The European Union, education governance and international education surveys

Abstract

The European Union – comprising 28 member states with individual sovereignty in the formation and implementation of education policy – has developed research and communication strategies to facilitate the exchange of best practices, gathering and dissemination of education statistics and, perhaps most importantly, advice and support for national policy reform. Additionally, shared programs have been implemented across the union, which have led to the formation of one of the largest transnational policy networks in the world. This paper examines the influence of international education surveys administered by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, outlining the key characteristics of the surveys and the most salient findings. We discuss the contribution of emerging European Union governance for the quality of education while also looking at the challenges ahead. These challenges include developing assessments to include value added, revising assessments to include broader skills and providing assessment feedback to teachers within an EU context in which national and Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development assessments become complementary, rather than overlapping, survey measures.

University governance: insights from England and Greece

“…The market orientation strategy, based on the fundamental principle of marketing, may indeed have a positive impact on the enhancement of the qualitative process since the increased competition among the institutions will force them to improve in order to maintain/enhance their position and consequently attract more students, both in terms of quantity and quality. However, the whole discussion and debate is not around commercial goods or services but it is about education services – a sector completely different from the business sector in terms of attitude and values (Altrichter, 2010; Antikainen, 2010 cited by De Haan, 2015; Burley et al , 2012; Cai and Mehari, 2015; Capano and Regini, 2014; De Haan, 2015; Eckel, 2007 cited by De Haan, 2015; Hordern, 2013; Lokuwaduge and Armstrong, 2015; Lanford, 2016; Lueger and Vettori, 2014; Marince and Gibbs, 2009; Ntim et al , 2017; Papa et al , 2013; Parker, 2013; Rowlands, 2013; Trakman, 2008; Volante and Ritzen, 2016; Vidovich and Currie, 2011). One could consider that the business sector aims to enhance quality so as to attract more customers and increase economic potential.…”

“…That said, it is clear from the above that a lack of strategic planning, and any subsequent short-term solution, not only struggles to bring improvement to the system but also makes it difficult to clearly identify what the system’s orientation might be. The lack of policy cohesion and the regular occurrence of changes/reforms are counterproductive as universities often do not have enough time to adjust properly to the new policy environment before the next round of strategic imperatives are passed (Fassoulis, 2014; Eckel, 2007 cited by De Haan, 2015; Hordern, 2013; Lokuwaduge and Armstrong, 2015; Lanford, 2016; Lueger and Vettori, 2014; Ntim et al , 2017; Parker, 2013; Rowlands, 2013; Saiti, 2013; Trakman, 2008; Volante and Ritzen, 2016; Vidovich and Currie, 2011).…”

Social and Economic Aspects of the EU ’s Education Policy

“…Hervás Soriano and Mulatero also through the concept of knowledge triangle highlight the importance of jointly fostering research, education and innovation, and of paying due attention to the linkages between them [3]. G. Rappai in his study empirically proved that a successful cohesion policy is essential fulfilling in the growth expectations set for a decade [4] and Volante and Ritzen through examination the influence of prominent international education surveys on education governance within the EU -particularly those administered by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), outlining the key characteristics of the OECD surveys and the most salient EU findings discussed the contribution of emerging EU governance for the quality of education while looking at the challenges ahead [5], but also with policies supporting innovation or European employment guidelines and development goals, which are addressed by Tvaronavičienė et all, Udrea, or Vagač [6][7][8]. In particular, lifelong learning, adult education and the need to implement their specificities and policies are dealt with, for example, by Bočáková and Kubíčková [9], and Butoracová Šindleryová [10], Formosa discusses the strengths and lacunae in the European Union's policy on older adult learning, what is in truth deemed as a productive investment on the basis that it not only engenders positive returns of economic growth but also improves the quality of life and social development of older persons [11] and Heyneman agreed with the conclusion that the age cohort attending higher education is higher today than at any time in human history [12].…”

Educational policies in Central and Eastern Europe: legacies of state socialism, modernization aspirations and challenges of semi-peripheral contexts

“…While interesting in comparative terms, such results may lead to possibly false conclusions that as long as scores are high there is a reason to be satisfied with how the particular educational system functions – a view that, for instance, helps keeping the question of teachers’ salaries off the center of public debate on schooling. 10 And their vague status as international – and, indeed, national – tools of governance resulting from a ‘peer pressure’ among states rather than a top-down regulations (Liesner, 2012; Volante and Ritzen, 2016) begs further, both broader and more specific, questions on policy-borrowing, imitation and the instrumentalization of education in an attempt to modernize as much as to create an illusion of fitting a regime presented as neutral and inevitable.…”