Author:
Cairney Paul,Keating Michael,Kippin Sean,Denny Emily St.
Abstract
Abstract
This chapter examines how governments define and pursue education equity. There is a broad consensus that reducing unfair education inequalities would be a good thing, but also the endurance of major inequalities, particularly in relation to a highly salient ‘attainment gap’ on leaving school. There is high contestation on the cause of inequalities and the balance between individual, school, and state responsibility, but also a tendency for a ‘neoliberal’ approach to overshadow ‘social justice’ approaches in national policy agendas. In that context, this chapter examines three key aspects. First, how policymakers define and pursue education equity policy. Second, what countries and regions can learn from allegedly leading countries. Third, the spatial dimension of education equity policy, in which there is a general tendency to decentralize policy delivery but centralize accountability, and scope for some regional governments to go their own way. The conclusion relates these findings to the idea of territorial cohesion.
Publisher
Oxford University PressOxford
Reference622 articles.
1. Hard and soft law in international governance;International Organization,2003
2. Abels, G. (2011). ‘Gender equality policy’. In: Knodt, M. and Heinelt, H., eds. Policies within the EU multi-level system: Instruments and strategies of European governance, 325–348. (Baden-Baden: Nomos).
3. Informe sobre la política autonómia de servicios sociales en España y Catalunya;Revista de Educación Social,2007
4. Meanings and Misunderstandings: A Social Determinants of Health Lexicon for Health Care Systems;Milbank Quarterly,2019