The International Observatory on Academic Achievement - Documentary search

File number :
CS-APE-22e

Bibliographic reference :
Institut national de recherche pédagogique (INRP) (2006). Régulations intermédiaires et pilotage des systèmes éducatifs. Lettre d’information de la Cellule Veille scientifique et technologique, no 16, mars 2006. [En ligne].
< http://www.inrp.fr/vst/ >
Consulté le 03 avril 2006

Abstract :

This newsletter is presented by the Institut national de recherche pédagogique (INRP) in the form of a literature review dealing with the level of intermediate regulation between central authorities and institutions in educational systems. As cited in the newsletter, regulation refers to the pursuit of an adjusted definition and flexible control of public action.

A Dual Movement of Centralization and Decentralization
Since the ‘80s, the progressive decentralization of school systems has lead to the development of new forms of regulations in which new players take part. On the international level, the text emphasizes systems being brought together through a dual movement of centralization and decentralization. Centralization involves the design of educational systems and their evaluation, along with student evaluation, whereas decentralization involves material aspects such as the selection of teaching manuals and teacher recruitment.

Highly decentralized states, including Hungary, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and Spain, have reinforced their management role particularly through the establishment of evaluation standards. Centralized states, including Iceland, Denmark, Poland and the Czech Republic have, for their part, transferred some of their powers to local communities and to institutions.

Countries such as Canada, the United States, Brazil and Germany have transferred new competencies to their schools while creating a movement of centralization through the establishment of national standards.

Nowadays, all member countries of the OECD are aware of this dual movement. With the exception of Belgium and Spain, the state remains responsible for the design of school curricula and structures, as well as funding and teacher management.

Conflicting Results
It seems hard to establish the effects of decentralization policies clearly. Some studies have established a positive relationship between decentralization and students’ academic scores, whereas others have invalidated this relationship. In addition, some studies have shown that in certain countries such as Chile, Argentina and Brazil, decentralization policies foster educational inequalities.

Intermediate Regulations
This newsletter also provides a synthesis of current intermediate regulation models in the United States, England and Wales, Belgium (French community) and Portugal. But first, the case of France is presented in more details. Since the ‘80s, the French state has been transferring its responsibilities towards local communities while maintaining an exclusive role in management and national evaluation. Academies still do not have any financial autonomy, but they are able to intervene in areas such as personnel movement and school map definition. All in all, decentralization has not left much leeway to players.

The newsletter emphasizes that this decentralization movement of teaching systems involves all the European countries and translates into a reinforcement of forms of intermediate regulation. States tend to relinquish management to intermediate levels to better take care of regulation and evaluation.

Links :
http://www.inrp.fr/vst/

Key Words :
Intermediate Regulation, Centralization, Decentralization, Standards, Evaluation, Models, Educational Inequalities, Literature Review, International Comparisons, Newsletter1

Monitored Countries :
England, Wales, Belgium (French community), France, United States, Portugal, international (OECD)