Conference Agenda

The two-part symposium presents conceptual, comparative as well as single-country studies that examine the neoliberal reform wave which most governments bought into over the past thirty years. In concert with Verger, Fontdevila and Parcerisa (2019), we refer to this reform package as School-Autonomy-with-Accountability (SAWA). The objective of the studies presented is to move beyond the simple documentation that neoliberalism spread worldwide and instead examine who the political coalitions were that bought into, or resisted, respectively the reform wave, what features of the reform resonated and why they held appeal, what features were repealed and how national policy actors translated key policies into the varied national contexts. These type of research questions are prototypical for research interchangeably labeled policy borrowing, policy transfer, policy mobility, or policy circulation research (Steiner-Khamsi, 2021). The panel attempts to advance both policy transfer research as well as comparative public policy studies by inserting a transnational lens into the analysis of policy processes.

The unit of analysis of all presentations is the SAWA reform. We consider SAWA to be a coherent, pervasive, and controversial reform package that (i) claimed to ensure quality improvement, (ii) advocated for (or at least aligned with) policies to set in motion competition among schools and differentiation in the school offer, such as school-based management and school choice (iii) instated a bundle of policies that strengthened school autonomy under the condition of pervasive accountability, and (iv) advanced a set of preferred policy instruments to trigger and sustain organizational change such as continuous standardized testing and other forms of external supervision. The panelists use this quadruple differentiation of fundamental reforms—their mission, mechanisms of change, bundle of policies, and policy instruments—to reflect the vernacularization or translation of the reform package, that is, what exactly was adopted by which political actors and in which particular political context, and why some features of the reform packaged resonated more than others.

In this panel, the presenters draw on the policy instrument approach which has triggered a lively debate within public policy studies more broadly (Lascoumes and Le Galès 2007; Béland et al. 2018; Capano and Howlett 2020) as well as more narrowly in policy studies related to the education sector (Verger et al. 2019). Several aspects of that approach are appealing for policy transfer research, notably, the insight that the choice of policy instrument is deeply political and has repercussions in who is empowered and who disempowered. Drawing on that approach, we differentiate between the reform goal, reform elements, and the instruments to achieve the goal.

Since the turn of the century, the number of countries conducting large-scale learning assessments (LSAs) has been rising steadily - to the point that today LSAs are perceived as a fixture of modern education systems. This trend has been extensively analyzed with a focus on the uptake of LSAs across countries, and the drivers behind the globalization of such policy instruments (Benavot & Koseleci, 2015; Furuta, 2022). The seemingly unstoppable entrenchment of LSAs within education systems should not lead us to assume that such policies have remained fixed entities or that they unfold predictably. LSAs in many countries are continuously adjusted and recalibrated, and even put at the service of policy agendas different from those that motivated their adoption. On occasion, LSAs have evolved following a ‘bottom-up’ pattern through unexpected uses by local actors, the emergence of instrument constituencies interested in LSAs survival, or the mix of LSAs with other policies (Sewering et al., 2022; Simons & Voß, 2018). It follows from the above that, far from linear, the policy trajectories experimented by LSAs are complex and vary significantly across countries. Yet the evolution of LSAs has not been systematically examined from a cross-country perspective, with much research focusing on the origins of assessment systems but leaving unaddressed their renegotiation over time. The limited empirical engagement with the evolving nature of LSAs may lead to an unproductive reification of this policy instrument. In light of this, this paper aims to map the recent evolution of LSAs - including their design (frequency, scope, coverage, etc) but also their uses (i.e. the purposes and stakes associated with them and their combined use with other policy instruments), as well as to examine the drivers and enablers of such changes. Drawing on the analysis of policy documents, we rely on recent advances in policy feedback theory to make sense of the change and continuity in the instrumentation of LSAs (Sewerin et al., 2020). Specifically, we pay attention both to self-reinforcing mechanisms leading to the perpetuation of LSA policies, and self-undermining mechanisms behind the revision or even termination of some features (Jacobs & Weaver, 2015), and identify those social, political and educational conditions conducive to their activation. In so doing, our paper contributes to a refined understanding of the diverging trajectories of the LSA program, and sheds light on the potential of those analytical perspectives going beyond early logics of instrument choice, and engaging with policy development over time.

Benavot, A, & Koseleci, N. (2015). Seeking quality in education: The growth of national learning assessments, 1990-2013. Background paper prepared for the Education for All Global 2015. Furuta, J. (2022). The Rationalization of “Education for All”: The Worldwide Rise of National Assessments, 1960–2011. Comparative Education Review, 66(2), 228-252. Jacobs, A. M., & Weaver, R. K. (2015). When policies undo themselves: Self‐undermining feedback as a source of policy change. Governance, 28(4), 441-457. Sewerin, S., Béland, D., & Cashore, B. (2020). Designing policy for the long term: agency, policy feedback and policy change. Policy Sciences, 53(2), 243-252. Sewerin, S., Cashore, B., & Howlett, M. (2022). New pathways to paradigm change in public policy: combining insights from policy design, mix and feedback. Policy & Politics, 50(3), 442-459. Simons, A., & Voß, J. P. (2018). The concept of instrument constituencies: Accounting for dynamics and practices of knowing governance. Policy and Society, 37(1), 14-35. Verger, A., Parcerisa, L., & Fontdevila, C. (2019). The growth and spread of large-scale assessments and test-based accountabilities: A political sociology of global education reforms. Educational Review, 71(1), 5-30.

School accountability with autonomy (SAWA) reforms have developed in diverse forms in Northern Europe. Indeed, Denmark and England have both legislated SAWA reforms in various configurations and at different stages over the past thirty years. Following processes of educational decentralization to the municipalities, and the implementation of free school choice and per capita funding, municipal quality assurance reports became key to the test-based accountability agendas of education policymakers in Denmark (Dovemark et al., 2018; Moos 2006). By contrast, in England, as a result of decentralization to the school level (Gewirtz et al., 1992; Rayner et al., 2018), and a significantly reduced role for local authorities, school accountability for educational standards has been increasingly tied to two regulatory instruments: performance league tables and inspection (Ydesen et al., 2022). While changes to the development and enactment of these accountability systems over time mean that SAWA reforms in these two contexts could be described as a moving target, research suggests that social systems often exhibit active resistance to radical transformation (Milner et al., 2021). Assemblage theorists tend to explain this phenomenon through the conceptual lenses of deterritorialization and reterritorialization. However, certain scholars argue that the postmodernist emphasis on fluidity neglects sufficient treatment of the stability of structures and have therefore attempted to combine assemblage theory (Deleuze and Guattari, 1972/1983, 1980/1987) with critical realism (Bhaskar, 1975; Archer, 1995; Collier 1999; Sayer, 2000). Inspired by this theoretical development, we employ a hybrid framework created by Martyn and Galvin (2022) to analyze the ‘production stories’ of quality assurance reports and inspection in Denmark and England. Drawing on data from an international comparative research project, and more recent policy analyses, we examine the arrangement of social entities that led to the development of these specific forms of accountability within these particular educational assemblages. With concern for the stability of structures, we explore the underlying logics to these assemblages and the latitude of teachers and school leaders to challenge them. We argue that pauses to the development enactment of accountability mechanisms are the result of distinct arrangements of social entities at distinct times within the social system. Additionally, the possibility for ‘rupture’ is limited by the resilience of underlying market and managerial logics supported by discourses of quality in education which appeal to key actors – government policymakers and parents.

Archer, M. (1995). Realist social theory. The morphogenetic approach. Cambridge University Press. Collier, A. (1999). Being and worth. Routledge. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1980/1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizo- phrenia. Translated by Brian Massumi. University of Minnesota. Dovemark, M., Kosunen, S., Kauko, J., Magnúsdóttir, B., Hansen, P., & Rasmussen, P. (2018). Deregulation, privatisation and marketisation of Nordic comprehensive education: Social changes reflected in schooling. Education Inquiry, 9(1), 122–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2018.1429768 Gewirtz, S., Whitty, G., and Edwards, T. (1992). City technology colleges: Schooling for the Thatcher generation? British Journal of Educational Studies, 40(3), 207-217. Milner, A.L, Mattei, P., and Ydesen, C. (2021). Governing education in times of crisis: State interventions and school accountabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic. European Educational Research Journal, 20(4), 520-539. Rayner, S.M., Courtney, S.J., and Gunter, H.M. (2018). Theorising systemic change: learning from the academization project in England. Journal of Education Policy, 33(1), 143-62. Ydesen, C., Milner, A.L., Aderet-German, T., Gomez Caride, E., and Ruan, Y. (2022). Educational assessment and inclusive education. Palgrave Macmillan.

In Switzerland, the neoliberal reform package was selectively adopted in two waves: a general New Public Management (NPM) reform and a few years later the SAWA reform. The two reform waves were inextricably linked and in fact advanced by the same politicians (Appius & Nägeli, 2017). The study consists of a multilevel analysis of one canton in Switzerland (Zürich) and investigates two aspects: changes in the governance structure as a result of the reform and the temporal dimension of policy enactment. The authors also reflect on the reform outcomes, which SAWA elements were actually implemented, and which were discarded in the political process. Similar to other countries, (i) school-based management was introduced, (ii) the decision-making authority of the local governance level was strengthened, and the (iii) central level (in Switzerland: the cantonal level) was charged with standard-setting and quality control by means of external school evaluation and standardized testing of students. Strikingly, one of the signposts of Swiss direct democracy - involvement of laypersons into quality assurance of public institutions at the district level - was, abolished to shorten the accountability route between the local and central level. In terms of the temporal dimension, the study shows that focusing on the timing of policy adoption may be misleading because in some cases policy enactment was—due to resistance, lack of financial resources, capacity shortcomings—short-lived or “hollowed out” over time (Zahariadis, 2003 & 2007; Pierson, 2004; Rüb, 2009; Morais de Sá e Silva & Porto de Oliveira, 2023). The study draws on empirical research carried out by Appius and Nägeli in three cantons (Lucerne, St. Gallen, Zürich) in which over 1,200 relevant policy documents were analyzed and interviews were conducted with policy actors and practitioners at different governance level within the three cantons. The empirical study was revisited in 2023 and reframed in terms of the new interpretive framework that draws attention to the complexity of a reform wave, explained in the introductory section of this panel, and takes into the consideration a multi-dimensional definition of time. The main findings of the recent study were published in 2024 (Steiner-Khamsi, Appius, Nägeli, forthcoming).

Appius, S. and Nägeli, A. (2017). Schulreformen im Mehrebenensystem. Eine mehrdimensionale Analyse von Bildungspolitik. Wiesbaden: Springer, 2017. Morais de Sá e Silva, M., and O. Porto de Oliveira. “Incorporating Time into Policy Transfer Studies: A Comparative Analysis of the Transnational Policy Process of Conditional Cash Transfer and Participatory Budgeting.” Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice 25, no. 4 (2023): 418-438. https://doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2023.2193961. Pierson, P. (2004). Politics in time: History, institutions, and social analysis. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rüb, F. W. (2009). Multiple-Streams-Ansatz: Grundlagen, Probleme und Kritik. In K. Schubert & N. C. Bandelow (Hrsg.), Lehrbuch der Politikfeldanalyse 2.0 (2. Aufl.) (S. 348-376). München: Oldenbourg. Steiner-Khamsi, G., Appius, S., and Nägeli, A. forthcoming). School-autonomy-with-accountability: Comparing two transfer spaces against the global script. Zahariadis, N. (2003). Ambiguity and choice in public policy: Political decision making in modern democracies. Washington, D.C: Georgetown University Press. Zahariadis, N. (2007). The Multiple Streams Framework. In P. A. Sabatier (Hrsg.), Theories of the Policy Process (S. 65-92). Boulder: Westview Press.

The study draws inspiration from the World Education Reform Database (WERD) and utilizes the same research questions, notably the investigation reform activity and reform content, over a longer period of time. In addition, it draws on Chinese scholarship that specified reform waves or phases, respectively in the Chinese context. What is more, the presentation presents a typology of the different types of legislative documents at the level of the State Council as well at the level of line ministries, notably the Ministry of Education. A corpus of over 10,000 policy documents were identified, of which the study narrowed the number by focusing on laws, regulations, and normative directives both at the level of the State Council and the Ministry of Education. The findings suggest that there was no School-Autonomy-with-Accountability reform wave in China. Instead, the data compiled suggests that China had its own trajectory of reform phases, informed by themes that were crucial at this stage of China educational development: expansion of compulsory education, national language issues, and private sector involvement in the education; just to name a few topics that emerged over the period 1978-2023. In conclusion, the presentation emphasizes the importance to make a differentiation between policy place and policy space. Different from OECD countries or countries dependent on the Washington Consensus and other donors, China’s reform trajectory reflects economic, political, and social developments in the country itself rather than international developments.

Broomley, et al. 2021. World Education Reform Database (WERD)