学校教育政策与实践的悖论:混乱中的公平

Raj Kumar Gandharba, R. Gaire
{"title":"学校教育政策与实践的悖论:混乱中的公平","authors":"Raj Kumar Gandharba, R. Gaire","doi":"10.51474/jer.v11i2.558","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores the paradoxes inherent within the intentions of Nepal’s public education policies and their actual implementation in local communities. It looks specifically at Nepal’s Constitutional Right to equitable quality education for socio-economically disadvantaged children. It highlights paradoxes in four major areas: 1) free and compulsory education, 2) equity and inclusion, 3) localizing education policies, and 4) the use of language in education, in the federal context of Nepal. To analyse school education policies and documents, we used participatory methods to generate data under the interpretive paradigm. More specifically, we held FGDs and interviews with women, Dalits, people with disability, indigenous groups, local governments, parents, teachers and students. The results show a number of significant paradoxes between the educational policies and the lived experiences of those in the local communities. The education policies deviate from the spirit of the Constitution and implementation is unsuccessful in delivering equitable education for all. A policy on paper does not guarantee equitable quality education and there are a number of questions that the government needs to consider to achieve the equity agenda.","PeriodicalId":32077,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Education and Research","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Paradoxes in School Educational Policies and Practices: Equity in Chaos\",\"authors\":\"Raj Kumar Gandharba, R. Gaire\",\"doi\":\"10.51474/jer.v11i2.558\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper explores the paradoxes inherent within the intentions of Nepal’s public education policies and their actual implementation in local communities. It looks specifically at Nepal’s Constitutional Right to equitable quality education for socio-economically disadvantaged children. It highlights paradoxes in four major areas: 1) free and compulsory education, 2) equity and inclusion, 3) localizing education policies, and 4) the use of language in education, in the federal context of Nepal. To analyse school education policies and documents, we used participatory methods to generate data under the interpretive paradigm. More specifically, we held FGDs and interviews with women, Dalits, people with disability, indigenous groups, local governments, parents, teachers and students. The results show a number of significant paradoxes between the educational policies and the lived experiences of those in the local communities. The education policies deviate from the spirit of the Constitution and implementation is unsuccessful in delivering equitable education for all. A policy on paper does not guarantee equitable quality education and there are a number of questions that the government needs to consider to achieve the equity agenda.\",\"PeriodicalId\":32077,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Education and Research\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Education and Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.51474/jer.v11i2.558\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Education and Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51474/jer.v11i2.558","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文探讨了尼泊尔公共教育政策的意图及其在当地社区的实际实施中固有的悖论。它特别关注尼泊尔宪法赋予社会经济弱势儿童公平优质教育的权利。它强调了四个主要领域的矛盾:1)免费和义务教育,2)公平和包容,3)教育政策本地化,以及4)尼泊尔联邦背景下教育中语言的使用。为了分析学校教育政策和文件,我们使用参与式方法在解释范式下生成数据。更具体地说,我们举行了fgd,并采访了妇女、达利特人、残疾人、土著群体、地方政府、家长、教师和学生。研究结果表明,教育政策与当地社区居民的生活经历之间存在着一些显著的矛盾。教育政策偏离了宪法精神,未能实现全民教育的公平。纸面上的政策并不能保证公平的优质教育,为了实现公平议程,政府需要考虑许多问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Paradoxes in School Educational Policies and Practices: Equity in Chaos
This paper explores the paradoxes inherent within the intentions of Nepal’s public education policies and their actual implementation in local communities. It looks specifically at Nepal’s Constitutional Right to equitable quality education for socio-economically disadvantaged children. It highlights paradoxes in four major areas: 1) free and compulsory education, 2) equity and inclusion, 3) localizing education policies, and 4) the use of language in education, in the federal context of Nepal. To analyse school education policies and documents, we used participatory methods to generate data under the interpretive paradigm. More specifically, we held FGDs and interviews with women, Dalits, people with disability, indigenous groups, local governments, parents, teachers and students. The results show a number of significant paradoxes between the educational policies and the lived experiences of those in the local communities. The education policies deviate from the spirit of the Constitution and implementation is unsuccessful in delivering equitable education for all. A policy on paper does not guarantee equitable quality education and there are a number of questions that the government needs to consider to achieve the equity agenda.
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
16
审稿时长
26 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信