Any room for deliberation? Educational guidance in French schools

Abstract

This article aims at studying school guidance from a policy analysis point of view. Based on the observation of French educational guidance practices, it discusses Thomas Risse’s logic of arguing thesis. Through focusing on the room left for deliberation within the micro decision-making process that is educational guidance in France, this analysis sets out to reveal the constraints that press upon a mechanism for, and a logic of, deliberation. Based upon a quantitative and qualitative study carried out in the Aquitaine region, it concludes that this procedure ultimately only rarely results in practices of debate that go beyond formalist commitments to open and equitable argumentation.

Keywords:

• guidance practices
• policy analysis
• deliberation
• education policies
• France

Notes

1. 1. The empirical data used in this text comes from a survey conducted in Aquitaine (France) in 2008. For the purpose of this survey, 53 semi-structured interviews were conducted with head teachers, guidance counselors, and teachers, local and regional stakeholders. Three hundred and fifty-three questionnaires were also administered to pupils in eight teaching institutions (colleges and high school general and professional).

2. 2. Made up of teachers as well as parents’ and pupils’ representatives (two per class) this is one of the key institutions of the French education system, the aim of which is to provide a forum for decision-making in matters of educational guidance choices.

3. 3. In the French secondary education system (secondary and sixth form), the teachers who agree to take on the position of tutor encourage and coordinate the exchange of information with the pupils and their families. They sum-up the pupils’ results with a report taking into account the forthcoming educational guidance decision.

4. 4. Split up as follows: 3,189,763 secondary school pupils, 1,446,866 sixth-form pupils, 703,090 vocational sixth-form students, 338,136 apprentices and 227,146 youngsters in other educational sectors (National Education 2009).

5. 5. According to March and Olsen (1998, p. 948) ‘a relatively stable collection of practices and rules defining appropriate behavior for specific groups of actors in specific situations. Such practices and rules are embedded in structures of meaning and schemes of interpretation that explain and legitimize particular identities and the practices and rules associated with them’.

6. 6. Chaired by the regional education authority (who normal delegates this responsibility to a head teacher), the appeal committee is made up of ex-officio members for a deliberative approach: two head teachers, three teachers, an education counselor, the head of an information and educational guidance center and three parents.

7. 7. For a model of the set of constraints (Berthet et al. 2008a).

8. 8. Reinforced by the official guidance texts which give a more important role to the pupil and their inner circle. It is now these actors who are meant to steer the procedure. ‘The choices are the result of a continuous elaboration process and the fulfilment of a personal educational project or social and professional integration that the secondary and sixth-form student undertakes in function with their aspirations and capabilities. Consulting with the pupil guarantees that their project is personalised. This process is managed with the help of the pupil’s family, the school, the teaching staff, the health and education staff and the guidance counsellors. These external advisors contribute to the preparatory guidance information actions’ (Article D 331-23, decree dated 23 May 2006 relative to the procedure concerning pupils’ educational choices in public teaching facilities).

9. 9. In the Dordogne region, the number of appeals goes from 0.36% in the first year of secondary school to 1.8% in the first year of the French sixth form (Data taken from the Dordogne region education authorities, 2007).

10. 10. In other words a decision in disagreement with the pupils’ wishes.

11. 11. Finally, actors need to recognize each other as equals and have equal access to discourse, which must also be open to other participants and be public in nature’ (Risse 2000, p. 11).

12. 12. The notion of ‘constrained choices’ must be looked at in detail. It is formed by the figures of the DEPP (The Direction de l’Evaluation, de la Prospective et de la Performance is the statistical department of the French ministry of education) used by Olivier Galland from the aggregation of two situations: ‘the % of youngsters declaring that their educational guidance choice was refused’ + ‘the % of youngsters declaring that their school results were not good enough to do what they wanted to’. Two completely different situations are therefore aggregated: on one hand, the result of a formalized guidance procedure and on the other hand, an opinion on their school results. Yet the second element can hardly pass as a systemic constraint unless the system is pronounced totally responsible for these youngsters’ school results. If only the first element is retained, that which goes back to the institutionalized educational guidance procedure, the figures decrease considerably to a general average of 26.6%, which in itself remains a large constraint.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Thierry Berthet

Thierry Berthet is a senior CNRS researcher in political science working at the Centre Emile Durkheim at the University of Bordeaux. His main research topics are education, employment and career guidance policies, all addressed from a comparative point of view. He is currently studying public policies in the fields of early school leaving, ‘flexicurity’ and social cohesion. In so doing, he participates in several French and European (FP7) research networks.