Global Recommendations and National Realities: The Translation of the RAPID framework in Colombia

• In Event: Highlighted Session: International Organizations and Education Policy: Crisis, Collaboration, and Coloniality

Proposal

The COVID-19 pandemic prompted international organizations to re-evaluate and amplify their existing ideas, transforming them into global recommendations to address the crisis (Morris et al., 2022). Among these recommendations, the RAPID framework stands out as a collaborative effort by multiple international organizations, including but not limited to the World Bank (WB), UNESCO, and UNICEF. The RAPID framework builds upon prior initiatives such as the WB’s focus on “learning poverty” and foundational skills (Schady et al., 2023; World Bank, 2020). Additionally, it emphasizes psychological health and well-being, advocating for socio-emotional learning—a priority previously shared by various international organizations (UNICEF, 2023, 2024).
However, a fundamental question remains: Did countries genuinely embrace these globally endorsed recommendations? Our study focuses on the Colombian case—a middle-income country that has experienced both robust and inconsistent influences from international organizations. Through ten interviews with domestic policymakers and officials from local international organization offices along with document analysis, we investigate the impact of three key RAPID recommendations: assessing learning to measure loss, teaching fundamental skills, and implementing socio-emotional learning.
Contrary to predictions in some branches of the literature on the globalization of education policy (Finnemore, 1993; Rutkowski, 2007; Sellar & Lingard, 2016; Wiseman et al., 2010), we find that global recommendations do not seamlessly trickle down to countries. First, local officials of international organizations tailor their recommendations to the specific context of each country. Second, even when local branches of international organizations promote other recommendations, countries do not readily adopt or passively accept them. First, local officials tailor these recommendations to the specific context of each nation. Second, even when local branches of international organizations promote other recommendations, countries do not readily adopt or passively accept them. Notably, assessing learning and teaching fundamental skills encountered resistance due to shifts in political coalitions within Colombia. These shifts reflect differing priorities and ideologies compared to the World Bank’s agenda, leading to requests for program adjustments despite existing allocated loans. In contrast, socio-emotional learning gained substantial traction in national and local policies due to alignment with government agendas.
Our findings disrupt prevailing narratives that focus exclusively on the authority of international organizations as drivers of education policy within middle and low-income countries. While international organizations wield undeniable epistemic influence (Alasuutari & Qadir, 2019), they must also be responsive to countries’ unique conditions and expectations to remain relevant at the domestic level.
Our research underscores the importance of examining the translation of international recommendations within national contexts, considering domestic politics that can either reject, modify, or bypass global prescriptions (Diaz-Rios, 2024). Understanding these dynamics is essential for comprehending the complexities of the globalization of education policy and recognizing the agency of domestic actors in Global South countries.

Author

• Claudia Milena Diaz-Rios, OISE University of Toronto