Search results1 – 10 of 41
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.
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.
Against the background of a changing relation between the state and “its” education system, the present contribution focuses on two concepts that can be used as tools in…
Against the background of a changing relation between the state and “its” education system, the present contribution focuses on two concepts that can be used as tools in order to explain the current transformations. “Governance” is more concerned with technical issues: with instruments and modes, procedures and actors, and with their constellations and forms of cooperation. It focuses research on questions such as: who provides educational services or what is the connection between public and private education. It has been employed to investigate the relation between the various levels of analysis and has proven particularly useful in creating an adequate theoretical understanding of the role of international organizations in shaping educational policies. Sociology and political science are the two disciplines most prominently associated with elaborating the concept under various perspectives. Governmentality, although sharing many characteristics with governance, is a Foucauldian term concerned with the generation of different subjectivities and collectivities through techniques and modes of ruling and guiding in an encompassing sense. A governmentality perspective thus focuses investigations on the typical Foucauldian knowledge/power nexus. While “governance” may be said to be more descriptive, more concerned with the “how” of current transformations, “governmentality” may be drawn on to argue that the changes are related to a reworking of the very modern Weberian notion of rationality, thus stressing the morphodynamics but not the reinvention of education. At stake is the increase of effectivity in order to augment and increase the “usefulness” and thus the value of the population.
This chapter addresses international educational governance by exploring some of the factors contributing to increasingly internationalized national educational…
This chapter addresses international educational governance by exploring some of the factors contributing to increasingly internationalized national educational policymaking and the ways that related trends in educational policymaking either constrain or shift to meet particular needs and challenges within specific national contexts. After discussing the phenomenon and the impact of globalization on international educational governance, the role of the state, and some examples of both contextualization and bounded rationality, the impact of national policy convergence is discussed. This chapter concludes by summarizing the ways that national policy convergence became the focus of international educational governance and national educational policy based on the same ideas and structure through seemingly different implementation, but often-identical measurable outcomes. Examples from Japan and Saudi Arabia highlight the discussion.