Strategic Review of the EDUCO Program - EQUIP123.net

Strategic Review of the EDUCO ProgramJuly 2010Summary: A Problematic Parallel System Exists in ACE and CDE-SchoolsCDE school principals are interested in ensuring a good level of teacher performance, but lackthe necessary support to do so. In general, CDE school principals suggest that the Teaching ProfessionLaw should be amended to enable inducing teachers to maintain a good level of professional work.This would also require changing the models of governance, to give schools a greater sense of “outwardresponsibility,” which would tend to put a halt to the wear and tear from having the luxury to allow internalbattles. Moreover, no less than half the people interviewed said they would be in agreement withbeing able to dismiss an employee following an evaluation and repeated reprimands. However, opinionwas divided about the possibility, if the law were amended, of the principal being the one to assume theresponsibility of evaluating and dismissing the teacher. They proposed that the ACEs or CDEs couldformally suggest possible sanctions before a competent entity (one that acts conscientiously, and not theway they have up until now), leading to the possibility of dismissal.El Salvador is leaning in two directions at the same time. On the one side, it offers the ACE schools, amodel of education that gives the responsibility for running the school to the parents, who participate activelyand exercise relatively effective accountability. They have the administrative, financial, and hiringresponsibility and manage human resources, in accordance with special regulations for ACE schools.Here, there are not many appointed principals and those who do exercise this role do not have the correspondingleadership or the incentives to do it well. This ACE model serves relatively poor communities,ensures coverage for these students, and attains academic achievement equivalent to the traditional educationalmodel, despite inferior working conditions. CDE schools represent the more traditional model.They are run by principals who are responsible for managing the school and who are accompanied bya governing council that has parent, teacher, and student members. With this type of representation,parents cannot demand effective accountability, which enables CDE schools, in many cases, to be placesfor clashes and conflict more than for serving students. It should be noted that among CDE schools, notall have an appointed principal, and many principals, whether appointed or acting, have not been fullytrained for their roles, and receive little ongoing support. In CDE schools, neither principals nor parentshave the authority to hire or fire teachers, at least according to the Teaching Profession Law, and have togo through other institutional channels to select or remove teachers. In this CDE model, students learnonly as well as ACE school students, despite not being as poor and despite having, in general, betterconditions, which suggest that the CDE model is not as efficient as the ACE model. To a certain degree,it could be said that both ACE and CDE schools have problems, but the problems are, up to a point, mirrorimages of each other. ACE schools achieve greater accountability and greater efficiency, but createanxiety among teachers. CDE school teachers have longer tenure, but also have less discipline, becausethere is less community power, and therefore, are less efficient (they have equal achievement despitehaving better conditions).32