Page 43 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Contemporary European Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 43
esl in the eu: policy overview and development
framed at the EU level have been taken into consideration in the mem-
ber states (qualitative reports) and how they help in realising commonly
defined goals (quantitative reports). National reports are then integrated
into the various EU-level reports. There are differing theoretical consider-
ations about how these progress reports by either literally exposing coun-
tries which have not implemented EU recommendations or numerically
showing which countries are lagging behind in achieving the commonly
agreed goals, or by naming and shaming exert pressure on member states
to perform well (improve their educational policies and practices in line
with the commonly agreed direction) (Gornitzka, 2006; Radaelli, 2008;
Lange & Alexiadou, 2010).
Member states are supposed to report on their ESL policies and their re-
sults in both the EU 2020 and ET 2020 frameworks. In the EU 2020 setting,
they prepare annual reports on their annual National Reform Programmes.
The European Commission and the Council prepare country-specific rec-
ommendations based on their analyses. While these Recommendations are
not legally binding, their influence relies on their political weight (Ecorys,
2014, p. 11). Although they are mostly focused on the broader macro-eco-
nomic situation in member states, in some cases they provide concrete rec-
ommendations for an education/ESL field. For example, the Council of the
EU recommends that France “take further actions to reduce education-
al inequalities in particular by strengthening measures on ESL” (Council,
2014a) and recalled in relation to Spain that “Some progress has been reg-
istered in measures to fight ESL /…/, but full implementation and efficient
use of funding remain crucial”.
In the ET 2020 framework, two kinds of progress reports are prepared.5
The Annual Education and Training Monitor (e.g. European Commission,
2015b), based on data from Eurostat, the OECD and other statistical organ-
isations provides an insight into the evolution of all and particular mem-
ber states with respect to the ET 2020 benchmarks and indicators (annual
qualitative reports). Biannually, the member states also prepare qualita-
tive reports on their progress on the basis of a prepared template. These re-
ports are analysed and summarised by the European Commission and the
Council, assessing the EU’s overall progress towards realising goals, and
exposing the group of countries performing well/poorly or having good
5 Another kind of reports, providing cross-national comparisons and important ex-
pert input to the OMC process, are various reports of expert bodies or networks
(such as NESSE, 2010; European Parliament, 2011; EENEE, 2013; Eurydice, 2014).
43
framed at the EU level have been taken into consideration in the mem-
ber states (qualitative reports) and how they help in realising commonly
defined goals (quantitative reports). National reports are then integrated
into the various EU-level reports. There are differing theoretical consider-
ations about how these progress reports by either literally exposing coun-
tries which have not implemented EU recommendations or numerically
showing which countries are lagging behind in achieving the commonly
agreed goals, or by naming and shaming exert pressure on member states
to perform well (improve their educational policies and practices in line
with the commonly agreed direction) (Gornitzka, 2006; Radaelli, 2008;
Lange & Alexiadou, 2010).
Member states are supposed to report on their ESL policies and their re-
sults in both the EU 2020 and ET 2020 frameworks. In the EU 2020 setting,
they prepare annual reports on their annual National Reform Programmes.
The European Commission and the Council prepare country-specific rec-
ommendations based on their analyses. While these Recommendations are
not legally binding, their influence relies on their political weight (Ecorys,
2014, p. 11). Although they are mostly focused on the broader macro-eco-
nomic situation in member states, in some cases they provide concrete rec-
ommendations for an education/ESL field. For example, the Council of the
EU recommends that France “take further actions to reduce education-
al inequalities in particular by strengthening measures on ESL” (Council,
2014a) and recalled in relation to Spain that “Some progress has been reg-
istered in measures to fight ESL /…/, but full implementation and efficient
use of funding remain crucial”.
In the ET 2020 framework, two kinds of progress reports are prepared.5
The Annual Education and Training Monitor (e.g. European Commission,
2015b), based on data from Eurostat, the OECD and other statistical organ-
isations provides an insight into the evolution of all and particular mem-
ber states with respect to the ET 2020 benchmarks and indicators (annual
qualitative reports). Biannually, the member states also prepare qualita-
tive reports on their progress on the basis of a prepared template. These re-
ports are analysed and summarised by the European Commission and the
Council, assessing the EU’s overall progress towards realising goals, and
exposing the group of countries performing well/poorly or having good
5 Another kind of reports, providing cross-national comparisons and important ex-
pert input to the OMC process, are various reports of expert bodies or networks
(such as NESSE, 2010; European Parliament, 2011; EENEE, 2013; Eurydice, 2014).
43
