CC BY
10INNOVATIVE MODEL FOR MONITORING THE QUALITY OF EDUCATION IN TERMS OF DECENTRALIZATION AND
AUTONOMY (SECOND PART)
PhD Gyoreva R. T.
Bulgaria, Blagoevgrad, Southwestern University "Neofit Rilski", Faculty of Pedagogy
Abstract. In the second part of the article presents an innovative model for monitoring the quality of education in school organizations.
The model tries to find a solution to the lack of adequate models and practices for modern internal and external controls in the Bulgarian school. In developing the model, used process approach. The process approach creates opportunities for systematic internal and external monitoring. It supports the preparation of analyzes. It allows participation of school teams in school management. The process approach helps to formulate priorities and make informed decisions. The model uses and norms of standard ISO9001: 2000 and its updates.
The article outlines the conditions for the effectiveness of the model based on empirical research.
Keywords: monitoring, quality education, criteria, indicators
One of the unsolved problems facing the educational system in Bulgaria is the lack of an adequate legislative framework for quality control in secondary education that meets modern requirements. In the new Law on preschool and school education1 has a special section "Managing the quality of education". Still, not enough models and practices for external control system in schools and carry out self-assessment in them. Developing and implementing a system to assess the quality of education based on observation and analysis should be one of the priority areas for modernization of Bulgarian education.
The model for monitoring the quality of education in schools of secondary education system is based on the standard, which provides international standard for quality management ISO 9001 (ISO 9001:2008, ISO 9001:2015) and using a process approach.
According to the standard ISO9001:2000 policy, quality assurance should provide a framework for establishing a system to ensure quality of education that continuously adapts, develops and improves. The standard contains a commitment to meet the requirements and expectations of educational activities and services, leadership, involvement of personnel, process approach, making decisions based on evidence, relationship management, etc.
The process approach is a set of processes that are in interaction. Introduces horizontal management, which focuses on achieving the overall objectives of the organization. Requires identification of key processes and their objectives and detailing them with a view to selecting the best options and selection criteria to achieve and assess the goals of the process.
The concept model for monitoring is based on the collection, compilation and analysis of information on the processes taking place in the school, relationships between them and management, evaluation of achieved against planned targets, taking into account the satisfaction of employees in the organization and users of educational services with a view to making improvements (Figure 1).
The main objective of the model is to create a reliable algorithm for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of schools. The specific objectives of the model are related to ensuring systematic surveillance and evaluation of the main directions in the activities of the school and its management, analysis of strengths and weaknesses, providing an opportunity for stakeholder participation in governance, reasonable accountability make informed solutions and others.
1 3aKOH 3a npegynuu^HOTO h yhhot^hoto 06pa30BaHHe- https://www.lex.bg/bg/laws/ldoc/2136641509
Fig. 1. Concept model for monitoring schools in the school education system
It is based on ensuring and improving the quality of education in schools through accountability and support. The successful introduction and implementation of a system of quality management provides information on ensuring the quality of education (accountability), as well as tips and recommendations for its improvement (support). Such are the requirements of the new Law on preschool and school education. Objectivity and reliability of information is crucial to clarify the objectives and expected results. Objective information shows both successful and ineffective activities, programs and practices. It helps decision-making and improve them if necessary. Thus creating conditions for increasing transparency in the management of school institutions and build trust and recognition from society.
In the conceptual model monitoring is being considered in a broader sense. It contains the basic processes in the school, but also includes their interrelations with the management and leadership, motivation of participants in the educational process and stakeholder participation in it. It is based on the requirements and satisfaction of consumers of educational services and other stakeholders (input data and output data). These links are set in the proposed toolkit, which will be the subject of another article.
The study of leadership as part of the management is aimed at:
- Modeling relations in the organization.
- Modeling subsystems in the institution and its interaction with the external environment.
- The work of the school principal and educational professionals as educational managers.
- Evaluation of credentials and responsibilities.
- Assessment of objectives of the contemporary school (preparing students for active citizenship based on a growing demand for knowledge, skills and competencies, support their personal development, digital learning, use of new and flexible approaches to teaching and learning focused on personality and others).
The evaluation of leadership helps assess the motivation of participants in the educational process and the availability of teamwork and commitment to achieving the goals of the organization. In dynamic school environment requires continuous and immediate adaptation of all aspects of the activities to changing conditions, engaging, stimulating and inclusion of teachers, parents and students with the mission and vision of the school, communication within the team and with "customers" etc. The study of the needs of stakeholders helps to consider different points of view to set school goals and results. The study of satisfaction used to assess the competitiveness of the school and the extent to which educational services match customer expectations and requirements.
The model for monitoring and evaluation in the school based on the following principles:
- The principle of innovation-this is a new control model in secondary education in Bulgaria. It provides the conditions for the implementation of relevant components of European, national, regional and local requirements for quality education.
- Principle of impartiality-the estimate is based on predefined and accepted criteria and indicators, i.e. objective data that can prove.
- Principle ofpurpose fulness-thc model aims to achieve high quality education in schools.
- Principle of continuity-the model assumes continuous monitoring of ongoing school processes through internal audits.
- Principle of openness and inclusion of stakeholders-the model is based on open channels of communication. The model includes the process of monitoring parents and the public.
- Principle of flexibility and adaptability-the model is able to adjust and adapt depending on the objects and subjects of monitoring.
- Principle of feedback-the information obtained from monitoring is used to evaluate and make recommendations for improvement of the schools, to inform and motivate participants in the educational process.
- Principle of transparency and publicity-suggests informing all stakeholders about the results of the monitoring done.
Principle of learning organization-reflects the need complicity of school management teams in the organization and management of the quality of education.
- Principle of diversity-refers to the necessity of using different internal audits on criteria set by the organization.
Especially important for the successful implementation of the model is the principle of learning organization. In terms of autonomy is particularly important to implement the five main "subjects" of the "learning" organization in the field of each school:
- System thinking and system models of monitoring activities.
- Acquisition of modern organizational culture and professional attitude to internal monitoring.
- Intellectual models of communication
- Building a common vision through dialogue and discussion.
- Team learning in the sense of "mutual learning" and "learning from each other".
The model is proposed instruments, subject to the following publication due to volumetric character. The toolkit contains:
- Map directions, criteria, indicators and monitoring indicators and relevant evidence
- Parameters for evaluation in internal monitoring.
The model is complemented by questionnaires:
- Questionnaire survey the opinion of parents on ensuring the quality of education in schools.
- Questionnaire survey pupils' opinions about ensuring the quality of education by age groups.
The Map directions, criteria, indicators and monitoring indicators and relevant evidence contains
four fields of monitoring and evaluation. These four areas correspond to the basic processes in school organizations. They are also reflected in the concept of the model. At each direction were developed criteria, indicators, indicators and evidence. Directions, criteria and indicators are presented in Table 1.
The model can be used both for internal evaluation and external evaluation. The two types of evaluation (external and internal) are a tool for good governance. They complement each other. They contribute to assess systematically and objectively the progress towards achieving a final result.
The proposed map directions are complied with the fundamental processes that occur at school (process approach). Subject to monitoring and evaluation are key processes that are carried out in school, but also leadership and effectiveness and efficiency of them management. Indicators suggest collect sufficient quantitative and qualitative data, enabling tracking of the implementation of
specific activities and achieve defined results at different levels by aggregating information from various sources.
Table 1. Directions, criteria and indicators for surveillance
Direction № 1. Processes related to planning in the management of school
Criterion 1. Strategic and operational planning Indicator 1. Strategic planning
Indicator 2. Operational Planning
Criterion 2. Planning of educational activities Indicator 1. Curricula
Indicator 2. Educational objectives
Direction № 2. Processes related to resource management
Criterion 3. Human Resource Management Indicator 1. Staff selection
Indicator 2. Motivation and development of staff
Indicator 3. Staff qualifications
Criterion 4. Management of financial and material resources Indicator 1. Management of financial resources
Indicator 2. Management of material and technical basis and conditions for realization of the educational process
Criterion 5. Relationships in school Indicator 1. Communication and collaboration with parents
Indicator 2. Participation of students in school life
Indicator 3. Relationships between management, teachers, students, parents
Criterion 6. Relationships of the school with external organizations Indicator 1. External relations
Indicator 2. Public Relations
Direction № 3. Processes related to the management of the educational process
Criterion 7. Teaching and Learning Indicator 1. Professional competence of the teacher
Indicator 2. Methods, technologies and training tools
Indicator 3. Motivation for learning and achievement of students
Indicator 4. Behavior of students and teachers in classroom
Criterion 8. Evaluation of learning outcomes Indicator 1. Target orientation of learning outcomes
Indicator 2. Benchmarks of learning outcomes
Criterion 9. Physical environment in school Indicator 1. Opportunities of the physical environment in school
Indicator 2. Social services for staff and students
Indicator 3. Provision of extracurricular activities
Criterion 10. Psychosocial environment at school Indicator 1. Psychological atmosphere in school
Indicator 2. Management student class as a specific microenvironment
Indicator 3. Behavior problems and conflicts
Indicator 4. Social microenvironment in school
Direction № 4. Related processes Total Quality Management.
Criterion 11. Internal audits and sell-assessment Indicator 1. Policy Total Quality Management
Indicator 2. Internal audits
Criterion 12. Feedback stakeholder Indicator 1. Satisfiction and feedback with parents
Indicator 2. Satisfaction and feedback with students
Indicator 3. Satisfaction and feedback from teachers and staff
Indicator 4. Reputation of the school
External or internal monitoring can be done with only one tool or a combination of several. The methods that can be applied are:
- Conversations in direct contact.
- Reports.
- Visits.
- Observations.
- Interviews.
- Questionnaire.
- Discussions (workshops, focus groups) and others.
The indicators have different weight in different types of schools. Schools can develop and apply their own criteria and indicators according to the the specific features of the organization. Depending on the specifics of the school, some proposed indicators in the card can be deleted or added new ones. The indicators may be supplemented depending on other features in the school. For example, the forms of training (day form of education, evening form of education, private form of education, individual form of education, combined form of education), whether the institution is a
sheltered school, types of students (different ethnicity, numerous gifted children with special educational needs, many gifted children) and other.
In terms of autonomy each school should know the process of self-assessment and apply it. Thus creating opportunities the school to promote better market, to be competitive, to meet the needs of stakeholders. The introduction of a quality system of education in school and practice of self-assessment is one of the important steps to reform the Bulgarian education, one of the most important approaches for ensuring quality education. The comparative advantages of internal evaluation mainly are: pedagogical specialists in the school know best the objectives of the organization; They know to what extent objectives are achieved; They know the extent provided quality education; have sufficient time resource for research and evaluation. The implementation of internal audits and evaluations must not bear the stress in the community. Internal audits should provide quick and easy feedback to intensify existing internal knowledge and contribute to their improvement. Internal audits are effective when the criteria and indicators are accepted by everyone in the team. They create transparency in the management of processes in the organization. They allow a more efficient collection, aggregation and analysis of information and focus on the problems. They help to improve teamwork in the community and the involvement of the team as a collaborator in the implementation of school policies. Internal monitoring provides continuous controlling and evaluation processes in schools. In the proposed model, internal monitoring plays a leading role as a modern tool of "learners school". It's kind of innovation in the Bulgarian school. The processes are evaluated and developed by all in the community, shared experience.
External monitoring and evaluation certify the accuracy of the completed self-assessment, strengthen the independence, objectivity and transparency of the process. Time resources in the external monitoring is limited. It usually comes down to review the evidence on criteria and indicators and their verification. Comparative advantages of external monitoring are the following:
In some cases, good policies and practices in school is taken for granted and not be documented and shared with colleagues or representatives of other contact groups.
- It is possible for schools to exclude self-assessment aspects that bear theirs negatives.
- It is possible that schools may not see gaps in your work or do not want to show them openly.
- The public and parents are entitled to receive objective information on how well or not so well does a particular school, it does not rely on traditional image that has created for himself.
Subjects of monitoring can be the Ministry of Education, Regional Department of Education, National Education Inspectorate, specially created national or regional assessment centers, other external experts, municipal administrations, the school principal, teaching staff, parents, students.
The results of the internal monitoring and verifying them by external can be used to analyze the quality of education in a given municipality or city, region and country. Can make generalizations estimates by comparative analysis in all directions, or at different criteria, for example:
The quality and effectiveness of government institutions in the system of preschool and school education.
- Preparation of pedagogical specialists-to identify deficits and planning training activities.
- The quality of the training content.
- The quality of educational work, interaction with parents and external environment.
- The personal development of students.
- The quality of the material and technical base for ensuring the learning process.
- The role of internal audits and self-assessment to improve the quality of education and other.
To investigate the effectiveness of the model was conducted empirical research. The study is
an attempt to answer the following questions:
- What is the degree of importance and relevance of the indicators proposed in the card?
- Are there indicators of very low significance and / or feasibility?
- Are there indicators with a high degree of significance and / or feasibility?
- Can add new indicators?
- Is it necessary to drop some indicators?
- Is there a correlation between variables significance and feasibility of indicators?
- Needed and timely the proposed model for monitoring is it?
- Does the model opportunity for teamwork in the school and its development as a learning organization?
- What is the role of parents as subjects of monitoring? And other.
The methods used in the empirical study are inquiry and discussions in focus groups. The purpose of the inquiry is an expert evaluation is necessary because of the innovative nature of the research problem. The anonymity of the study creates conditions for greater objectivity of opinions. The discussions in the focus group were selected as a complementary method. They provide an opportunity to study the problem in depth. The focus in the focus groups was placed on spontaneous responses of the participants. The discussions led to cross-check the information collected by the survey information and are provided as a complementary method to provide more diverse and reliable results.
The survey was conducted by experts from the Ministry of Education, Regional Education Management, researchers, directors of school authorities, teachers and parents. The discussions in the focus groups was examined opinion of the directors of educational institutions, teachers and parents. The results were summarized and analyzed.
Data analysis was performed with statistical methods:
- Methods of descriptive statistics-description, classification and presentation of quantitative haracteristics' summation the state of the variables, characterization of scattering and variation of the variables determining compliance with the normal distribution.
- Methods of deductive statistics (association statistics)-» establish the relationship between the two variables-attached is correlation analysis.
- For the assessment of the reliability of the data is measured Cronbch's coefficient alpha a.
The measurement results indicate that fashion has a value of 6 (the maximum value when all
the indicators. The same results are obtained when measuring the second index-median (Me = 6,00). The arithmetic mean values ranged from 5,51 to 5,73 (in significance) and from 5,34 to 5,54 (by feasibility)- Figure 2.
Fig. 2. Average value by criteria
These results show that the proposed indicators in the card are significant and highly relevant.
To confirm these findings are calculated indicators of scattering-sweep (R = 0,17), standard deviation (S = 0,034) and coefficient of variation (V = 0,6 %). These results indicate uniformity of the sample as it is estimated that 10-12 % sample is homogeneous, there is no distraction.
An important place in the theory of statistics takes normal distribution. The actual shape of the distribution can be seen in the histograms drawn. The analysis of the histograms shows that the curves are uni-modal and located entirely above the x-axis. The distribution is skewed, with the left arm extended. The conclusion that can be drawn is that the data have not a normally distribution. Although the resultant visual representation of the form of distribution, has been verified, that the normal distribution of the data it was determined the coefficients of asymmetry (skewness-As and kurtosis-Ex). The asymmetry factor accepts negative values in all criteria (As < 0). Across all criteria As = -2,04. Across all criteria Ex = 5,9. These results indicate asymmetrical distribution of empirical data. The distribution consists of higher than lower values and they have not a normally distribution.
Verification of the normal distribution of the data was made and a test of Shapiro-Wilk. If the test was not statistically significant, i.e. has a value of p > 0,05, it is assumed that the test variable is normally distributed. The test of Shapiro-Wilk, conducted in the study indicates that it is statistically significant (p = 0). Therefore, the distribution is not normal. The test of Shapiro-Wilk, conducted in the study indicates that it is statistically significant (p = 0). Therefore, the distribution is not normal.
The measured values of Cronbch's coefficient alpha a range from 0,950 to 0,991. The theory of statistics assumes that the scale is reliable when the coefficient a assumes values above 0.7 (in the ranking of Djonev1). The results showed excellent reliability of measurement for a sample (Figure 3).
1 0,98 0,96 0,92 С Cronfc >í ich 's : AlpK ia 1 1 L
It. cr. cr. Cf. Cr 7 10 II 9 a . Cr. Cr 6 i: Cr. СГ. Cr 2 15 . Cr. Cr. 4 3
Fig. 3. Kronbach's alpha by criteria
The correlation analysis was applied as one of the most widely used analytical procedures in the social sciences to establish the extent to which two variables are associated with each other. The correlation established between variables and is a measure of the strength of the relationship between them. Used is the Spearman's rank-order correlation, which is justified by the asymmetry of frequency distribution.
The results of the observations are presented in the correlation matrices. It is believed that when the p-value is small (p < 0,05), i.e. p ^ 0, the hypothesis of lack of correlation between variables (and in them) is rejected and concludes that there is a statistically significant relationship between the two variables. In matrices correlation coefficient was significant with p < 0,01 (** Correlation is significant at the 0,01). In particular, p = 0,000. It is therefore available a statistically significant relationship between the variables.
To determine the specific effect of the correlation is calculated correlation coefficient (r)-the magnitude of the effect. The interpretation of the measured values of r is performed on the scale of Cohen2.
The results for the correlation coefficient (r) are as follows:
- Variable significance-of 0,7 to 1-42,7 %; of 0,50 to 0,70-48,9 %; of 0,3 to 0,5-4 %; of 0,1 to 0,3-not measured. Therefore indicators have high importance. The correlation between them (by sign of significance) is high and very high. They are linearly related and dependent on each other, i.e. of comparable severity (Figure 4).
Fig. 4. Correlation of observations on variable significance
1 Джонев, С. (2004). Социална психология. Том 5. СОФИ-Р, стр. 47. 2Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences -http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/book/9780121790608, p. 48-50
- Variable feasibility-of 0,7 to 1-74 %; of 0,50 to 0,70-21,6 %; of 0,3 to 0,5-0,6 %; of 0,1 to 0,3-not measured. These data show that the indicators proposed in the card have a high degree of applicability. The correlation between them is very high or high, they are linearly related and dependent on each other, i.e. of comparable weight. (Figure 5).
Fig. 5. Correlation of observations on variable feasibility
- Between the variable significance and feasibility-of 0,7 to 1-29,4 %; of 0,50 to 0,70-60,2 %; of 0,3 to 0,5-10,3 %; of 0,1 to 0,3-not measured. The data show that among the variable importance and applicability is high and very high correlation (Figure 6).
According to the measured correlation of Spearman's coefficient between the two variables (significance and feasibility) as well as in them themselves, there is a large positive correlation that can be treated as large or larger than the typical size of the effect according to the scale of Cohen.
The conclusion is that indicators proposed in the card have a high importance and applicability and their weight is comparable in the two variables. The conclusion is that indicators proposed in the card have a high importance and applicability and their weight is comparable in the two variables. These findings confirm the hypothesis of the study.
Hp. 12 Hp. 11
Hp 10 Hp. 9 «p. a Hp. ?
_■ U 0,1 <r Í 0,3
H 0,3 < r í 0,5
Hp. G Hp. 5 Kp.4 Hp. 3 Hp. 2 Hp. 1 -« uO,5<riO,7 H 0,7 < r S 1
-' Hl
30 ao 60 SO 100
Fig. 6. Correlation of observations between the variable significance and feasibility
Conclusions. The results of empirical research lead to the following general conclusions: - The attitude of the various stakeholders in the implementation of monitoring as a comprehensive, integrated process and innovative methods for surveillance, measurement, evaluation and analysis of the quality of education at the school is positive.
- The proposed model is accepted by the respondents as an innovative, suggesting a suitable environment for the involvement of educational professionals, parents and students in determining the overall objectives of the school and their achievement by implementing a system of interrelated processes.
- In terms of decentralization and greater autonomy in educational institutions requires a new emphasis in the training of pedagogical specialists aimed at the modern needs of a system of quality management.
The technology of monitoring is a systematic and continuous process of collecting data on important educational issues by tracking achieved standards, assessment processes and results and taking appropriate measures for improvement and developing best practices. It is suitable form of control in terms of reforms in Bulgarian secondary education. Creating a system environment where school organizations to encourage and support to plan and implement necessary changes provide opportunities for partnership in policy making and the formation of modern educational design.
REFERENCES
1. Ангелов, Т. Качество и оценяване на продукта от обучението и възпитанието. Педагогика, 2007, кн. 8
2. Бижков, Г. (1988) Педагогическа диагностика. Народна просвета. С.
3. Ганева, З. (2016) Да преоткрием статистиката с IBM SPSSA Statistics Елестра ООД. С.
4. Джонев, С. (2004). Социална психология. Том 5. СОФИ-Р.
5. Закон за предучиищното и училищното образование -https: //www .lex.bg/bg/laws/ldoc/2136641509.
6. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences -http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/book/9780121790608
