Towards a culture of quality policymaking in transition countries. The case of education
Lecturer, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences
of Education and Research
28-30 G-ral Berthelor str.
Tel.: +40 21 312 71 65
Fax: +40 21 312 47 19
The main reason which motivates this research and
the main challenge that determined the application is a previous team research
under LGI policy fellowship started in 2002 focused on decentralization in
education in transition countries, performed together with colleagues from
The whole exchange of ideas among us and the main findings of our investigations, focused on identifying the systemic conditions for strategic steering and quality policy making in education in transition countries, finally brought into attention an extremely interesting transition process in public policymaking, visible inside the specific countries, but also the approximate repetition of the same steps by each country, according to the actual level of their political, social, economic and not least educational reforms.
A whole culture of quality policymaking in education started to develop, and a transition can be observed from a contemplative culture, deeply rooted in the communist years, but also in the broader and more subtle social and everyday life culture of Balkans and Slavic countries, towards an evaluative policy culture, more close to the western values and, generally, to the values of globalization. This unique policy environment offered by transition contexts and the possibility to capture and describe such a process as development of a quality policymaking culture could contribute to avoid a double danger that is obvious for those who studied the realities in post-communist countries:
· A schizophrenic evolution in the field of public policy, generated by the two-sided reality build in the last years and the gap between the policy discourse, on the one side and the effective implementation practices on the other side. The public policy development is only partly self-generated, as a need of the different sectors in their improvement efforts. There was and there still is a huge pressure, coming from political and financial “dependencies” of these countries: negotiation chapters with the European Union, structural adjustments imposed by World Bank and International Monetary Fund etc.
· Repetition of the same pathway and, implicitly, of the same mistakes by different countries situated at different development levels in their political, social and economic growth. The labyrinth of transition, even it looks so different from one country to the other, in the field of public policy development we had the possibility to note many similar evolutions that would make possible and fruitful the investigation of main characteristics and trends of public policy development.
We make reference to a culture of quality policymaking because we strongly believe that in transition context the quality of policymaking process is not primarily a technical problem of those involved, but a cultural problem, deeply rooted in the capacity to link discourse and practice, to ‘merge’ what we say and what we actually do.
The actualized and “European” or “global” discourse of policymakers in transition contexts, very knowledgeable about language and theory of public policy, is not necessarily a guarantee for the successful implementation of development programs in these countries.
The basic assumption that we have is that policymaking in education is more likely to produce high quality results if there is a mature policy system in place. By mature policy system we understand that some conditions are met in the process of development and implementation of educational policies:
Having in mind these three directions, we will
investigate the maturity level of educational policymaking systems in
Since education is one of the most dynamic and present public spheres in development efforts and programs, with a huge impact not only on a large number of people, but also with a long term impact, we thought that this would be a good case study that will allow for analogies and transfers towards what public policy generally means.
2.1. The general research problem
The general research problem of this proposal is linked to the process of policymaking in transition contexts, namely to the investigation of the level of development of the policymaking system in education.
We choose as a case study the field of education, with the intention to make analogies and transfers towards other public spheres and to try to underline the general framework and the coordinates of building a quality policymaking culture, as a joint result of internal development and external pressures.
2.2. Definition of the research problem
This research aims to investigate the process of development of a mature policymaking system in transition contexts and, based on that, the articulation of a policymaking culture. We plan to analyze the technical-functional, conceptual and professional development of this process, directly in two countries:
This direct and in-depth study will be complemented
by study of basic educational policy documents from other transition countries
in the region (
The different stages of different countries could be visible in terms of:
o Stage of transition (general one, but especially educational), i.e. functioning of new institutions and management systems.
o Level of maturity of policymaking process, i.e. competency of policy developers, separation between politics and policy.
o Degree of transition from a contemplative policy culture (discursive / ideological, control-based, eruptive / pressure-oriented, routine-oriented) towards a quality, evaluative policy culture (reflexive / action oriented, trust-based, evolutive / strategically oriented, creative / innovation oriented).
2.3. The research questions
The main research question is What is the level of development / maturity of the educational policymaking
Subsequent to this question, we will also try to answer questions such as:
· What are the steps of the policy cycle followed and what are the steps ignored? How functional is the articulation between different steps?
· To what extent is a policy language created and used on a regular basis? Do the structure and language of basic policy documents prove a mature and sound process of policymaking?
· What are the institutions involved in educational policymaking? How are they structured and what functions do they have?
· What are the main tools used by policymakers to ensure the strategic steering and quality policy making? (regulation and deregulation mechanisms, financial incentives and disincentives, professional self-regulation, standards and benchmarks, targeted development programs, planning and cooperation networks etc.)