Centralised and Decentralised Education: With the British Local Educational Authorities as the Representative of the Unfolding Discussion

Qiwei Li

doi:10.54254/2753-7048/7/20220811

Research Article

Open access

Published on 17 May 2023

Download pdf

Li,Q. (2023). Centralised and Decentralised Education: With the British Local Educational Authorities as the Representative of the Unfolding Discussion. Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media,7,249-259.

Export citation

Centralised and Decentralised Education: With the British Local Educational Authorities as the Representative of the Unfolding Discussion

Qiwei Li *^,1,

¹ Department of Sociology, University of York, Heslington, York, England

* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.

https://doi.org/10.54254/2753-7048/7/20220811

Abstract

In today’s globalised and knowledge-based society, countries across the world are increasingly adopting different models to structure and organise their education systems. More subtly, countries are transitioning from centralised education systems to decentralised ones to create more local stakeholder influence on schools. England, which is known for self-managing schools, is a case in point. Striking an appropriate balance between centralisation and decentralisation remains a challenge, however. In this regard, this study sought to explore the innovative approaches of educational decentralisation in British local educational authorities and the challenges facing them, as well as the strategies adopted by British local educational authorities to overcome these challenges so as to provide reference to other countries. Desk-based research was used for data collection. The findings suggest that although a centralised education system is praised for reducing inequalities and standardisation, it often fails to reflect the specific needs of learners because the system is not school-led. On the other hand, a decentralised educational system is preferred in England for many reasons, including better information and targeting, greater voice and participation, innovative and creative approaches, and improved efficiency and strengthened accountability relationships. Despite this, however, it may encourage social inequalities, in addition to being captive of some elite groups or special interest groups. England adopts devolution as its approach to educational decentralisation. In addition to this general approach, school-based management is particularly used to empower local educators, students, and parents. However, the country’s education system is littered with educational inequalities. The system can also be captive of elite groups.

Keywords

centralised education, decentralised education, education system, educational authorities

View pdf

References

[1]. Turner, D. (2004). Privatisation, Decentralisation and Education In The United Kingdom: The Role of the State. International Review of Education, 50(3): 347-357. doi:10.1007/s11159-004-2627-1

[2]. Lo, W. Y. W., and Gu, J. O. (2008). Reforming School Governance In Taiwan and South Korea: Empowerment and Autonomization In School-based Management. International Journal of Education Management, 22(6): 506-526. doi:10.1108/09513540810895435

[3]. Bray, M. (1991). Centralisation Versus Decentralisation In Educational Administration: Regional Issues. Educational Policy, 5(4): 371-385. doi:10.1177/0895904891005004003

[4]. Saiti, A., and Eliophotou-Menon, M. (2009). Educational Decision Making In A Centralised System: The Case of Greece. International Journal of Educational Management, 23(6): 446-455. doi:10.1108/09513540910980998

[5]. Qian, X., and Verhoeven, J. C. (2004). From Centralisation to Decentralisation in Chinese Higher Education. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(67).

[6]. Prawda, J. (1993). Educational Decentralisation In Latin America: Lessons Learned. International Journal of Educational Development, 13(3): 253-264.

[7]. Qi, X. (2018). Policy and Practice of the Decentralisation of Basic Education In China: The Shanghai Case. Front Edu China, 12: 445-467. doi:10.1007/s11516-017-0033-2

[8]. Leung, F. K. S. (2004). Educational Centralisation and Decentralisation In East Asia. APEC Educational Reform Summit, 14(1): 1-11.

[9]. Hanson, E. M. (1997). Educational Decentralisation: Issues and Challenges.

[10]. Hanson, E. M. (1998). Strategies of Educational Decentralisation: Key Questions and Core Issues. Journal of Educational Administration, 36(2): 111-128. doi:10.1108/09578239810204345

[11]. Rodden, J. (2004). Comparative Federalism and Decentralisation: On Meaning and Measurement. Comparative Politics, 481-500.

[12]. Bossert, T. J. (2014). Empirical Studies of An Approach To Decentralisation: ‘Decision Space’ In Decentralised Health System. Public Adm Dev, 26(4): 303-315.

[13]. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., Thornhill, A., and Wilson, J. (2009). Business Research Methods. Financial Times, Prentice Hall: London.

[14]. Goodwin, K. A., and Goodwin, C. J. (2016). Research In Psychology: Methods and Design. John Wiley and Sons.

[15]. Garner, R. (2008). Lib Dems Say They Would Abolish National Curriculum Exams. Independent. Retrieved from: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/lib-dems-say-they-would-abolish-national-curriculum-exams-847840.html

[16]. Department for Education. (2014). The Evolving Education System in England: A ‘Temperature Check’. Research Report. Retrieved from: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/325816/DFE-RR359.pdf

[17]. Weale, S. (2021). ‘Creativity Crisis’ Looms for English Schools Due to Arts Cuts, Says Labour. The Guardian. Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/jul/15/creativity-crisis-looms-for-english-schools-due-to-arts-cuts-says-labour

[18]. Department for Education. (2020). Maintained School Governance: Structures and Role Descriptors. Retrieved from: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/937573/Maintained_governance_role_descriptors.pdf

[19]. Staton, B. (2022). Educational Inequalities In England Barely Improve In Two Decades, Study Finds. Financial Times. Retrieved from: https://www.ft.com/content/aa247f99-9164-4869-b957-0d295facf0e5

[20]. The National Archives. (1980). UK Public General Acts: Education Act 1980. Retrieved from: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/20/contents

[21]. Lough, C. (2022). Zahawi: Pupils Not In Strong Academy Trusts Are Missing Out On Life Chances. Independent. Retrieved from: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/nadhim-zahawi-schools-covid-bill-birmingham-b2102488.html

[22]. Reynolds, K. (2014). Does England’s Education System Need More Devolution?. The Conversation. Retrieved from: https://theconversation.com/does-englands-education-system-need-more-devolution-31991

[23]. Adam, R. (2022). Nadhim Zahawi Makes U-turn On Schools Bill After Criticism. The Guardian. Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2022/jun/30/government-announces-u-turn-on-schools-bill-after-criticism

[24]. Coughlan, S. (2014). Wilshaw Warns MPs of Trojan School Extremism Risk. BBC News. Retrieved from: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-28226642

[25]. Compass. (2014). The Interim Report of the Inquiry Into a 21st Century Education System. Retrieved from: https://www.compassonline.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/78fe8b157df89dc89b_9em6b4j8f.pdf

[26]. Roos, N. P., Brownell, M., Guevremont, A., Fransoo, R., Levin, B., MacWilliam, L., and Roos, L. L. (2006). The Complete Story: A Population-Based Perspective On School Performance and Educational Testing. Canadian Journal of Education, 29(3): 684-705. doi:10.2307/20054191

[27]. Sheldon, S. B., and Epstein, J. L. (2004). Getting Students to School: Using Family and Community Involvement to Reduce Chronic Absenteeism. School Community Journal, 14(2): 39-56.

[28]. Moate, J., Lempel, L., Palojarvi, A., and Kangasvieri, T. (2020). Teacher Development Through Language-related Innovation In A Decentralised Educational System. Professional Development In Education. doi:10.1080/19415257.2021.1902838

[29]. Busemeyer, M. R. (2012). Two Decades of Decentralisation In Education Governance: Lesson Learned and Future Outlook for Local Stakeholders. OECD Conference. Retrieved from: https://ams-forschungsnetzwerk.at/downloadpub/50293543_Two_decades_of_decentralization_in_education_governance.pdf

[30]. Gamage, D. T., and Zajda, J. (2009). Decentralisation and School-Based Governance: A Comparative Study of Self-Governing School Models. In Decentralisation, School-Based Management, and Quality, 3-22. doi:10.1007/978-90-481-2703-0_1

[31]. Eacott, S. (2011). Liberating Schools Through Devolution: The Trojan Horse of the State. Leading and Managing, 17(1): 75-83.

[32]. Edukacja, K. (2014). Inequity In a Decentralised Education System – Evidence From Poland. Academia, 6(141): 5-22.

[33]. Wilkinson, R., and Pickett, K. (2010). The Spirit Level: Why Equality is Better for Everyone. London: Penguin.

Cite this article

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.

Disclaimer/Publisher's Note

The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

About volume

Volume title: Proceedings of the International Conference on Interdisciplinary Humanities and Communication Studies (ICIHCS 2022), Part 6

Conference website: https://www.icihcs.org/

ISBN：978-1-915371-39-3(Print) / 978-1-915371-40-9(Online)

Conference date: 18 December 2022

Editor：Muhammad Idrees, Matilde Lafuente-Lechuga

Series: Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media

Volume number: Vol.7

ISSN：2753-7048(Print) / 2753-7056(Online)

© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See Open access policy for details).