Can we really speak of a neo-liberal wave that would standardize school systems in developed countries ? What are the new educational models relevant in terms of efficiency and equity ? To answer these questions, Nathalie Mons assesses, in terms of foreign experiences, French educational policies: decentralization, school autonomy, school card, single college, etc.
While the investigation Pisa 2006 shows a slight drop in academic results for young French people, Nathalie Mons’s study is timely to clarify the public debate on what can be called “ new educational policies ». These form a “ Consensual reformist triptych Neo-liberal in education: decentralization, differentiation of lessons within the single school and the free choice of public school or private education. These new policies were first developed in Anglo-Saxon countries and then extended worldwide. In the end, while in the majority of countries in theOECD And this until the 1980s, the compulsory school was state, culturally unique, territorially homogeneous and, during the last decades, pedagogically undifferentiated, new educational policies have since imposed themselves. Far from being only simple adaptations of the school to its difficulties, these new policies are aimed at a radical mutation of the philosophy of the educational institution with the aim of calling into question the procedural, monopolistic and unitary management of educational function by central states. But if new educational policies raise the question of the convergence of the education sector to a new “ Global market repository Education also has faculties of internal resistance to this neo-liberal turning point. It is based on a set of formal rules, behavioral standards and powerful cognitive frameworks which inscribe the evolution of school systems in “ dependence trails »Narrow making it difficult to penetrate new standards.
This critical observation of the emergence of these new educational policies achieved, the objective is to analyze their effects on the academic performance of students. Indeed, the implementation of these new policies having precisely for their objective, according to their promoters, of improving academic performance, it is a question of providing elements of reflection on this performance.
Before that, the author presents her international comparison approach, both her research perspective on educational policies-neo-institutionalism, her principles of comparison-the creation of indicators ad hoc and the use of factual data rather than notices of native experts in particular, and its statistical approach, based on the exploitation of the survey Pisa 2000 and distinguishing indicators of efficiency, namely the global school level, that of the best students and that of the weakest, and indicators of equity, namely global school inequalities and those of social origin. It is also a quality that can be recognized by this book to adopt a clear, argued and non -supporting approach on the performance of educational policies. The book thus renews a comparative approach that is too little developed within the sociology of French education. In total, for each of the three new educational policies, the demonstration applies in a structured way: first a history of France’s educational policy in the matter, then the description of the large models existing in the world for this educational policy as well as the effects of these models on the effectiveness of the education system, finally the perspective of the French situation through these models and their effects.
Decentralization
The decentralization of the education system is one of the three major variations of neo-liberal ideology for the school. Thus, in the field of education, the closer we bring the place of decision of the end user, the more effective the system. In France, under a proactive appearance, decentralization has been very limited. In the world, the decentralization of different countries is distinguished in several models: “ Minimum decentralization “,” collaborative decentralization “,” voluntarist decentralization ” And “ Federal States ». This survey shows that the most efficient systems are those which give more initiatives to local actors but in a framing of the local intervention by the State. In addition, the link between decentralization and school inequalities is not automatic. On the other hand, all forms of decentralization strengthen social inequalities of success. In total, this research contributes to renewing public debate on the consequences of decentralization. It shows that one cannot do without the analysis of the levels of power in decentralization but also of decentralized skills. This evaluation also returns back the caricatural visions of the supporters New Public Management For which these reforms are imposed as one of the foundations of an effective administration and their adversaries which postulate the automaticity of the digging of school inequalities. This research finally demonstrates, point on which the author insists, that the State has an essential role to play within the very framework of decentralization.
Differentiation
Differentiation policies in compulsory education form the second part of neo-liberal educational policies. The principle of the single school, that is to say of a triplely unified teaching, in its content, its objectives and its methods, has been called into question since the 1980s by differentiating content, by reintroduction of leveling rankings between establishments or by the territorialization of programs. In the end, the single school is always in the majority in the countries of theOECD But undergoes many attacks. In the French case, the establishment of the single college was very gradual and was made with a little delay compared to the other countries of theOECD. Today, we are witnessing in France at the start of his questioning with professional discovery and junior learning. In the world, several models of “ unique school “Exist:” individual integration “,” Integration into the card “,” Uniform integration ” And “ the separation ». The main teachings of research on this policy are that the longer the common core, the more low school inequalities, and that, contrary to what is often alleged, acity and school efficiency are not negatively correlated. One of the proposed models succeeds in obtaining high global efficiency, an important school elite and weak inequalities: the individualized integration model, represented by the Nordic countries. Conversely, the federal states have both an efficiency and a weak equity. France, with low efficiency and a little stronger equity, can therefore rightly set as a objective a strong efficiency and equity.
Free choice
The last pillar of neo-liberal educational policies is the free choice of school, whether in the public or by the private sector. While before, the school’s free choice was motivated by ethical choices, from the 1980s, it was justified by an economic and political argument, competition having to play a beneficial role of emulation between schools. The international comparison makes it possible to see that the choice of the school is only “ real bureaucratic fake ” In France. Indeed, the choice in the public is much less forced than in other countries and the private sector is more developed there than the average. Four degrees of choice can be distinguished: “ lack of choice “,” the school card with the possibility of derogation “,” The free choice regulated ” And “ the free choice ». The results of this study show that the total total choice makes it possible to create a more numerous school elite but also that all the models are quite neutral as to the global school efficiency of the students. On the other hand, in terms of equity, the models are unequally efficient: the school card with derogation and the total free choice lead to stronger inequalities than for the models of the free regulated choice or the absence of choice. At the private level, the study shows that its development does not make any improvement in terms of school efficiency or equity.
Modeling
Going beyond what Nathalie Mons calls “ shadow concepts Decentralization, individualized teaching and free choice of the school, this survey shows that hybridization phenomena are emerging and reveals plural national policies. But, from this plurality of policies, four global models of compulsory education are distinguished.
The model “ traditional almost centralized “, Of which France is a representative, and the model” traditional federal »Form the rearguard of compulsory teaching models. Their future involves an evolution towards one of the other emblematic models of new education policies: “ Integrated differentiation ” And “ Disacute differentiation ». These two models have in common the questioning of the monopolistic role of the State in the educational function but, essential difference, the model of integrated differentiation, that of the Nordic countries, supervises this questioning in a structuring global framework, structured by the intervention of the State.
What then to think of the effectiveness of these new educational policies ? First, they can positively affect the overall performance of students as well as those of the weakest students but on condition of being supervised nationally. In addition, in the majority of cases, they positively affect the production of school elites and create more social inequalities at school. In addition, in terms of global school inequalities, no general conclusion can be drawn.
Hybridization
In the case of France, the reforms have been made at an idle rate for many years. But the evolution towards one of the two differentiation models seems inevitable so that we will have to make choices. Giving parents the freedom of choice of school, for example, can lead to different implementation with strictly opposite consequences in terms of acid and school efficiency. Nathalie Mons interprets this contradiction as a double phenomenon of convergence and hybridization of reforms: rhetorical mobilization is created around these new educational policies but the weight of institutions and the strategies of local actors are accumulated to create a hybridization of these soft theoretical concepts. In the end, the meticulous comparison of the efficiency and equity of educational systems tells us that the best of them manage to combine effective central piloting with an autonomy of local actors. This balance requires getting rid of the most ideological quarrels and asserting a strong political capacity: on these two points, France may not be the best armed.