Page 39 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Cooperation Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 39
the emergence, importance and challenges of a cross-sectorial approach to esl
Nico (2014) identified the following problems in the development of
cross-sectoral (youth) policy that either relate to political, ideological sys-
tems and will or the lack of knowledge, evidence and data:
- cross-sectoral (youth policy) as a rhetorical exercise and polit-
ically-correct vocabulary (including the lack of a legal frame-
work; intentions with no action; principles with no specific pro-
grammes, unclear relationships between departments, ministries
or agencies);
- lack of functionality or efficiency of existing structures (includ-
ing no communication, no collaboration or no coordination be-
tween departments, ministries or agencies; or the overlapping of
responsibilities and disregard for what is being done outside or
beyond the respective ministry or equivalents); and
- problems associated with the structure itself (such as the fact a
ministry or its equivalents are situated at the bottom of the gov-
ernmental hierarchy or, alternatively, are not even part of that
hierarchy).
The challenges of a cross-sectoral approach to ESL
Moving forward to the challenges of cross-sectoral policy in addressing ESL
identified in the EU, Nevala & Hawley (2011, p. 63) report that most coun-
tries still have a fragmented and insufficiently coordinated approach to
ESL, leading to the duplication of activity and funding. Similarly, Eurydice
(2014) realised that the necessary process of creating a shared understand-
ing of the issues, getting to know each other’s culture and motivational
forces and establishing common working methods is very recent in most
countries and remains a challenge for all. Consequently, there is still little
country-specific experience or evidence showing how cooperation mecha-
nisms actually work in practice.
Because the concept and practice of partnerships is still at a very ear-
ly stage of development (also beyond the ESL domain), much of the con-
ceptual underpinning has yet to be developed and core stages and elements
have neither been adequately identified nor tested within an empirical
framework (Googins & Rochlin, 2000, p. 141; Edwards & Downes, 2013).
The ability to generalise partnership models and capitalise on transfera-
ble knowledge is hence also minimal at this time. In any event, some rare
39
Nico (2014) identified the following problems in the development of
cross-sectoral (youth) policy that either relate to political, ideological sys-
tems and will or the lack of knowledge, evidence and data:
- cross-sectoral (youth policy) as a rhetorical exercise and polit-
ically-correct vocabulary (including the lack of a legal frame-
work; intentions with no action; principles with no specific pro-
grammes, unclear relationships between departments, ministries
or agencies);
- lack of functionality or efficiency of existing structures (includ-
ing no communication, no collaboration or no coordination be-
tween departments, ministries or agencies; or the overlapping of
responsibilities and disregard for what is being done outside or
beyond the respective ministry or equivalents); and
- problems associated with the structure itself (such as the fact a
ministry or its equivalents are situated at the bottom of the gov-
ernmental hierarchy or, alternatively, are not even part of that
hierarchy).
The challenges of a cross-sectoral approach to ESL
Moving forward to the challenges of cross-sectoral policy in addressing ESL
identified in the EU, Nevala & Hawley (2011, p. 63) report that most coun-
tries still have a fragmented and insufficiently coordinated approach to
ESL, leading to the duplication of activity and funding. Similarly, Eurydice
(2014) realised that the necessary process of creating a shared understand-
ing of the issues, getting to know each other’s culture and motivational
forces and establishing common working methods is very recent in most
countries and remains a challenge for all. Consequently, there is still little
country-specific experience or evidence showing how cooperation mecha-
nisms actually work in practice.
Because the concept and practice of partnerships is still at a very ear-
ly stage of development (also beyond the ESL domain), much of the con-
ceptual underpinning has yet to be developed and core stages and elements
have neither been adequately identified nor tested within an empirical
framework (Googins & Rochlin, 2000, p. 141; Edwards & Downes, 2013).
The ability to generalise partnership models and capitalise on transfera-
ble knowledge is hence also minimal at this time. In any event, some rare
39
