EDUCATIONAL IDEOLOGY POLICY AND LEGISLATION



Educational Ideology policy and legislation

Educational Ideology policy and legislation

Introduction

All over the world, the public education system is grappling with an unprecedented wave of change - unprecedented in its magnitude and scope as no area has been deemed exempt from close scrutiny. Educational goals and objectives are revisited and rewritten. School systems have been restructured. Decision-making mechanisms within the school organization have been decentralized. Curricula have been revised. Stakeholders have greater opportunity for direct involvement in all aspects of school operation.

Educational Ideology policy and legislation

The pace of change also is unprecedented, as it is unleashed in a climate of urgency. In the UK for instance, there were no less than 1,000 pieces of legislation within five years after the release of the document on “A nation at risk” (Negroni, 1992). In England, preceding the enactment of The Education Reform Act, only eight weeks were set aside for consultation. As Aldrich (1994) observed, “the politics of partnership had been replaced by the politics of confrontation, the agenda of consensus by that of radical reform”. In Manchester, UK, over five dozen bills were rushed through the Legislative Assembly in the fall of 1996, with an undisguised restriction on members engaging in debates (Lam, 1998). In UK, the loss of faith in connecting quality of public education with a corresponding increase of public resource (McGaw, 1994) heightened the tension between politicians and educators (Harrold, 1998). Coupled with a tighter schedule is an attempt by the concerned governments in these countries to regain their initiatives and to exercise greater control over the direction of reforms, irrespective of whether they have the backing of educators or not (e.g. Townsend, 1998).

Basically, on a worldwide basis, there are three types of reform. The first, advocated strongly by the World Bank is what is known as “finance-driven” reform (Farrell, 1993; Psacharopoulos et al., 1989; World Bank, 1990). Constituting this reform are such strategies as shifting public funding from higher to lower levels of education, giving more students greater educational opportunity. There will also be increases in school fees to bridge the gap between the actual cost and subsidies. Further, school expenditure will be reduced by holding down salary bills, increasing class size and making greater use of teaching in shifts.

The second type of reform is known as “equity-driven” reform. By definition and design, equity-driven reform aims at providing high-quality basic education or greater educational opportunities to the disadvantaged populations. These include students “at risk”, students from low-income families, students with special physical and mental needs, women and rural populations. Reallocation of resources within the educational system, creation of educational programmes, development of non-formal education and alternative methods of program/course delivery, such as distance education (UNESCO, 1993), are some of general strategies.

The third type of school reform is what is known as “competitiveness-driven” reform. Underlying this approach is the recognition (OECD, 1992) that the human factor is critical to success in competitiveness and prosperity. Competitiveness-driven reform stresses organizational restructuring, greater program and fiscal control to improve ...