Page 57 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Contemporary European Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 57
the esl situation in france
high truancy and ESL rates. They coordinate the prevention action taken
by the education staff, including the CPE and social and health staff, with-
in ESL-prevention groups. The third measure was related to truancy as an
early sign of potential school leaving. Some other important measures were
(for a detailed description, see Eurydice, n.d.): families are given the final
decision regarding the type of lycée a student will attend (to avoid unwant-
ed streaming to vocational programmes linked to ESL; Bavoux & Pugin,
2012), a website where ESLers can find information regarding training was
set up (http://www.onisep.fr/), an advisory phone number for (potential)
ESLers or parents about training solutions was made available, versatility
in training and flexibility for tracks was increased, external partners were
included in educational alliances to offer more personalised and transver-
sal responses, a plan to educate education staff on ESL was developed etc.
Altogether, over 30 policies were implemented with numerous local
projects or initiatives (also see Guigue, 2013) and the coexistence of differ-
ent type of actors (government departments, local governments and local
structures/networks). Numerous measures and instruments were loosely
coordinated, quickly outdated, decommissioned and scarcely financed at
the national/systemic level (Berthet & Simon, 2012). The collision of na-
tional and local agenda has impacted and sometimes destroyed local ex-
perimentations (ibid.). The authors also find that the voice of the students
in these projects was not heard (pupils had no information about the pro-
jects, projects bore no value to them, they were forced to participate), some-
times also due to constraints in the education system (not enough places at
the chosen school).
In 2014, the Ministry of Education prepared an evaluation of the part-
nership policy against ESL and proposed a systemic action plan (MEN,
2014, a, b). A coordinated and coherent action public policy to prevent ESL
was launched in November 2014 in the form of a national strategy to tack-
le ESL (Tous mobilisés contre le décrochage – Together against ESL; MEN,
2015b). The strategy brought different ESL policies and measures togeth-
er, and systemised them along three key areas. According to the strategy
(MEN, 2015b) the three key areas are:
(1) all mobilised against ESL (accountability/empowerment of all ac-
tors – schools, teachers, educational non-teaching staff, parents,
youth, external actors; ‘staying in school is everyone’s business,
and every young person needs daily encouragement’);
57
high truancy and ESL rates. They coordinate the prevention action taken
by the education staff, including the CPE and social and health staff, with-
in ESL-prevention groups. The third measure was related to truancy as an
early sign of potential school leaving. Some other important measures were
(for a detailed description, see Eurydice, n.d.): families are given the final
decision regarding the type of lycée a student will attend (to avoid unwant-
ed streaming to vocational programmes linked to ESL; Bavoux & Pugin,
2012), a website where ESLers can find information regarding training was
set up (http://www.onisep.fr/), an advisory phone number for (potential)
ESLers or parents about training solutions was made available, versatility
in training and flexibility for tracks was increased, external partners were
included in educational alliances to offer more personalised and transver-
sal responses, a plan to educate education staff on ESL was developed etc.
Altogether, over 30 policies were implemented with numerous local
projects or initiatives (also see Guigue, 2013) and the coexistence of differ-
ent type of actors (government departments, local governments and local
structures/networks). Numerous measures and instruments were loosely
coordinated, quickly outdated, decommissioned and scarcely financed at
the national/systemic level (Berthet & Simon, 2012). The collision of na-
tional and local agenda has impacted and sometimes destroyed local ex-
perimentations (ibid.). The authors also find that the voice of the students
in these projects was not heard (pupils had no information about the pro-
jects, projects bore no value to them, they were forced to participate), some-
times also due to constraints in the education system (not enough places at
the chosen school).
In 2014, the Ministry of Education prepared an evaluation of the part-
nership policy against ESL and proposed a systemic action plan (MEN,
2014, a, b). A coordinated and coherent action public policy to prevent ESL
was launched in November 2014 in the form of a national strategy to tack-
le ESL (Tous mobilisés contre le décrochage – Together against ESL; MEN,
2015b). The strategy brought different ESL policies and measures togeth-
er, and systemised them along three key areas. According to the strategy
(MEN, 2015b) the three key areas are:
(1) all mobilised against ESL (accountability/empowerment of all ac-
tors – schools, teachers, educational non-teaching staff, parents,
youth, external actors; ‘staying in school is everyone’s business,
and every young person needs daily encouragement’);
57
