Impact Of the Global Education Reform Movement on Education the Case of the United States and the United Kingdom.
Introduction
Education is the most critical aspect of human life. It has been in existence for a very long time when people engaged in informal education, which was carried out by parents and other older people in the society, to the current education structure that has spread all over the world (Cheng, 2020). The evolution of education occurs to meet the demand of the changing living standard of the human being. They include the industrial revolution, which brought with it the need for engineers. The emergence of unknown diseases made people start thinking of researching for medical remedies, globalization, which brought the need for connecting people, among other issues (Cheng, 2020). The evolving need for education brought a continuous need for reforms to make education meet society’s emerging issues.
There have been many contributions from all dimensions of society from the times when the formal type of education was introduced. Some of the most renowned people that contributed to education are Charles Darwin, Isaac Newton, and Karl Max, to mention but a few. Their contribution to education will forever be remembered, but this does not mean that we stop where they left it. Education is supposed to be dynamic to meet the ever-changing human needs, which means that we need more innovators amongst us. Therefore, it means that our governments and other industry players are supposed to develop reforms to propel the needs for better education. The process sometimes may be tedious, but the success associated with its results is worth fighting for. Most developed countries had already developed education systems based on the development of a student holistically away from the past when it was solely about performing in class-related subjects such as mathematics and sciences. This new system has proven to produce the best leaders who are confident with themselves. It makes the weak students feel compensated by participating in what they love, like games and artisanship.
Education reform is the action taken towards changing public education. The reform process has always taken different forms because of the motivational perspectives of reform drivers. The focus of reforms has been changing over the past four decades, aiming to change the education system input focus to output focus, focusing on students’ achievements. Among the leading countries in embracing these reforms in America’s united states, the united kingdom, Australia, and Canada, to mention just but a few (Cheng, 2020). United States acknowledges and encourages public education from the perspective of being the primary source of K-12 education for American youths. The reformers have been at the forefront, trying to make education a market where it relies on the input-output structure (Omwami & Rust, 2020). This structural system will be based on accountability, which will, in the end, produce good performance among the student as the end product. The performance is measured through partaking of standardized tests. It has resulted in inequality among the general population, which is evident by the achievement gap (Zhu et al., 2020). The primary objective of every education reform is to make small changes in the education system reflect a more significant social return in producing people’s health, wealth, and wellbeing. This has translated into public education being transformed to be affordable to the entire population, which was not the case in the classical education era. Tuition was expensive and could only be afforded by the rich in the society (Omwami & Rust, 2020).
Therefore, the global education reform movement has contributed immensely to the success of the current education system. The world is headed to an equitable education system that is affordable and relevant in all parts of the world (Verger et al., 2019). The problem faced in the past was when a particular country’s education certificates could not be used in different markets. The reforms adopted in recent years have made sure that this problem has been resolved.
Background
Countries move educational reform models for the orderly improvement of education. This article reports a non-experimental examination, composed as a calculated investigation that analyzes the educational reform’s current circumstances in the United States and the United Kingdom (Verger et al., 2017). The hypothesis of education moving fills in as a purposeful structure to examine ongoing educational change to Project-based Learning. It outlines the move from the underlying decentralized reform to its present incorporated state. Logical variables that impact decentralization are discussed.
Globalization has tested the customary view that countries can create and accomplish their public education objectives singularly. Instead, governments must depend on supranational organizations or different nations (Verger et al., 2017). These outcomes in countries are moving or getting education reforms, arrangements, and practices, because of the conviction that education reform models will improve their education frameworks and their financial and social conditions (Verger et al., 2017). An essential component of policy moving is the intentional deception of a policy or practice starting with one setting then onto the next. Bennett (1997) contended that policy moving joins outside impacts to change homegrown policy by blending various nations’ arrangements. The way toward moving education reforms is not an end in itself but rather a way to create education and improve its ability to contend territorially and worldwide.
Education moving is apparent in the United States and the United Kingdom, which have occupied with expansive based reforms to update their educational frameworks (Verger et al., 2017). By far, most of these educational reforms are essentially Western decentralized models that move authority from a brought together education framework to nearby governments or schools. More direct, these reforms reflect “unfamiliar models presented by unfamiliar specialists, absent a lot of thought for the exigencies of the nearby setting.”
There is no lack of analysis of policy move. The prevailing research focuses on the worry that education reforms, strategies, and practices successful in the setting where they were created probably won’t be viable elsewhere. Even though moving appears to be a short cycle, there are numerous deterrents. Moving education reforms requires the whole government and its educational systems to adjust their conventional methods of activity. Likewise, school pioneers and teachers may altogether “depend on frameworks produced for other educational settings based on various educational and social perspectives,” expecting them to supplant one lot of thoughts or approaches with a very different one. When any education reform is executed, educational systems, educational pioneers, and teachers must adjust or change to another framework, testing customary qualities and standards.
Around the world, education policy transferring has prompted the selection of decentralized education reforms. The push for network-level decentralization in education began in the US during the post-World War II time, inspired by political and financial concerns, picked up prominence, and quickened during the neoliberal globalization of the 1980s. The international writing on education considers decentralization as “likely the absolute most pushed reform for improving the arrangement of such fundamental administrations as education and wellbeing in creating nations.” The particular type of decentralization shifts in every unique situation; however, presenting a decentralized framework requires both conduct and institutional change. A decentralized reform system is political since it endeavors to adjust business as usual by moving government authority. In education, decentralization requires a crucial shift in educational administration and governance, requesting another administration culture’s presentation and execution.
In any case, as Chann (2016) proposed, the advancement of education is a mind-boggling cycle, and utilizing decentralization as a device for development is as yet liable to discuss. In creating nations, the call for educational decentralization is energized by reports distributed by International Development Organizations, for example, the World Bank and UNESCO, concerning the improvement of the Global South’s HR.
In this sense, educational decentralization is a profoundly conservative cycle that could bring about noteworthy changes to how educational systems cause policy, create incomes, spend reserves, and oversee nearby schools. As appeared by these contentions, the reasoning for educational decentralization includes serving markets by conveying responsibility, productivity, and adequacy, all while accomplishing majority rule government.
Focus on United States Education Reforms
The United States can be ranked as among the leading drivers of the modern-day education reforms, which has had an enormous ripple effect on education today. Other countries have had to follow in their footsteps in embracing the reforms that had worked positively on the United States education system (Wright, 2020). This does not mean that the process has not faced negative criticism from the public and activists. One of this criticism emerged after the international assessment (PISA) in December of 2019, which ranked the United States very poorly against the global competitors (Wright, 2020). It brought about many adverse reactions, arguing that the country had spent billions of dollars on education reforms yet produced nothing in the result (Wright, 2020). This report does not tell all story but only compares the student performance at face value. What we are not told is the improvements in exams that students have been showing since 2012. In a nutshell, the achievement gap has been widening. It is up to society to applause the government to improve Americans’ health and wealth.
The statistics presented by the report is based on the idea that education policy is not meant to improve every student on an individual level. Since the 1990s, the country has been developing education reforms concentrating on the best performing students by channeling billions into their education at the expense of struggling students who are left to work with their parents to make ends meet (Wright, 2020). This widening inequality in the system has produced some of these struggling live a sinful life compared to their counterparts, which translates to imbalance being seen in the United States economy. This does not mean that the government has not been working towards rectifying this mistake (Wright, 2020).
The system’s unfairness dates back to the 1950s when urbanization and real estate developments had started establishing itself in American society. People had begun shifting from one state to the other in search of quality living. One of the factors that made them change from these places was, among others, low education standards for their children (Wright, 2020). This made political leaders such as mayors and governors think of reforms that will hold them from leaving their states and towns. It is at this point that the inequality in the system was born. The country has been working towards returning from this by including the poor and underperforming students in the quality system of education.
The United States recent higher education reforms
Many students dream of joining the university or any other right college at the end of their high school education (Bolden & Tymms, 2020). This dream is sometimes shuttered because of the wrong policies adopted by these higher learning institutions, most especially if these students are from a poor background or marginalized communities. It has been a matter of concern in the United States, whereby inequality in higher learning institutions is apparent.
The recent bill (Accreditation Reform Act of 2020) is one of the reforms targeting to rectify these historical problems by targeting the unreliable component of the higher education system, the United States department of education’s oversight of accreditation agencies. The government has relied on such agencies to ensure that colleges and universities meet the prerequisite quality standards before students take federal aid to attend. These agencies cannot carry the entire burden of blame; the department of education is supposed to scrutinize these agencies’ operations (Wright, 2020). This has not been the case because these agencies are not asked about the low quality in these institutions, even if the evidence shows a downward trend on these institutions’ track record. It is unfair for the government to take such significant matters lightly, bearing in mind that harm students bring equity gaps in college outcomes. Also, $ 120 billion is lost in taxpayers’ funds through student financial aid.
The introduction of the Accreditation Reform Act comes when the education sector is faced with a lot of challenges, especially at the higher education level. The reform will act as guidance to the system whereby it will be protecting student and students’ affairs across the system while at the same time holding the accreditors accountable (Bolden & Tymms, 2020). This accreditation department is obligated by the constitution to ensure those higher education standards above the set threshold make it vital for them to be responsible. Furthermore, the act will increase transparency and improve the oversight system by changing their actions to be more investigative than compliance-driven.
The United Kingdom education reforms
The United Kingdom, just like the United States, has had its fair share of issues relating to education reforms. It has been on the quest to improve its education system for a long time, with every coming government promising better education reforms. With the completion of the 2019 general election, the conservative party gained power as the largest party with the highest number of representatives in the House of Commons. In her speech on 19th December 2019, the queen outlined the government policies and proposed legislation that included the planned education reforms. In her statement, she asserted that every student has a high education quality through increased per-student funding from the ministry in every school.
By going into specifics of this planned reform, the ministry increased per-pupil funding for primary and secondary schools. The funding was to be delivered to every school by using a single national formula to ensure equitability. Furthermore, the ministry would expand the free school program. The ministry also planned to increase teachers’ starting salary to £30,000 at the national level before September of 2022. The government would also increase its focus on technical education, targeting those who have past post-16 level. This will have a direct ripple effect on the economy because the government would have access to skilled labor, which is the requirement for any country’s success.
The government is also targeting to create the National Skills Fund and a rebuilding program to ensure colleges and university estates’ upgrading. The government also plans to establish 20 institutes of technology in collaboration with stakeholders such as further education colleges, higher education institutions, and employers (Zhu et al., 2020). These institutions will offer science, technology, engineering, and mathematics training required in the current competitive world. The government aims to deliver better value for students in post-18 education by providing more options that ensure that every individual gets the right knowledge and offers exceptional support for the disadvantaged individuals.
Conclusion
The global education reform movement has contributed a lot to public education’s success in our society today. There is a lot of improvement visible today globally concerning education, which has translated directly to improving human social-economic and political aspects. It is because the current education system is more focused on developing a quality workforce, unlike the past, when it was more of the student competition. When you visit schools today, you will see many curriculum changes that may not have been there years back. Some systems concentrate on developing students’ inner abilities from the lowest level of their education journey, early childhood education.
Many governments have put a lot of effort into early childhood education because it is argued that a successful system is the one that builds an individual from the most initial years of their life. The world working together in matters to do with education has improved the sector, proving that it has had a positive effect on the quality of education experienced today. First world countries are to be congratulated for guiding the developing nations whose education system has been struggling ever since (Bolden & Tymms, 2020). Furthermore, these rich countries have gone to the extent of offering financial aids through loans and grants. When comparing the education system, especially in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, it was very much behind but had been catching up in recent years. The trend looks promising for years to prove that the reforms put in place have positively correlated to the system’s success.
Moreover, this success can be said to have been possible through the increased focus from the government’s unlike the past when the focus was more on infrastructural development like roads and railways. Education fiction has improved a lot in early childhood education, which has been developed to concentrate more on early childhood development, which was not the case (Omwami & Rust, 2020). The past governments from third-world countries focused on students transitioning from primary schools to secondary without considering their performance. This impacted a lot on the production of a low-quality workforce, of which most of these students could not proceed to universities.
Another thing that has been improved is on reforms that have made it a must for every student to get basic education globally with a smaller percentage of countries, most of them being low and warring still lacking in actualizing this dream (Omwami & Rust, 2020). However, they have been getting a great deal of support from the international community.
Girl-child and women empowerment through education is another aspect that has gained a lot of support from the global education reform movement. This has made it possible in reducing the gap between men and women who access basic education to the current situation whereby the boy-child has started panicking due to the rate at which women are embracing education, with most of them concentrating on careers such as medicine, engineering, and sciences that was flooded by men in the past. All these prove that global education reforms have contributed to the success of the education sector, translating to good social-economic and political aspects of humanity (Zhu et al., 2020).
Reference
Verger, A., Parcerisa, L., & Fontdevila, C. (2019). The growth and spread of large-scale assessments and test-based accountabilities: A political sociology of global education reforms. Educational Review, 71(1), 5-30.
Zhu, G., Xu, G., Li, Y., & Chen, B. (2020). Typology of OECD’s Global Educational Governance and Its Policy Effect. Comparative Education Review, 64(3), 525-542.
Cheng, Y. C. (2020). Education reform phenomenon: A typology of multiple dilemmas. In Handbook of Education Policy Studies (pp. 85-109). Springer, Singapore.
Omwami, E., & Rust, V. (2020). Globalization, nationalism, and inclusive education for all: A reflection on the ideological shifts in education reform. In Globalisation, Ideology and Neo-Liberal Higher Education Reforms (pp. 31-46). Springer, Dordrecht.
Wright, V. (2020). Crisis in economic theory and the implications for PISA derived education policy. In Globalisation, Ideology and Education Reforms (pp. 43-56). Springer, Dordrecht.
Verger, A., Steiner-Khamsi, G., & Lubienski, C. (2017). The emerging global education industry: analysing market-making in education through market sociology. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 15(3), 325-340.
Bolden, D., & Tymms, P. (2020). Standards in education: reforms, stagnation and the need to rethink. Oxford Review of Education, 1-17.
Zhu, G., Xu, G., Li, Y., & Chen, B. (2020). Typology of OECD’s Global Educational Governance and Its Policy Effect. Comparative Education Review, 64(3), 525-542.