Page 122 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Contemporary European Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 122
ear ly school leaving: contempor ary european perspectives
policy learning in the EU involves various state and non-state actors6 who
rely on variable partnership forms, which is also congruent with the Lisbon
Strategy architecture (European Council, 2000, para 38).
May (1992) believes there is a gap between normative assumptions
(who is supposed to learn) and behaviourist assumptions (who actually
learns). Early assessment of policy learning in the EU in the area of ed-
ucation policies painted quite a disappointing picture. For example, em-
pirical evidence (Radaelli, 2004) indicated that it was especially learning
at the top (or EU-level learning) among a highly professionalised techno-
cratic elite that was significant, there was embryonic evidence of cogni-
tive convergence from the top, and almost no evidence of learning from
below (“bottom-up learning” or “social learning”). Another deficiency of
describing policy learning in a multi-level context was that insufficient at-
tention was placed on the flow between all three levels (EU, national, re-
gional). Structures to ensure the multi-level coordination of actors were in-
dispensable and in practice the learning process occurring between them
was often interrupted for various reasons (e.g. weak institutionalisation).
More than a decade later, it seems that the first quite disappointing
evidence has become more positive. An important contribution to this is
the new E&T 2020 framework and especially the Erasmus+ projects with-
in Key action 3 devoted to providing support for policy reform, which the
TITA project also forms part of. They provide a well-thought-out frame-
work for the formation, implementation and evaluation of local policy ex-
perimentations7. Based on the contextualisation of their results, specific
policy recommendations are prepared for the EU level. E.g. in the TITA
project framework, local multi-professional teams for addressing ESL have
been experimented with in France, Luxembourg and Switzerland. The
TITA project thus represents a well-considered balance between top-down,
bottom-up and horizontal learning approaches, with the involvement and
close cooperation of various state and non-state actors from all levels of
multi-level governance. Although the local experiments’ effectiveness has
6 Stone (1999) is convinced that most policy learning takes place among state actors as
this is the prerequisite for policy learning as opposed to mere learning.
7 In addition to EU policy experimentation, some EU member states have a well-de-
veloped national system of social experimentation. In France, as part of the gov-
ernment strategy for sustaining local programmes for educational completion,
“Fond d’Expérimentation pour la Jeunesse” are established as a tool for promot-
ing social experimentation and establishing links between different levels of govern-
ment (Berthet & Simon, 2012). A review of the existing social experiments in France
shows that several of them deal with ESL.
122
policy learning in the EU involves various state and non-state actors6 who
rely on variable partnership forms, which is also congruent with the Lisbon
Strategy architecture (European Council, 2000, para 38).
May (1992) believes there is a gap between normative assumptions
(who is supposed to learn) and behaviourist assumptions (who actually
learns). Early assessment of policy learning in the EU in the area of ed-
ucation policies painted quite a disappointing picture. For example, em-
pirical evidence (Radaelli, 2004) indicated that it was especially learning
at the top (or EU-level learning) among a highly professionalised techno-
cratic elite that was significant, there was embryonic evidence of cogni-
tive convergence from the top, and almost no evidence of learning from
below (“bottom-up learning” or “social learning”). Another deficiency of
describing policy learning in a multi-level context was that insufficient at-
tention was placed on the flow between all three levels (EU, national, re-
gional). Structures to ensure the multi-level coordination of actors were in-
dispensable and in practice the learning process occurring between them
was often interrupted for various reasons (e.g. weak institutionalisation).
More than a decade later, it seems that the first quite disappointing
evidence has become more positive. An important contribution to this is
the new E&T 2020 framework and especially the Erasmus+ projects with-
in Key action 3 devoted to providing support for policy reform, which the
TITA project also forms part of. They provide a well-thought-out frame-
work for the formation, implementation and evaluation of local policy ex-
perimentations7. Based on the contextualisation of their results, specific
policy recommendations are prepared for the EU level. E.g. in the TITA
project framework, local multi-professional teams for addressing ESL have
been experimented with in France, Luxembourg and Switzerland. The
TITA project thus represents a well-considered balance between top-down,
bottom-up and horizontal learning approaches, with the involvement and
close cooperation of various state and non-state actors from all levels of
multi-level governance. Although the local experiments’ effectiveness has
6 Stone (1999) is convinced that most policy learning takes place among state actors as
this is the prerequisite for policy learning as opposed to mere learning.
7 In addition to EU policy experimentation, some EU member states have a well-de-
veloped national system of social experimentation. In France, as part of the gov-
ernment strategy for sustaining local programmes for educational completion,
“Fond d’Expérimentation pour la Jeunesse” are established as a tool for promot-
ing social experimentation and establishing links between different levels of govern-
ment (Berthet & Simon, 2012). A review of the existing social experiments in France
shows that several of them deal with ESL.
122
