Regulatory frameworks: shifting frameworks, shifting criteria
Regulatory frameworks: shifting frameworks, shifting criteria
复制标题
监管框架：转变框架、转变标准
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Christina Segerholm
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Jacqueline Baxter;Sotiria Grek;Christina Segerholm
本章借鉴了“规则基础设施”的概念，以讨论在我们的研究中指导三个系统检查工作的监管框架。正如我们在前言中指出的那样，具体化的知识有被“视为无关紧要”的风险（Fourcade 2010: 571-2），除非存在一种规则基础设施和收集条件以及集中报告系统，这些系统可以构建个人观察结果，从而使它们不会被视为“仅仅是大量观察结果”（Fourcade 2010）。检查框架就是这样一个规则基础结构。它们通过规定系统和（或）故意收集什么和如何收集资料，以及视察员与被视察者之间应保持何种关系和距离来规范视察员的做法。对我们三国检查框架的讨论也提供了一幅在判断学校教育质量时被重视和偏爱的知识类型的图景。为了使检查被认为是有效和可靠的，为了使学校得到改进，必须测量和评估什么？关于什么是判断学校教育质量的坚实基础，什么是支持改进的合理过程，以及什么为成功管理学校提供资源的假设，可以通过研究检查框架来强调。
This chapter draws on the idea of ‘an infrastructure of rules’ in order to discuss the regulatory frameworks that guide the work of inspection in the three systems in our study. As we pointed out in our introductory chapter, embodied knowledge risks being ‘dismissed as irrelevant’ (Fourcade 2010: 571-2) unless there is a presence of an infrastructure of rules and conditions of collection and centralised reporting systems that structure personal observations so that they are not dismissed as ‘merely a mass of observations’ (Fourcade 2010). Inspection frameworks are such an infrastructure of rules. They regulate the inspectors’ practice through prescribing what and how information is to be systematically and/or deliberately collected, as well as what type of relation and distance there should be between inspectors and those inspected. The discussion of the inspection frameworks in our three countries also provides a picture of the types of knowledge that are valued and preferred when judging education quality in schools. What has to be measured and assessed, in order for the inspections to be regarded as valid and reliable and in order for the schools to improve? Assumptions about what counts as a solid basis for judging quality in schooling, of what is a reasonable process for supporting improvement, and about what provides resources for the successful governing of schooling, may be highlighted by studying inspection frameworks.
Inspection frameworks may also tell us something about how neo-liberal agendas (see chapter 2) and their pre-occupation with ‘steering the future’ are operationalised in practices requiring a variety of data, information and knowledge, or as Hayek puts it: ‘this planning, whoever does it, will in some measure have to be based on knowledge which, in the first instance, is not given to the planner but to somebody else, which somehow will have to be conveyed to the planner.’ (Hayek 1945: 520). But these projects also need the work of a nation state trying to preserve a balance between the market and the public interest (Wilkinson 2013). This balancing act directed at the future reflects a tension played out in school inspection in the three countries over time, as we illustrate through discussion of the constant change in the frameworks of inspection.
英格兰、瑞典、芬兰和苏格兰的国家政策斡旋和欧洲教育空间的建设
影响因子：
3.3
作者：
Grek S
通讯作者：
Grek S