The publicness in the policy making process: the case of the use of ICT in Higher Education

Author(s):

Ernesto Treviño(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2012

Network:

23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education

Format:

Paper

Session Information

23 SES 05 A, Public Debate and Education Policy

Parallel Paper Session

Time:

2012-09-19

11:00-12:30

Room:

FFL - Aula 19

Chair:

Keri Facer

Contribution

This paper presents a country case in an international frame. Almost fifteen years ago the Federal Mexican Government adopted a new way of designing and implementing public policy (PEF, 2000). It was based on a public policy approach and presented to introduce effectiveness, accountability and direct public participation in the definition of the governmental agenda. This was to replace the traditional way of designing policy, characterized for its verticality, lack of clarity and rigidness (Fox, 2002). One of the main sectors of application for this perspective was the public education system. But despite the intentions, after almost a decade, several strategic policies implemented under this approach are failing.

This paper presents an excerpt of an ongoing research which deals with a specific part of the process of designing and implementing public policies in education, a sector debated in the open, but quite obscure in terms of the policy making process. The research was detonated by two questions: why some policies in education, despite claiming to be based on a “public policy approach” seem to respond more to tradition, ideological convictions or institutional tendencies, than to the "greater public interest"? Is there a link between the failure of a specific policy and its publicness?

These questions were constructed as a research problem through the analysis of three policy cases. In this paper I present the case of the initiative for the implementation of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) for the expansion of Higher Education (HE) services (SEP, 2001; 2006). It is crucial to point out that since 1994 fundamental changes in Mexican education policies have been oriented by explicit recommendations of the OECD (OECD-SEP, 1994; OECD, 2005). Since 2000 the OECD presented explicit European initiatives as a role model in terms of policy making, encouraging the government to follow the best international practices (SEP, 2006; CONACYT, 2010).

As for the conceptual orientations, it has been necessary to revisit the idea of publicness or publicity, and the way in which it is constructed in different debates. Since the research has been conducted through the articulation of a political discourse analysis perspective (Laclau, 2005) with some elements retrieved from policy analysis approaches (Parsons, 1995; Hill, 2005), publicity has been conceptualized in the tension of an institutional condition, a state of existence and a valuable principle. Here, policies are understood as a configuration of signifying practices, vulnerable, disputed, carrying the traces of other ideas, meanings, contexts and times. But such configurations are also tools used to regulate life, and as long as policies imply the inclusion and exclusion of specific elements, readings about public interest, power and governmentality have also been relevant (Miller and Rose, 2008). At another level, in 2011 Mexico showed an access rate to HE of a low 26%, against this data, beyond its traditional representation as a “neutral instrument” (Gillard, Bailey and Nolan, 2008), ICT have been conceptualized here as a social and institutional aspiration, as a recurrent hope and as a latent menace for the future of HE

Method

This research aims to provide a particular insight into the publicity of a public policy in a specific context. Although this is not a policy analysis research, it has been useful to follow, with adaptations, the basic policy making cycle: the construction of the problem, the designing process, its presentation, and the way in which it’s being received in specific contexts (Parsons, 1995; Weimer, 1998; Birklan, 2011). The study has required documentary and testimonial information, including: institutional documents, structured interviews with policy makers and actors immerse in the process of presenting, defending and implementing the initiative, as well as with some actors affected by the policy itself; nine interviews have been conducted. The policy under study implies also a “media domain”, documented by following official communications, newspapers notes and specialized online forums. All these elements have been organized by the discursive perspective supplemented with a combination of argumentative and conceptual analysis (Fisher, 2003). The international, but particularly the European contexts, have been key references to elucidate the research problem and the process of analysis, particularly in terms of the policy cycle.

Expected Outcomes

The research is entering a key moment. To the day, the evidence shows that in Mexico we are experiencing the conflicting interaction and "discursive contamination" of several traditions in the public policy design and implementation process. At several stages we are witnessing a mixture of sophisticated debates about democratic participation, public policy and effective public administration acting together with old ways of thinking and building the political objects. The research also suggests that in the case of the policy oriented for the strategic use of ICT for the expansion of HE services ―widening access, improving participation―, publicness appears reduced. The Federal Government has built a public case about the urgency of using ICT as a strategic tool, but teachers, students, researchers, and even local University Presidents seem to be excluded of the relevant discussion and the decision making process. So, the room for the participation of these and other actors at any point of the policy process is almost closed. It’s illuminating the fact that the openly defended intention of replacing the old policy process takes part while respecting some old “operational ways”. This can be interpreted as the intent to minimize conflicts while introducing specific changes.

References

Birklan, T. A. (2011). An Introduction to the Policy Process. Sharp, In.: New York. CONACYT (2001) Programa Especial de Ciencia y Tecnología 2001-2006. México: Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología. Fisher, F. (2003). Reframing Public Policy. Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices. Oxford U.P.: NY. Fox, V. (2002). Agenda Presidencial de Buen Gobierno. Mexico: President's Office Gillard, S., Bailey, D., and E. Nolan (2008) “Ten Reasons for IT Educators to be Early Adopters of IT Innovations”, Journal of Information Technology Education, 7: 21-32. Hill, M. (2005). The Public Policy Process. Pearson-Longman. Laclau, E. (2005). On Populist Reason. London: Verso Miller, P. and N. Rose (2008). Governing the Present: Administering Economic, Social and Personal Life. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. OECD-SEP. (2006). Thematic Review of Tertiary Education. Country Background, Report for Mexico, México, SEP. OECD. (2005). OECD e-Government Studies: Mexico. Paris, France: OECD. Parsons, W. (1995). Public Policy: An Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Policy Analysis Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. PEF. (2001). Plan Nacional de Desarrollo (National Plan for Development). México: Poder Ejecutivo Federal. SEP. (2001) Programa de Nacional de Educación (National Education Program). México: Secretaría de Educación Pública. SEP. (2006). Programa Sectorial de Educación (Education Sector Program). México: Secretaría de Educación Pública. Weimer, D. L. (1998). Policy Analysis and Evidence: A Craft Perspective. Policy Studies Journal, 26(1), 114-128. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.1998.tb01928.x

Author Information

Ernesto Treviño (presenting / submitting)

Centro Interdisciplinario de Investigación y Docencia en Educación Técnica

Xalapa

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.