Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore the governance of educational reform, as an interpretive process – “interpretive governance” – through a case study of five superintendents living in a predominantly Swedish-speaking region in Finland.

To foreground superintendents’ perspectives on reforms as simultaneously reflective and constitutive of governance processes, the research applies and extends Rhodes’ (2012) notions of “network governance,” “meta-governance” and “interpretive governance.” Interpretive governance, an underresearched area, is construed as particularly important for developing better insights into how school reform is understood by key actors involved in its enactment.

The research identifies what are described as three “deliberative” dimensions of interpretive governance; these modes of governance are elaborated as “dialogic,” “directive” and “defensive” in nature.

The study reveals senior educators’ interpretations of governance as multifaceted, and argues that these complex modes of deliberation need to be taken into account to better understand how school development is understood and enacted in municipal and school settings.

This study investigated the conceptions of governance that informed the practices of school trustees, and considered the extent to which those conceptions matched the policy imperatives that shaped New Zealand's school governance framework.

Semi‐structured interviews were undertaken with 32 participants in the governance of New Zealand primary schools. The interviews were structured around four scenarios that described the work of a hypothetical Board. For each scenario, the participants were asked to rate how well the Board did its job and then asked to explain their ratings.

Conceptions of good governance were dominated by concerns about the quality of relationships and the effectiveness and efficiency of task completion. There was little evidence that educational or democratic values shaped governance activity.

These findings were derived from a small sample of 32 participants, drawn from a disadvantaged, multi‐cultural community. While their generalizability to all New Zealand primary school should not be assumed, the similarity of these themes to those reported in prior New Zealand surveys suggests that this sample may not be atypical.

The originality of this study is that it presents a methodology for discovering the extent to which key policy ideas are reflected in the understanding of those who are intended to carry them out.

Throughout Latin America, policy-makers are struggling to reconcile two conflicting political pressures: (i) the push to become more globally competitive on the basis of international assessments such as the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), and (ii) the simultaneous need to address long-standing, entrenched inequities in both educational quality and access throughout much of the region. This chapter documents how policy-making elites throughout Latin America are trying to address these two goals by incorporating “evidence-based” policy solutions that can be empirically defended as promoting equity. However, scholars throughout Latin America argue that instead of promoting equity, an increasing focus on accountability in educational policy at the national level throughout the region has resulted instead in a shift in priorities from the governance of educational systems to evaluation of those systems, with the state functioning primarily as an Evaluative State. This argument is developed through secondary analysis of the Hispanophone and Lusophone academic education literatures of Latin America, whose robust and rigorous studies of these trends at both national and regional levels remain little explored within the Anglophone academic tradition.

This chapter considers the commitment of gender equality at universities and how it is expressed and measured via a gender equality scorecard. The Gender Equality Scorecard is seen as an accountability measure that seeks to build awareness of the magnitude of the problem (if it exists), interpret the meaning of the (in)equities, and move to action. It is regarded as a supportive mechanism to the development and implementation of a Gender Policy as articulated in The UWI Strategic Plan, 2012–2017. The development of a Scorecard is also seen as an example of collaborative governance in action that fosters engagement, commitment, and action across an institution. The proposed model draws upon the experiences of the Gender Equity Scorecards used by international development agencies and other higher educational institutions. The chapter proposes a framework and methodology using staff and student data from The University of the West Indies for the period 1990–1991 to 2011–2012 to build a Gender Scorecard. Finally, the Scorecard is seen as a tool to track performance related to the creation and enhancement of relevant structures and processes to institutionalize gender equality into the functions, operations, and governance of institutions.

This chapter will situate the global paradigm shift toward Post-Education-For-All (Post-EFA) not only in the policy trends in the field of international education development, but also in the academic context of international relations and comparative education.

The chapter highlights three dimensions which characterize the paradigm shift; namely, discourse on norms, diversifying actors, and the changed mode of communication and participation in the global consultation processes. The existing formal structure of the EFA global governance is based on multilateralism which recognizes sovereign nation-states, representing national interests, as the participants. However, such an assumption is eroding, given that there is a growing number of state and nonstate actors who influence decision-making not only through conventional formal channels, but also informally. Urging the revision of theories of multilateralism, the chapter introduces the attention given to nontraditional donors and horizontal networks of civil society actors in this volume.

The introduction also shows that that the widening basis of participation in the global consultation processes on post-EFA and advanced communication technology have changed the ways in which discourse is formulated. While the amount and the speed of exchanging information have been enhanced and different types of actors have been encouraged to take part, it also obliges scholars to adopt innovative methods of analyzing discourse formation.

The chapter also demonstrates the importance of the focus on the Asia-Pacific region, which is composed of diverse actors who often underscore Asian cultural roots in contrast to Western hegemony. By focusing on the discourse, actors, and the structure through which the consensus views on the post-EFA agenda were built, the volume attempts to untangle the nature of the post-EFA paradigm shift, at the global, Asia-Pacific regional, and national levels.

Although policy makers strengthen the necessity of “deregulation”, discussions about deregulation vs regulation in Europe still seem to be characterized by a lack of sophistication and require a more differentiated picture of specific forms of deregulation. As a consequence, the analysis of new educational governance approaches should consider the local actor's interpretation of new roles and new responsibilities. Relating actions and reactions of school leaders to their formal environment should lead to more contextual patterns of responsiveness. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The authors investigate, based on a survey among Cypriot school leaders, whether school autonomy needs deregulation, or regulation towards autonomy, respectively. At the time of research the school system of Cyprus could be characterized as a “centralized” system and hence represented a suitable field of study. Using a factor model followed by a cluster analysis the paper explores the school leaders’ profiles of operative and perceived autonomy in different fields of governance issues and identify different types of leadership.

The authors find that the autonomy school leaders experience is not necessarily related to a “defined” degree of autonomy which is prescribed by educational law and driven by concepts of new public management. Their “perceived” autonomy is also due to factors which can be located at a rather individual level.

The findings provide insight into principals’ motives to adopt certain styles of leading schools, quite independently from new measures of educational governance. The authors conclude that greater emphasis on systematic support programmes may prepare school principals for gains of autonomy as well as for potential sources of conflict.

This paper aims to address research gaps around third party data flows in education by investigating governance practices in higher education with respect to learning management system (LMS) ecosystems. The authors answer the following research questions: how are LMS and plugins/learning tools interoperability (LTI) governed at higher education institutions? Who is responsible for data governance activities around LMS? What is the current state of governance over LMS? What is the current state of governance over LMS plugins, LTI, etc.? What governance issues are unresolved in this domain? How are issues of privacy and governance regarding LMS and plugins/LTIs documented or communicated to the public and/or community members?

This study involved three components: (1) An online questionnaire about LMS, plugin and LTI governance practices from information technology professionals at seven universities in the USA (n = 4) and Canada (n = 3). The responses from these individuals helped us frame and design the interview schedule. (2) A review of public data from 112 universities about LMS plugin and LTI governance. Eighteen of these universities provide additional documentation, which we analyze in further depth. (3) A series of extensive interviews with 25 university data governance officers with responsibilities for LMS, plugin and/or LTI governance, representing 14 different universities.

The results indicate a portrait of fragmented and unobtrusive, unnoticed student information flows to third parties. From coordination problems on individual college campuses to disparate distributions of authority across campuses, as well as from significant data collection via individual LTIs to a shared problem of scope across many LTIs, the authors see that increased and intentional governance is needed to improve the state of student privacy and provide transparency in the complex environment around LMSs. Yet, the authors also see that there are logical paths forward based on successful governance and leveraging existing collaborative networks among data governance professionals in higher education.

Substantial prior work has examined issues of privacy in the education context, although little research has directly examined higher education institutions’ governance practices of LMS, plugin and LTI ecosystems. The tight integration of first and third-party tools in this ecosystem raises concerns that student data may be accessed and shared without sufficient transparency or oversight and in violation of established education privacy norms. However, these technologies and the university governance practices that could check inappropriate data handling remain under-scrutinized. This paper addresses this gap by investigating the governance practices of higher education institutions with respect to LMS ecosystems.