Research Article
UK National Teaching Fellowships – A Review of Rewards for the Individual
James Garo Derounian*
Issue:
Volume 10, Issue 2, April 2025
Pages:
48-56
Received:
21 January 2025
Accepted:
6 February 2025
Published:
7 March 2025
DOI:
10.11648/j.her.20251002.11
Downloads:
Views:
Abstract: Peer-assessed UK National Teaching Fellowships were introduced in 2000; and have been competed for every year. This article presents findings from National Teaching Fellows (NTFs), assessing their view of whether the fellowship represents a genuine reward, or not. 158 out of 608 teaching fellows (26%) responded to an online survey. The findings are therefore illustrative. 63% (of 158 respondents) indicated that their Fellowship came with a monetary reward. However, 37% gained no financial reward on securing their fellowship. Since 2018 when the UK Government ceased funding the scheme, only a handful of higher education institutes have stepped in to continue direct payments to their successful NTFs. In terms of indirect benefits, the most discussed, and divergent views related to promotion, and particularly professorships. “Paradise deferred” is the message, given that 34% believed their fellowship - to a greater of lesser extent - contributed to a successful promotion. But 19% replied that they received no indirect benefits from their award. Of 158 respondents 53% believed that a personal financial award would/did encourage them to apply for an NTF. The exact significance of a fellowship to promotion requires further research.
Abstract: Peer-assessed UK National Teaching Fellowships were introduced in 2000; and have been competed for every year. This article presents findings from National Teaching Fellows (NTFs), assessing their view of whether the fellowship represents a genuine reward, or not. 158 out of 608 teaching fellows (26%) responded to an online survey. The findings are...
Show More
Review Article
Education Systems in South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore: A Comparative Policy Analysis
Tesmamu Mirre*,
Zerihun Tsegaye,
Desalegn Beyene
Issue:
Volume 10, Issue 2, April 2025
Pages:
57-63
Received:
2 April 2025
Accepted:
18 April 2025
Published:
14 May 2025
DOI:
10.11648/j.her.20251002.12
Downloads:
Views:
Abstract: This comparative policy analysis examines the education systems of South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore—East Asia’s “Asian Tigers”—focusing on their historical development, philosophies, objectives, structures, financing, administration, and teacher policies. Utilizing Bereday’s (1964) comparative method, the study synthesizes secondary sources, including government reports and academic journals, to explore how these nations leverage education for economic and social progress within distinct political and cultural contexts. South Korea’s system emphasizes fierce competition and STEM excellence, driven by high-stakes exams like the CSAT, yet grapples with equity issues due to private tutoring prevalence. Taiwan prioritizes holistic development, bilingualism, and a 12-year compulsory framework, fostering inclusivity but facing rural-urban disparities. Singapore champions meritocracy, aligning its streamlined 6-4-2 structure with economic needs through early streaming and robust public funding, though it risks rigidity. Commonalities include centralized governance, rigorous academic standards, and public-private partnerships, while differences in financing and decentralization reflect contextual priorities. The findings highlight policy coherence as a driver of educational success, offering lessons for developing nations like Ethiopia, such as investing in teacher quality, early education, and equitable access. This study underscores the transformative potential of education when aligned with national goals, providing actionable insights for global education reform in an interconnected world.
Abstract: This comparative policy analysis examines the education systems of South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore—East Asia’s “Asian Tigers”—focusing on their historical development, philosophies, objectives, structures, financing, administration, and teacher policies. Utilizing Bereday’s (1964) comparative method, the study synthesizes secondary sources, incl...
Show More
