Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Istambul small school ea


Published on

The CEPA Report on Small Rural Schools in Hungary A policy advocacy case. Istambul, 2006.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Istambul small school ea

  1. 1. The CEPA Report on Small Rural Schools in Hungary A policy advocacy case Péter Radó Center for Educational Policy Analysis OPEK
  2. 2. The discourse on small rural schools • Unchallenged positive and negative misperceptions about the small schools • The extremely poor quality of education in these schools • The additional costs are not bearable • Small rural schools are much more open to their environment and to the community • The political discourse • Prevailing „ideological” agendas → mythical political assumptions, small schools became political symbols • Powerlessness in relation to large scale systemic problems (cost- effectiveness, equity, etc.) → small rural schools became scapegoats • The professional discourse: not more informed (lack of analysis → it is based on anecdotal information and personal experience • The defensive weak positions of the interested
  3. 3. The Report • General situation analysis • The socio-economic characteristics of small rural settlements • Public services and local force field of interests • Incomes and expenditures of small local self-governments • The factors determining the quality of small rural schools • The effectiveness of small rural schools • The space for maneuver of the actors of educational policy • Educational policy and the small rural schools: 1985-2005 • Educational policy dilemmas • Development opportunities (recommendations, good practices and international references)
  4. 4. The Report: a few key findings 1. 1. SES based added value: the performance of the schools in comparison to the expected results in Math and Literacy 2004. (%) Math Literacy Math Literacy Schools whit better results Schools with worse results than expected than expected
  5. 5. The Report: a few key findings 2. 2. Obtainable saving in the overall public expenditure on the basis of increment of the minimum school size = i.e. closure of approx. 500 schools (without the additional costs of closure, e.g. transportation) 3. Due to the lack of competition and client satisfaction oriented organizational climate teachers in small schools much less willing to cooperate with parents School size (minimum number of students) Saving (%) 150 2,14 200 5,19
  6. 6. The advocacy strategy • Analysis: investing into evidence based discourse • The realignment of the discourse: targeting experts „around” stakeholders • Setting the agenda: the point of departure for policy making (access to educational services + ensuring quality requirements on the basis of minimum achievement standards) • Equipping policy advocacy: a positive vision for small schools • Reducing powerlessness of policy making: offering practical tools • Addressing the wider problems underpinning misbelieves: the policy brief on budgetary reform and education
  7. 7. The results • New legislation on the „unified schools” (already enacted amendment to the law on public education) • Planning of the second National Development Plan: targeting underperforming schools regardless of their size and their location • Planning of the reform of financing of major public services: introduction of per classroom funding in certain segments of education
  8. 8. A few conclusions • Does not work without reliable information systems → investment into info systems • Information does not speak for itself → investment into analytical capacities • Asking the right questions and question the obvious if it is not documented • Adjust the targets and tools of advocacy to the context (don’t stick to handbooks) • Consider the space for maneuver of national and local decision makers (the distinction between human rights movements and policy analysis supporting policy advocacy) • „User friendly” dissemination tools (policy briefs, leaflets, „EdPol Café”, etc.)