Decentralization of Educational Management: A Case Study in Oromia National Regional State
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2001-05
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Addis Ababa University
Abstract
The Ethiopian government has pursued decentralization policy by shifting
authority and responsibility to regions. Since 1992, significant changes have
been made in the area of provision of educational services, and the
management of the education system whose foundation was based on the
proclamation issued and the new education and training policy promulgated.
The decentralization reform seeks to improve the access, equity, quality and
efficiency of education. The decentralization process that has been chosen as
an approach to address educational problems was a new phenomena, and a
series of factors can compl icate its implementation. Thus, the objectives of the
study were, to assess how decentralization was working and the extent to
which the administrative levels effectively played their roles in implementing the
policy of decentralization. Furthermore, assessing changes that took place,
favorable conditions and constraints in the implementation were also the focus
of the study. Therefore, the study seeks to contribute valuable information
related to educational management problems, which is hoped to encourage the
conducting of detail process evaluation.
The study has made a brief review of the related literature and experiences of
some countries. Using a descriptive survey method, data are drawn from focus
group meetings, key informant interviews, data gathering questionnaire and
direct observations and transcribed and analyzed.
The report focused on how objectives/ purposes of decentralization filtered
down the educational administrative levels, the extent to which key
management functions were maintained at the intermediate levels, authority
and decision making were shared in key areas and creating an environment for
reform and changes to take place under the decentralization process.
The data indicated that the objectives and purposes of decentralization were
poorly articulated and differences in opinions existed between decision-makers
and implementers. Regarding transfer of power to intermediate levels to under
take the management functions, it was not to the expected level. The findingsshowed that high influence of upper authority in planning functions over the
lower administrative levels was observed and the central ministry loosely
controlled compliance with standards. On the other hand, the degree to which
decision making authority was pushed down to the lower administrative levels
was found to be medium and it was observed that authority was shared among
each level to some extent. However, the data also revealed power
concentration at regional level. The enabling environment so far practiced in
the area of policy issues and interventions was found to be fair. The data
obtained also showed the local capacity of REB and ZED to be fair while it was
poor for WEO.There were also efforts made to delineate responsibilities and authorities at
each level by the REB. However, the leadership and management competence
to create momentum for innovation and facilitate implementation of
decentralized management was found to be low. Although the results of
decentralization take a long time to notice and it would be premature to
interpret the findings as a full impact they, however, signaled the direction of
the changes. Thus, the changes in school environment were reported as a mix
of poor, promising and modest impacts for different educational objectives.
Therefore, it is suggested that building consensus around the objectives of
decentralization, restructuring of the organizational settings, developing
strategies to promote greater school autonomy and capacity building at all
levels are indispensable for the effective implementation and sustainability of
the decentralization efforts.
Description
Keywords
Educational Management