Search results

Over the past two decades, scholars have noted an increasing global convergence in the policy and practice of education that predominantly contains Western ideals of mass schooling serving as a model for national school systems (Bieber & Martens, 2011; Goldthorpe, 1997; Spring, 2008). A number of transnational organizations contribute disproportionately to global educational discourse, particularly the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) through its international comparative performance measure, the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). This study conducted a critical discourse analysis of the OECD document PISA 2012 Results: Excellence through Equity (OECD, 2013) to examine the ways that PISA and the OECD conceive of educational equity in a global context. Given the growing convergence of global educational policy, the way that transnational educational organizations address equity has crucial implications for the ways that the world intervenes in schooling to promote or diminish equitable outcomes. Analysis revealed that the OECD and the PISA foreground economistic notions of educational equity, which diminishes the role of other factors (i.e., race/ethnicity, gender, immigration status, language) that mediate equity in schools. Findings and implications are discussed.

This study aims to explore how educational leaders in South Korea adopted equity mindsets and how they organized changes to support students' deeper learning during COVID-19.

The authors developed a comprehensive framework of Equity Leadership for Deeper Learning, by revising the existing model of Darling-Hammond and Darling-Hammond (2022) and synthesizing equity leadership literature. Drawing upon this framework, this study analyzed data collected from individual interviews and a focus group with school and district administrators in the K-12 Korean education system.

The participants prioritized an equity stance of their leadership by critically understanding socio-political conditions, challenging unjust policies, and envisioning the big picture of equity-centered education. This led them to operationalize equity leadership in practice and create a more inclusive and supportive environment for student-centered deeper learning. District leaders established well-resourced systems by creating/developing instructional resources and making policies more useful. School leaders promoted quality teaching by strengthening access, developing student-centered curricula, and establishing individualized programs for more equitable deeper learning.

This study builds on scholarship of deeper learning and equity leadership by adding evidence from Korean educational leaders during COVID-19. First, the findings highlight the significance of leaders' equity mindsets in creating a safe and inclusive environment for deeper learning. This study further suggests that sharing an equity stance as a collective norm at the system level, spanning across districts and schools is important, which is instrumental to scale up innovation and reform initiatives. Second, this research also extends comparative, culturally informed perspectives to understand educational leadership. Most contemporary leadership theories originated from and are informed by Western and English-speaking contexts despite being widely applied to other contexts across the culture. This study's analysis underscores the importance of contextualizing leadership practices within the socio-historical contexts that influence how education systems are established and operate.

Leaders' adopting equity mindsets, utilizing bureaucratic resources in creative ways and implementing a school-wide quality curriculum are crucial to supporting students' deeper learning. District leaders can leverage existing vertical and horizontal networks to effectively communicate with teachers and local communities to establish well-recourced systems. As deeper learning is timeless and requires high levels of student engagement, school leaders' efforts to establish school-wide curricula is critical to facilitate deeper learning for students.

The study provides a nuanced understanding of how equity focused leaders responded to difficulties caused by the pandemic and strategized to support students' deeper learning. Existing studies tend to prioritize teacher effects on student learning, positing leadership effects as secondary or indirect. Alternatively, the authors argue that, without leadership supporting an inclusive environment, resourceful systems and student-centered school culture, deeper learning cannot be fully achieved in equitable ways.

This chapter undertakes a comparative analysis of discourses on equity found in OECD and Norwegian policy documents. This is an interesting area to study as the OECD is found to be an important agenda setter for many countries' educational policies. A comparative analysis of OECD and Norwegian educational policies is especially interesting because the OECD is often found to be pressing for a neo-liberal agenda, while Norway has a socialist-alliance government. Combining Basil Bernstein's theoretical framework with key principles from Critical Discourse Analysis, the author investigates power relations within OECD and Norwegian educational policy documents. Two equity models serve as analytical tools: equity through equality and equity through diversity, which can be described along the three dimensions: de-/centralization, de-/standardization and de-/specialization. Using the analysis of two key documents on equity in education from the OECD and Norway, the author points out the similarities and differences in two documents. Both the OECD and Norwegian approaches to equity in education can be related to a centralized decentralization or a conservative modernization of education. However, there are also important differences between the two documents. For example, the Norwegian ministry has more emphasis on equity through equality and is less influenced by neo-liberalism and authoritarian populism than the OECD. In conclusion, the author argues that neither of the two described approaches appears to improve the inequities in education. A different way of targeting these inequities could be based on critical theory and research.

Our chapter addresses the balance assessment professionals must strike in supporting academic freedom, shared governance practices, and learning improvement efforts within colleges and universities in the United States. Specifically, we address how assessment professionals (faculty or staff whose primary job involves accreditation or the assessment of student learning) can encourage increased educational equity while supporting academic freedom. The authors offer a unique perspective. As former faculty members, current assessment practitioners, and a current academic administrator, we work to ensure that our institutions are using assessments of student learning to improve learning for all students. This work gives us insight into the ways in which assessment information shapes institutional efforts, balancing the rights of faculty to control the curriculum with the rights of historically underserved students (including students from underserved ethnic or racial groups, first generation college students, students from low-income households, and students with special needs or disabilities) to receive a quality education. We propose that one solution to this apparent conflict is to provide faculty with data that allow them to analyze the ways in which their assessment choices influence educational equity. To contextualize our work in this area we summarize institutional and faculty freedoms and discuss areas of conflict. We then describe ways to reduce areas of conflict by creating a culture of inquiry that centers around consideration of data and opportunities to modify assessments to increase educational equity.

Different interpretations of what constitutes educational equity have shaped public policies and practices for students with disabilities over the past century. These differences are apparent in the clash between access to education as defined in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE), and access to more intensive educational services which smaller special education classrooms are designed to provide. This chapter examines these differences within the context of how services have historically been provided and how students have been assessed and have achieved academically. Specifically, this chapter also describes relevant literature and current data related to services and outcomes for youth with disabilities. We describe academic and behavioral interventions and strategies that have been used in different settings. We conclude by offering recommendations for future research in developing effective interventions to help close the achievement gap and move toward true educational equity.

The purpose of this paper is threefold: to describe the equity-oriented design of a publicly accessible and openly networked computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) initiative that has supported educator discussion about equity topics; to identify design principles for equity-oriented design in open education; and to propose a model for the design of open learning initiatives that are mutually committed to educational equity and educational openness.

This paper draws from design-based research methodology, specifically design narrative and the worked example. The paper is one response to the need for more “designerly work” in the learning sciences, generally, and more specifically in domains such as CSCL.

Four design principles are identified that informed the equity-oriented creation and iteration of the Marginal Syllabus, an open CSCL initiative: leveraging the open web, fostering multi-stakeholder partnerships, working with open content and engaging professional learning as an open practice. This paper also advances the open palimpsests model for equity-oriented design in open education. The model integrates design principles to assist CSCL and open education designers and researchers in creating or iterating projects to be more equity-oriented learning opportunities.

This paper’s design narrative identifies Marginal Syllabus design principles and advances the open palimpsests model for equity-oriented design in open education. The design narrative demonstrates how critical perspectives on the relationship between equity and digital technology can encourage collaboration among diverse project stakeholders, attune to the dynamics of power and agency and respond to the worldly needs of partners and participants.

This paper aims to share responses from current literature, a small case study about perceptions and practices of the school of education faculty toward multicultural and educational issues concerning the rapid rise in online environments during coronavirus (COVID-19) experiences and just-in-time strategies for addressing digital equity and educational inclusion in K-16 online educational settings.

This is a conceptual paper that emerged from an action research case study. The study included four faculty in an urban school of education. The faculty participants were asked to provide examples of educational inclusion strategies used during transitioning their courses and advising to online environments in a Research I university. Faculty included one educational leadership, one sports management, one special education and one teacher education professor. Central issues explored practices related to language, technology access, curriculum design and technological competencies and assessment. A driving question was: How do institutions, schools or educators provide learning opportunities to support digital equity and inclusive education practice to maintain and strengthen relationships and core practices of multicultural education during a time of physical distancing during COVID-19? And what are the experiences, barriers, successes?

Research-based transformative knowledge, real situations and practical resources for considering inclusive education curriculum concepts were found that are connecting educators, teachers, learners and communities during this time of crisis.

Methodological limitations that influenced the research design include conducting research in a totally virtual environment, small sample size, lack of diversity in curriculum content and one research site. The data collection was limited to written responses from the faculty participants. This action research study took place in a time frame limited by COVID-19 conditions during a four-month period.

In theory and practice, this new online movement suggests learners, teachers, educators and leaders are gaining experience and knowledge about resources and strategies for using new technologies, assessments and flexible curriculum as powerful tools for building language, curriculum and social-cultural communication bonds across generations and including special needs populations. Such new and emerging strategies could be used to bridge gaps in a time of distancing to support inclusive and equitable learning environments in education to minimize the effects of an emergent COVID-19 digital divide. Social learning culture as constructed, performed and captured in patterns of cooperation among faculties shows the world becoming more open and less restricted by borders. In conclusion, an emerging new conceptual framework is presented in Figure 2 to support action planning to bridge the digital equity access and learning gaps created by COVID-19.

It is in times of strife and difficulty that problems and issues become exacerbated. While some educators easily adapted and took on the challenges of online learning, others needed time for learning and mourning (literally and figuratively). The issues of equity and access have become even more apparent as this paper takes inventory of intersections between multicultural education, special education, sports education and K-16 education overall. This is an excellent time to reflect on how education can address the cultural, economic and social barriers that impact student learning globally for all learners.

The brief collective case study reports educational experiences during a time of crisis that stimulates creative and innovative approaches to creating inclusive and equitable online learning environments to address diverse learning needs. The various and often contrasting educator responses from faculty facing digital and educational challenges present ideas that might be applicable in the global learning environment beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

Does education affect economic outcomes, and if so, how? Does education finance interact with public policy? And how does education finance policy contribute to the development of a new strategic planning for the next generation, if at all? This chapter reviews recent conceptual and methodological developments in the field of economics and finance of education. The review covers these two major topics and is divided into three sections. First is an overview of the field, including current trends in economics of education in both developed and developing countries. This section incorporates themes such as returns to investment in education, costs of education, education and economic growth, and education market, choice, and incentives. The second section focuses on finance of education and current debates on equality, equity, and efficiency in educational finances. The third section presents summary and discussion. The discussion will bring to light the issues, challenges, opportunities, and future directions of the field. Where appropriate, examples and empirical evidence from both developing and developed countries are presented.

Outlines a framework for social justice, describes both the social and educational context of South Africa, highlights inequitable funding practices, and then advocates for policy changes in the form of vertical equity.

Provides a retrospective review of mandated segregation by race to hypothetical de‐segregation by post‐apartheid policies to de facto re‐segregation by class, in the “new” South Africa.

Describes how overt racism in the form of apartheid laws has been replaced by covert racism and class domination in the form of school fees.

Reveals how “new” educational injustices are preventing poor and marginalized groups from getting universal access to high‐quality education in the “new” South Africa.