Strategic Review of the EDUCO Program - EQUIP123.net

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Strategic Review of the EDUCO ProgramJuly 2010According to the literature reviewed, ACE members visit the school more than once a week onaverage, which is three to four times more than for CDEs. In addition, in the schools visited andinterviews done for this review, the time that ACE and CDE members invest in helping the schools wasestimated. In the case of ACEs, parents said they spend from five to 10 hours per week if they are on theGoverning Board, while CDE parents said they spend three hours per week on the school. Independentof whether the school has an ACE or CDE, parents said that the time they spend on the school increaseswhen there are special celebrations, fundraising activities, parties, etc.Between 60-80% of parents interviewed attend parent meetings and many of them participate indifferent activities in the schools. The activities that parents are primarily involved in, independent ofwhether they are ACE or CDE schools, are related to food preparation, cleaning the school, repairs atthe school, preparation of the PEI, purchases, fundraising activities, and accompanying the teacher toMINED and other agencies on school business. ACE parents participate in teacher hiring and the financialmanagement of the school, activities in which the CDE parents interviewed are not involved.Half of the ACEs actively participate in the schools’ vision and planning. Both ACEs and CDEshave the responsibility of working with the educational community to develop the educational vision ofthe school and the annual activities plan. These plans are known as the PEI and PEA, respectively. Accordingto the literature, half of the ACEs have demonstrated active participation in planning and implementationof the PEI and PEA. One third (34%) of ACEs meet frequently to evaluate progress with theplan.In the literature reviewed, great weight is definitely given to parent participation in the ACE and its contributionto the creation of social capital. This was confirmed in the words of the parents themselves inthe interviews, where they highlight the priority they give to education, the importance of their childrenhaving a better future, and the role they have as parents, which they internalize because they feel a senseof ownership toward the school.The issue of participation of the educational community provokes controversy in EDUCO becauseACEs have greater direct participation in school administration and in handling teacher hiring. In addition,according to the econometric studies done, it is precisely this factor that gives the ACE-schoolsa certain advantage. One of the main points of reference has to do with the volunteer time that parentsinvest in school management. According to the research team, parents spend on average two millionvolunteer hours on school support activities per year. This represents enormous social capital that, ifunderappreciated, could undermine trust in the government.The ACE and CDE approaches to school governance and administration differ in strategies forimproving access to and quality of education. According to the literature, EDUCO develops a strongsense of ownership, acceptance, and governance by the community to ensure that the school effectivelyresponds to the needs and interests of its primary clients—parents and the community. However, it24
Strategic Review of the EDUCO ProgramJuly 2010combines the functions of school governance and administration in the organization run by the community.In most cases, this way of organizing school management implies a lack of professional educationalmanagement, because of the kind of governing board that administers the school. However, onthe other hand, this somewhat confusing blend of management and governance has the advantage that itcan ensure greater teacher accountability to the community. 5For its part, the CDE is organized so that the entire community can participate, since it includes the entireeducational community—teachers, students, and parents—and is under the leadership of the school’sprincipal. In this case, CDE schools appear to have professional school management because of theappointment of school principals and teachers hired by the government. However, on the other hand, ithas much weaker instruments for making it responsible or accountable to the community. To a certainextent, the fundamental balance between the two school administration entities lies in the school’s accountabilityand professional management.The Role of School PrincipalsAccording to the regulations for ACEs, school principals are not responsible for school administration;this falls to the parents on the ACE Governing Board. However, in reality many of the parentsinterviewed (in our focus groups and in the literature) admit that the principals and teachers offerassistance with this job. It is probable that this “help” varies from being simply and truly just help, to inessence performing the duties, depending on many extremely complex factors. CDE school principalsare responsible for administrative and educational management and are the presidents of the CDEs. Inthis case, the difference between the authority and autonomy of ACE and CDE school principals can beseen, at least “in theory,” although in practice the entities appear to be more than the “theory” or regulationssay. Some of the interviewees mentioned cases of abuse of authority in the CDEs by principals.That is, in the ACEs the parents have responsibility, but at times do not use it; in the case of the CDEs,the principals have the responsibility, but at times abuse it and do not answer to the parents. What iscertain is that this situation shows that there is a vacuum in the roles and responsibilities in the exerciseof school management and confusion between the role of governance and of the daily management ofthe schools in both school models. In reality, what is occurring is that there is more variability withregard to accountability and effectiveness of government and management “within” the ACE model and“within” the CDE model than between the models. This suggests that many of the schools suffer from arelative lack of standards and training. Thus, the differences come from the idiosyncrasies of the particularschools and communities rather than from the models themselves, which signals a lack of qualitycontrol and standardization by the government.Not all ACE schools (or CDE schools) have an appointed principal. According to the most recentdata, there are only 530 appointed principals in ACE schools, while in CDE schools, there are 969. InACE schools, 1,403 teachers who have not been appointed as principal are acting as such, in comparisonwith 711 in CDE schools. Furthermore, in ACE schools the leadership of the principal is relatively5 This report very frequently makes a distinction between “governance” and “management” and insists that, in part, the problem of school governance inEl Salvador is that the laws and regulations do not clearly distinguish between these functions. This is a relatively technical issue, and therefore is notexplained in detail in the body of this document. Annex 4 contains a complete explanation.25
Page 1 and 2: Strategic Review of the EDUCOProgra
Page 3 and 4: Strategic Review of the EDUCO Progr
Page 23: Strategic Review of the EDUCO Progr
Page 75 and 76:
Strategic Review of the EDUCO Progr
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83:
show all

Strategic Review of the EDUCO Program - EQUIP123.net

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?