23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Paper
A critical study of the Swedish school intervention Collaboration for the Best School
Charlotte Baltzer1, Eva-Lena Lindster Norberg2
1Uppsala university, Sweden; 2Linné university, Sweden
Presenting Author: Baltzer, Charlotte;
Lindster Norberg, Eva-Lena
The purpose of this paper is to discuss how the Swedish state intervention Collaboration for Best School (CBS) governs principals in Swedish compulsary schools. CBS is a government assignment to the Swedish National Agency for Education which has been ongoing since 2015 in about 500 schools and 150 preschools and targets organisations with low results that are not expected to be able to reverse this trend on their own. Several researchers point out that Swedish teachers' and principals' room for action has decreased at the same rate as the central control increases and the state control regime has strengthened (see e.g Ivarsson Westerberg, 2016).
The starting point for the study is an assumption that schools and their leaders today are under enormous pressure to fulfill the educational system's requirements and authorities' policy directives, which are about delivering better results and an equal education (see e.g. Håkansson & Rönnström, 2021). In this regard, the school professions are at a disadvantage with their changing conditions in the form of a lack of qualified teachers and preschool teachers besides a limited professional autonomy. Biesta (2007) emphasizes that education needs a model of professional action that recognizes a non-causal interaction, that professional judgment is central to educational practice and that the nature of judgment is more a matter of morality than of technicalities. In line with Uljens (2021a, 2021b) we also argue that the task of pedagogy and education is to discuss and question political decisions. Politics and pedagogy must be seen as equal entities, even if politics decides on the content of education.
Eight years after CBS’ implementation, research on possible consequences is still limited, which is why this study can contribute through the analysis of collected empirical material within the framework of CBS and what it does with the principal's opportunities to understand and relate to their mission (cf. Lindster Norberg, 2016). Prøitz (2021) points out that questions about collaboration as an ideal and activity in modern governance provide the basis for a series of new questions regarding the development of the school. If a person, in this case the principal, does not adapt to the prevailing norm, that person is seen as disqualified and problematic in the prevailing regime of truth and thus becomes in need of retraining (Popkewitz & Brennan, 1997).
Based on this problematization we are interested in how school leaders participating in CBS are governed and shaped through various technologies of power (Foucault, 2008). The education sector can be seen as a practice where different methods and strategies operate to direct and control the thoughts and actions of individuals/principals/pedagogues in specific directions in order to best adapt to the trends that arise (Dahlstedt & Hertzberg, 2012). Although Foucault has been widely used in educational research in general, it can be stated that there is little research in educational leadership that takes Foucault as its point of departure (Nietche, 2011). Foucault's theories can therefore make a valuable contribution to our understanding of principals' work and principals' subjectivity. By examining the principal's role as a position for power relations and by exploring the principal's subjectivity, it becomes possible to find cracks and room for action where principals have the opportunity to operate within the framework of the normalizing and discursive regimes that make up the leadership's framework and the leadership's self-governance. This study can thus also contribute to exploring how principals can be given the opportunity to find room for action within the framework of a series of disciplinary regimes that assert themselves within the framework of the Collaboration for the Best School (cf Nietche, 2011).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
The empirics of the study mainly consists of interviews with principals and partly documents. After an initial reading of the National Agency for Education's reports (2019, 2021), a number of supporting concepts were selected which have formed the basis for the interviews. These concepts are: CBS, dialogue, effort, cooperation, governance, support, systematic quality work, school development, action, ownership and abilities. Based on the selected concepts, eight semi-structured interviews were conducted via zoom and recorded, with inspiration from concept maps (see e.g. Khattri & Miles, 1995; Lindster Norberg, 2016). The goal was to get the principals to freely associate around the selected concepts. The interview method with inspiration from concept maps fulfills the criteria for a qualitative research interview (Kvale & Brinkman, 2009).
Theoretically we use some of Foucault's concepts to analyze how the principals receive, implement and perceive this state intervention for school development. Foucault's concept of governmentality is useful for making visible the governance of the Swedish school in general. The concept of governmentality means "that collective power processes guide thoughts and behaviors in certain specific directions, directions that are not usually questioned" (Kronqvist Hård, 2021, p. 46). Foucault (2008) believes that different technologies of power control and regulate the behavior of individuals. Technology can be seen as a collection of techniques that explain how individuals are governed (Foucault, 1991, 2003). In the technologies there are certain norms and perceptions that have an impact on how technologies are designed (Ivarsson Westerberg, 2016). Techniques here become concrete approaches to achieve what is found in the technologies. Being guided to behave according to what is currently the norm and what is expected can be summarized in the concepts of conduct of conduct (Gordon, 1991; Rose, 1998). The concepts mean governing individuals so that they govern themselves. As mentioned above Foucault has been widely used in educational research in general, but not to any greater extent in educational leadership (Nietche, 2011). Foucault's theories can therefore make a valuable contribution to our understanding of principals' work and principals' subjectivity.
Collaboration for Best School aims to improve and develop current schools into something better than it was before, and the principal plays a decisive role. In advanced liberal governance, state governance becomes most effective when the individual acts in accordance with its interest. It is the activation of the individual itself that is the control, it is about "government at a distance" (Rose 1999).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe idea of effective intervention is a central aspect within evidence-based practice, ie administering treatments to achieve a certain effect (Biesta, 2007). This movement is an international phenomenon based on a Taylorist approach which emerged in the 1990s with sanction systems and public ranking of education (Uljens (2021a, 2021b).
In our study the principals generally describe a low goal fulfillment as the basis for participation in CBS and they express difficulties in making the necessary changes on their own when the state makes demands. They are aware that they are in the hands of state authorities, at the same time as they wish to be professionally autonomous. They express different perceptions of what collaboration is, and a collision appears between top-down and bottom-up logics. This exemplifies what Liljenberg (2021) describes, that national models and central initiatives tend to overlook local needs and rarely take into account the complexity of the interaction between those who participate. There is thus a risk that the support for the principals ignores the importance of the context for the principal's leadership (Hallinger, 2018).
Based on Foucault this could mean that power as politics and control of the subject's self-governance has been successful. Through the designation of schools and principals as more or less functioning, technologies of power are established and discursive constructions become truths (Foucault, 1991). In CBS, these discursive truths could be formulated as "the low-performing school", the incompetent principal", "The National Agency for - the savior in need", etc. (Sundberg, 2012). The principals are socialized in a certain direction and become active subjects in the social practice in which they operate (Edwards, 2008). This is in line with what Rose (1999) describes, that by being guided by the truth regimes that prevail, individuals' subjectivities are nurtured, developed and shaped into a way of being.
ReferencesAltrichter, H. & Kemethofer, D. (2015). Does accountability pressure through school inspections promote school improvement? School Effectiveness and School improvement, vol 26, 32-56.
Biesta, G. (2007). Why ‘what works’ won’t work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research. Educational Theory, 57(1), 1–22.
Edwards, R. (2008). Actively seeking subjects?. I Nicoll, K. & Fejes, A. (red.) (2008). Foucault and lifelong learning: governing the subject. Routledge
Foucault, M (1991) “Governmentality” I: G. Burchell, C, Gordon & P. Millen(eds) The Foucault effect. Studies in Governmentality, The university of Chicago Press.
Foucault, M. (2003). Regementalitet. Fronesis.
Foucault, M. (2008). Diskursernas kamp. Brutus Östlings förlag.
Gordon, C. (1991). Governmental rationality: an introduction. I: G Burchell, C Gordon & P. Miller (red.), The Foucault effect: Studies in Governmentality, The university of Chicago Press.
Hallinger, P (2018) Bringing context out of the shadow of leadership. Educational management administration & leadership. 46(1), 5–24.
Håkansson, J& Sundberg, D (2021). Utmärkt undervisning: Framgångsfaktorer i svensk och internationell belysning. Natur & Kultur.
Ivarsson Westerberg, A. (2016). På vetenskaplig grund-Program och teknologi inom Skolinspektionen. Förvaltningsakademin Södertörns högskola
Khattri, N., & Miles, M. B. (1995). Mapping Basic Beliefs About Learner Centered Schools. Theory into Practice, 34(4), 279-287.
Kronqvist Håård, M. (2021). Styrning genom samverkan? – En textanalys av dominerande diskurser i en statlig skolförbättringssatsning. Pedagogisk Forskning i Sverige 26(1), 42–66.
Kvale, S. & Brinkman, S. (2009). Den kvalitativa forskningsintervjun. Studentlitteratur.
Liljenberg, M. (2021). Förändringar i rektorers pedagogiska ledarskap efter tre års gemensamkompetensutveckling, Utbildning och lärande 15(3), 89–106.
Lindster Norberg, E-L. (2016). Hur ska du bli när du blir stor? En studie i svensk gymnasieskola när entreprenörskap i skolan är i fokus. [Doktorsavhandling, Umeå universitet].
Nietche, R. (2011). Foucault and Educational Leadership Disciplining the Principal. Routhlegde.
Popkewitz, T. & Brennan, M (1997). Restructuring of social and political theory in education. Educational theory. 47(3).287–313
Prøitz, T.S. (2021). Styring og støtte i moderne governance – samverkan för bästa skola. Pedagogisk Forskning i Sverige 26(1), 126–132.
Rose, N. (1998). Interventing our selves. Polity Press.
Skolverket (2019) Redovisning av uppdrag om Samverkan för bästa skola (U2015/3357/S
Skolverket (2021). Redovisning av uppdrag om Samverkan för bästa skola (U2019/03786/S och U2017/00301/S)
Uljens, M. (2021a). Pedagogiskt ledarskap på pedagogikteoretisk grund. I M. Uljens & A-S. Smeds-Nylund (red.) Pedagogiskt ledarskap och skolutveckling (s. 37–100). Studentlitteratur.
Uljens, M. (2021b). Skolförbättring och skolutveckling mellan policy och forskning. I M. Uljens & A-S. Smeds-Nylund (red.) Pedagogiskt ledarskap och skolutveckling (s. 253–290). Studentlitteratur.
23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Paper
New Managerialism and School Education in Greece: Educational Executives’ Perceptions
Vasilios P. Andrikopoulos, Amalia A. Ifanti
University of Patras, Greece
Presenting Author: Andrikopoulos, Vasilios P.
Τhis study sought to investigate educational executives’ views about their roles and responsibilities in the school practice in Greece and in relation to the New Managerialism (NM) trends in education administration. New Managerialism has been the dominant paradigm in public administration and policy, since its appearance in late 1970s and early 1980s. In education, it emerged in 1990s and since then it has joined as a dominant approach to educational management at local, national, supranational and international level. However, although there have been convergences at a theoretical and conceptual level, in practice the countries have diverged in terms of application of principles and methods of the New Managerialism.
Therefore, the Anglo-Saxon countries, with a strong liberal tradition of administrative organization and provision of public sector services, more easily adopted these principles and made use of market techniques in education. In these countries, assessment and accountability are used as mechanisms to promote market principles, such as the introduction of school competition and the possibility for parents to freely choose schools for their children in an open education market directly linked to school rankings. On the contrary, several countries of central Europe have used assessment and accountability procedures to ensure quality in an educational environment characterized by high levels of decentralization.
Finally, in southern European countries, accountability was incorporated into the institutional framework, in line with the international discourse on educational administration. At the same time, teachers’ professionalism and professional identity are redefined in the social and conceptual framework of New Managerialism. In this context, effective teaching and learning as well as complex accountability mechanisms based on students results in national exams or international tests, like PISA, seem to stand out. Thus, at a supranational and international level, New Managerialism has exerted a strong influence on educational policy and administration. In Greece, where traditional bureaucratic educational administration is almost prevalent, these ideas have recently been adopted in the educational policy.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedFor the purpose of our study, an empirical research was carried out. Ninety-nine (n=99) out of 104 Directors of Primary and Secondary Education in Greece participated in this study by completing an anonymously disseminated exploratory questionnaire (response rate: 95.19%). Firstly, a pilot survey was conducted, in which 12 Principals of Primary and Secondary Education participated (10% of the total population).
The questionnaire was drawn upon the review of the relevant literature on the topic. In the first part, there were questions about gender, educational background, teaching and administrative experiences in schools. In the second part, a five-point Likert scale (i.e.: not at all, a little, quite a lot, a lot, very much) was used. The questions were concerned with the investigation the Education Directors’ views about the following issues:
i) their role and responsibilities in the Greek educational administration system, the goals and priorities given in the system, the characteristics of an effective educational administration, ii) the accountability aspects of the Greek educational system, iii) school funding, iv) market mechanisms in the Greek educational system.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsData analysis revealed that Greek educational executives’ roles and responsibilities have slightly changed under the influence of New Managerialism. In particular, they were found to support the deployment of specific New Managerialism characteristics, such as educational accountability and assessment, decentralization and school autonomy attainment, and linked them with the school improvement. All in all, the convergences arisen harmonized with the global trends in educational policy and administration, while the divergences from the international discourse contributed to the better understanding of specific aspects of educational administration in Greece. In conclusion, this study unveiled the long-lasting dynamic role of New Managerialism and its appealing in educational governance worldwide through exploring its impact on the educational administration in Greece.
ReferencesCamphuijsen, M. K., & Parcerisa, L. (2023). Teachers' beliefs about standardised testing and test‐based accountability: Comparing the perceptions and experiences of teachers in Chile and Norway. European Journal of Education, 58(1), 67-82.
Christensen, T., & Laegreid, P. (2022). Taking stock: new public management (npm) and post-npm reforms – trends and challenges. In A. Ladner & F. Sager (Eds), Handbook on the politics of public administration (pp.38–49). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
Collet-Sabé, J., & Ball, S. J. (2023). Beyond School. The challenge of co-producing and commoning a different episteme for education. Journal of Education Policy, 1-16.
Crato, N. (2020). Curriculum and educational reforms in Portugal: An analysis on why and how students’ knowledge and skills improved. In F. M. Reimers (Ed.), Audacious education purposes: How governments transform the goals of education systems. Berlin: Springer.
Fan, X. (2023). Accountability in the evaluation of teacher effectiveness: Views of teachers and administrators. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 1-27.
Levatino, A., Parcerisa, L., & Verger, A. (2024). Understanding the stakes: The influence of accountability policy options on teachers’ responses. Educational Policy, 38(1), 31-60.
Pagès, M., Ferrer-Esteban, G., Verger, A., & Prieto, M. (2023). At the crossroad of performativity and the market: schools’ logics of action under a hybrid accountability regime. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 1-21.
Parcerisa, L., Verger, A., Pagès, M., Browes, N. (2023). The professionalism, accountability, and work of teachers in different regulatory regimes. In L. Maestripieri & A. Bellini (Eds.), Professionalism and social change (pp. 187-208). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Van Buuren, A., Lewis, J. M., & Peters, B. G. (Eds.). (2023). Policy making as designing: the added value of design thinking for public administration and public policy. Bristol: Policy Press.
Wilkins, A. (2023). Mapping the field of education policy research: A history of policy settlements. London: Bloomsbury.
23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Paper
Competitive Effects of Free Schools on Neighbouring Schools in England
Ruth McGinity
UCL, United Kingdom
Presenting Author: McGinity, Ruth
Free schools are new state-funded schools in England. They have been opened by non-state actors who apply to central Government for the right and funding to set up and govern a not-for-profit school. Free schools can disapply the National Curriculum, do not have to adhere to national teachers' pay and conditions and can set the length of their school day. These ‘freedoms’ were reflected in the name ‘free school’. Partly borrowed from the Swedish free schools (Friskolar) policy, the Government in England has associated the term ‘free’ with an argument that free schools “aren’t run by the local council. They have more control over how they do things” (DfE, undated). A central policy argument for opening free schools in England is that they will create new competitive pressures for improvement in neighbouring schools, thereby “forc[ing] existing schools to up their game” (DfE 2010: 57). This argument contains several assumptions about how school choice and competition operate. As Betts (2009) argued in the case of Charter Schools in America – from which free school policy is partly borrowed – the assumptions are that: free schools will compete well in terms of academic quality; parents will express a strong preference for higher quality schools; existing schools losing students or status to free schools will (be able to) respond by improving academic quality. There are numerous ways, however, in which this “chain of causation” can break down (ibid: 197). Free schools may not offer better quality environments. Parents may not prioritise or be able to recognise academic quality. Existing schools may not perceive new competition or, where they do, may not (be able to) respond in ways that improve quality or equity. Little change or even deterioration in student outcomes could result.
As of June 2022 there are over 600 free schools open (which represent the vast majority of new schools opened in England since 2010). Many more schools are neighbouring schools to these new free schools. This paper draws on a qualitative case study of the competitive effects of free schools on their neighbours, from a bigger mixed methods study, the aims of which were to:
- Test for the presence of free school competitive effects on student outcomes in neighbouring schools.
- Identify the mechanisms through which potential free school competitive effects are manifested, by analysing whether free schools compete well in terms of quality, whether parental preferences for local schools change with a free school opening and whether existing schools respond by changing their practices.
These aims require attention to the complexities of choice and competition across local markets. As such the main research question this paper is addressing is:
- How are choice and competition manifested in local markets in which a free school opens? To what extent do local structural conditions, a free school’s aims and the local status of neighbouring schools influence perceived competition and action-taking?
Policy makers assume free schools create efficient competition, yet competition due to a free school’s presence works through a mix of mechanisms including selective competition. This has influenced the actions schools take, the distribution of improvement and deterioration and the patterns of social segregation.
A key lesson from the free school experiment is for policy makers to recognise the potential of selective competition and the outcomes this can create. This paper is relevant for an international audience interested in how the free schools experiment in England has played out in relation to choice and competition and what this might mean for other education systems that operate within the context of quasi-market supply side reforms.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe case study included 9 cases which allowed for an appropriate range of school types and local contexts to be included. Following our wider project’s neighbourhood definition, the boundaries of each case study were defined as a free school and nine closet schools of the same phase.
We followed a convenience sampling approach. This drew on survey responses, where respondents were asked whether they would be willing to participate in a follow up interview. Invitations to participate were made to the headteacher of the free school and neighbouring schools that had not participated in the survey. The achieved sample, including the number of participating neighbouring schools in each case, is summarised in Table 7.1 below.
Table 7.1: Achieved case study sample
Cluster Case Phase Forecasted need prior to opening Participating neighbouring schools
1 A Primary Surplus 3
B Primary Shortfall 2
2 C Primary Surplus 4
D Primary Shortfall 3
3 E Secondary Surplus 3
F All-through Surplus 5
H Secondary Shortfall 4
4 G Secondary Shortfall 3
J Secondary Surplus 1
A common set of research procedures in each case supported comparative cross-case analysis combining two data collection methods, documentary analysis and semi-structured interviews. We interviewed the headteacher of the participating free school and the headteachers of participating neighbouring schools. The aims of the interviews were to understand the headteacher’s perceptions and experiences of competition locally; the schools own competitive actions and logics of those actions; wider relations with other local schools, including potential collaboration; and reflections on the wider consequences of the free school opening for local students.
The data was coded by hand and analysed thematically through a parallel inductive and deductive approach, using the initial codes of: context; structural conditions; free school origins and ethos; student recruitment; perceived impacts of the free school; responsive actions; logics of action; and local consequences. Apriori codes were refined and added to through engagement with the data.
On the basis of this thematic analysis we wrote individual reports for each case study to enable cross-case analysis. The cross-case analysis identified 4 clusters. Local cases were clustered on the basis of similarities in: i) their contexts and structural conditions; and ii) free schools aims and ethos. We were then able to analyse the extent to which these factors influenced perceived competition and, in turn, any action-taking.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsFirst, the analysis highlights factors influencing the intensity of perceived competition, due to the presence of a free school. Local structural conditions were shown to be important, including both the extent of residential segregation and the balance of supply and demand for places. Declining rolls and increasing surplus places increased the perceived intensity of competition and the impacts of the free school.
Second, the analysis demonstrated several foci of competition. In Cluster 1 competition was over student numbers and funding. In Clusters 2 and 3, it extended to social selection. This was influenced by the free school’s marketing, negative stereotyping of neighbours and recruitment practices perceived to cream, crop or exclude students.
Third, action-taking in response to a free school’s presence was common, although not universal, and was influenced by perceived impact. Marketing and promotion were widespread. Sometimes this combined with new extra-curricular activities, particularly in middle and high-status schools, highlighting their use in signifying status. Differentiation was also identified, where schools used messaging to (seek to) restate the legitimacy of their provision.
Fourth, while headteachers’ logics of action were often context-specific, there was a clear difference between high and low status. High status schools had locally advantaged intakes, likelihood of historic oversubscription and greater financial security. Their heads were less likely to report negative free school impacts and perceived greater capacity for action. Their dispositions towards action did vary by context, reflecting a distinction made by Van Zanten (2009). Where heads perceived their intake remained relatively stable, they tended towards a “monopolistic” logic, relying on an existing reputation to remain socially selective. Where heads perceived stronger competition, they tended towards a “entrepreneurial” logic, using promotional, differentiation and recruitment strategies to sustain an advantaged intake.
ReferencesBetts, J. (2009) The Competitive Effects of Charter Schools on Traditional Public Schools, in Berends, M., Springer, M., and Ballou, D. (Eds) Handbook of Research on School Choice. New York: Routledge.
DfE (Department for Education). (2010) The Importance of Teaching. London: TSO.
DfE (Department for Education). (Undated) https://www.get-information-schools.service.gov.uk/glossary
Van Zanten, A. (2009) Competitive arenas and schools' logics of action : a European comparison. Compare, 39(1): 85-98.
|
