Thursday, 23 July 2020

SCHOLAR: EDUCATION IN AUSTRALIA, BRITIAN, USA, LATIN AMERICA AND EUROPE


In order to be able to understand comparative education, it is first necessary to be able to define several recurring terms which will be used throughout this essay.  A historical context reveals the motives of education especially when considerate of political ideology.  This essay will explore education received in Australia, Britain and the United States.  It will brief on the Latin American experience and conclude with European education and its transformation.  Through this comparative analysis, one will ascertain an informed discourse about how education is provided in multiple contexts.  


To be able to look at the education of a specific nature, it is important to understand the concept of functional centralization or decenteralization.  This refers to the distribution of powers of an authority.  Education in some countries is managed by a Ministry of Education.  A centralized education system means that a single authority is responsible for all aspects of education.  In a centralized system the single authority makes the policy pertaining to education.  A move to separate this power would be referred to decentralization (Arnove R., et al, 2012).  Moreover if there is a transfer of power from higher to lower levels, it would be territorial decentralization.  Within territorial decentralization are three main subcategories which are as follows, deconcentration, delegation and devolution.  It is important to understand these terms as they relate to the power structures that administer education to a certain population.  Deconcentration is when a major authority creates branches.  Delegation is when an authority permits tasks to be completed by another authority lower in the power structure.  Devolution is when powers are held at subnational levels.  It is very important to understand the concepts of centralization and decentralization because it allows for a better understanding of the educational systems in place.  The reasons in which governments move to centralize or decentralize is because of political or administrative reasons.  For political reasons a government can choose to centralize to strengthen the power of the dominant group, they can on the other hand decentralize to spread or share the power.  For administrative purposes governments opt to facilitate bureaucratic efficiency.  There are also costs concerns and diversity considerations that governments may opt to perform de/ centralization.  In all, governments seek to nation build through education.  Governments vest their authorities with autonomy in decision making.  Through school- leaving qualifications, school textbooks and the operation of universities authorities can control the way education is provided.  Control of school leaving qualifications boards operated by the government may set entrance exams and the such so that they may control the quality of the students.  Through textbooks governments can control the ideology spread to the population via education.  For example, previously in China, they opted to use education to spread the ideology of communism to their students.  China has an official list of textbooks which are permitted to be used in schools.  These textbooks disseminate the ideas of communism and related subject matters.  Lastly, through the control of universities governments can influence the politics and reduce political threats.  Educated people serve as the fuel for activist movements and they are able to rationalize or normalize societal capitalism.


Through colonization, education spread to many countries.    Globalization has caused knowledge to be shared and disseminated from one country to another.  Through multiple voices, communities became diverse however, this diversity could be considered as a lack of agreements on values and ethics.  These disagreements can cause violence or even hatred.  Atrocities in the name of specific groups could be done, such is the case with Germany in WW2.  Dominant groups have and are marginalizing others (Arnove R., et al, 2012).  Although there is the risk of marginalization, education serves as a method to transform individuals.  Education can redefine who people are.  Identity is fluid and can be molded.  Through education identities can be formed.  In a multilayered construction of lives and cultures, governments can achieve identity creation.  This is then nation building.  


Australia, Canada and USA have federal systems in which substantial powers are given to the provincial governments.  Australia has pushed for centralized government control of the education system.  Education is provided under the human capital theory which viability of a nation is based on the foundation at which people are educated or skilled to work.  In Australia, the delivery of education occurs through grammar and largely private secondary education, a tertiary sector dominated by a university sector and a vocational and technical education to train people.  Schools in Australia all compete for students.  Therefore, the impact of neoliberalism in the Australian educational system is very evident as they move towards intensified market orientation.  For example in 2006 – 2007 Australia’s third largest export was education and in 2009 – 2010 educational services accounted for 36% of all exports.  Through the, “enterprise university,” a market becomes available in which universities can compete for students and funding from the government and private interests (Arnove R., et al, 2012).  

With pertinence to Britain after WW2 the welfare state reduced opportunity gaps between poor and rich.  Education became a pillar by which to reform the country.  Under Margret Thatcher however, the promotion of productivity and efficiency was paramount.  She promoted entrepreneurialism, consumer choice and reduced fiscal dependency.  They modeled the education system in Britain under the U.S. principles of monetarisim.  By the mid 1970’s it became clear that mass secondary schooling was reproducing patterns of inequality.  By 1984 Britain moved to centralize the curriculum through the School Examination Council and the School Curriculum Development Council.  This evidently dissolved the independent Schools Council.  Britain then decided to privatize through the Office for Standards Education.  They were responsible for standards in early learning, primary, secondary and post compulsory further education institutions and teacher education.  By 1994 Britain created a national curriculum for teacher education.  In 1996 the Education Act allowed students to borrow money from banks on the same terms as Student Loans Company.  This system was a U.S. style loan program which left students with debt payable after graduation (Arnove R., et al, 2012).  

The education system in the USA is based of neoliberalism.  Through this they focus on economic imperatives and choice agenda.  The role of the state, federal governments and corporations are factored in.  America is very competitive in a globalized world.  They address such problems as democracy, social cohesion and inequality.  The USA uses a corporatist model of schooling.  They believed that what has been effective in business can also be effective for fixing the education in USA public schools.  The dramatic expansion in global trade caused the USA to implement concepts of neoliberalism into their structures.  Governments opened markets, promoted free trade, reduced the public sector, reduced state intervention in the economy, and deregulated the markets.  The USA sought to privatize much of its government services as governments became bloated and inefficient.  The USA under Clinton established that in order to be successful in the globe, the USA needed an increase in highly skilled educated workers.  They based their educational policy under the concept of human capital (Arnove R., et al, 2012).    

Education in Latin America is riddled with the inability to mobilize enough resources or inability to provide sufficient wages.  Income inequality in Latin America is caused by its educational system.  Moreover, inadequate facilities, child labour and the distance of schools from communities are factors which affect school completion rates.  Large numbers of people from the least privileged sectors of society have not been enrolling to school.  Further, the average amount of education received by adults is less than six years.  The reduction of demand of oil has severely impacted Latin America’s prospects of improving the economy.  The rise of left centered socialist regimes has also made implications for policy.  The emergence of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America or ALBA was a response to the increasing influence of USA in the region.  Latin America has made attempts to expand the role of the state in redirecting resources.  Through these mutual agreements of member countries the cooperation of education is able to be accomplished.  Regardless, reduced government spending, outdated curricula and restricted access have ‘evidently reduced the quality of educations Latin Americans receive.  In Latin America public universities have started to charge for tuition, these fees could be the same as those charged in private institutions.  This is a result of insufficient state funding.  The decision to decentralize in Latin America has been very controversial.  Countries in Latin America that have decentralized include Columbia, Argentina, Mexico and Chile.  These countries that have decentralized face the issue of not having enough resources to make up educational costs which poses a problem for Latin America as a whole (Arnove R., et al, 2012). 

The Last region this essay is going to explore is Europe.  With the falling of socialisim in 1989, social and political change was imminent.  The objective to reform education to mirror the West was thus conceived.  Europe wanted to transform its socialist states to capitalist considerate economies in a globalized world.  There are three empires which are of significance in this region, the Hapsburg empire, Ottoman empire, and the Russian empire.  The Hapsburg empire was involved in educating all citizens so they can create a cohesive society.  The Ottoman empire were uninterested educating non-Muslims.  Therefore, each religion recognized by Islam ruled over their members with minimal interference.  Lastly, the Russian empire made a strong effort to make education a priority by establishing universities.  In the Post World War I era, curriculum development became the ideal tool to create a homogenized identity.  Policy makers favored highly centralized models.  European policy makers prioritized education and they encouraged the growth of higher education institutes.  By the early 1990’s Europeans began the discussion of decentralization.  They did this because they wanted to promote democracy, freedom, participation, and responsibility in education (Arnove R., et al, 2012).

As it becomes evident through this comparative analysis of education reform and policy, each region has their pros and cons.  They have evidently overcomed hardships and made due with what they had.  These changes don’t happen instantaneously.  Change occurs with a point of contention and through supportive voices countries can begin the transformation of policy and in this case education policy.  


No comments:

Post a Comment