Project Description

In this project, we aimed to analyse how visions of the future of education are negotiated and contested, looking at how narratives about the future of education are constructed by UNESCO and OECD in two projects, Futures of education (UNESCO) and Future of education and skills 2030 (OECD). Our main focus was on understanding the micropolitical “backstage” processes involved in constructing these narratives. We were particularly interested in whether and how formerly marginalised voices and groups are integrated in the process, and whether and in which ways these actors challenge reigning “orthodoxies” in the liberal education script. The project employed a qualitative approach, relying particularly on ethnographic methods, narrative and discourse analysis.

Research Questions

The project pursued two main research questions. One strand of research dealt with the ways UNESCO and the OECD responded to demands of greater inclusivity while maintaining organisational coherence. The other part concerned the depiction of educational futures in communication materials. In particular, the research questions of the project were as follows:

• (1.1) How do UNESCO and the OECD gain external legitimacy in relation to their environment within the context of their future initiatives?

• (1.2) How do these international organisations (IOs) create internal coherence and organisational identity regarding the demand for inclusivity?

• (2.1) What future imaginaries do IOs employ in their visual communication?

• (2.2) How do these imaginaries relate to authoritative claims in the education policy field?

Our research took systematically into account that the field of global governance of education is very ‘crowded’, i.e. that there are many policy actors in this field competing for a limited amount of policy space, leading to particular relations of cooperation and competition between actors. This particular character of the field of global governance of education shaped the findings with regard to both research questions.

Research Approach

The research approach for this project was qualitative. Empirical data was drawn from materials produced by the two initiatives, including reports, working papers, and visual content such as YouTube clips. Additionally, participant observations at IO events, such as the OECD’s Global Fora, and interviews with IO staff and other key actors involved in the initiatives were integral to the study

The dissertations related to this project involved interviews with a number of additional actors ranging from education policy elite and bureaucrats to representatives of student/youth movements.

Dissertations

In the context of the project, two dissertations contribute to answering the project’s research questions, while also establishing additional areas of focus.

• (1) Actors from the Global South and the OECD (Ana Werkstetter Caravaca)

  • How do actors from the Global South shape the OECD in the field of education?

  • What have been unintended consequences of the OECD’s ‘thickening’ of global education governance in the Global South?

• (2) ‘Stakeholders’ in the Futures-initiatives of the OECD and UNESCO (Walter Fritsch)

  • Who was considered a ‘stakeholder’ in the Futures-initiatives of the OECD and UNESCO, and how did they participate as such in these initiatives?

  • How do these ‘stakeholders’ make sense of the IOs’ efforts to consult with them?

Relation to the Liberal Script

The relation of the project to the problematique studied by the cluster was twofold.

First, the self-evident role of IOs as rational producers of policy knowledge is increasingly being contested. ‘Educational futures’ can no longer be constructed by groups of experts in IOs (such as those that wrote the UNESCO’s Faure and Delors reports in the 1970s and 1990s, named after the bureaucrats chairing the commissions that wrote them). The involvement of ‘stakeholders’ and the ‘democratisation’ of their processes are ways in which IOs try to meet this challenge. This challenge to IOs’ way of operation can be effectively examined through the two initiatives analysed in this project.

Second, education is often seen as an area and a means through which challenges to the liberal script should be addressed. Both initiatives studied in this study frame their work as a response to challenges stemming from phenomena such as democratic backsliding, increasing social inequality and various crises related to the planet’s ecological degradation.

Core Findings

Our research clearly demonstrated that the ‘democratisation’ and ‘inclusivity’ of the initiatives studied remains largely at the surface and mostly amounts to what we term ‘additive’ inclusion, i.e. the tokenistic, nominal inclusion of previously excluded actors in the field of education policy. This seldom leads to a substantial recalibration of the dominant claims and knowledge in the field of global education governance, which would represent ‘disruptive inclusion’. One reason for this, we argue, lies in in IOs’ need to balance external legitimacy with their (internal) organisational identity.

Academic Innovations

Academically, the project introduced three key innovations:

1. It contributed to the ongoing wave of research on IOs attempting to open the ‘black box’ that IOs’ inner workings often have been treated as. By examining the actual processes through which educational futures have been constructed within IOs and identifying the actors involved, this study provided valuable insights.
2. The project connected its findings to research on organisational legitimacy and identity. While organisational legitimacy has been extensively studied in the field of education, the interaction and occasional conflict between organisational identity and legitimacy needs have received far less attention.
3. The project sought to incorporate visual analysis into the study of communications produced by IOs. So far, the focus of existing research has strongly been on textual content, sometimes overlooking the fact that visual elements (e.g. ‘dataviz’, YouTube videos, etc.) make distinctive contributions to discourse, far beyond simply illustrating text.

Publications

Fritsch, W., Werkstetter Caravaca, A., Berger, T., & Waldow, F. (2024). Why and how they listen: on the (im)possibility of inclusion in the global governance of education. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 1–13.