Neo liberal Education Policies

This paper examines the phenomenon of educational policy transfer in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). It is argued that our age has witnessed a phenomenon of “the accelerating transnationalization of policy norms and practices” (Peck and Theodore 2010: 169) across national borders as states seek models and exemplars for their own educational development. A variety of mechanisms has been postulated for the apparent „movement‟ of policies from an originating context, and their adoption in other national environments labelled with terms such as: 'Policy Borrowing'. These mechanisms are sometimes advocated as a “shortcut to desired outcomes and results” justified by the impetus provided by the “global pursuit of competitive performance and the discourse of the knowledge economy” (Aydarova 2012:15). This paper asks: What policy influences are manifest in the UAE context?The metaphors of scapes, networks and flows are 'appropriated' from the work on mobility developed by Urry (2000)allowing for a more fluid and accommodating frame to describe and analyse the influence of policies from other contexts on the UAE. Ball (2012) counsels that policy transfer research methods and sensibilities be more attuned to movement and owe less to structure and place. The mobility construct applied to policy flows embodies a comprehensive view of transfer and influence from one context to another as movement of “people, objects, capital and information across the world” (Hannam, Sheller, and Urry 2006: 1).Policy transfer, discourse and influence can be „carried‟ by various vectors with the focus on the enabling role of technologically facilitated globalized mobility with its inherent alacrity.

This chapter critically discusses the key characteristics and ideological assumptions of neo-liberal education policy, and its impact on curriculum reform in China. To illustrate the adoption and consequences of neo-liberal education policy in China, this chapter focuses on recent curriculum reform in Shanghai. It is argued that there is a shift, through the implementation of neo-liberal education policy, from a “one-size-fits-all” educational model to one that focuses on individual interests and needs in China. However, the neo-liberal education policy in China faces two main challenges. First, although the educational changes attempt to promote more student- centred curriculum, pedagogy and assessment, key educational stakeholders in China still value traditional forms of teaching and learning that lead to academic success in high-stakes examinations. The second challenge is the de-professionalisation of school personnel where centralised control by the state through the school appraisal system and standardised exams threatens to undermine the professionalism and autonomy of the educators.