Search results

School inspection or supervision is one of the core institutional mechanisms for ensuring the quality of education. While analyzing the practices of this quality assurance tool at the basic education level in six developing and emerging economies, this paper found that there has been a major shift in exercising supervision system pushed by the policy dynamics of both international actors and state institutions. The school supervision system has been shaped by decentralization, school-based management, monitoring, data gathering, and output-focused governance. These are also known as the elements of New Public Management (NPM). The growing practice of NPM in all these countries has made the external supervision a less prioritized issue, which is evident in its stagnated and sometimes deteriorated state. On the other hand, the pro-NPM management system advocating for greater autonomy, decentralization and results has not evidently yielded any major positive outcomes, especially in lower-income countries. Thus, the absence of an effective supervision system, both support and control, has created a vacuum in the educational quality assurance instruments. By oversimplifying local contexts in situating NPM, this foreign-emerged management system also has shown reluctance toward fundamental crises of weak institutions in lower-income countries, including resource constraints, skills shortage, and service recipients’ lack of trust, among others. In short, developmental level and institutional capacity matter for the successful implementation of NPM.

While school leaders have commonly functioned as school managers, the urgency for improving learning outcomes highlights the need for school leaders to function more as instructional leaders. However, a number of barriers exist in exercising instructional leadership in the developing country context. School leaders often lack capacity for instructional leadership and operate under significant constraints, such as chronic shortage of materials, operating funds, and staff development resources. Knowledge about cultural and organizational factors influencing school leadership behaviors can inform conditions for strengthening instructional leadership. This discussion essay provides a framework for expanding comparative and international inquiry into the challenges of instructional leadership in terms of the principal–agent problem, school leader sense of self-efficacy, and the integration of teacher incentives.

This chapter guides the reader to an understanding of social responsibility in educational settings, namely on school/university social responsibility (USR). The phenomenon of social responsibility in these settings is nuanced when encountering stakeholders, either external or internal. This chapter conceptualizes school/USR and describes related stakeholders and their management strategies. In addition to this, the chapter discusses eight transition lines of stakeholders developed on the expectations of stakeholders, the degree and the format of engagement and impacts on society and institutions: pupil–student; teachers-academics; parents; alumni; future employers; business sector; funding providers; and society at large. It concludes that a managerial pattern while implementing social responsibility by involving stakeholders differs by educational setting. This is to say that school social responsibility is rather carried out through process, whereas USR concerns both process and outputs. This distinction results in introducing the definition of school/USR as a commitment toward performance based on ethical and other conventional principles that are respectively substantiated in the mission, values and related activities in the interplay with all possible stakeholders in order to create social value foremost.

Over the past decade most central governments across sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) have begun to decentralize some fiscal, political, and administrative responsibilities to lower-levels of government, local institutions, and the private sector in pursuit of greater accountability and more efficient service delivery, often in an attempt to solve broader political, social, or economic problems (SARA, 1997). Education, in particular, has been fertile ground for such decentralization efforts. From Ethiopia to South Africa, SSA countries have engaged in some form of education decentralization, though the pace has been quite uneven. Ethiopia, Uganda, Senegal, and South Africa, for example, are proceeding fast, while Ghana, Mali, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe are under way more slowly. Guinea, Niger, Zambia, and Nigeria are at the other end of the continuum. Decentralization of social services, including education appears to be embedded in the political changes occurring in the region. In almost all SSA countries the introduction of decentralized systems are accompanied by popular elections for local councils as part of the general trend of the introduction of or return to democratization.

This chapter provides an overview of speech-language pathology including education and training requirements of the field of speech-language pathology and the typical role that speech-language pathologists play as members of school-based teams serving children with speech-language-hearing related delays and disorders. A description of the primary areas of treatment is provided along with suggestions for how collaboration with additional team members and families are involved in school-based intervention plans.

Based on a description of the national features of the Israeli society and educational system, this chapter will briefly describe various attempts conducted since the 1970s to decentralize the Israeli educational system and promote school autonomy. It will focus specifically, on the School-Based Management (SBM) policy, borrowed by educational policymakers and implemented in the Israeli educational system during late 1990s. The decision to borrow this policy did not follow policymakers’ recognition in the limitations and shortcomings of the centralized structure of control, which characterized the educational system since Israel became an independent state in 1948. Rather, it followed pressures coming from various stakeholders who considered centralized policy plans irrelevant and not enough sensitive to the variety of local circumstances and needs (David, 1989; Hanson, 1984; Nir, 2002; Nir et al., 2016). Therefore, more than 20 years later, it appears that the implementation of SBM created limited effects in terms of teachers and school leaders’ degrees of freedom and that the educational system still maintains its centralized structure and features. The main argument the present chapter will attempt to make is that borrowed policies have a limited capacity to promote significant change in the borrowing system when policymakers do not fully believe in the policy’s values and ideas and are reluctant to abandon current patterns of organizational behavior. Specifically, it will describe the process that characterized the borrowing and implementation of the SBM policy in the Israeli educational system and will discuss the main symptoms that characterized the policy borrowing process when policymakers were not fully committed to the values and mode of operation brought by the borrowed policy.