Congruences and Gaps in Models of Values: Distinction between Education Policy and Practice

Eglė Katiliūtė

KaunasUniversity of Technology, Donelaicio 73, Kaunas, Lithuania

Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, University of Crete, 22-25 September 2004

Abstract

The article deals with solving the research problem focused on the following questions: What kind of values exists in the intended level of education policy? What kind of values exists in the real (in-use) level of education policy among the population of education stakeholders (principals, head teachers, teachers, pupils, parents and students)? What core factors point out the gaps and the congruences of values between the intended education policy and policy-in-use?

The research questions mentioned above are answered by four sections of this article. The first part presents the research literature overview and a theoretical set of values. The second part illuminates the changes in education policy in Lithuania with the focus on reorienting set of values that are performed in secondary school. The third part presents the research methodology. The fourth part presents the research results and discussion on the empirical data.

Introduction

A review of current science literature, revealed a widespread acknowledgement that all educational activities are value-laden. Every comment, decision or action reflects or communicates some value or values, and values permeate or "impregnate" the educational process (Tomlinson and Quinton, 1986; Bottery, 1990; Taylor, 1993). What do we, as educators and citizens, want the learners to become? As Todd (2001) points out, ‘philosophically speaking, exploring the place of ethics in education often begins from this normative point of departure: what values are to be invoked in educational encounters? How might students be educated to become better citizens, more responsible moral subjects, or people who can live and work better across social differences?’ Simon (1992) notes, that pedagogy is not just about teaching of morals, but is a ‘moral vision’ itself. Curriculum is central in educating students to become certain kinds of people, individuals or citizens – whether such curriculum builds on students’ own interests (Dewey, 1969) or is based on state-controlled outcomes (Wien and Dudley-Marling, 1998). In both cases, there is an underlying assumption about what it means to learn and be ‘educated’; indeed, who educators think students should become frequently defines the aims and purpose of educational practices (Todd, 2001). Curriculum is the core of educational policy. Therefore, analysis of gaps between intended and real values is the significant problem of educational policy.

This paper focuses on the following questions, that form the background of the research problem:

  • What kind of values exists in the intended level of education policy?
  • What kinds of values exist in the real (in-use) level of education policy among the population of education stakeholders (principals, head teachers, teachers, pupils, parents and students)?
  • What core factors point out the gaps and the congruences of values between the intended education policy and policy-in-use?

The research subject is values in the system of education policy.

The researchaim is to reveal the congruences and gaps in the sets of intended and real values (in the Lithuanian context).

Using the methodology of content analysis the congruences and gaps between education policy documents and education practice were diagnosed. The following research methods were applied: research literature analysis, qualitative content analysis and questionnaire survey (A questionnaire for a diagnosis of education policy implementation in the secondary school level was used. The study participants were 1030 respondents).

The first part of the article presents the research literature overview and a theoretical set of values in education. The second part illuminates the changes in education policy in Lithuania with the focus on reorienting set of values that is realized in secondary school level. The third part presents the research methodology, characteristics of the sample and the research method, such as qualitative and quantitative content analysis. The fourth part presents the research results and discussion on the empirical data.

1. Values in Education: a rationale for the theoretical set of values

The socio-cultural changes, as Podest (2001) pointed out, assume political and economic transformations and affect the daily life of each one of us, and shake up in many cases the bases of what we have used to structure our existence, questioning the principles and values assumed in other times when other existential scenarios were faced.

The post-modernistic change of Western societies could be characterized by the essential qualitative changes: on the one hand individualistic values (freedom, self-expression) overbalanced for collectivist values (co-operation, belonging to groups) (Birzea, 1997), and on the other hand, material values have been changed by the values of status, self-respect and intellectual satisfaction. The welfare has created post-material culture and thinking (Inglehart, 1990). The classical values of modernism (productivity, development, economical rationalism) have lost their importance: at present for an individual is important to express oneself and do the meaningful work than to gain the profit. As Birzea (1997) points out, in post-modern societies such phenomena as respect for the government, moneyas priority, trust in the overall welfare state, social homogenity, belief in knowledge and social progress step-by-step loose their position and the new “post-material values” appeare – leisure time, independence, multiculturalism, tolerance and self-trust. The post-industrial stage of society which, Drucker (1993) calls as knowledge stage, is characterized by certain fundamental qualities and values at the same time: critical reflection, effective communication, group-work, the application of problem solving method and fundamentally new attitude towards education.

According to Shapiro (2001), we need an approach to moral education, which will help students develop values that will enrich their lives as individuals and as members of society. It should enable them to participate in a communal effort to find a balance between individual liberty, private property, market competition, and due process on the one hand and self-restraint and community obligation on the other. Since we as a people have chosen pluralism and representative government over other forms of social organization (such as official moral orthodoxies or totalitarianism), it is incumbent upon our education institutions to prepare their students to live in a society where they will have to make their own moral choices, where they will have the capacity to help shape the moral contours of the society as a whole, and where their lives will be directly affected by the moral choices of others.

Even when school creates various possibilities for develop of personal qualities, it is crucial important to give the students estimation of values yet. The learning environment should be saturated with the values that represent the social order and the other different values which come up from students. The values brought by the students may exist in the learning environment only as an outcome of estimation of values through experience. For example, if stealing is a virtue for a student, in the learning environment it should be estimated as a negative value.

Educators, primarily parents, have rights to pass their values to their children, i.e. to indoctrinate. The structure of the value-orientated education is compared to the education structure and their perception is compared to their conscious apprehension, ability to use them in everyday life. Educator is supposed to stimulate learner’s ability to apprehend the essence of values, to solve problems, connected to the choice of behavior, determined by certain values (Bitinas, 2000). According to this strategy, the key point is to decide the set of acceptable values in the process of education. Yet the strategy of value indoctrination trespasses the main principle of the democratic society – the right of every individual, child included, to the free choice of values.

Philosophical theory of liberalism raises the question about the way people can live together in a society, which is deeply rooted by diverse attitudes to fundamental issues. It is related to the notion of liberty and liberation: freedom of choice, equal opportunities, individual autonomy; it rejects the differences of people’s moral value as not significant for legal and political order; unity of mankind, irrespective of culture, religion or racial differences, is emphasized; openness for new ideas is promoted. Democracy introduces its requirement. It is – governing based on legislation, which depends on all the society. The main aim of liberalism is the formation of free individuals and open society. In order to reach this aim, a lot of traditional values are necessary: autonomy, knowledge, competence, rationality and etc.

Rokeach (1973) created value typology, which consists of two value groups (Robbins, 2003): 1) “terminal” values that reflect preferred terminal condition of existence (terminal values are aims that a person wants to reach during his/her life); 2) “step” / “instrumental” values that reflect preferred way of action or aids to seek superlative values. Such segmentation shows that values could be of dual character: as a process or condition.

Contemporary view towards values was analyzed by Liepa (1994) and Matulionis (2001). Liepa (1994) had illuminated the European values: aspiration of personal happiness, respect to person and responsibility, freedom and equality, cherish of health, family, work and leisure time. Matulionis (2001) emphasizes that values depend on society and gives an example American values: equal opportunities, activity and work, progress, prosperity (comfort), freedom, success, effectiveness, science and democracy. Comparison of above mentioned values uncovered that here is not controversial differences. Although these values could be named as traditional, and those are valid at present. Therefore Rokeach (1973) set of values was taken as the basis of theoretical set of values with two modifications: “salvation” was changed to “trust” for keeping more liberal stand point and the “science” as value was added to (see Table 1).

Table 1

Theoretical model of values

Terminal values / Step (instrumental) values
Comfortable (successful) life
Achieved aim (long-term)
Peace (without fighting and conflicts)
Beauty (nature and art)
Equality (equal opportunities for all)
Safety of family (care of favorite people)
Freedom (satisfaction)
Happiness (fulfillment)
Inner harmony (without inner conflicts)
Pleasure (path strewn with roses)
Salvation → Trust
Social establishment (honor, admiration)
Real friendship (relationship)
Science
/ Ambitious (diligent, aspiring)
Talented (competent, efficient)
Joyful
Tidy
Courageous
Serviceable
Honest (sincere, truthful)
Fanciful (courageous, creative)
Logical (coherent, rational)
Tender
Obedient (disciplined, respectful)
Courteous (helpful, well-mannered)
Responsible (reliable)

Though the significant transformation of collectivist values to individualistic and post-materialistic values make the basis for the implementation of the new attitude towards the education, which stresses on the whole life learning, constant renovation and self-education and a rationale for the theoretical set of values in education is traditional values.

2. Changing the set of values in education policy documents

After fifty years of occupation the LithuanianState has been rebuilt. It is important to stress that if we talk about radical changes in society we may look at the field of values.As Boaz (2002) points out, ‘Marxism promised freedom and community but delivered tyranny and atomization. The tyranny of the Marxist countries is well known, but it may not be so well understood that Marxism created a society far more atomized than anything in the capitalist world. The Marxist rulers in the Soviet empire in the first place believed theoretically that men under conditions of "true freedom" would have no need for organizations catering to their individual interests, and in the second place understood practically that independent associations would threaten the power of the state - so they not only eliminated private economic activity, they sought to stamp out churches, independent schools, political organizations, neighborhood associations, and everything else down to the garden clubs. After all, the theory went, such non-universal organizations contributed to atomization. What happened, of course, was that people deprived of any form of community and connectedness between the family and the all-powerful state became atomistic individuals with a vengeance’. As Gellner (cf. Boaz, 2002) wrote, "The system created isolated, amoral, cynical individualists-without-opportunity, skilled at double-talk and trimming." The usual ways in which people were tied to their neighbors, their fellow parishioners, the people with whom they did business, were destroyed, leaving people suspicious and distrustful of one another, seeing no reason to co-operate with others or even to treat them with respect.

It could seem that political changes occurring in Lithuania inevitably stimulated the acceptance of Western values that have lead to the situation when all the Europeans should share the same system of values (Birzea, 1997). It may probably reflect at a certain extent the implementation of the principles of the new social order (political pluralism, the development of the fundamentals of the legal state and the development of market economy), but it can hardly reflect those cultural changes – thinking, attitudes, values and change in social relations (changes which lasts the period of one generation’s existence).

Therefore, it seems that during occupation years there was “useful” a double-value system in Lithuania and other Soviet republics: one set of values was formally declared and real life was built on another set of values. We should concede that to make changes in official documents of education and to declare a new set of values is the first and the easiest part of work, and the other part is to live according to new values in real life and to reach the desirable outcomes of education, which were declared in official documents.

The General Concept of Education of the Republic of Lithuania was developed in 1992. The concept described the landmarks for further changes of the educational system. The issues discussed there are those: the entire structure of an educational system, general upbringing of children and youth, vocational training for youth, higher education, adult education, pedagogue training, management and financing of education, and support services for the process of training (scientific information, psychological, and medical). This concept declared the fundamental principles of Lithuanian education - humanitarianism, democratization, nationalism, and innovation. Lithuania’s changing society requires from its citizens new skills and a re-definition of the concept of what constitutes “an educated citizen”: a self-motivated person with the ability to think, solve problems, and use higher-order intellectual skills to process information and make informed decisions. The new curricula and standards seek to strike a balance between the quantity of necessary knowledge and skills on the one hand, and the acquisition of intellectual, social and civic “fluency” on the other. Similar moves are being made in vocational and professional education, where diminishing needs for narrow specialists have shifted the focus to more general working skills applicable to a range of occupations.

Curriculum policy for Lithuania is defined centrally by the General Education Department of the Ministry of Education and Science, with professional support from expert panels and subject specialists in the Institute of Pedagogy. Curriculum guides outline the objectives for the subject by grade, a description of the content to be taught, time allocations for each subject (lessons per week), and expected learning outcomes. Curriculum renewal is quite rightly seen as an ongoing task, and efforts are made to co-ordinate new curricula with the introduction of new textbooks, new methods of diagnostic and summative assessment, and teacher in-service training. The General Programs of basic school education of Lithuania specifies the purpose, values and assignments for these schools. The purpose of school is the successful development of individual ability and evolution of the population, and assistance in the development of the modern, open and democratic Lithuanian state. All the efforts of basic education are oriented to the child and youth, and their talents and needs. The school recognizes the unconditional worth of individuals, and their right to freedom of choice and moral responsibility. The school develops democratic relationships, and supports the upholding of such within the internal life of community.

3. Methodology

The sample of the research. The research sample was purposeful, theoretical. The research participants were from eight Lithuanian towns and ten country sides. There were 38 research “nests” chosen. The total sample consisted of 1030 respondents. There were 1200 written questionnaires distributed and 1030 questionnaires were filled and received (return quota 85,8 %): 192 students of higher educational institutions (first course students / fresher), 246 pupils (school-leavers) of secondary school, 180 parents of school-leavers, 255 pedagogues (teachers) of secondary schools, 93 head teachers and 64 principles of secondary schools. For other sample characteristics see Table 2.