Session Information
23 SES 08 B, New Forms of Governance and School Improvement
Paper Session
Contribution
Context and Research Objective
Since the 1970s, decentralization initiatives have been promoted and realized in different European countries, such as Switzerland (Huber, 2013), Austria (Altrichter et al., 2010), the Netherlands (Collette et al., 2001) or the UK (Department of Education, www.deni.gov.uk). In Germany, however, measures concerning the shift of decision-making power to the municipal level and individual schools have only recently been implemented. Since 2006, regional governments all over Germany have supported more than 27 projects at secondary school level (Jungermann, Manitius & Berkemeyer, forthcoming). In addition, countless other small initiatives have been started by private local actors, schools and foundations. However, reviewing the existing empirical research on these initiatives, it also has to be pointed out that there is a gap between the important socio-political objectives of regionalization initiatives, such as equity in education, and the empirical evidence on their actual effectiveness (ebd.).
The federal state of North Rhine Westphalia (NRW) has taken a pivotal role in these decentralization efforts. Since 2008, Local Education Offices (RBB) have been established by almost all local authorities in NRW. They are based on a cooperation contract between the State Administration of Education and the municipal governing bodies. Their objective is to support school improvement and quality improvement efforts by network-based-collaboration. Educational policymakers have high conceptual expectations towards the Local Education Offices’ impact, especially concerning their capability to coordinate and manage networking processes in the regional educational landscapes (Manitius & Berkemeyer, 2011; e.g. Deutscher Städtetag, 2007). However, the scientific exploration of this new support system and its impact on school improvement still is in a very early state. The main objective of the study at hand therefore is to provide a baseline survey of this new actor. It aims to explore the structure, organization, main fields of action, work processes, strategies, partners, challenges and decision-making procedures of 44 Local Education Offices in NRW. Special interest is given to the question whether this stakeholder acts as a boundary spanner between various local organizations.
Theoretical Framework
Due to the relatively new approach within German educational research, theoretical frameworks for analysis of the RBBs have not yet been developed. For instance, the educational governance concept (Altrichter, Brüsemeister & Wissinger, 2007) has been used to explain the RBBs’ function in the multi-level system. Todeskino, Manitius & Berkemeyer (2012) use the new public management approach and the joint venture concept as framework to describe the development of RBBs. It has also been suggested that, on an analytical level, the RBB can be compared to the central office in US-American school districts (Sendzik, Berkemeyer & Otto, 2011). This study therefore draws on theoretical considerations of the American district research. Honig (2006) suggests that frontline central office administrators act as boundary spanners between the district administration and the schools. Boundary spanners are situated at the margins of their organization but resort to many relevant contacts and important networks inside as well as outside the organization (Tushman & Scanlan, 1981). They fulfill functions such as external representation and information processing (Aldrich & Herker, 1977), thereby acting as mediators between the different stakeholders in the local educational landscape and as promoters of change processes (Honig, 2006). Through their strategic position, they enhance the social legitimacy of the organization (Aldrich & Herker, 1977) and contribute to the innovative capabilities of the organization by bringing in new concepts and problem-solving strategies from the organizational environment (Neumann & Holzmüller, 2007). Our working hypothesis is that RBB employees fulfill a similar role for the school administration, mediating between the administrative structures, the schools and other local stakeholders.
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
Aldrich, H. E. & Herker, D. (1977). Boundary spanning roles and organization structure. In: The Academy of Management Review 2 (2), pp. 217–230. Altrichter, H., Brüsemeister, T. & Wissinger, J. (Eds.). (2007). Educational Governance. Handlungskoordination und Steuerung im Bildungssystem. Wiesbaden: VS. Altrichter H., Rauch, F. & Rieß, G. (2010). Netzwerkbildung in der österreichischen Schullandschaft. In: N. Berkemeyer, W. Bos & H. Kuper (Eds.). Schulreform durch Vernetzung. Münster: Waxmann, pp. 193-212. Collette, P., Verstegen, T. & van Winsen, M. (2001). Vensterscholen. Rotterdam: NAi Uitgevers. Department of Education. Extended Schools Programme. Zugriff am 20.1.2014. available online: http://www.deni.gov.uk/index/curriculum-and-learningt-new/standards-and-school-improvements/extended-schools-programme.htm. Honig, M. I., (2006). Street-Level Bureaucracy Revisited: Frontline District Central-Office Administrators as Boundary Spanners in Education Policy Implementation. In: Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. Vol. 28, No. 4 (Winter, 2006), pp. 357-383. Huber, S.G., Wolfgramm, C., Schwander, M. & Kilic, S. (2013). Bildungslandschaften Schweiz – Chancen und Schwierigkeiten beim Einstieg in die Kooperation von Akteuren aus dem formalen und non-formalen Bildungsbereich. Vortrag auf der SGBF 2013 am 26.8.2013 in Lugano. Jungermann, A., Manitius, V. & Berkemeyer, N. (forthcoming). Regionalisierung im schulischen Kontext - Ein Überblick zu Maßnahmen und Forschungsbefunden. Journal of Educational Research Online. Manitius, V. & Berkemeyer, N. (2011). Regionales Bildungsbüro - ein neuer Akteur der Schulentwicklung. In N. Thieme, F. Dietrich & M. Heinrich (Hrsg.). Steuerung und Entwicklung im Bildungssystem. Neue Steuerung - alte Ungleichheiten? (pp. 53-64). Münster: Waxmann, pp. 53-64 Manitius, V., Jungermann, A., Berkemeyer, N. & Bos, W. (2013). Regionale Bildungsbüros als Boundary Spanner – Ergebnisse aus einer Bestandsaufnahme zu den Regionalen Bildungsbüros in NRW. Die Deutsche Schule (3). Neumann, D. & Holzmüller, H. H. (2007). Boundary Spanner als Akteure in der Innovationspolitik von Unternehmen. In: A. Carell und T. A. Herrmann (Hg.): Innovationen an der Schnittstelle zwischen technischer Dienstleistung und Kunden. 2 Bände. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag, pp. 85–100. Sendzik, N., Otto, J., Berkemeyer, N. & Bos, W. (2012). Das Regionale Bildungsbüro als Boundary-Spanner? Eine Betrachtung des kommunalen Managements interschulischer Netzwerke. In: S. Hornberg & M. Parreira do Amaral (Hrsg.), Deregulierung im Bildungswesen. Münster: Waxmann. pp. 331 – 350.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.