Page 42 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Contemporary European Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 42
ear ly school leaving: contempor ary european perspectives
on holistic and collaborative ESL prevention and early interven-
tion activities at the school and local levels. Based on its activities
(peer learning, analysis of case studies, mapping of school gov-
ernance arrangements and of practices to support learners, inputs
from international research, dialogue with experts, and in-depth
country-focused workshops), the working group published Policy
messages on A whole school approach to ESL, as well developed
the online platform “European Toolkit for Schools for inclusive
education and early school leaving prevention”, which provides
support to schools to prevent ESL.
The review reveals that the mandates of the new thematic working
groups (2016–2018) do not explicitly cover the ESL issue4, although: a) ESL is
identified in priority areas and concrete issues for European cooperation in
education and training until 2020 (Council ot the EU, 2015, and European
Commission, 2015a); and b) the EU has still not reached its headline target
(less than 10% of ESLers by 2020) (European Commission, 2015a).
OMC policy learning activities are supposed to be implemented at dif-
ferent levels, by either organising activities at the EU level or stimulating
member states for national policy learning, as in the case of Council con-
clusions (2015) which invite member states “to encourage and promote col-
laborative (‘whole-school’) approaches to reducing ESL at local level, for in-
stance through cooperation between schools of different types and levels
which are located in the same area, as well as networking and multi-pro-
fessional learning communities at regional, national and international lev-
els /…/”.
In order to monitor the success of EU member states in attaining the
commonly agreed goals, various progress reports are published within the
OMC framework. They help recognise potential problems, identify good
practices and therefore stimulate policy learning among member states
concerning how to meet commonly agreed goals.
For national actors, the periodic monitoring and regular reporting in
the OMC are a special task with set deadlines. These reports feed informa-
tion back into the European education process regarding how measures
4 Two of the six working groups (Working group on schools; Working group on pro-
moting citizenship and the common values of freedom, tolerance and non-discrim-
ination through education – follow-up to the Paris Declaration) only indirectly in-
dicate ESL as a Relevant Europe 2020 target/ET 2020 benchmark, which their work
is related to.
42
on holistic and collaborative ESL prevention and early interven-
tion activities at the school and local levels. Based on its activities
(peer learning, analysis of case studies, mapping of school gov-
ernance arrangements and of practices to support learners, inputs
from international research, dialogue with experts, and in-depth
country-focused workshops), the working group published Policy
messages on A whole school approach to ESL, as well developed
the online platform “European Toolkit for Schools for inclusive
education and early school leaving prevention”, which provides
support to schools to prevent ESL.
The review reveals that the mandates of the new thematic working
groups (2016–2018) do not explicitly cover the ESL issue4, although: a) ESL is
identified in priority areas and concrete issues for European cooperation in
education and training until 2020 (Council ot the EU, 2015, and European
Commission, 2015a); and b) the EU has still not reached its headline target
(less than 10% of ESLers by 2020) (European Commission, 2015a).
OMC policy learning activities are supposed to be implemented at dif-
ferent levels, by either organising activities at the EU level or stimulating
member states for national policy learning, as in the case of Council con-
clusions (2015) which invite member states “to encourage and promote col-
laborative (‘whole-school’) approaches to reducing ESL at local level, for in-
stance through cooperation between schools of different types and levels
which are located in the same area, as well as networking and multi-pro-
fessional learning communities at regional, national and international lev-
els /…/”.
In order to monitor the success of EU member states in attaining the
commonly agreed goals, various progress reports are published within the
OMC framework. They help recognise potential problems, identify good
practices and therefore stimulate policy learning among member states
concerning how to meet commonly agreed goals.
For national actors, the periodic monitoring and regular reporting in
the OMC are a special task with set deadlines. These reports feed informa-
tion back into the European education process regarding how measures
4 Two of the six working groups (Working group on schools; Working group on pro-
moting citizenship and the common values of freedom, tolerance and non-discrim-
ination through education – follow-up to the Paris Declaration) only indirectly in-
dicate ESL as a Relevant Europe 2020 target/ET 2020 benchmark, which their work
is related to.
42
