Anglicky hovoriace krajiny English-speaking countries 2.ročník SŠ Autor: ZSŠDaN Topoľčany ŠCI: 0921.
Sustainable educational policy for multicultural societies Comparative study of the Czech Rep. and...
-
Upload
hugh-randall-edwards -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
1
Transcript of Sustainable educational policy for multicultural societies Comparative study of the Czech Rep. and...
Sustainable educational policy for multicultural societies
Comparative study of the Czech Rep. and Scotland
http://instituty.fsv.cuni.cz/~laubeova/anglicky/research/PHD.htm
Laura Laubeová
Thesis structure• Theories & concepts (minority, race, racism,
multiculturalism, politics of recognition, equity, cost benefit analysis)
• Czech Republic from multicultural perspective + education
• Scottish race equality and inclusive education
• Comparative framework 3+1 models:
– Assimilation, Multiculturalism, Equity/Rights, Exclusion
• Teacher education compared
• Summary of equality policies, bodies, acts + edu
• Policy recommendations and priorities
Key research questions (RQ)
1. What theories could provide background for “race equality*“ education?
2. How is “multicultural“ education defined?– Relevance for Roma education– Using comparison with Scotland
3. What are the relevant policies, bodies, instruments?
4. What is the role of teacher education?
5. Are Romani pupils included or segregated?
* multicultural/ inclusive /intercultural/ equitable
Theories and key concepts (RQ No 1)
Nancy Fraser• Social redistribution• Cultural recognition• Political participationNone can be reducedc.f.Marshal´s concept of human rights (civil, political,
social)Birch´s levels of integration (Barša, Zhřívalová)
Cultural recognition
• Compromise between liberals (Kymlicka) and communitarians (Taylor)
• Diferentiated citizenship (Fraser, Kymlicka)• Equality as diferentiated treatment (Parekh)• Equity- several complementing aspects• Issues of racism and denial
Efficiency and equity
Education may be the main (sometimes the only) vehicle to reduce inequalities and exclusion, but on the other hand it may often perpetuate it.
European Expert Network on Economics of Education (after the 2006 Spring European Council)
Human and social capital theoriesMonetary + Non-monetary (non-market) effects• effects for the INDIVIDUAL • effects for the ECONOMY and SOCIETY
Equity: equitable systems ensure that the outcomes of education and training are independent of socio-economic background and other factors, and that treatment reflects individuals’ specific learning needs
Efficiency: systems are efficient if the inputs produce the maximum outputs
The costs of inequities/ Cost-benefit analysis
In the US
Symposium at Columbia University
Costs of a drop out : € 350 000
In the EU
UK figures: Costs of a drop out in terms of productivity
REF: Study on the benefits of investing in Roma Education in Hungary, OECD Review Hungary
Equity and efficiency are complementary, no trade-off relationship
Age
Rate of
return
Pre-school Primary & Higher Adult education Secondary education education
Children from low socio-economic
background
Children from high socio-economic background
Efficiency and equity in lifelong learning strategies Returns to a Euro spent at different levels of education
European Expert Network on Economics of Education (EENEE), 2006:11
Hungary
Expected Long-term Budgetary benefits to Roma Education in Hungary. REF, Sept 2006
International evidence (Heckman, 2006, Perry Preschool Program US)
Net budgetary benefits:Investment that enables a young Roma to
complete secondary school (benchmark: starting at the age 4)
Educational attainments – 5 levels (max 7 grades, completed basic edu, vocational, secondary w. maturity, college)
Hungary Report -Cont.Accounts throught which a person contributes to or
receives from the central budget 1. personal income tax, 2. social security contributions, 3. unemployment insurance receipt, 4. means tested welfare benefits, 5. public employment projects participation, 6. VAT and excise tax paind after consumption,7. incarceration costs if sentenced + Account of government expenditures due to
extra secondary schooling and college
OECD Definition of Equity
• Fairness--personal and social circumstances are not an obstacle to educational success
• Inclusion--minimum standard of education for all
• Small variation in achievement between all schools no matter where they are located
• Small variation within schools no matter the social background of the students
• High achievement for all young peopleFair and Inclusive Education: The OECD Manual Draft 3/23/07
Index of Separation Between Schools
Index of separation between schools (2003)
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
Finlan
d
Norway
Sweden
New Z
ealan
d
Icelan
d
Canad
a
United
King
dom
1
Switzer
land
Denm
ark
Russia
n Fed
erat
ion
Irelan
d
United
Sta
tes
Nethe
rland
s
Poland
Luxe
mbo
urg
Portu
gal
Spain
Austra
lia
Japa
n
Greec
eIta
ly
Korea
Czech
Rep
ublic
Germ
any
Belgium
Austri
a
Slovak
Rep
ublic
Mex
ico
Turk
ey
Hunga
ry
Index of separation between schools (2003)
Students with lowest SES likely to be lowest math performers
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
Icelan
d
Turk
ey
Canad
a
Japa
n
Greec
e
Finlan
d
Norway
Sweden
Spain
Portu
gal
Italy
Austri
a
Poland
Austra
lia
Luxe
mbo
urg
Korea
New Z
ealan
d
Irelan
d
Nethe
rland
s
United
Sta
tes
Switzer
land
Mex
ico
Denm
ark
Czech
Rep
ublic
Franc
e
Germ
any
Hunga
ry
Slovak
Rep
ublic
Belgium
Od
ds
Ra
tio
Likelihood of students with the lowest SES to be lowest maths performers when compared to the likelihood of students with high SES
Defining multicultural education MCE
Comparison of 3 modelsScotland: race equality education, inclusive
education, additional learning support, based on the rights/equity model, i.e to the right to be educated to the fullest potential
Czech R: MCE reduced to immigrants; inclusive education reduced to the disability strand; Romani pupils reduced to social disadvantage
Differing models
From assimilationist policies to inclusiveness:
• Assimilationist model• Assimilation, Social Integration
• Curriculum (Multiculturalism) model • Pluralism, recognition
• Equity/Rights Model• Anti discriminatory; but:
• Exclusion/Segregation
Assimilationist model
DIFFERENCE DEFICIT
COMPENSATORY PROGRAMMESDoes the individual fit
into the System or ‘Institution’?
ASSIMILATIONASSIMILATION
Curriculum (Multiculturalism) model Cultural Effects
CULTURES
LIFESTYLES ATTITUDES
TOLERANCE AND HARMONY Does the organisation of this ‘institution’
recognise Diversity ?
PLURALISTPLURALIST
Equity/Rights Model
Social and Political Effects
EQUITY PARTICIPATION
LIFE CHANCESAre people enabled in this ‘institution’?
Do the structures allow for
achievement, growth and opportunities?
ANTIDISCRIMINATORYANTIDISCRIMINATORY
Social exclusion model Social handicap
POVERTY
DIFFERENCE DEFICIT
DENIAL OF THE PROBLEM Can the group be made invisible? Can the damage
incurred by the group be limited?
SEGREGATIONSEGREGATION
Policies, instruments (RQ No 3 & 4)
• Laws (Antidiscrimination Bill CR, Race relations Acts, Equality Act 2006; international law)
• Enforcement mechanisms (race equality schemes)
• Policy documents• Educational Law• Documents relevant for teacher education
Summary in chapter 9
Teacher Education as compared between CR and Scotland
• Teacher competencies
• Standards in ITE (initial teacher education) and CPD (continuing professional development)
• Career system
• Chartered teacher status
Key findings re RQ No 5
School Act 2004 abolished the Zvlastni schools (remedial schools for mild mental disabilities) that were replaced by Basic practical schools.
Pre- Reform (2004-2005): 64% of pupils at all special schools were at „zvlastni“ schools
Post reform (2005-2006) : 73% of pupils at all special schools were at basic practical schools
i.e. 9% increaseSource: UIV Výkonové ukazatele (on-line)
Pupils at ordinary basic schools, in special schools and in remedial schools (mild mental disability- ADHD)
2003/2004 2004/2005 2005/2006**
BASIC education schools pupils schools pupils schools pupils
Total basic schools C1.1. 4 838 998 731 4 765 958 860 4 474 916 575
Ordinary schools C2.1. 3 870 956 324 3 785 917 738 3 741 881 676
in per cent* 80,0 95,8 79,4 95,7 83,6 96,2
Special schools C3.1 898 41 039 910 39 798 670 33 806
in per cent* 18,6 4,1 19,1 4,2 15,0 3,7Out of which zvlastni schools C3.3 or practical schools C3.7
411 26 475 398 25 581 378 24 761
in percent* 8,5 2,7 8,4 2,7 8,4 2,7
in percent out of C3.1 45,8 64,5 43,7 64,3 56,4 73,2*out of the total number of basic schools (C1.1)** in 20052006 a change occurred as a result of the School Act 2004 that renamed zvlastni skoly C3.3. to basic practical schools C3.7.
Eurydice report
„Former zvláštní schools… where children from underprivileged socio-economic backgrounds had been often educated can be still established as a separate basic school or as a type of basic school - basic practical school, which provides education according to an annex to the educational programme for basic education… Nevertheless, measures have been taken to reduce number of pupils placed in such schools…
(Eurydice, 2007:236, chapter 10.6.4.)
CERD concluding observations March 2007
„The Committee is deeply concerned by consistent information according to which the Roma suffer from racial segregation on the State party’s territory in the field of education, a situation that the State party does not seem to fully acknowledge.“
Denial of continuing racial segregation (cf. CERD 1998 on de-facto segregation, FCNM, ERRC, DH vs CR)
„The State party should, within one year, provide information on the way it has followed up on the Committee’s recommendations„Instead of 5 years (regular report)
(CERD, 2007)
Framework Education Programmes for Basic Education FEP BE
Annex to FEPBE is FEP BE LMD* (RVP ZV-LMP, 2005)
The curriculum in basic practical schools
for children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), mild mental disabilities.
Framework timetable - higher allocation of hours for manual work rather than language and science.
the first stage: 15 hours of manual work,
the second stage: 20 hours
instead of 5 hours and 4 hours respectively, for pupils in “ordinary” basic school.
(Ramcový, 2005a,b)• LMD - light mental disfunction, i.e. mild mental disability, ADHD (LMP lehke mozkove poskozeni)
FEP BE
LMP*FEP BE LMP*
educational areas educational fields
1st stage 2nd stage
years 1 - 5 years 6 - 9and corresponding years of
lower secondary school
minimum number of hours
Language and language communication
Czech language and literature
38 33* 16 19*
Foreign language 9 0* 12 4*
People and the world of work5 15* 4 20*
Total compulsory number of hours118 118* 122 122*
* LMP - mild mental disability (Annex to the Framework educational programme for basic education, Rámcový, 2005b)
Framework timetable for Framework Edu. Prog. Basic Edu (FEP BE)
Recommendations – key principles
• Mainstreaming (e.g. mainstream the Decade of Roma inclusion into the Lisbon Agenda; or mainstream issues of ethnicity, gender, disability into all educational policies and processes)
• Inclusion (e.g. inclusion Roma at all levels of policy making and policy implementation; inclusion of all Romani children in ordinary schools)
• Equity and efficiency (with focus on different treatment to reach the same targets, OECD Jobs for the Future, cost benefit anlaysis REF)
• Compliance with international law (e.g. discrimination; right of child to be educated to their fullest potential)
• Multilevel governance principle applied to education (networking of teacher trainees, teachers, bureaucrats, NGOs on local, European and global levels)
Cont.
• OMC applied to education and used for setting indicators and benchmarks also on local level
• Education has gone beyond the realm of national interest as it has to be competitive in global markets (Lisbon agenda, Decade, UNDP, WB). Cultural traditions vs social change
• Focus on concrete implementation schemes (general duty complemented by specific duties)
• Focus on organisational (school) level • Replace the special needs concept with mainstreaming of additional
learning support that is available to all students cf inclusion• Discourse analysis (neo liberal newspeak)
Priorities
Policy makers should• acknowledge that there is a problem in Roma education
(discourse analysis, linguisitic/ translation isuues). • redefine understanding of racism, racial discrimination
and segregation so that these are in agreement with international academic discourse and with international law (CERD, 2007)
• redefine Roma children as a target group of education policy recipients so that it is not reduced to social or health disadvantage only.
Cont.
• Discontinue use of the catch-all category “mild degree of mental disability”
• Provide high quality education for Roma children • Create robust programmes with numerical goals and
appropriate supports to increase the number of Roma achieving maturita
(OECD, 2006:6)• To use findings of OECD thematic review of equity in
education in Hungary (2006) and the REF budgetary benefit report
REF Summary Education reform policies with risk for Roma
• Competition among schools to achieve quality - and free parental choice of schools:
• Roma children most often in low quality segregated schools
• Decentralization of education:• Local decision making bears biases, funding of education at risk in low income municipalities
• Early tracking to allow full development of talented children:• Most often becomes a social exclusion policy
• External school leaving examinations• Without free of charge additional tuition and support Roma can get increasingly excluded
• Curriculum reform for school based flexibility• Can result in lower standards of education in schools with Roma children
Call for vigilance in respect of impact on education of Roma Call for compensatory policies
REF Summary- cont. Cross-sectorial policies in background
A) Special focus: Antidiscrimination legislation
Lack shows:• Lack of political consensus• Lack of framework for antidiscrimination measures in education• Lack of enforcing mechanisms• Lack of background for advocacy
B) Political representationC) Connections to health, social care, employment, civil registration
Education development needs to rely on development in other areas as well. Especially critical: antidiscrimination legislation
REF Summary- conclusions
• Abundance of already structured experiences (roundtables)• General inclusion policies set as framework everywhere (except antidiscrimination legislation)
• Commitment without system or system without commitment
• Needed:– Development of targeted “middle range” policies (e.g. transfer from special to regular school)– Development of implementation policies (e.g. compulsory preschool for each child)– Much stronger commitment to scaling up useful improvements (e.g. scale up desegregation)– Fine-tuning of policies based on monitoring results (e.g. set appropriate funding formula)– Setting up sustainable implementing mechanisms (e.g. mentoring as part of teacher workload)
– Policy research, evaluation of pilots – Much closer connection of “Roma policies” to “education policies” – Much clearer focus on equity in designing new education reform policies – Much more, and more meaningful, and targeted exchange of experiences in order to build on results
OECD: Equity requires some central regulation
• Decentralization is a strong tendency in the Decade Countries
• Decentralization can lead to unregulated choice of schools and increased selection
• Selection and choice reinforce one another**• THE RESULT= Greater inequities
**Definitions: families choose, schools selectFair and Inclusive Education: The OECD Manual Draft 3/23/07
Research and practice show:
Unregulated choice (often premised on “market driven” competition) results in:
• Poor quality education, weaker results• Lack of benefit from peer group effects• Stigmatizing some students and schools• Unreliable sorting (assessing children’s ability at a
young age) OECD,2007