UNESCO, Education for All Global Monitoring Report, ISBN 92-3-103976-8, 2005, UNESCO, Paris...
2
led essentially to the restoration of German universities ‘along the fundamental lines of the Weimar tradition.’ This chapter does not make it sufficiently clear that the American impact was confined to its Zone of Occupation. The book ends with a short conclusion that attempts to draw some comparative implications from the earlier discussion and revisits the model constructed from Schriewer’s example in the Intro- duction. This necessarily leads the author (and the unfortunate reader) back into the thickets of jargon. The author concludes with the opaque admission that it is ‘questionable whether all aspects of transfer with transformation of educational con- cepts and practices are quite explicable within the theoretical perspective of this book.’ I agree with him. The book, which I think may be based on a doctoral thesis, is not original or thorough historical scholarship. It is too brief for that, but it is interesting in many parts. The weakness lies in the attempt to match the evidence to an unexceptional theoretical model which was the author’s intention. I recommend the book to those who wish a brief introduction to the history of modern higher education in Germany, Japan and the United States, which ironically was not the author’s intention or at least not his chief one. There is a useful bibliography, but unfortunately no index, a serious omission from what is intended as a scholarly work, even one of only 152 pages. W.J. Morgan UNESCO Chair of the Political Economy of Education and Centre for Comparative Education Research, School of Education, University of Nottingham, UK E-mail address: [email protected] doi:10.1016/j.ijedudev.2006.04.008 UNESCO, Education for All Global Monitoring Report, ISBN 92-3-103976-8, 2005, UNESCO, Paris (430pp.). There are now many annual reviews by multi- lateral organisations on states of well-being in the world. Fifteen years have passed since UNDP produced the first Human Development Report. Already the fourth Education for All (EFA) Global Monitoring Report (GMR) is being launched. The two series follow closely the model set decades ago by the World Bank’s World Development Reports, while those of the OECD are similar. All develop a detailed, research-based argument around a current global priority. They back it up with extensive statistical annexes, so that countries and regions can mark their progress against a long list of para- meters. With post Dakar EFA slogans resounding in the world’s ears, there is no accident that the first GMR in 2002 asked EFA: is the world on track? Highlighting access, it concluded that we had a long way to go before everyone would be able to complete basic schooling and that the process is complex. With 2005 looming as the deadline for meeting the first MDG gender target, GMR 2003/4 was on Gender and EFA: the leap to equality. Continuing to address access, it prioritised the case for making it equitable to girls and women and the factors that have to be addressed to bring this about. Inseparable from access, quality ranks high among them. Reporting on progress towards the previous year’s Dakar goals, GMR 2005 highlights the challenge of achieving an Education for All of a quality that encourages those who enrol to remain in the system, acquire usable cognitive skills and the values and attitudes conducive to responsible citizenship. The familiar premise is that high quality learning contributes to better management of personal lives (including health and fertility), higher life-time earning and robust national growth. It must be equitable and relevant to different social groups, among them the poor and marginal. It requires investment, in facilities, teachers and materials, government leadership and coordination. It must be gender sensitive and should reach very young children, with decisions about language, learning time and pedagogy playing an important part. A complex framework is proposed for under- standing quality. It accounts for learner character- istics, enabling educational inputs and other contextual influences on learning outcomes, beha- vioural change and later social benefits. Taking retention as the key indicator of quality, GMR 2005 ARTICLE IN PRESS Book reviews / International Journal of Educational Development 26 (2006) 667–675 668
-
Upload
rosemary-preston -
Category
Documents
-
view
212 -
download
0
Transcript of UNESCO, Education for All Global Monitoring Report, ISBN 92-3-103976-8, 2005, UNESCO, Paris...
ARTICLE IN PRESSBook reviews / International Journal of Educational Development 26 (2006) 667–675668
led essentially to the restoration of Germanuniversities ‘along the fundamental lines of theWeimar tradition.’ This chapter does not make itsufficiently clear that the American impact wasconfined to its Zone of Occupation.
The book ends with a short conclusion thatattempts to draw some comparative implicationsfrom the earlier discussion and revisits the modelconstructed from Schriewer’s example in the Intro-duction. This necessarily leads the author (and theunfortunate reader) back into the thickets of jargon.The author concludes with the opaque admissionthat it is ‘questionable whether all aspects oftransfer with transformation of educational con-cepts and practices are quite explicable within thetheoretical perspective of this book.’ I agree withhim. The book, which I think may be based on adoctoral thesis, is not original or thorough historicalscholarship. It is too brief for that, but it is
interesting in many parts. The weakness lies in theattempt to match the evidence to an unexceptionaltheoretical model which was the author’s intention.I recommend the book to those who wish a briefintroduction to the history of modern highereducation in Germany, Japan and the UnitedStates, which ironically was not the author’sintention or at least not his chief one. There is auseful bibliography, but unfortunately no index, aserious omission from what is intended as ascholarly work, even one of only 152 pages.
W.J. MorganUNESCO Chair of the Political Economy of
Education and Centre for Comparative Education
Research, School of Education,
University of Nottingham, UK
E-mail address: [email protected]
doi:10.1016/j.ijedudev.2006.04.008
UNESCO, Education for All Global Monitoring
Report, ISBN 92-3-103976-8, 2005, UNESCO, Paris
(430pp.).
There are now many annual reviews by multi-lateral organisations on states of well-being in theworld. Fifteen years have passed since UNDPproduced the first Human Development Report.
Already the fourth Education for All (EFA) GlobalMonitoring Report (GMR) is being launched. Thetwo series follow closely the model set decades agoby the World Bank’s World Development Reports,while those of the OECD are similar. All develop adetailed, research-based argument around a currentglobal priority. They back it up with extensivestatistical annexes, so that countries and regions canmark their progress against a long list of para-meters. With post Dakar EFA slogans resoundingin the world’s ears, there is no accident that the firstGMR in 2002 asked EFA: is the world on track?Highlighting access, it concluded that we had a longway to go before everyone would be able tocomplete basic schooling and that the process iscomplex. With 2005 looming as the deadline formeeting the first MDG gender target, GMR 2003/4was on Gender and EFA: the leap to equality.
Continuing to address access, it prioritised the case
for making it equitable to girls and women and thefactors that have to be addressed to bring thisabout. Inseparable from access, quality ranks highamong them.
Reporting on progress towards the previousyear’s Dakar goals, GMR 2005 highlights thechallenge of achieving an Education for All of aquality that encourages those who enrol to remainin the system, acquire usable cognitive skills and thevalues and attitudes conducive to responsiblecitizenship. The familiar premise is that high qualitylearning contributes to better management ofpersonal lives (including health and fertility), higherlife-time earning and robust national growth. Itmust be equitable and relevant to different socialgroups, among them the poor and marginal. Itrequires investment, in facilities, teachers andmaterials, government leadership and coordination.It must be gender sensitive and should reach veryyoung children, with decisions about language,learning time and pedagogy playing an importantpart. A complex framework is proposed for under-standing quality. It accounts for learner character-istics, enabling educational inputs and othercontextual influences on learning outcomes, beha-vioural change and later social benefits. Takingretention as the key indicator of quality, GMR 2005
ARTICLE IN PRESSBook reviews / International Journal of Educational Development 26 (2006) 667–675 669
examines the importance of the institutional envir-onment, incentives and quality-conducive policies.It reviews assessment procedures and comparesscores in different subjects, at different levels, indifferent parts of the world.
To no one’s surprise, GMR 2005 concludesthat progress to the EFA goals continues to beslow and widely different in richer and poorerworlds at early childhood and primary schoollevels, with even broader post-primary discrepan-cies. Access and retention of girls is slowlyimproving, but millions of people in South andEast Asia, adults and children, have (had) noschooling. On quality, the measurement of out-comes is not easy, often relying on quantitativesurrogates, but in low income states teacherqualifications are low and pupil-teacher ratios arehigh, increasingly exacerbated by AIDs. Multiplesolutions are indicated, from the household to theschool, community, national and global levels. Weare reminded of the multi-lateral position on thelimited effectiveness of fragmented project support,the case for prioritising coordinated donor invest-ment through current modes of collective budgetsupport, before being introduced to the goals andprinciples of the Fast Track Initiative. The case isstressed for donor harmonisation in all theseprocesses, while for EFA to be achieved, recalci-trant donors are urged to fulfil the overdue pledgesthey have made.
Congratulations go to all those who worked toproduce another well-presented, comprehensive ana-lysis in so short a time. The quantity of information,its range and depth, from regional and nationalstatistics, to micro level accounts of experience,represent as many countries as is feasible. Althoughevery page is a text book illustration of multiplemodes of data presentation, questions do arise as towho the readership will be and how much ordinarymortals without sophisticated training can absorb. If
the prime targets are educational leaders in poorstates, very few have this level of skill, even supposingthat the book lands on their desk. In the statisticalannexes, 127 countries are now included in the EFADevelopment Index (EDI), up from 94 the previousyear, with combined country scores for primaryenrolment, adult literacy, a gender EFA index andsurvival to grade 5. Meantime, for those wanting touse the statistical annex to build country profilescombining a range of variables from the differentmulti-lateral annuals, there is the usual challenge ofreconciling varying country categories and data fordifferent years. Other problems include the limitedcontinuity between successive volumes in the series.Having dedicated GMR 2003/4 to gender, and otherdiversity these have all but disappeared from thecurrent analyses. In GMR 2005, rather than embed-ding gender as a constantly present cross cuttingissue with important implications for quality, ithas receded from view. This leaves an impressionof a narrow, WID-oriented understanding of gender,primarily in terms of the enrolment of girls inschool with little account of its continuous interactionwith ethnicity other diversity and well-being. Finally,the persistent lack of a subject index at the backof these information rich texts is an irritant, at least inthe face of the limitations of political explanationsfor what is being observed in different parts of theworld.
As I finish this review, the fourth report is beinglaunched, EFA GMR 2006: Literacy for life. It is tobe hoped that the international system of supportcommits more fully to this than it has to itspredecessors.
Rosemary PrestonSchool of Health and Social Studies,
University of Warwick,
Warwick CV4 7AL, UK
E-mail address: [email protected]
doi:10.1016/j.ijedudev.2006.04.009
D. Barton, K. Tusting (Eds.), Beyond Communities of
Practice: Language, Power and Social Context,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, ISBN 0-
521-83643-3 (hbk), 0-521-54492-0 (pbk), 2005
(243pp., £15.99 (pbk), £40.00 (hbk)).
Field. John (Ed.), Lifelong Learning and the New
Educational Order, revised ed., Trentham Books,
Stoke on Trent, 2006 ISBN: 978-1-85856-346-6
(204pp., £16.99 (pbk)).
What games some academics play. No soonerdoes a theory come along like Lave and Wenger’slearning through legitimate peripheral participationin communities of practice (LPP/CP), a metaphor
