RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The main purpose of this paper is to problematize on-going evaluation as a contemporary governmental technology in the context of vocational education and training (VET). The background is that in recent decade the concept of on-going evaluation has become a matter of course, or you might even say “salvation” theme of the talking, writing and thinking about how to find way toward a “flexible, demand-driven approach” to evaluation that can improve the quality, effectiveness, consistency and sustainability of the implementation of various political programs, in this case in a VET context (COM, 2007; Svensson, 2009; Sipos & Baumgarten, 2015).  However, we are not interested in on-going evaluation from a traditional educational policy perspective, where issues such as educational objectives, results, resources and organization are in focus. We are instead interested in the politics of on-going evaluation, how the concept operates as a political technology in the formation of narratives about, for instance, society, education, research, teachers, researchers and power relationships (Nóvoa, 2015; Olsson, Petersson & Krejsler, 2015; ).

THEORETICAL PERSPERCTIVE

Theoretically, we connect to Foucault’s concepts of discourse analysis, governmentality and genealogy, as this kind of approach has the advantage that it does not require prior definition of concepts as education, teachers, researchers and power. Instead, it enables us to study how these concepts and other floating signifiers acquire meaning within particular regimes of discourse and practice (Foucault, 1994; Popkewitz, 2008; Law, & Grek, 2012). Our main focus is to analyzis the rationalities embedded in the concept of on-going evaluation. In a VET context this means that we investigate rationalities or the principles organizing and designing evaluation and implementation processes. Or, in other words, how the agents involved are constructed and expected to think, reason, and act to enable successful implementation of programs in the field of Vet-education.

COM (2007). Indicative Guidelines on Evaluation Methods. European Commission. Directorate –general. Working Document No. 5. Retrieved January, 26, 2015 from http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/2007/working/wd5_ongoing_en.pdf Foucault, M. (1994). Governmentality, in D. Faubion (eds.) Michel Foucault. Essential Works of Foucault 1954-1984 (vol 3), Power. London: Penguin Books. GÉRANDO de, J. M. (1832). The Visitor of the Poor, Boston: Hilliard, Gray, Little and Wilkins. Nóvoa, A. (2014). Knowledge as Politics. In Barry M. Franklin & Miguel A. Pereyra (eds.) System of Reason and the Politics of Schooling. Alternative Studies on School Reform and Science of Education. London: Routledge. Olsson, U., Petersson, K. & John B. Krejsler (2014). On community as a governmental technology. In Barry M. Franklin & Miguel A. Pereyra (eds.) System of Reason and the Politics of Schooling. Alternative Studies on School Reform and Science of Education. London: Routledge. Olsson, U., Petersson, K. & John B. Krejsler (2015). Lärandemålens politik (The politics of learning outcomes). In S. Lindblad & L. Lundahl. Utbildning – makt och politik (Education - power and politics). Lund: Studentlitteratur. Popkewitz, S. T (2008). Cosmopolitanism and the Age of School Reform. Science, Education, and Making Society by Making the Child. New York, London: Routledge. EuropeanMinds . On-going Evaluation. Retrieved January, 20, 2015 from http://www.europeanminds.com/eng/ongoing_evaluation.php Sipos, K. & Baumgarten, M. (2015). Apl – Guldägget i yrkesprogrammen (Workplace learning. The golden egg in vocational education and training). Stockholm: Skolverket. (work in progress). Svensson, L., Brulin, G. & Jansson, S. (2009). Learning Through Ongoing Evaluation. Lund: Studentlitteratur.