Page 36 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Contemporary European Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 36
ear ly school leaving: contempor ary european perspectives
In addition to education’s generally recognised contribution to re-
alising overall EU strategic development, more education-specific goals
and guidelines are important for understanding common EU cooperation
when it comes to tackling ESL.
On the basis of its predecessor ET 2010 (Council of the EU, 2002), in
2009 a new Working programme Education and Training 2020 (ET 2020)
(Council of the EU, 2009) was accepted with the aim of supporting EU
member states in further development of their education systems. It con-
sists of four common strategic objectives: 1) Improving the quality and ef-
ficiency of education and training; 2) Promoting equity, social cohesion
and active citizenship; 3) Making lifelong learning and mobility a reality;
4) Enhancing creativity and innovation, including entrepreneurship, at all
levels of education and training. It defines a set of principles for achieving
these objectives, as well as common working methods with priority areas
for each periodic work cycle3 (Council of the EU, 2009). ESL is related to all
four strategic objectives, most directly to the third one in terms of its elab-
oration that “Education and training systems should aim to ensure that all
learners including those from disadvantaged backgrounds complete their
education”. Making ESL a priority area of EU cooperation in the period
2010–2020 gave a clear mandate to the European Commission, EU member
states and all other relevant actors to closely work together. In that frame-
work, various activities have been implemented with the result that many
soft law (non-binding) documents have been accepted, providing general
and more concrete directions for achieving the commonly agreed EU ESL
goal.
3 The Council wanted a strategic framework that would remain flexible enough to re-
spond to new challenges and could therefore be regularly adapted. This is the rea-
son for ET 2020’s 3-year work cycles with Joint Reports (adopted by the Council and
the Commission) as a basis for establishing fresh priority areas for the ensuing cy-
cle. An overview shows that ESL has been identified as a priority area in all three
already activated cycles 2009–2011, 2012–2014 and 2015–2017. For example, in the
current cycle (2015–2017) as a concrete issue in addressing one of the priority areas
it is stated “Reducing ESL by supporting school-based strategies with an overall in-
clusive learner-centred vision of education and ‘second-chance’ and “Supporting in-
itial education and continuing professional development at all levels, especially to
deal with /…/ ESL /…/”. Review of the National Report on the implementation of
ET 2020 in which member states were asked to point out priority areas which they
find necessary to focus EU cooperation in the next working cycle (2015–2017) on re-
veals that all TITA countries actually conducting the (formally non-obligatory) re-
port (France, Luxembourg, Slovenia) exposed the importance of strengthening EU
cooperation on ESL from different angles.
36
In addition to education’s generally recognised contribution to re-
alising overall EU strategic development, more education-specific goals
and guidelines are important for understanding common EU cooperation
when it comes to tackling ESL.
On the basis of its predecessor ET 2010 (Council of the EU, 2002), in
2009 a new Working programme Education and Training 2020 (ET 2020)
(Council of the EU, 2009) was accepted with the aim of supporting EU
member states in further development of their education systems. It con-
sists of four common strategic objectives: 1) Improving the quality and ef-
ficiency of education and training; 2) Promoting equity, social cohesion
and active citizenship; 3) Making lifelong learning and mobility a reality;
4) Enhancing creativity and innovation, including entrepreneurship, at all
levels of education and training. It defines a set of principles for achieving
these objectives, as well as common working methods with priority areas
for each periodic work cycle3 (Council of the EU, 2009). ESL is related to all
four strategic objectives, most directly to the third one in terms of its elab-
oration that “Education and training systems should aim to ensure that all
learners including those from disadvantaged backgrounds complete their
education”. Making ESL a priority area of EU cooperation in the period
2010–2020 gave a clear mandate to the European Commission, EU member
states and all other relevant actors to closely work together. In that frame-
work, various activities have been implemented with the result that many
soft law (non-binding) documents have been accepted, providing general
and more concrete directions for achieving the commonly agreed EU ESL
goal.
3 The Council wanted a strategic framework that would remain flexible enough to re-
spond to new challenges and could therefore be regularly adapted. This is the rea-
son for ET 2020’s 3-year work cycles with Joint Reports (adopted by the Council and
the Commission) as a basis for establishing fresh priority areas for the ensuing cy-
cle. An overview shows that ESL has been identified as a priority area in all three
already activated cycles 2009–2011, 2012–2014 and 2015–2017. For example, in the
current cycle (2015–2017) as a concrete issue in addressing one of the priority areas
it is stated “Reducing ESL by supporting school-based strategies with an overall in-
clusive learner-centred vision of education and ‘second-chance’ and “Supporting in-
itial education and continuing professional development at all levels, especially to
deal with /…/ ESL /…/”. Review of the National Report on the implementation of
ET 2020 in which member states were asked to point out priority areas which they
find necessary to focus EU cooperation in the next working cycle (2015–2017) on re-
veals that all TITA countries actually conducting the (formally non-obligatory) re-
port (France, Luxembourg, Slovenia) exposed the importance of strengthening EU
cooperation on ESL from different angles.
36
