Convergences and hybridization of educational policies around ‘post‐bureaucratic’ models of regulation

Abstract

Our purpose is to document convergences and divergences in the mode of institutional regulation of the education systems in five European countries (Belgium, England, France, Hungary and Portugal). On the national level, partially convergent policies create, to varying degrees and with different temporal rhythms, variants of a post‐bureaucratic regulation regime which seeks to go beyond the bureaucratic–professional model which remains dominant today, by highlighting either the traits of an ‘evaluative state’ or those of the ‘quasi‐market’ model. However, beyond the influence of these transnational models, path dependencies also exist and, in addition, we witness hybridization of these models with institutional, political and/or ideological constraints specific to each country.

Keywords:

• regulation
• educational policy
• post‐bureaucratic
• Europe
• accountability

Notes

1. This analysis is derived from the European research Reguleducnetwork (Maroy 2004). Methodologically, it is based on five monographs on the principal morphological and institutional characteristics of the investigated school systems and an analysis of the educational policies affecting these modes of regulation in secondary schools over the last 20 years. After each team had integrated the literature on their national situation a transverse synthesis was carried out (Bajomi and Barroso 2002).

2. This idea of a model is close to the concept of ‘référentiel d'action publique’ or ‘policy paradigm’ used in cognitive approaches to public policies, stressing the presence of cognitive and normative references that tend to orient the definition of political actors' problems and solutions in various areas (Jobert 1992).

3. This model has been described in various ways: some authors call it steering or regulation based on expected results, regulation related to an ‘obligation de résultats’ (Demailly 2001), as opposed to ‘obligation de moyens’.

4. Our distinction between the quasi‐market model and regulation by results is close to that proposed by Harris and Herrington (2006), who distinguish between ‘market‐based accountability’ and ‘government‐based accountability’.

5. In the future this could change in France, with the presidency of N. Sarkozy.