G20 Edu Reform E

Yan Wang Editor
Education Policy
Reform Trends in
G20 Members
Education Policy Reform Trends in G20 Members
Yan Wang
Editor
Education Policy Reform

Trends in G20 Members
Editor
Yan Wang
Department of International Cooperation
National Institute of Education Sciences
Beijing, People’s Republic of China
ISBN 978-3-642-38930-6 ISBN 978-3-642-38931-3 (eBook)

DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-38931-3
Springer Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London
Library of Congress Control Number: 2013958464
© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts in connection
with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and
executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplication of this
publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the Publisher’s
location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from Springer.
Permissions for use may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright Clearance Center. Violations
are liable to prosecution under the respective Copyright Law.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
While the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of
publication, neither the authors nor the editors nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for
any errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with
respect to the material contained herein.
Printed on acid-free paper
Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com)

This publication is an outcome of a research
project sponsored by
The National Institute of Education Sciences
of China
Foreword
Education is a cornerstone that has a decisive impact on the destiny of individuals;

educational policy making therefore directly impacts the development of states. As
the Chinese saying goes, “stones from other hills may serve to polish jade”. In the
context of education policy, many nations have increasingly looked to others’ experi-
ences as these can reveal alternative approaches and strategies that can be applied to
solve their own specific problems.
Like other G20 members, China has a significant population; providing its children
with quality, sustainable education is a formidable challenge. Rapid economic,
technological, and social progress is making this challenge even more complex.
Policies need to be continually reformed in order to modernize old traditions, create
dynamic new teaching methods, and respond to various emerging issues. Thus,
reform itself becomes a learning process: we learn from past successes and
disappointments, from grassroots experiences, and from other nations. Today, with
increasing globalization, policy makers are taking an instrumental approach; they
are seeking inspiration from other countries and collaborating with their counter-
parts in order to explore solutions to be found in policy studies and reforms. Reform,
like learning, is no longer undertaken in isolation.
It is for this reason that, when my colleague Wang Yan told me that she wanted
to question multinational experts in order to design a policy study, I gave her my full
support. I was convinced that this would be of substantial benefit to China as well
as many other countries. I proposed using a structured approach so as to ensure the
comparability of the information gathered. This was to be generated by the following
questions: What major education policies have been developed in recent years?
What are the scope, objectives, and assumptions underpinning these reforms? What
was the impact of the reforms? What trends will guide reform in the future? I was
fully aware that it would not be easy to obtain responses to this information request,
but, to my delight, 19 G20 member experts, all of whom are highly accomplished in
the field of education policy in their own economy both from an academic and a
practical point of view, accepted our invitation. Thanks to their contribution,
Education Policy Reform Trends in G20 Members is totally innovative: not only
does it distil lessons learned in the field of G20 education reform, but it also serves
vii
viii Foreword
as an authoritative analysis of key issues on the subject as there were respondents

from every continent.
This publication explores issues relating to equity and the quality of education as
well as different strategies and means to resolve a range of challenges. The various
approaches stem from political, economic, and social contexts that differ considerably
from one country to another. Nevertheless, it is evident that the drive to modernize
education systems and to update educational theory, concern over student learning,
and demand for skill development all prove to be common trends. I believe that
Education Policy Reform Trends in G20 Members will inspire and guide policy
makers, researchers, and practitioners alike. Consequently, it should contribute to
improving the quality of education and thereby bring progress and prosperity to
many. Stones from other hills can, and will, serve to polish jade.
Former President, National Institute of Education Sciences of China Zhenguo Yuan

Vice-President, Chinese Society of Education
Beijing, China
Foreword
Wealth and individual well-being, in turn, depend on nothing more than on what
people know and what they can do with what they know. There is no shortcut to
equipping people with the right skills and to providing people with the right oppor-
tunities to use their skills effectively. And if there’s one lesson the global economy
has taught policy-makers over the last few years, it’s that we cannot simply bail
ourselves out of a crisis, that we cannot solely stimulate ourselves out of a crisis and
that we cannot just print money our way out of a crisis. Instead, in today’s world
economy, education and skills are the driving forces for progress. Investing in
high-quality education will thus be the key for improving the economic and social
well-being of people around the world.
It may therefore seem surprising that there has been no systematic effort yet to
analyse and compare the educational policies and practices among the G20
members. Education Policy Reform Trends in G20 Members provides an invaluable
resource to fill this gap. It reviews major policy trends in each of the G20 members,
analyses the rationale and policy imperative of intended and implemented policies
as well as their impact and provides an outlook of the future direction of travel.
The volume combines careful attention to the very different political, economic
and social contexts in which the G20 education systems operate, on the one hand, with
a comparative perspective that facilitates peer learning across countries, on the other.
What makes the volume also unique is that many of its chapters extend beyond the
remit of traditional educational institutions, seeing education as everybody’s busi-
ness. The volume thus provides a unique instrument for policy makers, researchers,
business leaders and practitioners alike to evaluate current policy experiences, to
explore new policy options and to build better and more efficient and effective
educational systems.
It is important for G20 members to develop the knowledge and skills needed
in the twenty-first century, to allocate resources in education effectively to support
social and economic development, and to offer everyone the chance to make the
most of their skills at every stage of their life when they advance from the largest
economies to economies offering their citizens the highest and most sustainable
ix
x Foreword
economic and social well-being. This volume, hopefully, would contribute to such
process of transition.
The volume was prepared by the National Institute of Educational Sciences of
China, under the resourceful and inspiring direction of Dr. Wang Yan. To support
the authentic analysis, each of the chapters draws on contributions from leading
specialists in each of the G20 Members with first-hand expertise in educational
policy and practice.
Deputy Director for Education and Skills Andreas Schleicher

Special Advisor on Education Policy
to the OECD’s Secretary-General
Paris, France
Preface
Research and learning have at least one aspect in common – both are a means used
to acquire knowledge. In my view, they always enhance each other. When China,
like many other countries in the world, looks increasingly toward other countries to
seek inspiration and learn from their lessons, international comparison becomes an
indispensable part of most significant studies. Having worked in policy analysis for
years, I was thus curious to know how policies were made in various countries
during the rapidly changing times of the past decade. Nonetheless, I failed to locate
any systematic analysis of recent policy developments in the major developed
and developing nations in the world even after painstaking search. That is why
I embarked on this international comparative study of education policies. It turned
to be a journey of discovery.
The focus of the study was finally set on the G20, which represents 80 % of the
GDP and two-thirds of the world population. To obtain an “insider” perspective
of policy reform trends, experts from G20 economies were invited to contribute
chapters on the topic. All the authors are specialists with accomplished expertise
in policy studies and first-hand experiences in policy making, thus could offer
valuable insights into the developments of the past couple of decades among G20
members. A compilation of their responses would be a useful reference tool for
policy-makers, researchers, and educators and also point to global education trends
on policy-making.
Education reforms are always interwoven with, if not driven by, economic and
political changes. Therefore, Part I highlights the education reforms in the recently
changing economic and political fabric. The ideological context changes, such as
from democratization to meritocracy in France, entail certain changes in how the
curriculum is presented, how learning is organized, and even how schooling is
structured. Intended or not, all these changes inevitably impact the construction and
implementation of the value system, social equity, and economic well-being.
The past decade has also witnessed a dramatic reform in education governance
in many countries, and typical examples are presented in Part II. Some countries,
like Italy, shifted from a state monopoly to the rise of a system of schools; others
have striven to improve the efficiency of the system by persistent endeavors of
xi
xii Preface
decentralization. Yet, both have had to reconcile the principles and acts of decen-
tralization with centralization. Meanwhile, reinforcing autonomy and strengthening
accountability, especially by benchmarking, has been a central theme in many
countries.
Notably, changing policy paradigms features education reforms in other nations
elaborated in Part III. In a federal country, such as Australia, emerging national
partnerships and agreements have changed the landscape of education dramatically.
The new policy paradigms, such as those transforming the philosophy and aim of
educational delivery, have played a key role in translating reform endeavors into
results. Such changes are in many cases accompanied by a shift in upper-level
developmental strategies, such as the need for a “coherent national strategy for
human capital development” (in Saudi Arabia) and a “strive for smart, sustainable,
and inclusive growth” (in the EU).
Whatever approach will finally fall on the ground of changes in the education
systems, the fundamental tasks of the education reform. Part IV narrates typical
cases of education system reforms, such as incremental steps to more responsibility
and efficiency in an expanding system in Germany. These reforms, either accom-
plished by reinforcing upper secondary education to build new paths for young
people or by improving school trajectories, all revolve around the dual motifs of
quality and equity. Yet, in spite of many similarities, every nation must take a unique
path that suits its specific requirements. In a stable system such as that found in
Canada, quality was seen being attributable to external factors as far as a desired
social safety net, whereas in China, the education progress was highlighted for
its strategy of building equity into the national basic policy for the livelihood of all
the people.
It is noteworthy that this type of study warrants a reliable conceptual framework
to thread the stories together from different contexts. Yet, sticking to any framework
too strictly might be at the cost of both diversity and originality. Thus, this study has
adopted a basic framework that incorporates five key questions: What major policy
reforms have been developed? What were the assumptions underpinning these poli-
cies? What are the impacts of the reforms? What lessons have been learned? What
are the future trends? While all the chapters are largely based on these questions,
both originality and diversity in analysis and presentation have been maintained to
produce a fuller picture of the educational reforms taken in different countries.
When undertaking a research publication of this sort, it is essential to have a
supervisor who is knowledgeable and ready to open new paths to explore. Professor
Yuan assumed this role perfectly. Not only did I have his full support in launching
the project, but he also extended invitations to the authors and patiently answered all
my queries throughout the entire process. He also contributed the chapter on China.
I am indebted to the reviewers, including Ali Alhakami, Andreas Schleicher,
Harry A. Patrinos, Eduardo Velez Bustillo, George Psacharopoulos, Dwight
Allen, Min Bista, Jee-Peng Tan, Robert J Tierney, Betsy Brown Ruzzi, Mary Stiasny,
Manal Quota, Liliana Pascual, Alain Mingat, Martin Gustafsson, Christoph Wulf,
Cristina Pinna, Michael Teutsch, and Oliver Rey. Their insights and suggestions
have significantly improved the quality of the chapters.
Preface xiii
I thank my colleagues, Shen Yubiao, He Mei, Ding Xiaona, Shengxia, and all
those who participated in discussions on the conceptualization of the publication
and contributed their ideas and inspired the process. Among others, Shen suggested
the scope of G20 when the study originally had focused on the major developed and
developing nations. My thanks also go to Guo Xiaoying, who provided much-
appreciated administrative assistance during the preparation of this publication.
Last but not least, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my husband,
Shiming, for his unwavering support of my academic pursuits, and to Shuchen, my
young son, who allowed his mother to work over many weekends and holidays
instead of accompanying him. Without their support, I would never have been able
to complete this work.
Beijing, China Yan Wang

Contents
Part I Education Reform in Social and Political Changes
Russia: Evolutional Changes Against Revolutionary Upheavals................ 3

Nikolay D. Nikandrov
France: Permanence and Change.................................................................. 19
Marie Duru-Bellat
India: Reforming Education in the Neo Liberal Era ................................... 33
Jandhyala B.G. Tilak
South Africa: The Education Struggle Continues........................................ 55
Martin Prew
England: Restructuring Education and the Demise of the LEA ................ 75
Mel West
Part II Pushing Forward Governance Reform
Italy: From State Monopoly to Rising of a System of Schools .................... 105

Luisa Ribolzi
Korea: Fostering Competition and Securing Excellence in Education ...... 129
Jeongwon Kim and Taewan Kim
Indonesia: Overcoming Challenges of Decentralization ............................. 143
Bambang Indriyanto
The United States: School Choice and Test-Based Accountability ............. 155
Kevin G. Welner
Brazil: Shift of Accountability Incentives ..................................................... 173
Fernanda da Rosa Becker and Luiz Claudio Costa
xv
xvi Contents
Part III Changing Policy Paradigms
Australia: National Change in a Loosely Coupled Federal System............ 191

John Ainley
Turkey: Translating New Policy Paradigms to Results ............................... 207
Batuhan Aydagül
Saudi Arabia: The Need for a Coherent National Strategy
for Human Capital Development................................................................... 229
Maha Taibah and Mounira Jamjoom
Japan: Conversion of the Philosophy and Aim of Basic Education ........... 245
Tamotsu Tokunaga
European Union: The Strive for Smart,
Sustainable and Inclusive Growth ................................................................. 267
Gábor Halász
Part IV Changes in the Education System
Germany: Steps to More Responsibility and Efficiency

in an Expanding system .................................................................................. 289
Horst Weishaupt
Mexico: Building New Paths to Educate Young People ............................... 309
Lorenzo Gómez Morin Fuentes
Argentina: Improving Student School Trajectories ..................................... 327
Margarita Poggi
Canada: Quality and Stability ....................................................................... 347
Benjamin Levin and Robyn Read
China: Promoting Equity as a Basic Education Policy ............................... 359
Zhenguo Yuan
About the Contributors .................................................................................. 377
About the Editor ............................................................................................. 385
National Institute of Education Sciences of China....................................... 387

Part I
Education Reform in Social
and Political Changes
Russia: Evolutional Changes Against
Revolutionary Upheavals
Nikolay D. Nikandrov
Abstract This chapter analyzes the process of education reform in Russia since the
disintegration of the Soviet Union with an emphasis on what has happened since
2000. It is argued that the innovative changes in the 1990s were burdened with
challenges and problems. They will only be put right if financing education is kept
stable and gradually increased and if evolutionary change is accepted as general
practice with no more revolutionary upheavals.
Keywords Challenges • Educational reform • Evolutionary change • Innovation •

Stable finance • Russia
Over 20 years ago the Soviet Union ceased to exist as a state. It happened in law or,
rather, technically on December 21, 1991. The author belongs to most people in
today’s Russia who deeply regret the disintegration of the great power though being
conscious of many things that had to be done to improve the situation in the country
and avoid the tragedy.
Since then, an unprecedented sequence of changes in education followed – as
elsewhere and everywhere. In fact, this can be said about the twentieth century as
a whole and about many countries. Special mention is due to the reform of educa-
tion announced in the Soviet Union in 1984. Viewed from the present, its impor-
tance was in admitting that “the best education system in the world” (the official
point of view at that time which I partly share) does need to be changed in several
aspects. By the time M. Gorbachev left power in 1991, it was clear that the “reform
itself had to be reformed” as many people said and wrote then. What was impor-
tant, however, is that while reforming education in the Soviet Union occurred
peacefully and without changes in the political structure, the reforms that followed
N.D. Nikandrov (*)

Russian Academy of Education, Moscow, Russia
e-mail: [email protected]
Y. Wang (ed.), Education Policy Reform Trends in G20 Members, 3

DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-38931-3_1, © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013
4 N.D. Nikandrov
were initiated by the people whose declared aim was to change the whole political
and social fabric of the country. A detailed and thorough analysis of educational
reforms in Russia and the Peoples’ Republic of China has been performed by a
team of Chinese and Russian academics (Россия Китай 2007). While drawing on
and agreeing with the main conclusions of the volume mentioned, this chapter will
give a synoptical view of the reforms in Russian education since about the year
2000 up to the present and beyond.
It is worthwhile to mention that educational changes in Russia after the col-
lapse of the USSR were initiated by two very important documents. In July 1991,
President B. Yeltsin signed Decree No.1 (“Ukaz” in Russia) on priority measures
for educational development (Указ 1991) and a year later the Law on Education
was adopted. Both documents made history in Russian education though most
measures and norms were proclaimed with a clear understanding that the econ-
omy at that time could not support them. In fact, some of them are not realized
even now like the requirement that teachers’ salary should be equal to the average
salary in the industry and the university teachers should get twice as much. But
it was good propaganda since both documents were clear indication that those in
power consider education as a priority.
1 Pro and Contra
Before passing on to the reform results, it should be emphasized that none of the
changes were unanimously and enthusiastically supported. As the first Russian
Minister of Education Edward Dneprov puts it, there have been reforms, counter-
reforms and pseudo (would-be) reforms (Dneprov 1994). In fact, this way of
things can be observed in all spheres of life and in many countries, and the very
terms were not coined by the man. He belongs to the most radical-minded people
in Russian education who at that time wanted to do away with much of the prac-
tice of the Soviet education and in part succeeded in doing so. One other thing to
be emphasized is that many changes had begun in the whole social structure of the
state and education just followed suit. President M. Gorbachev had put up the
slogans of openness (“glasnost”) and pluralism. In education that meant so much
that it is the first change to be mentioned and evaluated below. In the part that fol-
lows, several significant changes in education will be discussed in a similar way:
what was the plan, what happened later, what we have now, and what we are plan-
ning to do next.
2 Ideology and Education
There is no doubt that the pressure of political ideology on all aspects of life in the
Soviet Union was particularly strong. Suffice it to say what it meant in practical
terms for education and culture. In fact, it meant that whatever in the contents of
Russia: Evolutional Changes Against Revolutionary Upheavals 5
education and culture was considered inappropriate for the Soviet citizens to know
and/or discuss was excluded from it. So one could know a whole list of flaws in the
philosophical writings of “bourgeois” philosophers like Hegel, Kant, or Sartre with-
out having read a single article by them. Or one could give a very low assessment of
some work of art (be it music or painting or literature or anything else) without
really having heard or seen or read the work of art itself.
Prominent among the pieces of cultural heritage were jazz music, abstract paint-
ing, and various dances which were forbidden. Not to burden the writing with
numerous examples, let us limit ourselves to a few. In 1974, “the bulldozer exhibi-
tion” of avant-garde nonconformist painters was forcefully destroyed in Moscow,
the name calling the instrument actually used to flatten many paintings, while some
painters were arrested. People who liked the Beatles music could only enjoy it with
hand made low-quality recordings. Dances like rock’n’roll or boogie-woogie could
only be learned in small private dance schools but not in larger state-run schools
which were quite numerous. People who had a rare possibility to travel abroad
had their luggage searched while returning to the Soviet Union to forbid some
“anti-Soviet” printed matter from entering the country. Personally the author of
the article has little love for abstract painting and admits that all this had a positive
side, too, while people knew classical works of art much better than it is the case
now. But still there was very limited intellectual and spiritual freedom which was
certainly felt by many.
All this began to change under Gorbachev and still more radically under Yeltsin.
The monopoly of the Communist Party in matters of culture and education was
abolished, while everything which had been forbidden for reasons of ideology was
gradually brought to light. Institutions of learning and culture became places of
open discussion, content of school and university education was no more dictated
by ideological preferences, and teachers and students received much more freedom
to teach and learn whatever they chose.
This was certainly a positive development though it was also a challenge.
Textbooks, especially in the humanities, were written depending on the authors’
understanding of what is fact and what is fiction. So students of history in a school
classroom learned from a textbook that J. Stalin was a genius and brought the Soviet
Union to victory in the Great Patriotic War of 1941–1945; he was helped by talented
generals and brave soldiers. In another classroom of the same school, another
teacher using another textbook taught his/her students that J. Stalin was just a dicta-
tor, the victory was achieved by immense loss of human life, the generals knew little
about military strategy and tactics, and the soldiers were driven to attack solely by
fear of brutal repression. If in the Soviet Union there were just a few history text-
books with strict ideological coordination of the content taught, there were more
than 60 textbooks at the beginning of this century.
It is to be admitted that finding the balance in recent history is no easy matter
especially while the archives were just very slowly made public and very selec-
tively, too. And some of them that shed light on developments prior to or just
after World War II are top secret here in Russia and abroad. Of course some of
them are really too sensitive to be ever made public. Just another example of the
difficulty is “Operation Unthinkable” which was released from the top secret
6 N.D. Nikandrov
category in Great Britain at the beginning of the twenty-first century (Reynolds

2006). It is a well-documented story about the plan of the British Cabinet to
attack Russia just after Germany was defeated—on July 1, 1945. The plans
developed under the supervision of W. Churchill and supported by the American
President did not materialize because the planners convinced their superiors that
there was little chance of success considering the military and political situation
of the time. So what would a teacher of history emphasize in his/her lessons – the
close cooperation of the USSR and the Western allies or the preparation of World
War III by the latter?
Nowadays, the situation is changing. Special commissions of the two state
academies – the Russian Academy of Sciences and the Russian Academy of
Education – are to give expert opinions on scientific content and pedagogy of all
textbooks that are approved for schools. As always this is criticized from several
points of view. Some people call it a hidden form of censorship which is specifi-
cally forbidden by the Russian Constitution (article 29). Others insist upon still
stricter control being necessary while there are many cases where ideological
preferences overrun scientific facts. Still others write complaints to officials and
organizations insisting on something being included into or excluded from
school curricula.
As head of one of the commissions, I see the difficulties quite clearly and
understand why the progress is slow and uncertain. The reason is not in the field
of education but in the wider social and economic context. Getting rid of the
ideological pressure of the Soviet times was not accompanied by any other sys-
tem of values which would include values of education and culture acceptable for
most people though much is said about the importance of both. As a result, a
whole generation of young people grew up with the understanding that money is
the only thing that matters and that market ideology will put everything right –
and not only in the field of economics. As elsewhere in countries with transition
economies, this led to a decline in morals admitted by most people including
professional sociologists. A recent analysis of the morality of the young in
today’s Russia is presented in a short yet informative article by Batchikov and
Kara-Murza (2011). The very title of the article is in fact a synopsis of its con-
tent: “Chaotic reforms, cultural trauma and pathology of consciousness,” while
the whole situation is called catastrophic. I am not that pessimistic though I view
it as very serious. I would say that success of reforms in the Peoples Republic of
China as I understand them is partly explained by clever balance of tradition and
innovation. The explanation is certainly not new and can be easily found in the
important volume prepared together by Russian and Chinese experts that has
already been mentioned above (Россия Китай 2007). Here, it is perhaps impor-
tant to recall that too much hope in the market economy endangering the econ-
omy itself as well as the morals of the society was criticized by successful
capitalists themselves. For example, the book by G. Soros “The Crisis of Global
Capitalism: Open Society Endangered” (Сорос 1999) shows this quite well and
was translated into Russian at a very opportune moment.
3 Access and Quality
Much has been done as far as access to education is concerned. At the end of the
Soviet period, there were about 600 institutions of higher education which were all
run by the state. Now there are more than 3,000 universities and university level
institutions, though the population of Russia is just half of the USSR population.
With over 400 students per 10,000 population, we have surpassed most countries of
the world. True, all Soviet institutions of higher education had programs of 5 years
or more. Now we go over to the system in which most students will end their uni-
versity life with a 4-year bachelor’s degree and many experts are not happy about
this. Still access to higher education has never been that large.
Perhaps the greatest public interest, as far as entering universities is concerned,
is the debate on how school-leavers become university students. Since 2009, the
all-Russia/unified state examination (national standard examination) is the stan-
dard procedure which is similar to those in many countries. The idea is to check the
knowledge and skills of school-leavers by a set of written tests which are the same
all over the country and administered on the same day by independent commis-
sions. This is a stark contrast with former oral examinations administered by
schools and universities themselves. Though Russia has been experimenting with
this procedure since 2001, there are many people who oppose it for several reasons.
One of them is that this sort of checking knowledge leaves other aspects unnoticed
and not evaluated, creativity being one of them. But in practical terms, a more
important reason is that intricate techniques of swindling combining corruption
and use of modern information technologies result in scandals all over the country.
This is yet another example of the criticism of the wider public and a substantial
part of the expert community contrasting the staunch position of those in power
who are for the procedure. My understanding is that this exam is a good way to get
a general assessment of school-leavers’ achievement but it is less reliable as the
sole criterion for admitting to the university.
As everywhere growth in quantity (in the USSR there were slightly over five mil-
lion university students, now there are about nine million in Russia alone) is accom-
panied by problems of sustaining good quality. Motivation to get higher education is
steadily rising after the slump of the 1990s. At that time the whole way of life seemed
to show that getting an education is not worthwhile for it takes much time and gives
little reward. But now university teachers complain about many school-leavers’ poor
knowledge, still poorer skills and study habits. Accordingly, the Russian President
ordered the Ministry of Education and Science to monitor institutions of higher edu-
cation to check out the ineffective ones. Nobody seemed to oppose the monitoring
but the criteria and the swiftness of the procedure called forth massive criticism on
the part of university teachers and rectors (presidents). Though as many as 50 indica-
tions were demanded of the universities to make judgment, they included those that
had always been criticized by the academics, one of them being the cumulative result
of the foregoing unified state examination characteristic of the students who entered
this or that university. As a result some classical universities as well as some
8 N.D. Nikandrov
universities of fine arts were labeled by the Ministry as “having symptoms of inef-
fectiveness.” The ensuing criticism and sometimes students’ protests led to milder
pronouncements and the exclusion of some universities from the list. But the proce-
dure itself will be continued with the declared aim to improve some of the ineffective
universities while closing the worst ones. There is at least one point of almost general
consent – the understanding that there are too many universities and their affiliations
with very poor quality of education.
If access to higher education is certainly the most disputable issue as far as access
to education in a wider sense of the word is concerned, there is another problem of
interest. In the Soviet period about 80 % of all preschool children went to kindergar-
tens or even earlier level of the creche (maternity school). With the general income
of the people slowly rising, most parents prefer to keep their children at home till
about the age of three when they could go to kindergartens or similar preschool
groups. Since the slump in the 1990s, we have not yet reestablished the network of
preschool institutions, though most educationists and most parents agree that even
medium-quality kindergartens prepare children for school better than an average
family. In fact, it was the low-income argument that stimulated people to send chil-
dren to kindergartens in the Soviet times. But the Soviet experience was used by the
whole world to let women have better career possibilities and better prepare chil-
dren for school. So many countries now surpass Russia in the percentage of children
going to preschool institutions, while for us it is very often a difficult problem to
send a child to a kindergarten and parents have to line up for it. Some measures are
taken to alleviate the problem and my estimates are optimistic.
In schools of general education, there is another problem – that of school quality.
In earlier days children went to school closest to their homes. Rare exceptions were
cases of corrective schools for handicapped children and so-called schools “with a
bias” (schools with advanced programs of foreign languages, mathematics, physics,
biology etc.). Since the 1992 Law on Education was adopted, parents have the right
to choose schools, and by way of personal contacts and the Internet, better schools
are sought. At times of enrollment, it often comes to quarrels in front of the school
doors. It is yet another example when an achievement (the right for choice) is cou-
pled with a problem (not all schools are considered “good”). So nowadays schools
are obliged to take in children who live in the school area and only then other cases
should be considered. In Moscow and some other cities, there is a recent experience
with using the Internet for enrolling children in schools with the possibility that the
procedure will be used elsewhere.
Strict control of school and university curricula of the Soviet days is now gone.
However, the problem of what to teach not only remains but is exacerbated by the
newly acquired freedom of choice. As far as universities are concerned, the debate
is usually limited to the professional community of university teachers and scien-
tists. However, school curricula have really become a national issue, and since the
beginning of the 1990s, the work on national school standards has been going on. At
the very beginning it was limited to the content of school education. Since around
2000, the efforts were gradually being shifted to a wider scope of problems. By a
2007 amendment to the Law on Education (and since 1992 there have been dozens
of amendments), the national educational standard is a set of three provisions

(requirements): the structure of the basic program of education (including an explicit
list of the subjects to be taught), the level of student achievement, and the conditions
of learning (quality of school buildings, salary of teachers and teaching load, use of
advanced technologies). This wider understanding of education standards is also
kept in the new Law on Education in the Russian Federation adopted in 2012 and
signed by President V. Putin on January 5, 2013. The Law is to be implemented
beginning with September 1, 2013.
The standards for primary and basic school levels have already been adopted and
are gradually introduced in schools. The complete secondary education standard
(11 years of study now) has been very hotly debated. The most important point
of disagreement is how much the new school should keep from the previous days.
In my understanding complete break of traditional values and practices is dangerous
and destructive. Since the new standard of upper school levels is to be introduced all
over the country by 2020 only, there is still time to think and to experiment the stan-
dard adopted by the Minister for Education and Science, A. Fursenko, shortly before
he left office being the basis, for this discussion.
4 Management and Finance
Education management and finance are so closely interwoven that they can and
should be discussed together. A well-known drawback of the Soviet education
was a very high degree of centralization. In fact, this was a positive feature in the
transition period of the 1920s and 1930s because of the vast territory of the coun-
try and stiff resistance to change. It also helped during the immense stress of the
war of 1941–1945 and the restoration after it. But it all changed later. The rigidity
of the system left little space for creativity of teachers and students as well as for
introducing regional features. So the two keywords of the change in educational
management at the beginning of the 1990s were decentralization and democrati-
zation. That meant giving more administrative powers to lower levels of manage-
ment including educational institutions themselves and more independence in
expenditure. The particular features were embodied in the text of the 1992 Law on
Education. They are in line with the practices of other countries and are of no
special interest.
More important is the issue of finance. Contrary to the decree No. 1 by B. Yeltsin
and the 1992 Law on Education financing education in the 1990s was very poor.
The time was marked by low wages of all workers of education and sometimes by
no wages at all for several months. This is why teachers’ strikes were then more
frequent than other workers’ strikes. Compared to those times, there has been a
noticeable increase in educational expenses though even now they are about 4 % of
the gross domestic product (GDP). Still some innovations were introduced (or at
least proclaimed) and partly adhered to. Instead of strict itemizing of budgetary
spending, schools were to be financed in gross with greater flexibility and
10 N.D. Nikandrov
independence. Schools were allowed to take fees for some extracurricular activities
and for education services for people who did not belong to these schools. The
money earned could then be used to increase teachers’ salaries and develop material
resources. Some measures were taken to make teachers’ wages dependent on the
quality of their work. Unfortunately at that time those were mostly good wishes so
these measures are being introduced now with slight variations. The general idea is
that “money should follow students.” This means that schools have to compete to
enroll more students than others, and this is actually applied now.
Another innovative idea (innovative as compared with the Soviet model) was
involving parents and sponsors to finance education. The USSR was justly proud
of all education being free of charge; short-term courses like tailoring or car-
driving were rare exceptions. Since 1990, there exist in Russia thousands of
non-government (private) schools, colleges, universities, and other educational
institutions. Still more often a part – sometimes a substantial part – of student
body in the state-run institutions pay tuition fees.
Since about the same time, there exists the provision that the content of education
within the limits of the state standard should be financed by the state, while the parents
or older students themselves should only pay for what exceeds this limit. However,
until now it was rather rarely the case when private schools did receive the money.
Sometimes educational authorities are short of money. It happens, too, that the richer
schools prefer not to take money from the state because of stricter accounting when
money is allotted from state budgets. But there is strong pressure now to make the
provision work. It is partly explained by the demographic pattern. Because of dwin-
dling population there are fewer potential students so less money can be earned as
tuition fees. In this situation money allotted by the state becomes more attractive.
Many rectors (presidents) of state and private universities have apprehensions that the
transition to 3 or 4-year bachelor’s and 5 or 6-year master’s programs will mean
decline in educational spending. There have been many statements to the contrary
from the authorities at various levels and I believe in their good intentions. But I think
only real practice will show if the intentions come to real money.
5 Socialization and Upbringing
The aforementioned changes (and there have been many more) are of the sort that
some achievements are naturally (though unfortunately) coupled with challenges
and flaws. Nonetheless, there is an aspect where I would say we have almost failed
in Russia. This is socialization or inclusion of the young (and not very young) into
the newly formed social, economic, and cultural fabric of life. It was considered of
special importance in the Soviet Union but the system of values was quite different
from that of the present. Getting rid of the former system of values presented dif-
ficulties of two sorts. First, some of the values were dropped not because they were
intrinsically bad but because they were specifically valued in the Soviet system,
because they were “too Soviet.” A good example is patriotism, which was one of
the objectives of education in the Soviet Union and was made a derogatory word
by those who came to power in 1991. In the same vein, coordination and mutual
assistance gave way to criticism and competition, collectivism was converted to
individualism, and cultural values were supplanted by material and monetary
gains. This brought about more crime especially among the young people and
other societal and economic problems.
There is little doubt that education alone cannot be made responsible for this.
Unfortunately, the content of socialization in its wide sense has the same message
which has been analyzed in detail elsewhere (Запесоцкий 2008; Никандров 2000).
The whole message of the media, posters, banners, leaflets, and advertisements
which people find in their post creates a distorted and unattractive image of Russia.
With the many drawbacks we have in Russia, it is not that bad but the image forms
the mentality of the people.
The other thing of importance is that violence of all sorts, sex in all possible
ways, and propaganda of material success, which is reached no matter how, fill the
TV and radio broadcasts with understandable influence on the young. This is not to
say that parents, educationists, or ordinary people do not understand all that. But on
the one hand, the Russian constitution specifically forbids censorship, and any
attempt to lessen the number of violence and sex images on the TV screen can be
interpreted as censorship. On the other hand, such films and broadcasts bring the
most money to TV and other media. The Internet is also full of that stuff. So there
have been several attempts to set up supervisory boards which would help to settle
the problem, but they all failed. I hope there will be a gradual shift for the better
because my personal observations and available statistics show that the situation in
Russia in this respect is more serious than in other countries.
As it stands though, the system of education has to cope with the problems pre-
sented by the media rather than rely on their help in the process of socialization. In
several articles and a report presented at the joint session of all the Russian state acad-
emies of sciences, I tried to highlight the messages that are collectively carried by the
mass media in present-day Russia (Никандров 2007; Никандров 2010). Though
some people in this country may disagree, the report was supported by the session and
I will sum up the messages in several statements:
1. The negative or evil ideas and deeds take the upper hand in the world and
should consequently be emphasized in the media.
2. Our world is the world of violence of all sorts (physical, military, sexual,
psychological).
3. The basic (sexual) instinct seems to be the basis of everything. It is difficult to
distinguish between the “normal” and “too much of”, but many observations
support the idea that in quantity and the openness with which corresponding
visual material is shown in Russia we overrun the whole planet.
4. The cult of the dolce vita (literally “sweet life” in Italian), material success in
general and money in particular is natural and necessary, the teaching of “rea-
sonable needs” is an aftermath of the communist times, higher (spiritual) needs
are explained either by stupidity or poverty.
12 N.D. Nikandrov
5. Market rules the world not only in economy, but also in overall relations of man
to man for everything can be bought and sold.
6. Competition and rivalry for profit and resources are natural; mutual help and
altruism are exceptions proper to very few freaks or saints, the basic principle
being “taking all from life.”
7. The Russian authorities at all levels of government do not take care of the peo-
ple and are highly corrupt. They were better in the 1990s (i.e., when we strictly
followed the US lead in everything – N. Nikandrov).
8. The Russian army, police, and the law-enforcing agencies in general are against
the people, cruel, and corrupt.
9. Civil patriotism was possible in the past (e.g., in the Great Patriotic War of
1941–1945), but now it is impossible because of the relations between the peo-
ple and those in power.
10. The rights and freedoms of man in Russia are not adequately defended and are
purposefully violated by the powers and by the people towards each other,
which happens more often than in “civilized,” that is, Western countries.
11. The high dignitaries in the Russian orthodox church were tarnished themselves
by their collaboration with the state security authorities in the past, while now
by the unashamed use of their special position for purposes of material gains.
12. The development of Russia is extremely low.
13. There are insurmountable contradictions and conflicts between the countries
of the Union of Independent States which are called for by the events of the
Russian history of earlier days.
14. The Russian authorities are ineffective through being split. There is conflict
between the federal and the regional authorities, among the various branches of
power as well as in the Putin–Medvedev tandem.
No doubt clever choice of text and visual material (and there is many of both)
will produce support for these statements, as for anything else. And – again no
doubt – there is also much TV and other media content to support a more balanced
view of Russia. But for various reasons, the balance is mostly on the negative side
if the number of images, number of repetitions, and their proximity to prime time is
considered. This produces excessive anxiety in the people while persons with pho-
bia and other similar psychological problems are more affected.
Apart from the aforementioned joint session of the academies of sciences, I had
chances to speak about all this in both houses of the Federal Assembly (the Russian
Parliament). I am optimistic because similar pronouncements are made by President
V. Putin, Prime Minister D. Medvedev, and other important figures who take deci-
sions. Optimistic, too, because the newly adopted the Law on Education in the Russian
Federation signed by V. Putin on January 5, 2013 specifically mentions socialization
for the first time in Russian law-making practice. Nevertheless, the overall pattern of
the socialization which is no less important than education proper is unfavorable for
the mentality and behavioral patterns of the young Russian citizens and the necessary
changes are yet to come.
6 Other Hopes for the Future
Summing it all up, we can certainly mention important achievements in the sphere of
education though they are all coupled with challenges. There is much more freedom
in the society and choice in education – but it is often misused. Access to education
has never been so easy – but it entails poor quality in many institutions of education.
Teachers are free to experiment with the content and methods of education – but the
teaching load is too high and some teachers leave schools for better salaries and less
stress. There are many moves by educational authorities to change things for the bet-
ter – but teachers and specialists in education are not always consulted. There is
accountability of schools and competition among them to get more and better stu-
dents – but it does not always help to maintain social justice. People demand good
quality of education – but that means more lessons, more study, and poorer student
health. Monitoring quality of education is important and necessary – but the princi-
ples, methods, and the practice itself are hotly debated and severely criticized.
The educational and state authorities of Russia are certainly conscious of all
the abovementioned problems. They are also conscious of much disappointment in
the society about all this. So pronouncements about the importance of education are
common for all government officials at all levels up to the very top and not only at
times of approaching elections. Issues of education also take priority places in vari-
ous documents adopted at the highest (presidential and governmental) levels for the
period till about 2020. In May 2012, the last part of the school standard was adopted
and, as already mentioned, the new Law on Education in the Russian Federation
was signed by the President. Analyzing the all-important document, we can come to
several provisions which give an idea of general trends in educational development
for the coming years.
The Law took several years to be worked out and passed through a very intricate
system of debates and corrections. The number of suggestions made by profession-
als and ordinary citizens amounted to many thousands which is in itself unprece-
dented. Much of the discussion in the Duma (the lower house of the Russian
parliament) was understandably highly politicized for two reasons. First, education
does concern everyone in the country. Consequently, second, it is a good chance to
make (or lose) points in election campaigns and there have been several including
the presidential and the parliamentary let alone the regional and local ones. So in
practical terms, the Law could not have been made short or consensus-based. In
fact, it is almost five times longer than the previous version of 1992 with all the cor-
rections and reference articles of the latter. Some important provisions are there and
will uphold social and quality elements in the educational fabric of the country.
Some changes while being seemingly formal make a real difference – and not
always for the better. Just one example to illustrate the thesis: The new Law on
Education omits the term “basic professional education” which denotes training
factory workers in schools of vocational education. The argument is that now we
need fewer workers with only basic training, and this level is to be absorbed by the
higher level of the “secondary professional education.” Since the Russian
14 N.D. Nikandrov
Constitution stipulates that “basic professional education” is free of charge but

“secondary professional education” is not, many poorer students who have some
support from the state like free board and lodging may at least for the time being
lose the support.
It has many times been repeated that the practice of most education being free of
charge is to be continued. Since the promise dates back to the very beginning of
independent Russia (1992) and there has been widening practice of taking fees for
all sorts of things in education, people do have apprehensions. Some of them are
slogans of the political opposition but they are not unfounded. Up to now there have
been elaborate strict financial and organizational rules and patterns for which ser-
vices fees can be taken and how this is to be done. However, they are not strictly
adhered to and people often complain that too much money has to be paid for too
many things. The new Law puts some order into practice and contains specific pro-
visions for the whole school system of education being free of charge within the
limits of the federal state standard of 37 h/week.
As far as preschool education is concerned, the most important goal to achieve is
to assure full access to it for all families who need and want it. This is to be achieved
by 2016. Now just about 60 % children do go to all types of preschool institutions,
and by the beginning of 2012/2013 school year, about two million children (or,
rather, parents) lined up to get the service. The problem is so acute that special
emphasis was made on it in the Ukaz (Decree) of President V. Putin “On the national
strategy of action in the interests of children.” The Ukaz was signed on a symbolic
day of June 1, 2012, the date being the International Children’s Day celebrated in
many countries and just 3 weeks after Putin’s inauguration day. In the new Law
preschool education is presented as one of its levels, alleviating fears of some
people that the provision of preschool education, though reasonable in itself, will
introduce a kind of final examination for the very young children.
The Law is important, too, for making certain the existing provisions of the
new general education standards which are now gradually introduced into
schools. As mentioned above what is within the limits of the standards is to be
free of charge. This is why teachers and parents are closely watching what is
being promised and done in this field. The present-day standards are a compro-
mise between a wider content of education proposed by the Presidium of the
Russian Academy of Education and a narrower content (which is understandably
cheaper) proposed by another group. It is still more so with the standard of the
upper secondary education (years 10 and 11 of the school program). My hope is
that since the last mentioned standard is to be fully introduced by about 2020,
there will be a bias towards wider education content. The immediate task is to
monitor bringing education standards into school practice and introduce the
corrections shown as necessary by the school practice. In 2012 the Russian
Academy of Education instituted a Commission with the participation of the
regional ministers of education to coordinate the procedure.
The government promises to put more money into education practice and the
infrastructure of education. As far as the bulk of money and resources is measured,
this is certainly true, and the growth in the latest years is greater than in some other
fields. This is the result of the growth of the GDP while the part of it allotted for
education is stable and sometimes even dwindles. For example, in 2005 the GDP
was 21,609 billion rubles, while it was 54,369 billion rubles in 2011. At the same
time the percentage of the GDP spent on education was kept at about 4 % with very
slight variations about the figure. The same is true about the “consolidated” budget
(the sum total of all the money from the budgets of various levels). The schools of
general education are financed mostly by the municipal budgets. This explains a
very substantial difference among teachers’ salaries in various regions of Russia.
Though some measures are taken to alleviate the problem, the average salary of a
teacher in Moscow is 55,600 rubles (September, 2012), in the region of Orel
13,300, in the Altay region 12,300, etc. Steps are also taken to make teachers’ sala-
ries more dependent on the quality of their work, but there is no consensus about
how the quality is to be evaluated. The primary task now is still to raise teachers’
salaries to the average level of each particular region. The task is realistic and is sure
to be achieved soon.
The Law on Education adds certainty to the very sensitive issue of finance in
general and teachers’ salary in particular. The teachers’ status is also put up though
they are not (as some people hoped) made “civil servants.” The issue of teachers
becoming civil servants was being discussed since the beginning of the 2000s. My
understanding of the problem is twofold. On the one hand, civil servants in the
Russian terminology and practice get high salaries and sometimes higher bonuses
of various sorts. However, they are less independent in their professional behavior
and this is something the Russian teacher is getting more and more conscious of and
accustomed to since the early 1990s.
Many experts foresee some trouble with the introduction of the normalized per
capita approach to financing schools and universities. Seemingly this is the only
logical way of action: the more students, the more money (“Money follows stu-
dents”). Nonetheless, the practice of implementing the approach revealed prob-
lems. It is difficult to implement in rural schools where the task of teaching is no
less demanding than in urban areas, while classes are smaller. The practice of
restructuring and merging schools is not easy to implement because of large dis-
tances between townships and villages with poor transport and road facilities. And
it has been shown that closing a school in a village most probably “closes” the
village itself which merely disappears because younger people with children
leave for other places with better educational facilities. Still steps are taken in this
direction and computer/internet technologies help too.
In the latter respect, considerable progress has been made. All schools are now
provided with computers and the Internet facilities. Sometimes this is the only way
to make up-to-date knowledge and methods of teaching immediately available in
far-off places. Using interactive electronic textbooks is also gaining strength. The
new Law on Education introduces the practice of distant technologies in education.
While they are already being used more widely, the law provision makes it possibil-
ity to get almost all education via distant technologies under the obligatory supervi-
sion and testing by the teachers.
16 N.D. Nikandrov
The Law requires more attention to be paid to encourage the gifted students of all
ages. Appropriate programs are adopted for gifted children and university students,
grants are provided for them and their teachers. With the unified state examination
as the main criterion of admission to higher education, the so-called “olympiads”
(competitions among schoolchildren in various subjects) provide gifted children a
chance to be encouraged for their specific abilities and achievement. Sometimes the
success in the competitions overran the poorer results of the state examinations. No
less important is provision for learners with special problems in education (physi-
cal, psychic or behavioral). The general idea is inclusive education as almost every-
where in the world. It is gaining strength even now, but this is the first time it is
stipulated in law.
Important changes are ahead in the Russian higher education system. On the one
hand, Russia is country No. 1 in the percentage of people with higher education
diplomas (54 % while Canada is second with 51 % and Israel is third with 46 %). It
should also be mentioned that most of them studied 5 years or more, whereas the
majority of other countries’ diplomas are 4-year bachelor’s diplomas. But not all is
that simple. The quality problem is quite real in many universities or university type
institutions of higher education. It is acute in many non-government institutions but
not only there.
The other problem is that of demography. There are too few school-leavers to fill
the many existing university vacancies. And, last but not least, now most students
will end their university life as bachelors with about 10 % of them continuing their
course of study to become masters. The specialist 5-year programs which were
paramount before will be an exception. All those changes considered, the plans are
to close or restructure about 30 % universities by 2016.
It is also a benchmark to achieve that at least five Russian universities are among
the first 100 in international rankings like that of Quacquarelli Symonds by about
the same year. The QS ranking as other similar rankings place particular emphasis
on research, number of teachers and students from abroad, and citations per faculty.
Though many experts consider the “publish or perish” approach outdated, measures
will be taken to raise the corresponding indicators in leading Russian universities
including better financing.
Something must be done to improve teacher training. As it is now, just about
5–10 % graduates of teacher training institutions do become school teachers.
Others find employment elsewhere. The solution is seen in making teacher
training institutions part of better universities to enhance their training in the
fields of their future school subjects. However, this may result in lowering their
didactic and psychological preparedness which only time will show true or
false. Some rectors (presidents) of teacher training institutions have also appre-
hensions that they will be “Cinderella” (low-placed servants) as part of larger
universities. Hopefully the higher status of teachers (“education workers”) in
the new Law on Education will help attract better students wishing to become
teachers.
As mentioned above, higher education standards attract less public attention
than those of general education. However, with the introduction of bachelor and
master degrees as levels of higher education working out, the hundreds of

specialized standards will also present a serious practical task if not an altogether
new problem.
An important feature in the changes to be implemented in the near future is more
attention given to moral education. This was considered indispensable in the Soviet
times and was all but forgotten in the 1990s. More often than not it is now discussed
under the general heading of forming the identity of the citizens of Russia. It is now
part of the educational standards at all levels. However, it is crucial at the level of
general education (forms 1–11) and it took much time and effort by the Russian
Academy of Education to make this happen. The hope for this change is unfortu-
nately slightly eroded by very little progress in positive socialization, that is to say,
making the young to adhere to a system of values of good citizenship. As it stands
and as shown above, the general pattern of mass media and other socialization
instruments working against rather than in cooperation with the education system is
kept almost intact since the 1990s. Hopefully the newly formed Committee on Mass
Media in the State Duma will have more success in cooperating with various levels
and institutions of education in insuring positive socialization and better moral
education (Дармодехин 2012). If not, the abovementioned message of the social-
ization pattern will produce still more harm.
With a lot of criticism on the part of some experts and interested citizens, I am
still optimistic. It is very easy to say that the road to hell is paved with good inten-
tions. But hopefully we have passed through difficult times in education not to
lose the gains that have been achieved and mentioned above. What we do need is
some time of evolutionary change rather than revolutionary upheavals, and in this
respect there is a certain consensus in Russia.
References
Батчиков С., Кара-Мурза С. Хаос реформ, культурная травма и патология сознания //

Экономические стратегии. – 2011. - № 4. – P. 18–25. (Batchikov S, Kara-Murza S. Chaotic
reforms, cultural trauma and pathology of consciousness//Economics strategies. 2011. № 4.
pp.18–25).
Дармодехин С.В. О разработке современной стратегии воспитания и социализации детей
Педагогика. 2012. № 3. С.41-49. (Darmodekhin S.V. Developing a modern strategy of educat-
ing and socializing children // Pedagogika. 2012. № 3. Pp. 41–49).
Днепров Э.Д. Четвертая школьная реформа в России.- М.: Интерпракс, 1994. 248 с. (Dneprov
E.D. The fourth school reform in Russia.- Moscow: Interprax, 1994. 248 p.).
Запесоцкий А.С. Образование и средства массовой информации как факторы социализации
современной молодежи.- Санкт-Петербург: СПбГУП, 2008. 464 с. (Zapesotsky A.
Education and the media as means of socializing the young people of today. St. Petersburg:
Publishing House of the University of the Humanities, 2008. 464 p.).
Никандров Н.Д. Воспитание и социализация в современной России: риски и возможности //
Научная сессия академий, имеющих государственный статус (Москва, 5–6 октября 2006
года). Москва.: Наука, 2007. С.18-28. (Nikandrov N.D. Education and socialization in
present-day Russia: The risks and the possibilities // The scientific session of the state acade-
mies of sciences. - Moscow: Nauka Publishing House, 2007. Pp. 18–28).
18 N.D. Nikandrov
Никандров Н.Д. Идеология и идеологическое воспитание: есть ли они, нужны ли они

сегодня? // Родная Ладога. 2010. № 3. С.59-76. (Nikandrov N.D. Ideology and ideological
upbringing: do they exist and are they necessary? Rodnaya Ladoga. 2010. # 3. Pp. 59–76).
Никандров Н.Д. Россия: социализация и воспитание на рубеже тысячелетий. Москва:
Гелиос ОРВ, 2000. 229 с. (Nikandrov N. Russia: socialization and upbringing at the threshold
of the millennia. Moscow: Helios ARV, 2000. 229 p.).
Россия, Китай: образовательные реформы на рубеже XX-XXI вв.: Сравнительный анализ /
Отв. ред. Н.Е.Боревская, В.П.Борисенков, Чжу Сяомань. – Москва, 2007. – 592 с. (Russia
– China: Educational reforms at the edge of the 20th and 21st centuries / Ed. by N. Borevskaya,
V. Borisenkov, Xiaoman Zhu. – Moscow, 2007. – 592 pp.).
Сорос, Джордж. Кризис мирового капитализма. Открытое общество в опасности.- М.:
ИНФРА-М, 1999. 262 с. (The crisis of global capitalism: open society endangered.-
Moscow: INFRA-M Publishing House, 1999. – 262 pp.).
Указ Президента Российской Советской Федеративной Социалистической Республики “О
первоочередных мерах по развитию образования в РСФСР” //Российская газета.- 1991.12
июля. (Decree of the President of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic “On the
priority measures for the development of education” Rossiyskaya Gazeta.- 1991.- July 12).
Reynolds, David. From World War to cold war: Churchill, Roosevelt and the International History
of the 1940s. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
France: Permanence and Change
Marie Duru-Bellat
Abstract The chapter focuses on important evolutions of educational issues nested

in a broader ideological and economic context in France since 2000. It first describe
these changes, the transformation of the ideological context they reflect, and the new
framework they set up for political issues and concrete reforms. Then it analyzes four
main aspects of education reform: the growing individualistic perspective on educa-
tion, the stress put on choice, the development of autonomy and decentralization, and
the obsession with evaluation and benchmarking. Lastly, in conclusion, it discusses
the anticipated reform trends in France in an ever-changing political context.
Keywords Educational policy • Expansion of coverage • Inclusion of lagging

students • School choice • Selective processes • Social disparities • France
Within countries such as France, the State’s responsibility for education has been
firmly established for many years in a wide variety of political contexts, especially
since the beginning of the twentieth century. This is because education is viewed as
an important factor in both individual and societal development. The State’s respon-
sibility, in this respect, includes a myriad of dimensions, the two most important
being a civic concern to educate citizens to participate effectively in public life and
an economic concern to equip students with appropriate workplace skills. It could
also be maintained that education is the main ideological means used to justify the
remaining inequalities in democratic countries where individuals are considered as
equal and education-based meritocracy is the rule. That would explain why, what-
ever the ideological changes, educational issues—especially expanding educational
opportunities—have always been very important on political agendas.
M. Duru-Bellat (*)
Sciences-Po (Paris Institute of Political Science), Paris, France

20 M. Duru-Bellat
However, educational issues are nested in a broader ideological and economic

context, and important evolutions have taken place, especially since 2000. In the
first section, I will describe these changes, the transformation of the ideological
context they reflect, and the new framework they set up for political issues and
concrete reforms (for a deeper historical view, see Robert 2010; Duru-Bellat and
van Zanten 2001). Then I will analyze four main directions in which this broad
ideological climate is seen: the growing individualistic perspective on education,
the stress put on choice, the development of autonomy and decentralization, and
the obsession with evaluation and benchmarking. When empirical research is
available, I will shed some light on the effects of these policies. Lastly, in conclu-
sion, I will discuss the anticipated reform trends in France in an ever-changing
political context.
1 The Transformation of the Ideological Context:

From Democratization to Meritocracy
Until the end of the twentieth century, French education policies were dominated
by the expansion and democratization of education in a global post-World War
II European context. The general trend was to “go comprehensive,” i.e., unify
schooling, especially at the lower-secondary level, both to increase the mean level
of education and promote equal opportunity.
1.1 Expand and Unify to Achieve Democratization
In France, several institutional reforms occurred between 1959 and 1975 in order to
unify the system of education. Older educational tracks (with vocational short tracks
for the poorest pupils from age 14) were discontinued, and a common unified curricu-
lum was made compulsory. In addition, any track selection was postponed to the
end of the lower-secondary level (at age 15 or 16). However, it took some time (and
subsequent acts) for this to be achieved, and it has only been mandatory for every
French student to attend all 4 years of lower-secondary school since the 1980s. In
any case, these acts did produce an initial wave of expansion in the number of stu-
dents attending school (Duru-Bellat 2007, 2008). However, the strong social
inequalities that French sociologists (such as Pierre Bourdieu) had denounced in
the 1960s continued, especially at the end of lower-secondary school (“collège”) when
students were tracked either toward upper-secondary schools (“lycée”) or toward
vocational tracks, so that the inequalities were mostly shifted to a higher level.
Thus, a second wave of reforms was implemented in the late 1980s, both to
increase the mean level of education and to try to reduce the gap between social
groups in this respect. The easiest way to achieve this was to increase access to
upper-secondary school, which was done; France has experienced a dramatic
educational expansion since the 1960s. After a steady increase in the percentage
France: Permanence and Change 21
of students passing the “baccalauréat” (the exam at the end of secondary school,
necessary for gaining access to tertiary education) from about 5 % in 1950 to 28 %
in the early 1980s, the political objective of “80 % of a generation achieving the
baccalauréat” was set in 1981. This goal gave the evolution a boost, and the figure
rose rapidly to 55 % in 1993 and 63 % in 2005 (it has been stuck between 63 % and
65 % since around 2000).
Elevating the educational level of the younger generations was one of the main
targets of the socialist government that took office in France in 1981. It was reiter-
ated by all subsequent administrations, in spite of their various political leanings.
Amazingly, the educational goals met a consensus seldom observed in this country
in political matters. This is because it was grounded on the strong meritocratic
foundation of French society, which gives central and legitimate importance to the
diploma as a tool for shaping one’s life. Merit and the correlative issue of equality
of opportunities were very central themes of Nicolas Sarkozy’s first presidential
campaign (in 2007). This consensus concerning merit and education as a conveyor
of social justice is also easily understandable because it matches the European
discourse about the evolution toward the so-called knowledge economy. Moreover,
and just as importantly, it meets the interests of all the actors in question. For
the State, expanding education requires significant funds but has the advantage of
keeping a mass of young people away from the job market (and thus from unem-
ployment). Of course, teachers themselves are satisfied because this expansion
enlarges their labor market and reinforces their influence in French society. For
parents, it looks reassuring to have their children increasingly better educated so
that they can cope with an uncertain future and job market. The same is true for
employers, who are in favor of this expansion of public education since they did not
pay anything for it. Thus, the “more education” policy has a large consensus, since
no one can overtly go against increasing equality of opportunities.
This educational expansion has resulted in some democratization (Duru-Bellat and
Kieffer 2001), but it has been achieved through the development of a variety of bac-
calauréats and tracks in the tertiary level (diversifying a “product” is one way to
attract new customers). An example was the creation of the “baccalauréat profes-
sionnel” in 1985, which was created to give access to the baccalauréat-level educa-
tion to students studying vocational tracks. These students are mostly from low
socioeconomic backgrounds and have encountered difficulties in school early on,
because these vocational tracks are considered as less demanding than general ones.
Today in France, about 23 % of each generation graduates with a tertiary degree
equivalent to a Bachelor’s degree (i.e., 3 years of post-baccalauréat education) and
42 % graduates with a tertiary degree of some level. However, while France, according
to the OECD, is among the top countries in terms of the number of tertiary students
(South Korea and Canada have more), important social inequalities are still observed
(Duru-Bellat 2007; see also OECD 2010). For example, among those students
who entered lower-secondary school in 1995, 88 % of socially privileged students
received the baccalauréat, compared to 41 % of students from least qualified
working-class backgrounds. Moreover, educational inequalities are increasingly
taking a qualitative form, with a growing trend toward some “social specialization”
of the various tracks. Today, among those students who reach the last year of
22 M. Duru-Bellat
upper-secondary school, about 40 % of socially privileged children follow the

scientific track, compared to about 5 % of students from least qualified working-
class backgrounds. The latter are much more likely to study vocational tracks. And
since 1985, the development of the “baccalauréat professionnel” has been an impor-
tant component of this “segregative democratization” (students from the lowest
socioeconomic groups and with unemployed parents account for about 70 % of the
students following this track).
Similarly, we are presently facing a segregative democratization at the tertiary
level: the percentage of students from working-class backgrounds is increasing
across the board, but in the meantime, their numbers in elite schools is remaining
stable or is even slightly decreasing. Among those French children born between 1959
and 1968, about 21 % of upper-class children attended an elite school, compared to
less than 1 % of working-class children. The most prestigious elite schools in
France (e.g., polytechnic and HEC) are able to control (and restrict) the size of
their student body, which they have done over the last decades, while French public
universities are required to enroll all candidates, since the baccalauréat automati-
cally gives a student the right to enter any track he or she desires. Thus, the democra-
tization at that level has been “absorbed” by the universities.
In general, while we observed a generalized downward trend in the association
between education and social origin (because the least advanced students are catching
up with the most advanced) in France at the end of the twentieth century, this is
compatible with remarkably stable (or even increasing) social inequality in transi-
tions at more advanced stages of the educational system. And the differentiation that
was implemented to boost expansion—e.g., the professional baccalauréat—has
channeled these newcomers to higher secondary education into specific tracks.
In the last 20 years, more children from disadvantaged families have received the
baccalauréat, but they have been funneled into the new vocational tracks created at
that level, thus diverted from the traditional general tracks. While there would be no
sense in saying that the latter are of better value, one thing is sure: these tracks
lead to tertiary education with higher chances of success, which in turn generally
results in better opportunities on the job market.
1.2 A Shifting Stress to Equity
During the economic crisis of the 1980s, the ideals of the 1960s began to fade, and
“going adaptable” (rather than “going comprehensive”) in education in order to face
economic competition and boost employment progressively took priority on the
agenda. This evolution itself was nested in the spreading global liberal climate and
materialized notably in the “New Public Management” principles, which emphasized
the individualization and efficiency of previously public goods. This broad trend was
embedded in an overall evolution toward more individualism. It also possibly involved
a certain resignation concerning the possibility of really reducing inequalities. If such
was the case, it would be easier to focus on the reduction of the inequalities of
opportunities between individuals rather than on structural inequalities.
In recent years, this is why equity, rather than equality, has been on the agenda
more and more often. It is important to underline the meaning of this change, which is
not only a semantic slide. Equity differs from equality since it implies the distinction
between fair and unfair inequalities. That runs counter to the earlier conception of
fairness in France, which has long been equated with sameness, i.e., catering to all
the students in a strictly identical manner. Equity amounts to treating students in an
unequal way precisely because they are unequal (especially because they face
unequal starting conditions). In education, formal equality of treatment is unfair as
long as there are “objective” inequalities between families. Thus, at school, some
degree of “positive discrimination” (or “affirmative action,” notably allotting more
resources to certain students) is legitimated in order to level the playground so that
truly fair competition may take place. Thus, equity refers to the current concept of
equality of opportunities, which is supposed to justify later inequalities in perfor-
mance at school and rewards in adult life. Ultimately, some inequalities may be
judged fair: whenever a child receives a chance, only his or her merit and effort will
justify the result. The notion of equity suggests that we should not stick to the single
notion of equality but rather should focus on the question of which inequalities we
can consider fair: some inequalities of performance may be judged as fair, under
some conditions, if the competition was fair or if equality of opportunities was
secured. Following the North American model, the notion of “positive discrimination”
is now widely accepted in Europe, while inequalities of achievement between
students are often viewed with a certain fatalism; this is one of the notion’s
downsides among the many that deserve some consideration (see Sect. 2.1).
2 Some Recent Policies and Some Hints as to Their Impact
2.1 An Individualistic Conception of Education
In France, the neoliberal approach to education has resulted in the increased stress
placed on individual success and on the notion of merit (for a comprehensive
discussion, see Duru-Bellat 2009). What is at stake then is the detection of brilliant
students from lower socioeconomic statuses or ethnic minorities. Starting in 2007
(after the election of Nicolas Sarkozy as president of France), some specific “add-ons”
have been offered to these students, such as extra lessons, boarding schools (“internats
d’excellence”), and specific “merit grants”.
However, one might ask whether it is truly possible to detect merit. In France, as
in most European countries (but to a lesser degree in northern Europe), social
inequality of achievement is detected at a very early age, even before primary school.
As early as 4 or 5 years old, the gap between children whose parents are mid- or
upper-level professionals and those whose parents are unskilled manual workers is
about 1.2 standard deviation gap (on the basis of cognitive and linguistic tests).
These early cognitive inequalities, which can be tied to varied conditions of upbringing,
have a determinative influence over achievement level in primary school, and
24 M. Duru-Bellat
both preschool (“école maternelle”) and the first years of primary schooling prove
insufficient in offsetting them. This is problematic, since it is impossible to detect
“merit” if the playground was not level at the outset.
Later in life, these achievement inequalities tend to increase since a cumulative
deficit process is generally in place. This is because a student’s academic achieve-
ment level at the start of the academic year at all school levels is the main factor
responsible for the academic level at the end of the year. Just as prior achievement
is linked to a student’s family characteristics, social inequality is “retranslated” into
academic level. Nobody would dare, at such an early stage, consider that these
achievement inequalities are the outcome of inequality of merit. During subsequent
stages of the schooling career, inequalities continue to accumulate even more
markedly (Duru-Bellat 2007). One reason for this is that the school organization at
the secondary level provides more individual choices, and thus some families
develop strategies to draw benefits from what appear to them to be advantageous
opportunities. These range from the choice of some subjects, to educational track
decisions, and even to the choice of the school itself. Here again, nobody would
consider that these mainly strategic and distinctive choices have something to do
with merit itself.
Starting in 2008, the overarching neoliberal climate and specific policies gave
“deserving” students (those with high achievement levels and a disadvantaged
background) more freedom to choose their own school, thus spreading the idea that
if you are able to seize those opportunities offered to you, you can succeed. More or
less overtly, this suggests that education is no longer a public resource or a universal
right that the State owes all its citizens but rather a private good that one may or
may not get and whose quality results from an individual’s choices and is that
individual’s responsibility. This notion translates into the now commonly used (in
the neoliberal climate) term of “empowerment,” which amounts to convincing
people that they are responsible for their life and are able to find individual solutions
to their problems on their own. From this perspective, that is why school choice is
promoted: since it now appears obvious that the State is no longer able to provide
equal quality education in all school settings, students simply have to escape from
bad schools if they want to maximize their own chances.
This trend toward more choice is too recent for its effects to be estimated precisely.
However, in a context of growing employment problems for young people, one might
expect that as long as education continues to be a valued positional good, giving
students more opportunities of choice will continue to reinforce inequality as long
as students and their families have unequal resources and opportunities.
2.2 More Allowance for Individual Choices Generates

More Segregation Between Schools
Whenever school choice is promoted (in France as in comparable European countries),

research shows that student overall mean achievement does not improve. Rather,
quite conversely, it generates a chain of mechanisms that foster inequality. It is now
widely admitted that when the school choice is completely open (as in Belgium),
it generates a marked hierarchical academic ranking of schools, which are also
more socially segregated. In France, the first analysis of the effects of the school
choice option given to families (starting in 2007) shows that it has increased social
segregation in a number of schools, especially in Paris and large cities, since only
the most privileged families have the resources needed to make the choice (infor-
mation, money to cover transportation costs or other various arrangements, etc.).
Consequently, the policy increases social inequality since segregation itself fos-
ters inequality. A variety of mechanisms are involved here.
First, one should underline the fact that social sorting between schools is associated
with larger disparities between students, in terms of both academic results and
social origins, while the overall mean performance is not improved. This suggests
that the total influence of student background on level of achievement is explained
in part by the school attended and not only by some cultural disadvantages. This
strong trend—segregation actually fosters educational inequality—results in large
part from what is now labeled “peer effect.” Research shows that the composition of
the student body itself contributes to creating an environment of uneven quality,
because classmates are resources for each other. It also impacts the ambiance of the
daily classroom life as well as the teaching practices it allows or not. In fact,
students from working-class backgrounds attending mixed-intake schools progress
better (for France, see Duru-Bellat 2007). This is because they benefit from contact
with students who are better adjusted to school norms and have greater cultural
resources and thus are less prone to developing anti-school attitudes. In these
environments, they also develop more ambitious educational aspirations.
So, across the board, a balanced social mix improves both student academic
progress and attitudes without being detrimental to the mean level of achievement.
It especially boosts the weakest students, while putting only a slight brake on the
most brilliant ones. Thus, as long as more privileged parents continue to look for
social or academic resemblance when choosing schools (knowing that the quest
for social resemblance seems more important than the quest strictly for academic
excellence), and parents whose children would benefit more from heterogeneity
continue to be less prone to choosing, more choice will result in increased educa-
tional inequality.
Another group of mechanisms relates to the unevenness of teaching resources
provided in these segregated contexts. Often the most privileged tracks or schools
attract greater financial resources and, more importantly, more qualified and experi-
enced teachers (since experienced teachers are more effective in teaching).
Moreover, teachers develop higher expectations when confronted with more prom-
ising students, and curriculum content coverage generally improves, so that all
across the board, students have more opportunities to learn. All in all, program
provision and, more globally, the quality of a school’s offering are key mechanisms
by which inequalities are reinforced. The contrastive environments formed by
schools serving advantaged or disadvantaged students provide unequal settings of
both learning and socialization. This is because, in any educational setting, social
intake is a key ingredient because of the psychosocial dynamics between teachers
and students and among students themselves.
26 M. Duru-Bellat
Consequently, choice and social sorting between schools raise a problem of

efficiency and fairness: while the efficiency of this new style of school “management”
remains quite uncertain, it could be maintained that, in France as anywhere else, a
common level of knowledge would be better promoted if students were educated
together in the same schools.
2.3 Decentralization or “Marketization” of Education?
In the meantime, the growing concern regarding efficiency and State disengagement,
as well as the obsession with downsizing costs, has led to recommendations that
education systems become more “flexible” (this term is often used by promoters
of the European Lisbon strategy) and decentralized. That is the reason why, along
with ideological considerations, school autonomy and the decentralization of the
education system are promoted. Although decentralization may also be part of a
left-wing climate underlying actor autonomy and adaptation to students as they are,
over the last several decades, the underlying references here have (again) been the
New Public Management principles. What is at stake is increasing competition,
with reference to the model of a perfect and very efficient market. One might add
that it is this ideology which also led to the higher development of private education
in many countries (but not so much in France in comparison with other European
countries). Thus, one may use the term “marketization” of education, although it
may have rather limited application in France.
Concretely, the expressed motives for educational decentralization are diverse.
First, it is supposed to increase efficiency because teachers and staff would have
more freedom to adapt their practices to their local student body. Moreover, it aims
to limit bureaucracy and allows for a better financial control. And, just as importantly,
it is supposed to raise school responsiveness to local communities: consumers
would be given more power to push for teacher improvement, so that the latter would
have more incentives to improve their own practices. Educational decentralization
may affect different levels of decision-making: human resource management
(e.g., appointing teachers), student policies (e.g., school admissions), financial
resources (school budget), and curricula (content, textbooks). European countries
present a patchwork of situations in these respects, but it should be noted that France
(and others countries, such as Portugal) is rather resistant to the global trend toward
decentralization, compared with other countries that, in different historical contexts,
have already implemented strong decentralization, often for several decades
(e.g., the United Kingdom and some Eastern European countries).
Across the board, contrary to what was expected—that “marketized” education
would be more efficient—the relationship between the various aspects of school
autonomy and mean student performance proves to be weak, and the widespread
positive expectations that exist in regard to school autonomy and decentralization of
decision-making are not supported. Some studies (Wossman 2007) find a positive
correlation between higher degrees of school autonomy in certain respects and
average student performance, but the causality remains uncertain, as is always the
case with cross-sectional data, such as PISA surveys (assessing student performance
at age 15). Moreover, other studies (for a synthesis, see Teese and Lamb 2007;
van den Branden et al. 2011) suggest that decentralization proves detrimental to
performance homogeneity, fostering larger inequalities.
Today, it is widely agreed that without a centrally geared monitoring system and
control of standards, decentralization and the correlative adaptation of schools to
their student body are bound to cause increased achievement disparity and different
forms of social inequalities. Even if this remains an open issue (see Duru-Bellat and
Meuret 2003, comparing England and France), the best way to boost efficiency
without damaging equity and social cohesion seems to be to implement, along with
decentralization, some national control, notably for setting standards and managing
evaluation. This kind of evolution has taken place in some European countries, but
in France there is still today some reluctance toward centralized and standardized
evaluations, from teachers who fear that it may be used to assess their own efficiency.
That makes the present trend toward decentralization even more risky.
In a broader sense, decentralization may also mean opening schools (and more
broadly, educational decisions) to other partners. Some global policies used in
disadvantaged areas are moving in that direction. Here also, we have been facing an
important twofold shift in most European countries (and especially in France): (i) in
order to even out the quality of what schools offer to every pupil, it is now widely
admitted that some “positive discrimination” must be implemented; (ii) it is no longer
considered better to focus on individuals (on the weakest students, as discussed
above in this paper), but rather to focus on schools, and still more often on specific
larger geographical areas.
This latter strategy has been implemented in France since the 1980s with “Zones
d’Education Prioritaire (ZEP)” which were inspired by the former British “Education
Priority Action” and defined on the basis of the socioeconomic characteristics of the
population. The rationale here is that since the problems encountered by students
from the most disadvantaged backgrounds are multiple, a variety of partners and
institutions must be called upon to help, including street educators, policemen, and
social workers. Objective evaluations of the impact of this kind of action focused on
whole areas have been disappointing: even if some positive results in achievement
and attitudes may have resulted, they were canceled out by the negative impact of
the stigma attached to the schools and areas in question. However, some argue that
this evolution may have been even worse without this kind of action because of the
increased social segregation often observed in those areas as a result of middle-class
flight. The public funds may also be targeted too loosely, since as many as one out
of four schools at the lower-secondary level were included in the French ZEPs.
In 2006, a new program called “ambition réussite” (operation success) was
launched. It is more strictly targeted and attempts to attract more experienced teachers
to these areas as well as to provide more individualized help. Moreover, it also helps
give students with good results access to the best upper-secondary or tertiary schools
through special admission regulations and extra subsidies, with the goal of boosting
student motivation during lower-secondary school. Again, the stress is put on
28 M. Duru-Bellat
“empowering” actors with the hope of increased efficiency. The risk here is that
those students unable to flee their neighborhood’s poorest schools will be still more
disadvantaged in contexts still more segregated. In that sense, even if the obsession
with performance and testing is a criticized component of “New Public
Management”, the central State’s concern with what is learnt at school can be seen
as all the more justifiable since the system is decentralized. Actually, it could be
argued that this is precisely the case in France, since, in 2005, a special educational
act (see www.loi.ecole.gouv.fr) included the concept of a “socle commun de connais-
sances,” i.e., a common core knowledge that should be acquired by every French
student leaving the compulsory schooling. So, despite the (uncertain) feasibility
of the objective and the neoliberal climate of this period, the responsibility of the
State is reaffirmed.
2.4 The Increasing Obsession with Benchmarking
In recent decades, OECD has attempted to disseminate a way of defining education

priorities, and Europe has been increasingly involved in channeling educational
policies (Ertl 2006). However, the European Union has no legal way to enforce
them. So, these international influences operate on a continual process of “peer
pressure” (one might even call it a “naming and shaming” process) based on
benchmarking with a search for “best practices.” This process has been institutiona-
lized under the label “open coordination method”, i.e., voluntary cooperation on the
basis of the exchange of experiences.
So, monitoring has become crucial, and in following with the Lisbon objectives,
working programs have been developed that bring together stakeholders and
experts to support the implementation of these objectives through exchange of best
practices, study visits, and peer reviews. Concretely, a set of objectives to be reached
by 2010 (and now by 2020) was adopted with precise quantitative benchmarks
(see “Progress Towards the Lisbon Objectives in Education and Training”, SEC 2007,
1284). They include participation in preschool education, civic skills, the percentage of
low-achieving 15-year-olds in reading literacy, participation of adults in lifelong
learning, and the level of educational achievement of the whole population. Regular
reports give the figures for the 27 European Union countries, identifying those
performing well in particular areas so that their expertise and good practices may
be shared with others.
Of course, the risk is to encourage only quantitative targets with unexpected side
effects. Such is the case of France. Since the 1980s, France has worked hard to
develop its upper-secondary level of education in order to close the gap with other
countries in the percentage of students graduating from upper-secondary school.
As evoked before, France has faced a dramatic expansion of education since the
1980s in response to the “80 % of a generation achieving the baccalauréat” political
objective set by the left-wing government in 1981. The expansion of the education
system was one of the main targets of the socialist government that took office in
France in 1981. It was reiterated by all subsequent governments; the last act, passed
in 2005, was no exception (reaffirming again 80 % of a generation achieving a
baccalauréat and 50 % a tertiary degree). Starting in the 1980s, these objectives met
a large consensus, since they were aimed at closing the gap with our neighbors
and were also supposed to help reduce disparities among French students while
increasing the mean level of achievement. However, research shows (Duru-Bellat
2008) that in recent decades more baccalauréat education has been accompanied by
some deterioration of the degree holders’ perspectives on the job market: for example,
the baccalauréat-leavers’ opportunities to avoid a manual or poorly qualified clerk
job have declined between the 1970s and 2009 from 60 % to 23 % (Chauvel 2010).
A consequence is that social inequalities have been shifting to a higher level rather
than being canceled out. France is a very good example of the fact that expanding
education may paradoxically be what allows social inequalities to persist. As many
sociologists now admit, growth operates here both as a safety valve and as a
counterreform, allowing things not to change.
While the French government has continued with the consensual political aim of
expanding education (today with the objective of 50 % of a generation achieving a
tertiary degree, following European directives), this continuous growth is still
accompanied by 8 % of a generation leaving the education system without any
degree whatsoever. Obviously, to focus on the benchmark “percentage achieving the
upper-secondary level” leads to making some public funding choices, since France
is not rich enough to allocate all of its public resources to education. Thus, this
precludes spending on other areas for which a better case could be made, such as
quality pre-primary schooling for underprivileged students. Here one might
underline that a list of benchmarks is not a substitute for a program or a global
education policy. One reason for this is that focusing on one area or domain would
possibly lead to the neglect of another as long as no priorities have been set.
To come back to expanding the system and increasing access rates, it should be
stressed that not only does this policy have monetary costs but it also has poorly
assessed and even taboo social and psychological costs. Many studies have shed light
on some unexpected and undesired effects of expanding education beyond a certain
threshold (generally achieved in European countries). What has been shown is that not
only does the fact that degrees have become more numerous and increasingly neces-
sary for employment (which is the case in France) not generate a fairer society but it
also progressively spoils the content of education itself. It becomes a commodity,
rather than a good, that is extremely useful but not really interesting in and of itself. In
1976, the American sociologist Ronald Dore described what he called the “diploma
disease” in developing countries, i.e., examination-oriented schooling, with detrimen-
tal effects on the quality of learning as well as on subsequent attitudes toward learn-
ing, such as ritualism, and mostly no intrinsic interest in knowledge. In the same way,
research in France shows that from the higher secondary school to some university
tracks, students seem mostly interested in the grades they get, the exams they pass,
and what returns they achieve with it, rather than in the content of the studies
themselves. Curiosity or pleasure to learn seems to fade out, and the main objective
is no longer to learn but rather to get the certification needed to gain employment.
30 M. Duru-Bellat
Moreover, when these utilitarian students enter the labor market, their disillusion
is often great. As early as 1978, the French sociologist Bourdieu identified what he
called a “deceived generation,” who, facing the gap between their diplomas and
the real job market opportunities, would adopt a disillusioned attitude both toward
work and political life or even a more offensive one leading to protest. And this is
not only a matter of disillusion but also of personal suffering: as competition
becomes harsher, education largely becomes a positional good that many
students must fail to master, since the winners must not be too numerous if there
is something to be won.
Thus, failure must be accepted as a necessary part of the selection process by both
students and politicians if some value associated with the degree is to be preserved.
At the macro level, the fact is that competition is becoming tougher and tougher and
the growing sense of economic insecurity (which is very strong among French young
people) is having broader, yet to be identified undesirable effects.
However, despite this competition, one may consider across the board that some
symbolic efficiency is achieved if the conviction that you deserve the rank you obtain
in a continuous competition remains ingrained; if so, as Bourdieu would say, the
inequalities are legitimized. But the hypothesis could be made that the growing gap
between degrees and jobs obtained may throw some doubt on the meritocratic way
in which the whole system operates (Duru-Bellat and Tenret 2012). Opening schools
and developing access to education are supposed to convey more meritocracy and
consequently more social justice. Facts and analysis by sociologists of education
show that this is fiction (albeit a necessary one). As long as degrees have some value
on the labor market and, consequently, as long as education has mainly positional
effects, one cannot hope to reduce social inequalities by opening the system. This is
because by so doing (and as long as inequalities are maintained within society, with
unequal families striving for unequal positions), inequalities will only be perpetu-
ated. Meritocracy and equality of opportunity promise equity in the race for success,
not equality in results and certainly not in economic life.
Thus, continuing with “more of the same,” i.e., simply increasing access to
education, is not an efficient strategy. First, “openness” may take on the appearance
of a less overtly class-biased policy, e.g., school choice. It always sounds generous
to give more, and in France, during recent decades, expanding education has been
promoted as a means in and of itself. It has taken the form of pure quantitative
targets, leading to the neglect of the question of not only the “quantity” of education
but also its “quality,” i.e., what kind of education, for whom, and for what purpose.
This is more or less because the blind race for benchmarks is prevailing, that is,
driven more by economic rationale rather than by true educational concern.
This is not to say that setting quantitative objectives is a bad thing. Quite the
opposite, since while doing so, policymakers are required to express precisely
what objectives they put forward and show responsibility for whether or not these
objectives are fulfilled. Moreover, pressures to define and regulate standards through
national curricula and national systems of assessment are rather beneficial to
disadvantaged students and, more broadly, preserve some homogeneity within a
country’s youth.
3 Conclusion
In France, a new left-wing government was formed in June 2012, and it is too early
to make precise predictions of future trends of French education policy. However,
the new Minister of Education, Vincent Peillon, quickly announced changes that are
supposed to achieve a broad “refoundation” of the school system.
First, the downsizing of the number of teachers will cease, and starting in
September 2012, more teachers will be sent to the poorest areas: 1,000 extra teachers
have been recruited for primary schools, knowing that 5,100 primary teacher
positions were eliminated by the previous government. Second, in order to attract
more youngsters to the teaching profession, a training period will be reimplemented
(trainings were canceled during the previous government). More significantly, the
Minister maintains that the priority will be given to lower school levels (to reduce
early inequalities), so that, in a context of scarcity, less weight will be given to
higher education. He is also stressing citizen education, with the idea of introducing
some civic and moral courses to the curricula. Some issues of debate, such as school
choice, school calendar (the length of French holidays and the resulting long school
days), and student assessment on the basis of national standardized tests have yet to
be documented at this stage; a special consultation is ongoing.
Two remarks may be made here. First, the current economic context and the
objective of reducing public spending will obviously limit educational ambitions,
and the pressure to assess efficiency will remain very strong even if it is unpopular
among French teachers. Second, it is not sure that a broad consensus will emerge on
educational issues, which remain in France very passionate and meet diverging
private interests (different social groups may benefit from improved pre-primary
schooling or more resources in tertiary education). In any case, in France, left-wing
parties have always given importance to public education, as expected by teachers
and parents. In a rather pessimistic global context, successfully fostering some
hopes and achieving mobilization in schools would be a first step toward success.
References
Bourdieu, P. (1978). Classement, déclassement, reclassement. Actes de la recherche en sciences

sociales, 24, 2–22.
Chauvel, L. (2010). Overeducation and social generations in France. In P. Attewell & K. Newman
(Eds.), Growing gaps. Educational inequality around the world (pp. 210–238). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Dore, R. (1976). The diploma disease. London: G. Allen and Unwin.
Duru-Bellat, M. (2007). Social inequality in French education. In R. Tesse, S. Lamb, & M. Duru-
Bellat (Eds.), International studies in educational inequality, theory and policy 2 (pp. 1–20).
Dordrecht: Springer.
Duru-Bellat, M. (2008). Recent trends in social reproduction in France: Should the political promises
of education be revisited? Journal of Education Policy, 23(1), 81–95.
Duru-Bellat, M. (2009). Le mérite contre la justice. Paris: Presses de Sciences Po.
32 M. Duru-Bellat
Duru-Bellat, M., & Kieffer, A. (2001). The democratization of education in France: Controversy
over a topical issue. Population, 13(2), 189–218.
Duru-Bellat, M., & Meuret, D. (2003). English and French modes of regulation of the education
system: A comparison. Comparative Education, 39(4), 463–477.
Duru-Bellat, M., & Tenret, E. (2012). Who is for meritocracy? Individual and contextual variations
in the faith. Comparative Education Review, 56(2), 223–247.
Duru-Bellat, M., & van Zanten, A. (2001). Sociologie de l’école, East China Normal University
Press (last edition in French, 2012).
Ertl, H. (2006). European Union policies in education and training: The Lisbon agenda as a turning
point? Comparative Education, 42(1), 5–27.
OECD. (2010). Pisa 2009: Overcoming social background. Paris: OCDE.
Robert, A. (2010). L’école en France de 1945 à nos jours. Grenoble: Presses Universitaires de
Grenoble.
Teese, R., & Lamb, S. (2007). Social inequalities in education: Enlarging the scope of public pol-
icy through reflection on context. International Studies in Educational Inequality, Theory and
Policy, 3, 293–308.
Van den Branden, K., Van Avermaet, P., & Van Houtte, M. (Eds.). (2011). Equity and excellence in
education. New York: Routledge.
Wossman, L. (2007). International evidence on school competition, autonomy and accountability.
Peabody Journal of Education, 82(2–3), 473–497.
India: Reforming Education
in the Neo Liberal Era
Jandhyala B.G. Tilak
Abstract India has made significant achievements in education: there has been a
veritable explosion in numbers: the education system at all levels was made
accessible to a larger number of people. There has also been significant expansion
in the number of institutions of excellence in higher education, producing highly
specialised human capital. While the achievements in terms of quantitative prog-
ress are impressive, the system is also characterised by severe failures on several
fronts, including universal elementary education, vocationalisation of secondary
education and development of higher education for excellence. In the neo liberal
era, India attempts at reforming education and has taken a few significant initia-
tives. Elementary education is recognised as a fundamental right and following a
constitutional amendment in 2002, the Free and Compulsory Education Act has
been made in 2009. A new programme of universal secondary education has been
launched, along with a programme of skill development of about 500 million youth.
To address some of the problems of higher education, the government has taken up
judicial measures and introduced a series of legislations in the national Parliament
for approval. Many of the recent initiatives in policy reforms mark a transition in the
history of education in independent India—from a system embedded in the welfare
statism to a system based on neo liberal market philosophy.
Keywords Cost sharing • Free and compulsory education • Funding • India

• Legislative measures in higher education • Midday meals • Private education
• Public expenditure
J.B.G. Tilak (*)

National University of Educational Planning and Administration, New Delhi, India

34 J.B.G. Tilak
Education system in India has emerged as one of the largest systems in the world in
terms of number of students and number of schools. There are today about 280 million
students enrolled in nearly 1.4 million schools, colleges and universities in the
country, in which there are nearly seven million teachers. The number of students in
India outnumbers the total population of several countries.
Education in India presents a saga of both notable achievements and significant
failures. In recent years, government has taken quite a few initiatives for reforming
education. While the achievements are impressive, the failures are also shocking.
The chapter presents a quick review of some of the major policy reforms and devel-
opments in education in India over the last couple of decades. It elaborates an array
of typical strategies and approaches that the government of India has adopted, with
analysis of their impact upon education development. Finally it summarises the
achievements and the gaps and concludes with highlighting future prospects.
1 Context of the Reforms
After independence, India has adopted a strategy of socialistic welfare state for
development policies, development planning and mixed economy. India also recog-
nised the importance of education and resolved to provide universal elementary edu-
cation. A few important initiatives were taken by the government. In the first 5-year
plan, a reasonably high allocation of resources was made to education sector.
1.1 Earlier Reform Initiatives
The 1950 and 1960s were a golden period for education with generous allocation of
budgetary resources to education that were marked by overall enthusiasm created by
the newly acquired independence. Development planning was adopted as a strategy
and several new institutions were set up at all levels of education, including in higher
education and higher technical education. Enrolments at every level of education
increased at impressive rates. The period coincided with the human investment revo-
lution in economic thought (Schultz 1961) that recognised the relationship between
education and economic growth. The first National Policy on Education 1968 was
formulated, following the recommendations of the Education Commission
(1964/1966) that emphasized the role of education in national development. The
decade of 1970s was a period of setbacks with war, inflation, graduate unemploy-
ment and tight budgetary conditions. The growth in education suffered severely.
Budgetary resources became scarce. The 1980s marked a slow and steady re-emer-
gence of faith in education and consequent hopes for a smooth flow of public funds
to education. The National Policy on Education 1986 was formulated and several
new schemes were launched including the ‘operation blackboard’ scheme that
ensured every primary school in the country to have a minimum level of basic
India: Reforming Education in the Neo Liberal Era 35
infrastructure, including teachers; setting up of District Institutes of Education and

Training for improving training facilities for teachers; and setting up of Academic
Staff Colleges in universities to provide avenues for professional development of
college teachers. Several initiatives were also made to improve the access to educa-
tion in general and to the meritorious students among the marginalised sections of
the society (e.g., Navodaya Vidyalayas) and to raise the quality of education.
The 1990s heralded an era of budget containment, with the introduction of struc-
tural adjustment policies in the beginning of the 1990s. Budgets for education suf-
fered severely during adjustment period. The expenditure of the union and state
governments on education has declined fast. Quality of education was traded off for
quantitative expansion, as new institutions were opened with declining allocations
being spread thinly; and equity was also sacrificed, as the budget allocations for
scholarships and welfare programmes waned fast. Private institutions began to
increase in number at the cost of growth of public institutions. The budgetary
squeeze on education has contributed specifically to a few major developments in
education. Important among them include inflow of external aid for education, pri-
vatisation of education and cost recovery. Introduction of economic reform policies
included introduction of policies of globalisation. Education policy is influenced by
domestic and as well international developments. Though inflow of external aid for
primary education that began in the early 1990s almost ceased within 10–15 years,
some of the other developments have taken strong roots in the system and seem to
continue and rather dominate the education policy in the following decades.
1.2 Spectacular Quantitative Progress
It may be pertinent to start with noting the somewhat spectacular quantitative

progress India made in education during the last two decades. India has made rapid
stride in improving the literacy situation. Nearly three-fourths of the population
were literate in 2011, compared to about 50 % two decades ago. Even among the
females, the rate of literacy was 66 % in 2011, the gender gap falling to 16 % points
from 25 points in 1991. Literacy among youth has improved very impressively to
91 % in 2009–2010 from 60 % in 1983.
In elementary education—primary plus upper primary education—which constitutes
the compulsory education phase, as defined in the Constitution, there are nearly 200
million students, with a gross enrolment ratio above 100 %. Fifty two per cent of the
population of the age-group 14–17 are enrolled in secondary (and higher secondary)
schools. In all, as per the gross enrolment ratio, 87 % of the children of the
age-group 6–17 are in schools in 2010–2011. In case of higher education, there are
about 600 universities and about 40,000 colleges, with an enrolment of above
20 million. The 20 million constitutes 15 % gross enrolment ratio. In all, the mean
years of schooling of the working population (15 years old and above) increased
from 4.2 years in 2000 to 5.1 years in 2010 (Table 1). These are quite impressive
quantitative achievements for a developing country.
36 J.B.G. Tilak
Table 1 Progress in education in India

Literacy in India (%)
Male Female All Gender gap
1991 64.1 39.3 52.2 24.8
2001 75.3 53.7 64.8 21.6
2011 82.1 65.5 74.0 16.7
Source: Census of India 2011
Progress in enrolments and enrolment ratios in education

Enrolments (million) Gross enrolment ratio (%)
1999–2000 2010–2011 1999–2000 2010–2011
Elementary 155.9 197.4 81.0 102.5
Primary 113.6 135.3 94.9 115.5 (98.0)
Upper primary 42.3 62.1 57.8 81.5 (58.0)
All secondary 28.0 51.2 30.0 52.1
Secondary 18.6 31.8 65.0
Higher secondary 9.5 19.4 39.3
Higher 7.7 21.8* 8.1 15.2*
Note: ( ) refers to net enrolment ratios
Number of institutions (in thousands)

1999–2000 2010–2011
Elementary 853.7 1,196.1
Primary 651.4 748.5
Upper Primary 202.3 447.6
All Secondary 117.9 200.1
Secondary 83.3 128.3
Higher Secondary 34.5 71.8
Higher 10.15 46.43*
Teachers in schools
Teachers (million) Pupil-teacher ratio
1999–2000 2010–2011 1999–2000 2010–2011
Elementary 3.2 4.0 79
Primary 1.9 2.1 42 42
Upper primary 1.3 1.9 37 34
All secondary 1.7 2.5 32
Secondary 1.0 1.2 30 30
Higher secondary 0.7 1.3 34 39
Higher 0.4 0.7* 22 24
Source: Selected Educational Statistics, Statistics on School Education and Annual Report
(Ministry of Human Resource Development); Annual Report (University Grants Commission).
Relevant years
*
Figures exclude open distance learning
Table 2 Growth in Central Government Institutions of Higher Education during the Eleventh Five
Year Plan (2007–2012)
2006–2007 2011–2012 Increase
Central universities 19 40 21
Indian Institutes of Technology 7 15 8
Indian Institutes of Management 6 13 7
Indian Institutes of Science Education & Research 2 5 3
Schools of Planning and Architecture 1 3 2
National Institutes of Technology 20 30 10
Other technical institutes 15 15 0
Other universities/institutions 17 31 14
Source: Planning Commission 2012
Apart from universal elementary education, India has set targets in recent years
for universal secondary education and a gross enrolment ratio of 30 % in higher
education by 2020. It is only during the 11th Five Year Plan period, major expansion
of higher education has been attempted. The number of central universities was
doubled and so are the numbers of high quality of institutions of technical educa-
tion, viz., Indian Institutes of Management, Indian Institutes of Technology, Indian
Institutes of Information Technology and similar institutions (Table 2).
There has been a substantial increase in the numbers of not only institutions
set up by the union government, but also institutions set up by state governments
and private institutions. The total number of institutions of higher education
increased by 58 % from 29,384 at the beginning of the 11th Five Year Plan period to
46,430 by the end of the period.
The principal objective of the 11th and the 12th Five Year Plans (2002–2007 and
2007–2012, respectively) has been inclusive and faster growth. By strengthening
the vast education system, India aims at building up a knowledge society and trans-
forming itself into an advanced economy.
1.3 Persistent Daunting Challenges
However, it faces daunting challenges. One-fourth of the population of the coun-

try is illiterate. With 287 million illiterates in 2011, India is still the largest home
of illiterates in the world. Elementary education is not completely universal, in
terms of the three dimensions, viz., enrolment, completion and attainment of a
minimum level of learning. One can identify at least three persistent problems: (a)
high rates of dropout, (b) high degree of inequalities in participation in schooling,
and (c) low levels of learning. Special measures initiated in recent years have
resulted in a significant reduction in dropout rates; yet they continue to be high
(DISE 2011). Hardly 50 % of the eligible children are in secondary schools. The
38 J.B.G. Tilak
enrolment ratio in higher education is far from the world average, not to speak of
it being far below the ratio in the advanced countries. The quality of education at
all levels is far from satisfactory; and issues relating to equity in access to educa-
tion still pose serious challenges. The mean years of schooling of the adult popu-
lation are hardly 5 years.
An equally, if not more, serious problem refers to the extent of inequalities
in education. Although there has been a significant reduction in inequalities in
education between different sections of the population, there remains the persis-
tence of a high degree of inequalities. Inequalities in education include inequalities
between lower caste groups (Scheduled Castes/Tribes [SCs/STs] and Other
Backward Castes [OBCs]) and higher caste groups, between backward minority
communities and other religious communities, between males and females, between
the rich and the poor, and between regions—rural–urban and interstate inequalities.
While there has been a remarkable improvement in gender parity and some reduction
in inequalities by caste groups, rural–urban inequalities are quite marked, and inequal-
ities between the poorest and the richest strata of the society are most striking.
Another very important concern of all has been the levels of learning in elementary
education. According to recent reports (Pratham 2012, 2013), the levels of learning
of children in primary and upper primary schools are not only very low but more
importantly declining over the years.
Likewise, higher education in India is engulfed with several problems, including
low levels of access, stagnant and declining quality and standards and widening
inequalities. The system is also characterised with poor governance, high levels
of inefficiency in management, unemployment of the graduates and non-availability
of sufficient funds. The structural adjustment reform policies introduced in the
beginning of the 1990s had a brutal impact on higher education, in terms of severe
cuts in public expenditure and introduction of cost recovery measures (Tilak 1996).
The last two decades also witnessed a period of rapid growth of private education.
It is widely recognised that major reforms are long over due.
The mean years of schooling of the adult population, a summary statistic of
education development, are hardly 5 years, compared to the average of the develop-
ing countries which is 7; the corresponding figure is above 7 in Brazil and above 8
in China.
2 Changing Strategies and Approaches
The several attempts to reform education scene have to be seen against the backdrop
of a few major trends in the strategies and approaches being adopted in recent years.
There has been a significant shift in the development paradigm itself. It shifted from
one based on welfare state to a neo liberal one. The policies also resulted in
weakening of the fiscal capacity of the government. All this has had its own influence
on educational policies and strategies. The global campaign of Education For All
also impacted the policies of the government.
2.1 National Programmes
Though the Constitution of India (1950) has placed a large part of education under the
“state list”, the 42nd Constitutional Amendment in 1976 has brought education into con-
current list. However, both before the amendment and after, the union government has
been active in the area of education and has launched a few major national programmes.
2.1.1 Elementary Education: SSA
Much before the Jomtien Conference (1990) and the adoption of the World Declaration
on Education for All at the same conference, the Government of India had resolved
in the Constitution of India in 1950:
The State shall endeavour to provide within a period of 10 years from the commencement
of the Constitution for free and compulsory education for all children until they complete
the age of 14 years. (Article 45)
And as the goal has not been reached, the government repeated its resolve to
universalise elementary education as early as possible, and also to increase the
public funding of education to at least 6 % of national income, so that education,
elementary education in particular, does not suffer from paucity of financial
resources. The National Policy on Education 1968 and the National Policy on
Education 1986 have laid special emphasis on the fulfilment of the Constitutional
Directive of universalisation of elementary education. Five Year Plans repeatedly
promised to take the nation towards achieving this goal. Elementary education was
also included in the National Programme of Minimum Needs in the Five Year Plans,
and this inclusion has significant implications for allocation of resources. This was
expected to ensure favourable treatment in the allocation of resources and to protect
it from reallocation of approved outlays away from elementary education. Education
is also made an important component of the National Human Development Initiative
in the union budget 1999–2000.
Following the end of the external assistance to primary education, in 2002 the
government has launched a national programme of education for all called Sarva
Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) that promised to work on a mission mode to reach the con-
stitutional goal. SSA was conceptualised as a comprehensive and integrated flag-
ship programme. The programme implies massive provision of financial resources
by the union and state governments for overall improvement of the schools, includ-
ing for the construction of school buildings, provision of infrastructure facilities,
sufficient number of teachers and improvement of management and delivery
structures.
According to the umbrella scheme of SSA, universalisation of elementary education
with respect to enrolment and retention was to be achieved by 2010. Quite a few
components of SSA aim at improving access, quality and equity in elementary
education. Of the many successes, according to the government, the increase in the
number of schools and classrooms and rapid fall in the number of out of school
40 J.B.G. Tilak
Box 1: Targets of the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA)

(Target Dates as Originally Set)
• Enrolment of all children in the 6–14 age group in school/education guar-
antee scheme centres/bridge courses by 2003
• All children in the 6–14 age group complete 5 years of primary education
by 2007
• All children in the 6–14 age group complete 8 years of schooling by 2010
• Focus on elementary education of satisfactory quality with emphasis on
education for life
• Bridging all gender and social category gaps at primary education level by
2007 and at elementary education level by 2010
• Universal retention of children until they complete upper primary educa-
tion by 2010
Source: Annual Report 2002–2003 (Ministry of Human Resource
Development, Department of Education, Government of India)
Box 2: Midday Meals: Objectives

• To encourage enrolment and retention of children in schools until they
complete 8 years of schooling
• To improve the nutritional status of children in grades I–VIII
• To encourage poor children belonging to disadvantaged sections to attend
school regularly and help them concentrate on classroom activities
Source: Annual Report (Ministry of Human Resource Development)
children are attributed mainly to the ongoing SSA. However, not even a single target
set by the SSA (listed in the Box 1) has been reached so far. Moreover, the SSA
seems to have no significant effect on the quality of education and the school out-
comes in terms of achievement levels of children. Alternative schools and non-
formal education centres along with para teachers were formalised by the SSA and
they are believed to have caused serious adverse effect on the quality of education.
Further, SSA, like the externally funded project, the DPEP (Tilak 2008), created
parallel structures sidelining existing government structures and systems in admin-
istration, possibly weakening the overall government administration.
Much before the launching of the SSA, a national programme of midday
meals was launched in 1995 with the twin objectives of increasing enrolment
in schools and improving nutritional status of school-going children. The
programme covers all children enrolled in primary and upper primary levels of
education (Box 2). Very positive and significant effects of the noon meals
programme on participation of children in schooling were reported (Goyal and

Drèze 2003). SSA and midday meals account for nearly the total union govern-
ment budget for elementary education. In addition to SSA, a few other complemen-
tary schemes are also launched (see Tilak 2009a).
2.1.2 Secondary Education: RMSA
Secondary education was neglected in India for a long time. Public attention
concentrated either on elementary education or on higher education and the link
between the two, secondary education, was ignored. It is only recently that efforts
are initiated to correct this anomaly, as it was realised that “it is unlikely that the
country will significantly succeed in reducing poverty and creating a more equitable
society without adequately focusing on improving secondary education” (Planning
Commission 2012). Thus, partly recognising the need for expansion of secondary
education for development and partly because of the pressures for expansion of
secondary education are being felt with rapid progress in elementary education, dur-
ing the 11th Five Year Plan period the government has launched a programme of
expansion of secondary education, the Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan
(RMSA). The scheme is envisioned around four core objectives, viz., universal
access, equality and social justice, relevance to development context and structural
and curricular aspects. The scheme envisages that no child is deprived of second-
ary education of satisfactory quality due to gender, socio-economic disability and
other barriers. It also promises to improve quality of secondary education. The
gross enrolment ratio in secondary education was 65 % in lower secondary (grades
IX and X) and 39 % in higher secondary (grades XI and XII) in 2010–2011. Funded
on the pattern of SSA—75 % from the union government and 25 % from the state
government—the RMSA aims to provide universal access to quality secondary
education (Box 3).
Box 3: Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abihyan (RMSA)

Targets in the 12th Five Year Plan (2012–2017)
• Universal access to secondary education, gross enrolment ratio of 100 %
• Enhancing retention of children at secondary level, so as to reach 100 %
retention by 2020
• Achieving the target of 75 % gross enrolment ratio at higher secondary
level by 2017
• Establishment of a secondary school within a radius of 5–7 km
• Provision of necessary physical facilities, teaching and non–teaching staff
for every secondary school
Source: The 12th Five Year Plan
42 J.B.G. Tilak
Another important component of secondary education that was also ignored

for long refers to vocational and technical education, though its importance
was highlighted by several committees and commissions ever since independence,
e.g., the Mudaliar Commission (1952). The National Policy on Education 1968
and the National Policy on Education 1986 aimed at providing vocational and
technical education to 10–25 % of the students in higher secondary education.
But little progress has been made in this regard. While some attempts are made
to improve vocational and technical education provided in polytechnics and
industrial training institutes during recent years, partly with the assistance
from the World Bank, the government has launched a major programme of skill
development aiming at covering about 500 million youth in the 12th Five Year
Plan period. While it may be welcomed for several reasons, there is an important
problem. The massive programme is being planned not as a part of secondary or
higher education, but effectively as another tier in the education system that can
facilitate segregation of the students into vocational education and higher edu-
cation, an approach that did not work in the past.
2.2 Legislative Measures
In recent years, government concentrated on strengthening legislative framework for

the development of education. It has initiated quite a few legislative reforms both in
school education and higher education. As the provisions in the Constitution of
India (1950) and the compulsory education acts that existed in several states had not
been very effective, a new act to ensure free and compulsory education was made.
Similarly, to correct several inadequacies in the governance in higher education, a
series of legislative proposals have been made.
2.2.1 The Right to Education Act
One of the landmark developments in elementary education includes the amendment

of the Constitution of India in 2002 that explicitly recognises education as a fundamen-
tal right of every child in India. The amendment makes education a justiceable right.
To operationalise the amendment, the Free and Compulsory Education Act was
made in 2009, familiarly known as the Right to Education Act 2009 (RTE). Among
the several initiatives taken by the union government, this is perhaps the most
important one. The Act provides for free and compulsory education of satisfactory
quality for all children in the age group of 6–14 years as a fundamental right. Free
education means no child is required to pay any kind of fees or charges to the
school. In addition, children are provided with free textbooks, stationery and uni-
forms. Special incentives including financial assistance are provided to girls up to
grade X. The Act promises improved access to schooling facilities, by setting up
Box 4: Salient Features of the Right to Education Act 2009

• Free education: no fees, no capitation fee
• All schools are to be recognised schools only
• Admission: no entrance test/screening processes; no detention; no punishment
• Provision of a school in every neighbourhood
• School infrastructure: all-weather school buildings; one classroom per
teacher; library; head teacher office room, toilets; drinking water; barrier
free access; playground, fencing, boundary walls
• Teachers: Pupil-teacher ratio, trained teachers; no private coaching
Source: Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009. Government of India
schools in every neighbourhood. Besides construction of new schools and class-

rooms, the Act also provides for adequate infrastructure and adequate number of
trained teachers (Box 4). The Act also provides for admission of students belong-
ing to economically weaker sections in private schools to the extent of at least 25 %.
The RTE confers a permanent right to free and compulsory education of reasonable
quality on the children of India. It also implies a long-term commitment to ensure
that education is provided as a fundamental right to all children. The Act came into
force with effect from 1 April 2010, and most states have developed state specific
rules for the implementation of the Act. It is too early to make an assessment of
its impact and effectiveness. With the Act, one could expect that quality education
will be available to all truly free.
However, it is clear that the RTE or even the SSA does not seem to be paying suf-
ficient attention to the quality of education; at best they focus on provision of some
inputs that can influence quality of education. Other problems relating to the RTE
are the Act does not guarantee equitable quality of education; it promotes private
education and with devolution of responsibilities to local levels of government, the
role of the union and state governments has been diluted (Tilak 2010c).
The several parameters of the SSA are upgraded to equal the RTE norms, and
additional resources are allocated to elementary education in the 12th Five Year
Plan to implement the revised SSA. It is expected that by the middle of the 12th Plan
a new modality of implementation of the RTE would replace the SSA, which was origi-
nally designed as a time-bound project only.
2.2.2 Bills on Higher Education
The higher education system has been characterised with a big policy vacuum for a
long period (see Tilak 2010b). It is only towards the end of the 11th Five Year Plan
period, the government set out for reforms in higher education; actually there has
been a hasty rush for reforms, and a big paradigm shift in education policies could
be witnessed. Most strikingly, this has been a period of speedy reforms intended to
44 J.B.G. Tilak
be brought forth through a series of legislative measures. There are currently half
dozen major bills introduced in the national Parliament by the Ministry of Human
Resource Development, relating to reforms in higher education and they are at vari-
ous stages: some are approved by the Union Cabinet; some have gone to the
Parliament Standing Committees; some have been passed by either house of the
Parliament; and all require final approval by the Parliament. The several bills are: (i)
The Foreign Educational Institutions (Regulation of Entry and Operations) Bill,
2010; (ii) The Prohibition of Unfair Practices in Technical Educational Institutions,
Medical Educational Institutions and University Bill, 2010; (iii) The Educational
Tribunals Bill, 2010; (iv) The National Accreditation Regulatory Authority for
Higher Educational Institutions Bill, 2010; (v) The Universities for Innovation Bill,
2010; (vi) The National Commission For Higher Education and Research (NCHER)
Bill, 2010; and (vii) The Research and Innovation Universities Bill, 2012. There may
be many more bills in the pipeline.
The overall objective of these bills is rapid growth of higher education to reach
higher gross enrolment ratio and to improve quality and standards in higher educa-
tion. Ostensibly, the bills aim at checking corrupt practices, setting up tribunals for
speedy redressal of grievances, ensuring accreditation of the institutions, promotion
of autonomy, improvement in governance, opening of avenues for modern forms of
internationalisation and improvement in overall quality. There is a bill that aims at
setting up high-quality research universities or world class universities.
These bills together constitute a package of reforms that the government plans to
make for the development of higher education (see Tilak 2010a). There are a few
underlying assumptions and features that are common among all these bills. First,
they reflect a new understanding of the government on the role of the State in the
development of higher education. Traditionally the State has been an active player—
in policy making, planning and provision of higher education in India, like in most
other countries of the world. The emerging assumption of the present time is that the
State can minimise its role in higher education, not because of lack of funds but
because of the emerging conviction that higher education is not a sector that the
government should be bothered about. Government can adopt a policy of laissez-
faireism; and at best, it can confine its role to that of an enabler, which provides a
loose framework of rules and regulations for those who wish to enter into the busi-
ness of education. In a sense, the bills assume that higher education can be left to
a large extent to the markets. Secondly, formulated in the neo liberal environment,
all the bills assume, either explicitly or implicitly, and even encourage, commoditi-
sation of higher education and consequently privatisation and even commercialisa-
tion of higher education. Corporate sector is given an enhanced role in higher
education. Thirdly, several bills perceive that higher education is to serve more
global needs than to serve national social and economic purposes. The bills aim at
making India a global education hub that serves global markets. Fourthly, the under-
lying assumption of all the bills is that the existing institutions cannot be reformed
and they need to be replaced by new structures; or that even if they are restructured
and revitalised, they will not serve the neo liberal goals, as the existing ones were
set up in a period characterised by an altogether different development paradigm.
Hence, it was assumed that better altogether new organisations are established in
place of, or in addition to, the existing ones. Fifthly, while some of the bills (like the
bill that prohibits unfair practices and the one meant to set up educational tribunals)
are ostensibly very well-intended, they mark only a very small step in right direction
and they are highly inadequate to solve the problems and innumerable unfair and
corrupt practices that the Indian higher education system is inflicted with. Further,
the several bills also highlight the lack of cohesion, if not presence of friction,
between not only the union government and the state governments but also between
several ministries/departments involved in higher education at the central level, as
the coverage of some of the bills excludes institutions of higher education run by
different ministries/departments, like health and agriculture and even sub-depart-
ments of the Department of Education, like teacher education; and some ministries/
departments have already proposed parallel legislations. Lastly, the several bills,
together, are characterised with absence of a long-term perspective and a holistic
vision of development of the society and the role of education therein.
Every bill looks like a quick-fix solution—poor and inadequate—to a specific
problem. For example, it is well noted that the present size of the system of higher
education is highly inadequate and that the government may not have sufficient
resources for large-scale expansion. The Foreign Educational Institutions Bill is
viewed as a solution to this, the assumption being foreign universities will come to
India and make huge foreign direct investment in higher education, an untenable
assumption. The problem of quality of education and lack of autonomy is to be
tackled with the setting up of innovation universities as proposed in the Research
and Innovation Universities Bill. It is presumed that autonomy or no autonomy, it
does not matter to the existing universities. The problem of inadequate and ineffec-
tive system of regulation by the existence of a large number of regulating bodies is
to be tackled by the bill that proposes to set up a National Commission for Higher
Education and Research that will replace some of the regulating bodies in higher
education. That there are several unfair and corrupt practices prevalent in our
institutions of higher education is acknowledged with the bill that prohibits unfair
practices. The problem that our higher education system is vexed with numerous
legal conflicts, over burdening the judicial system, is addressed by the Educational
Tribunals Bill. The Bill for National Accreditation Authority is to ensure improved
methods of accreditation and assessment and to make accreditation mandatory for all.
The Educational Tribunal Bill and the National Accreditation Authority Bill are also
expected to meet the requirements of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and the
General Agreement on Trade and Services (GATS) that insists on setting up meth-
ods of transparency and grievance redressal mechanisms before higher education is
fully “committed”. Thus, the several bills view higher education in small fragments,
and not as a holistic process. Further, the solutions sought in the form of the bills are
inadequate in some cases as they are not necessarily based on sound thinking. It is
also noticeable that no effort relates one nill to the other.
Education is a “concurrent” subject according to the Constitution of India: both
the union government and state governments have responsibility with respect to
policy making, planning and funding of education. In recent years, the union
46 J.B.G. Tilak
government has been more active than state governments in taking policy initiatives
in education, though state governments have joined the consultation process with
respect to some of these initiatives.
2.3 Reforms in Funding and Cost Sharing
Public funding for education has been under strain in India since the beginning of
the 1990s. While during the 1990s, there had been severe cuts in the total public
expenditure, the situation did not improve much in the following decades. Though
in absolute terms the expenditure at current prices has increased remarkably, in real
terms per student expenditure has declined. More importantly, the relative priority
accorded to education registered a sharp decline. This is clear when one examines
public expenditure on education in terms of percentage of national income or of
total government expenditure. As a proportion of gross domestic product (GDP), it
has declined from 4.3 % in 2000–2001 to 3.8 % in 2010–2011 (Fig. 1). It is important
to note that the government has a goal of allocating 6 % of GDP to education and
during the last 10 years, the government has repeated its promise. Even as a proportion
of the total government expenditure, the share of education declined from 14.6 % in
1999–2000 to 13.6 % in 2008–2009 and as per tentative (budget) estimates, it is
likely to decline further to 11.7 % in 2011–2011 (Fig. 2).
As a corollary to the declining public expenditure, there has been an increased
emphasis on direct measures of cost recovery in education. In the beginning of the
1990s two government appointed committees (UGC 1993; AICTE 1994) have
4.50
4.25
4.00
3.75
3.50
3.25
3.00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
1999-2000
10(RE)
11(BE)
2009-
2010-
Fig. 1 Public expenditure on education as % of GDP (Source: Ministry of Human Resource

Development)
15
14
13
12
11
10
2009-10(RE)
2010-11(BE)
1999-2000
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
Fig. 2 Public expenditure on education as % of total government expenditure (Source: Ministry
of Human Resource Development)
recommended increase in cost recovery through student fees and other sources to
the level of about 20 % of the total expenditure on higher education. The commit-
tees have also recommended restructuring of the education loan scheme. Ever since,
these two proposals have been seriously acted upon by the government and the uni-
versities. Institutions, accordingly, have increased student fees erratically and ran-
domly by several times during the last 15–20 years, many generating fee revenue
accounting for much more than 20 % of their budgets. Government approaches
seem to encourage indiscriminate and steep increases in fees in education. In techni-
cal education, the fee increases have been very steep even in public institutions. For
example, the fee in the Indian Institutes of Technology has been increased in 2013
from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 90,000 per year—a steep 80 % increase within 1 year. There
was a recommendation by a committee to raise it to Rs. 250,000 per annum.
Student loan programme has been thoroughly revamped and it is now the respon-
sibility of commercial banks. Almost all commercial banks nowadays offer educa-
tional loans with varying terms of conditions including interest rates and repayment
periods. The role of the government is confined to offering interest subsidy for the
study period to students from lower socioeconomic status. The banks do not bother
about merit or the need of the students. While the numbers of student borrowers are
increasing, they are still small, compared to the total enrolments in higher educa-
tion, and the problem of access to loans for the weaker sections is still a major
problem (Tilak 2009b).
The trend towards heavy reliance on cost recovery measures raises questions on
their regressive effects on the demand for education of the weaker sections, neglecting
non-revenue generating discipline of study and trading off educational consider-
ations for financial ones by the institutions. In the absence of effective student aid
mechanism on the one hand and low levels of living on the other, and given the
overall low enrolment rates and lower enrolment rates among the lower
48 J.B.G. Tilak
socioeconomic strata, it may be neither desirable nor feasible to aim at substantial

cost recovery through increase in fees, unless welfare considerations are sacrificed.
Scholarships or loans rarely counterbalance effectively the regressive effects of
increase in fees.
2.4 Growth of Private Institutions
Though for a long time, it was strongly felt in India, like in many other countries,
that education should be mostly in the State sector due to (a) “public good” nature
of education, (b) externalities (and dynamic externalities) associated with educa-
tion, (c) market inefficiencies and (d) the State’s intentions of expanding access to
education to all, these aspects are ignored presently in the context of the global wave
of privatisation, liberalisation and globalisation; and privatisation of education has
been strongly advocated in recent years in India. Such an approach is not just con-
fined to higher education. Even primary education, which was promised to be pro-
vided “free” by the State, according to the Constitution, is not exempted from
attempts relating to privatisation. Privatisation became the buzzword and the public
policies seem to be encouraging privatisation of all types education at all levels.
There has been very rapid growth in private institutions at all levels of education
during the last couple of decades. In 1993–1994, private schools (that do not receive
any direct state funds) were small in number; they accounted for hardly 5 % at primary
level. The figure increased to 7.8 % by 2005–2006. Similarly, private upper primary
schools increased in proportion from 11 % to 22 % during the same period. Since
primary and upper primary levels together constitute the compulsory phase of free
and elementary education, these numbers are small and there was no significant
growth. As the policy discussions on legislation on free and compulsory education
took momentum, there was no further growth in them in the later years; in fact there
was a marginal decline in proportions, though there was indeed a marginal increase
in the absolute numbers. But in secondary and higher education, the growth has
been very high. Private secondary schools doubled in proportion, increasing from
15 % of all secondary schools in 1993–1994 to 36 % by 2010–2011 (Fig. 3).
The situation is more phenomenal in higher education. There has been not only
a higher rate of growth in private universities and colleges than government institu-
tions; the relative size of the private sector today excels that of the public sector,
accounting for a majority in the number of institutions and in student enrolments
(Table 3). Particularly the growth of private engineering and medical colleges has been
very high. These institutions have actually displaced public institutions, as they
account for about 90 % of all the institutions. The tuition fees in these colleges are
several times higher than in government colleges (Carnoy et al. 2013). On the
whole, the growth of private education has been fastest in India during the last two
decades. It seems that the higher education system in India is more privatised than
most other systems of the world, with very few exceptions.
40
Primary Upper Primary Secondary
35
30
25
20
15
10
0
1999-2000
1993-94
1996-97
1997-98
1998-99
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2009-10
2010-11
Fig. 3 Growth of private schools in India (% of all schools). Data was missing for some years
(Source: Selected Educational Statistics and Statistics on School Education. Ministry of Human
Resource Development. Various years)
Table 3 Growth in private and public higher education during the Eleventh Five Year Plan (2006–
2007 to 2011–2012)
2006–2007 2011–2012
No % share No % share % increase
Number of institutions
Central government institutions 145 0.49 221 0.48 52.4
State government institutions 11,094 37.76 16,547 35.64 49.2
Total government institutions 11,239 38.25 16,768 36.11 49.2
Private institutions 18,145 61.75 29,662 63.89 63.5
Total 29,384 100.00 46,430 100.00 58.0
Enrolment (million)
Central government institutions 0.31 2.24 0.56 2.57 80.6
State government institutions 6.03 43.54 8.4 38.57 39.3
Total government institutions 6.34 45.78 8.96 41.14 41.3
Private institutions 7.51 54.22 12.82 58.86 70.7
Total 13.85 100.00 21.78 100.00 57.3
Source: Planning Commission 2012
The limited evidence available indicates that private schools and colleges have
grown largely in response to the prospects of making quick profits, and/or for politi-
cal power, and are detrimental to all but few. The private institutions, particularly the
fee-reliant private schools and colleges, practice exclusiveness through charging
50 J.B.G. Tilak
high tuition fee and alarmingly large capitation fees or compulsory donations and
through selection of children on the basis of intellectual aptitude. There are strong
disequalising forces inherent in private education system. It is widely acknowledged
that private schools turn out to be socially and economically divisive; and that the
government school system was not adequate to counteract these forces; as a result,
the whole educational system was found to be a disequaliser accentuating income
inequalities (Tilak 2011).
However, the government policy is highly in favour of the growth of private
institutions (Tilak 2012). The government has stated its intentions of encourag-
ing private sector in education clearly in the 11th and the 12th Five Year Plan docu-
ments (Planning Commission 2007, 2012). The government strongly feels that
“private sector growth in higher education (including technical education) should
be facilitated”. It promises “removal of entry barriers to private participation” in
not only higher education but also in all levels of education, and in this direction, the
present existing condition that private education institutions should be “not for
profit” will be “re-examined in a more pragmatic manner”. Further, the government
proposes to encourage “innovative public–private partnerships (PPP)” in higher edu-
cation. The Ministry of Minority Affairs proposes to set up five new “minority” uni-
versities under the PPP mode. The Ministry of Human Resource Development has
already initiated such partnerships in secondary education during the 11th Five Year
Plan period and many are in the pipeline in higher education.
3 Concluding Observations
This paper presented a quick review of some of the recent major developments in
education in India concentrating on the last couple of decades. India has made significant
achievements in education: there has been a veritable explosion in numbers—students,
institutions and teachers. Enrolments and enrolment ratios in every level of education
have increased very fast. Secondly, the education system at all levels was made
accessible to a larger number of people—rich, poor and middle income classes, men
and women, rural and urban populations and backward and non-backward segments
of the population. Thirdly, in recent years, there has been significant expansion in
the number of institutions of excellence in higher education, producing highly spe-
cialised human capital, such as central universities, Indian Institutes of Technology,
Indian Institutes of Management and other technical and general education institu-
tions. On the whole, the quantitative progress has been impressive.
At the same time, the system is characterised by severe failures on several fronts
(see Tilak 2006). Failures refer to universal elementary education, vocationalisa-
tion of secondary education and development of higher education for excellence.
Despite substantial improvements, inequalities—gender, regional and religious/
caste, though declining—are still high both in the education system and correspond-
ingly in the labour market. Lastly, quality of education at all levels is depressingly
low. On the whole, the system is found to be highly inadequate in terms of numbers,
quality, equity and other dimensions for rapid economic transformation of the nation
and to face new challenges of globalisation and development. With globalisation and
liberalisation of the domestic economy, demand for skilled manpower increases
significantly and education sector has to respond to the increasing demands. It is
being increasingly realised that success of socioeconomic reform policies critically
depends upon the human capital base created in the country. Without a large human
capital base in the form of literate and highly educated workforce, major economic
reforms might not be successful.
There have been a few significant initiatives that the government has taken
during the last few years to reform education system at school and higher levels.
Elementary education is recognised as a fundamental right and following a consti-
tutional amendment in 2002, the Free and Compulsory Education Act has been
made in 2009. Most of the existing policies, programmes and schemes are revised
so as to meet the requirements of the Act. It is hoped that quality education would
be made accessible to all free in the near future and the targets with respect to
access, equity and quality, including learning levels of the children would be
reached. A new programme of universal secondary education has been launched,
along with a programme of skill development of about 500 million youth. While
expansion at every level of education has been rapid, it has been more rapid in
higher education. The rapid growth of higher education also necessitated the
government to be concerned about quality of higher education, governance, gradu-
ate unemployment and other aspects. After all, few Indian institutions of higher educa-
tion figure in the top 100 global university rankings.
To address some of the problems of higher education, the government has taken
up judicial measures and introduced a series of legislations in the national Parliament
for approval. While some of them may be well-intended, it is feared that they might
not contribute much to reforming higher education. Some of the measures initi-
ated in the recent past are in right direction, but many are not. On the whole, the
recent initiatives in policy reforms mark a transition in the history of education in
independent India—from a system embedded in the welfare statism to a system
based on market philosophy.
What Needs to Be Done?
Education needs to be transformed into a powerful instrument of social change

and national development. Development of education—both quantitatively and
qualitatively—requires more and more resources. Government should strive to allo-
cate more than 6 % of GDP to education. It would be desirable to fix certain short-,
medium- and long-term norms regarding the proportions of central and state bud-
gets that should be allocated to education. Resource flow to education—to any level
of education, including higher education—needs to be augmented, not retarded.
Heavy reliance on privatisation and on cost recovery measures for public goods
like education might be counter productive; it might hinder the growth of education
52 J.B.G. Tilak
and its equitable access. Correspondingly, it would affect growth and social justice.
The limitations of private sector in education are well known. The most important
limitation is that equity and welfare considerations go into oblivion, and commercial
and profit motives dominate development of private education. The case for privatisa-
tion of education is extremely weak; the role of the private sector can at best be mar-
ginal. Given the public good nature of education and the externalities it produces,
government should play an increasingly dominant role in education. Specifically, the
government must finance 100 % school education. In case of higher education, the
government must play a dominant role, and resources from non-governmental sector
may be generated to marginally supplement government efforts. In other words,
development of education should not be hampered by the unavailability of resources.
After all, there are several virtues of public financing of education.
It is necessary to aim at the development of education sector as a whole and not
just elementary education or higher education or secondary education. To view
primary education and higher education as competing alternatives is not proper.
After all, all levels of education are interdependent on each other, and one level
cannot be developed at the cost of another level. An integrated approach for the
holistic development of education is essential.
If one were to identify the single most important long-term sector of human
development, it figures out to be education. A cycle of educational process itself is
of about 20 years, and if one were to include early childhood education and life long
education, the span of the cycle is much longer, if not limitless; and the effects of an
educational cycle can be felt over generations. Hence, there is need for a long-term
perspective on the development of education. Further, the interdependence of edu-
cation and other development sectors on each other on the one hand, and the diverse
contribution of education to various sectors over a long period on the other,
necessitate formulation of a coherent and responsive long-term social policy on
education in a framework of inter-sectoral planning.
Finally, short-term financial compulsions should not lead to introduction of long-
term policies that adversely affect the quality, equity and efficiency aspects relating
to education and the overall egalitarian fabric of the welfare state. Inclusive growth
has been the most important stated objective of the 11th and the 12th Five Year Plans.
Development of education should be planned in such a way that it serves the goals
of inclusive growth—social equity and economic growth over the long run.
References
AICTE (All-India Council for Technical Education). (1994). Report of the high-power committee
for mobilisation of additional resources for technical education (Swaminadhan Committee
Report). New Delhi: All-India Council for Technical Education.
Carnoy, M., Loyalka, P., Dobryakova, M., Dossani, R., Froumin, I., Kuhns, K., Tilak, J. B. G., &
Wang, R. (2013). University expansion in a changing global economy: Triumph of the BRICs?
Stanford: Stanford University Press.
DISE (District Information on School Education). (2011). Elementary education in India.
New Delhi: National University of Educational Planning and Administration.
Education Commission. (1964/1966). Education and national development: Report of the

education commission, 1964–1966 (Chairman: D.S. Kothari), New Delhi: National Council of
Educational Research and Training [Reprint: NCERT, 1971].
Goyal, A., & Drèze, J. (2003). Future of mid-day meals. Economic and Political Weekly, 38(44),
4673–4683.
Mudaliar Commission. (1952–1953). Report of the Secondary Education Commission, 1952–
1953. New Delhi: Government of India.
Planning Commission. (2007). Eleventh Five Year Plan (2007–2012). New Delhi: Government of India.
Planning Commission. (2012). Twelfth Five Year Plan (2012–2017). New Delhi: Government of India.
Pratham Foundation. (2012). Annual survey of education report 2011. New Delhi: Pratham
Foundation.
Pratham Foundation. (2013). Annual survey of education report 2012. New Delhi: Pratham
Foundation.
Schultz, T. W. (1961). Investment in human capita. American Economic Review, 51(1), 1–17.
Streeten, P. (2000). Looking ahead: Areas of future research in human development. Journal of
Human Development, 1(1), 25–48.
Tilak, J. B. G. (1996). Higher education under structural adjustment. Journal of Indian School of
Political Economy, 8(2), 266–293.
Tilak, J. B. G. (2006). Education: A saga of spectacular achievements and conspicuous failures. In
India: Social development report (pp. 33–49). New Delhi: Oxford University Press/Council for
Social Development.
Tilak, J. B. G. (2008). Political economy of external aid for education in India. Journal of Asian
Public Policy (Routledge, UK), 1(1), 1–20.
Tilak, J. B. G. (2009a). Universalizing elementary education: A review of progress, polices and
problems. In R. Preet (Ed.), Concerns, conflicts, and cohesions, universalization of elementary
education in India (pp. 33–71). New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Tilak, J. B. G. (2009b). Student loans and financing of higher education in India. In Student loan
schemes: Experiences of New Zealand, Australia, India and Thailand and way forward for
Malaysia (pp. 64–94). Pulau Pinang: IPPTN and Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia Press.
Tilak, J. B. G. (2010a). Policy crisis in higher education: Reform or deform? Social Scientist,
38(9–12), 61–90.
Tilak, J. B. G. (2010b). Higher education in India: Emerging challenges and evolving strategies. In
M. Ka-Ho (Ed.), The search for new governance of higher education in Asia (pp. 171–191).
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Tilak, J. B. G. (2010c). Right to free and compulsory education act. Budget Track (May) http://
www.cbgaindia.org/publications_budget_track.php
Tilak, J. B. G. (2011). Private sector in higher education: A few stylized facts. In K. N. Panikkar,
J. Thomas, G. Geetha, & M. A. Lal (Eds.), Quality, access and social justice in higher education
(pp. 11–33). New Delhi: Pearson/Longman.
Tilak, J. B. G. (2012). Higher education policy in India in transition. Economic and Political
Weekly, 47(13), 36–40.
UGC (University Grants Commission). (1993). UGC Funding of Institutions of Higher Education.
Report of Justice K. Punnayya Committee (1992–92). New Delhi: University Grants Commission.
South Africa: The Education Struggle
Continues
Martin Prew
Abstract There has been a plethora of education legislation and policies gazetted
in South Africa since the end of apartheid and white minority rule in 1994. This
chapter focuses on three main policy thrusts. These are structural and systemic
changes, financial and pro-poor measures, and curriculum reform. This chapter
argues that there remain gaps in the delivery of the policy framework, including the
professionalisation of school management, use of national tests diagnostically,
empowerment of education districts, and linking education and skills training.
Finally, the author suggests some areas where change could improve performance
of the system, including opening the debate on the future and purpose of education
in South Africa and closing the gap between policy and practice.
Keywords Curriculum reform • Education system • Post-apartheid education •

Pro-poor measures • South Africa • Structural reform
1 Introduction
South Africa, at the time of the 2011 census (Statistics South Africa 2012), had a
population of 51.77 million, with 29 % of the population being under 15 years old
and 5.3 % over 64. The vast majority of the population is therefore of working
age. However, South Africa has one of the highest unemployment rates in the world
at well over 25 % and over 40 % amongst post-school youth. Although the weak
education system is often blamed for this high unemployment rate, an uncertain
investment climate, high crime rate, corruption, and erratic public policy are also
M. Prew (*)
School of Education, Witwatersrand University, Johannesburg, South Africa

56 M. Prew
significant factors. The consequence is that South Africa will struggle to take
advantage of this ‘demographic dividend’ unless the education system improves
dramatically and opportunities for youth employment increase.
The change of regime from white minority rule to a democratic dispensation in
1994 had a radical impact on education policy in South Africa. Prior to the 1994
election, South Africa had 17 separate education departments, each race-based and
each with its own bureaucracy (Kallaway 1984, 2002; Nkomo 1990). As a result, the
African National Congress (ANC)-dominated government which took power after
the election in 1994 inherited a deeply fragmented and divided schooling system,
with the formerly all white schools being as well resourced as any in Europe and the
schools serving black African populations in rural areas and blacks-only townships
being as badly resourced as schools in the poorest African countries.
The policies that have been introduced since 1994 have focused on three main
areas of operation: systems and structures, financing, and curriculum. This paper
will examine these three areas of policy development.
2 Structural and Systematic Reforms
The African National Congress’ education manifesto prepared for the first democratic
election in 1994, known as the “Yellow Book” (African National Congress 1994),
projected a South African education system that would achieve improved learning
results while becoming more accessible and equitable and able to meet the needs of
the labour market.
Following the 1994 election, two key education acts were promulgated: the
National Education Policy Act (NEPA) and the South African Schools Act (SASA),
which were both passed at the same time as the new Constitution was enacted
in 1996. The Constitution had declared that full access to basic education was an
absolute right. The two acts, which came into effect in 1997, were meant to allow
that right to be realised. They were the result of compromise between the ANC and
the other parties in the Government of National Unity.
The main provisions of the NEPA were related to the concurrent powers enjoyed
by the nine provincial departments of education and the national department of
education. According to the NEPA, the national department would set national
policy in consultation with provincial and other relevant structures and monitor the
implementation of the policy across the system. Meanwhile, the provincial depart-
ments of education would own and manage the schools in their province, employ
the teachers, and set policy (as long as it did not contradict national policy).
The NEPA also created the key decision-making bodies which would oversee
the education system – in particular the Council of Education Ministers, chaired by
the national Minister of Education and including all the provincial Ministers of
Education (Education MECs), and the HEDCOM, which is chaired by the national
Director-General of Education and involves senior bureaucrats from all the provincial
departments, including the Superintendent General for Education from each province.
South Africa: The Education Struggle Continues 57
These bodies and a number of statutory consultation forums were to manage the
overall system and make sure tensions between the various levels of the system
would not disrupt the core business of the departments of education: delivering
education in schools, adult basic education and training centres, and early childhood
development centres.
Provision was also made by a number of subsequent acts for the regulation of the
sector and the key relationships and structural functions within the sector. The
Education Labour Relations Council was established in terms of the Education
Labour Relations Act of 1993 (which was modified by the Labour Relations Act
of 1995 and the Employment of Educators Act of 1998) to allow the teacher unions
and the education departments to interface over labour issues. The South African
Qualifications Authority was established in legislation in 1995 to introduce and
manage a qualifications framework, which was established through the National
Qualifications Framework Act. The 2001 General and Further Education and
Training Quality Assurance Act established an exam oversight body.
At the same time, the 1997 Higher Education Act (Act 101 of 1997) was put in
place to regulate the higher education sector, and in 1998, the Further Education and
Training Act was promulgated to regulate the FET subsector. In addition, the skills
training sector – which from 1994 to 2009 was managed by the Ministry of Labour
and so was not integrated with the education system – was regulated by the 1998
Skills Development Act with delivery through Sector Education Training Authorities
(SETAs), which were established to manage the development of skills nationally.
3 Pro-Poor Financial Measures
The cornerstone legislation of the post-apartheid schooling system is the South

African Schools Act (Act no. 84 of 1996). The SASA focuses largely on school
governance, school funding, and private schooling. From the SASA, a number of
subsidiary pieces of legislation and policy were passed during the 2000s. These
include the Religion in Education Policy, the Language in Education Policy, and
a series of White Papers dealing with, inter alia, inclusive education and early
childhood development.
Since the SASA was promulgated, there have been attempts by the Department
of Education to reduce the school resourcing gap which was inherited from the
previous regime. The so-called ‘ex-Model C’ schools, which were well resourced,
mainly served the white middle class, while under-resourced schools served poorer
black African communities (Christie and Collins 1984). Historically, each white
learner received many times the state subsidy of each black learner. This legacy of
a highly differentiated system was sustained after 1994. To tackle this class-based
two-tier school provision, the government has implemented pro-poor measures
since 1997. These include differentiated grants related to poverty, fee exemption for
poorer learners, and, since 2006, ‘no-fee’ schools, whereby the children in the poor-
est 60 % of schools are freed from paying fees.
58 M. Prew
There have also been a slew of policies which have financial implications. The
stated intention is usually to assist the schooling system to offer a more equitable
learning experience irrespective of the student’s background. The ANC’s intention,
stated clearly in the Yellow Book, was to introduce a system of free public education
(ANC 1994). However, there was concern that the public fiscus could not support
free schooling. This argument won the day as is clearly illustrated in the SASA.
It required all schools to raise fees and supplement them through fundraising.
No cap was put on the amount a school could charge and raise. The only limitation
was that the fees had to be agreed at the school’s Annual General Meeting and
should be based on the operating costs of the school. Implicitly this allowed the
wealthier schools to employ additional teachers above their post provisioning
norm (PPN). These teachers were employed by the school governing body (SGB)
which paid their salary.
The government modified the SASA’s school funding policy, with the introduction
of National Norms and Standards for School Funding in 2004 and the implementation
of pro-poor skewing of school funding based on a quintile system (Kanjee and
Chudgar 2009). Every school was assigned a quintile by the relevant provincial
department. In each province the 20 % of schools serving the very poorest commu-
nities and with the least internal school resources were assigned to Quintile 1, the
20 % serving the next poorest communities and with limited resources assigned
Quintile 2, through to the wealthiest 20 % of the provincial schools which were
assigned to Quintile 5. School grants, from the provincial education budget, were
paid based on an equation, with the Quintile 1 schools getting more per learner than
the Quintile 2 schools and so on. The Quintile 5 schools got the least.
In theory this pro-poor measure was meant to redress some of the inequalities of
the past. However, the impact of this policy was reduced, because in the larger and
more rural provinces the whole education budget for years after 1994 was swallowed
up in salaries, leaving little for school grants whatever their quintile status. Also the
quintiles were set at provincial level, so 20 % of each province’s schools had to
be assigned Quintile 1 status, even if those schools were serving much poorer
communities than Quintile 1 schools in richer provinces such as Gauteng. This
meant that the system was not equitable on a national scale, with schools in larger
rural provinces being disadvantaged relative to those in more urbanised provinces.
In addition, as the salaries of teachers were not included in the calculations for allo-
cation between schools based on the quintile system, the urban richer ex-Model C
schools with the best qualified staff got a much larger allocation than the schools
which depended on low-paid underqualified teachers. Hence, the quintile system had
little or no impact on the gap between richer and poorer schools (Veriava 2010).
In the legislation there was some relief for poorer parents faced with high school
fees which they could not afford. They were allowed to fill in a form stating their
household income to claim exemption from paying all or part of the school fees.
However, most parents remained ignorant of this fee exemption provision and
schools blocked its implementation as government did not compensate schools
for income loss through fee exemption. This left schools which informed parents of
their right to fee exemption struggling to pay mounting electricity, water, and other
bills and buy additional materials. The fee exemption policy was eventually overtaken
in most schools by the no-fee policy which is discussed below.
Sections 20 and 21 in the SASA laid down the level of authority and self-management
schools were allowed. All schools had limited self-management as Section 20
schools while using a paper budget (their allocated funds being dispersed from the
provincial office). However, better functioning and managed schools could claim
Section 21 status from their provincial department of education. This allowed
them to draw down their allocated funds into their own bank account. With these
funds they had control over all expenses related to paying for services for the school
including utility bills (electricity, water, etc.), purchase of learning and teaching
materials, maintenance and improvement of the school buildings, setting the extra-
mural curriculum and determining subjects to be offered, and any other activity
and cost which is accepted by the provincial department.
By early 2000s it was clear that the intention of the Department to close the
wealth gap between schools was not succeeding. The reason for this was related to
the existing differentiation which defied a simple solution that did not involve major
redress with the physical movement of resources from wealthier schools to poorer
schools. This has been considered too difficult an issue politically. The funding
model used could have made a difference if it had included teachers’ salaries in the
equation (Karlsson et al. 2001). By the 2000s about 80 % of school spending was
related to salaries meaning that only about 20 % of the budget was available for
redistribution. Within that small section of the budget the impact of the redistribu-
tive model was not radical. However, even were it to have substantive pro-poor
impact this would be reversed by the SASA requiring schools to set their own fee
levels and raise funds from the parents and community. In many ex-Model C schools
the income from fees is in excess of R5 million with each learner paying over
R10,000 per year. In township schools, before the no-fee policy was activated in
2007, learner fees were often about R150 per annum. However, many township
schools had a payment rate of under 50 %; this meant that many of these schools
were surviving on fee-related income of below R100,000 per annum. When the
fund-raising efforts are added to this, the gap is even greater. The parents who have
a deciding vote in the school governing bodies in the ex-Model C schools ensured
that they remained well supported and well funded, in a way that poorer parents
who sit on SGBs of poorer schools cannot do.
The result of this is that the learners in these two different types of schools have
totally different experiences of education and naturally achieve very different
outcomes. It is therefore considered normal that all ex-Model C high schools get
Matric rates of over 90 %, while those of township and rural schools fluctuate from
lows of under 50 % to around 70 %, with a small number getting over 90 %.
Furthermore, the children in these schools often face greater safety and security
problems and see much less of their teachers than those in ex-Model C schools.
The Minister of Education in 2002, Kader Asmal, aware of this situation, commis-
sioned a review of the cost and funding of education. This led to an influential report,
the Review of Financing, Resourcing and Costs of Education in Public Schools
(Department of Education 2003), which later that year led to the development of the
60 M. Prew
Plan of Action for Improving Access to Free Quality Basic Education for All. This
created the foundation for the decision to introduce fee-free schooling for
the poorer school communities. To ascertain what the real costs of schooling were,
a study on the cost of education was commissioned in 2004 (Dewees and Musker
2004). As a result of this study and a review of the funds that could be reallocated to
no-fee schools, a notional funding allocation was set per learner.
National table of targets for the school non-personnel grant allocations 2006–2009
Quintile % of total 2006 2007 2008 2009
*
Q1 30 R703 R738 R775 R807
Q2 27.5 R645 R677 R711 R740
Q3 22.5 R527 R554 R581 R605
Q4 15 R352 R369 R388 R404
Q5 5 R117 R123 R129 R134
Average 100 R469 R492 R517 R538
Adequacy benchmark R527 R554 R581 R605
Source: Department of Education 2006
*
In January 2006 US$1 = R7 and in December 2009 US$1 = R7.5. During the period it once
increased to US$1 = over R10
All Quintile 1 schools were included in the no-fee policy when it was introduced
in 2007. In 2008 it was extended to Quintile 2 schools and gradually to Quintile
3 schools in 2009/2010 depending on the affordability at provincial level. Equally
the allocation has been increased per learner annually.
The policy has not been free of controversy. ‘No-fee schools’ are not allowed to
charge any fees so when provincial departments paid their allocation late, as often
happened, the schools were left facing serious financial difficulties. Most reverted to
charging fees. This undermined the policy and led to tension between some provincial
departments and their schools. In addition, research has shown that much of the cost
of schooling is contained in the transport, uniform, feeding, and the opportunity costs
of a child being in school rather than earning an income: these costs are not covered
by the no-fee grants (Social Surveys Africa and CALS 2009). So the financial burden
of sending a child to school for a poor family has been relieved but not removed.
By 2010 the quintile system was reset nationally yet not provincially (Veriava
2010), and the basis for setting quintiles deepened to include literacy rates, employment
rates, and household income in the community served by the school. This removed
some of the misallocation of school quintiles and made the system more equitable.
It meant that Gauteng has very few Quintile 1 and 2 schools while the poorer and
more rural provinces have large numbers of such schools. In addition, the provi-
sions for fee exemption in schools which still charged fees were strengthened and
extended to all orphans and children on social grants (Veriava 2010).
So, at present, about 60 % of schools nationally have been declared ‘no-fee
schools’. They get grants paid on a per capita basis by government and do not charge
user fees. They have some flexibility in spending those funds, particularly if they
have also claimed Section 21 status. However, as the amount a no-fee school receives
per learner is below R1,100 per year, and as the fees that Quintile 4 and 5 schools
charge go on increasing with many now charging considerably more than R10,000
per learner per annum, the income gap between schools continues to grow.
4 Curriculum Reform
Following any form of regime change the first target in education tends to be the
curriculum. In the South African case, a democratic government took over from a
white supremacist regime. Inevitably there was pressure for the curriculum and the
individual subject syllabus to reflect that change. Prior to 1994, the structure and form
of the curriculum was firmly rooted in the tenets of apartheid philosophy: segrega-
tion, perceived differences in ability based on race, and the need to reproduce labour
supply patterns that would result in the continued economic dominance of a single
race. After 1994 the core principles of the inherited curriculum were therefore at
odds with the principles on which the new regime was founded. Furthermore, there
was a pressing need to make changes to the content of the curriculum which Jansen
(1999) notes was ‘racist, Eurocentric, sexist, authoritarian and prescriptive’ and for
it to be ‘cleansed of its racist and sexist elements’ (Chisholm 2004).
In addition to the need to make significant changes to curriculum structure and
content, there was a need to change methods of teaching and learning (Taylor and
Vinjevold 1999). During apartheid, rote learning and uncritical reproduction of facts
was the norm in many schools, particularly schools for black children administered by
the Department of Education and Training. The teaching and assessment of higher
order reasoning skills occurred in ‘white’ schools, as these skills were deemed appro-
priate and necessary for a future managerial class. However, as the maintenance of the
political and economic status quo was one of the primary objectives of the National
Party government, even in historically white schools these skills were taught in a way
that did not challenge the political ideology of the day (Centre for Education Policy
Development 2011). Part of the philosophy of Christian National Education, which
prevailed under the National Party, was that education was delivered in a way that
sought to promote respect for authority, conformity, and reproduction of existing
social and economic patterns of segregation. It was all of these features of teaching
and learning that the post-election curriculum, Curriculum 2005, sought to address
in order to build a new generation of South Africans who would be active citizens,
respect human rights, prize social justice, and display acceptance of different cultures,
views, and beliefs (Centre for Education Policy Development 2011).
Under apartheid, patterns of educational attainment reflected racial and class
divisions. The reasons for this are well documented (see Kallaway 1984; Nkomo
1990) and are largely associated with inequitable levels of expenditure on education
and the availability of appropriate educational inputs, the quality of professional
preparation offered to teachers of different race groups, and the desire to reproduce
labour supply patterns that required large numbers of unskilled or low-skilled
workers for the mining, agriculture, and manufacturing sectors of the economy.
Unfortunately, the legacy of unequal distribution of resources and the systematic
62 M. Prew
inadequate preparation of black teachers has resulted in differentiated distribution

of achievement scores, with more advantaged schools far outperforming schools
located in less economically advantaged rural areas and townships.
The intention to replace the previous curricula, which for most grades had been
different for different race groups, with a single national curriculum, named
Curriculum 2005, was broadly supported. However, at this point a series of apparently
unrelated processes conspired to lead to a curriculum problem that still bedevils
South Africa. The events were a political decision that there must be an immediate
symbolic change in South Africa’s curriculum; the arrival in South Africa of an
American educationist, William Spady; a belief that outcomes-based education (OBE)
would make a good model for South Africa’s curriculum changes; the growing
influence of the technicians developing the National Qualification Framework
(NQF) on the schooling policy makers; and the loss of many of the ‘anchor’ teachers
in the system (Fiske and Ladd 2004). The mistakes that would emanate from this
series of situations were compounded by a strong belief that South Africa had
nothing to learn from the post independence successes and failures in the schooling
systems on the African continent.
On 24 March 1997, the national Minister of Education, SME Bengu, officially
launched Curriculum 2005 (C2005), which was described as a curriculum for the
new South Africa (Fiske and Ladd 2004). The launch of this curriculum was a very
important symbolic – and substantive – break with past educational traditions
that had reflected discriminatory values. Fiske and Ladd (2004) noted that the
new curriculum had three core requirements: (i) to reflect the social values that
defined the “new South Africa”, (ii) to promote a non-authoritarian approach to
education that acknowledged and valued local and indigenous knowledge, and
(iii) the need to be delivered in a democratic fashion. In this respect, the devel-
opment of C2005 was arguably the most significant curriculum reform undertaken
by South Africa over 100 years.
The decision to adopt an outcomes-based approach to education was strongly
influenced by the establishment of the National Qualification Framework (NQF),
which in turn had been shaped by debates on competency-based education and
the need to bridge the divide between education and training (even though, as
already noted, the Ministry of Labour had responsibility for the training arm of the
education system). The development and formulation of C2005 was driven by the
desire to align school-based education with the language and structure of the NQF.
The association with the NQF has been retained throughout all subsequent curricu-
lum reforms – the critical outcomes (or critical cross-field outcomes) appear in all
curriculum policy statements from 1997 to 2012.
The confusions among teachers and education system managers were manifest
from the start. There was a conflation of the underlying conceptual framework and
philosophy of the curriculum (OBE) and the content of the new curriculum (C2005)
in the minds of teachers and even in national documents (Fiske and Ladd 2004,
p. 159). At this point William Spady was brought in to assist. He was one of the
world’s most ardent advocates of OBE (Fiske and Ladd 2004) and he set about
assisting the Department to put in place a rigid system of outcomes (famously,
66 of them) and pedagogical approaches. The rigidity and absolutism of the white
regime’s Christian Nationalist Education supported by pseudo science of teaching
called Fundamental Pedagogics1 was being replaced by an absolutist OBE and
C2005. At the same time, many of the longest serving and most influential teachers
were being retrenched and the teacher unions were trying to sort out what their new
role would be in a democratic state. So the teaching profession was in no state to
challenge these changes stridently.
The result was problematic. Teachers were underprepared and did not understand
the new curriculum which seemed to devalue their teaching skills and referred to
them as ‘facilitators’. Perhaps the most damaging result was that many teachers lost
their enthusiasm for teaching and believed that they no longer needed to teach even
the basics (Department of Education 2000). For a workforce which had in many
places already been traumatised by apartheid and needed to be reassured and
supported, this was disastrous. An already shaky and low-performing schooling
system went into free fall. The following years were of immense embarrassment
to South Africa, as the international comparative studies found South African
learners’ content knowledge and deductive abilities to be very poor (Howie et al.
2012; Mullis et al. 2007; Reddy 2006).
As the Centre for Education Policy Development (2011) noted, OBE – and
C2005 in particular – has its educational roots in constructivism and progressivism.
Many of the ideas associated with these approaches can be seen as a counterpoint to
the ideology of the previous curriculum in that:
• The curriculum would specify the broad outcomes to be attained by children
(learners) but teachers would have a large degree of professional freedom to
determine exactly how to teach the content.
• All outcomes could be attained by all children (irrespective of race or class);
however, children may take different lengths of time to do this.
• Teachers were encouraged to promote indigenous knowledge and draw on
phenomena that were readily observable in children’s immediate environments
before presenting more abstract concepts and to promote conceptual linkages
across disciplines.
• Assessment and monitoring practices were designed in a way that were supposed
to enable teachers to follow the individual progress and performance of each
child through the creation of learner portfolios, regular (almost daily) assess-
ment, and detailed record keeping.
1
Fundamental Pedagogics (FP) was the dominant theoretical discourse in teacher education
and in schools under apartheid (Enslin 1990, p. 78). It claimed to be value-free and apolitical
(De Vries 1978). However, with its own language, techniques, and instruments, it was political,
endorsing the status quo (Enslin 1990). FP started from the assumption that babies are born sinful
and that the teacher is knowledge provider and moral guardian of the helpless, ignorant, and
incompetent child: this justified authoritarian methods. Christian Nationalist Education (CNE)
was the white supremacist ideology underpinning FP which condemned blacks to a subordinate
place in society and the economy. It was the prevalent ideology in most black teacher training col-
leges until the early 1990s.
64 M. Prew
Another feature of C2005 was the extent to which it, as a curriculum reform,
became associated with particular teaching methodologies. Teacher training on
OBE often focused on methods of classroom delivery and usually centred on the use
of group work, activity-based learning, and the promotion of higher levels of learner
participation. This led to what was described as a preoccupation with how teachers
are teaching and not what they are teaching (Potterton et al. 2008). Compliance with
the outward performance of teaching became the focus of many development pro-
grammes and assessments of teaching practice, with content knowledge and the
conceptual focus of lessons often taking second place.
By 2000 it became clear to the education department that there were serious
problems with the way that C2005 was being interpreted and implemented at school
level. Minister Kader Asmal set in place a Curriculum Review Committee. The
report (Department of Education 2000) found that there were multiple problems
with C2005 which prevented teachers introducing it as anticipated, including its
opaque and confusing language and terminology and its complexity. The report
recommended radical changes. This led to a rethink of the curriculum halfway
through its initial implementation cycle and resulted in a modified version, the
Revised National Curriculum Statement (RNCS). This was implemented from 2004
in the foundation phase. It still used OBE as its core philosophy, but it was less rigid
and complex in its language and approach while being more supportive of teachers
in how to interpret the approach. There was also a deliberate attempt to ensure that
the school principals and education district officials, including subject advisors,
were included in the training. They had not been involved in the C2005 training
and so felt marginalised, which undermined its implementation in many schools
and districts.
The RNCS was rolled out across the country for Grades 1–9 in 2003–2005
through mass workshops. It included activities and modeling of good practice as
well as discussions about implementation. However, such a conference-based
approach left many teachers unable to transfer what they had learned into the
classroom. This iteration of curriculum reform was as criticised as the first one.
This led to some immediate modifications and a rename to National Curriculum
Statement (NCS) when it was rolled out for the Further Education and Training
(FET) phase (Grades 10–12) from 2006 to 2008. One change during this period
was that it became compulsory for all students in the FET band to study either
Mathematics or Mathematical Literacy as few learners had been taking mathematics
in the FET phase, which was starving technical professions of new recruits. The
production of curriculum statements which provided clearer content specification
marked the start of the tensions between the espoused intentions of C2005 to
devolve decision making with respect to curriculum content to the local level
(in particular to the level of individual teachers) and the centralisation of control
over the specification of curriculum.
Researchers found that many of the misconceptions which had crept into schools
and classrooms during the implementation of C2005 remained and perpetuated the
findings that the new curriculum was not living up to its transformative potential as
“some of the central pedagogic principles built into the new approach worked
well only under the physical and fiscal conditions found in wealthy schools”
(Fiske and Ladd 2004, p. 163). Worried about South Africa’s continued poor per-
formance in international comparative studies, the third post-1994 national Minister
of Education, Naledi Pandor, established a Review Committee in 2009 to investigate
the continued inability of many teachers to implement the curriculum. This led
to a national debate about OBE and the previous curricula. The result was a fourth
reform of the curriculum in just over a decade, with the emergence of a modified
Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS). The core recommendations
of the Review Committee are summarised as follows:
• Greater clarity is needed in curriculum policy documents. It was recommended
that unclear and vague terminology be removed.
• There should be greater specificity of content in curriculum documents as
teachers experience difficulties in knowing exactly what content should be
taught in each grade.
• There should be greater articulation across the system, ensuring better grade-to-
grade progression in the work that is taught and more systematic development of
concepts and skills.
• Teachers’ workload should be reduced, in particular many of the administrative
requirements associated with curriculum implementation should be eliminated.
• There should be a rationalisation of policy documents, processes, and adminis-
tration. There should also be a rationalisation of the number of subjects taught in
the intermediate phase (Grades 4–6).
• District officials should provide greater support for curriculum implementation,
assisted by the supply of good quality teaching and learning materials from such
sources as the Department’s own dedicated e-learning portal, Thutong (Centre
for Education Policy Development 2011).
The new national Minister of Basic Education2 in 2009, Angie Motshekga,
implemented many of the recommendations immediately, such as reducing the
teacher workload by getting rid of the need to keep portfolios of learners’ work,
while also implementing some fundamental changes to the curriculum, insisted that
what she was doing was refining and rationalising the NCS. The resultant CAPS is
being introduced into all schools between 2012 and 2014. The CAPS provides
detailed guidance to teachers on delivering their subject syllabus and puts in
place much clearer assessment processes. It brought to a head a long-time dis-
cussion about how prescriptive the curriculum should be and how much leeway
should be provided to teachers. South Africa has moved from C2005, with its
prescriptive philosophy of education with very clear objectives for each stage of
the syllabus and laying down teaching methods while allowing the teacher to
define the content, to the CAPS which is more prescriptive in the content and more
flexible and less authoritarian in the methods and outcomes required. This includes
simplification of the language used in the CAPS documents for each subject,
2
The Department and Ministry of Education was divided in 2009 into the Department and
Ministry of Basic Education and the Department and Ministry of Higher Education and Training.
66 M. Prew
directions on how to teach and assess each topic, and greater articulation of the
content taught between grades and between topics, to ensure stronger concept
development.
In summary, the curriculum development process in South Africa since 1994 has
seen a series of innovative and creative curricula introduced, driven by OBE without
adequate training and support for the teachers and without the necessary resourcing
for effective implementation. The infrastructure to implement OBE effectively was
missing. While OBE was not going to be the solution to South Africa’s inherited
curriculum problems, if implemented effectively, it could have moved South Africa
towards more flexible and creative schooling. The problem is that any kind of
curriculum which departs from the traditional memorisation of a narrow range of
facts is difficult to implement and requires a higher level of teacher competence and
resourcing. Without the necessary training, support, and resources, many teachers
became immobilised or simply gave up, with the unintended – but predictable – result
that scores on traditional measures went down.
The effective implementation of these various curriculum changes has been
somewhat compromised by the difficulties involved in implementing an Integrated
Quality Management System (IQMS) which was designed to link the appraisal of
teachers’ performance to personal and school development plans.
Recent research (Department of Basic Education 2011; NEEDU 2013; Zenex
Foundation 2012) has shown that many curriculum delivery problems remain.
Findings show that many teachers:
• Set very limited amounts of written work and tend to set tasks with low cognitive
requirements
• Avoid topics in the curriculum that they do not fully understand and spend
considerable time teaching topics that they do understand
• Fail to recognise and compensate for learning and language difficulties that
learners in their class exhibit
• Fail to cover more than half the syllabus content each year, so leaving learners
with partial knowledge; this problem is compounded year on year
• Struggle with the complexity of home languages in their classrooms
5 What Has Been Missed? Major Gaps

in the Education Reform Process
The Department of Basic Education has made it clear in the document Schooling
2025 and the accompanying document, Action Plan to 2014 (Department of Basic
Education Department of Basic Education 2010a, b), that the main thrust for this
decade must be on ensuring existent policies are implemented effectively within
strengthened institutions and procedures rather than developing new policies.
However, it is acknowledged that there are a few areas of the system where policy
clarity is still needed.
5.1 Empowering Education Districts
The aim of the policy on education districts, which was gazetted in 2013
(Department of Basic Education 2013), is to define how districts are to relate to the
rest of the education system and how they are to support schools effectively. The
starting proposition is that fully staffed and functional education districts are criti-
cal to the improvement of the schools that they have responsibility for. Although
there are only 86 education districts nationally, any changes to their functions and
the way they operate have serious financial implications, as education staff at dis-
trict offices are senior educators and so relatively highly paid. For this reason, the
extension of increased responsibilities to education districts and the setting of
norms and standards, such as setting a maximum of 30 schools per circuit (a sub-
unit of the district) and 300 schools per district, are to be achieved gradually. These
increased powers, norms and standards are aimed at allowing education district
offices to support their schools more effectively, and to be more responsive to their
professional needs, rather than being enforcers of policy compliance, as is often
the case at present. Therefore the policy also lays down that there should be a
multi-skilled team available to assist schools at the circuit level, and the team
should consist of subject advisers, management and governance specialists, and
administrative personnel.
5.2 Professionalising School Management
Future policy on school managers is likely to revolve around the implementation

of an entry level qualification for principalship. A prototype has been trialed over
the last few years and has shown to have a positive impact on both the individual
who does the practice-based course and their schools (Bush et al. 2011). Further,
the policy is likely to professionalise the role of principal by making changes to
the way that principals are appointed and held accountable for the performance
of their schools. At present, under SASA, the SGBs have the power to appoint
teachers including the principal in their school as long as they advertise the
post, interview, and provide the provincial department of education with their
recommended top three candidates. The head of the provincial department usually
rubber stamps the recommendation and appoints the first name on the SGB’s list,
unless there is a dispute over the appointment. Once SGBs have had this power
reduced, there is a possibility that their powers to appoint teachers will also be
reviewed, as this provision means that there is limited ability across the system to
deploy teachers to where they are most needed. In addition, the present system
tends to maintain the status quo of higher qualified non-black teachers being
appointed mainly in ex-Model C schools and black teachers staffing the poorer
township and rural schools.
68 M. Prew
5.3 Utilizing Annual National Assessments
Another possible area of reform in the schooling system is with the management
and use of Annual National Assessment results. Since these annual tests were
implemented a few years ago they have had a major impact. For the first time, an
individual teacher’s performance can be appraised through the performance of their
learners. Generally teachers have reacted positively to this form of testing, partly
because it provides teachers who do not teach Grade 12 with some feedback on
their performance. However, the impact of such testing and accountability measures
often declines over time, as they get increasingly bureaucratised and teachers find
ways of circumventing their impact, as occurred with the IQMS. Changes are likely
to focus on requiring schools to use the ANA results diagnostically in planning
school improvements and holding schools and districts responsible for improving
ANA results.
5.4 Linking Education and Skills Training
Most of the legislative and policy changes over the next few years will come in
the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET). Since having a separate
identity and getting the link re-established between education and skills training
the DHET has been redesigning the sector. This has included a number of comple-
mentary processes.
The process started with three summits being held – for universities, further
education and training, and skills development. These were supplemented with
smaller seminars on such areas as humanities and social sciences. All these sum-
mits were informed by research. The resultant reports helped inform the develop-
ment of a Green Paper on Post-school Education and Training. This Green Paper
was developed through a consultative process during 2011 (Department of Higher
Education and Training 2012). In 2012 it was refined and exposed to public com-
ment, prior to being developed into a White Paper. While the intention behind the
Green Paper was to open possibilities and debate, the White Paper will define the
specific policy directions that the DHET intends to take. Ultimately this will lead
to legislation.
It is likely the White Paper and therefore future legislation will promote the
following:
• Articulation between the various post-school institutions
• A more flexible National Qualification Framework
• Expansion and greater access to post-school provision particularly for students
from poorer communities
• Increased access to tertiary education through the development of a number of
community education and training centres
• Making the fit between post-school education and the world of work tighter
while ensuring that post-school education is about more than skilling for work
(hence the focus on humanities and social sciences)
• Greater use of indigenous languages in higher education courses
• Revival of an apprenticeship system through the SETAs
• Consolidation and rationalisation of the SETAs with much greater oversight by
DHET
• Differentiation of the roles of the 23 universities
• The building of two new universities
• Interventions to ensure higher throughput and success rates in post-school
education and training institutions
5.5 Application of ICT in Teaching and Management
In both basic and higher education, possibly the most significant changes over the
next decades will be in relation to use of technology in both the pedagogical process
and in institutional and system management. This was already recognised in the
White Paper on e-Education (Department of Education 2004) which was never fully
implemented. The present school data system (which includes four different
platforms – EMIS, DEMIS, SA-SAMS, and LURITS) is fragmented and often
collects data which is inaccurate as it is not used at school level for planning.
The use of technology in the classroom is patchy and limited, as many schools lack
electricity or face teacher techno-phobia, which leads to assumptions of high costs
and complexity of implementation. Early experiments with widespread use of ICT
were based on provision of hardware. These projects were generally expensive and
poorly conceived. The lessons from these pilots is that schools, with guidance, should
set their own requirements for ICT, and the focus should be more on the provision of
software and training rather than installing expensive hardware. In addition there is a
need for eco-friendly schools and classrooms which reduce water and electricity bills
by using green technologies. Whichever route is taken, security will be an issue: com-
puters, solar panels, and batteries in schools attract thieves.
Inevitably at a policy level, the focus on ICTs is likely to be mainly related to
advancing science and mathematics education, in part to improve results and in part
to cover for the shortage of qualified teachers.
South Africa could benefit by an audit of what is already in place across the
schooling system (as many private companies have worked with individual schools)
leading to the development of an overall national education ICT database, strategy,
and master plan, in line with policy recommendations in the 2004 White Paper
(Department of Education 2004). The rule must be that any ICT provision should be
cost effective, sustainable, and used. More controversially, the guidelines on use
of ICTs in schools should be expansive and should open the space for risk and
innovation, and they should allow for the production of relevant knowledge.
70 M. Prew
6 How Does South Africa Move Forward?
Having reviewed the development of education legislation and policy since 1994,
with particular focus on structural and systemic, pro-poor financial and curriculum
policies, as well as the gaps in the policy framework, the last two sections look
forward and examine the direction that policy and education development is likely
to take over the next years.
The rationale for further reform is driven by the high cost and low performance
of the schooling system. The cumulative impact of the policies discussed in this
paper has been to reduce the effectiveness of the schooling process. This is widely
acknowledged by commentators and the government itself. The key indicator
illustrating this is that only about 30 % of each cohort of learners reaches Grade 12
and then passes the Matric exam. Over two-thirds of youth leave school with
limited literacy and life skills in an economy with urgent skill demand which they
cannot meet.
The focus of this section is on reforms that are needed to make the education
system more functional and to improve performance. It is proposed that this requires
improvements in teacher knowledge, language teaching, school management, and
provision of ICTs in education.
6.1 Teachers
The quality of teachers appears to be the nub of the problem the South African edu-
cation system faces. When 154 intermediate phase ‘master’3 teachers from three
provinces were given a mathematics test, based on Grade 6 outcomes and learning
area knowledge, 96 % failed to get a pass mark (set at 50 %) and the highest score
was only 71 %. The mean across all the 154 teachers was a miserable 26 % (JET
Education Services 2007). Tests in science and language written by Foundation and
intermediate phase ‘master’ teachers show similar knowledge gaps. Other teacher
tests have indicated most teachers cannot manage high-level language and mathe-
matics tasks included in the grade syllabus they are teaching (NEEDU 2013). In
secondary schools many teachers are not properly qualified to teach their subjects –
particularly mathematics and science. This problem is a legacy of the apartheid era
but exacerbated by the closure of teacher training colleges in the late 1990s.
South Africa needs to train more teachers and ensure that initial and inservice
teacher training courses are competence-based, lead to real skills in the classroom,
build strong subject knowledge, and do not just promote theory.
Teacher knowledge levels should be checked regularly so that the capacity building
is specific to the needs of each teacher. This should be linked into the national IQMS
3
These were teachers who had been selected by their provincial departments of education for the
project, on the basis that they were good teachers who could teach their peers once they had passed
through the course.
and an existing national professional development point systems, which requires

teachers to undergo a certain amount of training each year.
6.2 Language of Teaching and Learning
There is increasing awareness that poor ANA and Matric results are rooted in the
limited language capacity of many learners who are learning from Grade 4 in an
exogenous (foreign) language (Department of Basic Education 2010c). Many
learners struggle with this early exit to English, which is the language of teaching
in most schools. While the policy encourages bi- and multi-lingualism, most teachers
lack the skill to manage a multilingual class. The next years need to either see
home language teaching extended through the primary phase or improved teaching
of English in Grades 1–3 in preparation for the transition to English in Grade 4.
Either way it is essential that South Africa responds to the present reality that many
learners cannot understand their teacher well enough to learn.
6.3 School Management
Management of schools needs to become a priority. Without effective school

management – and particularly effective curriculum management – which ensures
that teachers attend class and teach effectively, it is unlikely that children will learn
more and better. This is especially critical in primary schools where the basics have
to be learned. The basis for taking this forward as a priority is in place: there is a
draft national education management policy and ‘Standard for School Leadership’
creating the policy framework; the conditions of service and appointment built into
the Occupational Specific Dispensation will professionalise the school principal’s
job, particularly when supported by the qualification for principals, which is being
implemented across all provinces now but needs to be legislated as a prerequisite for
all future appointments to principalship.
6.4 Investment into ICT
Substantial investment is needed to make sure every school has electricity and high-
speed broadband access. This would allow schools to offer a range of services to
their communities. It would also require all schools to have a bank of computers,
which are accessible during and outside school hours, and welcome the use of smart-
phones on site. The educational spinoffs could be massive. It would allow learners in
remote schools access to the internet and to information which at the moment only
urban middle class learners can generally access. The weak teacher would cease to
be the barrier to learning that she often is at present, and it would allow learners a
72 M. Prew
constructive base for support groups, with the ability via such sites as Khan Academy
to teach themselves, do tests, and check and extend their knowledge.
From a governance viewpoint the ICT improvements would require partnerships
between the Department of Basic Education and computer companies, local social
network providers, and cell phone network providers, on a much larger scale than at
present.
7 Envisioning the Future
The government has acknowledged that education is in crisis and that concerted
national attention needs to be paid to improving it. It is not solely a matter of more
funding, but is also about how money is allocated and spent within the context of a
national plan for education. This plan, if it is to make a real difference, would need
to foreground basic teacher subject knowledge, ability to teach reading and other
basic literacy skills in the vernacular and the language of teaching, and classroom
management within schools which are equipped with appropriate ICT and are safe.
Policy should be utilised to reinforce that process. If that means rewriting some
policies, and particularly the cornerstone SASA, then this needs to be done.
At the same time the policy-making process needs to be better informed by what
South Africans want out of their education system. For too long the national debate
on education has been seen as the preserve of the educated middle class and those
involved in education. However, education touches the very core of the collective
future as a society and as a developing nation. It is time that this debate is opened up
and involves as wide a range of people as possible. The starting point needs to be
what the people of South Africa want and expect from their education system. This
conversation needs to be a structured and informed debate: many South Africans do
not have a vision of what an effective schooling and education system would look
like, having never seen one. This means that it needs to be an information-rich
process and also involve both bottom-up and top-down approaches. The result may
take education in a direction which is not entirely in line with the development plans
of the Ministry, but this should be accepted. This process should then become
the basis for fundamental reforms in the legislative environment and real actions
to effect that at school level. This should involve serious changes in the way that
communication technology is treated and managed in schools. ICT should not be
seen as a threat by teachers and principals but as an ally and tool in the educative
process. Lessons can be learned from countries where this has been implemented
effectively. This should be supported by development of eco-friendly schools and
classrooms with sustainable access to electricity and water through use of solar
power and other appropriate technologies.
For too long there has been a gap between policy and practice, with symbolic poli-
cies which avoid upsetting powerful interests, such as the IQMS, and well-intentioned
policies which lack a well-designed and implemented training model or strong out-
come indicators and monitoring and evaluation plans. As a result, the policies rarely
speak to those people working in schools, education district offices, and in
communities who are meant to implement them. This gap needs to be closed. There
needs to be a process of rationalising and simplifying the present plethora of laws
and policies governing education and empowerment of school managers and gover-
nors to take risks within policy and embrace new technologies which can be used to
enhance the learning and school management processes. This will be a ‘back to
basics’ endeavour led by courageous leaders with a vision. It will also need to link
into other government reforms such as the rural electrification, government-on-line
initiatives, as well as rural development and even anti-corruption drives. Without
this, the drift towards parents seeking ‘better’ schooling for children from the bur-
geoning private schooling sector (CDE 2012) will continue, with long-term negative
impact on the state schooling sector and the confidence and success of that system.
References
African National Congress. (1994). A policy framework for education and training. Johannesburg:
ANC. Draft.
Bush, T., Duku, N., Glover, D., Kiggundu, E., Msila, V., & Moorosi, P. (2011). The impact of the
national ACE project on school and learner outcomes: Executive summary. Pretoria:
Department of Basic Education and Zenex Foundation.
Centre for Education Policy Development. (2011). Literature review for UNICEF’s curriculum
monitoring and evaluation project (Unpublished).
Centre for Development and Enterprise (CDE). (2012). Promoting school choice for the poor:
Practical ideas from international experience. Johannesburg: CDE.
Chisholm, L. (2004). The quality of primary education in South Africa, prepared for UNESCO
Education for All Global Monitoring Report.
Christie, P., & Collins, C. (1984). Bantu education: Apartheid ideology and labour reproduction.
In P. Kallaway (Ed.), Apartheid and education: The education of black South Africans.
Johannesburg: Ravan Press.
De Vries, C. G. (1978). Orientering in die Fundamentele Opvoedkunde. Stellenbosche:
Universiteitsuitgewers en Boekhandelaars.
Department of Basic Education. (2010a). Schooling 2025. Pretoria: DBE.
Department of Basic Education. (2010b). Action plan to 2014: Towards the realisation of schooling
2025. Pretoria: DBE.
Department of Basic Education. (2010c). The status of the language of learning and teaching
(LOLT) in South African public schools. Pretoria: DBE.
Department of Basic Education. (2011). Report on the annual national assessments of 2011.
Pretoria: DBE.
Department of Basic Education. (2013). Policy on the organisation, roles and responsibilities of
education districts. Pretoria: DBE.
Department of Education. (2000). Report on the review committee on curriculum 2005. Pretoria:
DoE.
Department of Education. (2003). Review of financing, resourcing and costs of education in public
schools. Pretoria: DoE.
Department of Education. (2004). White paper on e-Education: Transforming learning and teaching
through information and communication technologies (ICTs). Pretoria: DoE.
Department of Education. (2006). Amended national norms and standards for school funding.
Pretoria: DoE.
Department of Higher Education and Training. (2012). Green paper for post-school education and
training. Pretoria: DHET.
74 M. Prew
Dewees, A., & Musker, P. (2004). Minimum learning package assessment and costing project
report. Pretoria: DoE.
Enslin, P. (1990). Science and doctrine: Theoretical discourse in South African teacher education.
In M. Nkomo (Ed.), Pedagogy of domination: Towards a democratic education in South Africa.
Trenton: Africa World Press.
Fiske, E. B., & Ladd, H. F. (2004). Elusive equity: Education reform in post-apartheid South
Africa. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
Howie, S., van Staden, S., Tshele, M., Dowse, C., & Zimmerman, L. (2012). PIRLS 2011: South
African children’s reading literacy achievement. Summary Report. Pretoria: CEA, University
of Pretoria.
Jansen, J. D. (1999). Setting the scene: Histographies of curriculum policy in South Africa. In
J. Jansen & P. Christie (Eds.), Changing curriculum: Studies on outcomes-based education in
South Africa (pp. 3–18). Cape Town: Juta and Co Ltd.
JET Education Services. (2007). Integrated education program: Teacher content knowledge
Report. Johannesburg: JET.
Kallaway, P. (Ed.). (1984). Apartheid and education: The education of black South Africans.
Johannesburg: Ravan Press.
Kallaway, P. (Ed.). (2002). The history of education under apartheid 1948–1994. Cape Town:
Pearson.
Kanjee, A., & Chudgar, A. (2009, November 20). Accuracy of the poverty quintile system for
classifying South African schools. Paper presented at the 2nd monitoring and evaluation
colloquium of the Gauteng Department of Education.
Karlsson, J., McPherson, G., & Pampallis, J. (2001). A critical examination of the development of
school governance policy and its implications for achieving equity. In E. Motala & J. Pampallis
(Eds.), Education and equity: The impact of state policies on South African education.
Sandown: Heinemann.
Mullis, I., Martin, M., Kennedy, A., & Foy, P. (2007). PIRLS 2006 International Report: IEA’s
progress in international reading literacy study in primary schools in 40 countries. Chestnut
Hill: TIMSS and PIRLS International Study Centre, Boston College.
NEEDU. (2013). National Report 2012: The state of literacy teaching and learning in the foundation
phase. Pretoria: NEEDU.
Nkomo, M. (Ed.). (1990). Pedagogy of domination: Towards a democratic education in South
Africa. Trenton: Africa World Press.
Potterton, M., Jardine, M., Ritchie, M., Cain, D., Zinn, A., & Daza, P. (2008). Report on the
summative review of classroom practice in KwaZulu Natal and the Eastern Cape. Johannesburg:
Zenex Foundation.
Reddy, V. (2006). Mathematics and science achievement in South African schools in TIMSS 2003.
Pretoria: HSRC.
Social Surveys Africa and CALS. (2009). Barriers to education study. Johannesburg: SSA.
Statistics South Africa. (2012). Census 2011: Highlights of key results. Pretoria: Stats SA.
Taylor, N., & Vinjevold, P. (Eds.). (1999). Getting learning right: Report of the President’s education
initiative. Johannesburg: JET.
Veriava, F. (2010). The resourcing of public schools: An analysis of compliance with, and measurement
of the state’s constitutional obligations. Johannesburg: Studies in Poverty and Inequality
Institute.
Zenex Foundation. (2012). The Zenex school development programme summative evaluation
report. Cape Town: Evaluation Research Agency.
Websites
http://www.sacmeq.org/indicate.htm. Accessed 30 Sept 2012

http://www.education.gov. Accessed innumerable dates Sept 2012 and Jan 2013.
England: Restructuring Education
and the Demise of the LEA
Mel West
Abstract This chapter focuses on developments over the past 25 years in England,
where almost 85 % of the population lives. The review goes back to 1988, when there
were 107 Local Education Authorities in England. The number of local authorities
has increased to 152 today, as the result of various local government reforms, yet the
local authorities’ powers and responsibilities have diminished. The chapter illustrates
such a continuing process of reform by three distinct but unequal phases, which
largely followed the changes of the essentially two-party political system. The
chapter describes the reform conceived and implemented by each government and
analyzes their assumptions underpinning the reform and the evidenced-based impact.
Finally, it delineates external factors that have contributed to development of
education standards in England and potential lessons for replication.
Keywords Educational reform in England, the 1988 Education Act • New Labour
education policy • Creating an education marketplace • Education and social disad-
vantage • Education intervention strategies • Checks and balances in public educa-
tion systems
The United Kingdom embraces four jurisdictions. The UK national government sets
education policy for England, but Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland each have
their own National Assemblies that develop and oversee education policy. Of
course, there are many similarities; Wales in particular closely follows the policies
established in England, while Scotland too follows many of these, although typi-
cally some time later and with modifications. The position in Northern Ireland is
again different, with the complexity of two parallel school systems—one Catholic,
one Protestant—that need to be coordinated.
M. West (*)
University of Manchester, Manchester, England, UK

76 M. West
This chapter focuses on developments of public education in England, where

almost 85 % of the population lives. There is also a private education sector, but
currently this accounts for only about 6 % of school-age children; the overwhelming
majority in England attend state schools.
This review goes back to 1988, when there were 107 Local Education Authorities
in England, each of them responsible for providing and then overseeing the
provision of education within their local area. The number of local authorities
has increased to 152 today, as the result of various local government reforms, which
seems to suggest an increase in local democratic influence, In fact, however, quite
the reverse is true, as these authorities have very few remaining powers and greatly
limited responsibilities regarding education.
Education reform in England has been a continuing process over the past
25 years. This time span, however, is divided into three distinct but unequal phases,
because the essentially two-party political system means changes from time to
time in the government party, and when governments change, policies change too.
Thus, the first period of significant change in education can be seen to date from
the then Conservative government’s Great Reform Act in 1988, the second from the
election of the Labour government in 1997, and the third from the Conservative-
dominated coalition government that was formed after the 2010 elections.
Before these reforms commenced, although both the education system and
educational entitlement were national, and largely funded by the national govern-
ment, there were significant local differences in education provision. These conflicts
arose partly because the responsibility for organising and managing the system
locally was distributed among more than 100 Local Education Authorities, and
partly because determining and overseeing the content and conduct of the curricu-
lum was the responsibility of each school’s individual governing body. However,
despite increases in the numbers of children participating, in the average number of
years of schooling received, and in the resources devoted to education during the
previous 40 years, the Thatcher government of the 1980s thought that the system
was in need of a major overhaul, with less emphasis placed on the processes of
schooling and much greater emphasis placed on the outcomes. The resulting 1988
Education Act precipitated fundamental changes in the educational landscape,
bringing the education system under direct national influence and thus beginning
the major erosion of local authority powers that has continued to this day.
1 Conservative Government Reforms 1988–1997: The

Creation of an Education Marketplace
Essentially, the 1988 Education Act had four key components (West and Ainscow
1991). The first was prescription, introducing a National Curriculum, accompanied
by national testing, that all schools must follow. The second was devolution,
transferring many of the management functions previously carried out by Local
Authorities to schools, and thereby significantly changing the role of the headteacher.
England: Restructuring Education and the Demise of the LEA 77
The third related to competition, altering the basis on which schools were funded.
Essentially, this changed the basis on which schools had been funded, away from
the numbers of teachers employed to the number of pupils the school attracted,
allowing popular schools to grow at the expense of less popular neighbouring
schools and creating a local education marketplace. It also embraced the creation of
a new category of schools directly funded by the government, grant-maintained
schools. The fourth was privatisation, breaking the Local Authorities’ monopoly on
the supply of services to schools within their areas and opening these up to competi-
tion from private companies.
1.1 Development of the Policy Reform
The driving force for these reforms, rooted in the White Paper “Better Schools”
(DfES 1985 ), which had identified the need to provide a better return on invest-
ment in education through increasing standards of attainment at all levels of abil-
ity as the overriding priority for education policy, was the notion that replacing
the supposedly ‘cosy’ Local Authority environment with simulated marketplace
conditions would lead to improvements in standards. Although this notion was
popular with right-wing politicians, who saw public ownership as the enemy of
enterprise and efficiency, it was an ideological rather than an evidenced proposition.
Opponents pointed out that free market systems often lead to quite as much duplication
and inefficient resource use as centrally planned ones. But the primacy of the market
is deeply engrained in Conservative philosophy, and objections from schools and
teacher associations were portrayed as self-serving rather than serving the interests
of pupils and were swept aside.
Certainly a case could be made for ensuring that there were common components
prescribed within every child’s educational experience; too many children had, for
example, been able to opt out of science subjects or modern languages at a relatively
early stage of schooling. Nevertheless it was questionable from the outset whether a
single curriculum model could be expected to meet the needs of all pupils, regardless of
aptitudes, interests, or ability levels. Critics argued that a core curriculum, identify-
ing perhaps a half-dozen key subjects and accounting for about 70 % of the time
children spent at school, could achieve the objectives of a national curriculum but
still allow some flexibility to tailor the curriculum towards individual needs. But the
government insisted on a rigid 100 % model, prescribing both the subjects—ten in
all—and the balance of time to be allocated to those subjects from age 5 to 16,
although it was clearly impossible from the outset that this single, heavily tradi-
tional, and academic curriculum model could have equal utility value to all pupils.
There were similar doubts about the wisdom of unbridled competition between
schools. Studies were beginning to demonstrate that in England the poverty gap was
increasing, and with it the gap in attainment between children from different
socioeconomic backgrounds was widening, with children from the poorest families
falling ever further behind national average attainment levels. It was evident that
78 M. West
competition between schools would further favour children from middle-class

backgrounds, whose parents were much more likely to shop around for the ‘best’
schools, leaving already disadvantaged schools even more disadvantaged as numbers
fell and the social mix of the pupils became even more heavily weighted towards
the poorest groups in the community. The newly established—some would say
liberated—grant-maintained schools were a particularly important stimulus to
competition. Under the provisions of the 1988 Act, schools could ‘opt out’ of the
local authority altogether. Such schools would receive their funding directly from
government, which was a significant incentive, as this would mean budgets were not
‘top-sliced’ to fund local authority services to schools before distribution. Thus
those schools that responded to the government’s invitation to switch to grant-
maintained (GM) status enjoyed the competitive advantage of increased resources
levels that, in turn, would make it easier to attract pupils who brought with them
even more resources. At the same time, as the government made a corresponding
reduction in the education support grant paid to the local authority to fund schools,
the provision of high-quality local services that might persuade a school not to
apply for GM status became more difficult.
Controversy over these issues continued into the 1990s, by which time there was a
new prime minister, but not a new party in government. Initially, it was hoped that this
change might see a softening in the hostility towards local authorities and teacher
associations, but instead this hardened. Post-16 (years of age) education provision was
removed from local authority control and placed under a newly formed national fund-
ing council, further diluting local influence on education provision. New legislation
was passed giving the Secretary of State (minister) for Education extended powers in
relationship to teachers’ pay and conditions of service, and, least popular of all, the
Office for Standards in Education (OfSTED) was established. OfSTED is an agency
set up by the government to oversee the inspection of all maintained schools on a
regular 4-year cycle and was central to the government’s determination to increase the
accountability of schools for the performance of their pupils. Inspection reports would
be published and, along with the ‘league tables’ of school performance now emerging
as the first cohort of National Curriculum pupils reached assessment points, would
stimulate debate within the local community about the quality of schooling provided.
The government’s assumption—substantially correct—was that parents would see
raw scores attained by pupils as an indicator of school quality, rather than, as was and
is more often the case in developed countries, a reflection of the socioeconomic status
and social capital of parents. Thus, new forces to increase competition between
schools and for school places were unleashed at a local level.
Following an election that again returned the Conservative party to power, the
government produced a new White Paper: “Choice and Diversity: A New Framework
for Schools” (DFE 1992). This document, in arguing that the needs of all children
were not the same, and that schools must pay more attention to individual interests
and aptitudes, set out a formula for relaxing the National Curriculum and its punishing
testing regime without acknowledging that its introduction had been a mistake.
Instead, it proposed to introduce specialist schools, whose curricula would be skewed
in favour of particular subjects. Thus, there would be designated Science schools,

Performing Arts schools, Modern Language schools, and so on. The issue of how
these schools might recruit children whose interests or abilities coincided with these
‘specialisms’, or indeed how children might access schools whose specialisations
matched their interests, was largely overlooked, although such schools were permitted
to admit a small proportion (5 %) of their intake on the basis of established interest
in the area of specialisation.
A further loosening of the National Curriculum came in 1993, when the govern-
ment-commissioned review, “The National Curriculum and Its Assessment” (DfES
1985), was published. This paper concluded that the curriculum as legislated was
impractical: a national curriculum required national staffing in the proportions the
curriculum implied, and this was not available. Further, it warned that assessment
had become the main focus in the classroom, distorting and reducing the quality of
teaching and learning activities. This seemed to be a voice of reason, asserting itself
in the face of reforms driven by political dogma rather than educational wisdom, and
a number of the report’s proposals were adopted. Among these were the scaling
back of the National Curriculum to an 80 % model, restoring schools’ discretion
regarding how best to fill the remaining time; reductions in the amount of content
prescribed for and the time allocated to testing; and greater flexibility in the 14+
curriculum, allowing some traditional academic subjects to be dropped in favour of
more vocationally orientated programmes.
However, although these policy shifts were generally welcomed by the education
community, the government pushed further ahead with its accountability measures.
OfSTED became increasingly intrusive, designating some schools as ‘failing’ and
requiring their closure, spreading alarm everywhere it went and severely damaging
teacher morale. The publication of school performance tables became an annual
ritual, with schools increasingly fearful of slipping down the league. OfSTED
reports and league table positions became marketing tools for the strong, threats to
the weak. Competition between schools was thoroughly established. But a change
was also taking place among school headteachers. The generation of 1988, who had
found themselves thrust, largely unprepared, into the role of school managers were
gradually being replaced by a new and altogether more pragmatic generation, who
accepted competition and indeed thrived on it. In 1988 very many headteachers had
been reluctant to take on this new role, especially aspects associated with managing
the school’s budget. Ten years later, by the time the Conservatives were swept from
power in the 1997 election, very many would be reluctant to give it up.
1.2 Assumptions Underpinning Conservative Government

Reforms
One starting point for the reforms undertaken during this period was a belief that
there are areas of knowledge and basic skills that all children should acquire through
schooling. Once that concept is accepted, some national curriculum guidelines seem
80 M. West
inevitable; surely, if we agree that all children should be offered access to a common
core of experiences, we must agree that all schools should be required to make
these available. Indeed, it may seem strange to many countries that England did not
introduce national curriculum guidelines before 1988.
A second assumption was that competition is the best way to organise the provision
of goods and services within society. The increasing size of the public sector had
long been a concern to right-wing politicians and voters. It seemed that key public
sector services—such as education and health—had insatiable appetites for resources,
yet showed little by way of increased productivity. This feeling made these sectors
irresistible targets for reform; obviously schools and hospitals cannot be closed, as
no elected government could expect to be returned after taking such action. But if
these services could be forced to operate in the ‘real world’, where survival depends
on performance and providing value for money, that is likely to play well with vot-
ers. Thus, competition between schools through the simulation of market conditions
is seen as a force that will induce schools to improve quality and efficiency. Further,
establishing an education market transforms parents—the effective ‘consumers’ of
education in that they make the consumption decisions on behalf of their children—
into customers, empowering them in the education marketplace. This notion also
plays well with voters.
A third assumption was that public sector management was less effective than
its counterpart in the private sector. Public sector management was represented
as overly large and bureaucratic, slow to react to changes in demand, inefficient
in its use of resources, and ineffective in achieving its goals. Decision making in
education was ineffective because decisions were being made in local town halls,
remote from the schools and by people who were not fully aware of the real
problems and priorities. Surely, the transfer of decision making into the school,
moving it closer to the point of implementation, would improve the quality of
decisions made?
1.3 What Evidence Is There Regarding the Impact of These

Reforms?
There is no doubt that this reform programme brought about a sea-change in the
English education system. In a single decade the carefully calibrated checks and
balances provided by local education authorities that had previously moderated
direct political influence over schools were removed and a new relationship between
central government and schools established. In fact, it is probably relationships
within the system that changed most during this era of reform. The close relationship
between schools and local authorities was broken, and schools were increasingly
contracting services—from the provision of school meals to provision of in-service
training—from alternative providers, thus creating new markets for educational
services. Relationships between schools, especially large secondary schools, and
government changed, as direct funding was accompanied by direct dialogue, and a

select band of headteachers who supported government reforms found themselves
brought into the policy-making circle, further distancing local authorities from the
point at which education policy decisions were made. At the same time, relationships
in schools began to change. Schools, rather than local authorities, were now the
teachers’ employer; the headteacher had become chief executive of ‘The School Ltd’,
with a broader role and much wider powers. Relationships between parents and
schools changed, as parents were increasingly seen as customers who needed to
be attracted, as was evidenced by the huge increase in school-level marketing
activities, and the transformation of the ‘school brochure’ from a collection of stapled,
photocopied sheets into a glossy advertisement for the school.
Of course such changes were uneven, spreading at different rates in different
areas. Generally, the fragmentation of local authorities as schools opted out was
more evident in the south of England, traditionally the location of Conservative
Party strongholds, than in the north, where local political control was more often
in the hands of the Labour Party. And the changes, especially ‘opting out’ and
the imposition of the OfSTED Inspection regime, alienated many teachers, erod-
ing morale and reducing job satisfaction levels (Scanlon 2001). Demographic
change exacerbated the situation as school rolls fell during the 1990s, placing
even more pressure on those already squeezed by competition. But closing
schools is not easy, so that unpopular schools tended to remain open, with extra
places, unhappy staff, and high costs, thus undermining the government’s drive
to increase efficiency.
In terms of schooling outcomes, although test results increased modestly over
the period, there was no dramatic leap forward, as gains in one school were largely
offset by disappointing performance in another. Indeed, many argued that the gains
recorded in the most successful schools were a consequence of the reallocation of
pupils across the stock of schools, rather than the dramatic increases in performance
that were trumpeted (Gorard 2005). Meanwhile, important questions about the
curriculum and assessment systems continued to be asked. Did the curriculum
reflect the needs of an increasingly global employment market, or did vocational
education need to be improved? Was the national examination ‘fit for purpose’?
What could be done to reduce non attendance? In many inner-city areas there were
schools where as many as 10 % of the pupils were missing on any given day, at
least in part, it was argued, because the curriculum on offer did not seem relevant to
their lives.
For these reasons it seems fair to conclude that the major impact of reforms in
this period were structural, altering (irreversibly) the architecture of the education
system in England and changing relationships within it, but having relatively
little overall impact on either the efficiency or the effectiveness of the system. By
1997, the Conservative government had reduced the influence of local authorities
and teacher associations, and had established an education marketplace that would
require its political opponents to rethink their own position and policies, but it had
also begun to run out of ideas and lose public confidence.
82 M. West
2 Labour Government Reforms 1997–2010: Tackling Social

Disadvantage Through Educational Intervention
2.1 Development of the Policy Reform
Few were surprised when Tony Blair famously described New Labour’s key priori-
ties as ‘Education, education, education’ in the run-up to the 1997 election. After
almost 10 years of sweeping reforms from a Conservative government that had
dramatically altered the balance of powers within the education system, many
(especially teacher associations) assumed this signalled that local influence would be
restored. However, they were soon to be disabused of this notion, as the new govern-
ment embarked on a series of policy initiatives that were in many respects even more
prescriptive than those of their predecessors, and set in place mechanisms for ‘micro-
management’ of almost every aspect of schooling. The new government publicly
endorsed the key role of headteachers as the ‘transformational leaders’ who would
ready the nation’s school system for the twenty-first century, while simultaneously
indulging in unprecedented levels of prescription about what should be taught, how
it should be taught, how it would be assessed, and even how heads should manage
their schools. Indeed, specific ideas about how to ensure educational quality became
the very last thing headteachers needed to worry about. Knowing how to organise the
school to satisfy the measures, targets, and inspection criteria imposed were much
more useful attributes, as it became clear that this was a government that believed the
best way to raise standards was to intervene directly in the ways schools went about
their business. The overriding policy goal during this period, and the primary focus
of intervention policies, was to increase standards while reducing the ‘gap’ between
the highest and lowest attaining pupils. International studies such as PISA had indi-
cated that while overall education performance remained relatively strong, other
countries were catching up, with some pulling ahead. At the same time, these studies
also suggested that the impact of socioeconomic factors on attainment levels was
higher in England than almost any other country (Machin 2006).
The White Paper “Excellence in Schools” (DfEE 1997) set out the initial policy
objectives. All schools would set targets to raise standards. School performance
league tables would provide more detail, showing not only the attainment levels
pupils had achieved but also their rates of progress over time. Secondary schools
would be encouraged to become ‘Specialist’ schools, favouring a particular curricu-
lum area; in return they would be given limited control over pupil admissions.
Primary school class sizes would be reduced, and all primary school children would
spend at least 1 hour each day learning English and 1 hour each day learning maths
(National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies). Education Action Zones (EAZs) would
be established in areas of high social deprivation, with targeted strategies, resources,
and support. Other forms of disadvantage, for example, ethnic minority status or
special educational needs, would also receive additional resources. In schools,
setting children by ability—anathema to a generation raised on the ideals of compre-
hensive schooling—would be encouraged. All headteachers would be trained in
school leadership. This agenda was enlarged upon in the subsequent White Paper
“Achieving Success” (DfES 2011), which reduced still further the now modest fund-
ing level and influence of local authorities over the schools in their area, loosened
further the constraints of the National Curriculum, actively promoted the involve-
ment of groups and organisations, both public and private, in the governance of
schools, and targeted disadvantage even more closely. The Children’s Act of 2004
was perhaps the most ambitious piece of legislation during this period. An attempt to
bring coherence to the separate activities of the different services involved in child
health, welfare, and education, it sought to integrate these more strongly, portraying
schools as natural centres where service delivery might be coordinated. The act was
accompanied by a powerful statement setting out the government’s beliefs about the
entitlement of children and young people, “Every Child Matters” (DFEE 2004).
2.2 Four Types of Interventions
In addressing these goals, government actions became focused around the identifi-
cation of targets for every school, the measuring of school performance against
these, and the imposition of ‘solutions’ to improve the school if targets were unmet.
In fact, the government was so convinced by the efficacy of its ‘solutions’ that these
were quickly spread out across schools in the most extensive programme of inter-
ventions ever seen in the English education system. Promoted under the slogan
‘raising the bar, narrowing the gap’, the government had a view on how all aspects
of schooling should be conducted. The preoccupation with setting and hitting targets
meant that the scope and pace of interventions to ‘improve’ schools accelerated
rapidly, sometimes moving further in directions already signalled by the previous
government, sometimes identifying new aspects of schooling that would benefit
from central direction and control. This unprecedented array of interventions can be
grouped into four basic types: general interventions, targeted interventions, within-
school interventions, and structural interventions (Kerr and West 2011).
2.2.1 General Interventions
These interventions aimed to improve the overall quality and effectiveness of all schools,
particularly in relationship to the strengthening of leadership and teaching quality. The
underlying assumption was that (at least part of) the reason for differences in educational
attainment levels lies in the limited effectiveness of some schools. Improving schools
generally can therefore be seen as a way of improving the outcomes of those serving
disadvantaged pupils, leading in turn to an improvement in their life chances. This
type of intervention was particularly popular during the early period of the New
Labour government in the late 1990s, for example, the National Literacy and
Numeracy Strategies. Subsequently, these were incorporated into the National
Strategies, a set of system-wide improvement approaches commissioned by
84 M. West
government from a private sector education service provider, supported by teams of

‘consultants’ employed nationally, regionally, and within each local authority, to
ensure their implementation. Soon, the really quite modest improvements in test and
examination scores occurring in those years levelled off, and these ‘one-size-fits-all’
approaches were phased out. Officially, they had done their job and were no longer
needed, although many would say that in truth they were expensive but relatively inef-
fective strategies and that funding such interventions could no longer be justified.
2.2.2 Targeted Interventions
These initiatives were aimed directly at improving the performance of schools in

socioeconomically disadvantaged areas. The underlying premise was that in such
areas, ineffective schools ‘fail’ pupils who are already disadvantaged by personal or
family circumstances, and so merely perpetuate existing inequities. As a first conse-
quence, such schools were often identified by OfSTED as unsatisfactory and became
subject to direct interventions and regular monitoring, coordinated by the local author-
ity but dictated by central government. In some areas, groups of schools were targeted
simultaneously in more sweeping interventions. This process began with the identifi-
cation of Education Action Zones. It was continued into the Excellence in Cities (EiC)
programme, which required groups of secondary schools in deprived inner-city areas
to work together for the benefit of all the pupils in all their schools. Such collaborative
arrangements which was exactly the sort of function previously coordinated by the
now-disempowered local authorities continued to develop under a variety of names
throughout the period. As they developed, interventions began to focus on collabora-
tion beyond the school, for example, between schools, parents, and community
groups. Arguably the most significant example of this approach was the London
Challenge, which, during the 7 years from 2003 on, focused particularly on raising the
attainment levels of disadvantaged learners in Greater London, while at the same time
improving the overall performance of all schools and pupils in the area. The perceived
success of this intervention led to its extension to the City Challenges established in
the Black Country and in Greater Manchester, and finally the ‘National Challenge’.
This intervention targeted more than 600 ‘low-performing’ secondary schools located
across the country in areas of socioeconomic disadvantage. Unfortunately, this caused
the government some embarrassment, as many of these schools had previously been
praised by OfSTED for the quality of their provision.
2.2.3 Within-School Interventions
Although the first two types of intervention focus on improvement at the whole-
school level, this third type was aimed at improving outcomes for underachieving
groups within schools. These approaches are therefore rooted in the view that pupil
outcomes show significant within-school variation. This differential attainment of
different pupil groups implies that many schools do not work equally well for all
their pupils. In national policy documents these approaches were usually referred to
as being about ‘narrowing (or closing) the gap’ between high- and low-performing
groups. So, for example, there have been interventions that have specifically focused
on the underachievement of boys, particularly those from white working-class back-
grounds; on learners from certain minority ethnic backgrounds; on bilingual learn-
ers; on children in local authority care; on traveller children; on gifted and talented
children; and on children with special educational needs. Specific attention was also
given to improving access to university education amongst students from disadvan-
taged backgrounds through the Aim Higher initiative. This plan involved universities
working closely with local schools to help raise both awareness and aspirations and
to open up pathways for young people from communities that have no established
tradition of university education.
2.2.4 Structural Interventions
The final years of the Labour government saw the introduction of a number of new
categories of schools. A particularly important ‘new’ category of school, City
Academies, was introduced in 2000. These schools, modelled on the Charter
Schools operating in inner-city areas in the USA, were proclaimed as a radical new
approach to the problems of education in deprived urban environments. The cre-
ation of new categories of school typically involved changes in school governance
arrangements such as Academies, Federations, Trusts, and All-through Schools.
Increased freedom from the already severely diminished influence of the local
authority became a key feature of such schools’ governance, with ‘sponsors’ replac-
ing traditional school governing bodies as the ultimate decision-making body for
the school. In particular, ‘Faith Groups’ were encouraged to come forward to act as
sponsors. Sometimes such schools were established as a result of local ambitions,
and sometimes as a result of central government’s dissatisfaction with existing local
arrangements. These interventions seemed to operate from the assumption that a
partnership of strong schools and strong government is all that is needed to improve
schooling outcomes. Curiously, a feature of the ‘new’ schools created by these poli-
cies is the relative freedom granted to these schools in relationship to the curricu-
lum. Although government has never conceded officially that one factor generally
holding back attainment among disadvantaged groups may be an inappropriate
National Curriculum, which meets neither the needs nor the interests of many
pupils, it is interesting that greater freedom to abandon National Curriculum pre-
scriptions is typically available within the new categories of schools.
2.3 Assumptions Underpinning Labour Government Reforms
As already noted, all these interventions see the school as the primary focus for
national improvement efforts. They also imply a central role for the school in
86 M. West
improving equity within education systems. This view resulted in a strong

emphasis on the accountability of individual schools for the performance of their
pupils, leading to what some have seen as unreasonable pressure on schools to
solve the wider problem of social disadvantage (Muijs and Chapman 2009).
Emphasis was also placed on support for schools through the involvement of
‘expert’ advisers and consultants, professional development opportunities, tar-
geted financial support, and support in terms of human resources. Different inter-
ventions varied with respect to how much they emphasised support as opposed to
expectations, and can be located along a continuum, from those that were mainly
supportive (e.g., improving school programmes) to others which were substantially
punitive (e.g., various forms of school reconstitution and closure), but all underlined
school-level accountability.
Interventions also differed in terms of the degree of prescriptiveness. Some, such
as those provided through the National Strategies, came with detailed guidelines
and training regarding how they were to be implemented. Others allowed rather
more local discretion and encouraged schools to innovate, resulting in strategies
such as ‘lending’ one another teachers, as happened under the Leadership Incentive
Grant initiative (West 2010). Indeed, an important strand within these interven-
tion policies was an emphasis on school-to-school collaboration. On the surface
this may seem strange within a policy context in which competition between schools
remained the key strategy for ‘driving up standards’. But there was increasing
research evidence that collaboration between schools has enormous potential for
fostering system-wide improvement, particularly in challenging contexts (Ainscow
and West 2007), by both transferring existing knowledge and, more importantly,
generating new knowledge that is context specific.
Further, this period saw increasing recognition of the need to link school
improvement efforts to wider social action. This argument positions schools as hubs
of such action—a ‘universal service’—through their collaboration with other
agencies that work with children. In addition, schools have been encouraged to
take on a more extended role within their communities and with the involvement of
community partners (Dyson 2011) through the creation of new structures such as
trusts and academies.
Reflecting on all this, the interventions reported here seem to be driven by two
key underlying assumptions: first, the traditional governance arrangements do not
enable schools to overcome the disadvantages that children in areas of economic
and social deprivation bring into school with them; and second, boosting academic
attainment levels among these children will increase their life chances, and thus
help reduce inequities within society.
The notion that increased attainment is itself life changing is perhaps overly sim-
plistic. In reality, examination success is at best a proxy for educational quality, and
there is ample evidence that improving the 16-plus qualifications of young people by
a few percentage points hardly influences either post-school choices or opportunities.
Equally, it can be argued that the attainment gains themselves are not attributable to
the new forms of governance, but rather to the substantial additional resources that
have accompanied such interventions. Had the schools that have been closed down
and replaced enjoyed the facilities and resources available to the new Academies, who
can say they would not have achieved as much, if not more? However, few can
question that additional resources are justified: these schools tend to be located in
areas of high deprivation, with a much greater proportion of pupils qualifying for free
school meals, having special needs, or with English as a second language.
However, as already noted, the notion that at least part of the reason for the differen-
tial achievement of different student groups lies in the quality of the school provision
they experience is a general assumption driving the educational reform process during
this period. There is some evidence to support this, but there is also evidence that
points to its limitations. There is strong evidence that the school effect on attainment
is significant and is similar in effect size to that of pupil social background
(Muijs 2006). However, this school effect must not be overstated, as it has sometimes
been by national policy makers. According to studies in the UK, typically between
10 % and 20 % of the variance in attainment outcomes between pupils can be explained
at the school level, although this does not mean all that variance is the result of school
factors (see, for example, Sammons 2007; Muijs 2006; Teddlie and Reynolds 2000).
However, it is a mistake to assume that the remaining variance, at the student level, is
all associated with social background. In fact, whenever researchers use actual mea-
sures of social background, such as mothers’ education level (the measure that best
predicts outcomes among measures of social background), parental income, or job
classification, the variance explained is typically less than 10 %. Rather, the research
suggests that the largest factors associated with learner outcomes relate to measures of
general ability and prior learning. Of course, both social factors and school-related
factors contribute to these factors too, so separating out the effect size of individual
variables is an impossibly complex process. Additionally, it must also be noted that
the poor quality of many of the measures used in education means that a fair proportion
of the variance is simple measurement error.
Some research evidence suggests that the impact the school has on students from
disadvantaged backgrounds is greater than on all students generally, the ‘school effect’
being up to three times greater on the attainment levels of those students (Muijs and
Reynolds 2003). This suggestion implies that interventions to improve school effective-
ness will bring greater proportional benefits to these students, thereby improving
educational equity too. However, there is also some evidence that schools in areas of
socioeconomic disadvantage face greater operational problems, for example, in recruit-
ing and retaining high-quality teachers (Maguire et al. 2006), which may further disad-
vantage students in these schools. This is one of the reasons put forward to explain why
various national school improvement interventions have used relatively prescriptive
approaches in an attempt to develop teacher competence and to ensure there are tight
management arrangements for consistent implementation and monitoring.
Some researchers draw attention to the built-in limitations of improvement
efforts that focus solely on within-school factors. Some argue that schools reflect
the massive inequalities that exist within British society, an analysis that offers little
encouragement to school improvement as a means of breaking the link between
home background, educational outcomes, and life chances. Others take a more
optimistic line, suggesting that efforts to improve individual schools are needed but
that these must be linked to wider actions to break down the additional barriers
faced by disadvantaged groups.
88 M. West
2.4 What Evidence Is There Regarding the Impact of These

Reforms?
The Labour government came to power at a time when the Conservative reforms of
the previous decade had altered the landscape in which schools operate but had then
run out of steam. As noted earlier, many educational commentators thought that the
changes achieved reflected the ideological beliefs of the political right more than
they improved schooling. In this context, the Labour government had both public
expectations and the goodwill of the education professions on its side when it took
office. Unfortunately, this was an opportunity they largely squandered. Mortimore,
summing up their period in office, wrote:
Much needed to be done when this government came into office in 1997. And many
teachers wanted to help improve schools and make our society more equal. But instead of
the formulation of a long-term improvement plan based on the two big questions-what sort
of education system is suitable for a modern society, and how can excellence and equity be
made to work together-schools got top-down diktat. Successive ministers, and especially
their advisers thought they knew ‘what works’. They cherry-picked research, suppressed
evaluations that gave them answers they did not want, and compounded the mess….
(Mortimore 2009)
This is perhaps an overly bleak view. The Labour government itself asked to be
judged on its capacity to deliver the targets it set, for the most part, targets involving
the percentages of children reaching given levels in the various national tests and
public examinations. In the event, some of these were met, others were not, but there
was increasing scepticism about the relevance of these targets to either improving
schooling generally or enhancing life chances for learners, specifically those from
disadvantaged backgrounds. Predictably, government statements point to improve-
ments in test and examination scores, arguing that the impact has been significant.
Within the research community, however, there is a variety of views, including some
who argue that there has been very little real impact, particularly on learners from
disadvantaged backgrounds, and that even the apparent improvements in mea-
sured performance are not always supported by a detailed analysis of national data
(Gorrard 2005). Concern has also been expressed that such improvements that have
been achieved in test and examination scores may have been achieved by the use
of dubious tactics, such as orchestrated changes in school populations, the exclusion
of some students, the careful selection of which courses students follow, and the
growth in so-called equivalent qualifications that may inflate reported attainment
levels. Another problem is that where strategies do work, they may well work
just as well for advantaged students, so that overall improvements may even widen
the ‘gap’. There is also a proposition that improvements in measured performance
do not necessarily result in increased access to higher education, particularly to
more competitive universities, or in improved employment opportunities. Such
views cast doubts on both the authenticity of improvement claims and the value of
continued investment in such initiatives.
These realizations underline that the evidence for impact of these interventions
is, at best, mixed, not least because of the limited extent to which reliable evidence
has been systematically collected and analyzed. Where systematic quantitative

evaluations have been carried out, what is often found is that impact is patchy, with
evidence of progress in some schools, but little overall improvement in learner
outcomes, particularly learners from disadvantaged groups, that has been sustained
(Tikley et al. 2006). At the same time, there is an accumulating volume of qualitative
accounts, from both individuals and networks of schools in socially disadvantaged
areas, which report significant progress in improving student performance.
The positive examples reinforce the importance of factors that are now well
established within the school effectiveness research base, such as raised expec-
tations, the strengthening of teaching practices, the systematic use of data to
guide classroom-level strategies, and the way change is managed at school level.
These examples also suggest the need to develop strategies that relate to the
immediate contexts, both inside and outside the school. In the case of schools that
are relatively low performing, for example, initial emphases on strengthening
systems and procedures through the tightening of management arrangements and
the standardizing of classroom practices seem most effective. Here, the partnering
of schools where a relatively stronger school provides support to a weaker school
has also been found to be a useful approach. But for schools that are performing
more effectively, further standardization seems less helpful: engagement with spe-
cific data about aspects of school performance, investigating within-school differ-
ences in performance, and encouraging experimentation in the classroom seem to
be more successful approaches.
Turning to specific initiatives, there has been little in the way of systematic, rigorous
evaluation of the impact of targeted interventions. However, such evidence as exists
suggests limited success, in terms of both outcomes for children and increased
understanding of the key process and management factors that influence the impact
of interventions. Perhaps the strongest evidence emerges from interventions that
were targeted at preschool and early years education. The evaluation of the impact
of a parenting programme on children aged 3 to 5 years showing conduct disorder
(Hutchings et al. 2007), for example, showed significant improvements in most
measures of parenting. Another study of early intervention (Evangelou et al. 2005)
considered a project supporting a range of approaches trialled by voluntary organ-
isations across the country. Some of these offered curriculum variations, whereas
others focused on guidance for practitioners. The key findings were that the initia-
tive developed both skills and understandings among practitioners. Similarly, the
national evaluation of the Sure Start programme (Institute for the Study of Children,
Families and Social Issues 2008), which supported the transition to school of young
children from disadvantaged backgrounds, reported improved child behaviour,
increased self-esteem among parents, improvements in health, and a reduction in
levels of Social Services involvement with targeted families. The official evalua-
tions (DfES 2004, 2006) of the Children’s Fund initiative reinforce many of these
findings. It reported that local initiatives had often been able to respond to previ-
ously unmet needs of children and their families. However, sustaining parental
involvement and breaking down barriers to social inclusion in the wider community
proved more problematic.
90 M. West
However, as already noted, findings are often contradictory, as is the case with
evaluations of the early years’ numeracy and literacy strategies. Here some studies
show positive results, indicating improvements in teacher effectiveness and pupil
outcomes, whereas others are sharply critical of the limitations of these strate-
gies, seeing them as encouraging impoverishing teaching, being based on poor
and limited evidence of what constitutes effective classroom practice, and lead-
ing to even greater divergence between low- and high-achieving students (Smith
and Hardman 2000; Wyse 2003; Earl et al. 2003; Millett et al. 2004). A problem
here for the researcher is the variation in approaches used in the different inter-
ventions, which makes it difficult to identify those factors to which learning
gains might be attributed.
Consequently, specific evidence of the impact such interventions have on breaking
the link between poverty and achievement is scarce, and the scant evidence that is
available is not always encouraging. Looking at new models, in the case of
Federations, an analysis of national student and school level datasets found little
difference between student attainment levels in Federated schools and comparable
non-Federation schools. The new arrangements, however, have a second major
implication for schools: they brought the opportunity to incorporate the wider chil-
dren’s services agenda Every Child Matters into school-level planning and prac-
tices. This point may be significant, because structures and processes can be
developed that may bring local communities into schools. Trust schools also have
the potential to bring in partners involved in the wider children’s services agenda,
although as yet there has been little research into their potential to do so.
The government maintained that Academies were more successful than tradi-
tionally governed schools in improving attainment standards in socially deprived
communities. Again, however, this is not always supported by research findings,
with some studies finding that Academies do not perform any better than other
schools in the area. Even where there are clear increases in attainment levels, it may
be that this is related to factors other than improvements in teaching quality. For
example, in Academies up to 10 % of the student intake can be ‘selected’ (although
not formally on ability); some Academies have deliberately ‘widened’ their intake
of students to include ‘a more diverse pupil profile’, while others attract a wider
profile of students because of initial success or increased parental confidence, so it
is hard to make true comparisons without looking at overall system performance.
Indeed, some argue that improved outcomes may be attributed as much to a fall in
the proportion of students eligible for free school meals (FSM) as to any improve-
ments in teaching and learning. However, the impact of this factor is hard to gauge,
as student numbers in Academies typically increase, which is not surprising because
they have typically replaced failing schools. Although the numbers qualifying for
FSM also increase, the increase is not proportional, making it hard to refute even
this claim. There is undoubtedly considerable variation in student populations
among Academies. For example, one of the first opened started with 51 % of its
students eligible for FSM, and this has decreased to 12 %. In contrast, a later Academy
opened with 9 % of students eligible for FSM, and this has subsequently increased
to 41 %. This finding indicates that the social mix in Academies may change both
rapidly and dramatically, not in itself a bad thing, but a confounding variable,
nonetheless, when trying to evaluate impact on children from particular socioeco-
nomic backgrounds.
The new structural arrangements can perhaps be configured to meet the needs of
the communities they serve and the challenges confronted more effectively than
the schools they replaced. A number of case studies reported on the DCSF
Standards site offered good examples of local practice developing to meet local
problems, for example, drawing in support for smaller schools in rural environ-
ments, or pooling staff and other resources in urban areas, or building a more posi-
tive local image.
Despite these examples, the apparent lack of overall impact from so many initiatives
is somewhat surprising, particularly if the contention that schools make a difference
is true. There are, however, a number of possible explanations for this, some of
which relate to methodological matters. For example, many of the evaluations
carried out to date are based on relatively short-term output data, perhaps completed
too soon for any effect to show. Among policymakers there is often an expectation
that interventions will have an immediate impact. However, most of the school
improvement research suggests that at least 3 to 5 years are needed for an interven-
tion to lead to measurable changes in output at the school level.
This is a further example of the point made earlier: the methodologies used in
evaluations are often weak when it comes to detecting impacts and attributing these
to particular interventions. Only rarely is there any attempt at random assignment,
or is there effective use of comparators, making it very hard to discern the impact of
particular interventions. The impact of individual schools on students also differs,
depending on which outcomes are studied. They tend to have their strongest impact
on cognitive development, and on social behaviours and dispositions. Impact
on students’ affective outcomes is more limited, however, with even a factor such as
‘attitude to school’ being substantially determined by non-school factors.
Ironically, even where the intention is to reduce disadvantage, the differential
capacity of schools to implement interventions effectively can lead to increased
differences in performance between schools, compounding equity problems. This
disparity underlines an important limitation of the single school focus approach
adopted by the Labour government for many of its interventions, which is that too
often improvements in one school in an area of widespread social disadvantage
are achieved at a cost to surrounding schools. Research provides examples of
how, as a school improves, it will tend to attract a greater number of students from
families more committed to education. Sometimes, too, a school that becomes
oversubscribed may also decide to become more selective. As a result, other
schools in the area are left with less-motivated students from less ambitious back-
grounds, locking them into a spiral of decline. Unfortunately, this phenomenon
seems to have been an unintended consequence of Labour policies. Thus, in the
end, despite their undoubted commitment to improve standards in schools and
reduce the impact of social disadvantage on attainment levels, there is no compel-
ling evidence that Labour government reforms made much difference to either.
The lasting impression of this period is the unprecedented level of interference by
92 M. West
politicians in the detail of schooling, fuelled by an inability to grasp that teachers

have a fairly good idea of how to improve schools, if only you trust them enough
and let them get on with it.
3 Coalition Government Reforms Since 2010: The Pendulum

Swings Back?
The outcome of the 2010 election was close, so close that for the first time since
wartime a coalition was needed to form a government. Once again, the Conservatives
were the largest group in Parliament, but to achieve the majority necessary to gov-
ern, an alliance with the much smaller group of Liberal Democrats was necessary. This
need meant that conservative policy objectives, including education, would need to
be tempered to ensure Liberal Democrat support.
The Conservatives had outlined priorities for education in the run-up to the election.
These ideas seemed to imply even greater ‘freedom’ for schools: having freed
them from local government influence in their previous term of office yet with
increasing central government control, this time central direction would also be loos-
ened. Academies, the self-determining schools established initially against consid-
erable public resistance by the Labour government, would not be scrapped; in
fact, all secondary schools would be encouraged to apply for Academy status.
Further, so-called Free Schools would be established. Free Schools are schools
funded by the government, but established in response to local demand from par-
ents, charities, or indeed businesses that are unhappy with the quality of schools
already available within the local area. This schooling is free of charge and not
academically selective (although priority in admissions may be given to the children
of those groups that set up the school). Before the election the Conservatives pro-
posed that several hundred free schools would be opened in the first year of office,
although in fact only 24 materialised, and in the second year, only about 50 more are
expected. However, the main significance of the acceleration of the Academies
programme and the introduction of Free Schools lies in the final elimination of
local authorities’ influence on schooling.
Inevitably, this has been a contentious issue, and one that was difficult for the
Coalition partners to sign up to, because before the election they had been calling
for a restoration of local authority coordination of and control over schooling. A key
issue here is the impact of self-determining schools on the prospects of children
from disadvantaged backgrounds. If schools find their performance is measured and
their activities are resourced according to the attainment levels of their pupils, and
are given a degree of freedom to ‘select’ which children attend and to exclude chil-
dren who cause difficulty, one might expect to find that there are pupils that no
school is keen to accept. Thus, the argument goes, new ‘freedoms’ associated with
current government policies are likely to make it even more difficult for children
already suffering from social and economic disadvantage to access quality schools,
because they would be the most difficult and least cost effective for whom to provide.
To secure agreement for this policy, the Conservatives had to offer their Liberal
Democrat partners something in return: this something was the pupil premium. The
pupil premium is an additional payment made to schools that admit children from
disadvantaged homes, meaning that schools will get additional resources for every
such child on roll, as funding follows pupils.
The White Paper “The Importance of Teaching” (DFE 2010) sets out the government’s
policy agenda for this parliament. This agenda is somewhat curtailed by current
economic policies. As in most European economies, public debt reduction is the
overriding priority. Consequently, this is not a time for plans that require significant
resources; indeed education budgets have seen dramatic cuts, particularly to the
ambitious school building programme of the last government. Several policy shifts
are signalled, including further slimming down of the National Curriculum, and an
end to the prescription of teaching methods, tougher criteria for entering teacher train-
ing, and a sharpening of accountability. Further light has been shed on accountability
measures, with the publication of a new Framework for School Inspection (DFE
2010), which details changes in the OfSTED regime. Schools that are considered
‘outstanding’ by OfSTED can apply to become ‘Teaching Schools’, which will allow
them to sell services to other schools, further squeezing the residual local authority
role, and under the new ‘Schools Direct’ arrangements, schools can take a much more
significant role in the recruitment and training of new entrants into teaching.
Perhaps the most contentious reform signalled was the introduction of a new
examination system to replace GCSEs (General Certificate of Secondary Education),
the English Baccalaureate (EBacc). In truth, the need to reform GCSE has been
discussed for some years. Many have doubts about the ‘improvements’ in attain-
ment standards GCSEs seem to indicate, and instead point out that the examinations
have become easier, that multiple attempts to improve grades are now possible, that
‘coursework’ completed outside examination conditions has artificially inflated
grades, and so on. In addressing these concerns, the government proposed that from
2015 the EBacc will substantially replace GCSEs by providing a new ‘core curri-
culum’ of five subjects, English, mathematics, science, a modern language, and either
history or geography, together with a new examination system that is ‘more rigorous’,
that will exclude marks awarded for assessed coursework in most subjects, and
require instead terminal examinations taken simultaneously in a single sitting.
3.1 Assumptions Underpinning Current Policies
Current policies display the traditional scepticism Conservatives have about the pub-
lic sector and their continuing belief in competition and choice as sources of improve-
ment, influenced by what is perceived as ‘successful’ practice overseas. Similar to
other parties on the political right, such as the Republicans in the USA and the
Christian Democrats in Germany, conservatives are suspicious of ‘big government’
and favour markets over intervention. Their dislike of local authority influence is
94 M. West
long standing, and the fact that most of the lowest performing local school sys-
tems are in areas where the Labour Party has local political control does nothing to
allay suspicions that local authorities have little to offer. Coupled with this is a desire
to shrink the ‘nanny state’ and to encourage individual citizens to take more responsi-
bility for their own lives and decisions, including what type of schooling they want
for their children. The role of government is to ensure that parents have effective and
efficient local schools from which to choose. Of course this is a principle that is
easier to expound than deliver, but it lies at the core of Conservative government
ideology. Indeed, in this context, the 2010 White Paper seems clearly underpinned by
a belief that a privatised system of education would be most effective, and so any
national system should try wherever possible to simulate privatisation.
And, as with most governments in the global village, educational standards are
seen as a barometer of international competitiveness and a key to economic growth.
Thus the measured outcomes of education must at least keep pace with improve-
ments elsewhere, as reported in international comparisons. Hence governments
change school systems in order to try and achieve ‘results’ that boost national
performance and are very interested in finding out schools systems that appear
to perform well in such comparisons. Recently, both Sweden and Finland have reg-
ularly scored highly. It is not surprising therefore to find Conservative education
policies that are rooted in developments in these countries. Sweden has ‘free schools’
and Sweden is a relatively high performing system. Finland has placed great emphasis
on the quality of teachers and Finland comes out best of all.
3.2 What Evidence is There Regarding the Impact of These

Reforms?
It is of course too early to do more than report the early response to current policies.
The transfer of schools to academy status has certainly accelerated, and the number
of Academies created by the Labour Government between their inception in 2000
and the 2010 elections was around 200. Two years later, this number is approaching
2000. Introduced as alternative secondary schools in inner-city areas with a record of
school failure, Academies can be considered an improvement over the schools they
replaced, although the rates of improvement are certainly not dramatic and a number
of Academies have failed, being placed in special measures following OfSTED
inspections. However, the modest increases in exam results coupled with the oppor-
tunity to involve faith groups (Labour Party) and industrial and commercial organisa-
tions (Conservative) in the governance of schools has resulted in support from across
the political spectrum. The Coalition government have opened up Academy status to
primary and special schools as well as secondary, and have also put in places measures
to compel failing schools to become Academies. They have also diluted the consulta-
tion process significantly, so that the ability of local communities and parents to
resist this change in status has substantially evaporated, which many have criticised
as anti-democratic. Despite these criticisms the spread of Academies seems irresist-

ible, and in some areas local authorities are actually pressing local schools to apply,
possibly because they are finding it impossible to sustain any services to schools with
so many already released from local influence and making no financial contribution
to service provision.
The progress of Free Schools has been less impressive, although there was no
established procedure here on which to build. Nevertheless, there has been less
demand for Free Schools than the government would like, and quite a number of
those that have been established are operating well below capacity. Inevitably,
because they draw resources from the system as a whole, such schools increase
inefficiency in education and reduce the resource levels to conventionally funded
schools. Given that Free Schools are largely an aspiration of articulate middle-class
parents whereas the children from the poorest families remain in the system, this
could hardly be seen as a strategy likely to reduce the attainment gap. It is too early
to offer any judgements on the pupil premium, although the suspicion is that its
relevance is more symbolic than substantive.
The new OfSTED inspection framework sharpens judgements on school quality
and puts more schools at risk of finding themselves in need of improvement that is
at the mercy of government policy. But more worrying than the changes in criteria
and process seems to be the tightening of standards applied: schools that were satisfac-
tory in previous OfSTED inspections are at real risk of being found unsatisfactory
under the harsher judgements that seem to have accompanied the new Framework.
As already noted, the proposal to reshape both curriculum and assessment
regimes for 14–16 year-olds by introducing the EBacc met with great hostility, and
there has been criticism from all sides. Those representing subjects included in the
EBacc, even some science and maths teaching associations, have argued that the
timescale is unrealistic, and that the proposals were hastily conceived and seriously
flawed. Others criticised the lack of consultation, and saw the timescale as a cynical
attempt by government to force through changes before the next election so that the
reform cannot easily be unpicked should there be a change of government. Those
representing creative and arts subjects were also very critical, arguing that an EBacc
would marginalise such subjects, resulting in a less varied curriculum and creating
more disaffection among students. The National Union of Teachers and the National
Association of Headteachers, with the support of other teaching unions, called on
the government to rethink its plans. The Examinations Boards questioned whether
the imposition of the so-called EBC (the English Baccalaureate Certificate) infringed
the regulations on competition defined in EU treaties, and even Ofqual (the national
agency established to regulate and quality assure examinations, qualifications, and
assessment in England) indicated that the scheme seemed impractical. In the end,
the government bowed to this chorus of opposing views and duly announced that
the EBacc would be scrapped. However, elements of the proposal relating to increas-
ing the rigour of the examination system and developing broader, value-added mea-
sures for assessing school performance will be retained.
Despite this setback, the implications of the current reforms would seem to be a
further and final dismantling of local authority influence, and an increase in competition
96 M. West
between schools and between categories of schools that would seem designed to
invite private companies to enter the ‘market’ thus moving towards a publicly financed
but privately managed education system, resulting in greater inequities in the quality of
schooling available, in which the pupil premium becomes an irrelevance. At the
same time, the hounding of those schools unfortunate enough to have pupil populations
that cannot be manipulated to meet the ‘floor targets’ set by government will increase
apace, leading to yet more closures and ‘takeovers’ accelerating this strategy of
covert privatisation. Ideologically, this sits well with traditional Conservative party
prejudices, but it seem likely that association with this policy will damage beyond
repair the standing of their Coalition partners; the Liberal party may long regret this
fleeting flirtation with the levers of power.
4 A Note on the Training of Teachers
As might be expected, in a period of such compulsive meddling with schools and

schooling, the training of teachers has also attracted much government attention.
In fact, the then Conservative government began to reel in the relative freedom available
to teacher training providers who were previously able for the most part to determine
the content and pattern of their training programmes themselves, in 1984, by intro-
ducing the Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (CATE). This Council
drew up a set of competencies against which ITT (Initial Teacher Training) trainees
could be assessed, which was initially voluntary, but became formalised through
subsequent legislation that also established ‘training partnerships’—significantly
increasing the role and influence of schools in initial teacher preparation, and bringing
the partnerships under purview of OfSTED, who were granted powers to inspect
providers much as they inspected schools.
In 1994, CATE was replaced by the Teacher Training Agency (TTA), which had
broader powers to oversee and allocate places to providers and also formalised the
competencies into National Standards in 1997. Standards were specified in four
broad areas: subject knowledge, planning and teaching, monitoring and assessment
and professional attitudes and attributes. These Standards were revised in 2002, by
which time they had become the major criteria for both the direct assessment of
trainees and the indirect assessment of teacher training provider quality.
In 2005, the TTA become the Teacher Development Agency (TDA), with a further
expansion of its remit to include the training of all staff employed in schools, and
also responsibility for overseeing the continuing professional development of teachers.
This role was reinforced in 2007, when National Standards were again revised, and
this time standards indicating competence levels expected of teachers at various
points throughout a teaching career were added to sharpened standards for begin-
ning teachers. In 2012, following a change of government, the National Standards
were again revised, and tied closely to career development stages. The net result of
these changes has been to produce unprecedented levels of central control of teacher
preparation and development, with highly detailed descriptions of what teachers
should know, be able to do, and even what they should believe. Inevitably critics and
the universities whose influence has been eroded as central control increased, are in
the forefront have described the impact of these changes as reductionist and ulti-
mately de-skilling. Some have warned that the changes have reduced teaching to a
rational-technical process that stifles individual creativity and discourages initiative,
while others see them as driven by political motives rather than research evidence.
Those worried about the direction of travel have not been reassured by more
recent developments. In 2002, the government introduced the ‘Teach First’ scheme
(modelled on ‘Teach for America’). Overtly, this scheme seeks to attract into teaching
for a short period (at least 2 years) particularly able young graduates in subject areas
where it has proved difficult to attract sufficient numbers through conventional
training routes, such as mathematics and physics. These recruits are then ‘fast-tracked’
into schools via a 6-week summer training school, which is supplemented by in-
school support once they start teaching and a further summer school at the end
of the first year. There is no doubt, although the numbers recruited via this route are
relatively small, that some highly motivated and inspirational young people have
been tempted into schools, some of whom choose to stay on in teaching. But the fact
that after a few years the government decided that completing the Teach First
training programmes would lead to the same accreditation as conventionally trained
teachers, and the remarkable career progress made by some of those who remain in
the profession, has led some to think this is devaluing the efforts of those who are
trained and indeed those who train teachers through the conventional route.
Most recently, the government’s proposal to designate some schools as ‘Training
Schools’ that can then offer professional development to other schools on a commer-
cial basis, and introduction of the ‘Teach Direct’ route into teaching, through which
schools, or groups of schools working together, can recruit and train their own teach-
ers, has done little to reduce anxieties among conventional teacher training providers.
Many believe that, similar to the local education authorities, they too are being
moved to the margins of teacher training activity, and will see activities that have
traditionally been their own transfer to ever more powerful and autonomous schools,
that are being encouraged—‘bribed’—even by government to usurp their role.
Currently, the numbers of teachers recruited through these initiatives remain
small, and it is questionable that conventional training can ever be wholly replaced
by such school-based or school-centred provision. However, there is a clear pattern
here, and we can see that this government, despite political differences with the
previous one, shares the belief that a partnership of strong government and strong
schools is the best recipe for educational improvement, and teacher trainers
who may believe that their legitimate involvement in education provision is being
displaced by this approach are unlikely to see any change in policy direction.
5 Conclusions
This review of education reforms during the past 25 years may seem to imply that
the education standards in England are lower now than they were when the process
started in 1988, but this is not the case. Apart from the impact of aforementioned
98 M. West
policies and interventions, there are other factors that have contributed to education
development. There has been significant economic and social change, which has led
to important changes in patterns of education and educational expectations. There
has been a significant increase in the quality of teachers and teaching, the quality of
resources available, and the role played by digital learning technologies. In
1988, only one third of 16-year-olds achieved the examination threshold set for
further academic study; by 2010 this had increased to two thirds (although with girls
outperforming boys by about 10 %). Several factors contributed to this improvement,
including changes in the examination and testing systems, away from a normative
system operating as a rationing device for higher education towards a normative
system, in which all can succeed; movement away from a series of examinations
squashed into a couple of weeks of memory-based tests towards a regime that included
various forms of modular and continuous assessment; an increase in the numbers of
young people wanting to stay on at school and then go on to university education;
and more sharply focused and outcome-oriented teaching. But despite these factors
and the increases they have brought about, this still appears to have been a time of
both missed opportunities and misguided interference from governments that took
an overly simplistic view of ‘standards’, and often good ideas were undermined by
the way they implemented.
A national curriculum was clearly both sensible and desirable, but the unwieldy
and over-prescriptive academic model drawn up and inflicted on schools was never
going to serve the needs of all children. Similarly, some national monitoring of
school performance is desirable, but the burden of the national testing regime that
accompanied the National Curriculum was a major distraction: as the saying goes,
‘no child ever grew faster for being measured.’ Above all, the introduction of school
performance tables was problematic. It is inevitable that such lists, once drawn up,
will be seen by the public as representing the quality of schooling, although typically
they tell us much more about the sort of pupils we will find in the school than they
do about the quality of the teaching. But the very existence of these tables is a dis-
traction: not only do they become a stimulus to competition and parents’ choice of
school, they also invite teacher behaviours that do little to improve either education
or equity, such as teaching to the test rather than for understanding, and focusing on
‘borderline’ pupils who can improve the school’s league table position rather than
those most in need of support. Indeed, probably the most intelligent measure the
government might now take is to ban the publication of these spurious tables that
conceal more than they reveal.
Despite these criticisms, this brief analysis suggests a number of lessons can be
drawn from the reform efforts of recent years, which might inform future policy and
practice. These include the following:
1. Although it is clear that schools cannot by themselves overcome social disadvan-
tage or eliminate the inequalities apparent in schooling outcomes, the evidence
clearly suggests that they can make some impact and that school-focused actions
remain an important part of wider solutions. However, education policy needs the
support of appropriate social and economic programmes if inequity is to be

eradicated.
2. School improvement interventions must be designed carefully, based on the
available evidence about what underpins effective schooling and also on what we
know about how successful schools develop. This means being clearer about the
outcomes expected and their value in the real world—and let us not continue to
delude ourselves that any combination of examination results will ever be more
than a proxy for effective schooling—while permitting greater latitude for
appropriate ends and means to be determined at school level by those most
acquainted with the needs and interests of their pupils.
3. Educational improvement efforts need to better reflect the local contexts within
which schools work. As we have seen, initiatives that lead some schools to
improve at the expense of others in their neighbourhood will not lead to overall
improvements in equity, which implies that central government needs to allow
greater space for locally determined action, based on a local analysis of chal-
lenges and opportunities. Thus, policy makers must recognise that the details of
policy implementation are not amenable to central regulation. Rather, these have
to be handled by those who are close to and, therefore, in a better position to
understand, particular contexts and opportunities. All of this raises important
questions regarding the need for effective local coordination: maybe we do not
need to reinvent local authorities, but something more than the operation of mar-
ket forces is needed to ensure that duplication and wasteful competition are
avoided and that so-called sink schools, filled with the children none of the other
schools want, do not become a by-product of covert selection procedures.
4. There is evidence that collaboration between differently performing schools can
help to reduce the polarisation of the education system, to the particular benefit
of pupils who are on the edges of the system and performing relatively poorly.
Incentives need to be provided that will encourage such collaboration. More
efforts should also be made to understand the conditions that are needed to make
such approaches effective. It needs to be understood that collaboration is at least
as important as competition in raising overall attainment levels.
5. We need to pay more attention to what we know does not work. In particular,
there is a need to focus on those aspects of disadvantage and under-attainment
that schools can influence and not attempt to make schools responsible for
solving problems that evidence suggests they influence only marginally. Piling
too many responsibilities on schools distracts them from concentrating on what
they can do well.
6. The political desire for ‘quick fixes’ notwithstanding, there is a need to allow
reform initiatives time to have an impact. The constant imposition of new initiatives
is destabilising and also hinders development of the consistency in learning and
teaching practices that research suggests best fosters positive outcomes for learners
from disadvantaged backgrounds.
100 M. West
References
Department for Education. (1992). Choice and diversity: A new framework for schools. London:
HMSO.
Department for Education. (2010). The importance of teaching: The schools white paper. London:
HMSO.
Department for Education and Employment. (1997). White paper: Excellence in schools. London:
HMSO.
Department for Education and Science. (1985). Better schools. London: HMSO.
Department for Education and Skills. (2011). Schools: Achieving success. London: HMSO.
Department for Education and Skills. (2004). Every child matters: Change for children. London:
HMSO.
Department for Education and Skills (2006). Developing Preventative Practices: The Experiences
of Children, Young People and their families in the Children’s Fund. (Research Report RR735)
London: Department for Education and Skills.
Dyson, A. (2011). Community focused schools. In E. Baker, B. McGaw, & P. Peterson (Eds.),
International encyclopedia of education. New York: Elsevier.
Earl, L., Watson, N., Levin, B., Leithwood, K., Fullan, M., & Torrance, N. (2003). Watching and
learning 3. Final report of the external evaluation of England’s National Literacy and Numeracy
strategies. London: DfES.
Evangelou, M., Brooks, G., Smith, S., & Jennings, D. (2005). Birth to school study: A longitudinal
evaluation of the Peers Early Education Partnership (PEEP) 1998–2005. Research Report
SSU/2005/FR/017. London: DfES. http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/
SSU2005FR017.pdf. Accessed 16 Oct 2008.
Evangelou, M., Brooks, G., Smith, S., & Jennings, D. (2005). Birth to school study: A longitudinal
evaluation of the Peers Early Education Partnership (PEEP) 1998–2005. (Research Report
SSU/2005/FR/017. London: DfES. http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/
SSU2005FR017.pdf. Accessed 16 Oct 2008.
Gorard, S. (2005). Academies as the future of schooling: Is this an evidence-based policy? Journal
of Education Policy, 20(3), 369–377.
Hutchings, J., Bywater, T., Daley, D., Gardner, F., Whitaker, C., Jones, K., Eames, C., & Edwards,
R. (2007). Parenting intervention in Sure Start services for children at risk of developing con-
duct disorders. British Medical Journal, 334(7595), 646.
Institute for the Study of Children, Families and Social Issues, Birkbeck College, University of
London (2008) The Impact of Sure Start Local Programmes on Three-year Olds and their
Families London: Department for Schools, Children and Families.
Kerr, K., & West, M. (Eds.). (2011). Social inequality: Can schools narrow the gap? BERA Insight
Series Paper: British Educational Research Association.
Machin, S. (2006). Social disadvantage and educational experiences. OECD employment and migra-
tion working papers no. 32. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, UK
Maguire, M., Wooldridge, T., & Pratt-Adams, S. (2006). The urban primary school. Maidenhead:
Open University Press.
Millett, A., Askew, M., & Brown, M. (2004). The impact of the National Numeracy Strategy in
year 4 (I): Attainment and learning, and (II): teaching. In O. McNamara & R. Barwell (Eds.),
Research in mathematics education (Vol. 6, pp. 175–206). London: BSRLM.
Mortimore, P. (2009). Missed opportunities and ad ideas: The government’s legacy. Guardian, July 7.
Muijs, D. (2006). New directions for school effectiveness research: Towards school effectiveness
without schools? Journal of Education Change, 7(3), 141–160.
Muijs, D., & Chapman, C. (2009). Accountability for improvement: Rhetoric or reality? In H.
Gunter & C. Chapman (Eds.), Radical reforms. Perspectives on an era of educational change.
London: Taylor & Francis.
Muijs, D., & Reynolds, D. (2003). Student background and teacher effects on achievement and
attainment in mathematics. Educational Research and Evaluation, 9(1), 21–35.
Sammons, P. (2007). School effectiveness and equity: Making connections. Reading: Centre for
British Teachers.
Scanlon, M. (2001). The impact of OfSTED inspections: The experience of special measures
schools. National Education Welfare Board (NFER), UK
Smith, F., & Hardman, F. (2000). Evaluating the effectiveness of the National Literacy Strategy:
Identifying indicators of success. Educational Studies, 26(3), 365–378.
Teddlie, C., & Reynolds, D. (Eds.). (2000). The international handbook of school effectiveness
research. London: Falmer Press.
Tikley, L., Haynes, J., Caballero, C., Hill, J., & Gillborn, D. (2006). Evaluation of aiming high:
African Caribbean achievement project. Research Report RR801. London: DfES.
West, M., & Ainscow, M. (1991). Managing school development. London: Fulton.
West, M. & Ainscow, M. (Eds.). (2007). Improving urban schools. Maidenhead: Open University
Press.
West, M. (2010). ‘School-to-school cooperation as a strategy for improving student outcomes in
challenging contexts’ in School Effectiveness and School Improvement: An International
Journal of Research, Policy and Practice “http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/nses20?open=21”
21(1).
Wyse, D. (2003). The national literacy strategy: A critical review of empirical evidence. British
Educational Research Journal, 29(6), 903–916.
Part II
Pushing Forward Governance Reform
Italy: From State Monopoly to Rising
of a System of Schools
Luisa Ribolzi
Abstract In the last 25 years, the Italian school system has moved from a centralized,
monopolistic, and standardized one to a more autonomous “system of schools.”
In that new form, private accredited schools (“paritarie”) have a recognized space,
and regional and local authorities play a greater role. This chapter describes how
this process has been developed and fulfilled, starting with the cultural and politi-
cal processes that have determined the educational structures. Three main trends
are discussed: from standardization to autonomy, from state monopoly to legiti-
mization of private schools, and from centralization to local empowerment. Then
it elaborates an array of rolling reforms concerning the teachers’ qualification and
career, the assessment of the system, the vocational versus general education, the
changes in organizational models, and so on. Finally, future reform directions are
projected.
Keywords Italy • Autonomy • Centralism • Evaluation • Public/private • Teachers
1 Retrospect of Structural Reforms
In her seminal book on Social origins of educational systems (1979), Margaret

Archer demonstrated that the structure and functioning of any school system is con-
nected to the forms of the society where it has been originated. So it could be useful,
or even necessary, to highlight some characteristics of the Italian school history.
L. Ribolzi (*)
ANVUR (National Agency for the Evaluation
of University and Research Institutions), Rome, Italy

106 L. Ribolzi
1.1 The Starting Point: A Centralized, Standardized

School System
Until the end of the twentieth century, the Italian educational system was entirely
school centered, and school was very rigid, with a highly centralized, standardized
curriculum leading to a legally recognized diploma.
In 1861, when Italy became a nation, it was essentially a puzzle made up of a
great number of previously independent states (at least nine of them had some rel-
evance) with different cultures, languages, and levels of social development: in the
southern regions of the country, barely 10 % of the population was even able to
speak Italian, and 78 % was illiterate. The unification process involved a small
minority of the population, namely, the élites and the middle class. Then the govern-
ment, aiming to create a common culture and provide a modern education system,
adopted an interventionist educational policy.
Following the French example, the Italian government identified nationwide
homogeneity as a crucial standard for schooling. As a famous politician and writer,
Massimo D’Azeglio, declared: “Italy has been made, now we have to build Italians.”
Italy pursued homogeneity in this sense through administrative interventions. At the
very beginning of the Fascist Period, the so-called Gentile reform (after the name of
the Minister of Education in office in 1923) enhanced the idea of the State being the
sole educating agency, and a common curriculum for all the schools was put into
effect, based on the memory of the past Italian glory, but at the same time aimed at
improving the poor quality of the existing school system so as to cope with moder-
nity. The Gentile reform remained in force, almost unchanged, until the beginning
of the twenty-first century.
The postwar Constitution, adopted in 1947, though reacting against the Fascist ide-
ology, maintained, and even enhanced, the idea of a single centralized state school
system. The main idea taken for granted behind that structure was that all schools had
to be alike for the purpose of promoting equality and protecting the poor. Nonetheless,
equity was not guaranteed by the monopolistic state school: an analysis of dropout rates
reveals that within this centralized, standardized model, dropout affects the working
class children much more than those belonging to the middle or upper classes (Ministero
della Pubblica Istruzione 2008). We can add that the labor market asks for more dif-
ferentiated competences and skills, and the importance of nonformal and informal
(“tacit”) competences requires greater flexibility in schooling, in order to counter the
(existing) separation between general education (run by the state) and vocational edu-
cation (run by local authorities), which is peculiar of the Italian educational system.
1.2 Educational Policies Since the 1960s: The Myth of Equity
In the last two decades, the educational reforms were based on the policies of the
1960s, which could be summarized, in principle, into the slogan “from élite to mass
Italy: From State Monopoly to Rising of a System of Schools 107
school.” The most important element of change was, in 1962, the law which abol-
ished students’ early streaming in favor of a delayed choice. Up to that year, chil-
dren could choose, at the end of the primary school, whether to stop their school
education (compulsory education lasted only 5 years, by then), or continue their
education in a vocational school (3 years ending with a low professional qualifica-
tion), or go on with their studies, after having passed an exam at the end of the pri-
mary school cycle, in the lower secondary, which opened the way to the upper
secondary higher education. It was not only a difficult choice, at the age of 11,
irreversible as it was, but actually it was not even a real “choice,” because it was
strongly connected to the socioeconomic status of the family. When Law 1859, Dec.
31, 1962, established the comprehensive lower secondary school (scuola media uni-
ficata), 65 students out of 100 left the school at the age of 11, after the primary
school; at the age of 14, more than 70 % students—a real crowd of young people—
became school dropouts. The new scuola media was free, compulsory and compre-
hensive, and strictly connected with the primary school, where not only the basic
skills and notions (literacy in Italian, mathematics, science, and so on) were taught,
but also the fundamentals of citizenship.1
The choice between working or studying was delayed: the first 8 years of
schooling had a general aim, preparing students to this choice through civic com-
petences and participation. At the same time, the new lower secondary school pro-
vided adolescents with basic education in arts, music, and technology. The motto
was “the person at the center,” but unfortunately these words remained only good
intentions.
During the 1970s and until the end of the 1980s, the number of students’ with-
drawals remained very high: though it had considerably lowered and gradually
disappeared at a compulsory education level, it grew instead in the upper second-
ary school. The reason was that the greater number of young people who com-
pleted their lower secondary education cycle led a greater number of students to
enroll in the upper secondary school. However, both for lack of guidance and due
to a lower qualification level, the dropouts’ rates increased to a worrying
15–20 %.2 To restrain the number of dropouts, many projects were developed and
carried out over time, but until the Lisbon Council,3 they proved only partially
successful.
1
In this comprehensive school, anyway, there were some “special classes” for children at risk who
needed specialized aid. Since some of these special classes had become, over time, a sort of ghetto
for children with social problems, they were closed down in 1977 (Law 517).
2
http://www.fga.it/uploads/media/L__Ribolzi_In_medio_stabat_virtus_-_FGA_WP42.pdf
3
The Lisbon Special European Council of 23–24 March 2000, aiming to transform Europe into
a “knowledge society,” developed the so-called “Lisbon strategy”: one of the five educational
aims for 2010 consisted in eradicating withdrawals and raising the rate of young people holding
an upper secondary diploma to 80 %. Being Italy far from attaining these goals, with a rate of
dropouts around 10–20 % at the age of 16, a new strategy, called “EU 2020” was launched in
2009 (see http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/education_training_youth/general_frame-
work/c10241_en.htm)
108 L. Ribolzi
In the same period, the secondary school became increasingly “lycealized,”4

meaning that technical and professional education was becoming less important
than academic education, both in terms of social prestige and in terms of schooling
quality. As a consequence, a growing number of students continued their studies to
higher education, which in Italy was limited to university, since only less than 3 %
upper schools belonged to the university area. Furthermore, in 1969, access to uni-
versity was liberalized, and every student holding a 5-year highschool diploma was
entitled to apply to any university faculty. Graduates’ ratio in Italy was in average
1/3: only 30 % freshmen succeeded in graduating, while the remaining 70 % used
to give up their studies during the university cycle. This was a terrible waste of
human and economic resources.
This was the situation in the mid-1990s, when the last season of educational
reforms began.
1.3 Reforms at the Turning of the Century: School

Structure Reform
The School Structure Reform has a long history. It is possible to find some indica-
tors of the malfunctioning of the system (do not forget that basically the Italian
school was working with the Gentile Law of 1923) since, at least, the end of the
1960s. Some formal changes allowed it to survive until when, in the mid-1990s, the
negative aspects of the school system began to become unbearable.
The ruling centralist model clashed with an ever-growing users’ differentiation,
connected both with an increasing presence of foreign students, and with the dif-
ferent social and economic conditions characterizing the Italian territory. The
merely executive role played by the school was rejected both by teachers, who
aspired to greater independence, and by students’ families, which aimed at becom-
ing more involved. In addition, the ever-growing deterioration of basic education
did not allow reducing the dropout phenomenon in the upper secondary schools
and universities. The debasement of technical education and its separation from
vocational education, run by the regions, contributed to further worsening the mis-
matching between qualification demand and offer.
There was by then a widespread opinion that it was no longer possible to continue
through minor adjustments, and it was instead necessary to completely reform the
system. In January 1997, a paper entitled “Ipotesi per una riforma dei cicli” (A Working
Hypothesis for a Reform of the School Cycles) was circulated, which started a never-
ending reform, passing through five ministers and three laws that were never put into
effect (2000 and 2003), until the reform was finalized between 2008 and 2010.
For a foreign reader, it is not only a long story, but also a story difficult to under-
stand. This could happen because, in Italy, any law, to be effective, requires several
4
The Italian “liceo” was, and is, a mainly academic form of upper secondary school, providing
general education to students who are expected to continue their studies in the University.
decrees, which in turn were not enacted, since in the meantime the government
changed. Before getting into the heart of the matter, a reconstruction of the events
would be advisable.
The first reform bill was changed into Law 30 in 2000 (the so-called Berlinguer
Law after the name of the former Minister of Education of the center-left govern-
ment). However, this law underwent a slowdown when the minister resigned and
was replaced. It was finally repealed in 2001, when the center-right coalition won
the elections and a new government was established. A new law (Law 53, the
so-called Moratti Law, after the name of the minister in office) was passed in 2003,
but was only partly implemented through the law decrees concerning the prepri-
mary and primary school. In 2006 the center-left coalition won the elections again,
and the new minister Fioroni decided not to enact his own law, but rather to “dis-
mantle” the previous law through the so-called screwdriver method. However, after
less than 2 years, a political crisis led to new elections, won this time by the center-
right coalition, and the new minister Gelmini, resuming the unfinished process
begun by the minister Moratti, who belonged to her political party, chose instead
to enhance some elements introduced by the previous center-left government and
succeeded in enacting in 2008 a new law (Law 137, the so-called Gelmini Law),
which came finally into force between 2008 and 2010. Thirteen years had passed
from the beginning of the debate, and 10 years from the first law had been neces-
sary for carrying out the structural reform which gave rise to the Italian school as
today is (Fig. 1).
The “Gelmini” Law 137 has reorganized the compulsory education cycle, lasting
8 years for the 6–14 age segment, which today is virtually attended by all. School
year repetitions in the primary school have to be justified, because the new peda-
gogical model considers them useless or even capable to lead to children’s social
and educational marginalization. In the first level of the primary school, which is
part of the compulsory education cycle, students who repeat a year can be more
frequently found, especially those belonging to the most underprivileged social
groups (foreigners, gypsies, children coming from families in poverty or in difficult
conditions, and special-need children), but in general, we can affirm that almost all
students attain the minimum required level.
Law 137 has also extended the right of education up to the age of 18, thus introduc-
ing an important element, since students can exercise this right not only as regards
general education in the traditional school, or regional vocational education, but also
as regards apprenticeship. Educational achievement and success are no longer limited
to academic courses, but have also been extended to other kinds of education and
training, and this could perhaps reduce the number of dropouts. The upper secondary
cycle was reorganized too: there are currently six kinds of general high school
(Liceo) in all, and on the other side, nine different kinds of technical schools and
two kinds of vocational schools. It was calculated that in the previous system, the
number of possible specializations was more than 700, while in the current one, they
roughly total 40.
By 2010/2011, about eight million students were attending the Italian school:
one million the infant/preprimary school, 2.6 million the primary, 1.6 million the
110 L. Ribolzi
Ph. D
AGE
M.A.
EDUCATION
HIGHER
B.A.
UNIVERSITY
HIGHER
VOCATIONAL
EDUCATION
HIGH SCHOOL QUALIFICATION

SECONDARY
UPPER
Lyceum Vocational Education

LICENCE
Lower
secondary
EDUCATION
BASIC
Primary
PRIMARY
PRE
Fig. 1 The structure of the Italian school
lower secondary, and 2.5 million the upper secondary.5 Girls are considerably over-
educated: in 2009 male students totaled 80.2 % of the cohort in the 15–19 age seg-
ment, while girls totaled 83.5 %; in the 20–29 age segment, men totaled 18.5 % and
women 24.3 %.6
5
For more detailed information, see OECD (2011). Data refer to 2008/2009.
6
As for higher education, in 2010/2011, there were 1,781,786 students, 14.8 % of which holding a
high school diploma, decreasing compared to a maximum of 1,823,000 units reported in 2005/2006.
2 Beyond the Structures: Three Fundamental Reforms
However, during the years in which the great reform of the school system was dis-
cussed, the school did not stand still. On the one hand, schools were carrying out an
“innovation without reform” in everyday practice, and on the other, three important
reforms were introduced, which respectively concerned the management of schools,
the relations between the public and the private sector, and the relations between the
State and regions.
2.1 The Rising of Autonomy: Towards a “System

of Autonomous Schools” (1997–2000)
As previously noted, at the end of the twentieth century, one of the main problems
of the Italian school was its centralized structure, in which any decision was cen-
trally made, and schools acted as mere executors. At the end of the nineteenth
century, centralism had had the main purpose of joining citizens who came from
profoundly different realities. After the end of World War II, in a period of social
and economic breakdown, centralism intended to reconstruct in the population a
sense of democratic participation after two fascist decades, to radically change the
curricula, and improve the education level of the population through direct State
interventions. In the late 1990s, however, centralism had completely lost any rea-
son of being and was showing two extremely serious limits:
• Standardization made it difficult to meet the educational demand of an increas-
ingly differentiated population and was one of the main causes of students’
noncompletion of their school education.
• Centrally made decisions increased the weight of bureaucracy, and teachers’
propensity to innovate and participate decreased accordingly.
Resistance and opposition to this innovation, which in some way is at the base
of many changes occurred in the following years, were very strong and still are.
Grimaldi and Serpieri define it as “the resilience of routines” (Grimaldi and
Serpieri 2012). The central bureaucracy (the Ministry of Education counted in the
late 1990s about 8,500 employees) was in some way asked to “commit suicide” in
favor of schools and renounce many of its prerogatives. This may be the reason
why autonomy principle does not result from a law concerning the schooling
reform but rather from a law focused on the reform of public administration: Law
59, March 1997, on the Reform of Public Administration. Article 21 of this law
grants autonomy to state schools. Moreover, the same law established the issuing
57.3 % of them were women. Freshmen were 288,286 (vs. a maximum of 301,376 units in
2006/2007), 10 % being students of a ripe age. The so-called fuori corso (students who have not
passed their university exams in due time) totaled a heavy 600,000.
112 L. Ribolzi
of regulations, which were published in 1999, and provided for a gradual 2-year
testing period. School autonomy became effective as from school year
2000–2001.
At the end of that period, the school system, such as we know it today, was no
longer a centralized system, but rather a system of autonomous schools, in which
every school enjoys didactic autonomy (i.e., it can change its objectives and
methods within a set of general regulations established by the central administra-
tion and shared by all schools); organizational autonomy (i.e., it can change its
teaching and lesson timetable, on condition it ensures the national minimum
level to all; it can change its class organization; and it can change to a small
extent the teachers’ service timetable); and financial autonomy, which, though, is
rather limited. In the Italian school system, over 90 % of the overall spending
devoted to education is reserved to teachers’ wages, and the amount of money
schools are allowed to have freely at their disposal, which by then was already
very small (4–5 % out of the overall education spending), has been further cut
down over time.
The key issue for the autonomous school was the definition and fulfillment of
the educational offer: in practice, each school (within a set of common general
guidelines effective all over the country) pointed out to its users the goals it
intended to reach and the way in which they had to be achieved, while making a
sort of pact with the families and the community. It was provided for that the
headmaster and the teachers, families, labor market, and local authorities were
involved in drawing up the offer program. To allow reaching these objectives, the
school headmaster was supposed to become a real manager, responsible for proj-
ect fulfillment.
It was a real revolution, and therefore many teachers, faced with a sudden growth
of their responsibilities (if in the past they had been mere officers who carried out a
task established by others, in consequence of school autonomy, they were actually
becoming professionals who had to understand the needs of their students and prop-
erly meet their requirements) opposed their resistance, or even began to dream
about a return to the past. However, regardless of these cultural reasons, two were
the main obstacles to the fulfillment of a real autonomy:
• The first and most serious fact was—and still is—that schools cannot freely
choose their teachers, who are appointed by the central administration. In busi-
ness language, this means that managers are asked to guarantee the quality of a
product, but are not allowed to control and monitor available resources.
• The second obstacle consisted in the lack of an evaluation and appraisal system
capable, first, to detect whether schools were keeping the promises made to users
and, secondly, to reward the best and penalize the worst. Resistances to the evalu-
ation method remained very strong, and as we shall later see, the introduction of
a quality evaluation and control system still remains one of the major current
problems in the Italian school.
In spite of these limits, the introduction of autonomy has to be considered an

acquired achievement, and a fundamental reform at the base of the innovations and
changes brought during the first decade of the Third Millennium.7
2.2 State Versus Private School: The National

School System (2000)
The status of private schools in Italy is very peculiar.8 Non-state, private education
has been considered as opposed to state-supported, public education, and until
recent times, even the schools run by municipal authorities were considered private
bodies, such as the schools run by religious or other non-state organizations.9 The
question concerning “the choice of the school” as a right of citizenship, like in other
European countries, had strong nationwide ideological implications. Up to now,
most Italians assume that this term pertains specifically to the Catholic culture. The
same could be said about other, apparently religiously neutral words and phrases,
such as “participation” and the “common good.” An actual distinction between pri-
vate schools in general, and Catholic schools, has only recently emerged. To date,
non-Catholic religious schools are few in Italy, and they are prevailingly run by
the Jewish communities.
This approach, though predominant, is not formally recognized by law, and the
current debate is based on different interpretations of the Constitution. In fact,
Article 33 of the postwar Italian Constitution, adopted in 1947, reads that “public
and private bodies shall be entitled to establish schools and educational institutions
with no financial costs for the State.” This phrase catalyzed a seemingly endless
series of political confrontations. To make a long story short, we can say that, in
the Italian school system, whatever was not State was private and had no public
role, and for this reason was not funded and was paid by families. In addition,
private schools were considered “schools for the rich,” reserved in particular to
affluent families whose children were unable to cope with the standards of public
school. Actually, as private schooling was paid and public was free, only a small
number of families had obviously the possibility to send their children to a private
school and, namely, affluent families or families that, to protect their cultural
7
The process of autonomy has been extensively studied by researchers, but unfortunately English
literature in this connection is rather poor. For Italian-speaking readers, I wish to remind that the
“Osservatorio sull’autonomia” of the LUISS University in Rome published three volumes of
Rapporto sulla scuola dell’autonomia (2002, 2003, 2004), Armando Editori, Roma. In English,
see Landri (2009).
8
See “Italy” in Glenn and de Groof (2003).
9
ISTAT (National Institute for Statistics) included the schools run by municipalities within the
private sector until 1984.
114 L. Ribolzi
identity, accepted to renounce other forms of consumption, in order to get education

in a school in which they trusted, both in terms of ideology and in terms of quality.
As the debate was mainly of an ideological nature, in 1994 the proposal to intro-
duce school vouchers in order to facilitate and promote the choice of private schools
aroused violent opposition. However, something new was coming out: not only an
uncritical rejection, but also a general awareness that this proposal was the result of
a different conception of the role of the State. One year later, on March 15, 1997, the
Law 59 was passed, introducing the principle that schools are evaluated and vali-
dated not so much because of their belonging to the State, but rather because of their
educational planning strategy, since only the State is responsible for establishing the
essential guidelines concerning school performance and achievements. The stated
principle of accountability has a logical consequence for private schooling: the non-
public status of non-state schools is no longer tenable when they have and keep all
along the same requisites and standards as state schools (established and assessed
by the State itself). In some way, autonomy and choice opportunities were a win-
ning combination.
Nevertheless, the ideological debate became inflamed, and only 3 years later, Law
62 was passed on March 10, 2000. Law 62 contains “regulations for school equality
and measures concerning the right to schooling and education and training.” Article 1
states, “The national educational system, under art. 23, paragraph 2, of the Constitution,
consists of State schools and paritarie (acknowledged) schools, whether private or
established by the Local Authorities.”
This law introduced the concept of “equality,” which is granted to the schools
complying with eight specific conditions, ranging from “an educational plan con-
forming to the Constitution principles” to “the appropriate premises, furniture, and
educational equipment.” For the time being, funds are allocated only to private pri-
mary schools and to private sector interventions in favor of handicapped children. It
also envisages a progressive allocation of funds, depending on state budget priori-
ties. At the end of the third year of testing, in June 2003, the Minister of Education
was supposed to submit a report to the Parliament and at the same time, gather all
the circulars issued on this subject into a single Consolidated Act.
Neither the report was made nor the funding was decided,10 except for some regional
laws that introduced school vouchers, or for a reduced number of schools and subjects
(preprimary/infant, primary, special-need children, etc.). Nevertheless, this law embod-
ies a real step forward in terms of cultural point of view and education policies, because
for the first time, public and private are no longer opposed, and the country’s educa-
tional system is identified as a national (and no longer as a state) system, since autono-
mous state schools and acknowledged private schools are considered equally worthy.
For the purpose of overcoming social inequality, several proposals were put forward,
both in the field of school funding (agreements with schools, refund of expenses for
teachers’ wages, etc.) and family funding (school vouchers, tax deductions, etc.), but
they did not prove successful. That is the reason why the supporters of the choice of the
school talk about an “unaccomplished parity.”
10
Concerning the impact of economic crisis on education funding, see Van Damme and
Karkkainen (2011).
2.3 State Versus Regional Policies: The Reform

of the Constitution (2001)
The analysis made in the previous paragraphs entails another key issue related to
reforming the Italian schooling system. On October 18, 2001, the Reform Law
concerning several articles of the Italian Constitution was issued. Article 114
states that “the Republic is organized into Municipalities, Provinces, Metropolis,
Regions, and State,” and Article 118 transfers several competences to the regions
as regards many aspects (school location, vocational training and education, right
of study, etc.), while Article 117 grants the State exclusive competence on the
“General Measures for Education,” whereas “education is subject to concurrent
legislation, apart from the areas of school autonomy and vocational education and
training,” which are already included within the competence of the regions. This
means that regions, provinces, and municipalities are entitled to amend any regu-
lation as long as the General Measures for Education—measures that actually
need a further definition—are not contradicted.
It is evident how complex the situation is and how rapidly it is developing
after decades of immobility. Though the Fifth Title of the Constitution had
aroused great expectations in a period in which a transition of Italy to federal-
ism was envisaged, very little has actually changed. The separation between
vocational education assigned to the regions and general education reserved to
the State has remained unchanged, and in general, the transfer of competences
to the regions has not been carried out at all, except in some places where inno-
vation has always been widespread for many years. Furthermore, we should not
forget that the situation of the Italian regions (which are 20) is extremely diver-
sified, ranging from regions that can be placed among the European “driving
forces,” such as Lombardy and Veneto, to quite underdeveloped regions, as a
fair number of southern regions. However, since the law did not provide for any
differentiated or delayed start and only few regions were in a position to
take charge of the new tasks laid down by the law, everything stopped and only
some experimentations could start. Nevertheless, in this case, too, as in the case
of the law that regulates private schools, a significant cultural step forward has
been made, which underlines the importance of the close relation existing
between schools and reference territory.
2.4 Financing of Education
The proportion of national wealth spent on education is an investment that can help
foster economic growth, enhance productivity, reduce social inequality, and contrib-
ute to personal and social development. The percentage of GDP given to education
indicates the priority a nation gives to education. Given that expenditure on educa-
tion comes largely from public budgets, it is the result of choices made by the
Government and only partially from enterprises and individuals (families and
116 L. Ribolzi
students). These choices are problematic at times—as now in Italy—when the

Government is being urged to cut spending. In 2008 (OECD 2012) the average
expenditure on educational education was for the EU 21 5.5 % of GDP and for
OECD countries 6.1: in Italy, it was 4.8 (0.5 for preprimary, 2.0 for primary and
lower secondary, 1.3 for upper secondary, and 1.0 for tertiary). Only 0.3 % came
from private sources: it was 0.5 for EU 21 and 1.4 for OECD.
It is possible to say that almost all the money for educational institutions in Italy
comes from public sources: it was 91.4 % in 2008 (ibid.), the average expenditure
being in EU 89.1 % and in OECD 83.5 %. The remaining came from other private
sources (1.6 %) and mainly from household expenditure: 7.0 %. In tertiary educa-
tion, the State paid 70.7 %, 7.8 % came from private sources and 21.5 % from
household expenditure. The consequence of that composition of the expenditure is
that if and when the public expenditure has to be cut, education suffers more than
other sectors, where the private funding is higher.
Let’s have a look at the composition of these public payers. In 200511 less than
10 % (9.8 %) of the expenditure for the school was paid by the families: the
remaining 90 % was public—State 65.6 % (quite all by the Ministry of Education,
with a very small contribution of other ministries), regions 4.9 %, districts 5.1 %,
and municipalities 14.7 %. This is an average range: due to the differences in
levels, the rate of different public payers varies considerably (i.e., the districts,
province, only pay for upper secondary and for vocational education; municipali-
ties pay for preprimary and primary). As for the household expenditure, we lack
recent information, but it was estimated around 10 % of the total, increasing from
infant to upper secondary.
The greatest part of the expenditure (about 76 %) goes for the salaries of teach-
ers, who are civil servants and are paid by the State: this is a great cause of rigidity.
Schools are funded depending on the number of classes, neither on the number of
students nor the quality of teaching. The schools, even if “autonomous,” actually
can use freely between 1 % and 2 % of the total. As a consequence, the possibility
to realize specific programs is reduced.12
Private school, including the authorized ones, are paid by the families:
there is a state contribution for infant schools, a lump sum for primary schools
(about €35,000 for a class of at least 25 pupils: in public school, each student
in primary costs about €9,000 per year), nothing for secondary, both lower and
upper: private schools can apply to have funds for disabled students, or to
participate in state programs.
11
Invalsi–Mipa, Aspis III. Linee di ricerca sull’analisi della spesa per l’istruzione. Roma, Nov.
2005. The Aspis research (http://www2.invalsi.it/RN/aspis3/sito/docs/Rapporto%20finale%20
Invalsi%20-%20Aspis%20III.pdf) is the only systemic analysis of the expenditure for education,
but it finished in 2005, and never more repeated.
12
Recent data on costs for salaries in http://www.corteconti.it/export/sites/portalecdc/_documenti/
controllo/sezioni_riunite/sezioni_riunite_in_sede_di_controllo/2012/delibera_13_2012_contr_cl.pdf
3 The Future of Reforms: From “Big Narrations”

to Rolling Reforms
As from the unification of the country, two different trends have always characterized
the Italian educational and school policies. On the one hand, efforts have been
made to devise and develop extensive global reforms13 involving the whole school
system, which have ambitious and general aims (i.e., granting the right of educa-
tion to all, raising and improving schooling levels, promoting equity and equality,
developing and shaping a school system capable to ensure both one’s personal
growth and the economic competitiveness of the country, and so on). On the other,
as these reforms—which could be defined as “great narrations”—are becoming
more and more difficult and lengthy (and expensive) to carry out, they risk to
become outdated and obsolete even before being fully developed and implemented.
For this reason, more flexible provisions are currently spreading in view of the so-
called rolling reform, that is to say, a reform process capable to continuously
change and transform itself depending on the feedback it receives from the envi-
ronment. Since the schools keep producing best practices, partial reforms (as those
I previously mentioned, but not only them) become increasingly important, as well
as innovations without reform, which are adjustments coming from the bottom,
from everyday practice, and allow the school keeping up the pace with society and
answering, though actually not in real time, but at least with a tolerable delay, the
requests coming from society.
Are then great reforms useless or out of date? This question is not easy to answer.
It is plain that the “rhetoric of teaching rationalization and educational policies
effectiveness” has to confront itself with the actual conditions of the school and with
teachers’ mediation, because, despite the efforts made by the political decision-
makers, “teachers selectively decide whether putting into effect or changing the
reforms” (Novoa 1998). However, there are still some open questions, which have
been only partly dealt with, so far. Many of them will not become the object of a
reform, but rather the object of administrative decisions only; other problems,
instead, will be dealt with and solved individually by each school.
3.1 Quality Assurance and Loss of Quality
Referring to mass schooling, I mentioned the need for any country to ensure
education to all citizens. It may be useful to add that this term does not mean
13
As mentioned, these reforms bear the name of the minister who devised them and made them
effective and are substantially two: Casati Law, issued in 1859, which established the characteris-
tics of the school system in the newborn Italian state, and Gentile Law (actually a set of laws issued
between 1922 and 1924), which laid the foundations of the modern school and, with many adjust-
ments, has survived up to nowadays, as well as the set of laws I described at par. 2.1, which were
formalized by Ministers Moratti and Gelmini (2003; 2008/2010).
118 L. Ribolzi
education whatsoever, but rather quality education. The quality of an educational

service cannot be measured in terms of number of school years, but rather in
terms of ability of the school to develop and improve citizens’ knowledge, skills,
and expertise and enhance their attitudes. Equity and quality are not placed in a
zero-sum relation (that is to say, if quality grows, equity decreases accordingly,
and vice-versa), and a really effective school model makes quality grow without
affecting the equity level. Within the Italian school, which had remained “aca-
demic” until the mid-1960s, a strong pedagogical and political movement began
to develop as a reaction. This movement promoted socialization while often
overlooking the transfer of the necessary knowledge and abilities. This approach
had such seriously negative consequences on learning, that in the early 1980s,
Norberto Bottani14 felt the need to recall teachers to the fundamental task of the
school, the task to transfer and spread knowledge.
The idea that the Italian school had particularly worsened from the point of view
of learning was rather widespread, but it remained rather unspecific until 2000, the
year in which the results of the PISA (Programme for International Student
Assessment) survey launched by OECD to assess 15-year-old students’ literacy
abilities15 (mathematical literacy, reading literacy, science literacy, problem solving)
were published. The results concerning Italy proved unsatisfying and very poor and,
most of all, revealed that a single “Italian school” did not exist, since there were
profound differences among regions, to the detriment of the south (a gap of almost
100 points between northeast of Italy and south and islands in all four indicators),
among the courses of study, where the different kinds of “liceo” were on top of the
list, followed by the technical schools and by the vocational schools, and finally,
between female and male students. To make a long story short, we can say that from
the point of view of learning, there was a continuity line connecting the male stu-
dents attending the vocational schools of the south with the female students attend-
ing the “liceo” in the northeast. These data gave evidence that the Italian school’s
organizational and teaching model was producing negative results both in terms of
quality (since the average values of the related three indicators placed the country in
the lower half of the sample) and in terms of equity (since the different population
groups reached quite different learning levels).
The results of the first survey had few consequences: only through the second
survey, carried out in 2003, and even more through those carried out in 2006 and 2009,
the outcomes of PISA (which had the same characteristics as those of the first survey)
were extensively discussed, processed also at a regional level, and taken as a starting
point for drawing up new educational policies. In practice, these data revealed the
urgency to introduce the Italian school quality assessment policies, capable to keep
14
Bottani (1986). Bottani was the director of OECD CERI and started with the compared assess-
ment of school systems through the indicators of Education at a Glance: OECD Indicators, first
published in Sept. 1992.
15
OECD affirms that PISA does not assess what is taught in schools, but rather that “the acquisition
of literacy is a lifelong process taking place not just at school or through formal learning, but also
through interactions with peers, colleagues and wider communities” (OECD 2004).
under control the “production factors” of education. A small proportion of budget was
devoted to programs aimed at improving learning results. At the same time, a still
ongoing debate broke out between the supporters of the need to systematically assess
the learning levels and the detractors of this method, who were concerned about the
possibility that a “teaching for testing” didactics they considered reductive gained
ground and established itself in the school.
The reduction of funds made available to education, connected with the lack of
an assessment tradition and the impossibility to incentivize or penalize teachers
basing on the results achieved by their students, even in terms of value added to
the school, has however heavily reduced the possibilities to balance the most visible
learning distortions, though some regions (e.g., Puglia), by adopting regional
policies aimed at teachers’ retraining and requalification, have succeeded in filling
their gap to a great extent.
3.2 School Evaluation and Teacher Appraisal
Quality assurance is an issue strictly connected with the appraisal of schools and
teachers. Up to recent years, in the Italian school, assessment concerned only stu-
dents through marks and evaluations. Teachers’ resistances to the assessment, in
particular, were—and still are—very strong, while the so-called table leagues,
already widespread and effective in other countries (France, UK), were becoming
increasingly popular. Rankings help families in the choice of an appropriate school
not only basing on what is taught in it (see our previous remarks on the “educational
offer plan”), but also on students’ performance and results and, in the case of upper
secondary schools, on students’ opportunities of being successful in the university
or in finding a good job.
At the end of the 1990s, a certain number of schools decided to meet these
requests through the attainment of ISO 9000 quality certification, which however
referred to the conditions required for carrying out a good educational project, but
not to the characteristics of the project itself. Some other schools developed and put
into effect assessment projects, often in partnership with companies. Nonetheless, a
common proposal was still lacking, and in particular, these projects did not envisage
any teachers’ assessment. The opposition of the teachers’ unions was so strong that
in 2000 the minister who had tried to introduce an assessment program was obliged
to resign. Likely frightened by this event, the subsequent ministers all talked about
rewarding merits, to motivate the teachers who, though working more and better
than others, received however the same wage and no acknowledgement, but they did
not take any real measure in this regard.
Several experimental projects for school managers and teachers were launched,
and in some cases they were actively boycotted, but at the moment when I am writ-
ing this paper (October 2012), no comprehensive teacher appraisal strategy exists,
so far. A recent decree on teachers’ appraisal provides for strengthening and improv-
ing the tests supplied by the National Institute for the Evaluation of Educational
120 L. Ribolzi
System (Istituto Nazionale per la Valutazione del Sistema Educativo—INVALSI),

while a test project for the school (VALES), though providing for support mecha-
nisms to failing schools, is of a voluntary nature and does not provide for disciplin-
ary measures for the less-effective ones. Furthermore, assigned inspectors are
absolutely too few, and an open competitive exam for state-level employment
announced in 2010 has not yet come to an end.
3.3 Teachers
The key elements certifying the quality of an educational system are teachers. No
system can be better than its teachers’ quality. Teachers in Italy are government
employees with an employment contract providing for 757 teaching hours a year
in the case of primary schools and 619 in the case of lower and upper secondary
schools (the average OECD value being, respectively, 779 and 771 h). OECD
teachers spend on average 1,660 h a year in the school (OECD 2011). As a conse-
quence, Italian teachers have less workload than their foreign colleagues or, at
least, less instruction time. The teacher-student ratio is also below average: 10.7 in
the primary school compared to 16.0, 10 in the lower primary compared to 13.5,
and 11.8 in the upper primary compared to 13.5. Therefore, the number of teachers
in the Italian school is very high (it is however difficult to determine their exact
number, they are about 840,000, 90,000 of which reserved to special-need stu-
dents), and they are paid less than teachers in other European countries, because
their time of work is much less than the normal 36 h per week.
However, this is not the real problem. Many young people, especially those who
hold a scientific or technological degree, consider teaching a “second best” choice
if they cannot find another more suitable job opportunity. Moreover, since this
profession does provide neither for any kind of career nor for any kind of reward
or incentive for those who work well, it actually keeps the best elements away from
the school. Targeted training and university courses for teachers began to be held,
with an enormous delay, only in 1999 (Italy being the last OECD country to adopt
them); then they were suspended and finally restarted in 2012, yet with rather
vague procedures. Primary and infant school teachers must hold a 5-year university
degree, which includes also a training period. Secondary school teachers must hold
an M.A. degree concerning the teaching matters and attend an additional 1-year
training period in a school. The lack of clear mechanisms for coming on duty (the
last national exam took place in 1999!) and the impossibility for schools to choose
and keep their teachers have led to the creation of many “temporary” teachers lying
for years and years in wait for a permanent job, who live in the school with short
term or renewable from year to year assignments without ever being assessed.
According to estimates, they are in all about 150,000 units.
Inquiries focused on teachers (one of the most frequent subjects in education
sociology) point out a prevailing female component exceeding 90 % in the primary
school and close to 100 % in the preprimary/infant school, as well as an average age
among teachers, which is the most advanced within the European Union: more than
half Italian teachers were over 50 year old in 2011/2012, while in France, Germany,
and Spain, three out of ten teachers are above 50 years old. On the other hand, the
share of less than 30-year-old teachers is below 3 %. Quite surprisingly, despite so
many difficulties, teachers do not seem to regret their choice, since 82 % of them
would make it again (Cavalli and Argentin 2010). For this reason, and “regardless
of everything,” a real policy addressed to the teaching staff would be necessary, a
policy capable to reward and enhance the human resources of the school in all work-
ing stages (initial and in-service training, recruitment, career, etc.), though no solu-
tion seems imminent for the time being.
3.4 Transition to Work
The Italian school has always followed an extremely theoretical orientation. Within
a hierarchically devised framework, the “liceo” (the Italian academic high school)
was placed on top, followed by the technical school or vocational school, and finally,
the short-term vocational education, managed by regions, which was considered a
kind of residual education, a second chance for those who had been unsuccessful in
the school. In their guidance and orientation activities, teachers tended to suggest
the most successful students to attend the “liceo,” going gradually down to the
regional schools, which they used to suggest to those who had experienced a failure
in their studies. There was a close relation between the social and economic status
of students’ families and the choice of the secondary school type. When in 1969
universities opened out to all students who held a 5-year secondary school diploma,
the most successful students who were attending the technical schools, and even
some of those who were attending the vocational schools, preferred to continue
their studies in the university rather than entering the labor market. This provision
represented a positive element, in some respects, as it also allowed students who
belonged to the lower classes to attend a university course, but on the other hand, it
further decreased the prestige of the technical and vocational education, while
spreading the wrong idea that, to increase equity, it was necessary to allow any stu-
dent to remain in the school as long as possible.
The idea that application-oriented education is “inferior” to academic educa-
tion, as well as going against all modern theories on competences and skills, has
resulted in further mismatch and imbalance between job offer and demand. Even
in a period of economic crisis and widespread youth unemployment (the youth
employment rate in October 2012 dropped to 44.6 %), almost one offered job
position out of four meets with recruitment difficulties.16 The law in force provides
for the possibility to complete one’s education and training with an apprenticeship
contract, but the young people who benefit from this kind of contract are less than
15,000, so far! To change these conditions, it would be necessary to improve the
16
Progetto Excelsior, Indagine 2012, in excelsior.unioncamere.net.
122 L. Ribolzi
orientation and guidance service in the school, increase relations between school
and companies, assign the best teachers to the technical and vocational school, and
make it possible to put experimentation and research into effect. But unfortunately
“the division made by Gentile between ‘big leagues’ (the different types of “liceo”)
and second-class schools (technical and vocational schools) continues to inspire a
significant part of the behavior of the educational system actors” (Gentili 2007).
For instance, affluent families normally choose the liceo for their sons/daughters in
spite of their previous results.
The production system also relates to ICT. In this area, the Italian school still
suffers from many problems. The application of ICT is not only restricted by
considerably decreasing budgets, but most of all, by teachers’ insufficient quali-
fication and, in some cases, by their resistances against application of ICT, as
they were afraid of “being replaced by a machine.” Teachers’ advanced average
age is likely one of the causes of this hostility. The entry into the school of
younger teachers, whose education included IT technologies and who, in particu-
lar, make extensively use of communication technologies in their everyday life,
should be able to reduce the distance between the so-called native digitals and
the immigrant digitals, in a school where kids, and even children, are today much
more skilled than their teachers. Nonetheless a serious research activity is neces-
sary in order to understand how the use of new technologies can change students’
learning mechanisms and in which way didactics has to take them into account.
It is therefore important that the political decision-makers understand that it is
not only a matter of quantity (more computers, more Internet connections) but
also a matter of culture.
3.5 Governance and Participation
When school autonomy was established (1997), the law provided for a reform of the
governance system of schools, which substantially were managed by a headmaster
and by the ministerial bureaucracy, up to the Minister. Schools had also a complex
set of bodies called “collective bodies,” which were partly representative and partly
elected, with the purpose of ensuring the link between educational system and terri-
tory. These bodies, established by Law 477, July 1973, and by the implementing
decrees issued in 1974, were enthusiastically welcomed, because they were expected
to put an end to the centralist bureaucratic model and start a real stakeholders’
participation.
However, two serious limits emerged quite soon: the first one depending on the
consultative function of these bodies and their non-binding opinion, which gave rise
to frustration among members; the second limit was that, in the composition of
these bodies, parents coming from the middle and upper-middle classes were over-
represented and that political choices prevailed over educational ones. As a
consequence, the number of voters fell down, and most of these bodies actually
remained only on paper. In 1997, the need for a new governance system began to be
felt in the presence of a school that was changing and had to cope with much more
tasks than in the past. After 15 years, this reform has not been made, so far.17 The
two main reasons which have determined the opposition to this reform are the dif-
ficulty of the central structure to renounce its powers and the fact that a transition
from bureaucratic governance to managerial one is not welcomed by teachers.
There is also a heated debate on the space to be reserved to students’ families.
A relevant aspect of participation consists in the relationship with the “territory.”
On the one hand, there is the traditional idea that the territory should coincide with
the administrative division of the country (i.e., municipalities, provinces, and regions)
and with its formal organizations (trade unions and associations). On the other, the
opinion of those who talk instead about “civil society” and aim at improving and
enhancing all available (even if non-organized) forces, starting from families, is
gaining ground. In their opinion, a strong social capital coming from families and
from functional communities is an asset for educational success and gives greater
opportunities to share civic values and enhance learning.18
However, the previous governance form continues to survive, and the Ministry
of Education has in every region a regional school office, which is assigned to keep
the links between the central and peripheral administrations, even if, logically
speaking, regions should be independent and provide for a specific office assigned
to keep the relations with the central administration, as happens in some autono-
mous provinces, such as Trent. The dismantlement of the central administration
envisaged first by school autonomy, and then by the reform of Title V of the
Constitution, has never been really carried out, and perhaps the goodwill of the
political decision-maker in this direction is lacking.
3.6 Organizational Models and Networking
A final perspective for educational reforms in Italy should be focused on organiza-

tional model and networking possibility. Italian schools were reorganized 10 years
ago by discontinuing or merging small schools up to reach an average number of
800 attending students, while their overall number could be reduced in case of small
islands, mountain villages, or linguistic minorities. In 2011 the size of these schools
was further increased up to include 1,000 or 500 units, respectively, and all schools
had to become comprehensive, i.e., including infant, primary, and lower secondary
school. Municipalities and schools opposed obviously this law, which in June 2012
17
To date (Oct. 2012), a bill was recently approved by one of the branches of the Parliament, and
it is expected to be approved in the forthcoming months by the other one.
18
See the seminal paper by J.S. Coleman (1998), A. Portes (1998).
124 L. Ribolzi
was finally repealed and declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court. In

October, a new law lowered the threshold to 900 students. In any case, about 1,000
schools should be merged.
The problem is not only—as trade unions complain—that a number of teachers
and principals would lose their job. In larger schools, small communities risk to lose
their identity, and the social capital they represent would get lost. In addition, the
Italian territory is characterized by a great number of small municipalities (more
than 8,000), spread in the mountains, in small islands, and in badly connected areas,
and the costs to move students would be greater than savings.
The solution to this problem seems to consist in increasing networks, which are
already informally widespread. A recent inquiry, carried out in more than 5,000
schools located all over the country (Cocozza 2012), detected the presence of more
than 3,000 networks: schools are cooperating in the development of projects, in car-
rying out training courses, and in making scale economies as regards services.
Encouraging this tendency would allow more effectively organizing the system
though keeping the specific characteristics of small schools, which are often the
only meeting opportunity for the inhabitants of those places. For the time being,
decisions have been made on a regional scale, but undoubtedly, a more general pro-
vision should regulate this model in the future.
Within schools (which are about 10,000 and include 40,000 individual
school units), the organizational model continues to remain bureaucratic, and the
principal is the repository of the decision-making authority. A new model of
widespread or participated leadership is beginning to take place in many schools.
According to this model, the principal leads a sort of “governing board” (usually
elected by teachers, but also trusted by the headmaster), which shares control
over the different operation areas (didactics, relations with the territory, manage-
ment of laboratories, etc.) (Barzano’ 2008). In this case, too, the Reform Law
which assigned school management to principals (Law Decree 59 of 1998) did
not provide for actually increasing their control power and did not change the
school managers’ recruitment and training system. Today, within the Italian
school, an effective leadership could be defined a proactive leadership, but, as a
matter of fact, the principals currently in office and the new ones who are enter-
ing the school are still highly traditionalist.
4 Conclusions
In conclusion, is it possible to outline the prospects of the reforms regarding the

Italian school system? After having underlined that the time of great system reforms
is likely over, there are however some directions the political decision-makers
should follow.
Basing on the assumption that any educational policy should start from the
consciousness that education, at all levels and in all forms, is an absolute priority
for our country and requires not so much and not only to tackle and solve indi-
vidual problems (such as teachers, structure of the sets of lessons, and appraisal),
these policies should first of all promote a real investment for society in the school.
The aim should be to identify some priorities and invest in them regardless
whether it would be necessary to make even unpopular decisions or decisions that
would be effective in the long run without bringing political rewards to those who
make them.
The first problem to be tackled, in a period of economic crisis, is the cost of
innovations. To increase system efficiency, it is possible both to reduce costs,
results being equal, and improve results, costs being equal. Considering that
today the results of Italy are not stirring if we compare them to those of other
European countries (non-attainment of diplomas, persistence of high dropout
rates, insufficient number of graduates in technical and scientific matters, etc.),
efficiency increase should be sought by improving results, costs being equal,
and consequently, in a different way of spending.
The second objective, still not fully met, is an increase in equity, which
translates not so much into breaking the entry barriers, which have already
been broken to a great extent, but rather into the possibility to complete stu-
dents’ educational paths, and the construction of not merely academic paths,
but also technical and professional paths of excellence at all levels. The idea
that school and university cannot be conceived any longer out of an enlarged
and more and more integrated system connoted by the expansion of communi-
cation is increasingly spreading worldwide. School and university would
achieve better results at lower costs and in a shorter time if they cooperated
within functional networks.
The best practices of schools should be circulated, improved, and enhanced also
in terms of innovation without reform. Political choices have often ignored people’s
experiences and needs and have built reform models based on more or less topical
theories, but not on the attention that should be carefully paid to the needs expressed
by civil society. Today, any reform, in its complexity, presents itself as a renewal
process beginning from a careful analysis of educational needs and a common
agreement on the most qualifying issues; reforms should develop in a dynamic,
interactive way and be capable to change and transform themselves over time. This
model, which is also called rolling reform, that is to say, a self-regulating and self-
adjusting reform, is perhaps the most interesting lesson North European countries
have taught us.
Educational research is, for the time being, scarcely spread in Italy and needs
to be enhanced and rewarded adequately. It should be developed also to deter-
mine, as well as priorities, their order and the minimum time required for imple-
menting the whole project, by setting the intermediate objectives that have to be
126 L. Ribolzi
assessed. To develop this reform action, politicians should take the following
two main actions:
• Try to get consensus as regards these objectives and commit themselves to keep
them even in case of political changes. A reform exclusively devised to protect
the interests of a single party would condemn the school to a subordinate and
precarious position and burn out any possibility to transform it into a develop-
ment lever.
• Foresee a resistance to change resulting from the centralistic view of the admin-
istrative and didactic government of schools and universities, which are accus-
tomed to expect “programs” launched by the central administration, and from a
negative attitude against innovation by those who would exclusively convey
knowledge consolidated by tradition, and refuse to organize knowledge focusing
on the actual problems that have to be solved.
The European objectives can be met only in this way, from the Lisbon and
Barcelona processes for the school to the Bologna process for the university, which
aim all at increasing the competitiveness of Europe, by increasingly changing it into
a knowledge society, where persons in a position to actively and flexibly introduce
themselves in society and in the labor market created by technological innovation
are acting.
References
Barzano, G. (2008). Leadership per l’educazione. Roma: Armando editore.

Bottani, N. (1986). La ricreazione è finita. Bologna: Il Mulino.
Cavalli, A., & Argentin, G. (2010). Gli insegnanti italiani: come cambia il modo di fare scuola
(Terza indagine dell’ Istituto IARD sulle condizioni di vita e di lavoro nella scuola italiana)
(p. 68). Bologna: Il Mulino.
Cocozza, A. (2012). Il sistema scuola. Milano: FrancoAngeli. Chapter v.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of
Sociology, 94, 95–120.
Gentili, C. (2007). Umanesimo tecnologico e istruzione tecnica (p. 28). Roma: Armando Editore.
Glenn, C., & de Groof, J. (2003). Freedom, autonomy and accountability in education (Vol. 2).
Utrecht: Lemma.
Grimaldi, E., & Serpieri, R. (February 2012). The reforming trajectory of the Italian educational
system. Site-based management and decentralisation as a challenge for democratic discourse.
Journal of Educational Administration and History, 42(1), 75–95.
Landri, P. (2009). A temporary eclipse of bureaucracy. The circulation of school autonomy in Italy.
Journal of Sociology of Education. http://www.ijse.eu/index.php/ijse/article/view/31
Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione. (2008). La dispersione scolastica, Indicatori di base, Anno
scolastico 2006/07. Roma: Maggio.
Novoa, A. (1998). Histoire & Comparaison. Essais sur l’éducation (p. 63, 37). Lisbon: Educa.
OECD. (2004). Learning for tomorrow’s world – First results from PISA 2003. Paris: OECD.
OECD. (2011). Education at a glance, 2011. Paris: OECD.
OECD. (2012). Education at a glance 2011. Paris: OECD.

Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and application in modern sociology. Annual Review
of Sociology, 22, 1–24.
Van Damme, D., & Karkkainen, K. (2011). Crisis survey 2010: The impact of the economic reces-
sion and fiscal crisis on education in OECD countries. OECD education working papers, No.
56. OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kgj1r9zk09x-en
Korea: Fostering Competition and Securing
Excellence in Education
Jeongwon Kim and Taewan Kim
Abstract The Lee administration’s guiding principle for national strategy is fully
reflected in educational policy planning. Upon diagnosing the preceding govern-
ment’s education policies as “having placed excessive emphasis on the equality
issue,” the Lee government set forth a series of new education drive that focused on
“fostering competition and securing excellence in education.”
Keywords Lee administration • Korea Competition • Excellence • Education

reform • Policies
Recent education reform initiatives implemented in Korea are closely tied with the
incumbent government’s key visions for state administration. President Lee Myung-
Bak, elected by the people in the expectation that he will reverse Korea’s economic
slowdown, had promised to “cut down on tax rates and ease government interven-
tion and regulations, so as to achieve a 7 % average annual economic growth, raise
Korea’s per capita income to 40,000 USD, and ultimately advance the country into
the world’s 7th largest economy.” This economy-focused presidential election
pledge is often referred to as “MBnomics,” coined after the initials of his given
name (Seoul Economy 2007. 12. 19).
The Lee administration’s guiding principle for national strategy is fully reflected
in educational policy planning. Upon diagnosing the preceding government’s edu-
cation policies as “having placed excessive emphasis on the equality issue,” the Lee
The chapter refers to education reform in Korea of Lee Administration and it was written when
President Lee Myung-Bak was in office.
J.W. Kim (*)
Korean Educational Development Institute (KEDI), Seoul, South Korea
T.W. Kim
Keimyung University, Daegu, South Korea

130 J.W. Kim and T.W. Kim
government set forth a new education drive that focused on “fostering competition
and securing excellence in education,” thereby distinguishing itself from the previ-
ous administration (Han, Yoo-kyung 2010). The core objective of education policy
that was stressed from the very inception of the Lee government was to allow for a
diversity of discourses and systems to compete in a free market by streamlining
regulations at the central level and thereby maximizing qualitative excellence in
education. In turn for deregulation, more school autonomy and a boost of educa-
tional diversity, the government declared a strong will to raise accountability stan-
dards for all parties involved in education so that no single student may fail to
acquire basic academic ability (Prime Minister’s Office 2008). In sum, the Lee
administration’s policy paradigm for education was constructed on the two pillars
of “enhancing the competitiveness of school education by reinforcing autonomy
and diversity” and “strengthening accountability and ensuring that each and every
one secures basic educational attainment levels.”
Contradicting the objective of “economic recovery” which rests at the heart of
the current administration’s initial promises, Korea’s economic growth rate stood at
a mere 2.3 % in 2008 in which the Lee government was inaugurated, far below the
presidential pledge of 7 %. In 2009, the rate dropped even lower to 0.3 % (Statistics
Korea 2012). Added to that, the income inequality problem which had been spiral-
ing since the IMF supervision period continued to aggravate, and the number of
middle-income families decreased in contrast to an increase of poor households
(Kang, Kong-ku 2012). What is more, the poverty ratio of highly educated income-
earning couples started to mark a rise (Hyundai Research Institute 2010). This pro-
vided cause for the government to fundamentally overhaul its national policy
philosophy. The Lee administration’s national slogan switched from “market-
orientation” and “pragmatism” to “people-friendliness and equal-opportunity soci-
ety,” according to which a more active policy interest was placed on supporting
social minority groups including educational aid for children of rural areas, low-
income households, and immigrant housewives.
Into the year 2011, as Korea’s economic health saw little signs of improvement
amid a prevailing global economic slump, a number of educational issues that
reflected the country’s financial struggle emerged as subjects of hot political debate.
Of particular interest were arguments that primary and middle school students
should be given free lunch meals and that university tuition rates should be cut by
half, issues which developed into a political war between ruling and opposition par-
ties. The political row over free meals even led to the resignation of the Seoul City
Mayor who was replaced by an opposition party mayor-elect. Even now, as part of
policy commitments for the upcoming presidential election in late 2012, both ruling
and opposition parties have promised to halve university tuition rates.
Against this backdrop, this article introduces the core education reform initiatives
that comprise the election pledge of the Lee Myung-Bak administration, with focus on
primary and secondary school policies. Explanation is provided on the ultimate objec-
tive that the incumbent government’s key education strategies aim for, and the direction
according to which those strategies are being implemented. The major achievements
and limitations identified in the course of policy execution are then described, ending
with a presentation of implications for ways to address future educational challenges.
Korea: Fostering Competition and Securing Excellence in Education 131
1 Key Policies for Education Reform
Of the wide range of education initiatives carried out by the Lee administration, a
number of core policies represent the government’s two basic directions for edu-
cational advancement, that is, to “enhance the competitiveness of school educa-
tion by expanding autonomy and fostering diversity,” and to “identify accountability
standards and ensure that all students acquire basic academic ability” (Kim,
Jeongwon et al. 2011). These are policies that were set forth as presidential elec-
tion pledges and carried out with intensive force for the following 5 years. They
are, in other words, the centerpiece of education policies that represent the incum-
bent government’s mandate (Table 1).
Representative policies pursued under the target of “expanding school auton-
omy” include a major step to minimize the central government’s role in school
education. Following a policy to “revise the local education administration system,”
Metropolitan and provincial offices of education were designated as the immediate
and ultimate authority responsible for primary and secondary education. “School
autonomy expansion plans” (Ministry of Education, Science and Technology
(MEST) 2008. 4.15) were implemented to abolish rules and regulations restricting
primary and secondary education and to boost school autonomy for curricular oper-
ation and teacher personnel management. A policy to “promote autonomy for cur-
ricular operation” accompanied those policies. The role of school inspection,
evaluation, and teacher management, which had previously rested with local educa-
tion offices, was transferred to city and provincial offices of education with the
Table 1 Outline of the Lee administration’s major initiatives for education reform
Policy
Direction Major policy tasks
Autonomy/diversity Revise the local education administration system
Enhance autonomy in school management and curricular
operation
Expand autonomy in university admission by facilitating
the Admissions Officer System
Implement a project to nurture 300 diversified high
schools (100 private self-governed high schools, 50
Meister vocational high schools, 150 public boarding
high schools)
Strengthen vocational secondary education through public
autonomous high schools and specialized high schools
Accountability/guarantee Leave no student lagging in basic academic ability (carry
of basic levels out the National Assessment of Educational
Achievement, support schools that have a significant
number of under-achieving students)
Identify and assist students in crisis
situations (Wee project)
Implement Teacher Evaluation for Professional
Development
“revision of the local educational administration system.” Local education offices

were instead imposed with a new responsibility to focus on supporting individual
schools. To match their new role, the offices changed name to “Educational Support
Offices” (MEST 2010. 5). The government also abolished a great number of rules
that had regulated school management and devised a “plan to expand autonomy for
school curricular operation,” which was announced in the form of the “2009 national
curriculum revision” (MEST 2009. 2). This enabled schools to add or reduce teach-
ing hours for subjects according to their own needs, within 20 % of requisite annual
instruction hours stipulated in the national common basic curriculum. At the high
school level, students were given more opportunity to choose electives. And for
students between grades 7 and 12, schools were required to offer courses that had
previously been taught over several semesters in just one or two semesters in any
grade year, under the title “concentrated subject completion system.” That policy
was claimed to support to reduce the students’ burden of learning by assuring that
students do not undertake more than eight subjects per semester. Meanwhile, in the
higher education sector, the government introduced a plan to “expand autonomy for
university admission procedures,” which caused quite a stir throughout Korean soci-
ety. The “Admissions Officer System” is a representative policy that was introduced
as part of this strategy. It was not until the current government that the system saw
a fast and full-fledged application nationwide though the system had been carried
out in partial attempts by previous governments. The idea of the system is to place
weight on a candidate’s various academic experiences, rather than college entrance
exam scores, when conducting admission screening. This is to help higher educa-
tion institutions select students that possess qualities and potential that fit in with the
direction of the university or program (Park, Je-Nam 2008).
The government’s target of “diversification” is best characterized by the “project
to nurture 300 diversified high schools.” The project grew out from criticism of
Korea’s high school equalization policy which had been in place since 1975.
Underlying the project were assertions that varying new types of high schools
should be developed so that students may choose schools according to their abilities
and aptitudes. The idea was that this will induce sound competition between schools
and lead to fostering excellence in education. The project comprises three compo-
nents. The first task is to increase the number of “private independent high schools”
to 100 nationwide within President Lee’s term in office. These schools are granted
a certain level of autonomy in teacher appointment, curricular operation, admission
fee rates, and student selection. Second, the government is developing 150 “board-
ing high schools” in rural areas in a bid to prevent excellent students from leaving
their hometown for urban schools. The third plan is to nurture 50 “Meister high
schools” which will take the lead in cultivating a highly qualified vocational work-
force (Prime Minister’s Office 2008). Another policy that is being stressed side by
side with the Meister high school project is to “facilitate vocational secondary edu-
cation,” specialized high schools in particular, though this was not necessarily a core
policy focus in the early stages of the current government. The policy comes as a
countermeasure to the decrease of technically skilled manpower in Korea as a rap-
idly growing number of vocational high school graduates seek advancement to
university. The aim is to “revise all vocational high schools into specialized insti-
tutes by sector” and provide multi-layered support to foster an “environment that
encourages youths to get employed first, build a career, and pursue academic studies
later on when needed” (Relevant Ministry 2010. 5). Alongside, the government also
started to select public high schools in 2009 that would be run autonomously in
terms of curricular operation and teacher appointment. These “public independent
high schools” are not allowed to select students, but can formulate the curriculum as
they find suitable, just like private independent high schools. Principals at these
schools are granted the right to teacher appointment. And the schools receive addi-
tional budgetary aid for their education programs. Having started with the designa-
tion of 21 schools in 2009, a total of 97 public independent high schools are in
operation nationwide as of 2012, and 19 schools were additionally designated in the
second half of that year (MEST 2012. 8).
In the policy area of “identifying accountability standards in education,” the
government’s representative initiative is the “zero under achievement student plan”
which shares the objective of the US No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act in an
attempt to leave no student lagging behind in basic academic ability. To the pur-
pose, the government introduced in 2008 a yearly National Assessment of
Educational Attainment (NAEA) that is conducted among all students in grades 6,
9, and 10 (changed to grade 11 starting in 2010). Results of the assessment are
reflected in identifying academically under-achieving students and directing spe-
cial support into schools that have a significant number of such students, in view of
inducing each and every student to break away from low achievement (MEST
2011. 7). The decrease rate of under-achieving students is also included as a core
indicator when evaluating school principals. Another policy interest that runs
together with this is to assist students who are facing crisis situations. The “Wee
project” is designed to prevent dropouts, crime, and violence at school by placing
professional counselors personnel at schools, local education offices, and
Metropolitan and provincial offices of education. The project works in a way to
build a three-stage safety net to aid students experiencing difficulties. In the first
stage, “Wee Classes” are set up at schools, and professional expert counselors are
placed in the classes to function as a window of communication for students in
need. The second-stage safety measure is to establish “Wee Centers” at local edu-
cation offices. The Centers use local networks to provide one-stop assistance for
students who require continuous monitoring and support from expert counselors or
for cases where student guidance requires expertise beyond a school’s capability.
In the final third stage, “Wee Schools” are built within Metropolitan and provincial
offices of education in the form of boarding schools. These are long-term con-
signed educational institutions where students live and study together and are pro-
vided with psychological treatment, school adaptation guidance, and subject
instruction. As of 2011, “Wee Classes” were set up at 4,497 primary and secondary
schools, accounting for 39 % of all schools in the country. “Wee Centers” were set
up at 136 or 77 % of all local education offices nationwide. Three “Wee Schools”
were in operation, and four more schools were preparing for opening (Kim,
Jeongwon et al. 2011).
Another policy aimed at strengthening accountability is the government’s move

to appraise all primary and secondary school teachers starting in 2010. Teacher
evaluation, which had been discussed and tried out as a pilot project in the preceding
government, expanded into a nationwide project in 2010 under the current govern-
ment. Named the “Teacher Evaluation for Professional Development,” the evalua-
tion scheme has its focus on raising the quality standards of teachers and is not tied
to promotion decisions. Teachers who receive fewer than 2.5 by fellow teachers
(perfect score is 5.0) and 2.0 by students’ satisfaction are required to attend
professional training for a 6-month period (MEST 2010. 12).
2 Achievements and Limitations of Major Education

Reform Policies
The incumbent government’s policies for education reform have been creating vary-
ing outcomes and also confronting different limitations. Even so, certain general
features can be commonly found across all policies. Drawing from the findings of a
recent related research (Kim, Jeongwon et al. 2011), this article describes below the
major achievements and limits of governmental reform measures in education.
2.1 Policy Achievements
2.1.1 Diversification Fostered in Secondary Education Through Meister

High Schools and Public Independent High Schools
The Meister high school policy, introduced in a bid to nurture high-quality technical
human resources among high school graduates and to improve the climate of aca-
demic elitism in society, is evaluated as having contributed to diversifying second-
ary education by offering industry-customized curricula. Credit is also given to the
schools for developing employment MOUs with industries, inducing industrial part-
ners to donate equipment, and offering students with practical training opportunities
(Kim, Jong-Woo 2011). For example, Hyundai Motor Co. signed an MOU with
Meister high schools agreeing to employ 1,000 graduates from the schools during
the next 10 years. Of all the major education policies laid out by the Lee administra-
tion, the Meister high school policy attracts the most positive response from teach-
ers, parents, and education professionals alike, as revealed in a survey of policy
approval ratings (Kim, Jeongwon et al. 2011).
One of the policies that are given affirmative evaluation by the Ministry of
Education, Science and Technology (2011) is the “employment first, study later”
policy that targets specialized high school graduates. The ministry points to the
steady rise of graduate employment rates as a result of the policy (17.5 % in
2008 → 21.9 % in 2009 → 29.5 % in 2010). Also noted are the facts that banks,
conglomerates, and local governments are increasing their recruitment of high

school diploma holders, students are showing more eagerness for employment, and
social awareness is improving for vocational education.
As for public independent high schools, notwithstanding the fact that these
schools do not enjoy the same right of student selection that is granted to private
self-governed high schools, they are viewed as an important contribution to the
effort of diversifying general high school programs. Research indicates that the
number of parents who choose public independent high schools for their distinc-
tive curriculum doubles the number of parents who make the choice in the belief
that the schools will help their children get better scores on the college scholastic
aptitude test. The schools are also acknowledged for gaining higher satisfaction
levels from students and parents and revamping their previous image as least-
favored schools in underdeveloped regions (Hong, Chang-Nam 2010).
2.1.2 Year-by-Year Decrease of Students Who Lack Basic

Academic Ability
Under a special support project launched in 2009, the government identified schools
that have a large number of students who lack basic academic ability and designated
them as “creative management schools to lead academic ability enhancement.”
Research (Lee, Hwa-Jin 2011) finds a number of positive outcomes produced by
the project including a decrease in the overall ratio of under-achieving Korean stu-
dents, an increased ratio of students who demonstrate average or higher academic
ability, and a sharp drop of under-performing students at the designated creative
management schools. According to the research, the proportion of students who
lack basic academic ability as of all Korean students decreased from 7.2 % in 2008
to 4.8 % in 2009 and again to 3.7 % in 2010. The proportion of under-achieving
students at the designated schools showed a steeper decline, from 17.4 % in 2008 to
10.8 % in 2009 and to 6.2 % in 2010.
2.1.3 Declining Cases of Study Interruption and Un-notified Absence

Among Students in Crisis
At schools that adopt the “Wee project” to assist students in crisis situations, the
rate of satisfaction for students’ personal and school life shows an increase, while
the rate of dropouts and absences without leave marks a decrease, as revealed by
related research (Choi, Sang-Geun 2010). The research notes that the rate of stu-
dent dropouts decreased by 5.6 % between 2008 and 2010 at schools that run
“Wee Classes.” The rate remained unchanged during the same period at schools
that do not offer “Wee Classes.” The same tendency is found in terms of absence
without leave, with the rate of un-notified absences dropping by 7.35 % between
2008 and 2010 at schools with “Wee Classes” and rising 11.94 % at schools with-
out “Wee Classes.”
The “Wee Project” has been carried out rather quietly, without arousing much
of a social repercussion or attention. But over the years, public support for the
project has grown relatively higher than other government education policies
(Kim, Jeongwon et al. 2011).
2.2 Limitations of Policy Implementation
With all the achievements, however, the Lee Myung-Bak administration’s education
reform initiatives hold a varying dimension of limitations, as elucidated below.
2.2.1 Hasty Implementation of Policies in the Absence

of Sufficient Infrastructure
Evidence points to the fact that a systemized survey of policy demands had not
preceded the government’s development of policy objectives, which basically
created difficulty in pushing policies through to the point of desired goal attainment.
Good examples of half-baked policies are those to “nurture 100 private indepen-
dent high schools” and “50 Meister high schools” under the overarching objec-
tive to “diversify 300 high schools.” The Meister high school project halted with
28 school designations, mainly due to the schools’ inability to build contracts
with the most competitive industries in major fields. The number of students at
these schools being contracted for employment upon graduation fell far shorter
than the number of admissions. In the lack of such a practical cooperation system
to support students’ employment, the government had little choice but to suspend
any further rapid expansion of Meister high schools (Kim, Jong-Woo 2011).
Likewise, the government has failed to attain the goal of nurturing 100 private
independent high schools. A total of 51 such schools have been designated across
the country, of which 26 are concentrated in the Seoul capital area. But at several
designated schools, the number of newly enrolled students reached lower than
the admission quota, forcing one school to switch status to a general high school.
As a result, only 50 private independent high schools are currently in operation
(MEST 2012). These 50 schools are not without worries over student recruit-
ment. Three designated schools have, out of concern that they will not be able to
recruit an adequate number of new students, requested a reduction of classes and
received approval so far (Joongang Daily 2012, August 9). Another problem is
the tendency among enrolled students to transfer to other schools, citing reasons
that the private independent schools’ education programs do not offer distinctive
quality commensurate to tuition levels. As of 2011, 852 students out of a total of
17,296 students enrolled in private independent high schools are found to have
decided to transfer to other schools or discontinue study (The Seoul Shinmun
2011, September 20).
The lack of sturdy policy infrastructure has also manifested itself in the course
of efforts to “expand school autonomy.” The autonomy policy is structured on the
idea of delegating core primary and secondary education responsibilities, previ-
ously held by the central administrative authority, to Metropolitan and provincial
offices of education and to encourage individual schools to assume a key role in
administration. But little effort was provided before planning policies to develop
an institutional basis that would clearly define roles and responsibilities between
the central government, Metropolitan and provincial offices of education, and
schools. This naturally led to a great amount of confusion when implementing
policies. In the 2010 election of superintendents that was held in time with local
elections, in particular, opposition-leaning superintendents were elected at six out
of the total 16 Metropolitan and provincial offices of education, signaling a rise of
collision between local education offices and the central Ministry of Education,
Science and Technology. Conflict between both sides continues to date over various
policies. Another controversial policy is the “2009 national curriculum revision,”
carried out in view of granting school more autonomy in curricular operation.
A central issue is the “concentrated subject completion system” which limits the
number of subjects a student can take to eight per academic semester. The original
intention of this policy was to alleviate students’ study burden by reducing the
number of subjects they must take in a semester. But the policy was introduced in
the absence of any change in the national curriculum, which states a definite
description of what should be taught for each grade year and subject. As many
argue, this resulted in a situation where students and teachers had to shoulder an
additional teaching and learning burden. That is, under the pretext of “expanding
autonomy,” the government had pushed forth with the policy without fully prepar-
ing for the problem of teacher quota changes that will occur with subject hour
changes. For these reasons, the policy is often evaluated as a typical example of
“forced autonomy” (Kim, Jeongwon et al. 2011).
As for the “zero under achievement student plan,” though some research presents
evidence that it has helped to reduce the ratio of students who lack basic academic abil-
ity, an ample amount of criticism is also voiced on its negative effects. Critics raise
question on whether a diagnostic tool designed in consideration of the national
curriculum for each grade year can also be used as a tool to assess “basic academic
ability.” Another major issue is that even though a large portion of students identified as
lacking in basic academic ability also have difficulties of behavioral and emotional
disorder, schools only focus on raising their academic performance and offer little else
than helping them do workbook exercises. In particular, the decision to consider a
school’s decrease rate of under-achieving students as an indicator for principal appraisal
eventually brought about unhealthy between-school competition and even some worri-
some instances where schools would welcome the transfer of under-performing
students. Reports on such educationally detrimental cases have also sparked debate on
whether the National Assessment of Educational Attainment needs to be conducted
among all students in target grades and whether assessment results should be disclosed.
In all, together with the “private independent school” scheme, this policy is one of the
least publicly approved initiatives in place (Kim, Jeongwon et al. 2011).
2.2.2 The “High School Diversification” Policy Leading to School

Rankings and a Deterioration of Educational Environments
at “General” High Schools
Private self-governed high schools have emerged as elite schools side by side with
special-purpose high schools including those focused on foreign languages and sci-
ence, which had previously dominated the selection of excellent students. This is
because private self-governed schools use their limited student selection rights and
high tuition rates to attract students of top quality mostly from middle-class families
(Cha, Sung-Hyun 2010). They also take advantage of the curricular flexibility granted
for independent schools to help students prepare for college entrance. For these rea-
sons, the “high school diversification” policy is often criticized as having aggravated
uniformity in education programs rather than bringing in more variety. In contrast,
general high schools that have no special title are entitled to a relatively less extent of
budgetary support and enjoy rather restricted rights in curricular operation. And since
students in the middle and low ranks of academic performance usually enroll in gen-
eral high schools, their overall educational environment is in the face of deterioration.
That is why the “high school diversification policy” is assessed by many as having
given rise to the “ranking of high schools” (Kim, Jeongwon et al. 2011).
2.2.3 Collision Between Policies
Within the same education sector, policies are being pursued in directions that con-
tradict each other. So shaded by other policies that stand out for the visible pressure
they shoulder and also due to various social circumstances, the government’s origi-
nal policy intentions have often been mistakenly delivered. For example, the initia-
tive to grant curricular autonomy is fundamentally aimed at diversifying education
programs so that they better tailor to school and student needs. But as critics point
out, due to policy measures such as disclosing results of the National Assessment of
Educational Attainment and tying the ratio change of under-achieving students with
principal appraisal, school education is increasingly switching its focus on prepar-
ing students for evaluation. In yet another aspect, when the high school diversifica-
tion policy and curricular autonomy policy overlap, schools secure a differentiating
degree of rights over providing curriculum centered on college entrance prepara-
tion. The controversy is that schools which are granted more rights to curricular
operation use that authority to provide concentrated preparation for the college
scholastic aptitude test, which eventually has the effect of aggravating uniformity in
the high school curriculum (Kim, Jeongwon et al. 2011).
3 Future Challenges
The achievements and limitations identified in the Lee Myung-Bak administration’s

education policies over the past 5 years present implications for future educational
policy planning, especially in terms of the following tasks.
3.1 Establishing a Long-Term National Education Policy

Framework and Presenting a Simplified Outline Direction
for the National Curriculum
However sublime a policy’s objective may be, unless that policy is carried out on
top of a systemized infrastructure basis, it becomes virtually impossible to attain the
very essence of the intended policy goal. This is evidenced in the past 5 years of the
Lee administration’s education policy procedures. When establishing fundamental
policies, the first task to consider is to develop a long-term forecast and present a
road map to implement policies in accordance with that outlook. Farsighted plans
should be formulated upon conducting systemic discussions on how we wish to
shape our future society and what kind of education we need in order to realize that
ideal. Only then will education policies be carried out in a sustainable manner,
regardless of government changes.
A policy that particularly requires a long-term approach is the school curriculum
policy. In the current Korean context, what is most demanded of education policy
planning is to grant teachers the right to develop and operate curricula upon their own
decision. Allowing schools more curricular autonomy is not enough, since in actual-
ity, the national basic common curriculum states a detailed prescription of what to be
taught in each grade year and for each subject and thus leaves the value of “auton-
omy” impotent. This is why much supports the need to present just a simplified
outline of contents within the national curriculum and instead secure conditions that
will enable teachers to develop a curriculum customized to the characteristics of their
students (Cho, Nan-Sim 2010). In line with this, the current subject instruction-
oriented teacher development system should also be revised to a method that helps
teachers better understand students and nurtures teacher capacity to self-formulate
the curriculum in the light of individual student needs.
3.2 Diversifying Education Programs Based on a Horizontal

Variation of Social Values
The current government’s high school diversification policy, while being assessed
as having contributed to raising social recognition for vocational education, is at
the same time criticized for having prompted the ranking of high schools. This
implies that what Korean society calls for is a diversification of social values, not
“various” mechanisms to solidify the existing social hierarchy built on educa-
tional credentials. The kind of school education that Korean society demands is
one that opens children’s eyes to the “various values of life” that coexist in this
world and help them find a value of their own to pursue (Kim, Jeongwon 2004).
To meet this demand, all high schools in Korea should be operated as autonomous
institutions, not just a selected few, so that they may flexibly develop programs
that consider the characteristics of entering students. Schools should also be
“diversified” so as to help students who have early decided on life and career
paths to intensively build on their field of interest from high school years.
3.3 Empowering the Role of Schools as an Inclusive Support

System for Children’s Development
Policies aimed at supporting educationally disadvantaged groups, which had been

launched by the preceding government, have continued throughout the Lee Myung-
Bak administration in the name of “expanding infrastructure for educational welfare.”
This comprises support for students from low-income households, special aid for chil-
dren of immigrant housewives, and the establishment of a national scholarship
scheme. In some instances, the policy to ensure basic academic ability in students
(zero under achievement student plan) is classified as a welfare policy in that it targets
academically needy students who constitute an educationally vulnerable group.
But the need to develop an inclusive support system for underprivileged children,
a policy agenda that has been proposed time and again since the previous adminis-
tration, has not been sufficiently addressed by the current government. The reality
is that different government ministries and offices have their own system of carrying
out welfare policies, and the lack of policy coordination creates a situation where a
student who has differing layers of difficulty such as household poverty, emotional
disorder, and academic incompetence has to access assistance separately from dif-
ferent implementation systems. This not only hinders a comprehensive understand-
ing of the student’s needs but also makes it difficult to identify the major mechanism
that may bring changes to the student. Even so, uncoordinated policy systems have
continually been created anew under the current government.
This all implies the need to develop future policies in the direction of advancing
the role of schools, imposing them with a central responsibility in the country’s
social welfare system and encouraging their function as an inclusive support system
for children’s development. Policies should aspire beyond merely promoting the
subject instruction role of schools. They should be able to nurture schools into a
holistic growth-supporting system that comprehensively understands and addresses
the everyday needs of each and every student.
3.4 Defining the Different Roles of Educational

Stakeholders and Promoting Communication
The “school autonomy expansion plan” places the ultimate responsibility for
primary and secondary education on Metropolitan and provincial offices of educa-
tion. But because of this very policy, aspects of conflict are frequently arising
between the central government and local offices of education. What is lacking is a
clear set of standards to define what authority the central government holds and
what rights may be executed by local offices. Mutual conflict can be minimized
when the authority over primary and secondary education is divided pursuant to
those standards, and a legal basis is provided to back the role division.
Aside from this, recent education reform initiatives are often questioned for their
rapid speed of implementation. Many argue that policies are being pushed unilater-
ally, without allowing time for teachers to fully understand their objectives or direc-
tions. Schools also have little choice than to just adhere to the government’s policy
rules and regulations. Little opportunity is given to apprehend the background and
aim of each policy before carrying them out. Schools therefore tend to negatively
respond and resist all government policies, regardless of any value that a policy
might hold. Henceforth, less focus should be placed on how fast a policy is being
implemented. Instead, active opinion sharing with schools and teachers should be
given priority so that policies can be planned practically from the bottom up.
3.5 Improving Linkage and Coordination Between Policies
Policies that point to different goals should not be carried out simultaneously. If
synergic effect is to be secured between policies, a system of coordination and
cooperation among relevant ministries should be activated all throughout the stages
of policy planning to policy implementation. The presence of such a cooperative
system will enable the government to assess the value of every education reform
initiative in consideration of its long-term vision for education. When setting up
implementation strategies, inter-ministerial coordination will also boost the devel-
opment of linkage with other policies, which will not only ensure consistency in
educational policy planning but also facilitate the effective exercise of administra-
tive capacity.
References
Cha, Sung-Hyun, Min, Byeongcheol, Kim, Sung-sik, Kim, Junyeop, Park, So-Young, Bynn, Jong-
Seok. (2010). Desining a panel survey of a high school and beyond. Seoul: Korean Educational
Development Institute.
Cho, Nan-Sim. (2010). The tasks for settlement of the policy of school curricular autonomy rein-
forcement. Seoul: KICE Position Paper2(3).
Choi, Sang-Geun, Kim, Dong-Min, Oh, In-Soo, Shin, Ul-Jin, Kim, In-Gue, Lee, Il-Wha, Lee, Suk-
Yong, & Choi, Bo-Mi. (2011). A research for development plan and result analysis of Wee class
operation. Korean Educational Development Institute.
Han, Yoo-Kyung, Park, Sang-Woan, & Kim, Min-Hee. (2011). Exploration of methods to embed
government policies for education reform into school settings.
Hong, Chang-Nam, Jeong, Soo-Hyeon, Kim, Do-Gi, & Song, Keong-Oh. (2010). 2010
Consultation report on public self- governed high school. Ministry of Education, Science and
Technology Busan Metropolitan Office of Education.
Hyundai Research Institute. (2010, April 19). Structural characteristics of the domestic poverty
class and future challenges. Hyundai Weekly Economic Review.
Joongang Daily. (2012, August 9). The number of transfer students of private self-governed high
schools is approaching to three times of that of general high schools.
Kang, Jong-Ku, Park, Chang-Gui, & Cho, Yoon-Je. (2012). Analysis of the cause of widening
income disparity based on country panel documents. Economic Analysis 18(1). Institute of
Monetary and Economic Research, Bank of Korea.
Kim, Jeongwon. (2004). ‘Diversifying’ high school education – a thought on government policy
directions. The Journal of Korean Education. 31(6). Korean Educational Development Institute.
Kim, Jong-Woo. (2011). Facilitating vocational secondary education. In: Kim, Jeongwon et al.
Diagnosis of the government’s core education policies and measures for improvement
(pp. 56–75). Seoul: Korean Educational Development Institute.
Kim, Jeongwon, Kim Gap-Sung, Kim, Myung-Soo, Kim, Mi-Ran, Kim, Soon-Nam, Yoon, Hyung-
Han, Lee, Hwa-Jin, Jeon, Je-Sang, Joo, Chang-Bum, Cho, Jin-Il, Cha, Sung-Hyun, Choi, Sang-
Geun, & Hong, Chang-Nam. (2011). Diagnosis of the government’s core education policies
and measures for improvement. Korean Educational Development Institute.
Lee, Hwa-Jin, Oh, Sang-Chul, Kim, Tae-Eun, & Kim, Young-Bin. (2011). Analysis of outcomes of
the policy to nurture creative management schools that lead academic ability enhancement and
the guidance/support system for students who lack basic academic ability. Korea Institute for
Curriculum and Evaluation.
Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. (2008. 4.). A plan for enhancing autonomy of in
school management.
Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. (2009. 12.). 2009 Revised Curriculum
(Elementary/Secondary Curriculum). Press release.
Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. (2010. 12.). A plan for the improvement of
t e a c h e r
evaluation for professional development. Press release.
Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. (2010. 5.) A plan for the reorganization of
advanced local educational offices. Press release.
Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. (2012). Compilation of the Lee, Myung-bak
administration’s education policies.
Park, Je-Nam, Han, Seok-Su, Kim, Jeong-Hee, & Park, Sang-Gyu. (2008). A research for the
settlement of the system of admission office. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology.
Prime Minister’s Office. (2008). National policy agendas of the Lee, Myung-bak government.
Relevant Ministry. (2010. 5. 12). Plans for the advancement of vocational education in high
schools.
Seoul Economy. (2007. 12. 19). ‘The Lee Myung-bak period,’ reviewing ‘MB- nomics.’
Statistics Korea. (2012). Statistical DB.
The Seoul Shinmun. (2011, September 20). The first reduction of class number of private self-
governed high schools which experienced the shortfall of applicants for admission.
Indonesia: Overcoming Challenges
of Decentralization
Bambang Indriyanto
Abstract Although the idea of decentralization in Indonesia’s education manage-

ment is not new, it only gained a formal recognition since 1998, triggered by the
economic crisis that followed the fall of a political regime. This chapter discusses
the decentralization reform in Indonesia’s education system, illustrated by reform in
the field of basic education. As decentralization is both political and managerial
phenomena, the reconciliation between central and local governments is proposed
to be a solution to overcome the challenges. Nonetheless, complexities of reforms
increased given the dual management of basic education by the Ministry of
Education and Culture (MoEC) and the Ministry of Religious Affairs. As a result of
trade-off, the decentralization grants full autonomy to district governments; in the
meanwhile, the central government still plays substantial roles in the provision of
education budgets to ensure achieving the target of universalizing basic education.
Keywords Basic education • Education decentralization • Education management

• Education system • Indonesia
Decentralization has been the name of the game in Indonesian bureaucracy since
1998. It was triggered by the economic crisis that followed the fall of a political
regime which had been in power since 1966. Initially the idea of decentralization was
very political when students practically all over Indonesia demanded democratiza-
tion in areas where people’s voices should be heard by the government. This demand
was followed up by the promulgation of Law on Decentralization (No. 32, 2004,
known as the Law of Autonomy). The Law stipulates that all central government
functions, including education, are devolved to local governments. In Indonesian
bureaucratic context, local government consists of provincial and district
B. Indriyanto (*)
The Center for Policy Research, Ministry of Education and Culture,
Jakarta, Indonesia

144 B. Indriyanto
government. Under the Law, the provincial government is representative of the cen-
tral government at the local level. The devolution takes place at district government
level and the provincial governments play as mediator between central and district
governments.
Although this decentralization has been implemented for a decade, the idea had
started long before that. One crucial factor relates to the vast geographical area of
Indonesia which expands over more than 12 thousand islands, though geographical
area was not the sole consideration for the decentralization (Gie 1993). Among the
12,000 islands in Indonesia, there are five big islands consisting of Sumatera, Java,
Borneo, Celebes, and Papua. Area-wise, Papua is the biggest, but economic-wise,
Java is the most developed island compared to the rest of Indonesia. Being the most
developed, Java attracts many people with higher education qualification. Besides,
although Java does not have as many natural resources as the rest of four islands,
about 60 % of wealth and about the same proportion of Indonesia’s population con-
centrates in Java.
There were also considerable cultural as well as political differences that influ-
ence the decentralization policy. Decentralization is intended to strengthen political
integration of Indonesia. It is a scenario of giving local governments and schools
autonomy and unites them at the same time. Specifically speaking, there are at least
three main missions of decentralization: first is to bring public services closer to the
beneficiaries; second is to build democratic atmosphere in public policy agenda set-
tings and implementations; and third is to increase effectiveness and accountability
of policy implementation (Parera and Koekerits 1999; Busoni 2002; Brodkin 2006).
1 Context of Decentralization
This part describes the context of decentralization: the system of basic education.
The policy targets that measure progress of the reform are also discussed.
1.1 Dual Management System for Basic Education
According to the Education Law No. 20 of 2003, basic education consists of 6-year
primary schooling and 3-year junior secondary schooling. The management of the
basic education is the responsibility of the Minister of Education and Culture.
Article 50 of the Law states that “the management of the national education system
is the responsibility of the minister.” As articulated by article 1, the term “the min-
ister” is a minister who controls and manages education, namely, the Minister of
Education and Culture. This article, however, does not indicate that the minister has
a direct control over the schools offering basic education services.
Dual management characterizes basic education in Indonesia. According to the
Law, the primary schools consist of general primary schools called Sekolah Dasar
Indonesia: Overcoming Challenges of Decentralization 145
Table 1 Number of enrollment in basic education, 2011

Level
Primary SD MI Non formal Total
Enrollment 27,208,693 3,302,789 87,715 30,599,197
Ratio 88.9 % 10.8 % 0.3 % 100.0 %
Junior secondary SMP MTs Non-formal Total
Enrollment 9,458,533 2,890,272 256,307 12,605,112
Ratio 75.0 % 22.9 % 2.0 % 100.0 %
Source: Indonesia: Educational Statistics in Brief 2011/2012. Jakarta: Ministry of Education and
Culture, 2012
(SD) and Islamic primary schools called Madrasah Ibtidaiyah (MI). Likewise,
junior secondary schools consist of general junior secondary school called Sekolah
Menengah Pertama (SMP) and Islamic junior secondary school called Madrasah
Tsanawiyah (MT). The Ministry of Religious Affairs (MoRA) directly manages the
madrasahs. This includes appointing teachers and principals to them.
MoRA has the authority to manage madrasahs since historically madrasahs
were community-based education institutions as part of the Islamic teaching.
Local Islamic leaders (Ullamahs) have played a pivotal role in establishing the
madrasahs especially during colonization era. As Indonesia became an indepen-
dent nation in 1945, the madrasahs reoriented their pedagogical missions towards
academic matters. The progress of industries and other formal economic sectors
encourages the graduates of madrasahs to enter the job markets competing with
their peers from general school tracks.
As a consequence, modern approach to education administration is applied in
madrasahs. Teachers with university attainment are recruited. As far as curriculum
and evaluation of academic achievement are concerned, MoRA refers to those
developed and managed by MoEC. Academic-oriented curriculum is employed as
the basis of teaching in addition to Islamic teaching. Their curriculum consists of
about 60 % Islamic teaching, while in general schools the portion of religion in
the curriculum is less than 20 % since they also give equal portion to other religions
as subject matters. Likewise, the student achievement is assessed by standardized
academic test.
While madrasahs and general schools are formal tracks, Indonesia’s basic
education system also involves non-formal tracks consisting of Package A equal
to primary schools and Package B equal to junior secondary schools. These pro-
grams are intended to provide basic education to school-age children who cannot
attend school on a regular basis, such as street children and children living in
isolated areas.
In terms of the number of students, general schools (SD and SMP) outnumber
both madrasahs and non-formal education institutions. Table 1 shows that 88.9 %
and 75 % are enrolled in SDs and SMPs, respectively, and only less than a quarter
of the students are enrolled in madrasahs and non-formal tracks.
146 B. Indriyanto
95.14% 95.23% 95.41% 95.55%

94.90%
94.48%
NER
GER
98.11% 98.20% 99.47%

88.68% 92.32% 96.18%
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Fig. 1 Trends in NER of primary schools and GER of junior secondary schools: 2006–2011
1.2 Target of Universalizing Basic Education
Compared to other education programs, basic education program has a target com-
parable to international initiatives, i.e., universalization of 9-year basic education.
This target is aligned with the goal of Education for All (EFA) initially declared at
Jomtien, Thailand, in 1990 and the Millennium Development Goals. Both initia-
tives set the target that all the school-age children are enrolled in primary schools.
Thus, the target of the universalization of 9-year basic education is to enroll children
of 7–15 years old. Specifically speaking, those between 7 and 12 years old are
enrolled in primary schools while those between 13 and 15 years old are enrolled in
junior secondary schools.
There are two types of enrollment rates used as indicators of success of the uni-
versalization of 9-year basic education. The one used for the primary schools is
Net Enrollment Rates (NER), and the one for junior secondary school is Gross
Enrollment Rates (GER). It had been targeted that 95 % of NER and 95 % of GER
be achieved by 2008. Figure 1 presents aggregate data regarding the achievement of
the target at national level. It shows that both targets of NER and GER have been
achieved. The figure also shows that starting from 2006 both NER and GER have
been increasing slowly. Those who have not been enrolled yet are typically children
who live in isolated areas, street children, or children with disabilities. It needs extra
efforts to get them into school. The government has extended nonformal programs
and non-conventional schools such as Open-SMP to cater to this need. These pro-
grams are flexible programs intended to suit the conditions of these children.
Further analysis of 2011 data on GER and NER shows that although the targets have
been achieved at national level, some districts have achieved the targets of neither NER
nor GER. The districts that fall under quintile 20 on NER and GER are typically the
districts outside Java Island or less developed districts with low fiscal capacity. Having
low fiscal capacity, these districts tend to lack education facilities (Fig. 2).
100%
98.9%
95.7% 97.7%
92.9 %
NER
136.8%
GER
100.5% 108%
85.4% 94.9%
Quintile 20 Quintile 40 Quintile 60 Quintile 80 Quintile 100
Fig. 2 Trends in NER of primary schools and GER of junior secondary schools: 2011–2012
2 Decentralization and Governance
The following discussion elaborates on the approach to decentralization and related

governance strategies at two levels: central level and district level. The discussion
does not intentionally skip the role of the provincial government. As mentioned
previously, provincial governments are part of central government; they are repre-
sentatives of central government at local levels. Their roles are more relevant to the
topic of governance at central level.
2.1 The Approach to Decentralization
Education decentralization is a part of grand scenario of decentralization of

government (Toha 1999). Two features characterize the decentralization of govern-
ment. First, it does not give full autonomy to local governments, rather it devolves
some autonomy of central government to district governments. If the autonomy is
granted to provincial governments, some argue, it may lead to the formation of fed-
eralism, as the provincial governments are considered significant enough to set their
own policies which are not in line with central government’s policies. Second, the
devolution practically includes all areas except religion, foreign affairs politic, defense,
security, judicature, national monetary, and fiscal policies.
Although education is decentralized, religion is still held by central government.
This results in complications in the decentralization. Logically, once education is
decentralized, all components of the education system including schools, teachers,
and education facilities are devolved to district governments. Nonetheless, this is
not the case for madrasahs since they are centrally managed by MoRA.
This has been the consequence of the fact that religious affairs are centralized
while education is decentralized. The proposal to integrate the management of
madrasahs under one roof management, namely, MoEC, was not accepted by MoRA
148 B. Indriyanto
and ullamahs. They argued that madrasahs should still maintain Islamic teaching.
MoRA has its district offices under direct control of MoRA at central level. MoRA’s
district offices have the function of managing the religious affairs at district level
including madrasahs. These include recruitment and deployment of teachers in
madrasahs as well as providing education facilities and equipment for madrasahs.
In contrast, MoEC does not have their counterpart district level. Education
offices at district level, under the direct control of district governments, are respon-
sible to the mayor. It is the mayor of the district who appoints the heads of the
offices. They in turn recruit and deploy teachers and provide education facilities and
equipment to schools in its jurisdiction. Likewise, the power over the appointment
of teachers and principals except for those of madrasahs is in the hand of the mayor.
2.2 Governance at Central Level
Thus, education is decentralized to district governments, but MoEC still manages

about 80 % of education budgets. And MoEC still holds authority in such areas as
funding for education facilities and equipment, provision of School Operation
Subsidy (SOS), and provision of teacher professional allowance.
2.2.1 Funding for Facilities
MoEC had decided to provide funding for education facilities ever since the decen-
tralization was established. Over the period between 2005 and 2010, the central
government has built new classroom and rehabilitated classroom of about 65 % of
SDs and SMPs all over Indonesia. With 65 % out of total budgets for SDs and
SMPs, about 70 thousand and 45 thousand classrooms in SDs and SMPs were built
each year. Besides, the budgets are also allocated for the rehabilitation of 4,500 and
1,750 classrooms in SDs and SMPs per year over the period of 2005–2010. The
allocation is made by the central government. The local governments with lower
fiscal capacity get more allocations than their counterparts with higher fiscal
capacity.
2.2.2 SOS Program
The program started in 2002 as a continuation of Social Safety Net Program in

Education, which was launched in 1999, a year after the economic crisis in 1998. To
push forward universalization of 9-year basic education, the government provided
subsidies for students from low-income families who were hit severely by the crisis.
It was found that this intervention had remarkably positive impact on the increase of
enrollment both in primary and junior secondary schools, So in 2002 it was estab-
lished as a policy to ensure the increase of enrollment.
The School Operation Subsidy (SOS) program is essentially a funding policy

aimed at giving subsidy to all the schools at basic education level including both
madrasahs and general schools (private and public). For the distribution of subsi-
dies, the MoRA directly manages the madrasahs while MoEC manages general
schools. The scheme of the funding is based on a flat-rate approach that offers each
student the same amount of subsidy each school year regardless of their socio-
economic backgrounds. The subsidy only varies by level of schooling: for the
school year of 2012/2013, each student of primary schools receives 580 thousand
IDR per year, while that of junior secondary schools receives 710 IDR per year.
When the subsidy under Social Safety Net Program was converted to massive
subsidies under SOS program, each student in primary schools received 235 thou-
sand IDR per year, and that in junior secondary schools received 324 thousand IDR
per year. These amounts were considered far from enough, but the central govern-
ment was not able to increase them since it still had to provide funds to build new
classrooms and rehabilitate classroom. A study (Gozali 2005) found that SOS sub-
sidies only cover about 30 % and 25 % of total operational costs of primary and
junior secondary schools, respectively, on the average.
Even as the government has increased the subsidy per student up to 580 thousand
IDR per year and 710 IDR per year for each student in primary and junior secondary
schools, respectively, the proportion of the SOS to the total education expenditure has
not increased significantly. Using the data of Gozali’s study (2005) and taking infla-
tion rates from 2005 up to 2012 into account, it is estimated the proportion of SOS
subsidies out of total operational cost of schools is still less than 40 %. This is true for
both primary and junior secondary schools in both madrasahs and general schools.
In 2003, a problem arises when there was pressure from political parties and
interest groups that the universalization of 9-year basic education should be free.
Their pressure has a legal basis since the Education Law of 2003 stipulates that
basic education shall be free of charge. The debate revolved around the term “free.”
The term “free” is only imposed on public schools (madrasahs and general schools),
not for private schools. The former has been fully supported by the central and local
governments (both provincial and districts). Except for the SOS, private schools do
not receive other forms of subsidies.
The term “free” does not mean that the school should refuse any contribution
either from parents or from other community members. In order to clarify this, the
Minister of Education and Culture issued the Decree No. 44, 2012, which clearly
distinguished between fee and contribution. The term “fee” refers to two criteria
distinguishing from contribution: first, the amount of fee is decided by the school,
while that of contribution is decided by parents; second, the due date for paying the
fee is also decided by the school, but there is no due date for the contribution. Schools
have to guarantee that contribution will not affect student academic performance,
which means that schools should treat each and every student equally, no matter their
parents pay a contribution to school or not.
In order to ensure the public schools are free of charge, the central government
encourage local governments (provincial and districts) to provide similar subsidies
to compensate for the differences covered by the SOS funding. The subsidy is called
150 B. Indriyanto
Provincial SOS if it is provided by the provincial government and District SOS if it

is provided by the district government. Up to now, approximately 70 % of provin-
cial and 60 % of district governments provide the subsidies.
The education decentralization takes places at two levels: district and school levels.
The unwillingness of some district governments to pay for SOS results in low enroll-
ments in both primary and junior secondary schools. To overcome this problem, cen-
tral government provides financial aids to schools for students from low-income
families—“The Subsidy for Students from Low Income Families.” It started from
1999 when economy recession hit Indonesia. As the program has a positive impact,
especially on preventing student from dropping out, it was extended by targeting on
the average 3.7 million and 2.3 million students in primary schools (SDs and MIs) and
junior secondary schools (SMPs and MTs), respectively, from 2005 to 2013. These
aids can be used by students to buy books and school uniforms.
To ensure that SOS funds and financial aids reach the targeted schools and stu-
dents, the funds are directly transferred to schools’ accounts. Schools are granted
autonomy to manage their budgets so they can achieve their target efficiently and
effectively as well as accountably. At the school level, it is established through
school-based management system. This system becomes a part of Indonesia’s edu-
cation decentralization.
2.2.3 Teacher Professional Allowance
The teacher professional allowance was instituted through the Law on Teachers
(No. 14, 2005), the issuance of which became a celebrating moment for teachers.
The purpose of the Law is to improve the quality of teaching. Since then their job
status was established as a professional status similar to other professionals like
lawyers, doctors, and accountants. But to achieve this status is not a natural process.
Teachers should hold at least a bachelor’s degree. In addition they have to teach
minimum 24 h per week and meet the minimum teaching competences. To measure
the competence, a set of tests is developed by MoEC. Once they have met all three
requirements, they will receive a professional allowance every month. The amount
of the allowance is equal to their monthly salary.
MoEC controls the distribution of the budgets of these professional allowances.
In doing so, it ensures that the distribution is effective in two senses: first, all teach-
ers who receive it have fully met the requirements; second, the allowances reach the
targeted teachers. Therefore, it is sent directly to teachers’ bank accounts.
Although MoRA has the authority to recruit the teachers for madrasahs, all the
procedures and criteria of recruitment have to follow the requirements set up by
MoEC. Otherwise there would be big gaps of quality between teachers of madrasahs
and general school. Having had equal quality, the teachers of madrasahs receive equal
treatment including that regarding the professional allowance as long as they meet all
the professional requirements. The way MoRA distribute them is also through central-
ized mechanism, that is, it sends the allowance to the religious district offices, and
then the religious district offices distribute them to teachers. This mechanism proves
effective since MoRA can hold the offices accountable to them.
2.3 Governance at District Level
Since the decentralization is put into effect, district governments cannot be held
accountable by both provincial and central governments as they are autonomous
bodies. In general the running of provincial and district governments is supported
by local revenues and General Allocation Funds (GAFs). The latter is called the
equity funds provided by central government, to balance the revenue between rich
and poor districts (Rasyid 2002). The uses of GAFs are delegated to district govern-
ments. The provision of these funds is to subsidize development programs targeted
by district governments in case the local revenues are not enough to fund them.
In addition district governments receive Special Allocation Funds (SAFs).
These funds support development programs targeted by the central government
including education, infrastructures, and natural disasters. Unlike GAFs, the SAFs
are earmarked funds, that means the central government decides upon the use of
them, and district governments do not have any leeway to reallocate them but can
only implement them. In order to ensure the allocations to achieve the target, they
are typically accompanied by a document called the Technical Guidelines. A series
of meetings inviting representative from district governments are held to ensure
them to fully understand the target of development program allocated through
SAFs. The relevant ministries are responsible for preparing the Technical
Guidelines and convening the meetings.
The distribution of GAFs and SAFs is carried out by the Ministry of Finance.
Both GAFs and SAFs are generated from national budgets but are not considered
sectoral budgets allocated to relevant ministries. On the contrary, they are specified
as overall government grants to support local governments.
In addition to GAFs and SAFs for education, MoEC, as noted above, also pro-
vide some funds for education facilities and equipment, School Operation Subsidy
and teacher professional allowances. SAFs and the fund for education facilities and
equipment are typically aimed at the same targets. For example, both of them could
be allocated for the classroom rehabilitation. They are complementary rather than
overlapping since the targets of classroom rehabilitation are so large that one source
of budget will not be enough.
3 Reconciliation and Trade-off
Education decentralization is both political and managerial phenomena. When edu-

cation decentralization is considered a political phenomenon, the most difficult
business is to build a consensus on priorities over a certain period of time between
central and local government. In Indonesia district and central governments have
equal bargaining position. This is especially true for the naturally rich districts.
They are practically self-sufficient without financial support from the central gov-
ernment. They can set their education policies which are in many cases not in line
with the MoEC policies despite that the Education Law has stipulated that MoEC is
152 B. Indriyanto
the party who is responsible for the national education system. In many cases,
MoEC has to reconcile its policy with theirs as long as the period of achieving the
targets are agreed upon. This issue of reconciliation is becoming serious, especially
when the district governments pay less attention to education, which results in the
delay of achieving the universalization of 9-year basic education and the improve-
ment of teacher quality.
The fact that education decentralization involves planning and targeting implies
that it is a managerial phenomenon. Differences in a level of development between
districts are taken into consideration when decentralization is designed as a scheme
of public sector management. Typically districts in western Indonesia are relatively
more developed as compared to other parts of Indonesia, especially eastern
Indonesia. According to the Law of Autonomy, all the districts had to implement the
decentralization scheme, even though some districts may not be equally ready. This
unequal readiness results in different phases of achieving the targets set forth by the
national government. Such targets include participation rates of basic education as
well as secondary education.
There are many evidences showing that to achieve both NER in primary schools and
GER in junior secondary schools, such factors as fiscal capacities both in district and
national governments have to be taken into account. Miscalculations about those fac-
tors may result in ineffectiveness. Maintaining more than 30 million students spreading
out in about 12 thousand islands, the central government runs the risk of discriminating
them from having good quality of basic education. At the same time the government
faces a perennial problem of having no enough budgets to support the universaliza-
tion of 9-year basic education. Consequently the central government has to trade off
the improvement of quality of both senior secondary and higher education.
Other concerns relate to the coordinating lines between central and district gov-
ernments since as stipulated by the Law of Autonomy, there is no longer direct order
from the central government to district governments. A problem rising from this
type of relation is the difficulty of holding districts to comply with national policy.
It also poses difficulties in resource sharing as far as the implementation of develop-
ment programs is concerned (Ahmad and Hofman1999) which requires district gov-
ernments to provide counterpart budgets to the subsidies allocated by central
government. While decentralization scenario impedes some districts, it facilitates
others to achieve the targets.
4 Future Direction
Despite the national target of the universalization of 9-year basic education to be

achieved by the year 2008, some districts have not achieved the target yet. Central
government encourages them by providing subsidy such as for classroom rehabili-
tations and for students from poor families; it also requires them to provide
counterpart budgets at least 30 % out of the total subsidies allocated to district gov-
ernments. MoEC allowed some districts which had not achieved the target to delay
achieving the target, which will sacrifice children’s opportunities to attain basic
education. At the same time, MoEC has to move forward to other education policy
agendas. Starting from 2013, there will be two policy agendas to be launched—the
improvement of quality of basic education and the universalization of secondary
education. These policies are based on the achievement of the universalization of
9-year basic education.
The improvement of quality of basic education and the universalization of sec-
ondary education are agendas that could only be well-implemented through the
involvement and support of district governments. These include financial support
and managerial involvement. There will be some tough negations to get district
governments committed to the policies. King (1998) and Toha (1999) propose that
schools should be involved to pave the way of the implementation of the policies.
This seemingly will not be an effective solution, given the fact that schools are still
fighting against the controls from the district governments. Their fight will not be
successful at least for a short period of time without interventions from stronger
hands like politicians and/or central government.
Reaching a common consensus between central and district governments will
still be a long and winding road for both governments to go through. District gov-
ernments might have their own reason for not giving priorities to education. In reali-
ties many districts may still have to overcome many competing agendas, for
example, between education and health or between education and infrastructure; in
the meanwhile they still struggle to increase their revenues. Therefore, it is justifi-
able for MoEC to subsidize them in order to ensure the national education policy
goals be achieved timely.
The issues of recentralization of education are indeed reviving ever since the idea
was initiated in 2005. This idea came about due to the assumption that education is
under political domain rather than managerial domain. As a consequence, the justi-
fication to set the targets in certain period tended to be political rather than empiri-
cal, which results in mistargeting and delaying of achieving targets.
While waiting for the Law of Autonomy to be amended, education policies have
to be implemented continuously. This certainly will not be easy as it is thought.
Therefore, this mechanism will go through, as Lindblom (1959) coined it, a
muddling-through process. The process needs some fine-tunings which accommo-
date both the interests of central and local governments. The central government
still controls most of education budgets and thus can exert its power over district
government through the incentive–disincentive mechanism. It gives more education
subsidies to district governments who comply with central government policies and
provide counterpart budgets accordingly. On the other hand, it gives less subsidies
to district governments who do not comply.
Maximum utilities should be the success criteria of the incentive–disincentive
mechanism.
154 B. Indriyanto
References
Ahmad, E., & Hofman, B. (1999). Indonesia: Decentralization—opportunities and risks. A paper
based on the report of a joint FAD-World Bank team.
Brodkin, E. Z. (2006). Bureaucracy redux: Management reformism and the welfare state. Journal
of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17, 1–17.
Busoni, T. (2002). Politik, birokrasi, dan layananpublik (Politic, bureaucracy, and public services).
In Yaya M. Abdul Aziz, & Ade Priangani. (Eds.), Titik balik demokrasi dan otonomi (Turning
points democracy and autonomy) (pp. 239–250). Jakarta: Pustaka Raja.
Gie, T. L. (1993). Pertumbuhanpemerintahdaerah di negaraRepublik Indonesia.(The development
of local government in the Republic of Indonesia). Yogyakarta: Liberty.
Gozali, A. (2005). Studi keuangan pendidikan dasar (A study on basic education finance). Jakarta:
The Center for Policy Research, The Ministry of Education and Culture.
King, D. Y. (1998). Reforming basic education and the struggle for decentralized educational
administration in Indonesia. Journal of Political and Military Sociology, 26, 83–95. Summer.
Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The science of “muddling through”. In dalam Jay M. Shafritz., dan Albert
C. Hyde. (Eds.), Classic of public administration (pp. 263–75). Chicago: The Dorsey Press.
Parera, F. M., & Koekerits, T. J. (1999). Demokratisasi dan Otonomi (Democartization and
Autonomy). Jakarta: PT. Kompas Media Nusantara.
Rasyid, R. M. (2002). The policy of decentralization in Indonesia. A paper presented in GSU
Conference: Can decentralization help rebuild Indonesia? Atlanta.
Toha, M. (1999). Desentralisasi pendidikan (Education decentralization). Jurnal Pendidikan dan
Kebudayaan (Journal of Education and Culture), 5, 017. 1–7.
The United States: School Choice
and Test-Based Accountability
Kevin G. Welner
Abstract This is an unusual time in the USA for policy concerning primary and
secondary education—kindergarten through 12th grade. The forces shaping K-12
policy are remarkably aligned with both major political parties devoted to two
fundamental approaches: test-based accountability and school choice. While these
lawmakers differ over details, including the proper role of the federal government,
there is little disagreement regarding reliance on these basic approaches. While
individual states and school districts have embarked on enough different reforms
so as to decorate this remarkably aligned political landscape with a variety of inter-
esting gardens worthy of notice, this chapter focuses on explaining the history and
current import of the two dominant policies.
Keywords Test-based accountability • School choice • US policy
This is an unusual time in the USA for policy concerning primary and secondary
education—kindergarten through 12th grade. The forces shaping k–12 policy are
remarkably aligned with both major political parties devoted to two fundamental
approaches: test-based accountability and school choice. While these lawmakers
differ over details, there is little disagreement regarding reliance on these basic
approaches. Yet even within such an aligned political landscape, individual states
and school districts have embarked on enough different reforms so as to decorate
the landscape with a variety of interesting gardens worthy of notice.
This chapter therefore describes the nature, appeal, and consequences of the two
primary strands of policy even while making note of the complexities and diversity
co-existing—and often standing in tension—with the dominant policy agenda. The
first section sets forth the basic legal structure for public schooling in the USA. This
is followed by a very brief presentation of historical eras of education policy and
K.G. Welner (*)

University of Colorado Boulder, School of Education, USA

156 K.G. Welner
then an overview of recent changes to that policy and to underlying principles. The
bulk of the chapter then focuses on test-based accountability and school choice, the
policies that now dominate schooling in the USA.
1 The Legal Structure of, and Recent Changes

to, US Educational Policy-Making
According to the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES), schools in the
USA enroll 55 million students in grades prekindergarten through 12 (aged approxi-
mately four through 18), with 50 million of those students enrolled in public
schools (National Center for Educational Statistics n.d.a). Most students persist
through graduation; students categorized as Asian graduated at the highest rate
(79 %), while Black and Latino students had graduation rates of 60 % and 58 %,
respectively (Chen 2012). Nationally, almost half (48 %) of all public school stu-
dents are from low-income families. Over one-eighth (13 %) are identified as hav-
ing disabilities, and a growing number—again 13 %—are Limited English Proficient
(National Center for Educational Statistics n.d.b).
Across the USA, there are almost 93,000 public schools serving grades kindergar-
ten through 12, and these schools “will spend about $571 billion for the 2012–2013
school year. On average, the current expenditure per student is projected at $11,467
for this school year” (National Center for Educational Statistics n.d.c). Because of
great variation in the cost of living, in needs such as transportation, in student poverty
levels, and in a given state’s ability and level of commitment to funding education,
state-level annual per pupil spending averages vary from $6,064 (in Utah) to $18,618
(in New York) (National Center for Educational Statistics n.d.a).1
Meaningful international spending comparisons are difficult, since the US has an
employment-based system of health care and retirement pensions. For instance, the
$18,618 figure for New York includes $4,658 just for employee benefits—which is
in addition to $10,895 for salaries and wages. Nonetheless, comparisons are avail-
able, including an NCES determination that “In 2008, the United States spent
$10,995 per student on elementary and secondary education, which was 35 % higher
than the OECD average of $8,169” (National Center for Educational Statistics n.d.d).
US spending figures are based on the addition of spending at federal, state, and
local levels, reflecting a comparable distribution of authority and responsibility.
Education of k–12 students in the USA is primarily a state-level responsibility, but
the federal government has made inroads over the past half century—and particu-
larly over the past decade. The following is a brief discussion of the federal and state
roles in policy-making as well as the authority exercised at other levels.
As a legal structure, the system has many layers of rule-making. At the ground
level are individual classrooms, where teachers were formerly able to exercise a great
1
See Table 8 at http://www2.census.gov/govs/school/elsec10_sttables.xls, for school year 2009–
2010 (most recent data).
The United States: School Choice and Test-Based Accountability 157
deal of discretion. This was true in the 1970s and 1980s but, as discussed below, has
changed over the past couple decades. Beyond the classroom level, different school
systems distribute authority in a variety of ways. In high schools, for instance, addi-
tional decision-making sometimes takes place at the department level, where there
may be a mathematics or sciences or English chair who is vested with some authority
over instruction and supervision. At the school level, the principal generally exercises
considerable personnel and budgetary authority as well as some authority over cur-
riculum and instruction. District-level governance differs from state to state, but there
is typically a school board—which is usually elected by community members—which
hires a district superintendent, who in turn hires other district staff and school leaders.
The school board and superintendent are usually vested with ultimate authority over
district-level policies, including key budgetary decisions and broad policy-making.
Recognizing these more local levels of decision-making is important because the
educational system is loosely coupled (Weick 1976). Dictates from higher levels of
the political system do not make their way down to classrooms with perfect fidelity;
for better or worse, they are often watered down and adapted to localized needs and
preferences (Welner 2001).
But an increasing number of critical educational policies—arguably most major
policies—are now determined at the state and federal levels. At each of these two
levels, there are statutes, constitutional provisions, and departments of education
with rule-making authority. Because the USA was created as a federation of states,
the federal government is akin to national governments in most countries. Yet the US
Constitution, which is the ultimate law of the land, includes nothing specific about
education. In fact, throughout most of the nation’s history, the federal government
played only a minor role in k–12 education. This limited role was focused on efforts
such as data gathering and research and then, starting in the 1960s, civil rights and
equity concerns. Courts, at both the federal level and in the states, have also played a
key role over the years, as they were called upon to interpret and give teeth to protec-
tions set forth in constitutional and statutory provisions (Welner et al. 2010).
Until very recently, the most important decisions were largely left to the discre-
tion of the legislators and governors in each of the 50 states, who created a patchwork
of different systems. These various state systems certainly had many commonalities,
which has been important because families often move from state to state. Such simi-
larities facilitated such things as college applications across state lines as well as a
relative continuity of curriculum progression for, e.g., a 10-year-old child who moves
from New York to Pennsylvania.
But many elements were also different, including the ages of mandatory schooling,
the required qualifications of teachers, and the treatment of students with special needs
or with a first language other than English. To a considerable extent, these variations
still remain, but federal interventions have resulted in greater consistency. Most
recently, and as discussed below, the US Department of Education has pressured
states to adopt academic standards to ensure that all students are “college and career
ready”—in furtherance of the so-called Common Core State Standards movement.
Note that although these are designated “academic standards” rather than “curriculum
standards”, almost all states are also adopting one of two high-stakes assessments (also
discussed below), which are very likely to drive more uniformity in curriculum.
158 K.G. Welner
This dynamic has, over the past couple decades, yielded an uneasy and ever-
changing relationship between the states and the federal government. During that
period of time, the nation has seen the two main political parties come into alignment
on education issues. That is, this alignment is a relatively recent phenomenon. From
the 1960s through the 1980s, the parties staked out substantially different positions.
Democrats pushed for an equity-focused and expanded federal role. The main civil
rights laws came out of this effort, as did the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
(ESEA), the main source of federal educational funding.2 Most of ESEA’s funding is
allocated through Title I of the Act and is designed to provide compensatory resources
for students in low-income communities. Republicans, in turn, pushed back against
many of these efforts. They contended that the federal government should not interfere
with the states’ historically dominant role in education.
This all changed with a series of bipartisan federal laws, including the two most
recent reauthorizations of ESEA: the Improving America’s Schools Act of 1994
and the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001. NCLB in particular illustrates
the new landscape for US educational policy. Title I compensatory funding was
increased, which pleased most Democrats. And, as discussed more fully below,
Republican legislators as well as President George W. Bush were exceptionally keen
to install test-based accountability systems that made extraordinarily ambitious
demands on the public schools.
2 Shifting Principles
This abbreviated history hints at changes over time in the nation’s dominant policy
approaches to schooling. When the twentieth century began, education was still
largely for the elite. Many states did not even require children to attend elementary
schools. Compulsory education laws, as well as laws forbidding child labor, were
part of the so-called progressive-era reforms during the first 30–40 years of the
century. The universal schooling that arose out of these reforms was, however,
highly unequal. Wealthy, white, male students were commonly prepared for college,
but the same opportunities were regularly denied to Native American, Latino, Asian
American or African American students, as well as to female students, poor stu-
dents, those with special educational needs, or immigrant students who did not
speak English (Tyack 1974). Slow progress was made in some of these areas, but it
was not until 10 years after the US Supreme Court’s 1954 decision in Brown v.
Board of Education, which prohibited intentional racial segregation in k–12 schools,
that change began to occur at a more rapid pace.
The era of equity reform in education, which lasted from approximately 1964 to
approximately 1980, saw enormous strides for all these groups of students. This era
2
Notwithstanding the differences between the parties, many of these efforts received substantial
bipartisan support.
correspondingly saw enhanced outcomes, with less segregation, greater access, and
improved test scores and graduation rates (see Darling-Hammond 2007).
To understand what has happened since, however, it is important first to under-
stand the underlying principles behind the nation’s different reform approaches.
“Almost every educational policy that finds support in the United States advances
one or more of the following ideals: excellence, accountability, equity, innovation,
social cohesion, security, efficiency, choice, and meritocracy” (Welner and Oakes
2007, p. 93). Sometimes these goals reinforce one another, but sometimes they exist
in tension.
One tension in particular is important to tease out. In the years from approxi-
mately 1964–1980, equity and fairness were pursued through policies broadly
increasing access to opportunities to learn. Examples include funding and resource
equity, civil rights and anti-discrimination protections, reforms of special education
policy and language access policy, and class-size reduction. In the years since,
however, the policies put forward to enhance equity and fairness have taken a differ-
ent approach. They have focused on increasing access to individual choice, along
with test-based accountability systems that publicly label schools, teachers, and others
as succeeding or failing. That is, the nation saw a policy shift from one addressing
structural inequalities at a societal level plus large-scale compensatory programs
that emphasize inputs to one focused on enhancing individual choice options within
a more market-based and deregulated system that emphasizes outcome measures.3
This shift has not been complete, and the past decades have also seen additional,
and sometimes countervailing, reform agendas. These include ongoing funding equity
lawsuits, policies designed to increase safety and access for gay and lesbian students,
class-size reduction and teacher quality initiatives, and early reading intervention
programs, as well as pushes for early childhood education and for the reduction or
elimination of curriculum tracking. But the movement toward policies emphasizing
testing and choice is stark, clear, and overwhelming.
Advocates for this shift spotlight low-income families living in communities with
poor schools that serve as little more than “dropout factories”—with few graduates
and even fewer students who matriculate to college. The status quo for educational
results in such communities is unacceptable. Accordingly, severe accountability
rules have a gut-level appeal, particularly at a time when state budgets are strapped.
That is, if we cannot invest in schooling, at least we can demand more of the students,
teachers, and principals in those schools. There is also a gut-level appeal to school
choice policies that give some of these families the opportunity to seek out and enroll
in schools that sometimes have more resources and better outcomes. Examples of
such policies include charter schools, open enrollment, vouchers to attend private
school, tax credits for private schooling, protection of families that choose to home-
schooling, and (most recently) online or cyber schooling.
3
Note that while Title I funding has continued to increase and while this money continues to be
spent overwhelmingly on compensatory needs in low-income communities, the policy conditions
attached to this spending now emphasize test-based accountability and, to a lesser extent, school
choice.
160 K.G. Welner
As discussed below, neither testing policies nor choice policies have found
substantial support from research, but they both remain popular among lawmakers.
School choice policies in particular have seen unprecedentedly rapid growth over
the past decade.
Underlying testing and choice policies are deeper changes to fundamental values
and beliefs. In particular, this shift reflects a shift in thinking about the importance or
unimportance of larger societal inequalities. The basic concepts of fairness and
opportunity have long been deeply embedded in the nation’s core values about public
education (Oakes et al. 2000). Further, Americans have long looked to public schools
as the main institution of social mobility, an idea that can be traced back at least as
far as Horace Mann’s celebrated call in the mid-nineteenth century for schools to be
the “great equalizer” and the “balance wheel of society” (Mann 1848/1868, p. 669).
When a lawmaker is paying attention to larger inequalities, it makes little sense
to pursue equity through parental choice. In such a system, parents with less educa-
tion and less wealth are generally in a relatively worse position to secure advantages
for their children (Yettick et al. 2008; see also Wells and Serna 1996). Better educated
parents with more resources have more social capital and capacity to “work the
system”. Accordingly, choice mechanisms will often lead to a situation where the
rich get richer and the poor get poorer. While there certainly are disadvantaged
families who use choice policies to find better schools for their children, the broad
trends are not encouraging (Miron et al. 2012).
3 Choice and Accountability: The Current

Trends in US Education Policy
At first glance, school choice policies and test-based accountability policies appear
to be separate and distinct. Each one certainly could be pursued in the absence of the
other. But as designed and implemented in the USA, the two policies have become
intertwined. When schools’ test scores are too low, what should be done? Lawmakers
are increasingly turning to school choice. How do parents decide whether to choose
a school outside the immediate neighborhood? Many look to test scores and the
“school grades” based on those test scores. In ways such as these, the two policies
have become mutually reinforcing.
3.1 Standards and Test-Based Accountability
Back in the era of equity reform in education, school improvement was primarily
driven by inputs. Additional resources, supports, and access were expected to yield
gains in outputs, but it was those inputs that garnered the attention of lawmakers.
In contrast, the current reform agenda is focused on outputs. In particular, tests are
expected to drive school improvement. These policies are often called “accountability
reforms” and are linked to curriculum standards, performance standards, and

standardized assessments. Further, as discussed below, these standards-based
accountability policies are now being connected to teacher quality policies, grade
retention policies4, a movement toward a nationwide “common core” set of academic
standards, and of course to school choice.
The allure of standardized tests is nothing new in the USA (Gould 1981). They
have been used for everything from admission into graduate and professional
schools to undergraduate college admissions, to civil service and military appoint-
ments, to placement in gifted programs and into different levels (or “tracks”) within
schools, and to employment decisions made by private companies. The current test-
ing and accountability push is remarkable in part because of its scope; the amount
of testing of k–12 students has increased markedly. But even more remarkable is a
key change in use. Prior to 2002 NCLB law, such tests were used to understand the
learning needs of, and to make decisions about, the test-takers themselves. They are
now being used to make decisions about teachers, principals, schools, and school
districts. That is, students’ test scores are being imputed to those around them, to
hold those adults and institutions accountable for student learning.
These accountability policies have impacted almost everything we now see in US
schools. Decisions about governance, funding, attendance, personnel, curriculum, and
instruction have all been transformed. School years even start earlier, so as to squeeze
more learning days in, prior to the spring testing period. Keeping in mind the variation
between each state’s laws, the systems generally include the following nine elements:
1. Standards that set forth the curriculum at each grade level
2. Standards that set forth what each student should be able to know and do at each
grade level
3. Standards that set forth what each teacher should know and be prepared to do
4. Assessments for each grade level
5. Standards (or “cut points”) setting forth proficiency on each assessment or set-
ting forth a system for measuring growth
6. A set of rules for holding teachers accountable for the test scores of students in
their classes
7. A set of rules for holding principals accountable for the test scores of students in
their schools
8. A set of rules for holding schools accountable for their students’ test scores
9. A set of rules for holding school districts accountable for their students’ test scores
4
Grade retention and exit (diploma) exams are the only major student-level policies arising out of
the recent movement for greater reliance on test scores. While not discussed further below, it should
be noted that the retention push has been strong in recent years. As a way to address the importance
of early reading skills, Florida and other states have adopted test-based grade retention policies.
Student with low scores on the third-grade reading assessment must repeat the third grade. In
Florida, these retained students are also provided with intensive reading interventions, which com-
plicates attempts to measure the effectiveness of the grade retention itself. But a great deal of other
research concludes that retention is not an effective intervention and, in fact, puts students at a
substantially greater risk of later dropping out of school (see studies cited in Moreno 2012).
162 K.G. Welner
An additional element calls for these various components to be aligned with one
another and with other factors, such as textbooks and teacher preparation programs
at college and universities (Smith and O’Day 1990).
Under NCLB, each state was given the discretion to set its own standards, assess-
ments, and cut scores for proficiency, with very little input from the federal govern-
ment. Each school was, however, required to meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
targets, meaning that they would have to post ever-increasing test scores—up to the
point that all students would be proficient by the year 2014 (with several limited
exceptions). In fact, the test scores were required to be reported for various disaggre-
gated subgroups (e.g., special needs students, English-language learners, and African
American students), and each of these subgroups was also required to show the neces-
sary progress (AYP) toward 100 % proficiency.5
When schools failed to clear the NCLB hurdles, they were forced to march
through a series of escalating interventions. According to the law, in their first year
of “needing improvement”, these schools must provide their students with options
for attending nearby, better-performing public schools. The next year, the schools
must also allow for a diversion of their Title I funding to pay external service pro-
viders for students’ tutoring. The third year, they must implement certain listed
“corrective actions”. The fourth year, they must make plans for a change in gover-
nance. Then, in the fifth year of “needing improvement”, the school must implement
a mandated school restructuring (see discussion in Mathis 2009).
This all gets very complicated; suffice it to say that the Obama administration
was aware that more and more schools were swept into this system of escalating
sanctions and saw the need to grant waivers to release states from the sanction
requirements. Not surprisingly, most states have indeed submitted plans that have
been approved by the US Department of Education in exchange for these waivers.
Importantly, and controversially, the department did not simply issue waivers; it
insisted that these state plans include provisions to promote the administration’s
own favored policies—in particular the adoption of “college and career ready stan-
dards” plus teacher and principal evaluations linked to students’ academic growth.
(Both of these policies are discussed below.) That is, while NCLB’s system techni-
cally remained the law of the land, the administration was able to use the waiver
process to neuter the AYP sanction system and replace it with a set of different
policies—but the replacement policies are again linked to standards and testing.6
NCLB requires7 that public school students be tested annually in reading and
mathematics in grades 3–8, tested twice in the elementary grades in science, and
tested in reading, math, and science at least once in grades 10–12. This is much
5
This requirement of disaggregated subgroup reporting and accountability was one of the elements
of NCLB that brought together Democrats and Republicans.
6
As of July of 2013, eleven states were still operating under the old system, having either not
applied for or not been granted a waiver. These include the large states of Texas and California.
7
The focus herein on NCLB’s accountability provisions. It also includes many other elements,
including a provision requiring that teachers be “highly qualified” and teach classes within their
area of training.
more testing than had existed in most states before the law, yet the trend in more
recent years is still upwards. The Obama administration’s policies for the evaluation
of teachers and principals call for students’ academic growth to be measured in all
grades and in all subjects—that is, for all teachers. While the administration cannot
directly mandate such policies, it has been successful in coercing states into making
the desired policy changes. The conditions imposed on NCLB waivers, noted above,
are part of this. Additional leverage has been exercised through competitive grants
such as the “Race to the Top” program funded by the so-called stimulus money
allocated as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
Academic growth can certainly be measured in ways that do not depend on stan-
dardized assessments. But in practice the states have turned to these tests as a means
of complying with the administration’s demands. They have used two approaches
for measuring growth: either value-added modeling (VAM), which attempts to iso-
late classroom learning effects, or the “Colorado Growth Model”, which is based on
student growth percentiles, descriptive measures of relative growth (similar to the
children’s growth percentile tables used by doctors). Each of these two approaches
has problems in terms of measurement and validity, although most published cri-
tiques have focused on VAM, which is the approach most states are using (see Baker
et al. 2010; Braun 2005; Corcoran 2010; Rothstein 2009).
Each approach also raises serious concerns about the effects of test-driven reform
on curriculum and instruction. Perhaps the most important lesson offered by our
experience with No Child Left Behind is that schools placed under an incentive
system linked to test scores responded by narrowing the curriculum and teaching to
the test (Nichols and Berliner 2007). There is no question that high-stakes testing
creates powerful incentives and thereby changes behavior, but the key question
for lawmakers considering a test-driven reform is whether the exact nature of the
incentives will result in beneficial change (Welner 2013).
Implementation is just the beginning of policies that use student test scores as
part of teacher and principal evaluation systems. The school districts in Washington
DC the state of Tennessee, and a few other jurisdictions have been implementing
such systems for the last 2–3 years, but many other states began these systems in
2012–2013 or will begin in 2013–2014. We can expect that empirical analyses of
their effects will soon be published.
Test scores have also been used to “grade” schools. Some states expressly attach
grades of A–F to schools. In Louisiana, for example, these A–F grades then connect
to the state’s school choice policies; students attending schools with grades of D or
F are given priority to participate in the state’s voucher program funding private
school tuition. Other notable policies similarly connect assessment results to school
choice. As mentioned above, NCLB’s escalating sanctions include open enrollment
(intra-district public school choice). In addition, one of the listed school restructur-
ing options available to schools that hit the fifth year of “needing improvement” is
conversion to a charter school. Similarly, charter conversion is one of four options
available under the federal “school improvement grant” program for schools with
low test scores and other evidence of low achievement. The new “parent trigger”
laws in California and other states also promote charter conversion as an option for
164 K.G. Welner
certain low-scoring schools. What all these laws have in common is a logic model
connecting students’ test scores to the need for drastic interventions and then turn-
ing to school choice as a preferred intervention.
As noted above, the Obama administration has pressured states to adopt what they
call “college and career ready standards”. Owing to the historically limited educational
role of the federal government, the administration has kept the development of these
standards at arm’s length. Instead, an effort to create “Common Core State Standards”
(CCSS) has been led by the National Governors’ Association and the Council of Chief
State School Officers, accompanied by fiscal support from the Gates Foundation and
other organizations (see Mathis 2012).
The CCSS are set forth at a fairly general level; for example, the “Phonics and
Word Recognition” standard for third-grade students (approximately 8 years old)
reads in its entirety as follows: “Know and apply grade-level phonics and word analy-
sis skills in decoding words. (a) Identify and know the meaning of the most common
prefixes and derivational suffixes; (b) Decode words with common Latin suffixes; (c)
Decode multisyllable words; and (d) Read grade-appropriate irregularly spelled
words”. The task of putting curricular flesh on these bones is left to the states and, as
a practical matter, to the developers of the high-stakes tests based on the CCSS.
A primary impetus for this effort is a concern that many states have been lax in
creating rigorous standards and in setting rigorous thresholds for proficiency.
Holding students across the nation to the same high standards could, the argument
goes, result in the ability to compare results across states—information that is cur-
rently supplied by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) but
that is not provided very well by the hodge podge of state-level assessments. Two
national assessment consortia (the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium and
the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers) are develop-
ing computer-based testing8 and expect to begin administration of those tests in the
2014–2015 school year. In fact, another anticipated advantage of widespread adop-
tion of the CCSS is the creation of economies of scale for, e.g., private and public
organizations that will supply professional development, instructional materials,
and standardized testing.
In some ways, this brave new world presents exciting possibilities. But all of the
above-described efforts over the past couple decades have been built on the same set
of reform assumptions, few if any of which have proven to be correct. With regard
to test-based accountability, six main assumptions are as follows:
1. We can design and implement a series of paper-and-pencil (or computer-based)
tests that do a good job in capturing what we as a nation think is important for
students to know and to do.
2. The results of those assessments can precisely, accurately, and validly distin-
guish between different students so well that we can make high-stakes decisions
about those students.
8
Smarter Balanced is using adaptive testing, whereby questions vary depending on a student’s
prior answers, as part of this computer-based model.
3. In fact, we can look at the changes in those students’ test scores and validly attribute
the changes in those scores to specific people (teachers and principals) and institu-
tions (schools) and again make high-stakes decisions based on those results.
4. By putting these test scores at the center of high-stakes accountability systems, we
will create improvement incentives for students, teachers, principals, and others.
5. At the same time, we will not create incentives that undermine our overall
educational goals, such as incentives to eliminate or reduce non-tested but
still important content and types of learning.
6. The end result of all this will be improved academic outcomes.
Each of these six assumptions deserves some attention before this chapter shifts
to an examination of school choice.
Scope of Test Coverage: Standardized testing in the past has overwhelmingly
focused on mathematics and the language arts, excluding goals related to citizen-
ship and the arts as well as the social sciences and, to a large extent, the sciences.
These tests have also focused on readily tested knowledge and skills, to the exclu-
sion of applied knowledge and deeper skills that are more likely to emerge and be
used in project-based endeavors. A goal of the two new CCSS testing consortia is to
assess a deeper and more applied set of knowledge and skills.
Precision, Accuracy, and Validity: States have used tests to retain students in
grade, to place students in gifted programs, to grant admission to competitive
schools, to assign students to high- or low-track classes, and to grant or withhold a
high school diploma. For all of these uses, the assessments undoubtedly provide
useful and relevant information. But the measurement error and the issues addressed
above regarding test coverage raise serious issues about whether the assessments
can be validly used for these purposes. The Joint Standards for testing, published by
the American Educational Research Association, American Psychological
Association, and the National Council on Measurement in Education (1999), cau-
tion that when test scores are used for such high-stakes purposes, “empirical evi-
dence documenting the relationship among particular scores, the instructional
programs, and desired student outcomes should be provided” (American Educational
Research Association et al. 1999, p. 147). The Joint Standards also warn, “As the
stakes of testing increase for individual students, the importance of considering
additional evidence to document the validity of score interpretations and the fair-
ness in testing increases accordingly” (American Educational Research Association
et al. 1999, p. 141).
High-Stakes Attribution of Changes in Test Scores to Teachers and Principals:
As noted above, students’ test scores cannot be validly used for such purposes
(Baker et al. 2010; Braun 2005; Corcoran 2010; Rothstein 2009). Classroom-based
factors such as teacher quality likely account for no more than 20 % of the observed
variance in students’ test scores (see Hanushek et al. 1998; Rowan et al. 2002).
Isolating that effect and then attributing it to the teacher—rather than to such fea-
tures as peer effects, class size effects, or classroom resource effects—are beyond the
capacity of any existing regression model. While current policies base high-stakes
personnel evaluations on multiple criteria, using test-score growth for 20–50 % of
166 K.G. Welner
the overall score, the range of scores arising from the other criteria (e.g., classroom
observations) tends to be less than the forced range of scores derived from the
growth models, meaning that those models tend to have an outsized effect over final
ratings.
Improvement Incentives: When NCLB was first being implemented, there were
already concerns that it would impel schools to “teach to the test” (see discussion in
Nichols and Berliner 2007). In response, the law’s defenders pointed out that prior
to the law’s passage, many schools were almost completely ignoring the academic
needs of their disadvantaged students. Teaching to the test would be a substantial
improvement, particularly if states adopted tests worth teaching to. Supporters of
test-based accountability systems also push back against the premise of this cri-
tique, arguing instead that schools will attempt to improve test scores by improving
instruction, not by trying to “game” the tests.
Unintended Consequences and Counterproductive Incentives: According to
Campbell’s Law, “The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social deci-
sion making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it
will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor” (see
Nichols and Berliner 2007). That is, as higher and higher stakes are attached to
students’ test scores, two things can be expected to happen. First, the validity and
usefulness of the scores themselves are undermined. Second, the teachers and oth-
ers who are subject to the high stakes will change their behavior to respond to the
new incentives, often in ways that are not beneficial to teaching and learning.
These two outcomes are interrelated. When teachers and principals are told that
their success will be overwhelmingly judged by test scores, they will change class-
room instruction and the allocation of learning resources in order to raise those
scores. Some of these changes are straightforward: find out what will be tested and
how it will be tested, and prepare students to master that material and those skills.
Another change is completely unacceptable, no matter how predictable: cheating.
But the most radical changes are deep and structural: an imbalance in curriculum
and instruction. Curriculum is changed to add extreme focus on the tested content,
primarily reading and mathematics. Instruction is similarly changed to add extreme
focus to the type of knowledge and application demanded by the tests. Project-
based, authentic learning is squeezed out, as is applied, deep knowledge.
Given such changes, what is then measured by the high-stakes tests? Students
attending a school that resists these pressures and continues with balanced cur-
riculum and instruction will be administered the same assessments as those attend-
ing schools with a laser-like focus on those tests. All things equal, the second school
will show higher scores, but would lawmakers be correct in assuming that the sec-
ond school is providing a better education? Or would much of the difference be best
understood as a clear illustration of Campbell’s Law?
Schools and Educators Will Drive Better Outcomes: The pattern typically
observed when high stakes are attached to a test is a quick improvement in those
test scores followed by little or no subsequent improvement (Bowie and Green
2012). When academic performance is measured, however, on a different (low-
stakes) assessment—in the USA, the relevant test fitting this description is the
NAEP—the early, quick improvement does not show up. It seems, then, that the early
improvement is due much more to teaching students how to excel on a given high-
stakes test than to any meaningful improvement in teaching and learning. The post-
NCLB trends on the NAEP have been very similar to the pre-NCLB trends (overall,
these are upward trends), suggesting that reform had very little effect on student
learning (Fuller et al. 2007; but see Dee and Jacob 2011, suggesting some positive
effects in math for some younger students).
3.2 School Choice
School choice comes in a wide variety of forms, including magnet schools, home-
schooling, cyberschools, charter schools, open enrollment among schools within a
public school district, inter-district public school choice, vouchers, and what I call
“neovouchers”, which provide private school tuition assistance through a complex
tax credit mechanism (Welner 2008). Almost all of these choice approaches are on
the upswing, with neovouchers, cyberschooling, and charter schools showing
particularly steep curves (Miron et al. 2012). Currently, more than 13 million US
students exercise one or more types of school choice.
However, while school choice is discussed here as a “policy”, it is probably
more accurately thought of as a “policy tool”. There are large differences between
these different types of school choice. Further, for any given approach, there can be
large and important differences depending on how the particular policy is structured
(see Arsen et al. 2000; Welner 2008). When thought of as a policy tool, therefore,
school choice can be crafted in ways to help accomplish the larger goals of the
broader policy.
Yet the reality is that lawmakers in the USA have generally been pursuing school
choice as an end in itself. The strongest choice advocates share much of the late
economist Milton Friedman’s faith in the power of the free market to drive greater
efficiency—as well as higher quality and even equity. Seven primary assumptions
underlie this advocacy:
1. Increased choice will lead to innovations that are then used to improve the larger
school system.
2. Increased choice will lead to competition that drives improvements in the larger
school system.
3. Parents will choose schools that are better fits for their families and their
children.
4. Parents will choose schools that increase their children’s academic achievement.
5. Increased choice will address inequity by providing new options for disadvan-
taged families.
6. Increased choice will not undermine our overall educational goals by, for exam-
ple, increasing segregation and stratification.
7. In a choice system, market forces will hold schools accountable to families and
will deter fraudulent or negligent behavior.
168 K.G. Welner
Briefly consider the evidence regarding each of these assumptions.

Choice Driving Innovation in Curriculum or Instruction: School choice has
led to greater options for many parents. For example, models such as Montessori
and Core Knowledge are often adopted by choice schools, giving more parents
access to these schooling approaches. These are, however, not innovations of the
sort imagined by early advocates of, e.g., charter school reform. The schools are
adopting existing innovations. Professor Christopher Lubienski of the University
of Illinois contends that the relative lack of innovation in the charter school
sector is predictable, since each school’s success depends on convincing parents
to enroll their children (Lubienski 2012). A recognizable approach or model
(Montessori and Core Knowledge being prime examples) will send a more attrac-
tive message to these parents: “We’ve come up with a great new idea, so please
send your children to us so that we can try it out on them”. That said, charter
schools have been in the forefront of some true innovations, most notably the
technology-based idea of “blended learning” (see Pandolfo 2012). Whether this
new approach is beneficial is still an open question, but it is reasonably described
as an innovation.
Competition Driving Improvement: Several studies have suggested small test-
score benefits of competition in some states or cities. Others have found no effects
of competition, even in areas with considerable school choice. Still others have
found that competition has forced schools to devote limited resources to non
instructional purposes such as advertising. And still others have raised concerns that
competition for students does not play out equitably. That is, in a competitive sys-
tem, some children cost more to educate or are less likely to have high test scores or
other desired outcomes—many high-quality schools will therefore not compete for
them. Others might, but the result would be an increasingly stratified system.
Overall, the research results studying competitive effects of school choice “are
mixed and inconclusive” (Arsen and Ni 2012, p. 194). Because the more aggressive
forms of school choice are still relatively small in scope in most communities, it is
difficult to say how many of these hopes and concerns will play out. For example,
“while charter schools have garnered considerable attention over the past two
decades, they only account for around 4.1 % of the national enrollment in public
schools” (Miron and Welner 2012, p. 8).
Parental Choice of Fitting Schools: Research has consistently shown that parents
are generally happy with the choices they make (see Mayer et al. 2002). It is also
reasonable to assume that many choosers seek out schools with curriculum and
instructional approaches that are good fits with their parenting philosophies.
Parental Choice of Academically High-Quality Schools: Parents are more likely
to seek out schools with high test scores, but preferences and perceptions of quality
appear to be influenced by race and other social demographics (Lacireno-Paquet
2012). That is, parents may view the race and poverty of children at a school as a proxy
for quality. Even achievement test scores are a problematic proxy for quality of
instruction, given that students’ entering test scores—and their existing knowledge
and skills—are a better predictor of subsequent test scores than any differences in
instructional quality between schools. In fact, there is little evidence to support even
the basic assumption of a benefit to actively choosing a school other than one’s
assigned neighborhood school. The achievement results of school choice have been
studied extensively for two prominent policies—charter schools and private school
vouchers—and neither appears to be associated with appreciable improvements in
average achievement outcomes (Miron and Urschel 2012).
Choice as Beneficial for Disadvantaged Families: As discussed above, some
lawmakers in the USA have looked at equity from the perspective of the individual:
do we have laws that treat all individuals equally? From this perspective, school
choice can advance equity by removing some financial barriers for disadvantaged
families. But if equity is framed as overall opportunities to learn, the picture is less
rosy. As already noted, there is little evidence that exercising school choice pro-
vides academic benefits, so school reforms focused broadly on improving neigh-
borhood public schools appear to be a wiser use of resources. Moreover, as
discussed immediately below, school choice systems can exacerbate overall
inequalities, segregation, and stratification.
Possible Unintended Consequences: School choice can take a variety of
forms, and the specifics of any given policy can result in large differences in the
policy’s effects. School choice can, for example, be constrained so as to give
priorities to low-income families or to families who live in given neighborhoods.
Although unconstrained choice will likely lead to balkanized schools—with
racial segregation as well as stratification by wealth, special needs status, and
English learning status (Mickelson et al. 2012)—approaches that deliberately
shape constraints can increase diversity in schools. More broadly stated, if school
choice is used as a tool within a larger policy designed to accomplish broader
societal or learning goals, the chances of unintended negative consequences can
be greatly reduced.
Accountability Through Market Pressures: Ideally, a fully informed and effica-
cious set of school “consumers” will hold choice schools accountable by choosing
only the highest-quality operators. In reality, many sketchy and low-quality oper-
ators have run choice schools and even thrived within the marketplace (see, e.g.,
Coutts 2011). Some of the worst offenders, who have committed fraud and other
crimes, have eventually been shut down by regulators. But the overall marketplace
reflects a wide distribution that includes a large number of high-quality, mediocre,
and low-quality choice schools. This should not be surprising. People respond to
incentives, but those incentives do not always play out as lawmakers might hope.
Market incentives can, for instance, drive greater efficiency and even innovations.
But the best efficiencies might come from screening out or pushing out students
who are more challenging or expensive to educate, and innovations might be
focused on lessening costs in ways that actually undermine learning goals.
Market “accountability” can be effective, but so can bureaucratic accountability,
accountability tied to performance goals, and accountability through professional
standards of practice (Garn and Cobb 2012). Each approach comes with strengths
and weaknesses.
170 K.G. Welner
4 Conclusion
The above summary of research, if written by a scholar more receptive to the

current US reform agenda, would surely leave a somewhat more positive impres-
sion. Each researcher or author will bring his or her own perspective. But as
long as we all stick to the overall body of research evidence, the differences in
our summaries would only be at the margins. The truth would remain that the
evidentiary record for test- and choice-focused policies gives us little reason to
believe that either approach will yield substantial benefits. In fact, for those of
us who are more skeptical, the evidentiary record provides clear warnings of
unintended, negative consequences.
Yet these two reform locomotives show few signs of decelerating. Some back-
lash against test-based accountability is now developing (see Bui 2012), but even
after the wave subsides, it is likely to leave behind considerable debris. Already,
both reforms have reshaped the US educational system, and choice policies in
particular become more pervasive and influential each year. When we look back
after another decade, we will undoubtedly see considerable testing and choice;
the open question is whether additional efforts—ideally focused on opportunities
to learn—are on the ascendency.
References
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and the

National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psy-
chological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Arsen, D., & Ni, Y. (2012). The competitive effect of school choice policies on public school per-
formance. In G. Miron, K. G. Welner, P. Hinchey, & W. Mathis (Eds.), Exploring the school
choice universe: Evidence and recommendations. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Arsen, D., Plank, D., & Sykes, G. (2000). School choice policies in Michigan: The rules matter.
East Lansing: Michigan State University.
Baker, E. L., Barton, P. E., Darling-Hammond, L., Haertel, E., Ladd, H. F., Linn, R. L., Ravitch,
D., Rothstein, R., Shavelson, R. J., & Shepard, L. A. (2010). Problems with the use of student
test scores to evaluate teachers. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved from
http://epi.3cdn.net/724cd9a1eb91c40ff0_hwm6iij90.pdf
Bowie, L., & Green, E. L. (2012, July 22). Baltimore school test results hit three-year lull:
Results focus attention on Alonso’s reforms. The Baltimore Sun. Retrieved from http://
articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-07-22/news/bs-md-ci-school-progress-stalls-
20120722_1_jessica-shiller-ceo-andr-s-alonso-maryland-school-assessments/2
Braun, H. I. (2005). Using student progress to evaluate teachers: A primer on value-added models.
Princeton: Educational Testing Service. Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, 347
US 483 (1954).
Bui, L. (2012, November 15). Montgomery superintendent Joshua Starr’s prominence injects him into
national debate. Washington Post. Retrieved from http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-12-15/
local/35847170_1_standardized-tests-new-national-curriculum-standards-teacher-performance
Chen, K. (2012, November 30). Latest release of US High School graduation rates still prelimi-
nary. PBS NewsHour. Available online at http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/11/
latest-release-of-high-school-graduation-rates-still-too-preliminary.html
Corcoran, S. P. (2010). Can teachers be evaluated by their students’ test scores? Should they be?
The use of value added measures of teacher effectiveness in policy and practice. Annenberg
Institute for School Reform. http://annenberginstitute.org/pdf/valueaddedreport.pdf
Coutts, S. (2011, April 9). Akron’s White hat gets poor grades for students. ProPublica &
Akron Beacon-Journal. Retrieved from http://www.ohio.com/blogs/education/first-bell-on-
education-1.286050/akron-s-white-hat-gets-poor-grades-for-students-1.286681
Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). The flat earth and education: How America’s commitment to equity
will determine our future. Educational Researcher, 36(6), 318–334.
Dee, T. S., & Jacob, B. (2011). The impact of no child left behind on student achievement. Journal
of Policy Analysis and Management, 30(3), 418–446.
Fuller, B., Wright, J., Gesicki, K., & Kang, E. (2007). Gauging growth: How to judge no child left
behind? Educational Researcher, 36(5), 268–278.
Garn, G., & Cobb, C. (2012). School choice and accountability. In G. Miron, K. G. Welner, P.
Hinchey, & W. Mathis (Eds.), Exploring the school choice universe: Evidence and recommen-
dations. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Gould, S. J. (1981). The mismeasure of man. New York: Norton.
Hanushek, E. A., Kai, J. F., & Rivkin, S. J. (1998). Teachers schools and academic achievement.
NBER working paper 6691. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. From
http://www.cgp.upenn.edu/pdf/Hanushek_NBER.PDF
Lacireno-Paquet, N. (2012). Who chooses schools, and why? The characteristics and motivations
of families who actively choose schools. In G. Miron, K. G. Welner, P. Hinchey, & W. Mathis
(Eds.), Exploring the school choice universe: Evidence and recommendations. Charlotte:
Information Age Publishing.
Lubienski, C. (2012). Educational innovation and diversification in school choice plans. In
G. Miron, K. G. Welner, P. Hinchey, & W. Mathis (Eds.), Exploring the school choice universe:
Evidence and recommendations. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Mann, H. (Ed.). (1868). Twelfth annual report to the Massachusetts State Board of Education,
1848. In Life and works of Horace Mann (Vol. 3, p. 669). Boston: Walker, Fuller.
Mathis, W. (2009). NCLB’s ultimate restructuring alternatives: Do they improve the quality of
education? Boulder: National Education Policy Center. Retrieved from http://nepc.colorado.
edu/publication/nclb-ultimate-restructuring
Mathis, W. (2012). Research-based options for education policy making: Common core state stan-
dards. Boulder: National Education Policy Center. Retrieved from http://nepc.colorado.edu/
publication/options
Mayer, D., Peterson, P., Myers, D., Tuttle, C. C., & Howell, W. (2002). School choice in New York
city after three years: An evaluation of the school choice scholarships program, final report.
New York: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.mathematica-mpr.
com/publications/PDFs/nycfull.pdf
Mickelson, R. A., Bottia, M., & Southworth, S. (2012). School choice and segregation by race,
ethnicity, class, and achievement. In G. Miron, K. G. Welner, P. Hinchey, & W. Mathis (Eds.),
Exploring the school choice universe: Evidence and recommendations. Charlotte: Information
Age Publishing.
Miron, G., & Urschel, J. (2012). The impact of school choice reforms on student achievement.
In G. Miron, K. G. Welner, P. Hinchey, & W. Mathis (Eds.), Exploring the school choice universe:
Evidence and recommendations. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Miron, G., & Welner, K. G. (2012). Introduction. In G. Miron, K. G. Welner, P. Hinchey, &
W. Mathis (Eds.), Exploring the school choice universe: Evidence and recommendations.
Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Miron, G., Welner, K. G., Hinchey, P., & Mathis, W. (Eds.). (2012). Exploring the school choice
universe: Evidence and recommendations. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Moreno, A. (2012). Does retention (repeating a grade) help struggling learners? Denver: Marisco
Institute for Early Learning and Literacy. Retrieved from http://www.du.edu/marsicoinstitute/
policy/Does_Retention_Help_Struggling_Learners_No.pdf
172 K.G. Welner
National Center for Educational Statistics (n.d., a). Fast facts. Available online at http://nces.ed.
gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=65
National Center for Educational Statistics (n.d., b). Ed Data express: National snapshot.
Available online at http://www.eddataexpress.ed.gov/state-report.cfm?state=US&submit.
x=21&submit.y=8
National Center for Educational Statistics (n.d., c). Fast facts. Available online at http://nces.ed.
gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372
National Center for Educational Statistics (n.d., d). The condition of education: Education expen-
ditures by country. Available online at http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_ifn.asp
Nichols, S., & Berliner, D. C. (2007). Collateral damage: How high-stakes testing corrupts
America’s schools. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.
Oakes, J., Quartz, K. H., Ryan, S., & Lipton, M. (2000). Becoming good American schools:
The struggle for civic virtue in school reform. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pandolfo, N. (2012, September 24). Education Nation: In Arizona desert, a charter school com-
petes. Hechinger Report. Retrieved from http://hechingerreport.org/content/education-nation-
in-arizona-desert-a-charter-school-competes_9687/
Rothstein, J. (2009). Student sorting and bias in value-added estimation: Selection on observables
and unobservables. Education Finance and Policy, 4(4), 537–571.
Rowan, B., Correnti, R., & Miller, R. J. (2002). What large-scale, survey research tells us about
teacher effects on student achievement: Insights from the prospects study of elementary schools.
CRPE Research Report RR-051. From http://cw.marianuniversity.edu/mreardon/755/docu-
ment%20repository/Teacher%20Effects%20on%20Student%20Achievement.pdf
Smith, M., & O’Day, J. (1990). Systemic school reform. In Politics of education association
yearbook (pp. 233–267). Taylor & Francis: London.
Tyack, D. (1974). The one best system. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Weick, K. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 21(1), 1–19.
Wells, A. S., & Serna, I. (1996). The politics of culture: Understanding local political resistance to
detracking in racially mixed schools. Harvard Educational Review, 66, 93–118.
Welner, K. G. (2001). Legal rights, local wrongs: When community control collides with educa-
tional equity. Albany: SUNY Press.
Welner, K. G. (2008). NeoVouchers: The emergence of tuition tax credits for private schooling.
New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
Welner, K. G. (2013). Consequential validity and the transformation of tests from measurement
tools to policy tools. Teachers College Record, 115(9). http://nepc.colorado.edu/files/welner_
tcr_consequential_validity.pdf
Welner, K. G., & Oakes, J. (2007). Structuring curriculum: Technical, normative, and political
considerations. In F. Michael Connelly, M. F. He, & J. Phillion (Eds.), Handbook of curriculum
and instruction (pp. 91–112). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Chapter 5.
Welner, K. G., Biegel, S., & Jackson, D. D. (2010). Legal foundations of education. In S. Tozer
et al. (Eds.), Handbook of research on the social foundations of education (pp. 153–162). New
York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis.
Yettick, H., Love, E. W., & Anderson, S. (2008). Ineffective decision making and educational
opportunity. In K. Welner & W. Chi (Eds.), Current issues in education policy and the law
(pp. 99–120). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.
Brazil: Shift of Accountability Incentives
Fernanda da Rosa Becker and Luiz Claudio Costa
Abstract An analysis of the Brazilian indicators clearly shows that there has been
a positive evolution in the educational scenario over the last two decades. The coun-
try has seen a shift of accountability incentives from finance and management
accountability to a new assessment and monitoring. This chapter discusses the
finance and management reforms and the introduction of a new assessment and
monitoring system in Brazil to illustrate the shift of accountability incentives. Much
has been done, but there are still obstacles to overcome, such as the proper use of the
information provided by the exams and the indexes, to conclude a management and
finance reform but also a learning reform based on equity and quality assurance.
Keywords Accountability • Assessment and monitoring • Brazil • Finance and

management • Education • Policy reform
Brazil has a federal system with three governmental levels: federal, state (27 states),
and municipal (5,560 municipalities). There are around 47 million students in the
basic education system (early childhood education, elementary education, and high
school) in different education networks. Each level of government is responsible for
an educational level; municipalities usually provide early childhood education and
elementary education; states usually provide high school education. Each educa-
tional network is autonomous both administratively and pedagogically, especially
concerning curriculum.
F. da Rosa Becker (*) • L.C. Costa

National Institute for Educational Studies
and Research Anísio Teixeira – INEP, Brasilia, Brazil
e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]

174 F. da Rosa Becker and L.C. Costa
In the 1990s, a cycle of reform processes began in Brazil in light of a belief that
it was necessary to change the institutional and organizational design of educational
systems. One of the main justifications was the low record of accountability for
results in the traditional administration. The past two decades have seen a shift of
accountability incentives from finance and management accountability to a new
assessment and monitoring system.
This chapter discusses the finance and management reforms and the introduction
of a new assessment and monitoring system in Brazil, to illustrate the shift of
accountability incentives. The chapter is divided into three sections: reforms in
basic education, reforms in higher education, and future trends.
1 Management and Finance Reform
In Brazil, management reform is closely connected to finance and expenditure

reform. Owing to the geographical size of Brazil, local demand sometimes cannot
be presented to central government. Unless the relationship among different govern-
ment is adjusted, the way that basic services are provided will not be changed.
Management reform entails not only an administrative adjustment but also a new
relationship among different governmental levels that changes the way that basic
services are provided. Thus, management and finance reform is designed to improve
efficiency, accountability, and responsiveness in the provision of educational ser-
vices and to encourage local participation.
Currently, each school has its own budget according to the number of enroll-
ments and the service provided. Information is available at the student level that is
updated every year together with specific goals to be achieved by each school prin-
cipal. Every person has access to a complete diagnosis of the educational networks
via the Internet. This is the main method used to promote the education quality in
Brazil: accountability focusing on results and responsiveness.
1.1 Basic Education Management and Finance Reform
The management of basic education has changed in the last two decades. The
responsibilities were redefined, finance reform was implemented to provide
resources to all levels of education, and decentralization was both a cause and a
consequence of the whole process.
1.1.1 Reform of Education Funding System
The Brazilian Federal Constitution of 1988 defined the administrative responsibili-

ties in the area of education and the minimum percentage of the public revenue for
Brazil: Shift of Accountability Incentives 175
Table 1 Legal responsibilities

Municipalities States Union
Early childhood To guarantee Technical and funding Technical and funding
education the supply to meet cooperation with cooperation with the
(0–5 years) the demand the municipalities municipalities
as it is not a
compulsory period
Elementary To guarantee To guarantee it in Technical and funding
education it in collaboration collaboration with the cooperation,
(6–14 years) with the states municipalities (LDB, seeking to guarantee
art. 10) the equalization of
High school Offered only after Prioritizing attending educational
education meeting the demand opportunities
(15–17 years) of the previous levels
Source: Brazilian Federal Constitution and LDB
the funding of public education. The mandated amount was 18 % of the budget of
the federal government and 25 % of the tax revenues of the states and municipali-
ties. Later, the 1996 Law of Guidelines and Bases of Education specified adminis-
tration responsibilities per level of government (Table 1).
As such, the municipalities are responsible for the provision of early childhood
education and elementary education. In terms of the education funding, a minimum
percentage to be spent on basic education is determined, but there is no specification
of a minimum to be spent on the different stages of education. Moreover, a detailed
specification of responsibilities of each sphere of government in respect of technical
cooperation is lacking. As a result, the municipalities, the sphere that is nearest to
the population, are under a great deal of pressure and are regularly forced to respond
to local demands, which are not always their duty.
Throughout the 1990s, subject to the budget availability, the majority of the
municipalities directed a large percentage of their resources to elementary educa-
tion and early childhood education, which at that time was not compulsory. In
places where the state provided almost all of the elementary education, such as in
the metropolitan region of the São Paulo state, the municipalities invested mostly in
early childhood education.
Supplementary to constitutional contributions, there are other sources for the
funding of education. The most noteworthy is the Salário-Educação established in
1964. It is not a tax per se but rather a social contribution by enterprises generated
from 2.5 % of companies’ payroll. Until 2006, the Salário-Educação resources were
largely spent on elementary school. Two thirds of the resources are returned to the
state where the tax was collected, and a third is retained by the Federal Government
for distribution among states and municipalities according to the principle of equity.
The share of federal resources is used to support the National Fund for Education
Development (FNDE).
FNDE is an autarchy of the Ministry of Education (MEC) whose mission is to
provide resources for development of the educational system. The FNDE spending
Table 2 Enrollments in basic education per level

1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012
Early childhood 3,783,905 4,270,376 5,338,196 6,903,762 6,719,261 7,295,512
education
Elementary school 30,177,447 33,131,270 35,717,948 34,012,434 32,086,700 29,702,498
High school 4,104,643 5,739,077 8,192,948 9,169,357 8,366,100 8,376,852
Source: INEP
represents approximately 10 % of the MEC’s budget. With the creation of the

Money Direct to School Program (Dinheiro Direto na Escola)1 in 1995, a part of the
resources of FNDE is passed directly to public schools with 150 students and above.
These funds are allocated for teaching activities, the distribution is made according
to the number of students enrolled in schools, and largest amount is transferred to
the poorest region. Currently, programs funded by Salário-Educação and run by
FNDE include the National School Meal Program, National Program of Schoolbooks,
Money Direct to School Program, National School Library Program, and the
National School Transportation Program.
1.1.2 FUNDEF: Minimum per Student Expenditure
Despite the mandate that the provision of education should be decentralized accord-
ing to the 1988 Federal Constitution, the main decentralization only occurred in
1996 after the creation of a new fund: the Fund for Maintenance and Development
of Fundamental Education and Valorization of Teaching (FUNDEF). It has played
a leading role in the increase of net enrollment rates since 1998 (year of
implementation).
Table 2 presents the enrollment evolution in the last 20 years. As shown in the
table, there has been a great improvement in the number of enrollments in early
childhood education. The gross enrollment rate in preschool is around 70 % accord-
ing to Basic Education Census 2011, and there is a goal to achieve 100 % by 2016.
However, the same variation is not observed in elementary school. There was a
growth between 1992 and 2000, and then the number of enrollments started to
decrease, with a large number of students being retained and thus spending more
time in school. In this scenario, the decrease of enrollments suggests a better school
flow and higher graduation rates. The net enrollment ratio is around 98 % in ele-
mentary school according to Basic Education Census 2011. High school presented
some variations, but clearly the number of enrollments is growing, which is very
positive as it is a level of education with an unsatisfactory attendance rate. According
1
“Money direct to school” is a program that transfers money from the federal government
directly to schools without passing through the other government levels. For example, a munic-
ipal school receives money from federal government without passing through the local govern-
ment. It is a way to accelerate the funding process and reduce bureaucracy.
Table 3 Elementary school enrollments share

Administration 1992 (%) 1996 (%) 2000 (%) 2004 (%) 2008 (%) 2012 (%)
Municipal 31.08 32.96 46.74 52.81 54.36 54.96
State 57.56 55.74 44.25 37.33 34.28 30.58
Federal 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.08
Private 11.25 11.19 8.93 9.79 11.28 14.38
Source: INEP
to Superior Education Census 2011, the net enrollment ratio in high school is around
55 %, and the attendance of students aged 15–17 years is around 86 %.
Before FUNDEF, there was no equality of the sharing of tax revenue and the
sharing of educational services, especially in the supply of elementary education
among states and municipalities that lacked incentive for the collaboration regime
mandated by the Federal Constitution. Then Brazil faced two challenges: (1) the
way the system favored noncompliance with the constitutional requirement of rev-
enue allocation; and (2) the existence of disparities between the state and municipal
educational networks, countering the principle of equity in providing a basic service
to the population. FUNDEF produced a shift in the enrollment distribution per level
of government and guaranteed a minimum amount per student as a mechanism to
reduce inequalities among the education networks. This criterion of redistribution
of resources—based on the number of students in municipal and state-managed
education networks—stimulates the effort of the educational systems to enroll all
school-age children.
Table 3 presents the share of enrollments per level of government. It shows that
in the period before FUNDEF (1992 and 1996), more than 50 % of total enrollments
were at the state level. In contrast, 2 years after the fund implementation, there was
an increase of 14 % in the participation of the municipal level. This municipaliza-
tion of elementary school is largely attributable to FUNDEF. Management reform
decentralized education and legal responsibilities were redefined at each govern-
mental level, but only after the creation of a fund (financial and expenditure reform)
did the municipalization actually occur. The fund essentially served as the main link
between the management reform and the finance and expenditure reform in Brazil
and incentivized the decentralization of elementary education, the sharing of
responsibilities between states and municipalities, as well as the redistribution of
revenue among municipalities (according to the number of students served by their
respective educational networks).
In practice, Brazil had rich municipalities with few students in their networks
because state schools provided that service, while at the other extreme, poor munici-
palities could be found with many students and with insufficient funds to ensure the
supply of compulsory schooling with a minimum of quality (UNESCO 2000). For
the municipalities of the North and Northeast regions, the poorest regions in Brazil,
the redistributive impact of FUNDEF was most effective. The innovative criterion
in sharing resources was also translated into wage increases for teachers as 60 % of
the fund was bound to teachers’ wages.
Moreover, the strategies implemented to increase the net enrollment rate were
accompanied by social programs to remove the socioeconomic obstacles and boost
school retention. The most consolidated of these programs is the school meal pro-
gram; through this instrument, federal, state, and municipal resources guarantee at
least one meal a day for all children attending elementary school and for those in
early childhood education. Providing a meal at school is an important incentive for
poor families to enroll their children and to keep them attending classes.
1.1.3 Basic Education Fund (FUNDEB)
Although the fund was redistributed according to the number of enrollments in

elementary school, other levels such as early childhood education and high school
still suffered from the lack of investments. This changed in 2007 as a new fund was
created to replace FUNDEF: the Basic Education Fund (FUNDEB).
FUNDEB assumes that education is a basic right. It encompasses different stages
and types of education such as nursery, preschool, elementary school, high school,
and youth and adult education. Similar to the previous fund, 60 % of the funds must
be used to pay teachers and the remaining 40 % should be spent on the maintenance
of teaching. In this sense, the fund expanded the range of FUNDEF and promoted
equality not only of schools and students but also within the education levels.
The FUNDEB resources are distributed among the Federal District, states, and
their municipalities, relating to enrollments in their respective fields of responsibil-
ity. The fund will be valid until 2020 and is considered the largest amount of invest-
ment for education to date. Over R$ 100 billion has already been spent by the fund,
sourced from states and their municipalities’ own resources, which constitutes 20 %
of their compulsory taxes for basic education.
In short, the management and finance reforms promoted the access to education
and the equality in the provision of basic education service as the funds established
a minimum amount per student.
1.2 Higher Education Management and Finance Reform
In higher education, the management reforms were also based on legal changes
introduced by the 1988 Federal Constitution and the 1996 LDB. The Constitution
established the full autonomy of universities, initiating the discussion on the LDB
by which institutions of higher education in Brazil are legally organized and accred-
ited as university centers, integrated faculties, federal institutes, or universities.
The universities are institutions of multidisciplinary education of high-level pro-
fessionals, research, and extension. In this sense, they must meet the following
requirements: (1) intellectual production, through the systematic study of the themes
and issues relevant to cultural needs at a regional and national level from a scientific
standpoint; and (2) a third of the teaching faculty with at least a master’s and/or
doctoral degree; and (3) a third of the teaching faculty employed on a full-time
basis. The university has didactic and scientific autonomy as well as autonomy for
administrative and financial management.
Table 4 Higher education institutions evolution in Brazil

University Integrated Federal
Total Universities % centers % faculties % institutes %
2001 1,391 156 11.2 66 4.7 1,143 82.2 26 1.9
2002 1,637 162 9.9 77 4.7 1,367 83.5 31 1.9
2003 1,859 163 8.8 81 4.4 1,576 84.8 39 2.1
2004 2,013 169 8.4 107 5.3 1,703 84.6 34 1.7
2005 2,165 176 8.1 114 5.3 1,842 85.1 33 1.5
2006 2,270 178 7.8 119 5.2 1,940 85.5 33 1.5
2007 2,281 183 8 120 5.3 1,945 85.3 33 1.4
2008 2,252 183 8.1 124 5.5 1,911 84.9 34 1.5
2009 2,314 186 8 127 5.5 1,966 85 35 1.5
2010 2,378 190 8 126 5.3 2,025 85.2 37 1.6
Source: INEP
Table 5 Higher education institutions evolution per administration level

Public
Total Federal % State % Municipal % Private %
2001 1,391 67 4.8 63 4.5 53 3.8 1,208 86.8
2002 1,637 73 4.5 65 4 57 3.5 1,442 88.1
2003 1,859 83 4.5 65 3.5 59 3.2 1,652 88.9
2004 2,013 87 4.3 75 3.7 62 3.1 1,789 88.9
2005 2,165 97 4.5 75 3.5 59 2.7 1,934 89.3
2006 2,270 105 4.6 83 3.7 60 2.6 2,022 89.1
2007 2,281 106 4.6 82 3.6 61 2.7 2,032 89.1
2008 2,252 93 4.1 82 3.6 61 2.7 2,016 89.5
2009 2,314 94 4.1 84 3.6 67 2.9 2,069 89.4
2010 2,378 99 4.2 108 4.5 71 3 2,100 88.3
Source: INEP
The university centers are institutions that offer education and have autonomy in
their courses and higher education programs. They are similar to universities in that
they are exempted from requiring permission to open new courses; however, they
are not required to have academic research and extension programs.
The integrated faculties are organized to act in a common way and under a uni-
fied system. They have a plan of studies under the control of a central administra-
tion. They do not have autonomy and must ask for permission to the MEC to start a
new course.
The federal institutes are institutions of basic and professional higher education,
specialized in offering vocational and technological education in different learning
modalities, based on a combination of technological expertise and practical experi-
ence. Tables 4 and 5 present the evolution of higher education institutions in Brazil
during the last decade which shows an expansion both in the public and private
sectors.
The LDB, on the one hand, introduced flexibility in the organization of curricula
and programs through decentralization. On the other hand, the LDB established new
forms of control through external evaluation processes for accreditation and reac-
creditation of the institutions and for the recognition and renewal of recognition of
courses (Barros 2010). Moreover, the LDB regulates the functioning of higher edu-
cation through mandating compulsory attendance of students and a school year of
200 days, and academic qualifications for professors, preferably at master’s and
doctorate levels.
1.2.1 University for All Program (PROUNI)
Comparatively speaking, finance reform was more related to expansion than to

management in higher education. The reform entailed programs and financial alter-
natives created for students without condition to pay for higher education. A typical
example is the University for All Program (PROUNI) instituted in 2005 that grants
full and partial scholarships to undergraduate students in private institutions of
higher education. As noted in the basic education section, there is a need to connect
the expansion of access to quality. In this sense, PROUNI links the granting of
scholarships to students of private institutions to the performance indices of the
national system of evaluation (to be presented in the next section), forcing adher-
ence to the system as well as changing the relationship between the public and pri-
vate sectors.
The institutions that join the program provide scholarships in exchange for the
exemption of income tax and contribution to social security. A candidate is eligible
for a scholarship provided he or she meet the following criteria: having completed
high school education in a public school, having completed high school at a private
institution with a full scholarship, having special needs, or being a teacher of a pub-
lic elementary school or high school who is seeking additional training and pursue
for a bachelor’s degree. In the latter case, it is not necessary to prove household
income per capita. Figure 1 shows the expansion of the program; there are currently
thousands of active scholarships.
1.2.2 Federal University Expansion and Restructuring Program (REUNI)
The expansion of access occurred not only in the private sector but also in the public
sector. In 2007, the program REUNI was instituted and was joined by all federal
universities. It provided funding for the expansion of the number of campuses, jobs,
and courses, preferably on the night shift. It was the responsibility of each institu-
tion to develop proposals for the growth of undergraduate education and to reach a
total of 90 % of undergraduate degrees in relation to the total number of entrant
students (Fig. 2).
To summarize, the goals of REUNI are to expand access, generate new vacancies
on the night shift, to reduce school dropout, and to increase the supply of courses in
different areas. The number of municipalities served by universities increased from
1,000 912 920

900
800 749
700
596
600
500 435
400 310
300
205
200
96
100
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 / 1st
half
Fig. 1 PROUNI scholarships evolution (Source: MEC)
Fig. 2 Expansion of higher education (Source: INEP)
114 in 2003 to 237 in 2011. Nevertheless, it is not desirable to expand a system and
provisions of such a service without quality assurance. Hence an entire system of
assessment and monitoring was designed during the last few decades to promote the
quality of higher education in Brazil.
2 Education Assessment and Monitoring Reform
Accountability in education formed just one part of the broader movement of public
management. One reason for the change of focus of accountability is that Brazil, like
many countries, was faced with the challenge of expanding the system while ensuring
that the quality also improves. The more detailed information on the educational sys-
tem’s final product a government obtains, the more effective measures can be taken.
That’s why reform on education assessment and monitoring was commenced.
2.1 Basic Education Assessment and Monitoring Reform
Since the early 1990s, Brazil has instituted three types of evaluation, in other words,
three generations of large-scale evaluation. The first generation was SAEB, which
was characterized by the diagnosis without direct consequences for the school and
the curriculum; the second generation was Prova Brasil, which expanded SAEB
and returned results for schools, and started to have some intervention in the
curriculum and the school unit management; and the third generation involves
assessments that relate to accountability policies, such as sanctions or rewards
according to the school’s results (Bonamino and Sousa 2012). The three generations
and their relationships to basic education policy reform in Brazil are presented in
the following sections.
2.1.1 National Assessment of Basic Education (SAEB)
The first large-scale assessment of basic education in Brazil was the SAEB. The
system was coordinated by the National Institute of Educational Studies and
Research Anísio Teixeira (INEP) and was implemented in 1990. The SAEB is
essentially a sampling survey and evaluates students in the 4th and 8th grades of
elementary school and the 3rd grade of secondary education. The samples are
representative of all federal states (in 1990, 25 states took part in the study; in
1993, 26). In addition to measuring school performance, the SAEB collects data on
the students (socioeconomic and cultural status, and learning practices), principals
(profiles and management practices), teachers (profiles and teaching practices), and
the schools’ infrastructure.
The SAEB continues to improve, both from the methodological and procedural
points of view. The first survey, conducted in 1990, evaluated only public elemen-
tary schools, assessing Portuguese language, mathematics, and science areas. Both
SAEB 1990 and 1993 assessed students in the 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 7th grades of ele-
mentary school.
In 1995, a concern about the comparability of data prompted a change in proce-
dure. The assessments that then followed began to focus on the end of each cycle of
study, i.e., the 4th and 8th grades of elementary school (or 5th and 9th years) and the
3rd grade of high school. The “Construction” and “Analysis of Items” techniques
were introduced and the classical test models were replaced by the “Item Response
Theory” and the model of “Matrix Sampling of Items.” Operational changes also
occurred. An outsourced party was hired to carry out the evaluation, which was
initially performed by the MEC directly, and thereafter, the scope was expanded to
all public education networks (federal, state, and municipal) and private schools.
In 1997, new areas were assessed such as high school physics, chemistry, and
biology for high school students. This edition of SAEB started to use Reference
Matrices (Frameworks). The Reference Matrices was based on a wide consultation
on the contents taught in elementary school and high school, aggregating the
analysis by teachers, researchers, and experts on scientific production in all areas

assessed. The same model was applied in SAEB 1999, which introduced history and
geography evaluations.
The SAEB 2001 involved a new consultation with teachers and education spe-
cialists, and consequently the Curricular Reference Matrix was upgraded. The final
Reference Matrices not only delineated the content to be assessed in each subject
and grade but also defined the expertise and skills expected from students. It is note-
worthy that the evaluation also built articulation between descriptors and items of
exams with a view to coherence and consistency, so that it could assess the learning
actually attained by pupils and their knowledge gap at conclusive stage of each
cycle of education (INEP 2001) more accurately.
In 2003, the exam was again altered. With the intention of an improved under-
standing of the educational phenomena affected by interventions of all kinds, the
SAEB 2003 entered new areas of interest. A new set of variables was introduced
into the questionnaires, aimed at obtaining information that could shed light on new
aspects of the targeted population and, to a certain extent, understand whether such
aspects interfered or not with the learning process. Accordingly, the questionnaire
began to collect data on violence in schools and the subjectivity of the teachers
(INEP 2003).
2.1.2 Prova Brasil
The most significant change in the assessment of schools occurred in 2005 when
Prova Brasil (Test of Brazil) was launched. Prova Brasil adopted the same Reference
Matrices as SAEB, evaluating students in the 4th and 8th grades of elementary
school. Nonetheless, it focused on public schools in urban areas. In addition, unlike
SAEB, which is a sample-based test, Prova Brasil encompasses all the public
schools in urban areas that offer education to the target grades. Because of its census
characteristics, Prova Brasil can obtain average performance results for all the stu-
dents in Brazil, including the five geographic regions of the country, the units of the
federation (26 states and the federal district), the municipalities, and the participat-
ing schools.
A study of SAEB indicates the difficulty of analyzing the performance of stu-
dents of a particular state, because there is no way to separate the influence of state
policy from the initiatives of municipal managers and the actions within the school
(Cotta 2001). Clearly, the state manager does not have power over all actions that
affect the quality of education. This paradox constrains the users of assessment
information from relying on the SAEB to hold public managers accountable to
society. Whereas Prova Brasil offers the possibility to conduct an analysis at the
municipal level or even to measure the performance of each school individually,
which somehow resolves the aforementioned dilemma.
In 2005, Prova Brasil was carried out in 5,387 municipalities of all units of the
federation and evaluated 3,392,880 students attending 4th and 8th grades of elemen-
tary school, involving 125,852 classes of 40,962 schools in urban areas (INEP 2006).
In 2009, Prova Brasil was expanded into rural public schools. The latest edition,
Prova Brasil 2011 was implemented in 55,924 schools in all the 27 units of the fed-
eration. With the data collected, it is now possible to evaluate schools and districts to
identify areas that warrant improvement. Thus, the MEC and the State and Municipal
Education Boards may formulate policies and take actions aimed at improving the
quality of education and reducing inequalities, for instance, to direct their financial
and technical resources to areas identified as priorities.
2.1.3 Basic Education Development Index (IDEB)
Soon after initiation of Prova Brasil, in 2007, the Basic Education Development
Index (IDEB) was created to provide the means to enable the monitoring of schools
with low student performance. IDEB synthesize the information about students’
performance with flow (promotion, repetition, and dropout). The index is essen-
tially a combination of standard grades of Prova Brasil (indicator of proficiency)
and the average rate of approval of the students (indicator of student flow). The
calculation of IDEB follows a simple formula; the test scores on Portuguese lan-
guage and mathematics are standardized on a scale of 0.00 (zero) to 10.00 (ten).
Then, it is multiplied by the average rate of approval, as a percentage, which varies
from 0 (zero) to 100 (one hundred). As Prova Brasil provides data not only for the
country and units of the federation but also for each municipality and participating
school IDEB can be calculated by state, by municipality, or even by school.
The IDEB is part of the government’s Development Plan for Education. The plan
sets goals for the nation, states, counties, and schools on the basis of the stage of
educational development of the unit (school, county, and state) in 2005. Thereafter,
a path for each unit was proposed to reach its goal. As the trajectories are different
for each unit considered, approaches will also be different. The construction of the
targets was carried out through the development of a logistic function taking into
account the initial parameters observed in 2005 and the convergence of IDEBs of all
units in 2095, focusing on the possibility of “promoting equity” in the projection
horizon. Municipal systems, as well as the state and federal systems of education,
all have quality targets to accomplish. It was stipulated that the Brazilian education
system in 2021 is expected to reach one IDEB equal to 6 for the early years of ele-
mentary school.
Thus, IDEB is currently the main performance indicator of basic education, used
in various programs of MEC and in some local programs. For this reason, it is
important for municipalities to have IDEB. In light of the analysis of IDEB, the
MEC increased the transfer of funds to municipalities with better performance by
some programs, such as the Money Direct to School Program, and offered technical
and/or financial support to municipalities with the worst results. The IDEB is also
used as the criteria for schools to be prioritized to receive technical and financial
assistance through the School Development Plan.
As Prova Brasil is a component of the index, to take part in this assessment
becomes essential for their participation in federal programs. Thus, Prova Brasil
began to have an important role in the management of education in states and

municipalities; it is used by the Federal Government for tracking and monitoring the
public program for basic education. The results of Prova Brasil therefore acquire a
role that goes far beyond an instrument in the process of educational assessment. It
enabled not only a broader view on the educational system but also comparisons
among schools in the same network and even among networks. It occurred that the
usefulness of Prova Brasil was even overestimated for to analyzing potential con-
tributing factors to the quality of education.
2.1.4 Further Thought on the Reforms
The assessment and the index should not be seen as an end in themselves but rather
as a tool to correct paths and to look towards the future. It is crucial to ensure that
based on the information provided, instruments that could help solve serious social
problems that affect the school-aged population are created and put into practice in
other words, to “bridge the gap” between evaluation and action. It is not sufficient
to merely initiate a process of reflection based on the inadequacies or problems of a
school. Without using the necessary resources to overcome such issues the assess-
ment process would remain passive in its reflective or observatory stance rather than
informing or catalyzing vital reform.
This struggle in building the “bridge” has parallels within the educational assess-
ment systems in other countries. Kellaghan and Greaney (2004) report the huge gap
between what the assessments demand from teachers and the teachers’ understand-
ing of their role in the assessment process in African countries. Another issue is
“political will,” as without crucial governmental support, policy recommendations
based on evaluation results will simply not be implemented (Ibid.).
A review of educational assessments in Latin America over the 1990s concluded
that teachers saw the evaluation mechanisms as a form of pressure rather than a
means to improve the quality of education. Teachers may have agreed with the basic
concept of assessment, but criticized the way in which it was implemented (Laies
2003). As a result, though the results became instruments of public policy, the
impact on education in schools was very low (Tedesco 2003). Therefore it might as
well be difficult yet critical to convince all teachers of the goals and empower them
to develop strategies to achieve them. In Brazil, despite improvement in monitoring
and assessment systems, it is still necessary to build mechanisms to ensure that the
results are applied by managers and teachers to boost the quality of the education.
Moreover, concerning impact of the assessment and monitoring system on the
scope of the education policy reform in Brazil, another thing that merits a mention is
the creation of state systems of assessment (units of federation assessment systems)
following the SAEB and Prova Brasil model. Soon after the SAEB 1995, some states
began to adopt the same statistical technique of IRT as SAEB. The results generated
by the state education assessment systems are being used for purposes ranging from
the creation of state indicators of educational development (inspired by the creation
of IDEB) to benefits and awards to teachers and school principals.
2.2 Higher Education Assessment and Monitoring Reform
Similar to basic education, the Law of Guidelines and Bases of National Education
made significant contribution to the organization of the evaluation system of higher
education in Brazil. As a result, new evaluation mechanisms were progressively
implemented: the National Course Examination (ENC—also called Provão) for
graduates of undergraduate programs; Questionnaire on the Socioeconomic Condi-
tions of the Student; Assessment of Teaching Conditions (ACO); and Institutional
Assessment of University Centers, etc.
Since 1996, students enrolled in the last period of the courses of law, administra-
tion, and civil engineering took the National Course Examination. Each year, four
new courses were included in the process aiming to apply the National Course
Examination to all courses eventually.
The Assessment of Teaching Conditions that focuses on undergraduate courses
is based on the following factors: (i) the didactic–pedagogic organization; (ii) the
adequacy of physical facilities; (iii) the adequacy of special facilities, such as labo-
ratories, workshops, and other environments essential to the implementation of the
curriculum; (iv) the qualifications of the faculty members; and (v) the libraries. The
assessment should be conducted by an external committee designated by the MEC.
In 2004, the National Course Examination was substituted by the National Exam
for Evaluating Student Achievement (ENADE), a large-scale assessment of under-
graduate student performance in relation to the syllabus provided in the curriculum
guidelines and the development of skills and competencies in furtherance of general
and vocational training.
ENADE is part of the National Higher Education Evaluation System (SINAES),
created in 2004 SINAES consists of three pillars: the evaluation of institutions,
courses, and student performance. Each pillar involves several stages and processes
that differ among higher education institutions. This is one of the major principles
of SINAES “to respect differences and particularities of each institution”. The infor-
mation obtained through SINAES is used by higher education institutions to
improve their institutional and academic effectiveness. It is also used by students,
parents, academia, and the general public to guide their decisions about courses and
institutions.
Moreover, the CPC (Preliminary Course Rating) was created, an index com-
posed of three elements: the information collected (30 %), the results from ENADE
(40 %), and the IDD (Indicator of Difference of Performance) (30 %). The informa-
tion comprises infrastructure and physical facilities, didactic–pedagogic resources,
and faculty members’ education attainment. The IDD is the difference between the
average performance of the graduates of a course and the average estimated perfor-
mance for the graduates of that course, considering the participant institutions as a
whole. The courses that were assessed as level one or two will be compulsorily
visited by an Evaluation Committee. For courses of level three and four, the visit is
optional, and courses of level five will have their accreditation renewal automati-
cally generated.
3 Future Trends and Final Comments
The above analysis clearly shows that there has been a very positive evolution in the
educational scenario over the last two decades. The management reform, finance
reform, assessment and monitoring systems, as well as the strategy built on pro-
grams of assistance and incentives to state and municipal governments have been
effective and should be kept in place. As exposed, both reforms (basic and higher
education) were focused on access, monitoring, and accountability but mostly on
quality. There are still obstacles to overcome, but Brazil is on the way to achieving
the goal of equity and quality in education.
Given the net enrollment rate in elementary school, this level of schooling is now
considered universal. Brazil’s problem today is more regional and rural, which rein-
forces the importance of the redistribution of resources for education based on the
number of students, which is proven to be effective in promoting rapid expansion of
education provision, especially in municipalities.
However, it is important not only to expand the access and retention in education
but also to improve the quality, and, as presented in this chapter, Brazil has estab-
lished a large system of monitoring and assessment for this purpose. Consequently,
there has been some growth in student’s proficiency as shown by national assess-
ment results and a substantial decrease in repetition and dropout rates reflected by
IDEB improvement.
These changes are the result of a range of incentives, from technical and financial
support from the Federal Government to a consolidated assessment and monitoring
program based on clear goals, to a campaign to raise the awareness of teachers of
the importance in analyzing their students’ results and revising pedagogical prac-
tices as well as a campaign to highlight the problem of repetition and the initiative
of many states in teachers’ education and in the creation of catch-up classes.
Nevertheless, regarding the assessment and monitoring systems (federal and state
systems), it is still necessary to invest in teachers’ education to enable proper use of
the information provided by the exams and the indexes to conclude not only man-
agement and financial reform but also a learning reform based on equity and quality
assurance.
References
Barros, D. (2010) Por uma melhor Discussão da LDB. Revista Ensino Superior. São Paulo: V 90.
Brasil
Bonamino, A., & Sousa, S. (2012). Três gerações de avaliação da educação básica no Brasil: inter-
faces com o currículo da/na escola. Revista Educação e Pesquisa, 38(2), 373–388.
Cotta, T. (2001). Avaliação Educacional e políticas públicas: a experiência do sistema nacional de
avaliação da educação básica (SAEB). In: Revista do Serviço Público. Ano 52 no 4 Brasília.
INEP. (2006). Instituto Nacional de Estudos e Pesquisas Educacionais. Relatório SAEB 2005.
Brasília
Instituto Nacional de Estudos e pesquisas Educacionais. (2001). Saeb 2001 Relatório Nacional.
Brasília
Instituto Nacional de Estudos e pesquisas Educacionais. (2003). Relatório Nacional Saeb 2003.
Brasília
Kellaghan, T., & Greaney, V. (2004). Assessing student learning in Africa. Washington, DC: World
Bank.
Laies, G. (2003). Evaluar las evaluaciones. In: Evaluar las Evaluaciones: una mirada política
acerca de las evaluaciones de la calidad educativa. IIPE – UNESCO Buenos Aires Argentina.
Tedesco, J. (2003). Evaluar las evaluaciones. In: Evaluar las Evaluaciones: una mirada política
acerca de las evaluaciones de la calidad educativa. IIPE – UNESCO Buenos Aires Argentina.
UNESCO. (2000). Education for all: Evaluation of the year 2000- national report: Brazil. EUA.
Part III
Changing Policy Paradigms
Australia: National Change
in a Loosely Coupled Federal System
John Ainley
Abstract Over the past 12 years there has been a growth of interest in education
policy in Australia. Education policy has become a matter of considerable political
interest especially in terms of structures, processes and finances. Even though the
constitutional responsibility for education remains with States and Territories, there
has been an increasing emphasis on national reform especially in early childhood
education, national curricula, assessment and accountability, improving teacher
quality, youth transitions, and school improvement. Recently there has emerged a
set of proposals for reforms in educational finance.
Keywords Educational governance • Educational reform • School improvement

• Australia
Recent years have seen considerable interest in education policy in Australia so

that stories about education feature regularly in news media. Education policy
has become a matter of considerable interest to both major political parties in
terms of structures, processes and finances. Even though the constitutional
responsibility for education remains with states and territories, there has been an
increasing focus on national reform. This chapter describes the major reform
trends that have emerged over the 12 years since the turn of the century. The first
section of the chapter describes the context in which educational reforms are tak-
ing place. This is followed by a brief description of some mechanisms through
which reforms are enacted and which in themselves represent reforms in educa-
tional governance. The major focus of the chapter is on a set of reforms intended
to improve educational outcomes for students. These include early childhood
J. Ainley (*)
Australian Council for Educational Research, Melbourne, Australia

192 J. Ainley
education, national curricula, assessment and accountability, improving teacher

quality, youth transitions, and school improvement. The chapter then concludes
with a discussion of the possibility of reforms in educational finance that have
the potential to shape the immediate and intermediate future even though the
detail is not yet clear.
Policy reform in Australian education is guided by a document agreed by
all (federal and state) education ministers in December 2008: the Melbourne
Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians (MCEETYA 2008). It
specifies two overall goals for schooling: the promotion of equity and excellence;
and the development of successful learners, confident and creative individuals and
active and informed citizens. The document outlines more specific goals in early
childhood education, teaching and school leadership, curriculum and assessment,
accountability and transparency, senior secondary schooling and transitions to
further study and work, and improving outcomes for Indigenous young people
and those from low socio-economic backgrounds. This set of goals is supported
by a 4-year plan that identifies key strategies for each area of action (MCEEDTA
2009). These goals and plans are linked to a National Education Agreement
(NEA) and related agreements in domains such as those concerned with early
childhood, adopted through the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) as
well as other National Agreements. Under the NEA, Australian governments have
agreed “to work together towards the objective that all Australian school students
will acquire the knowledge and skills to participate effectively in society and
employment in a globalised economy”. This agreement includes a framework for
reporting on performance as well as a specification of roles and responsibilities.
1 Context
In 2011 Australia had a population of just over 21,500,000 in an area of 7.7 mil-
lion square kilometres. Although the overall population density is low, it is a
highly urbanised society. Outside the cities the country is sparsely populated;
28 % of primary schools have 100 or fewer students, and 37 % of secondary
schools have 300 or fewer students (ABS 2012a, pp. 17–18). Australia is classi-
fied as a high-income country. Literacy among adults is nearly universal. In 2011,
57 % of those aged 15–64 years (and 72 % of 19-year-olds) had completed sec-
ondary school, and 23 % held a bachelor’s degree or a higher qualification (ABS
2012b). Although the Australian population is mainly of European background,
immigration has produced greater ethnic and cultural diversity. In 2011 one fifth
of the population (19 %) had been born in a country where English was not the
main language (ABS 2012b). About 5 % of Australian school students are
Indigenous, and approximately 24 % of the Indigenous population live in remote
or very remote locations.
Australia: National Change in a Loosely Coupled Federal System 193
1.1 Education Systems
Australia does not have a single national education system. The states and territories
are each responsible for their own educational administrations although the overall
structures are similar. Although the role of the federal government has increased in
the past two decades, state and territory governments are responsible for providing
schooling to all school-age children. They determine curricula, course accredita-
tion, student assessment and awards for both government and non-government
schools. They have the major financial responsibility for government schools, con-
tribute supplementary funds to non-government schools and regulate school poli-
cies and programmes. State and territory education departments recruit and appoint
the teachers in government schools, supply resources and provide limited discre-
tionary funding for use by schools. State and territory governments are also respon-
sible for the administration and major funding of vocational education and training
(VET). Some commentators have noted that centralised administrative structures
emerged historically to promote uniformity of educational provision for a dispersed
population (Kandel 1938).
School attendance is compulsory from 6 years of age in all jurisdictions except
Tasmania, where it is compulsory from 5 years of age. However, almost all children
commence a preliminary year of school around 5 years of age. Most children con-
tinue to Grade 6 or 7 (depending on the jurisdiction) in their primary school so that
they complete primary school at the age of 11 or 12 years. Students in Australian
primary schools usually have one teacher for most subjects and are promoted to the
next grade each year. Secondary education is provided for either 5 or 6 years,
depending upon the length of primary education in the state. The first 2 years of
secondary school typically consist of a general programme followed by all students.
In subsequent years a basic core of subjects is supplemented with optional subjects
available to students. Students in secondary schools generally have a different
teacher for separate subject areas. In the final 2 years of secondary schools, students
have more scope to specialise, and a range of elective studies is provided from
which students choose five or six. One of the most marked changes during the 1980s
was an increase in the percentage of students who remained to complete secondary
school. The percentage of commencing secondary students remaining to the final
year of school rose from 35 % in 1980 to 77 % in 1993. It has since fluctuated
slightly, and was 79 % in 2011 (ABS 2012a, p. 33).
1.2 Schools
Schooling is provided through both government and non-government schools. In

2011 non-government schools enrolled 34 % of students (31 % of primary and
39 % of secondary school students) a proportion that has risen steadily since
1970 (ABS 2012a). Most non-government schools have some religious
194 J. Ainley
affiliation, most commonly with the Catholic Church (59 % of non-government

school students are in Catholic schools). Non-government schools are usually
classified as either Catholic or independent. A range of funding sources including
government grants supports private schools. In 2004, 43 % of non-government
school income was derived from fees or donations, 15 % from state government
grants and 42 % from federal government grants. Government grants comprised
72 % of the income of Catholic schools and 40 % of the income of independent
schools (MCEETYA 2005).
In 2011 the average sizes (student population) of primary and secondary schools
were approximately 271 and 548 students respectively. The figure for secondary
schools includes secondary school sections that form part of combined primary-
secondary schools; and for separate secondary schools, the average size was 848
students per school (ABS 2012a).
Most government schools are comprehensive and coeducational. Taxation reve-
nues provide almost all the financial resources for the operation of government
schools. Although parents are not officially required to pay fees for students to
attend government schools, many schools seek voluntary contributions from parents
and raise funds from other local sources. There is a small number of selective-entry
secondary schools in some states; and in two jurisdictions, the final 2 years of
schooling is in separate senior secondary colleges.
1.3 Teachers
Approximately 255,110 (full-time equivalent) teachers were employed in schools in

2011: approximately 130,598 in primary and 124,512 in secondary schools (ABS
2012a, p. 31). In 2010 the ratio of students to teachers was 15.7 in primary schools
and 12.0 in secondary schools (ACARA 2012a). Those ratios have not shifted
appreciably since 2006. Overall 70 % of teachers are female (81 % in primary and
59 % in secondary schools) (ABS 2011). Salaries are determined at state level and
there are differences between states. On average, in 2010 the statutory starting sal-
ary for a primary teacher was equivalent to US$34,029 and that for a teacher with
10 years experience was equivalent to US$46,318 (OECD 2012). The correspond-
ing figures for secondary school teachers were US$34,321 and US$47,455 (OECD
2012). These figures are slightly above the OECD average. Teacher training occurs
in universities but states determine acceptable qualifications. Teachers for primary
schools normally complete a 4-year post-school course of study that is made up
of concurrent academic and pedagogical studies which results in a Bachelor of
Education degree. Four years of university education is the normal length of initial
training for secondary teachers, typically a 3-year Bachelor of Arts or Bachelor of
Science degree and a 1-year diploma of education. However, a postgraduate Master
of teaching degree is becoming more widely provided for both intending primary
and intending secondary teachers.
2 National Education Reform in a Federal System:

National Agreements and Partnerships
A federal system of government such as that which operates in Australia generates

complexities for the implementation of reform on a national basis. Several vehicles
have emerged in the past decade that provide bases for educational reform on a
national basis in Australia. It needs to be said that there has always been the possi-
bility of joint ministerial action. For some considerable time, ministers of education
have cooperated through the Australian Education Council (AEC) which, from
June 1993, became the Ministerial Council on Employment, Education, Training
and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA) and then, from July 2009, the Ministerial Council
for Education, Early Childhood Development and Youth Affairs (MCEECDYA).
This council of ministers is now, since January 2012, one of several standing coun-
cils of the Council of Australian Governments (COAG): the Standing Council on
School Education and Early Childhood (SCSEEC). The first set of name changes
signifies a broadening of roles, an increasingly national perspective on education
and an increased role for the federal government. The most recent change represents
a shift to educational governance being seen as one part of a set of national arrange-
ments for government administration. The SCSEEC is concerned with strategic
policy on how school education and early childhood development can be coordi-
nated at the national level and through which information can be shared and
resources used collaboratively towards the achievement of agreed objectives. It
works with and through a number of statutory authorities and ministerial companies
to develop and implement reform in specific areas. The Australian Curriculum,
Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) and the Australian Children’s
Education and Care Quality Authority (ACECQA) operate as statutory authorities
established under acts of parliament. The Australian Institute for Teaching and
School Leadership (AITSL) and Education Services Australia Ltd (ESA) are com-
panies owned by relevant ministers of education.
The COAG reform agenda is implemented through National Agreements,
National Partnerships and other intergovernmental agreements. National Agreements
define the objectives, outcomes, outputs and performance indicators and clarify the
roles and responsibilities that will guide the Commonwealth and the States in the
delivery of services. There are currently six National Agreements in place across
healthcare, education, skills and workforce development, disability services, afford-
able housing and Indigenous reform. The overarching aim of the National Education
Agreement is that all Australian school students acquire the knowledge and skills to
participate effectively in society and employment in a globalised economy. Each
year, the COAG Reform Council (a body established by the COAG, focused on
reporting of government performance) reports on the performance of Commonwealth,
state and territory governments against the objectives and outcomes of the National
Education Agreement. The five outcomes of the National Education Agreement are
the following: all children are engaged in and benefiting from school; young people
are meeting basic literacy and numeracy standards, and overall levels of literacy and
196 J. Ainley
numeracy achievements are improving; Australian students excel by international

standards; young people make successful transitions from school to work and
further study; and schooling promotes social inclusion and reduces the educational
disadvantage of children, especially Indigenous children.
National Partnerships are more directed to specific areas of reform and outline
mutually agreed policy objectives, outputs and performance benchmarks for national
reform. They are formal agreements that set out objectives, intended outcomes (with
specific criteria) and financial commitments. National Partnership payments support
specific projects, facilitate reforms and some involve base payments and reward
funds (based on meeting established criteria). The COAG Reform Council indepen-
dently assesses and reports on the achievement of performance benchmarks before
reward payments are made.
There are three education National Partnerships in education with reward fund-
ing: Improving Teacher Quality, Literacy and Numeracy, and Youth Attainment and
Transitions. In this sense reward funding refers to part of the funding from the
federal government to the states and territories which depends on reaching agreed
targets. The setting of those targets and measuring whether they have been reached
have been challenging given that there is uncertainty in the measures used to make
those assessments and differences among jurisdictions in the breadth of coverage of
jurisdictional initiatives. In practice the concept of partial rewards has been intro-
duced as part of the structure. A further five education-related National Partnerships
are also relevant: Low Socio-Economic Status School Communities, Early
Childhood Education, National Quality Agenda for Early Childhood Education and
Care, Indigenous Early Childhood Development, and Empowering Local Schools.
3 Key Education Policy Reforms over Recent Years
The past 15 years has seen increased public attention given to education and a greater
focus on educational policy reform. It has been a period that has seen the emergence
of a national perspective on educational governance with an increasing role for fed-
eral structures that link state and territory initiatives with each other and with a
national perspective. For example, the annual Report on Government Services
(ROGS) includes a substantial chapter of education that integrates information about
outcomes and developments in policy and provision (SCRGSP 2013). This section
reviews educational reforms in several key areas: early childhood education, national
curricula, assessment and accountability, attracting and retaining teachers, improv-
ing youth attainment and transitions, and school improvement.
3.1 Early Childhood Education
Early childhood education (ECE) emerged over the past 15 years as an important
focus for policy reform. Reforms have involved child care and preschool provisions
as well as schools. In the late 1990s state and territory governments moved to
provide for smaller classes in the early years of school accompanied with a renewed
emphasis on the formal teaching of literacy in those years. For example, in New
South Wales government schools, the average class sizes in 1997 for Grades K, 1 and
2 were 24.1, 25.5 and 26.2, and for Grades 3 through 6, the average was 26.8. In 2011
the average class sizes in Grades K, 1 and 2 were 19.2, 21.2 and 22.6, respectively,
compared with an average of 26.1 across Grades 3 through 6 (DEC 2011).
A review of Early Childhood and Care (ECEC) had pointed to the complexity of
provision through a variety of organisations, varying patterns of government respon-
sibility and diverse frameworks (Press and Hayes 2000). It was argued that the
patchwork stemmed from the late nineteenth-century kindergarten movement that
focused on early learning and preparation for school and quality care, being chari-
table and welfare in nature. Not long after this review, the Australian government
established the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children through which two
nationally representative samples of children (one aged less than 1 year and the
other aged 4 years) were followed through life from 2004 onwards (Sanson et al.
2002). This study has provided large-scale, national data on the experiences and
outcomes of Australian children, from infancy onwards. There has been a number
of publications from this ongoing study. In addition there emerged initiatives to
monitor the quality of the provision of child care and to meet the rising demand for
preschool education and quality child care (Elliott 2006).
In 2008 the COAG resolved to make substantial improvement to early childhood
education through the National Partnership Agreement on Early Childhood Education
(NPAECE) (COAG 2009; Dowling and O’Malley 2009). This agreement among fed-
eral and state governments set out to ensure that by 2013 all children in the year before
formal schooling would have access to high-quality early childhood education pro-
grammes. This meant programmes delivered by degree-qualified early childhood
teachers, for 15 h per week, 40 weeks of the year, in preschools and child care institu-
tions. There was an additional National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Early
Childhood Development which was to deliver integrated services, including early
learning, child care and family programmes in areas of high disadvantage and for a
high proportion of Indigenous children.
The reform of early childhood education has been supported by several associ-
ated initiatives. One of these was the development of a national Early Years
Learning Framework (DEEWR 2009). That framework stresses developing liter-
acy and numeracy, monitoring children’s development and learning, identifying
activities that most enhance opportunities for age-appropriate child development,
and facilitating cognitive, social, psychological and physical developmental out-
comes through participation in formal/informal learning programmes. The impor-
tance attached to the quality of provision is evident in “the growing emphasis on
regulation and accreditation of early childhood education and care” (Maguire and
Hayes 2011). A National Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education and
Care covers day care providers, preschool and out-of-school-hours care pro-
grammes. Care providers are required to meet certain minimum standards, such as
in staff-to-child ratios and staff qualifications. The National Information Agreement
on Early Childhood Education and Care, endorsed in 2009, facilitates the collec-
tion, sharing and reporting of early childhood education and care information
198 J. Ainley
among Australian governments and key data agencies. It is intended to provide the
basis for monitoring and reporting on the provision of early childhood education.
Another parallel initiative has been the introduction of the Australian Early
Development Inventory (AEDI). The AEDI was implemented in 2009 to gather data
about all children in their first year of full-time school. It is a population measure of
young children’s development based on a teacher-completed checklist covering five
domains of early childhood development: physical health and wellbeing, social compe-
tence, emotional maturity, language and cognitive skills (school-based), and communi-
cation skills and general knowledge (Goldfeld et al. 2009). Data from the AEDI are used
to facilitate planning the provision of early childhood education and care so as to direct
resources to areas of greatest need. The survey was conducted again in 2012.
Data from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children were used to examine
participation in early childhood education among two cohorts 4 years apart (i.e. 2005
and 2009) (Maguire and Hayes 2011). Both of these were before the implementa-
tion of the reforms in early childhood education. It was reported that the vast majority
of children attended an education/care programme with fewer than 7 % of 4–5-year-
olds not attending any programme. Most children attended some sort of preschool
programme in spite of an apparent decline between 2005 and 2009 (92 % of the
older cohort and 81 % of the younger cohort children). In addition children from the
older cohort were less likely to attend a preschool programme in a school or in a
child care centre but more likely to attend a preschool programme outside of a
school, and much more likely to attend a child care programme without also attending
a preschool programme. It was also evident that children from more disadvantaged
families were more likely not to attend any school or care centre. The first evalu-
ation of the National Partnerships on Early Childhood Education pointed to the
limitation of infrastructure on expanding the number of hours of preschool edu-
cation and sustaining an adequate supply of appropriately qualified early childhood
teachers (Urbis 2011).
3.2 National Curricula
Although authority for curricula rests with state and territory governments, a key
recent reform has been the development of national curricula that set broad content
standards to be interpreted and implemented by jurisdictions. An Australian
Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) was established in late
2008 as a statutory authority that would bring together the functions of national cur-
riculum, assessment and data management, analysis and reporting. This is intended
to bring about national reforms in curriculum covering the full span of schooling
and a full range of learning areas: English, Mathematics, Science, Humanities and
Social Science, the Arts, Languages, Health and Physical Education, and Technologies.
The process has involved developing a statement of the shape of the area, writing
materials, and implementation and evaluation. It began with an overall paper enti-
tled The Shape of the Australian Curriculum which established broad parameters
(ACARA 2012b). Then curricula frameworks (shape papers) in English, mathematics,

science, and history were published. Curriculum materials in these areas were
drafted and approved in 2010 subject to validation in 2011. The next phase of
the process involves the learning areas of geography, languages, and the arts. Shape
papers have been published and writing has commenced. The third phase will
include the development of curriculum for health and physical education, tech-
nologies (including ICT as well as design and technology), civics and citizenship,
business and economics.
In addition to specific learning areas, the national curricula are intended to
include general capabilities: knowledge, skills, behaviours and dispositions that
link curriculum content in each learning area with cross-curriculum priorities
(literacy, numeracy, information and communication technology capability, critical
and creative thinking, personal and social capability, ethical understanding and
intercultural understanding).
The process of developing a national curriculum appears to have been valuable
in focussing on a reappraisal of curricula that had grown through a series of pro-
cesses of accretion and excision. The shape papers thus far have provided overviews
of where those processes have led and how well they match the modern context.
However, much remains to be done in terms of developing the curricula in the
remaining areas and articulating the curricula in learning areas with the cross-
curricular capabilities. The process of implementation is also a work in progress in
that the national curricula need to be articulated in the frameworks of jurisdictional
authorities and supported in the way they are used by teachers in schools.
3.3 Assessment and Accountability
The first national assessments of student achievement in Australia were sample-

based minimum competency assessments of literacy and numeracy among 10-year-
olds and 14-year-olds conducted in 1975 (Keeves and Bourke 1976) and 1980
(Bourke et al. 1981). These generated much public debate at the time, and debates
about large-scale assessments have continued since then, often focussed on the
scope of the assessments and the potential for narrowing the implemented curricu-
lum. Following the introduction of the Basic Skills Tests in New South Wales in
1989 (Masters et al. 1990), most Australian jurisdictions introduced assessment and
monitoring programmes focussed initially on literacy and numeracy in selected pri-
mary school grades. The programmes gradually extended to secondary school
grades and encompassed other learning areas. Those jurisdictions that had initially
used sample-based assessments moved to population testing by the end of the 1990s.
These assessment programmes made use of modern measurement techniques (item
response theory) and approaches to scaling.
In 2000, the ministers of education endorsed a set of national key performance
measures as a set of measures that would provide nationally comparable data on
aspects of performance against the national Goals of Schooling that had been
200 J. Ainley
adopted in 1999. These were specified in the Measurement Framework for

National Key Performance Measures which was implemented from 2003 onwards
to extend to 2011 (MCEETYA 2006). A National Assessment Program (NAP)
was part of that framework and included achievement data concerned with areas
identified in the 1999 statement of national goals: literacy, numeracy, science,
information and communication technology as well as civics and citizenship. It
encompassed the annual full-cohort tests in literacy and numeracy tests (initially
the state and territory tests that were “equated” at minimum competence level),
3 yearly sample assessments in science literacy (2003, 2006, 2009), civics and
citizenship (2004, 2007, 2010), and information and communication technology
(ICT) literacy (2005, 2008, 2011) and the Australian data from international
assessments (PISA for 15-year-olds every 3 years, TIMSS for Grade 4 and 8 every
4 years and from 2010 PIRLS in Grade 4).
From 2008 onwards the NAP included a National Assessment Program in Literacy
and Numeracy (NAPLAN) as an annual assessment for the full cohort of students in
Grades 3, 5, 7 and 9 in Reading, Writing, Language Conventions (spelling, punctua-
tion and grammar) and numeracy. These national tests replaced the former State- and
Territory-based literacy and numeracy tests. In 2008 the scales for the assessments in
NAPLAN were established. In subsequent cycles, tests were equated to the original
NAPLAN scales so that the results could be compared with those for previous and
subsequent years. Test equating, using common-person equating techniques, enables
the results from NAPLAN tests in different years to be reported on the same scale.
The scales are also equated over grades using common-item methods so that any
given score denotes the same achievement level regardless of the grade. This means
that some items are common between the adjacent levels that are tested (e.g. the
Grade 5 assessment contains some items that also appear on the Grade 3 assessment
and some that also appear on the Grade 7 assessment). One of the critiques of
NAPLAN tests is that the coverage of the areas is too limited because they have too
few items and they do not use a rotated test design. Participation in NAPLAN is high,
with participation rates around 96 % in Grades 3, 5 and 7, and 92–93 % in Grade 9.
NAPLAN produces a detailed national report each year which provides analyses
of results including breakdowns by jurisdiction and student background character-
istic such as sex, language background, Indigenous status, geographic location and
parental education and occupation. These data are also reported as time series.
Individual reports are provided to all students who participate in NAPLAN and
reports are provided to schools and jurisdictions. NAPLAN data are used by juris-
dictions for planning, decisions about resource allocation and for the implementa-
tion of specific initiatives.
NAPLAN results for individual schools are also reported on a public website
(My School—http://www.myschool.edu.au). My School provides information
about the average achievement of students in NAPLAN, the distribution of perfor-
mance across performance bands, and indications of progress over time. The
website also reports values on the Index of Community Socio-Educational
Advantage (ICSEA) which is based on data about parental occupation and educa-
tion and other characteristics of the school population that are combined in a way
that generates the greatest correlation with school average performance on

NAPLAN. This is used to identify schools serving students from statistically simi-
lar backgrounds and to compare the results of schools that have similar scores on
the index. In addition My School contains financial data on a comparable basis
across schools and a profile of the school.
The public reporting of achievement data on My School has been, and continues
to be, controversial. It is argued that this process of reporting places unreasonable
pressure on school principals and teaching staff and does not adequately take
account of contextual differences, and that it results in a narrowing of the imple-
mented curriculum because of pressure to teach to the test. In addition it is argued
that the results for small schools are not sufficiently reliable and that differences
may be the result of year-to-year fluctuations in the school population. Against this
it is argued that these data provide information to schools that helps them judge their
performance, to parents that helps them choose schools and to education systems to
guide the nature and focus of interventions.
3.4 Attracting and Retaining Teachers
One of the important areas of current activity in education concerns the implemen-
tation of a range of reforms that aim to attract, train, place, develop and retain qual-
ity teachers and leaders. There has been concern that more students are graduating
from teacher education programmes in universities than are required by school sys-
tems, that the areas of expertise among those graduates do not match the areas of
expertise required in schools, and that there has been a decline in the levels of
achievement of those entering teacher education programmes (New South Wales
Government 2012). Education Ministers have agreed to the creation of new profes-
sional standards, a framework to guide professional learning for teachers and school
leaders, and national consistency in the registration of teachers. Other strategies
focus on changed pay structures to reward quality teaching, improved support for
teachers in disadvantaged and hard-to-staff schools and national accreditation of
pre-service teacher education programmes (ACARA 2012a).
Reforms concerned with teaching and teachers are the focus of a 5-year National
Partnership Agreement on Improving Teacher Quality that commenced in 2009. Its
focus is on attracting better entrants to teaching, including mid-career entrants;
more effective training for teachers, principals and other school leaders; placing
teachers and principals in ways that minimise skill shortages and enhance retention;
developing the skills and knowledge of teachers and school leaders throughout their
careers; and rewarding and retaining principals, teachers and school leaders who
have demonstrated high levels of competence and improving teacher workforce
data (COAG 2009). This is an area in which there is a variety of existing provisions
that operate through teacher registration authorities in many jurisdictions.
One of the key reforms has been the development and implementation of a
national professional teacher standards framework and an accreditation process for
202 J. Ainley
accomplished and leading teachers (AITSL 2012a). The standards are to provide a
nationally consistent basis for recognising quality teaching by making explicit
what teachers should be able to do and what is expected of effective teachers across
their career. The standards are organised into four career stages (graduate, profi-
cient, highly accomplished and lead) across three domains (professional knowl-
edge, professional practice and professional engagement). The stages reflect the
continuum of a teacher’s developing professional expertise from undergraduate
preparation through to being an exemplary classroom practitioner and a leader in
the profession.
There is a number of important issues in the development and implementation of
national professional teacher standards (Ingvarson 2002). One issue concerns the
extent to which content standards need to be specifically concerned with particular
areas of teaching (each with its own content knowledge and pedagogical content
knowledge) and the extent to which more general content standards covering
broader areas of teaching are possible. A second issue concerns the ways in which
the standards become manifest in certification as discussed in the document
Certification of Highly Accomplished and Lead Teachers: Principles and Processes
(AITSL 2012b). A third issue is the extent to which the development of standards is
shaped by the teaching profession and the extent to which it is determined by
employing authorities.
In addition to the development of national professional teaching standards, there
has been a range of other important activities initiated by individual jurisdictions
including the establishment of Centres of Excellence, recognition of Highly
Accomplished Teachers, expanding non-traditional pathways into teaching (such as
Teach for Australia for high-achieving graduates and Teach Next for experienced
professionals from other fields), enhancing the quality of professional experience
programmes in initial teacher education courses and trialling processes for reward-
ing excellence with pay.
There is a key role in these reforms for the Australian Institute for Teaching and
School Leadership which began in 2010. It has responsibility for the development
of national professional standards for teachers and school leadership, implement-
ing a system of national accreditation of teachers based on those standards, sup-
porting initiatives in professional development and professional learning for
teachers and school leaders, and supporting a national approach to the accredita-
tion of pre-service teacher education courses (AITSL 2011). In addition it engages
in research, administers annual awards for teachers and leaders and works with
other stakeholders in the field.
3.5 Improving Youth Attainment and Transitions
Improving the educational attainment of young Australians has been a focus of

educational reform for some time. A high-level committee had reported a review of
post-compulsory schooling to the Australian Education Council in 1991 including
recommended targets (Finn 1991). Over subsequent years there have been a number
of initiatives intended to lift levels of educational attainment predicated on the belief
that the completion of senior secondary schooling leads to better labour market
outcomes. Research based on longitudinal data supports that belief (Ryan 2011).
These initiatives have often included vocational education and training (VET) stud-
ies as part of general senior secondary school so that by 2006 up to 90 % of second-
ary schools offered some VET subjects (Lamb and Vickers 2006). Also, some
education systems devised whole courses with an applied or vocational focus. In
addition there has been a parallel emphasis on providing vocational education in
non-school institutions although the evidence for the success of these for labour
market outcomes is more mixed (Lim and Karmel 2011).
More recently there has been a renewed emphasis on support for the senior
years of schooling and the provision of pathways that facilitate transitions
between further study, training, and employment. Under the terms of the National
Partnership for Youth Attainment and Transitions, the COAG has established a
target to increase to 90 % the percentage of 20–24-year-olds who have attained
Year 12 or an Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) Certificate II or above
by 2015 (and by 2020 that 90 % of 20–24-year-olds will have achieved Year 12
or equivalent or an AQF Certificate III or above). Support for this is through
requirements for participation in education, training or work until age 17, which
extends the period of compulsory education and effectively raises the minimum
educational leaving age. The provision also creates an entitlement to an educa-
tion or training place for 15–24-year-olds, which focuses on attaining Year 12 or
equivalent qualifications and includes participation requirements as part of eligi-
bility for income support. Some initiatives that have been developed include
trade training centres in schools, school business community partnerships and
programmes directed to re-engaging people who had left school.
3.6 School Improvement
A more recent reform focuses on school improvement by incorporating different

types of indicator. It includes a national school improvement tool that looks at indi-
cators of school practice as well as measures of student outcomes (Masters 2012).
The tool was developed first in Queensland where there was a focus on improving
schools that were not achieving satisfactory outcomes in literacy and numeracy. It
was then applied in other jurisdictions before being adopted nationally and included
in the National Plan for School Improvement. It has been made available to all
Australian schools for use in their school improvement planning since 2013. The
tool involves assessments of the quality of practice (low, medium, high, and out-
standing) on eight aspects of school practice: an explicit improvement agenda, anal-
ysis and discussion of data, a culture that promotes learning, targeted use of school
resources, an expert teaching team, systematic curriculum delivery, differentiated
classroom learning, and effective teaching practices. The tool used in Queensland
204 J. Ainley
also included reference to school-community partnerships, but the version adopted

nationally does not. The tool does not describe everything that effective schools do,
but focuses on those practices that are most directly related to school-wide improve-
ment; nor does it exclude direct measures of student outcomes, and it sees those as
part of the process of monitoring school improvement. The experience of its appli-
cation in Queensland indicated that audited ratings of these aspects of school prac-
tice could be reliably measured and applied to monitor improvements (Masters
2012). The challenge is to implement the tool on a large-scale national basis in
which the results are linked to funding rewards.
4 Potential Future Reform Trends: School Finance
The approach to school funding in Australia reflects the complexities of a federal

system in which finance derives from both federal and state sources. Those resources
support both government and non-government schools (making up 72 % of the
income of Catholic schools and 40 % of the income of other non-government
schools), and the regulatory frameworks, including those covering curriculum,
operate under state authority (Keating 2011). These complexities have been com-
pounded by the shift of enrolments from government to non-government schools
(Watson and Ryan 2009) with the result that school funding arrangements have
become obscure (Dowling 2007).
A review of school financing has recommended substantial changes to the bases
for financing schools (Gonski 2011). The review noted the complexity of current
funding arrangements and lack of coordination between federal, state and territory
governments as well as lack of coordination of infrastructure funding. It recom-
mended substantial increases in school funding with proportionately greater
increases to government schools on the basis of the characteristics of their students.
It proposed a new schooling resource standard as a basis for funding and an inde-
pendent National School Resourcing Body to monitor that standard. In addition it
recommended planning authorities be established to coordinate new school building
and expansions. The schooling resource standard would establish per student
amounts (to be indexed and reviewed every 4 years) for each primary and secondary
school student, with loadings for the additional costs associated with various educa-
tional needs. Non-government schools would be funded at a level that took account
of the expected level of income from private sources (with a minimum public con-
tribution of 20–25 % of the standard).
Reforms to school finance following this review have yet to be determined,
and the detail of its operation is yet to be spelled out. However, it is clear that the
question of school finance has been made a central part of the debate about edu-
cational reform for the immediate future. Its recommendations are being consid-
ered at a time when the federal governance of education in Australia has become
less loosely coupled. The reforms over recent times have been part of an emerg-
ing national perspective.
References
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2011). School Australia 2010 (Catalogue No. 4221.0).
Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2012a). School Australia 2011 (Catalogue No. 4221.0).
Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2012b). 2011 census of population and housing. Canberra:
Australian Bureau of Statistics.
Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2012a). National report on schooling
in Australia: 2010. Sydney: Australian Bureau of Statistics.
Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2012b). The shape of the Australian
curriculum. Sydney: Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority (ACARA).
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL). (2011). Accreditation of initial
teacher education programs in Australia: Standards and procedures. Melbourne: Australian
Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL).
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL). (2012a). Australian teacher
performance and development framework. Melbourne: Australian Institute for Teaching and
School Leadership (AITSL).
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL). (2012b). Certification of highly
accomplished and lead teachers: Principles and processes. Melbourne: Australian Institute for
Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL).
Bourke, S. F., Mills, J. M., Stanyon, J., & Holzer, F. (1981). Performance in literacy and numer-
acy: 1980. Canberra: Australian Education Council.
Council of Australian Governments (COAG). (2009). Investing in the early years: A national early
childhood development strategy: An initiative of the council of Australian governments.
Canberra: Council of Australian Governments (COAG).
Department of Education and Communities (DEC) New South Wales. (2011). Average class sizes:
1997 to 2011. Sydney: Department of Education and Communities (DEC) New South Wales.
Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR). (2009). Belonging,
being and becoming: The early years learning framework for Australia. Canberra: Department
of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR).
Dowling, A. (2007). Unhelpfully complex and exceedingly opaque: Australia’s school funding
system. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Dowling, A., & O’Malley, K. (2009). Preschool education in Australia. Melbourne: Australian
Council for Educational Research.
Elliott, A. (2006). Early childhood education: Pathways to quality and equity for all children
(Australian Education Review). Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Finn, B. (Chair) (1991). Young people’s participation in post-compulsory education and training:
report of the Australian Education Council Review Committee. AEC Review Committee.
Canberra: AGPS.
Goldfeld, S., Sayers, M., Brinkman, S., Silburn, S., & Oberklaid, F. (2009). The process and policy
challenges of adapting and implementing the Canadian early development instrument in
Australia. Early Education and Development, 20(6), 978–991.
Gonski, D. (Chair of the Expert Panel). (2011). Review of funding for schooling: Final report.
Canberra: Department Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. Accessed at: www.
schoolfunding.gov.au
Ingvarson, L. C. (2002). Development of a national standards framework for the teaching
profession (ACER Policy Briefs Issue 1). Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational
Research.
Kandel, I. L. (1938). Types of administration: With particular reference to the educational systems
of New Zealand and Australia. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
Keating, J. (2011). Resourcing schools in Australia: A proposal for the restructure of public funding.
Melbourne: Foundation for Young Australians.
206 J. Ainley
Keeves, J. P., & Bourke, S. F. (1976). Literacy and numeracy in Australian schools: A first report
(Australian studies in school performance, Vol. I). Canberra: Australian Government Publishing
Service.
Lamb, S., & Vickers, M. (2006). Variations in VET provision across Australian schools and their
effects on student outcomes. LSAY Research Report No. 48. Adelaide: National Centre for
Vocational Education Research.
Lim, P., & Karmel, T. (2011). The vocational equivalent to Year 12. LSAY Research Report No. 58.
Adelaide: National Centre for Vocational Education Research.
Maguire, B., & Hayes, A. (2011). Access to preschool education in the year before full-time
school. In Australian Institute of Family Studies (Ed.), Longitudinal study of Australian
children: Annual statistical report. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Masters, G. (2012). Measuring and rewarding school improvement. Canberra: Department of
Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.
Masters, G., Lokan, J., Doig, B., Khoo, S. K., Lindsey, J., Robinson, L., & Zammit, S. (1990).
Profiles of learning: The basic skills testing program in New South Wales 1989. Hawthorn:
Australian Council for Educational Research.
Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA). (2005).
National report on schooling in Australia: 2004. Carlton: Curriculum Corporation.
Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA).
(2006). Measurement framework for national key performance measures. Carlton: Curriculum
Corporation.
Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA).
(2008). Melbourne declaration on educational goals for young Australians. Carlton:
Curriculum Corporation.
Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA). (2009).
MCEETYA Four Year Plan, 2009–2012. Melbourne: MCEETYA.
New SouthWales Government (NSW). (2012). Great teaching inspired learning: Discussion
paper. Sydney: New South Wales Department of Education and Communities.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2012). Education at a
glance 2011: OECD indicators. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD).
Press, F., & Hayes, A. (2000). OECD thematic review of early childhood education and care
policy: Australian background report. Canberra: AGPS.
Ryan, C. (2011). Year 12 completion and youth transitions. LSAY Research Report No. 56.
Adelaide: National Centre for Vocational Education Research.
Sanson, A., Nicholson, J., Ungerer, J., Zubrick, S., Wilson, K., Ainley, J., Berthelsen, D., Bittman,
M., Broom, D., Harrison, L., Rodgers, B., Sawyer, M., Silburn, S., Strazdins, L., Vimpani, G.,
& Wake, M. (2002). Introducing the longitudinal study of Australian children. LSAC Discussion
Paper No. 1. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
SCRGSP (Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision). (2013). Report
on government services 2013. Canberra: Productivity Commission.
Urbis. (2011). Evaluation of the national partnership on early childhood education: Annual
progress report 2010. Sydney: Urbis.
Watson, L., & Ryan, C. (2009). Choice, vouchers and the consequences for public high schools:
Lessons from Australia. Canberra: Australian National University.
Turkey: Translating New Policy Paradigms
to Results
Batuhan Aydagül
Abstract The extension of compulsory education to 8 years in 1997 had ignited

long overdue education reforms in Turkey. Reforms have gained even more
momentum during the last decade thanks to political and financial stability.
Education was restructured, new infrastructure was built, more funding was allo-
cated thanks to economic growth and compulsory education was extended to 12
years. While progress has been achieved in increasing access and improving
learning outcomes, serious challenges exist, especially for further improving
quality and ensuring equity.
Keywords Access to education • Compulsory education • Education policy •

Education financing • Educational governance • Educational quality • Turkey
Education seldom became a de facto policy priority for governments in Turkey

during the 1970s and 1980s. An analysis of Turkish education between 1970 and
1997 highlighted an unfavorable political and economic context for education
reform during those times (Batuhan 2002). Political and financial instability had
shadowed social development throughout the country. The breakthrough has not
been made until 1997 when the extension of compulsory education to 8 years
The author wishes to acknowledge the contribution of Alper Dinçer, Aytuğ Şaşmaz, Betül
Keleş, Çiğdem Tongal, Işık Tüzün, Işıl Oral, and Yaprak Sarıışık. The opinions expressed here are
solely his.
B. Aydagül (*)
Education Reform Initiative, Istanbul, Turkey

208 B. Aydagül
came as a major driver for focusing on basic education. The Basic Education
Reform as a national mobilization campaign ignited long overdue education
reforms in Turkey.
In 2003, Justice and Development Party (AK Party) won the general elections
and became the majority party within the parliament. The political stability of a
majority government together with the economic stability that post-2001 economic
crisis macro interventions secured provided positive political economy of reform in
Turkey and an opportunity to build on the 1997 Basic Education Reform.
As this article will outline in the following sections, there have been signifi-
cant policy changes and new initiatives in almost every sphere of education sec-
tor in Turkey. While progress has been achieved in increasing access and
improving learning outcomes, serious challenges exist, especially for improving
quality and equity.
This paper primarily draws from the analytical policy work of the Education
Reform Initiative (ERI), a nongovernmental think-and-do-tank in Turkey. ERI’s
flagship publication for monitoring Turkish education is Education Monitoring
Report, published annually since 2008. While the first report covered the period
between 1997 and 2007, the subsequent ones offer analysis of the previous years.
Additional publications by ERI, such as research reports or policy notes, are also
used in writing this article.
1 Reformation of Education Management System
Increasing the effectiveness of public management and finance in Turkey has been
a priority for the AK Party from the beginning. An immediate step towards this
direction was the Public Financial Administration and Control Law, enacted in
2003. This law required all public agencies to adapt a strategic approach to public
management and finance, to prepare strategic plans by 2010, and to report their
performance to public at the end of every year. To facilitate the implementation, a
strategy development unit was established within the ministries. This law provided
the Ministry of National Education (MoNE) with critical tools, such as strategic
plans and performance-based budgeting that could be used in policy formulations,
implementation, and monitoring processes.
1.1 Restructuring Ministry of National Education
Altogether, there have been many innovations as far as education governance is

concerned in Turkey. These new policy tools provided an opportunity to operationalize
a strategic and systematic approach to addressing policy challenges. A restructur-
ing of the ministry was needed as both the government and nongovernmental actors
had been criticizing the existing structure as too big and idle for a long time.
Turkey: Translating New Policy Paradigms to Results 209
The work to restructure the ministry began as early as in 2003. The Project for
Strengthening the Capacity of the Ministry of National Education, funded by the
European Union (EU), came in later and was completed in 2010 with a green paper
and recommendations on how the ministry should be restructured. Finally, in
September 2011, the government adopted an executive order,1 introducing a new
organizational structure for MoNE. Accordingly, central bureaucratic organization
was streamlined to cut down hierarchy within the ministry and to achieve more
effective coordination among general directorates. New career-track positions were
established to train a new generation of policy experts.
According to the rhetoric behind the reorganization, this policy drive would also
be a step towards gradual decentralization of education governance in Turkey. Within
the new order, the policy-making role and capacity of the central bureaucracy would
be increased while running day-to-day operations of schools would be gradually
delegated to provincial directorates. All decision-makers, including provincial edu-
cation directors, would be evaluated based on their performances. However, in prac-
tice, no visible step is taken towards translating this rhetoric to practice on the ground.
In addition to a new law aiming at improving overall public administration, vari-
ous steps were taken to establish an effective education management information
system and a new bureaucratic organization. For instance, MoNE undertook many
initiatives to improve its education management information systems. The most
significant of these initiatives has been what is called the “e-school.” This is a com-
prehensive administrative database which keeps students’ personal and academic
information and facilitates workflows for certain school-based procedures, such as
registering and monitoring attendance or selection of elective courses.
The transition to a new organizational structure and redistribution of tasks among
various ministry unit are proving to be challenging processes. These challenges
could be expected during such radical changes within the education system. A close
monitoring and mentoring of change by senior policy-makers and continuous
investment on human resources are needed.
1.2 Reorganization of Education Structure in Turkey
The most radical change in Turkish education since the expansion of compulsory
education in 1997 happened in April 2012. Back in 1997, primary (5 years) and
junior secondary (3 years) schools were merged to create 8-year-long compulsory
primary schools. With the recent change, however, the old structure was introduced
with a change in durations: Both primary and junior secondary schools are now
4-year long. Also, compulsory education was expanded to 12 years.
The government formulated this new law, which had been highly contested by
many stakeholders during the legislation process, on the basis that it was not
1
Executive Order No. 652, adopted on September 2011.
210 B. Aydagül
Fig. 1 Structure of Turkish education system—old and new
appropriate for students in such a wide range group (6–14) to use the same physical
facilities at the same time. Also, the government further argued that this new
system would be more flexible and responsive to diverse needs and requests of
families and children. In that respect, the government reestablished the imam-
hatip schools, institutions that provide religious courses in addition to the core
curriculum, and introduced a variety of elective courses at the newly formed
junior secondary level (Fig. 1).
Together with the modifications to the age of starting primary school, this com-
prehensive set of changes obliged the ministry to undertake a rapid revision of
instruction, especially at primary and junior secondary levels.
1.3 Changing Education Finance Patterns
In terms of education finance, Turkey has been facing twin challenges: The public
expenditure on education services is lower than the average of developed countries,
whereas the private expenditure is higher. This leads to inefficiencies and inequali-
ties in education spending of the country in general, as pointed out by international
organizations several times.
In parallel with the increasing student numbers and accompanying teacher
numbers in public sector of education (which comprises 97 % of the education
system in terms of student numbers), public education spending increased under the
rule of the AKP government. According to recent calculations, which were facili-
tated by the operation of above-mentioned Public Financial Administration and
Control Law, public education spending rose from $21bn (TL34bn) in 2006 to
$31bn (TL51bn, estimated) in 2011 price level.
Yet, the increase of education expenditure as a percentage of GDP is much more
modest, and the government does not plan to increase this indicator in the upcoming
years. Compared to the OECD average (5.7 %) and the suggestion of the UNESCO
70,000 % 4.5
% 4.0 % 3.9 % 4.0
% 4.0
60,000
% 3.4
% 3.2 % 3.5
% 3.1 % 3.8 % 3.8 % 3.8 % 3.7 % 3.7 % 3.6
50,000
% 3.0
% 3.2
40,000 % 2.9 % 3.1
% 2.5
30,000 % 2.0
% 1.5
20,000
% 1.0
10,000
% 0.5
- % 0.0
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
(estimated) (initial (suggested (suggested
grant) grant) grant)
Local government's education expenditure

Public expenditure under Social Assistance Fund
Central government's education expenditure (estimated)
Total public education expenditure ( % of GDP)
Central government's education expenditure ( % of GDP)
Fig. 2 Public education spending in Turkey (in million TL, 2011 price level) (Source: Education
Reform Initiative 2012a)
to developing countries (6 %), Turkey’s public education spending is 4 % of GDP,

with more room to develop to achieve providing quality education for all (Fig. 2).
While discussing the education finance, it should be noted that Turkey has a very
young population, which is a comparative advantage of the country especially
regarding its candidacy status for the EU. Yet, this advantage can only be utilized if
the young population is provided with quality education. Taking this fact into con-
sideration and compared to other developing and newly industrialized economies
such as Korea, Turkey’s public education spending needs improvement despite the
progress achieved under the AK Party rule (Fig. 3).
2 Expanding Access to Education
2.1 Expanding Early Childhood Education
A significant progress in the last decade has been the expansion of early childhood
education in Turkey. Following newly emerging scientific evidence on and increas-
ing global visibility of early childhood education and strong civil society advocacy2 in
2
Mother Child Education Foundation (AÇEV) in Turkey had conducted a major public campaign
titled “7 is too late” to promote early childhood education.
212 B. Aydagül
30 6
25 5
20 4
15 3
10 2
5 1
0 0
Turkey Brazil Mexico Iran South Africa Korea Ukranie
Population in the age group for basic and secondary education/total population (%)- left axis
Public education spending as % of GDP- right axis
Fig. 3 Demographıcs and education spending data on selected countries (Source: Education
Reform Initiative 2011a)
Turkey, MoNE acknowledged the benefits of investing in early childhood for both
individuals and society and initiated a major policy drive to increase access. An
incremental plan was introduced to target universal coverage for 60–72 months old
age group. According to this plan, universal coverage would be targeted in 32 prov-
inces in 2009–2010, 57 provinces in 2010–2011, and 71 provinces in 2011–2012.
The remaining ten provinces were supposed to be included in 2012–2013, thereby
reaching universal coverage throughout the country. As a result of this national
drive, net enrollment rate for the 60–72 months age group went up to 65.7 % in
2011–2012. On the other hand, the enrollment rate for the 3–5 years age group
(36–72 months) jumped to 31 % from a dramatically low 5.4 % 10 years ago.
Despite this progress, low enrollment rates for 3- and 4-year-olds also demand a
rapid and ambitious action from the ministry (Fig. 4).
This expansion has been criticized on the basis that it did not prioritize an equi-
table expansion enough. The ministry initiated the expansion from less populated
provinces with already high preschool coverage. The six most disadvantaged
provinces, including the country’s most populated province, Istanbul with 650,000
children in 3–5 age cohorts, are yet to be included in the expansion program.3
Moreover, preschool is not free in Turkey as it is not included within the compul-
sory education, thus posing a serious risk of exclusion for children who live in
poverty and who could benefit most from early intervention. The gravity of this
issue can be better understood through research evidence showing that access to
early childhood education is associated with household income level in Turkey
(World Bank 2010).
3
Other provinces are Ağrı, Şırnak, Gaziantep, Mardin, and Batman.
% 50 1,400,000
% 45
1,200,000
% 40
1,000,000
Number of Students
% 35
Enrollment Rate
% 30
800,000
% 25
600,000
% 20
% 15 400,000
% 10
200,000
%5
%0 0
Total number of students Enrollment Rate (36–72 months) Enrollment Rate (48–72 months)
Fig. 4 The expansion of early childhood education in Turkey (Source: Education Reform
Initiative 2012a)
There are other challenges before expanding early childhood education cover-
age further. Enrollment rates show that the increase almost halted during 2011–
2012. While MoNE prioritized recruitment of preschool teachers, physical
capacity needs still remain. The merger of Directorate General (DG) of Preschool
Education with DG of Primary Education to form DG of Basic Education during
the reorganization within the ministry could have also limited the bureaucratic
attention on the expansion. Finally, early childhood education provision is still
predominantly center-based with limited outreach of community-based models.
The ministry has been working on this latter challenge through the “Strengthening
Preschool Education Project,” a project funded by the European Union and imple-
mented in collaboration with UNICEF Turkey. The project aims to develop mod-
els for community-based early childhood education to promote a more holistic
expansion.
2.2 Expanding Basic Education
Turkey expanded the compulsory education to 8 years in 1997 together with a

national campaign to ensure access to all children in basic education. After coming
to power in 2003, AK Party sustained and built on the previous government’s efforts
(i.e., promoting civil society support to education, investing in boarding schools and
student transportation in rural areas) to increase access.
The “All Girls to School!” campaign, a 5-year-long national campaign to increase
girls’ enrollment in basic education (grades 1–8) planned and executed in
214 B. Aydagül
collaboration with UNICEF Turkey, was launched in 2003. This was a significant
campaign which officially and openly acknowledged Turkey’s daunting problems
concerning girls’ education, and developed and implemented an action plan
throughout the country. This campaign also mobilized civil society actors to con-
tribute to girls’ education, such as “Father Send me to School” campaign, under-
taken by a national newspaper and a big grassroots NGO.
Following the expansion and restructuring of compulsory education in 2012, MoNE
also changed its policies concerning age requirements for primary school. The baseline
for compulsory education was dropped to 66 months from 69; however, children who
were 60 months old by September would also be eligible to start school if their parents
thought they were ready. This change was contested by some stakeholders on the basis
that three quarters of children aged 60–68 months had no prior early childhood educa-
tion experience and that their direct transition to primary school could create learning
and development disadvantages for them in the future.
The conditional cash transfer program, initiated by the government in collabora-
tion with the World Bank to alleviate the economic effects of the 2001 economic
crisis on households in Turkey, proved to be another widely used and effective
social policy in increasing enrollment in basic education. As the World Bank financ-
ing ended, the government reformulated the program, which is renamed as “condi-
tional education assistance,” and continues to implement it through the Ministry of
Family and Social Policies.4
These policy efforts and investments contributed to increasing enrollments, espe-
cially in basic education. However, most stakeholders focused to a large extent on
ensuring enrollment in school. A research paper published in 2007 aimed at drawing
public attention to emerging challenges in education: school attendance and drop-
outs (Gökşen et al. 2006). The campaigns were successful in making children, espe-
cially girls, start school, but there was a considerable risk of dropout awaiting them
later on.
MoNE began focusing on attendance and dropouts around 2008 and undertook
various policy initiatives in collaboration with UNICEF Turkey to this end. New
research on understanding dropouts was commissioned, and based on its findings, a
new policy program called “Step-by-Step Monitoring of Attendance” (ADEY) was
developed. ADEY was expected to help school leaders and teachers to prevent non-
attendance and dropouts by identifying and closely monitoring pupils at risk of
dropouts.
Based on the policy performance throughout the last decade, it can be noted that
the General Directorate of Basic Education pioneered the efforts to transition to an
evidence-based policy-making culture within MoNE. Policy efforts to increase
enrollment, especially at the 8-year basic education level, were carefully developed
based on outcomes and insights of previous policies or programs and on up-to-date
needs analyses. As a result of subsequent and complementary policy efforts, net
enrollment rate today has reached 98.67 %, and gender parity ratio is 0.95.
4
The Ministry of Family and Social Policies is a new ministry, established in 2010 by the AK Party
government.
Fig. 5 Nonattendance to basic education across regions (%) (Source: Education Reform
Initiative 2012a)
Turkey needs to consolidate its policy efforts to ensure that everyone completes
basic education. At the moment, attendance constitutes a challenge, especially after
the 5th grade and in the Eastern parts of Turkey. There is both quantitative5 and
qualitative evidence (Gökşen et al. 2006) which could inform new policies. Findings
point to two major factors that need to be considered: poverty and the quality of
education. Empirical analysis from e-school data showed that the latest economic
crisis in 2008 almost doubled the nonattendance of children living in poverty. Here,
the “conditional education assistance” is found to be significantly effective in
increasing attendance of these children, especially in the eastern provinces (Fig. 5).
2.3 Expanding Secondary Education
Turkey’s success in approaching almost universal enrollment in basic education and

the following increase in the number of graduates drove enrollment rates in secondary
education up. As a result, the past decade has witnessed substantial improvements in
enrollment rates. The net enrollment rate has increased from 48.11 % in 2001 (53.01 %
for boys and 42.97 % for girls) to 67.37 % in 2011 (68.53 % for boys and 66.14 % for
girls). However, despite this impressive gains, enrollment rates still remain signifi-
cantly behind most OECD countries. Also, regional disparities are significantly deep.
The net secondary enrollment rate in some western provinces is around 90 %, whereas
5
“Basic Determinants of Attendance and Non-Attendance in Primary Education in Turkey,”
research carried out under the partnership of ERI with UNICEF and the Ministry of National
Education (research report forthcoming).
216 B. Aydagül
it drops to around 30 % in some eastern provinces. School absenteeism and dropouts

are among other persistent and critical issues Turkey needs to overcome. The most
recent data obtained from MoNE indicates that 8.2 % of students studying at public
and formal institutions of secondary education dropped out of their schools for rea-
sons other than death or leaving the country in the 2009–2010 academic year. Likewise,
in the same academic year, 44 out of every 100 public general secondary education
students and 49 out of every 100 public vocational technical secondary education stu-
dents were absent from school for 20 or more days.
These absenteeism and dropout figures point to a serious internal efficiency problem
within the secondary education, probably linked to the quality and relevance of educa-
tion in high school. Furthermore, disparities among schools are also significant where
vocational and nonselective general high schools face more challenges. For example,
dropout rates from vocational high schools are as high as 9.4 %.
The recent law expanding the compulsory education to 12 years in Turkey is the
boldest development in secondary education since duration of high schools were
extended to 4 years from three in 2005–2006. Back then, this change was presented as
a preparation for adopting 12-year-long compulsory education in Turkey. Seven years
later, as previously mentioned in Turkey’s Development Plans, the government com-
pleted the legal work for 12 years compulsory education. As of 2011–2012, students
will only receive a diploma when they complete secondary school.
The law foresees an incremental implementation of compulsory education,
beginning with 9th graders in 2012–2013. As already 80 % of students graduating
from basic education transitioned to secondary last year, it was expected that the
increase in enrollments will not cause serious teacher and physical space needs this
year. However, one third of secondary school cohort is out of school so a consider-
able investment in upgrading human resources and physical capacity will be needed
to achieve universal coverage in the 4 years. With that, MoNE’s challenge will be
keeping children in school given the high rates of absenteeism and dropouts. In
2009–2010, 75 % of students who dropped out of high school during the 9th grade.
This is an extremely serious problem in secondary education, one that could jeopar-
dize the success of the compulsory education.
2.4 Education for Special Need Students

and Mainstreaming Policies
Turkey has also taken serious policy initiatives to improve the implementation of
mainstreaming policies for children with special needs. Inclusive education is
among MoNE’s priority areas, and it has become increasingly widespread in
implementation. In the last decade, the number of primary school students bene-
fiting from inclusive education has nearly quintupled. At the secondary level, the
growth has not been as impressive; nevertheless, the number of mainstreamed
students has increased steadily. Even with this increase, enrollment figures indi-
cate that many students with special needs fail to transition to secondary schools.
Furthermore, while Turkey’s gender parity ratio is 0.95 in primary and 0.88 in
secondary education, in inclusive education, the ratio remains at 0.64 and 0.61,
respectively, indicating that female students with special needs are experiencing a
deeper and multi-layered inequality in the education system. While inclusive edu-
cation practices reach a broader population each year, the quality of services
offered is suffering. In 2011, MoNE has launched the “Strengthening Special
Education Project,” also funded by the European Union, to address the current
problems of special education overall and inclusive education in particular.
The project will continue through 2013, working towards raising awareness,
better equipping teachers for special education and devising a “School without
Barriers Model” to be implemented in schools across Turkey. MoNE has embraced
and prioritized mainstreaming policies, but there is still progress to be made
regarding the quality of special education services, improving the inclusion of
girls with special needs and inclusive education in secondary schools.
3 Enhancing Education Quality
3.1 Curriculum Reform
A major reform was launched in 2003 to revise the national curriculum for basic
and secondary education. Within the next 5 years, a new curriculum based on the
constructive pedagogy was developed, piloted, and implemented throughout the
pre-university education in Turkey. An independent review of the new curriculum for
grades 1–5 revealed that “the new programs represent[ed] a great step in supporting the
multi-faceted development of students and laying the foundation for the transformation
from ‘passive citizens’ to ‘active citizens’ (Education Reform Initiative 2005).” Critical
thinking, creative thinking, communication, problem solving, and respecting the indi-
vidual and social values were among the skills that the new curriculum targeted.
More recently, during the restructuring of basic education in 2012, the ministry
also decided to expand teaching hours at junior secondary levels to accommodate
the newly introduced elective courses without comprising core courses. A review of
global practices on teaching hours by the Board of Education had showed that
Turkey lagged almost 1 year behind in total teaching hours during basic education
in courses such as mathematics and science.
Between the adoption of the new law in April 2012 and the schools’ opening in
September 2012, MoNE completed a series of changes in education. The following
is a summary of these changes in education concerning content:
• Grade 1:
– An hour of Turkish, free activities, visual arts, and music classes were removed
from the timetable.
– An additional hour of math was added to timetable.
218 B. Aydagül
Table 1 New elective courses for junior secondary schools (5th–8th grades)
5th 6th 7th 8th
grade grade grade grade
Religion, ethics, and values Quran 2 2 2 2
The life of the Prophet Muhammad 2 2 2 2
Basic religious knowledge 2 2 2 2
Language and expression Reading skills 2 2
Writing skills 2 2 2 2
Living languages and dialects 2 2 2 2
Communication 2 2
and presentation skills
Foreign language Foreign languages (that are 2 2 2 2
approved by the cabinet)
Science and mathematics Science applications 2 2 2 2
Math applications 2 2 2 2
Environment and science 2 2
Information technology 2 2 2 2
and software
Arts and sports Visual arts (painting, traditional 2/(4) 2/(4) 2/(4) 2/(4)
arts, fine arts, etc.)
Music 2/(4) 2/(4) 2/(4) 2/(4)
Sports and physical activities 2/(4) 2/(4) 2/(4) 2/(4)
Theater 2 2
Intelligence games 2 2 2 2
Social sciences Folk culture 2 2
Media literacy 2 2
Law and justice 2 2
Reasoning training 2 2
Total number of courses 8 8 8 8
to be selected
Source: MoNE, Board of Education
– Physical education class was transformed to “Play and Physical Activities,”

and its course load was increased to 5 h from 2.
– A 12-week introductory program for children without prior early childhood
education experience was introduced to facilitate these children’s transition to
primary school.
• Grade 5–8 (junior secondary):
– The weekly timetable was extended to 36 in 5th and 6th grades and 37 in 7th
and 8th grades from 30 h in all grades.
– An hour of Traffic Safety and 4 h of Free Activities were removed from the
timetable.
– An additional hour of math and science were added to timetable.
– Eight hours of electives were added to timetable (Table 1).
It needs to be noted that in 2012, the government introduced elective and
confessional religion courses in upper primary and secondary schools. As of the
2012–2013 school year, elective courses include “The Koran,” “The Life of
Prophet Mohammad,” and “Basics of Religion.” It is said that the third course
may include Christianity, Judaism, and Alevism upon demand. However, it is
not clear as to how this will be implemented in schools.
These elective and confessional religious courses are offered on top of the
Religious Culture and Moral Education (RCME) course, which has been com-
pulsory for grades 4–12 since 1982. The content of this course has been con-
tested by civil rights activists for a long time and was subject to a series of
changes as a result of national demands for a thorough revision of its philosophy
and implementation. Evaluations of the most recent curriculum acknowledged
some progress and recommended further improvement to fully become a non-
confessional course.6
These comprehensive changes in the curriculum went into effect in September
2012. It will take some time to evaluate their impact on education, particularly on
children’s learning outcomes. However, based on early monitoring activities
(Education Reform Initiative 2012b), it is possible to suggest that the ministry did
not have adequate time to fully prepare for a change of this scope at various levels
of education system. The new timetables, the curriculum, and textbooks for the
early transition program and the curriculum for elective courses were published
between August and September; the Board of Education were still introducing cur-
riculum for elective courses after the opening of schools. This tight schedule also
left little opportunity for ensuring teachers to be fully prepared for the new school
year. Trainings were often limited to web-based lectures without face-to-face or
web-based interactions.
3.2 Teacher Development
While the new curriculum was promising, its success depended on the implementa-
tion of new changes. The independent review suggested that teachers, principals, as
well as families were critical success factors to make this paradigm change effec-
tive. The pedagogy of teaching was undergoing a radical transformation, requiring
teacher development to be a national policy priority.
Recognizing the need for augmenting teacher effectiveness, MoNE continued to
provide in-service training to teachers through existing procedures and regulations.
However, there were serious issues concerning MoNE’s teacher development prac-
tices, some of which were highlighted by findings from the TALIS7 research. TALIS
data showed that teachers in Turkey received less training than their counterparts in
other TALIS countries and that in fact they were less interested in receiving any.
6
Mine Yıldırım is a researcher in human rights law with particular expertise in the international
protection of freedom of religion or belief. She is expected to be granted her PhD degree from Abo
Akademi’s (Finland) Institute for Human Rights Law in 2012.
7
TALIS research was conducted with a randomized sample of 200 primary school principals and
4,000 branch teachers in these schools.
220 B. Aydagül
According to teacher questionnaires, conflict of schedules between trainings and

teachers’ regular professional and personal tasks and training content irrelevant to
their needs were among the reasons why teachers were less interested in in-service
training opportunities. Findings from TALIS research also showed that the propor-
tion of teachers who claimed they benefited from training courses and workshops
were below the TALIS average.
MoNE’s policy response to the need for restructuring teacher development in
Turkey was the development of “teacher competencies” and the “school-based pro-
fessional development model.” These two complementary initiatives have advanced
in parallel; however, progress has been slow. A full-scale implementation of the
school-based model is still depending on the finalization of teacher competencies.
This delay in restructuring professional development system and in improving its
effectiveness could prove detrimental to efforts to increase quality of education as
new waves of education reform further puts more pressure on teachers to constantly
renew their skills.
In 2011, when the new minister of education Prof. Dr. Ömer Dinçer came to
office, he identified teachers and teacher development as a priority and initiated
a process for developing a national teacher strategy. While this strategy is still
being developed, it is based on challenges related to four pillars of teachers’ poli-
cies: (1) preservice teacher education, (2) recruitment and assignment of teach-
ers, (3) professional development, and (4) career development. The development
and effective execution of a national strategy targeting a comprehensive review
and improvement of teacher policies in the near future could catalyze the impact
of educational policies of the government.
3.3 Developing Education Standards
A significant policy effort to complement the MoNE’s efforts to expand early child-
hood education was the “Strengthening of Preschool Education Project”. Through
this project, the ministry plans to develop “learning standards” for preschool in
order to establish a quality assurance system. These standards, currently being
developed in collaboration with UNICEF and Mother Child Education Foundation,
are expected to play a critical role in the expansion process and to prevent further
compromises on quality of education in both center-based and community-based
early childhood education provision. Within this project, a new curriculum for pre-
school (36–72 months) is prepared and being piloted during 2012–2013.
In addition, MoNE embarked on an initiative to develop Primary School
Standards as a means of quality assurance and school-based development. In
partnership with UNICEF Turkey, a comprehensive set of standards were devel-
oped and piloted. The implementation of Primary School Standards has been
continuing for 2 years now with emphasis on continuous monitoring and evalua-
tion of the new policy.
3.4 Transforming Secondary Education
The rapid transformation in basic education following the 1997 Basic Education
Reform had put pressure on secondary education to deliver more quality and rele-
vant education to increasingly more students. At the same time, knowledge econ-
omy was globally demanding a different set of competencies and skills from
graduates, with more emphasis on problem-solving skills, digital literacy, interdis-
ciplinary thinking, and higher levels of foreign languages competency. These fac-
tors, combined with the existing quality flaws in secondary education, especially in
general and vocational high schools where majority of students attended, called on
the government to undertake series of policy initiative to transform secondary edu-
cation and increase its quality.
MoNE’s initial response was to launch two projects to modernize and strengthen
vocational and technical education with the support of the European Union. Later in
2005, as mentioned previously, secondary education was extended to 4 years. This
has been followed by waves of comprehensive reforms, including consolidation of
types of high schools which brought 79 high school types to 15. An overall trend to
emphasize foundation skills while postponing specialization to later years was vis-
ible. As such, a common curriculum for the 9th grade was introduced into both
academic and vocational high schools and a modular system was introduced into
vocational schools. Active engagement of private sector was expected in defining
standards and competencies which would drive development of curriculum for
vocational courses.
While on the one hand MoNE took steps towards consolidating school types, on
the other hand, there has been a strong commitment to expanding vocational educa-
tion within the secondary level. An important barrier before this goal was the nega-
tive coefficients applied to vocational secondary school graduates if they wanted to
pursue higher education in a field different from their high schools subject matters.
The government first revised this policy in 2009 and removed it completely in 2012.
Government’s commitment to vocational education, catalyzed by private sector’s
increasing engagement and contribution,8 was effective in pulling more students
into vocational high schools. The percentage of students attending vocational
schools went up to 44 % in 2011–2012 from 31.7 % in 2002–2003 (Fig. 6).
As statistics shows, the share of academically selective high schools within the
secondary level has also been increasing. This is a direct result of MoNE’s policy to
gradually transform all general high schools to Anatolian high schools. Though there
is no empirical evidence evaluating this ongoing transformation, the depth of real
change occurring in schools is questioned. Whether or not this policy will improve or
hold back quality improvements across Anatolian high schools is to be seen.
8
The establishment of the Vocational Qualifications Institute in 2007 has been instrumental in
facilitating private sector’s contribution, especially in development of programs and curriculum.
There were also other examples of public-private partnerships in education, most notably the
“Vocational Education: A Crucial Matter for Nation” project and public campaign undertaken by
the Koç Holding, one of Turkey’s biggest conglomerates.
222 B. Aydagül
Fig. 6 Distribution of students across different high school types (%) (Source: Education Reform
Initiative 2012a)
Tracking students from primary to secondary constitutes a major policy chal-

lenge in Turkey because there are serious disparities among school types in a variety
of indicators, such as learning outcomes, dropout, and nonattendance. Therefore,
government-related policies need to be seriously monitored and evaluated from an
equity perspective.
3.5 Application of Information and Communication

Technology
The most significant development with regard to learning environments in the last
decade or so has been the “Movement to Increase Opportunities and Technology”
(FATIH) Project. With FATIH, launched in 2010, MoNE aims to improve
technological infrastructure in schools and encourage the use of information and

communication technologies in education. The underlying goal of the project is to
equip 40,000 schools and 620,000 classrooms across the country with information
technology infrastructure and to provide students at targeted levels with tablet com-
puters. Initially covering secondary education, the project, with an estimated budget
of more than $6 billion, will gradually expand to lower levels. There are five com-
ponents: hardware and software infrastructure, provision and management of digital
content, effective use of the infrastructure in teaching programs, reliable and mea-
surable use of information technology and Internet, and provision of in-service
training to teachers.
Teachers are pivotal to the project as they are expected to adapt to technologi-
cally enhanced teaching environments and alter teaching methods accordingly.
However, an initial assessment with teachers suggested that inadequate provision
of in-service training appeared to be a serious flaw in the project design. Unless
teachers are equipped with necessarily skills and tools that are compatible with
technological infrastructure, to what extent FATIH Project could yield to mean-
ingful improvements in learning outcomes will remain as a significant question.
Moreover, the evidence with regard to the impact of technological tools on learn-
ing outcomes is mixed, and there are only very few studies measuring such
impact.9 Given the massive budget it requires, lack of clear evidence, and inad-
equate focus on teacher development, the FATIH Project stands as a high-risk
investment by the Turkish government.
4 Looking into the Impact of the Reforms
Previous sections have shown the various policy initiatives Turkey has undertaken
across a wide range of areas in education to increase access to and improve quality
of education. While it is possible to evaluate the impact of these initiatives on access
through recent improvements on the education management information system,
there is a lack of national indicators and assessment mechanisms to evaluate prog-
ress in learning outcomes. Placement examinations conducted during transition to
secondary and higher education are not designed as assessment tools that could
inform policies. The periodical assessment surveys undertaken by the ministry are
under utilized and fail to attract any public attention, thereby detached from the
policy-making processes. While this lack of public initiatives has drawn private sec-
tor’s engagement in assessment, so far these initiatives have been used in limited
number of schools and in few provinces, failing to reach to a critical mass.
Within this national context, international assessment tests have played a critical
and constructive role in Turkey in assessing the learning outcomes of children and
informing both public opinion and policies. Turkey has previously participated in
PISA (2003, 2006, and 2009), in TIMMS (1999, 2007, 2011), and in PIRLS (2001).
9
For further explanation, see Education Monitoring Report 2011.
224 B. Aydagül
600
Primary
9.6
General
550
9.9 Anatolian Vocational
Equivalent to
3 years of Anatolian General
500
Average reading score
schooling
9.9 Science
450 9.8 Vocational
9.8 Multi Program
400 9.7
Technical
Anatolian Technical
350
Anatolian Fine Arts
Anatolian Teacher Training

300
Fig. 7 Average performance in reading among students by school (Source: World Bank 2012)
Thorough analysis of these assessments provides insight into how Turkey is doing
in learning in a time trend and across nations.
15-year-old students in Turkey scored 464, 445, and 445 in reading, mathematics,
and science tests, respectively, in PISA 2009. With these scores, an average 15-year-
old student in Turkey is one full year or more (or 40 points) behind the OECD aver-
age (World Bank 2012). Among OECD countries, Turkey outperforms only Mexico
and Chile, trailing the other 31 countries, including the newcomers Estonia, Israel,
and Slovenia. Among all of the 65 PISA countries, Turkey ranks between 41st and
43rd. In PISA 2006, Turkey ranked between 37th and 44th among 57 countries
(Education Reform Initiative 2011b).
The percentage of students who fail to acquire basic level of competencies in
reading, mathematics, and science constitutes a serious risk for Turkey. Based on
PISA 2009 results, 24.5 % of students who took the test are below the basic compe-
tency level (below PISA level 2) in reading. This proportion is 30 % in science and
42 % in mathematics. Given one third of 15–19 age cohort is out of school, it can be
argued that more than half of 15-year-olds in Turkey do not have basic competency
in mathematics (Education Reform Initiative 2011c).
Serious disparities in learning outcomes exist among income groups and high
school types. A gap of 100 points (or more than 2 years of education) exists
between students from the richest and poorest income quintile groups (Fig. 7)
(World Bank 2012).
Turkey has improved its PISA results in 2009 compared to both 2003 and 2006.
A 30 points increase in science following the 2006 test was the best improvement
among OECD countries (Education Reform Initiative 2011b). The improvements
were mainly due to the decrease in the percentage of students under the basic
Table 2 Percentage of students below competency level 2 in PISA

2003 2006 2009
Reading 37 32 24.5
Mathematics 52 52 42
Science 46 30
Source: Education Reform Initiative 2011c
competency levels; in other words, low achievers’ efforts contributed to improve-

ments in Turkey’s average learning outcomes (Table 2).
A recent report offered in-depth analysis of Turkey’s 20 points or more increase
in PISA test between 2003 and 2009, representing roughly half a year of schooling
(World Bank 2012). The progress of low achievers was also quantified in that report:
The bottom 1 % of achievers has gone up by 30 points in reading, by 33 points in
math, and by 25 points in science. Most of the progress is attributed to a combina-
tion of the overall socioeconomic progress being made in Turkey and increased
efficiency in the delivery of education (World Bank 2012). The report concludes
that “Turkey’s education policies over the past decade have lifted the performance
of all students, except the very top achievers, and have reduced performance
inequalities among students – both important achievements.”
5 Conclusion
While the AK Party government has undertaken many ambitious and comple-
mentary reforms to increase overall education governance in Turkey, the results
so far have been mixed. While the new system produces intended outputs, such
as strategic plans or annual reports, the impact on changing the policy paradigm
has been limited.
5.1 Synopsis
Compared with 1970s and 1980s, education in Turkey has received the much
needed and delayed policy attention from the governments in the last 15 years.
Compulsory education was extended from 5 years in 1997 to 12 years in 2012.
National indicators clearly demonstrate the increase in access to education,
improvement in physical infrastructure, and expansion in teaching force.
Disadvantaged children, especially girls, children with disabilities, and child
laborers have also drawn more attention both from the government and the
nongovernmental actors. Turkey achieved gender equality in primary education
in terms of enrollment figures.
226 B. Aydagül
A series of new laws were introduced to improve public administration and finance
in Turkey, which also affected the public education sector. MoNE adapted its first
5-year strategic plan by 2010. On the finance side, more Turkish Lira was allocated to
public education budget thanks to a long-term growth in the economy. Yet, the share
of GDP spent on education has not changed. Turkey still falls significantly short of
average OECD and EU spending on public education. Given its large student popula-
tion and major challenges in education ahead, governments need to consider increas-
ing the share of spending up to 6 % in the near future. The inadequacy of public
spending requires a radical contribution from private households to maintain a mini-
mum standard of education in school, and this still constitutes a problem for lower-
income families despite the governments’ ambitious social policies and programs.
The lack of alignment of government’s education policies with public investment
plans is a major weakness in the education sector. As this paper demonstrated,
MoNE has undertaken an extensive range of policy initiatives, including but not
limited to expanding low levels of enrollment in preschool and secondary educa-
tion. These are high cost endeavors assuming the quality of instruction and infra-
structure will be increased at the same time. So far, the government has failed to
provide the necessary budget to match its policy priorities, thus jeopardizing the
quality across all levels of education.
Furthermore, educational development in Turkey suffers from the lack of a
holistic, evidence-based education strategy, one which builds on national consulta-
tions and consensus. While this paper should have provided various cases to support
this argument, the very recent law which restructured the compulsory education
stands as the boldest example. The restructuring, which was not mentioned or fore-
seen in any of the prior national or education plans, was designed without evidence
and presented to the parliament without any public consultation. As much as this law
was democratically legitimate, its introduction and adoption violated principles of
good governance and created serious tensions both among the already polarized
stakeholders and within the education sector.
Particularly, the restructuring did not include kindergarten within the compul-
sory education despite the government’s own efforts to expand early childhood edu-
cation in the recent years. It was widely acknowledged that this move would have
been critical in achieving universal access to preschool for 5-year-olds. A substan-
tial benefit would have been removal of tuition at kindergartens, something that
impedes low-income children’s access to preschool. On a related note, it is impor-
tant to highlight that the government removed user fees from higher education insti-
tutions during the same time. As a result, today in Turkey families pay for preschool
while universities are free, a policy choice which is out of touch with the critical role
early childhood education can play in tackling existing inequalities.
Finally, the education sector needs to address the implementation deficiency within
the system. Series of new laws, institutions, and content in education could hardly be
translated to better outcomes, particularly to learning outcomes. Turkey is facing a
major crisis vis-à-vis how to attract, maintain, and develop quality teachers. The gov-
ernment has failed to undertake the necessary steps to improve teacher policies and
education. This issue calls all stakeholders to action, including teachers themselves.
5.2 Future Prospects
It appears that implementing the new compulsory education law and the FATIH
Project will become a priority for MoNE in the near future. In addition, there is
ongoing work to finalize and implement national teachers’ strategy and to design
a new secondary education system. These are ambitious policy initiatives to tackle
simultaneously for any bureaucracy around the world. Therefore, it is critical that
MoNE is well supported both financially and technically. Equipped with a robust
policy-making capacity and adequate financing for providing quality education to
all, MoNE should be well-positioned to maintain and advance the progress in
Turkish education.
References
Batuhan, A. (2002). The nation-state strikes back: The expansion of secular compulsory education
in Turkey. Stanford: Stanford University. Unpublished monograph.
Education Reform Initiative. (2005). Öğretim Programları İnceleme ve Değerlendirme (Review of
New Curricula). İstanbul: ERI.
Education Reform Initiative. (2011a). Eğitime Daha Fazla Kaynak Ayrılmalı: 2012 Bütçesine
İlişkin Politika Notu (More resources should be allocated to education: Policy note on 2012
budget). Istanbul: ERI. Available at http://erg.sabanciuniv.edu/sites/erg.sabanciuniv.edu/files/
Butce_Politika_Notu_Yeni.pdf (Turkish).
Education Reform Initiative. (2011b). PISA 2009 Sonuçlarına İlişkin Değerlendirme (An evalua-
tion of PISA 2009 results). İstanbul: ERI.
Education Reform Initiative. (2011c). Eğitim İzleme Raporu 2010 (Education Monitoring Report
2010). Istanbul: ERI.
Education Reform Initiative. (2012a). Education Monitoring Report 2011. Istanbul: ERI.
Education Reform Initiative. (2012b). “4 + 4 + 4” Düzenlemesi ile Neler Değişti? Yeni Sisteme
Geçişste Neler İzlenmeli? Istanbul: ERI.
Gökşen, F., Cemalcılar, Z., & Gürlesel, C. F. (2006). Drop outs in Turkey’s basic education:
Policies for monitoring and prevention. Istanbul: ERI/Mother Child Education Foundation/
Association for Supporting Female Politicians.
World Bank. (2010). Turkey: Expanding opportunities for the next generation: A report on life
chances. Washington, DC: World Bank.
World Bank. (2012). Promoting excellence in Turkey’s schools. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Saudi Arabia: The Need for a Coherent
National Strategy for Human Capital
Development
Maha Taibah and Mounira Jamjoom
Abstract Since 2005, education has been a key priority for the Saudi Arabian gov-
ernment. Education appears in almost all the Kingdom’s development plans and
strategies for building a knowledge society. The steps taken towards building a
knowledge economy have been manifested through many policy reforms and initia-
tives covering the human capital value chain, including mainstream education, tech-
nical and vocational education, higher education, and job training. This chapter
outlines two key trends that cut across sectors and that have enabled the process of
human capital reforms, namely, public–private partnerships and quality assurance.
Then it takes a closer look at human capital reforms in Saudi Arabia over the last
decade, highlighting the need to a holistic and strategic approach going forward.
Keywords Education reform • Human capital • Public–private partnerships •

Quality assurance • Saudi Arabia
Upon ascending the throne in 2005, King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz announced that
improving education standards will be his government’s utmost priority. Since then
the plans have been ambitious. A generous budget was allocated to advance reforms
across all education sectors to ensure that the nation transitions to a knowledge-
based economy by 2020.1 A new vision and trajectory was set for the Kingdom, one
that encouraged diversification away from oil and a focus on human capital develop-
ment. Achieving this vision meant that many reforms were needed to take place.
Prince Faisal bin Abdullah bin Mohammed, Minister of Education, notes in this
1
“Knowledge Society”, Al Aghar Group, 2008.
M. Taibah (*)
Ministry of Labor, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
M. Jamjoom
The Ideation Center, Booz & Company, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

230 M. Taibah and M. Jamjoom
regard “We must cultivate a passion for education in our children to develop them-
selves into an advanced and knowledge-based society where education should be
the main ingredient to achieve excellence in all aspects of life.2”
Today, national discourse is replete with “a sense of urgency” for human capital
reforms given the nation’s young demographic structure, its considerably high levels
of unemployment, and the mismatch of skills between supply and demand in the
workforce. According to the latest censuses report, 65 % of the Saudi population is
under 30 years of age, and population growth rates are projected at 2.9 % each year.3
Yet, the job market cannot meet the demand. In fact, unemployment rates have
reached a high of 13 %. Youth and women are the most affected by unemployment
where 48 % of Saudis between the ages of 20 and 24 are unemployed, as are 31 %
of Saudis aged 25–29 (Shediac and Samman 2010). Women’s unemployment hovers
at 28 % with only 12 % labor participation rate (Shehadi et al. 2011).
Despite these numbers, the Kingdom was reported as one of the top 10 countries
in the world spending the most on education. An enormous budget of $195 billion
was allocated for education reform for 2010–2014, almost 50.6 % of the total allo-
cations of the development sectors.4 The budget was intended mostly to support
several programs and initiatives that promised breakthroughs in knowledge and
advancement of human capital outcomes.
The steps taken towards building a knowledge economy manifested through
many policy reforms and initiatives covering the human capital value chain, includ-
ing mainstream education, technical and vocational education, higher education,
and job training. With a continuous refocus on designing programs, improving poli-
cies, and enforcing quality, these initiatives will better link education outputs with
the socioeconomic priorities. Together, these reforms, tying business to education,
aim at graduating a globally employable and locally employed workforce.
Reform in human capital over the past years has followed several common
trends. One of the most progressive landmarks of this current wave of reforms is
building strategic public–private partnerships, either with regional or global cen-
ters of excellence. These have allowed government to identify specific needs in
research, content development, degreed and non-degreed forms of education, infra-
structure, and ancillary support services. This approach not only facilitates solid
partnerships between the government sector and the private sector, but also allows
for healthy decentralization, granting the private sector more autonomy to deliver
performance-based and demand-led results, which ultimately amplify the impact of
education on economic growth.
Second, quality assurance sits at the nexus of any impactful endeavor. As such,
all major institutions leading education policy have recently established regulation
bodies to define standards, enforce institutional quality assurance, and measure
quality, either through inspection or imposing standardized testing.
2
Minister of Education: Saudi Arabia Transformed into Knowledge-Based Society (http://www.
sauditv2.tv/News/GeneralNews/Pages/gnews1118.aspx).
3
Census Report, 2011 (http://www.cdsi.gov.sa/english/).
4
Ninth Five Year Development Plan, 2010–2014.
Saudi Arabia: The Need for a Coherent National Strategy for Human… 231
In what follows, an attempt is made to address the most salient policy reforms in
K-12 education, higher education, and vocational education. Background, assump-
tions, achievements, and challenges of these reforms will be vetted culminating with
a discussion on the need for a holistic and coherent approach to education reform.
1 K-12 Education Reform
Since the 1950s, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has achieved tremendous progress in
ensuring accessibility to general education. At the time, the Ministry of Education
adopted a “quantitative expansionist policy” with a focus on increasing geographic
coverage and accessibility to general education. Since then, accessibility to education
grew at a staggering pace where general education enrollment grew in excess of
eightfold from 1970 to 2008.5
Today, gross enrollment rates are at 98 % for elementary, 96 % for intermediate,
and 92 % for secondary stage (Ibid.). The expansion phase also improved gender par-
ity where girls now constitute 49 % of general education enrollment and outperform
boys in assessments. The advances in terms of infrastructure, textbook development,
and teacher training were so rapid to the extent that it later became difficult to evaluate
the quality of the efforts expended into education (Abd-el Wassie 1970; Al-Issa 2009).
1.1 Aims and Approaches to the Reform
The impetus for the strong wave of educational reform was due to three essential
challenges: First, the need to become globally competitive and not lag behind other
nations. While Saudi Arabia has improved its global competitive standing in the
past decade, health and education still do not reach the standards of other countries
at similar income levels. As a result, the country continues to occupy low ranks in
the health and primary education pillar (61st), and room for improvement remains
on the higher education and training pillar (36th).6 Second, the country faces a set
of challenges that stem from local social, economic, and educational challenges.
Saudi Arabia’s general education outcomes in terms of student performance place
the country below where it is aspired to be. For example, it is estimated that over
two thirds of students do not meet international standards (Hanushek and Wossman
2007). Saudi students scored among the lowest in the TIMSS 2007 math and
science, with no significant improvement since 2003. The results are below most of
Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and Arab countries (Middle East and North Africa
(MENA) average is 370 in math and 423 in science; Saudi scored 329 and 403
respectively).7 Students also lack the soft skills which enable them to compete in the
5
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Education Sector Benchmarking, Ministry of Education, 2009.
6
Global Competitiveness Report, 2011–2012.
7
TIMSS, 2007.
labor market. A third set of challenges stems from the need to create a balanced
national identity in an increasingly globalized world. A review of local discourse in
the conventional and social media highlights the salient tension between the widen-
ing horizons of globalization and the need for a local identity. The Kingdom is in the
process of redefining the edifice of an educational paradigm which captures that
subtle balance.
In 2003, Saudi Arabia convened its first National Dialogue which addressed the
question of national unity, identity, and international relations. The National
Dialogue was later institutionalized through the creation of the King Abdul Aziz
Centre for National Dialogue which convenes national dialogue annually that
addresses important national issues. In 2006, the Sixth National Dialogue addressed
almost entirely the question of “the quality of education.” It was agreed that the
overall spending on education had increased rapidly over the past years and an
ongoing upward trend can be expected due to growth in student population.
However, education spending did not alleviate one of the most important challenges
now facing the Kingdom—namely, the problem of unemployment (Moujaes et al.
2008). To this end, a recommendation was put forth to establish Tatweer, which is
the King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud Project for General Education
Development. Taweer is an education initiative, launched to improve the quality
of education for boys and girls. This project, with a committed budget of about
SR12 billion (US$3.2 billion), aims to train more than 400,000 teachers in school
management, educational supervision, curriculum development, computer skills,
and self-development skills (Al Munajjed 2009). While the project is still underway,
the question of sustainability of education reform after the project’s completion
needed to be addressed. Dr. Ali Al Hamaki, Director General of Tatweer project,
explains “Then came the discussion on sustainability. How can we ensure the
sustainability of Tatweer, to be a seed of sustainable development and to build an
entity that is able to move the education sector forward in the Kingdom?” As a result,
the Tatweer Education Holding Company (THC) was established in accordance with
a Royal Decree. THC is a strategic investment company. The purposes of THC include
provision of core and support educational services; development, establishment,
acquisition, operation, and maintenance of educational projects; and execution of
related works and activities. THC is tasked with implementation of King Abdullah
bin Abdulaziz Project for Development of Public Education and any additional
educational programs.8
1.2 Three Reform Trends
There are three key recent education reform policy trends which are shaping the
K-12 education landscape in the Kingdom. First is a salient increase in private
sector participation (PSP) to support the Ministry of Education (MoE) in
8
Personal Communication, Dr. Ali Al Hakami, Director General of Tatweer Project.
addressing its objectives. This policy reform is underpinned by the assumption

that the private sector could offer a faster way to introduce change and provide
more efficient and effective management and increased competition which
would drive quality improvements across the system. The increased number of
providers would offer parents a variety of educational choices and increase
access to specific areas of education such as kindergartens and special education
provision. Most importantly, it will reduce the management burden and foster the
focusing of the Ministry on core educational activities by outsourcing non-core
education activities to the private sector (Moujaes et al. 2011).
The Ministry identified several priority areas for PSP including private schooling
and private pre-primary education. Indeed, demand for private schooling has
increased at a rate of 10 % in the past 5 years (Ibid.). Private schools also increased
in number between 2004 and 2009 with private school growth outpacing public
school growth. The Ministry aims to achieve a 25 % private school enrollment rate
by 2025, where private school enrollment currently hovers around 10 %. This policy
trajectory does not come without challenges, many private schools in the Kingdom
currently suffer from low-quality core and support education services, there is rela-
tively large variability in education outcomes, schools are not always able to attract
high-quality teachers, and many do not teach enhanced curricula. In effect, the
Ministry should reassess private schooling licensing, standards, and regulations and
develop quality assurance regulations.
The underlying assumption is that an investment in pre-primary education helps
reduce sunk costs arising during later stages of the education life cycle. The current
enrollment rate in pre-primary education is far below international levels. The cur-
rent gross enrollment rate in pre-primary schooling between ages 3 and 6 is only
12 %. The trends in the Kingdom have not changed since the introduction of pre-
primary education in 1980s. The country’s young population structure means
that there will continue to be large potential demand for pre-primary education.
Currently there are around 103,000 children enrolled in 1,392 preprimary education
institutions which are concentered in large and wealthier provinces.
The second key trend in policy reforms involves a reassessment of the central-
ized model of education, with a long-term aim to transfer specific responsibilities
from MoE to provinces and to empower schools and school leadership.9 For exam-
ple, one of Tatweer’s signature programs, the New School Project, envisions a new
role for the school of the future. To date, school leadership only conducts adminis-
trative tasks with no visible role in planning and no financial or administrative inde-
pendence. The envisioned future school is a semi-independent learning organization
that develops and implements an annual plan, prepares periodic reports on the over-
all performance, has an effective and innovative leadership, and is open to the com-
munity. Dr. Ali Al Hakami notes in this regard that “schools are currently in reactive
mode and we want to move them to proactive mode.” This emphasis on empowering
schools came hand in hand with a reform initiative aiming to improve internal com-
munication and knowledge sharing across different levels of the education sys-
9
The Strategic Plan for General Education Development in Saudi Arabia, 2011.
tem. For example, the MoE has recently launched two nationwide information
system initiatives: the first is a comprehensive enterprise resource planning system
(ERP), and the second is a geographic information system (GIS) that links all
schools across the Kingdom. Other initiatives involve training and empowering
teachers to take on the responsibility of their own professional development. A career
pathway scheme is currently being developed. This scheme introduces incentives for
teachers to develop professionally and fosters accountability.
The third crucial reform policy trend is towards developing quality assurance
capabilities across the system. To this end, on September 10 2012, the Council of
Ministers approved the creation of an Authority for Public Education Evaluation—
an independent legal entity with administrative and financial autonomy.10 The
Ministry is also working collaboratively with the Ministry of Higher Education to
set competencies and standards for new and existing teachers.11
2 Higher Education Reform
The demand for higher education in the Kingdom has witnessed rapid growth dur-
ing the last few years, owing to its slow but steady steps towards building a
knowledge-based economy.12 Student enrollment in higher education is also expected
to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of around 9 % from 2010 to
2014.13 In the higher education landscape, the government remains the major
provider.
2.1 Recent Policy Progress
Building a knowledge-based economy also requires building the capabilities of a

qualified local workforce to combat the dire unemployment. Similar to the K-12
system, the higher education sector underwent a major expansion phase. Nonetheless,
this expansion phase was rather recent. For example, the number of universities in
the country increased from 8 in 2003 to 25 in 2011, and more than 20 private univer-
sities and colleges were approved (El-Maghraby 2011). Although there has not been
a comprehensive evaluation of the expansion phase, the general view within the
higher education sector is that the large-scale restructuring has been successful.
In 2009, the King Fahad University of Petroleum and Minerals (KFUPM) was
entrusted with a research initiative called Aafaq (Horizons). The initiative is respon-
sible for setting a 25-year plan to improve the quality of higher education. The
10
Ministry of Education (http://www.moe.gov.sa/news/Pages/Nh_1433_10_21_11.aspx).
11
Personal communication, Dr. Ali Al Hakami, Director General, Tatweer Project.
12
Saudi Arabia’s Education Forecast, 2013.
13
Ibid.
Aafaq initiative will conduct studies in various areas such as admission and capacity,
job market, cost and financing, and infrastructure. Among the initiative’s objectives
are to encourage universities to allocate more resources for R&D, boost scientific
research, and tackle the country’s shortage of scientists in critical fields. Saudi Arabia
has a workforce shortage in many areas of science and technology. For example, Saudi
engineering graduates meet only a fifth of the country’s needs, and 68 % of science
jobs are filled by graduates from abroad (Sawahel 2009). Aafaq also focuses on
enhancing women’s opportunities in tertiary education. Women represent more than
58 % of the total number of Saudi university students, although males form the
majority of students on external scholarships. For example, government statistics
indicate that the total number of female students enrolled at the university level,
seeking a bachelor’s degree, more than tripled from 93,486 in 1995–1996 to 340,857
in 2005–2006.14 At the same time, the private sector launched a number of private
universities for women, based on the efforts of individuals or private institutions and
under the supervision of the Ministry of Higher Education. There are 10 private col-
leges and universities for women spread throughout major cities including Riyadh,
Al Khobar, Jeddah, and Al Baha (Al Munajjed 2009).
2.2 Three Reform Trends
While a great deal has been achieved in a short period of time, the higher education
sector in Saudi Arabia is facing many challenges including shortages of well-trained
professors, a rising cost of education, and limited higher education infrastructure. In
response to these challenges, three policy trends can be identified in the higher edu-
cation industry: First is an increase in government initiatives offering academic
scholarships and focusing on female higher education; second is an expansion of
private higher education and the emergence of new institutions such as the King
Abdullah University for Science and Technology (KAUST); third is a focus on qual-
ity assurance, accountability accreditation, and performance.
Launched in 2005, the King Abdullah Scholarship Programme (KASP) is the
largest scholarship program in the history of Saudi Arabia. The program began with
a 5-year limit and was recently extended to 2020. The program provides full
funding for 125,000 students—for both undergraduate and graduate programs
abroad. The top 10 host countries for KASP students are the USA, the UK, Australia,
Canada, New Zealand, Malaysia, France, India, China, and Germany (Fig. 1).
In addition to the scholarship programs, the government has also accorded great
importance to expanding higher education opportunities for women who make up
today more than 57 % of university graduates. One example of such expansion is
the establishment of the Princess Noura bint Abdul Rahman University for women.
The university aims to become one of the largest centers of higher education for
14
UNDP-POGAR: Gender and Citizenship, Arabia & SAMA, 2008 (http://gender.pogar.org/
Saudi).
Fig. 1 Saudi students on

scholarship in the USA
(Source: The Washington
International Education
Council)
Saudi women, presenting them with new educational opportunities to enter the
labor market. It includes an academic area of 15 colleges, including the College of
Medicine, College of Nursing, College of Pharmacology, College of Physiotherapy,
College of Dentistry, and a number of other colleges such as the College of
Administrative Sciences, the Computer and Technology College, the Kindergarten
College, the College of Science, and the College of Languages and Translation.
Private higher education was recently introduced in the Kingdom, and it has been
attracting a considerable number of students. The Council of Ministers in the year
1998 stipulated the authorization of the Minister of Higher Education to prepare a
new vision for the establishment of private colleges and enabling the private sector
to establish nonprofit educational institutions.15 Since then, private higher educa-
tion enrolment in Saudi Arabia has grown at 33 % per annum, making it one of the
fastest growing private education segments worldwide.16 The growth in private
higher education is driven by several factors including the need to focus on educa-
tion for employability, the demand for quality and English-medium instruction,
and the need for an alternative for expatriates living in the Kingdom who cannot
enroll in public universities. Private universities tend to hire more expatriate teach-
ers with better English language skills—37 % of all teachers in private universities
are expatriates in comparison to only 5 % in public universities.17 Private higher
education also represents a prospect for active participation of the private sector
into higher education activities. The rise of private sector participation is expected
to attract the attention of private equity players who have been keen participants in
the education sector.
15
Ministry of Higher Education, 2012.
16
The Parthenon Group, an advisory firm.
17
KSA’s USD21bn education push, Zawiya, 2012.
Among the different models of private higher education in the Kingdom, i.e.,
Universities, Specialized Colleges, For-Profit, and Not-For-Profit Institutes, King
Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST)18 stands out as an inter-
esting model. The university is governed by an independent, self-perpetuating
Board of Trustees and supported by a multibillion dollar endowment. KAUST was
established by the government-owned Aramco to drive innovation in science and
technology and to support first-class research in areas such as energy and the envi-
ronment. Saudi Aramco was best positioned to take the lead in the development
and operation management of KAUST given its strong history of funding commu-
nity projects in the Kingdom, such as several schools, large “high-tech” hospitals,
fire stations, etc. The use of new institutions such as KAUST to drive education
reform is a model that can be seen more broadly across the GCC region. For exam-
ple, the Abu Dhabi Education Council (ADEC) and the Qatar Foundation were
established to circumvent bureaucracies and rapidly implement high-profile
reforms. While changes along the KAUST model are very important as they create
a better educated populace through a “beacon effect,” they are models that are
often difficult to replicate.
Finally, quality assurance initiatives and accreditation systems for tertiary edu-
cation institutions have been gaining momentum in the Saudi Arabia. In 2004, the
National Commission for Academic Accreditation and Assessment (NCAAA) was
established. NCAAA is an independent body both financially and administratively
reporting to the Council of Higher Education. The aims of NCAAA are to establish
standards, criteria, and procedures for accreditation and to review and evaluate
performance of existing and new institutions, thus supporting improvements in
quality. Since then almost all institutions developed quality centers or committees
to lead and coordinate their quality assurance initiatives. Given that quality assur-
ance system is a recent trend in Saudi higher education sector, the quality and
accountability culture is still underdeveloped. There is a marked lack of profes-
sional quality assurance expertise. Also, given that most Saudi Universities operate
in a centralized manner, most quality assurance mechanisms are top down with
little student involvement such as student surveys, committees, and college review
panels. Another important initiative is the National Center for Assessment in
Higher Education, Qiyas, which was launched in 2001 to ensure fairness and equal
opportunity in higher education. Qiyas prepares and conducts acceptance/admis-
sion tests in various institutions of higher education. The center also works on the
development of educational measurement methods at all levels of higher education
in order to raise the efficiency and promote a culture of “Measurement and
Evaluation” in the higher education sector (El-Maghraby 2011).
18
KAUST was founded in 2009 and focuses exclusively on graduate education and research, using
English as the official language of instruction. It offers programs in life sciences, engineering,
computer sciences, and physical sciences.
3 Technical and Vocational Education Reform
Today, technical and vocational education sector has increased its capacity by fully
using its current infrastructure and investing in new infrastructures, moving towards
a public–private partnership model, establishing a new regulation body, and lastly,
changing the perception of technical and vocational graduates in the eyes of students,
the private sector, and community at large. These reforms have led to incremental
improvements—76 % of the graduates from technical and vocational education
streams are employed, study, or own a business.19
3.1 Restructuring Vocational and Technical Education System
With massive expansions and investment in infrastructure around the Kingdom,

strong demands for technical and vocational training emerged. Different ministries
took up the initiatives to train Saudis. However, in 1980, a Royal Decree consoli-
dated all technical and vocational education under a unified effort, at that time
named the General Organization for Technical Education and Vocational, where
the Minister of Labor (MoL) served as chairman of the board. The organization
went through several transformations until the most recent restructuring in 2007.
At this time, the organization went back to focusing on labor market-driven pro-
grams that would ensure that students are employable upon graduation. In 2007, the
organization underwent a second restructuring and was renamed the Technical and
Vocational Training Corporation (TVTC). TVTC’s vision is “effective participation
in economical, social, and environmental development by offering technical and
vocational training for male and female citizens to meet private sector demanded
competencies and quality in order to achieve global leadership that ensures self suf-
ficiency and independence.20”
The TVTC’s main mandate is to develop, license, and offer vocational and tech-
nical training programs for both boys and girls that meet private sector needs, and
to mandate bylaws appropriately specialized in quality and quantity and to super-
vise their implementation. Additionally, it participates in national programs that
build the localization of technology transfer, offers its support for the private sector,
and steers investment in technical and vocational training.21
The government is keen to promote technical and vocational training for nationals
to further develop their employability skills. The budgets allocated to technical
and vocational training rose by 41.6 % (SAR23 billion) in the 2010–2014 plan.
The current infrastructure has the capacity to absorb only 32 % of the total demand
19
Personal Communication, Dr. Saleh Al Amro, Deputy Governor for Strategic Partnerships,
TVTC.
20
Technical and Vocational Training Corporation (TVTC) (http://tvtc.gov.sa/English/Pages/
default.aspx).
21
Ibid.
for technical and vocational education. With relatively high dropout rates that can
be as low as 10 % in some colleges and as high as in those 40 % operated by strategic
private sector partners and only 53 % of the graduates finding a job upon graduation,
the TVTC saw the need for rapid and immediate reform. Approximately 170 techni-
cal and vocational training institutes are under construction in Saudi Arabia.22
As a result of the reform, there are two forms of technical and vocational training:
First is the Technical and Vocational Public Training, which includes programs for
Colleges of Technology, Industrial Vocational Training Institutes, Higher Technical
Institutes, Military Vocational Training, and Vocational and Industrial Training
Institutes in Prisons. Second is the Joint Training Program which establishes strategic
private sector partnerships with institutions that include private institutes and centers
(For-Profit), joint training programs, and institutes (non-profit). Some of these insti-
tutes include the Saudi Japanese Automobile High Institute, High Institute for Plastic
Fabrication, Saudi Oger Training Institute, and General Motors Program. To encour-
age alignment with labor market demands, the TVTC runs several apprenticeship
training programs. These typically last 1–4 years, with students spending, on aver-
age, more than 60 % of training time in the workplace pursuing practical training and
the remainder of their time in the classroom. Apprenticeship programs were intro-
duced in 2002 under the National System for Joint Training Program. These appren-
ticeship programs last from a couple of months to 2 years and are divided into two
parts. The first is basic and theoretical training, which comprises 25 % of the duration
of the program. The second is practical, which comprises 75 % of the duration of the
program and is executed in the workplace.
To ensure that every graduate meets high-quality standards and is employable
upon graduation, an official regulation body has been established to oversee the
quality assurance of technical and vocational education. The National Center for
Evaluation and Professional Accreditation (NCEPA) has been mandated to develop
National Occupational Skills Standards (NOSS) to take charge of institutional quality
assurance and run national centralized student assessments. The Kingdom began
developing its National Occupational Skills Standards (NOSS) in 2003. Prior to this
initiative, each college developed and delivered their curriculum based on their own
interpretation of market demand.
Currently young high school graduates are reluctant to take up technical or voca-
tional jobs, and as a result, only 9 % of the age cohort complete T&V education
compared to 44 % in OECD countries.23 The TVTC realizes that perception is a
major factor in this lack of interest and has conducted extensive research to better
understand the lack of motivation towards technical and vocational jobs. Results of
this qualitative research reveal that many students perceive technical and vocational
education as a “last resort,” while others question the quality of education and its
relevance to labor market demands. To address this issue of perception, the TVTC
has earmarked a hefty budget to spend on rebranding technical and vocational
22
GCC Education Industry, 2012, Alpen Capital.
23
National Occupational Skills Standards Report. International Network of Sector Skills
Organization, August 2012.
education and develop methods to attract more students to technical and vocational
education, such as building clear career paths, demanding a higher level of profes-
sionalism, certifying skills at different levels, and providing platform for continuous
practical education where emphasis is placed on practical skills.
3.2 A Focus on Strategic Partnerships
In August of the year 2000, the Council of Ministers and the Royal Court released
Royal Decree No. 18M to establish the Human Resources Development Fund
(HRDF). The fund is meant to be a stand-alone legal entity and to be administra-
tively and financially independent. Its goal is to fund programs and initiatives that
encourage, train, and employ Saudis in the private sector. To meet the goal, since its
inception, the HRDF has led several initiatives. One of the key programs established
under the HRDF is the strategic partnership program (SPP) that aims at launching
partnerships with the private sector to provide Saudis with training and employment
opportunities. Currently, the strategic partnership program is leading three major
initiatives: employer-driven academies (EDA), functional academies, and the life
skills strategy.
Employer-driven academies are partnerships between the HRDF and leading
private sector employers to provide an agreed minimum number of training and
employment opportunities. The sectors being targeted are those service sectors with
large numbers of expatriate employees in jobs that Saudis can be trained to be suc-
cessful at within less than 12 months, such as retail. HRDF will subsidize the sala-
ries of candidates during training and a portion of the salary during the first 2 years
of employment. EDA programs include key features to attract and retain Saudis in
the services sector. For example, the jobs may be entry level, but they come with a
clear indication of room for growth. This will help curtail resistance to service sec-
tor jobs because they are considered to be low status. Also, the training courses
include life skills training as well as technical training to help Saudi men and women
adjust to the expectations of working in the private sector. Finally, a large proportion
of on-the-job training and ongoing coaching is available, to encourage Saudis to
persist with the training period and focus on the longer-term benefits.24
Functional academies, on the other hand, focus on delivering short programs in
professions and/or skills required across many sectors such as HR, law, insurance,
finance and accounting, and IT. HRDF will fund the training through a voucher
system issued to qualifying trainees and also subsidize the salaries of candidates
during training and a portion of the salary during the first 2 years of employment.
Graduates of the HR pool program, for example, will be prepared to serve as HR
managers in the Saudi context and, thus, provide better support in implementing
Ministry of Labor and HRDF initiatives in training and employing Saudis. A large
proportion of HR managers in KSA are expatriates, and it is believed that Saudi HR
managers will be more effective in attracting, recruiting, and retaining Saudis in the
24
Human Resource Development Fund (HRDF), Strategic Partnership Program.
long term. One of the key features of the program is that it will provide ongoing
mentoring for the Saudi graduates once they are hired and on the job. In particular,
the program will emphasize structured on-the-job training (SOJT) assignments at
HR departments of companies in Saudi Arabia. The SOJT will include coaching and
mentoring sessions with detailed plan and on-the-job (OJT) monthly assessments.
Upon completion of the program, the participants must pass an exam that will be
designed and administered by a third-party certification organization selected by
the SPP, and afterwards they will be placed in companies across Saudi Arabia.
Finally, the life skills training initiative focuses on those skills that many young
Saudis need in order to prepare for a successful working life. These include com-
munication and time management skills, teamwork, personal responsibility, and
grooming. Due to cultural challenges and the limitations of the current education
system, many Saudis are leaving school/college without the basic skills needed to
compete against expatriate labor in today’s world, even for lower skilled positions.
This impacts their ability to secure work and progress in their career. It also places
a significant financial and operational burden on employers who experience low
productivity and high dropout rates among Saudi employees. Moreover, it has a
potentially discouraging impact on the young Saudi job seekers who may be totally
unprepared for the workplace requirements and find the experience unbearable soon
after starting to work. The strong emphasis on the need for life skills training was
apparent as many employers experience high dropout rates when hiring Saudi. Even
though the exact causes for rapid turnover are varied and still not well understood,
misaligned expectations with respect to basic skills is frequently mentioned as a
significant reason.
A good example of a private–public initiative in training is provided by the
Tamer Group and HRDF. The company urgently needed workers with expertise in
logistics and operations but could not find Saudi nationals with the required skills.
So it created a training institute in partnership with the HRDF. Specifically, Tamer
Group designed the 3-month curriculum to teach logistics and operations skills and
to provide some English language education. In this context, the company supplied
the training facility, and the HRDF subsidized about three-quarters of the cost, and
Tamer Group paid the remainder. The company generally offers jobs to the top 20 %
of trainees. The next 30 % receive certificates that they can use when approaching
other firms and the remainder fail or drop out. Tamer Group finds skilled workers
and reduces its recruitment costs. The company also helps align Saudi nationals’
skills with job market needs, thereby enriching the economic environment in which
it operates (Sabbagh et al. 2012).
4 Conclusion
The scale and scope of the human capital development challenges facing the Kingdom
are well understood by the leadership. The challenges are particularly pressing for
the education sector because the current high unemployment levels are attributed to
a large extent to a poor quality of education.
In all cases, addressing these challenges requires a holistic and coherent approach.
Booz & Company’s latest research on successful education transformation leaders
around the world identified three roles that these individuals fulfill. First, transfor-
mation leaders in education “think ahead,” setting the vision and strategy for the
education system in order to meet future expectations regarding employment and
national competitiveness. In the case of Saudi Arabia, a clear vision for education
development has already been set. Second, transformation leaders in education
“deliver within,” overseeing the education system during the transformation in order
to build new capabilities. Third—and most important—these individuals “lead
across,” directly engaging stakeholders during the planning and implementation
phases of transformations, in order to ensure that everyone supports the proposed
changes and will work to help them succeed (Chadi et al. 2012).
In the case of Saudi Arabia, the emphasis needs to be on “leading across” and
“delivering within.” For delivering within, local education reform efforts must go
beyond structural reforms and focus on human capital development and talent man-
agement through further training and lifelong learning while promoting employ-
ability, productivity, and social inclusion. This will require an investigation into the
system’s already existing capabilities or potential achievable capabilities.
Capabilities are set of distinctive factors or key strengths that distinguish a system
or an organization. Each capability derives from the right combination of processes,
tools, knowledge, skills, and organization—all focused on achieving the desired
result. Strategies for education should be clearly aligned with the existing and
achievable capabilities of education systems if they are to succeed.25 A second con-
sideration is the coherence between strategies for education development and capa-
bilities. Increasing the coherence and consistency between capabilities will increase
the likelihood for success. For leading across, an enhanced communication and
collaboration across various sectors, entities, and stakeholders in the education
landscape is crucial. While cross-sector collaboration is beginning to gain momen-
tum in the Kingdom, more strategic partnerships are necessary.
Education reform is by no means straightforward. However, a better alignment
and coherence across all initiatives undertaken to transform education in the
Kingdom can improve academic outputs in the short term. This can be measured
in terms of achievements of the education system and performance of students,
usually against national or international standards. In the long term, social and
economic gains are expected. Improvements can be measured quantitatively
through increased employment rate, higher per capita income, and increased GDP.
Improvements can also be measured qualitatively through more entrepreneurship,
increased private sector involvement, increased public sector effectiveness, and
improved quality of life.
What exists for Saudi Arabia today is the promise of potential. Reforms must
unleash the country’s considerable human promise, and they must be designed to har-
ness the resources of an increasingly educated and ambitious youthful population.
25
“Capabilities Driven Strategy”, Booz & Company.
References
Al Munajjed, M. (2009). Women’s education in Saudi Arabia: The way forward. Dubai, UAE:
The Ideation Center, Booz & Company.
Chadi, M., Hoteit, L., Hiltunen, J., & Sahlberg, P. (2012). Transformation leadership in education:
Three key imperatives for lasting change. In Leading Research. Dubai, UAE: Booz & Company.
El-Maghraby, H. (2011). Quality assurance in newly established universities in Saudi Arabia. Al
Jouf University.
Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2007). Education quality and economic growth. World Bank.
Moujaes, C., Samman, H., Maroun, N., & Abouchakra, R. (2008). How to succeed at education
reform: The case for Saudi Arabia and the broader GCC region. Dubai, UAE: The Ideation
Center, Booz & Company.
Moujaes, C., Hoteit, L., & Hiltunen, J. (2011). A decade of opportunity: The coming expansion of
private school market in the GCC. In: Leading Research. Dubai: UAE Booz & Company.
Nolan, L. (2012). Liberalizing monarchies: How Gulf monarchies manage education reform?
Doha: Brookings Doha Center.
Sabbagh, K., Moujaes, C., Hoteit, L., Hiltunen, J., & Samman, H. (2012). Education for employ-
ment: Committing enterprises to education development in the Middle East and North Africa.
Addressing the 100 million youth challenge perspectives on youth employment in the Arab
world in 2012. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
Sawahel, M. (2009). Saudi Arabia: 25-year plan for higher education. University World News, Issue 91
Retrieved from http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20090903215333517.
Shediac, R., & Samman, H. (2010). Meeting the employment challenge. Dubai, UAE: The Ideation
Center, Booz & Company.
Shehadi, R., Hoteit, L., Tarazi, K., & Lamaa, A. (2011). Educated, ambitious, essential: Women
will drive the GCC’s future. In Perspective. Dubai, UAE: Booz & Company.
Japan: Conversion of the Philosophy
and Aim of Basic Education
Tamotsu Tokunaga
Abstract In 1983, Japan has dramatically converted the philosophy from “complete
education” to “lifelong learning.” Hence, the aim of school education shifted to the
formation of the “ability to self-educate” that supports lifelong learning. The new
educational policy became firmly established within the law through subsequent
amendments that have continued until today. Responsively, the educational ministry
has decreased the content that was to be taught at schools as determined by curricu-
lum standards and in the meanwhile shifted the focus onto students’ “ability to self-
educate” and onto practical use of basic knowledge, followed by a range of reforms
of learning environments. The chapter addresses the background of the conversion,
how policies were developed and what measures were taken, and the causes of the
insufficiently visible outcomes. Finally, it discusses the future challenges and sug-
gests potential solutions to tackle the challenges.
Keywords Ability to self-educate • Aim • Classroom instruction • Complete

education • Curriculum standard • Instruction methods • Japan • Lifelong learning •
Philosophy • Revision of course of study
This chapter addresses the main trends in educational reforms carried out at the policy
level in Japan since the late 1980s, with a main focus on primary and secondary edu-
cation, and discusses the main challenges that the current educational policy faces.
In 1983, the Ministry of Education of Japan has dramatically converted the
philosophy and the aim of school education. Abandoned was the “philosophy of
complete education,” whereby everything needed generally as a member of the
society was expected to be taught in schools. Instead, the “philosophy of lifelong
learning,” has been introduced, whereby people are expected to keep on learning
whatever is needed as members of the society throughout life, and the aim of school
T. Tokunaga (*)
University of Tsukuba, National Institute for Educational Policy Research, Tokyo, Japan

246 T. Tokunaga
education shifted to the formation of the “ability to self-educate” that supports

lifelong learning. Since then, school education policies have been developed, and
many measures concerned have been taken, including the shift of the basic stance
towards instructions in classes “from teaching to learning.”
The article will address the background of the conversion, how policies were
developed and what measures were taken, and the causes of the insufficiently visi-
ble outcomes. It should be noted that this article is mainly based on my knowledge
fostered while serving as top or middle senior officials in divisions and bureaus with
the central roles in the Ministry of Education and taking into consideration relevant
research outcomes of the National Institute for Educational Policy Research.
1 The Brief History of the Educational Administration

Before the Conversion
In this section, I describe the brief history of the development of the educational
administration for primary and secondary education before the conversion, mainly
based on the facts described in the official histories1 (Ministry of Education 1972,
1992) and with my interpretation (Tokunaga 2012a).
1.1 Expansion of the School System Under the Philosophy

of “Complete Education”
Since the modern school system was established in 1872, it was considered that all
knowledge and skills required as a member of a nation of modern industry should
be acquired through school education, under the philosophy of “complete educa-
tion.” Therefore, when broader and higher level of knowledge and skills became
necessary in response to further industrialization and sophistication of the society,
school years became longer and textbooks thicker. The school system, school
facilities, qualified teachers, and the curriculum were put in place accordingly.
Compulsory education was extended from 4 to 6 years of primary school, then to
8 years of national school (kokumin gakkou) including 6 years of elementary and
2 years of higher level in 1941 and then 9 years including elementary school and
junior high school in 1950. Following that, the advancement rate to high schools
rose, and practically the course term was further extended by 3 years (Table 1).
At that time, educational policies had been focusing on providing adequate
school facilities and qualified teachers. Concerning facilities, the National Subsidy
for Compulsory Education School Facilities Act was enacted in 1958, which obli-
gates the national government to subsidize expenses of elementary and junior high
1
Japan’s modern educational system: A history of the first hundred years (1972); Japan’s modern
educational system 2: A history of the first hundred twenty years (1992).
Japan: Conversion of the Philosophy and Aim of Basic Education 247
Table 1 Transition of high school attendance rate

1950 1955 1960 1965 1970
42.5 % 51.5 % 57.7 % 70.7 % 82.1 %
Source: School basic survey (Ministry of Education)
schools facilities to municipal governments. Concerning teachers, the Act on

National Treasury’s Sharing of Compulsory Education Expenses by Municipalities
was enacted in 1918, which obligated the national government to share half the
teachers’ salary. In 1952, the existing Act on National Treasury’s Sharing of
Compulsory Education Expenses was enacted.
1.2 Qualitative Enhancement of School Education
Once the extension of school years and the quantitative expansion of schools
reached a certain level, the focus of educational administration shifted to qualitative
advancement of school education.
The Ministry of Education made the National Curriculum Guideline in 1947 and
revised it in 1951. But the Ministry of Education did not have any effective control
powers over schools and municipalities which were in charge of school management.
In order to maintain the quality nationwide, the Ministry of Education introduced the
national curriculum standard system in 1955 with the Course of Study which can
legally bind the curriculum organization in all elementary, junior high, and high schools.
Since then, the educational ministry has been revising the Course of Study approxi-
mately every 10 years, showing its basic policies at that time. The 1958 edition of
national curriculum standard emphasized systematic teaching of the subject content.
With the enactment of the Act on the Organization and Operation of Local
Educational Administration in 1956, the Ministry of Education introduced a new
administrative system for exerting its control over local governments and public
schools, where the ministry has the legal authority to guide and lead all the local boards
of education. The act and another relevant law have shifted from municipalities to pre-
fectures the personnel authority and the financial burden for half the salary expenses of
teachers of schools established by municipalities, giving the prefectural boards of
education the leading role over the municipal boards of education. In addition, the
Class-Size Standard Act on Compulsory Education2 was enacted in 1958 which fixed
the number of students in a class and set the minimum number of teachers in a school
according to the number of classes, followed by the enactment of the High School
Class-Size Act in 1961 when the advancement rate to high school exceeded 60 %.
2
Act on Standards for Class Formation and Fixed Number of School Personnel of Public
Compulsory Education Schools.
248 T. Tokunaga
In 1971, when the advancement rate exceeded 80 %, a new curriculum standard was
adopted.3 It advanced the educational content both qualitatively and quantitatively and
increased the number of classroom hours. In response to these changes, with amend-
ments of the Class-Size Standard Act, several-year plans were intermittently imple-
mented to lower the upper limit of the number of pupils per class and to raise the lower
limit of the number of teachers to be placed per school based on classroom numbers.
2 Background of the Conversion of the Philosophy

and Aim of School Education
This section addresses the background that led to conversion of the philosophy and
aim of primary and secondary education.
2.1 Problems in Schools and with Students
In spite of the efforts to develop conditions, school education under the new
curriculum standard adopted in 1971 for elementary schools and in 1972 for
junior high schools showed many problems such as “pupils and students left
behind,” the so-called Shichi-Go-San (753)4, and high school dropouts arose.
In the early 1980s, situation got worse and more serious. In addition to the left-
behind and drop outs, problematic behaviors such as delinquency and violence
in school increased, and competition in university entrance exams intensified. It
was said that students had to study so hard as to sleep only 4 h a day in order to
prepare themselves for the tough exam.
Very concerned about these situations, the Ministry of Education revised curricu-
lum standards for elementary and junior high schools in 1977 and for high schools
in 1978. Through these revisions, educational contents were intended to be limited
to core issues, and 4 units of class hour per week were converted into nonclass
activities which were called the “school leeway time.” However, these symptomatic
treatments were not enough, and their revision and implementation in 1980, 1981,
and 1982 were too late to improve the situation.
Newspapers and TV news programs called the situation concerning school and
students with many problems the “education devastation” and blamed the Ministry
of Education for its lack of measures. This made school education a social concern,
and its reform became a political challenge.
3
New editions of the Course of Study for elementary schools and junior high schools were legally
noticed in 1968, and one for high school was noticed in 1970.
4
A sarcastic expression using the name of a traditional event to celebrate the healthy growth of
children, representing a situation where the proportion of pupils and students that manage to
acquire what they learn at school, was merely 70 % in elementary school, 50 % in junior high
school, and 30 % in high school.
2.2 Demand from Industry
In addition, from a very different point of view, there was a pervasive feeling among
the industry that there is a need for a fundamental reform of school education for
further economic growth. In 1968, Japan’s GDP already ranked second in the world.
The manufacturing industry maintained its competitiveness by refining the tech-
niques brought in from Western countries and with the precise quality management
and efficient production. Nevertheless, economic growth by catching up was seeing
its limits, and it was widely acknowledged that hereafter, competitiveness based on
independent technological development was needed. This led business groups to
make proposals and statements to the government and the ruling party. They
suggested to abandon cramming education, which was effective for catching up by
utilizing existing knowledge, and now that Japan had already caught up, to shift to
education that cultivates creativity necessary to succeed in the competition in
technological development. Thus, business groups and industry people had been the
strongest supporters for the educational policy shift since 1983 (Keidanren 1996).
However, early in the twenty-first century, they turned their stance to blame the
educational ministry for the decline of academic ability.
2.3 Political Situation
Nakasone Yasuhiro, the prime minister at the time, launching the Ad Hoc
Commission for Administrative Reform under the direct supervision of the Cabinet,
promoted strongly administration reform, deregulation, and decentralization. The
commission, which was composed of experts from outside the government, achieved
remarkable success such as the privatization of the Japan National Railways, which
in fact ensured the public support to the prime minister and his way to run the
policies and implement measures. Under the circumstances described above, the
prime minister announced that he recognized the need to promote education reform
in the same way as the administrative reform or outside the Ministry of Education.
As a result, in 1984, the Extraordinary Council on Education was established under
the General Administrative Agency of the Cabinet, indicating that a fundamental
reform in school education should be carried out by the government as a whole.
Considering the situation at the time, senior officials worried that they may lose
leadership unless they set out to proactively drastic policy change.
2.4 Recognition of the Rapidly Changing Society

and “the Age of Uncertainty”
Although I mentioned three factors above, I think that the most influential but incon-
spicuous factor was the senior officials’ recognition of the rapidly changing society
250 T. Tokunaga
and “the age of uncertainty.” They were expected to constantly review the curriculum
standard and to provide the most appropriate one so that all knowledge and skills
required as a member of a nation of modern industry would be taught in school.
Although it could be carried out only if they knew what knowledge and skills would
be required in the future, they were conscious that the society was changing
rapidly and that opinions of the experts have not seemed to agree on what kind of
society would be following the industrial society. “The Third Wave” (1980 Alvin
Toffler) and “The Age of Uncertainty” (1978 John Kenneth Galbraith) were very
popular in Japan. They thought it better to cultivate the ability to learn knowledge
and skills required at that time than to teach what was uncertain to become useful or
not in the future.
3 Development of Educational Policies Under

the “Philosophy of Lifelong Learning”
Increasing the volume of content of school education responding to the development

of industry and sophistication of the society was seeing its limits. In 1983, the
Subcommittee on Educational Content of the Central Council for Education, which
has the top policy deliberation council established in the Ministry of Education, sub-
mitted a groundbreaking report that changed the philosophy and aim of school educa-
tion dynamically. As a basic philosophy of educational policy, the report proposed to
adopt the “philosophy of lifelong learning” instead of the “philosophy of complete
education.” That is to say, instead of trying to teach everything needed as a member of
the society in schools, we should continue learning throughout life. In addition, the
report suggested the shift of the aim of school education from the acquisition of
knowledge and skills to the formation of “self-educating ability,” which is the founda-
tion for learning throughout life. Furthermore, they requested to put more emphasis
on the acquisition of ability to learn knowledge and skills by students themselves in
classroom instructions, to increase problem-solving/problem-exploring type of learn-
ing, and to cultivate students’ willingness to learn throughout their lives as well. Since
then, the educational policies in Japan have been developed along these lines (Box 1).
Box 1: Excerpt from Council Progress Report of the Subcommittee on

Educational Content (1983)
• Acquirement of abilities to learn is important, including how and what to
learn.
• School education should put emphasis on students’ solid learning of basic
and fundamental knowledge and skills, as well as problem-solving and
problem exploring learning methods.
• Students should form the will for lifelong self-education.
It should be noted that this report was written when educational reform had
become a political issue and the ad hoc commission was scheduled to be set up led
by the prime minister. In these situations together with the sense of distrust towards
the educational department, it may be that the Ministry of Education refrained from
making this a formal report of the Council with consideration for this situation.
3.1 Revision of the Course of Study Under the “Philosophy

of Lifelong Learning”
The Ministry of Education revised the curriculum standard in 1989 and 1998 and
implemented them in 1992 and 2002, respectively. For high schools, the curriculum
standard was revised in 1999 and implemented in 2003.
In the 1989 revision, the volume of the educational contents was slightly
decreased. In addition, the school guidance record, which is a nationally standard-
ized form of recording student attendance and learning assessment, was revised, and
included in the evaluation items were acquisition of learning methods, levels of
ability to think logically, expressive power and judgment, as well as formation of
learning motivation.
In the 1998 revision that followed, the volume of content of educational subjects
was reduced by about 30 %, and the “Period for Integrated Study” (PIS) was intro-
duced. This new form of class carries out problem-solving or problem-exploring
type of learning, aiming to cultivate skills such as logical thinking ability and
expressive power.
3.2 Measures to Support New Classroom Instruction
In order to carry out these new classroom instructions under the new aim, the
national government has implemented various measures to support schools
and teachers.
The Ministry of Education started the “Open Space” subsidy program in 1984.
Through this program, the national government subsidized municipalities the
expenses for renovating of school buildings in order to divert surplus areas caused
by student decrease into versatile spaces. In 1985, the educational ministry started
another subsidy program for municipalities, to promote the installment of PCs
in primary and lower secondary schools. In this context, the Ministry of Education
tied up with the Ministry of International Trade and Industry to establish the Center
for Computer Educating for developing hardware and software suitable for school
education in 1986 and set out on research and development of PC programs for
school education in 1987.
The national government formulated a new plan for period from 1993 to 2000 for
improving the allocation of teachers and revised the Class-Size Standard Act in
252 T. Tokunaga
1991. Based on the “6th Teacher Allocation Improvement Plan,” the Ministry of
Education allocated around 15,000 additional teachers to promote small-group
guidance within classes and team teaching. Following this, in the 7th Teacher
Allocation Improvement Plan for period from 2001 to 2005 formulated in 1999,
around 15,000 teachers were allocated for small-group guidance especially for
classes of mathematics, Japanese, English, and science (Research Committee on
School Staffing 2000).
After disseminating the “philosophy of lifelong learning” as well as the new
policies and the new edition of the Course of Study under the philosophy, most of
the senior officials of the educational ministry expected that the provision of the
time and place for new classroom instructions or development of staff necessary
for them or equipment of facilities and devices suitable for them could automatically
generate new classroom instructions under the new philosophy and the new aim.
However, that was serious misunderstanding.
3.3 Amendment of the School Education Act
The school education policy aiming for the cultivation of “self-educating ability”
under the “philosophy of lifelong learning” was criticized temporarily that it caused
declining academic ability. Nevertheless, in 2010, these aims and objectives of
classroom instructions in schools were stipulated in legislation. The School
Education Act was revised, and paragraph two of article 30 was added in relation to
elementary schools, and this is applied mutatis mutandis to junior high schools and
senior high schools.
Previously, they were defined through administrative orders of the Ministry of
Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT)5 such as ministerial
ordinances and public notices. The provision of the School Education Act clarified
the basic idea that school education should “form the foundation for lifelong
learning.” In addition, as more concrete objectives of classroom teaching (those are
commonly referred as academic ability), “development of abilities such as thinking
ability, judgment, and expressive power” and “nurturing of a mindset to learn
proactively” were placed at the same level as “acquisition of basic knowledge and
skills.” This amendment of the School Education Act implied endorsement of
the shift in educational policies that took place since 1983 by democratic
procedures in the Diet (the Japanese Parliament), and thus, the shift became well
established (Box 2).
5
In 2001, the Ministry of Education was merged with the Agency of Science and Technology and
became the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT).
Box 2: School Education Act

Schools, throughout all levels, must let students acquire basic knowledge and
skills in order to establish the foundation of lifelong learning and to be
mindful and make best efforts to develop abilities such as thinking ability,
judgment, and expressive power that are necessary to solve problems by utilizing
their knowledge and skills and to nurture a mindset to learn proactively.
Note. Article 30, Paragraph 2
3.4 Revision of the Course of Study in 2008
Right after amendment of the School Education Act in 2006, MEXT revised the
curriculum standard in 2008 and implemented it in 2011 (for high schools, revised
in 2009 and implemented in 2012). This revision increased the volume of instruc-
tions in each educational subject up to the level of the 1989 revision. Among the
items to be considered when designing instruction plans for the educational subjects
were cultivation of thinking ability, judgment, and expressive power, enhancement
of language activities, emphasis on problem-solving type of learning, pupils’ own
choice of learning tasks, and provision of opportunities for students to think about
their future. This made clear that the aim to cultivate the “ability to self-educate”
under the “philosophy of lifelong learning” would be maintained, and its content
was described more specifically.
4 What Has Made the School Education

Reform More Reliable: Criticism
Around the year of 2000, there was an upsurge of criticism among university faculty
members, industry and economic quarters, experts, and mass media against the shift
in the basic philosophy and the aim of school education since 1983 as well as the
development of educational policies based on this.
4.1 Criticism Against the Shift in the Philosophy

and Aim of School Education
Most of the criticism said that the academic ability of pupils and students had
declined due to the revision of the curriculum standards, usually based on the
recognition that academic ability is the amount of crammed knowledge. Criticism
from university faculty members came from the dissatisfaction that the decrease of
254 T. Tokunaga
knowledge amount of the freshmen was increasing the burden of those responsible
for liberal arts classes, and other criticisms echoed this. Nevertheless, students who
entered universities at that time were those who had received primary and secondary
education based on the curriculum standard implemented in 1980 or 1992, which is
not so different from the curriculum standard implemented in 1961 in terms of the
volume of instruction for each subject, based on which most of the faculty members
at that time educated.
Critiques called the path of educational policies since 1983 “pressure-free
(yutori) education.” However, this naming was based on a misunderstanding. It was
taken simply from the popular name of “class of school’s discretion”—“class of
leeway (yutori)”—which was adopted when the curriculum standard was revised
in 1977 and implemented in 1980. Although criticism was largely based on an
inadequate understanding of facts, situations, and backgrounds, the new curriculum
standard, publicly notified in 1998 and foreseen to be implemented in 2002, with
the reduced volume of instruction of the educational subjects by 30 %, did have
inherent risks of lowering academic standards.
4.2 Conciliatory Response to Criticism
In order to respond to criticisms concerning the decline of academic ability, as

part of the government’s overall deregulation initiative, MEXT made a flexible
interpretation of the curriculum “standard,” accepting “advanced learning” that
goes beyond the content defined in the standard. Subsequently, MEXT accepted to
partially implement the new curriculum standard, which was publicly notified
in 2008 and expected to restore the instruction volume up to the previous level,
earlier than originally intended.
Many criticisms arose. Even though they were based on misunderstanding or
lack of knowledge, MEXT had to respond to these criticisms through educational
policies. I think that there were appropriate reasons: First, MEXT did not present
the intent of the shift in educational philosophy and the aim of school education
to the public and to the educational stakeholders in a form of a simple and easy
administrative document, explaining the problems with the previous educational
policies and the goal of the subsequent educational policies. Second, MEXT had
not neglected the effort to confirm the effect of policies and measures under the
“philosophy of lifelong learning” and verify what the conversion of the philosophy
and the aim had brought to school education.
4.3 Shift of the Attitude to Respect the Verification
In 2004, Nakayama Nariaki, the educational minister, announced to introduce a

nationwide assessment for academic abilities, and the Cabinet determined in 2005
to proceed the study for conducting a national academic survey. The statement
approved by the Cabinet then said that it “would carry studies forward as soon as
possible in order to facilitate understanding and analysis of the academic status of
students, and to develop and improve teaching methods based on the understanding
and analysis.” It has been publicly considered that the government decided to intro-
duce a nationwide academic survey to respond to criticism concerning the decline
of academic ability. Thus, the National Assessment of Academic Ability started in 2007.
Prior to this, Japan joined the PISA by OECD in 2000.
5 Impact of Administrative Reform on School

Education System
The development of new educational policies based on the “philosophy of lifelong

learning” took place at the time when administrative reform and its important parts,
deregulation and decentralization, were pushed forward powerfully. Hence, it has
impacted upon the education reform substantially.
5.1 Deregulation and Decentralization of School

Education System
As I mentioned earlier, the Ad Hoc Commission on Administrative Reform was

established under the Cabinet in 1981, and subsequently several succeeding bodies
had been established. The Extraordinary Council on Education (1984–1987), which
can be called an educational version of the Ad Hoc Commission on Administrative
Reform, submitted reports to the prime minister four times. Among them, the first
report (1985) and the fourth report (1987) promoted the transformation of the
education system from uniform to diversification and from rigid to flexible.
The report from the Committee for the Promotion of Decentralization (1995–2001)
to the Cabinet and the succeeding report from the Central Council for Education to
the educational minister in 1998 introduced the drastic amendment of the Act on the
Organization and Operation of Local Educational Administration in 1999. As a
result, the Ministry of Education, which was scheduled to be merged with the Agency
of Science and Technology based on the report of Committee for the Promotion of
Reform of the Central Government (1998–2000), has lost considerable parts of the
authority for exerting its strong control over local educational boards and public
schools (Tokunaga 1999).
Thus, continuous deregulation/decentralization of school education system and
educational administration in primary and secondary level was carried out, and the
discretionary powers of local school boards and school principals were increased in
a broad range of fields including school management, organization of school
curriculum and its implementation, instruction of educational subjects and relevant
evaluation, and allocation and employment of teachers.
256 T. Tokunaga
5.2 What Deregulation and Decentralization Has Brought

to Educational Administration
In general, deregulation and decentralization contributed greatly to the progress of

school education policy. The progress made in school education policy due to
deregulation and decentralization can be categorized as the following:
First, as a result, deregulation and decentralization established a system suitable for
developing new educational policies dealing with new challenges, as the conven-
tional standardized school management/instruction system or the regulative
administrative method was facing limitations in tackling them.
Second, administrative departments whose authorities and assignments were
reduced actively took up new administrative challenges and methods in search
of their new leading roles that they would have never cared about otherwise.
In effect, progress was made in new educational policies.
Third, in cases where there was difficulty in changing conventional orientations
and mechanisms to tackle new administrative challenges due to delays in
consensus building among stakeholders, educational administrative departments
would work with deregulation/decentralization bodies to push forward the
educational policy as part of the deregulation/decentralization agenda.
5.3 What Deregulation and Decentralization Has Brought

to School Education
In order for the pupils and students to learn how to learn, to cultivate skills such as
the logical thinking ability and expressive power, and to cultivate “self-educating
ability” under the new philosophy, it should had been necessary to introduce
various learning forms and instruction methods such as small-group instruction,
group learning, problem-exploring activities using computers, discussions, and
hands-on learning, in addition to the traditional classroom-style teaching using
blackboards and textbooks (Research Committee on School Staffing 2000).
The flow of deregulation and decentralization was advantageous for introducing
the various forms of learning and methods of instruction. Especially, relaxation
of the requirement of teaching credential for teaching staff allowed business people
and volunteers from the community to contribute to classes as special instructors.
Due to the declining birthrate, the number of pupils and students had decreased in
majority of elementary and junior high schools, which meant decrease in the
number of classes and in effect smaller number of teachers allocated to the school.
In order to make up for the decrease in the number of teachers and to introduce
various learning forms and instruction methods, it was essential to utilize instructors
other than the formal teachers with teaching certificates. The participation of
business people with professional knowledge and skills as instructors made the
various learning forms and instruction methods more effective as well.
6 From Teaching to Learning: Shift in the Basic Stance

of Classroom Instructions and Development of
Instruction Techniques
It is not an easy process to translate the policies into actions. The shift in the basic
stance of classroom instructions and development of instruction techniques were
impacted by various factors.
6.1 Confusion of Teachers over the “Period

for Integrated Study”
The implementation of the “Period for Integrated Study (PIS)” that was introduced
in the 1998 revision of the curriculum standard involved confusion and difficulty.
Teachers were informed of the intent of its introduction through documents and
training. However, they were puzzled as to what and how to teach in actual classes.
All of a sudden, we started seeing pupils and students visiting fields frequently.
There were not a few teachers that could think of nothing else but field visits as
activities in PIS. In the light of this situation, the Ministry of Education accepted to
use PIS for complementary learning of other educational subjects.
As I mentioned earlier, policy efforts and various measures to support new
classroom instruction had been conducted prior to the introduction of PIS,
and its implementation was not out of the blue. However, introduction of PIS had
missed the critical components. Policymakers did not sufficiently understand that
nurturing “self-educating ability” would need a shift in the basic stance towards
classroom instruction—the shift from “teaching to learning.” And they neglected to
promote research and development, with sufficient fund and staff, for classroom
instruction methods appropriate for the cultivation of skills such as logical thinking
and expressive power and the ability to learn proactively. As a result, teachers did
not receive necessary training in teacher-training courses in universities or in
teachers’ training.
6.2 Influence from International Community
However, influenced by the OECD DeSeCo project that was conducted at this time,
and struck by the result of PISA, senior officials of the educational ministry were
aware of the need of both the shift of the basic stance to classroom instruction and
the development of classroom instruction methods.
Japan considered that the shift in educational philosophy and the aim of
education in Japan went ahead of the selection and definition of key competencies
by the OECD. However, the DeSeCo project had clearly mentioned the shift of
258 T. Tokunaga
stance from teaching to learning in relation to the acquisition of key competencies

OECD (2005). For example, its “executive summary” describes that “Despite the
fact that competencies comprise more than just taught knowledge, the DeSeCo
Project suggests that a competency can itself be learned within a favourable learning
environment” (www.oecd.org/).
The Ministry of Education had thought that the shift of policy since 1983 was in
the same line as the DeSeCo project and that the outcome would be reflected in the
PISA results. However, in PISA 2003 and 2006, Japan ranked only middle level in
literacy (NIER 2007). This was reported in the media as a proof that “academic
ability” in the traditional sense had declined and the conversion of educational
philosophy and aim of education was blamed for this.
In response to these, the Ministry of Education felt strongly the need to review
educational policies, to formulate theories that would support the conversion of
the philosophy and the aim of school education and the shift of the basic stance
of classroom instruction, and to research and develop the classroom instruction
methods and learning style suitable to cultivate skills such as logical thinking
ability, expressive power, and ability to learn proactively, and it has set out on
them immediately.
6.3 Research and Development by NIER
More concretely, the National Institute for Educational Policy Research (NIER)
started theoretical research, case studies of initiatives abroad, as well as practical
research and development using the Schools for Research and Development System.
This is a system where practical research and development is conducted with the
approval of MEXT within a designated school. It allows exceptions to the organiza-
tion of subjects and the content of instructions defined in the curriculum standard
and to teach without teaching qualifications. Researchers from NIER participate in
these initiatives. The special creation of “Periods for Learning Skills” from 2007 to
2010 in Niigata elementary and junior high school attached to Niigata University
(Niigata Junior High school 2010) and creation of the subject “Language” in
Hiroshima High School (integrated junior high and senior high school) are
examples (Hiroshima Prefectural Junior High 2010).
Furthermore, many of the initiatives in designated project schools such as Super
Science High School Project (SSH) (since 2005) and Super English Language High
School Project (SELHi) (2002–2009) were based on the shift “from teaching to
learning” and contributed to the research development of an appropriate instruction
method. Some results of these research projects have been already reflected in the
policies or measures. The 2008 revision of the curriculum standard introduced
language activities in all educational subjects that was based on the outcomes,
although some of the research projects have not yet finalized (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1 Initiatives by NIER (Source: Tokunaga 2012b)
7 Results of the Conversion of Educational Philosophy

and the Aim of School Education
Although the shift of the philosophy and the aim of school education now provide
the foundation which is essential for new educational challenges, such as the cultiva-
tion of global talents, enhancement of employability, and development of the twenty-
first century skills, it has not necessarily achieved socially acknowledged outcomes.
7.1 Formation of the Foundation for Development of New

Educational Policy
The combination of the conversion and the development of policies have formed the
foundation of school education which is necessary to respond to the new educa-
tional policy challenges, such as the cultivation of global human resources and
enhancement of employability. Rich and various technical results of trial and errors
since 1983 such as the shift of the aim of school education, the development of cur-
riculum, learning forms, instruction methods, team teaching, and so on must be
effective and beneficial for the new educational policy challenges. It could be said
that this formation of the foundation in itself is the most important outcome of the
shift in educational policy and the aim of school education.
7.1.1 Enhancement of Employability Through Schooling
It has been pointed out that the reason for the increase of instable youth employ-
ment or young people not in education, employment, or training—the NEET or
260 T. Tokunaga
freeter (part-time jobber)—was the increase of temporary employment not only

due to the deregulation of the employment system but also due to the lack of
employability as seen in the high proportion of high school and university gradu-
ates resigning early (Ministry of Health, Labour & Welfare 2009, pp. 17–26). This
led to the introduction of career-oriented education in universities since around
2000. Following the global financial crisis in 2008 and the severe employment
situation for university graduates, there have been stronger expectations towards
the enhancement of career education, the recovery of reality in the instructions,
and the introduction/advancement of cooperation between schools and industry in
all school levels.
7.1.2 Nurturing of Global Human Resources in Response

to the Globalization
As globalization of economic activities and related social systems advanced,

stimulated by the adoption of the UNESCO/OECD Guidelines concerning
higher education in 2003 and by the selection and definition of key competen-
cies by the OECD, ensuring the international validity of school systems and the
educational content became a major challenge for the educational ministry since
the early 2000s. Furthermore, since the late 2000s, in response to the expansion
of overseas activities by enterprises, qualities and skills for taking up business
activities globally became widely expected for those engaged in business
(Tokunaga and Momii 2011, pp. 101–138). Thus, the nurturing of global human
resources through school education has become a major policy issue for the
national government.
It has been realized that human qualities and abilities which are believed to be
required in a globalized society would surely match the direction of the shift of
educational philosophy and the aim of school education (Tokunaga and Momii 2011,
pp. 139–158), with the advancement of globalization and clarification of the image
of human resources needed in a globalized society through the media. Today, there
is an endorsement from the society that school education aims for the development
of twenty-first-century skills such as ability to communicate and expressive power
instead of simply cramming knowledge as it used to do.
7.2 Insufficiently Visible Outcomes
On the other hand, it seems that the conversion of educational philosophy and aim
of education in primary and secondary level and the development of educational
policies based on it have not necessarily achieved socially acknowledged outcomes,
especially concrete ones.
7.2.1 Situation of Behaviors and Academic Abilities of Students
The comparison of official survey results6 in 1988 and 2011 shows that the situation
concerning problematic behaviors of pupils and students that triggered the shift of
direction has not improved compared to the 1980s. The proportion of pupils
and students who cannot follow the classes—the phenomenon that was named
“Shichi-Go-San (753)”—seems to have decreased (NIER, MEXT 2006). However,
this could be an effect of the decrease of the volume of instructions of educational
subjects. Rather, as a result of the end of cramming education and the reforms of
entrance examinations of high schools and universities, the middle-level students
stopped preparing for tough entrance exams. According to the fourth Basic Learning
Survey conducted by the Benesse Educational Research and Development Center in
2006, the average studying time at home was 87 min for second-year junior
high school students and 70 min for second-year high school students, which was
considerably shorter than those in 1990. That led to an outstanding gap between
top-level students and middle- or lower-level students in results of various surveys
on academic achievement.
7.2.2 Decline of Confidence in Public Schools
Furthermore, the cut back of the content of instruction of educational subjects by the
curriculum standard raised the aspiration of top-level students to attend private junior
high schools. According to the official statistics,7 the proportion of students in private
junior high schools has doubled in about 20 years from 3.5 % in 1988 to 7.2 % in 2008.
Especially in elementary schools of the urban districts of Tokyo, in general, about one
fourth to one third of the graduates continue on to private junior high schools. Many of
these junior high schools and affiliated high schools that did not have a track record of
good advancement rates adopted the conventional cramming education, and as a
result, the shift in the policy did not extend to many of the top-level students. However,
after recognizing needs for global talents with twenty-first-century skills
responding to the progress of globalization, not a few top-ranked private junior high
schools and affiliated high schools are likely to change their direction and educational
style, including certified by the International Baccalaureate Organization.
Consequently, they seem to be joining the educational policy line from 1983.
7.2.3 Proliferation of First-Year Training in Universities
Since the late 2000s, there has been an increase in universities providing training of
skills necessary for university education for freshmen. Training includes remedial
6
Research report on issues such as student guidance on problem behavior of students by the
Ministry of Education/Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology.
7
School Basic Survey by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology.
262 T. Tokunaga
classes of high school math and science, or training of basic reading and writing in
Japanese and English, and taking notes efficiently and effectively. Today, about
90 % of universities provide such training (Higher Education Bureau, MEXT 2011).
The need for such training has increased partly because the entrance examinations
to universities have become easier due to the decline in the number of 18-year-olds,
which led to the rise in the advancement rate to universities, accepting students that
not always have the competence and ability needed for university education.
Nonetheless, it seems that the cut of the volume of the content of instruction of
educational subjects by the 1998 revision of the curriculum standard also had some
influence. Although the shift of philosophy and aim of primary and secondary
education was intended to develop necessary skills for university education, it has
not been successful in this regard8 (NIER, MEXT 2010).
8 Future Challenges
It seems that the direction taken through the shift of educational philosophy and
the aim of school education at primary and secondary level since 1983 as well as
the related educational policies adopted continuously were not a wrong one.
Today, the challenge is to develop new instruction methods that realize the shift in
the philosophy and aim of school education. Especially, important issues are the
acquisition of skills such as self-expression skills and thinking ability, as well as
development of forms of learning appropriate for this.
8.1 Further Development of Classroom Instruction Methods

Based on Research Findings of Learning Science
Classroom instruction methods have been developed in a practical manner in

schools. However, this style of research and development needs trial and errors and
is difficult to generalize. Currently, research in learning science, incorporating
research findings from robotics, is making rapid progress, with several universities
playing a central role and NIER participating in it. In the future, it seems necessary
and effective to further develop and refine classroom instruction methods based on
research findings of learning science.
8
The National Assessment of Academic Ability and Learning Activities (elementary school, junior
high school) consists of questions A, which test one’s basic knowledge, and questions B, which test
one’s capacity to utilize basic knowledge. The percentage of questions A answered correctly is
always higher than that of questions B throughout the 4 surveys conducted from 2007 to 2010.
8.2 Development of Curriculum Standards According to Skills
Conventional curriculum standards allocated knowledge to be taught in classes to

each subject and grade according to academic disciplines. Currently, NIER is work-
ing on a possible new style of a curriculum standard, where knowledge is combined
with twenty-first-century skills such as logical thinking and communication ability
and thus forms a unit to be allocated in it.
8.3 Further Progress in Research in Learning Science

and Development of Classroom Instruction Plans
Composed of Diverse Learning Forms
Classroom instruction in schools will increasingly need to be backed up scien-

tifically. Therefore, in the policy field, the promotion of research in learning science
is considered.
Based on existing research findings from learning science (Miyake 2012, pp.
292–294), learning forms that intentionally create a constructive interplay are being
introduced. This is effective for the intellectual development of pupils and students.
Individual instructions for the formation of proactive learning minds and acquisition
of self-educating skills, as well as problem-exploring activities both individually
and collectively, are also being introduced. Furthermore, various platforms for
learning outside schools are provided by social education institutions and NPOs.
From now on, I believe it is necessary to intentionally create various forms of
learning including those outside schools and at home, class lectures using black-
board and textbooks, as well as individual consultation and complementary
individual instructions by teachers outside of classes. These should be combined
with knowledge and skills that can be learned effectively through the forms and
classroom instruction plans that allocate appropriate number of hours for each of
the various forms of learning to be developed. The author calls this “the three-
dimensional matrix of knowledge, skills, and forms of learning” and is suggesting
the development of a sophisticated theoretical framework and a concrete model of
classroom instruction plan.
References
Alvin Toffler. (1980). Daisan no Nami (The third wave). Japanese Translator Suzuki, K., Sugama,
A., Sakurai, M., Kobayashi, C., Kobayashi, A., Ueda, C., Nomizu, M., Ando, T., & Editor
Tokuyama, J. NHK Publishing. 642 p.
Benesse Educational Research and Development Center. (2006). Dai4kai gakushuu kihon-
gakuryoku jittai chousa houkokusho. [Report on the 4th basic learning survey & assessment of
academic abilityE]. Tokyo: Benesse.
264 T. Tokunaga
Central Council for Education. (1983). Kyouiku-naiyou-tou shou-iinkai shingi-keika houkoku.

[Council progress report of the Subcommittee on Educational Content]. Tokyo: Ministry of
Education.
Central Council for Education. (1998). Kongo-no chihou kyouiku gyousei no arikata ni tsuite.
[Council report, Local educational administration as it ought to be]. Tokyo: Ministry of
Education.
Extraordinary Council on Education (1985). Kyouiku kaikaku ni kansuru rinji kyouiku shingikai
dai-ichiji toushin. [First report on educational reform by the Extraordinary Council on
Education]. Tokyo: Prime minister’s office.
Extraordinary Council on Education. (1987). Kyouiku kaikaku ni kansuru rinji kyouiku shingikai
dai-yoji toushin, saishuu toushin. [Forth report on educational reform by the Extraordinary
Council on Education, the final report]. Tokyo: Prime minister’s office.
Galbraith, J. K. (1978). Fukakujitsusei no Jidai (The age of uncertainty). Japanese Translator
Tsuru S., TBS-BRITANNICA Co., Ltd., 494p.
Higher Education Bureau, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science & Technology. (2011).
Daigaku ni okeru kyouiku naiyou tou no kaikaku joukyou tou ni tsuite. [Survey report on
university education improvements]. Tokyo: Higher Education Bureau.
Hiroshima Prefectural Junior High School. (2010). Kenkyuu kaihatsu jisshi houkokusho, Heisei
21nendo. [Research and development implementation report in 2009 fiscal year]. Research and
development implementation reports in 2009 fiscal year. Tokyo: Ministry of Education, Culture,
Sports, Science & Technology.
Keidanren. (1996). Souzoteki-na jinzai-ikusei no tameno “itsutsu no teigen, nanatsu no akushon,
Sozouteki-na jinzai no ikusei ni mukete motomerareru kyouiku-kaikaku to kigyou no koudou.
[5 recommendations and 7 operational targets for fostering creative human resources, the
necessity of educational reform and corporate efforts to foster creative human resources].
Tokyo: Keidanren.
Ministry of Education. (1972). Gakusei hyakunenshi [Japan’s modern educational system, A history
of the first hundred years]. Tokyo: Ministry of Education.
Ministry of Education. (1992). Gakusei hyakunijuunenshi. [Japan’s modern educational system 2,
a history of the first hundred twenty years]. Tokyo: Ministry of Education.
Ministry of Health, Labour & Welfare. (2009). Heisei 21nen ban kousei-roudou hakusho: kurashi to
shakai no antei ni muketa jiritsu shien. [Annual health, labour and welfare report 2008–2009:
Supports for independence in order to stabilize living and society]. Tokyo: Ministry of Health,
Labour & Welfare.
Miyake, N. (2012). Hito robotto kyouseigaku; jissentekina gakushuu kenkyuu ni robotto wo
dounyuu site naniga dekiruka. Cognitive Studies, 19(3), 292–301 [Human Robot Symbiosis].
National Institute for Educational Policy Research (NIER). (2003). Heisei 13nendoshou-
chuugakkou kyouikukatei jisshi joukyou chousa no kekka gaiyou ni tsuite. [Summary of survey
results on the outcome of curriculum activities in elementary schools and junior high schools
in 2001 fiscal year]. Tokyo: NIER.
NIER. (2005). Heisei 15nendo shou-chuugakkou kyouikukatei jisshi joukyou chousa no kekka gaiyou
ni tsuite. [Summary of survey results on the outcome of curriculum activities in elementary
schools and junior high schools in 2003 fiscal year]. Tokyo: NIER.
NIER (Eds.). (2007). Ikiru tameno chishiki to ginou (3) – OECD seito no gakushuu toutatsu-do
chousa (PISA) 2006nen chousa kokusai kekka houkokusho. [Knowledge and skills for living
(3) – report on the international results of the 2006 OECD Assessment of Student Academic
Achievement (PISA)]. Tokyo: Gyosei.
NIER, MEXT. (2010). Heisei 22nendo zenkoku gakuryoku gakushuu-joukyou chousa houkokusho
(shougakkou, chuugakkou). [Survey results report of the National Assessment of Academic
Ability and Learning Activities in 2010 fiscal year (elementary school, junior high school)].
Tokyo: NIER.
Niigata Junior High School attached to the Niigata University. (2010). Kenkyuu kaihatsu jisshi
houkokusho, Heisei 21nendo. [Research and development implementation report in 2009 fiscal
year]. Research and development implementation reports in 2009 fiscal year. Tokyo: MEXT.
OECD. (2005). The definition and selection of key competencies, executive summary. Retrieved 13
June 2010 from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/35070367.pdf
Research Committee on School Staffing. (2000). Kongo-no Gakkyuu-hensei oyobi kyousyokuin-
haichi ni tsuite, houkoku. [Report for the improvement of class-size and staffing of schools].
Tokyo: Bureau of Local Educational Administration, Ministry of Education.
Tokunaga, T. (1999). Chi-kyou-gyou-hou kaisei kyuu ando ei. [Commentary on the revision of the
act on the organization and operation of local educational administration]. Tokyo: Gyosei.
Tokunaga, T. (2012a). Wagakuni-no gakko-kyouiku-seido to kyouiku-seisaku no hensen ni tsuite.
[The historical transition of the modern school systems and national education policies in
Japan]. NIER Research Bulletin, 141, 247–269.
Tokunaga, T. (2012b). From ‘Teaching’ to ‘New Learning’. International trends of education
reform: Achievements and challenges (pp. 5–20). Seoul: Korean Educational Development
Institute, 29 Aug 2012.
Tokunaga, T., & Momii, K. (2011). Guroubaru jinzai ikusei no tameno daigaku hyouka shihyou.
[Evaluation indicators of university education for promoting the development of global human
resources]. Tokyo: Kyoudou Shuppan.
European Union: The Strive for Smart,
Sustainable and Inclusive Growth
Gábor Halász
Abstract This chapter aims at presenting the key features of the education policy
of the EU as part of its overall reform agenda. It exposes the specific strategic com-
munity priorities related with the various subsystems of education (vocational train-
ing, higher education, school education, and adult learning) and also the horizontal
goals that overarch the subsystems. The main components of the lifelong learning
paradigm, as a general policy framework, are presented, with a special focus on the
EU’s higher education modernisation agenda. A detailed picture of various policy
instruments the community uses to support policy implementation is also presented.
The final section of the article analyses the possible future developments of educa-
tion reform policy in the EU.
Keywords European Union • EU2020 • EU education strategy • Education policies

• Lifelong learning • Education qualification system • Higher education modernization
• Governance • Future of education reform
Policy reform in the case of the European Union has a different meaning from all
the other G20 members. The EU, in contrast with the other G20 countries, is not a
state. Although it shares many features with “normal” nation states, it is a unique
political construct that cannot be described as a “real state”. Even though it has its
citizens, its parliament, its government, and its policies, and it does operate specific
mechanisms of governance, these are different from those characterising “real
states”. The EU is more than an intergovernmental international organisation
(e.g., in certain policy areas it has full regulatory power) but less than a federal state
(like the United States, Canada or Germany) because its constituents are not
“provinces” with limited jurisdictions but powerful sovereign nations. This unique
political construct has, however, highly elaborated policies even in those sectors
G. Halász (*)
University Eötvös Loránd, Budapest, Hungary

268 G. Halász
where its regulatory power is missing or is very limited—such as education—and it

has a highly developed repertoire of implementation instruments that are put into
operation even in these sectors. It can and, in fact, it does initiate policy reforms, and
it does have the capacity to implement them.
The aim of this article is to present the key features of the current education
policy of the EU as part of its overall reform agenda. The article intends to show that
the EU has been pursuing marked reform and modernisation policies in the education
sector which are strongly embedded into and determined by its overall policy of
social and economic modernisation. A special focus is given to the question of how
reform policies, which had been defined at community level, are implemented in the
member states. This focus is justified by the fact that implementing reform policies
in the EU context is particularly challenging since the EU consists of sovereign
member states which have almost full control of governing their education systems.
The article does not have the intention to present specific policy reforms within
specific EU member countries: it deals only with community level goals and actions.
1 Education Sector Reform Policies of the EU
In the field of education, the EU has a well-focussed reform policy which aims at
enhancing modernisation processes in its member states. This reform policy is
directly connected with its broader policy for “smart, sustainable and inclusive
growth” as formulated in the so-called EU2020 strategy proposed by the European
Commission1 and adopted by the main decision-making and law-making body of
the Union: the Council of the ministers.2 “Smart” refers to the goal of founding
growth on the most advanced technologies, “sustainable” refers to both environ-
ment friendly and efficient growth, and “inclusive” refers to the goal of enhancing
the maintenance of social cohesion.
The direct antecedent of the EU2020 strategy is the so-called Lisbon Strategy,
adopted by heads of states of the European Union one decade earlier, in March
2000. The latter set goals for social and economic development to be reached by the
end of the last decade. The EU2020 strategy is, in fact, the continuation or the pro-
longation of the Lisbon Strategy in an enriched and updated form. They both have
been urging major reforms in the “European economic and social model” in order
to improve the competitiveness of Europe while reinforcing social cohesion and
protecting the environment. They both have been translated into specific sectoral
strategies, including one for the education sector. During the last decade, this was
the “Education and Training 2010” strategy, and its prolongation, currently in force,
is called “Education and Training 2020”.
1
See European Commission (2010a). For more detail see also the European Commission’s related
website (http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020).
2
Council Conclusions on Europe 2020, Economic and Financial Affairs Council (ECOFIN),
Brussels, 16 March 2010.
European Union: The Strive for Smart, Sustainable and Inclusive Growth 269
1.1 Policy Reforms and Strategic Goals

in the Education Sector
The current “Education and Training 2020” strategy, proposed by the European
Commission, was adopted by the ministers of education in 2009,3 that is, prior to the
overall “big” growth strategy. This is an important fact because it shows that the
education sector is not simply implementing the “big” strategy, but it also plays a
kind of forerunner role. The prominent role of the education sector in the Europe
2020 growth strategy is shown even better by the fact that from the eight measurable
key policy targets (“headline targets”) approved by the heads of states in summer
2010,4 two are directly related with education (early school leaving and tertiary
graduation), and three others (employment rate, R&D and poverty reduction) are
strongly, although indirectly linked with the performance of the education sector
(see Table 1).
According to the text adopted at the highest political level, the goal of the com-
munity is “improving education levels, in particular by aiming to reduce school
dropout rates to less than 10 % and by increasing the share of 30–34 years old hav-
ing completed tertiary or equivalent education to at least 40 %”.5 This has sent a
very clear message to the member countries: in the context of the current financial
crisis, they should restore the balance of their national budgets so that spending on
education and training remains a priority.
Table 1 Europe 2020 targets (Source: European Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/

targets_en.pdf))
Targets Estimated starting value in 2010 Target value by 2020
1. Employment rate (in %) 73.70–74 % 75 %
2. R&D in % of GDP 2.65–2.72 % 3%
3. CO2 emission reduction targets2 −20 % (compared −20 % (compared
to 1990 levels) to 1990 levels)
4. Renewable energy 20 % 20 %
5. Energy efficiency—reduction 206.9 Mtoe 20 % increase in energy
of energy consumption in Mtoe efficiency equalling
368 Mtoe
6. Early school leaving in % 10.30–10.50 % 10 %
7. Tertiary education in % 37.50–38.0 % 40 %
8. Reduction of population at risk Cannot be calculated because 20,000,000
of poverty or social exclusion of differences in national
in number of persons methodologies
3
Council Conclusions of 12 May 2009 on a strategic framework for European cooperation in
education and training (ET 2020), Official Journal C 119, 28 May 2009, pp. 0002–0010.
4
European Council Conclusions. Brussels, 17 June 2010.
5
European Council Conclusions. Brussels, 17 June 2010.
270 G. Halász
The specific education sector strategy adopted in 2009 defined four major
objectives: (1) “making lifelong learning and mobility a reality”, (2) “improving the
quality and efficiency of education and training”, (3) “promoting equity, social
cohesion and active citizenship”, and (4) “enhancing creativity and innovation,
including entrepreneurship, at all levels of education and training”. Three of these
four objectives are not new: they have been present in the sectoral strategy since the
beginning of the previous decade. The fourth one (creativity and entrepreneurship)
has also been supported by the community for a longer time, even if it did not
figure among the big sectoral objectives set in the previous main strategy document.
Under each of the four priority areas, a number of specific key policy initiatives
have been launched.
The policy initiative that might have the strongest and the deepest influence
on the development of the education systems in the member states is the reform
of national qualifications systems triggered by the adoption of the European
Qualifications Framework (EQF).6 This is a so-called meta-framework which aims
at orientating national qualifications reforms within the member countries. The lat-
ter have committed themselves to establish their own national qualifications frame-
works following the EQF principles, that is, linking the level of each national
qualification to the European standards and describing specific qualifications in
terms of learning outcomes defined as knowledge, skills and competences. The new
national frameworks are to mediate towards the national education systems a com-
mon way of thinking about learning and about the formal recognition of outcomes
of learning. Although this is a fully voluntary process, based on the autonomous
decisions of each member country, it would be difficult for any of them to keep
away from this harmonisation of national qualifications systems. In fact, the prog-
ress of this process shows that voluntary cooperation might often be a stronger
unifying force than compelling regulations.
This is also demonstrated by the much better known Bologna process by which
European countries are creating a European Area of Higher Education which also
means harmonising higher education systems. It is important to stress that this is an
intergovernmental process, launched outside the European Union by countries
among which several have never been and will never be members of the EU. While
harmonising the structure of educational system of its member countries is formally
excluded by the EU Treaty, this is something that can be done and is being done on
a voluntary basis. The European Commission supports the Bologna process by its
implementation capacities, but it is not the “master” of it. The commission has its
own higher education policy priorities that actually go beyond the scope of the
Bologna process as they include reform goals related with funding and governance
which are not part of the latter, and they stress particularly strongly the mission of
higher education in enhancing economic growth and competitiveness.
6
Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on the
establishment of the European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning (Official Journal
C 111, 6 May 2008).
1.2 Policies Related with the Particular Subsystems
Traditionally vocational training has been the strongest component of community

education and training policy because this was the only education-related field in
which the original Treaty of Rome has endowed the Community with formal
competences. This was extended to general education only in more than three
decades later with the Maastrich Treaty. Vocational training is still a central
component of the policies of the Union, but today it is strongly embedded into a
more general policy of skills and human resource development. This policy area has
always been strongly connected with employment policy, and for more than one
decade with the policy of lifelong learning which became part of the employment
strategy of the Union developed after the conclusion of the Amsterdam Teaty in 1997.
A key element of vocational training policy has been the efforts to make vocational
qualifications mutually recognised and transparent in order to enhance the free
movement of labour. The Union has significantly contributed to promoting the value
and social recognition of vocational training in the member states.
Since the 1980s, higher education has also become a key policy area. Originally
the related policies and measures were focusing on mobility, inter-university coop-
eration and strengthening linkages between higher education and industry, but since
the first half of the last decade, the Union has been promoting a general modernisa-
tion strategy that goes well beyond the original focus. Linked with the Lisbon
Strategy, its departure point is a rather gloomy picture of the state of higher educa-
tion in Europe, or as the Commission has put it diplomatically in its most recent
communication: “the potential of European higher education institutions to fulfil
their role in society and contribute to Europe’s prosperity remains underexploited”
(European Commission 2011a, p. 2). It has proposed reforms or improvements in
three specific areas: curricula, funding and governance. The curriculum reform
component aims at making teaching better connected to the needs of the world of
work and make European universities more attractive globally. Funding reform
aims at enlarging and diversifying the funding basis of higher education and making
it less dependent on direct state funding. The aim of governance reform is to make
universities more autonomous, more accountable and more entrepreneurial.
School policy is a relatively recent component of community education policies.
The strongest element of this is the decision taken by the Council and the European
Parliament in 2006 to support the development of eight key competences in the
school systems of the member countries. Based on a strong mandate, given by the
heads of states in Lisbon in 2000, and after years of difficult professional debates
and negotiations, the Commission proposed eight key competences that all European
citizens should possess (see Box 1). Although the recommendation of the Council
and the European Parliament is about key competences “for lifelong learning”, that
is, formally they are not linked to any specific subsystems of the education system,
and the legal text does not mention the word curriculum, it is clear that this has a
major impact on the conception of school education and school curricula. This has
been made clear when the commission launched, in 2008, a public debate on the
272 G. Halász
Box 1: The European key competences

• Communication in the mother tongue7
• Communication in foreign languages
• Mathematical competence and basic competences in science and technology
• Digital competence
• Learning to learn
• Social and civic competences
• Sense of initiative and entrepreneurship
• Cultural awareness and expression
question of “What should our schools be like in the twenty-first century?” and the
theme of key competences was in the centre of this debate. The policy proposal of
the Commission emerging from this debate was entitled “Improving competences
for the 21st Century: An Agenda for European Cooperation on Schools” (European
Commission 2008), and it placed the implementation of the key competence recom-
mendation into the focus of its proposed school policy. The recommendation,
although unevenly, has had a significant impact on school policies in most member
countries, often supporting ongoing domestic reforms targeted at standards, teach-
ing practices and assessment (Gordon et al. 2009).
Besides the definition of key competences, the professional development of
teachers has become a cornerstone of community school policy. In the second half
of the last decade, education ministers meeting in the Council have adopted several
decisions on this theme,8 recognising the strategic role of the quality of the teacher
labour force in educational development. The theme of teachers was also the first
among the 13 action areas defined on the basis of the Lisbon mandate in the
“Education and Training 2010” programme which guided the education policy-
related activities of the community during the last decade.
7
Recommendations of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on Key
Competences for Lifelong Learning (2006/962/EC), Official Journal of the European Union, 30
December 2006.
8
Draft Conclusions of the Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member
States, meeting within the Council, on efficiency and equity in education and training (2006/C
298/03), Official Journal of the European Union 8 December 2006; Conclusions of the Council
and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council
of 15 November 2007 on improving the quality of teacher education on 15 November 2007
(2007/C 300/07), Official Journal of the European Union 12 December 2007; Conclusions of the
Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within
the Council of 21 November 2008 on preparing young people for the twenty-first century: an
agenda for European cooperation on schools (2008/C 319/08), Official Journal of the European
Union 13 December 2008; Council Conclusions of 26 November 2009 on the professional
development of teachers and school leaders (2009/C 302/04), Official Journal of the European
Union 12 December 2009
A fourth area seen as a subsystem of education is adult learning. In 2007, after a

Europe-wide consultation process, the Commission proposed a separate policy
package on adult learning which was backed, later on, by the Council and the
Parliament.9 This was a kind of renewal of the recognition of “adult learning as a key
component of lifelong learning” which has already been well reflected in the fact that
participation in lifelong learning of adults is one of the major sectoral benchmarks in
education. According to this benchmark, set originally in 2003, by 2020 15 % of
adults aged 25–64 should participate in adult learning as measured by the European
Labour Force Survey which “asks about participation in formal and non-formal
learning in the 4 weeks prior to the survey” (European Commission 2011b, p. 34).
1.3 Horizontal Policies
There are several horizontal EU policies and priorities in the education field that are
not necessarily linked with any particular subsystem of the education system although
in some cases they are connected more strongly with one than with another area.
Perhaps the most important of them is supporting equity which has been present in
education-related community policies since the beginning of cooperation in this sec-
tor. It has taken various forms, such as fighting against school failure, facilitating
transition from school to work, promoting “second chance schools”, supporting the
integration of children with special needs and that of immigrants and ethnic minori-
ties. As referred to earlier (see Table 1), reducing the proportion of early school leav-
ers is currently a major policy goal supported by one of the community benchmarks.
The promotion of information technology in education has been a similar
horizontal priority. The importance of this was recognised at community level
earlier than in most member states, and a number of specific programmes have
been launched or supported by the European Commission.10 Quality assurance
and development is a further policy priority that is relevant for all subsystems.
The European approach to quality has had a major impact on national approaches,
especially regarding such principles as the balance of internal and external
evaluation, the involvement of stakeholders in quality processes and the use
of quality management for strategic improvement.11 Finally, the promotion of
9
European Commission (2007); Council Conclusions of 22 May 2008 on adult learning (2008/C
140/09), Official Journal of the European Union 6 June 2008; European Parliament Resolution on
Adult learning: It is never too late to learn, 2007/2114 (INI).
10
Resolution of the Council and the Ministers for Education, meeting within the Council, of 19
September 1983 on measures relating to the introduction of new information technology in educa-
tion; Council Resolution of 13 July 2001 on e-Learning; European Commission (1996).
11
Council Recommendation of 24 September 1998 on European cooperation in quality assurance
in higher education (98/561/EC); Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council
of 12 February 2001 on European cooperation in quality evaluation in school education (2001/166/
EC), Official Journal of the European Communities L 60/51.
274 G. Halász
cooperation between education and business has also been a permanent priority of
community policies in education.12
Recently the theme of education/business nexus has been strongly connected
with the issue of the contribution of education to innovation. Strengthening the
innovation capacity of the Union has been a central component of community
policies that has a strong impact on education sectoral policy. Ministers declared in
2009 the “European Year of Creativity and Innovation” in order to “raise awareness
of the importance of creativity and innovation for personal, social and economic
development; to disseminate good practices; to stimulate education and research
and to promote policy debate on related issues”.13 And Now one of the “flagship”
action programmes of the Union in the framework of the EU2020 strategy is about
innovation.14
2 Lifelong Learning as the General Policy Framework
Since the beginning of the last decade, all education sector reform policies of the
European Union have been ranged under the umbrella of lifelong learning (LLL).
The notion of LLL covers all subsystems of education, including informal and non-
formal learning outside the formal education system, and it is now seen as a kind of
new paradigm of thinking about the world of education and education policies.
2.1 The Content of Community LLL Policy
The idea to put lifelong learning into the very centre of community education policy
goes back to the 1970s when the first major proposal for a community policy in
education was formulated (Janne 1973), but this became a central commitment of
the European Commission only following the creation of legal bases for community
actions in the education sector in the 1992 Maastrich Treaty (European Commission
1993). The first detailed and coherent policy for LLL was proposed by the European
Commission at the very beginning of the last decade following a 1-year-long, active
public debate in the member countries (European Commission 2001). It is impor-
tant to stress that this has been initiated as a “shared policy” of the employment and
the education sectors. Making LLL policy highly operationalised and explicitly for-
mulated became inevitable by the launching of the policy coordination process in
employment policy following the Amsterdam Treaty in 2007.
12
See, for example, the “University-business dialogue and co-operation” website of the European
Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/education/higher-education/business_en.htm).
13
See the official website of the year (http://create2009.europa.eu/about_the_year.html).
14
See the “Innovation Union” website of the European Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/research/
innovation-union/index_en.cfm?pg=keydocs).
As we saw, “making lifelong learning and mobility a reality” is the first of the
four priorities of the education sector strategy adopted in 2009 for the current decade.
Since its inception the LLL policy of the community has been confirmed, extended
and deepened by a number of important decisions of the Council and the Parliament,15
but the main lines of this policy are more or less the same as they were set at the
beginning. The so-called building blocks of this policy (see Box 2) together have
created a new paradigm that seems gradually to gain ground in the member countries
partly due to the use of the community policy instruments (to be presented in more
details below) supporting implementation. Since every member state is supposed to
devise and implement a national LLL strategy and both the strategy and its imple-
mentation are regularly evaluated by the community, there is a high probability
that the European strategy has a significant influence on the content of the national
documents, and its building blocks do appear in the latter.
Box 2: The key components of the LLL policy of the European Union
• “Valuing learning” (recognising competences acquired in informal and
non-formal learning; learning outcomes-based qualifications reform)16
• “Information, guidance and counselling” (the development of lifelong
guidance systems and European policy cooperation in this area)
• “Investing time and money in learning” (promoting regulatory policies that
support individual and company investment into learning)
• “Bringing together learners and learning opportunities” (promoting flexibility in
employment and education regulations so that they make adult learning easier)
• “Basic skills” (defining new standard frameworks for key competences
and redirecting teaching to develop these competences)
• “Innovative pedagogy” (enhancing innovation in education, especially in
classroom level teaching/learning so that learning environments become
more favourable for lifelong learning)
15
See particularly the following decisions: Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 on lifelong learning
(2002/C 163/01), Official Journal of the European Communities C 163/1; Conclusions of the
Council and of the representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the
Council on Common European Principles for the identification and validation of non-formal and
informal learning (May 2004); Resolution of the Council and of the representatives of the Member
States meeting within the Council on Strengthening Policies, Systems and Practices in the field of
Guidance throughout life in Europe (May 2004); Resolution of the Council and of the representa-
tives of the Member States meeting within the Council on Strengthening Policies, Systems and
Practices in the field of Guidance throughout life in Europe (May 2004); and European
Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning. Recommendation of the European Parliament and
of the Council (April 2008).
16
See European Commission (2001) for the source of the list in quotation marks. The details in
brackets are explanations referring also to major subsequent policy developments.
276 G. Halász
Since it has become the basic framework of community education policy, more
than one decade ago the paradigm of lifelong learning has gone through some evo-
lution, but, as mentioned, its basic pillars have remained broadly the same. Lifelong
learning has always been understood in a very broad sense in the EU, encompassing
all forms of learning from early childhood education (which has recently become a
major priority area) to the workplace learning of adults. A key feature of this para-
digm is to put the learner (the demand side) into the centre of education and training
policies instead of providers (i.e., the supply side), which has far-reaching implica-
tions for all policy aspects including legal regulation, funding or pedagogy. Opening
the education sector towards the “outside world”, that is, strengthening its connec-
tions with the world of work and giving business a greater role, has ever been a
major priority in community education policy. This orientation has sometimes
been criticised by those who think the education policy pursued by the EU is
too “instrumental” or too much oriented by “neo-liberal values” (e.g. Field 1998;
Borg and Mayo 2005; Lee et al. 2008).
2.2 A Central Element: Reforming National

Qualification Systems
From an EU perspective, the most important component of national LLL strategies

and reform policies is, as already referred to earlier, the development of national
qualifications frameworks (NQF) in accordance with the common European meta-
framework (EQF). According to a recent official EU report released in October of
2012, 29 member or candidate member countries were developing or have already
designed a comprehensive NQF covering all types and levels of qualifications.
NQFs have been “formally adopted” in 21 countries: four of them have “fully
implemented” their NQFs and seven of them were “entering an early operational
stage” (CEDEFOP 2012).
A particularly interesting element of this implementation process is the so-called
“referencing” which aims at checking whether national categories match correctly
the corresponding European levels (Coles 2011). This is the condition for national
awarding institutions to issue national diplomas or other qualifications containing
an indication of their “European level”. Since this is in the interest of the citizens
who have obtained these qualifications, there is a pressure on national governments
to perform the referencing process even if they are not legally bound to do so. And,
since the European framework is based on defining learning outcomes, national
frameworks have also to follow the same logic.
One of the most important outcomes of the progression of LLL policies, includ-
ing the implementation of EQF, is the blurring of borderlines between the various
subsystems of education, on the one hand, and between sectoral policies affecting
the development of education, on the other. It is now difficult to draw a sharp dis-
tinction between policy areas such as education, employment, social care, regional
development or innovation policy. The LLL approach has created a kind of common
policy space in which measures taken in the various policy areas reinforce each
other and create synergies.
The advancement of LLL policies in the member countries has now reached a
stage that we could perhaps describe as a new policy generation often called skills
policy (European Commission 2010b; OECD 2012). Skills policies tend to put a
strong stress on the demand side (as opposed to the supply side), they put more
stress on workplace or work-based learning (as opposed to learning in schools),
they see skills utilisation as important as skills production, and they shift the
attention from matching demand towards creating skills equilibrium (OECD 2012;
Campbell 2012). A new skills policy for the European Union was proposed by the
European Commission in 2008, and this became the object of one of the seven
flagship action programmes supporting the implementation of the EU2020 strategy.17
3 The Higher Education Modernisation Agenda

of the Community
The lifelong learning paradigm has given a new direction to community policies
related to all subsystems of education. There is one subsector policy that deserves
being treated in more detail because of its key contribution to the Lisbon Agenda
and the EU2020 strategy: this is higher education. The European Commission has
continuously supported efforts to make higher education part of the broader lifelong
learning system, although European academic circles have been reacting rather
ambiguously to these efforts. We can observe both extremely positive and very
reluctant reactions. The former can be symbolised, for example, by the emergence
of professional networks supporting “University Lifelong Learning”,18 or by the
adoption of the “European Universities’ Charter on Lifelong Learning” by the
European University Association in 2008 (EUA 2008). The latter can be symbolised
by the high number of “critical” analyses of both the higher education policy of the
community and the Bologna process.19
The higher education modernisation agenda of the Union interacts in an interest-
ing way with the intergovernmental Bologna process, the latter aiming at the cre-
ation of a European Higher Education Area. This is a typical pattern of European
education policy making which often transfers issues of contention either to other
sectors, where the policy environment is friendlier, or outside the Union into policy
17
See the “Agenda for new skills and jobs” website of the European Commission (http://ec.europa.
eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=958).
18
See, for example, the “European University Lifelong Learning Network” created in 2006 by 100
partner institutions in 31 countries which created an online “Managers’ Handbook” for university
leaders intending to open their institutions towards LLL (http://distance.ktu.lt/thenuce/ebook2006/
INTRODUCTION/fcontent.html).
19
See, for example, Tomusk (2007) and Olsen and Maassen (2007).
278 G. Halász
spaces with a more favourable dynamics (Corbett 2011). This is also one of the
examples of member country governments using the community to legitimate poli-
cies that are difficult to get through within their domestic policy-making machinery.
In fact a large proportion of the academic community in the member countries seem
to be reluctant to accept the higher education modernisation agenda of the EU. As
formulated in a recent publication: “there is (…) concern, particularly voiced in
some European university systems, that by increasing university dependence on
non-state resources and deepening their engagement with industry and commerce,
universities will lose their freedom to act in their traditional role as critics of soci-
ety” (Shattock 2008, p. 14).
In fact, there are leading European academics who think that the EU is going
too far in subordinating higher education policy to the needs of economic growth,
competitiveness and employment, and they are not happy with the proposal of the
Commission “involving employers and labour market institutions in the design and
delivery of programmes, supporting staff exchanges and including practical experience
in courses can help attune curricula to current and emerging labour market needs
and foster employability and entrepreneurship” (European Commission 2011a, p. 5).
Some observers describe the higher education policy of the EU as efforts to
reformulate the existing tacit contract between higher education, the society and
the state. This is a difficult process supported half-heartedly by a large part of the
European academic community which has been often accusing the EU of being too
“instrumental” in its thinking about the goals of higher education. This was
expressed recently in the following way in the keynote speech of a leading
European higher education researcher at an EU conference during the Polish
presidency: “European higher education systems will have to find a fair balance in
expected transformations so that the academic profession is not deprived of its
traditional voice in university management and governance; so that the European
professoriate still unmistakably belongs to the middle classes; and so that universities
are still substantially different in their operations from the business sector, being
somehow, although not necessarily in a traditional manner, ‘unique’ or ‘specific’
organisations” (Kwiek 2012, p. 9).
The higher education policy of the European Union is strongly influenced by its
innovation (or research and technology) policy. The latter has ever been a key ele-
ment of community policies, but it was given a new impetus within both the Lisbon
Agenda and—as mentioned above—in the EU2020 strategy. A related study rightly
stated a few years ago that “higher education and research are interpreted as subsystems
of a larger overall European innovation policy” (Vught 2009, p. 18). The innovation
policy of the European Union is very strongly connected with industrial policy. As
one of the relevant websites of the European Commission puts it: “Innovation pol-
icy is about helping companies to perform better and contributing to wider social
objectives such as growth, jobs and sustainability”.20 Most university leaders as well
20
See the “Industrial innovation—Innovation Policy” website of the European Commission
(http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/policy/index_en.htm).
as decision makers in higher education policy share the idea that universities should
play a stronger role in making European enterprises more competitive through
boosting innovation. This has been recently manifested by the creation of a platform
entitled “Empower European Universities” by “eminent thinkers and practitioners
of higher education” with the aim of putting more pressure on national governments
to shape national higher education policies so that they serve better the goals of
European competitiveness and innovation.21 These “thinkers and practitioners”—
led by the Dutch ex-minister and former vice president of the World Bank Jo Ritzen,
who is one of those politicians who made, during many years, perhaps the most for
advancing European cooperation in the education sector—share the idea that univer-
sities can “save Europe from its current economic problems” and “universities can
contribute to recreating hope and optimism through more innovation in the
economy”.22
4 The Implementation of Community Education Policies
The responsibility for the implementation of community policies is shared between

the member states and the European Commission. The common discourse describes
the European Commission as the “government” of the Union. It has, in fact, at its
disposal a wide range of policy implementation instruments, similarly to national
governments, excluding legislation.
4.1 Governance and Policy Instruments
Lawmaking in the European Union is the prerogative of the Council of ministers

and the European Parliament which adopt the policy proposals of the Commission
and translate them into legal actions. The Commission is not, however, without
power and effective competence. The “indirect” or “soft” competences of the
Commission are particularly important in the education sector where the law-
making competence of the Union is very limited: it is, according to the EU Treaty,
supposed to supplement and support and not to replace the actions of national gov-
ernments. The European Union, unlike its member states, does not have direct
responsibility to provide educational services. Its main function is to promote devel-
opment and modernisation, and the instruments it uses are the product of a several-
decade policy evolution. Today it commands sophisticated institutional mechanisms
21
See the platform’s website (http://empowereu.org/).
22
See Jo Ritzen’s article on 12 August 2012 in University World News (http://www.university-
worldnews.com/article.php?story=20120807141433279). See also Ritzen (2012).
280 G. Halász
that one can describe as consisting of the following key elements: (1) structural and
cohesion policy, (2) cross-sectoral instruments, (3) educational programmes, (4)
policy coordination, and (5) knowledge and information management.
Structural and cohesion policy is probably the most important as it is served by
two major funds: the European Social Fund and the European Regional Development
Fund. The Commission uses them to support structural adjustment in the member
states and the reduction of development disparities between them. The former is
under the supervision of Directorate of Employment and Social Affairs Directorate,
and the latter is managed by its Directorate of Regional Development. Since the
beginning of the last decade, supporting the modernisation of national education
systems figures among the goals of structural and cohesion policy, and these funds
can be used for this purpose. Education sector development programmes are planned
as part of the multi-annual national development programmes of the member states,
typically as a component of multi-sectoral human resource development or regional
development programmes. They have to be in accordance with the general regula-
tions of the structural funds which specify the eligibility criteria for community
co-funding. Only educational development programmes supporting growth,
employability and social cohesion can get community support, in accordance with
the strategies mentioned in the first part in this article.
Cross-sectoral instruments or policy instruments of other sectors than education
are particularly important in the European Union for influencing developments in
the education sector. The “travelling” of policies from one sector to another has
always been an important element of the implementation strategy of the European
Commission (Halász 2003). Sectoral policies are nowhere isolated from each other,
and this is particularly true in the Union. For instance, lifelong learning and skills
development are key components of employment policy. Education is seen as one of
the most important instruments of community policies aiming at fighting against
poverty and exclusion. As noted in the previous paragraph, human resource devel-
opment is a major component of structural and cohesion policies as well as regional
development policies. The policy of common market and competition covers all
areas of cross-border flow of products and services, including the products and ser-
vices of what we call the “learning industry” (e.g. educational publishing, the edu-
cational use of information technology or private provision of educational services).
Transferring policy issues from one sector to another is very common in the Union:
there have been many examples when policy initiatives were launched in the sector
where member states were the most receptive for them.
Those within the education sector tend to see the so-called educational
programmes as the most important sectoral policy instrument, although the
resources available here are much lower than those spent directly or indirectly on
educational development through the structural or the employment/social policy
(Moschonas 1998). Educational programmes are, nevertheless, increasingly
important as illustrated by the continuous growth of their budget since the first of
them was launched in 1986 (see Fig. 1). Originally there were separated pro-
grammes for each subsystem of education—the names of the original pro-
grammes, connected to the four big subsystems (i.e., Comenius for schools,
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
19 6
19 7
19 8
19 9
90
19 1
92
19 3
19 4
95
19 6
19 7
19 8
99
20 0
20 1
20 2
20 3
04
20 5
06
20 7
20 8
20 9
20 0
20 1
20 2
13
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
9
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
Fig. 1 The total budget of educational programmes 1986–2013 (million euro, current prices)
(Source: European Commission 2006)
Erasmus for higher education, Leonardo for vocational training and Grundtvig
for adult education), are still in use—but today they are integrated into the so-
called Lifelong Learning Programme (LLP).23 They fund a wide range of actions
such as student and teacher mobility, pedagogical innovations, inter-institutional
cooperation, various networking or policy development projects. Funding from the
educational programmes is typically project based: proposals submitted by institu-
tions or individuals are selected either by the national LLP agencies or by a
central agency in Brussels. Proposals have to be in accordance with eligibility
criteria defined by the Council decision24 about the new generations of programmes,
and the selection is based typically on competitive open tenders.
4.2 Policy Coordination
Since the decision on the Lisbon Strategy, a new policy coordination mechanism has
been developed and applied also in the education sector. The so-called Open Method
of Coordination (OMC) is an innovative method of governance in the European
Union tested first in the employment and social policy area following the Amsterdam
Treaty (1997). In 2000 the decision of the Lisbon European Council25 opened the
way to apply it also in the education sector. Normally the OMC consists of four
components: (1) the setting of common policy goals, (2) the definition of measur-
able indicators and benchmarks linked with these goals, (3) member states translat-
ing the common goals into national action plans and reporting on progress, and (4)
community evaluation of national performance including the formulation of
23
See the relevant website “The Lifelong Learning Programme: education and training opportunities
for all” of the European Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-programme/
index_en.htm).
24
The current Lifelong Learning Programme was launched in 2006 (Decision no 1720/2006/EC of
the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 November 2006 establishing an action pro-
gramme in the field of lifelong learning, Official Journal of the European Union, 24 October 2006).
25
See European Council (2000).
282 G. Halász
250
240 MST graduates
230
220
210
200
190
180
170
160
150
2010 benchmarks = 100
140
130
120
110
100 progress required
90
80
70
60
50 Adult lifelong learning
40 Early school leavers
30
20
10 Upper secondary
0
–10 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
–20
–30 (above 0 = performance
–40
–50 improving, below: worsening) Low achievers in reading
–60
–70
–80
Year
Fig. 2 The average value of education sector benchmark indicators between 2000 and 2010
compared to planned progression (Source: European Commission 2011b)
country-specific policy recommendations. In fact, OMC is applied to education sec-

tor in two different, parallel channels. On the one hand, the education sector has
developed its own OMC mechanism in the “Education and Training 2010” strategy
framework, and, later on, this was prolonged under the name of “Education and
Training 2020” strategy.26 On the other hand, education and training-related ele-
ments appear also in the “big” growth and employment strategy of the EU (the
Lisbon Strategy and, later, the Europe 2020 strategy), that is, sectoral policy coordi-
nation takes place also in the overall framework of coordination.
The OMC applied in the education sector is a kind of “lightened” version: member
countries are not obliged to elaborate specific sectoral national action plans
(although, as mentioned above, the education and training sector, together with oth-
ers, appears in the overarching national action plans for growth and employment).
Countries have been, however, obliged—since 2004—to submit biannual education
sector progress reports to the Council and the Commission, and the latter has
performed a regular evaluation of their policy achievements. This is done for each
individual country and also for the community as a whole (see the summarised
results of the last such evaluation in Fig. 2). The figure shows time series of values
26
See the relevant website “Main policy initiatives and outputs in education and training since the
year 2000” of the European Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/
policy-framework_en.htm).
for five key targets: growth of studying maths/science/technology, participation in

adult lifelong learning, the proportion of early school leavers, the proportion of
those acquiring upper secondary qualifications and the proportion of low achievers
in reading. The dotted line symbolises the target values, the five other lines the
actual achieved values of the five target areas.
Policy coordination in every sector, particularly in education, is achieved partly
through symbolic instruments such as giving feedback and enhancing policy learn-
ing. The community has devoted significant resources to develop activities that
made it possible for national authorities to take part in working groups and clusters
aiming at developing common frameworks and standards (such as the European key
competence framework mentioned earlier) and learning from the experiences of
those member states which have performed better than others in certain areas.27 This
leads us to the fifth community policy instrument knowledge and information man-
agement. In fact, the European Commission, having no direct regulatory power in
education, uses knowledge and information spreading as one of the most important
tools to achieve its policy goals in this sector. The Commission is an advanced
knowledge broker in a perfect position as it sees developments at the same time in
27 different systems. In the eyes of the Commission, the 27 national systems behave
as living laboratories, trying out permanently various policy solutions. Some of
these solutions fail, but others survive and prove to be successful. The Commission
invests much into gathering, analysing and spreading information about these pro-
cesses. Given the fact that, contrary to national governments, it does not have local
executive branches, it is obliged to gather information through various surveys and
quasi-scientific analyses, which make it more knowledgeable than most national
governments having no similar knowledge management facilities.28
5 The Future of Education Reform Policies of the EU
The future of education reform policies of the EU seems to depend on two main
factors: the relationship between the community and its members and the capacity
of the community to influence the behaviour of its members, on the one hand, and
the relationship between policies in the education sector and other sectors, on the
other. During the past decades, we could witness two key trends. One was the con-
tinuously growing role of the EU in education policy and its increasing capacity to
27
See the website “Exchange of good practice and peer learning” of the European commission (http://
ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/exchange_en.htm) and particularly the website
“Knowledge System for Lifelong Learning” of CEDEFOP (http://www.kslll.net).
28
See, for example, the “Higher education – Studies” website of the Commission for all recent
analyses in the field of higher education policy (http://ec.europa.eu/education/higher-education/
studies_en.htm) and also its website “Research and Analysis” (http://ec.europa.eu/education/life-
long-learning-policy/analysis_en.htm).
284 G. Halász
influence educational developments in its member states. The other was the perme-
ability of borderlines between education policies and other policy areas and the
continuous possibility for other sectors to influence the development of education.
The key question is whether these two trends will continue in the future.
If the answer to the second question is affirmative, we anticipate the continuation
of the trend of education being seen as a key factor in supporting Europe to become
more competitive in the emerging global knowledge economy while preserving the
values of equity, inclusion and sustainability. If the first question is also answered
positively, we can predict that the EU as a community, instead of being an abstract
entity above the concrete reality of the member states, will remain a real common
space for educational policy development on the European continent.
As for the second question, the probability of the affirmative answer is very high.
Given the fact that the EU does not have direct responsibility for the daily operation
of systems of educational provision, the vested interests of social actors whose fate
depends on the specific institutional arrangements of given sectors and of the differ-
ent subsystems of education do not play a dominant role in determining the content
of education policy. Thus, community education policy will remain future- and
reform-oriented, and it will not lose its openness to the variety of sectoral agendas
and approaches, particularly in employment, social affairs, regional development
and innovation. The EU will probably continue to play a leading role in fostering
modernisation and educational reforms in Europe.
The first question—the potential impact of EU on the member states—is less
easy to answer. We see in several member states the growth of “eurocepticism”: it
becomes more and more frequent that political groups opposing the transfer of
power from the nations to the supranational entity gain power in national elections.
There are strong actors in each national education system that are not welcoming
the modernisation agendas—be they national or supranational—and therefore are
not susceptible to the current orientation of EU policies. They are, therefore, typi-
cally opposed to EU interference into national affairs in the education sector even if
they have, in general, pro-European attitudes.
There are perhaps three factors that might increase the probability of the influ-
ence of the EU growing further. The first is related with the current fiscal, monetary
and economic crisis. The crisis has been forcing member states, particularly those
using the euro as their currency, to tighten monetary coordination and budget con-
trol. For instance, the so-called European semester, which is also described as “new
architecture for the new EU Economic governance”29 mechanism, adopted by the
member states in September 2010 is now making possible the exante coordination
of national budgetary and economic policies. The education sector cannot, natu-
rally, remain unaffected by this, even if the jurisdiction of the EU continues to be
very restricted in this policy area, since this process affects all budget areas, without
exception. The second factor is related with our second question: the increasingly
29
See a popular explanation on the relevant website “European semester: a new architecture for
the new EU economic governance – Q&A” of the European Union (http://europa.eu/rapid/
pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/11/14).
cross-sectoral nature of education policy. If the opponents of the EU modernisation

agenda get strength in national education systems and make the dynamics of
national education policy shift towards an “anti-European” line, this will not pre-
vent the penetration of education and training-related EU policies into the national
systems through doors opened by other sectors.
The third factor is connected with the internal dynamic of the development of
policy instruments within the EU. Some of them—such as the instruments of struc-
tural policy and those embedded into the educational programmes—are developed
and redeployed in a cyclical way through medium term replanning. The rules of the
use of the structural funds as well as those of the educational programmes are refor-
mulated every seven years based on the experiences gained during implementation.
As evaluations often criticise the existence of parallelisms and the fragmented char-
acter of programmes and the lack of strategic coherence, the reformulating exercise
typically results in streamlining and in the reinforcement of strategic orientations.
One can expect this to happen also in the current revision period. Streamlining and
strengthening strategic lines always imply stronger community control and less
exposure to the specific fragmented interests of the member states. This would
mean in the case of structural policy that member states will have to subordinate
their national development goals even more to common strategic priorities, that is,
they will have to devise, for example, education development programmes that will
be even more linked with the overall modernisation agenda of the Union. In the case
of educational programmes, institutions and individuals in the member states will
have to make even more efforts, if they want to win community support, to demon-
strate that their proposals are in line with the EU priorities.
References
Borg, C., & Mayo, P. (2005). The EU memorandum on lifelong learning. Old wine in new bottles.
Globalisation, Societies and Education, 3(2), 203–225.
Campbell, M. (2012). Skills for prosperity? A review of OECD and partner country skill strategies,
Working paper. Paris: OECD.
CEDEFOP (2012). Qualifications frameworks in Europe: An instrument for transparency and
change. Briefing note (online: http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/publications/20509.aspx)
Coles, M. (2011). Referencing national qualifications levels to the EQF, European qualifications
framework series: Note 3, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Corbett, A. (2011). Ping Pong: Competing leadership for reform in EU higher education 1998–
2006. European Journal of Education, 46(1), 36–53.
EUA. (2008). European Universities’ charter on lifelong learning. Brussels: European University
Association.
European Commission (1993). Guidelines for community action in the field of education and train-
ing, Commission working paper, COM(93) 183 final.
European Commission. (1996). Learning in the information society. Action plan for a European
education initiative (1996–98). Communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Brussels.
European Commission. (2001). Making a European area of lifelong learning a reality.
Communication from the Commission. Brussels.
286 G. Halász
European Commission. (2006). The history of European cooperation in education and training.
Europe in the making – an example. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the
European Communities.
European Commission. (2007). Action plan on adult learning: It is always a good time to learn.
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Brussels, 27 September
2007. COM(2007) 558 final.
European Commission. (2008). Improving competences for the 21st century: An agenda for
European cooperation on school. Communication from the Commission to the European
Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of
the Regions, Brussels, 3 July 2008. COM (2008) 425 final.
European Commission. (2010a). Europe 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive
growth. Communication from the Commission, COM (2010) 2020 final.
European Commission. (2010b). New skills for new jobs: Action now. A report by the expert group
on new skills for new jobs prepared for the European Commission.
European Commission. (2011a). Supporting growth and jobs – An agenda for the modernisation
of Europe’s higher education systems. Communication from the Commission to the European
Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of
the Regions {SEC(2011) 1063 final}.
European Commission. (2011b). Progress towards the common European objectives in education
and training (2010/2011). Indicators and benchmarks. Commission Staff Working Document.
Brussels.
European Council. (2000). Presidency conclusions, Lisbon, 23–24 March 2000.
Field, J. (1998): European dimensions. Education, training and the European Union. higher
education policy series 39. London/Philadelphia: Jesica Kingsley Publishers.
Gordon, J., et al. (2009). Key competences in Europe: Opening doors for lifelong learners across
the school curriculum and teacher education. Warsaw: CASE-Center for Social and Economic
Research.
Halász, G. (2003). European co-ordination of national education policies from the perspective
of the new member countries. In Becoming the best – Educational ambitions for Europe
pp. 89–118). Enschede: CIDREE-SLO.
Janne, H. (1973). For a community education policy. Commission of the European Communities.
Bulletin of the European Communities, Supplement. 10/73.
Kwiek, M. (2012). The growing complexity of the academic enterprise in Europe: A panoramic
view. European Journal of Higher Education (online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21568235.201
2.702477)
Lee, M., Thayer, T., & Madyun, N. (2008). The evolution of the European Union’s lifelong learning
policies: An institutional learning perspective. Comparative Education, 44(4), 445–463.
Moschonas, A. (1998). Education and training in the European Union. Aldershot: Brookfield.
OECD. (2012). Better skills, better jobs, better lives. A strategic approach to skills policies. Paris:
OECD.
Olsen, J. P., & Maassen, P. (2007). European debates on the knowledge institution: The moderniza-
tion of the university at the European level. In P. Maassen & J. P. Olsen (Eds.), University
dynamics and European integration (pp. 3–22). Dordrecht: Springer.
Ritzen, J. (2012). Can the University save Europe? IZA policy paper, no. 44. Forschungsinstitut zur
Zukunft der Arbeit Institute for the Study of Labor. Bonn.
Shattock, M. (2008). Introduction. In M. Shattock, (Ed.), European Universities for entrepre-
neurship: Their role in the Europe of knowledge (pp. 11–21). EUEREK. Final report. Sixth
Framework Programme (online: http://cordis.europa.eu/search/index.cfm?fuseaction=lib.
document&DOC_LANG_ID=EN&DOC_ID=129062621&q=)
Tomusk, V. (Ed.). (2007). Creating the European area of higher education. Voices from the
periphery. Dordrecht: Springer.
Vught, F. van (2009). The EU innovation agenda: Challenges for European higher education and
research. Higher Education Management and Policy, 21(2), 13–34.
Part IV
Changes in the Education System
Germany: Steps to More Responsibility
and Efficiency in an Expanding System
Horst Weishaupt
Abstract This chapter first outlines central reforms introduced to education in

Germany in the past decade: the expansion of education and care opportunities avail-
able for children under the age of three, diverse state reform measures in school edu-
cation in consequence of findings from the first PISA study 2000, tendencies of
change in the vocational education and training system and the implementation of a
consecutive structure of study courses as well as new approaches to governance in
higher education. Although the field of continuing education remained little affected
by reform impetus, developments in the area of educational monitoring are remark-
able. The further development of the education system is conditioned by demographic
development, labour market demands and family structural changes. Against this
background, it is necessary to remove social inequity in education, to further advance
endeavours towards an inclusive education system that have recently been intensified
and to rebalance vocational education and higher education systems. Furthermore,
continuing education needs to be addressed by reform measures in the future.
Keywords Challenges • Education reform • Efficiency • Expansion • Responsiblity

• Germany • Vocational Training • Pre-primary education • School • Vocational
training • Higher education
In an international comparison, the German education system is characterised by

some idiosyncrasies. In particular, this concerns the federal system of education:
central competencies for education are transferred to the 16 federal states (Länder)
in the Federal Republic of Germany. The federal states co-ordinate educational
policy measures via the Standing Conference of Ministers of Education and Cultural
Affairs (Kultusministerkonferenz, KMK), a voluntary consultation board of the
ministers of culture that has no right to formulate legally binding decisions for the
H. Weishaupt (*)
German Institute for International Educational Research, Frankfurt, Germany

290 H. Weishaupt
states. Nevertheless, recommendations issued by the KMK, which need to be

unanimously decided, are highly relevant for educational political developments in
Germany. The federal government (Federation) can only provide financial support
to measures in limited areas of education, and its power of legislation is reserved to
company-based vocational education and training and early childhood education
and care. With the exception of the domain of higher education, the federal states
share fulfilment of their competencies with the local governments, which are
predominantly responsible for building and maintaining facilities. The federal states
are in charge of regulating curricula and pedagogical programmes, the conceptuali-
sation of teaching, learning and care processes.
1 Structure of Education System in Germany
When taking the structure of the education system into perspective, it is necessary to
realise that the reunification of both German states in 1990 meant that two systems
that had developed differently after the Second World War needed to be reorganised
according to a common structure. For example, the German Democratic Republic
(GDR) had a well-established, well-developed system of pre-primary education and
care facilities, mostly on an all-day care basis, whereas in the Federal Republic of
Germany, pre-primary education and care was traditionally not regarded as part of
the education system; it was provided as supplementary to family care, and provi-
sions were mostly offered on a part-time basis. Furthermore, the school system in the
GDR was a uniform system structured by levels (Stufen), allowing for only a few
supplementary special schools. Meanwhile, a multi-track school system has also
been introduced to the federal states in the territory of the former GDR, based on the
model practised in the Federal Republic of Germany. Following a generally 4-year
period of joint primary education schooling, students are allocated to different types
of secondary school (tracks) according to achievement-based differentiation. In
West German states, attempts were made since the 1960s to substitute the multi-
track secondary school system with a comprehensive school, i.e. “one school for
all”, which failed not least because of resistance from the parents assisted by conser-
vative political parties. Several federal states nowadays offer comprehensive schools
in parallel to the segregated secondary school types. The school system grants
a general education certification after 9 years of successful schooling (Haupt-
schulabschluss), an intermediate secondary school leaving certificate after 10 years
(Realschulabschluss or Mittlere Reife), a qualification for entering universities of
applied science after 12 years and a full higher education entry qualification (Abitur)
after either 12 or 13 years of schooling.
After compulsory school education of 9 or 10 years, respectively, students can
attend an upper secondary school, either at a general education school preparing for
Abitur or a full-time school for vocational education and training. The latter mainly
prepares students for specific professional segments outside dual training (assis-
tants, nonacademic health professions, childcare and in addition, preparation for
civil service). Besides the option of school attendance, vocational education and
Germany: Steps to More Responsibility and Efficiency in an Expanding System 291
training in the dual system is open to students and chosen by more than half of the
students in a school year, characterised by paid in-company training in combination
with attending a training institution once a week (or en bloc). Vocational education
and training courses in the dual system can last from 2 years to 42 months.
The domain of higher education (tertiary sector) can be distinguished by univer-
sities of applied sciences (requiring a respective qualification, Fachhochschulreife,
offering a highly structured and application-oriented curriculum) and universities
(requiring higher education entry qualification, Abitur, connecting research and
teaching).
Continuing (further) education is largely in-company or company based. Parallel
to a large number of private organisations in the field of continuing education
representing diverse societal groups, adult education centres (Volkshochschulen) are
operated as public-funded institutions offering further education in all regions. Some
of the vocational schools are schools for further vocational training (Fachschule)
which require a successful completion of an apprenticeship.
This basic information is essential to perceive the reform endeavours undertaken
in the past decade which are outlined below.
2 Reforms of the Education System in the Past Decade
Until 15 years ago, educational politics in Germany were highly complacent—it

relied on well-trained teachers and well-equipped schools and universities, believ-
ing to be in a privileged and internationally competitive situation. This estimation
was fundamentally shaken by findings from the TIMSS study published in the
mid-1990s, which received broad media coverage; the study revealed that Germany
only held an average position in an international comparison. In part, the results
were put into perspective in public discussion, and they were challenged regarding
their value for school development. Nevertheless, the debate led to an “empirical
turn” in education in Germany, introduced by the “Constance Decision” (Konstanzer
Beschluss) of the Standing Conference of Ministers of Education and Cultural
Affairs as of October 24, 1997. The decision calls for measures of quality assurance
in school education and the development of test instruments for an evaluation of the
school systems’ performance across the federal states. At the same time, the
intended comparative studies were to predominantly target the development of fun-
damental competencies, as determined by standards.
2.1 Reforms in the School Sector
The critical discussion of German educational politics received further momentum

following the findings from the first PISA study in 2001: Once again, students’
achievements in Germany were only average in the international comparison, and
social inequality regarding access to higher levels of education was more pronounced
than hardly any other OECD country.
292 H. Weishaupt
2.1.1 Quality Improvement in Seven Areas of Action
Following the publication of findings from the PISA study in 2001, the Standing
Conference of Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs (KMK) defined seven
fields of action focusing on measures of quality improvement in education, which
are still relevant today, i.e. an array of measures targeting at:
1. The improvement of language competence even at pre-primary age
2. The improved interlinkage of pre-primary education and primary education,
aiming at early school enrolment
3. The improvement of primary education and continual improvement of reading
competence and improvement of fundamental understanding of mathematical
and science contexts
4. The effective promotion of disadvantaged children, particularly children and
young people from migrant backgrounds
5. Consequent further development and assurance of instructional quality and
school quality, based on binding standards and an outcome-oriented evaluation
6. The improvement of teacher professionalism, particularly regarding diagnostic
and methodological competence as an element of systematic school
development
7. The enhancement of in-school and out-of-school all-day provisions, aiming at
an enhancement of educational and support opportunities, especially for
students with educational deficiencies and gifted students (KMK decision,
December 1, 2001)
In the past decade, different degrees of progress have been reached concerning
the measures introduced by the seven fields of action.
To date, measures targeting the improvement of language competencies are
mostly limited to conducting language level diagnoses, which are meanwhile obliga-
tory in 14 of the 16 federal states—in most cases, they are not succeeded by targeted
language promotion programmes.
Interlinking and collaboration of pre-school daycare (kindergartens) with
primary schools turns out to be difficult, and it is yet little developed: On average,
one primary school corresponds to three kindergartens—children attend the primary
school where they live, but in the case of kindergartens, parents might opt for an
institution close to their workplace or for a kindergarten offering a special type of
pedagogy (e.g. Montessori pedagogy, denominational). Hence, it is hardly possible
to link pre-primary and primary education by means of a direct collaboration
between institutions. Some federal states have introduced earlier school enrolment,
which is generally compulsory for children aged 6 years (if their birthday is before
June 30). The respective states have shifted the appointed date for school enrolment
from 1 month up to 6 months (Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung 2012,
p. 249).
No valid information exists regarding the improvement of primary school educa-
tion in the federal states. However, no recognisable general enhancement of com-
pulsory instruction in primary school can be identified, which might have been an
endeavour taken to improve competencies of students. On an international scale,

the number of compulsory instruction periods in primary schools is below OECD
average (OECD 2012).
So far, hardly any effect can be identified regarding support measures taken by
schools to reduce social imbalance and improve educational opportunities of chil-
dren from migrant backgrounds, even though according to the PISA findings, social
differences of competence levels have slightly been reduced between 2000 and
2009, and they are now close to the OECD average. While a growing number of
children with a migrant background living in Germany have already been born in
Germany, their relative disadvantage in school leaving qualifications compared to
German children has not been reduced. Ethnic groups among the migrants differ
significantly regarding their aspiration for upward social mobility via their children’s
education (Baumert and Maaz 2012). Hence, increased endeavours are necessary to
reach out to certain groups among the German population and those migrants who
do not offer targeted support to their children’s education.
The development of educational standards was strongly promoted. Such standards
were introduced as early as 2003 and 2004, substituting or supplementing earlier
curricula in the states. Standards are outcome-oriented, relating to the average
achievement of students. Hence, minimum standards, by which the proportion of
students who do not reach these benchmarks could be identified, are not defined.
In primary education (grade level 4) such standards exist for German and
Mathematics; regarding lower secondary education (year 9) and the intermediate
level of qualification (year 10), standards exist for German, Mathematics and first
foreign language (English/French); and in the case of the intermediate level of
qualification, additional standards also exist for Biology, Chemistry and Physics.
Test tasks were also prepared for educational standards regarding university entry
qualifications (“Abitur” standards) in German, Mathematics, English and French.
Measures targeting the improvement of teacher professionalism are largely
focused on the reform of university-based teacher education. Traditionally, teacher
education and training consists of subject-specific, subject-didactic and educational
science course elements. Generally speaking, reform endeavours have on the one
hand targeted the strengthening of subject-didactic training, to improve teacher
competencies regarding teaching contents. On the other hand, educational science
course elements are strongly oriented towards pedagogical-psychological compe-
tencies, and experience-related elements are increased. In the past decade, more
effort was put into enhancing job-related further education of teachers and into
making such training mandatory. However, this has not altered the situation that as
a rule it is impossible to support school innovations by offering complementary
further training programmes for teachers.
The enhancement of all-day schools is one of the most salient changes to the
German school education landscape in the past decade. In 2002, only one in ten schools
was an all-day school while now this is the case for one in two schools. However, full-
time attendance of school is compulsory in a small number of schools only. In most
cases, the schools are open all day, offering a lunchtime meal and provisions supple-
mentary to school instruction in the afternoon—depending on interests, part of the
294 H. Weishaupt
students attend the afternoon provisions either once or several times a week. This is
why only a quarter of the students take part in the all-day school programmes.
Apart from reforms pertaining to the seven central fields of action outlined in
2001, some other reforms and developments, respectively, are worth mentioning.
These include the reduced time allocated to grammar school education (Gymnasium),
a harmonisation of school structures in lower secondary schooling and the develop-
ment of private schools.
2.1.2 Consolidation of Grammar School Education
The reduction of grammar school from 9 to 8 years in all of the federal states apart from
Rhineland-Palatinate has been a matter of intensive public debate. Regarding the num-
ber of school years necessary to acquire a higher education qualification (Abitur),
developments also differed between East and West Germany. In the GDR, students
spent 12 years at school before obtaining an “Abitur” degree, while in West Germany,
13 years were compulsory (in each case, 4 years of primary education, followed by 8
or 9 years of secondary schooling). After the dissolution of the GDR, the East German
states were initially expected to extend school time for grammar schools after a transi-
tion period. As two federal states were not willing to agree, the KMK decided to rec-
ommend that 265 weekly periods of instruction would be required, which must be
completed in either 8 or 9 years. Discussions relating to longer time spent on school
and university education in Germany compared to other countries led to a change of
mind in the federal states. Meanwhile, all the states offer an opportunity to reach an
Abitur in either 8 or 9 years. Sometimes, grammar schools offer both options in paral-
lel, or it is possible to alternatively enrol in an 8-year grammar school or a comprehen-
sive school or vocational education and training school that enables students to obtain
the degree after 9 years. Owing to higher pressure on the achievement related to an
8-year grammar school, this reform remains highly controversial in the public.
2.1.3 Harmonisation of School Structures in Lower Secondary Schooling
According to an ideal description, school education in Germany consists of 4 years

of primary school, followed by a three-track secondary school system of three
school types (Hauptschule, Realschule, and Gymnasium).1 Traditionally, these three
school types are connected to different educational pathways and related school
leaving qualifications: Hauptschule leads to a general secondary education qualifi-
cation (Hauptschulabschluss), Realschule leads to an intermediate secondary school
qualification (Mittlere Reife) and Gymnasium (grammar school) leads to a higher
education entry qualification (Abitur). Federal states that emerged from the former
GDR have in some cases established only one school type besides the grammar
1
Special schools also exist for children with special educational needs, focusing on different priori-
ties; presently these are attended by ca. 5 % of all students. In Berlin and Brandenburg the primary
school consists of 6 years.
school, joining Hauptschule and Realschule in one school form. Meanwhile, most
federal states across Germany have adopted this two-track secondary school sys-
tem. An additional school type is offered besides the grammar school, for which a
variety of names exists (Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung 2012, p. 252).
This second track of secondary school combines general and intermediate secon-
dary school qualifications (i.e. one school type offering two educational pathways),
and in some cases, students can obtain a higher education entry qualification,
“Abitur” (school type offering three educational pathways). Moreover, those federal
states that have retained the three-track system have introduced an option to acquire
an intermediate secondary school qualification at the Hauptschule. Therefore, the
type of school that a student attends barely allows for deducing the school leaving
degree he or she will obtain.
This development corresponds to the increase in flexibility of educational oppor-
tunities, supporting a trend to obtaining higher school leaving qualifications. On the
one hand, this trend is due to decreasing demographic developments, according to
which it is no longer possible to retain a viable multi-track secondary school system
in rural areas. In addition, there is a decreasing level of acceptance regarding
Hauptschule qualifications and their sufficiency for transition to the labour market.
Meanwhile, the intermediate level of secondary school qualification (Mittlere Reife)
is obtained by the majority of students after 10 years of schooling. Many students
continue their educational career after they have acquired this degree and obtain a
degree that qualifies them for entry into higher education.
Grammar schools (Gymnasium) are unaffected by the transformation of the
three-track to a two-track school system in Germany. Grammar schools are the only
school type present in all federal states, and their existence remains undisputed.
One reason for their strong position is that despite a rising proportion of students
attending grammar schools, the grammar schools have managed to retain their
average level of student achievement, without lowering the standard (Autorengruppe
Bildungsberichterstattung 2012, p. 92). Presently, a development towards a uniform
school system cannot be envisioned in Germany; hence, a differentiation is main-
tained at the secondary school level with the grammar school (Gymnasium) as the
traditional first choice chosen by middle- and upper-class parents and a lower form
of secondary school for lower social strata.
2.1.4 Development of Private Schools
The increase in private schools2 should also be mentioned, not in terms of a political
reform but as a social tendency. During the past decade, the number of private
schools in Germany has grown by 50 % (Kühne and Kann 2012). At the same time
enrolment in public schools declined by 22 % owing to a decrease in student popu-
lation. The rise in private school numbers was particularly high in the area of
2
In Germany 85 % of the running costs of private schools are refunded by the tax payer (Statistisches
Bundesamt 2012, p. 50).
296 H. Weishaupt
primary schools, despite the fact that the constitution (Basic Law) of the Federal
Republic of Germany restricts the establishment of private schools in the primary
sector—children from all social classes are meant to attend 4 years of common
schooling. In West Germany, 2.0 % of the primary school children attend a private
school; thus, the figure is still rather low, but in East Germany, the proportion has
meanwhile risen to 7.1 % in the primary sector. Many private schools develop in
small towns in East Germany, where the state closes schools for lack of students. In
several big cities, more than 10 % of the primary school children nowadays attend
private schools. Principally, the broad variety of organisations offering schooling
should be welcomed. Changes in society and altered expectations of parents regarding
education are thus expressed, which are not adequately represented in the provi-
sions of public schooling. In many cases, however, the increase in private schooling
expresses an interest in social delimitation, in a phase of increasing social differ-
ences in society.
2.2 Shift in Pre-primary Education
Since reunification, pre-primary education has continuously shifted from a family-

supplementary care and education service to an elementary field of education. Here,
the situation of the East German states was important, where an education-oriented
provision of pre-primary care already existed. In a first step taken in West Germany,
a legal right to attend kindergarten was enacted in 1996 for each child aged 3 years
and older—this led to an alignment of kindergarten attendance in West Germany to
the situation in East Germany. Nowadays, early childhood care and education can
be regarded as a fixed part of an educational biography from a child’s fourth year
onwards: More than 90 % of children aged between 3 and 6 years attend child day-
care facilities. Despite the voluntary character of supply, nearly all of the children
participate in early childhood care and education for at least 3 years.
Meanwhile, a decision has been made for a legal obligation to extend child
daycare for children under the age of three: By August 2013, capacities must be
provided for 35 % of children under the age of three. In 2011, daycare placements
were available for only 25 % of the respective children (20 % in West Germany and
47 % in East Germany). In 2006, early childhood provisions reached out to only
17 % of children under the age of three. Still, great efforts need to be made to
establish a need-oriented supply of the legally granted right of child daycare.
2.3 Innovation in Vocational Training
Full-time schools play a certain role in vocational education and training in

Germany: Beyond the dual system of vocational education and training that is regu-
lated in the Federal Vocational Education and Training Act (Berufsbildungsgesetz),
there are a number of assistant professions, particularly in nonacademic healthcare

professions, in the field of industrial/commercial clerks and for training pre-school
education and care staff. This also applies for training in the civil service and a few
specialised professions (e.g. pilots, driving instructors). Nevertheless, the majority
of vocational education and training is organised in a dual system. Endeavours are
being made to adapt the scope of about 340 official training professions to the
change of the occupation system, characterised by an increase in service profes-
sions. Still, a large body of vocational training professions is located in the field of
craftsmanship, sales and traffic.
Vocational training opportunities of young people depend on the placements
offered by private business as only ca. 5 % of the apprentices find a placement
in public service. Hence, the supply of vocational education and training (appren-
ticeships) strongly depends on the rise and fall of the economy, rather than being
oriented towards the demand of young people. In the past 15 years, this had severe
negative consequences because the demand for vocational education and training
was regularly higher than the supply.
In many cases, young people who had completed school had to spend several
years in the so-called transition system prior to beginning vocational training in the
dual system, attending transition measures of vocational preparation, to either
acquire or improve a school leaving qualification. This led to an increase of the age
of entry into vocational education and training in the dual system to 19.5 years.
Particularly the long pathways taken by adolescents who have left the lower second-
ary school type of Hauptschule (either with or without a degree) have led to a high
average age of entry; to a less extent this is due to apprentices having acquired a
higher education entry qualification (Abitur). A proportion of approx. 29 % of
school leavers still enter vocational education via measures offered by the transition
system. Predominantly, this is the case for young people in certain West German
federal states or with foreign citizenship who have left the lower secondary school
form (Hauptschule), either with or without obtaining a general secondary school
qualification.
Attempts to expand alternative vocational education and training opportunities
according to needs have not been successful, also because of resistance from the
chambers of commerce and industry. As a consequence, presently a significantly
high proportion of male adults aged between 30 and 34 years are not fully qualified
in a vocational profession than adults aged between 60 and 64 years. Young people
with a migrant background encounter particular difficulties when seeking an
apprenticeship in the dual system of vocational education and training, and in this
group more than a third of adults aged between 30 and 34 years have not completed
vocational education and training (Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung 2012,
p. 43 f.). In Germany, completing vocational education is a prerequisite to sustain-
able integration into the labour market, without the increased risk of unemploy-
ment—even more so than in other countries. Hence, further vocational education
and training faces particular challenges in the future.
Principally, all vocational and training occupations are open to all young people
who have obtained a general school leaving certificate. In fact, however, raising
298 H. Weishaupt
qualification demands in the majority of apprenticeships have led to a segmentation

of the market. Therefore, school leavers with a general school leaving certificate
(Hauptschule) will generally only be able to begin an apprenticeship in a limited
choice of vocational education and training professions. On the other hand, roughly
a quarter of the young people who have acquired a higher education entry qualifica-
tion (Abitur) opt for an apprenticeship in the dual system, in professions that are
only exceptionally accessible to school leavers from a Hauptschule. In many cases,
these apprentices acquire the Abitur only to improve their chances regarding the
vocational education and training market. The alternative to a university course is
attractive because the pay young people will receive for their apprenticeship renders
them financially independent. It is thus possible to avoid the continuing dependence
on parents or the necessity to apply for a loan (fall into debt).
While the field of vocational education and training has resisted reform owing to
a conflict of interest between actors, a certain innovation is recognisable, which
might be significant for the relation between vocational education and higher edu-
cation. Based on the fact that school leavers who have a higher education entry
qualification can attend a university instead of a vocational education school in dual
vocational education and training, different concepts have been developed for dual
courses of study. As a rule, students in a dual study course have signed a contract
with a training company. In addition, they receive apprenticeship pay offering
financial security, and they are enrolled as part-time students in a university course;
thus, they acquire practical skills as well as academic content knowledge. Mostly
such courses are offered by universities of applied sciences, sometimes privately
organised, that collaborate closely with the private sector companies offering dual
study courses. So far, these academic training the courses have mainly focused on
industrial, science and engineering and medical professions. In some cases, the
students acquire a training qualification as well as a Bachelor’s degree or only a
Bachelor’s degree. So far, only a few of the federal states in Germany can offer a
supply that meets the demand for dual study courses. Still, there is a strong increase
in the number of students enrolled in dual study courses.
2.4 Restructuring of Higher Education
In the field of higher education, the restructuring of study courses and the gover-
nance of the individual universities were central reforms.
2.4.1 Restructuring of Study Courses
The central reform in the field of higher education concerns the restructuring of
study courses within the framework of the so-called Bologna Process: Former
diploma and master courses at universities were transformed into a two-cycle system
of Bachelor/Master courses, corresponding to a reduction of study time until the

first degree is obtained. At the same time, a credit point system was introduced
resulting in a far-reaching reorganisation and standardisation of study courses.
The content quality of study courses is assured by an external accreditation of
studies, carried out by accreditation agencies in collaboration with the German
Accreditation Council. Accreditation replaces the approval of study courses by
authorised ministries. So far, this does not apply for study courses that require a
state examination in law or medicine. No exception is made for prospective teachers:
While their study courses also require a state examination, the subjects they study
are closely entangled with respective nondidactic subjects. Study reforms have
resulted in highly disparate teacher training models between federal states and
individual universities, and it is not yet clear whether the targeted improvement in
teacher qualification has actually been achieved.
The Bologna Process was more readily implemented at universities of applied
sciences (Fachhochschulen) than the universities because the former often already
offered six-semester study courses. Meanwhile, however, the Bologna reform has
largely been implemented at universities regarding Bachelor study courses.
Currently, the phase of implementing new Master’s study programmes is still under
way at many universities. Because Master’s programmes can now also be offered by
universities of applied sciences, the reform process in recent years has led to a
structural alignment of universities of applied sciences (Fachhochschulen) and
research-oriented universities. These two types of universities can now only be
distinguished by a more or less strong orientation of study courses towards applied
science and research respectively. The study reform went along with a hope that
study time would be reduced, and graduates would sooner be able to enter the labour
market, but this does not seem to be the case: Most of graduates with a Bachelor’s
degree strive to continue their university career with a subsequent Master’s pro-
gramme rather than immediately entering the labour market.
2.4.2 Change of Funding and Management
In the field of higher education, approaches to new governance have also led to far-
reaching changes of university funding and management. It is meanwhile common
to sign target agreements with individual universities, and allocate funds according
to achievement indicators, instead of budget or incremental governance of universi-
ties. Commonly used indicators include the number of students graduating within
the assigned time and the number of graduates and acquisition of external funding
(research universities only). Allocation of sources within the universities is subject
to the same principles. The changed concept of governance corresponds to
increased autonomy of the individual universities; control functions are increas-
ingly carried out by university councils, accreditation agencies or benchmarking
systems that compare the excellence of universities instead of the ministries of
science.
300 H. Weishaupt
2.5 Continuing and Further Education and Training
Political statements and scientific evidence demonstrating the importance of con-

tinuous training were unable to increase participation in continuing training in the
past decade—figures have stagnated. The figure is slightly rising for older age cohorts,
while for younger people the figure has even declined slightly. Furthermore, existing
inequality structures have remained regarding further training participation according
to status of income, level of education and migrant background. Despite a reiterated
emphasis of the importance of continuous professional training with respect to an
ageing population of employees in Germany, a decline rather than an increase can be
observed in the field of continuing vocational training. Presently no reform motions
are worth reporting in the field of continuous and further education and training.
2.6 Enhancement of Educational Monitoring
German participation in international student achievement assessments and a

central evaluation of realisation of educational standards in a comparison of federal
states constitute two components of a general educational monitoring strategy,
decided by the Standing Conference of Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs
(Kultusministerkonferenz) in 2006.
2.6.1 National Assessment
For the purpose of assessing the achievement of educational standards, the

federal states in the Federal Republic of Germany founded the “Institut für
Qualitätsentwicklung” (Institute for Quality Development, IQB) in Berlin. The IQB
is commissioned to develop task pools, design test procedures and carry out state-
comparison assessments for evaluating educational standards. Assessments are
timed according to international studies (PIRLS and PISA), and they substitute the
enhanced random samples that until 2006, supplemented international achievement
assessments for comparisons across states within Germany. They serve to assess
school quality and the achieved average competence levels of students in a com-
parison of 16 federal states.
2.6.2 International Comparative Studies
The centre for international educational comparative studies (Zentrum für interna-
tionale Bildungsvergleichsstudien, ZIB) was launched in 2011 by the 16 states
together with the Federal Ministry of Education and Research, commissioned with
conducting the PISA studies in Germany as well as connected research and the
promotion of young researchers, respectively. The ZIB as an “international pillar”

of comparative educational research collaborates closely with the Institute for
Quality Development in Education (IQB, see above) as a “national pillar”.
2.6.3 National Report on Education
In addition, comparative work is conducted regarding the evaluation of achievements

of individual schools (full assessment of all schools carried out in grades 3 and 9),
as well as a national report on education jointly commissioned by the Federation
and the federal states. This educational reporting is particularly remarkable because
it is the only component of the monitoring strategy practised by the government
and the states that address all areas of education. Since 2006, educational reporting
has resulted in a biennial report on education (Bildung in Deutschland): This
indicator-based report takes education across the lifespan into perspective and ana-
lyses individual educational pathways from a systemic perspective (Konsortium
Bildungsberichterstattung 2006; Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung 2008,
2010, 2012). Beyond parts that are continually reported, each version of the educa-
tion report offers a thematic chapter highlighting a particular field of interest such as:
2006: Education and migration
2008: Problems of transition after compulsory education
2010: Perspectives of the education system in view of demographic change
2012: Cultural-aesthetic education across the lifespan
2014: People with disabilities/special needs
Educational reporting as an instrument of an indicator-based permanent obser-
vation of quality development in the education system now exists in several federal
states, too (Bavaria, Baden-Wuerttemberg, Berlin-Brandenburg, Hamburg,
Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, Schleswig-Holstein).
In many cases, the reports are authorised by the ministries of culture and thus limited
to the field of primary and secondary education; responsibility for pre-primary
education rests with ministries of social affairs, and higher education is subject to
the ministries of science—at the federal state level, not just one ministry is respon-
sible for education.
At the level of municipalities (cities, towns, districts), it is likewise rarely the
case that responsibility for all fields of education rests with a single department.
Still, municipalities are more strongly committed to collaboration among different
disciplines and authorities, because municipalities show a growing interest in offering
citizens a comprehensive, well-adapted broad scope of qualified educational
opportunities. Regarding the competition among municipalities, a well-developed
educational infrastructure is regarded as an important advantage. Against this back-
ground, more than 60 districts and towns in Germany have commissioned education
reports (corresponding to nearly 15 % of all municipalities)—this includes some
local authorities that have published two or more reports, e.g. Freiburg, Munich and
Offenbach. This development was strongly supported by a programme launched by
302 H. Weishaupt
the Federal Ministry of Education and Research, “Lernen vor Ort” (learning in the
community), aiming to set up educational management across all areas of education
at a local level and support it by a system of permanent education monitoring.
2.6.4 Regular School Inspection
At the level of federal states, the introduction of regular school inspections also
constitutes an important measure of quality assurance, implemented by all the
federal states as a means of external evaluation. In part, school inspections are
supplemented by regulations on the formulation of school programmes and internal
evaluation procedures. School inspections are aimed at assessing school quality by
means of a structured and standardised procedure, delivering reasoned feedback to
schools regarding their strengths and areas of development and thus making the
schools aware of their state as it is, providing impetus for further development.
Across the federal states, procedures implemented in school inspections differ as
well as composition of expert commissions for school inspection, for instance,
classroom visits are included to varying extent.
Schools in Germany often find it difficult to get used to accountability and
quality assessment. In this respect, it will take time for such procedures to be
accepted as a normal part of school routine.
3 Future Challenges
The future challenges to education and the educational system are embedded in
central tendencies in society.
3.1 Central Tendencies in Society as Points of Reference
Central tendencies in society provide important points of reference for future

challenges to education. These are demographic development, structural changes in
the employment system and family structural changes.
3.1.1 Demographic Development
For some decades, the natural population development in Germany has shown a
negative trend. Germany has one of the lowest birth rates in the world, i.e. 1.3–1.4
births per woman. Immigration was the only means of increasing population figures
since 1970. Owing to demographic processes in Germany, in the next two decades
the strong population born in the 1950s and 1960s will successively withdraw from
the labour market, and a generation marked by low birth rates will enter the education
system and labour market. Accordingly, the average age of the population will accel-
erate. By 2025, a third of the population will be older than 60 years. If average years
of employment are not increased, at this time one person at working age will account
for one other person who is younger or older than employment age. In acknowledge-
ment of this fact, the average age of retirement from employment has risen in the
recent past. This process will be continued due to employment policy measures.
Effects of a shrinking population on societal and economic developments in
Germany are controversially debated as new, previously unknown societal constel-
lations emerge. The discernible decline in population figures and the increasing
average age can no longer be compensated by immigration. Since the late 1950s,
labour migrants came to Germany, followed by war refugees, asylum seekers and
others who sought entry to Germany for humanitarian reasons. Among immigrants
to Germany, the group of native Germans (ethnic German resettlers) is significant:
Particularly between 1990 and 2000, people with German ancestors emigrated from
Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union and acquired German citizenship.
Immigration to Germany has strongly declined in the past decade, 19 % of the popu-
lation currently have an immigrant background if applying the minimum criterion
of at least one parent having immigrated to Germany. More than half of the migrants
now possess German citizenship. One third of the pre-primary school-aged children
have a migrant background. This means a great challenge to the education system
because the group of migrants is very heterogeneous regarding its language and
cultural background.
3.1.2 Change in Employment System
For some decades, the employment system has undergone a transformation towards a
service- and knowledge-based society. This involves an increased demand on school
and professional qualifications of employees and at the same time, altered qualifica-
tion profiles, resulting from a reduction of commercial/industrial professions tradi-
tionally reserved to men. In order to pay tribute to the qualification needs of the
employment system, and owing to the demographic and labour market structural rea-
sons, a significantly higher number of highly skilled workforce and university gradu-
ates will need to be recruited from a probably continually shrinking population.
The shrinking number of people at employment age will lead to a release of pres-
sure on the labour market as is already discernible in recent years, resulting in a
decrease of unemployment figures. Full employment will only be achieved in the next
decade if a larger proportion of insufficiently skilled employees is continually quali-
fied; otherwise, the supply of unskilled labour will exceed labour market demand.
3.1.3 Family Structural Changes
Women are the beneficiaries of educational expansion in Germany. Nowadays,

women have on average reached a higher level of school leaving qualification than
304 H. Weishaupt
men. With an increasing standard of vocational training, they are no longer able to
interrupt their employment for longer periods of time if they wish to keep up with
professional developments. Even when setting up a family, there is an increasing
need for women to continue working, not only to contribute to the family income
but also to save up for later in life as the traditional pensions system will no longer
be able to cover all costs. Moreover, the phase dedicated to family care is relatively
reduced in Germany, given average life expectancy of women of currently 82
years (prospectively rising to 89–91 years by 2060). Women are nowadays less
prepared to accept far-reaching disadvantages with respect to their overall lifespan
and standard of living. As a matter of consequence, women spend shorter periods of
time outside of employment to set up a family and continue to expand their employ-
ment phase. This tendency is supported by the fact that women are mostly employed
in the service sector where there is a growing demand. The development introduced
by the extension of pre-school daycare and all-day school facilities is intended to
improve opportunities for harmonising family and employment demands and due to
continue. Otherwise, the birth rate would rather decline; as at present; an improved
level of education of women corresponds to a lower number of children. Therefore,
pre-primary education and care and all-day schools will increasingly be charged
with upbringing and care tasks which in the past were regarded as tasks to be ful-
filled by the family (at least in West Germany).
3.2 Challenges Ahead
Challenges faced by the future development of education in Germany should be

seen in the light of the outlined demographic development and changes in the
employment system and the family structures in society. The necessary reforms
cover all age groups and the fundamental questions of equity and inclusion.
3.2.1 Reduction of Social Disadvantages of Children and Young People

with Migrant Background
Owing to an increase of participation in education in Germany in the past decades,

the educational potential of upper social groups in society is nowadays nearly fully
exploited. In view of the expected further demand for a well-qualified labour force,
stronger efforts are necessary in Germany to remove social differences regarding
educational opportunities, thus to enable children from lower social groups and
with migrant backgrounds to achieve higher school leaving degrees and qualified
vocational training. School organisation measures (school types offering several
pathways, all-day schools) and pedagogical measures (language intervention
programmes, assistance with homework) have already been taken to deal with the
problem. Still, such efforts need to be considerably enforced.
3.2.2 Extension of Care and Education Facilities

for Children Under the Age of Three
The demand for institutionalised care provisions for children after their first year of
life will probably increase. The legally granted right to a daycare placement will
result in a further increase in creating early childhood facilities in the coming
decade. In this respect it will be important to ensure an adequate care ratio as well
as the quality of pre-school care and education.
3.2.3 Special Needs Support
The future organisation of instruction of children with special educational needs

presents an important challenge. Already in 1994 the Standing Conference of
Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs decided that fulfilment of special edu-
cational needs is not tied to special schools and that this should be seen as a com-
mon task faced by principally all schools. Supported by an amendment to the
constitution (Basic Law) expressing that it is forbidden to discriminate against
people of a disability, school legislation in all of the federal states now prefers
integrative (inclusive) instruction of students with special educational needs against
segregation in special schools, provided that organisational, human and material
resources exist.
In 2009, the “UN convention on the rights of persons with disabilities” came into
force, adding momentum to the assessment of common practice in special needs
support in all of the federal states in Germany. Reality at the school level however
shows an increase in the support ratio from 4.6 % in 2000 to 4.9 % in 2010. During
the same period of time, the proportion of students with special needs integrated
into general schools rose as well, from 0.7 % to 1.4 %, respectively. Markedly, in
most federal states the extension of integrative instruction has not led to a declining
proportion of students enrolled in special needs schools; instead, a general exten-
sion of the proportion of students with special educational needs has emerged.
Moreover, the proportion of children who enter the school system via a special
needs school has increased from 3 % (2003) to 3.4 % (2010). Only a fifth of these
children are classified as having a mental developmental need.
Discussion as to how the situation can be changed is currently highly controver-
sial in Germany. The differentiated character of special education needs, defined
according to eight priorities of special needs, must be considered (visual impair-
ment, hearing impairment, mental development, learning, language, chronic disease,
emotional and social development, physical and motor development). It does not
suffice to close special needs schools for an inclusive support of children with
special educational needs at a general school. If the requirements afforded by inclu-
sive education are to be met, far-reaching changes of instructional organisation are
necessary (individualised support); qualification measures are required for teachers,
and they need to be willing to co-operate with special needs experts (who themselves
need to be trained regarding co-operation with primary and secondary school
306 H. Weishaupt
teachers). In this respect, the UN Convention presents a comprehensive and inevi-

table challenge to reforming the education system in Germany in the near future.
3.2.4 Redefining the Relationship Between Vocational Education

and Higher Education
The significant increase in higher education entry qualifications in Germany has

since 2006 led to an unexpectedly high incline not only of study course beginners
but also the ratio of students entering higher education to 55 % of the total age group
in 2011. Some temporary effects contributed to this high proportion, but even after
2015, when a decline in absolute figures is expected due to demographic change,
the proportion of students entering higher education is likely to remain at 50 %. In
the near future, this would suggest the task of readjusting the relationship between
higher education and vocational education if universities turn out to be the quanti-
tatively strongest postsecondary education and training sector in Germany’s soci-
ety. In general, conventional, historically rooted separations of initial vocational
education and training, continuous training and higher education will become out-
dated and replaced by new, hybrid formats of study courses requiring new forms of
organisation. The increasing relevance of dual study courses and continuing study
programmes (often attended by students in employment) should also be perceived
against this background.
3.2.5 Extension of Continuing/Further Education and Training
At several points the necessity to improve the role of continuing and further educa-
tion and training has been indicated, to take on improvement of qualification
processes:
• For the assurance and further development of competencies, all persons at
employment age (and currently particularly older employees) should be offered
improved opportunities for vocational training and continuing training, to enable
longer durations of employment in life and close gaps in the labour force.
• Learning accompanying employment at a very high level is particularly relevant
for graduates from the dual system and holders of a higher education entry
qualification who at first preferred an early entry into professional life against a
better qualification at the university level. These groups could and would like to
benefit from respective offerings for further qualification. Taking societal and
individual needs for qualification into account, universities therefore need to set
up additional qualification programmes for people who are in employment.
• Persons with a low level of education constitute another important target group
for which forms of qualification need to be sought: For them, deferral of learning
to adulthood and the acquisition of qualifications later in life will be an important
requirement for social and economic integration. In the coming years, a constantly
high number of low skilled labour force are expected, for whom there is an insuf-
ficient demand on the labour market. Hence, there is an urgent need to provide a
broad scope of qualification measures to this group of people to enable their
sustainable integration into the labour market.
Initial and further training of adults who have already been in employment might
present an important task to existing vocational training institutions. Universities
should also be viewed as lifelong learning institutions, which would not only result
in an increased engagement in further training but also a reorientation of study
courses offered in initial academic training. Supplementary in-employment aca-
demic qualifications are gaining importance for professional advancement and
adjustment of skills to cutting-edge research. Bachelor/Master study courses offer
an opportunity to time training and employment phases according to different needs.
Universities should therefore provide appropriate structures of study courses.
4 Education and Development in Society
Today, a general consensus in society has been reached regarding the importance of
the education system for development in society and particularly assuring Germany’s
competitiveness in a global market. Education and research expenses enjoy societal
priority even in times of financial difficulty. There is a controversial debate in
Germany as to whether federalism constitutes a condition or rather an obstacle for
improving the quality of education, i.e. whether the federation should increasingly
centralise education tasks. The Basic Law reform in 2006 has strongly reduced
tasks that were shared by the federal government and the federal states (e.g. build-
ing universities), strengthening autonomy of the federal states. Currently a fear is
raised that education systems in the federal states develop disparately, leading to
distinctly different educational opportunities.
Differences in economic power and sociocultural composition of the population
between the federal states, however, result in disparities that should not be regarded
as a consequence of educational policy measures but rather present different condi-
tions of action for educational policy. These inequalities are enforced by also taking
into account the municipalities as important levels of educational policymaking.
While national competency in educational policy would result in educational pol-
icy measures that apply across the entire Republic, this would not lead to an
improved regional implementation, because existing differences are not removed at
this level. Hence, perhaps attention should be focused on conditions for implement-
ing reforms at the local level rather than focused on nationwide framework condi-
tions. In the past decade, local authorities have increasingly perceived their tasks in
offering their citizens a comprehensive supply of educational opportunities across
all levels of education. Communities will probably need to receive more support
regarding these activities, because educational opportunities must be offered to
citizens close to home.
308 H. Weishaupt
A growing flexibility can be observed regarding educational pathways in

Germany, and transitions between one area of education and another are increas-
ingly interlinked. At the same time, educational pathways have reached an increased
level of diversity; different means of access to educational careers are offered (12 or
13 years of schooling for a higher education entry qualification (Abitur), half-day
versus all-day school, public/private schooling, general/vocational education
schools, Bachelor’s degree at a university of applied science/university, etc.).
Thereby, new educational opportunities are offered to individuals participating in
education. To avail themselves of these options, parents and young people require
information and counselling. In the past, this aspect was rather neglected, and
endeavours need to be strengthened in the future, to improve the young people’s
competencies for planning their educational careers individually. In particular, this
is relevant for the phase of entering a professional career.
At the level of educational institutions, there is a growing tendency to realise that
they can no longer fulfil their tasks in isolation, but they need to co-operate with
institutions engaged in cultural, social and sports education, as well as business
enterprises. In as far as these institutions gain importance for fulfilling educational tasks,
it becomes evident that educational tasks reach far beyond the field of educational
policy and that education should be seen as a cross-sectional task involving society
at large. This might in fact present the main challenge to be faced in the future.
References
Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung. (2008). Bildung in Deutschland 2008: Ein indika-

torengestützter Bericht mit einer Analyse zu Übergängen im Anschluss an den Sekundarbereich I.
Bielefeld: Bertelsmann.
Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung. (2010). Bildung in Deutschland 2010: Ein indika-
torengestützter Bericht mit einer Analyse zu Perspektiven des Bildungswesens im demograf-
ischen Wandel. Bielefeld: Bertelsmann.
Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung. (2012). Bildung in Deutschland 2012: Ein intika-
torengestützter Bericht mit einer Analyse zur kulturellen Bildung im Lebenslauf. Bielefeld:
Bertelsmann.
Baumert, J., & Maaz, K. (2012). Migration und Bildung in Deutschland. Die Deutsche Schule,
104(3), 279–302.
Konsortium Bildungsberichterstattung. (2006). Bildung in Deutschland. Ein indikatorengestützter
Bericht mit einer Analyse zu Bildung und Migration. Bielefeld: Bertelsmann.
Kühne, S., & Kann, C. (2012). Private (Grund-)Schulen als blinder Fleck in der öffentlichen
Daseinsvorsorge? Regionale Analysen zu Entwicklungen in der deutschen Privatschullandschaft.
Die Deutsche Schule, 104(3), 256–278.
OECD. (2012). Education at a glance 2012 (OECD indicators). Paris: OECD.
Statistisches Bundesamt (Hrsg.). (2012). Bildungsfinanzbericht 2012, Wiesbaden: Statistisches
Bundesamt.
Mexico: Building New Paths to Educate
Young People
Lorenzo Gómez Morin Fuentes
Abstract This chapter presents an overview of the Mexican education system—one

of the largest in the world—with reference to children and young people’s educa-
tional problems and opportunities related to access to education and effective
learning. Two education reforms proposed by the Ministry of Public Education are
presented: the first is for basic education and consists in the establishment of a
Professional Teaching Service program, aimed at improving teacher recruitment and
professional development; the second is the Upper Secondary Education (USE)
reform that focuses on universalizing coverage for youth (14–17 years of age) and
creating a National System of Upper Secondary Education to coordinate USE schools
and foster better results in terms of student achievement.
Keywords Education reform • Mexico • Professional Teaching Service • Upper

Secondary Education
In Mexico, as in the rest of the world, it is recognized that education is a fundamental

human right that promotes freedom and personal autonomy and allows the
improvement of social, economic, and cultural conditions of the country. The
increase in years of schooling (which includes significant learning) is associated
with increased productivity, poverty reduction, and strengthening of social cohesion,
among other factors of human development (INEE 2011). The importance that
Mexico gives to education is established in the content of article 3 of the Mexican
Constitution, whereby compulsory basic education and Upper Secondary
Education (USE), free education offered by the state, and secular and democratic
nature of national education are established.
L.G.M. Fuentes (*)

Latin American Superior School of Social Sciences (FLACSO Mexico),
Mexico City, México

310 L.G.M. Fuentes
To ensure the right to education, the Mexican Government is obliged to guarantee

universal education services for compulsory education at the stage of preschool and
grades 1–9 and, more recently, for Upper Secondary Education, hereinafter referred
to as USE (grades 10–12). Therefore, since 2012, Mexico compulsory education
includes 15 grades (from 3 to 17 years of age).
This compulsory nature of education is not yet translated into equal opportunities for
access, retention, and school achievement. In particular, the decision to make USE
compulsory (typically attended by the youth of 14–17 years of age) has taken into
account the fact that young people who do not complete this education level are
exposed to a high degree of vulnerability: their lack of higher skills puts them at risk of
being hired in vulnerable jobs with low income and, therefore, being excluded from the
full benefits of development Economic Commission for Latin America and the
Caribbean (CEPAL 2012). It is important to point out that the obligation of the state to
ensure equal opportunities for access to education services should also include the
achievement of meaningful learning by students, mandated by a national curriculum.
This paper presents an overview of the Mexican education system, with particular
reference to children and young people’s educational problems and opportunities.
It seeks to explain the reasons that motivated the Federal Ministry of Education
to implement the two most recent reforms in the system: the establishment of a
teaching professional service in basic education and the reform of USE.
1 Mexican Education System
In 2011, Mexico ranked the 11th among the countries with the largest populations
in the world, with a total population of more than 112 million inhabitants (INEGI
2012). The Mexican education system is one of the largest in the world: the third
largest in the American continent, surpassed only by education systems of the USA
and Brazil (INEE 2012). The Mexican education system has 32,835,292 students,
1,768,983 teachers, and 247,773 institutions of basic education, USE, and higher
education. 25,666,451 students are enrolled in basic (preschool, primary, and sec-
ondary) education, i.e., 74.6 % of the enrollment of the education system; USE has
4,187,528 students, representing 12.2 % of the total enrollment; and 2,981,313
students are enrolled in higher education, 8.7 % of the total (Table 1).
Mexico has one of the largest education population in the world. In 2010, 33,251,615
children from 3 to 17 years of age (typical ages to attend basic education and USE)
attended school, representing 29.6 % of the total population. This percentage seems
high in the international arena, exceeding that of the USA (20.2 %), Brazil (26.1 %),
and Spain (14.5 %). In Mexico, the high turnout is because of the large proportion of
the population of children enrolled in compulsory basic education, compared with the
total population (23.8 %). School attendance of these children subpopulations poses a
challenge for the national education system and the solutions are not yet satisfactory.
Except for children from 6 to 11 years of age, the right to attend school for children
between 3 and 5 years of age and between 12 and 17 years of age is not yet exercised
fully in Mexico. Attendance at schools was almost universal (98 %) among students
Mexico: Building New Paths to Educate Young People 311
Table 1 Composition of the Mexican education system

Normative
age for School
Education enrollment Years in enrollment Amount of
level Grades (years) school (2010–2011) teachers/schools
Basic Preschool K1–K3 3–5 3 25,666,451 1,175,535
education Elementary 1–6 6–11 6 teachers/
Lower 7–9 12–14 3 226,374
secondary schools
Upper Upper 10–12 15–17 2–3 4,187,528 278,269 teachers/
secondary secondary 15,110 schools
education
Tertiary College or – – 2,981,313 315,179 teachers/
education graduate 6,289 schools
studies
Totals 14–15 32,835,292
Source: INEE 2012
Note: Because tertiary education is not compulsory, it does not have a normative age for enroll-
ment, nor a fixed number of years in school
from 6 to 11 years of age, but fell to 71 % for children from 3 to 5 years of age, and was
92 % and 67.2 % for children from 12 to 14 and from 15 to 17 years of age, respectively.
The school enrollment structure in the educational system of Mexico is characterized
by a large proportion of children enrolled in basic education, and a small proportion of
young people and adults enrolled in higher education.
It is noteworthy that the rural population (those who live in communities of less
than 2,500 inhabitants) equals 23.2 % of the total population. To keep this in mind is
essential to understand the Mexico’s challenge of providing education for children who
live in more than 159,000 communities of less than 250 inhabitants. In addition,
in 2010, almost a quarter of children aged 3–14 (26.9 %), and of those aged 15–17
(26.7 %), lived in towns of less than 2,500 inhabitants; around 6 % of both age groups
declared to be exclusively indigenous language speakers; about 9 % of them had
parents or guardians who had not received any formal education.
2 From Administrative Decentralization to School-Related

Issues: The Path of Reforms in Basic Education
2.1 Ongoing Quality Issues
In 1992, the National Agreement for the Modernization of Basic Education was signed
by the federal government, state governments, and the National Union of Education
Workers (SNTE); it was a commitment of all parties for a new cycle of reforms, all of
them related to both decentralization and improvement of efficiency and quality of the
system (Hopkins et al. 2007). Beginning with this process of decentralization, it
started a new stage of construction of local education systems that were able to com-
ply with the objectives specified in the National Agreement of 1992.
312 L.G.M. Fuentes
Table 2 Percentage of Mexican students (aged 15 years) with low achievement (below level 1b;
levels 1b and 1a) in reading competency according to PISA 2009
Reading competence 2000 Reading competence 2009
(below level 1b; levels 1b and 1a) (below level 1b; levels 1b and 1a)
% ee* % ee*
Brazil 55.8 (1.7) 51.6 (1.9)
Chile 48.2 (1.9) 30.6 (1.5)
Mexico 44.1 (1.7) 40.1 (1.0)
Argentina 43.9 (4.5) 51.6 (1.9)
USA 17.9 (2.2) 17.6 (1.1)
Spain 16.3 (1.1) 19.6 (0.9)
Canada 9.6 (0.4) 10.3 (0.5)
OECD 19.3 (0.3) 18.1 (0.2)
Source: INEE 2012
*
Estimated error
The first decade of this century witnessed the creation of the National Institute for
the Education Evaluation, whose purpose was to take over the application of the inter-
national education assessments (such as PISA), in which Mexico participates. In
the meantime, a national education quality assessment program was launched in
2005, to assess student achievement from the 3rd grade (elementary) to the 9th grade
(lower secondary). This new test is applied annually to every child enrolled in school.
However, after 20 years of education reforms aiming at decentralization, trans-
parency, accountability, and robust quality and efficiency, it must be admitted that the
results have been disappointing, because of the low achievement level reached by
the Mexican students, according to both the international student assessments
(PISA, TIMSS, Latin American Laboratory for the Evaluation of the Education
Quality [LLECE]) and the national one, applied together by the National Institute for
the Education Evaluation and the Federal Ministry of Education (SEP).
Since 2000, Mexico has participated in the PISA, which shows the quality of
basic education by testing academic performance of 15-year-old students. The 2000
PISA results revealed one of the most serious problems at this education level:
approximately half of the 15-year-old students in Mexico do not have basic com-
petencies to function adequately in the twenty-first century society.
Table 2 shows Mexico’s PISA results for reading competency in 2000 and 2009,
compared with other countries such as Brazil, Spain, and USA. The high percentage
of young people that do not have the basic level of reading competence (level 2) rep-
resents a risk for progress in Mexico, and there is just a small improvement in decreas-
ing low performers between 2000 and 2009. For example, at the current rate, it would
take 45 years to lower percentage of low achievers to the level of Spain.
Table 3 shows the percentage of low achievers (below level 1b, at level 1b,
and at level 1a) for reading, mathematics, and science competencies in every
PISA test performed in Mexico. Unfortunately, results for mathematics and sci-
ences are much worse than for reading.
In addition to the problem described above, another significant concern is the very
low percentage of students with high performance in the reading competence as
shown in Table 4. The percentage of high-performance students for mathematics and
Table 3 Percentage of National competence

Mexican students (aged 15 (below level 1b; levels
years) with low achievement 1b and 1a)
(below level 1b; levels 1b and
Competencies/year % ee*
1a) in reading, mathematics,
and science competencies Reading/2000 44.1 (1.7)
according to PISA results for Mathematics/2003 65.9 (1.7)
2000, 2003, 2006, and 2009 Sciences/2006 50.9 (1.4)
Reading/2009 40.1 (1.0)
Source: INEE 2012
*
Estimated error
Table 4 Percentage of Mexican students (aged 15 years) with high achievement (levels 4–6) in
reading competency according to PISA 2009
Reading competence 2009
Reading competence 2000 (levels 4–6) (levels 4–6)
% ee* % ee*
Canada 44.5 (0.7) 39.5 (0.8)
USA 33.7 (2.4) 30.4 (1.5)
Spain 25.3 (1.0) 21.0 (0.7)
Argentina 10.3 (1.6) 7.0 (0.9)
Mexico 6.8 (0.9) 5.7 (0.4)
Chile 5.3 (0.5) 10.6 (0.9)
Brazil 3.6 (0.5) 7.4 (0.7)
OECD 30.5 (2.0) 29.6 (1.3)
Source: INEE 2012
*
Estimated error
sciences is lower. This definitively has negative implications in terms of future scien-
tific and economic development. It implies that the education system is not producing
qualified human resources.
2.2 Development of Professional Teaching Service
Mexico has received advice from international organizations about education reform
to tackle the issues of quality. The main recommended reforms are described in detail
in an OECD publication titled “Progress with Educational Reform in Basic Education
in Mexico: An OECD Perspective” (2012). Perhaps the most important of those
reforms relates to the need to recruit some of the best people in the country and turn
them into teachers. It is acknowledged that the quality of an education system cannot
be higher than the quality of its teachers and that the foremost education reform is not
the decentralization of the system, but the enhancement of the quality of the teacher.
In Mexico, until 2012, both the entry into the teaching profession and retention
of teachers have been controlled de facto by the National Union of Education
Workers (“Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de la Educación,” SNTE) and have
314 L.G.M. Fuentes
been ruled by considerations that have nothing to do with merit nor academic capacity.
For instance, it has been common practice over the years for a family member to
inherit the teacher’s post from their parents. The international assessments do insis-
tently recommend the establishment of a Professional Teaching Service, ruled
entirely by professional merit and skill (OECD 2012).
During the last 2 years, the social pressure for the establishment of such a system
has increased. Nevertheless, although the first attempts to set it up are dated in 2011,
it has been only toward the end of 2012 that this reform has been effectively enacted.
One of the first actions of the new Federal Government inaugurated on 1 December
2012, was the promotion of a constitutional reform that included this fundamental
education reform. The most prominent feature of this new reform is the establish-
ment of a Professional Teaching Service.
This component of the reform is expected to allow the Mexican state to improve
the quality of the public education, by launching and maintaining a national teaching
system that could regulate and make transparent the processes of selection and
promotion of teachers. These critical processes have for decades been under the con-
trol of the national teacher’s union (SNTE), and their main dynamic principles have
been the group’s interests, the control of job positions by the Union, and the rewarding
of loyalties. The core ambition of the reform project consists of the regulation of the
recruitment and advancement of teachers by no other consideration than professional
merit. It is important to add that this expected improvement in education quality tack-
les one of the most prominent, publicly perceived, educational problems. It is why this
component has been, in general terms, well received by the political parties and the
public, in a political ambience featured by tendencies toward polarization and radical-
ization, as well as an incapacity to reach agreements in previous years.
2.3 Creation of National Education Evaluation System
Closely related to the aforementioned component is the project for the strengthening
and expansion of the National System of Evaluation of the Education (Sistema
Nacional para la Evaluación de la Educación). This component is of critical impor-
tance, because the objectives of the professional teaching system cannot be reached
if there is a lack of reliable and relevant information about the efficacy and effi-
ciency of the national education delivery system. More specifically, the merit of the
teachers needs to be objectively and fairly assessed, and this seems practically
impossible to achieve because basic information, including the number of teachers
working in the country, is not reliable, as has been recently publicly disclosed.
The third main feature of the reform project is its stated goal of elevating these
two systemic changes to the legal category of constitutional mandates. The inclu-
sion in the Mexican Constitution seems to be the only efficient way to give stability
to the changes in the long term (Presidencia de la República 2012). The reform
project was enacted in September 2013. It will be fully implemented next year, with
the 2014 budget recently approved by the Congress.
3 Why Upper Secondary Education Reform?
As described above, reforms in basic education have been put into effect over the
last 20 years, with varying results though. It was recognized in 2012 that the key
catalyst for reform was teacher recruitment and training, as well as an independent
evaluation system of the quality of education.
However, USE has not been the focus of public education policy until very
recently. This education level has strategic importance for future national develop-
ment, because of the need to develop the skills and competencies for the twenty-first
century for the biggest generation of young people ever in Mexico’s history. As
explained below, this is a structural reform of the education system, which is
centered on youth and their future, and involves new approaches to diversify oppor-
tunities for their education and transition to adulthood.
3.1 Recognizing the Importance of USE
According to the Latin American Organization for Youth (OIJ), youth has been
traditionally conceived as a transitional phase between two stages: childhood and
adulthood. In other words, it is a process of transition in which children become
autonomous people. Therefore, it can also be understood as a preparation stage in
which people are incorporated in the employment process and acquire indepen-
dence from their families.
In today’s world, there are about 1.5 billion young people between 12 and 24 years
of age, of whom 1.3 billion live in developing countries. The current situation of youth
in the world offers an unprecedented opportunity to accelerate economic growth and
significantly reduce the levels of poverty. The World Bank, in its 2007 World
Development Report, Development and the Next Generation, establishes the need to
invest in young people to positively impact on five stages of their lives: the need to
keep studying, the beginning of their life at work, adopting a healthy lifestyle, raising
a family, and exercising their civil and democratic rights (SEP 2008a).
The reason why international organizations emphasize investment in young
people at these stages is based upon the assumption of their positive impact on the
long-term cultural and human capital development. In this sense, they also recog-
nize the need to orient policies and institutions toward three strategic sectors: expand
opportunities through broader access to health services and a better quality of edu-
cation, develop the capacities of young people so they can make better decisions
based on complete and adequate information, and promote an effective system of
compensation programs that generate the incentives necessary to overcome the
effects of misguided decisions.
The conditions in which the Mexican youth live in these days could be seen as
evidence of the break in the path from education to work and citizenship, which had
been the main anchor of the transition to adulthood in modern times. At the beginning
316 L.G.M. Fuentes
of the twenty-first century, that path has lost its continuity and stability, because of
the failure to include the new generations in it.
Within the framework of the redistributive shortcomings of that path, two
problems arise. First, many young people do not have access to formal education,
and when they have it, some of them drop out because of economic constraints
of subsistence living or because they do not like school. Others, who have the
possibility of continuing their education, do not show a favorable educational
performance. Second, many young people enter the labor market earlier but into
precarious sectors, with low levels of qualifications and low wage conditions.
Some combine studies with work under difficult conditions that do not allow
them optimal performance either in school or at work.
If education and work do not offer enough opportunities for young people to
develop, it is clear that young people face problems to fully exercise their rights
and responsibilities as citizens. Without sufficient skills and competencies to
develop their autonomy, Mexican youth face difficulties in living and participat-
ing in a democracy and could be subject to political exclusion and limited cul-
tural self-expression such as anti-systemic militancy, citizen apathy, or political
patronage.
3.2 Identifying Key Issues in USE
USE in Mexico is organized into three education models: general USE, technologi-
cal USE, and professional technician. General USE offers introductory or general
preparation for students, so that they can pursue their studies in higher education.
The technological USE serves two purposes: to prepare students for admission to
higher education and to train them so that they can work in industrial, agricultural,
fishing, or forestry technical activities. The professional technician model has also
a propaedeutic character that allows students to continue to higher education and, at
the same time, it offers a diploma for a short technical career. Students may choose
among different schools that offer these three models. Within each model, there are
a wide variety of programs and institutions.
Each model also involves different levels of administrative responsibility (federal,
state, private, and autonomous). As a result, schools operate relatively autonomously
from each other, with unequal stages of development and with different results in
terms of quality (Santos and Delgado 2011). Hence for decades, USE has been
characterized by both fragmentation and disarticulation and shows a remarkable lack
of coherent public policy that could give it meaning and identity. This affects its
organization and communication between the schools; the decisions students have
to take to enter this system or to continue their studies are very complex. For exam-
ple, there are more than 150 different academic programs for USE, making both
mobility and exchange of students and a homogenous vision of what USE has to
offer them very difficult to achieve.
Fig. 1 Student dropout rate for Upper Secondary Education in Mexico (Source: Gómez Morin
and Miranda 2010)
Empirical evidence shows that despite its importance, USE in Mexico still has
severe problems such as insufficient coverage, high dropout rates, and low student
academic achievement as discussed above (OECD 2012; INEE 2012). Perhaps the
most dramatic and illustrative characteristic of USE shortcomings is the high
dropout rate. Figure 1 shows the dropout rate (%) from 1990 to 2009. As can be
seen, the dropout rate has decreased only 2.9 % in almost 20 years. Moreover, in the
2008–2009 school year, the dropout rate was 15.9 %, that is, approximately 630,000
students. If the school year consists of 200 days of school attendance, this means
that every day more than 3,000 young people drop out of their USE studies in
Mexico (Gómez Morin and Miranda 2010).
In addition, USE has the greatest repetition and failure rate within the education
system in Mexico, which is reflected in the subsequent trajectory of its graduates.
Among those who do graduate, only 50 % of them continue with their higher educa-
tion. The highest unemployment rate among the entire population of Mexico is pre-
cisely observed among young people of 18 years who graduated from high school
(8.5 %); on average, a new graduate from USE spends at least 8 months in finding
his/her first job (Székely 2010; Zorrilla Alcalá et al. 2012).
3.3 Reaching Consensus on USE Reform
Quantitative and qualitative indicators of USE indicate that it does not meet the
new requirements of the Mexican youth, within the framework of the society of the
twenty-first century. The quantitative and qualitative changes that the country and
the young people have experienced require, with urgency, a deep transformation of
both the education model and the institutional paradigm that have characterized the
education system and, in particular, USE.
318 L.G.M. Fuentes
Furthermore, the challenge now is even greater, because it is in the first decade
of the twenty-first century when Mexico has the highest number of young people
throughout its history. This implies that there will be a greater demand for these
services in the near future. It means not only taking measures and actions for
strengthening the academic programs, but also calling for innovation to address the
new conditions of educational development, as well as the emerging features of
increasingly complex youth in their transition to adulthood and full citizenship.
Faced with this reality of great challenges, a process of structural change of USE
started in 2007. This has been possible thanks to the confluence of four groups of
participants: local education authorities, higher education institutions, the National
Congress, and federal education authorities. All four groups shared awareness of the
strategic importance of the USE and the urgent need to modernize it and align it
with the demands of today’s world.
To achieve the needed transformation in USE, an education reform was pro-
posed, approved, and put into effect in 2008. The objectives and goals of this reform
are explained below.
4 New Approaches to Youth Education: Reform Components
USE reform in Mexico is, without a doubt, an act of public recognition of the short-
comings of this education level. At the same time, it reiterates the commitment
of the Mexican Government to young people to improve opportunities for access
to school and the completion of studies with appropriate levels of educational
achievement.
4.1 Scope and Objectives of USE Reform
The design of the reform does not only recognize the main problems of this education
level, but also considers the expectations of young people, with regard to
their education and their future life path. In this context, the objectives of USE
reform were to improve the relevance, equity, and quality of education services
and to strengthen institutional coordination and the effectiveness of all the academic
programs and management so that young people have access, stay in school, and
study in favorable environments of learning for the development of effective
competencies (Székely 2010).
The scope of USE reform includes the creation of a National System of Upper
Secondary Education, which could provide this education level with identity,
academic and administrative order, articulation between different school models,
and content relevance. The reform does not seek to develop a single school model
for USE or a unique national curriculum, but a common framework of organization
for the whole system.
The main objective of USE is to provide young people with the opportunity to
acquire skills, aptitudes, knowledge, as well as the ability to continue learning
throughout life and that means the possibility of being active, productive, and
participative citizens (OECD 2012). To do so, USE needs to incorporate new
pedagogical approaches to prepare youth for an era of accelerated change and
uncertainty, for them to be flexible and adaptive, to keep abreast of the use of infor-
mation and communication technologies, and to be capable of responding to the
challenges of the knowledge society.
USE reform has an integral approach to implement the needed changes to the
system by developing various institutional strategies, whose specific aim is to
support and accompany students. This is probably one of the more innovative
features of this reform, compared with previous efforts to improve educational
outcomes. The reform states that students are both the principal actor and the target
of every improvement planned.
4.2 Components of the USE Reform
The comprehensive USE reform consists of four innovative transformation compo-

nents (Secretaría de Educación Pública 2008a; Székely 2010).
4.2.1 Common Curriculum Framework
This component encompasses the reorientation of an education model based on

memorization to one based on learning in which knowledge is transmitted through the
development of skills and competencies. It started with the definition, for the first time
in the education system, of a Common Curriculum Framework for USE that offers a
common ground for every USE school model. The Common Curricular Framework
organizes USE curriculum around three types of competences: generic (common to
all USE models), disciplinary (basic and propaedeutic), and professional.
Basic competencies. These types of competencies have three characteristics: (a)
they are applicable in social, academic, personal, and employment contexts and
are important for life; (b) they are transversal because they are relevant to every
academic discipline and for school processes; and (c) they are transferable
because they strengthen the capability to acquire other competencies.
Disciplinary competencies. These types of competencies are the skills, attitudes,
and knowledge that every student must acquire in school to both develop their
scientific and humanistic culture and be prepared for lifelong learning. These
competencies are organized in four disciplinary fields: (a) mathematics, (b) exper-
imental sciences, (c) humanities and social sciences, and (d) communication.
Professional competencies. These competencies offer skills and knowledge relevant
to a good performance in the professional sector.
320 L.G.M. Fuentes
4.2.2 Delivery Models
This component encompasses the formal definition of four different ways to deliver
education services:
Teacher-led, which is the traditional education where a student attends school and
80 % of learning activities are conducted by a teacher
Intensive program, which is basically the same as teacher-led but, instead of 3 years
of schooling, is reduced to 2 years
Virtual education (e-learning), which takes advantage of information and communi-
cation technology for learning, with tutorial assistance of a teacher, and after
completion of courses, students are certified
Self-planned education and mixed models, which allow students to choose their
courses according to their available time and between 30 % and 40 % of learning
activities are supervised by a teacher
These delivery models offer the possibility of graduation from USE to all young
people with different interests, needs, and contexts.
4.2.3 Implementation Mechanisms
Certain operational processes were required to implement the new Common Curriculum
Framework. These processes included teacher training, management skills for school
principals, dropout prevention programs, infrastructure and equipment enhancement
for schools, school management improvement, scholarships for students, rules for
student transfer between schools of different education models, establishment
evaluation practices, and finally, design and implementation of mechanisms for
linkage with the labor market.
• Management mechanisms that are listed below are indispensable components of
the comprehensive reform of USE, because they define standards and common
processes that guarantee adherence to the Common Curriculum Framework,
under the terms of the National Upper Secondary Education System (NUSES).
• Training and updating of the teaching staff according to the objectives of
USE reform. This is one of the most important elements for USE reform to be
carried out successfully. Teachers must be able to work in accordance with the
competency model and to adopt learning-focused strategies. To achieve this, a
teacher profile is required. This profile is aligned to the graduate profile, so it
provides the teacher with the tools needed to promote generic, disciplinary, and
professional competencies for their students.
• A national strategy to support and accompany students through mentoring and
orientation programs designed both to decrease dropout rates and to pay
attention to the needs of the students to help them to achieve a successful USE
completion.
• The definition of a school management program and the development of a school
principal profile, along with training programs for both.
• The development of a school control system and the definition of student transfer
rules that would enable the mobility of students between subsystems, which
avoids the need to restart from the beginning because of different and mutually
exclusive academic programs.
• Expansion of the coverage of USE and an infrastructure investment program to
create new schools and adapt existing ones so they could accept more students.
• The provision of economic aid and scholarships to young people who are
unable to finance their studies.
• The design and application of a standardized test to verify the degree of progress
in the achievement of the graduate profile (ENLACE test for students who are in
their last year of USE).
In addition, schools operated by the Ministry of Education at the federal level have
introduced some additional transformations including, among others (competitive)
selection of principals through examinations, a school management system to estab-
lish goals and priorities by staff in each school year, as well as various evaluation
mechanisms for transparency and accountability.
4.2.4 School Incorporation to the National Upper Secondary Education

System
This component consists of establishing procedures so that each school on a

voluntary basis could accredit the operation of the three previous components
(i.e., to adopt the Common Curriculum Framework, select a delivery model, and
put into effect the mechanisms of implementation) and submits its registration to
the NUSES.
In turn, the processes to implement the NUSES are:
The establishment of the Council for the Evaluation of Upper Secondary Education.
A civil association including representatives from the Ministry of Education, the
state education authorities, the National Association of public universities, and
the National Institute for the Education Evaluation, among others. This Council
will coordinate the processes of evaluation of USE schools for membership to
the NUSES, as well as the implementation of mechanisms for the accreditation
of the quality of the schools participating in the system.
Registration and accreditation of institutions that will assist the Council for the
evaluation of Upper Secondary Education in evaluating USE schools that wish to
be part of NUSES.
USE school analysis and assessment. This is the process whereby a school principal
can voluntarily request to the Council the presence of an evaluation institution to
determine whether the school operates under the three components described
above and complies with the general principles of the reform. After the assess-
ment, the school is classified according to the fulfillment of the three compo-
nents: if the school fulfills all components of the reform, it is registered in the
system; if not, it is given support to achieve its registration.
322 L.G.M. Fuentes
The design of the procedure of entry through three previous processes implies:
• For the first time in the country, USE will have clear parameters for quality
evaluation and monitoring of the services offered.
• The budget can be prioritized more effectively, directing resources to schools
that require greater support and toward the mechanisms of implementation of the
reform that present greater shortcomings or needs in each case.
• The school principals are leaders of the education project of their community,
because it is they who, with the approval of the appropriate education authority,
requested the analysis and assessment to enter the path of continuous improvement
for entry to the NUSES.
• The teachers have clear objectives, with information for feedback management
and with the competencies and skills to promote the development of the future
graduate profile.
• The students of the schools belonging to the NUSES may be eligible to receive
an additional complementary NUSES certification.
• The society will have clear parameters to identify quality and improvement in
USE schools.
5 Universalizing USE
Another feature of Mexican youth is its social segmentation, which is clearly

associated with the social inequality that characterizes the country as a whole. Both
national surveys for youth in Mexico in 2000 and 2005 and various findings of
educational research on youth offer information on a highly differentiated youth
population both in its material and symbolic existence. The contrasts and differences
are manifest in areas that are crucial in terms of their social, political, and cultural
life: they live in different socioeconomic contexts and are characterized by deep
structural heterogeneity in their existence, living, and accommodation.
For decades access to this level of education was in fact restricted to young
people who had better social, economic, and cultural backgrounds. Figure 2 shows
the large difference in coverage of USE in relation to the level of income, with lower
coverage rates tied to a low-income decile.
USE is fundamental because during this education cycle students acquire critical
knowledge and skills, including sociocultural and educational experiences that will
define their inclusion in society as participating and productive citizens. Its capacity
to offer relevant, sufficient, and appropriate programs that meet the demographic,
sociocultural, and educational requirements of Mexican youth will be vital for their
training and development, and thus their insertion in the current world of a competi-
tive economy and their participation in the consolidation of democratic develop-
ment and social welfare of the country.
Given such recognition, in October 2010, the Mexican Congress unanimously
approved reforms to articles 3 and 31 of the Mexican Constitution, which declared
USE compulsory in the country. Finally, the decree was signed in February 2012.
Fig. 2 Attendance rate in

Upper Secondary Education 100
(population aged 16–18
Attendance rate (%)

years) by income decile 80
(Source: World Bank. (2005).
Mexico Expenditure Review. 60
In: Diario Oficial de la
Federación, 2008)
40
20
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Income decile
Implementation of compulsory USE will be gradual; it will begin in 2012–2013 to

achieve total coverage in schools by 2021–2022 (Cámara de Diputados 2011, 2012).
6 Initial Results of USE Reform
The USE reform has been implemented for a 4-year period, and there are already
encouraging signs that it is on track and producing the first positive results:
1. In 2008, the Ministry of Education published a decree establishing the
Common Curriculum Framework, with all its components, as a legal provision
in the Mexican education system. The majority of USE schools adopted this
framework (SEP 2008b). To implement this Common Curriculum Framework,
47,000 teachers and 749 school principals were trained, which means that one
of the most important steps to gain access to NUSES has been completed
(Subsecretaría de Educación Media Superior 2012).
2. The Council for the Evaluation of Upper Secondary Education was successfully
established (www.copeems.mx). As of September 2012, the Council has regis-
tered and certified 206 schools that operate the first three components of the
reform. In addition, 320 schools are in the process of being assessed this year to
achieve accreditation by the Council (Secretaría de Educación Pública 2012a).
According to information from the Ministry of Public Education, more than 4,000
schools are moving forward in the process of incorporation to NUSES.
3. Education indicators of USE registered significant improvement in the past 3
years. Dropout rates between 1990 and 2008 decreased 2.9 % (from 18.8 % to
15.9 %), whereas in only 4 years between 2008 and 2012, dropout rates decreased
1.5 %. As part of the implementation mechanisms, a national strategy was
designed to reduce the student dropout rate (Gómez Morin and Miranda 2010),
which was launched in over 1,000 schools across the country (Secretaría de
Educación Pública 2012b).
324 L.G.M. Fuentes
4. This strategy combines all the components of a policy focused on supporting

young people and includes programs in mentoring, development of reading
skills, vocational guidance, and scholarships, among others. The basis of this
strategy was the design of an early warning system to identify students who are
at risk of dropping out, so that schools can intervene at any time with any of the
programs of prevention (Secretaría de Educación Pública 2012b).
5. Finally, another significant advance refers to USE coverage at the national level.
According to statistics of the Ministry of Education, coverage in this education
level increased from 56.9 % in the school year of 2005–2006 to 69.3 % in the
school year of 2011–2012, i.e., an increase of 12.4 %. This indicates that today
there are better opportunities for young people in Mexico to finish their USE.
There is still inconclusive evidence of the impact of the USE reform on student
academic achievement. It will not be until the end of 2013 that PISA results will be
released, allowing us to make a comparison with 2009 results. A national standardized
test has shown a lack of progress in students’ reading competence. This is a pending
matter for further analysis.
7 Conclusion
The experience of Mexico, like many other countries, shows that the success or
failure of reforms in education depends largely on how well those involved in the
change understand what should be changed and how that change can be achieved in
the best possible way. Obviously, education systems have achieved the greatest
advances when they have collectively built a solid public idea that justifies and guides
change.
To opt for a process of democratic construction of education policies is much
more than to encourage citizen participation and gather the opinion of various
individuals and interest groups. It means that the decisions taken must be the result
of reflection and collective discussion of ideas with regard to what should cause a
change in education and how. However, to make the process truly democratic, the
dialogue between actors needs to be informed and evidence-based.
We know that to determine the real effects and results of policy education reforms,
we have to wait at least a decade. However, if the education policy initiative has clear
objectives and strategies for change and has identified goals to achieve, it can lead to
the improvement in some of the conditional factors of lasting change.
References
Cámara de Diputados. (2011). Ley general de educación. In Diario oficial de la federación.

México: Cámara de Diputados (modificación del 16 de noviembre de 2011).
Cámara de Diputados. (2012). Ley general de educación. In Diario oficial de la federación.
México: Cámara de Diputados (modificación del 11 de enero de 2011).
Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe –CEPAL. (2012). Panorama Social de
América Latina. Santiago de Chile: Naciones Unidas-CEPAL.
Gómez Morin, L., & Miranda, F. (2010). Modelo Integral para la Atención y Acompañamiento
de Adolescentes y Jóvenes en la Educación Media Superior. México: Informe Final. Secretaría
de Educación Pública and Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales..
Hopkins, D., Ahtaridou, E., Matthews, P., & Posner, C. (2007). Reflections on the performance
of the Mexican education system. London Centre for Leadership in Learning, Institute of
Education, University of London. OECD, Directorate for Education.
INEE—Instituto Nacional para la Evaluación de la Educación. (2011). La Educación media supe-
rior en México: Informe 2010–2011. México. Downloaded on Sept 7 2012 from: http://www.
inee.edu.mx/images/informe2011/informe2011final.pdf
INEE—Instituto Nacional para la Evaluación de la Educación. (2012). Panorama Educativo de
México 2011. Indicadores del Sistema Educativo Nacional. Educación Básica y Media
Superior. México: INEE. Downloaded on 7 Sept 2012 from: http://www.inee.edu.mx/images/
panorama2011/panorama2011.pdf
INEGI—Instituto Nacional de Geografía y Estadística. (2012). Presentación de Resultados del
Censo de Población y Vivienda 2012. Downloaded on 30 Aug 2012 from: http://www.inegi.
org.mx/est/contenidos/proyectos/ccpv/cpv2010/Default.aspx
OECD. (2012). Avances en las reformas de la educación básica en México: Una Perspectiva de la
OCDE. OECD Publishing.
Presidencia de la República. (2012). Reforma Educativa. http://www.presidencia.gob.mx/wp-
content/uploads/2012/12/Reforma-Educativa.pdf
Santos, A., & Delgado, A. (2011). Consideraciones sobre la obligatoriedad y la composición de la
educación media superior (capítulo 1). En La educación media superior en México. Informe
2010–2011. México: Instituto Nacional para la Evaluación de la Educación.
Secretaría de Educación Pública—SEP. (2008a). Acuerdo Número 442 por el que se establece el
Sistema Nacional de Bachillerato en un marco de diversidad. México: Diario Oficial de la
Federación, 26 de septiembre de 2008, Primera Sección.
Secretaría de Educación Pública—SEP. (2008b). Perspectiva de la Juventud en México. Reporte
del Instituto Mexicano de la Juventud. México.
Secretaría de Educación Pública. (2012a). Comunicado 112. El Sistema Nacional de Bachillerato
ofrece educación de calidad a los jóvenes. Retrieved from http://sep.gob.mx/es/sep1/
C1120812#.UGe9aUKr2sQ
Secretaría de Educación Pública. (2012b). Síguele, Caminemos juntos: Acompañamiento Integral
para Jóvenes. Retrieved from http://www.siguele.sems.gob.mx
Subsecretaría de Educación Media Superior. (2012). Avanza la Reforma Integral en Educación
Media Superior. Retrieved from http://www.sems.gob.mx/es/sems/avanza_la_reforma_
integral_en_educacion_media_supe
Székely Pardo, M. (2010). Avances y transformaciones en la educación media superior. In: Alberto
Arnaut y Silvia Giorguli (cords.). Educación. Los grandes problemas de México, vol. VII.
México: El Colegio de México.
Zorrilla Alcalá, J. F., Bracho, T., Miranda, F., & Martínez Rizo, F. (2012). La Educación Media
Superior en México. Balance y Perspectivas. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica/Secretaría
de Educación Pública.
Argentina: Improving Student School
Trajectories
Margarita Poggi
Abstract This chapter provides an analysis of the evolution of the Argentine

education system from the late nineteenth century up to the present. It starts with a
brief historical overview of state consolidation, early educational achievements and
the expansion of a modern, open, and free system. It goes on to describe the main
regulatory frameworks and most relevant policy guidelines developed in the last
decade while analysing the relationship between federal and provincial levels of
government. The chapter also examines social and educational gaps, repetition and
dropout rates, quality of education and the status of the teaching profession. Finally,
promoting diversity and prioritising knowledge are explored as some of the chal-
lenges that educational policies should address in the future.
Keywords Argentina • Education system • Federalism • Inequality • School trajec-

tories • Quality of education • Teacher profession
Argentina is organised into a federal system comprising 23 provinces and the

Autonomous City of Buenos Aires.1 The population is estimated at about 40,120,000,
according to the last 2010 National Population and Household Census. Among
them, 49 % are men, 51 % are women, and approximately 90 % of the total popula-
tion lives in urban areas.
According to the census, Argentina is the third most aged country in Latin
America after Uruguay and Cuba (14 % represents the population of over
60-year-olds). Over the decades, the country has been characterised by a gradual
decrease of the population between 0 and 14 years old, which represented 25.5 % in
2010. Argentina, together with Chile, Cuba and Uruguay, belongs to the group of
1
Hereinafter called “jurisdictions”.
M. Poggi (*)
International Institute for Educational Planning, IIEP/UNESCO Buenos Aires office,
Buenos Aires, Argentina

328 M. Poggi
countries within the region with a progressive demographic transition, characterised

by populations with a moderate or low birth and mortality rates, resulting in a low
natural growth of about 1 %. For this reason, the population pyramid confirms the
upward trend in the relative burden of the elderly population, showing in turn lower
levels in the birth rate. This trend in the long term has had an impact on the expan-
sion and development of the education system, among other things.
Argentina is a country with a high level of human development in Latin America
and ranks among the countries with the highest levels, together with Chile, Cuba
and Uruguay.2
It is noteworthy that throughout the twentieth century, the country had undergone
long periods of military rule, especially during the second half of the century, until
the end of 1983 when a period of democratic government began and continues up to
today.
Here follows a series of the most relevant characteristics of the Argentine edu-
cation system: first, a historical perspective that allows understanding early
achievements and more structured characteristics; second, an in-depth analysis of
the main policy guidelines during the last decade; finally, the article presents the
still pending challenges that education policies should either address or delve into
more vigorously in the future.
It should be noted that, due to the length allowed for this chapter, the analysis
focuses on policies oriented to regular education, particularly those corresponding
to the levels defined as compulsory by the National Education Law. However, this
does not mean that other aspects not considered herein lack relevance.
1 Main Characteristics of the Argentine

Education System
Understanding the achievements of the educational system and challenges for cur-
rent policies requires a brief historical overview before a general description of the
characteristics of this system (education types, processes and attainments).3 This
overview takes into account the relationships between the federal and provincial
levels of government that have been shaped through different regulatory frame-
works (Bravo 1988). Regulations have also established the main topics addressed
by educational policies as will be explained later.
2
For further information, see SITEAL (2011).
3
This section particularly picks up Chap. 4 of the 2010 Human Development National Report.
Human development in Argentina: development and new challenges. Buenos Aires. United Nations
Development Program (UNDP).
Argentina: Improving Student School Trajectories 329
1.1 Brief Historical Overview
The early expansion of the Argentine education system was grounded in the
development and consolidation of a state that, since the end of the nineteenth
century, took primary education as one of its main projects and that, in the second
half of the twentieth century—in spite of interrupted democratic periods and
repeated budgetary restrictions—achieved a significant expansion of education at
the secondary and higher education levels. This commitment and dynamism
resulted in, among other things, economic benefits deriving from participation in
the world economy as a raw material producer throughout the nineteenth and twen-
tieth centuries, the development of a dynamic industrial sector in light of import
substitutions strengthened during the 1940 and 1960 decades, the construction of
an active state in terms of the social and economic life organisation, the emergency
of a pushing middle class and the early organisation of citizenship strongly
demanding more and better state services.
In this context, the Argentine education system experienced an early expansion
and consolidation—especially compared with other Latin American countries—
between the end of the nineteenth century and the first decades of the twentieth
century. This expansion was evidenced in the following: (i) the accelerated growth
of primary education until reaching a stage of universalisation towards the decade
of 1980; (ii) the creation of a diversified and strongly expanded level in secondary
education as of the decade of 1950 (iii) the establishment, as of 1869, of a quite
homogeneous and very dynamic system of teacher training institutions; and (iv) the
expansion, during the twentieth century, of a modern university system with periods
of strong open admission process and free education delivery.
The education system is based on a structure resulting from evolution over 100
years. The reform dates back to the end of the nineteenth century and has witnessed
oscillation of the education structure towards a more consolidated regulatory frame-
work (Albergucci 1996; Almandoz 2000). Two acts have mainly shaped its trajec-
tory. The first one was Law No 1420 in 1884 that was part of a wider set of rules that
contributed to provide the creation and consolidation process of the Argentine state
with a final institutional structure. This law, ruling over the Federal Capital and
national territories, allowed Argentina to decide on a compulsory, free, universal
and lay education system that delivers basic reading and writing skills, mathemat-
ics, world and Argentine history and geography, natural sciences, and access to
knowledge of the National Constitution.
The difficulties experienced by several provinces in expanding their educational
services caused the enactment of Law No 4878 (known as Láinez Law) in 1905. It
authorised the Nation to establish primary schools in the territory of those provinces
requesting the action. This measure had a rapid impact (Braslavsky & Krawczyk
1988). Thus, in the decade of 1930, more than half of the primary school enrolment
in the provinces corresponded to national schools. However, many of them offered
four out of the seven grades expected and thus provided rural populations with a
short-length primary education programme. As a result, a double education system
330 M. Poggi
coexisted in each province (national and provincial) with strong differences between
them, for example, bureaucratic and financial reporting relationship, teacher sala-
ries or curriculum proposals. Also, several provinces closed down schools under
their responsibility and transferred them into national schools.
Although there have been several attempts at reform over the 100 years, these acts
have established a regulation framework that has served as the basis of expanding
and consolidating primary education in Argentina all along the twentieth century.
On the contrary, secondary education was not ruled by a national law in Argentina
until the enactment of the Federal Education Law in the 1990s. This lack of regula-
tion was partly due to the initial subordination of secondary education to training
courses for university admission exams. In fact, the Constitution of 1853 contains a
vague reference to secondary education, therefore its expansion developed without
a comprehensive legislation providing an organic structure to the array of offers,
categories and specialisation courses.
Therefore, specialisation courses that shaped secondary education were the
result of the creation of schools that was imposed as a model to pursue. The first
secondary school, Colegio Nacional de Buenos Aires, was created in 1863 with a
focus on elite education and training for university education. Afterwards, technical,
productive and commercial specialisation courses were created following a two-
stage process. At the first stage, intra-institutional diversification, “annexes” were
created in national schools with special courses in response to the productive needs
of the surrounding areas. The second, at the inter-institutional diversification stage
from 1890 to 1910 approximately, several technical, commercial, agro-technical
and art schools were established and taken as a model to pursue each specialisation.
Since then, the Argentine secondary school was developed into such categories as
general (bachiller), commercial, technical, art and agro-technical. These categories
survived the different reform attempts throughout the century.
However, the true expansion of technical education was as of the end of the
1940s when a strong subsystem including arts and crafts schools was developed and
further reconsidered by the end of the 1950s when the CONET (National Council
for Technical Education) was created.
Teacher training underwent a similar process. The Escuela Normal de Paraná (a
teacher training school in the province of Entre Ríos) was established in 1869. This
was the first school oriented to training the necessary teachers to support the grow-
ing expansion of the primary education. Early in the twentieth century, other teacher
training schools and institutions led to institutional models that would be replicated
creating a teacher training system for secondary school level all along that century,
thus shifting the central role of universities at the primary and secondary levels of
the education system.
1.2 Recent Regulatory Frameworks
In 1968, a process was started to transfer schools created by the Láinez Law to
the provinces. All primary schools managed by the central government was
transferred in 1978, except the schools for adults that were transferred in 1980.
Law No 24049, passed in 1992, also transferred secondary schools and tertiary
nonuniversity institutions including those belonging to the private sector.
As a result of the aforementioned trends, the Argentine education system was
characterised by a sustained education coverage increase, particularly that of pri-
mary education, reflected in a sustained and sharp drop of the illiteracy rate until the
1960s. Although this rate was lower as of the 1970s, a remarkably low rate is
attained by the end of the previous century. At a regional level, only Cuba and
Uruguay show illiteracy percentages in the population over 25 years old lower than
Argentina (UNESCO 2007; PRIE 2011).
As far as primary education is concerned, universalisation was attained in the
1980s. In connection with secondary education, a strong expansion process started
in the 1950s and 1960s, only scaled down during the military governments. However,
it was as of 1983 with the return of democracy that admission tests were eliminated,
and secondary education turned into a more open and less selective system. This
change resulted in a remarkable increase in the student enrollments.
The following changes were introduced by the Federal Education Law No 24195
enacted in 1993: system forms of government changed, structure divided into levels
and cycles, compulsory education extended to 10 years, curricular contents updated,
and education quality evaluation system established. The central government was
defined as being responsible for regulating, guiding and evaluating the education
system and for the compensation of regional differences, while provinces remained
responsible for the management of institutions. This law restructured the Federal
Council of Culture and Education (CFE) established in 1970, to gather provincial
ministers of education (Almandoz 2000).
The direct responsibility over the education management fell on provincial gov-
ernments, which had to assume the costs and the transformation of the education.
Also, policies that had to be agreed between the National Ministry of Education
and provincial ministers within the Federal Council of Education (CFE) resulted in
a large body of regulations that were unevenly applied and had a limited legal
enforceability due to the ambiguities of the law and the resistance created.
Above and beyond the controversial nature of this reform, extending the compul-
sory education from 7 to 10 years contributed to expanding the education among the
population, especially secondary education.
This regulation was replaced by National Education Law No 26206, enacted in
2006 (Filmus & Kaplan 2012). This law especially established a system containing
a unified structure throughout the country in order to ensure a better regulatory
framework and cohesion, as well as a better organisation and relationship among the
different education levels and methods and the national accreditation of degrees and
certificates issued by the education system. The law also established compulsory
education from 5 years old until finishing upper secondary education and a four-
level, eight-modality structure. Coming back to primary education of 6 or 7 years
and secondary education of 5 or 6 years—provisional definition containing the real
possibilities for adapting to each jurisdiction—entails recognising school traditions
that the previous law was unable to change.
332 M. Poggi
In connection with the government and the national education system

management, the law maintains the structure of concurrent responsibilities agreed
between the Ministry of Education and the jurisdictions. It also reorganises the
Education Federal Council and adds a new responsibility that involves issuing com-
pulsory and binding regulations whenever this agency decides.
The law also provides for the debates raised over the last two decades on educa-
tion quality. Three elements are set forth on this issue, which are stated both in the
law and policies implemented: (a) attempt to ensure the development of a set of core
learning priorities as a strategy to avoid a perceived trend towards dispersion as a
result of the decentralisation process and the regulatory challenges to the system at
central level after the enactment of Law No 24195; (b) a new emphasis on the
improvement of the education quality, focused on the system as a whole and not on
schools and (c) the need to reinforce teacher and professor training and improve
teacher working conditions.
It is necessary to point out that as of 2004 a set of new provisions was made to
redefine the legal system in the context of a social, political and economic frame-
work thoroughly transformed after one of the most serious crisis in the country in
2001. Apart from the National Education Law, there have been acts such as a law to
guarantee the teacher salary and 180 class days during the school year (No 25.864),4
Teacher Incentive Fund Law (No 25.919), Technical and Vocational Education Law
(No 26.058), Education Financing Law (No 26.075) and Comprehensive Sex
Education Law (No 26.150).
In connection with the Education Financing Law, for years Argentina
could hardly exceed the 4 % limit to education investment vis-à-vis the Gross
Domestic Product (GDP). The availability of resources largely determined the
capacity of the different governments to encourage the various actions over the last
decade.
It was necessary to guarantee the increase in total resources allocated to educa-
tion in order to prioritize this area as one of the core issues of the economic, social
and citizen development. The new law established that the consolidated state budget
would be progressively increased until reaching 6 % of GDP in 2010, significantly
exceeding the allocation to this sector. Concrete actions in terms of resources for the
sector were set, together with a division of commitments agreed between the
national government and the jurisdictions, prioritised objectives and institutional
devices to guarantee the final compliance. Thanks to these actions, consolidated
education investment for the whole country had exceeded the barrier of 5 % of GDP
by the end of 2006, further reaching 6.47 % in 2011. Also, the law created the
Teacher Salary National Compensation Programme (FONID) with the purpose of
contributing to compensate for inequalities in the initial teacher salary in the juris-
dictions calling for this measure. This allowed setting a legal framework to the sal-
ary improvement policy started in 2003.
4
Calendar later extended to 190 days in 2012.
2 Progress and Challenges of the Current Education System
The Argentine education system is made up of state, private, cooperative and social
management education systems. Education is compulsory from 5 years of age until
finishing high school. The structure of the education system contains four levels and
eight modalities and is undergoing a transition and reorganisation process.
The levels are as follows: preprimary, primary, secondary and higher education,
the latter including higher education institutes reporting to the jurisdictions, and
autonomous universities.
The eight modalities are as follow: technical and vocational education,5 art
education, special education, lifelong education for young people and adults, rural
education, intercultural bilingual education, education in detention, and home and
hospital education.
Approximately 12,000,000 students are enrolled in the system in all levels and
modalities (Table 1).
2.1 Access to Preprimary, Primary and Secondary Education
The successive extension of the compulsory school attendance that occurred over
the recent years had an impact on the enrolment and set new challenges in connec-
tion with the access, retention and graduation of children and adolescents in the
Argentine education system.
As far as the primary education is concerned, the universalisation of this level is
practically attained in the 1980s. This does not mean that the state should not have
made the best efforts to increase the attendance of children from rural areas and
from low-income sectors.
Censuses carried out in 2001 and 2010 show that the enrolment rate increased from
98.2 % to 99 % in the 6–11 age group (with a difference of almost 0.8 percentage
point).
According to the census source mentioned, the highest enrolment increase is
shown in ages corresponding to the preprimary level. Indeed, a 16.08 % increase is
evidenced in the 3–4 year age group enrolment (from 39.13 % to 55.2 % for a stage
that is not defined as compulsory) and another 12.56 % increase in the 5 year age
group (from 78.8 % to 91.4 %) that is the age span corresponding to the education
defined as compulsory.
5
The Technical and Vocational Education Law No 26058, enacted in 2005, was the first one created
to modify the regulatory structure set forth in 1990. The purpose of this law is to rule and set a legal
framework for the vocational and training education at the secondary and nonuniversity higher
levels and defines this modality as the one “promoting among people the ability, knowledge,
capacity, skill, value and attitude learning related to performances and criteria typical of the social
and productive contexts, allowing for a better knowledge of reality based on the systematic reflection
on the practice and the application of the theory” (art. 4).
334 M. Poggi
Table 1 Student enrollments according to the type/level of education and year

Year
Type and level 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009
Regular—preprimary
Nursery school 22,525 25,390 39,318 60,986 74,642
Pre-school 1,255,858 1,256,191 1,324,529 1,364,909 1,452,273
Regular—primary
Half-day schools 4,456,124 4,383,100 4,345,371 4,387,561 4,370,581
Full-day schools 243,866 238,247 252,376 258,282 272,849
Regular—secondary
Basic cycle 1,846,136 1,838,779 1,913,868 1,920,661 1,844,898
Oriented cycle Technical 242,316 322,069 305,322 291,922 286,843
Nontechnical 634,027 830,472 839,161 841,711 791,876
Basic and Technical 221,171 134,229 105,438 118,928 174,173
oriented cycles Nontechnical 545,913 363,572 302,018 298,516 521,441
Regular—nonuniversity higher education
Teacher training only 277,546 313,085 277,808 282,514 337,903
Technical only 180,071 213,472 233,029 249,654 302,712
Both types of training 23,865 28,598 23,879 38,272 15,581
Adults
All levels 602,609 613,194 625,495 661,143 732,751
Special
All levels 73,508 74,294 78,797 79,872 100,439 (*)
Source: Annual surveys 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007 and 2009. National Bureau of Education Quality
Information and Evaluation (DiNIECE). Ministry of Education of Argentina (MEN)
There is a percentage difference in the 15–17 age group that stands out: while the
12–14 age group shows a 1.4 point increase in the inter-census period, the 15–17 age
group attendance grows by 2.15 % (from 79.4 % in 2001 to 81.6 % in 2011).
From a regional perspective, it may be said that enrolment rates corresponding to
the primary and secondary levels in Argentina are the highest in Latin America. In
the region where primary education is highly extended, Argentina, together with
Cuba, Ecuador, Panama, Mexico and Uruguay, is part of a group of countries with
rates far over 97 %. At this level, the graduation rate is high for countries in the
region, even when there are some countries from Central America with the lowest
rates (e.g., Guatemala, Nicaragua, Honduras and El Salvador) (SITEAL 2009,
2010; PRIE 2011).
At the secondary level, Argentina is part of a group of countries, together with
Chile, Cuba and Peru, having high graduation rates. At the age of 17, eight out of
ten adolescents are undergoing the final stage of secondary school, some of them
have already finished and a small part has undertaken higher level studies. Seven out
of ten young people between 20 and 22 years old have already finished secondary
education (SITEAL 2010; Poggi 2010).
Fig. 1 Student school trajectories indicators. Regular education. Primary and secondary levels
(Source: Annual surveys 2007, 2008 and 2009. National Bureau of Education Quality Information
and Evaluation (DiNIECE). Ministry of Education of Argentina (MEN). Repetition, effective pro-
motion, interannual drop out and overage rates: 2008–2009. Graduation rate: 2007–2008)
2.2 Overcoming Hindrances in Student School Trajectories
Regardless of the achievements already mentioned, there are still some hindrances in
the education system in connection with the student school trajectories that should be
stressed. To clarify this, five key indicators should be analysed: repetition, overage,
dropout, effective promotion, and graduation, which refer to problems and effects
that are mutually combined. Repetition leads to overage, and both are associated
with dropout, which makes promotion, and graduation rates fall, although there
might be other independent causes. This also calls for interpreting indicators
carefully: for example, overage is also a result of the late enrolment in the education
system. Consequently, there are times when the success of school inclusion
programmes might increase this rate. The above figure shows each indicator (Fig. 1).
In the case of primary level, inter-annual dropout rate averages 1.16 %. Dropout
rates increase considerably at the 8th year of schooling (12.08 %6). This may be due
first to the fact that, at that moment, most of students accumulate years as grade
repeaters and therefore turn overage. Second, this shows the difficulties faced by
secondary schools to adapt to the inclusion of new groups of students. Finally,
6
Annual surveys 2008 and 2009. National Bureau of Education Quality Information and Evaluation
(DiNIECE). Ministry of Education of Argentina (MEN).
336 M. Poggi
adolescents young people living in less advantaged social contexts are seldom
impelled to engage in the informal work force.
The cumulative effect of repetition is evidenced in the overage at the basic cycle
of secondary education, which scales up to 38.2 %. High repetition rates imply that
there is a growing overage increase every year; however, it is offset by the dropout
increase (since most of those leaving school are those who repeated at least once in
their career). This has an impact also on the overage rate at the second cycle of sec-
ondary education. Overage rate at the primary education level is over 22 % and
grows as the students progress in their education as a result of the cumulative effect
of repetition.
Another side of repetition and dropout is promotion. The effective promotion
rate at the primary school level is over 93 %, at basic secondary school level is over
79 % and at the oriented secondary school level reaches almost 75 %.
There are many very complex causes for repetition. In a context of growing school
inclusion, this discrepancy increases due to, among other factors, the access of boys,
girls, adolescents, and young people from historically excluded social sectors, and
challenges the system’s traditions and practices. Schools have not been prepared to
disclose inequality and diversity relationships entailed by their profiles.
It is worth mentioning a recent measure adopted by the Federal Education Council
about repetition during the first year of primary school where the rate reaches 8.16,
when it is 5.18 for the whole level.7 In the framework of other considerations about
school trajectories,8 the agency has resolved that the two first years of this level are a
pedagogical unit and therefore the promotion schemes leading to review repetition
should be recast. It is also important to implement a promotion scheme for the sec-
ond cycle accompanied by supporting measures and assistance through specific pro-
grammes to encourage continuing schooling, ensure learning achievements and
respect the specific processes undergone by boys and girls.
2.3 Decreasing Social and Economic Inequalities
Argentina—after the 1990s and particularly after the 2001 crisis—recorded a strong
increase of social and economic inequalities as evidenced also by the cultural level
and the possibilities of civic integration and participation. Education has not escaped
from this situation. While social gaps increased, the education system presented an
extremely heterogeneous and fragmented scenario.
Over the past few decades, employment has been strong in the country, and the
society was highly integrated. This situation has been gradually decreasing, social
7
Annual surveys 2008 and 2009. National Bureau of Education Quality Information and Evaluation
(DiNIECE). Ministry of Education of Argentina (MEN).
8
See Resolución CFE No174/12 approving the document “Federal guidelines to improve teaching
and learning and school trajectories at the pre-primary and primary levels and modalities and their
regulation”.
groups started to develop different integration strategies and schools played an

important role to this end. School difficulties added to this situation, as mentioned
above, turning more complex the design and development of educational policies
that seek to recover social justice (Filmus & Kaplan 2012).
It was in this scenario that inclusion policies were promoted to provide for the
essential material conditions to effectively exercise the right of children and young
people to have access to education and remain in the education system. The provi-
sion of resources (school and inclusion scholarships, books and educational mate-
rial, computer equipment), together with the building and refurbishment of physical
spaces, has been conceived as a basic condition leading to a broader education pro-
posal to make teaching and learning a feasible fact.
Scholarships granted through the different programmes totalled 690,785 students
in 2009 (DiNIECE 2011); all along the 2000s, scholarships were extended from
students attending secondary schools to those who did not attend any level at all
(primary or secondary) to bring them back to school; the programme was gradually
extended to reach also resident foreign students.
In 2009, an unprecedented comprehensive policy was established to replace and
exceed both scholarship programmes and other social benefits delivered by several
agencies until then. The purpose of the “Universal Child Allowance for the Social
Protection” is to improve the situation of boys, girls and adolescents in a vulnerable
social situation by granting a single benefit to their parents or tutors on the condition
that sanitary controls and attendance at the public education system are complied
with during the period established as compulsory.
In 2012, over 3,540,700 beneficiaries received the expected contribution, which
allowed improving access and retention of children, adolescents and young people
in the education system.
2.4 Secondary Education as a Central State Policy
Secondary education has been assumed as a central state policy (both at a national
and provincial levels) to guarantee adolescents and young people the right to access,
continue and finish this level of education.
The above-mentioned National Education Law has established the compulsory
nature and therefore raised the challenge to overcome a selective tradition, typical
at this level, in most of the modalities.
To progress in this aspect, a series of political and strategic guidelines has been
agreed with the Federal Education Council, principally on the following subjects:
jurisdictional plans and institutional improvement plans, guidance for pedagogical
and institutional organisation, student mobility guidelines and proposals to include
and/or rule students’ school trajectories at the secondary education level.
Indeed, the National Plan for Secondary Education is organised based on three
strategies that have to do with major coverage of this education level and the
improvement of student school trajectories, better quality of the educational offer in
338 M. Poggi
connection with quality policies and the strengthening of the institutional

management, both at a school level and technical team level within jurisdictions.
Defining a secondary school for all is a key issue (Tiramonti 2004). Some of the
main characteristics set forth in the strategic documents are the following: quality
standards, which entail more teaching in language, mathematics and foreign lan-
guage; tutors spending more hours at the institution to ensure a better guidance to
students at key stages throughout the school cycle and including subjects that con-
tribute to the comprehensive training of students, such as sex education, education
on and for human rights. Also, the purpose is to ensure a training environment inside
and outside the school including community members and to promote and strengthen
student participation.
2.5 Expanding Technical and Vocational Education
The technical and vocational education (ETP) is a modality within the education
system coordinated by the National Institute for Technological Education (INET),
reporting to the National Ministry of Education. This modality is ruled by the above-
mentioned law. The function of this institute in the country is to coordinate and
integrate different types of institutions and educational programmes for and into
the labour activity. It includes ETP Institutions (both at secondary and higher educa-
tion levels) and Teacher Training Institutes.
One of the main objectives is to strengthen the technical and vocational training,
in terms of quality and appropriateness, to meet social inclusion processes, facilitate
the integration of young people into the labour market and the continuous training of
adults throughout their working lives, and meet the new demands of technological
innovation, economic growth and reactivation of production systems.
It is worth mentioning that during the 1990s technical education was practi-
cally non-existent. Since 2003, a decision was taken to reactivate technical edu-
cation and the Technical and Vocational Education Law was enacted, which
allowed increasing resources invested in this area. This type of training is cur-
rently considered strategic and is recognised in terms of social and economic
development.
Coordination actions between technological, technical and vocational training
education on the one hand and labour and production sectors on the other are pro-
moted at local, regional and interregional levels; also, international cooperation
arrangements are carried out together with actions connected with the different
integration processes, particularly, those of the MERCOSUR countries.
In recent years, efforts have been concentrating in strengthening technical and
vocational education with the purpose of encouraging educational, social and labour
inclusion. Actions taken include the following: national standardisation and validity
of degrees, at both the secondary and higher levels; development of family voca-
tional profiles and training programs, and strengthening ETP institutions manage-
ment by financing improvement projects.
Concurrently, proposals have been developed for initial teacher training and
improving science and technology teaching and learning processes by means of
continuous teacher training actions in technological areas, production of teaching
resources and publications on different contents and basic disciplines.
2.6 Improving the Status of the Teaching Profession
Improving the status of the teaching profession has been a strategic focus of the
educational policies during the recent years. From a comprehensive point of view
that includes not only the actions leading to improve material living conditions but
also opportunities to access the cultural production. Improvement in salary and
labour conditions has been accompanied by actions tending to reposition training as
an inalienable right of teachers and, in turn, as an obligation of the central
government.
In this context, the National Teacher Training Institute (INFOD) was created by
the National Education Law as a new institutional framework to develop and
strengthen teacher training policies.
The creation of this institute allowed defining three priority areas of activity:
• Institutional development: includes working strategies leading to reshape the
identity of the teacher training system, facilitating consensus and conditions for
its organisation, planning, strengthening, and improvement
• Curricular development: focused on integrating and improving curriculum and
curriculum management and on updating teacher training, teaching and learning
methods
• Professional development: includes the in-service training of teachers, articulated
with their practices and updating contexts, taking into account the heterogeneity
of their careers and the teaching and learning problems arising from the different
labour contexts.
Also, the Teacher Training National Plan (2007–2010) was formulated in 2007
to develop a set of action guidelines leading to a continuous teacher training and
professional development, considered as permanent activities articulated with the
effective practices of trainers, oriented to teacher needs and their specific
performance.
2.7 Learning Assessment and Improvement Policies
Argentina regularly evaluates learning achievements through a sampling or census

process on specific curriculum areas (mathematics, language, natural and social
sciences) and at certain key stages of the student school trajectories: 3 and 6 years
of primary education and 2/3 and final years of secondary education.
340 M. Poggi
Table 2 Results by level of performance in mathematics, end of secondary school 2007 and 2010.
Country total
Performance levels 2007 2010
High 18.5 % 14.7 %
Medium 36.8 % 55.3 % 55.3 % 70.0 %
Low 44.7 % 30.0 %
Sources: Operativo Nacional de Evaluación (ONE, National Assessment of Student Achievement)
2007 and 2010. National Bureau of Education Quality Information and Evaluation (DiNIECE).
Ministry of Education of Argentina (MEN)
Results from the evaluation of the Argentine education system are far from being
desirable, in contrast with the high coverage rates achieved; therefore, it is impor-
tant to delve into policies specifically oriented to quality so that this becomes a
fundamental aspect to include children in schools. Therefore, learning achievements
are a key issue where it is necessary to enhance improvement policies actions.
However, it is to be noted that the national education quality process to finish
secondary school corresponding to the year 2010 reveals interesting results that are
worth mentioning9 (DiNIECE s/f, p. 10):
– The percentage of students in the medium and high performance levels is 65.5 in
natural sciences, 70 in social sciences and mathematics and 73.7 in Spanish.
– In mathematics, social and natural sciences, the amount of students with low
performance level decreased between 12 % and 21 % points when compared
with those of 2007.
– The highest percentage of students corresponds to the medium level of perfor-
mance for all areas of study.
– In mathematics, the percentage of students in the medium level increases in
18.5 % points in comparison to the year 2007, while the percentage in the high
level drops 3.8 %.
– In mathematics, considering high and medium levels of performance as a whole,
students reaching satisfactory or outstanding performances account for 70 %,
representing a 26 % points increase over those in the same level in the 2007
evaluation survey (44 %).
– In natural sciences, an 18 % increase is also observed in the medium level of
performance, and in the highest level, there is a 3.3 % increase.
– In Spanish, there is an increase of 5 % points of students in the low performance
level in comparison to the year 2007. Still this area has the lowest percentage of
students in the low level.
– Spanish is the area with the highest percentage of students with a high perfor-
mance level (20.4 %); this area also shows the highest percentage of students
with high and medium performance levels (73.7 %).
9
The principal results obtained in the 2010 ONE corresponding to the census conducted at the end
of secondary education. Results of this survey for other years can be accessed through the DiNIECE
website: http://diniece.me.gov.ar.
Table 3 Results by level of performance in Spanish, end of secondary school 2007 and 2010.
Country total
High 20.2 % 20.4 %
Medium 58.6 % 78.8 % 53.3 % 73.7 %
Low 21.2 % 26.3 %
Sources: ONE 2007 and 2010. National Bureau of Education Quality Information and Evaluation
(DiNIECE). Ministry of Education of Argentina (MEN)
Table 4 Results by level of performance in social sciences, end of secondary school 2007 and
2010. Country total
High 10.8 % 17.2 %
Medium 47.0 % 55.3 % 52.8 % 70.0 %
Low 42.2 % 30.0 %
Table 5 Result by level of performance in natural sciences, end of secondary school 2007 and
2010. Country total
High 10.1 % 13.4 %
Medium 34.2 % 44.3 % 52.2 % 65.6 %
Low 55.7 % 34.3 %
– In social sciences, there is a 6.4 % increase of students in the high level for the
whole country compared to the 2007 results (Tables 2, 3, 4 and 5).
Among the aspects of the educational policy promoted by the National Ministry
of Education and the provincial ministries that allow establishing hypothesis
about improving learning achievements, there are several questions worth
mentioning.
First, efforts were undertaken during the last decade to extend the school year in
order to guarantee 180 class days established by Law No 25.864 at the end of 2003,
later extended to 190 days, calling for a compensation of days lost to ensure the
minimum number of days set forth by law.
Second, equal learning conditions as well as recognition of diversity must be
guaranteed in an unequal education system. Working to narrow the gaps led to
approving the core learning priorities (NAP) as a cluster of knowledge that should
be part of the education of boys, girls and young people to create equal opportuni-
ties to access knowledge, which contribute to the full social integration and values
in favour of the common good, social coexistence, job sharing and respect for the
differences.
342 M. Poggi
Third, school teaching policies and teacher training development policies,

through the programmes implemented by the National Ministry of Education, aim
at intensifying literacy and numeracy skills at the first cycle of the primary educa-
tion level and teaching mathematics and sciences at the second cycle. Provincial
initiatives developed on this subject should also be considered.
Also, several measures have been implemented in connection with reinforcing
educational equipment and material to improve teaching conditions, for exam-
ple, provision of school textbooks, science labs, working materials for teachers
and students in different curriculum areas.
The Conectar Igualdad Programme10 (Equal Opportunity Connection
Programme)—driven by different agencies of the national government together
with other proposals to provide connectivity—merits a special mention. It seeks to
promote social and digital inclusion by delivering netbooks and provide connectiv-
ity to every state-managed school and secondary and special school students
together with those at Teacher Training Institutes throughout the country.
In 2005, over 75 % of urban schools and 40 % of rural schools at primary and
secondary levels owned a computer, serving 81 % of urban enrolment and 54 % of
rural enrolment. However, differences were still visible: 86 % of private schools
were equipped with computers versus 70.5 % of state-owned schools. By 2005,
only 37 % of educational institutions had connectivity, out of which 63.8 % had
only a telephone connection and half of them was paying for it at that time.
Institutions with broadband connections (ADSL, cable MODEM and satellite)
were scarce and in general had to pay for it (DiNIECE 2006).
The National Education Law confirmed the importance of this issue by stressing
the fact that the access and ICT literacy should be part of the essential curriculum
contents to be included in the knowledge society.
The Conectar Igualdad Programme has already delivered more than 2,200,000
netbooks for the 2010–2012 period out of the expected 3,000,000 netbooks accord-
ing to the reported information. This includes a series of pedagogical actions for
professional development of supervisors, headteachers and teachers, promoted not
only by the central government but also by the provinces, together with the prepara-
tion of supporting materials for teaching in the classroom and students’ families
(Conectar Igualdad 2011).
3 Future Challenges
To conclude, some thoughts on the approach of the pending challenges of the

Argentine education system will be presented. It is worth noting that these are spe-
cifically addressed in the National Plan for Compulsory and Teacher Education,
recently approved by the Federal Council of Education (December 2012).
10
For further information please visit http://www.conectarigualdad.gob.ar/.
3.1 The Challenge to Narrow Social and Educational Gaps
The Argentine educational system shows profound regional and provincial gaps,
some of which are related to social inequalities in terms of the capacity to enroll,
retain and promote boys, girls, adolescents and young people throughout the
country. A similar scenario that occurs relates to the capacity to provide quality
education for all.
In this context, addressing the equity challenge means bearing in mind the need
to coordinate government efforts, financing and supply strategies on the one hand
and comprehensive and active social policies on the other hand. Equity is a problem
directly related to the functioning of the education system, which also requires a
steady effort from the nation, the provinces and the city of Buenos Aires to build a
society with higher levels of social equality.
Social inequalities in the provinces are juxtaposed with profound school inequal-
ities in terms of coverage, infrastructure, the quality of the equipment and the avail-
ability of resources at schools, altogether with teacher training and working
conditions. All of the above has a bearing on the quality of teaching offered by
schools and what students learn throughout their school trajectories.
Other differences deriving from enrolment segregation processes should be
attributed to jurisdictional differences. The difference among schools—which
reflects the social differences among the students—is the result of a complex pro-
cess involving space and social circumstances as well as the scope of policies, the
way they are implemented, and the effects produced to face these inequalities.
Overlapping social, regional and school inequalities contribute to a process of
fragmentation and differentiation of schools that tends to become fixed. This frag-
mentation goes beyond the traditional forms of segmentation within the system.
The main issue here is that it is impossible to think of reversing the fragmenta-
tion effects on equity without the decisive action of the state in rebuilding the rules
to curb them, ensure minimum common guidelines to operate the institutions within
the education system and prioritise, in a clear and precise way, the support to schools
serving lower income and less advantaged social sectors (Tedesco 2012; Filmus &
Kaplan 2012).
Therefore, a further analysis is necessary for distributive educational policies to
secure acceptable levels of social cohesion, ensuring common basic levels to
guarantee quality education.
3.2 The Challenge to Promote Diversity
At the same time, it is essential to attach its own importance to diversity recogni-
tion policies that are increasingly included in the current educational agenda.
The new educational laws have made their progress in the regulatory require-
ments of a broad set of rights for sectors of the society which were unattended by
the old universal and homogeneous educational model. However, there appears
344 M. Poggi
to be a considerable discrepancy between these regulatory prescriptions and the

effective conditions that the education system seems to provide to ensure those
rights. The most evident case is that of the intercultural bilingual education,
which has been in the international and national agendas for over two decades,
but every day runs up against the limits imposed by the feeble initiatives aimed
at supporting this type of education.
It is not only about carrying out actions focused on a certain group of subjects
recognised as holders of rights. The multiple articulations of social inequality
and cultural diversity challenge the daily functioning of an education system that
calls immediately for actions to deal with this context in a more sensitive way
(Lopez 2010).
There are two tensions sprouting here: on the one hand, the difficulties to meet
traditional socialising mandates that provided meaning to education in Argentina
during the twentieth century in a context demanding recognition for diversity and,
on the other hand, the difficulties derived from the importance of school tradi-
tion—important for the daily functioning of the education system—and the need to
search for innovative and viable ways to understand the teaching and learning pro-
cesses. In both cases, the traditional mandates provide a certain order to the actions
taken by schools but limit their capacity to adapt to the ever-changing contexts and
the diverse population enrolled. Over the past decades, the changing initiatives
have been more prone to destabilise the smooth running of schools than to achieve
new practices that are of relevance to school actors and meet the needs of their
communities.
3.3 The Challenge to Prioritise Knowledge
The above-mentioned tension that seems to exist between the inclusiveness of the
Argentine education system and the attainment of good education performance
appears as one of the most difficult core issues to resolve. Deep inside, there is a
tension in the relationship among cultural transmission, equity and diversity that
calls for the need to think over about the system functioning guidelines.
On one hand, it is essential for equity policies to operate in such a way more
access to knowledge is attained together with a meaningful and relevant learning
for society and students (Tenti 2008). In this sense, policies should ensure equal
learning achievements.
On the other, recognising diversity requires reviewing the curriculum and the
daily organisation of teaching practices with the purpose of ensuring the right to
education for all without entailing any imposition in this sense. Ensuring equal
learning achievements would mean to carefully redefine the goals that everybody
should attain. Diversity recognition policies must ensure respect for a cultural
identity.
In this scenario, educational policies face the challenge to prioritise knowledge
in complex societies where universal certainties keep changing.
Learning achievements are themselves a top priority issue. However, the response
should not be to give everybody more of the same, least of all, a strategy that in the
name of group identity will segregate and differentiate people.
It is necessary to view the experience of past decades in perspective to combine
creative educational policies that focus on the strengthening of fundamental cogni-
tive skills to understand, apply, develop and disseminate knowledge while, at the
same time, organise a society that turns coexistence into an experience of tolerance
and shared recognition.
References
Albergucci, R. (1996). Educación y estado. Organización del sistema educativo. Buenos Aires:
Docencia.
Almandoz, M. R. (2000). Sistema educativo argentino. Escenarios y políticas. Buenos Aires:
Santillana.
Braslavsky, C., & Krawczyk, N. (1988). La escuela pública. Buenos Aires: Flacso–Miño y Dávila.
Bravo, H. F. (1988). Bases constitucionales de la educación argentina. Buenos Aires: Centro
Editor de América Latina.
Conectar Igualdad. (2011). Nuevas voces, nuevos escenarios: estudios evaluativos sobre el
Programa Conectar Igualdad. Buenos Aires: Ministerio de Educación.
DiNIECE. (2006). Equipamiento informático, conectividad y sus usos en el sistema educativo
argentino. Buenos Aires: Ministerio de Educación. Disponible en: http://diniece.me.gov.ar
DiNIECE. (2008). PISA 2006. Informe nacional. Buenos Aires: Ministerio de Educación.
Disponible en: http://diniece.me.gov.ar
DiNIECE. (2011). La educación argentina en cifras 2010. Buenos Aires: Ministerio de Educación.
Disponible en: http://diniece.me.gov.ar
DiNIECE s/f. Operativo Nacional de Evaluación 2010. Censo de fi nalización de la Educación
Secundaria. Informe de Resultados. Buenos Aires: Ministerio de Educación. Disponible en:
http://diniece.me.gov.ar
Filmus, D., & Kaplan, C. (2012). Educar para una sociedad más justa. Buenos Aires: Aguilar.
GIP (Grupo Iberoamericano de PISA). (2009). Iberoamérica en PISA 2006. Informe regional.
Madrid: OCDE–Santillana.
López, N. (2010). Entre el universalismo y la discriminación. Desafíos de la educación. Aportes
para el desarrollo humano en Argentina No 3. Buenos Aires: Programa de Naciones Unidas
para el Desarrollo – PNUD//Argentina.
Marchesi, A., & Poggi, M. (coord.). (2010). Presente y futuro de la educación iberoamericana.
Madrid: AECID – Fundación Carolina. Número 7, 2° época. En: http.//www.pensamientoi-
beroamericano.org/sumarios/7/presente-y-futuro-de-la-educacion-iberoamericana/
Ministerio de Educación de Argentina. (2008). El desarrollo de la educación. Informe Nacional de
Argentina 2004–2008. Buenos Aires: Ministerio de Educación.
Ministerio de Educación de Argentina. (2011). Análisis y evaluación de los aspectos educativos de
la Asignación Universal por Hijo (AUH). Buenos Aires: Ministerio de Educación.
PNUD. (2010). Informe Nacional sobre Desarrollo Humano 2010. Desarrollo humano en
Argentina. Trayectos y nuevos desafíos. Buenos Aires: Programa de Naciones Unidas para el
Desarrollo – PNUD/Argentina.
Poggi, M. (2010). Una radiografía de los sistemas educativos de América Latina. Desafíos para las
políticas educativas. En Marchesi y Poggi, op. cit.
Proyecto Regional de Indicadores Educativos (PRIE). (2011). Panorama educativo 2010. Desafíos
pendientes. UNESCO, Secretaría de Educación Pública de México y Organización de los
Estados Americanos (OEA).
346 M. Poggi
SITEAL. (2009). Universalizar el acceso y completar la educación secundaria. Entre la meta

social y la realidad latinoamericana. Datos para el debate No 7, SITEAL. Buenos Aires: IIPE/
UNESCO Buenos Aires- OEI. Disponible en: http://www.siteal.iipe-oei.org
SITEAL. (2010). Informe de tendencias sociales y educativas 2010. Metas educativas 2021.
Desafíos y oportunidades. Buenos Aires: IIPE/UNESCO Buenos Aires- OEI.
SITEAL. (2011). Argentina. Perfiles de países. Buenos Aires: IIPE-UNESCO Buenos Aires –
OEI. En http://www.siteal.iipe-oei.org
Tedesco, J. C. (2012). Educación y justicia social en América Latina. Buenos Aires: Fondo de
Cultura – Universidad Nacional de San Martín.
Tenti Fanfani, E. (comp.). (2008). Nuevos temas en la agenda de política educativa. Buenos Aires:
IIPE-UNESCO Buenos Aires – Siglo XXI.
Tiramonti, G. (comp.). (2004). La trama de la desigualdad educativa. Mutaciones recientes en la
escuela media. Buenos Aires: Manantial.
UNESCO. (2007). Educación Para Todos en 2015, ¿alcanzaremos la meta? París: UNESCO.
Canada: Quality and Stability
Benjamin Levin and Robyn Read
Abstract This chapter describes policy processes for education in Canada and
contributing factors to strong educational outcomes. Canada does not have a national
education policy and has not engaged in dramatic education reforms. There are two
main reasons for Canada’s strong education outcomes. First, social factors outside
school include respect for equity and diversity and a reasonable, though deteriorat-
ing, social safety net. Second, Canadian schools are reasonably resourced and have
strong professional staff with an emphasis on equity and diversity as well as quality
of outcomes. These factors explain Canada’s strong education performance.
Keywords Canada • Education outcomes • External factors • Internal factors

• Quality • Stability
Canada has one of the best K–12 school systems in the world and is consistently
among the top performers in international comparisons. Most notably, Canadian 15
year olds have ranked among the top five performers in all four rounds of the OECDs
Program of International Student Assessment (PISA). Canada was also recognized
by the OECD (2010a) for having very high levels of equity in education and is one
of the very few countries in PISA in which students born outside the country achieve
as well on average as students born in the country.
To say that Canada has a high-performing education system does not mean
that the country does not still face significant challenges in education. In Canada,
as virtually everywhere else in the world, there are still systematic inequities in
education outcomes (Glaze et al. 2012). Notably, Aboriginal students in Canada,
especially those in First Nations communities where the federal government is
responsible, lag behind badly. There are large gaps in outcomes based on socio-
economic status, and some (but not all) racialized groups also have systematically
B. Levin (*) • R. Read

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]

348 B. Levin and R. Read
poorer performance. These remain large challenges, even if Canada’s equity

performance is, as far as we can judge, better than most other countries.
It is fair to say that Canadians were as surprised as anyone when these results
came out and that, while we are proud of our accomplishments, we cannot say
definitively what has produced such good results. Given the lack of definitive evidence
on these questions, part of what follows could be called informed speculation.
This chapter describes the governance structures and policy processes for education
in Canada, then discusses potential contributing factors to strong educational out-
comes and finally describes features of recent education reforms. The chapter is lim-
ited to school education (ages 6–18); early childhood, adult education, and higher
education are not taken up as each of these would require lengthy descriptions in
their own right.
1 How Does the Canadian Education System Work?
Canada has an unusual education governance system in that it is the only country in
the developed world with no national education policy and no national education
ministry (OECD 2010a). Understanding this decentralized system is critical to
understanding policy trends.
1.1 Education Governance Structure
Canada is a federal state with ten provinces and three territories (the latter in the far
north with very small populations). Under the Canadian constitution, education is the
exclusive responsibility of the provinces and territories, each of which manages its
own education system. Each province or territory has a minister and ministry of edu-
cation which are responsible for education policy and finance. Canada has never had
a national minister or ministry of education nor is there any prospect of such a minis-
try being created despite regular calls for it from some national groups. Indeed, unique
among major policy areas in Canada, there is not even a vehicle for ongoing federal-
provincial discussion or dialogue around education. The federal government plays a
minor role in Canadian schools and even then only in a few areas, although despite the
constitutional restrictions it has had a significant presence in post secondary educa-
tion. This means there are essentially no means to have national policies or approaches.
The main mechanism through which provinces collaborate on education, and
through which they try to deal with the federal government, is the Council of
Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC). Created in 1967, the Council includes all
provincial and territorial ministers of education or post secondary education (which
is always more than 13, because at any given time at least some provinces have sepa-
rate ministers for schools and for postsecondary). The Council operates primarily
by consensus, which has made it a relatively low-key organization because there are
very few issues on which all provinces and territories agree given not only their vast
Canada: Quality and Stability 349
differences but also the different parties in power across the country. The CMEC is
not, therefore, particularly influential either in shaping provincial education policy
or federal activity related to education, although it does play a useful role in coordi-
nating activities, sharing information, and managing some relationships with the
federal government.
On the whole, education policy and practice does not vary dramatically across
Canada, despite provincial jurisdiction, and most provinces run roughly similar
systems.1 All provinces in Canada have legislation establishing school districts that
are governed by locally elected boards. In having a local political body strictly
focused on schools, education governance in Canada is different from other countries,
though similar to the United States. Local school districts running local schools were
the original governance system for education reflecting the process of settlement by
Europeans. Over time, provinces came to play a larger role, and powers of local
school districts have been steadily diminished (Ungerleider and Levin 2007).
Almost all provinces now provide 100 % or close to it of the funding of schools;
local contributions through local property taxes, which were once the dominant
mode of financing schools, are now minor or nonexistent funding sources.
Still, school boards continue to have important responsibilities including hiring all
teachers and principals, allocating programs to schools, budgeting for individual
schools, and owning and operating school buildings.
Currently, education in Canada is reasonably well resourced in comparison to
other countries of similar wealth. Just as importantly, there are no large inequalities
in funding across regions or districts. Curriculum is set by provinces, though with
varying amounts of specification. Teachers all have qualifications meeting provin-
cial standards—typically at least 5 years of postsecondary education. All provinces
run some kind of testing or accountability system, though these vary quite a bit.
All provinces also provide public funds to at least some religious or private schools.
The Canadian constitution provides for the recognition of minority language and
religious rights although these, too, are accommodated differently in each province.
About 5 % of Canadian students attend schools outside the public system, primarily
for religious reasons. Canadian teachers and most support staff are unionized;
bargaining is sometimes at the provincial level and sometimes at the district level.
1.2 Education Policy Process
As already noted, Canadian provinces all have their own policies, and connections
across provinces are rather weak. On the other hand, because education in Canada
is so decentralized and also because Canada is next to the United States, education
policy debates in Canada are often influenced by developments in the United States
1
The most important exception is the province of Quebec, which operates both French language
and English language public education systems. Quebec has a unique model with only 11 years of
school education instead of 12 as in other provinces but then also has a 2-year college system that
provides technical training or is a bridge into university from high school.
or in other parts of the world. The country tends to borrow many education policy
ideas from elsewhere.
Education policy in Canada, as in many other countries, is largely influenced by
a few important stakeholder groups, notably teachers and other educators and some-
times parents. The status of education as a highly organized and regulated system
means that policy processes tend to be quite formalized and involve significant
amounts of consultation, which in turn tends to favor groups that are larger, more
organized, and better financed. Education professionals, including teachers and
principals, are especially important. Teacher unions have played an active political
role in Canada, whether influencing policy discussions or, on some occasions,
directly involving themselves in provincial politics and elections. As in many other
countries, a wide range of other actors, such as business groups, non-governmental
organizations, and other community groups are also involved, to a greater or lesser
extent, in education policy debates.
Canada also has a relatively weak education research infrastructure, and its
impact is further reduced by the lack of national institutions and by huge distances
that make it harder for researchers to collaborate. On the whole, the Canadian policy
analysis capacity in education is also weak, and Canadian education debates tend to
rely on research from other places.
2 What Contributes to Strong Educational Outcomes?
The shared characteristics across Canadian jurisdictions, both within education

systems and within Canadian society as a whole, could be seen as collectively
responsible for Canada’s high performance in education. The following section
highlights some of these shared characteristics.
2.1 External Factors
Unlike our American neighbors who value life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,
the Canadian constitution affirms the values of peace, order, and good governance.
This translates into a belief that it is our collective responsibility to provide a basic
standard of living for all citizens. Canadians as a whole enjoy a relatively high
standard of living, and Canada ranked 6th out of 187 countries in the 2011 United
Nations Human Development Index (HDI) (International Human Development
Indicators 2011). Although there is some variation in average income among
regions, these variations are relatively small and do not significantly affect overall
standards of living (UNICEF 2007). However, despite our high standing on the
HDI, Canada actually has lower government social spending per capita than many
other developed countries including most Western European states and the United
States (OECD 2010b). Yet even with lower spending, our long-standing national
identity as a social welfare state has resulted in a strong universal health-care system
and a redistributive system of income security programs (Johnston et al. 2010).
Thus, although Canada has a fairly significant child poverty rate, our state runs
social safety nets such as universal health care and unemployment insurance to help
most children arrive at school, healthy and able to learn. One main exception to
this pattern, however, is Aboriginal people in Canada, who typically lag far behind
average standards for health and education, especially those who live in remote
parts of the country (Wilson and Macdonald 2010).
Additionally, Canada has a strong multicultural identity and is recognized as one
of the most culturally and ethnically diverse countries in the world (Fearon 2003).
Currently there are 200 ethnic groups represented in our population, and over
19 % of the population was born outside of Canada (Human Development and
Skills Resources Canada 2012). In 1971 Canada became the first country in the
world to adopt an official policy on multiculturalism which recognized the right of
all Canadians to preserve and share their cultural and ancestral heritage, as well as
confirming the rights of Aboriginal peoples and further entrenching English and
French as the two official languages (Citizenship and Immigration Canada 2008).
Since multiculturalism is a fundamental aspect of Canadian heritage and identity,
citizens tend to have a high tolerance for difference, and immigrants are supported
to adjust to life in Canada through settlement programs that offer free language
classes, support in accessing social services and finding employment, etc. Of course
there are disputes about the appropriate role and level of immigration in Canada,
but there is a broad consensus that continued immigration is important and that
diversity of population is one of Canada’s key strengths.
In order to improve educational outcomes and reduce inequality within the edu-
cation system, a country must tackle some of the gross disparities outside of schools.
Canada’s welfare state helps to ensure that young people get a better start in life, are
better prepared for schooling, and better supported in their lives outside of schools.
Difference is respected more, and diversity is valued as an integral component of
our national identity. Although the above examples are certainly not an exhaustive
list of the characteristics of Canadian society that support high academic outcomes,
these factors have had powerful effects on education in Canada. This is not in any
way to suggest that Canada can afford to be complacent. There is still much work to
be done to address the many inequalities that exist within Canadian society and also
appear in our schools, not only for our Aboriginal groups but also for young people
growing up in poverty. So while there are many reasons to be proud of our high
international standing on the HDI, we can do more to address the inequalities outside
of schools in order to improve school outcomes.
2.2 Internal Factors
As mentioned previously, despite being governed by different jurisdictions, education

systems across Canada look very similar in terms of policy, practice, and funding.
While nobody knows for certain why Canadian education systems perform so
well in international assessments, the following similarities among systems are
likely factors.
2.2.1 Well-Resourced Systems
Education in Canada is well resourced, at an average of about $11,000 per pupil

across the country. Even more importantly there are no large inequalities in funding
or human capital across regions. Indeed, in Canada the jurisdictions with the highest
levels of student need tend to get the most funding; for example, the northern
territories, with high levels of poverty and huge challenges of geography, spend
significantly more per pupil than southern provinces in recognition of the higher
costs of providing education in those areas.
All provincial funding systems for education are based on three main elements:
block grants that are given based on numbers of students, categorical grants used to
fund particular programs such as special education or transportation, and equaliza-
tion payments which provide additional funding to areas with higher levels of need
(OECD 2010a, p. 2; 2013). Each province has its own formula for funding school
districts, taking into account local circumstances such as school isolation, poverty
levels, age of buildings, and varying salary costs across the country.
2.2.2 Skilled and Committed Teachers
Within schools, it is well known that teachers and teaching are the single largest
influence on student learning and that teaching quality has a great deal of influence
over student outcomes (Hattie 2009; OECD 2005). Canadian teachers are highly
skilled and motivated professionals. Because teaching continues to be seen as a
desirable job, admission to teacher training programs is very competitive all across
Canada and therefore affords a high level of selectivity in teacher candidates.
All teacher training programs include both theoretical and practical components.
Once in the classroom, teachers continue to develop professional skills through
well-resourced professional development sessions provided by provincial govern-
ments, school districts, and professional organizations (OECD 2004). Additionally,
like almost all high-performing countries, Canadian provinces have strong teachers’
unions that have negotiated decent pay and working conditions and continually
advocate for the rights of teachers and students in public education. The same
situation applies to leaders of schools and districts in Canadian education, virtually
all of whom were professional teachers. In the present international policy context
of “liberalization,” none of these positive features can be taken for granted, but at
the moment they remain part of the Canadian setting.
2.2.3 Commitment to Collaboration
Education systems do best for children when stakeholders develop and agree on
goals for public education and when conflict is minimized and differences are
resolved through dialogue. Canada has a long tradition of partnership and collabora-
tive work among governments, school boards, teachers, parents, and the broader
community. Provincial governments frequently consult a wide range of stakeholders

including school boards, school administrators, teachers, parent groups, and school
councils, “…not only to build relationships but to engage them in the development of
our policy agenda” (OECD 2010a, p. 72). Collaboration on educational issues across
stakeholder groups reflects the Canadian belief that it is our collective responsibility
to ensure that all children have the opportunity to attain high levels of education.
2.2.4 Respect for Diversity
Canadian school systems include a wide range of different kinds of schools even within
the public education system. For example, Canadian children and families may choose
language immersion schools that provide most instruction in a second language, alter-
native schools of various kinds that cater to specific community needs, and Aboriginal
schools to support the needs of our native population. In recent years urban school
districts in particular have experimented with an even wider range of public schools
such as those focusing on sports or the arts or specific forms of instruction, such as
more conservative or more progressive. And, as already noted, all provinces provide at
least some public funding for other kinds of schools, such as those organized by
particular religious groups. So although Canada has few formal systems of school
choice such as those that have been highly contentious in other countries, there is in fact
a considerable amount of choice in most Canadian jurisdictions (Riffel et al. 1996).
Respect for diversity has come slowly, though. Historically, the most contentious
debates in Canadian education have been over issues of language and religion. Over
time, the system has evolved from one that was primarily sectarian, organized on
religious principles, to one that is broadly public and attempts to accommodate diver-
sity in various ways within the public system. The emergence of this approach was
the result of much struggles; it took Quebec some 40 years to create a system orga-
nized primarily on linguistic rather than religious lines, while changing the denomi-
national education system in Newfoundland in the 1990s required an amendment to
the Canadian constitution and direction from the Supreme Court of Canada (Galway
and Dibbon 2012). Issues of language and religion continue to be important in
Canadian education. Ontario continues to support a Catholic school system, but no
other religions, with public funds, an issue that remains contentious (Hart 2012). As
noted earlier, Canada does have significant achievement gaps, some of which are
strongly related to ethnicity. Nonetheless, Canada’s system does seem to accommo-
date diversity reasonably well, at least in comparison to many other countries.
2.2.5 Commitment to Equity
The commitment to diversity is coupled with a commitment to equity in the form of

wanting good outcomes for all students. Indeed, many of the most heated debates in
Canada’s educational history have had to do with conflicts between these two
values—for example, whether there should be separate public schools focused on

particular minority, linguistic, or religious groups. In general, Canadian values give
preference to equity.
Canada’s distinct multicultural identity is reflected in the student population, with
one in five students being born outside of Canada or having both parents born outside
of Canada (OECD 2004). Canada is one of very few countries in which there is no
significant difference in performance on the PISA tests between foreign-born and
Canadian-born students. This is due in part to a commitment to creating a school
environment that recognizes and supports diversity and gives considerable attention
to effective ways of integrating immigrant and minority children into the school
system. Additionally newcomers are supported by programs that support students in
learning English or French as a second language (ibid.). By supporting diversity
in our schools, Canada has not only been able to achieve very high levels of equity in
education but also helps to ensure that multiculturalism remains an integral element
of the Canadian identity.
3 Recent Education Reforms in Canada
Over the last 20 years, Canadian school systems have witnessed a range of reforms,
but little in the way of what might be called policy upheavals. There have been few
large-scale system changes, although some reforms have proved highly contentious
politically. The main features of the Canadian education system are much the same
as they were in 1990. There remains substantial political consensus that our systems
are satisfactory.
For the most part, Canadian education policies have focused on efforts to maintain
a reasonably high quality system for all students. The issues that have dominated
education policy debates in other countries have generally been muted or silent in
Canada. For example, there have been no significant efforts in Canada to have
dramatic decentralization, or to intensify accountability and testing dramatically, or
to introduce more significant elements of choice and competition. There are no
examples of takeovers of “failing” schools. There are no active proposals for merit
pay for teachers or for firing of staff in poorly performing schools.
In fact, where these ideas have been mooted, they have been rejected by voters.
For example, opposition to a proposal to extend funding to faith-based schools
played a major role in the 2007 election in Ontario. As another example, the province
of Alberta introduced charter schools in 1994. There were originally 10, but 18 years
later there are still only about a dozen in the province and no other province has
introduced them.
Overall there is somewhat greater attention to student outcomes, teaching and
learning issues, and the need for greater equity, but generally without dramatic
impacts on the system. Testing systems were increased in the 1990s in many
provinces, but have not changed much since then. In general, Canadian provinces
have modest amounts of all-student testing, and the tests are low stakes.
3.1 Contention over Funding
In the last couple of decades, public concerns about education have erupted in
several provinces over efforts to curb spending in education systems. In the early to
mid-1990s, many provinces took actions such as freezing collective bargaining or
imposing compulsory days without pay to this end. The result was sometimes
considerable turmoil as the attempts met much resistance not only from teachers but
also from many parents. Polling data in Canada (e.g., Hart 2012) show consistently
strong support for a relatively generous level of public funding for education.
Although these debates were difficult in many provinces and led to strikes and
other conflicts, they did not change the basic nature of the system, and when better
fiscal times returned towards the end of the 1990s, funding for public education was
again expanded in all provinces. Today another crisis in public finance is leading to
similar debates about the size and funding of the public education system, with
potential for another round of conflict, but once again without much debate about
changing basic elements of the system.
3.2 Shifting Provincial and District Roles
In most of Canada, education systems were carved out by pioneers who created and
governed their own local schools. At one time, Canada had many thousands of
school districts, almost all of which had only one school. For example, Manitoba
had 2,400 districts to serve about half a million people. These local districts were in
charge of mostly everything, from curriculum to buildings to hiring teachers.
For the last 100 years, there has been a steady trend towards systems with fewer
districts and increasing control at the provincial level. Unlike provinces, school
districts have no constitutional status in Canada, so exist at the pleasure of provincial
governments. Their strength depends primarily, then, on their political legitimacy.
Yet voter interest in and turnout for school board elections has been declining
steadily, leading provinces to exert more and more control. As well, developments
in transportation and communication, and the requirement to educate many more
children to higher levels, have tended to work against a strong role for small local
districts. As a result, there have been several waves of contraction in the number of
districts and their powers. For example, Manitoba now has 38 districts instead of
2,400, to serve a much larger population.
Provinces have exerted control in many areas. At one time almost all funding for
schools in Canada came from local property taxes. Provinces then began to provide
grants, and gradually their share increased steadily as the costs were simply too great
to be borne by local property owners, especially given vast differences in property
wealth from one district to another. Beginning in the 1970s, provinces began to take
over full control of funding of education; today there is a significant role for locally
set property taxes in education in only one province, while in most cases provinces
provide virtually 100 % of the money according to provincial funding formulas.
Funding was not the only area of increasing provincial control, either. Provinces
have become more assertive about virtually every feature of the education system,
increasingly providing direction to local school boards about curriculum, pedagogy,
assessment, discipline, and other features. The move to 100 % provincial funding in
Ontario, for example, took place in the late 1990s and also took away significant
other powers from Ontario school districts, which had until that time maintained
quite a large degree of local control. Alberta, British Columbia, and Nova Scotia
have adopted similar approaches.
4 Dynamic Provincial Reforms
The best known example of system reform in Canada has been in Ontario since
2004. A consistent effort over 8 years now has produced significant improvements
in student outcomes, but also improved teacher morale as shown by declining attri-
tion rates, and improved public satisfaction. These efforts have been described in
detail elsewhere (e.g., Levin 2008; Fullan 2010). However, notable features include
sustained attention to a small number of goals with strong political leadership, a
positive approach that respected and engaged educators without blame or punish-
ment, and a strong focus on building the capacity of educators at all levels to do the
specific things necessary to improve student success. So unlike many reform efforts
(but somewhat similar to places like Finland or Singapore), Ontario has focused on
gradually building a more and more effective teaching and leadership corps with the
policy framework supporting that work.
Other provinces have also taken some actions that are worth noting. British
Columbia has made a special effort to work with schools and Aboriginal communi-
ties to improve outcomes for those young people, with some success (British
Columbia Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation 2011). Alberta has
worked to build professional capacity through the Alberta School Improvement
Initiative (Hargreaves et al. 2009) which has supported district and school improve-
ment for quite a few years. However, in most cases, as noted earlier, provinces have
worked on gradual improvement or individual initiatives rather than bold programs
of reform.
Given Canada’s current high level of performance, that seems a reasonable choice.
References
British Columbia Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation. (2011). New relationships
with aboriginal people and communities in British Columbia: Annual progress report 2010–
2011. Victoria: British Columbia Ministry.
Citizenship and Immigration Canada. (2008). Canadian multiculturalism: An inclusive citizen-
ship. http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/multiculturalism/citizenship.asp. Accessed Aug 2012.
Fearon, J. (2003). Ethnic and cultural diversity by country. Journal of Economic Growth, 8, 195–222.
Fullan, M. (2010). All systems go. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press & Sage.
Galway, G., & Dibbon, D. (Eds.). (2012). Education reform: From rhetoric to reality. London:
Althouse Press.
Glaze, A., Mattingley, R., & Levin, B. (2012). Breaking barriers: Excellent and equity in educa-
tion. Toronto: Pearson.
Hargreaves, A., Crocker, R., Davis, B., McEwen, L., Sahlberg, P., Shirley, D., Sumara, D., &
Hughes, M. (2009). The learning mosaic: A multiple perspective review of the Alberta Initiative
for School Improvement (AISI): Summary report. Alberta: Ministry of Education.
Hart, D. (2012). The 18th OISE survey of educational issues: Public attitudes towards education
in Ontario 2012. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. http://www.oise.utoronto.
ca/oise/About_OISE/OISE_Survey. Accessed Aug 2012.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement.
New York: Routledge.
Human Development and Skills Resources Canada. (2012). Indicators of well-being in Canada:
Canadians in context – immigration.
International Human Development Indicators. (2011). http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/.3ndic.1t.4r@-
eng.jsp?iid=38http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/CAN.html. Accessed Aug 2012.
Johnston, R., Banting, K., Kymlicka, W., & Soroka, S. (2010). National identity and support of the
welfare state. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 43(2), 349–377.
Levin, B. (2008). How to change 5000 schools. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.
OECD. (2004). What makes schools perform? Seeing systems through the prism of PISA. Paris:
OECD.
OECD. (2005). Teachers matter: Attracting, developing and maintaining effective teachers. Paris:
OECD.
OECD. (2010a). Lessons from PISA for the United States, strong performers and successful
reformers in education. Paris: OECD.
OECD. (2010b). Government social spending per head: Total public social expenditure per
head, at current prices and PPPs. OECD social expenditure statistics (database). http://www.
oecd- ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/government-social-spending-per-head-
2010_20743904-2010-table2. Accessed Aug 2012.
OECD (2013). Annual expenditure per student by educational institutions for all services (2010):
In equivalent USD converted using PPPs for GDP, by level of education, based on full-time
equivalents. Retrieved July 2013 from Education at a Glance 2013: OECD Indicators: http://
www.keepeek.com/Digital-Asset-Management/oecd/education/education-at-a-glance-2013/
annual-expenditure-per-student-by-educational-institutions-for-all-services-2010_eag-
2013-table77-en
Riffel, J. A., Levin, B., & Young, J. (1996). Diversity in Canadian education. Journal of Education
Policy, 11(1), 113–123.
Ungerleider, C., & Levin, B. (2007). Accountability, funding and school improvement in Canada.
In T. Townsend (Ed.), International handbook of school effectiveness and improvement
(pp. 411–424). Dordrecht: Springer.
UNICEF. (2007). Child poverty in perspective: An overview of child well-being in rich countries.,
Innocenti report card 7. http://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/rc7_eng.pdf. Accessed
Aug 2012.
Wilson, D., & Macdonald, D. (2010). The income gap between aboriginal peoples and the rest of
Canada. Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.
China: Promoting Equity as a Basic
Education Policy
Zhenguo Yuan
Abstract China has the largest population in the world, and delivering education
services is therefore a significant challenge. The chapter elaborates on the education
reform in China since 1978 and delineates the milestone policies at each stage of
reform. It highlights the policy measures taken by the Government of China to
achieve the equity, such as universalizing 9-year compulsory education, adjusting
the distribution of education resources, setting up an efficient student support sys-
tem, and implementing nutrition program for rural students in compulsory educa-
tion, etc. Finally, it enumerates the strategies to achieve the goal of equity and
quality in the future.
Keywords Education • Equity • Policy • Quality • China
China’s history goes back thousands of years, and its long-standing cultural
traditions include a keen interest in education. It has the largest population in the
world: in 2012, it was home to 1.35 billion people (National Bureau of Statistics of
China 2013); delivering education services is therefore a significant challenge.
Since the foundation of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, the Government of
China (GoC) has striven to maintain the culture of education. It is committed to
fostering creativity and has drawn on international experience in order to achieve
this. All of the reforms undertaken during the last 30 years have embraced quality
and equity; these considerations have been even more prominent in recent years. As
a result, a large number of skilled students have become an important driving force
of social and economic development in the country.
This chapter gives an overview of education policies since the 1980s: a period of
particularly rapid economic and social development as well as considerable
Z. Yuan (*)
Former President, National Institute of Education Sciences,
Vice-President, The Chinese Society of Education, Beijing, China

360 Z. Yuan
advances in the field of education. It focuses on reforms passed since 2000, the
assumptions underpinning these reforms, the challenges that lie ahead, as well as
development trends.
1 Reform Progress Since 1978
In 1978, a program of reforms was launched designed to open up the country, as

a result of which it enjoyed the most rapid period of educational development in
its history. In 1978, the average number of years of schooling received by the
population was a mere 3.5 years; the figure rose to 9.7 by 2012. Over the same
period, the gross enrollment rate in tertiary education soared from 1.55 % to 27 %
(Ministry of Education 2011a); enrollments increased from under one million
(Chen 2008) to 31.67 million (MOE 2011b).
Since the “reform and opening up” program has been in effect, the government
has geared the aims and foci of education development to be responsive to eco-
nomic and social needs. Four key policy papers issued in 1985, 1994, 1999, and
2010, respectively, document the historical milestones of China’s education reform
and development.
1.1 1985: Structural Reform
1977 marked the end of the cultural revolution and 10 years of devastation; at that
point the country’s needs were enormous. There was a shortage of resources in all
sectors, but the largest shortfall was that of a skilled workforce; the most urgent
issue was therefore how to develop this capital rapidly. Consequently, in 1985 the
Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CCCPC) issued “The
Decision on Educational System Reform.” The Decision, which aimed to accelerate
the development of skills through structural education reform, maintained that plan-
ning and structures had to be reformed in order to inverse the mismatch between the
education and economic systems; it set out “to reform systematically starting from
the education system.” Concretely, it proposed to reform the educational adminis-
tration system by strengthening the macro-management of higher education at the
central ministry level while increasing micromanagement at the institutional level.
It ceded responsibility for the delivery of basic education services to local govern-
ments. It sought to mobilize local governments and stakeholders to take responsibil-
ity to run local schools and to abandon one-size-for-all nationwide model. It granted
more autonomy to tertiary education institutions in relation notably to student
admissions and the graduate-assignment system. Finally, it made provision to accel-
erate the development of vocational education, which was to keep pace with basic
education. Through these reforms, the capacity of educational institutions of vari-
ous types and at various levels was substantially upgraded.
China: Promoting Equity as a Basic Education Policy 361
1.2 1993: Creating an Educational Framework in Alignment

with China’s Socialist Market Economy
In 1992, the concept of creating a socialist market economy took shape, and on
February 13, 1993, the CCCPC and the State Council issued a new education frame-
work known as the “Outline for Education Reform and Development.” It aligned
educational practice with the country’s socialist market economy, the idea being
that the structural reform of the market economy called for corresponding changes
in the structure of education systems. The Outline proposed “to create educa-
tion systems that cater for the needs of economic, political and science and technol-
ogy (S&T) structures, to better serve the socialist modernization.” It detailed the
direction, goal, rationale, and content of the reform, namely, the overarching goal
for educational development in China by the end of the twentieth century was to
develop a basic framework for the socialist education system which took account of
Chinese specificities and was oriented towards the twenty-first century. It was
designed “to modernize education and develop a relatively mature and adequate
socialist education system through several more decades of effort.” With these goals
in mind, the Outline resolved to deepen education reform, adhere to coordinated
development, increase educational funding, improve the quality of teaching,
improve education quality, enhance the efficacy of educational institutions, plan by
region/area, and engage further with communities. Thus by pursuing the reform of
school operating and administration systems as well as teacher-training institutions,
a mechanism providing for education development facilitated by market readjust-
ment took shape (CCCPC 1993).
1.3 1999: Quality-Oriented Education and Curriculum Reform
Towards the end of the 1990s, China faced fierce international competition and
social and economic development made new demands on education, such as its
capacity to produce innovative skills. Against this backdrop, the CCCPC and the
State Council (1999) promulgated the “Decision on Deepening Educational Reform
and Promoting Quality Education” (1999), which triggered off unprecedented cur-
riculum reform. The Decision aimed to “promote quality education and develop a
vigorous socialist education system which incorporates Chinese characteristics, to
lay solid foundations for the national strategy of invigorating the nation through
science and education.” It also mandated the reform of educational structures, edu-
cational institutions and the administrative system, and the creation of conditions
for implementing quality education. In response to the notion of “emphasizing text-
book knowledge over practical ability and emphasizing intellectual education over
moral education,” it stressed “a combination of education and productive labor is an
important approach to fostering all-round talent.” By reforming the curriculum, it
proposed to update philosophy, education methods, and content at school level,
362 Z. Yuan
thereby reforming examination and admission systems as well as the administrative

system at various levels of government.
As a result of this reform, China developed the three-level curriculum system
(national, local, and school based) that is still in application today; it established
curriculum standards for all subjects and developed various versions of textbooks.
1.4 2010: Equity and Quality, Two Strategic Goals
Eleven years after the last major reforms and in view of growing economic globaliza-
tion, advances in science and technology, and increasingly fierce international
competition, it was clear that knowledge had become the most important factor in
determining comprehensive national power and international competitiveness.
Similarly, a skilled workforce had increasingly become a strategic resource in the
drive to push forward social and economic development; in this context, it was
evident that education plays a fundamental, leading, and overarching role. Therefore, in
July 2010 the Government of China launched the “National Outline for Medium- and
Long-term Education Reform and Development” (2010–2020) which established
two strategic foci: equity and quality. The Outline introduced a new objective: that of
modernizing education, establishing a learning society, and joining the rank of
nations that have a highly qualified workforce. It set out to prioritize development,
enhance student knowledge, promote reform and innovation, enhance equity, and
improve quality. Hence, improving quality and promoting equity, became strategic
goals in educational development (CCCPC 2010).
2 Promoting Equity via the National Education Policy
Development in China is characterized by substantial rural–urban and interregional

disparities, but they also exist in the field of education. There was, for example, a
rural–urban quality gap in the quality of education. In 2004, over 160 million
students were enrolled in compulsory schooling (Zhou 2004). While local govern-
ments were responsible for funding education, expenditure per student, public edu-
cation expenditure per student, and public current expenditure per student varied
significantly between rural and urban areas, as does the quality of teaching. Rural
areas often had dilapidated schools, and this is where there is the highest incidence
of student dropout. Also, substitute teachers mainly worked in rural areas. Rural–
urban disparities are the primary source of inequity.
Second, there were significant geographic differences in the quality of education,
notably in central and western China, compared to the east. In these regions, the
disparity was due to lower educational expenditure and inadequate education provi-
sion in minority areas. Substitute teachers (who do not have formal qualifications)
outnumbered qualified teachers in these regions and were numerous in primary and
lower secondary schools (which constitute compulsory schooling). Schools in these
regions had larger classes and less information technology infrastructure. Lastly,
there were fewer higher education institutions (HEIs) there, and a considerably
lower proportion of their students are admitted to high-ranking universities.
Third, vocational schools were underdeveloped due to the fact that expenditure
on vocational education has lagged behind that of academic education. Tuition and
fees charged by vocational schools were relatively high, yet their students do not
dispose of the same learning facilities and access to higher levels of education as
their fellow students in academic schools. In addition, easy transitional pathways
between educational institutions of various types were lacking, and vocational stu-
dents were much less likely to go to university or college.
Fourth, the issue of school choice in urban areas was not resolved. It has been cre-
ated by demand by social groups with high socioeconomic status. The quality gap
between different schools was a serious impediment to the equitable development of
vocational education and was also the main reason behind this phenomenon.
Fifth, disadvantaged social groups needed to have greater access to education.
In 2005, 5.48 % of migrant children did not complete 9-year compulsory schooling;
similarly, there is a big discrepancy between the educational attainment of disabled
and nondisabled children (Duan and Yang 2008).
Over the last decade the Government of China has undertaken to promote equity
in education as it is critical to improving people’s livelihoods, while education
figures at the top of people’s priorities. The government has pledged to make the
issue a fundamental element of its education policy and to implement it via an
array of policy actions, thereby narrowing the gaps.
2.1 Promoting Equity Through Development
The prerequisite for educational equity is access to schooling. In order to deliver

education to the largest possible number of students, the Chinese government has
taken the following policy measures.
2.1.1 Universalizing 9-Year Compulsory Education
In 1986, a law on compulsory education was passed and the law was amended in
2006. The law was put in place the foundations for attaining universal education and
guaranteed children the right to 9 years of compulsory education (The Standing
Committee of the National People’s Congress 2006). This became fully free of
charge in 2008, when the enrollment rate reached 99.8 %. In 2000, for every 100,000
people, there were 3,611, 11,146, and 33,961 students with, respectively, either uni-
versity education, senior secondary education, or junior secondary education; in
2010 these figures rose to 8,930, 14,032, and 38,788. On the other hand, the number
of people who only had primary education dropped from 35,701 to 26,779, and the
number of illiterate people dropped by 30.4 million over the same period: the illit-
eracy rate declined from 6.72 % to 4.08 % of the population.
364 Z. Yuan
2.1.2 Developing Regular Senior Secondary Education

and Vocational Education Equitably
Between 2002 and 2011, the gross enrollment rate in senior secondary education
increased from 42.8 % (MOE 2003) to 84.0 %, respectively, approaching the aver-
age rate in developed countries (over 85 %), while the figure in some provinces in
eastern China actually exceeded 95 %. Enrollments in senior secondary and voca-
tional education are, on the whole, balanced. In 2011, the country’s 13,117 second-
ary vocational schools were host to nearly 22 million students (MOE 2011b), i.e.,
approximately half of those in senior secondary education. To a large extent, this
meets society’s needs for skilled manpower and professionals.
2.1.3 The Rapid Rate of Expansion of Higher Education
In the late 1990s, the gross enrollment rate in higher education was less than 10 %.
University enrollment started to increase significantly in 1999 and has risen by
approximately 20 % every year since then (Research Team for China’s Educational
Reform and Development Over the Past 30 Years 2008). The rate reached 15 % in
2002, marking the beginning of mass higher education. Since then, the annual figure
has grown by some 12 % points, reaching a participation rate of 26.9 % in 2011. The
same year, enrollment in regular HEIs reached 6.81 million, and the total number of
college and university students exceeded 30 million, thereby doubling the 2002
figure (MOE 2011b). Over the past 10 years, China’s higher education enrollment
rate has progressively overtaken that of Russia, India, and the USA, and it now has
the highest rate in the world. Approximately 119 million Chinese employees have
tertiary education qualifications, and the country now ranks second in this domain
(National Bureau of Statistics of China 2011). This unprecedented access to higher
education has created real opportunities for tens of millions of young people.
2.2 Adjusting the Distribution of Educational Resources
Expenditure and funding mechanisms are the cornerstones of educational equity.

For many years, investment in China was concentrated in cities and the eastern part
of the country. This imbalance resulted in significant disparities between urban and
rural areas, between the east and the west, and between industry and agriculture and
was undermining equity in education. Several steps were taken to remedy the prob-
lematic situation the imbalance had created.
2.2.1 Allocating Resources in Favor of Rural Areas

to Narrow the Urban–Rural Gap
In the early 2000s, the government introduced a policy of allocating the share of
newly increased educational expenditure for rural areas, thus bringing about a
marked increase in their budgets.
As of 2004, the government began to implement the policy of “two exemptions

and one subsidy.” Tuition, miscellaneous fees, and textbooks became free of charge
for students from poor rural families, notably in the west. It also provided subsidies
that benefited 10 million boarding students. In 2005, central and local governments
made further efforts to implement this policy by earmarking 7.2 billion yuan. As a
result, some 34 million students became entitled to free textbooks, and 31 million
were dispensed with having to pay miscellaneous fees. These figures correspond to
32 % and 30 %, respectively, of the number of students in the central and western
regions in compulsory education. A further six million students became entitled to
boarding subsidies, bringing the number of boarding students in rural areas to 19 %.
Within 2 years, 350,000 rural students who had dropped out because of poverty
were able to return to school (Jin 2006).
In 2006, the government set up a mechanism guaranteeing funding for compulsory
education. Initially, all students in rural, western areas became entitled to free
schooling. Some 49 million students benefited from this policy, and nearly 200,000
dropouts from poor families returned to school (Tian and Zhang 2006). Then, as of
spring 2007, rural students in compulsory education throughout the country were
exempted from having to pay tuition or miscellaneous fees; some 150 million
students benefited from this policy (Jiang 2007). The government began to offer free
textbooks to all rural students in compulsory education in the autumn of 2007 and
also raised subsidies for boarding students.
In 2010, the policy of offering free textbooks was extended to students from poor
urban families. Overall, some 136 million students, i.e., over 89 % of the total num-
ber of students in compulsory education (Yuan 2011), benefited from it. Following
on from this, the government raised boarding subsidies in 2010 and 2011 for poor
students in compulsory education in rural areas of central and western China. The
daily subsidy amounted to four yuan for each primary school student and five yuan
for each middle school student (Wu and Qu 2011).
Within the framework of “two exemptions and one subsidy,” state funding
between 2006 and 2011 reduced the amount that rural families would have had to
pay by over 230 billion yuan. This corresponds, on average, to savings of 250 yuan
and 390 yuan per family with, respectively, a child in primary school and one in
junior secondary school (Ministry of Finance 2010).
In order to increase the number of teachers in rural areas in central and western
China, the government implemented a policy to create special posts in primary and
junior secondary schools thereby creating a special fund with which to hire urban
college graduates to teach in rural areas. By 2009, some 130,000 such teachers were
recruited and engaged in over 6,400 schools located in some 500 districts (Du et al.
2012). This policy also encouraged an exchange scheme for principals, headmas-
ters, and teachers in primary and secondary schools, as well as among schools of
different levels. By 2010, over half of China’s provinces had established such a
mechanism (ibid.).
366 Z. Yuan
2.2.2 Allocating Resources in Favor of Central and Western Regions

to Narrow Regional Gaps
In the early 1990s, the government set itself the goal of universalizing 9-year
compulsory education and eliminating illiteracy among young people and adults by
2000. This objective was met in most localities by 2000, but difficulties persisted in
western rural areas. In 2004, the central government launched a campaign known as
“two basic accomplishments” which intensified efforts to address these difficulties;
over 10 billion yuan were earmarked to build boarding schools in rural western areas.
As a result, over 8,300 schools were built or renovated, thus ensuring students’
access to schooling. At the same time, the government implemented the policy of
“two exemptions and one subsidy,” ensuring that these students were able to com-
plete their education. Between 2003 and 2007, some 10 billion yuan were allocated
through the budgets of central and local governments to modernize facilities in pri-
mary and secondary schools in rural central and western areas. These funds served to
build computer classrooms in 37,500 junior secondary schools and to equip 384,000
primary schools with satellite reception facilities. They also financed CD players and
complete sets of CD-based sets of teaching resources for 110,000 primary education
units (Yuan 2007). These measures in favor of western and central regions have given
rural students there greater access to quality education resources.
In 2008, the Ministry of Education introduced a program to support student enroll-
ment in central and western regions which was specifically designed to enhance their
access to education. The policy brought about a steady increase in enrollments in
these areas; there were 170,000 new enrollments in 2012 (MOE 2012). The program
required 15 provinces and municipalities (such as Beijing, Tianjin, and Liaoning)
whose higher education institutions were somewhat better equipped in terms of
resources and running conditions to draw up coordination plans with eight provinces
and regions (including Shanxi, Inner Mongolia, and Yunnan) that had lower enroll-
ment rates and fewer resources. The aim of the program was to narrow the regional
gap, and it did indeed promote equity in access to higher education.
The national training program for primary and secondary school teachers that
was launched in 2010 focused on training rural teachers from central and western
regions. The central budget allocates an annual sum of 50 million yuan to support a
demonstration training project for primary and secondary school teachers and pro-
mote teacher training across the country, especially in the western and central
regions (MOE 2010; MOF 2010). The program has played an important role in
strengthening the ranks of rural teachers and enhancing education as a whole in
central and western regions.
2.2.3 Allocating Educational Resources in Favor of Less-Privileged

Schools to Narrow the Interschool Gap
Due to the shortage of graduates and teachers and insufficient financial resources,
for many years China adopted a policy whereby it prioritized the development of
some schools rather than others. Over the last decade this policy has been reduced.
The state has established basic standards on the organization and quality of schools
throughout the country; these were determined by various localities in accordance
with the provincial government, which is responsible for overall coordination, plan-
ning, and implementation. Provincial and higher-level governments now allocate
education resources more equitably and are upgrading less-developed schools. Over
20 provinces have published their standards on running schools at the compulsory
education level in order to promote common standards. At the same time, teachers
in urban and well-equipped schools are encouraged to support those that work in
less-developed rural areas. Further training is offered to all teachers. Collectively,
these arrangements should gradually narrow the gap between schools.
2.3 Setting Up an Efficient Student Support System
In order to prevent student dropout due to poverty, the state has gradually put in
place a system for assisting poor students at different stages of their education. It
was launched in rural areas and western regions and was extended to cities and
central and eastern regions. The range of students receiving such assistance is being
continuously increased, and standards are raised progressively. Every year nearly
180 million students receive such assistance, and now no young people drop out of
school due to poverty.
In order to help college students from poor backgrounds to complete their courses,
provision has been made to assist them. This includes student loans, government
grants and scholarships, special allowances, as well as reduced tuition fees and exemp-
tions. In 2000, the government extended the possibility of obtaining a loan to all col-
lege and university students throughout the country. In 2004, the Ministry of Education,
Ministry of Finance, China Banking Regulatory Commission, and the People’s Bank
of China collectively carried out a major reform of this policy and the operating mech-
anism for the loans. They set up a new system based on risk compensation, thus ensur-
ing that loans would be available to all eligible applicants, especially newly enrolled
students. In the autumn semester of 2010, over one million students received govern-
ment grants to the value of 10 billion yuan. The scale of government scholarships and
grants has also grown progressively (Yuan and Xie 2011). In 2011, the central govern-
ment allocated 10.3 billion yuan in special grants from its budget, thereby assisting
5.15 million college students. This sum was boosted by a further 6.5 billion yuan
provided by local governments (Ministry of Finance 2011).
2.4 Implementing a Nutrition Program for Rural Students

in Compulsory Education
Despite its rapid economic growth, the standard of living throughout China used to
be very low, and there are still over 100 million people living under the poverty line
of one USD per person per day. These poor families are confronted with severe
368 Z. Yuan
difficulties and their children suffer from malnutrition. In order to address the prob-
lem, in the autumn of 2011, the state launched a nutrition program for rural students
in compulsory education, beginning on a trial basis in poverty-concentrated areas.
Since then, the central government allocates over 16 billion yuan per annum from
its budget to provide food allowances for these students. The daily subsidy amounts
to three yuan per student. Through this policy, some 26 million students in 680
districts have access to healthy food (Jin 2012).
3 Looking to the Future: The Drive to Achieve

Quality and Equity
After three decades of efforts, the Government of China has achieved its goal of
giving all children access to schooling, yet the quality of education is not yet uniform
or ideal. There is still a way to go before all children will have access to good
schools. Although Shanghai has ranked well in PISA performance testing, it does
not represent the national average. In relation to the development of practical skills
and students’ capacity to innovate, national education still has many shortcomings.
Hence, a new round of reforms will be launched within the framework of the
“National Outline for Medium- and Long-term Education Reform and Development”
in order to achieve the dual goals of quality education and equity.
3.1 Reforming the Examination and Admission Systems
Examinations first took place in China as early as 1,000 years ago and have since
played a significant role in selection processes. However, until now, due to technical
limitations, examinations have only been able to measure students’ mastery of
academic knowledge and cannot evaluate comprehensively their overall proficiency,
ability, and personality. Several other shortcomings in the current examination sys-
tem are widely criticized. The fact that people’s lifetime prospects depend on their
once-only performance at the gaokao (the all-important national college entrance
examination) is one reproach. Furthermore, the chances of obtaining a place in col-
lege are unequal from one province to another, and there are sometimes unaccept-
able cases whereby students can arbitrarily obtain bonus points. Colleges are not
given enough decision-making power over enrollments, and the subject matter that
examinations test—and how they are conducted—is another source of criticism as
they do not encourage all-round education. In response to these reproaches, after
resuming the gaokao, the state has begun to reform the examination, and the educa-
tion authorities hope that this will substantially improve the national higher educa-
tion selection process. The National Outline for Medium- and Long-term Education
Reform and Development states that China will “reform its examination and enroll-
ment system and change the status quo whereby one’s lifetime prospects depend on
his/her once-only performance at the gaokao so as to encourage education that pro-

duces all-round, innovative people.”
According to the principle that the gaokao must be retained but also reformed, the
Outline states that the education authorities will undertake several reforms. First,
they are to develop two distinct sets of entrance examinations for students applying
for undergraduate studies or to vocational institutions, respectively, so as to meet
their various requirements. Second, they must improve achievement tests and overall
quality evaluation for senior high school students so as to encourage them to do well
in all subjects rather than just sciences or arts. Third, the authorities are to explore the
possibility of conducting several exams a year on particular subjects and including
these scores in the final college entrance evaluation so as to ease pre-gaokao student
stress. Fourth, they must make sure that the examination and enrollment processes
are fair, adjust the distribution of enrollment quota among colleges, and regulate the
practice of giving bonus points at the gaokao. Fifth, they need to build bridges for
students to pursue further studies so that they will have more choice in terms of study
and future career. Since the gaokao influences many aspects of society and is such a
sensitive issue, any change to the grading process needs to be carefully studied. As
required by the Outline, a national steering committee on education and examina-
tions is being created to study in-depth suggestions on how to reform the gaokao. The
education authorities will further reform the gaokao completely, give colleges more
decision-making power in relation to enrollments, set distinct entrance examinations
for undergraduate studies and vocational education, and improve communication
about examinations and enrollments.
In order to encourage students to combine integrity and skills, to study both arts
and sciences, and to think independently, the reform requires educational actors to
update their understanding of education and to reform the education system. More
specifically, they should encourage students to combine learning and reflection as
well as theoretical and practical knowledge. Teaching staff should be encouraged to
teach students according to their aptitude.
Primary, secondary, and higher education should be better linked; there should
be close ties between teaching policies, research, and practices, and evaluation and
selection processes should be further reformed.
3.2 The Drive to Transform Management Systems

and Enhance Government Coordination
Ever since China adopted its policy of reform and opening up, there has been
pressure on the government to reform its management systems and approaches. It is
also being pressured into streamlining administrative processes and delegating
power to lower levels so that schools may use and develop their decision-making
prerogatives in line with legislation and can be more autonomous. However, in rela-
tion to exercising decision-making, ambiguity still prevails concerning rights and
obligations, e.g., the relationship between the state, the school, and the society is
370 Z. Yuan
still not clear. The government interferes excessively in educational activities and
on occasion gets involved with matters beyond its scope. There are too many admin-
istrative admissions to be applied for; for example, the number of administrative
departments and senior managers in schools is subject to limitations imposed by the
local personnel department. The school’s overall organization has to be examined
and approved by the administrative department of education of the district con-
cerned. Furthermore, the transfer and recruitment of staff are restricted by policies
devised by local governments and must also be approved by the relevant govern-
ment department. All of these administrative layers have weakened the enthusiasm
and initiative of schools and curtailed their development.
If the current situation is to evolve and schools are to become dynamic, the
authorities must continue to reform management systems. Styles must change and,
in particular, the role of government needs to be reviewed. Attention needs to be
given to streamlining administrative procedures and delegating power to lower
levels and overall to improve the level of public education. The authorities should
also define the duties of both central and local governments at all levels, standardize
procedures to run schools, and ensure the independence of management, operation,
and evaluation procedures. They should establish a coordinated and methodical
management system that draws a line between government administration and pub-
lic institutions and establish clear frontiers between powers and duties. The basic
principle underpinning the reform of management systems is that the government
should administer education in accordance with education law, just as schools do.
The key points of the necessary reforms are outlined below. First, the govern-
ment should improve its management style, i.e., fulfill its obligations satisfactorily
and delegate more power to schools. It should reduce the extent to which it inter-
venes directly in schools and dispense with the need for the administrative depart-
ment to examine and approve the way each school functions. The government
should also develop more guidance by way of policies, regulations, standards, and
financial reporting to support the development of education.
Second, the powers and duties of governments at all levels should be defined,
and, in particular, the power of provincial governments should be enhanced and
coordinated. They should be granted more power to develop educational programs,
and there should be a better, rational distribution of educational resources in the
provinces. The allocation of resources should be optimized in order to ensure equal
access to basic and vocational education, and initiatives to develop local
governments’ education policies should be encouraged.
Third, the education authorities should make a clear distinction between gov-
ernment and school, on the one hand, and management and operations on the
other hand. They should guarantee schools the right to manage themselves, with
the support of democratic oversight and community engagement and establish a
modern system under which schools can function in accordance with legislation.
Under the leadership and the supervision of the Communist Party of China, the
education authorities should strengthen the administration of provincial education
structures. Only in this way will the country be able to meet the needs created by the
rapid development of its economy, society, and education sector. The development
of compulsory education should be balanced, teaching methods should be reformed,

and vocational and higher education should be granted equal shares of educational
resources within administrative sectors or provinces.
The government should increase the rights and responsibilities of provincial
governments to manage enrollments and award degrees. The distribution of power
in relation to personnel matters, financial affairs, and other important issues is
unbalanced and is a recurrent problem. The education authorities should be atten-
tive to the recruitment, exchange, and promotion of teachers, and more stringent
procedures should be put in place to control the allocation of education budgets
and manage educational projects satisfactorily.
The points above are the key to allocating resources properly, improving the
quality of education and increasing the extent to which people are satisfied with
their education system. Ideally, therefore, the government should launch pilot
reform measures on the overall organization of the system. In order to have a better
balance of power as regards personnel matters, financial affairs, and other important
issues, it should take steps to reform a number of issues, strengthen cooperation
between different departments, and clearly define their responsibilities. The educa-
tion authorities should take a more prominent position when it comes to overall
arrangements, clearly define the responsibilities and power of various bodies,
strengthen cooperation, and, this way, form a clear and effective mechanism for
delivering public education.
3.3 Promoting the Development of Private Sector Education
Building up a sound private sector can help meet the need for diversified and
individualized education, increase sources of funding, and inject new vitality into
the system. Therefore, the Outline devotes considerable attention to devising a
blueprint for developing private education and recognizes that it is a major actor in
the development of education as well as a powerful force driving educational
reform. The Outline therefore urges governments at all levels to put private educa-
tion high on their agendas and to encourage nongovernmental sectors to invest in, or
donate funds to, private schools. These can be run independently or in partnership
with the state. Despite the fact that the private sector education is growing fast at the
moment, certain problems persist. Proper understanding of the issues is lacking,
policies are flawed, and implementation is not always effective. In order to pursue
reforms on the way schools are run and thereby promote the development of private
education, first of all, efforts must be made to improve the conditions favorable to
the development by carrying out pilot reforms in such areas as private schools’
juridical person attributes, property rights attributes, the protection of teachers’
rights and interests, and, lastly, preferential policies. Meanwhile, relevant policy
measures have to be established and fine-tuned.
More specifically, at the policy level, all discriminatory policies must be aban-
doned or updated, and private school students and faculty should enjoy the same
372 Z. Yuan
legal status as public facilities. Well-designed preferential policies should be formu-

lated so as to stimulate various forms of investment in, and donations to, private
sector schools, and sound policies must be drawn up that improve public financial
support for this sector in general and nonprofit schools in particular.
At the management level, pilot programs should be carried out to oversee profit
and nonprofit private schools separately; in addition, steps need to be taken to
improve the overall planning and management of private education. Support will be
given to private schools to help them improve their juridical person governance
structure by implementing risk prevention mechanisms and an information disclo-
sure system. Private schools should be encouraged to have innovative systems,
mechanisms, and education models so as to improve the quality of teaching, develop
unique features, and serve the community as best as possible. It is hoped that, in the
near future, private and public education will work together and flourish.
3.4 Improving Education Funding Mechanism
Since the publication of the National Outline for Medium and Long-term Education
Reform and Development (2010–2020), sources of educational funding have been
increasing. In 2012, China reached its goal of allocating 4 % of GDP to education.
However, if true equity in education is to be attained, educational input needs to be
increased. To do this, expenditure must no longer rely overly on special allocations
and project funds. Instead, there should be a systematized mechanism for allocating
such input. To this end, the following reforms should be adopted.
A study should be conducted to calculate how much students at each grade cost
in terms of allocations in order to determine how much the government should
provide in total. Education authorities should find out how much governments at the
national and local levels need to run their schools and then divide this amount by the
number of students in order to identify per-student allocation standards. These stan-
dards should be raised to keep pace with developments in the country’s economic,
technology, and education sectors. They should also serve as a benchmark to see
whether the government is providing enough educational funding. Using the pilots
undertaken in some provinces and municipalities as a starting point, the practice
should be promoted in other areas.
Innovative policies should be introduced to increase private sector investment in
education which, in turn, would increase total funding for education. In recent years,
although the private sector has invested increasingly in education, of the total
amount of funding for education, the share coming from the private sector decreased
from 38.7 % in 2005 (MOE 2006) to 26 % in 2009 (MOE 2010). Since at present
there is little scope for schools to raise their tuition fees, innovative policies could
be as follows. First, nongovernment sectors could be encouraged to donate to, or
invest in, schools by offering them preferential conditions in relation to finance,
taxes, banking, land, etc. Second, individuals who make donations to the education
system should be able to claim income tax relief equal to the net value of the
donation. Third, businesses that donate to or invest in education should be able to

deduct the amount they donate or invest from their taxable income that year, which
is an internationally accepted practice.
Education budgets should be subjected to greater control to make sure that the
funds are used more efficiently and effectively. They need to be monitored closely
in order to guarantee that the funds are raised, allocated, and spent as they should
be. Every step in the budget process should be supervised, from the moment when
it is drawn up through to when sums are allocated, spent, and justified. A sound
mechanism must be established to supervise the whole process so that educational
budgets will be used more efficiently.
4 Conclusion
Looking towards the future, education systems in China still face numerous
challenges. In summary, there is still a gap between increasing societal demand
for quality education and a lack of quality resources. Reforms are urgently
needed in relation to equity and quality.
Although education has been made a national priority formal, long-term regulatory
bodies are now needed. Although educational expenditure has reached 4 % of GDP, it
remains a challenge to provide quality education to all, allowing people to improve
their skills and knowledge and thereby contribute to social and economic progress.
The influence of traditional Chinese culture, coupled with parents’ high expectations
for their children given the prevailing one-child policy, has created an overwhelm-
ing learning burden for students. A key objective of future reform will be to lessen
this burden and improve learning effectiveness. Meanwhile, efforts need to be made
to foster social responsibility and the spirit of innovation among students and help
them develop practical abilities so that they will be better prepared for the labor
market and able to shoulder responsibility for social development in the future.
Another challenge is how to further open up the field of education. On the one
hand, China needs to draw upon other countries’ experiences in order to advance
education reform so that it may join the ranks of top-performing nations. On the other
hand, the country needs to upgrade its education system to international standards
in order to tempt more skilled people to continue their studies and also attract more
international students to study in China.
Although China has the biggest education system in the world and access to
education has been expanding substantially over recent years, there is still a distinct
imbalance between various levels and types of education. Some sectors such as
preprimary education, vocational education, minority education, and continuing
education are, to various degrees, lagging behind the others. China’s long-term goal,
therefore, is to step up development in these areas and construct an education
system which is aligned with social and economic development. Access to quality
education for all will ensure that, regardless of people’s social or regional origins,
they will be able to maximize their potential in life.
374 Z. Yuan
References
Chen, Z. L. (2008). The rising of a country through education (1978–2008) (p. I). Beijing:
Educational Science Publishing House.
Du, J. F., et al. (2012, April 23). Firmly promoting social fairness and justice. People’s daily.
Duan, C. R., & Yang, G. (2008). The newest situation of migrant children in China: An analysis
based on data from national demographical census of one percent of population. Journal of
Demography, 6, 28.
Jiang, N. (2007). About 150 millions of students enjoying tuition-free policy. People’s Daily.
http://edu.people.com.cn/GB/6487039.html. Accessed 6 November 2007.
Jin, X. Y. (2006). 350 thousands of drop-out students returning to schools under “two free and one
subsidy” policy. Guangming daily. http://www.gmw.cn/01gmrb/2006-04/26/content_410074.htm.
Accessed 9 April 2013.
Jin, X. Y. (2012). Understanding the nutrition improvement plan in rural schools. Guangming
daily. http://edu.people.com.cn/h/2012/0221/c227696-2677311330.html. Accessed 9 March
2013.
Ministry of Education. (2006). “2005 statistical bulletin on national education expenditure” issued
jointly by Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Education and National Statistics Bureau, 31 Dec 2006.
Retrieved from: http://www.edu.cn/jiao_yu_jing_fei_497/20070102/t20070102_212602.shtml
Ministry of Education. (2010). “2005 statistical bulletin on national education expenditure” issued
jointly by Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Education and National Statistics Bureau, 7 Dec
2010. Retrieved from: http://www.jyb.cn/info/jytjk/201012/t20101207_404433.html
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2003). Statistical communiqué on China
national educational development in 2003. http://www.eol.cn/20041124/3121940.shtml.
Accessed 5 March 2013.
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2011a). China’s gross enrollment rate
of higher education reaching 26.9 per cent in 2011. http://news.0898.net/edu/n/2012/0831/
c231202-17428498.html. Accessed 5 March 2013.
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2011b). Statistical communiqué on China
national educational development in 2011. http://www.moe.gov.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/
moe/moe_633/201208/141305.html. Accessed 5 March 2013.
national educational development in 2011. http://www.moe.gov.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/
moe/moe_633/201208/141305.html. Accessed 9 March 2013.
national educational development in 2011. http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2012-08/30/content_2213875.
htm. Accessed 9 March 2013.
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2012). The cooperation and coordination
plan for supporting admission work in middle and western areas. http://www.moe.gov.cn/
publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/moe/s6811/201209/141512.html. Accessed 3 September 2012.
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China and Ministry of Finance of the People’s
Republic of China. (2010). Notice to implement “national plan for training teachers from primary
and secondary schools”. http://www.gov.cn/zwgk/2010-06/30/content_1642031.htm. Accessed 9
March 2013.
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China, Ministry of Finance of the People’s
Republic of China and National Bureau of Statistics of China. (2005). Statistical communiqué
on national education funds use in 2005. http://www.edu.cn/jiao_yu_jing_fei_497/20070102/
t20070102_212602.shtml. Accessed 31 December 2006.
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China, Ministry of Finance of the
People’s Republic of China and National Bureau of Statistics of China. (2010). Statistical
communiqué on national education funds use in 2009. http://www.jyb.cn/info/jytjk/201012/
t20101207_404433.html. Accessed 7 December 2010.
Ministry of Finance of the People’s Republic of China. (2010). China implementing free compulsory
education in rural areas through hard work during the period of the eleventh “five year plan”.
http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2010-12/23/content_1771495.htm. Accessed 6 March 2013.
Ministry of Finance of the People’s Republic of China, (2011). 10.3 billions RMB of funds earmarked
for college scholarship. http://www.gov.cn/jrzg/2011-06/10/content_1881552.htm. Accessed 6
March 2013.
National Bureau of Statistics of China. (2010). Statistical communiqué on the sixth China national
demographical census in 2010. http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjgb/rkpcgb/qgrkpcgb/t20110428_
402722232.htm. Accessed 9 April 2013.
National Bureau of Statistics of China (2011, April 28). Communiqué of the National Bureau of
Statistics of People’s Republic of China on Major Figures of the 2010 Population Census [1]
(No. 1). Retrieved from: http://www.stats.gov.cn/english/StatisticalCommuniques/
National Bureau of Statistics of China. (2013). Statistical communiqué on China national
economic and social development in 2012. http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjgb/ndtjgb/qgndtjgb/
t20130221_402874525.htm. Accessed 22 February 2013.
Research Team for China’s Educational Reform and Development Over the Past 30 Years. (2008).
The rising of a country through education (1978–2008) (p. 192). Beijing: Educational Science
Publishing House.
The Central Committee of the Communist Party of China. (1985, June 1). The decision on the
reform of education system by the central committee of the communist party of China. China
Education Daily.
The Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, the State Council of the People’s
Republic of China. (1993). The outline for China’s educational reform and development. China
Higher Education, 4, 8–17.
Republic of China. (1999). The decision on deepening education reform and promoting quality
education. China Higher Education, 13/14, 3–7.
Republic of China. (2010). Outline of China’s National Plan for Medium and Long-term
Education Reform and Development. (2010-2020) (pp. 12–14). People’s Publishing House.
The Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress. (2006). Compulsory education law of the
people’s republic of China. http://www.edu.cn/ywjy_7555/20080821/t20080821_319448.shtml
Tian, Y., & Zhang, Z. T. (2006). About 48.8 millions of students from western rural area enjoying
free education. http://news.xinhuanet.com/edu/2006-08/25/content_5007902.htm?rss=1
Wu, J., & Qu, J. (2011). China reaching the goal of “no students dropped out of schools due to
economic hardship”. http://news.xinhuanet.com/2011-12/28/c_111327064.htm
Yuan, C. L. (2011). 2 millions of the poor college students getting support from student loan. China
youth daily. http://zqb.cyol.com/html/2011-08/09/nw.D110000zgqnb_20110809_5-01.htm
Yuan C. L. & Xie Y. (2011, March 3). Over 1 million students received national student aid loan
totaling 10 billion Yuan. China Education Daily.
Yuan, G. R. (2007). 10 billions RMB of funds planed for improving school conditions in middle and
western rural areas. http://news.sina.com.cn/o/2007-06-04/171211956053s.shtml. Accessed
4 June 2007.
Zhou, J. (2004). The review and outlook of China’s education development. http://www.whedu.net/
cms/data/html/doc/2004-01/07/29685/index.html
About the Contributors
Bambang Indriyanto is currently the Director of Center for Policy Research,

The Ministry of Education and Culture, The Republic of Indonesia. This is his second
time in this position; he had held it first during 2000–2003. During 2003–2005, he was
the Director of Center for Curriculum Development, and from 2005 to 2010 he was
the Secretary of the Directorate General of Management of Basic and Secondary
Education. From 2010 to 2011 he served as the Secretary of the Directorate General
of Basic Education, The Ministry of Education and Culture. In 1982, he graduated
from the University of Gadjah Mada with a bachelor’s degree in sociology. He got
his master’s degree in education administration and policy Studies from the State
University of Albany, New York, in 1989, and in 1992 he got his doctorate in the
same major and university. Since then, he has participated in several research
project sponsored by the Ministry of Education, World Bank, UNICEF, ILO, and
UNESCO. He has served as a member of Indonesian delegation for the World
Trade Organization (WTO) and APEC.
Batuhan Aydagül is the Director of the Education Reform Initiative (ERI), a
nongovernmental think-and-do-tank in Turkey. He is an education policy analyst
with more than 15 years of experience in education policy and administration in
both developing and post-conflict countries. Mr. Aydagül has a BA in Business
from Marmara University and an MA in International Comparative Education
from Stanford University. He previously served in Finansbank, the British
International School Istanbul, Liberia Ministry of Education, and Mother Child
Education Foundation (AÇEV) and was a recipient of a “Distinguished Service
Award” from the Liberia Ministry of National Education. Concurrently he serves
in the Advisory Board of Mother Child Education Foundation and in the Board of
Network of Education Policy Centers.
Benjamin Levin is a Professor and Canada Research Chair in Education Leadership
and Policy at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto.
He has worked with private research organizations, school districts, provincial
governments, and national and international agencies, as well as building an
academic career. He served as Deputy Minister (chief civil servant) for Education

DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-38931-3, © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013
378 About the Contributors
for the Province of Ontario from 2004 to 2007 and 2008–2009 and held a similar
position in Manitoba from 1999 through 2002. He has authored or co-authored eight
books and more than 300 other articles on education, conducted many research
studies, and has spoken and consulted on education issues around the world. His
current interests are in large-scale change, poverty and inequity, and finding better
ways to connect research to policy and practice in education.
Fernanda da Rosa Becker is a researcher at National Institute for Educational
Studies and Research Anísio Teixeira (INEP). She has authored and co-authored
articles and books on education. Her current interests are in large-scale assessment,
public policies on education and early childhood education. She holds a bachelor’s
degree in economics and a master’s degree in public administration.
Gábor Halász is Doctor of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. He is Professor of
Education at the Faculty of Pedagogy and Psychology of the University Eötvös
Loránd in Budapest where he is leading a Centre for Higher Educational
Management. He is the former Director-General of the National Institute for Public
Education in Budapest (now Institute for Educational Research and Development)
where he is now scientific advisor. His research fields are education policy and
governance, comparative and international education, and theory of education
systems. As an education policy expert, he took an active part in Hungary’s
education change process in the 1990s. He is one of the founders of the Hungarian
School for Education Management. Since its creation in 1998, he has been member
of the governing board of the Tempus Foundation which is coordinating the
EU-funded education programs in Hungary. Dr. Halász has worked as an expert
consultant for a number of international organizations, particularly the OECD, the
European Commission, the World Bank, and the Council of Europe. Since 1996, he
has been representing Hungary in the Governing Board of CERI (OECD), between
2004 and 2007 he was the president of this Board.
Horst Weishaupt has been the Director of the Center for Research on Educational
Governance at the German Institute for International Educational Research in
Frankfurt am Main since 2008. He was Professor of Empirical Educational Research,
University of Erfurt from 1992 to 2004 and University of Wuppertal from 2004 to
2013. His research areas cover school organisation and development, educational
planning and the monitoring of education, school financing, geographical aspects of
the education system, teacher research, the situation of educational science and
educational research. He holds a Ph.D. in educational sciences and a diploma in
educational sciences from Frankfurt University.
Jandhyala B.G. Tilak is Professor at the National University of Educational Planning
and Administration, New Delhi. Tilak earned his Ph.D. degree in economics from
the Delhi School of Economics (University of Delhi) and had taught in the Indian
Institute of Education, the University of Delhi, Sri Sathya Sai Institute of Higher
Learning, the Hiroshima University, and the University of Virginia. As a economist
of education, he was also on the research staff of the World. Prof. Tilak has authored/
edited a dozen of books and more than 250 research papers. He is a recipient of the
About the Contributors 379
Swami Pranavananda Saraswati National Award of the UGC in Education,

Malcolm Adiseshiah Award, and the Global Education Award – Inspirational
Teacher of the Year (2012) of the School of Educators. Prof. Tilak is the Editor of
the Journal of Educational Planning and Administration, and is on the boards of
several national and international journals. He is a member of several official com-
mittees on education of the Government of India and also serves the Comparative
Education Society of India as its President.
Jeongwon Kim is a Research Fellow in Korean Educational Development Institute
(KEDI) in Seoul, South Korea. Her major concern has been about the educational
opportunity of the minority. She served as Director of Research Center for
Educational Welfare in KEDI. Now she is Director of Education Support Center for
North Korean Migrants. She has authored or co-authored five books and more than
100 articles and research reports. Her current interests are educational policy in
social context, inequity in education, and teacher education.
John Ainley is a Principal Research Fellow in the Educational Monitoring and
Research Division at the Australian Council for Educational Research. Up to July
2010, Dr. Ainley was Deputy CEO (Research) at ACER. His research interests focus
on policy-oriented research in several areas such as information and communication
technology in education, civic and citizenship education, and participation in
science studies. During his career at ACER, he undertook a number of studies for
national and state education authorities including analyses of the progress of young
people through school, further education, training and work, influences on subject
choice in the senior secondary years and the development of literacy over the first
5 years of school. Dr. Ainley is chair of the Advisory Council for the Centre for
Educational Statistics and Evaluation in New South Wales, a member of the
Ministerial Advisory Group on Literacy and Numeracy in New South Wales, a
member of the Consortium Advisory Group for the Longitudinal Study of Australian
Children and a member of the Youth Advisory Group for the Australian Institute of
Health and Welfare. Dr. Ainley is a member of the editorial board of the journal
Education Research and Evaluation. He has been a visiting scholar at the Far West
Laboratory for Educational Research in San Francisco and the Ontario Institute for
Studies in Education.
Kevin G. Welner is a Professor in the School of Education at the University of
Colorado, Boulder, specializing in educational policy and law. He is Director of the
National Education Policy Center (NEPC), housed at CU Boulder. He earned both
his J.D. (1988) and Ph.D. (1997) from UCLA (University of California, Los Angeles).
Prof. Welner’s present research examines the use and misuse of research in policy-
making and explores various issues concerning the intersection between education
rights litigation and educational opportunity scholarship. He also continues to examine
issues of tracking and detracking. His past research studied small-school reform,
tuition-tax-credit vouchers, and the change process associated with equity-minded
reform efforts – reforms aimed at benefiting those who hold less powerful school
and community positions. Prof. Welner has received the Early Career Award in 2006
and Palmer O. Johnson Award (best article in 2004) from the American Educational
Research Association, and has been made a Fellow of that Association. He has also
received the Rockefeller Foundation’s Bellagio Residency and the Post-Doctoral
Fellowship awarded by the National Academy of Education and the Spencer
Foundation.
Lorenzo Gómez Morin Fuentes is Professor at the Latin American Superior
School of Social Sciences (FLACSO) in Mexico, an academic institution founded
by UNESCO, where he leads the team that has been providing technical assistance
to the Ministry of Education of Mexico to develop dropout prevention programs and
teacher training in upper secondary education. He has occupied the position of
Undersecretary of Basic Education in the Federal Government (2001–2006) and
State Secretary of Education and Social Welfare in the state government of Baja
California, Mexico (1997–2001). Before that he worked as a professor and researcher
at the Autonomous University of Baja California for 15 years. In private sector, he
was the first Executive Director of the most influential think tank in education in
Mexico called Mexicanos Primero (Mexicans First), an NGO lobbing for quality
improvement of education in México, and currently he is Executive President and
of the Fundacion Mexicana para el Fomento de la Lectura (Mexican Foundation to
Foster Reading) responsible of the National Reading Survey in Mexico.
Luisa Ribolzi is vice president of ANVUR, Agency for the Assessment of University
and Research Institutions. She has been professor of sociology of education in the
university of Bari and then in the University of Genoa where she was also teaching
sociology of family and has been vice-dean of the Faculty of Education, and chair
of the scientific committee of the Ph.D. for the evaluation of educational systems
and processes (DOVE). Her research activities are in many sectors of sociology of
education: institutional aspects of education and educational policies, i.e. schooling
models and public/private education, assessment of schools, teacher as a profession,
relationships between education and labour market, both in a national and interna-
tional setting. She has published four books, co-authored three books and more than
150 papers in scientific reviews or contribution in books, and a great number of
short articles in magazines and newspapers. She has been in the Governing Board
of AIS (Italian Association of Sociology) and has thrice been coordinator of the
Sociology of Education Working Group. She took part in a number of committees
for the Ministry of Education since 1995 and has been in the Governing Board of
Indire (National Institute for Educational Research and Innovation) and in the board
of public and private research organizations. From 2006 to 2011, she represented
Italy in the OECD CERI Governing Board.
Luiz Claudio Costa is President of the National Institute for Educational Studies
and Research Anísio Teixeira (INEP). He entered the Federal University as Professor
of the Department of Agricultural Engineering in 1983. From 2000 to 2004, he
worked as Pro-Rector for community matters and from 2008 to 2011 as Rector at
the same university. He worked as leader of the UNO’s specialist team for climatic
changes: drought and extreme temperatures. He was Secretary of Higher Education of
Ministry of Education in Brazil. He has published more than 300 scientific papers.
He holds a first degree in mathematics and a master in agricultural meteorology and

Ph.D. in Agrometeorology from the University of Reading, England.
Maha Taibah was appointed the Vice Governor for Strategic Initiatives at the
Technical and Vocational Training Corporation in Saudi Arabia in June 2013. She is
charged with raising women’s awareness of flexible career options that fit with their
professional aspirations and talents. Concurrently, Maha serves as an advisor to the
Saudi Minister of Labor where she focuses on educating and employing Saudi
youth through driving technology and human capital initiatives that build capacity
and further strategic partnerships with the private sector, government and the global
community at large. In 2005, Maha was selected to establish and serve as the
General Supervisor of the All-Women Business College at Al Yamamah University
in Riyadh. In 2003, Maha earned a master’s degree in educational leadership from
DePaul University and a bachelor’s degree in early childhood education from King
Saud University. In 2011, she completed the Program for Leadership Development
at Harvard Business School and is actively building a global network for an
expanded perspective. Maha is currently part of the Official Saudi delegation to the
ILO and G20 amongst other global participations.
Margarita Poggi is the Head of the International Institute for Educational Planning,
IIEP/UNESCO Buenos Aires Office. She has been a university and postgradu-
ate professor at several national universities. She served as National Director of
Information and Educational Quality Assessment at the Ministry of Education of
Argentina and formerly as General Planning Director at the Ministry of Education of
Buenos Aires City Government. She has also been a consultant to national and inter-
national agencies. She has extensive experience in training public officials, supervi-
sors and managers and coordinating educational research teams. She has published
widely on educational innovation, evaluation, managers training and schools.
Marie Duru-Bellat is Sociologist of Education, Professor in Sciences-Po (Institute
of Political Sciences), OSC. A specialist of education, she has published, from her
research, 10 books and about 75 articles in academic reviews. She is associate editor
in several academic reviews. Among other experiences, she has been member of the
Haut Conseil pour l’Evaluation de l’Ecole (High Council for the Evaluation of
School), and has been associated to numerous activities of consulting on educational
issues and reforms. She has been elected as a “Consultant Fellow” of the International
Institute for Educational Planning, UNESCO.
Martin Prew holds a visiting fellowship at Witwatersrand University School of
Education in South Africa and works as an education development specialist based
in South Africa and Uganda. Previously, He was Executive Director of the Centre
for Education Policy Development (CEPD), after spending 6 years in a senior
management post in the South Africa Department of Education with responsibility
for school management and governance. His teaching and lecturing experience
was gained in post-independent Zimbabwe. He holds a doctorate from Exeter
University, UK.
Mel West is head of School of Education at the University of Manchester. His work
has principally been in the fields of school management and school improvement.
In the mid-1980s, he was one of the architects of the influential Improving the
Quality of Education for All (IQEA) programme. This programme, which is still
going strong in several parts of the world, has been used by some hundreds of
schools, and has become one of the most widespread approaches to school develop-
ment. He is also co-directing the Leadership Development Unit, set up by the
Department for Education and Skills (DfES) and the National College for School
Leadership, to support schools and LEAs facing challenging circumstances.
Mounira Jamjoom is a Senior Research Specialist with the Ideation Center, Booz
& Company’s official Middle East think tank. She is leading the Center’s research
efforts on education, women’s studies and evolving social issues that have important
implications for the MENA (Middle East and North Africa) region. Mounira has
published several articles in academic journals and co-authored numerous Booz &
Company and Ideation Center publications. Mounira has a Ph.D. in education from
Oxford University and a master’s degree from Columbia University. She has written
extensively on education in Saudi Arabia and on women’s role in the education
system, among other topics.
Nikolay D. Nikandrov graduated from Leningrad University (USSR) in 1959 and
received his doctorate in education there in 1973. Since 1997, he is president of the
Russian academy of education – a body of about 30 research institutes which is to
advise the authorities on matters of educational development. His main interests
are in the fields of comparative education, methodology of educational research
and methods of teaching and learning. He is author of over 300 publications on these
subjects, among them several books such as Programmed Learning and the Ideas of
Cybernetics, 1970; Pedagogics of Higher Education, 1974; Higher Education
Abroad, 1978; Creativity in Teaching, 1990; Values Education: The Case of Russia,
1996; Russia: Values in the Society at the Threshold of the Twenty-First Century, 1997;
Russia: Socialization and Education at the Turn of the Millennia, 2000; General
Foundations of Education, 2006; Professional Activity: An Introduction, 2011. He is
also active as a professor of education at the Moscow Pedagogical University.
Robyn Read is a doctoral student in education leadership and policy at the Ontario
Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto. She has worked and lived
in several countries as well as with Canadian NGOs. Currently she is focusing her
doctoral work on the role of research in financing of education in developing
countries, including the role of the World Bank.
Taewan Kim is currently a Professor of the Keimyung University. Dr. Kim was the
President of the Korean Educational Development Institute (KEDI) from 2009 to
2012. Dr. Kim is a member of the UNESCO Educational Committee as well as the
Chief Editor of KEDI Journal of Educational Policy (KJEP). Dr. Kim’s research is
mainly focused on educational administration and higher education. His most
recent work includes leading the Policy Advisory Committee for School Autonomy
and chairing the Committee on University Enhancement. He serves as a member of
the Special Committee for Teacher Policy and the Self-Evaluation Committee at
the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. Dr. Kim is a member of the
Agenda Forum Committee for the Equality of Sexes at the Korean Women’s
Development Institute. Dr. Kim attained his bachelor’s and master’s degree in
education at Seoul National University and a second master’s degree and a doctoral
degree from the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor) in sociology of education and
in educational policy.
Tamotsu Tokunaga served as the Director-General of the National Institute for
Educational Policy Research for 2 years from July 2010. Before that, he was an
administrator serving as Director responsible for systems of regional educa-
tional administration, regional educational finance, teachers and school manage-
ment in primary and secondary-level education, Director of Budget and Accounts
Division of the Minister’s Secretariat responsible for the organization of the
overall education budget, Deputy Director-General and Director-General in
charge of the university system, improving and managing of national universities
and academic research.
Zhenguo Yuan is former President of National Institute of Education Sciences
(NIES), a research arm of the Ministry of Education. Before joining the NIES, he
was Professor of Education and Dean of Faculty of Education at East Normal
University up to 2000. He served as Deputy Director-General of Department for
Teacher Education of Ministry of Education (2000–2004) and Deputy Director-
General of Department for Social Sciences (2004–2007). As an education policy
scientist, his research examines the education policy, philosophy of education,
teacher education and research methodology, etc. He authored several ground-
breaking and award-winning books in the field of education policy, such as
China Education Policy Review, Education Policy Science, Teacher Education
Series, New Perspectives of Education, etc. He also published numerous articles and
reports on various topics relating to education policy and reform. Prof. Yuan holds
a Bachelor of Literature from Yangzhou Teachers College and a Master of Education
and a Ph.D. in Education from East China Normal University. He is honorary
professor at Peking University, Zhejiang University and Fudan University.
About the Editor
Yan Wang is Director of the Department for International Exchange of the National
Institute of Education Sciences. She is also a research associate with the Wah
Ching Centre of Research on Education in China, the University of Hong Kong. In
her prior role, she worked as consultant for the World Bank in 2008 and 2010.
From 2002 to 2007, she was Executive Director, Department for International
Exchange & Cooperation, Beijing Academy of Educational Sciences. Since then,
she has designed and implemented a series of qualitative and quantitative research
projects in the fields of basic education, vocational and technical education and
training, lifelong learning, etc. The research outcomes catalyzed subsequent
legislative changes and policy development on national and local levels. She has
also conceptualized, initiated and led the implementation of multiple international
collaborative research projects on a variety of education issues. She holds a Ph.D.
of Education Policy and Administration from the University of Hong Kong, a
Master of Educational Economics and Administration and a first degree in English
Literature. She has authored, co-authored and edited numerous articles, reports
and books on comparative education, education policy and administration in both
English and Chinese.
Email: [email protected]; [email protected]

National Institute of Education Sciences
of China
Established in 1957, the National Institute of Education Sciences (NIES) is a

research arm of the Ministry of Education and a national-level comprehensive
education research institution in China. The predecessor of the NIES, the Education
Research Division of the Central Research Institute was founded in 1941. For over
70 years since its original establishment, NIES has strived to contribute to the
education development in China by advising policymaking process, advancing
theoretical innovation and guiding local practices.
Now the institute employs 260 staff, including 176 researchers and research
associates, engaged in studies on education policy, basic education, curriculum and
pedagogy, teacher development, education inspection and evaluation, physical,
health and arts education, higher education, psychology and special education, etc.
The NIES has eleven researcher’s center. It also has a center for educational news-
papers and periodicals, and a publishing house. The National Planning and Funding
Office for Education Research that plans and administers national level educational
research projects is affiliated with the NIES. The institute has developed partnership for
reform experiments with seven areas located in the north, east, west, south and middle
part of China, with which the NIES provide advisory and informative assistance for
education reform and innovation.


G20 Edu Reform E

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

G20 Edu Reform E

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

G20 Edu Reform E

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Yan Wang Editor

Education Policy Reform

ISBN 978-3-642-38930-6 ISBN 978-3-642-38931-3 (eBook)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2013958464

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Printed on acid-free paper

Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com)

Education is a cornerstone that has a decisive impact on the destiny of individuals;

as an authoritative analysis of key issues on the subject as there were respondents

Former President, National Institute of Education Sciences of China Zhenguo Yuan

Deputy Director for Education and Skills Andreas Schleicher

Beijing, China Yan Wang

Part I Education Reform in Social and Political Changes

Russia: Evolutional Changes Against Revolutionary Upheavals................ 3

Part II Pushing Forward Governance Reform

Italy: From State Monopoly to Rising of a System of Schools .................... 105

Part III Changing Policy Paradigms

Australia: National Change in a Loosely Coupled Federal System............ 191

Part IV Changes in the Education System

Germany: Steps to More Responsibility and Efficiency

About the Contributors .................................................................................. 377

About the Editor ............................................................................................. 385

National Institute of Education Sciences of China....................................... 387

Keywords Challenges • Educational reform • Evolutionary change • Innovation •

N.D. Nikandrov (*)

Y. Wang (ed.), Education Policy Reform Trends in G20 Members, 3

1 Pro and Contra

2 Ideology and Education

category in Great Britain at the beginning of the twenty-first century (Reynolds

3 Access and Quality

of amendments), the national educational standard is a set of three provisions

4 Management and Finance

5 Socialization and Upbringing

6 Other Hopes for the Future

Constitution stipulates that “basic professional education” is free of charge but

master degrees as levels of higher education working out, the hundreds of

Батчиков С., Кара-Мурза С. Хаос реформ, культурная травма и патология сознания //

Никандров Н.Д. Идеология и идеологическое воспитание: есть ли они, нужны ли они

Abstract The chapter focuses on important evolutions of educational issues nested

Keywords Educational policy • Expansion of coverage • Inclusion of lagging

Y. Wang (ed.), Education Policy Reform Trends in G20 Members, 19

However, educational issues are nested in a broader ideological and economic

1 The Transformation of the Ideological Context:

1.1 Expand and Unify to Achieve Democratization

upper-secondary school, about 40 % of socially privileged children follow the

1.2 A Shifting Stress to Equity

2 Some Recent Policies and Some Hints as to Their Impact

2.1 An Individualistic Conception of Education

2.2 More Allowance for Individual Choices Generates

Whenever school choice is promoted (in France as in comparable European countries),

Consequently, choice and social sorting between schools raise a problem of

2.3 Decentralization or “Marketization” of Education?

2.4 The Increasing Obsession with Benchmarking

In recent decades, OECD has attempted to disseminate a way of defining education

Bourdieu, P. (1978). Classement, déclassement, reclassement. Actes de la recherche en sciences

Jandhyala B.G. Tilak

Keywords Cost sharing • Free and compulsory education • Funding • India

J.B.G. Tilak (*)

Y. Wang (ed.), Education Policy Reform Trends in G20 Members, 33