konsequenz dieser neuen Politik? Es drängt sich auch ein Nachdenken über den Bedeutungswandel auf: Anfangs der 1980er-Jahre wurde die Schulautonomie als Möglichkeit präsentiert, das Versprechen des Wohlfahrtsstaates auf Chancengerechtigkeit besser realisieren zu können. Am Ende der 1990er-Jahre erscheint sie als Grundlage einer Managementmethode, die sich an den Methoden orientiert, mit denen es dem Kapitalismus möglich war, die Krise von 1973 zu überwinden: mit dezentralen Einheiten, einer lokalen Verwaltungsregulierung und einer Organisationsstruktur, die sich an internationalen Qualitätsnormen orientiert. (DIPF/Orig.)

1. Introduction / Romuald Normand and Jean-Louis Derouet -- 2. Standards and standardisation in European politics of education / Paolo Landri -- 3. Policy transfers in Europe : the European Union and beyond / Magdalena Hadjiisky -- 4. The praise of mutual surveillance in Europe / Luis Miguel Carvalho and Estela Costa -- 5. Policy learning and expertise in European education / Romuald Normand -- 6. Ranking and the structuration of a transnational field of higher education / Niilo Kauppi -- 7. Higher education : from unclear technologies to human resources management techniques / Jean-Emile Charlier and Sarah Croche -- 8. Universities, the risk industry and capitalism : a political economy critique / Susan L. Robertson and Chris Muellerleile -- 9. 'Silencing the disbelievers' : games of truth and power struggles around fact-based management / Isabelle Bruno -- 10. Compliance and contestation in the neoliberal university : reflecting on the identities of UK social scientists / Alan Cribb, Sharon Gewirtz and Aniko Horvath -- 11. Losing the plot, plotting the lost : politics, Europe, and the rediscovery of lifelong learning / John Holford -- 12. How are European lifelong learning systems changing? An approach in terms of public policy regimes / Eric Verdier.

After the Second World War, the OECD promoted the idea – which had begun to emerge between the wars in various European countries – that the creation of a comprehensive school system, bringing together all children from age 6 to 15 or 16, was the precondition for the democratisation of society and economic progress. This model was implemented very differently from one country to another. The ideal has now ended in disenchantment. Almost everywhere, the schooling of 11 to 15-year-olds is seen as the weak link in educational systems, a site of violence and suffering for pupils and teachers. A new system is being put in place, which some call post-comprehensive. Without abandoning the concern for equality, the international organisations are foregrounding a new system of reference based on performance obligations: skills standards, international comparisons through which each country's performance can be judged in a context of competition. The debate has moved on: the American New Right places its hopes in the market; the European texts propose several readjustments of the social-democratic compromise: an equality of performances which takes the form of the definition of key skills; an attempt at compromise between the ideal of redistribution, the imperatives of performance and the creation of a collective consciousness in pluriethnic and pluricultural societies which takes the form of the idea of inclusive societies. The comprehensive school and the debates surrounding it are liable to be overtaken before being analysed. A retrospective analysis seems necessary to do justice to the efforts that have been made. The way societies organise their educational system is a key element in the production and transformation of the social. This special double issue of the European Educational Research Journal examines the current state of the comprehensive model in Europe and formulates the hypothesis of a post-comprehensive era; in so doing, it addresses the fundamental problem area of the relationship between education and society(ies). It was this aim of retrospective analysis that inspired the organisation, at the European Conference on Educational Research (ECER) in Porto in 2014, of a symposium on "The emergence of a post-comprehensive school in Europe? The role of social science journals in constructing a reflexive and critical analysis". This was followed by a call for contributions for this EERJ dossier, "Re-examining the comprehensive school project in Europe." The aim of that invitation and of this ensuing double issue is to offer a European perspective on the question of the comprehensive school. There were 21 responses to the call; ten articles were selected after review. Together they provide a wide-ranging view of the situation.

After the Second World War, the OECD promoted the idea – which had begun to emerge between the wars in various European countries – that the creation of a comprehensive school system, bringing together all children from age 6 to 15 or 16, was the precondition for the democratisation of society and economic progress. This model was implemented very differently from one country to another. The ideal has now ended in disenchantment. Almost everywhere, the schooling of 11 to 15-year-olds is seen as the weak link in educational systems, a site of violence and suffering for pupils and teachers. A new system is being put in place, which some call post-comprehensive. Without abandoning the concern for equality, the international organisations are foregrounding a new system of reference based on performance obligations: skills standards, international comparisons through which each country's performance can be judged in a context of competition. The debate has moved on: the American New Right places its hopes in the market; the European texts propose several readjustments of the social-democratic compromise: an equality of performances which takes the form of the definition of key skills; an attempt at compromise between the ideal of redistribution, the imperatives of performance and the creation of a collective consciousness in pluriethnic and pluricultural societies which takes the form of the idea of inclusive societies. The comprehensive school and the debates surrounding it are liable to be overtaken before being analysed. A retrospective analysis seems necessary to do justice to the efforts that have been made. The way societies organise their educational system is a key element in the production and transformation of the social. This special double issue of the European Educational Research Journal examines the current state of the comprehensive model in Europe and formulates the hypothesis of a post-comprehensive era; in so doing, it addresses the fundamental problem area of the relationship between education and society(ies). It was this aim of retrospective analysis that inspired the organisation, at the European Conference on Educational Research (ECER) in Porto in 2014, of a symposium on "The emergence of a post-comprehensive school in Europe? The role of social science journals in constructing a reflexive and critical analysis". This was followed by a call for contributions for this EERJ dossier, "Re-examining the comprehensive school project in Europe." The aim of that invitation and of this ensuing double issue is to offer a European perspective on the question of the comprehensive school. There were 21 responses to the call; ten articles were selected after review. Together they provide a wide-ranging view of the situation.

After the Second World War, the OECD promoted the idea – which had begun to emerge between the wars in various European countries – that the creation of a comprehensive school system, bringing together all children from age 6 to 15 or 16, was the precondition for the democratisation of society and economic progress. This model was implemented very differently from one country to another. The ideal has now ended in disenchantment. Almost everywhere, the schooling of 11 to 15-year-olds is seen as the weak link in educational systems, a site of violence and suffering for pupils and teachers. A new system is being put in place, which some call post-comprehensive. Without abandoning the concern for equality, the international organisations are foregrounding a new system of reference based on performance obligations: skills standards, international comparisons through which each country's performance can be judged in a context of competition. The debate has moved on: the American New Right places its hopes in the market; the European texts propose several readjustments of the social-democratic compromise: an equality of performances which takes the form of the definition of key skills; an attempt at compromise between the ideal of redistribution, the imperatives of performance and the creation of a collective consciousness in pluriethnic and pluricultural societies which takes the form of the idea of inclusive societies. The comprehensive school and the debates surrounding it are liable to be overtaken before being analysed. A retrospective analysis seems necessary to do justice to the efforts that have been made. The way societies organise their educational system is a key element in the production and transformation of the social. This special double issue of the European Educational Research Journal examines the current state of the comprehensive model in Europe and formulates the hypothesis of a post-comprehensive era; in so doing, it addresses the fundamental problem area of the relationship between education and ...