AVUSTRALYA, KANADA VE ALMANYA’DA EĞİTİMDE YERELLEŞME POLİTİKALARI VE UYGULAMALARI

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 3 Sayı: 1, 103 - 123, 31.05.2022

Mesut Demirbilek

Öz

Eğitim olgusunun yapılandırılma biçimleri ülkelere göre farklılık göstermekte olup merkezi veya yerel unsurların baskın olduğu farklı modeller eğitim sistemlerini biçimlendirmektedir Bu çerçevede okul tabanlı yönetim uygulamaları, eğitim otoritesinin yerel bir gurup, veliler veya bir kurula ait olması gibi toplum kontrolü uygulamaları, otoritenin ebeveynler ve profesyoneller (öğretmenler ve müdür) arasında eşit paylaşıldığı dengeli kontrol uygulamaları gibi eğitimde farklı yerelleşme uygulamaları hayata geçirilmiştir. Araştırma konusunun ele aldığı ülkeler (Avustralya, Kanada ve Almanya) bağlamında ise eğitimde yerelleşmenin boyutları; bina-tesis-arazi işleri, fonların harcanması, bütçe planlama ve denetimi, personelin istihdamı, vergilendirme, yerel emlak vergisi toplama, kendi kendini kurma yetkisi, yıllık bütçeyi belirleme ve yönetme, okul politikası belirleme, okullar inşa etme, sendikalarla müzakere yapma, ders ve eğitim yönetimi gibi yetki ve sorumluluklara ulaşmaktadır. Aynı zamanda bu anlayış müfredatın eyalet ve bölge düzeyinde belirlendiği esnek ve yerel odaklı süreçleri yoğun olarak içermektedir. Bu doğrultuda derleme çalışması şeklinde gerçekleştirilen bu araştırmada ele alınan ülkeler bağlamında elde edilen sonuçların, merkezi eğitim sistemlerinin karşılaştıkları zorlukların giderilmesi ve yerel şartların dikkate alınarak verimli eğitim süreçlerinin planlanması açısından katkı sunacağı düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

yerelleşme, eğitimde yerelleşme, okul tabanlı yönetim, toplum katılımı, okul özerkliği

DECENTRALİZATİON POLİCİES AND PRACTİCES İN EDUCATİON İN AUSTRALİA, CANADA AND GERMANY

Öz

The structuring of the phenomenon of education differs according to the countries, and different models, in which central or local elements are dominant, shape the education systems. In this context, different decentralization practices in education such as school-based management practices, community control practices such as the education authority belonging to a local group, parents or a board, balanced control practices where the authority is shared equally between parents and professionals (teachers and principal). In the context of the countries (Australia, Canada and Germany) the research subject deals with, the dimensions of decentralization in education; building-facility-landworks, spending of funds, budget planning and control, staff employment, taxation, local property tax collection, self-determination, setting and managing the annual budget, setting school policy, building schools, negotiating with unions, tutoring and access to powers and responsibilities such as educational administration. At the same time, this understanding intensively includes flexible and locally focused processes in which the curriculum is determined at the state and district level. In this direction, it is thought that the results obtained in the context of the countries discussed in this research, which was carried out as a compilation study, will contribute to the elimination of the difficulties faced by the central education systems and the planning of efficient education processes by taking into account local conditions.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Decentralization, decentralization in education, school-based management, community participation, school autonomy

Kaynakça

• Australian Government Department of Education and Training (DET) (2016). The Australıan Educatıon System–Foundatıon Level. http://dfat.gov.au/aid/topics/ investment-priorities/education-health/education/Documents/australian-education-system foundation.pdf adresinden edinilmiştir.
• Bakioğlu, A. ve Kaya, G. T. (2014). Dünyada eğitimde yerelleşme deneyimleri: başarı- başarısızlık neye bağlı?, VI. Uluslararası Eğitim Araştırmaları Kongresi içinde (s.126-148), Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi
• Barrera-Osorio, F., Fasih, T., Patrinos, H. & Santibáñez, L. (2009). Decentralized Decision Making in Schools. New York: The World Bank. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/dc54/4522f59f3dea14a50b101128bea036e7be6c.pdf adresinden edinilmiştir.
• Bishop, J. H., & Woessman, L. (2004). Institutional Effects in a Simple Model of Educational Production. Education Economics, 12(1),17–38. CSBA (2018). Canadian Education System: How Does the Canadian Education System Work?. Canadian School Boards Association. http://cdnsba.org/education-in-canada/all-about adresinden edinilmiştir.
• Daun, H. &Siminou, P. (2009). Decentralisation and Market Mechanisms in Education – Examples from Six European Countries. Joseph Zajda and David T. Gamage (Edt.). Decentralisation, School-Based Management, and Quality (s.75-101), New York: Springer
• Diem, S., Sampson, C. & Browning, L.G. (2018). Reorganizing a Countywide School District: A Critical Analysis of Politics and Policy Development Toward Decentralization. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 26(1), 1-31.
• Eckhardt, T. (2017). The Education System in the Federal Republic of Germany 2014/2015. Secretariat of the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs of the Länder in the Federal Republic of Germany, Bonn-Germany.
• Galiani, S., Gertler, P. & E. Schargrodsky, E. (2008). School Decentralization: Helping the good get better, but leaving the poor behind. Journal of Public Economics, 92 (10-11), 2106–2120.
• Galway, G., Sheppard, B., Wiens, J. & Brown, J. (2013). The Impact of Centralization on Local School District Governance in Canada. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, (145), 1-34.
• Gammage, D. T. (2008). Three decades of implementation of school based management in the Australian Capital Territory and Victoria in Australia, International Journal of Educational Management, 22(7), 664-675
• Görgülü, D. (2019). Eğitim Örgütlerinde Yerelleşme. Uluslararası Liderlik Çalışmaları Dergisi: Kuram ve Uygulama, 2(1), 73-85.
• Hanushek, E. A., Link, S. & Woessmanns, L. (2012). Does School Autonomy Make Sense Everywhere? Panel Estimates from PISA. ADB Economics Working Paper Series. Asian Development Bank.
• Haug, B. (2009). Educational Decentralization and Student Achievement. Master of Philosophy in Comparative and International Education. Faculty of Education University of Oslo, Norway.
• Heredia-Ortiz, E. (2007). The Impact of Education Decentralization on Education Output: A Cross-Country Study (PhD Dissertation), Georgia State University, Atlanta.
• Hoxby, C. M. (1999). The Productivity of Schools and Other Local Public Goods Producers. Journal of Public Economics, 74(1), 1–30. Lessard, C. & Brassard, A.(t.y.). Education Governance in Canada: Trends and Significance.http://www2.crifpe.ca/html/chaires/lessard/pdf/AERAgouvernanceang3.pdf adresinden edinilmiştir.
• Li, J. (2010). Suggestions for the Implementation of School-based Management. E-Product E-Service and E-Entertainment (ICEEE) International Conference, 7-9 Nov. 2010, Henan, China.
• Lohmar, B. & Eckhardt, T. (2013). The Education System in the Federal Republic of Germany 2012/2013. Secretariat of the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs of the Länder in the Federal Republic of Germany, Bonn-Germany.
• Majhanovich, S. (2009). Decentralisation of Education: Promising Initiative or Problematic Notion?.Joseph Zajda and David T. Gamage (Edt.). Decentralisation, School-Based Management, and Quality (s.75-101), New York: Springer
• Moradi, S., Beidokhti, A. A. & Fathi, K. (2016). Comparative Comparison of Implementing School-Based Management in Developed Countries in the Historical Context: From Theory to Practice. International Education Studies, 9(9), 191.198.
• NCEE (2018). Australia: System and School Organization. National Center On Education And The Economy, http://ncee.org/what-we-do/center-on-international-education-benchmarking /top-performing-countries/australia-overview/australia-system-and-school-organization/ adresinden edinilmiştir.
• Nechyba, T. J. (2003). Centralization, Fiscal Federalism and Private School Attendance. International Economic Review, 44(1), 179–204. Newton, P. & Costa, J. (2016) School autonomy and 21st century learning: the Canadian context, International Journal of Educational Management, 30(7), 1279-1292.
• OECD (2012). Delivering School Transparency in Australia: National Reporting through My School, OECD Publishing. OECD (2014). Education Policy Outlook: Germany. OECD Publishing
• Patrinos, H. A., Arcia, G. & Macdonald, K. (2015). School autonomy and accountability in Thailand: Does the gap between policy intent and implementation matter? UNESCO IBE, (45),429–445
• Pena, P. S. & Sole-Olle, A. (2009). Evaluating the effects of decentralization on educational outcomes in Spain, Working Papers in Economics 228, Universitat de Barcelona. Espai de Recerca en Economia.
• Shah, J. I.(t.y.) Centralisation Versus Decentralisation İn Education. The Dialogue, 5(3), 284-288.
• Urbanovič, J. & Patapas, A. (2012). Decentralisation Reforms of Education Management: Theoretical and Practical Issues. Vıešojı Polıtıka Ir Admınıstravımas Publıc Polıcy And Admınıstratıon, 11(4), 659–671
• West, A., Allmendinger, J., Nikolai, R. & Barham, E. (2010) Decentralisation and educational achievement in Germany and the UK. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 28 (3), 450- 468.
• Winands, G. (2011). Education in Germany - Current Developments. During a forum on Education and Inclusive Growth: A Philippine-German Dialogue on Experiences and Perspectives. February 15, 2011 at 22/F Clermont Room, Discovery Suites, Pasig City.
• Woessmann, L. (2003). Schooling Resources, Educational Institutions, and Student Performance: The International Evidence. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 65(2),117–70.
• Wohlstetter, P. & Odden, A.(1992). Rethinking School-Based Management, Policy, and Research Paper, Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Education Finance Association, New Orleans, LA, March 1992.
• Zajda, J. & Gamages, D. T. (2009). Decentralisation, School-Based Management, and Quality. New York: Springer