94444 School Autonomy and Accountability in Context: Application of Benchmarking Indicators in Selected European Countries By Gustavo Arcia1 Harry Patrinos Emilio Porta Kevin Macdonald The World Bank December 2010 1 The authors are respectively: Senior Economist, Analítica; Lead Economist, Human Development Network, The World Bank; Senior Education Specialist, Human Development Network, The World Bank, and Economist, Human Development Network, The World Bank 1 School Autonomy and Accountability in High Performing Education Systems: Application of Benchmarking Indicators in Europe 1. Introduction School autonomy and accountability are two components of School-Based Management (SBM) that complement each other to increase the operational and pedagogical efficiency of schools. If schools have enough operational autonomy to manage their financial and human resources, then they can become accountable to their clients, namely their students and their families and, as a result, increase the probability of improving student learning (Barrera, Fasih and Patrinos, 2009). Since SBM encompasses diverse practices and policies applied in different forms in many countries in the world, the World Bank has initiated the design of SBM indicators that could be of use to governments to identify and implement practices and policies that increase autonomy and accountability and, by inference, induce the education system to produce better learning outcomes (World Bank, 2007; Patrinos, 2010). The international evidence on student learning outcomes indicates that several countries in Europe consistently show high scores in international standardized tests, and the analysis of these results clearly indicates that in those countries where school autonomy and accountability have flourished test scores have consistently been high (OECD, 2010)2. The evidence from countries with high performing education systems begs the questions: what role has SBM played in their success? Are there key SBM issues that can be identified and transplanted to other regions of the world? This report is a first step in answering these questions. By applying a preliminary set of SBM indicators in a few high performing countries one can learn about the relationship between key SBM variables and school and student performance. A preliminary set of indicators of school autonomy, budget management, parent participation, school and student assessments, and accountability, were applied to the education systems of Finland, Poland, Hungary, Denmark, the Netherlands and Spain. This report summarizes the results of the application and the lessons learned so far. 2. School-Based Management: The role of school autonomy and accountability Improving student learning relies on the smooth functioning of a system comprised of many interconnected factors. It is widely accepted that for education to yield good results there has to be a proper mix of teacher quality, school curriculum, school environment, home environment, and other factors that motivate students and teachers to apply themselves and increase student knowledge (Vegas and Petrow, 2008). The interaction among these factors is complex, (Umansky, 2005), but in order to use education policy effectively it is necessary to understand the internal efficiency of those factors considered pivotal for improving learning. The analysis of the most important factors affecting education is a necessary step to understand how an education system3 should change in order to improve its outcomes (Arcia et al, 2010). 2 It is important to clarify from the beginning that school autonomy takes many forms and that managerial independence at the school level may vary. Similarly, accountability also takes many forms but in high performing systems schools always are accountable to somebody. The key issues here are that in high performing systems schools control many of their operational decisions, that school performance is evaluated with regularity, and that schools are accountable to someone for the results of the evaluations. 3 The education system is defined here as an interconnected mechanism of human and institutional components: students, parents, teachers, the educational infrastructure, school management rules and the institutions regulating their operation, and the economic and social factors affecting its functioning. As in any system, some components 2 A key factor affecting system functioning is its degree of decentralization, which should allow schools to be more autonomous in their decision making and in the planning and use of their human and financial resources (di Gropello, 2004). By giving more autonomy to schools local communities can receive education that is more tailored to their needs, which should increase the demand for schooling. By giving schools more decision making power local communities can give schools more support and, in turn, hold them more accountable for their performance (Barrera, Fasih and Patrinos, 2009; Patrinos and Horn, 2010). School-Based Management (SBM) is the set of managerial practices that allows school autonomy and accountability to complement each other to generate personal and professional incentives at the school level. This generation of incentives seems to be effective in improving the school climate, increasing the communication between teachers and parents, and in creating a sense of shared fate between teachers and the community (Gertler, Patrinos and Rubio-Codina, 2007). Under such conditions logic dictates that students would face lower barriers to improving learning and teachers would also face fewer obstacles in the exercise of their labor (World Bank, 2007). Because SBM can take many forms it can be interconnected with other functions and activities within the education system. As a result, some SBM activities could become crucial for improving system performance. Inversely, if SBM activities are not interconnected with other important components of the education system—such as teacher quality and school assessments—the system may not achieve closure and improved outcomes may not result. Hence, it is important to point out that SBM activities are mediating variables and, as such, they produce an enabling environment for teachers and students, allowing for pedagogical variables, school inputs, and personal effort to work as intended (Arcia et al, 2010). Recent studies have found that in most developing countries SBM has produced only modest gains in student learning4. However, a revision of the SBM programs as implemented in developing countries suggest that changes in school managerial practices in many countries did not correlate with increased learning outcomes because other important factors in the education system became limiting barriers to system closure and to improved learning. Such is the case with teacher quality and educational assessments—two key variables in any education system—both of which seem to continue being barriers to improved system performance (Vegas and Petrow, 2008; Clarke, 2010). The most recent evidence on the role of autonomy and accountability comes from 20 different school systems that have shown significant gains in performance during a period of five years. During that period of time some of the countries had an excellent educational record and kept getting better; the performance of some countries went from good to great, in some others it went from fair to good, and in another group it went from poor to fair (Mourshed, Chijioke, and Barber, 2010). Relevant to this study— conducted under the aegis of McKinsey & Co.—are their findings in two groups of countries: those whose performance went fro fair to good, and those whose performance went from good to great. In countries that went from fair to good, their findings indicate that the following factors were the most important: may be pivotal in increasing learning, and a better understanding of these pivotal components and their interactions with the rest of the system is fundamental for achieving better system outcomes. 4 This evidence is shown in Table 5 in Patrinos, Harry Anthony, 2011. “School-Based Management”, Chapter 2 in Bruns, Barbara, Deon Filmer, and Harry Anthony Patrinos, 2011. Making Schools Work: New Evidence in Educational Accountability in the Developing World . Human Development Network, The World Bank, Washington DC. 3 x Transparency and accountability, where reliable data on student assessments and school inspections were used to hold schools accountable to parents and government; x Identification of areas that needed improvement, where the same data were used to identify specific areas (e.g., subjects, grades, gender) that need reinforcement; x Organizational structure, where countries invested in school governance to make school management work, and x Efficient and equitable school financing, with clear rules and formulas for school funding. In countries that went from good to great the following factors were crucial for performance improvement: x Raising the professional requirements for incoming new teachers and new directors; x Raise the professional capacity of existing teachers and directors x Improve School-Based Management through self-evaluation and flexible pedagogical practices. The above findings suggest that issues related to school-based management variables, especially those reinforcing accountability and school-based managerial decisions, were extremely important in the improvement process. These findings are important because it can be argued that in most developing countries the desired improvements in school performance could be viewed in the same vein: going from fair to good or from good to great. If that were the case, the above paths for improvement could apply to them and school autonomy and accountability could be considered as crucial components of the educational improvement process. 3. SBM Indicators and sub-indicators To assess the degrees of autonomy and accountability a series of key indicators and sub-indicators were applied in six countries considered as high educational performers: Denmark, Finland, Hungary, Poland, Spain, and The Netherlands. Five main indicators were developed for assessing: a. School autonomy in budget planning and approval b. School autonomy in personnel management c. Participation of the School Council in School Finance d. Assessment of school and student performance e. School Accountability The first indicator deals with central-local finance issues, where autonomy means an increasing degree of local control of central fiscal transfers. By giving schools control over the use of a fiscal transfer or a block grant their operation is bound to reflect more closely the needs of its community. The second indicator deals with the school authority to hire and fire personnel, and—if labor laws allow it—the authority to set teacher salaries. Having schools manage personnel should reinforce the notion of local accountability. When teacher salaries and incentives are set centrally or through rigid collective agreements, teachers may be less responsive to the community because they may perceive that the entity paying their salaries is their real client. The third indicator deals with the role of School Councils in school finance, under the assumption that if the School Council has an important role in budget planning and management, it can have an impact on operational efficiency and on teacher incentives. The fourth indicator relates to the regular measurement of school performance—either through teacher evaluations, the evaluation of learning outcomes, or both. Measuring school performance is a key precondition for ensuring accountability. The fifth indicator deals with the mechanisms in place to render accounts to parents, local governments, and society at large. 4 Each indicator has sub-indicators that make the concept operational, since each indicator is estimated with the aid of a simple questionnaire5. Table 1 shows the five SBM indicators and the sub-indicators used in the evaluation. It should be noted that assessing a school system using the above questionnaire only requires information about the functioning of the school system itself—it can be filled out by anyone. This is important because by filling it out one can determine what type of information should be available to assess key managerial issues in a school system. Table 1. List of SBM indicators and sub-indicators related to autonomy and accountability 1. School autonomy in budget planning and approval 1A. Does the school director have legal authority to manage its operational budget? 1B. Does the school director have legal authority to set and manage staff and teacher salaries? 1C. Does the school director have the legal authority to raise other funds in addition to the transfers received from national or sub-national sources? 2. School autonomy in personnel management 2A. Are hiring and firing decisions of teachers managed by the school director? 2B. Do School Councils (which may include the school director) have legal authority to hire and fire teachers? 2C. Do School Councils have legal authority to hire and fire the school director? 3. Participation of the School Council in School Finance 3A. Does the School Council assist the school in the preparation of the school budget? 3B. Do School Councils have legal authority to approve the school budget? 3C. Is there a manual or set of instructions describing the participation of the School Councils in the preparation of the school budget? 3D. Do School Councils have legal authority to supervise the implementation of the school budget? 3E. If School Councils participate in the preparation and approval of the school budget is this budget used as an input in the general budget prepared by the Ministry of Education? 4. Assessment of school and student performance 4A. Do schools perform yearly assessments of school and student performance? 4B. Are schools assessments used for making administrative or pedagogical decisions aimed at improving school and student performance? 4C. Do schools perform yearly assessments of learning outcomes using standardized tests? 4D. Are schools assessments using standardized tests used for making administrative or pedagogical decisions aimed at improving school and student performance? 4E. Are the results of the assessment of school and student performance made public to parents? 5. School Accountability 5A. Is there a manual regulating the use of the results of the yearly assessments of school and student performance by the School Council? 5B. Is the school assessment of school and student performance part of a national or regional assessment system? 5C. Are the results of the assessments used to compare school performance with schools in similar conditions? 5D. Do School Councils have the legal authority to hire external auditors to perform financial audits at the school? 5E. Is there a manual to guide the School Council in the use of financial audits to evaluate school performance? 4. SBM in selected European countries: Context matters 5 The complete questionnaire is shown in the Appendix B. 5 School autonomy has been an evolving policy in most European countries since the 1970’s. Traditionally, schools in Europe—especially in the primary and lower secondary levels—were centrally managed, especially in areas related to personnel and curricula. By 2010 all countries in Europe had implemented different types of school autonomy, mainly through the funding and supervision of schools by municipal governments (EURYDICE, 2007). Since school autonomy was associated with the different patterns of decentralization, it did not have a common approach to school management—school autonomy had different characteristics from country to country. As a result, the use of benchmarking indicators is necessary to analyze how school autonomy shapes school-based management. Similarly, accountability has been a recurring theme in Europe but in a more formal and systematic way—through regional efforts at measuring student learning, where the educational authorities and society at large are the ones enforcing accountability. The presence of strong formal institutions and a long tradition of professional development in the teaching profession may have reduced considerably the need to render accounts directly to parents (;Miljevic, 2009. The analysis of autonomy and accountability was done in two phases: first, personal interviews were conducted with leading education researchers and policy analysts in Denmark, Finland, Hungary, Poland, Spain, and The Netherlands. In addition, interviews were conducted with technical staff at the EURYDICE program of the European Commission in Brussels, and at the OECD headquarters in Paris. Second. Education profiles and data for each of the six countries were analyzed, and then the scoring matrix was filled out with the aid of a questionnaire. Below is a summary of the main findings. Budgetary autonomy in budget and personnel management In al of the countries surveyed, school budgets are not geared toward teacher incentives; teachers are generally civil servants, even in cases such as the Netherlands, a high performing country where the School Board has a substantial role in school management and supervision. As a result, these countries finance education on the basis of civil service salaries, with contributions from municipal governments for infrastructure maintenance and school materials. In essence, in these six countries teacher salaries seem to be necessary but insufficient conditions for accountability. Two common threads were found in all the countries: a. Teacher salaries were competitive with the salaries of other professions, such as engineering and medicine6, and b. Teacher selection was highly demanding. These two factors may help explain why teacher’s unions concentrate their efforts on in-service training needs, on working conditions, and on professional development; unions behave as guilds, not as adversarial institutions. It helps that in all countries demographic pressure is low. The student-age population for primary and secondary school represents about 15% of the total. In contrast, in Central America, the student-age population is close to 30% of the total. As a result, the demand for teachers does not face the short 6 In Denmark, Finland, Spain, and the Netherlands teacher salaries are slightly higher than the GDP per capita, while in Hungary they are about 90% of GDP per capita (OECD, 2008; p.440). 6 pressures of countries with population growth above replacement rates7. It also helps that these countries have developed highly demanding teacher training programs and strict teacher selection processes. School and student assessment All countries assess teachers and students, but assessment methods are highly diverse. The extreme approach is found in Finland, where each school decides on how to assess teachers and students, using the information internally only. According to the OECD (2008), school and student assessments are used to provide feedback to schools, with no intent to use results to affect school financing, rewards or sanctions to schools or teachers. The key issue here is that, whatever they do, they take it seriously, using the assessment results to make changes to their methods, their resource mix, and their teacher training. Do they take assessment seriously because selected teachers are interested in being good professionals, and because of the trust placed in them by society? School Councils, parental participation and accountability In some of the high-performing countries parents are passive observers; they only visit the school for ceremonies or when they have individual issues, especially related to discipline or special education needs. In the Netherlands the School Board is the main actor at the local level. The presence or absence of a strong role for school councils differs from the model of SBM in that School Councils in Europe take mostly an advisory role, leaving school management to the professionals. Even in the Netherlands, where the School Board is very important in the system, professionals play a role. Large school boards, administering 30 to 50 schools, are professional organizations that pay their members to do their supervisory job. Again, the lesson learned here is that parents do not need to be the center of accountability if there are already well-running institutions that complement teachers of good quality. In fact, the above model suggests that if a school system is supported by a strong institutional framework, parent participation in school councils—and the use of school councils as quasi-government institutions enforcing accountability—is a second-best solution. SBM and decentralization During the interviews it became clear that despite their high performing status, the countries themselves can be highly critical of their own system. However, they are in a constant process of evaluation and renewal. In particular, as in the case of the Netherlands and Spain, ethnic and regional inequalities have become motives of concern. In particular, the issue of decentralized government has become central to education policy. Some analysts interviewed point out that decentralized education can help get parents and students closer to the providers of education, ensuring better access to pedagogical and managerial methods more in tune with their needs. Such an approach, if taken to the limit, may result in a fragmented education system where standards may be reduced and local community values may become too parochial to benefit society at large8. Still, decentralized education is a common factor in all of the systems reviewed, where municipal governments have a substantial say in the financing of education, in education content, and in education 7 Ironically, the Netherlands may be facing a shortage of young teachers because old teachers are still working and the population is growing so slowly that the cohort of new entrants to the profession is not large enough to cover the impending growth in demand, especially in the new immigrant population (de Vijlder, 2001). 8 Ritzen, Josef M. M., Jan van Domelen, and Frans J. de Vijlder, 1997. “School Finance and School Choice in The Netherlands.” Economics of Education Review, Vol 16, No. 3, pp. 329-335. 7 accountability. All of the countries included in this report are decentralized, and all of them have clear rules for the fiscal transfers at the central and municipal levels. Inasmuch as they represent a new model of governance in which citizens are closer to the providers of public goods, decentralization has a strong impact on education accountability and, by extension, on education quality. 4. Observations on the SBM Indicators Each sub-indicator was given a value of 1 (Low), 2 (Medium), or 3 (High) depending on the response to the questionnaire, and the overall score for all sub-indicators were classified in four categories: Latent, Emerging, Established, and Mature. The following color scale is used to symbolize the degree of implementation of each sub-indicator Table 2. Table 2. Categorization of indicator scores Categorization of Categorization of Total Score for Total Score for Indicators 3, 4 Indicators 1 and 2 Category and 5 Latent 1,2, 3 5,6,7 Emerging 4,5 8,9,10 Established 6,7 11,12,13 Mature 8,9 14,15 The results of applying the SBM indicators measuring autonomy and accountability are summarized in Table 3. For each country the Table lists the scores for each sub-indicator (1 (low), 2 (medium) or 3 (high)) based on the responses to the questionnaire. The row totals for the sub-indicator scores are categorized into Latent, Emerging, Established and Mature depending on the total score obtained for each indicator9. Table 3. Country Scoring on SBM indicators and sub-indicators Row Total Country Indicator Score Score Budget Autonomy 1A 1B 1C Denmark 3 2 2 7 Finland 2 1 1 4 Hungary 3 3 3 9 Poland 2 2 1 5 The Netherlands 2 1 2 5 Spain 3 2 3 8 Personnel Autonomy 2A 2B 2C Denmark 1 3 2 6 Finland 2 3 3 8 Hungary 2 1 1 4 Poland 3 1 3 7 The Netherlands 1 3 3 7 Spain 1 1 1 3 Participation Finance 3A 3B 3C 3D 3E Denmark 3 3 3 3 3 15 9 The semantics of this classification may change from study to study. If one uses the McKinsey scale an analogous categorization would be: Poor, Fair, Good, and Great. 8 Table 3. Country Scoring on SBM indicators and sub-indicators Row Total Country Indicator Score Score Finland 1 2 2 3 2 10 Hungary 1 1 1 1 1 5 Poland 3 2 3 2 2 12 The Netherlands 3 3 3 3 2 14 Spain 1 1 1 1 1 5 Assessment 4A 4B 4C 4D 4E Denmark 3 3 3 3 2 14 Finland 3 3 2 3 2 13 Hungary 3 3 1 2 1 10 Poland 3 3 3 3 1 13 The Netherlands 2 2 3 3 3 13 Spain 3 3 1 1 1 9 Accountability 5A 5B 5C 5D 5E Denmark 1 3 2 3 3 12 Finland 1 1 1 3 2 8 Hungary 1 1 2 2 2 8 Poland 2 3 2 3 3 13 The Netherlands 3 1 1 3 3 11 Spain 1 1 1 1 1 5 Source: Questionnaire results A quick look at the wide variation in the distribution of colors in the Row Total Score suggests that school autonomy and accountability take many forms, and that there is no pattern that explains the high level of educational performance. At most, there seem to be a trend towards medium levels of implementation in the sub-indicators used for the assessment. Individually, sub-indicators 4A (Do schools perform yearly assessments of school and student performance?), 4B (Are schools assessments used for making administrative or pedagogical decisions aimed at improving school and student performance?), and 5D (Do School Councils have the legal authority to hire external auditors to perform financial audits at the school?) show consistently high scores across all countries. Otherwise, there is wide variation in the sub-indicator scores and no discernable pattern. Based on these results some observations on the use of SBM indicators in Europe are worth mentioning: a. Some indicators may always score low in European countries. This is especially true in two areas: parent participation in school councils, and accountability to parents through standardized test scores. Even though standardized testing is being considered as a potential component of their evaluation system, most interviewees consider them insufficient to measure outcomes such as student leadership, entrepreneurship, and cooperation. b. There is a need to develop SBM indicators for teacher selection. All countries take great care in the selection process because most teachers are civil servants, and therefore difficult to fire once they are hired. c. Indicators on assessment should only include high-stakes testing, since many countries use tests for information purposes, with no connection to potential changes in human resources, management, or pedagogy. 9 d. European education analysts consider standardized testing as simplistic for assessing high performing countries; these countries are already past the tipping point of good performance and are more interested in other aspects of education, such as innovation, motivation, and leadership. e. The level of aggregation of the information on test results available to the public is an important issue. As far as education policy is concerned, European countries prefer that test information be aggregated at the school level, to avoid misuse of results at the individual level. This approach reflects the maturity of their system of accountability, which relies on institutions, instead of substitutes, such as students and parents. f. The section on assessment should include the school climate, which can be a crucial component of teacher and student performance. 5. Conclusions Summarizing the results, the SBM indicators show that school autonomy—as a tool for increasing accountability and inducing improved learning—works well in contexts where formal educational institutions are weak and, by inference, where governments are unable to provide public goods of sufficient quality. In this context, which may include many governments in developing countries, School- Based Management activities are necessary but insufficient conditions for producing education of good quality and for improving learning. In such cases, education systems achieve closure only when good teaching complements accountability. SBM can create the conditions in which good teachers can flourish, but it cannot replace bad teachers. Inversely, autonomy and accountability in SBM are not a necessary condition for success in education systems where formal educational institutions are strong, especially in the area of training and selecting good teachers. The strength of educational institutions also includes teacher incentives, which may be the sum of competitive salaries, professional development, professional pride, and a collective sense of mission. In these conditions, which are found in many high performing countries in Europe, trust is the main element of accountability. Parents trust the system and support the system because the empirical evidence—shown by the results in international testing exercises such as PISA—indicates that the system is producing very good results. What it is conceptually important here is that, in order to produce and maintain a climate of trust, the school system relies on a management style that fosters personal incentives and personal accountability without much prodding from the outside. Such incentives may include school-based management practices such as: highly demanding criteria for choosing teachers, competitive salaries, opportunities for professional growth, and academic freedom. The strong formal institutions found among the success stories in Europe have taken decades to develop. For example, in Hungary, education analysts point out that education was a priority since the days of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1867. The commitment to good education continued during communism, and continues to this day. During these 140 years Hungarian society has become accustomed to trust formal institutions, obviating the need for parent intervention in asking for accounts (Halász, 1999). Finland, a society that considered itself as poor until the middle of the 20th century, also made education quality a high priority; Finnish society understood early on that education was their main vehicle for social and economic mobility, and that ensuring education quality was a societal priority (European Commission, 2009). Slowly, Finland developed a strong educational system where trust became the main driver for accountability. 10 Bibliography Arcia, Gustavo, 2010b. “School Autonomy and Accountability in Context: Application of Benchmarking Indicators in Selected European Countries.” Consulting report, Human Development Network, The World Bank, Washington DC. Arcia, Gustavo, Harry Patrinos, Emilio Porta, and Kevin Macdonald, 2010. , “School Autonomy and Accountability”, Regulatory Institutional Framework, Benchmarking Education Systems for Results, Human Development Network. The World Bank, Washington DC. Barrera, Felipe, Tazeen Fasih, and Harry Patrinos, with Lucrecia Santibáñez, 2009. Decentralized Decision-Making in Schools. The theory adn evidence on School-based management. Washington DC: The World Bank. Bokros, Lajos, and Jean-Jacques Dethier, eds., 1998. Public Finance Reform During the Transition: The experience of Hungary. The World Bank, Washington DC. Clarke, Marguerite, 2010. “Roadmap for Building and Effective Assessment System.” Human Development Network, The World Bank, Washington DC de Vijlder, Frans, 2001. “Choice and Financing of Schools in The Netherlands.” Max Goote Expert Center, University of Amsterdam. Di Gropello, Emanuela, 2004. “Education decentralization and Accountability Relationships in Latin America.” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3453, Washington DC. OECD (2010), PISA 2009 Results: What Students Know and Can Do – Student Performance in Reading, Mathematics and Science, (Volume I). http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264091450-en European Commission, Education Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency, EURYDICE, 2009. Organisation of the Education System in Finland 2008-2009. Brussels, Belgium. European Commission, Education Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency, EURYDICE, 2009. Organisation of the Education System in Poland 2008-2009. Brussels, Belgium. European Commission, Education Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency, EURYDICE, 2009. Organisation of the Education System in Hungary 2007-2008. Brussels, Belgium. European Commission, Education Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency, EURYDICE, 2009. Organisation of the Education System in Denmark 2008-2009. Brussels, Belgium. European Commission, Education Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency, EURYDICE, 2009. Organisation of the Education System in The Netherlands 2008-2009. Brussels, Belgium. European Commission, Education Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency, EURYDICE, 2009. Organisation of the Education System in Spain 2008-2009. Brussels, Belgium. Eurydice European Unit (EURYDICE), 2007. School Autonomy in Europe. Policies and Measures. European Commission, Brussels. Finnish National Board of Education, 2008. Education in Finland. Helsinki. 11 Gertler, Paul, Harry Patrinos, and Marta Rubio-Codina, 2007. “Impact Evaluation for School Management Reform.” Doing Impact Evaluation No.10; Poverty Reduction and Economic Management, The World Bank, Washington DC. Halász, Gábor, 1999. “The Changes of System Regulation in School Education in Hungary.” National Institute of Public Education, Budapest. Hanushek Eric A. and L. Woessmann (2007). “The Role of Education Quality for Economic Growth” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Number 4122. World Bank, Washington D.C. Miljevic, Gordana, ed., 2009. School Governance and Social Inclusion. Involvement of Parents. Open Society Institute and University of Ljubljiana, Slovenia. Mourshed, Mona, Chinezi Chijioke, and Michael Barber, 2010. How the world’s most improved school systems keep getting better. Mckinsey & Co., London. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), 2008. Education at a Glance. OECD Inficators. Paris. Patrinos, Harry Anthony, 2010. “Making Schools Work: New Evidence in Educational Accountability in the Developing World.” Human Development Network, The World Bank, Washington DC. Patrinos, Harry Anthony, and Robin Horn, 2010. “Benchmarking Education Systems for Results.” PowerPoint Presentation, Human Development Network, The World Bank, Washington DC. Ritzen, Josef M. M., Jan van Domelen, and Frans J. de Vijlder, 1997. “School Finance and School Choice in The Netherlands.” Economics of Education Review, Vol 16, No. 3, pp. 329-335. Umansky, I. 2005. “What Have We Learned? Revisiting the Education Production Function as a Tool for Understanding Education Quality in Latin America.” Latin America and the Caribbean Region, Human Development Department. World Bank, Washington, DC. Vegas, Emiliana, and Jenny Petrow, 2008. Raising Student Learning in Latin America. The challenge for the 21st century. The World Bank, Washington DC. World Bank. 2007. “What do we know about School Based Management?” World Bank, Washington D.C. 12 Appendix A Summary of Country Characteristics The profiles below summarize the salient features related to SBM, as discussed during the interviews with education analysts in each country. The profile is supplemented with information available in the Eurydice reports for each country. Finland Policy framework The most important factor affecting the Finnish education system is that education is—and it has been for decades—a national priority. Education policy is set at the Ministry level and is designed to regulate the number of lessons/child/year/topic10. The Finnish National Board of Education11 prepares the national- level curriculum, including guidelines about what children need to know at each grade level. At the local level schools are free to select the timing for compliance of national standards, assign extra topics (languages, programs for new immigrants), and let teachers decide on their method of teaching. School autonomy and budget management All public and private schools are funded by the Government. Both public and private schools receive the same amount of funding. Private schools are under public supervision. School budgets are controlled by the municipal government and managed by a Municipal Education Board. The central government transfer—on average—about 43% of the education budget at the municipal level and the rest comes from the municipal government. Municipal funding for education comes from income tax (which is collected at the municipal level) and property taxes. Estimating the central budget transfer requires an assessment of per student costs at the national level. This average is based on actual expenditures by schools. The average figure, however, has a built-in equity mechanism. Poor schools tend to be in less expensive rural areas or in poor municipalities. The average transfer per student leaves the poor schools with additional funds because their actual costs tend to be below the national average. The net result is that richer municipalities have to contribute proportionally more. Assessment One of the most striking features about the education system in Finland is the method for evaluating performance. The driving force for evaluating educational performance is trust; trust in teachers, trust in individual schools, and trust in the capacity of the system to regulate itself and to seek ways in which to improve performance within a context of shared fate and ownership. Only 15% of all schools are inspected annually, and schools that are not inspected rely on self assessment for correcting problems detected during the school year. Students are assessed daily on ordinary tasks, and more formally at least twice a year. However, the method of assessment and the feedback used to improve student performance is left to the discretion of teachers and the school. One detected weakness of self-assessment is the path to correcting self-detected problems; the correction process can take some time because directors usually recommend taking up one issue at a time. In reality, little is formally known about how teachers and schools assess themselves. 10 A brief description of education in Finland can be found at http://www.oph.fi/download/124278_education_in_finland.pdf 11 http://www.oph.fi/english; World Bank. 2007. “What do we know about School Based Management? ” World Bank, Washington D.C. 13 School autonomy and personnel management In a system that relies on trust to renew itself, how do you keep teachers motivated? According to officials at the Finnish National Board of Education, teacher motivation can be traced to several sources: a. Tapping the culture. Until early in the 20th century Finland was a poor country where education was clearly identified by parents as a key factor for economic and social mobility. As a result, there was a general consensus that education had to be taken seriously. b. As a result of the consensus on the importance of education, teachers in Finland always had good training before going into the classroom. c. Education institutions (primary schools, secondary schools and vocational schools) always chose their teachers carefully. Teaching means the acquisition of a civil service position with an open- ended contract, good working hours for female teachers with children, good retirement benefits, and societal respect. As a result, teaching is a profession found very attractive to people, which in turn means a large pool of applicants for every opening. Currently the school system hires only 10% of all the applicants to the teaching vacancies every year. d. Teachers are free to use their own teaching method, as long as they comply with the goals of the curriculum. e. School directors are chosen for their capacity to provide pedagogical leadership and their motivational skills. In terms of salaries, executives at the National Board of Education indicate that Finland has long considered that teacher salaries should be on par with the salaries of other professions (engineering, medicine, etc.). If a competitive salary is combined with job stability, convenient hours, and summer vacation, teaching becomes very attractive to many who would otherwise go into a non-teaching profession. The issue of salary is still in progress. School Councils and school governance School councils are optional. They consider that the system works well and that there is no need to tinker with it. Since school governance is managed by the Municipal Education Board, they consider that that level of disaggregation is enough for ensuring good governance and accountability. Recently teachers have indicated that motivating young students has become difficult. They attribute it to the lack of incentives brought in by affluence; children are not hungry or living in difficult conditions, which may reduce their motivation. Accountability Because the system is based on trust, the sample-based periodic assessment of learning outcomes is taken as a reference point by schools. The Finnish National Education Board publishes an annual set of quantitative indicators that reports on national figures by level of education. In addition, education sector information is also provided by the Official Statistics of Finland,12 which are produced annually. Finally, every three years there is a formal report on teacher training. Statistical feedback to schools can be found on the WERA web site13. Data on school performance aggregated at the municipal level are available on the WERA website. However, large municipalities have their own data at the school level made available to school staff. In general, the analysis of school and student performance is done at the Ministry or at the Board levels. Because of the level of aggregation of education data the real client for educational 12 (http://www.stat.fi/meta/svt/index_en.html) 13 WERA (Web ARchive Access) is a web-based library of documents and data operated by the Royal Libraries of Stockholm and of Copenhagen, the Helsinki University Library, the National Library of Norway, and the National and University Library of Iceland. 14 accountability is the municipal government. This type of accountability also includes a constant dialogue between the municipal governments and the schools. Poland Policy framework Education is very important in Poland and it has been for decades. As in the case of other countries that were influenced by the former Soviet Union, Poland took education seriously, especially in science and mathematics. The importance of education is still strong in the national psyche. As far as education analysts are concerned, schools always have a social and economic context, and in producing good education one can use different pedagogical and organizational methods14. Under this framework, one needs to be careful in implementing school autonomy, since the case of Poland shows some significant problems that they are now identifying and trying to resolve. About 98% of students attend public schools, which are funded by the central and municipal governments. Preschools, elementary schools and lower secondary schools are managed by municipal boards, while upper secondary schools are managed by regional boards. An important policy development is the decision to use the Municipal Reports on Education to shift the emphasis from reporting on inputs and outputs in general terms to a system of indicators, which are in the process of being developed. They are reluctant to test indicators with past data because of serious limitations on data quantity and quality. The quality of education statistics is improving rapidly. The new system for education statistics is computer-based. The data are aggregated at the school level to protect student privacy and made available to schools. School autonomy and budget management School budgets have two components: a central allocation and a municipal allocation. The budget for each school is allocated at the municipal level. Funding for each school is based on enrollment and per student cost. Costs are based on national assessments of educational expenditures by schools. Assessment Standardized and non-standardized assessments are done at the teacher and classroom levels. Teachers are evaluated by the director, and their performance in class—which is also used to evaluate the school’s performance—is evaluated by regional inspectors. The system of class inspection is being replaced by a national evaluation system that includes the inspections of schools for compliance with many regulations. The objective of these evaluations under the new system is to check for input compliance, which is complemented by a system of national examinations. Starting in 2002 Poland began implementing standardized exit exams at the end of the 6th grade15 and at the end of lower secondary (9th grade). The results are used to assess student knowledge before they enter the next school level. Recently, the Ministry of Education used the value added concept to analyze test scores at the school level in a sample of lower secondary schools. The results were given to the schools, but they found that the results of the value added approach was at odds with the results of a new methodology for evaluating school processes in the same schools. To ensure that they get an accurate picture of school performance, municipal governments get information about the schools from different sources: budget implementation by schools, value added by teachers, supervisory reports, the new method for process evaluation, and test scores. 14 This brief assessment of some essential policy issues in Poland are the results of discussion with education analysts listed in the Appendix. 15 A standardized test is given at the end of the 6-year Szkoła podstawowa (age 13) and at the end of the 3-year lower secondary (Gymnazju) at age 16. For details consult: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency, 2009. Organisation of the Education System in Poland 2008-2009. European Commission, Brussels. 15 School autonomy and personnel management School directors can hire and fire teachers, supervise the implementation of the school budget and provide leadership over the implementation of pedagogy. School Councils and school governance Municipal governments control municipal school councils. The participation of parents is allowed in the councils, but the role of parents at large is minimal. In 1990 Poland approved a law authorizing the formation of school boards with wider parent participation, but the law was never implemented and the regulations have not taken hold. Parents have always been considered to be passive observers who expect that accountability in the system remains at the institutional level. However, the government now wants an increasing role for parents to give the system increased transparency and accountability. Accountability At the conceptual level, education officials consider that accountability to parents is problematic in principle, because of a key confounding factor: a parent’s low ability to differentiate between an individual issue (“my child is unhappy at school”) and a school issue (teacher quality). Given the long tradition of taking education seriously, officials tend to side with institutional accountability. There are two types of accountability: budgetary and pedagogical. Accountability holds at three levels: a. The school level, where the director supervises teachers, with the authority to hire them and fire them. b. A second level of accountability holds in upper secondary schools, where regional-level inspectors check for budgetary and pedagogical compliance. c. Supervision at the national level. At the upper secondary school level there are also inspectors attending classes to check for teacher performance. Parents are informed about school or student performance in the national examinations. The good reputation that public schools have in Poland suggests that parents assume that they do not need to be informed because they trust that their education system will produce good results. However, education officials are les confident and, as a result, municipal governments are now thinking about enforcing two types of accountability with the goal of improving education quality: (i) Accountability through school score cards, similar to the system now used in the United States, and (ii) The passing of a law requiring municipal governments to report on the status of education in their territory. Hungary Policy framework Most children in Hungary—about 90 percent—attend public schools, which are administered by the municipal governments. Education policy is under the authority of the Ministry of Education, but policy is initiated by advisory bodies such as the National Public Education Council, in charge of technical advice on operational and pedagogical issues; the Public Education Policy Council which advises on education policy issues, and the Educational Authority, in charge of institutional coordination for assessment and evaluation. Schools comply with a national core curriculum and with local additions agreed upon with local authorities. Teachers are free to choose methods and materials as long as the core 16 curriculum is complied with. Hungary has about 3,200 municipalities, of which about 2,400 have a school of some kind. Of those, about 1,800 have schools that do not go beyond lower secondary, and about 400 that only have preschool and elementary schools. Many of such municipalities are very small. As a result, there are no economies of scale and adequate management for many of those schools. School autonomy and budget management The Hungarian education system is highly decentralized, especially in finance. The law allows for equal powers between the central and municipal governments in the provision of education. Municipal governments operate all schools with block transfers from the central government amounting to 70-80% of the total cost. The block transfers from the central government to the municipal governments are based on norms and are non-negotiable. Every year the central governments set aside the funds for education in their municipal block transfers, but the amount is considered inadequate to meet real expenditures. As a result, municipal governments have to fund the shortfall. Assessment Student performance is assessed yearly by individual schools using methods of their choosing. A national standardized exit exam is given to all students at the end of secondary school. This exam determines their eligibility for different types of post-secondary education. Post secondary education is a complex multilayered system of vocational and academic institutions. School autonomy and personnel management Although Hungary is decentralized, schools are not autonomous. Municipal governments set the budget, make staff decisions, and supervise performance. All teachers are civil servants. Teachers and directors are selected by the municipal government, provided they have the professional qualifications. School Councils and school governance Each school may have a School Board, which has an advisory and collaborative role aimed at supporting educational and pedagogical issues. Hiring and firing decisions are exclusively under the control of the municipal government. Schools can create their own education plan as long as they comply with national standards. Parents tend to be less active than what the system requires. They can become very active if the school is in danger of lowering its quality due to budget shortfalls or in danger of closing for lack of students. Although the law allows for the existence of a School Council, schools mostly work without them. Accountability Education quality is considered good. Since the days of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire the government elite always kept educational standards at a high level. Under communism these standards were also kept at a high level. Although Hungarian test scores are high at the international level, there is some worry that high test scores are not enough to ensure creativity, leadership and collaboration. Accountability to the municipal government relates mostly to managerial issues, and school performance is measured by internal efficiency indicators. Denmark Policy framework 17 Denmark has a national tradition of high education quality. Maintaining quality is based on high standards for teachers, and continuous communication between school directors, their school board, and the municipal government. School boards are synonymous with school councils, but that represent all stakeholders. About 82% of students attend public schools and the remaining 18% attend private schools partially funded by the government. School curricula and regulations are jointly managed by the central and municipal governments. Municipal governments fund and administer preschools, and elementary and lower secondary schools. Upper secondary schools are funded by the Ministry of education. School autonomy and budget management School funds come directly from the municipal budget, which receives block grants from the central government. Such grants are intended to fund education, social services, and health for the elderly. Budget allocations are based on enrollment, but the money follows the student. Depending on the education level and on the curricula approved, schools require different amounts per student. As a result, student enrollment defines the budget. At different education levels students are assigned different levels of funding. Given that different educational institutions have different operational costs, enrollment affects their budget, since the money always follows the student. Assessment Educational assessments are done yearly by each municipal government under standards of their choice, but the national government has embarked in a ten-year evaluation plan with standardized testing for the elementary and lower secondary levels. This plan is a direct response from Parliament to an OECD evaluation that suggested that Denmark’s evaluation system needed reinforcement. The new evaluation system will test for reading, mathematics, physical sciences, biology and English. The new evaluation system is now online, and it is still in the process of being perfected. The standardized tests are prepared by an external body and the school-level results area available to teachers and parents. The results are not yet public. The first standardized test was conducted in the spring of 2010. School autonomy and personnel management Teachers are civil servants and their salary and employment conditions are regulated by collective agreements. Teacher dismissal is decided by the “employer”, which is the municipal government, but the process can take several months. Dismissals are rare because teacher selection is rigorous. Danish education officials consider that the role of the school director in providing leadership is one of the crucial components of the current system. Danish school directors are hired by the municipal governments from a list of candidates provided by the School Board in the respective school. School Councils and school governance School councils take the form of school boards. The school board has the following members: x Two school staff members elected yearly x Two students elected yearly x Five to seven parents elected every four years x The school director x A parent who serves as board chairman The School Board is a forum for dialogue. As such, it cannot hire or fire teachers, but it has the right to approve the school budget prepared by the school director. However, the School Board oversees the organization of teaching—in the Danish system the number of lessons on a given topic is the key variable 18 in the implementation of the curriculum—the choice of elective courses, the provision of special education, and the pupil/teacher ratios. The board also serves as a regulatory body for communications between schools and parents, the distribution of the workload among teachers, and details about the school operations. The school director is the manager of all school activities authorized by the board. Accountability Accountability is managed by the School Board and the municipal government, using as inputs the results of the annual evaluation of teachers and students. For the Ministry of Education accountability through standardized testing poses political problems, since it may uncover different results between poor and non-poor households. If poor people have little choice in changing schools, while non-poor people may have the means to enroll their children in better-performing schools, the Ministry is afraid that education could become polarized quickly, with the good performing schools getting better and the bad-performing schools getting worse. Under such scenario the Government is concerned that public education would accentuate equity problems that could take years to fix. 3.5 The Netherlands Policy framework Education policy in the Netherlands is highly centralized but school operations are highly decentralized. The Ministry of Education deals only with policy issues, while School Boards are responsible for school operations. The entire organization of the school system is based on check and balances, where accountability is paramount. The Constitution guarantees freedom of education, which in practice reveals itself as the formation of all kinds of schools of different political, pedagogical, and religious affiliations. The only requirement is that they meet some basic curricular requirements and that they report to a School Board. The School Boards report to a Board of Governors, and in turn the Board of Governors report to the Government. In the last 30 years there has been a gradual move towards more parent-teacher interaction, and parents have begun to participate in the Advisory Council to the School Board in every school. In similar fashion there is a parental Advisory Council to the Board of Governors. The main actor in the Dutch education system is the School Board. They oversee the school and its operations. About 70% of the schools in The Netherlands are private and subsidized by the government. All schools— public and private—report to a School Board, which can oversee one school or several schools depending on the area. School autonomy and budget management Schools are funded almost entirely by the central government through the Board of Governors. At each educational level schools receive a grant per student, which—if inadequate—has to be supplemented with municipal funds. Equity for disadvantaged groups is handled by compensatory financing to disadvantaged families, and by additional funding directed to education priority zones. Budget supervision falls under the jurisdiction of the School Board, and the school director is in charge of school operations. Assessment Assessment is relatively new. Around 1990 schools began measuring teacher and student performance in order to report to their respective school boards and to the Board of Governors. Most bad schools are found in areas supervised by voluntary one-school school boards. Such schools are generally more conservative and more religious. Student assessment is done trough a yearly Primary leaver exam. Primary school students are not generally held back because of the test results, but in secondary schools students who fail the exam may repeat one year. Teachers and schools are assessed by the Education 19 Inspectorate. Classroom visits and a review of compliance with education policies at the school level are the two main mechanisms for ensuring education quality. In addition, the Inspectorate is in charge of reviewing the quality of the grade-leaving exams. Schools that show problems with education quality are inspected more often. Over the years the Netherlands has implemented a series of cohort surveys which use standardized tests to assess learning. Schools participating in the survey receive school level results and analysis of their performance. School autonomy and personnel management Attracting good teachers has become a problem because of an aging population. One of the big issues in education is the new demographic profile of the Netherlands, in which the proportion of the elderly in the population has increased, increasing the demand for social services16. Another problem is that older teachers are the majority, which cannot be replaced quickly because of the shortage of young teachers. Also, teacher evaluation was not customary, which precludes the firing of bad teachers since there are no records of bad performance. Finally, teaching is not considered an attractive alternative to young people. School Councils and school governance There are 1,200 school boards overseeing the primary school level, of which 600 oversee only one school. This group of school boards oversees 7% of the primary student population. The other 600 school boards oversee between 30 to 50 schools each—with about 2,000 students per school. School boards overseeing large numbers of schools are professional boards; board members are paid for their service and are hired by the Board of Supervisors, a private independent body with an advisory role to the Ministry of Education. Membership in the Board of Supervisors is by invitation, following specific selection rules. The Board of Supervisors—which is entirely composed of private citizens—appoints a Board of Governors, which is composed of hired professional paid staff accountable to the national government for the performance of the education system. The Board of Governors is the supra body overseeing the performance of all schools boards in the country, using its power to distribute the education budget as one of its main tools for accountability. Accountability School performance is evaluated by the School Board, which reports to the Board of Governors. Both the Board of Governors and the School Board receive inputs from parents to resolve pending issues. Responsibility for resolving the issues fall on the School Board and on the Board of Governors. Parents have a voice at al levels of government through the advisory councils. 3.6 Spain Policy framework The main goal of the education system in Spain is to provide all the inputs to produce a good citizen. Behind this goal there is a conviction that the set of inputs are normative, and that serving their client— namely the student—does not imply that the client should define the objectives of the education system. Leaving the definition of education to the client may result in the overemphasis of parochial interests and views, which may run contrary to the common good and common national values. In short, serving the client is good as long as what the client wants is consistent with societal needs. This national framework 16 Given the typical budget constraints, this demographic change is exerting negative pressure on the education budget. 20 coexists with the curriculum and values specific to the Autonomous Regions, which can specify about 65% of the core curriculum to suit the needs of their constituents. School autonomy and budget management Public schools serve the majority of students but private schools and subsidized Centros Concertados (similar to charter schools) are also significant. The central government is responsible for education policy, including the core curriculum, education sector planning, and professional standards. The regional governments (the Autonomous Communities) are responsible for local curricula, local regulations of school operations, and the creation and maintenance of school infrastructure. Local communities are responsible for providing school sites, infrastructure maintenance, and the establishment of school councils at the school levels, from which representatives are drawn to the municipal, and Community levels. Schools are free to draw their own education plan and request the necessary funding from the education authority at the Autonomous Community level. Schools are responsible for managing their budget and have significant leeway in school operations. About 12% of the school budget at the Autonomous Community level comes from the Ministry of Education, about 83% comes from the Community budget, and about 5% from local communities. Assessment School and student assessments are regulated centrally and at the level of Autonomous Communities. Primary school students are assessed by their teachers, who determine eligibility for passing to the next grade cycle. Secondary school students are assessed by their teachers on every subject. Evaluations are the responsibility of the Autonomous Communities, which generally have different methods in each. Teachers are evaluated yearly under civil service rules. The results of the evaluations are used to assess school needs, personnel training, and student performance. The education authorities are the bodies that monitor accountability. School autonomy and personnel management Schools are governed by the Autonomous Communities, which have their own education authorities. Teachers have civil service status and their contracts are open ended. Dismissals need due cause and follow civil service procedures. Dismissals fall under the supervision of the Autonomous Community. Teacher selection is by rigorous competitive exams. School Councils and school governance School councils in which parents have a role are not important in the running of the education system. It is widely accepted that the system is run by professionals and that parent participation could place personal interest above system performance. Accountability Accountability is bound by bureaucratic and professional rules. Teachers are accountable through civil service rules, and schools are accountable to the educational authority of the Autonomous Community. 21 Appendix B SBM Questionnaire Indicator 1: School autonomy in budget planning and approval Indicator 1A 1. Does the school director have legal authority to allocate and manage its operational budget? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 4 No __ go to 2 2. Is the school operational budget centrally allocated by the Ministry of Education but managed at the school level? Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 4 No __ go to 3 3. Is the school operational budget allocated by the municipal government but managed at the school level? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 4 Indicator 1B 4. Does the school director have legal authority to decide staff salaries including those of teachers? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 8 No __ go to 5 5. Are all salaries set and managed centrally by the Ministry of Education or by the National Civil Service rules? Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 8 No __ go to 6 22 6. Are all salaries decided centrally by the Ministry of Education or the National Civil Service rules but the sub-national government is responsible for managing teacher salaries , including decision-making on promotions ? Yes __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 8 No __ go to 7 7. Are all salaries set centrally by the Ministry of Education or Civil Service rules but the school is responsible for managing the teacher salaries, including decision-making on promotions? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 8 Indicator 1C 8. Does the school director have the legal authority to raise funds from private and other sources in addition to the transfers received from national or sub-national budgets? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 11 No __ go to 9 9. Is the school budget fixed by the Ministry of Education without flexibility to change allocations among the items by the school director? Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 11 No __ go to 10 10. Can the school director request additional funds from regional or municipal governments to supplement the budget allocated by the Ministry of Education? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 11 Indicator 2: School autonomy in personnel management Indicator 2A 11. Are hiring and firing decisions of teachers made by the school director? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 14 23 No __ go to 12 12. Are hiring and firing decisions regulated by collective agreements with trade unions or other professional bodies at the national level? Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 14 No __ go to 13 13. Can the school decide to hire and fire teachers within a framework set out by agreement with a teachers trade union or other professional body? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 14 Indicator 2B 14. Do School Councils have legal authority to hire and fire teachers? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 17 No __ go to 15 15. Do collective agreements with trade unions or other professional bodies mean that School Councils cannot hire or fire teachers? Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 17 No __ go to 16 16. Do School Councils lack authority over the hiring and firing of teachers but they are consulted on the selection or separation of teachers? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 17 Indicator 2C 17. Do School Councils have legal authority to hire and fire the school director? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 20 No __ go to 18 18. Are school directors selected and managed by the Ministry of Education or other sub- national authorities? 24 Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 20 No __ go to 19 19. Can the School Council ask for the hiring and firing of a director but the decision is made by the national or sub-national authorities? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 20 Indicator 3: Participation of the School Council in School Finance Indicator 3A 20. Does the School Council participate in the preparation of the school budget? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 23 No __ go to 21 21. Is the School Council unable to participate in the preparation of the budget because school budgets are set by the Ministry of Education or other sub-national authorities? Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 23 No __ go to 22 22. Can the School Council interfere in the preparation of the budget but the school director is responsible for preparing the school budget? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 23 Indicator 3B 23. Do School Councils have legal authority to approve the school budget? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 26 No __ go to 24 24. Does the School Council lack authority to approve the school budget because budgets can only be approved by the Ministry of Education or other sub-national government? Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 26 25 No __ go to 24 25. Are School Councils consulted about the school budget but only the school director has the legal authority to approve the budget? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 26 Indicator 3C 26. Is there a manual regulating the roles and responsibilities of the School Councils in the preparation of the school budget? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 29 No __ go to 27 27. Is the lack of a manual because School Councils cannot participate in the preparation of the school budget? Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 29 No __ go to 28 28. Is there a manual regulating the procedure for the School Councils’ involvement in the preparation of the school budget? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 29 Indicator 3D 29. Do School Councils have legal authority to supervise the implementation of the school budget? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 32 No __ go to 30 30. Do School Councils lack authority over the implementation of the school budget because the law does not allow it? Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 32 No __ go to 31 26 31. School Councils are consulted but lack supervisory duties over the implementation of the school budget? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 32 Indicator 3E 32. If School Councils participate in the preparation and approval of the school budget is this budget used as an input in the budget prepared by national and sub national authorities? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 35 No __ go to 33 33. Are budgets prepared with the assistance and approval of the School Council ignored because budgets are the sole responsibility of the sub national or national authorities? Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 35 No __ go to 34 34. Are budgets prepared with the assistance and approval of the School Council considered as recommendations during the preparation of the budgets by the sub national or national authorities? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 35 Indicator 4: Assessment of school and student performance Indicator 4A 35. Are schools required to perform yearly non-standardized assessment of student performance? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 38 No __ go to 36 36. Are there schools that conduct assessments of student performance? Yes __ go to 38 No __ classify as LOW and go to 37 27 37. Are assessments of student performance voluntarily conducted by schools on a yearly or sporadic basis (e.g., once in 3 years)? __ classify as Medium and go to 38 Indicator 4B 38. Are non-standardized student assessments required as inputs for making administrative or pedagogical decisions aimed at improving school and student performance? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 41 No __ go to 39 39. Are non-standardized student assessments required for any kind of school decision? Yes __ go to 41 No __ classify as LOW and go to 40 40. Are non-standardized student assessments required as inputs for pedagogical adjustments? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 41 Indicator 4C 41. Are schools required to perform yearly assessments of student performance using standardized tests (e.g., national or provincial exams) and required to compare the school-level results from year to year? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 44 No __ go to 42 42. Are schools required to perform assessments of student performance using standardized tests every few years? Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 44 No __ go to 43 28 43. Are schools required to perform annual assessments of student performance using standardized tests but the examining body does not provide data to compare schools? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 44 Indicator 4D 44. Are the results of student assessments using standardized tests required as inputs for making administrative or pedagogical decisions and for tracking pedagogical and policy impacts? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 47 No __ go to 45 45. The results of student assessments using standardized tests are not used for making either administrative or pedagogical decisions? Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 47 No __ go to 46 46. Are the results of student assessments using standardized tests required as inputs for making pedagogical or administrative decisions? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 47 Indicator 4E 47. Are schools required to publish the results of the assessment of school and student performance and make them available to parents, along with comparisons with similar schools and with previous years? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 50 No __ go to 48 48. Are schools required to make available the results of school and student assessments only to educational authorities and school staff? Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 50 No __ go to 49 29 49. Are schools required to publish the results of the assessment of school and student performance but not required to make comparisons with the results in similar schools and with previous years? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 50 Indicator 5: School Accountability Indicator 5A 50. Is there a manual regulating the use of the results of the annual assessments of teacher performance by the School Council, including recommendations for personnel action for failing teachers? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 53 No __ go to 51 51. Does the School Council have access to the results of the yearly assessments of school and student performance to make recommendations to the school? Yes __ go to 53 No __ classify as LOW and go to 52 52. Is the manual regulating the role of the School Council in the use of the results of the annual assessments of school and student performance only applicable to non- personnel issues (e.g., classroom management)? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 53 Indicator 5B 53. Is the non-standardized or standardized assessment of school and student performance part of a national or regional assessment system with a long term plan for the use of results? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 56 No __ go to 54 54. Is the non-standardized or standardized assessment of school and student performance only for internal use of the school? 30 Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 56 No __ go to 55 55. Is the non-standardized or standardized assessment of school and student performance part of a national or regional assessment system but without a long term plan (e.g., three year plan) for its use? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 56 Indicator 5C 56. Are the results of the school and student assessments made public at the school level and used to compare school performance with schools in similar conditions? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 59 No __ go to 57 57. Are the results of the school and student assessments not made public and used only by education authorities and school personnel? Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 59 No __ go to 58 58. Are the results of the school and student assessments made public only at the municipal level with school data used only by education authorities and school personnel? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 59 Indicator 5D 59. Do School Councils have the legal authority to hire independent auditors to perform financial audits of the school? Yes __ classify as HIGH and go to 62 No __ go to 60 60. Are School Councils to oversee the financial performance of the school but without authority? 31 Yes __ classify as LOW and go to 62 No __ go to 61 61. Are School Councils consulted on assessment of the school financial performance? __ classify as MEDIUM and go to 62 Indicator 5E 62. Is there a manual to guide the School Council in the use of financial audits to evaluate the school’s financial performance? Yes __ classify as HIGH and Finish No __ go to 63 63. Do School Councils have no authority to oversee the school’s financial performance? Yes __ classify as LOW and Finish No __ go to 64 64. Do School Councils have a voice on the financial performance of the school? __ classify as MEDIUM and Finish 32 Appendix C SBM Indicators by Country Indicators for Finland Finland Indicator 1: School autonomy in budget planning and approval Indicator 1A Strength of Indicator Medium Does the school director have legal authority to No. The operational budget is allocated at the allocate and manage its operational budget? municipal level. Indicator 1B Low Does the school director have legal authority to set No. All salaries are set and managed centrally by the and manage staff and teacher salaries? Ministry of Education Indicator 1C Low Does the school director have the legal authority to No. Budget is fixed by the Ministry of Education raise other funds in addition to the transfers received from national or sub-national sources? Finland Indicator 2: School autonomy in personnel management Indicator 2A Strength of Indicator Medium Are hiring and firing decisions of teachers Yes. Personnel decisions are managed by collective managed by the school director? agreement but the school director can select teachers. However, firing decisions are regulated by the collective agreement. Indicator 2B High Do School Councils have legal authority to hire Yes. Municipal School Councils have the legal and fire teachers? authority to hire and fire teachers. Indicator 2C High Do School Councils have legal authority to hire Yes. Municipal School Council has the legal authority and fire the school director? to hire and fire the school director Finland Indicator 3: Participation of the School Council in School Finance Indicator 3A Strength of Indicator Low Does the School Council assist the school in the No. School budgets are prepared at the national and preparation of the school budget? municipal levels Indicator 3B Strength of Indicator Medium Do School Councils have legal authority to Yes. Municipal School Councils approve budget at approve the school budget? the municipal level. Indicator 3C Strength of Indicator Medium Is there a manual or set of instructions describing Yes. Municipal School Councils have operating the participation of the School Councils in the manuals for their budgetary activities preparation of the school budget? Indicator 3D Strength of Indicator High Do School Councils have legal authority to Yes. Schools Council legal authority to supervise the supervise the implementation of the school budget? implementation of the school budget. Indicator 3E Strength of Indicator Medium 33 If School Councils participate in the preparation Yes. Central budget transfers are based on the average and approval of the school budget is this budget of all local costs. used as an input in the general budget prepared by the Ministry of Education? Finland Indicator 4: Assessment of school and student performance Indicator 4A Strength of Indicator High Do schools perform yearly assessments of school Yes. Schools have yearly assessment of school and and student performance? student performance Indicator 4B High Are schools assessments used for making Yes. Schools use the yearly assessments to track the administrative or pedagogical decisions aimed at impact of short and long term administrative and improving school and student performance? pedagogical adjustments on school and student performance Indicator 4C Medium Do schools perform yearly assessments of learning Yes. Standardized assessments are made on 15% of outcomes using standardized tests? the schools every year Indicator 4D High Are schools assessments using standardized tests Yes. Schools use the results to track the impact of used for making administrative or pedagogical short and long term administrative and pedagogical decisions aimed at improving school and student adjustments on school and student performance performance? Indicator 4E Medium Are the results of the assessment of school and Yes. Assessments are made public at the municipal student performance made public to parents? level, and no comparisons are made with similar schools or with previous years Finland Indicator 5: School Accountability Indicator 5A Strength of Indicator Low Is there a manual regulating the use of the results No. Assessments are only available to the educational of the yearly assessments of school and student authorities and to school personnel performance by the School Council? Indicator 5B Low Is the school assessment of school and student No. Assessments are set by the school for its own use. performance part of a national or regional assessment system? Indicator 5C Low Are the results of the assessments used to compare No. Assessments are managed by the national and school performance with schools in similar sub-national authorities for their own use conditions? Indicator 5D High Do School Councils have the legal authority to hire Yes. School Councils have legal authority to perform external auditors to perform financial audits at the external financial audits school? Indicator 5E Medium Is there a manual to guide the School Council in No. There is a manual guiding the participation of the the use of financial audits to evaluate school School Council that excludes financial audits because performance? the Council lacks legal authority over the school finances 34 Indicators for Poland Poland Indicator 1: School autonomy in budget planning and approval Indicator 1A Strength of Indicator Medium Does the school director have legal authority to No. The operational budget is allocated and manage its operational budget? managed at the municipal level. Indicator 1B Medium Does the school director have legal authority to set Yes. Teacher salaries are set and managed at the and manage staff and teacher salaries? central or municipal levels, but the school director has legal authority to make some modifications. Indicator 1C Low Does the school director have the legal authority to No. Budget is fixed by the Ministry of Education raise other funds in addition to the transfers received and municipal governments. from national or sub-national sources? Poland Indicator 2: School autonomy in personnel management Indicator 2A Strength of Indicator High Are hiring and firing decisions of teachers managed Yes. School directors have the legal authority to by the school director? hire and fire teachers. Indicator 2B Low Do School Councils (which may include the school No. Personnel decisions are managed by the school director) have legal authority to hire and fire teachers? director Indicator 2C High Do School Councils have legal authority to hire and Yes. School Council has the legal authority to hire fire the school director? and fire the school director Poland Indicator 3: Participation of the School Council in School Finance Indicator 3A Strength of Indicator High Does the School Council assist the school in the Yes. Schools Council participates in the preparation of the school budget? preparation of the school budget Indicator 3B Medium Do School Councils have legal authority to approve No. School Councils may be consulted but budget the school budget? approval is done at the municipal level. Indicator 3C High Is there a manual or set of instructions describing the Yes. Schools Council have manuals regulating participation of the School Councils in the preparation their roles and responsibilities in the preparation of of the school budget? the budget Indicator 3D Medium Do School Councils have legal authority to supervise No. School Councils can have a voice on the the implementation of the school budget? implementation of the school budget but no supervisory authority. Indicator 3E Medium If School Councils participate in the preparation and Yes. The budgets are sent to the national and sub- approval of the school budget is this budget used as national levels as recommendations for the final an input in the general budget prepared by the allocation of resources. Ministry of Education? Poland Indicator 4: Assessment of school and student performance Indicator 4A Strength of Indicator 35 High Do schools perform yearly assessments of school and Yes. Schools have yearly assessment of school and student performance? student performance Indicator 4B High Are schools assessments used for making Yes. Schools use the yearly assessments to track administrative or pedagogical decisions aimed at the impact of short and long term administrative improving school and student performance? and pedagogical adjustments on school and student performance Indicator 4C High Do schools perform yearly assessments of learning Yes. Standardized external assessments are made outcomes using standardized tests? at the end of the 6th, lower and upper secondary, and vocational levels. Indicator 4D High Are schools assessments using standardized tests used Yes. Schools use the yearly assessments to track for making administrative or pedagogical decisions the impact of short and long term administrative aimed at improving school and student performance? and pedagogical adjustments on school and student performance Indicator 4E Low Are the results of the assessment of school and No. Assessments are only available to the student performance made public to parents? educational authorities and to school personnel Poland Indicator 5: School Accountability Indicator 5A Strength of Indicator Medium Is there a manual regulating the use of the results of Yes. School Councils have guidelines for using the the yearly assessments of school and student assessments, but the recommendations do not performance by the School Council? include personnel actions Indicator 5B High Is the school assessment of school and student Yes. Assessments are components of a national or performance part of a national or regional assessment sub-national exercise and they form part of a long system? term plan for the use of the results Indicator 5C Medium Are the results of the assessments used to compare Yes. Assessments results at the school or sub- school performance with schools in similar national level are made public but school-specific conditions? data are only known by school authorities. Indicator 5D High Do School Councils have the legal authority to hire Yes. School Councils have legal authority to external auditors to perform financial audits at the perform external financial audits school? Indicator 5E High Is there a manual to guide the School Council in the Yes. School Councils have a manual for guiding use of financial audits to evaluate school them in the use of external financial audits in performance? school accountability 36 Indicators for Hungary Hungary Indicator 1: School autonomy in budget planning and approval Indicator 1A Strength of Indicator High Does the school director have legal authority to Yes. The operational budget is allocated at the manage its operational budget? municipal level and the director manages it. Indicator 1B High Does the school director have legal authority to set Yes. Directors and teachers work on the budget and manage staff and teacher salaries? and can alter the salaries in the negotiation process with the municipal board. Indicator 1C High Does the school director have the legal authority to Yes. Schools are independent legal entities that can raise other funds in addition to the transfers received raise additional funds from other sources. from national or sub-national sources? Hungary Indicator 2: School autonomy in personnel management Indicator 2A Strength of Indicator Low Are hiring and firing decisions of teachers managed No. Personnel decisions are managed the by the school director? municipal government. Indicator 2B Low Do School Councils (which may include the school No. Personnel decisions area managed by the director) have legal authority to hire and fire teachers? municipal government. Indicator 2C Low Do School Councils have legal authority to hire and No. School directors are selected and managed at fire the school director? the level of the Ministry of Education or at the municipal level. Hungary Indicator 3: Participation of the School Council in School Finance Indicator 3A Strength of Indicator Low Does the School Council assist the school in the No. School budgets are prepared at the municipal preparation of the school budget? level Indicator 3B Low Do School Councils have legal authority to approve No. Only the government has authority to approve the school budget? the school budget Indicator 3C Low Is there a manual or set of instructions describing the No. School Councils are not expected to participate participation of the School Councils in the preparation in the preparation of the school budget of the school budget? Indicator 3D Low Do School Councils have legal authority to supervise No. School Councils are not expected to supervise the implementation of the school budget? the implementation of the school budget. Indicator 3E Low If School Councils participate in the preparation and No. Only the government has authority to approve approval of the school budget is this budget used as the school budget an input in the general budget prepared by the Ministry of Education? Hungary Indicator 4: Assessment of school and student performance Indicator 4A Strength of Indicator High Do schools perform yearly assessments of school and Yes. Schools have yearly assessment of school and 37 student performance? student performance Indicator 4B High Are schools assessments used for making Yes. Schools use the yearly assessments to track administrative or pedagogical decisions aimed at the impact of short and long term administrative improving school and student performance? and pedagogical adjustments on school and student performance Indicator 4C Low Do schools perform yearly assessments of learning No. Yearly assessments are not standardized outcomes using standardized tests? Indicator 4D Medium Are schools assessments using standardized tests used No. Assessments are not standardized, but non- for making administrative or pedagogical decisions standardized tests are used to perform the same aimed at improving school and student performance? functions Indicator 4E Low Are the results of the assessment of school and No. Yearly assessments are only available to the student performance made public to parents? educational authorities and to school personnel Hungary Indicator 5: School Accountability Indicator 5A Strength of Indicator Low Is there a manual regulating the use of the results of No. Assessments are only available to the the yearly assessments of school and student educational authorities and to school personnel performance by the School Council? Indicator 5B Low Is the school assessment of school and student No. Assessments are set by the school for its own performance part of a national or regional assessment use. system? Indicator 5C Medium Are the results of the assessments used to compare No. Results of the assessments are managed at the school performance with schools in similar municipal level conditions? Indicator 5D Medium Do School Councils have the legal authority to hire No. Financial accountability is managed by the external auditors to perform financial audits at the municipal government. school? Indicator 5E Medium Is there a manual to guide the School Council in the No. Financial accountability is managed by the use of financial audits to evaluate school municipal government. performance? 38 Denmark Indicator 1: School autonomy in budget planning and approval Indicator 1A Strength of Indicator High Does the school director have legal authority to manage Yes. School directors have the legal authority to its operational budget? manage the funds allocated at the central and municipal levels. Indicator 1B Medium Does the school director have legal authority to set and Yes. Teacher salaries are set and managed at the manage staff and teacher salaries? central or municipal levels, but the school director has legal authority to set and manage the salaries of administrative and support staff. Indicator 1C Medium Does the school director have the legal authority to Yes. School directors can request more funds raise other funds in addition to the transfers received from sub-national governments. from national or sub-national sources? Denmark Indicator 2: School autonomy in personnel management Indicator 2A Strength of Indicator Low Are hiring and firing decisions of teachers managed by No. Personnel decisions are managed by the school director? collective agreements at the national level and by the school board at the school level. Indicator 2B High Do School Councils (which may include the school Yes. School Councils have the legal authority to director) have legal authority to hire and fire teachers? hire and fire teachers following established procedures. Indicator 2C Medium Do School Councils have legal authority to hire and fire No. The School Council can ask for the hiring the school director? and firing of a director but the hiring decision is made by the municipal authorities Denmark Indicator 3: Participation of the School Council in School Finance Indicator 3A Strength of Indicator High Does the School Council assist the school in the Yes. Schools Council participates in the preparation of the school budget? preparation of the school budget Indicator 3B High Do School Councils have legal authority to approve the Yes. Schools Councils have legal authority to school budget? approve the school budget but the final decision is made by the municipal government. Indicator 3C High Is there a manual or set of instructions describing the Yes. Schools Council have manuals regulating participation of the School Councils in the preparation their roles and responsibilities in the preparation of the school budget? of the budget Indicator 3D High Do School Councils have legal authority to supervise Yes. Schools Council legal authority to supervise the implementation of the school budget? the implementation of the school budget. Indicator 3E High If School Councils participate in the preparation and Yes. Municipal authorities use these budgets as approval of the school budget is this budget used as an their main input for the final transfer of resources input in the general budget prepared by the Ministry of to the school Education? 39 Denmark Indicator 4: Assessment of school and student performance Indicator 4A Strength of Indicator High Do schools perform yearly assessments of school Yes. Schools have yearly assessment of school and student performance? and student performance Indicator 4B High Are schools assessments used for making Yes. Schools use the yearly assessments to track administrative or pedagogical decisions aimed at the impact of short and long term administrative improving school and student performance? and pedagogical adjustments on school and student performance Indicator 4C High Do schools perform yearly assessments of Yes. Standardized assessments just started and learning outcomes using standardized tests? will be comparable from year to year Indicator 4D High Are schools assessments using standardized tests Yes. Schools use the results to track the impact of used for making administrative or pedagogical short and long term administrative and decisions aimed at improving school and student pedagogical adjustments on school and will be performance? used to asses student performance Indicator 4E Medium Are the results of the assessment of school and Yes. Assessments are made public but no student performance made public to parents? comparisons are made with similar schools or with previous years Denmark Indicator 5: School Accountability Indicator 5A Strength of Indicator Low Is there a manual regulating the use of the results No. Assessments are only available to the of the yearly assessments of school and student educational authorities and to school personnel performance by the School Council? Indicator 5B High Is the school assessment of school and student Yes. Assessments are components of a national performance part of a national or regional or sub-national exercise and they form part of a assessment system? long term plan for the use of the results Indicator 5C Medium Are the results of the assessments used to Yes. Assessments results at the school or sub- compare school performance with schools in national level are made public but school- similar conditions? specific data are only known by school authorities. Indicator 5D High Do School Councils have the legal authority to Yes. School Councils have legal authority to hire external auditors to perform financial audits perform external financial audits at the school? Indicator 5E High Is there a manual to guide the School Council in Yes. School Councils have a manual for guiding the use of financial audits to evaluate school them in the use of external financial audits in performance? school accountability 40 The Netherlands The Netherlands Indicator 1: School autonomy in budget planning and approval Indicator 1A Strength of Indicator Medium Does the school director have legal authority to No. The operational budget is allocated at the manage its operational budget? municipal level. Indicator 1B Low Does the school director have legal authority to set No. All salaries are set and managed centrally by and manage staff and teacher salaries? the School Board Indicator 1C Medium Does the school director have the legal authority to Yes. School directors can request more funds from raise other funds in addition to the transfers received municipal governments though the school board. from national or sub-national sources? The Netherlands Indicator 2: School autonomy in personnel management Indicator 2A Strength of Indicator Low Are hiring and firing decisions of teachers managed No. Personnel decisions are managed the school by the school director? board. Indicator 2B High Do School Boards have legal authority to hire and fire Yes. School Boards have the legal authority to hire teachers? and fire teachers. Indicator 2C High Do School Boards have legal authority to hire and fire Yes. School Board has the legal authority to hire the school director? and fire the school director The Netherlands Indicator 3: Participation of the School Council in School Finance Indicator 3A Strength of Indicator High Does the School Board assist the school in the Yes. Schools Board participates in the preparation preparation of the school budget? of the school budget Indicator 3B High Do School Boards have legal authority to approve the Yes. Schools Boards have legal authority to school budget? approve the school budget Indicator 3C High Is there a manual or set of instructions describing the Yes. Schools Boards have their own manuals participation of the School Board in the preparation of regulating their roles and responsibilities in the the school budget? preparation of the budget Indicator 3D High Do School Boards have legal authority to supervise Yes. Schools Boards have legal authority to the implementation of the school budget? supervise the implementation of the school budget. Indicator 3E Medium If School Boards participate in the preparation and No. The school budgets are negotiated at the approval of the school budget is this budget used as municipal level, but central allocations may play a an input in the general budget prepared by the role in disadvantaged areas. Ministry of Education? 41 The Netherlands Indicator 4: Assessment of school and student performance Indicator 4A Strength of Indicator Medium Do schools perform yearly assessments of school and Yes. Schools have yearly grade-leaving student performance? assessments of students, but schools are assessed at least once every four years. Indicator 4B Medium Are schools assessments used for making Yes. Schools use their assessments to make short- administrative or pedagogical decisions aimed at term administrative and pedagogical adjustments improving school and student performance? Indicator 4C High Do schools perform yearly assessments of learning Yes. The Primary School Leavers outcomes using standardized tests? Attainment Test Indicator 4D High Are schools assessments using standardized tests used Yes. The test is used to advise students and as a for making administrative or pedagogical decisions feedback for teachers aimed at improving school and student performance? Indicator 4E High Are the results of the assessment of school and Yes. Assessments are made public and student performance made public to parents? comparisons are made with similar schools The Netherlands Indicator 5: School Accountability Indicator 5A Strength of Indicator High Is there a manual regulating the use of the results of Yes. School Boards have guidelines for using the the yearly assessments of school and student assessments, including recommendations about performance by the School Board? personnel actions Indicator 5B Low Is the school assessment of school and student No. Assessments are set by the school for its own performance part of a national or regional assessment use. system? Indicator 5C Low Are the results of the assessments used to compare No. Assessments are managed by the national and school performance with schools in similar sub-national authorities for their own use conditions? Indicator 5D High Do School Boards have the legal authority to hire Yes. School Boards have legal authority to perform external auditors to perform financial audits at the external financial audits school? Indicator 5E High Is there a manual to guide the School Board in the use Yes. School Boards have a manual for guiding of financial audits to evaluate school performance? them in the use of external financial audits in school accountability 42 Spain Spain Indicator 1: School autonomy in budget planning and approval Indicator 1A Strength of Indicator High Does the school director have legal authority to Yes. School directors have the legal authority to manage its operational budget? manage the funds allocated at the regional and municipal levels. Indicator 1B Medium Does the school director have legal authority to set No. Teacher salaries are set by civil service rules at and manage staff and teacher salaries? the Autonomous Community level, but the school director has legal authority to set and manage the salaries of administrative and support staff. Indicator 1C High Does the school director have the legal authority to Yes. School directors can raise additional funds raise other funds in addition to the transfers received from national and sub-national governments, from from national or sub-national sources? the private sector, and from non-governmental institutions. Spain Indicator 2: School autonomy in personnel management Indicator 2A Strength of Indicator Low Are hiring and firing decisions of teachers managed by No. Personnel decisions are managed by collective the school director? agreements at the Autonomous Community level. Indicator 2B Low Do School Councils (which may include the school No. Personnel decisions area managed by director) have legal authority to hire and fire teachers? collective agreements at the Autonomous Community level Indicator 2C Low Do School Councils have legal authority to hire and No. School directors are selected and managed at fire the school director? the Autonomous Community level. Spain Indicator 3: Participation of the School Council in School Finance Indicator 3A Strength of Indicator Low Does the School Council assist the school in the No. School budgets are prepared at the municipal preparation of the school budget? level. Indicator 3B Low Do School Councils have legal authority to approve No. Only the government has authority to approve the school budget? the school budget Indicator 3C Low Is there a manual or set of instructions describing the No. School Councils are not expected to participate participation of the School Councils in the preparation in the preparation of the school budget of the school budget? Indicator 3D Low Do School Councils have legal authority to supervise No. School Councils are not expected to supervise the implementation of the school budget? the implementation of the school budget. Indicator 3E Low If School Councils participate in the preparation and No. Budgetary decisions are made at the approval of the school budget is this budget used as Autonomous Community and municipal levels. an input in the general budget prepared by the Ministry of Education? Spain Indicator 4: Assessment of school and student performance 43 Indicator 4A Strength of Indicator High Do schools perform yearly assessments of school and Yes. Schools have yearly assessment of school and student performance? student performance Indicator 4B High Are schools assessments used for making Yes. Schools use the yearly assessments to track administrative or pedagogical decisions aimed at the impact of short and long term administrative improving school and student performance? and pedagogical adjustments on school and student performance Indicator 4C Low Do schools perform yearly assessments of learning No. Assessments are not standardized outcomes using standardized tests? Indicator 4D Low Are schools assessments using standardized tests used No. Assessments are not standardized for making administrative or pedagogical decisions aimed at improving school and student performance? Indicator 4E Low Are the results of the assessment of school and No. Assessments are only available to the student performance made public to parents? educational authorities and to school personnel Spain Indicator 5: School Accountability Indicator 5A Low Is there a manual regulating the use of the results of No. Assessments are only available to the the yearly assessments of school and student educational authorities and to school personnel performance by the School Council? Indicator 5B Low Is the school assessment of school and student No. Assessments are set by the school for its own performance part of a national or regional assessment use. system? Indicator 5C Low Are the results of the assessments used to compare No. Assessments are managed by the national and school performance with schools in similar sub-national authorities for their own use conditions? Indicator 5D Low Do School Councils have the legal authority to hire No. School Councils have no legal authority over external auditors to perform financial audits at the the school financial affairs school? Indicator 5E Low Is there a manual to guide the School Council in the No. School Councils have no legal authority over use of financial audits to evaluate school the school financial affairs performance? 44 45