Conference Agenda

This presentation is part of a larger PhD project which looks at research on policy-making in educational research. Specifically, the thesis will explore the relationships between researchers who study environmental and sustainability education, including climate change, and the policy-makers at the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the core agency for education within the United Nations system, who develop guidelines, strategies, and plans to guide UNESCO’s Member States. This relationship between researchers and policy-makers is also called “Science-Policy Interface” (Kaaronen, 2016). There is a research gap on how the relationships between researchers and policy-makers work and how knowledge flows within the network. As Singer-Brodowski et al. (2020) claim: "what happens in a particular SPI [Science-Policy-Interface] policy-research relationship remains underresearched, particularly in relation to 'success criteria' for policy makers and researchers." (p. 554). It is also unclear if a science-policy interface is a desirable mechanism to develop policies.

This paper will focus on the literature review of the larger PhD thesis, highlighting what research has already been done in terms of researcher and policy-maker relationships in the areas of sustainability, and climate change education. The presentation will present concepts that are currently used within the United Nations Systems to educate all about the planets boundaries and what role educational research plays for the networks in which new policy are being created.

Education for Sustainable Development (ESD), a concept found in most national curricula frameworks of formal education globally today (UNESCO , 2021), tries to overcome our world’s issues by teaching systems thinking and ways to connect the today with the present (Leicht et al., 2018). It is one of the most dominant educational discourses steered by the United Nations (Bengtsson , 2016; Bylund et al., 2022; González -Gaudiano, 2016; Gough , 2017). ESD tries to teach all learners about the complex issues humankind has created, such as inequality, poverty, and climate change, and aims to overcome them by encouraging learners to take ownership and responsibility of their actions. ESD focuses on three, sometimes four dimensions – environment, social, economic, and culture – claiming that all dimensions are needed to create the Future we Want (United Nations , 2012), as the outcome document of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development is called.

A related, although different concept is Action for Climate Empowerment (ACE), which is part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). UNESCO and UNFCCC are increasingly working together to promote the concept of climate change communication and education (CCE), often in relation to ESD. Most recently, UNESCO and UNFCCC hosted a joined webinar series on ACE ahead of COP27. Due to this collaboration, ACE is also an area that has become relevant for this paper.

ESD is a highly contested concept debated by academics (González-Gaudiano, 2016). Interestingly, the same people who criticize the concept, also tend to be the people who are invited by UNESCO to contribute to policy-making (Lysgaard et al., 2016; Payne , 2016). ACE is slightly different, as it is primarily negotiated at UNFCCC events, such as the Conference of the Parties (COP). Nevertheless, guidelines for ACE are sometimes written by the same people as for ESD (e.g., UNESCO & UNFCCC, 2016). Therefore, the question is: how is sustainability and climate change policy made? Whose research is involved in making sure the policy is evidence-based? Where do the ideas for the education policy come from?

This paper aims to explore how neo-nationalism and neoliberalism interact in the context of French higher education (HE) policy. A focus on the affective dimension allows the analysis to cut across multiple scales and disciplines, shedding light on the dynamics tying the two paradigms together in the domain of HE policymaking. Within this wider framework, the present paper is dedicated to international students’ migration, subject to debate and legislation in both Paris and Brussels. Relying on the inherent diversity of educational research, the analysis builds on concepts and approaches developed in different disciplines, applying them across the individual, institutional, nation-state and EU scales.

According to Andre Gingrich and Mark Banks (2006), neo-nationalist forces constitute “new and recent variants of nationalism” sharing distinct anti-immigration and anti-European stances, combined with “pro-law-and-order elements” (Gingrich, 2006, p. 215). This conceptualization was further elaborated, as neo-nationalist parties began looking towards the left for their economic policies, embracing welfare-chauvinism (Eger & Valdez, 2019), and replaced their tout-court hostility against the EU with calls for an alternative vision of the Union (Coman & Leconte, 2019). Most importantly, the policies and stances advocated by neo-nationalist forces have been increasingly appropriated by the so-called mainstream parties, located around the centre of the political spectrum (Brøgger, 2022). Most of the policies adopted by these parties, nevertheless, are still commonly identified as an expression of neoliberalism, that this paper addresses as “a system of thought bound up with market capitalism” (Lazzarato, 2009, p. 110).

My fieldwork in France began, therefore, with the intention to explore whether and to what extent neo-nationalist trends were co-existing with neoliberal discourse and policies. While conducting interviews with university staff, affect prominently entered the scene: among others, experiences of resentment, disillusion, and fear for the future. The paper builds on the extensive scholarship that developed from the “affective turn” of the mid-90s and early 2000s (Gregg & Seigworth, 2010). In other words, the analysis will assign a key role to emotions – or affects, going beyond dichotomous definitions of the two and seeing them, with Sarah Ahmed (2014), as “a matter of how we come into contact with objects and others” (p.208).

In the wake of a flourishing literature focusing on affect within educational research (e.g. Taylor & Lahad, 2018; Staunæs & Brøgger, 2020), this paper was greatly inspired by the works of Riyad Shahjahan (2020; 2022). Shedding light on the relationship between temporality and affects in academia, Shahjahan (2020) argues for a multi-scale analysis of the different ways individuals, institutions and nation-states affectively engage with temporal norms. On the individual level, neoliberal governmentality leads to the adoption of different “survival tactics” (Shahjahan, 2020) and the profusion of what Lazzarato (2009) – building on Deleuze and Guattari (1980) – defines as “micro-politics of little fears” (Lazzarato, 2009, p.120).

Moving from the individual to the nation-state level, the paper builds on William Walters’ concept of “domopolitics” (Walters, 2005) and Nandita Sharma’s “home economics” (Sharma, 2006). Encouraging us to reflect on the government of the nation-state as a home (domus in Latin), these works contribute to highlighting the affective dimension of migration management and the often-overlooked links between border security and social security systems (Walters, 2005), and therefore HE policy.

The “Bienvenue en France” strategy, launched by the French government in 2018, serves as a case study to explore how different agendas intertwine, on multiple levels, in the domain of international students’ migration. Following the fil rouge of affects, the paper works across the policy framework provided by the EU, the measures adopted at state level, the reactions of HE institutions and the concerns of their staff.

Shadow education is known as supplementary tutoring courses, which is a metaphor saying that supplementary tutoring is influenced by mainstream education, like mainstream education’s shadow. Shadow education is a worldwide phenomenon now. In Europe, shadow education is increasing. And in some Asian countries, shadow education seems to even exceed mainstream education.

The seriousness of implications caused by shadow education cannot be ignored. The parents and students have to purchase supplementary tutoring. For this reason, the financial expenditure will be a burden for some low-income families. This concerns the equality of educational resources because the higher-income family might provide various quality tutoring chances for their children. And following, educational anxiety and students’ study burden increase with the increase in shadow education attended. Moreover, the salary of being a tutor is higher than being a school teacher, which might cause schoolteacher corruption. They might have a part-time tutoring job and ask students to sign up for their tutoring courses. There are many social problems caused by shadow education. The education policy toward Shadow Education varies according to the different national conditions. Basically, there are four types: supportive policies, such as in Singapore and America, the MOEs provided financial support to students joining extra lessons; regulating types, such as in India, Portugal and Austria, their MOEs regulated schoolteachers being tutors; laissez-faire policy types, such as in the Czech Republic and Japan, which believe that free-market economy competition will regulate shadow education by itself; and the last type is prohibitive policy, such as today’s China.

China had the most extensive shadow education system in the world. However, since 24/07/2021, Chinese shadow education has been facing an enormous change. The Chinese MOE issued Double Reduction policy aims to reduce students’ study and homework burden by banning supplementary institutions from tutoring primary and lower secondary school students. All the supplementary academic institutions were forced to transform into art institutions or nonprofit-seeking academic institutions. Furthermore, the Chinese MOE set up a new department to monitor shadow education.

However, the Chinese education assessment system is still based on academic performance, competitive grades are the main way to get into a quality university. Therefore, the extra tutoring lessons might help students to learn more and be more competitive in school, the demands are here but the “market” is banned. China is not the only one that issued a prohibitive shadow education policy. South Korea and Mauritius had similar banning shadow education policies but were eventually abolished because shadow education was still highly demanded even though there were prohibitive policies. Whether Chinese policy can work well has become the focus.

Nevertheless, recent research typically investigated how the students, parents and schoolteachers felt about the Double Reduction, it showed that they thought Double Reduction helped students reduce their burden and promote mental health, but schoolteachers felt the workload increased. And also the recent research paid attention to how the public understood the policy, which showed that they could understand the policy is for seeking education equality. However, these studies ignored the shadow education providers’ perspectives on how they understand the Policy, How the Policy is implemented in the institutions from their sight.

Therefore, the general purpose of my study is to explore and analyze what has happened and what is happening in Chinese shadow education after Double Reduction from the shadow education providers’ perspective. This is a referenceable experience we can draw upon that how the policy is implemented in the Chinese shadow education sector; where does it work? where are the deficiencies? And enriching the diverse perspectives of the Double Reduction, not only limited to students, parents and the public.