Search

Governments tend to have strong opinions about education, largely because education eats up a large proportion of their budget. They do not always, however, have the opportunity to express those opinions in reasoned terms in learned journals. Here is the exception. Nicholas Fox has been seconded from the UK Training Agency to the COMETT Technical Unit. He thus has experience both of national and international governmental operations and an almost unique insight into the ways in which government decisionmaking takes place and the reasons why certain programmes are accepted while others fail. In this paper he gives an overview of European Distance Education programmes, and uses examples in the UK and France to illustrate national strategies in that field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Survey of Schools: ICT in education commissioned in 2011 by the European Commission took place between January 2011 and November 2012, with data collection in autumn 2011. This article presents the main findings of the Survey based on over 190,000 questionnaire answers from students, teachers and head teachers in primary, lower and upper secondary schools randomly sampled. The article details the analytical framework design and the survey methodology implemented. It then presents the main 'state of the art' indicators that have been built, concerning ICT infrastructure and access to it, frequency of students' ICT based activities during lessons, level of teachers' and students' confidence in their digital competences, their opinion about using ICT for teaching and learning, and the school strategies to support ICT integration in teaching and learning. The article also presents the main findings of the exploratory part of the analysis, introducing the concepts of digitally supportive school, digitally confident and supportive teacher and digitally confident and supportive student, estimating their respective proportion at EU level on average and by country and investigating whether high percentage of digitally supportive schools include high percentages of digitally confident and positive teachers and students. A few recommendations for policy making at European, national, regional/local and institutional levels conclude the article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The development of key competences for lifelong learning has been an important policy imperative for EU Member States. The European Reference Framework of key competences (2006) built on previous developments by the OECD, UNESCO and Member States themselves. It defined key competences as knowledge, skills and attitudes applied appropriately to contexts. Now most Member States have incorporated key competences, or similarly broad learning outcomes, into their school curriculum frameworks. This is a necessary but insufficient step towards implementation; for the effective development of learners' key competences, assessment must also change. This article focuses on the challenge of assessing cross-curricular key competences in primary and secondary education. It is based on a major study for the European Commission (Gordon, et al., 2009), which drew on information gathered and validated with the help of experts in each of the 27 EU Member States. The study's typology of assessment provides a basis for reviewing some recent developments in Member States. Present challenges and innovative responses are addressed, including 'unpacking' key competences, 'mapping' them to contexts and 'accessment' of their full scope and range. Policy developments are considered in the context of the author's work with the European Commission's Thematic Working Group on the assessment of key competences. The article concludes with considerations for policy and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the EU commitment to alleviating the high rates of poverty in Europe there is widespread agreement among policy-makers that it is crucial to include the voices of those who are living in poverty in order to fight exclusion most effectively. Similarly, those studying ways to address poverty and inequality are increasingly required to seek dialogue with those who are the focus of their research. These policy-makers and researchers need procedures that will allow them to move from the principle of including the voices of the most vulnerable social groups to specific ways of undertaking such a dialogue. Research using the critical communicative methodology (CCM) sheds some light on this. By examining aspects of the Integrated Project INCLUD-ED, the largest research on school education in the Framework Programme, this article argues that three elements of the CCM - egalitarian dialogue, successful actions' approach and informing effective policies - facilitate the engagement between researchers, end-users, and all the other involved stakeholders and therefore the move from principles to action in the process of overcoming poverty in Europe. As this article and the special issue demonstrate, through those elements, INCLUD-ED has already provided scientific knowledge that is instrumental to shorten the distance between the present situation and the horizon of a Europe which is free from poverty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How effective is EU cooperation in higher education? This article treats the issue as one of effectiveness in policy-making. What are the policy ideas which the EU wishes to feed into a policy domain where it has to operate largely through political cooperation and a modest degree of incentive funding? What outcomes are possible? The question is of interest since Europe has two processes which aim for a better regional integration of higher education in order to boost the quality of European higher education and to make a global impact. These are the world- famous Bologna Process and the EU process to drive Europe's universities to make better use of their interlinked roles of education, research and innovation, part of a larger strategy (EU 2020, Lisbon) for European Union growth to support employment, productivity and social cohesion. Building on the theoretical insights of an institutionalist literature concerned with the dynamics of European policy-making in the knowledge domain (Maassen & Olsen, 2007; Gornitzka, 2006, 2010) and complementary theories of historical institutionalism (Pierson, 2003, Thelen, 2003) and agenda setting (Kingdon, 1995), this article examines policy-making on higher education cooperation in the European arena since the Treaty of Maastricht in 1992. It seeks answers to two questions. Why did the Bologna Process dominate the agenda from 1999 to 2004? How did the European Commission acquire the power to shape the issue of European higher education cooperation? Rejecting simple spillover explanations, it theorises in terms of policy entrepreneurship why the EU has latterly been effective in shaping European cooperation in higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since its creation in 1958, the European Social Fund (ESF) has played a major role in supporting the development of vocational training in the Member States. However, compared to other, more recently launched, EU programmes and initiatives in the area of education and training, the ESF has not made a significant contribution to the debate about European cooperation in this field. This article argues that the ESF has made a mistake in this respect. It also seeks to illustrate and analyse the important changes that the ESF has undergone over the years in addressing the issue of vocational education and training (VET) and to demonstrate that it has substantial resources, in terms of money and experience, that can be used to adapt education and training systems to labour market requirements and to the needs of a knowledge-based economy. The article places a deliberate, though not an exclusive, emphasis on vocational education and training for young people and on the extension of transnational cooperation within the framework of the ESF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Learning Cities and Learning Regions are terms now in common use as a result of the growing importance of lifelong learning concepts to the economic, social and environmental future of people and places. Why ‘learning’ regions? Why not intelligent, creative, clever, smart or knowledge regions? In truth, all of these can, and some do, also exist, but we argue that this is not a semantic debate. The basis of intelligence, smartness, cleverness, creativity and knowledge is effective learning and its intelligent application in creating a better future. We can, we believe, only learn our way into the future and the same is true, in developmental terms, of cities, towns, regions and communities. What therefore is a learning region? Definitions tend to differ according to perception, situation, occupation and objective. Where the focus is on technology a learning region will emphasise the advantages of hi-tech for the development of a physical infrastructure that will assist regeneration and be useful for more efficient behaviour and learning by people and organisations. Hence the growth of ‘smart cities,’ mainly in North America. Where it is on employment, employability, organisational management and training for industry, the development of human and social capital for economic gain and competitive edge tends to predominate. Most regions concentrate on this aspect. Where the motivation is based on the use of valuable resources, it will concentrate on volunteering, active citizenship and the building of social capital. Such an approach is not well developed in many regions and the optimum balance between economic, community and personal growth is poorly understood. Where the goal is the competent use of organisational potential a learning region will mobilise all its stakeholder institutions as partners in the service of the region as a whole. Here, very little is understood or implemented. This article argues that all of these approaches and others in the fields of environment, personal and cultural growth, innovation, diversity and communication are a holistic part and parcel of learning region development. Its meaning and its characteristics will become clear as it charts the development of ideas about learning regions, particularly those that have occurred during the past 20 years. It suggests the existence of a paradigm shift at work — the age of education and training, which has served us well in the late 20th century in satisfying the needs of a growing, upwardly mobile proportion of the population, has now given way to the era of lifelong learning, in which the means, the tools and techniques are employed to target and motivate everyone in a city, town or region. Those regions that achieve this nirvana will be the winners in the apparent paradox that intelligent local action leads to success in a globalised world, a version of the concept of ‘glocalisation’ coined by Robertson (1995) . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigates the information society discourse in the European Union in relation to the European Commission's eLearning programmes, based on selected academics' conceptualisation of the term. It reveals a mixed picture of the perceptions that academics have of the information society in their respective countries. The findings indicate a convergence of these perceptions with the indicators of a presumed information society in various quantitative studies. This study considers that an integrated European Information Society, promoted by the European Commission partly through its eLearning programmes, is a concept destined to remain a motivational instrument for driving ICT policies throughout Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article argues that, despite globalisation forces, national education and training systems have kept their particularities. Policies of convergence, enhanced by supranational organisations such as the European Commission, have not yet led to a homogenisation of national education and training systems. The latter are still influenced by the political, economic and social framework. Thus, no single model of lifelong learning prevailed in Europe. There were countries close to the demand-led model of ‘voluntary partnership’ (e.g. UK), countries representative of the ‘formalised social partnership’ model (e.g. Sweden) and countries adhering to the ‘statist’ model (e.g. Greece). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]