Can we transform global education without transforming how we monitor progress?

A. Benavot, James Williams
{"title":"Can we transform global education without transforming how we monitor progress?","authors":"A. Benavot, James Williams","doi":"10.1108/jice-07-2022-0020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis paper critically aims to review existing monitoring strategies of Target 4.7 of the Sustainable Development Goals and proposes an alternative approach for reporting country progress on relevant Target 4.7 themes. Since this target constitutes one of the most ambitious and transformative education targets there is considerable value in developing a comprehensive reporting and monitoring strategy.Design/methodology/approachThe paper draws on key policy documents to clarify processes leading up to the definition and measurement of a global indicator for Target 4.7. It also discusses limitations associated with the current reporting and measurement strategy.FindingsThe paper finds that the current monitoring approach to Target 4.7, based on an existing reporting mechanism for the 1974 Recommendation concerning Education for International Understanding, Co-operation and Peace and Education relating to Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom, is unfit for purpose and needs to be overhauled. The current process for revising the 1974 Recommendation is unlikely to result in a new monitoring strategy that would address existing weaknesses in the current strategy.Originality/valueTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, a critical review of measurement, reporting and monitoring strategies of Target 4.7 has not been undertaken. Also new in this paper is the proposed global observatory of Target 4.7 policies, practices and initiatives, which, if established, would work to: (1) create a more dynamic and informative monitoring infrastructure; (2) foster peer learning among countries; and (3) identify notable strategies of national, regional and international action in relation to Target 4.7.","PeriodicalId":356133,"journal":{"name":"Journal of international cooperation in education","volume":"215 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of international cooperation in education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jice-07-2022-0020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

PurposeThis paper critically aims to review existing monitoring strategies of Target 4.7 of the Sustainable Development Goals and proposes an alternative approach for reporting country progress on relevant Target 4.7 themes. Since this target constitutes one of the most ambitious and transformative education targets there is considerable value in developing a comprehensive reporting and monitoring strategy.Design/methodology/approachThe paper draws on key policy documents to clarify processes leading up to the definition and measurement of a global indicator for Target 4.7. It also discusses limitations associated with the current reporting and measurement strategy.FindingsThe paper finds that the current monitoring approach to Target 4.7, based on an existing reporting mechanism for the 1974 Recommendation concerning Education for International Understanding, Co-operation and Peace and Education relating to Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom, is unfit for purpose and needs to be overhauled. The current process for revising the 1974 Recommendation is unlikely to result in a new monitoring strategy that would address existing weaknesses in the current strategy.Originality/valueTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, a critical review of measurement, reporting and monitoring strategies of Target 4.7 has not been undertaken. Also new in this paper is the proposed global observatory of Target 4.7 policies, practices and initiatives, which, if established, would work to: (1) create a more dynamic and informative monitoring infrastructure; (2) foster peer learning among countries; and (3) identify notable strategies of national, regional and international action in relation to Target 4.7.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
我们能在不改变监测进展方式的情况下改变全球教育吗?
本文旨在审查可持续发展目标4.7的现有监测战略,并提出报告相关目标4.7主题的国家进展情况的替代方法。由于这一指标是最具雄心和变革意义的教育指标之一,因此制定一项全面的报告和监测战略具有相当大的价值。设计/方法/方法本文借鉴了关键的政策文件,以阐明导致具体目标4.7的全球指标的定义和测量的过程。它还讨论了与当前报告和度量策略相关的限制。本文发现,目前对目标4.7的监测方法是基于1974年《关于促进国际理解、合作与和平的教育以及与人权和基本自由有关的教育的建议》的现有报告机制,不适合实现目标,需要进行彻底改革。目前订正1974年建议的进程不太可能产生一项新的监测战略,以解决目前战略中的现有弱点。原创性/价值据作者所知,尚未对目标4.7的测量、报告和监测策略进行批判性审查。本文的另一个新内容是提议设立的全球观察站,以落实具体目标4.7的政策、做法和举措,如果建立起来,将有助于:(1)建立一个更有活力、信息更丰富的监测基础设施;(2)促进国家间的同侪学习;(3)确定与具体目标4.7相关的国家、区域和国际行动的显著战略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Evolution of quality assurance in higher education from INQAAHE GGP to ISGs − Are quality assurance agencies in Asia ready to the emerging modules? Higher education cooperation at the regional level Book review: Shadow Education in the Middle East: Private Supplementary Tutoring and its Policy Implications Birth and evolution of “social studies” in Myanmar: dramatic changes in contents and approaches How did local wisdom and practice make schools thrive during the pandemic? Evidence from a positive deviance study in rural Uganda
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1