Strategic Review of the EDUCO Program - EQUIP123.net

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Strategic Review of the EDUCO ProgramJuly 2010weak. Principals do not have adequate incentives or support to do their work. This situation is moreevident in ACE schools than in CDE schools, although both systems are affected. This situation is worrisome,since the international literature points out the proven importance of having a principal in eachschool who has been appointed, and is fully empowered to manage the school and be the pedagogicleader of the teachers. If most principals are teachers acting as principals, who do not feel they haveenough power or monetary remuneration to exercise the position and to also teach class, and where, asin El Salvador, being a principal means having a large bureaucratic burden, it is very unlikely that principalscan do their jobs well.There are differences in the selection, hiring, and renewal of terms of principals between ACE andCDE schools. ACE-school principals, just like ACE-school teachers, are hired on annual contracts andat the end of the year the ACE and the community determine whether to renew the contract, which is,therefore, the most hard-hitting way of evaluating their performance. In the case of CDEs, principalscan be appointed for up to five years, and their terms can be renewed, if the evaluation of their work bythe Council of Teachers, the School Governing Council, and the Student Council, in accordance withtheir respective regulations, is favorable. In any case, the Court of the Teaching Profession must issuea judgment (Article 46). The Court of the Teaching Profession has the responsibility to administer theinstruments that evaluate the performance of the respective position and to make the decision to acceptor reject renewals. To give an example, in 2009, the Court renewed 53 of the 85 applications submittedby principals (Tribunal Calificador, 2010). This issue merits a separate analysis. On the one hand, theissue of principals and their appointments is confusing, but in addition, in the case of CDE schools, theirrenewal can lead to charges of favoritism and even power struggles in the school between those whowant to renew the principal’s contract and those who do not. These struggles (at times partisan, involvingparty or trade union politics) are a disadvantage in CDE schools and tend to discourage conscientiousparents and attract less conscientious parents to these struggles. All this profoundly impairs theeducational mission of the school and is a much more common problem in CDE schools than in ACEschools.In short, the administrative, financial, and managerial differences among schools, and the difference inthe performance evaluation processes for principals between ACE and CDE schools, are relevant issuesthat will be considered in the options, given their impact on learning.Human Resources ManagementTeacher Selection and HiringAt present, ACE and CDE school teachers belong to the career ladder system, the same salaryscale applies to them, and their work history is on record at MINED. They are classified into twolevels based on academic training and into six 5-year categories according to the teachers’ length of26
Strategic Review of the EDUCO ProgramJuly 2010service. This results in the salary scale shown in Table 4. According to the data reviewed, most teachersare at level 2, category 5; that is, they have 5-10 years of experience. Important to note here is that thereis no division between ACE and CDE teachers with regard to the career ladder.Table 4. EDUCO salary table, adjusted to the scale for traditional-system teachersCategory Level SalaryOvertimeRuralIncentiveDecree633TotalAccruedRentISSSAFPPensionTotalPayment4 1 617.63 200 40 857.63 68.42 20.57 53.6 715.044 1 617.63 40 657.63 43.57 19.73 41.1 553.234 2 561.48 200 40 801.48 57.05 20.57 50.09 673.774 2 561.48 40 601.48 38.3 18.04 37.59 507.555 1 571.88 200 40 811.88 58.03 20.57 50.74 682.545 1 571.88 40 611.88 39.28 18.36 38.24 5165 2 519.89 200 40 759.89 53.15 20.57 47.49 638.685 2 519.89 40 559.89 34.4 16.8 34.99 473.76 1 519.89 200 40 759.89 53.15 20.57 47.49 638.686 1 519.89 40 559.89 34.4 16.8 34.99 473.76 2 472.63 200 40 25 737.63 51.07 20.57 46.1 619.896 2 472.63 40 25 537.63 32.32 16.13 33.6 455.58Source: MINED, 2009Salary differences between ACE and CDE school teachers result in ACE teachers receiving moremoney. According to the Wage Law, teachers in El Salvador receive remuneration composed of a basewage and a year-end bonus. There is a difference between the year-end bonus for teachers covered byEDUCO and those under the Wage Law. In EDUCO, the year-end bonus is calculated based on thelength of service at the same ACE school, according to the Labor Law (for example, a teacher with 3-10years of service would receive a year-end bonus of $379.95). Wage Law teachers receive a year-endbonus that is a fixed, equal amount ($288.45) for all teachers, according to the Budget Law.EDUCO teachers, who are governed by the Labor Law, receive a severance payment at the end of theyear (indemnización) corresponding to one month’s base wage. For level 2, category 5 teachers, thismeans an additional $510 that teachers in the Wage Law system do not receive.Although all teachers, without exception, do receive a benefits package, there are differences inthe packages for EDUCO teachers and Wage Law system teachers. EDUCO teachers have healthinsurance through the ISSS, which covers the family group until age 18, and for which MINED pays7.5% as the employer’s contribution. Wage Law teachers are covered by the Teachers’ Welfare healthsystem, which covers the family group with children up to age 21, children with a disability with no age27
Page 1 and 2: Strategic Review of the EDUCOProgra
Page 3 and 4: Strategic Review of the EDUCO Progr
Page 25: Strategic Review of the EDUCO Progr
Page 77 and 78:
Strategic Review of the EDUCO Progr
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?