[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-599620-105":59,"doc-detail-599620-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","theorizing-privatization-in-education-comparing-conceptual-frameworks-and-the-value-of-the-capability-approach","Theorizing Privatization in Education - Comparing Conceptual Frameworks and the Value of the Capability Approach","","Examines the rapid growth of private educational provision over the past decade, focusing on low-fee private schools and public-private partnerships in primary and secondary education. Evaluates how three common conceptual frameworks—the neoclassical, social primary goods, and rights-based approaches—fall short for analyzing educational privatization, particularly regarding equity and system impacts. Argues that the human capability approach offers the strongest framework for understanding complex private-sector engagement and for countering neoclassical dominance.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/theorizing-privatization-in-education-comparing-conceptual-frameworks-and-the-value-of-the-capability-approach/599620/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/theorizing-privatization-in-education-comparing-conceptual-frameworks-and-the-value-of-the-capability-approach/599620.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"jayni","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-29","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":24},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"Which forms of privatization are emphasized in the paper?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The paper focuses on low-fee private schools and public-private partnerships (PPPs), including voucher-style mechanisms and government-financed operators.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"Why does the paper critique the neoclassical framework?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"It argues the neoclassical approach inadequately captures equity implications and is unethical by prioritizing efficiency over equity outcomes.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What framework does the paper propose as the strongest for analysis?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"It proposes the human capability approach as the most appropriate framework to analyze the complex, multi-faceted issue of private-sector engagement in education.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},599620,1792190438,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":24,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},3985747859343,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","Theorizing Privatization in Education:  \nComparing Conceptual Frameworks and the Value of the Capability  \nApproach  \nFrancine Menashy  \nUniversity of Massachusetts Boston  \nThe past decade has witnessed a notable shift in the international education policy environment, characterized by a rapid growth in private educational provision. In the context of a divisive debate on the role of the non-state sector in primary and secondary education, this paper grapples with the theoretical underpinnings of both advocacy and critique of educational privatization, paying particular attention to a rise in low-fee private schools and public-private partnerships. It is argued that three of the most commonly adopted conceptual frameworks – the neoclassical, social primary goods and rights-based approaches – each have notable shortcomings when applied to an analysis of privatization. In light of this, the overarching aim of this paper is to offer the human capability approach and to argue that it is the strongest and most appropriate framework for understanding and analyzing the complex and multi-faceted issue of private sector engagement in education.  \nIntroduction  \nThe past decade has witnessed a notable shift in the education policy environment, characterized by a rapid growth in private educational provision. In the Global South in particular, two forms of privatization have risen dramatically: low-fee private schools that cater to low-income families, and public-private partnerships wherein governments are financing non-state school operators via vouchers or charters. Supporters promote private provision as areform policy to increase access, competition and thereby quality, along with relieving public sector costs (Fielden and LaRocque, 2008; Patrinos et al, 2009). On the other hand, critics have drawn attention to equity-related impacts of privatization on marginalized students, as well asthe potential weakening of public school systems (Plank, 2005; Robertson et al, 2012; Härmä, 2011) . In the context of this debate, in this paper I grapple with the theoretical underpinnings of both advocacy and critique of educational privatization.  \nI suggest that policies concerning the issue of privatization are theoretically situated in very particular conceptual approaches or frameworks. Most notable is the single most predominant framework employed to support privatization in education, which is rooted in neoclassical economics and also commonly termed neoliberal. A wealth of literature from within the field of comparative and international education (CIE) has argued against the neoclassical framework, critiquing it as not adequately capturing the equity implications of associated policies, and as unethical by subjugating the end goal of equity to efficiency. Critics have demanded the adoption of an approach that can result in more socially just and equitable systems of education (Klees, 2008; 2012; Harvey, 2005; Olssen, et al, 2004; Saad-Filho and Johnson, 2005) .  \nHowever, I argue that the most commonly adopted alternative frameworks for social policy – namely the social primary goods and rights-based approaches – despite offering significant responses to neoclassicism, still have notable shortcomings. In light of this, the overarching aim of this paper is to offer the human capability approach and to argue that it is the strongest and most appropriate framework for an analysis of the complex and multi-faceted issue of private  \n© 2014, Current Issues in Comparative Education, Teachers College, Columbia University. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Current Issues in Comparative Education 16 (1), 13-25.  \nFrancine Menashy  \nsector engagement in education, able to rigorously counter the dominance of the neoclassical approach.  \nThis paper structurally borrows in part from Robeyns (2006), who similarly applies conceptual approaches (or “models”) to education, but pays particular attention to issues concerning gender. In this article, I first provide a bri","cbCairu0vGKPxecq","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCairu0vGKPxecq","pdf",208769,13,"English","# Introduction\n# The context of private sector engagement in education\n## Public-private partnerships and low-fee private schools\n## What PPPs cover","[{\"question\":\"Which forms of privatization are emphasized in the paper?\",\"answer\":\"The paper focuses on low-fee private schools and public-private partnerships (PPPs), including voucher-style mechanisms and government-financed operators.\"},{\"question\":\"Why does the paper critique the neoclassical framework?\",\"answer\":\"It argues the neoclassical approach inadequately captures equity implications and is unethical by prioritizing efficiency over equity outcomes.\"},{\"question\":\"What framework does the paper propose as the strongest for analysis?\",\"answer\":\"It proposes the human capability approach as the most appropriate framework to analyze the complex, multi-faceted issue of private-sector engagement in education.\"}]","Theorizing Privatization in Education - Comparing Conceptual Frameworks and the Value of the Capability Approach | PDF",1792089130,33]