Advertisement

International Comparisons

(with Sandra Leaton-Gray and Euan Auld)
  • David Scott
Chapter
Part of the Evaluating Education: Normative Systems and Institutional Practices book series (ENSIP)

Abstract

Education systems and their curriculum arrangements round the world are in a constant state of reform and change. The catalyst for reform emanates from multiple sources, such as governments seeking to demonstrate different priorities in education to the opposition parties on the one hand, or agree to a range of constituents’ demands on the other. Reforms may reflect the growing importance of global education policies, where national education systems seek to align their programmes to improve their rankings on international comparative assessments such as the OECD’s PISA programme. National concerns reflecting local economic and cultural priorities may also be influential.

Keywords

Education System National Curriculum Vocational School Scottish Executive English Language Learner Student 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Anderson S, Jaffer B (2006) Policy trends in Ontario education 1990–2006 (Working paper), Toronto.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, D., & LeTendre, G. (2005). National differences, global similarities: World culture. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, S. (1994). Education reform: A critical and post-structural approach. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Ball, S. (2010). New voices, new knowledges and the new politics of educational research: The gathering of a perfect storm. European Educational Research Journal, 9(3), 124–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barber, M., & Mourshed, M. (2009). Shaping the future: How good education systems can become great in the decade ahead, Report on the International Education Roundtable, Singapore, 7th July.Google Scholar
  6. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2004). Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom. Washington, DC: Phi Delta Kappa.Google Scholar
  7. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS). (2006). Magazine, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  9. Federal Ministry of Education and Research. (2003). Germany’s vocational education at a glance. Bonn: German Federal Ministry.Google Scholar
  10. Fullan, M. (2006). Change theory: A force for school improvement. Jolimont: Centre for Strategic Education.Google Scholar
  11. Harris, N., & Gorard, S. (2009). Trends in bildung, international, 22.Google Scholar
  12. Hayward, L. (2007). Trust, collaboration and professional learning: The quest for social justice. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 14(2), 251–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Her Majesty’s Inspectorate. (2009). Improving scottish education, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  14. Hopman, S. (2008). No child, no school, no state left behind: Schooling in the age of accountability. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40(4), 417–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hutchinson, C., & Hayward, L. (2007). The journey so far: Assessment for learning in Scotland. The Curriculum Journal, 16(2), 225–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jörgensen, H. (2006). The inter-war land reforms in Estonia, Finland and Bulgaria: A comparative study, in Scandinavia. Economic History Review, 54(1), 64–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Levin, B. (2008). How to change 5000 schools: A practical and positive approach for leading change at every level. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  18. Ministry of Education and Culture. (2013a). Education in Finland. [Available Online].Google Scholar
  19. Ministry of Education and Culture. (2013b). Education system in Finland. [Available Online].Google Scholar
  20. Ministry of Education and Culture. (2013c). Degrees and studies in Finnish education system. [Available Online].Google Scholar
  21. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2000). Manual for the PISA 2000 database. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  22. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2005). Formative assessment, improving learning in secondary classrooms. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  23. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2007a). Evidence in education: Linking research to policy. Paris: OECD Publications.Google Scholar
  24. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2007b). Quality and equity of schooling in Scotland. Paris: OECD Publications.Google Scholar
  25. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2009a). Chile, Paris: OECD Publications.Google Scholar
  26. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2009b). Knowledge and skills for life: PISA. Paris: OECD Publications.Google Scholar
  27. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2014). PISA programme. Paris: OECD Publications.Google Scholar
  28. Priestley, M., & Humes, W. (2010). The development of Scotland’s curriculum for excellence: Amnesia and Déjà Vu. Oxford Review of Education, 36(3), 345–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Reuling, J., & Hanf, G. (2003). The role of national qualifications systems in promoting lifelong learning, OECD country report. Bonn: Federal Institute for Vocational Training.Google Scholar
  30. Sahlberg, P. (2007). Education policies for raising student learning: The Finnish approach. Journal of Education Policy, 22(2), 147–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sahlberg, P. (2013). Education in Europe session 3, Talk by Pasi Sahlberg at the NYU Brademas Centre Events. [Available Online].Google Scholar
  32. Sanguinetti, J. (2000). An Adventure in postmodern action research: Performativity, professionalism and power. In J. Garrick & C. Rhodes (Eds.), Research and knowledge at work: Perspectives, case studies and innovative strategies. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Scheerens, J., Ehren, M., Sleegers, P., & de Leeuw, R. (2012). OECD review on evaluation and assessment frameworks for improving school outcomes. Enschede: University of Twente.Google Scholar
  34. Scottish Executive. (2004). Curriculum for excellence. Edinburgh: Scottish Government.Google Scholar
  35. Scottish Government. (2008). Case for change for the CfE, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  36. Scottish Parliament. (2001). Scottish parliamentary debate, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  37. Tuovinene, J. E. (2008). Learning the craft of teaching and learning from the world’s best practice, The case of Finland. In D. M. McInerney & A. D. Liem (Eds.), Teaching and learning: International best practice (pp. 51–77). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  38. Välijärvi, J. (2012) The history and present of the Finnish Education System, Sino-Finnish seminar on education systems, Shanghai.Google Scholar
  39. Vergelers, M. (2003). Waarden en normen in het onderwijs. Zingeving en humanisering: autonomie en sociale bettrokkenheid, Utrecht: Univeriteit voor Humanistiek (oratie).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Scott
    • 1
  1. 1.Curriculum, Pedagogy & AssessmentUniversity College London Institute of EducationLondonUK

Personalised recommendations