Search results

This chapter presents a theoretical and evidence-based investigation of the contribution that national educational systems make to the development of and transition to a knowledge economy in the Arabian Gulf, generally, and Saudi Arabia, specifically. The challenges to creating an Arabian Gulf knowledge economy are twofold. One is a functional and structural challenge of developing a knowledge economy-oriented mass education system. The other is a cultural and contextual challenge of aligning Arabian Gulf expectations, traditions, and norms with institutionalized expectations for knowledge economies. The knowledge economy development challenge that is specific to national versus non-national Gulf populations, information and communication technology (ICT), and formal mass education systems is highlighted. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the role that national innovation systems play in knowledge economy development in the Arabian Gulf countries.

The quality of an education system or a comparative international assessment refers more and more to quantitative parameters, i.e. “educational indicators”. The paper aims to analyse the structure of several educational indicators and indicator systems and answer the question “What can educational indicators achieve?”

Starting with a general consideration of the term “indicator” the findings are applied to the educational area and the development of educational indicators is analysed critically.

Indicators allow for the illustration of outcomes and of system processes. Beginning in the 1950s, following the empirical turn in research methods, and the growing significance of approaches from economics of education, indicators are now applied in national and international settings. The findings show that the combination of the quantitative and qualitative approach is more successful as the isolated research.

The research is based on secondary analysis. A combination of quantitative and qualitative research methodology should be undertaken in following the progress of educational systems.

The findings of quantitative research based on educational indicators determine the general public and political discussion and often the discourse in the scientific community. The analysis shows that a critical distance especially when preparing political decisions is a necessary attitude.

This study considers the structure of PISA penetration into education policy through a comparative analysis of Japan and Norway. Many studies on PISA’s impact tend to emphasize the character of PISA result as a norm, such as the concept of “governance by comparison.” This study regards PISA as a norm of educational contents and analyzes the structure of PISA penetration into educational contents policy, with respect to the national curriculum. In describing the situations around PISA in the two countries, the background of the acceptance of PISA, the nature of national curriculum in education policy and its character, and the structure of PISA penetration with the focus being on how PISA is integrated into the national curriculum are analyzed through related documents and literatures. As a result of comparative analysis, three common features are found. First of all, PISA penetration occurred in the context of “PISA Shock” since the importance of PISA itself was recognized. Second, the system of management by objectives was included in the educational system and PISA penetrated into that system as objectives. Third, in relation with this second point, PISA as a norm of educational contents was integrated into existing educational goals or subjects. These features are evident only in the comparison of two countries, so a deeper analysis of PISA penetration will be needed in a future study.

Education reform and policy formation have become national priorities in all of the Gulf States that make up the six member Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). This move toward developing and sustaining effective education provision for the national citizenry gained greater importance in the wake of the Arab Spring movement that swept across the region. Although not as directly impacted as some other Arab nations further north, the leadership of Gulf States recognized that the large youth demographic in the region needed greater education and employment options, partly to stem the tide of unrest in their own nations. Many Gulf States, including the Kingdom of Bahrain, were already looking overseas for education models and systems that they could “buy-in” and implement in local schools. One such provider that seemed attractive to Bahrain, among others, was Singapore, which is widely hailed in the Gulf region as a model of a high-performing, global economy and education system. Yet importation of foreign models, with little or no accommodations made for local needs and cultures leads to an uncomfortable “grafting” of systems that seem out of place. This, coupled with the desire by Gulf States to take part in international benchmarking exercises, such as TIMSS, has created an awkward skewing in many educational practices and processes in Bahrain and other GCC states. This chapter, using Bahrain as a case study, will explore the regional importation of systems and models and the effect that participation in international assessments is having on localized education practices.

The shift from data-informed to data-driven educational policymaking is conceptually framed by institutional and transhumanist perspectives. Examples of the shift to large-scale quantitative data driving educational decision-making suggest that data-driven educational policy will not adjust for context to the degree as done by the data-informed or data-based policymaking. Instead, the algorithmization of educational decision-making is both increasingly realizable and necessary in light of the overwhelmingly big data on education produced annually around the world. Evidence suggests that the isomorphic shift from localized data and individual decision-making about education to large-scale assessment data has changed the nature of educational decision-making and national educational policy. Big data are increasingly legitimized in educational policy communities at national and international levels, which means that algorithms are assumed to be the best way to analyze and make decisions about large volumes of complex data. There is a conceptual concern, however, that decontextualized or de-humanized educational policies may have the effect of increasing student achievement, but not necessarily the translation of knowledge into economically, socially, or politically productive behavior.

For the longest period of its history, the university was the guardian and transmitter – not the producer – of knowledge. This relatively recent change of transmitting canonical knowledge and generating new knowledge is normally associated with Wilhelm von Humboldt. Other highly influential university models were provided by France and Great Britain. The association of certain types of universities with particular countries is a strong indicator of the intricate link between nation-state and education. Hence, the history of tertiary education and its elite institutions, the research universities, must be considered in relation with a sea change in educational history – the gradual emergence of national education systems. Only under the conditions of the by now standard form of organizing modern societies as nation-states did education become a central institution (Meyer, Boli, Thomas, & Ramirez, 1997) collapsing individual perfectibility and national progress. The nationally redefined university was integrated into the education system as its keystone while also being considered the motor of societal development. From a social history perspective, the latter aspect in particular indicates the pragmatic (training professionals, imparting military and technical knowledge, etc.) and symbolic expectations, “myths” of the nation-state that have been so aptly described and analyzed in numerous macro-sociological neo-institutionalist studies (Meyer, Ramirez, & Soysal, 1992; Meyer et al., 1997; Ramirez & Boli, 1987). In a macro-phenomenological perspective, the term “myth” is used to denote a fundamental change in the self-description of European society which since the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries no longer views itself as consisting of separate collectivities divided from each other by social origin – as was the case under feudal conditions – with each collectivity providing itself the necessary education for its members or being provided for by others in the case of neediness. Instead, as a result of a number of material and immaterial changes, society now defines the individual as its key unit, with the nation being consequently the aggregate of individuals and not of collectivities and the state redefined as the guardian of the nation. This conception might be taken as a kind of overlapping area which includes different approaches, such as Michel Foucault's concept of the disciplinary society (Foucault, 1977), Balibar and Wallerstein's (1991) deliberations on the relation between race, class, and nation, and Benedict Anderson's (1991) description of nations as imagined communities. All these studies could be taken as sharing the notion of “constructedness” (cf. Berger & Luckmann, 1972) of modern society with the neo-institutionalist perspective. The concept of a “world polity” which encompasses the “myths” society is based on, the overall notion of a cognitive culture, which takes Max Weber's concept of rationality as a point of departure, is identified as the basis of isomorphic change in the organizational structure of modern education systems (cf. Baker & Wiseman, 2006). However, the strong emphasis on international, world system embeddedness of nation-states and their education systems is not to be taken as a unidirectional dependence on external forces. While modern nation-states originate from and remain tied to international dynamics and developments, they are conceived as unique entities. For most of their history, modern nation-states have been preoccupied with making themselves distinct from each other. Thus, while international competition has always been present, looking abroad traditionally meant reworking, adapting, and reshaping what was imported, or borrowed (Halpin & Troyna, 1995; Steiner-Khamsi, 2004). This is true for education as well as for other areas of society.

In this chapter, we argue from a theoretical perspective that globalisation has impacted differentiation within higher education systems. The three propositions about mechanisms affecting diversity distinguished by van Vught (environmental conditions, competition for resources and academic norms) remain the same, but the initial conditions have changed. Governmental policy, in particular, affects the degree of openness of higher education systems (positively or negatively), either through (de-)regulation or by affecting higher education institutions’ strategies for internationalisation. Thus, we add as a fourth proposition that increasing institutional autonomy increases system diversity in the context of globalisation.

After the electoral victory in 2018, the newly formed Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) government presented its National Education Policy Framework, chalking out its priorities of bringing more than 22 million out-of-school children to schools, improving educational quality, and introducing a uniform education system in the country. However, the government’s grand ambitions, transpired quickly, only to produce a draft of a new unified curriculum in 2020. This chapter investigates the newly formulated Single National Curriculum (SNC) in Pakistan by using the lens of Critical Cultural Political Economy of Education (CCPEE). To understand the endogenous and exogenous factors shaping the SNC, the chapter argues that securitization and neoliberalization are the significant factors informing the development and the production of the new curriculum.

This chapter discusses the influence of international educational studies on knowledge in a general sense. In a theoretical framework, a split between realistic and constructivist theories of knowledge with special regards to global and local knowledge is discussed.

Since Slovenia is a country that is included in a number of different international comparative educational studies and assessments, even more so, it has been participating in these studies continually for the last two decades, the focus is on Slovenian educational policymaking (PM). The chapter for the first time analyzes the impacts on national PM of different international studies and predicts the future Slovenian participation in these studies; therefore, the chapter could be interesting for national and international audiences involved in comparative education research. For the estimation of existing impacts on national PM, semi-structured interviews were used. The findings suggest that international results represent an argumentation for some directly and indirectly curricular and syllabus changes over the years. Furthermore, some of the argumentations for changing the national educational system regarding the international findings are still more declarative; irrespective of experts and policymakers estimations of how great impacts these studies have in Slovenia. Future research on the topic for Slovenian PM in education will need more secondary analysis of collected data from both national and international assessments.

Botswana enjoys the celebratory status of a shining example of a successful democracy in Africa. As such, one expects democracy to underpin policy formulation and the running of the education system. This chapter problematizes the relationship between democracy and education in Botswana. It focuses on the Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Conduct of the 2010 Examinations. The conduct of the examinations marked a crisis which resulted in a deadlock between the Botswana’s Ministry of Education and Skills Development (MoESD), Botswana Examination’s Council (BEC) on the one hand and teachers’ unions-Botswana Sectors of Educators Trade Union (BOSETU) and Botswana Teacher’s Union (BTU) on the other hand. Teachers’ unions complained about poor conditions of service and remunerations associated with the administration of national examinations. This action triggered a national strike in the public service in general and consequently revealed Botswana Government’s undemocratic response to what was a sensitive issue of national interest. When the examinations results were released, it became evident that students performed horribly BEC was persecuted for the poor performance. This chapter therefore registers that the 2010 Examinations crisis in Botswana is a classic indication that democracy and education are two worlds apart in Botswana’s education system.