Search results

This chapter examines the policy context, characteristics, and challenges of supplementary tutoring in the United States, with a specific focus on the supplemental educational services (SES) mandate of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). This government-sponsored tutoring is particularly an interesting case of the United States, where privately funded tutoring is increasingly integrated into a public policy.

After introducing the details of SES program and examining major forces that influenced the introduction of this program, the chapter provides a summary on the scale of SES with a particular focus on a historical period when this program was most pervasive. It also discusses challenges of this policy and notes some recent policy changes due to NCLB reauthorization. The main sources of data for this study include two major federal reports on SES as well as the empirical studies on the effectiveness of supplementary tutoring in the United States.

An examination of policy contexts reveals that both federal and market forces contributed to the development of supplementary tutoring in the United States. While the number of tutoring providers and eligible students increased, evaluation studies have found either a small or insignificant effect of publicly funded tutoring. Communications among schools, families, and tutoring providers need to be more effective.

Although SES of the NCLB have exclusively been examined in the American context in the previous studies, this study suggests that other countries may learn from its policy context, practices, and challenges to reflect on supplementary tutoring in their own school systems.

This paper sets out to examine the contribution of employer co‐funding of publicly‐funded vocational education and training in the UK (i.e. training initiatives that are available to all qualified applicants but funded jointly by the public and private sectors).

The paper draws on qualitative research undertaken with more than 30 employers in a cross‐section of economic sectors.

The evidence from this study suggests that there is no model for how and why employers start to become engaged in co‐funding publicly‐funded training.

The paper identifies key issues for public policy‐makers.

The purpose of this study was to identify the transformation disclosures in the publicly available annual reports of South African public universities and to establish the extent to which universities account to their stakeholders about how they have discharged their transformation obligations.

This exploratory qualitative study involves a thematic content analysis of publicly available annual reports using ATLAS.ti software to identify and categorise transformation interventions disclosed by South African public universities.

This empirical study identifies several interventions that universities have introduced to facilitate access to and successful completion of tertiary studies by students. Some of the disclosed mechanisms include the provision of financial aid, student support and counselling, tutoring and mentoring and ICT enhancements and the introduction of language policies. The results also highlighted several challenges to sustainable transformation including funding, social and academic barriers and infrastructural challenges experienced by universities.

According to the authors’ knowledge, this study represents one of the first studies to use the public disclosures in the annual reports of public universities to identify interventions introduced to facilitate transformation of the student body. Despite its South African orientation, the observations have implications for universities worldwide experiencing similar challenges, especially in developing countries.

In the United Kingdom Higher Education is propelled by Government policy and monitored by university recruitment, retention and teaching and learning strategies — and yet when (international) students arrive at these publicly funded and accountable institutions the results can be “horrid, very very horrid”. Exploring the relationship between Government influence and corporate behaviour within the Higher Educational (HE) context of the United Kingdom (UK), this paper provides an overview of current Governmental policy towards resourcing higher education, and considers the impact of these policies for ‘Widening Participation’ students, including international students. The paper concludes with the experiences of one student, who narrates his “story” and as the story unfolds, we start to view the “system” of Government, University and Course through the eyes of an ‘outsider’. (Sinfield, Burns & Holley 2004). This personal narrative illustrates how systems — Governmental, Institutional and at Course level — can totally fail an individual.

The purpose of this paper is threefold: first, to shed light on the increasing start-up competitions (SUCs) phenomenon; second, to provide an interpretive framework to understand whether the SUCs have the potential to be effective entrepreneurial learning environment; third, to analyse the different roles of public and private actors in organizing SUCs.

The paper presents a cross-section analysis of the Italian SUCs population. In total, 77 competitions are analysed on the basis of different criteria which should properly mirror their distinguishing structural features, helping understand the potential of SUCs as learning environments.

The recent increase in the number of SUCs has been mainly fuelled by private actors. Moreover, Italian SUCs show some features that make them rich learning environments. Private and public actors play different roles, as confirmed by statistical tests performed. Privately organized SUCs follow mainly a market-oriented approach, while publicly organized ones are more education oriented.

The findings cannot be easily generalized mainly due to the peculiarities of the Italian context.

Soft forms of regulation should be defined to strengthen those features which could potentially support the entrepreneurial learning processes. In this view, SUCs should be part of a start-up friendly ecosystem where actors (startuppers, incubators, venture capitalists) are effectively coordinated with each other.

Despite the remarkable diffusion of SUCs, there are significant gaps in literature about this phenomenon. Given the lack of a systematic and comprehensive analysis of SUCs as effective entrepreneurial learning environments, the paper represents an important starting point.

In this chapter we draw on research from Canada to develop a framework for understanding the variety of forms of supplementary education and their position within broader organization fields of education. The chapter asks: What is the nature and organizing logic of supplementary education in Canada? and, How does supplementary education relate to public schools in Canada?

Data come from a variety of secondary sources.

Distributed between three relatively autonomous settings – state, market, and nonprofit – supplementary education exhibits tremendous variety in its use value to parents, instructional content, and organizational form. Supplementary education is popular among Canadian parents and appears to be growing, yet it has failed to fundamentally alter the technical core of Canadian schooling, processes that stratify students, and child and family usage of their time or income. Supplementary education’s inability to penetrate these processes reflects its peripheral position within the broader organizational field of Canadian schooling.

The adoption of an organizational field approach generates new ways of thinking about determinants, forming and organizing logics of supplementary education both nationally and comparatively.

The purpose of the paper is to contribute to the debate on the maintenance and enhancement of quality in the emerging landscape of higher education practice and delivery where new kinds of institutional relationships are emerging. Much of the literature describes situations where the risk to quality assurance is relatively low. The example discussed here details how principles of risk management can be used to assure quality where the risk of reputational damage is far greater.

The paper uses a single case study approach.

New and flexible forms of delivery in higher education present opportunities but also the potential for reputational damage so innovative delivery must be matched by a corresponding commitment to quality. This must be embedded at all levels, including tutors. Much of the literature from the perspective of tutors emphasises their experience of quality as a matter of bureaucratic compliance. The case study illustrates that in circumstances where there is a risk of compromise academic tutors can actively engage with a quality enhancement process.

Although a case study of specialised practice there is evidence that increasing numbers of universities are seeking to engage in similar methods. The literature on the implications of these initiatives is comprised of case studies so there is a need for more systematic research which examines practices more broadly. The case study also suggests that the search for quality cultures in HE may fruitfully investigate circumstances where quality has to be fought for rather than assumed.

The paper demonstrates that universities can deliver in flexible and innovative ways which do not compromise their reputation provided they risk assess the implications of each arrangement and develop appropriate procedures and practices at all levels of operation.

The case study is not the first of its kind to be published but it is the first to be published in the context of the quality assurance literature rather than the more specialist work based learning literature. It links developments within that specialist field to more mainstream discourses in the quality assurance literature. It also draws attention of a wider audience to some of the more innovative developments in British HE practice.

This analysis addresses the question of how the goals motivating policies around markets for supplementary education are supported and reflected (or not) in the subsequent structures for those markets.

Drawing on policy documents and empirical research on these policies, we examine the policy contexts and market structures the low-intensity form of supplementary education (SE) seen in the United States relative to the high-intensity case of Korea – specifically, the supplementary educational services (SESs) of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 and the After School Programs (ASPs) in Korea, respectively.

The analysis finds that Korea is using school-based SE programs as an alternative to existing SE markets in order to mediate perceived free-market excesses, while the United States is subsidizing SE markets to address the negative consequences of inequitable schooling. Yet, even in different contexts and purposes, policymakers in both countries see a value to supplementary education as part of their overall education strategy, despite a lack of evidence on the effectiveness of these approaches. This commonality is reflective of the larger neoliberal approach, evident around the globe, of using market forces such as competitive incentives and parental choice to drive policy toward social objectives.

The significance of this analysis is the insight that these policy approaches, while different in context and policy specifics, represent an overall blurring of traditional distinctions between public and private organizations.

What kinds of changes do mentoring programs initiate for children and their schools? According to a study by Public/Private Ventures which specializes in social policy, just under half of mentoring programs are based at a particular site (Herrera, 1999). Schools are the most common site recognized. Schools purchase the mentoring program examined in the study to follow. Adults work with children primarily on academic activities and they are paid to do so. The school pays half of the cost of the NSCC (National School and Community Corp) program and federal funds provide the remaining support. Herrera (1999, p. 11) has argued the most direct benefit of school-based programs is the mentor's integration into the school environment and the role of advocate that the mentor can play. Advocacy has been recognized as the critical task performed by mentors. As advocate, mentors develop a relationship with a child, which advances youth development and deters youth detrimental behavior (Herrera, 1999). This singular relationship, the advocate mentor and child, is challenged by research that follows. The advocate mentor recognizes a socialization model used in studying children that assumes the mentor as the active role taker shaping the child as passive recipient of mentoring. This model relies on an adult perspective, assuming the child to be an empty vessel serving as clay to be shaped (Waksler, 1994). Waksler (1994) has criticized this model, arguing that children must be taken seriously as a topic of study – not as objects of socialization. The interpretive model of childhood development by contrast is more useful for examining the data gathered in the following study. Rather than focus on the advocate mentor in relationship with a child, the interpretive model recognizes the child as actor and highlights the range of peer relationships sponsored through mentoring activities. This collective view as contrasted with the singular relationship assumes a different perspective on childhood development.

Entrepreneurial approaches to public mass education are not easily developed or managed by public sector institutions. Instead, private sector entities are often responsible for the development and implementation of innovative and entrepreneurial education. Part of the reason may be the resistance to change that isomorphism in mass education engenders, but the involvement of privately-funded, organized, and managed organizations plays a significant role as well. Private sector-driven educational change has become the dominant mode of entrepreneurship in 21st century national educational systems, but there are challenges and obstacles to privately managing public sector institutions such as education and the activities or curricula that comprise its core. To understand this phenomena the promises and challenges for innovation and entrepreneurship are discussed through an institutional framework.