STREET-LEVEL BUREAUCRACY AND PUBLIC POLICIES: ANALYZING EDUCATIONAL POLICY IMPLEMENTATION FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF SCHOOLS AND TEACHERS

ABSTRACT This paper analyzes the implementation of educational policies and the roles of school professionals considering the street-level bureaucracy theory (LIPSKY, 1980). This study assumes that educational reforms elect schools as planning and administration centers, making them and the professionals working there responsible for new attributions which are motivated by improved autonomy, in addition to administrative and educational decentralization. In these contexts, which are marked by schools’ increasing empowerment, the discretionary power exercised by its professionals (teachers, principals, coordinators, among others) is a key element to understanding the availability and implementation of programs and their ability to either influence or change the design of educational policies on a local level. This perspective emphasizes the importance of considering those closer to actions deriving from such policies, that is, the actors who see the bottom-up process because they are in the lower end. According to Lipsky (1980), these are the so-called local policy agents or street-level public agents. As for schools, we understand that to enforce a certain policy, factors such as interpersonal influence, commitments, and informal negotiations are as important as formal processes and regulations. Finally, this study attempts to prove the impacts and contours assumed by changes in school dynamics in terms of translating local educational policies.

Decentralization of Education in Nepal: A Rein in a Horse Nose

The main argument of this article is to shed light on the dubious nature of the decentralization policy of education and the 'intention' of the state to recentralize it, in one way or other, despite the widespread clatter of decentralization. By taking policy documents into account, I intend to justify my claim that what the Nepal government calls it, an educational decentralization, is nothing but policy rhetoric and a reign hold tactically at the centre. I claim what the state calls it as an autonomous power of ground-level functionaries to exercise their discretionary in decentralized education system instead is, 'a rein in a horse nose', where jockey (the centre) is 'always' in a commanding position. To expatiate educational decentralization, I employ Weiler's (1990) standpoint and juxtapose his arguments: redistributing power, enhancing efficiency, and improving learning to show that though these arguments are put in favour of decentralization, the same arguments are shown to conflict with powerful forces favouring centralization. I also focus on the context and motivation in which the educational decentralization was carried out to understand the egression of decentralization in education in Nepal. In the final section, I try to analyse the dubious tendency of the state and try to explore, 'why despite prioritizing decentralization in policies, there is a periodicity of higher bodies in the education system'.

Studi komparatif reformasi pendidikan di Singapura dan Indonesia

Perubahan zaman menuju era globalisasi menuntut dunia pendidikan untuk berkiprah secara aktif mempersiapkan generasi muda dalam menyongsong tantangan zaman. Kerangka pendidikan yang selama ini diterapkan juga harus beradaptasi dengan tuntutan zaman. Dalam menghadapi tantangan ini, sejumlah Negara telah menginisiasi diberlakukannya reformasi pendidikan. Artikel ini membahas tentang program-program refomasi pendidikan di dua Negara dengan latar belakang dan kondisi serta ideologi yang berbeda yaitu Singapura dan Indonesia. Diantara program refomasi pendidikan di Singapura adalah Teach less, Learn More; Thinking School, Learning Nation, dan School Excellent Model. Sedangkan kebijakan refeormasi pendidikan di Indonesia diantaranya diselenggarakan dengan desentralisasi pendidikan dalam kerangka manajemen berbasis sekolah, Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan dan Kurikulum 2013, serta program sertifikasi guru. Dari hasil pembahasan, dapat diketahui bahwa Singapura telah berhasil menyelenggarakan reformasi pendidikan. Hal ini dapat dilihat dari kualitas pendidikan Singapura yang masuk dalam ranking teratas Negara-negara dengan pencapaian standar pendidikan internasional. Sementara itu, Indonesia nampak masih harus berjuang untuk mencapai tujuan reformasi pendidikan. Hasil implementasi pendidikan yang berbeda di kedua Negara ini tentu dikarenakan perbedaan latar belakang, serta kondisi sosial, ekonomi, politik budaya dan geografis kedua Negara tersebut. Dengan demikian, dapat disimpulkan bahwa banyak factor yang mempengaruhi keberhasilan penyelengaraan reformasi pendidikan di sebuah Negara. AbstractGlobalization requires education to actively take part in preparing the young generation to face the challenges. The educational framework which has been implemented should also adapt to the existing new challenges. To deal with this, a number of countries have initiated the implementation of educational reform. This article discusses educational reformation programs conducted in two countries which have a different background as well as different ideology, social, economic, political, and geographical circumstances i.e., Singapore and Indonesia. Some of the main educational reform agendas in Singapore are Teach less, Learn More; Thinking School, Learning Nation, and School Excellent Model. Meanwhile, educational reform programs in Indonesia are conducted through educational decentralization within the framework of school-based management, School-level Curriculum, and the 2013 curriculum and teacher certification. It can be understood that Singapore has succeeded in conducting educational reform. This can be seen from the quality of Singapore's education which has been ranked high in achieving the benchmark of international education standard. Meanwhile, Indonesia still needs to struggle to achieve the desired outcomes of educational reform agendas. The differing result of educational reform revealed in these two countries resulted from different backgrounds of the countries. Thus, it can be concluded that there are a number of factors influencing the success of educational reform agendas in a country.

Gender Status in the Community School of Nepal

This paper focused on government and community schools are those schools management responsibility handed over either to the school management committee, or to the local government bodies or to other local organizations for the purpose of improving the quality of education through the active involvement of local communities. School Management Committee (SMC) is the executive body to manage community school. Involvement of local communities in the management of primary and secondary level education is common in South Asia. Much of the enthusiasm of involving communities in the form of decentralisation has come from the assumption that it will empower marginal sections of the society, particularly women to participate in development and governance process of community school development. The study is complemented by both qualitative and quantitative data collected from the selected case study sites and backed by the review of the education policy development processes in different time horizons and also other relevant documents related to the school sector where local communities are being given the responsibilities for managing schools as part of nationwide educational decentralization program. The purpose was to identify factors (both structural and agency related) that constrain or enable women’s participation in community school management.

Understanding Education Decentralization and 'Sustained' Elite Capture – Explicating Cases From Two Public Schools

The paper aims at uncovering the practices of educational decentralization in Nepal that started after the restoration of democracy in 1990. Though decentralization in education in Nepal began with the aim of greater community participation and autonomy to the needs and priorities perceived by the local level functionaries in school, it has been subject to elite capture in its governance. Because of control in planning, organization, management, financial liability and different activities for the education system, the paper argues that practices of educational decentralization have been shaped by the local elites who capture the local resources and power to operate the school with their network and 'one-upmanship'. While arguing so, the paper is based on the ethnographic case study of two public schools located in the Mid-Western region of Nepal. Applying the Gramscian concept of hegemony, the paper narrates the process of a 'sustained' selection of the School Management Committee Chairpersons and shows how they negotiate and balance their power to sustain their capture. The paper concludes that the informal mechanisms of individual attributes such as trust and capital are playing an important role in their sustained elitism.

Federalismo e gasto público com educação no Brasil

Estuda a dimensão e a estrutura dos gastos públicos com educação, realizados pelas três esferas de governo, com base nos dados de gastos relativos ao ano de 1995. A análise confirma algumas tendências quanto ao desenvolvimento da educação brasileira: a importância da área da educação nos gastos sociais – os estados respondendo por 40,4% e os municípios por 32,9% do total dos gastos sociais. Revela, também, o caráter descentralizado das ações governamentais nesse setor, com os estados e municípios sendo as instâncias que comprometeram parcela considerável de seus recursos não-financeiros – os estados sendo responsáveis majoritariamente pelo ensino fundamental, a União pela educação superior e os municípios pela educação infantil. Confirma também o grande esforço público em atuar prioritariamente no ensino fundamental, com 42,5% do total dos gastos públicos com educação. Palavras-Chave: despesas com educação; gastos públicos; federalismo. Abstract The author proposes in this survey to study the impact of educational decentralization on the distribution of public expenditure for the 1995 fiscal year. It is shown that the share of a government's budget for education at different levels of education is a function of its responsability, and control of, established by the 1998 federal Constitution. It is confirmed the priority of public policies devoted for primary education (ensino fundamental). It is shown, as well, the importance of education on public financial support for the total of social programmes. States and municipalities spending, respectively, 40.4% and 32.9% of all of social expenditure. Key-Words: expenses with education; public costs; federalism.