Strategic Review of the EDUCO Program - EQUIP123.net

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Strategic Review of the EDUCO ProgramJuly 2010Implications of the implementation of Option AWith this option, there would be no need to change current practices.Option B. Keep EDUCO with Changes in Teacher HiringThis option would continue the current system of administration, financial management, and schoolgovernance by the ACEs, but without the specific power to renew teacher contracts each year. Teacherswould be hired directly by the Ministry, which would be their employer. The payment of wagesto teachers would be unified through the regular salary system. Therefore, the ACE would continuedirectly governing and administering the school, but would lose the accountability tool it has in contractrenewal. MINED would have to absorb all EDUCO teachers. This option would not affect CDEschools. The advantages and disadvantages of this option are as follows:AdvantagesDisadvantagesAccess toeducationSimilar to Option A, access to education in ruraland poor areas maintained. Timely responseto urgent needs maintained, with the ACEs’expeditious procedures. Marginal communitieswould continue to have a means to ensureappropriate coverage. Social Education Plangoals maintained in the ACEs.Unclear how to increase middle and highschool coverage.QualityUncertainty and a potential disadvantage.If accountability through the potential fornon-renewal of contracts ensures bettereducational outcomes, and there is a lackof other accountability mechanisms, then,without this tool, learning would not improveor could decrease.AdministrativeandinstitutionalmanagementReduction in work load for MINED at thedepartmental level. School budget wouldhave to be maintained. School managementwould remain the same, except without parentmonitoring of teachers for contract renewal.This could waste all the capacity developedin those parents who have extensiveexperience in school management. It will benecessary to ensure that their support in theschools continues.In reducing accountability, the goal of theSocial Education Plan that strengthenscommunity participation in the ACEs wouldnot be met.36HumanresourcesmanagementTeachers would have job stability by being hireddirectly by MINED. MINED would have somesavings on salaries from elimination of the annualseverance payment.Teachers would receive health care through theTeachers’ Welfare system. 6Teachers would receive less money sincethey would not receive an annual severancepayment, and their year-end bonus wouldbe lower. The nature of the accountabilityrelationship with the school would change,and it is uncertain what impact not havingthis accountability could have on teacherattendance and performance and thereby, onstudent achievement.
Strategic Review of the EDUCO ProgramJuly 2010Implications of the implementation of Option BImplementing this option would involve a significant administrative process to address the individualtransfers of the almost 8,000 teachers who would be switched from one-year contracts to being hiredby MINED. A decision would be needed as to whether transfer would be automatic or based on certainperformance criteria and conditions. The transition calendar should be coordinated with the fiscal yearplanning calendar. The change in policy and the transition process will be confusing for the ACEs andthe affected teachers. To reduce problems, a substantial investment in a public relations and communicationsplan will be necessary. Even more important will be the implementation of a large-scale trainingand orientation program for Departmental Education Offices, school principals, and ACEs to informthem about the implications of the change. It will also require the revision of the ACE manual andprocedures for hiring and firing teachers as well as several adjustments to the Teaching Profession Law.Option C. Keep EDUCO with Changes in the Nature and Responsibilities of ACEs,Stressing Governance over Administration and ManagementThis option changes the regular work of the ACEs. It takes away their day-to-day responsibility forschool administration, financial resources management (purchasing plan, school budget, etc.) and reducesthe ACE’s involvement in teaching as an element of teacher supervision. Changing the ACEs’ regularwork could be achieved by appointing principals with positions, who would assume the daily administrativeand managerial responsibility for the school. Since it might not be realistic to appoint fulltimeprincipals, it might be necessary to review school facilities and enrollment, because it could be possibleto be creative and identify a principal for a group of small schools. The role of the ACEs would change:they would be responsible for the strategic decisions involving the school, setting educational goals, settingthe school’s mission and vision, and approving plans and budgets, as guarantors of governance, butthey would not manage resources or daily activities. The ACE Governing Board would participate inthe school’s management and direction. The ACE would participate in school planning; it would monitorstudents’ academic achievement and would carry out an accountability function, advocating for theschool.In the case of the teachers, they would continue to be hired on annual contracts and would continue tobe liable to dismissal, but these processes would be professionalized under the principal’s direction;performance reviews would be handled together with the school principal, based on clear performancestandards. Any change or improvement in educational outcomes in EDUCO would be achieved throughthe introduction of clearer standards and tools for performance evaluation of the schools’ teachers andprincipals. MINED would continue managing two teacher payment systems, but would clarify the rolesof the principal and the ACE in management and governance. This option would only apply to EDUCOschools; the CDE system would not undergo any changes. The advantages and disadvantages of this optionare as follows:6 The status of specific benefits for teachers, such as inclusion in the Teachers’ Welfare system, could not be conclusively determined, as the¡¢¡£team heard different explanations and opinions.¤¥37
Page 1 and 2: Strategic Review of the EDUCOProgra
Page 3 and 4: Strategic Review of the EDUCO Progr
Page 35: Strategic Review of the EDUCO Progr
Page 83: Strategic Review of the EDUCO Progr

Strategic Review of the EDUCO Program - EQUIP123.net

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?