Session Information
23 SES 01 D, Media and Education Policy Making (Part 1)
Paper Session to be continued in 23 SES 02 D
Contribution
The present paper reports the findings of an analysis of school autonomy (redistributing decision making powers and responsibilities in the Austrian school system) in the public discussion of the daily press. It discusses the implications of the findings while considering and comparing different concepts of school autonomy in political party programs and position papers as well as the actual international state of educational research on school autonomy (e.g. Altrichter, Brauckmann, Lassnigg, Moosbrugger & Gartmann, 2016; Gartmann, 2015).
International scientific discourse claims predominantly that decisions about educational reforms should be evidence based (or at least informed). It is less considered that educational policy makers also have to take into account public opinions as well as their own political interests, in order to estimate the reception of and the support for the reforms (by population, political opponents and certain interest groups). In a field such as (school) education, which is currently intensively discussed in public and in the clash of different interests and ideologies, it is particularly important for policy makers to legitimize their own position and to strengthen their credibility (compare the analysis of PISA as an educational policy event by Tillmann, Dedering, Kneuper, Kuhlmann & Nessel, 2008). Therefore, this paper outlines the positions of the stakeholders of the current media discussion about school autonomy in Austria by answering three questions:
- Which conceptual contents and meanings of school autonomy are introduced into the public debate?
- Which actors appear in the discourse, and what specific interpretation of school autonomy do they represent?
- Which superordinate argumentation patterns and structures show up in the discourse?
Subsequently it turns out that the logic of political debate and public communication characterizes the public media debate on school autonomy in a systematic way. School autonomy is approved in principle and entails mostly positive associations. But it is rarely specified and if so, with some highly contradictory or unclear aspects. In this way school autonomy is propagated as a solution to different problems in the education systems. This paper shows how this scientific term, used as an umbrella concept, provides policy makers in the public debate with a projection screen to beam their different socio-political ideas on, while suggesting that they all talk about the same problem-solving approach to current educational issues. Known mechanisms of media impact, such as framing and theming effects (e.g. Batinic & Appel, 2008), are taken into account for the interpretation and discussion of the findings.
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
Altrichter, H., Brauckmann, S., Lassnigg, L., Moosbrugger, R. & Gartmann, G. B. (2016). Schulautonomie oder die Verteilung von Entscheidungsrechten und Verantwortlichkeiten im Schulsystem. In M. Bruneforth et al. (eds.). Nationaler Bildungsbericht Österreich 2015. Bd. 2. Graz: Leykamp (im Ersch.) Batinic, B., & Appel, M. (2008). Medienpsychologie. Heidelberg: Springer. Corbin, J., Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: procedures, canons and evaluative criteria. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 19, 418-427. Gartmann, G. B. (2015). Schulautonomie! Welche Schulautonomie? Unv. Vorstudie zum Nationalen Bildungsbericht Österreich 2015. Johannes Kepler Universität Linz. Herkner, W. (2004). Lehrbuch Sozialpsychologie. (2. Auflage). Bern u. a.: Huber Strübing, J. (2004). Grounded Theory: Zur sozialtheoretischen und epistemologischen Fundierung des Verfahrens der empirisch begründeten Theoriebildung. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Tillmann, K.-J., Dedering, K., Kneuper, D., Kuhlmann, C., Nessel, I. (2008): PISA als bildungspolitisches Ereignis. Oder: Wie weit trägt das Konzept der „evaluationsbasierten Steuerung?“ In: Brüsemeister, T., Eubel, K. D. (eds.). Evaluation, Wissen und Nichtwissen. Wiesbaden: Springer VS, 117-140. Willig, C. (2003). Discourse analysis. In: Smith, J.A. (Hrsg.). Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods. London: Sage, 159-183.
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.