In 2010, Russian authorities presented a new draft law on education, which immediately became controversial. The essay examines whether user groups (parents) and low-ranking sector employees (teachers) were active in the movement critical of the reform, and how the state responded to the anti-reform movement. The movement consisted of several networks and organizations with no central point. It included teachers, parents and activists from both non-systemic groups and systemic opposition parties. Since the movement was welfare-oriented rather than fundamentally regime-critical, the Russian authorities tolerated open criticism both from civil society and inside the Duma. Some gains for teachers were won, but the movement’s proposed amendments and demands were generally rejected or only introduced in revised form.
Perry, L. & Lubienski, C. (2020). Between-school stratification of academic curricular offerings in upper secondary education: School decision-making, curriculum policy context, and the educational marketplace. Oxford Review of Education, 46(5), 582-600.
This study examines the factors that shape secondary schools' offerings of academic curricula. While academic curricula provide many benefits to individuals and the larger society, inequalities in opportunities to study these subjects may exist between schools, even in comprehensive secondary education systems. School leaders of low socioeconomic public schools reported the most resource constraints in offering academic curricula, and all school leaders acknowledged systemic constraints related to the large number of curricula that could be offered. The findings highlight how marketisation dynamics combine with curriculum policies to shape schools' curricular offerings in ways that provide unequal access for different types of students.
Shultz, L., & Viczko, M. (2021). What are we saving? Tracing governing knowledge and truth discourse in global COVID-19 policy responses. International Review of Education: Journal of Lifelong Learning, 67 (1–2), 219-239. 219–239.
As the world went suddenly into lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic, sending individuals to their homes and shutting businesses and institutions, the closing of schools posed big problems. This article discusses the World Bank, OECD, and UNESCO responses using an analysis of knowledge harmonization and difference among these knowledge institutions as well as their location as key norm-setters and governing actors in the field of education. The findings suggest that the technologies of saving have centered on privatized, corporate edu-business and edu-tech aimed at online education delivery, bringing significant risks for the erasure of local knowledge. Further, local policymakers, including community-based and national actors, must be invited into the discussion to envision other possibilities and to name the potential destructiveness embedded in the international organizations’ actions.
Silva, J. S., Peixoto, P., & Freitas, A. (2018). Disparate faculty perspectives on system changes in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(3), 593–606.
Wood, C., Dell, K., & Carroll, B. (2022). Decolonizing the business school: Reconstructing the entrepreneurship classroom through indigenizing pedagogy and learning. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 21(1), 82-100.
Decolonization is an ongoing process of addressing power imbalances and knowledge hierarchies that require critical self-reflection from those teaching in business. If educators take decolonizing seriously, they must create space for Indigenous Peoples to reconnect and engage with their own knowledge systems and ways of knowing. The purpose of the study was to examine the use of a virtual learning platform by Indigenous students engaged in entrepreneurship education. Information about how Indigenous knowledge and wisdom can thrive alongside Western knowledge in a decolonized business school and become part of the wider movement of decolonization of academia and society.