Search

Previous research has illustrated that advocacy organizations play a crucial role in education policy networks by communicating educational reform agendas to public and private stakeholders. In the United States, an inter-state consortium of these advocacy organizations has formed their own network. The Policy Innovators in Education (PIE) network is a formal, centrally coordinated policy network that connects state-level advocacy organizations to one another and to national advocacy organizations, think tanks, and philanthropic foundations. Despite more than doubling in size since 2016, little is known about the policy preferences of PIE members. In this paper, we use social network analysis to identify and describe the ideological dimensions of advocacy that structure the PIE Network and to examine how these ideological dimensions have changed as the network has expanded. We find that the central areas of emphasis among these organizations have coalesced around neoliberal ideologies that promote accountability and standards. However, there is an underlying tension within the network that unfolds along two dimensions. On the one hand, preferences for choice and autonomy (e.g., charters, general choice, and autonomy & deregulation) are contrasted to those favoring equitable funding for low-income schools and early childhood education. On the other hand, members emphasize policies involving factors internal to schools (student interventions, leadership standards and accountability) to those external to schools (e.g., familial support, funding-based equity). These tensions within the network have grown more pronounced over time as the network has expanded to include new members with a more ideological narrow set of market-based policy preferences.

In 18th century Lombardy a well-developed offer of grammar schools granted rural bourgeoisie and some artisans and shopkeepers easy access to Latin education. The Habsburg school reforms (1774, 1786) aim to reduce the offer of Latin education and transform the grammar schools into normal schools for “common education”. The opposition of rural municipalities produced a body of proof concerning the perception of the meanings of Latin education in the countryside of Lombardy.

In 18th century Lombardy a well-developed offer of grammar schools granted rural bourgeoisie and some artisans and shopkeepers easy access to Latin education. The Habsburg school reforms (1774, 1786) aim to reduce the offer of Latin education and transform the grammar schools into normal schools for "common education". The opposition of rural municipalities produced a body of proof concerning the perception of the meanings of Latin education in the countryside of Lombardy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Espacio, Tiempo y Educación is the property of Espacio, Tiempo y Educacion and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The Croatian government has continued with its work aiming at curriculum reform with premier Plenković at its head: he has been given this task in order to ensure that this reform will continue. The Italian government has incorporated a law concerning the reform of national education tiltled as the „Good School“. The aims and means have been clearly defined, the tools required, the means of realisation and evaluation, as well as additions for teachers, schools and all those who desire investing in school infrastructure. There are two very similar realities in schools that have the need for the strong support of the community.

[A past that will not pass. Teaching history in a time of never-ending school reform] Introducing the journal issue on “History teaching today”, the article points at the persisting inconsistencies and shortcomings of educational policies in Italy and elsewhere and calls for cooperation between government agencies and academics.