一个尺码适合所有人?世界银行和经合组织关于俄罗斯、巴西和中国学校教育质量保证和评价的政策建议

T. Takala, Johanna Kallo, J. Kauko, R. Rinne
{"title":"一个尺码适合所有人?世界银行和经合组织关于俄罗斯、巴西和中国学校教育质量保证和评价的政策建议","authors":"T. Takala, Johanna Kallo, J. Kauko, R. Rinne","doi":"10.1108/S1479-367920180000035009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the field of comparative education there is a vast and growing amount of research on how education policy agendas are formed at the transnational level, and how these may influence policymaking in individual countries. Particularly the World Bank and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) play an important role in the dissemination of education policies. This article seeked to contribute to a more nuanced understanding of how the two organizations have formulated their policy advice concerning quality assurance and evaluation of school education toward the intended beneficiaries of such advice, either in standardized form or taking into account local contexts. The case countries were Brazil, China, and Russia (BCR), which in terms of their political power and economic resources differ from the typical World Bank client countries, but at the same time are not OECD members. Our data consisted of World Bank and OECD publications from the three BCR countries published during two decades from the mid-1990s onward. The document analysis was complemented by some factual information gained through interviews of relevant actors. In the analyzed material prescriptions given in the tone of “international best practice” were predominant. This position saw the quality of education as a concept that has a globally applicable definition. In addition, the advice directed at Russia and China has in an ambivalent manner acknowledged the sociocultural context of the concept of quality in the national pedagogical tradition.","PeriodicalId":130720,"journal":{"name":"Cross-nationally Comparative, Evidence-based Educational Policymaking and Reform","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"One Size for All? Policy Advice of the World Bank and the OECD on Quality Assurance and Evaluation of School Education in Russia, Brazil and China\",\"authors\":\"T. Takala, Johanna Kallo, J. Kauko, R. Rinne\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/S1479-367920180000035009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the field of comparative education there is a vast and growing amount of research on how education policy agendas are formed at the transnational level, and how these may influence policymaking in individual countries. Particularly the World Bank and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) play an important role in the dissemination of education policies. This article seeked to contribute to a more nuanced understanding of how the two organizations have formulated their policy advice concerning quality assurance and evaluation of school education toward the intended beneficiaries of such advice, either in standardized form or taking into account local contexts. The case countries were Brazil, China, and Russia (BCR), which in terms of their political power and economic resources differ from the typical World Bank client countries, but at the same time are not OECD members. Our data consisted of World Bank and OECD publications from the three BCR countries published during two decades from the mid-1990s onward. The document analysis was complemented by some factual information gained through interviews of relevant actors. In the analyzed material prescriptions given in the tone of “international best practice” were predominant. This position saw the quality of education as a concept that has a globally applicable definition. In addition, the advice directed at Russia and China has in an ambivalent manner acknowledged the sociocultural context of the concept of quality in the national pedagogical tradition.\",\"PeriodicalId\":130720,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cross-nationally Comparative, Evidence-based Educational Policymaking and Reform\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-06-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cross-nationally Comparative, Evidence-based Educational Policymaking and Reform\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-367920180000035009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cross-nationally Comparative, Evidence-based Educational Policymaking and Reform","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-367920180000035009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

在比较教育领域,关于教育政策议程如何在跨国层面形成,以及这些议程如何影响个别国家的政策制定,有大量且越来越多的研究。特别是世界银行和经济合作与发展组织(经合发组织)在传播教育政策方面发挥了重要作用。本文试图有助于更细致地了解这两个组织如何以标准化形式或考虑到当地情况,为这些建议的预期受益者制定关于质量保证和学校教育评估的政策咨询意见。案例国家是巴西、中国和俄罗斯(BCR),它们的政治权力和经济资源与典型的世界银行借款国不同,但同时又不是经合组织成员国。我们的数据包括世界银行和经合组织从20世纪90年代中期开始的20年间出版的三个BCR国家的出版物。通过采访相关行为者获得的一些事实信息补充了文件分析。在经分析的材料中,以“国际最佳做法”口吻给出的处方占主导地位。这一立场认为教育质量是一个具有全球适用定义的概念。此外,针对俄罗斯和中国的建议以一种矛盾的方式承认了国家教学传统中质量概念的社会文化背景。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
One Size for All? Policy Advice of the World Bank and the OECD on Quality Assurance and Evaluation of School Education in Russia, Brazil and China
In the field of comparative education there is a vast and growing amount of research on how education policy agendas are formed at the transnational level, and how these may influence policymaking in individual countries. Particularly the World Bank and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) play an important role in the dissemination of education policies. This article seeked to contribute to a more nuanced understanding of how the two organizations have formulated their policy advice concerning quality assurance and evaluation of school education toward the intended beneficiaries of such advice, either in standardized form or taking into account local contexts. The case countries were Brazil, China, and Russia (BCR), which in terms of their political power and economic resources differ from the typical World Bank client countries, but at the same time are not OECD members. Our data consisted of World Bank and OECD publications from the three BCR countries published during two decades from the mid-1990s onward. The document analysis was complemented by some factual information gained through interviews of relevant actors. In the analyzed material prescriptions given in the tone of “international best practice” were predominant. This position saw the quality of education as a concept that has a globally applicable definition. In addition, the advice directed at Russia and China has in an ambivalent manner acknowledged the sociocultural context of the concept of quality in the national pedagogical tradition.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信