Search results

Using evidence from the Reguleduc European research experience, the pertinence of a “multilevel” international comparative analysis may be called into question. Reguleduc research, on one hand, links data on European educational systems’ modes of regulation collected from various empirical entry points (national, local academic spaces, and educational establishments) and, on the other hand, interprets the games of a number of actors at different levels from varied social perspectives. There is at once a recognition of necessity, partnered with an acknowledgement of the difficulties, of an international comparative analysis combining levels of analysis and contexts to observe and interpret change in modes of regulating school systems.

In October 2008, a group of international scholars met at Hohentuebingen Castle, in Tuebingen, Germany, to discuss issues of international governance in education. At that time, governance as an analytical concept was just beginning to be more widely discussed in German educational science. These discussions were primarily in the context of new forms of organizational steering and with regards to a changing embeddedness of national education systems attributed to processes of globalization and fiscal austerity. In addition, a large interdisciplinary research project located at the University of Bremen, TranState, was already exerting considerable international influence with a decidedly comparative perspective on those areas of German educational science. However, in this early phase, the debate on international governance in education was limited and focused heavily on emerging theories of governance, among colleagues at the University of Tuebingen, both at the Institute of Education as well as in other parts of the faculty. To me, Frank-Olaf Radtke was the key person who had first drawn my attention to educational governance, and I was especially grateful for having had the opportunity to continue our previous exchanges in the context of the Tuebingen meeting.

S. Karin Amos is professor of education with a special emphasis on comparative and multicultural education at the Eberhard Karls University at Tuebingen. Her research interests include the role of education in the construction of societal membership, transnational educational governance, and cultural studies and education.

The article deals with competition between primary schools in Berlin. The focus is on the perception of competition and the process of student selection – despite school law restrictions for primary state schools. The aim is to find out whether and in what way primary school leaders perceive a competitive situation and how they act in view of second-order competition.

Berlin primary school leaders' statements were analyzed, which were collected and evaluated using quantitative and qualitative methods.

Results show that schools with a good reputation are more likely to benefit from competition because a good reputation may increase the demand for spots at that school and may enable the school to select “desirable” students. State school leaders are more limited in their actions, while private school principals are more autonomous and are better able to make a match between a school's orientation and families' ideas.

The study is limited by its small sample size, yet it provides a basis for further research and gives much needed attention to selection processes at primary schools in Germany.

This is one of a few studies looking at the perspectives of primary school leaders regarding the competitive situation and in particular the selection of students.

The cosmetics retail industry in France is changing for at least two reasons: first, more and more services are available within cosmetics stores and, second, large groups like LVMH or Marionnaud are themselves looking for retail chains in order to exert greater control over their distribution systems. The findings from an exploratory study of several cosmetics retail companies operating in the French market seem to indicate that developing services is the best way of retaining business independence and resisting predators. Moreover, the development of new services leads these companies to implement plural form organisations. Many managerial and strategic advantages can be drawn from this type of organisation compared to pure franchise or company‐owned arrangements. A model is proposed to explain the evolution of organisational forms in cosmetics chains.