.jpg)
printActor Models of Global Educational Policy
Antyukhova E.A.,
Senior Lecturer, Comparative politics department, MGIMO University, e.antyukhova@gmail.com
elibrary_id: 711990 | ORCID: 0000-0003-0860-4792 | RESEARCHER_ID: I-4189-2017
DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2020.03.11
For citation:
Antyukhova E.A. Actor Models of Global Educational Policy. – Polis. Political Studies. 2020. No. 3. P. 158-168. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2020.03.11
Abstract
The relevance of a global educational policy is determined by the new realities of the modern digital-global world, with traditional technologies rapidly changing in many areas. It is shown that the transformation of education (both in terms of education and in terms of the formation of a new global competence with personality) is in the interest of the entire global community, not merely individual states. The notion of a global education policy is clarified, and the promising use of actor approach in the framework of neoliberalism is confirmed. We identified five actor models in the educational sphere (models with a single actor (government); models complemented by the activities of non-governmental actors; models that consider the development of the role and status of non-governmental actors; models that reflect the progress of technological innovation; model-building in the status of actors in educational ecosystems, wearing a supranational character). It is hypothesized that the model with the greatest prospects is the model consisting only of educational ecosystems as actors on a global level. It is shown that the establishment of actor models is not enough to form a holistic view of a global educational policy; without specifying a single methodological design, the causes of changes in the type and composition of actors and the value of innovations in the future educational agenda. The author identifies the driving forces influencing global educational policy: scientific and technological progress and the transformation of the world economic system; communications developments; and the dynamism of foreign policy strategies, which makes it possible to implement the concept of “competition through cooperation”. It is shown that the set of possible actions actors can perform is realized through a sequence of scenarios (economic, institutional, and social scenarios), leading to the formation of the globalization scenario being integral. The paper presents suggestions for refining the actor approach, enabling movement away from declarative and subjective justifications of actors, and combining the assessment of possible actions, policies, and scripts which allows for the methodologically meaningful identification of actors within the available body of knowledge in their chosen field of education.
Keywords
globalization, global education, global educational policy, actors.
References
Abdel-Moneim M.A. 2020. Between Global and National Prescriptions for Education Administration: The Rocky Road of Neoliberal Education Reform in Qatar. – International Journal of Educational Development. No. 74. Article 102160. P. 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2020.102160
Ball S.J. 1998. Big Policies/Small World: An Introduction to International Perspectives in Education Policy. – Comparative Education. Vol. 34. No. 2. P. 119-130.
Banks J.A. 2013. The Construction and Historical Development of Multicultural Education, 1962-2012. – Theory into Practice. Vol. 52. No. 1. P. 73-82. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2013.795444
Burnouf L. 2004. Global Awareness and Perspectives in Global Education. – Canadian Social Studies. Vol. 38. No. 3. P. 1-12. URL: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1073942.pdf (accessed 23.03.2020).
Davies I., Evans M., Reid A. 2005. Globalising Citizenship Education? A Critique of ‘Global Education’ and ‘Citizenship Education’. – British Journal of Educational Studies. No. Vol. 53. No. 1. P. 66-89. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8527.2005.00284.x
Ead H.A. 2019. Globalization in Higher Education in Egypt in a Historical Context. – Research in Globalization. Vol. 1. Article 100003. P. 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resglo.2019.100003
Fumasoli Т., Stensaker В., Vukasovic М. 2018. Tackling the Multi-Actor and Multi-Level Complexity of European Governance of Knowledge: Transnational Actors in Focus. – European Educational Research Journal. Vol. 17. No. 3. P. 325-334. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904117742763
Global Education: From Thought to Action. 1990. Ed. by K.A. Tye. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Goren H., Yemini M. 2017. The Global Citizenship Education Gap: Teacher Perceptions of the Relationship Between Global Citizenship Education and Students’ Socio-Economic Status. – Teaching and Teacher Education. Vol. 67. P. 9-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.05.009
Kniep W.M. 1986. Defining a Global Education by Its Content. – Social Education. Vol. 50. No. 6. P. 37-46.
Marshall K. 2018. Global Education Challenges: Exploring Religious Dimensions. – International Journal of Educational Development. Vol. 62. P. 184-191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2018.04.005
Mukhopadhyay R., Sriprakash A. 2011. Global frameworks, local contingencies: Policy translations and education development in India. – Compare. Vol. 41. No. 3. P. 311-326. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2010.534668
Non-State Actors in World Politics. 2001. Ed. by D. Josselin, W. Wallace. Palgrave.
Obstfeld M. 2020. Globalization Cycles. – Italian Economic Journal. No. 6. P. 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40797-020-00121-4
Peck J., Theodore N. 2010. Mobilizing Policy: Models, Methods, And Mutations. – Geoforum. Vol. 41. No. 2. P. 169-174.
Pike G. 2000. Global Education and National Identity: In Pursuit of Meaning. – Theory into Practice. Vol. 39. No. 2. P. 64-73. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3902_2
Pike G., Selby D. 2000. The World in Your Classroom: Engaging Students in Global Education. Toronto: Pippen Publishing Corporation.
Renalda B. 2011. The Ashgate Research Companion to Non-State Actors. Burlington: Ashgate.
Riel M. 1993. Global Education Through Learning Circles. – Global Networks: Computers and International Communication. Ed. by L.M. Harasim. Cambridge: MIT Press. P. 221–236.
Risse Th. 2002. Transnational Actors and World Politics. – Handbook of International Relations. Ed. by W. Carsnaes, Th. Risse, B.A. Simmons. London: Sage. P. 256-274.
Scheunpflug A., Asbrand B. 2006. Global Education and Education for Sustainability. – Environmental Education Research. Vol. 12. No. 1. P. 33-46. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620500526446
Standish A. 2014. What Is Global Education and Where Is It Taking Us? – The Curriculum Journal. Vol. 25. No. 2. P. 166-186. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2013.870081
Stone D. 2004. Transfer Agents and Global Networks in the “Transnationalisation” of Policy. – Journal of European Public Policy. Vol. 11. No. 3. P. 545-566. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760410001694291
The Handbook of Global Education Policy. 2016. Ed. by K. Mundy, A. Green, B. Lingard, A. Verger. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Touraine A. 1984. Le Retour de l’acteur. Essai de sociologie. Paris: Librairie Artheme Fayard.
Verger A., Novelli M., Altinyelken H.K. 2018. Global Education Policy and International Development: A Revisited Introduction. – Global Education Policy and International Development: New Agendas, Issues and Policies. Ed. by A. Verger, M. Novelli, H.K. Altinyelken. London: Bloomsbury. Р. 1-34.
Aksenova O.V. 2008. Izmenenie roli politicheskogo sub’ekta: agent ili aktor? (Na primere ekopoliticheskoi sfery [Changing the Role of a Political Subject: Agent or Actor? (On the Example of The Eco-Political Sphere)]. – Publichnoe prostranstvo, grazhdanskoe obshchestvo i vlast’: opyt razvitiya i vzaimodeistviya. [Public Space, Civil Society and Power: The Experience of Development and Interaction]. Ed. by A.Yu. Sungurov. Moscow: Russian Political Science Association; ROSSPEN. P. 181-193. (In Russ.)
Bayer Yu.P. 2019. Actor Approach to Researching Global Educational Policy. – Management Consulting. No. 3. P. 72-78. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22394/1726-1139-2019-3-72-78
Bulaeva S.V., Isaeva O.N. 2012. Sistema mirovogo obrazovaniya: sovremennye tendentsii razvitiya [The System of World Education: Modern Trends of Development]. Ryazan: Ryazan State University. (In Russ.)
Friedman M.F. 2015. Teoriya global’noi nauchno-obrazovatel’noi politiki informatsionnogo obshchestva: sotsial’no-filosofskii analiz i prognoz [Theory of Global Scientific and Educational Policy of Information Society: Social and Philosophical Analysis and Forecast]. Moscow: Pero. (In Russ.)
Grudzinsky A.O., Paleeva O.A. 2016. Education’s Functionality Evaluated by Process Actors. – Vestnik NSU. Series: Social and Economics Sciences. No. 3. P. 75-82. (In Russ.)
Holdorov O.N. 2016. Correlation of the Category of “Actor” with the Categories of “Subject”, “Participant” and “Agent” in Political Process. – The Bulletin of The Volga Region Institute of Administration. No. 4. P. 128-133. (In Russ.)
Kalyuzhnaya D.E. 2013. Modern Actors of World Politics and Transition to Sustainable Development. – Sociodynamics. No. 5. P. 45-87. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.7256/2306-0158.2013.5.664
Kasatkin P.I. 2017. Modern Education: Functions and Mission. – Problems of Modern Education. No. 5. P. 109-118 (In Russ.)
Kasatkin P.I., Kovalchuk Yu.A., Stepnov I.M. 2019. The Modern Universities Role in The Formation of the Digital Wave of Kondratiev’s Long Cycles. – Voprosy Ekonomiki. No. 12. P. 123-140. https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2019-12-123-140 (In Russ.)
Lebedeva M.M. 2013. Actors of Modern World Politics. – Bulletin of MGIMO University. No. 1. P. 38-42. (In Russ.)
Lebedeva M.M. 2016. Mirovaya politika [World Politics]. Moscow: Aspect Press. (In Russ.)
Moreau Defarges P. 1996. Introduction a la geopolitique. (Russ. ed.: Moreau Defarges P. Vvedenie v geopolitiku. Moscow: Concorde).
Morozova S.A. 2008. Grazhdanskoe obrazovanie kak ponyatie i pedagogicheskoe yavlenie [Civil Education as a Concept and Pedagogical Phenomenon]. – UNIVERSUM: Bulletin of the Herzen University. No. 6. P. 20-24. (In Russ.)
Tsygankov P.A. 2008. Aktory i faktory v mezhdunarodnykh otnosheniyakh i mirovoi politike [Actors and Factors in International Relations and World Politics]. – Privatizatsiya mirovoi politiki: lokal’nye deistviya – global’nye rezul’taty [Privatization of World Politics: Local Actions – Global Results]. Ed. by M.M. Lebedeva.
Moscow: ZAO Golden-Bi. P. 30-53. (In Russ.)
Tsygankov P.A. 2013. Non-State Actors in World Politics: Interaction with States and Intergovernmental Organizations. – Peace and Politics. No. 10. P. 257-265. (In Russ.)
Ursul A.D. 2019. Development of Education for Global Peace. – Vek globalizatsii. No. 2. P. 49-60. (In Russ.)
Vlasova O.Yu. 2012. Political Education in Modern European States. – Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Serija 12: Politicheskie nauki. No. 1. P. 88-91. (In Russ.)
Vlasova O.Yu. 2013. Models of Educational Policy of Modern European States. – Gosudarstvennoe upravlenie. Vol. 41. P. 229-247. (In Russ.)
Content No. 3, 2020
See also:
Antyukhova E.A.,
Education in the US “Soft Power” Policy. – Polis. Political Studies. 2019. No2
Eremeev S.G.,
Education in the modern political agenda. – Polis. Political Studies. 2015. No1
Belyayeva N.Yu.,
Evolution of the concept of public policy: attention for «motive forces» and for governing entities. – Polis. Political Studies. 2011. No3
Korotayev A.V., Shishkina A.R., Lukhmanova Z.T.,
The Global Socio-Political Destabilization Wave of 2011 and the Following Years: A Quantitative Analysis. – Polis. Political Studies. 2017. No6
Pechatnov V.O.,
“…And yet It Keeps Revolving”: Reading Victor Kuvaldin’s “The Global World”. – Polis. Political Studies. 2018. No1
.jpg)
.jpg)