Erik Schreiner (s1942212) Public Governance across Borders Bachelor Thesis The Exit from G8 Upper Secondary School Reform in Germany – a Multiple Case Study 1st Supervisor: dr. Harry de Boer 2nd Supervisor: dr. Peter Stegmaier 03-07-2019 Ethical review request number: 190407 Word count: 19,270 Faculty of Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences University of Twente P.O. Box 217 7500 AE Enschede The Netherlands Table of Contents 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Educational governance structure in Germany .............................................................................. 2 1.2 Research question .......................................................................................................................... 3 2. Theory ................................................................................................................................................. 4 2.1 Theoretical findings ....................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Theoretical model .......................................................................................................................... 6 2.3 The impact of changed ideological positions ................................................................................ 7 2.4 The impact of perceived policy failure .......................................................................................... 7 3. Methodology ....................................................................................................................................... 8 3.1 Research design ............................................................................................................................. 8 3.2 Case selection ................................................................................................................................ 9 3.3 Operationalisation ....................................................................................................................... 11 3.4 Data collection ............................................................................................................................. 13 3.5 Data analysis ............................................................................................................................... 14 4. Findings ............................................................................................................................................. 15 4.1 Federal state-specific context of the G8 reform .......................................................................... 15 4.1.1 Lower Saxony ....................................................................................................................... 15 4.1.2 Hesse .................................................................................................................................... 16 4.1.3 Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg ................................................................................... 17 4.2 Interim findings on Lower Saxony .............................................................................................. 18 4.2.1 Change of ideological positions ........................................................................................... 18 4.2.2 Perceived policy failure ........................................................................................................ 21 4.3 Interim findings on Hesse ............................................................................................................ 24 4.3.1 Change of ideological positions ........................................................................................... 24 4.3.2 Perceived policy failure ........................................................................................................ 27 4.4 Interim findings on Hamburg ...................................................................................................... 30 4.4.1 Change of ideological positions ........................................................................................... 30 4.4.2 Perceived policy failure ........................................................................................................ 33 5. Analysis ............................................................................................................................................. 35 5.1 Change of ideological positions .................................................................................................. 36 5.2 Perceived policy failure ............................................................................................................... 39 6. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 42 6.1 Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 42 6.2 Reflection .................................................................................................................................... 44 7. References ......................................................................................................................................... 46 7.1 Literature ..................................................................................................................................... 46 7.2 Newspaper articles, online documents and websites ................................................................... 47 7.3 Law .............................................................................................................................................. 50 7.4 Election programmes ................................................................................................................... 50 7.5 Coalition agreements ................................................................................................................... 55 APPENDIX A ....................................................................................................................................... 57 Lower Saxon election programme positions on the G8 policy ......................................................... 57 Hessian election programme positions on the G8 policy .................................................................. 60 Hamburg election programme positions on the G8 policy ................................................................ 65 Lower Saxon coalition agreement positions on the G8 policy .......................................................... 68 Hessian coalition agreement positions on the G8 policy ................................................................... 69 Hamburg coalition agreement positions on the G8 policy ................................................................ 70 APPENDIX B ....................................................................................................................................... 71 Interview (Lower Saxon Ministry of Education and the Arts) .......................................................... 71 Survey (Hessian Ministry of Education and the Arts) ....................................................................... 82 APPENDIX C ....................................................................................................................................... 85 Abstract The introduction of the G8 upper secondary school reform in former western Germany between 2001 and 2007 shortened the high school duration from nine to eight years. As the reform policy has been discontinued in many of the western Bundesländer in the past decade, this thesis investigates the factors that explain the G8 discontinuation in certain Bundesländer by means of a multiple case study. While most research has addressed the issue from a pedagogical perspective, little research has been done on G8 from a governance or policy analysis perspective, particularly in terms of policy termination. Thus, the thesis derives explanations for the extent of changing ideological positions and perceived policy failure to have triggered a decision towards varying outcomes of G8 discontinuation in the selected cases by analysing qualitative data. Whereas perceptions of lacking maturity of Abitur graduates in Lower Saxony and a loss in quality of the school-leaving qualification in Hesse had been predominant and where a decision has been made towards G8 discontinuation, the results suggest that the absence or weaker presence of these factors in Hamburg explain why the G8 reform has not been discontinued here. 1. Introduction “G8 for all is outdated, as is G9 for all”, the former Bavarian Minister of State for Education, Ludwig Spaenle, emphasised in 20161. This citation gives a first hint at the outdatedness of two upper secondary school models in Germany, that have been subject to public debate over the past three decades since German reunification. The G8 upper secondary school reform has been implemented in most of the federal states (Bundesländer) in the west of Germany from 2001 up until 2007 (Huebener & Marcus, 2015). Aiming at the reduction of the length of high school from nine to eight school years after alerting results of the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), the reform has also been implemented to harmonise educational