natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In Portugal, the Decree – Law No 115-A, which set the principles of school autonomy, published in 1998, was being gradually developed in schools until 2006 when new and more concrete policies were launched.
Na Portugalskem so odlok – zakon 115-A, ki določa načela šolske avtonomije in je bil objavljen leta 1998, v šolah uresničevali postopno vse do leta 2006, ko so uveljavili nove in bolj konkretne smernice.
Similarly, since 2001, a circular issued by the Scottish Government, invited schools at ISCED level 2 to take further advantage of their pedagogic freedom by introducing new vocational subjects.
Podobno so na Škotskem leta 2001 z okrožnico povabili vse nižje sekundarne šole (ISCED 2), naj izkoristijo strokovno svobodo in ponudijo učencem nove poklicne predmete po svoji presoji.
The new French Government is also considering extending school autonomy in order to reinforce the measures taken in the 1980s.
Nova francoska vlada prav tako razmišlja o nadaljnji širitvi šolske avtonomije, sprejete že v osemdesetih letih.
In most countries, these new measures were prompted by concerns that the first suite of reforms had stalled due to resistance on the ground.
V večini držav so nove ukrepe sprejeli zato, ker so se bali, da bodo prve reforme zaradi odpora šol zastale.
The school autonomy movement has developed gradually over three decades and the associated reforms reflect a range of schools of thought which vary according to the period in which they were introduced.
Šolska avtonomija se je postopno razvijala tri desetletja, reforme, s katerimi je bila vpeljana, pa izhajajo iz vrste teoretičnih razmišljanj, ki se razlikujejo glede na to, kdaj so bile vpeljane.
5) Prior to the major reform in 1993, the Education Reform Act of 1985 had already identified the necessary areas of autonomy.
(6) Pred glavno reformo leta 1993 je zakon o reformi izobraževanja iz 1985 že opredelil področja, na katerih je bila potrebna avtonomija.
Chapter 1:Implementation of School Autonomy
Prvo poglavje: Uvajanješolske avtonomije
Figure 1.1: Dates of the first large-scale reforms which sanctioned school autonomy ISCED levels 1 and 2, 1985-2007
Slika 1.1: Letnice prvih obsežnih reform, ki so spodbujale šolsko avtonomijo na izobraževalnih stopnjah ISCED 1 in 2 (1985–2007)
This historical overview takes into account only major legislation or regulations which provided for the implementation of school autonomy policies covering different areas of school responsibility.
V tem zgodovinskem pregledu je upoštevana samo najpomembnejša zakonodaja oziroma določila, ki so omogočila uresničevanje politike šolske avtonomije in vključevala različna področja odgovornosti šole.
Ad hoc measures which often preceded these large-scale reforms are not included.
Ad hoc ukrepi, ki so bili pogosto sprejeti pred temi obsežnimi reformami, tukaj niso upoštevani.
Different schools of thought in different decades
Različne teorije v različnih desetletjih
The overarching concept is that school autonomy is associated with several schools of thought which, according to the time-frame, influenced school autonomy measures to a greater or lesser extent.
Na splošno velja, da je šolska avtonomija povezana z več teorijami, ki so v svojem času bolj ali manj vplivale na ukrepe v zvezi s šolsko avtonomijo.
Historically, as we have seen in Belgium and the Netherlands, school autonomy developed as a reflection of teaching freedoms and was legitimised by religious and philosophical considerations.
Kot smo videli v Belgiji in na Nizozemskem, se je šolska avtonomija razvijala kot odraz svobode pri poučevanju, težo pa so ji dala razmišljanja, ki so izhajala iz religije in lozoje.
In the 19th and throughout most of the 20th century it was mainly on this basis that school autonomy was at issue.
V 19. stoletju in večino 20. stoletja je bila predvsem to osnova, iz katere je izhajala šolska avtonomija.
The 1980s were to see a new direction.
V osemdesetih letih so se pogledi spremenili.
School autonomy reforms were linked with the political cause of democratic participation and emphasized the need for schools to be more open to their local communities.
Reforme šolske avtonomije so začeli povezovati s političnim zavzemanjem za demokratično sodelovanje. Poudarjali so, da morajo šole postati bolj odprte do svojih lokalnih skupnosti.
In Spain, for example, in the spirit of the Constitution, the LODE aimed to implement school autonomy as a means to achieve democratic participation.
V Španiji na primer je bil cilj LODE (zakona o pravici do izobrazbe) zagotoviti uresničevanje ustave in vpeljati šolsko avtonomijo kot način, kako doseči demokratično sodelovanje.
All sectors of the education community had to be represented at the heart of the school decisionmaking process.
Pri sprejemanju odločitev v zvezi s šolo so morali sodelovati vsi sektorji izobraževalne skupnosti.
Similarly, in France, a new legal status for institutions at ISCED level 2 conferred increased management freedoms while the decree of August 1985 laid down the terms of school autonomy based on the principle of opening schools to their community.
Podobno so bile v Franciji z novim pravnim statusom šolskim institucijam na nižji sekundarni stopnji ISCED 2 podeljene veliko večje svoboščine pri upravljanju, z odlokom avgusta 1985 pa so bili določeni tudi pogoji šolske avtonomije, izpeljani iz načela odpiranja šol v njihova okolja.
The end of the 1980s was also the occasion for Portugal to embark on a wide consultation on school autonomy organised by the Education Reform Commission.
Konec osemdesetih let je Portugalska začela obširna posvetovanja o šolski avtonomiji, ki jih je organizirala komisija za reformo izobraževanja. Poglobljen razmislek o konceptualnih rešitvah je privedel do tega, da so začeli strogo razlikovati med šolsko avtonomijo v smislu vodenja in šolsko avtonomijo v smislu upravljanja.
In addition, there developed a discussion around the management bodies involved in these new school freedoms: should they be seen as agents of governance, open to representation from parents and the community or as agents of management involving only participants from within the school?
Poleg tega so na široko razpravljali tudi o organih vodenja in njihovih novih pristojnostih. Spraševali so se, ali je vloga teh organov zastopanje oblasti, in naj bodo torej v njih tudi predstavniki staršev in lokalne skupnosti, ali je njihova vloga upravljanje šole, in naj v njih delujejo samo udeleženci, povezani s šolo, ki jo upravljajo.
The predominance of teachers in decisionmaking and the powers they were granted were also opened to question.
Odpirali so tudi dve vprašanji, vprašanje prevlade učiteljev pri sprejemanju odločitev in vprašanje moči, ki jim je bila dana.
In the 1990s, if granting new freedoms to local participants remained an issue, it was joined by another concern, that of efficient management of public funds.
Prenašanje pristojnosti na lokalne ravni je dolgo ostalo sporno vprašanje.
School autonomy reforms became strongly linked to a dual movement towards political decentralisation and implementing the ‘New Public Management’
V devetdesetih letih se je poleg tega odprlo še vprašanje učinkovitega upravljanja z javnimi sredstvi. Reforme šolske avtonomije so začeli
Policies and Measures agenda.
Politikain ukrepi povezovati z dvema gibanjema, in sicer s težnjami za politično decentralizacijo in za uvedbo t. i. nove javne uprave.
New Public Management seeks to apply private sector principles to the management of public services.
Značilno za novo javno upravo je, da pri upravljanju javnih služb uporablja načela zasebnega sektorja.
There are five main tenets: placing the customer at the centre of state activities and thus eroding the public sector mentality; decentralising responsibilities to the level closest to the field of operation; making government officers accountable to the community; emphasising the quality of services and efficiency of public bodies and, finally, replacing traditional procedural controls with evaluation by results (Hood, 2001) (6).
Postavili so pet bistvenih pravil: preseganje tradicionalnega odnosa javne uprave do strank, tako da postane stranka središče vseh dejavnosti; decentralizacija odgovornosti do ravni, ki je najbližja potrebam ljudi; državni uslužbenci morajo postati odgovorni skupnosti; poudarek je na kakovosti storitev in učinkovitosti javnih organov; in končno, zamenjava tradicionalnega modela nadzorovanja procesov z modelom evalvacije rezultatov (Hood, 2001).7 Decentralizacija pristojnosti na lokalne skupnosti in šolska avtonomija sta med sabo povezana procesa, katerih cilj je povečati učinkovitost upravljanja šole.
Decentralising responsibilities to local communities and school autonomy are therefore linked in order to increase the efficiency of school management – it is taken for granted that decisions taken at the level closest to operations will guarantee the best use of public resources.
Zdelo se je samoumevno, da bodo odločitve, sprejete na ravni, ki je najbližje praksi, zagotovile najučinkovitejšo porabo javnih sredstev.
This dual theory drove the reforms during this period in the Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia and in the Baltic states where the break with the highly-centralised earlier system also provided the opportunity to adopt new rules for public management.
Taka teoretična razmišljanja so takrat spodbudila reforme na Češkem, Poljskem, Slovaškem in v baltskih državah, kjer je prelomu s prejšnjim močno centraliziranim sistemom sledilo sprejemanje novih pravil v delovanju javne uprave.
In the Nordic countries, school autonomy was also connected with the process of political decentralisation which saw local councils become major players in school management.
V skandinavskih državah je bila šolska avtonomija povezana tudi s procesom politične decentralizacije, v okviru katere so občine postale glavni nosilci šolske uprave.
School autonomy often forms part of the same legislative framework as political decentralisation – like two boxes which stack together – since local authorities which are granted new responsibilities may, in turn delegate new duties to the schools of which they are in charge.
Šolska avtonomija je pogosto del istega sistemskega okvira kot politična decentralizacija (komplementarna zakonodaja), saj lahko lokalne oblasti, ki so dobile večje pristojnosti, le-te delegirajo naprej na šole, za katere so odgovorne.
The vision of school autonomy has evolved little in the present decade since the transfer of new responsibilities to schools is no longer built into a global process of political and administrative structural renewal.
Vizija šolske avtonomije se je v tem desetletju, ko prenos pristojnosti na šole ni več del globalnega procesa politične in upravne strukturne prenove, počasneje razvijala.
In most countries, school autonomy is now seen largely as a tool to be used to improve the quality of education.
V večini držav danes vidijo šolsko avtonomijo kot sredstvo, s katerim naj se izboljša kakovost izobraževanja.
Whether it is a country which re-launches a process already begun in past decades – such as Bulgaria, Czech Republic or Portugal – or a country which is taking its first steps along the route, such as Germany, Luxembourg or Romania – the emphasis is on a close analysis of the responsibilities which should be devolved.
Tako je v vseh državah ne glede na to, ali ponovno začenjajo spremembe, ki so jih poskušale uveljaviti že pred desetletji (kot so Bolgarija, Češka ali Portugalska), ali delajo šele prve korake na tej poti (kot so Nemčija, Luksemburg ali Romunija).
Greater attention is paid to pedagogic autonomy which seems more closely linked to raising achievement at school.
K razvijanju šolske avtonomije pristopajo tako, da najprej natančno preučijo, katere pristojnosti, naloge in odgovornosti naj prepustijo nižjim ravnem.
This renewed interest in school autonomy is characterised by an increased use of trials with the intention of studying how schools use their new powers and achieving greater understanding of the effects of school autonomy (Figure 1.2).
Za prenovljeno zanimanje za šolsko avtonomijo je značilno, da države želijo s poskusnim uvajanjem najprej preučiti, kako šole pravzaprav uporabljajo svoje nove moči, in bolje razumeti učinke, ki jih daje šolska avtonomija (Slika 1.2).
During previous decades, with the exception of some Nordic countries and other very limited trials (7), school autonomy has been implemented without any transition period or any testing.
Prejšnja desetletja se je šolska avtonomija z izjemo nekaterih skandinavskih držav in nekaterih manjših poskusnih uvajanj8 vpeljevala brez prehodnih ali poskusnih obdobij.
However, the current decade has seen a more pragmatic, experimental approach.
To desetletje pa je pristop bolj pragmatičen oziroma eksperimentalen.
For example, since 2004, most German Länder have been operating trials which are closely analysed in order to understand the processes at work.
Lep primer je Nemčija, kjer večina dežel od leta 2004 s poskusnim uvajanjem spremlja vse procese v šolskih delovnih okoljih in natančno analizira posledice.
Similarly, in the Czech Republic teaching autonomy reforms which required schools to develop their own curriculum in 2006 were piloted in 14 schools at ISCED levels 1 and 2 from 2004.
Podobno so na Češkem učinke pedagoške reforme, v okviru katere so morale šole leta 2006 razvijati lasten kurikulum, dve leti prej preizkušali na vzorcu 14 osnovnih šol.
Luxembourg has also been carrying out a pilot scheme with a largely pedagogic focus in ISCED level 2 institutions since 2004.
Tudi v Luksemburgu so od 2004 izvajali poskusni program, v katerem je bil poudarek na strokovni avtonomiji v nižjih sekundarnih šolah.
Similarly, the new contractual policy in Portugal is currently being tested in 24 schools selected from a reserve of volunteer schools who had already carried out self-evaluations.
Na Portugalskem prav zdaj na vzorcu 24 šol preizkušajo nov sistem sklepanja pogodb s šolami o letnem programu njihovega dela. Šole so izbrali s seznama tistih, ki so že prostovoljno izvajale samoevalvacijo.
Autonomy is therefore gradually developing in several areas: teaching (including curricula), human resources, social services and the management of property and finances.
Avtonomija se tako postopno razvija predvsem na naslednjih področjih: poučevanje (tudi odločanje o kurikularnih zadevah), človeški viri, organizacija dela ter upravljanje s premoženjem in financami.
Romania followed the same course in 2006, testing its new system of autonomy in around 50 schools at ISCED levels 1 and 2.
Romunija je leta 2006 prav tako poskusno vpeljala nov sistem avtonomije v približno 50 osnovnih šolah.
In 2006/07, Slovenia also launched a trial on the use of flexible hours (leaving schools to decide how to allocate time to different subjects and how to organise cross-curricular activities, project work, etc.).
V šolskem letu 2006/07 je Slovenija poskusno vpeljala fleksibilni predmetnik; šolam je prepustila, da se same odločajo, kako bodo razporedile določen čas pri nekaterih predmetih in organizirale medpredmetne dejavnosti, projekte in podobno.
7) Bulgaria trialed the introduction of curriculum autonomy for modern foreign languages in primary schools in 1993 and 1994.
) Bolgarija je v letih 1993 in 1994 v osnovno šolo poskusno vpeljala avtonomijo v učni načrt za sodobne jezike.
If the school autonomy policies followed the different schools of thought current at the time, the political process under which these reforms were decided and implemented does not appear to demonstrate the same degree of diversity.
Čeprav so bile v izhodišču politik šolske avtonomije v različnih časovnih obdobjih različne teoretske predpostavke, pa politični procesi, v okviru katerih so sprejemali odločitev o reformah in jih vpeljevali, niso tako različni.
Figure 1.2: Occurrence and types of trials of school autonomy at ISCED levels 1 and 2 (1985-2007)
Slika 1.2: Pojavnost in vrsta poskusnega vpeljevanja šolske avtonomije na izobraževalnih stopnjah ISCED 1 in 2 (1985-2007)
No trials before implementation of reforms
Nobenih poskusov preduvedbo reform
Global trials before the reforms were implemented
Poskusno uvajanje v celotnem sistemu preddokončno uveljavitvijo reforme
On-going trials
Poskusno uvajanje še poteka.
Data not available
Podatki niso na voljo.
Additional notes
Dodatne opombe:
Belgium and Netherlands: No information due to their long tradition of school autonomy which preceded the period in question.
Belgija in Nizozemska: Ni podatkov zaradi dolgoletne tradicije šolske avtonomije, ki je obstajala še pred obravnavanim obdobjem.
United Kingdom (ENG/WLS/NIR): The information relates to the delegation of funds by local authorities to schools following legislation in 1988 (England and Wales) and 1989 (Northern Ireland).
Združeno kraljestvo (ENG/WLS/NIR): Podatki se nanašajo na finančna sredstva, ki so jih lokalne oblasti prenesle na šole po sprejemu zakonodaje leta 1988 (v Angliji in Walesu) in 1989 (na Severnem Irskem).
There were also a number of local initiatives to delegate funds in the early 1980s.
Veliko lokalnih pobud, da se sredstva prenesejo na šole, je bilo že na začetku osemdesetih let.
Transition period – gradual implementation process used during the 1990s, for instance in Iceland (1996-2001), Italy (1998-2002).
Obdobje postopnega uvajanja: postopen proces uvajanja sprememb v devetdesetih letih, na primer na Islandiji (1996–2001) in v Italiji (1998–2002)
Global trials – trials in which all school autonomy measures in the country were tested.
Poskusno uvajanje v celotnem sistemu: poskusi, s katerimi se za določen poskusni čas vpeljejo vse spremembe šolske avtonomije v celotnem sistemu države.
Such trials took place this decade in Romania (2006) and Lithuania (2002-2005).
Taki poskusi so to desetletje potekali v Romuniji (2006) in Litvi (2002–2005).
Limited trials – trials which involved only some of the school autonomy measures and tested in a limited number of schools.
Vzorčni poskusi: poskusi, v okviru katerih so preizkušali samo nekatere ukrepe šolske avtonomije in v omejenem številu šol.
These types of trial took place mainly during this decade; for instance in the Czech Republic (2004-2006), Luxembourg (2004) and Slovenia (2006/07).
Tovrstni poskusi so potekali predvsem v tem desetletju, na primer na Češkem (2004–2006), v Luksemburgu (2004) in Sloveniji (2006/07).
School autonomy: a top-down policy imposed on schools
Šolska avtonomija: politika, uveljavljena od zgoraj navzdol
Conceptually, school autonomy should run in tandem with local participation.
Načelno bi se morala šolska avtonomija izvajati v tesnem sodelovanju z lokalnim okoljem.
Indeed, historically this principle of school management is strongly linked to the demand for teaching freedom by local stakeholders (school managers, parents, etc.).
Zares pa je upravljanje šol zgodovinsko zelo povezano s svobodo poučevanja, ki so jo zahtevali predvsem šolska vodstva, starši in drugi.
However, since the 1980s in Europe, these reforms are largely laid down under national legal frameworks which demonstrate a top-down model of decisionmaking process without any identifiable driving force coming from schools themselves.
V Evropi so se od osemdesetih let naprej reform lotevali s spreminjanjem zakonodaje na ravni države. To je značilen model odločanja od zgoraj navzdol, pri čemer šole niso izkazale nobene lastne pobude.
In fact, in most European countries, school autonomy measures are defined under national legal frameworks and are imposed on all schools. In the vast majority of cases, these policies are laid down under the strict framework of legislation (rather that the more flexible framework of administrative regulations issued by executive bodies).
Pravzaprav so v večini evropskih držav šolsko avtonomijo določili s sistemskimi ukrepi na ravni države in jo šolam preprosto naložili.Večinoma so te politike vgrajene v nacionalno zakonodajo (in ne morda v podzakonske predpise ali pravila, ki jih lahko izdajajo izvršilna telesa).
In the first scenario, schools’ new responsibilities were granted under general regulations which covered a wide range of aspects of the school system and, as such, school autonomy was not their primary objective.
Po prvem pristopu so šole nove pristojnosti dobile na podlagi splošnih predpisov, ki urejajo širše področje šolskega sistema, šolska avtonomija pa v njih ni bila izrecno med prednostnimi cilji.
Therefore, in Spain, the different general education laws and regulations passed within the context of progressive decentralisation, recognised the legal right of the Autonomous Communities to regulate the autonomy of their schools, although they also established a basic general framework that has lead to a relatively homogeneous structure on this matter at national level.
Tako so v Španiji v kontekstu decentralizacije razvoja države sprejeli različne zakone in predpise, med drugim o splošnem izobraževanju. V njih so prepoznali zakonsko pravico avtonomnih skupnosti, da same regulirajo avtonomijo v svojih šolah.
In the same way, in France, the initial laws on decentralisation granted a single status (EPLE) (8) to ISCED level 2 institutions and gave them the role of a corporate body – a necessary condition for acquiring management autonomy.
Hkrati so uzakonili tudi temeljna splošna pravila, s katerimi so zagotovili razmeroma homogene strukture na ravni države.
In Poland, the Education System Act of 7th September 1991 was coupled to the Local Government Act of 8th March 1991 and defined both the new powers of local authorities with respect to education and the transfer of responsibilities to schools.
Podobno je bilo v Franciji, kjer so s temeljnim zakonom o decentralizaciji nižjim sekundarnim šolam zagotovili nujen samostojni status pravne osebe – ta je bil predpogoj za poznejšo pridobitev avtonomije pri upravljanju.
In the United Kingdom (England and Wales), the Education Reform Act 1988 transferred many of the responsibilities previously held by ‘local education authorities’ to individual schools.
Na Poljskem so zakon o sistemu vzgoje in izobraževanja (7. septembra 1991) navezali na zakon o lokalni samoupravi (8. marca 1991); v njem so upoštevali oboje: nova pooblastila lokalne uprave v zvezi z izobraževanjem in tudi prenos nekaterih pristojnosti, nalog in odgovornosti na šole.V Združenem kraljestvu (Anglija in Wales) so z zakonom o reformi izobraževanja leta 1988 omogočili, da mnoge lokalne šolske oblasti precejšen del svojih pristojnosti prenesejo na posamezne šole.
Similar reforms were introduced by the Education Reform (Northern Ireland) Order 1989.
Podobne reforme so bile v Severni Irski vpeljane z odlokom o reformi izobraževanja leta 1989.
Italy also subscribed to this movement, although in rather an extreme way. From 2001, Article 117 of the Constitution itself recognised the
Tudi Italija se je pridružila temu gibanju, in sicer kar s spremembo 117. člena ustave, ki od leta 2001 prepoznava avtonomijo šolskih ustanov.9 V isto kategorijo spada tudi Grčija.
A second scenario, which is less common, involves several countries which have laid down regulations for school autonomy under legislation designed specifically for the purpose.
V nekaterih državah so sprejeli predpise o šolski avtonomiji po zakonodaji, ki je bila pripravljena posebej za to.
This is the case in Luxembourg, for example, which has adopted specific legislation (the law of 25th June 2004) regarding the management of general secondary schools and technical secondary schools (lycées, lycées techniques) which paves the way for a school autonomy pilot project.
V Luksemburgu so na primer sprejeli posebno zakonodajo (zakon 25. junija 2004) v zvezi z upravljanjem splošnih in tehničnih srednjih šol (lycées, lycées techniques), in tako na široko odprli možnosti za razvoj šolske avtonomije.
Similarly, in Portugal, the decree of 1998 was dedicated to defining the framework for school autonomy.
Podobno je Portugalska z odlokom iz leta 1988 določila okvir šolski avtonomiji.
This trend for specific legislation together with the new schools of thought which underpinned the reforms became more widespread from the year 2000.
Trend sprejemanja posebne zakonodaje na novih teoretičnih izhodiščih pripravljanja reform se je bolj razmahnil po letu 2000.