Page 125 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Contemporary European Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 125
esl in the eu: learning from differences and common trends
learning (Lange & Alexiadou, 2010), the dominant actors in policy learning
processes are those who attempt to impose their convictions, policies and
practices on other actors (in)directly. In doing so, they assume the role of a
teacher, whereas other actors who accept the convictions, policies and prac-
tices may be seen as learners. Accordingly, the question should not only be
‘Who learns?’ but ‘Who teaches?’ (Grek, 2009).
The TITA project is a clear example of institutionalised, voluntary pol-
icy learning with the aim to find a solution to ESL. Irrespective of wheth-
er its results will provide a policy learning example of failure or success,
learning from its experiences (in the French, Luxembourgish and Swiss
Francophonic local contexts) will require in-depth contextualisation.
Research (e.g. Jugović & Doolan, 2013) shows that not only specific local
contexts but also specific EU regions can share some similarities regard-
ing ESL, which distinguish them from other parts of the EU. By learning
lessons from the TITA experiences, Rose (2002) steps for learning lessons
from abroad, presented above, could be taken into consideration.
What do they learn?
No standard definition of knowledge in terms of what is supposed to
constitute the core of policy learning can be found in the literature.
Knowledge (as a subject of policy learning) can (regardless of whether
it refers to new policy instruments, frameworks or paradigms) be for-
mulated rationally (the positivist approach to understanding knowledge
dominates here)8 or socially9 and politically10 (where the constructivist
approach dominates).
Taking research findings showing that tackling ESL in the EU is not
only policy but also political exercise (e.g. Macedo, Araújo, Magalhães &
Rocha, 2015) into consideration, how we understand benchmarking charts,
which reveal differences and common trends in EU anti-ESL efforts, is im-
portant. A quick and superficial overview of them may lead to an impres-
sion about which are good and bad education systems/practices worth
learning from. These are facts which can easily trigger social and political
8 Scientifically obtained data are intended for developing, validating and improving
the beliefs of key actors and, as such, motivate actors to achieve goals (Sabatier, 1993).
9 The emphasis here is not on scientifically obtained data, but mostly on the role of
norms and the discourse structure defining good policy and steering individuals’
actions (Checkel, 1999; Gilardi & Radaelli, 2012; Hall, 1993).
10 Political learning is learning about the strategy of advocating a specific policy idea
or problem (Birkland, 2005).
125
learning (Lange & Alexiadou, 2010), the dominant actors in policy learning
processes are those who attempt to impose their convictions, policies and
practices on other actors (in)directly. In doing so, they assume the role of a
teacher, whereas other actors who accept the convictions, policies and prac-
tices may be seen as learners. Accordingly, the question should not only be
‘Who learns?’ but ‘Who teaches?’ (Grek, 2009).
The TITA project is a clear example of institutionalised, voluntary pol-
icy learning with the aim to find a solution to ESL. Irrespective of wheth-
er its results will provide a policy learning example of failure or success,
learning from its experiences (in the French, Luxembourgish and Swiss
Francophonic local contexts) will require in-depth contextualisation.
Research (e.g. Jugović & Doolan, 2013) shows that not only specific local
contexts but also specific EU regions can share some similarities regard-
ing ESL, which distinguish them from other parts of the EU. By learning
lessons from the TITA experiences, Rose (2002) steps for learning lessons
from abroad, presented above, could be taken into consideration.
What do they learn?
No standard definition of knowledge in terms of what is supposed to
constitute the core of policy learning can be found in the literature.
Knowledge (as a subject of policy learning) can (regardless of whether
it refers to new policy instruments, frameworks or paradigms) be for-
mulated rationally (the positivist approach to understanding knowledge
dominates here)8 or socially9 and politically10 (where the constructivist
approach dominates).
Taking research findings showing that tackling ESL in the EU is not
only policy but also political exercise (e.g. Macedo, Araújo, Magalhães &
Rocha, 2015) into consideration, how we understand benchmarking charts,
which reveal differences and common trends in EU anti-ESL efforts, is im-
portant. A quick and superficial overview of them may lead to an impres-
sion about which are good and bad education systems/practices worth
learning from. These are facts which can easily trigger social and political
8 Scientifically obtained data are intended for developing, validating and improving
the beliefs of key actors and, as such, motivate actors to achieve goals (Sabatier, 1993).
9 The emphasis here is not on scientifically obtained data, but mostly on the role of
norms and the discourse structure defining good policy and steering individuals’
actions (Checkel, 1999; Gilardi & Radaelli, 2012; Hall, 1993).
10 Political learning is learning about the strategy of advocating a specific policy idea
or problem (Birkland, 2005).
125
