Page 40 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Contemporary European Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 40
ear ly school leaving: contempor ary european perspectives
Monitor 2015 reveals that the majority of member states has implement-
ed the Council Recommendation by adopting either explicit comprehen-
sive strategies (e.g. France) or other national policies (e.g. Luxembourg and
Spain) (European Commission, 2015b, p. 37).
In the OMC framework various operational documents have been ac-
cepted at the EU level, assisting member states in implementing their na-
tional policies on ESL. The working group on ESL outlined 12 key messages
for policy-makers and translated them into practical tools through a check-
list regarding comprehensive policies on ESL (European Commission,
2013). The working group on school policy created policy messages, iden-
tifying key conditions for implementing a whole-school approach to tack-
ling ESL as well as an online “Toolkit for Schools”, supporting (national)
policy-makers and practitioners in their efforts to tackle ESL (European
Commission, 2015a).
The review shows that, despite the non-obligatory nature of the OMC
(no harmonisation of EU laws), in nation states various policy measures are
accepted which, at least to some extent, are initiated by EU-level process-
es. Since the process of translating EU guidelines into national contexts is
very differently and in some states weakly organised, Ecorys (2014) rec-
ommends that the European Commission and member states share their
(good) practices in this regard.
For translating EU guidelines into national contexts and developing
their national policies on ESL, member states have a variety of mutual pol-
icy learning activities available within the OMC framework. They enable
member states to share good practices and therefore collectively search
for solutions which lead to the achievement of commonly agreed goals (as
measured by indicators and benchmarks).
Periodic monitoring, evaluation and peer review organised
as mutual learning processes
To reflect the complexity of the last OMC element, we split its presenta-
tion into two parts. The first part presents peer review organised as a mutu-
al learning process and the second part presents periodic monitoring and
evaluation.
Various academics (e.g. Gornitzka, 2006; Radaelli, 2008; Lange &
Alexiadou, 2010) claim that the OMC represents the “architecture of pol-
icy learning”. Seen in this way, the OMC is an institutional arrangement
which organises policy learning process among member states. This means
40
Monitor 2015 reveals that the majority of member states has implement-
ed the Council Recommendation by adopting either explicit comprehen-
sive strategies (e.g. France) or other national policies (e.g. Luxembourg and
Spain) (European Commission, 2015b, p. 37).
In the OMC framework various operational documents have been ac-
cepted at the EU level, assisting member states in implementing their na-
tional policies on ESL. The working group on ESL outlined 12 key messages
for policy-makers and translated them into practical tools through a check-
list regarding comprehensive policies on ESL (European Commission,
2013). The working group on school policy created policy messages, iden-
tifying key conditions for implementing a whole-school approach to tack-
ling ESL as well as an online “Toolkit for Schools”, supporting (national)
policy-makers and practitioners in their efforts to tackle ESL (European
Commission, 2015a).
The review shows that, despite the non-obligatory nature of the OMC
(no harmonisation of EU laws), in nation states various policy measures are
accepted which, at least to some extent, are initiated by EU-level process-
es. Since the process of translating EU guidelines into national contexts is
very differently and in some states weakly organised, Ecorys (2014) rec-
ommends that the European Commission and member states share their
(good) practices in this regard.
For translating EU guidelines into national contexts and developing
their national policies on ESL, member states have a variety of mutual pol-
icy learning activities available within the OMC framework. They enable
member states to share good practices and therefore collectively search
for solutions which lead to the achievement of commonly agreed goals (as
measured by indicators and benchmarks).
Periodic monitoring, evaluation and peer review organised
as mutual learning processes
To reflect the complexity of the last OMC element, we split its presenta-
tion into two parts. The first part presents peer review organised as a mutu-
al learning process and the second part presents periodic monitoring and
evaluation.
Various academics (e.g. Gornitzka, 2006; Radaelli, 2008; Lange &
Alexiadou, 2010) claim that the OMC represents the “architecture of pol-
icy learning”. Seen in this way, the OMC is an institutional arrangement
which organises policy learning process among member states. This means
40
