Why compare? A response to Stephen Lawton

Gordon, Liz; Pearce, Diane

doi:10.1080/0268093930080205

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the same time the 'product' of the educational machinery-the student-assumes a significant role in the resource generating capability of education institutions by: first, being the main determining factor in just how much public funding institutions attract and, secondly, by directly contributing towards educational coffers through the payment of various educational fees. As Gordon and Pearce (1993) have argued, this vision is not about education per se. It is about the economy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is a general consensus among education policy commentators that contemporary education policy in all the countries that have implemented neo-liberal reforms have had nothing to do with education per se, but has had much more to do with underlying economic conditions (Dill, 1997;Gordon and Pearce, 1993). This assertion finds support in the fact that free-markets, as a policy-orientation, came to prominence in the 1980s in most countries around the world when countries were going through economic difficulties.…”

Section: The Market Ideology and Tertiary Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Vision for Tertiary Education Under Free Market Policies: A Comparative Analysis of Contemporary Tertiary Education Policy of Zambia and New Zealand

Mbita¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>In the past two decades economic theories of the 'market' have permeated economic and social sector policies of both developed and developing countries. Market mechanisms have become the main policy option upon which economic and social sector reforms, including tertiary education, have been premised. In this study I have compared trends in contemporary tertiary education policy of two countries: Zambia and New Zealand. Prior to 1980 in both countries education was predominantly a public monopoly and free at all levels. However, in the late 1980s and early 1990s New Zealand and Zambia respectively embarked on radical economic and social sector reforms based on the competitive market model. I have argued that market mechanisms in education policy of both Zambia and New Zealand had their origins in economic theories of the competitive market. These theories gained popularity at a time when countries were going through unprecedented economic difficulties. Thus, although on the surface competitive market policies would seem to suggest that the aim of government was to improve efficiency and accountability and to increase equity and equality of opportunities in tertiary institutions, under conditions of increasing demand on declining public resources and at a time when demand for tertiary education was increasing, it would appear that the long-term intentions of governments in both countries were to reduce public appropriation to tertiary education by transferring part of the responsibility of funding education to institutions themselves and to the beneficiaries of tertiary education. I have also argued that because New Zealand already had a prolific education system in place and a comprehensive student support system it was in a better position to operate its tertiary education system along free market lines. An under-developed tertiary education sector and lack of comprehensive student-aid packages in Zambia have meant that the implementation of market-oriented policies in tertiary education are likely to impact more negatively on the students, education institutions and Zambian society in general.</p>

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Market Ideology and Tertiary Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%