پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 25 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 932 |
| تعداد مقالات | 7,652 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 12,493,169 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 8,884,810 |
استراتژی‌های تمرکززدایی در نظام آموزش و پرورش ایران | ||
| اندیشه های نوین تربیتی | ||
| مقاله 9، دوره 19، شماره 2 - شماره پیاپی 68، تیر 1402، صفحه 165-184 اصل مقاله (572.3 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: تحقیق کیفی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22051/jontoe.2022.40822.3608 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| محمد صادق کریمی1؛ رضا هویدا* 2؛ سید علی سیادت3 | ||
| 1دانشجوی دکترای مدیریت آموزشی، گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران. مربی گروه علوم تربیتی دانشگاه فرهنگیان کرمانشاه | ||
| 2دانشیار گروه علوم تربیتی دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران | ||
| 3استاد گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| هدف این پژوهش، شناسایی و تدوین استراتژی‌های تسهیل‌کنندۀ تمرکززدایی در نظام آموزش و پرورش ایران است. این پژوهش کیفی با رویکرد داده‌بنیاد اجرا شده است. داده‌های اولیه از طریق مصاحبه نیمه‌سازمانیافته گردآوری و با ابزار “SWOT”، تجزیه و تحلیل شده است. جامعۀ پژوهش شامل صاحب‌نظران و مدیران عالی آموزش و پرورش بوده، که 25 نفر با روش هدفمند به‌عنوان نمونه انتخاب شدند. در کدگذاری اولیه شانزده عامل داخلی و هجده عامل بیرونی تعیین شد. نتایج جهت تأیید اعتبار و ضریب‌دهی برای مشارکت‌کنندگان ارسال شد. ضرایب وزنی نهایی در هر دو حوزۀ داخلی و خارجی نشان داده که شرایط و استراتژی‌های کنونی آموزش و پرورش اثربخشی لازم برای بهبود و کاهش نقاط ضعف و تهدیدها و به‌رهبرداری از قوت‌ها و فرصت‌ها را ندارد. با تشکیل ماتریس “SWOT”، استراتژی‌های؛ "هدایت اعتبارات پژوهشی برای طراحی نقشۀ جامع استانی و منطقه‌ای"، "توسعۀ انجمن‌های علمی"، "کاهش دغدغه‌های حاکمیت در حفظ وحدت"، "توسعۀ تدریجی اختیارات شوراها"، "توسعه و استمرار ارتباط با مجلس و مدیران سیاسی"، "شناسایی قابلیتها، نیازها و محدودیتهای مناطق"، "تقویت برنامه‌های درسی و آموزش‌های متناسب با بوم"، "توانمندسازی نیروی انسانی"، "تعدیل واحدهای ستادی"، "جلب حمایت قوای سه‌گانه"، "توسعۀ تدریجی اختیارات استانی"، "توسعۀ مدارس وابسته" و "شناسایی و جذب منابع بالقوه" ارائه شده است | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| آموزش و پرورش؛ استراتژی؛ تمرکززدایی؛ سوآت؛ متمرکز | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Decentralization strategies in the Iranian education system | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Mohammad Sadegh Karimi1؛ Reza Hoveida2؛ Seyed Ali Siadat3 | ||
| 1PhD student in Educational Management, Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology, Isfahan University, Isfahan, Iran . Instructor, Department of Educational Sciences, Farhangian University, Kermanshah | ||
| 2Associate Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran | ||
| 3Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| The aim of this study was to present decentralization strategies in the Iranian education system by identifying weaknesses, strengths, opportunities and threats to decentralization through "SWOT" matrix. Preliminary data for identifying internal and external factors influencing the way education is administered were obtained through semi-structured interviews with 25 experts and senior and middle managers of education. Analysis of the interview transcripts led to the emergence of sixteen internal factors and eighteen external factors. Results were sent to the participants for validation and rating. The sum of the final weighting coefficients in both internal and external domains shows that the current status of education and its strategies are not effective enough to reduce weaknesses and threats or exploit strengths and opportunities. Comparison of factors in the analytical matrix led to the emergence of thirteen strategies in competitive, aggressive, defensive and conservative domains. These strategies can use opportunities and strengths to control threats and weaknesses and facilitate the effective implementation of decentralization schemes. Introduction: Iran enjoys diverse climates, economic and social conditions and subcultures. Therefore, residents of each region have different educational needs. Meanwhile, Iran's education system has a completely centralized structure which offers the same educational programs and lessons throughout the country. Education plays an important role in the development process. Therefore, there is an urgent need for internal development of this institution on which all aspects of development depend. A large organization such as education department with so many problems in planning, organization, coordination, supervision and leadership, a school-based management should be developed and applied (Jafari, 2021). Furthermore, centralized management of education in Iran has reduced the inefficiency and effectiveness of schools. Therefore, experts have emphasized the need for revising and transforming education system in line with decentralization and delegation of authority (Jafari Moghadam & Fani, 2002). Many administrators and experts acknowledge the inefficiency of the current centralized structure, emphasize the need for decentralization of the Iranian education system, and mention concentration as the cause of many problems in Iran's education system (Farhadi Rad et al., 2019). Another study also confirms the necessity of revising the centralized educational system of a country with the climatic, cultural, social and economic characteristics of Iran (Quak, 2020; EASNIE, 2017). Therefore, the main objective of this research is to identify and introduce strategies that can use internal organizational strengths and environmental opportunities to manage the weaknesses and threats in the direction of decentralization in Iran's education system. Methodology: This research is a qualitative study based on grounded theory. The data collection tool was a semi-structured interviews. The data recorded in the interview process was coded based on the SWOT model to identify and extract internal factors (weaknesses and strengths) and external factors (opportunities and threats). For this purpose, the internal strengths and weaknesses of education and environmental opportunities and threats that can hinder or facilitate decentralization were identified and coded based on the experiences and studies of the participants. The target population in this research included senior high and middle managers of education after the Islamic Revolution, who had more management experience, and experts with studies related to education. Purposive sampling was used to select 15 managers with the most managerial records in education and 10 experts. Despite achieving theoretical saturation by 14 interviews, eight other managers and experts were also interviewed online in order to strengthen the validity of the data. The identified factors resulting from open coding, which were approved by the participants, were classified during axial coding under the categories of strengths, weaknesses, threats and opportunities, and validated through member check and external check. The weighted score of the factors was calculated based on the opinion of the participants. Four strategies were identified in the final matrix and prioritized based on the quantitative strategic planning matrix (QSPM). Results: According to the opinions, experiences and studies of the participants, the weaknesses and threats were experienced far more than the strengths and opportunities. In this analysis, ten threats and ten weaknesses were identified. Meanwhile, six internal organizational strengths and eight environmental opportunities were identified, which were approved by the participants and supervising experts. The final score in both internal and external domains was less than 2.5, which shows that the current strategies have not been effective in dealing with the existing factors. The set of internal factors (strengths and weaknesses) and external factors (opportunities and threats) identified are reflected in Table 1. SWOT matrix analysis also led to the identification of three aggressive strategies, four competitive strategies, three defensive strategies and three conservative strategies. The matrix for determining the four strategies is shown in Table 2. The output of QSPM shows that the strategy of "gradual increase in the powers of provincial, district and school councils" with a score of 3.37 is the first priority and the strategy of "empowering human resources" with a score of 2.22, is the last priority. We are providing solutions for each of the identified strategies. These solutions were identified in the process of coding the interview transcripts, based on the participants’ opinions. Some of the most important solutions include continuous communication with the members of the parliament (MPs) and inviting them to participate in the meetings of the educational councils, compiling local plans in line with the reform document with the participation of managers, teachers and experts in each region, developing and strengthening agricultural, technical and vocational schools in local fields of study, forming scientific associations, gradual delegation of parts of the responsibility of monitoring educational content and quality to related associations, designing and implementing programs to acquaint local students with common cultural roots, facilitating the establishment of schools affiliated to the public and private sectors, presenting incentive schemes for the transfer of headquarters forces to districts and schools, forming the Strategic Council for Education Reforms with the presence of representatives of the legislative, judicial, executive and influential institutions and creating communication networks between scientific associations and regional councils. Discussion and conclusion: Experts and even education managers agree on the problems of the ineffectiveness of the current centralized structure of education and the necessity of its reform and decentralization. This structure does not respond to individual and social needs and environmental changes, and it should be modified according to the current conditions. However, factors inside and outside the system have always prevented reform and decentralization. Some of these factors are caused by the centralized structure of the political system and some are due to the resistance of powerful groups who prevent decentralization in order to protect their interests. The application of strategies such as "formation of the Strategic Council of Reforms" and "establishing continuous communication with political managers and MPs" to gain the support of political and legislative power institutions, facilitates the implementation of decentralization. Under the support of these institutions, it is possible to gradually delegate the authority of decision-making and planning according to local conditions and needs to provinces, regions and schools. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| "centralized", "Decentralization", "Education", "Strategy", "SWOT" | ||
|
سایر فایل های مرتبط با مقاله
|
||
| مراجع | ||
|
Abdel-Moneim, M.A. (2020). Between global and national prescriptions for education administration: the rocky road of neoliberal education reform in Qatar. International Journal of Educational Development, (74):1-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2020.102160 Abtahi, Seyedhosein & Mousavi, Seyed Mohammad (2009). Designing Human Resource Strategies (Case Study: A Spiritual Organization). Journal of Research in Human Resources Management. 1(3): 1-23. (Text in Persian). Amin Khandaghi, M. & Dehghani, M (2011). Reflection on Centralization, Decentralization and Recentralization and Explanation of Their Implications for Iran's Curriculum System: A New Perspective. foundations of education. 11(2): 165-184. https://doi.org/10.22067/fe.v11i2.2495 (Text in Persian). Arefi, M. (2007). Analysis of the decentralized approach in the Iranian educational system based on human resources. Journal of Educational Psychology Studies, 4(6): 85-102. (Text in Persian). Ayeni, Adeolu J. & Ibukun, W. O. (2013). A Conceptual Model for School-Based Management Operation and Quality Assurance in Nigerian Secondary Schools. Journal of Education and Learning, 2(2):36-43. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jel.v2n2p36 Baacha, N.; Haidar, S. & Soomro, K. A. (2020). Decentralization, Effective Accountability, and Monitoring of Public Schools in Pakistan: Community Awareness and Reliance Indispensable. Journal of Elementary Education, 29(2):51-68. Balıkçı, A. & Türkoğlu, Muhammet Emin (2020). A Comparative Evaluation on the Central Structure of the Ministry of National Education. International Journal of Society Research, 15(21). 356-377. Beard, V. A., Miraftab, F. & Silver, C. (2008). Planning and Decentralization: Contested Spaces for public Action in the Global South, Translated by Abbas Akhoundi & Samaneh Afshari (2018): Tehran: Agah. (Text in Persian). Bernbaum, M. (2011). A Guide to Education Project Design, Implementation, and Evaluation Based on Experiences from EQUIP2 Projects in Egypt, Georgia, Mali, and Malawi. Washington, DC: Educational Quality Improvement Program (EQUIP), FHI 360. Bida, O. (2021). Decentralization Policy and Local Education Disparities in Southeast Sulawesi Province. Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Negara (AsiAN), 9(1). 228-248. https://doi.org/10.30589/pgr.v2i3.109 Channa, A. & Faguet, Jean-Paul (2012). Decentralization of health and education in developing countries: a quality-adjusted review of the empirical literature. Economic organisation and public policy discussion papers, EOPP 38. STICERD, London, UK. available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/44887/ De Luna, M. C. (2021). Challenges and complexities of school-based management: Level of perception of the pre-service teachers of bulsu hagonoy campus. (February 27, 2021). available at: SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3794437 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3794437 Edwards, Jr. D. B., & DeMatthews, D. (2014). Historical trends in educational decentralization in the United States and developing countries: A periodization and comparison in the post-WWII context. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(40):1-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v22n40.2014 European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education (2017). Decentralisation in Education Systems – Seminar Report. (V.J. Donnelly, E. Óskarsdóttir and A. Watkins, eds.). Odense, Denmark. Evendia, M. & Firmansyah, A. A. (2021). legal redesigantion of central and regional authorities to strengthen sinergity in public services. Kanun Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 23(1):23-48. Farajirad, K.; Kazemian, G. & Rokneddin Eftekhari, A. (2013). Pathology of Regional Development Policies in Iran: An Institutional Approach. Management and Development Process, 26(2): 27-58. http://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.17350719.1392.26.2.2.0 (Text in Persian). Farhadi Rad, H.; Shahi, S. & Tahmasebi, F. (2019). An investigation into the requirements and circumstances of decentralization in Ahvaz education: viewpoint, leadership and human resource. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Administration, 10(38): 57-76. (Text in Persian). Fred R. David (1999). StrateGic Management. Translated by: parsian A. & Aarabi S. M. (2021). Tehran: Cultural Research Office. (Text in Persian). Haghighi, M. (2012). The Role of Decentralization and Delegation of Authority in the Structure of Education. Educational Administration Research Quartery, 3(11): 57-74. (Text in Persian). Jafari Moghadam, S. & Fani, AliAsghar (2002). Designing a school-based management system in Iran. Modares. 6(3): 1-16. (Text in Persian). Jafari, S. (2021). Developing and Validating a School-Based Management Model Based on of the Fundamental Reform Document. Managing Education in Organizations, 10(2): 187-223. http://dx.doi.org/10.52547/MEO.10.2.187 (Text in Persian). Khorshid, S. & Ranjbar, R. (2010). Strategic analysis, development and selection of strategy based on SWOT matrix and fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making techniques. Industrial Management, 5(12): 19-39. (Text in Persian). MacGinn, N. & Welsh, T. (1999). Decentralization of education: Why, When, What and how? UNESCO, International institute for educational planning. Mehrmohammadi, M. (2020). Curriculum discourse modification; An essential but difficult mission in the evolution of education. Higher Education Council Portal, Articles Section. http://www.medu.ir/fa/maghale/part/news/ctg/2173?ocode=1000000744 (Text in Persian). Mosapour, Neamatollah (2017). Governmental or Popular? Educational and Curriculum Foundation in Contemporary Iran. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 12(45): 1-28. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.17354986.1396.12.45.1.4 (Text in Persian). Nasr Esfahani, Ahmad Reza (2003). School-based curriculum planning: basics, challenges, and perspectives. Research Journal of Isfahan University, 4(2): 207-226. Piri, M. & BehrooziTabar, Kh. (2016). Feasibility study of school-based curriculum planning in the curriculum planning system from the perspective of educational experts. Curriculum Research, 5(1): 1-27. (Text in Persian). Quak, E. (2020). The political economy of the primary education system in Tanzania. K4D Helpdesk Report No 710. Brighton, UK: Institute of Development Studies. Saki, R. (2012). Assessing the status of school-based support platforms in education. Journal of Education, (109): 35-54. (Text in Persian). Krishna Panthee, Shree (2018). Decentralization of Education: Politics and Consensus. International Journal of Science and Research, 7(6):2319-7064. Kuhon, R. (2020). Decentralization and education for all in indonesia. Jurnal Ilmiah, 16(1):14-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.19166/pji.v16i1.1996 Lopizic, I. & Manojlovic Toman, R. (2021). Predictions of state and country top civil servants regarding the abolition of county state administration offices: Two sides of the same coin? Central European publicAdministration review, 19(1): 41-61. Sandeman, L. K. (2021). Racialised Discourses of Educational Opportunity: Neoliberal Education Reform and Community Resistance in Bronzeville, Chicago [Master's thesis, Miami University]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=miami161909471708297 Tabatadze, M. (2020). Priorities of spatial economy and fiscal mechanism of decentralization. Journal of International economic research, 6(1):32-41. Teng, y. & Tsang, K. K. (2021). Educational decentralisation and students’ academic achievement: a cross-cultural analysis. Educational studies, 47(5). Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03055698.2021.1942793 Winkler, R. D. & Yeo, Boon-Ling (2007). Identifying the Impact of Education Decentralization on the Quality of Education. EQUIP2. fhi360. available in, https://www.fhi360.org/resource/identifying-impact-education-decentralization-quality-education | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 311 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 243 |
||
