23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Paper
Caring for the ECEC Market? Perspectives from Swedish Municipalities and Private Preschool Providers
Joakim Lindgren, Malin Benerdal, Sara Carlbaum, Linda Rönnberg
Umeå university, Sweden
Presenting Author: Lindgren, Joakim;
Carlbaum, Sara
In recent decades, New Public Management and quasi-markets have become a central policy idea in the provision of social services. Sweden is a pioneer having one of the most unregulated welfare sectors and the most extensive tax-funded private production of welfare services in Europe (Blix & Jordahl, 2021). Despite their increasing political popularity, quasi-markets are both sensitive and fragile – they need more attention and care than regular markets, and, as a result, require regulation, organisation, and surveillance in various ways (Dickinson et al., 2021). Market organisation, market stewardship or market shaping activities broadly refers to “the actions and strategies employed by government and non-government actors to ensure that the quasi-market will meet the goals of the policy that it supports” (Malbon & Carey, 2021: 20). Thus, whether quasi-markets flourish, function or succeed depend on empirical conditions (Le Grand, 2011).
Following an “evaluative approach” (Cutler & Waine, 1997) research often use criteria such as quality, efficiency, choice, responsiveness, and equity to resolve the complex issue of policy effects, i.e. by deploying criteria used by policy makers themselves. In contrast, in this paper we seek to explore quasi-markets by acknowledging how they may define and change social realities, i. e. with a focus on “constitutive effects” (Dahler-Larsen, 2012).
Research has studied quasi-market arrangements focusing on the state or high-level decision-making processes. However, as argued by Mabon and Carey (2021: 18), “local actors, in particular street level bureaucrats, are a key part of the complex work of managing quasi-markets”. This is the case in Sweden, as well as in many other parts of Europe, and this paper attempts to contribute to a nuanced understanding of how this is done at the local level – by empirically exploring different forms of municipal organisation of local quasi- markets with a focus on the Swedish preschool sector.
The Swedish parliament decided on national quasi-market competition or free establishment for independent (for-profit- and non-profit) preschools in 2006. The municipalities, responsible for these markets, are governed by local elected political councils with far-reaching discretion to decide how municipal tax funds are spent and to govern welfare services, including preschools. This overall situation warrants that market organisation comprise ideological conflicts – especially so in municipalities with a left-wing political majority imbued with market scepticism that may manifest itself in practices and social relations. However, in a decentralised system, quasi markets can be articulated differently beyond ideological disagreements, meaning that the Swedish preschool system is in fact comprised of multiple interconnected local quasi-markets. For example, quasi-markets may function differently depending on administrative cultures, institutional preconditions, and characteristics of the public managers and employees (Lapuente & Van de Walle, 2020).
In this paper we use the idea of market stewardship as an analytical tool to explore quasi- market organisation. Market stewardship relies on work carried out on the street- level and it is based on and involves both formal rules and local informal cultural practices (Malbon & Carey, 2021). The latter involves the qualitatively different ways in which municipalities engage with private actors locally, i.e., how approval, inspection, support, dialogue, and service – what we label “market care” – is enacted by street-level bureaucrats (Lipsky, 1980).
This paper aims to explore how municipalities facilitate, support and police the local preschool quasi-market and how such practices and the associated social relations between municipal and private actors evolve and result in different local modes of market organisation. To reach this aim, we ask: How do municipal administrative officers, representatives from independent preschool providers and membership organisations describe different modes of market organisation? What are the institutional underpinnings and the constitutive effects of different modes of market organisation?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis paper is part of an ongoing research project entitled The Preschool as a Market (Carlbaum et al, 2020). The project includes four interrelated sub studies, and in this paper, we combine data from two studies aiming to A) analyse municipalities as facilitators of and key actors in local preschool markets and, B) analyse who the private independent preschool providers are and their rationales. For sub study A) we selected 30 municipalities characterized as having either a large private pre-primary sector (N=10), medium-sized (N=10) or few private preschool services (N=10). In this selection, we also strived for geographical variation and each of the three groups include municipalities located in different geographical areas of Sweden, with different contextual and demographical characteristics, etc. For sub study B) we selected 15 private pre-school organisations – five large-, five medium- and five small sized. We strived to capture a wide range of different private preschool providers, including large chains with up to about a hundred individual pre-schools, medium sized with more than two preschools and small organisations with only one pre-school. Different selection criteria were then used to capture variations in terms of for instance pedagogical profiles and different organisational forms (such as economic associations, parental or staff run cooperations and limited companies) as well as geographical location.
Both studies are based on documents and interviews. The documents include a wide range of official and internal material from municipalities and private pre-school operators harvested through either public repositories and registers and/or websites. We interviewed municipal officers responsible for the pre-school sector and in some cases, staff working specifically with administrative tasks (N: 32). We interviewed representatives from private independent preschool providers, and, in some cases, staff working in closer contact with municipalities (N: 17). In addition, we interviewed representatives from organised interests (membership organisations and business associations) that support municipalities and private pre-school providers (N: 6). The documents and interviews have been analysed qualitatively via thematic content analysis involving several steps and including continuous discussions and interpretation between the project members on emerging categories and second order themes.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe preliminary analysis shows that quasi-market organisation may take different forms both when it comes to the enactment of statutory administrative tasks and market caring activities. Local administrative cultures and capacities influence the ways in which municipalities adopt NPM-reform. Hybrid forms of local governing result in forms of post-NPM administration where specialization, fragmentation and marketization are combined with coordination, centralization and collaborative capacity (Lapuente & Van de Walle, 2020). Representatives from the private sector and private preschool providers claim that quasi-market organisation must provide legally fair and predictable conditions. Hence, municipalities that offer a well organised structure for private actors and treat private and municipal pre-school equally are described as role models. Private actors also emphasise the instilment of values like trust and recognition. Such values are regarded important for co-operation and development to function productively. The paper thus demonstrate how market organisation is manifested in social relations where municipal officers may or may not enact “market care”.
A tentative conclusion is that whether municipalities care for and care about the local quasi market have important implications. Municipalities with resources, knowledge and a market friendly culture appear to be better equipped to manage quasi-markets. Other municipalities, who lack such resources and knowledge – or for different reasons seek to exercise local self-government and resist marketisation – may enact a less caring market stewardship. Overall, these observations are linked to on-going discussions on “cultures of care” within the institutions, architectures and systems of governance (Greenhough, Davies & Bowlby 2023).
We finish the paper by discussing what the insights from the Swedish case can contribute to in a wider European perspective, where different forms of quasi-market organisation also are politically cherished organisational options in national policy frameworks that are to be enacted, managed and “cared for” at local levels in various ways.
ReferencesBlix, M., & Jordahl, H. (2021). Privatizing Welfare Services : Lessons from the Swedish Experiment. Oxford: Oxford academic press
Carlbaum, S., Benerdal, M., Lindgren, J. & Rönnberg, L. (2020). Preschool as a market. Application to the Swedish Research Council, grant no 2020-03157.
Greenhough, B., Davies, G., & Bowlby, S. (2023) Why ‘cultures of care’?, Social & Cultural Geography, 24:1, 1-10, DOI: 10.1080/14649365.2022.2105938
Cutler, T., & Waine, B. (1997). The politics of quasi-markets: How quasi-markets have been analysed and how they might be analysed. Critical Social Policy, 17(51), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/026101839701705101
Dahler-Larsen, P. (2012). Constitutive effects as a social accomplishment: A qualitative study of the political in testing. Education Inquiry, 3(2), 171–186. https://doi.org/10.3402/edui.v3i2.22026
Dickinson, H., Carey, G., Malbon, E., Gilchrist, D., Chand, S., Kavanagh, A., & Alexander, D. (2021). Should We Change the Way We Think About Market Performance When It Comes to Quasi-Markets? A New Framework for Evaluating Public Service Markets. Public Administration Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13392
Lapuente, V., & Van de Walle, S. (2020). The effects of new public management on the quality of public services. Governance, 33(3), 461–475. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12502
Le Grand, J. (2011). Quasi-Market versus State Provision of Public Services : Some Ethical Considerations. Public Reason, 3(2), 80–89.
Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy : dilemmas of the individual in public services. Russell Sage Foundation.
Malbon, E., & Carey, G. (2021). Market stewardship of quasi-markets by street level bureaucrats: The role of local area coordinators in the Australian personalisation system. Social Policy and Administration, 55(1), 18–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12607
23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Paper
Managerialist Dialogue in Early Childhood Education and Care Policy-making in Norway.
Anne Homme1,3, Kari Ludvigsen2
1University of Bergen, Norway; 2Western Norway University College, Norway; 3NORCE Norwegian Research Centre
Presenting Author: Homme, Anne;
Ludvigsen, Kari
This paper regards the Norwegian national early childhood education and care (ECEC) reform policies of the last decade, in particular the revision of the framework plan for early childhood (EC) centers from 2017.
ECEC is an integrated part of the Norwegian education system. All children between age one and five have a right to the ECEC services, and the attendance rate at age five is 97% (Størksen et al., 2021). Norway is defined as a social democratic welfare state regime characterized by a comprehensive state, strong citizen rights, universal welfare arrangements (Esping-Andersen 1990), and a high trust society (Listhaug & Aardal, 2011). In line with this regime, the education system has promoted social inclusion by securing equal access to education for all, comprehensive public schools and an emphasis on democratic values, community, and equality (Aasen 2003; Arnesen & Lundahl 2006).
A revision of the Norwegian 2006 ECEC Framework Plan was initiated in 2015, with a government white paper labelled Time for play and learning. The then conservative government built its suggestions upon OECD reports that enhanced learning ambitions. The government paper evoked a strong mobilization, by some labelled “the kindergarten riot”, of interest groups critizizing the increased weight upon testing and learning and defending the role of play in the ECECs. The majority of the Norwegian parliament supported this critique revised framework plan was not launched until 2017, by the same government.
The new plan can be regarded a compromise between different ambitions and values related to the role of ECEC and stress the crucial role of inclusion and diversity on the one hand and play and learning on the other. The framework plan is part of a series of reforms aimed at growth, enhanced quality of the ECEC sector, as well as social cohesion.
Our research finds that the 2017 Framework Plan has gained strong support from EC center staff as well as public and private owners and authorities (Ludvigsen & Homme, 2020). Other research also find that the framework plan is an important tool for staff and referred to in their daily work (Eide et al., 2020). Thus, our research question concerns how the framework plan gained its high legitimacy in the ECEC sector by scrutinizing features of the policy process leading to the 2017 revision.
The paper is part of a five-year evaluation of the implementation of the 2017 framework plan, which is initiated and funded by the Norwegian Directorate for Education. The evaluation is a comprehensive project, aiming to study how actors on all level understands and work to implement the Framework Plan over a period of five years.
The paper draws on literature on characteristics and modes of democratic policymaking. Vukasovic and colleagues (Vukasovic et al., 2021) highlight four modes of democratic policymaking in governing reforms in higher education, which we apply in our study of early education policymaking: Pluralist, Corporatist, State centered, and Managerial democratic policymaking.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedBuilding on the five-year evaluation, we here draw upon material on the policy process and design, and regard the role of preparatory elements in the policy design of the Norwegian ECEC 2017 Framework Plan
The main empirical basis for our analysis consists of relevant policy documents, such as white papers, consultation papers, and government consultations and 12 semi-structured interviews with 21 key actors (from the ministry of education, Directorate for education and training, and from two (of 11) County Governors, professional associations, the National Parent Association, The Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities (KS), the National Association for Privately Owned Kindergartens (PBL), and the Sami Parliament, and experts).
The themes covered in the interviews were the policy process, participants, reform objectives, policy tools and implementation process. All participants gave consent and were given opportunity to leave the study any time. Data is stored in a server with strictly limited access. Both authors took part in the interviewing. The interviews were done in person or via Teams or Zoom. Notes were taken, all interviews recorded and transcribed in full text. The interview data were coded and analyzed as part of a convergent mixed methods design (Creswell 2015) and the main method of analysis was thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006). Both authors read and reread the documents and transcripts and coded the data material separately and collectively (Eggebø, 2020)
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe policy formation process that resulted in a revised framework plan for Norwegian ECEC was characterized by a combination of several modes of policymaking. Through negotiation, consultancy, dialogue, and strategic positioning (Vukasovic et al., 2021), the final document was formed as a compromise. Important interest groups have regarded the plan a continuation and clarification. The process can be regarded as a form of path dependency (Christensen & Laegreid 2001, 2007; Pierson, 2000), in the sense that the revised plan underlines core values of the sector. It also manifest a form of incremental change by incorporating enhanced learning ambitions. The use of dialogue-based policy making enables both partial change and legitimacy. In the revision process, the corporatist model was modified through including new interest groups in line with the managerial model; the sami parliament and the association of private kindergarten owners. Such participation is first and foremost a tool for building legitimazy (Vukasovic et al.,2021). The consultation process was vital to build legitimazy and support amongst a broad range of stakeholders and this involvement persisted throuhgout the implementation process. Moreover, the modified model was also vital for policy formation in the sense that the core stakeholders saw their viewpoints acknowledged in the process. The revised plan secured a continuation of sector values related to the child as a being and play as a core element, but it also secured weight on learning, teaching methods, and documentation.
Even though the ambition was to make the plan more coherent, we find inherent tensions regarding its values and aims. The plan has double status as both a regulatory tool and a curriculum as it includes traditional values concerning childcare as well as educational ambitions. Moreover, it aims to enhance both service quality and equality, and relies on professional autonomy and adaptation to local needs.
ReferencesAasen, P. (2003). What Happened to the Social-Democratic Progressivism in Scandinavia? Restructuring Education in Sweden and Norway in the 1990s. In Apple, M.W. (ed.) The State and the Politics of Knowledge, 109–148. London: Routledge Falmer
Arnesen, A.-L., & Lundahl, L. (2006). Still Social and Democratic? Inclusive Education Policies in the Nordic Welfare States. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 50 (3): 285–300.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2001). New Public Management: The effects of contractualism and devolution on political control. Public Management Review, 3(1), 73-94.
Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2007). Regulatory agencies—The challenges of balancing agency autonomy and political control. Governance, 20(3), 499-520.Creswell, J. W. 2015. A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Eggebø, H. (2020). Collective qualitative analysis. Norwegian Journal of Sociology, 4(2), 106-122.
Eide; H.M.K., Danielsen, H., Sataøen, S.O. & Olsen, T.A. (2020). Barnehagestudien. In Homme, A., Danielsen, H., Ludvigsen, K. (eds.). Implementeringen av rammeplan for barnehagen. Rapport nr 37/2020, NORCE Samfunn.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press
Ludvigsen, K. & Homme, A. (2020). Utformingen av rammeplanens mål og virkemidler. In Homme, A., Danielsen, H., Ludvigsen, K. (eds.). Implementeringen av rammeplan for barnehagen. Rapport nr 37/2020, NORCE Samfunn.
Listhaug, O. & Aardal, B. (2011). Politisk tillit – et mål på demokratiets helsetilstand? In Aardal, B. (ed.), Det politiske landskap. En studie av stortingsvalget 2009, (pp. 291–304), Cappelen Damm AS, Oslo.
Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American political science review, 94(2), 251-267.
Størksen, I., Ertesvåg, S. K., & Rege, M. (2021). Implementing implementation science in a randomized controlled trial in Norwegian early childhood education and care. International journal of educational research, 108, 101782.
Vukasovic, M., Frølich, N., Bleiklie, I., Elken, M., Michelsen, S. (2021). Policy processes shaping the Norwegian Structural Reform. NIFU Innsikt;2021-1
23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Paper
The Quest for Preschool Quality: Travelling ideas through a Scandinavian Edu-business
Sara Carlbaum1, Linda Rönnberg1, Ann-Sofie Holm2
1Umeå University, Sweden; 2University of Gothenburg, Sweden
Presenting Author: Carlbaum, Sara;
Rönnberg, Linda
Commercial actor interests in education, producing and delivering a variety of educational goods and services has gained prominence and impacted on how we perceive education. The Global Education Industry (GEI) has been facilitated by policies of economisation, marketisation and privatisation and the drive for innovation, modernisation, and development (Parreira do Amaral et al., 2019; Verger et al., 2016). As GEI actors move across the globe, they carry and promote certain ideas of, for instance, what constitutes, ‘successful pedagogy’ or ‘quality education’ - they have a performative role in what education have been, is and should be. This is especially visible through the school improvement and quality assurance industry of audit, accountability, performance measures (Hogan & Thompson, 2021; Lingard, 2011).
Within early childhood education and care (ECEC), focus has mainly been on structural quality (group sizes, education level of ECEC staff, children/adult ratio etc.) whereas so called process quality (the play and learning environment, intensity, and structuration of child-teacher interactions etc.) has received less attention within both research and the wider global discourses on quality (de la Porte et al., 2022; Yerkes & Javornik, 2019). However, with the OECD’s (2022) recent review of process quality in ECEC, this is now changing. But ECEC services, as a sub-segment in the GEI, has not been as much researched as other sectors of education such as compulsory or higher education. Nor has the Scandinavian actors been in focus (for important exeptions Andersen, 2020; Falkenberg, 2022) despite their growing influence of these actors on the global market, especially in northern Europe (Carlbaum & Rönnberg, under review).
In this paper, we explore the quest for preschool quality and the ideational foundation it builds on by using a Swedish for-profit education company, delivering preschool services internationally in four countries as an empirical case. The aim to analyse the flow and use of ideas on preschool quality to understand how edu-businesses draw on global discourses and use them for commercial interests in the context of preschool export. More specifically, we examine the ideas and logics of action in the (commercial) circulation of quality assurance systems between Swedish and Norwegian subsidiaries to the Swedish based edu-business ‘EducaCorp’ (a pseudonym). As such, the paper seeks to facilitate a discussion on the different manifestations and functioning of the GEI in the preschool ‘segment’, holding, we argue, important implications for conceptions on what preschool quality is and should be.
Cross-national flows of policy and ideas in the wider context of marketisation have been the focus in education research in different ways (Ball, 2012; Parreira do Amaral et al., 2019; Robertson et al., 2012; Steiner-Khamsi, 2018; Verger et al., 2016). In this literature, the international flows of ideas and their local manifestations are highlighted, along with how they are carried and enabled by a range of both public and private actors, including commercial companies, that are working to advance and promote certain ideas and products. This links well to our research interest in exploring how certain ideas on quality and QA is mobilised and legitimated across national borders through the work by a commercial actor. With this literature as an important starting-point for our study, we turn to discursive institutionalism (Schmidt, 2008, 2011) in acknowledging not only the important role of ideas, but also to draw attention to three dimensions of ideational power (Carstensen & Schmidt, 2016); the ‘power through ideas’ (involving persuasion through ideational elements); the ‘power over ideas’ (how certain ideas make their way in the QA offer) and the ’power in ideas’ (how QA ideational elements contribute to define and constrain (hegemonically) what can be considered, is desirable etc.).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis paper is part of the research projects Going Global (Rönnberg, 2018) and Preschool on export and import (Carlbaum, 2021). Since far-reaching marketisation and privatisation reforms were introduced in Sweden in the 1990s, a for-profit education industry has emerged and some of the largest Swedish free school companies have also started to export their services abroad. One of these is EducaCorp, positioning itself as the largest edu-business in northern Europe. This is a corporate group with a multi-brand strategy with several subsidiary companies providing education from ECEC to adult education as well as selling education goods and services. The company’s international expansion goes back almost a decade with the ‘ambition to create a new Nordic export industry’ (EducaCorp, 2017, p. 7), primarily within the ECEC market. It currently operates 300 ECEC centres in four countries (Sweden, Norway, Germany, and the Netherlands) making it a suitable case for exploring the flow of ideas on quality assurance through Scandinavian corporate actors as part of the GEI.
Empirically, we study the circulation of ideas of quality in the setting of preschool export by analysing a variety of materials from EducaCorp and two of its subsidiaries, the Swedish preschool company Manikin and the Norwegian preschool company Seedling Inc. (pseudonyms). We have collected data from the parent company, as well as the subsidiary company websites, including general information, marketing material, annual financial and quality reports, special section reports, and publicly available videos and online seminars etc. Furthermore, we have interviewed 13 representatives from different levels and with different responsibilities within the parent- and the two subsidiary companies focusing on relations, connections, development, cooperation and influence between the different national contexts and preschool practices and ECEC centres in the two national settings. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed, and the Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsrådet, 2017) ethical guidelines were carefully followed. The material has been analysed thematically (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005) focusing on the articulations of the need for quality assurance, the described work practices of quality assurance, and how it contributes to, limits and frames ideas on what ‘good quality ECEC’ is and should be in relation to global QA discourses.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsOur preliminary analysis indicates that through EducaCorp’s takeover of Seedling Inc, ideas embedded in a global QA discourse came into play and the idea of ‘process quality’ entered quite forcefully, legitimated by and drawing on a previous system used in the Swedish ECEC company Manakin. Drawing on these ideas, Seedling came to assemble its ‘own’ quality system based on, for instance, instruments such as Seedling preschool staff peer-review assessments and external evaluations every second year, etc. Interestingly, the set up and organisation of the Seedling QA system is publicly accessible and available. Rather than to be commodified as an educational good to be sold for potential short-term profit, it is commodified as a competitive market advantage in recruiting children and staff – and to secure their position as a legitimate actor in the ECEC market. Seedling Inc represent itself as ‘the Actor’ driving preschool development and improvement, as a means to position themselves and to legitimise their own existence as a commercial preschool operator in a context where such actors are increasingly questioned in both Sweden and Norway. In fact, the Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training is currently developing a national process QA system for all Norwegian preschools – with the Seedling Inc system as the model. We argue that such private-public interdependencies between and across organisational and national boundaries (c.f. Ball, 2012) is illustrative of how ideas travel in the GEI and come to influence what is perceived as good quality education as well as how ECEC is to be assessed and improved. We finish by discussing how this can be understood in relation to the three dimensions of ideational power (Carstensen & Schmidt, 2016).
ReferencesAndersen, M. (2020). Commodifying the Nordic welfare state in the age of cognitive capitalism: The journey of Nordic childcare know-how to China (phd diss.). Aalborg Universitet: Det Samfundsvidenskabelige Fakultet.
Ball, S. J. (2012). Global Education Inc. New policy networks and the neo-liberal imaginary. Routledge.
Carlbaum, S. (2021). Preschool on export and import. Application to Umeå School of Education.
Carlbaum, S., & Rönnberg, L. (under review). 'We help Germany create greater equality'. Logics and rationales in exporting 'Scandinavian' early childhood education and care. Education Inquiry.
Carstensen, M. B., & Schmidt, V. A. (2016). Power through, over and in ideas: Conceptualizing ideational power in discursive institutionalism. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(3), 318-337.
de la Porte, C., Larsen, T. P., & Lundqvist, Å. (2022). Still a poster child for social investment? Changing regulatory dynamics of early childhood education and care in Denmark and Sweden. Regulation & Governance, Online version ahead of print.
Falkenberg, K. (2022). Wachstumsmarkt kita. Zu den aktivitäten eines Schwedischen bildungskonzerns im Deutschen elementarbereich. In J. Mierendorff, et al. (Eds.), Der elementarbereich im wandel: Prozesse der ökonomisierung des elementarbereichs. (pp. 128-147). Beltz Juventa.
Hogan, A., & Thompson, G. (Eds.). (2021). Privatisation and commersialisation in public education: How the public nature of schooling is changing. Routledge.
Lingard, B. (2011). Policy as numbers. Accounting for educational research. The Australian Educational Researcher, 38(4), 355-382.
OECD. (2022). Quality assurance and improvement in the early childhood education and care sector. OECD.
Parreira do Amaral, M., Steiner-Khamsi, G., & Thompson, C. (Eds.). (2019). Researching the Global Education Industry. Palgrave Macmillan.
Robertson, S. et al. (Eds.). (2012). Public private partnerships in education: New actors and modes of governance in a globalizing world. Edward Elgar.
Rönnberg, L. (2018). Going global. Application to the Swedish research council, grant no 2018-04897.
Schmidt, V. A. (2008). Discursive institutionalism: The explanatory power of ideas and discourse. Annual Review of Political Science, 11(1), 303-326.
Schmidt, V. A. (2011). Speaking of change: Why discourse is key to the dynamics of policy transformation. Critical Policy Studies, 5(2), 106-126.
Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2018). Businesses seeing like a state, governments calculating like a business. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 31(5), 382-392.
Verger, A., Lubienski, C., & Steiner-Khamsi, G. (Eds.). (2016). World Yearbook of Education 2016: The Global Education Industry. Routledge.
Vetenskapsrådet. (2017). God forskningssed. Vetenskapsrådet.
Yerkes, M. A., & Javornik, J. (2019). Creating capabilities: Childcare policies in comparative perspective. Journal of European Social Policy, 29(4), 529-544.
|
