Following a major structural reform in 2007, general upper secondary education in Denmark had a new ownership structure. This included changed governance activities of funding, regulation, and provision (Dale, 1997). From referring directly to the responsibility of the counties, the upper secondary schools became self-managed. This self-management entailed three fundamental principles (Undervisningsministeriet, 2006). The first was to give to the institutions the responsibility of hiring and firing staff, and of organizing the administrative tasks. The second was to govern within the control system of the Department of Education as to student intake, educational content, administration, exams and censorship, evaluations, and quality assurance; and the third involved changed funding by means of a value added grants system. The last-mentioned was to assure that the institutions received funding according to their number of students and a fixed amount of money per student. Thus, the more students the institutions have, the more funding they receive (Ministeriet for Børn og Undervisning, 2012). As such, a strong element of marketization was introduced to this part of the educational system. Since 2011, the number of young people between 16 and 19 has been declining, and projections until 2030 show an even further decline of 10% (Danmarks Statistik, 2020; Beskæftigelsesministeriet, 2018). Adding to this that the students can now ‘freely choose’ schools, the general upper secondary school system has become a competitive arena for attracting as many students as possible. In addition to the so-called ‘free choice’, regional distribution committees have to distribute the students among the institutions in the region. The committees apply criteria of e.g. geographical proximity to school, infrastructure, and consideration of choice (Viteritti, 2005). Departing in regional and institutional rationales for the distribution and redistribution of students, we aim at analyzing what such governance measures mean in relation to the democratic provision (Fraser, 1990) of upper secondary education. Our empirical research involves national regulations, education policy documents from two regions, and interviews with school leaders and boards that expose views from critical institutional points, representing very small and very large student populations. To get an understanding of the politics with the many actors on different levels and their role in the governance, we approach the analysis through the policy concept of enactment (Ball et al., 2012). Aiming also at understanding the roles of the key coordinating institutions in relation to the complex structures of provision, we mainly draw on Fraser (1990).

Ball, S. J., Maguire, M. & Braun, A. (2012). How Schools Do Policy. Policy enactments in secondary schools. London and New York: Routledge. Beskæftigelsesministeriet. (2018). Faktaark: Ungdomsuddannelser. Hentet fra https://bm.dk/media/7860/faktaark-om-ungdomsuddannelser.pdf Dale, R. (1997). The State and the Governance of Education: An Analysis of the Restructuring of the State-Education Relationship. In Halsey, A. H., Lauder, H., Brown, P. & Wells, A. S. (eds.) Education. Culture, Economy, and Society. Oxford University Press, 263-272. Danmarks Statistik. (2020). Befolkningsfremskrivning. Retrieved from https://www.statistikbanken.dk/ Fraser, N. (1990). Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy. Social Text, no. 25/26, (56-80), Duke University Press. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/466240. Ministeriet for Børn og Undervisning. (2012). Teknisk gennemgang af taxametersystemet - med særlig vægt på de gymnasiale uddannelser. Retrieved from https://www.ft.dk/samling/20111/almdel/buu/bilag/197/1116695.pdf Undervisningsministeriet. (2006). Overgang til selveje. Håndbog til de midlertidige bestyrelser på gymnasier og HF Kurser. Retrieved from http://static.uvm.dk/publikationer/2006/gymhfselveje/ Viteritti, J. P. (2005). The End of Local Politics? In W. G. Howell, Besieged. School Boards and the Future of Education Politics. Washington S: The Brookings Institution Press, 308-323.