Search

Influencing major education policies in the US such as school vouchers and charter schools, market theory assumes that organizational autonomy, parental choice, and competition between schools improve the quality of education. However, whether those policies can influence the instructional core of schools is not well understood. Comparing private and public schools offers an opportunity to examine whether market-oriented assumptions hold in practice. Relying on institutional theory, this study examines whether public and private schools differ in their instructional quality and whether such differences translate into achievement advantages in the US. Using Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) surveys and achievement data, the study integrates structural equation modeling and propensity score matching to examine the latent construct of instructional quality and mitigate selection bias. Results indicate similar instructional quality in public and private schools explaining comparable student achievement by school type. Barriers to instructional change through market-oriented reforms are discussed.

Purpose: ORCID is well recognised as a Persistent Identifier (PID) amongst the global academic community. The international literature is generally extremely positive towards this development. A minority of vociferous critics however have continued to dispute its benefits. Particular concerns have been noted around the potential for ORCID to be used as a tool for evaluation and surveillance by University management structures. This research sought to critically evaluate in-depth perceptions of ORCID in the Technological University (TU) sector in Ireland. Design/methodology/approach: This study involved ten semi-structured interviews with academics and five with librarians in the TU sector. Reflexive thematic analysis informed by Heideggerian hermeneutic phenomenological principles was used to explore transcribed interview data. Findings: The results demonstrate a clear difference in perceptions concerning ORCID, with library staff being very positive and uncritical, even arguing for mandatory adoption. Although some academics were using ORCID IDs in a performative manner, most were suspicious of, or resigned to their use. Concerns about ORCID ranged across various issues including employer surveillance, a lack of institutional autonomy and its inappropriateness for the sector. It is argued that academics in the TU sector have so far not had an opportunity to fully explore and articulate their vision for the future. In its current form ORCID represents a foreign, imposed and inappropriate tool that may facilitate willing or unwilling inclusion in the inequitable and crude "game" of global university league tables. Originality/value: The paper offers an in-depth and critical analysis of ORCID adoption in Ireland based on perceptions amongst two stakeholder groups: academics and librarians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]