(Dis) Empowered Stakeholders – Advancement of “Inclusion” educational policies in the Czech Republic

Author(s):

Alena Felcmanová(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2017

Network:

32. Organizational Education

Format:

Paper

Session Information

32 SES 05, Power Relations and Perception Gaps as Factors of Organizational Development

Paper Session

Time:

2017-08-23

13:30-15:00

Room:

K3.18

Chair:

Michael Göhlich

Contribution

In September 2016, new “inclusive” school law amendment came into force, the main change in the school law is the introduction of supportive measures in education, which should allow and support inclusive education. In addition to that, a part of the 'Framework Educational Programme for mild mental disability' (RVP LMP) is hereby cancelled. With the amendment, the help of teachers’ assistants should be accessible as one of the supportive measures. For some stakeholders in education, inclusion seems to be concept prescribed by the European Union and not as a concept which would reflect the needs of Czech society. As origin of this political development it is usually referred to Appeal of ECHR D.H. and other vs. Czech Republic, which is used as one of the core arguments to promote inclusive education and putting political pressure on that. But even in literature the term “inclusion policy” stands for many, often contradictory conceptions and definitions, which oscillates between special needs in education and education to support marginalized groups in society (Slee; 2011).

In the Czech Republic, the educational policy is not very stable and lacks continuity (Matějů et. al., 2010; Veselý, 2013) Changes often come quickly and without an intensive discussion with teachers. There is a big discrepancy between what should an inclusive policy support – individual development of students, safety and friendly atmosphere on the one hand – and the pressure on results, testing and comparing of school per results and rates of students being accepted to high school on the other hand. Therefore, I analyse, what is the role of stakeholders in drafting and implementation of educational policy? To what extent do they feel in charge of influencing the process and policy? How inclusive is the process of inclusion policy in the Czech Republic?

The aim of this paper is to describe factors which empower or disempower stakeholders (teachers, directors, NGO experts, parents) to take an active role in shaping and implementing educational policies on the example of policy guidelines on inclusion in education, as well as to describe gaps in their interaction. The factors I will elaborate on are: team leadership, team cohesion, common values, school reputation, trust (internal and external) among different stakeholders, role of parents, fear from “white flight” (segregation) and clarity (or its lack) regarding the role of teachers, or other stakeholders.

To interpret the role of teachers and other stakeholders in educational politics (including their role in drafting and implementation of policies) I will refer to concept of empowerment (Rowlands, 1995; Mulkau, 2014; Kreisberg; 1992). Stemming from these concepts, teachers should take more active role in drafting (bring concrete plans and ideas) and implementing education policies (Veselý; 2013). I will also investigate the link patterns of Freires Banking concept of education in organizational management (Kreisberg; 1992), institutional memory and organizational culture.

Method

In the qualitative research, based on in-depth interviews and narrative approach to interviewing (Hermanowicz, 2002; Kohler Riessman,1993; Gee, 2014; Rubin & Rubin 2012), I try to indicate how do the interviewees describe their own role – if they describe their role as active, or if they see themselves rather as somebody who passively takes part in a process set by others. As for the choice of methodology, I relate to the problem of structuring or delimitation (in public policy) (Veselý 2007) and stakeholder analysis (Schmeer, 2000; Varvarsovszky & Brugha, 2000). As for investigating the problem, I chose the Stakeholder Analysis, which offers deep insight into different interpretations of the problem, as Straková and Veselý propose: “We need to try to get beyond general statements and reveal true interests and values of key stakeholders” (Straková & Veselý 2010, p. 406). In our case teachers' role in shaping educational politic. The analysis includes nearly 30 interviews with a variety of stakeholders from two towns with socially excluded areas (teachers from primary and practical primary schools, principals, parents, social and NGO workers tutoring children from socially disadvantaged backgrounds) were collected from 2015 to 2017.

Expected Outcomes

Major disempowering factor are unclear boundaries of teachers and other stakeholders’ roles. The borderline is derived from the goals set by each stakeholder, but is conflicting with the fuzzy political priorities since 1989. The situation is not very new, shifting role border between state and family education already described Moree (2013). Teachers, schools and other stakeholders very often perceive each other as competitors and their unclear duties and responsibilities lead to limited transparency in educational policy and therefore limited access to decision-making. All those factors undermine empowerment and limit ability to take an active part in the decision-making process. As consequence of this, different stakeholders degrade each other, and lack respect and acknowledgment in the end. Instead it would be more helpful to create common discourse, where they can clear their role boundaries and articulate common needs as policy proposals. In the analysis, I will try to find parallels explaining this participation failure in educational management, limits of organizations, banking concept of education and school culture. On the other hand, I will elaborate also the empowering factors and stakeholders’ proposals, as team cohesion and collective action.

References

Freire P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Penguin Books, London. Gee, James Paul (2014). Language as Saying, Doing and Being. In.: Angermuller, Johannes et al. (eds), The Discourse Studies Reader. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 234-243. Hermanowicz, Joseph C. (2002). "The Great Interview: 25 Strategies for Studying People in Bed", Qualitative Sociology 25(4): 479-499. Kohler Riessman, C. (1993) - Narative Analysis. Qualitative Research Methods Series 30, A Sage University Paper, Sage publications, Newbury Park, London, New Dehli Kreisberg, S. (1992). Transforming power: Domination, empowerment, and education. SUNY Press. Matějů, P., Straková, J., Veselý, A., & Basl, J. (2010). Nerovnosti ve vzdělávání: Od měření k řešení. Sociologické nakladatelství (SLON). Moree, D. (2013). Učitelé na vlnách transformace: kultura školy před rokem 1989 a po něm. Karolinum Press. Mulkau, Anette. Empowerment als Haltung in der „flüchtigen Moderne“. In.: Brock, Inés. (2014) Psychologie und Empowerment. Impulse für die psychosoziale Praxis. Verlag Barbara Budrich, Oplade, Berlin & Toronto. Rowlands, Jo (1996). Empowerment examined In.: Development and Social Diversity. Introduced by Mary B. Anderson. A Development in Practice Reader. Series Editor: Deborah Eade Published by Oxfam (UK and Ireland). ISBN 0 85598 343 4 First published 1996 © Oxfam (UK and Ireland) 1996 - This article first appeared in Development in Practice Volume 5, Number 2, in 1995. http://www.developmentinpractice.org/sites/developmentinpractice.org/files/DiP%20Reader%20SocDiv%20text.pdf staženo březen 2015 Rubin, Herbert J. and Rubin, Irene (2012). Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data. Thousand Oaks etc. : Sage, ch. 10. Schmeer, K. (2000). Stakeholder analysis guidelines. Washington, DC: Partnership for Health Reform. http://www.eestum.eu/voorbeelden/Stakeholders_analysis_guidelines.pdf Slee (2011). The Inclusion Pradox: The Cultural Politics of Difference In.: Apple, M. W., Au, W., & Gandin, L. A. (2011). The Routledge international handbook of critical education. Taylor & Francis. Varvarsovszky, Z., Brugha, R. (2000), How to do (or not to do) . . .A stakeholder analysis Veselý, A. (2007). Problem delimitation in public policy analysis. Central European Journal of Public Policy, 1(1), 80-100. Veselý, Arnošt (2013) Vzdělávací politika: rozdílná vymezení, předpoklady a implikace. Pedagogicka orientace, 2013, roč. 23, č. 3, s. 279–297

Author Information

Alena Felcmanová (presenting / submitting)

Charles University Prague

Department of Civil Society Studies

Praha 3

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.