Вестник ТГПУ им Л.Н. Толстого №3 2005

СОТРУДНИЧЕСТВО № 3, 2005 National Framework Type Sectors Control Implementation New Zealand Strong All-encompassing Prescriptive Compulsory Ireland Weak Some key sectors Non-directive Consensual Lessons to be learned The New Zealand experience illustrates the problems associated with prescription and unified control when there are well-established traditions and systems already in place. Universities in theWestern Anglo-American tradition value their autonomy and separation from state control and may feel threatened by the imposition of external control and frameworks. They also value knowledge for its own sake and are suspicious of being hijacked for economic expediency. At any rate, Systems Theory shows that the maintenance of homeostasis is fundamental to the interaction of an organism with its environment. (Sundarasaraduia and Hasan, 2004) The French sociologist Foucault has adopted the term ‘discourse’ to describe all the practices, procedures and language associated with particular professions. One of the roles of such ‘discourses’ is to act as a gatekeeper to the professions, preventing interference or invasion by outsiders (Foucault, 1980). The imposition of a new discourse which utilises concepts such as transparency, leading to a scrutiny of accountability and quality assurance as well as that of ‘units’ and ‘credits’must have been unsettling and even oppressive to New Zealand educational institutions. It is not surprising that, in order to survive, the NZ framework needed to make many accommodations with its stakeholders. Conversely, the Irish experience shows the value of a more flexible approach and many commentators have pointed out the strengths of the Irish system in its delineation of levels and wide-ranging criteria (Moon, 2004). The gentler non-prescriptive approach appears to have worked well with most of the major stakeholders accepting the value of the framework. However the lack of a clear initial guidance on some elements of the framework such as that on levels have posed problems of implementation which will be discussed below. The non­ directive and consultative nature of the development of the framework may be more suited to a small and what was, until recently, a relatively homogenous society like Ireland. Implications for Russia The movement from an ‘ideal’ systemwith its all encompassing unitary framework towards a more pragmatic working model in New Zealand was paralleled in Ireland by the movement from a flexible multi-dimensional model towards a more unified model. This suggests an evolution towards a mid-point which takes account of the multiple stakeholders, while preserving the teleology of qualification frameworks. Accommodation and convergencerecognising stakeholderswhile providing necessary direction topreserve framework integrity Frameworkaccommodation Non-directive Consensual It may be the case that a society like Russia, which already has a high degree of central control of education, would have fewer problems than New Zealand in imposing a national