CONTRIBUTION OF SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTES TO SCHOOL BASED

CONTRIBUTION OF SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTES TO SCHOOL BASED MANAGEMET IN SRI LANKA TIROMI WIJAYANTHI VILASITHA INDIGAHAWALA

Background School Based Management (SBM) • Decentralization of authority from the central government to the school level (Caldwell, 2005) • Formal alteration of governance structures; form of decentralization that identifies the individual school as the primary unit of improvement (Malen et al. , 1990) • Decentralization process and evolution of school based management in Sri Lanka ( SL version: Programme for School Improvement , PSI)

Background Establishment of PSI in Sri Lanka • 1987: Amendment to the country’s Constitution (13 th Amendment), with the aim of decentralizing power to the periphery • 1997: National Education Commission recommendations to establish SBM in Sri Lanka • 2006: Program for School Improvement introduced as a compulsory program in 8 pilot zones (Cirular 2005/24) • 2014 : Generalization of PSI to all public primary and secondary schools to all Sri Lanka

Background Objectives of PSI • Development of the school based on an improvement plan well-prepared with involvement of all school actors; • Effective utilization of resources • Improved performance in curricular and co-curricular activities through cooperation between school and community • Entrusting responsibility for the school to the School Development Committee, thus ensuring accountability (Mo. E, 2005) • Establishment of congruence between staff training and school needs • Active participation all stakeholders (parents, teachers and past and present students) in carrying out the school affairs • Strengthening school-community relationships

Research Objectives • Identify how the SBM program has been developed • Examine the contribution of School Development Committees to school management processes • Assess their impact, limits to their action and conditions for their successful involvement • Suggest strategies to increase the contribution of School Development Committees to SBM

Research Design Problem analysis Research instruments Outcomes Principals Teachers Literature review S B M EMIS data, SDC Parents New theoretical framework Identification of main implementation problems Questionnaires Observations Past pupils Formulations of suggestions Representatives

Sample • The sample was 24 schools (which were started the SBM program at the first stage) (At the initial phase, three educational zones in three administrative districts in the Sothern Province of Sri Lanka, has implemented the PSI (SBM) program. the study represent those three educational zones) and • covers all four officially categorized types of schools. (the contribution of different types of members in the SDC were examined)

Data collected for the project • ESDFP evaluation reports (Mo. E, Province) • Provincial evaluation reports • TSEP project monitoring and evaluation reports (WB) • WB third party evaluation reports and recommendations • School reports, SDC & SMC minutes, plans • Researchers observation records and questionnaires

Findings Some Challenges identified in PSI Evaluations According to the literature review challenges of PSI and issues of implementation • Lack of legal support • Lack of technical support and guidance • Insufficient capacity building and professional development of school leaders and SDC. • Negative attitudes, lack of awareness • Lack of parental support • Authority/influence of school leaders. • Hijacking by local stakeholders (past pupils/some parents/some teachers)

Findings the selection of SDC members was not transparent The influence of strongest stakeholders was revealed Nevertheless, SDC was the decision making body for school development, however its role was limited to decision making on financial matters • The contribution of SDC to the school based capacity development was found to be inadequate • The committee lacks proper guidance and support from the zonal authorities in order to improve the school management system. • According to the literature PSI programme is a balanced control model. (Aturupane et al. . , 2013) But in schools: Balanced model Type 2 & C Community control model Type 3 & 1 AB • • •

Establishment of PSI in Southern Province

Suggestions/Recommendations • Collect data of students achievements on SBM • Building capacity of school leaders on the management process of schools, budgeting and planning • Build capacity of SDC members on PSI program and its’ objectives through trainings and workshops (on making decisions, planning and budgeting) • Raise community awareness on SBM and their responsibilities regarding school improvement • Strengthen local authority support conducting trainings • Strengthen monitoring and evaluation programs • In schools where PSI is less successful, structures should have been established`to promote the objectives PSI

References • Aturupane, H. , Kellaghan, T. , Shojo, M. (2013). School-Based Education Improvement Initiatives The Experience and Options for Sri Lanka. report no 58. World Bank. • Caldwell, B. (1990). School-based decision- making and management: international Development , in School- based decision- making and management. Judith D. Chapman (ed. ) Hampshire , The Falmer press. • Caldwell , B. J. (2002). Autonomy and self-management: Concepts and evidence. in T. Bush & L. Bell (Eds), The principles and practice of educational management (pp. 21 -40). London: paul Chapman. • Caldwell, B. j. (2005). School- based management. Brussels: international Academy of Education paris: international institute for Educational planning. Retrieved January 15 , 2014 from http: //www. unesco. org/iiep • Kasthuriarachchi, C. (2012). How to Make Decisions with the Programme of School Imrovement System in Sri Lanka. Retrieved January 26, 2014, from archive. cmb. ac. lk/reaserch/bitstrean • Kularatne, W. G. (2008)The guid book for Stake holders on School Improvement Program. Secondary Education Modification Project 11, Mo. E, Sri Lanka. • Ministry of Education. (2010)Program for School Improvemet, Circular no. 2010/28 • Ministry of Education. (2013) Guidebook and circular on planning and procurement for school based qualitative and quantitative development. Circular no. 07/2013 • NEREC (2004). A qualitative study to identify the interrelated educational and management that enhance student learning in sri Lankan schools. • Parakramawansha, S. (2012)Education Perspectives. Mo. E. Sri Lanka. Volume 01. • perera, W. (2004). Better school management: the role of head teachers in sri lanka. In kandasamy, M. and Blaton, L (2004). school principals: core actors in educational improvement, report on seven Asaian countries, International Institute of Educational planning , retrieved from http: //www. unesco. org /iiep • perera, W. J. (2006). Efforts toward decentralization. Ideology vs. reality-The Sri Lankan case. In C. Bjork (Ed), Educational decentralization (PP. 211 -222). New York: springer. • World Bank. (2011). Transforming School education in sri Lanka: from Cut Stones to Polished jewels. Washington D. C. : World Bank.

Thank you