Gillard is undoing the advances schools have made

As might be expected, given its desire to force schools to abide by a centralised, union dominated system of enterprise bargaining, the Australian Education Union is opposed to school autonomy on the basis that, “Unfortunately for its advocates, there is no evidence that devolution in its myriad forms has in itself led to improved student achievement”.

The AEU is wrong.  While the evidence might not be overwhelming, there is an increasing consensus that giving schools the freedom and flexibility to best manage their affairs and meet the needs and aspirations of their local communities leads to stronger educational outcomes.

The most recent edition of the OECD’s Education at a Glance 2012 states, “In recent years, many schools have become more autonomous and decentralised organisations and have become more accountable to students, parents and the public at large for their outcomes. PISA results suggest that when autonomy and accountability are intelligently combined, they tend to be associated with better student performance”.

Additional evidence is provided by a 2007 study investigating the impact of a more market-driven approach to education, titled OECD Education Working Papers No 13, where the conclusion is that, “Various forms of school accountability, autonomy and choice policies combine to lift student achievement to substantially higher levels”.

Freeing schools from the often inflexible and intrusive demands of head office is not just associated with conservative governments as proven by the Academy Schools initiative championed by the UK Labour Government under Tony Blair.  More significant is that here, once again, the evidence is that giving schools control over budgets, staff and curriculum focus is beneficial.

A 2011 study by the London School of Economics concludes, “…moving to a more autonomous school structure through academy conversion generates significant improvement in the quality of pupil intake, a significant improvement in pupil performance and small significant improvements in the performance of pupils enrolled in neighbouring schools”.

Closer to home, the example of Catholic and independent schools also provides evidence that school autonomy leads to stronger educational outcomes.  It’s no secret that non-government schools, even after adjusting for students’ socioeconomic background, outperform government schools in areas like test and Year 12 results and tertiary entry.

Central to the success of non-government schools is what, within the Catholic system, is known as subsidiarity.  The overriding principle is that decisions are made as close as possible by those most affected and external authorities are only involved where necessary.

Best illustrated by the Building the Education Revolution Taskforce report, where there is an acknowledgment that non-government schools, compared to government schools, were able to build infrastructure more quickly and more efficiently, autonomy is preferable to schools being micromanaged and controlled by those far removed from the realities of the classroom.

It shouldn’t surprise that non-government schools perform so well.  Schools have control over hiring, firing and rewarding staff, such schools, within a general framework, are able to set their own curriculum focus and in areas like classroom behaviour and discipline schools have the power and ability to set standards and manage their own affairs.

Such is the evidence supporting school autonomy that the Conservative government in the UK intends to give local authority controlled schools the opportunity to become what are termed Free Schools.

In the USA, President Obama has made it a condition of federal funding that the states introduce what are termed charter schools – schools given the freedom to employ staff, control budgets, partner with community, philanthropic and business groups and decide curriculum.

It’s ironic, while the ALP federal government argues it supports school autonomy, that in her recent National Press Club speech Prime Minister Gillard outlined a range of initiatives that constitutes a serious attack on school autonomy.

As part of her so-called moral crusade in education, under the banner of a National Plan for School Improvement, every school in Australia, government and non-government, will be forced to implement an annual school improvement plan, teachers will be subject to annual performance reviews and be made to design personalised learning plans for at-risk students.

Coupled with the Rudd/Gillard inspired national curriculum, national testing, national teacher registration and certification and national standards for teacher training it’s clear that all roads lead to Canberra and schools will face an ever increasing tide of intrusive regulation and micromanagement.

Worse still, the Gillard led government’s command and control model of education will have its most adverse impact on Catholic and independent schools; the very schools that achieve so much and that are increasingly popular with parents because of their distinctive character.

Dr Kevin Donnelly is Director of Education Standards Institute and author of Educating your child: it’s not rocket science.

Comments on this post will close at 8pm AEST.