Discourses on Modernization in the Employment Public Services: Towards a New Form of Governance?

The “crisis of the social issue” in the EU has led to a certain consensus in the need to renew the organizational and institutional model of public administration. The core of the reform implies important administrative changes in most of the European welfare states. Those changes are inspired on theories such as the new public management, management by objectives or partnership. Such changes involve both semantic (“sharing responsibilities”, “effective costs”, or the substitution of “citizen under an administration” by “consumer”) and political (predominance of scattered forms of power and the individualization of responsibilities) transformations which operate in the framework of individuals and State relations. The paradigms of activation and flexicurity have been central in this public administration modernization project. This commitment with new forms of governance of social issues has important consequences for the political and moral foundations of social cohesion, and the Spanish case is not an exception. This paper aims at looking at those representations of “modernization” (as they appear in debates about the employment services restructuring policies) in detail as well as providing references to the trajectory of such reforms of public services since the early eighties to the beginning of the crisis.

Co-evaluation as a strategy to improve working group dynamics: an experience in Sport Sciences

The aim of this study was to analyze if the perceptions of students before and after carrying out the work, that is, their perception of different aspects of the functioning of the group, the working skills acquired as well as those they think that need to be improved, varied depending on whether the contribution of the different members of the group was being co-evaluated or not. 144 students of Physical Activity and Sport Sciences participated in this study. In order to analyze the students' perception of group work the adapted questionnaire by Bourne et al. (2001) was used. Results showed that groups which implemented co-evaluation assessed more negatively the experience in general than those which did not. However, co-evaluation groups perceived their competence to work as a team had improved to a greater extent than the groups without co-evaluation, evaluating more positively both the performance and the result of work and increasing their knowledge of the other team members. Using a co-evaluation system seems to generate both a better assessment of the running of the team and the result of its work.