Advertisement

Good education in an age of measurement: on the need to reconnect with the question of purpose in education

  • Gert Biesta
Article

Abstract

In this paper I argue that there is a need to reconnect with the question of purpose in education, particularly in the light of a recent tendency to focus discussions about education almost exclusively on the measurement and comparison of educational outcomes. I first discuss why the question of purpose should always have a place in our educational discussion. I then explore some reasons why this question seems to have disappeared from the educational agenda. The central part of the paper is a proposal for addressing the question of purpose in education—the question as to what constitutes good education—in a systematic manner. I argue that the question of purpose is a composite question and that in deliberating about the purpose of education we should make a distinction between three functions of education to which I refer as qualification, socialisation and subjectification. In the final section of the paper I provide examples of how this proposal can help in asking more precise questions about the purpose and direction of educational processes and practices.

Keywords

Good education Evaluation Accountability Aims of education Evidence-based 

References

  1. Allen, J. (2003). Daring to think otherwise? Educational policymaking in the Scottish Parliament. Journal of Education Policy, 18(3), 289–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Apple, M. W. (1993). Official knowledge. Democratic education in a conservative age. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, S. J. (2003). The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 215–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biesta, G. J. J. (2001). How difficult should education be? Educational Theory, 51(4), 385–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Biesta, G. J. J. (2004a). Education, accountability and the ethical demand. Can the democratic potential of accountability be regained? Educational Theory, 54(3), 233–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Biesta, G. J. J. (2004b). Against learning. Reclaiming a language for education in an age of learning. Nordisk Pedagogik, 23, 70–82.Google Scholar
  7. Biesta, G. J. J. (2005). George Herbert Mead and the theory of schooling. In D. Troehler, & J. Oelkers (Eds.), Pragmatism and education (pp. 117–132). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  8. Biesta, G. J. J. (2006a). Beyond learning. Democratic education for a human future. Boulder: Paradigm.Google Scholar
  9. Biesta, G. J. J. (2006b). What’s the point of lifelong learning if lifelong learning has no point? On the democratic deficit of policies for lifelong learning. European Educational Research Journal, 5(3–4), 169–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Biesta, G. J. J. (2007a). Why ‘what works’ won’t work. Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit of educational research. Educational Theory, 57(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Biesta, G. J. J. (2007b). The education-socialisation conundrum. Or: ‘who is afraid of education?’. Utbildning och demokrati, 16(3), 25–36.Google Scholar
  12. Biesta, G. J. J. (2008a). A new ‘logic’ of emancipation: The methodology of Jacques Ranciere. Educational Theory.Google Scholar
  13. Biesta, G. J. J. (2008b). What kind of citizen? What kind of democracy? Citizenship education and the Scottish Curriculum for Excellence. Scottish Educational Review.Google Scholar
  14. Biesta, G. J. J. (2008c). Education after the death of the subject: Levinas and the pedagogy of interruption. In Z. Leonardo (Ed.), The handbook of cultural politics in education. Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  15. Biesta, G. J. J., & Lawy, R. S. (2006). From teaching citizenship to learning democracy. Overcoming individualism in research, policy and practice. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(1), 63–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bogotch, I., Mirón, L., & Biesta, G. (2007). “Effective for what; effective for whom?” Two questions SESI should not ignore. In T. Townsend (Ed.), International handbook of school effectiveness and school improvement (pp. 93–110). Dordrecht/Boston: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dearden, R. F., Hirst, P. & Peters, R. S. (eds)(1972). Education and the development of reason. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  18. DfEE (1998). The learning age. A renaissancefor a new Britain. Sheffield: Department for Education and Employment.Google Scholar
  19. DfEE (1999). Learning to succeed. A new framework for post-16 learning. Sheffield: Department for Education and Employment.Google Scholar
  20. Ecclestone, K., & Hayes, D. (2008). The dangerous rise of therapeutic education. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Field, J. (2000). Lifelong learning and the new educational order. Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books.Google Scholar
  22. Fischman, W., DiBara, J. A., & Gardner, H. (2006). Creating good education against the odds. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(3), 383–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  24. Giroux, H. A. (1981). Ideology, culture and the process of schooling. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Granger, D. (2008). No child left behind and the spectacle of failing schools: the mythology of contemporary school reform. Educational Studies, 43(3), 206–228.Google Scholar
  26. Gray, J. (2004). School effectiveness and the “other outcomes” of secondary schooling: a reassessment of three decades of British research. Improving Schools, 7(2), 185–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Haugsbakk, G., & Nordkvelle, Y. (2007). The rhetoric of ICT and the new language of learning. A critical analysis of theuse of ICT in the curricular field. European Educational Research Journal, 6(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Henry, G. T. (2002). Choosing criteria to judge program success: a values inquiry. Evaluation, 8(2), 182–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hess, F. M. (2006). Accountability without angst? Public opnion and no child left behind. Harvard Educational Review, 76(4), 587–610.Google Scholar
  30. Hirsch, E. D. (1988). Cultural literacy: What every American needs to know. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  31. Hostetler, K. (2005). What is ‘good’ education research? Educational Researcher, 34(6), 16–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. House, E. R., & Howe, K. R. (1999). Values in evaluation and social research. Thousands Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
  33. Kerr, D. (2005). Citizenship education in England – listening to young people: new insights from the citizenship education longitudinal study. International Journal of Citizenship and Teacher Education, 1(1), 74–96.Google Scholar
  34. Lawy, R. S., & Biesta, G. J. J. (2006). Citizenship-as-practice: the educational implications of an inclusive and relational understanding of citizenship. British Journal of Educational Studies, 54(1), 34–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Luyten, H., Visscher, A., & Witziers, B. (2005). School effectiveness research: from a review of the criticism to recommendations for further development. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16(3), 249–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mollenhauer, K. (1964). Erziehung und Emanzipation. Weinheim: Juventa.Google Scholar
  37. Nicolaidou, M., & Ainscow, M. (2005). Understanding failing schools: perspectives from the inside. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16(3), 229–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Peters, R. S. (1966). Ethics and education. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  39. Peters, R. S. (ed.) (1976). The concept of education. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  40. Pirrie, A., & Lowden, K. (2004). The magic mirror: an inquiry into the purposes of education. Journal of Education Policy, 19(4), 515–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rancière, J. (1991). The ignorant schoolmaster: Five lessons in intellectual emancipation. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Ross, K. (1991). Translator’s introduction. In J. Rancière (Ed.), The ignorant schoolmaster: Five lessons in intellectual emancipation (pp. 7–23). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Rutter, M., & Maughan, B. (2002). School effectiveness findings 1979–2002. Journal of School Psychology, 40(6), 451–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schwandt, T., & Dahler-Larsen, P. (2006). When evaluation meets the ‘rough’ ground’ in communities. Evaluation, 12(4), 496–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Scottish Executive (2004). A curriculum for excellence. The curriculum review group. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive.Google Scholar
  46. Siegel, H. (2004). High stakes testing, educational aims and ideals, and responsible assessment. Theory and Research in Education, 2(2), 219–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Slavin, R. (2002). Evidence-based educational policies: transforming educational practice and research. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 15–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tomlinson, S. (1997). Sociological perspectives on failing schools. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 7(1), 81–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Townsend, T. (2001). Satan or savior? An analysis of two decades of school effectiveness research. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12(1), 115–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Townsend, T. (ed) (2007). International handbook of school effectiveness and school improvement. Dordrecht/Boston: Springer.Google Scholar
  51. Usher, R. (2006). Lyotard’s performance. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 25(4), 279–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Valero, P., & Zevenbergen, R. (eds)(2004). Researching the socio-political dimensions of mathematics education. Dordrect: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  53. Winch, C. (2005). Education, autonomy and critical thinking. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Stirling Institute of EducationUniversity of StirlingStirlingUK

Personalised recommendations