Class Discussion

The article critique portion of the class stood out to me the most! 

·         Research Design

o   Hypotheses based on type of government (conservative, social-democratic, liberal)—interesting they used regime versus government

o   Looked at indicators of participation and other indicators—seeing if it is grouped by government type

o   Where they got the date from is under the results section—from 2008 OECD Education­—supplemented with other information/data-- countries reported what wanted to, a lot of missing observations

·         Findings

o   Conservative regimes expanded less than liberal regimes

§  Same pattern with graduation rates

o   Policy makers should make decisions based on regime

§  Why do they have to do that?  Wouldn't they do that naturally?

§  How can they change outcomes if they’re only making policies based on your regime

·         Discussion/Conclusion

o   Useful that it was with four policy makers instead of one….multiple lenses

o   Interesting—sample age is 25-64—why so large?

o   Quote on page 22- why low achiever??  Does this mean tracking….

§  Conservative—people have their proper place I society—46

§  More extensive tracking….more money and resources

§  What about Fowler models….

o   Framework analysis helps with framing for article critiques

§  Also look at leadership and power—how are they being used

Take away from Article Discussion

·        You can always poke-- I really liked this language :)  

·        Can always cite Fowler and Smirch/Morgan—this will become second nature as you come along

o   Weick also with sense making

o   There is a cast of characters that you can start citing along the way

·         Soon—you will be able to see holes in anything and be able to increase your own writing

Pechar & Anders: Higher Education Policies

Pechar and Andres investigated and found that there is a convincing relationship between higher education and welfare regimes.  In order to do a meaningful comparative analysis, the authors had to understand the trade-offs each country is faced with.  The US, for example, used education often as a trade-off since it is under discretionary spending instead of mandated funding.

The three types are:

-Liberal welfare regimes (Canada, US, UK)-- low degree decommodification and strong role in markets

• high tuition fees

-Conservative welfare regimes (Austria, France, Italy)-- preserving social structures and hierarchies and the traditional family

• low/no tuition fees

-Social democratic (universal) welfare regimes--equal access to benefits and services of high standards

• no tuition fees

With welfare regimes and education, it is a system of give and take-- what each country prioritizes more.  pg 25--Countries that adhere to liberal welfare don't est equitable living conditions but they spend more money on higher education than other regimes.  Doesn't these seem a little counter-intuitive?

Conservative regimes provide better conditions for those who will not attain a degree-- great opportunity for vocational degrees.   However, I did not appreciate that implication that those who get vocational degrees are necessarily low achievers.

OECD-- Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

Fowler-- Chapter 9 and 11

Chapter 9
An important part of being a school leader is to look at policies and scrutinize them as administrators are the ones to develop policies in some instances and implementing others' policies in other cases.

Fowler presents three lenses in which to critically look at policies:

1. Lowi's Techniques of Control
• three basic types of policies-- distributive (bestow gifts such as goods and services to citizens), regulatory (formal rules applied to large groups of people), redistributive (shifts resources from one social group to another)-- each has its own political arena
• not one of Lowi's policies fits, in many cases they are overlapping.  Fowler argues that in the long term, all policies are both regulatory and redistributive (pg. 219).
• Lowi's policies help manage policy change in the long-term.  Fowler suggests that wise leaders shouldn't make too many changes at once and to ensure that many people are not at the end of too many changes,
2. McDonnell and Elmore's Policy Instruments
• mandates-- rules that consist of language and penalties for those who do not comply with the rules.  The MOST popular.  
• inducements-- money transferred to indiv/agencies in return for goods and services
• capacity building-- money given in purpose of investing in intellectual or human resources
• system changing-- transfers authorities among indiv/agencies
• persuasion (fifth added later)-- sends a signal that goals and actions are considered a high priority
• COMBINATION-- coherence is an effective combo of the above policy instruments
3. Cost Analysis and Cost-effectiveness Analyses
• combo of personnel, facilities, and required client inputs
• also consider tangible and intangible costs and benefits
• systematic way to compare alternative methods to reach goals

Chapter 11
This chapter considered evaluation and if policies really do work.  On pg. 278, Fowler discusses that many policies are never evaluated or at least not evaluated carefully, so no one is able to act on the findings.  Evaluations are "nervous making".

Important terms for policy evaluation-- evaluation, project, program, stakeholder

Basic steps

1. determine goals of policy
2. select indicators
3. develop how data will be collected
4. collect data
5. analyze and summarize data
6. write evaluation
7. respond to evaluators' recommendations

Methodologies that can be used

• quantitative
• qualitative
• holistic-- use both

Evaluations are almost always political :( and there are maneuvers to prevent a good evaluation 

Acting on an evaluation report-- a variety of options

• inaction
• minor modifications
• major modifications-- replacement, consolidation, splitting, decrementing
• termination