Path-dependent Implementation of the European Qualifications Framework in Education. A Comparison of Norway,Germany and England

Abstract

By comparing the implementation of the European Qualifications Framework (EQF) in three education systems, this article advances the understanding of implementation processes and outcomes. The analytical framework combines concepts of norm diffusion with institutional, political and practical dimensions of implementation. Although a certain degree of norm diffusion is revealed, we find a variety of points of correspondence between national problem definitions and the EQF, varying levels of stakeholder involvement, as well as national institutional robustness against full EQF implementation. The national implementations represent different mind-sets and signify translation processes that reflect continuation of established institutional practices.     

Educational Intentions Among Prison Inmates

The aim of the study was to examine the impact of geographical and cultural affiliation and learning problems on prison inmates' intentions to embark on education above their obtained level of education. Younger inmates, inmates who had reading or writing problems and inmates with less geographical and cultural affiliation to Norway were significantly more likely to report that they wished to start upper secondary school than older inmates, inmates who had no reading or writing problems and inmates with a strong affiliation to Norway. Likewise, younger inmates, inmates who had a non-Norwegian affiliation and inmates who had no problems with arithmetic or mathematics were significantly more likely than others to say that they wished to embark on university studies or other higher education.     

Foreign trading screens in the United States

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. Key points

• Remote trading screens allow investors to trade onexchanges located in other jurisdictions. The Securities andExchange Commission (‘SEC’) has generally prohibitedthe placement of foreign trading screens in the United Statesunless the associated exchange complies with US regulatory requirements.While the SEC defends its position as an essential investorprotection, European officials complain that SEC requirementsconstitute an unfair barrier to trade.
• This article arguesthat technological advances have largely mooted this contro-versy.Current requirements do not protect US investors as much asthe SEC claims nor do they inhibit competition as much as theSEC's critics assert.
• To the extent that alternative tradingmechanisms already give US investors de facto access to unregulatedforeign exchanges, the SEC may well choose to revisit its positionon foreign trading screens, particularly as US and Europeanfinancial markets become more integrated and disclosure requirementson both sides of . . . [Full Text of this Article]