Systemic reform: curricula, context, culture, and environment

1993 ◽  
pp. 171-185
Author(s):  
Harvey Keynes
Keyword(s):  
Systemic Reform

Group Duties

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie Collins
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Systemic Reform ◽  
Moral Duty ◽  
Tripartite Model ◽  
Group Level ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Moral Duties ◽  
Fundamental Categories ◽  
Group Pattern

Moral duties are regularly attributed to groups. We might think that the United Kingdom has a moral duty to defend human rights, that environmentalists have a moral duty to push for global systemic reform, or that the affluent have a moral duty to alleviate poverty. This book asks (i) whether such groups are apt to bear duties and (ii) what this implies for their members. It defends a ‘Tripartite Model’ of group duties, which divides groups into three fundamental categories. First, combinations are collections of agents that do not have any goals or decision-making procedures in common. Combinations cannot bear moral duties. Instead, we should re-cast their purported duties as a series of duties—one held by each agent in the combination. Each duty demands its bearer to ‘I-reason’: to do the best they can, given whatever they happen to believe the others will do. Second, coalitions are groups whose members share goals but lack decision-making procedures. Coalitions also cannot bear duties, but their alleged duties should be replaced with members’ several duties to ‘we-reason’: to do one’s part in a particular group pattern of actions, on the presumption that others will do likewise. Third, collectives have group-level procedures for making decisions. They can bear duties. Collectives’ duties imply duties for collectives’ members to use their role in the collective with a view to the collective doing its duty.

Discipline Provisions of IDEA: Misguided Policy or Tacit Reform Initiatives?

2002 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 408-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Etscheidt
Keyword(s):  
Problem Behavior ◽  
Teacher Effectiveness ◽  
Behavioral Disorders ◽  
Educational Equity ◽  
Systemic Reform ◽  
Reform Initiatives ◽  
Exclusionary Practices ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Suspension And Expulsion

The author examines the controversy surrounding the discipline provisions of the 1997 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and suggests that the provisions may serve to encourage systemic reform capable of dramatically impacting the educational and postschool careers of students with emotional or behavioral disorders. The IDEA discipline provisions may assist in curbing traditional exclusionary practices and in developing alternatives to suspension and expulsion. Thus, they may fortify a pedagogically sound and efficacious approach to addressing problem behavior, enhance teacher effectiveness, and improve the schools’ accountability for all students. Such reform is capable of reconciling the competing goals of educational equity and excellence.

scholarly journals India's Open Door to Foreign Universities: Less than Meets the Eye

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Altbach
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Education System ◽  
Higher Education Institutions ◽  
Systemic Reform ◽  
Open Door ◽  
Open Door Policy ◽  
Higher Education System ◽  
Foreign Universities

India may finally open its doors to foreign higher education institutions and investment. India's higher education faces severe problems of capacity and quality. This lack of capacity will affect India's new open-door policy. It will be unable to adequately regulate and evaluate foreign institutions. Though the system needs systemic reform, it is impossible for foreigners to solve or even to make a visible dent in India's higher education system.

scholarly journals Overrepresentation of Indigenous students in school suspension, exclusion, and enrolment cancellation in Queensland: is there a case for systemic inclusive school reform?

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda J. Graham ◽  
Callula Killingly ◽  
Kristin R. Laurens ◽  
Naomi Sweller
Keyword(s):  
School Reform ◽  
The United States ◽  
Systemic Reform ◽  
Exclusionary Discipline ◽  
Political Commitment ◽  
Government Schools ◽  
Indigenous Students ◽  
Inclusive School ◽  
In School Suspension ◽  
Incident Rate

AbstractWell-established evidence of the ill-effects of exclusionary school discipline, its disproportionate use on students of colour, and association with the “school-to-prison pipeline” has, in the last decade, led to systemic reforms in the United States, which are successfully reducing exclusion and improving outcomes. Few studies, however, have similarly investigated overrepresentation in Australia, with little attention to systemic reform as a result. In this study, we analysed suspension, exclusion, and enrolment cancellation rates in Queensland (QLD) government schools between 2013 and 2019 and found Indigenous students were consistently overrepresented. Suspension incidents proportionate to enrolments increased for all students, but this increase was faster for Indigenous than non-Indigenous students and driven primarily by steep rises in short suspensions during primary school (Preparatory-6). Exclusions increased—again disproportionately—for Indigenous students, chiefly in secondary school (7–12). During 2019, Physical Misconduct had the highest incident rate for both groups; however, Indigenous students were most overrepresented in suspensions for Disruptive/Disengaged behaviours. Further, while Indigenous students were overrepresented in all QLD regions, one region’s Indigenous suspension rate was higher than all others despite no difference in the distribution of Indigenous/non-Indigenous enrolments across regions. The scale and nature of Indigenous overrepresentation in exclusionary discipline incidents in QLD indicate clear need for further research to secure political commitment to systemic inclusive school reform, as well as to produce high-quality evidence capable of guiding that reform.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document