Suchergebnisse

Among the main policy objectives recently reaffirmed by the European Community are the renewed European cooperation in the youth field and the emphasis on developing social capital, citizenship and participation. The need to give young people a more significant role in decision making processes, in particular in school contexts, has been acknowledged also in the educational research field. Focusing on evaluative school contexts, some researchers highlight that we need more active approaches to assessment and accountability, which afford a more significant role to stakeholders inside schoolcommunities, and in particular to students, the less listened voice in schools. Within this framework, the aim of this article is to build a new concept of school quality, drawing from how pupils in England, Italy and France answered the question 'what does make a good school?'. Qualitative data was collected by direct consultation with pupils through an open ended questionnaire in three middle schools, one of each country. ; Fra i principali obiettivi recentemente riaffermati dalla Comunità Europea emergono quelli relativi alla necessaria cooperazione comunitaria in contesto di politiche giovanili e l'enfasi sullo sviluppo del capitale sociale, della cittadinanza e della partecipazione. Anche in ambito di ricerca educativa, si sta oggi affermando l'idea che sia necessario assegnare ai giovani un ruolo maggiormente significativo all'interno dei processi decisionali, in particolare neicontesti scolastici. Focalizzando sui processi valutativi scolastici, alcuni autori sottolineano la necessità di adottare approcci maggiormente partecipativi, nell'ambito dei quali gli stakeholders possano assumere posizioni più rilevanti; ciò in particolare per gli studenti, le voci meno ascoltate nelle scuole. All'interno di questo framework, l'obiettivo dell'articolo è quello di presentare una ricerca volta a ricostruire il concetto di "qualità" della scuola, a partire dalle idee espresse dagli studenti che, in Inghilterra, Italia e Francia, ...

The need for policy makers to understand science and for scientists to understand policy processes is widely recognised. However, the science-policy relationship is sometimes difficult and occasionally dysfunctional; it is also increasingly visible, because it must deal with contentious issues, or itself becomes a matter of public controversy, or both. We suggest that identifying key unanswered questions on the relationship between science and policy will catalyse and focus research in this field. To identify these questions, a collaborative procedure was employed with 52 participants selected to cover a wide range of experience in both science and policy, including people from government, non-governmental organisations, academia and industry. These participants consulted with colleagues and submitted 239 questions. An initial round of voting was followed by a workshop in which 40 of the most important questions were identified by further discussion and voting. The resulting list includes questions about the effectiveness of science-based decision-making structures; the nature and legitimacy of expertise; the consequences of changes such as increasing transparency; choices among different sources of evidence; the implications of new means of characterising and representing uncertainties; and ways in which policy and political processes affect what counts as authoritative evidence. We expect this exercise to identify important theoretical questions and to help improve the mutual understanding and effectiveness of those working at the interface of science and policy.

The need for policy makers to understand science and for scientists to understand policy processes is widely recognised. However, the science-policy relationship is sometimes difficult and occasionally dysfunctional; it is also increasingly visible, because it must deal with contentious issues, or itself becomes a matter of public controversy, or both. We suggest that identifying key unanswered questions on the relationship between science and policy will catalyse and focus research in this field. To identify these questions, a collaborative procedure was employed with 52 participants selected to cover a wide range of experience in both science and policy, including people from government, non-governmental organisations, academia and industry. These participants consulted with colleagues and submitted 239 questions. An initial round of voting was followed by a workshop in which 40 of the most important questions were identified by further discussion and voting. The resulting list includes questions about the effectiveness of science-based decision-making structures; the nature and legitimacy of expertise; the consequences of changes such as increasing transparency; choices among different sources of evidence; the implications of new means of characterising and representing uncertainties; and ways in which policy and political processes affect what counts as authoritative evidence. We expect this exercise to identify important theoretical questions and to help improve the mutual understanding and effectiveness of those working at the interface of science and policy. ; ESRC