References of "Powell, Justin J W 50002885"
     in
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailTeaching Diverse Learners in Europe: Inspiring Practices and Lessons Learned from Germany, Iceland, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Spain and Sweden
Powell, Justin J W UL; Merz-Atalik, Kerstin; Ališauskienė, Stefanija et al

in Schuelka, Matthew; Johnstone, Christopher; Thomas, Gary (Eds.) et al SAGE Handbook of Inclusion and Diversity in Education (in press)

Teaching in inclusive settings may be considered a new, challenging task; however, successfully supporting diverse pupils in their learning process has always been at the heart of outstanding pedagogy ... [more ▼]

Teaching in inclusive settings may be considered a new, challenging task; however, successfully supporting diverse pupils in their learning process has always been at the heart of outstanding pedagogy. Vast differences both in the extent and the quality of inclusive schooling exist between and within European countries. Promoting comparison and cooperation among countries with long-institutionalized inclusive schooling and countries with less inclusive structures, cultures, and practices proves crucial in education research and reform. Building upon a multi-year collaboration, we synthesize lessons learned about inclusive education reforms and “inspiring practices“ in inclusive education in partner schools in Germany, Iceland, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Spain, and Sweden. Contemporary practices take the diversity of groups of learners into account, building upon diversity as a resource; this served as the framework for our collaboration. The TdiverS consortium—as an EU-funded Comenius Network Project “Teaching Diverse Learners in (School-)Subjects“ (TdiverS)—was built on the following principles and goals: (1) diversity in theory and practice, resulting from collaborations of practitioners and scientists exchanging knowledge about teaching in inclusive settings; (2) strengthening awareness of the diversity of frameworks, conditions, and determining factors of teaching inclusively in varying cultural contexts; and (3) inclusive education research uniting multilevel, multicultural, and multidisciplinary perspectives. We highlight the values of inclusive education, map its contemporary European geography, summarize contemporary country-level education reforms and the local development of inclusive practices in six countries, and discuss lessons learned across Northern, Eastern, Southern, and Western Europe. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 18 (4 UL)
Full Text
See detailDie Notwendigkeit inklusiver Bildung für die Erneuerung der Governancekonzepte: Deutschland und Luxemburg im Vergleich
Powell, Justin J W UL; Merz-Atalik, Kerstin

in Budde, Jürgen (Ed.) Inklusionsforschung im Spannungsfeld von Erziehungswissenschaft und Bildungspolitik (in press)

Die hohe und gestiegene Bedeutung inklusiver Bildung – für Individuen und Gesellschaften gleichermaßen – wird global, national, regional und lokal von verschiedensten Akteur*innen hervorgehoben sowie ... [more ▼]

Die hohe und gestiegene Bedeutung inklusiver Bildung – für Individuen und Gesellschaften gleichermaßen – wird global, national, regional und lokal von verschiedensten Akteur*innen hervorgehoben sowie zunehmend auch wissenschaftlich multidisziplinär diskutiert. Fragen der Steuerung, der Governance, hingegen, sind bisher im deutschsprachigen Raum nur wenig systematisch oder umfassend analysiert worden, obwohl mehrere Wissenschaftsdisziplinen sich zunehmend mit diesen Fragen auseinandersetzen. Während politikwissenschaftliche Analysen die Machtstrukturen, Pfadabhängigkeiten und Entscheidungsprozesse fokussieren haben soziologische Analysen die globale Diffusion von Diskursen und Normen sowie systembedingte Komplexitäten und Umsetzungsschwierigkeiten vielfältiger Reformen verdeutlicht. Die Erziehungswissenschaft, nicht nur in der deutsch-sprachigen Welt, hat sich lange Zeit schwer getan, sich eindeutig zu den brisanten bildungs- als auch sozialpolitischen Fragen der inklusiven Bildung – auch die zentrale Frage der Governance – zu positionieren, weil es das fundamentale Verhältnis von Allgemeiner und Sonderpädagogik hinterfragt sowie in letzter Konsequenz die Transformation des gegliederten und hochgradig selektiven Bildungswesen verlangt. Dieser Band beleuchtet eben dieses Spannungsverhältnis aus verschiedenen Perspektiven; in diesem Beitrag wird deshalb versucht, verschiedene Dimensionen der Governance auf der Forschungsagenda zu platzieren, wie auch in zwei konkreten Fällen – Deutschland und Luxemburg – zu vertiefen. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 76 (10 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailDisability and Inequality in Educational Opportunities in Life Course Perspective
Powell, Justin J W UL; Pfahl, Lisa

in Becker, Rolf (Ed.) Research Handbook in Sociology of Education (in press)

Inclusive education has become a global norm, supported by the recognition of human rights, and now affects education policymaking and system development worldwide. While important contributions in ... [more ▼]

Inclusive education has become a global norm, supported by the recognition of human rights, and now affects education policymaking and system development worldwide. While important contributions in sociological research on education, disability, and inequality exist, those in life course perspective and international comparative perspectives are rarer. Studies of educational opportunities of children and youth with disabilities and disadvantages over the past several decades underscore the lack of systematic approaches to facilitate educational and social inclusion. Within the educational research field, sociological approaches to disability, to special educational needs, and to inclusive education emphasize such dimensions as exclusion/inclusion, segregation/integration, learning opportunities, in/equality, institutionalization, stigma, risk, and certification or credentials. To recognize and understand the causes and consequences of disability-related inequality requires in-depth dialogue and benefits from results of studies on different levels and within diverse cultural contexts. This article provides insights into disability and inequality in educational opportunities across Europe and an overview of research topics, results, and gaps. The sociology of education would increase its contribution were it to be more inclusive in analyzing the processes that affect educational opportunities and life chances of those who experience disablement in schooling. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 86 (21 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailThe New Institutionalism in Higher Education
Meyer, Heinz-Dieter; Powell, Justin J W UL

in David, M.E.; Amey, M.J. (Eds.) SAGE Encyclopedia of Higher Education (in press)

countries. It views educational institutions as a key producer of social cohesion by supplying the shared beliefs that generate shared cultural meanings. To most institutionalists, education (schools ... [more ▼]

countries. It views educational institutions as a key producer of social cohesion by supplying the shared beliefs that generate shared cultural meanings. To most institutionalists, education (schools, colleges, universities, but also home schooling, religious, and informal education) stands out as one of only a handful of key social institutions next to the family, the economy, religion, science, and government. Higher education takes its place in this nexus of institutions, as it globally expands in size and grows in strategic importance. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 69 (5 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailReview of Elizabeth Guffey (2018). Designing Disability: Symbols, Space and Society.
Powell, Justin J W UL

in Design Issues (2019)

In her pathbreaking book Designing Disability: Symbols, Space and Society, Elizabeth Guffey provides vital insights into decades of social and design processes that ultimately produced the most ubiquitous ... [more ▼]

In her pathbreaking book Designing Disability: Symbols, Space and Society, Elizabeth Guffey provides vital insights into decades of social and design processes that ultimately produced the most ubiquitous symbol of disability—and accessibility—worldwide: The International Symbol of Access (ISA). Building on existing scholarship from a range of disciplines coupled with original historical research, this book uncovers the origins and evolving (largely transatlantic) architectural and design discourse, and several moments of serendipity, that led to its creation. The ISA has since diffused to become part of the built environment in all corners of the world. Richly illustrated and charting at times vitriolic debates, protest activities, and artistic interventions up to the contemporary era, Guffey weaves together activist and aesthetic perspectives into a tapestry of social and design history relating to disability and accessibility. Structured in historical phases, the book’s chapters progress across larger and shorter stretches over more than a century of wheelchair design, social and welfare policies and programs (mostly in the US, UK, and Scandinavia), architectural standards, and symbols relating to barriers and accessibility measures. Guffey engages the reader in what is necessarily a multidisciplinary, multilevel investigation, with unexpected twists and turns. On one level, the book focuses on the politics of highest office, with US Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Dwight D. Eisenhower (who permanently or temporarily used wheelchairs) sketched against the backdrop of the lack of accessible government buildings in Washington, DC, and the social consensus then to hide impairment for fear of stigmatization (shifted marginally by disabled Veterans). On another level, welfare state provisions in the US, UK, and Scandinavia are discussed in light of progressive legislation and the persistent challenges of implementation. Finally, at ground level, the utmost significance of individuals devoted to universal design writ large becomes manifestly evident. Guffey recounts how, in US universities, inspirational figures such as Timothy Nugent (at Illinois), Ron Mace (at North Carolina State), and Viktor Papanek (at Purdue, CalArts, Kansas, etc.), campus planners, and students designed and constructed new worlds on the drawing board and poured in concrete. We follow design professionals, such as architect Selwyn Goldsmith in the UK, who was a strident arbiter of accessibility. Academic initiatives went hand-in-fist with advocacy activities in organizations and protest and artistic actions in the streets. Indeed, to raise general awareness of the ever-present attitudinal and structural barriers—institutionalized discrimination—that disabled people face daily and to secure disability rights, disability protests and cross-national organizing have repeatedly been necessary. The long and bumpy road to universal design extends into the future. Integral to this history of design development, revision, and critiques of various symbols of disability have been international events (world expositions, Olympics & Paralympics) and organizations (Rehabilitation International), artistic inspiration, design competitions, and guerilla art interventions. Tracing the convoluted process of designing what would become the ISA—fifty years ago now—leads to Susanne Koefoed, a Danish design student, and Karl Montan, leader of the Swedish Institute for the Handicapped, but also to international negotiations and chance. The on-going questioning of the official ISA, especially, its “misfit” nature as an amalgam of technical aid and person, emphasizes the shift from invisibility to ubiquity of disability via social change and political activism as well as cultural representations and the need for signs of identity. In the new century, newer initiatives in the US, such as Brendan Murphy’s and the Accessible Icon Project (developed by Sara Hendren and Brian Glenney), have challenged the official ISA, revealing both persistence and change in understandings of disability and accessibility. When integrated into signage, the ISA designates accessible spaces and facilities. If the ISA has become present in public buildings and spaces everywhere, cultural notions of disability and access remain understudied across the social sciences, with especially the Global South remaining a blank page. Research is needed to chart the diverse local interpretations that mirror shifts from exclusion to inclusion of disabled people as the human rights revolution witnessed since the end of WWII continues, but also suffers backlash, even in the Global North. Paradoxically, this global icon refers simultaneously to disability, and its ameliorating factor, accessibility. Yet, the ambivalence and debate surrounding the ISA persist, as Guffey emphasizes especially in the later chapters, focusing on proposed alternatives to the existing ISA, codified as it is in law and conforming to the guidelines of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Until universal design (and the universalizing social policies likely needed to support it) succeeds in reducing the barriers in environments and in attitudes and in maximizing the usefulness of products and services during the design stage, identity formation processes are among the most positive aspects of the ISA. The icon’s influence and implementation extend far beyond marking modifications to the built environment. Whether taken-for-granted, modified or critiqued, the current ISA has spread globally. It can now be found wherever people move in physical space, finding their way. The symbol testifies to the on-going shift from exclusion, along a slow and winding road, to social inclusion and full participation of disabled people. In sum, Guffey brings scholarship on the ISA to the next stage. It complements studies that chart the influence of disabled peoples’ organizations and of international organizations as they facilitated remarkable shifts in disability paradigms. Yet institutionalized discrimination abounds, with the ISA marking that accessibility and universal design are far from achieved. If a few imprecisions tarnish the literature list, this historical work reconstructing a largely Western process cannot be faulted for not providing a complete global analysis of ISA implementation and adjustment. In that vein, with contributions from Guffey herself, the current exhibition “Viktor Papanek: The Politics of Design” (Kries, Klein & Clarke, 2018) indeed extends the discussion to the Global South and across further disciplines, rightfully embedding the dialogue about symbols of disability and enhancing access within broader contexts. Footnote: Kries, Matteo, Amelie Klein & Alison J. Clarke (eds.) (2018). Viktor Papanek: The Politics of Design. Weil am Rhein, Germany: Vitra Design Museum. ISBN: 978-3-945852-26-2. The exhibition is currently on view at Germany’s Vitra Design Museum (20 September 2018–10 March 2019), then at Barcelona Design Museum (20 October 2019–2 February 2020). [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 43 (7 UL)
Full Text
See detailThe Global Triumph of the Research University: A Driving Force of Science Production
Baker, David P.; Dusdal, Jennifer UL; Powell, Justin J W UL et al

E-print/Working paper (2018)

The demand for higher education in countries around the world has never been higher. This increase in education levels has generated many benefits to society, including more knowledgeable citizens ... [more ▼]

The demand for higher education in countries around the world has never been higher. This increase in education levels has generated many benefits to society, including more knowledgeable citizens, advanced economies, and enhanced longevity. We have also seen countries and universities invest heavily in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), including health (STEM+) research and scientific output. This has resulted in unexpected pure exponential growth in science production around the world. Increased competition, as well as boundary-spanning collaborations, drive unprecedented scientific advancement and technological innovation. In a book entitled The Century of Science: The Global Triumph of the Research University, we explore global scientific developments from the early 20th century to today. University-based research, especially, has risen globally to become the driving force of science production in STEM+ fields. Universities, with their multiple missions of research, teaching, and public service, are uniquely positioned to contribute to scientific output while simultaneously producing the next generation of scientists. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 63 (10 UL)
Full Text
See detailThe RAE/REF have engendered evaluation selectivity and strategic behaviour, reinforced scientific norms, and further stratified UK higher education
Marques, Marcelo UL; Powell, Justin J W UL; Zapp, Mike UL et al

Article for general public (2018)

The UK’s periodic research assessment exercise has grown larger and more formalised since its first iteration in 1986. Marcelo Marques, Justin J.W. Powell, Mike Zapp and Gert Biesta have examined what ... [more ▼]

The UK’s periodic research assessment exercise has grown larger and more formalised since its first iteration in 1986. Marcelo Marques, Justin J.W. Powell, Mike Zapp and Gert Biesta have examined what effects it has had on the submitting behaviour of institutions, considering the intended and unintended consequences in the field of education research. Findings reveal growing strategic behaviour, including high selectivity of submitted staff, the reinforcement of scientific norms with respect to the format and methodological orientation of submitted research outputs, and an explicit concentration of funding. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 90 (20 UL)
Full Text
See detailDie Ideenfabrik. Universitäten als Produzenten von Wissen
Zimmermann, Julia Maria; Powell, Justin J W UL; Dusdal, Jennifer UL

Article for general public (2018)

Detailed reference viewed: 72 (16 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailHuman Rights – Inclusion – Education. Interdisciplinary and Comparative Perspectives
Schäfer, Lea; Köpfer, Andreas; Aust, Robert et al

in Bildung und Erziehung (2018), 71(4), 481-482

Detailed reference viewed: 10 (0 UL)
Full Text
See detailHigher level vocational education: The route to high skills and productivity as well as greater equity? An international comparative analysis
Bathmaker, Ann-Marie; Graf, Lukas; Orr, Kevin et al

in Nägele, Christof; Stalder, Barbara E. (Eds.) Trends in Vocational Education and Training Research. Proceedings of the European Conference on Educational Re- search (ECER), Vocational Education and Training Network (VETNET) (2018)

This international comparative analysis of higher level vocational education examines developments across five countries: England, Germany, Australia, Canada, and the USA. The authors consider how current ... [more ▼]

This international comparative analysis of higher level vocational education examines developments across five countries: England, Germany, Australia, Canada, and the USA. The authors consider how current developments address two key policy concerns: an emphasis on high skills as a means of achieving economic competitiveness and raising productivity; and the promise of increasing access for students hitherto excluded from higher education. We address these questions in relation to specific country contexts, in order to highlight similarities and differences in developments within the European arena and in a wider global context. We locate our analyses in an understanding of the different political and socio-economic conditions within different countries, which render particular reforms and innovations both possible and realizable in one context, but almost unthinkable in another. We argue for the need to recognize and embrace diversity in provision, while using comparison across countries as a means of challenging taken-for-granted assumptions of how things are and what is possible within individual country contexts. Such comparative analysis is a prerequisite for answering questions of policy transfer and learning from others. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 81 (7 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detail(Re)shaping Educational Research through ‘Programmification’: Institutional Expansion, Change, and Translation in Norway
Zapp, Mike UL; Helgetun, Jo B.; Powell, Justin J W UL

in European Journal of Education (2018), 52

Educational research in Norway has experienced unprecedented structural expansion as well as cognitive shifts over the past two decades, especially due to increased state investments and the strategic use ... [more ▼]

Educational research in Norway has experienced unprecedented structural expansion as well as cognitive shifts over the past two decades, especially due to increased state investments and the strategic use of extensive and multi-year thematic programs to fund research projects. Applying a neo-institutionalist framework, we examine institutionalization dynamics in cultural-cognitive, normative, and regulative dimensions over the past two decades using interviews, research program calls, policy documents, and funding data. In the cultural-cognitive dimension, we find references to the knowledge society, the importance of evidence in policy-making, and ideas of quality, excellence, and relevance. In the normative dimension, we find the introduction of new professional and methodological standards, reflecting broader global patterns of academic and epistemic drift. In the regulative dimension, the strengthened role of both government and the Research Council of Norway is manifest in substantial growth in both funding and large-scale, long-term planning, including thematic choices—evidence of ‘programification’. The importance of external models has grown in an era of internationalization, yet translation occurs at every level of governance of educational research. This results in a specific Norwegian research model, guided by a mode of governance of programs, that maintains social values traditionally strong in Nordic societies. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 145 (40 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailLuxemburgs Wissenschaftliche Produktivität im Vergleich zu Deutschland, Frankreich und Belgien
Dusdal, Jennifer; Powell, Justin J W UL

in University of Luxembourg; SCRIPT (Eds.) Nationaler Bildungsbericht Luxemburg 2018 (2018)

Dieser Beitrag vergleicht das luxemburgische Hochschul- und Wissenschaftssystem mit drei weiteren Mitgliedsstaaten der Europäischen Union – Deutschland, Frankreich und Belgien. Gemessen wird der ... [more ▼]

Dieser Beitrag vergleicht das luxemburgische Hochschul- und Wissenschaftssystem mit drei weiteren Mitgliedsstaaten der Europäischen Union – Deutschland, Frankreich und Belgien. Gemessen wird der wissenschaftliche Output anhand wissenschaftlicher peer-reviewed Zeitschriftenbeiträge aus dem von Thomson Reuters (jetzt: Clarivate Analytics) bereitgestellten Web of Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE). Ein Vergleich der vier Universitätssektoren zeigt, dass Deutschland und Belgien mit ihren forschungsstarken und internationalen Universitäten einen wesentlich höheren Institutionalisierungsgrad aufweisen als Frankreich und Luxemburg. Ein Vergleich der außeruniversitären Sektoren belegt eine hohe Ausdifferenzierung Deutschlands und Frankreichs im Gegensatz zu Belgien und Luxemburg. In Luxemburg gibt es eine vielfältige und leistungsstarke Forschungslandschaft, die besonders internationalisiert ist. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 13 (2 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailHigher Education and the Exponential Rise of Science: Competition and Collaboration
Powell, Justin J W UL

in Scott, Robert; Buchmann, Marlis (Eds.) Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences (2018)

How we collaborate and compete to find solutions to the problems and challenges of our age vastly impacts our individual and group success and well-being. Interdependent, the institutions of education and ... [more ▼]

How we collaborate and compete to find solutions to the problems and challenges of our age vastly impacts our individual and group success and well-being. Interdependent, the institutions of education and science have dramatically expanded. Today, scientists in nearly all countries contribute to our shared stores of knowledge, with research universities the driving force behind unexpected pure exponential growth in scientific production. Competition—regional, national, organizational, and individual—has become more potent—with performance measures, comparative indicators, and formal evaluations continuously generated and used in decision-making. Simultaneously, collaboration across institutional, disciplinary, organizational, and cultural boundaries expands the possibilities of discovery and produces the most influential science. Competition and collaboration at the nexus of higher education and science demand enhanced attention as they shape the future of scientific innovation and production, with its understudied yet increasingly incontrovertible effects on individuals and societies. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 95 (17 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailComparaison de la Productivité Scientifique du Luxembourg avec l’Allemagne, la France et la Belgique
Dusdal, Jennifer; Powell, Justin J W UL

in SCRIPT; Université du Luxembourg (Eds.) Rapport National sur l'Education au Luxembourg (2018)

Cette contribution compare le système d’enseignement supérieur et scientifique luxembour- geois avec celui de trois autres États membres de l’Union européenne : l’Allemagne, la France et la Belgique ... [more ▼]

Cette contribution compare le système d’enseignement supérieur et scientifique luxembour- geois avec celui de trois autres États membres de l’Union européenne : l’Allemagne, la France et la Belgique. La production scientifique est mesurée à l’aide d’articles de revues scientifiques à comité de lecture tirés du Web of Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) fourni par Thomson Reuters (aujourd’hui Clarivate Analytics). Une comparaison des quatre secteurs universitaires montre que l’Allemagne et la Belgique, avec leurs universités internationales et axées sur la recherche, ont un degré d’institutionnalisation beaucoup plus élevé que la France et le Luxembourg. Une comparaison des secteurs scientifiques non universitaires révèle un degré élevé de différenciation en Allemagne et en France, par rapport à la Belgique et au Luxembourg. Au Luxembourg, la recherche est variée, performante, et a une portée internationale. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 18 (4 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailReview of Meyer, Heinz-Dieter (2017): The Design of the University: German, American, and “World Class”. Abingdon: Routledge
Powell, Justin J W UL

in Comparative Education Review (2018), 62(3), 451-454

By and large, we take our universities for granted. Indeed, the oldest have outlived political regimes of all kinds. This stimulating historical and comparative study exemplifies the importance of in ... [more ▼]

By and large, we take our universities for granted. Indeed, the oldest have outlived political regimes of all kinds. This stimulating historical and comparative study exemplifies the importance of in-depth experience and engagement with the cultural and structural environments in which some of the world’s greatest universities have over centuries incrementally developed and been embedded. This is crucial if we hope to understand the sources of their authority and myriad contributions to scientific knowledge and human flourishing. A neo-institutionalist scholar and multicultural citizen who fruitfully contributes to dialogues exploring core institutions in education and society on both sides of the Atlantic, Heinz-Dieter Meyer is uniquely placed to grapple with the complex processes of institutional learning and design that have made the German and American universities among the globally most productive. He also shows how they have influenced each other via the complex, yet crucial flows of inspired scholars and students carrying key idea(l)s with them for interpretation and application back home. The contributions of key actors, but also the outcomes of choices at critical junctures, such as the failure to establish a national state-funded university in the United States, take center stage in this engaging account of how the leaders of American universities adapted the German model, joining diverse concepts to design what has become the greatest uni-versity system in the world, yet one that remains nearly impossible to emulate due to the unique constellation of actors and institutional environment in which it developed. In eighteen chapters in four parts, The Design of the University: German, American, and “World Class” takes us from Göttingen and Berlin to Boston and to the world level as the scientific enterprise—and competition between scientists and the most crucial organizational form in which they conduct their experiments and make their arguments, the research university—becomes ever more global. Contributing to and inviting debate, Meyer’s main argument is that the American university has suc-ceeded based upon an institutional design—or, perhaps, a non-design—that on multiple levels facil-itates self-government and the identification of a niche within an extraordinarily large and differen-tiated higher education system. This is not a full-fledged historiographic treatment of a subject fa-vored by academics (permanently searching for reputational gains) and policymakers (as they in-creasingly launch research funding programs and evaluation systems to foster competition). Rather than a full-fledged sociology of science, this book creatively sketches the trajectories of German and American university development, emphasizing affinities as well as crucial differences, to ulti-mately argue that in fact “Humboldt’s most important ideas flourished in the American atmosphere of unrestricted institutional experimentation and vigorous self-government” (xiii). Interrogating what he calls the “design thinking” of eminent thinkers Adam Smith and Wilhelm von Humboldt, among others, Meyer traces the challenging, complex, and contingent learning processes in the adaptation of the German research university model to the American context, eventually becoming the most differentiated and “world-class” higher education system in the world. Asking about the reasons for the American university’s success, especially in comparison to the recent insti-tutional crisis of the German research university, albeit still extraordinarily productive, Meyer argues that this American meritocratic success story has institutional design (of self-government) at its heart. Enjoying the patronage of not one, but three major institutions—state, church, and market—the American university attained true autonomy and global preeminence through unparalleled wealth of patronage and an intricate system of checks and balances. In this line of argument, chart-ing the ascendancy from humble origins of what can hardly be called a system due its extraordinary diversity, Meyer concurs with David Labaree (2017), who’s A Perfect Mess [1] is a highly-suitable com-panion piece grounded in the history of American higher education. Contemporary architects of higher education policy globally, driven by the fantasy of “world class” labels, Meyer warns, have completely underestimated the “institutional, social, and political prerequisites that excellence in research and teaching require” (p. 4). Meyer begins his treatise, appropriately, in Göttingen, the site of Georgia Augusta University, where many leaders of American higher education, first and foremost Boston Brahmin George Ticknor, learned by doing, ensconced in a cosmopolitan center of learning and intellectual enlightenment. The blueprint included professionalized scholarship, the unification of research and teaching in seminars and lectures, freedom to choose among academic offerings, a vast library of scientific knowledge, and academic standing based on perpetual production of cutting-edge research judged by peers (p. 19). Instead of Adam Smith’s preferred instruments of competition, choice, and tuition-dependence, Wilhelm von Humboldt’s “design revolution” proposed “three unities” whose powerful integration could surpass the utilitarian logic prevalent then and now: “teaching and research; scien-tific discovery and moral formation (Bildung); scholarly autonomy and scholarly community” (p. 40). The book’s second part, on institutional learning, charts the institutional migration of the blueprint; the contested design options of Gymnasium, college, and graduate school (the latter ultimately the key to global preeminence); the lasting influence of Protestantism (here Meyer follows the arguments of Max Weber, Robert K. Merton, and Joseph Ben-David) and extraordinary educational philanthropy; the battle between those who would centralize, by establishing a national university, and those committed to local control; and finally the contrasting answers to the eternal question of vocational-ism—e.g., how should business be treated, as a sibling to medicine and law or as their distant cousin? The more education-enamored, democratically-inclined patrician elites of the American East Coast were, Meyer argues, radically different institution-builders than German scholars, French state nobility, or even Chinese mandarins: “No other class combined their respect for, and grand vision of, the civilizing role of learning with their economic resources and the realism needed to put their plans into practice” (p. 113). Building on philosophical and historical elaboration, the book’s third part on achieving self-government discusses the six American moves leading to institutional innovation. At organizational level, the German chair and institute give way to departments and discipline, the university presi-dent is no longer figurehead but chief executive, and independent boards of trustees, not govern-ment officials, have ultimate authority. The implications for individuals and organizations of these “design shifts” cannot be overstated. Anyone seeking to understand American higher education, with its phenomenal vertical and horizontal differentiation and on-going academic drift (“a snake-like procession” as David Riesman, to whom the book is dedicated, calls it), and its self-organized autonomy—supported by many philanthropists without the limiting control of a few state bureau-crats—will find this analysis illuminating. Embedded in civil society, “vigorous self-government is the historic design contribution of the American university” (p. 209)—and an achievement that must be guarded in an era in which university autonomy is at risk. In concluding, Meyer’s American opti-mistic and laudatory tone shifts back to Germanic critique and foreboding, identifying challenges and the contemporary struggles that threaten the unintentional masterpiece of institutional learning and diversity. Such justified hopes and fears must now give way to empirical studies of the extraor-dinary outputs in terms of scientific production and societal capabilities and well-being brought about by the continuous process of university Bildung—in Germany, the United States, and around the world. [1] David Labaree (2017), A Perfect Mess: The Unlikely Ascendancy of American Higher Education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 49 (7 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailSchulische Inklusion in Deutschland, Luxemburg und der Schweiz: Aktuelle Bedingungen und Herausforderungen
Powell, Justin J W UL; Hadjar, Andreas UL

in Rathmann, Katharina; Hurrelmann, Klaus (Eds.) Leistung und Wohlbefinden in der Schule: Herausforderung Inklusion (2018)

Die hohe und gestiegene Bedeutung Inklusiver Bildung – für Individuen und Gesellschaften gleichermaßen – wird global, national, regional und lokal von verschiedensten Akteurinnen und Akteuren ... [more ▼]

Die hohe und gestiegene Bedeutung Inklusiver Bildung – für Individuen und Gesellschaften gleichermaßen – wird global, national, regional und lokal von verschiedensten Akteurinnen und Akteuren hervorgehoben sowie zunehmend auch wissenschaftlich multidisziplinär diskutiert. Inklusive schulische Bildung wird hinsichtlich der Merkmale des Zugangs und der Anwesenheit, der Beteiligung am Unterricht sowie der Teilhabe in Schulaktivitäten sowie in Bezug auf die Lernleistung, respektive deren Zertifizierung, bewertet. Aber auch Aspekte wie Wohlbefinden, Gleichstellung und soziale Integration werden zunehmend thematisiert. Der globale Diskurs um Inklusive Bildung als Menschenrecht geht über die Schulbildung hinaus und betrachtet auch die Hochschulbildung sowie lebenslanges Lernen. Inter- wie intranational werden vergleichende Analysen und Länderberichte immer wichtiger, um den Stand der schulischen Inklusion, der individuellen Verwirklichungschancen sowie der gesellschaftlichen Teilhabe von benachteiligten und behinderten Menschen zu messen. Innerhalb der räumlichen Vielfalt der inklusiven Bildung und sonderpädagogischer Fördersysteme finden sich vielfältige Barrieren, aber auch Katalysatoren inklusiver Bildungsreformen. Die Institutionalisierung sonderpädagogischer Fördersysteme in den deutschsprachigen Ländern, insbesondere über die zweite Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts, als isolierten eigenständigen und differenzierten Teil des Bildungssystems, stellt heutige Ziele inklusiver Bildungsreformen vor große Herausforderungen. In den drei hier untersuchten Ländern stellt Deutschland das differenzierteste und auch am stärksten segregierte System dar, dann folgt die Schweiz mit einem eher separativen Modell innerschulischer Differenzierung und schließlich Luxemburg als im Vergleich kleinstes Land, das aufgrund der spät begonnenen Etablierung von Sondereinrichtungen und seiner Kleinteiligkeit und seiner relativ hohen Schuldichte vergleichsweise günstige Ausgangsbedingungen für schulische Integration darstellt, allerdings – wie die beiden anderen Länder auch – durch die Mehrgliedrigkeit des Schulsystems und räumliche Segregation durch teilweise homogenisierte Lernumwelten gekennzeichnet ist. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 206 (10 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailDesigning the (Most) Mobile University: The Centrality of International Student Mobility in Luxembourg’s Higher Education Policy Discourse
Kmiotek-Meier, Emilia Alicja UL; Karl, Ute; Powell, Justin J W UL

in Higher Education Policy (2018), 31(online first), 1-24

The nexus of national educational and migration policies and international student mobility (ISM) in Europe becomes strikingly visible in Luxembourg. ISM is central for higher education policy in ... [more ▼]

The nexus of national educational and migration policies and international student mobility (ISM) in Europe becomes strikingly visible in Luxembourg. ISM is central for higher education policy in Luxembourg, but also for larger questions of social integration and economic development. Based on a discourse analysis of the political debates surrounding the foundation of the University of Luxembourg in 2003, we analyse how and why ISM became a cornerstone of higher education policy in Luxembourg. Our findings reveal that, on the one hand, incoming student mobility — and the establishment of an international research university — was and is seen as a means of competing for the best and brightest, regionally and globally, and of securing human resources to satisfy a booming, internationalised labour market. On the other hand, outgoing student mobility has traditionally been viewed as the main mechanism to establish international networks across Europe and foster elites back home. Both incoming and outgoing mobility are thought necessary to establish and maintain a competitive and sustainable knowledge economy. Reconstructing the underlying rationales behind the support for ISM as the key to higher education policy, we explain why Luxembourg currently has the highest proportion of ISM worldwide. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 50 (16 UL)
Full Text
See detailChancen und Barrieren Inklusiver Bildung im Vergleich: Lernen von Anderen
Powell, Justin J W UL

in Schriftenreihe Eine für Alle — Die inklusive Schule für die Demokratie (2018), 3

Das Menschenrecht auf Inklusive Bildung als globale Norm – und als Thema der Bildungsforschung in Deutschland. Die hohe und gestiegene Bedeutung Inklusiver Bildung für Gesellschaften und Individuen wird ... [more ▼]

Das Menschenrecht auf Inklusive Bildung als globale Norm – und als Thema der Bildungsforschung in Deutschland. Die hohe und gestiegene Bedeutung Inklusiver Bildung für Gesellschaften und Individuen wird global, national, regional und lokal von verschiedensten Akteur*innen hervorgehoben und medial sehr breit rezipiert—und zunehmend auch wissenschaftlich multidisziplinär diskutiert. Durch Initiativen wie „Education for All“ (UNESCO, 2015), die Konvention über die Rechte von Menschen mit Behinderung der Vereinten Nationen (UN-BRK, seit 2006), welche inklusive Bildung als Menschenrecht verankert, oder die UN Millennium Development Goals (www.un.org/millenniumgoals) wird das Thema Inklusion verstärkt in Bildungspolitik und -praxis aufgegriffen. Innerhalb einer Dekade haben über 170 Länder die UN-BRK ratifiziert (United Nations, 2017). Artikel 24 definiert Inklusive Bildung als Menschenrecht: „Die Vertragsstaaten (sichern)... den Zugang zu einem inklusiven, hochwertigen und unentgeltlichen Unterricht“ (Art. 24, UN-BRK). Damit wird inklusive Bildung zur globalen Norm und zum einklagbaren Recht entlang des Lebenslaufs. In diesem Beitrag wird anhand ausgewählter Vergleiche aufgezeigt, wie sich die Expansion und Persistenz der schulischen Segregation anstatt der Ausweitung der Inklusion vollzieht. Dabei wurde ein langsamer Wandel statt Transformation dieser komplexen Bildungssysteme konstatiert. Im Ländervergleich wurden immer wieder markante Divergenzen festgestellt, wonach die unterschiedlichen „institutionellen Logiken“ dieser Systeme sichtbar wurden. Abschließend lässt sich festhalten, dass die Förderquote wohl weiter steigen wird wegen größerem Bedarf (oder wahrgenommenen Förderbedarfs), erhöhter Standards und gesteigerter Rechenschaftspflicht als Teile der Governance von Bildung. Sonderpädagogische Förderung nimmt seit Jahrzehnten weltweit zu, oft in Sonderschulen oder -klassen. Es mag paradox erscheinen, dass gleichzeitig sowohl segregierende als auch inklusive Lernumwelten expandieren. Der Grund: Die Verflechtung und Wechselwirkungen zwischen sonderpädagogischen Fördersystemen, allgemeiner Bildung und anderen Institutionen sowie die Interessen der beteiligten Professionen verhindern die Transformation hin zur schulischen Inklusion für alle. Gleichzeitig schreitet dennoch auch in den Bildungssystemen, die hochgradig selektiv und segregiert sind, Inklusive Bildung voran. Vergleichende Forschung verdeutlicht vielfältige Grenzen, aber auch Facilitatoren der Inklusion auf unterschiedlichen Ebenen. Die Ratifizierung der UN-BRK in Deutschland hat die Notwendigkeit unterstrichen, die Bildungssysteme auf Länder- und lokaler Ebene umzubauen und den Wandel zu erforschen. Die UN-BRK stärkt Advokaten der Inklusiven Bildung nachhaltig. Auch aufgrund des Bil- dungsföderalismus wird die Implementierung weiterhin ein schrittweiser, pfadabhängiger Prozess und keine fundamentale Transformation sein. Gerade in föderalen Ländern wie Deutschland und den USA gibt es eine Persistenz einzelstaatlicher Disparitäten trotz (inter-)nationaler Ziele, Normen und völkerrechtlicher Verträge, die es weiter zu untersuchen und zu implementieren gilt. Die Chance, die solche Systeme bieten, ist die Kontrastierung der diversen Pfade hin zur Inklusiven Bildung und die Chance zur Politik der Vielfalt, die zu einer Schule für alle und zur Pädagogik der Vielfalt passt. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 90 (6 UL)