Schulentwicklung kontrovers
This paper
proceeds from the assumption that ‚Schulleitung‘[1] and ‚Teilautonomie‘[2] are seen as desirable concepts
emanating from the economic discourse and the shortness of financial means in the
nineties of the 20th century in Switzerland. Pedagogical postulates
towards the educational system played a subordinate role in the endeavour for
reform. By the way of ten theses questions will be discussed and answered
concerning: The definition of terms in this debate (1), the historical
implications of development in the educational system (2), the adoption of
steering mechanisms from other educational systems (3), the growing problems of
legitimation of public education (4), the assessment of the projects by means
of external evaluation (5), the question of viable alternatives to
public/governmental control of education (6), the quality of the debate with
regard to the system parameters (7), reforms promising success with regard to
the contents for the school of tomorrow (8), the efficiency of the educational
process (9), and the resources for school administration as well as the
problems of staff development in schools (10).
The
analysis of the current situation leads to the conclusion that the call for
improvement in the quality of school education and tuition can give no adequate
answers to the latent problem of legitimation. The strongest roots of this
problem lie in postulates of financial policies, which were one reason that the
reforms with regard to content, that were initially aimed at, were never
thoroughly discussed. Instead the discussion focused on questions of system at
an early stage already. The system reacted with resistance which can be
explained in terms of class politics, but also in terms of contents, with
regard to profession. In this manner the discussion became a debate of wishes
factoring out the system parameters of direct democracy, partly on purpose and
partly from deficits in project management. Meanwhile this debate is threatening
to fail in many places. Reasons for this lie in the adaptation of foreign
management models coming into existence in specific contexts, in which they may
have been successful. The empirical findings related to these projects were not
received or only at a very late state. In the knowledge that only a free choice
of school and the laws of the markets would be conditions promising success,
set pieces of the models were combined with models in New Public Management
(NPM) – theory and propagated for Swiss schools. The innovations signing for
the Helvetic neologism of ‘Teilautonomie’ produced more and more of their own
empirical data that occasionally brought forth some critically questioning
results. These results find their way into the political debate on educational
issues only insufficiently.
This study
does not question the fact that the investment of means in schools must be
legitimated even more clearly through publicly effective proof of performance.
In the same way there is a need to establish administrative support of schools
(budget, staff development, real estate) or to professionalise it. By setting
up a ‘Schulleitung’, who has to face these challenges and countless
responsibilities concerning contents and pedagogical questions additionally, the
wrong direction has been chosen for elementary education. Firstly, the
institution ‘Schulleitung’ tips over the finely balanced system of the
supervisory school authorities, whereas at the same time a long-term
improvement of even one component of school can not be expected under the
existing circumstances. Secondly, public discourse concerning necessary reforms
and questions with regard to the knowledge our future society will need, is
still avoided. Thirdly and above all, a pedagogical ‘Schulleitung’ diminishes
the requirements and expectations to qualitatively improve the professionalism
of the teacher and the efficiency of the educational process.
This paper ends with recommendations to focus the
inquisitive perspective towards the development of the system of school
education on the contents and to translate into action now the insights that have been gained with regard to necessary publicity work and efficient
administration. Alternative models of staff development in schools are
proposed.
.jpg)
