Abstract
This chapter presents a comparative analysis of Education for All plans in Brazil and the Philippines. These two countries share a number of commonalities not least due to their current status as emergent, intermediate economies in the global world. However, the official indicators of educational development show disparate trends in the middle term, with Brazil overcoming the Philippines in the last decades. The analysis draws on two different strands of literature in order to make sense of these trends. On the one hand, it uses historical neo-institutionalist accounts of the ‘developmental state’ to account for the endogenous social transformations that both of them have experienced. On the other hand, the chapter draws on the literature on education policy transfer in order to spell out the clues of external influence in each case. The findings discuss some significant correlations between patterns of state development and the reception of the global educational agenda.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arretche, M. (2010). Federalismo e Igualdade Territorial: Uma Contradição em Termos? DADOS – Revista de Ciências Sociais, 53(3), 587–620.
Asian Development Bank. (2010). Education by 2020. A sector operations plan. Metro Manila: Asian Development Bank.
Asian Development Bank. (2011). Republic of the Philippines: Education improvement sector development program. ADB Concept Paper (Project Number: 45089), 1–29.
Castells, M. (1998). The information age: Economy, society and culture. New York, NY: Blackwell.
Conferência Nacional de Educação – CONAE. (2010). Construindo o Sistema Nacional Articulado de Educação: O Plano Nacional de Educação, uas Diretrizes e Estratégias de Ação. Brasilia: Ministério da Educaçao.
Dale, R. (1999). Specifying globalisation effects on national policy: Focus on the mechanisms. Journal of Education Policy, 14(1), 1–17.
Dale, R., & Robertson, S. (2007). Beyond methodological ‘Isms’ in comparative education in an era of globalisation. In A. Kazamias & R. Cowan (Eds.), Handbook on comparative education (pp. 1113–1128). Netherlands: Springer.
Dobbin, F., Simmons, B., & Garret, G. (2007). The global diffusion of public policies: Social construction, coercion, competition, or learning? Annual Review of Sociology, 33, 449–472.
Doner, R., Ritchie, B. K., & Slater, D. (2005). Systemic vulnerability and the origins of developmental states: Northeast and Southeast Asia in comparative perspective. International Organization, 59(2), 327–381.
EFA Global Monitoring Report Team. (2014). Teaching and learning: achieving quality for all. Paris: UNESCO.
Eickelberg, A. (2012). Framing, fighting and coalitional building: The learnings and teachings of the brazilian campaign for the right to education. In A. Verger & M. Novelli (Eds.), Campaigning for «Education for All». Histories, strategies and outcomes of transnational advocacy coalitions in education (pp. 101–119). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Elacqua, G., Schneider, M., & Buckley, J. (2006). School choice in Chile: Is it class or the classroom? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 26(3), 577–601.
Elster, J. (2007). Explaining social behavior. More nuts and bolts for the social sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Evans, P. (1992). The state as problem and solution: Predation, embedded autonomy and structural change. In Sociology of development. Aldershot, UK: An Elgar Reference Collection.
Farrington, J. J., & Slater, R. (2006). Cash transfers: Panacea for poverty reduction or money down the drain? Development Policy Review, 24(5), 499–511.
Fernandez, L., & Rosechin, O. (2011). Overview of the Philippines’ conditional cash transfer program: The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (Pantawid Pamilya). WB-AusAID Philippine Social Protection Note, 2(May), 1–12.
Filgueira, F. (2009). El desarrollo maniatado en América Latina : estados superficiales y desigualdades profundas. Buenos Aires: Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales.
Frigotto, G., & Ciavatta, M. (2003). Educação básica no Brasil na década de 1990: subordinação ativa e consentida à lógica do mercado. Educaçao e Sociedade, 24(82), 93–130.
Guzman, A. B. de. (2007). Chronicling decentralization initiatives in the Philippine basic education sector. International Journal of Educational Development, 27, 613–624.
Hoop, J. (2012). People power for education: Civil society participation in the Philippine educational politics. In A. Verger & M. Novelli (Eds.), Campaigning for «Education for All». Histories, strategies and outcomes of transnational advocacy coalitions in education (pp. 31–50). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
INEP. (2012). (s.d.). IDEB – Resultados e Metas. Retrieved from http://ideb.inep.gov.br/
Jayasuriya, J. (2008). Regionalising the state: Political topography of regulatory regionalism. Contemporary Politics, 14(1), 21–35.
Kang, D. C. (2002). Crony capitalism. Corruption and development in South Korea and the Philippines. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Maca, M., & Morris, P. (2012). The Philippines, the East Asian ‘developmental states’ and education: A comparative analysis of why the Philippines failed to develop. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 42(3), 461–484.
Ministerio de Educaçao BR. (2008). O Plano de Desenvolvimento da Educaçao: Razoes, Princípios e Programas. Brasilia: Ministério da Educaçao.
OECD. (2013). Brazil country note. En Programme for International Student Assessment. Results from PISA 2012 (OECD). Paris: OECD.
OEI (Organización de Estados Iberoamericanos). (2010). Metas Educativas 2021: la educación que queremos para la generación de los bicentenarios (Documento final). Madrid: OEI y CEPAL.
Rambla, X. (2012). ‘Soft power’, educational governance and political consensus in Brazil. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 22(3), 191–212.
Ramos, R. C., & Giorgi, C. A. (2011). Do Fundef ao Fundeb: avaliando o passado para pensar o futuro: um estudo de caso no município de Pirapozinho-SP. Ensaio: Avaliação e Políticas Públicas em Educação, 19(72), 623–650.
Republic of the Philippines. (2005). Functionally Literate Filipinos: An educated nation. National action plan to achieve education for all by the year 2015. Metro Manila: Republic of the Philippines.
Reyes, V. Ch. Jr. (2009). Systemic corruption and the programme on basic education in the Philippine Department of Education. Journal of Developing Societies, 25(4), 481–510.
Robertson, S. (2011). The new spatial politics of (re)bordering and (re)ordering the state-education-citizen relation. International Review of Education, 57, 277–297.
Saforcada, F., & Vassiliades, A. (2011). Las leyes de educación en los comienzos del siglo XXI: del neoliberalismo al Post-Consenso de Washington en América del Sur. Educaçao e Sociedade, 32(115), 287–304.
Sarmiento, D. C. (2005). Criação dos sistemas municipais de ensino. Educaçao e Sociedade, 26(93), 1363–1390.
Sassen, S. (2006). Territory, authority, rights. From medieval to global assemblages. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2004). Blazing a trail for policy theory and practice. In G. Steiner-Khamsi (Ed.), The global politics of educational borrowing and lending (pp. 201–220). New York, NY & London: Teachers College Press.
Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2010). The politics and economics of comparison. Comparative Education Review, 54(3), 323–342.
Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2012). Understanding policy borrowing and lending. Building comparative policy studies. In G. Steiner-Khamsi & F. Waldow (Eds.), Policy borrowing and lending in education (pp. 3–18). London & New York, NY: Routledge.
Thrupp, M. (2007). School admissions and the segregation of school intakes in New Zealand cities. Urban Studies, 44, 1393–1404.
Tilly, C. (1984). Big structures, large processes, huge comparisons. New York, NY: The Russell Sage Foundation.
Tilly, C. (2001). Mechanisms in political processes. Annual Review of Political Science, (4), 21–41.
UNESCO. (2008). Educaçao para Todos em 2015. Alcançaremos a meta? Brasilia: Representaçao da UNESCO no Brasil.
UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2014a). Literacy in Brazil. En Country Profiles (UNESCO). Toronto: UNESCO. Retrieved from www.uis.unesco.org
UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2014b). Education and literacy in the Philippines. In UNESCO (Ed.), Country profiles. Toronto: UNESCO.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2014). Human development report data. Washington, DC: UNDP. Retrieved from www.undp.org
Verger, A., Novelli, M., & Altinyelken, H. K. (2012). Global education policy and international development. London: Bloomsbury.
World Bank. (2011a). Learning for All: Investing in people’s knowledge and skills to promote development. Washington, DC: The World Bank Group.
World Bank. (2011b). Philippines. Private provision, public purpose. A review of the government’s education service contracting program. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Sense Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rambla, X. (2016). Policy Transfer for Educational Development. In: Geo-JaJa, M.A., Majhanovich, S. (eds) Effects of Globalization on Education Systems and Development. The World Council of Comparative Education Societies. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-729-0_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-729-0_4
Publisher Name: SensePublishers, Rotterdam
Online ISBN: 978-94-6300-729-0
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)