1. bookVolume 12 (2019): Issue 1 (June 2019)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
1338-4309
ISSN
1337-9038
First Published
03 Aug 2009
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
access type Open Access

Autonomy, Collaboration and Competition: The Impact of Education Management Reforms which Aim to Increase School Autonomy on Relations between Schools

Published Online: 18 Jun 2019
Volume & Issue: Volume 12 (2019) - Issue 1 (June 2019)
Page range: 175 - 197
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
1338-4309
ISSN
1337-9038
First Published
03 Aug 2009
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
Abstract

In recent decades, the neoliberal education policy has been implemented in many countries, by reducing the state’s role in education management. Lithuania is one of the countries which after the restoration of Independence in 1991 and collapse of the Soviet Union has decentralized its education management system by giving more autonomy to schools and local authorities. Education-management reforms, which have already been implemented or are currently being implemented in response to social, economic and political changes in the country, have an impact on relationships between schools. Purpose: This article reports the findings of a study which reviewed education management reforms aimed at increasing school autonomy and their impact on inter-school collaboration and competition. Research Method: This study employs a qualitative research design with semi-structured interviews. Twenty-four elementary and secondary school principals from different regions of Lithuania were interviewed. Findings: The results reveal that a significant influence on relations between schools comes from government decisions which relate to school autonomy, school choice, allocation of funds, school ranking, and the like. Implications: This study generates discussions on the impact of the education management reforms which aim to enhance school autonomy on inter-school relationships. In order to answer that question, a theoretical model of research was developed, including the theoretical basis of school autonomy, collaboration and competition, as well as the characteristics of Lithuanian education governance.

Keywords

Adnett, N. and P. Davies. 2000. “Competition and Curriculum Diversity in Local Schooling Markets: Theory and Evidence.” Journal of Education Policy 15(2), 157 – 167.10.1080/026809300285872Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Altrichter, H., M. Heinrich and K. Soukup-Altrichter. 2014. “School Decentralization as a Process of Differentiation, Hierarchization and Selection.” Journal of Education Policy 29(5), 675 – 699.10.1080/02680939.2013.873954Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Altrichter, H. and M. Rürup. 2010. “Schulautonomie und die Folgen.” In H. Altrichter and K. Maag Merki (eds). Handbuch Neue Steuerung im Schulsystem. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag, 111 – 144.Search in Google Scholar

Caldwell, B. J. and J. M. Spinks. 2013. The Self-Transforming School. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203387986Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Chapman, C. 2013. “Academy Federations, Chains and Teaching Schools in England: Reflections on Leadership, Policy and Practice.” Journal of School Choice: International Research and Reform 7(3), 334 – 352.Search in Google Scholar

Chapman, C. 2015. “From one School to many: reflections on the Impact and Nature of School Federations and Chains in England.” Educational Management Administration & Leadership 43(1), 46 – 60.Search in Google Scholar

Chapman, C., D. Muijs and P. Sammons. 2009. A Quantitative Study of the Impact on Student Outcomes. Nottingham: NCSL.Search in Google Scholar

Cheng, Y. C. and T. Tai Hoi Lee. 2016. “School Autonomy, Leadership and Learning: A Reconceptualization.” International Journal of Educational Management 30(2), 177 – 196.Search in Google Scholar

Creswell, J. W. 2007. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches. Thousand Oaks (Calif.), London, New Delhi: SAGE Publications.Search in Google Scholar

Creswell, J. W. 2009. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks (Calif.), London: SAGE Publications.Search in Google Scholar

Daun, H. 2010. “The New Mode of Governance in European Education – in the Context of Globalisation and EU-ification.”. Orbis scholae 4(2), 115 – 131.Search in Google Scholar

Eurydice. 2007. School Autonomy in Europe: Policies and Measures. Brussels: Eurydice European Unit, European Commission.Search in Google Scholar

Flick, U. 2006. An Introduction to Qualitative Research. London, Thousand Oaks (Calif.), New Delhi: SAGE Publications.Search in Google Scholar

Glatter, R. 2012. “Persistent Preoccupations: The Rise and Rise of School Autonomy and Accountability in England.” Educational Management Administration & Leadership 40(5), 559 – 575.Search in Google Scholar

Gobby, B. 2013. “Enacting the Independent Public Schools Program in Western Australia.” Issues in Educational Research 23(1), 19 – 34.Search in Google Scholar

Hallinger, P. and K. Snidvongs. 2005. Adding Value to School Leadership and Management: A Review of Trends in the Development of Managers in the Education and Business Sectors. Nottingham, England: NCSL.Search in Google Scholar

Hanushek, E. A., S. Link and L. Wößmann. 2013. “Does School Autonomy Make Sense everywhere ? Panel Estimates from PISA.” Journal of Development Economics 104, 212 – 232.10.1016/j.jdeveco.2012.08.002Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Higham, R. and P. Earley. 2013. “School Autonomy and Government Control: School Leaders’ Views on a Changing Policy Landscape in England.” Educational Management Administration & Leadership 41(6), 701 – 717.Search in Google Scholar

Holmes, K., J. Clement and J. Albright. 2013. “The Complex Task of Leading Educational Change in Schools.” School Leadership & Management 33(3), 270 – 283.Search in Google Scholar

Honig, M. I. and L. R. Rainey. 2012. “Autonomy and School Improvement: What do we Know and where do we Go from here ?” Educational Policy 26(3), 465 – 495.10.1177/0895904811417590Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Jones, J. 2009. “The Development of Leadership Capacity through Collaboration in Small Schools.” School Leadership & Management 29(2), 129 – 156.Search in Google Scholar

Karlsen, G. E. 2000. “Decentralized Centralism; Framework for a Better Understanding of Governance in the Field of Education.” Journal of Educational Policy 15(50), 525 – 538.Search in Google Scholar

Keddie, A. 2014. “‘It’s like Spiderman … with Great Power Comes Great Responsibility’: School Autonomy and the Audit Culture.” School Leadership & Management 34(5), 502 – 517.Search in Google Scholar

Keddie, A. 2016. “School Autonomy as ‘the Way of the Future’: Issues of Equity, Public Purpose and Moral Leadership.” Educational Management Administration & Leadership 44(5), 713 – 727.Search in Google Scholar

Klenke, K., J. R. Wallace and S. M. Martin. 2015. Qualitative Research in the Study of Leadership. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Search in Google Scholar

Levin, B. and M. Fullan. 2008. “Learning about System Renewal.” Educational Management Administration and Leadership 36(1), 289 – 303.Search in Google Scholar

Lindsay, G., D. Muijs and A. Harris. 2007. School Federations Pilot Study 2003 – 2007. London: TSO.Search in Google Scholar

Maag Merki, M. and B. Steinert. 2006. “Die Prozessstruktur von teilautonomen Schulen und ihre Effektivität für die Herstellung optimaler Lernkontexte für schulische Bildungsprozesse.” Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Bildungswissenschaften 28, 103 – 122.Search in Google Scholar

Malen, B., R. T. Ogawa and J. Kranz. 1990. “What do we Know about School Based Management: Case Study of the Literature – a Call for Research.” In W. Clune and J. Witte (eds). Choice and Control in American Education 2, 289 – 342.Search in Google Scholar

Monkevičius, A. and J. Urbanovič. 2016. “Decentralization of Education Management and School Leadership: The Effects of Public Management Reform Ideologies.” In E. Samier (eds). Ideologies in Educational Administration and Leadership. London: Routledge, 193 – 216.Search in Google Scholar

Ofsted. 2011. Leadership of More than One School: An Evaluation of the Impact of Federated Schools. Manchester: Ofsted.Search in Google Scholar

Phegley, M. N. and J. Oxford. 2010. “Cross-Level Collaboration: Students and Teachers Learning from each other.” The English Journal 99(5), 27 – 34.Search in Google Scholar

Provisions of the State Education Strategy for 2003 – 2012, approved by the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania on 4 July 2003, by Resolution No. IX-1700.Search in Google Scholar

Todman, P., J. Harris, J. Carter and J. McCamphill. 2009. Better together: Exploratory Case Studies of Formal Collaborations between Small Rural Primary Schools. London: DCSF.Search in Google Scholar

Tooley, J. 1993. A Market-Led Alternative for the Curriculum: Breaking the Code. London: Institute of Education/Tufnell Press.Search in Google Scholar

Urbanovič, J. 2011. Mokyklos autonomijos valdymo modelis / Model of School Autonomy Management. Doctoral thesis, MRU, Vilnius.Search in Google Scholar

Urbanovič, J. and J. Navickaitė. 2016. Lyderystė autonomiškoje mokykloje / Leadership in Autonomous Schools. Vilnius: MRU.Search in Google Scholar

Walsh, P. 2010. “Does Competition among Schools Encourage Grade Inflation ?” Journal of School Choice 4(2), 149 – 173.Search in Google Scholar

Williams, J. 2008. United we Stand: A Soft Federation Model for Small Primary Schools. Nottingham: National College.Search in Google Scholar

World Bank. 2007. What do we Know about School Based Management ? Washington, D.C.: World Bank.Search in Google Scholar

Woods, P. A. and T. Simkins. 2014. “Understanding the Local: Themes and Issues in the Experience of Structural Reform in England.” Educational Management Administration & Leadership 42(3), 324 – 340.Search in Google Scholar

Wößmann, L. 2005. “Educational Production in Europe.” Economic Policy 20(43), 445 – 504.Search in Google Scholar

Wößmann, L., E. Lüdemann, G. Schütz and M. R. West. 2007. “School Accountability, Autonomy, Choice, and the Level of Student Achievement: International Evidence from PISA 2003.” Education Working Paper 13. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo