Politics, Integration and Higher Education Policy Reforms in Vendetta Countries

Research Paper (undergraduate) 2015 19 Pages

Pedagogy - School System, Educational and School Politics


Table of Contents

1. Introduction

2. System and subsystem policies and politics in education
2.1. Setting Policies in the organization

3. Politics, Theories and Policy review in Higher Education

4. The politics position in Educational organization

5. Public policy for Higher Education
5.1. Case study of black society living in Texas
5.2. Politics, education, and conflict in Nepal
5.3. Education, curriculum and politics in Sudan
5.4. Reforming Education Policies in Egypt
5.5. A case study of Bolivia
5.6. Deficiency of international regulations on education policies

6. Conclusion


Course Objectives

The objectives of this course include:

1. To explore policies that affect organizations.
2. Critique political perspectives affecting higher teaching and learning organizations

Course Description

The course is to analyze different policies on Higher education organizations and further, assess integrative policies in organizational management. This course is in addition, defines Policy review and managerial development skills in the organization and cultivation of Public policy and change in the organization.

1. Introduction

Policies in any organization are the termed as the driving force over which goals and objectives are attained. However, politics from the government perspective are the ingredients of the formation and implementation of those policies. The study of Stallones (2011) suggests that politics in education implies corrective educational alterations and change that is implemented in both private and government organizations. With this focus, politics can become a vital ingredient that can speed up and further, bring transformations in a higher education institution. This transformation partly may have a significant affect the running of institutions. Wang (2014) for instance, presupposes the fact that for change to take place, educational stakeholders have infact to notice the policies to make radical re-interpretation of the organizational needs in order to form such a reliable team of the organization.

2. System and subsystem policies and politics in education

Both Baumgartner and Jones (2009); Sabatier (1993) as quoted by Kauko (2012) distinguish between a political subsystem, such as higher education, and the political system. Rabovsky (2011) appreciate the political system to be apparently stable, but changing rather rapidly in certain periods of time. Nonetheless, Ginsburg (2010) sees the political system as part of the policy environment, and the subsystem as being described by the design of that government political view system. Generally speaking, a subsystem focuses on a specific area that needs changes either from the political or the social stratum (Hirano 2012). The use of the higher education system, according to Stallones (2011) refers to all the institutions focusing on the politics of government reforms in higher education which particularly has autonomy over education revolution. However, there is a distinction between the higher-education system and the political system. The latter includes all the institutions in the organization polity and is considered part of the external factors which again includes the institutions involved in higher education decision-making (Rabovsky 2011).

2.1. Setting Policies in the organization

The three agenda-setting theories have rather similar approaches to the change inside an educational organization. For instance, Pherali (2012) asserts that the key of the three agendas is being in the relationship between institutional changes and external education forces. From a subsystem perspective according to Kauko (2012), the appropriate moment may be a response to external changes or a result of changes in the institutional structure of the higher-education system (Acedo 2013).

3. Politics, Theories and Policy review in Higher Education

Transformative theory, assumes that the relative importance of institutional education changes in the long term, produces perfect results in the organizational sector (Rabovsky 2011). It is of value then to assert that institutions affect the scope of the agendas in the political system (Hirano 2012). Nevertheless, the key facilitator of change is the interaction between the minor organizational systems and its external influencing factors. According to Ginsburg (2010), the institutional structure can be brought into line with the external factors, which have a positive impact on how changes may occur through the influence of those external bodies.

Acedo (2013) for instance, describes the influencing task model from the external education forces by arguing that compatibility between both internal and external the policy reviewing forces may conflict and frustrations in the organization may easily be realized among stakeholders. Regarding the change in institutional structure, Babyegeya (2002) also holds that the formation of coalitions inside the subsystem, in addition to changes outside it, can easily affect educational transformation of any educational organization.

4. The politics position in Educational organization

The situation of political ideas normally impacts the curriculum of any institution that has the ambition of pedagogy. Change may be for this case initiated by having educational structures that are actively based on the positive institution’s achievements. Changes that the political voice brings may however dictate the educational growth on any particular learning institution. It is from these critical changes where the ultimate determination on either growth or death of an organization is of course established (Rabovsky 2011). Different theories have nonetheless been put in place to give some guidance as to the forms the institutional structure can take. According to Ginsburg (2010) institutions form policy venues where policy stakeholders could directly offer suggestions on the revolution in the set educational trend. However, there may also be monopolies, created to delimit the contestation by emphasizing the complexity, the required professionalism or social insignificance of an issue (Acedo 2013). Furthermore, Wang (2014) puts forward the idea of creating coalitions of ideologically similar institutions. In other words, the institutional structures based on the traditional routine could also affect what can be stipulated in education sectors.

Nonetheless, those different agenda-setting theories from external forces concerning the trend of education from the global perspective over the national perspective have of recent attracted criticism. Kauko (2012) focuses too much on balance, and that change dynamics would be a more important factor in explaining decision-making integrated from those two policy making bodies. It is within this criterion that gives space to policy scholars such as Babyegeya (2002) who nonetheless, criticizes the match model for giving too few tools with which to consider how the different educational policy levels become matched. It is of significance to note that critiques which outline the development from the historical value of the impact of politics in the higher educational sector could provide the foundation of the current trend over the best educational practices (Wang 2014). Change for instance, in any higher learning organization has got an indirect or a direct link with the political world. The dynamics values and the trend of learning embraced basically from the political sphere but with the view on the social framework of the learning institution (Stallones 2011). However, if the working framework of an educational institutional is not consistent with the learning processes which integrate external factors, it may lead the political voice to issue a hostile ultimatum implying an immediate change to occur over a certain period. In this case, stakeholders have the obligation of reviewing the structure of their institution or patiently wait to receive the reviewed policies from the political forum which may comprise of transformative learning processes within the institution (Rabovsky 2011).

5. Public policy for Higher Education

By the nature of higher learning institutions, policies vary basically on the essence of learning procedures, administrative procedures, exam implementation procedures and discipline procedures. Almost all formed education policies are established with the most significant perspectives that support academic excellence. These policies affecting higher education are fostered by stakeholders from the political grounds, social grounds and the economic grounds. For instance, different governments normally provide scholarships to those students that have a certain level of merit but this does not deny the opportunity of studies for other students. It is explicitly given that any student that considers education valuable should make demanding efforts to achieve the merit level of attaining scholarship for higher education. For instance, Stallones (2011) unveils the concept of the reconstructed government of the common society in Texas just immediately after the civil war that sought to give an equal value of the educational policy and therefore had to centralize the free school system of education. However, because of insufficient unity and cooperation of these populations, schools had to encounter disaster just because of self-doubting education policy that could hardly convince the population on the relevance of school learning education.



ISBN (eBook)
ISBN (Book)
File size
460 KB
Catalog Number
Institution / College
Atlantic International University – SOCIAL AND HUMAN STUDIES
politics integration higher education policy reforms vendetta countries




Title: Politics, Integration and Higher Education Policy Reforms in Vendetta Countries