Governance and School Leadership in the Flemish System

Diversity and Partnerships

Gaby Hostens

OECD-workshop

Brussels, 1-2 February 2007

1. Political context

2. Constitutional context

3. Educational context

4. Governance in education

5. Attractive, Developing and Retaining Effective School Leaders

6. Performances of Flemish schools in international surveys (PISA, TIMSS)

7. Major challenges for education policies

I. Political context

1. Belgium : a federal country

2. 3 Communities :

- Flemish : ± 6 mio = Dutch-speaking

- French : ± 4 mio

- German : 0,1 mio

3. Competencies in education

Systems have grown apart

- Governance : the role of ministers of education

- Funding mechanisms

- Curricula

- Quality assurance mechanisms

- Teacher salaries

Performances of the systems

II. Constitutional contextHas impact on governance 1. Freedom of education

a. Freedom for providers = freedom to start a schoolGreat diversity of providers* Private organisations* Municipalities, provinces* State → Community

b. Freedom to choose a school = free choice for parents

Schools compete for students ! Quasi-marketInformed choice ? Voice ?Equity ?

c. How to implement freedom of education ?- Providers :

* Financial support* Pedagogical autonomy

* Obligation to enroll students

Great responsibilities

- Parents, students* No fees during compulsory

education* The right to enroll* Geographical accessibility

d. A great diversity of providers. Diversity of

- Pedagogical projects

- Denominational, non-denominational, official schools

- Size of school boards

Impact on governance

Impact on school leadership

2. The right to education

a. Entitlement to the school of your choiceb. Entitlement to high quality education

= a challenging curriculum

c. The right to enroll

3. Equal treatment of students, teachers, parents, schools

But : objective differences are allowed

III. Educational context Defining characteristics/features of the system

1. A large diversity of relatively by autonomous providers

2. Autonomous providers have networkedhave been networked - Catholic schools - State, community schools - Municipal schools - Provincial schools

3. National core curriculum = a minimum

4. A compulsory ‘schooling’ period of 12 years

5. No national exams (A-levels, Bac, etc.) No standardised tests at key stages

6. Schools that meet legal criteria issue valid diplomas

7. Input funding based on enrolment figures = No output funding based on performances

Funding mechanism : sensitive to student enrolment

8. Accountability mechanisms- Inspectorate - Free choice?

IV. Governance in education

Introduction :

- Many layers of government

- Involvement of a great many stakeholders

- Heavily institutionalised

1. Different layers

a. Organising bodies = school boards

→ Bear the full responsibility for operation of their schools

- Employers- Pedagogical autonomy- Quality outcomes : performances- Financial management- Infrastructure

But organising bodies, school boards- For community schools = school group- For municipality schools = municipal council

- For private schools* Religious congregations* Diocese* Local organisations* Etc.

School boards = Schulträger- Critical in education in Flanders- Central role in organisation of schooling

b. Communities of schools in primary educationand

secondary education- Regional networks of schools- A limited number of competencies- Diversity in communities of schools,

differences in :* Geographical spread* Size : number of schools, number of

students* Impact on individual schools

- Policy objectives :* Achieve a more rational school landscape* More rational use of resources* Better career guidance for students

c. National networks of schools = umbrella

organisations

- Membership : voluntary vs compulsory

- Roles :

* Representation

* Capacity building

* Curriculum development

* Professional support

→ Important actors at macro level

2. Involvement of stakeholders

a. Teaching unions. Reflecting diversity of theschooling system !

Representative unions are members of appropriate committees at every

level :

Local : Schools

Regional : Communities of schools

National : Umbrella organisation and

Government

b. Umbrella organisations (providers)

c. Other stakeholders such as parents, teachers, students, social partners, etc.Well developed legal framework for

participation at : - School level

- National level→ Monitoring by the inspectorate

3. Advisory bodiesa. Flemish Educational Council = VLOR

- Composition : all relevant stakeholders + elected headmastersand teachers

- Competencies :* Advice* Consultation* Study

→ Involvement of a great many people→ VLOR : important actor in

policymaking

b. Flemish University Council = VLIR

c. Flemish Council for Colleges for Higher Education = VLHORA

4. Negotiating bodies

- Minister of education

+

- Umbrella organisations, representing the school

boards

+

- Teaching unionsChecks and balances

Governance structure : lean and mean ?

Decision-making process : slow !

V. Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective School Leaders1. Diversity in school boards, organising bodies

↓Impact on school leadershipImpact on attracting school leaders

2. Differences in challenges and approachesa. Size mattersb. Professional vs less professional approach to

attracting and selecting headmasters- Scouting potential candidates- Closed vs open system- Assessment mechanisms

c. Training and professional development

- Pre-service training :

* Certificate in community education

* No certificate in private or municipal schools

- In-service-training for headmasters

* A wide supply of academic and other courses

* Peer learning

VI. Performances of Flemish schools in international surveys. PISA, TIMSS

1. Does the system achieve quality?

a. Excellent average performances

b. Consistency of performances across

- Age cohorts : 13 vs 15-year-old students

- Subjects : Mathematical literacy

Scientific literacy

Reading literacy

- Surveys : PISA – TIMSS

- Periods : 1995 → 2003

c. A large cohort of excellent performances

2. Does the system achieve equity ?

1. Large gap between excellent and low performances

2. Large impact of socio-economic background

3. Weak performances of first and second generation immigrant students

Low Performanc

e

HighMathematics performance

Low performance

Low social equity

High performance

Low social equity

Low performance

High social equity

High performance

High social equity

Strong impact of social background on

performance

Moderate impact of social

background on performance

ItalyPortugal

LatviaUnited StatesSpain

Norway

Hungary PolandLuxembourg

Slovak Republic

AustriaGermany Ireland

DenmarkFrance

Sweden

Czech RepublicIceland

Australia

Japan

Belgium

New Zealand

Switzerland Macao-China

Canada

Netherlands

Finland

Hong Kong-China

Korea

Liechtenstein

Russian Federation

Greece

440

460

480

500

520

540

Bel -Flemish Community

Bel - French Community

VII. Major challenges for education policies1. Good governance

a. School leadership : effective school leaders- Shortages- Quality of candidates- Training and professional development- Mandate vs tenure for heads of secondary schools

b. School leadership : effective school leadershipOne-man show versus team leadership

c. Involvement of all stakeholders- Participation in elections- Genuine involvement in committees

d. Professional school boards- Good pool of excellent candidates ?

2. Achieve quality and equity in the system- Mitigate impact of socio-economic

background- Raise performances of immigrant students- Narrow achievement gap between schools

→ Effective school leaders