CC BY
42
UDC: 351
DOI: https://doi.org/10.32689/2617-2224-2019-4(19)-211-221
Ponomarenko Tatiana Vadimovna,
student, Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, 03039, Str. Frometivska, 2, tel.: 093 500 48 90; e-mail:ponomarenko1592@ gmail.comt
ORCID: 0000-0001-5395-5618
Пономаренко Тетяна BaduMieHa,
студентка, Мгжрегюнальна Академ1я управлтня персоналом, 03039, вул. Фро-мет1вська, 2, тел.: 093 500 48 90; e-mail: ponomarenko1592@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0001-5395-5618
Пономаренко Татьяна Вадимовна,
студентка Межрегиональной Академии управления персоналом, 03039, ул. Фроме-товская, 2, тел.: 093 500 48 90; e-mail:ponomarenko1592@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0001-5395-5618
STRUCTURE OF EDUCATiONAL ORGANiZATiON AS A MANAGEMENT OBJECT
Abstract. The article is devoted to the analysis of the essence and content of the structure of the educational organization. The educational institution as an object of management, as well as conceptual approaches to the construction of the organizational structure and management structure of the educational institution are considered. Modeled organizational structure and structure of the institution. It is determined that the management of modern educational institutions should be based on methodological principles as a system of provisions based on a clear understanding of laws, laws, principles, and the use of diverse approaches as a combination of methods, methods for addressing managerial problems that more fully provide the theoretical basis of management. It is substantiated that an educational institution is an organization that continuously and continuously carries out the educational process with the aim of studying, upbringing, developing and self-improvement of the individual. The educational institution is a link of the educational system and the institutional basis of pedagogy. It is proved that the structure of management of an educational institution is due to its structure and is complex. The complexity is determined by objective factors — size, object, differentiated directions of work, etc. So in the organizational structure of a comprehensive educational institution there are three levels: the director, deputy directors, heads of methodological associations, psychologists, social educators,
organizers of educational work. Some scholars highlight the fourth level to which the bodies of class and school self-government refer to to emphasize the subject-subject connections. But the leaders of methodological associations work mostly on a voluntary basis, and the functions of psychologists, social educators, organizers of educational work are only partially managerial, student self-government is guided by the three previous levels. Therefore, in fact, the management function is performed by the director and his deputies with the delegation of authority to other members of the team. This kind of control is called linear, and the director and his deputies are linear leaders.
Keywords: educational institution, conceptual approaches, educational organization, organizational structure, object of management.
СТРУКТУРА ОСВГГНЬО! ОРГАШЗАЦП ЯК ОБ'еКТ УПРАВЛ1ННЯ
Анотащя. Стаття присвячена розгляду аналiзу та сутносп, змюту струк-тури осв^ньо! оргашзаци. Розглянуго навчальний заклад як об'ект управлшня, а гакож концептуальш шдходи до побудови оргашзацшно! сгрукгури га структури управлшня навчальним закладом. Змодельовано оргашзацш-ну структуру та структуру навчального закладу. Визначено, що управлшня сучасними навчальними закладами мае Грунтуватися на методолопчних засадах як системi положень, в основi яких лежить ч^ке розумшня закошв, закономiрносгей, принципiв, на використанш рiзноманiгних пiдходiв як су-купносгi способiв, прийомiв розгляду управлшських проблем, якi повнiше забезпечують теоретичну основу управлшня. Обгрунтовано, що навчальний заклад — це оргашзащя, що на постшнш i безперервнш основi здiйснюе осв^-нiй процес з метою навчання, виховання, розвитку i самовдосконалення осо-бистосп. Навчальний заклад е ланкою системи осв^и та шституцшною основою педагогiки. Доведено, що структура управлшня навчальним закладом обумовлена його структурою i е складною. Складшсть зумовлюеться об'ек-тивними чинниками — розмiром, об'ектом, диференцшованими напрямами роботи тощо. Так, в оргашзацшнш сгрукгурi загальноосвiгнього навчального закладу видшяються три рiвнi: директор, заступники директора, керiвники методичних об'еднань, психологи, сощальш педагоги, органiзагори вихов-но! роботи. Деякi вченi видiляюгь четвертий рiвень, до якого вiдносягь ор-гани класного i шкiльного самоврядування, щоб пiдкреслиги суб'ект-суб'ек-гнi зв'язки. Але керiвники методичних об'еднань працюють здебiльшого на громадських засадах, а функцп психологiв, соцiальних педагогiв, оргашза-горiв виховно! роботи е тшьки частково управлiнськими, учнiвське самоврядування скероване трьома попередшми рiвнями. Тому фактично управ-лiнська функцiя виконуеться директором i його заступниками з делегуванням повноважень шшим членам колективу. Такий тип управлшня називаеться л^ ншним, а директор i його заступники лшшними керiвниками.
Ключовi слова: навчальний заклад, концептуальш шдходи, осв^ня оргашзащя, оргашзацшна структура, об'ект управлшня.
СТРУКТУРА ОБРАЗОВАТЕЛЬНОЙ ОРГАНИЗАЦИИ КАК ОБЪЕКТ УПРАВЛЕНИЯ
Аннотация. Статья посвящена рассмотрению анализа и сущности, содержания структуры образовательной организации. Рассмотрено учебное заведение как объект управления, а также концептуальные подходы к построению организационной структуры и структуры управления учебным заведением. Смоделирована организационная структура и структура учебного заведения. Определено, что управление современными учебными заведениями должно базироваться на методологических принципах, на системе положений, в основе которых лежит четкое понимание законов, закономерностей, принципов, на использовании различных подходов как совокупности способов, приемов рассмотрения управленческих проблем, которые полнее обеспечивают теоретическую основу управления. Обосновано, что учебное заведение — это организация, которая на постоянной и непрерывной основе осуществляет образовательный процесс с целью обучения, воспитания, развития и самосовершенствования личности. Учебное заведение является звеном системы образования и институциональной основой педагогики. Доказано, что структура управления учебным заведением обусловлена его структурой и является сложной. Сложность определяется объективными факторами — размером, объектом, дифференцированными направлениями работы и тому подобное. Так, в организационной структуре общеобразовательного учебного заведения выделяются три уровня: директор, заместители директора, руководители методических объединений, психологи, социальные педагоги, организаторы воспитательной работы. Некоторые ученые выделяют четвертый уровень, к которому относят органы классного и школьного самоуправления, чтобы подчеркнуть субъект-субъектные связи. Но руководители методических объединений работают в основном на общественных началах, а функции психологов, социальных педагогов, организаторов воспитательной работы являются только частично управленческими, ученическое самоуправление направлено тремя предыдущими уровнями. Поэтому фактически управленческая функция выполняется директором и его заместителями с делегированием полномочий другим членам коллектива. Такой тип управления называется линейным, а директор и его заместители линейными руководителями.
Ключевые слова: учебное заведение, концептуальные подходы, образовательная организация, организационная структура, объект управления.
Formulation of the problem. The
effective functioning of any educational system depends on its management. The urgency of the problem of improving the management of educational organizations has recently become due
to significant changes in the political and socio-economic life of society. It became obvious that the management, which is based on traditional principles, does not meet the requirements of the present and requires immediate reor-
ganization. Moreover, a number of objective scientific research and practical activities have proved that the preservation of anachronistic approaches in the management of educational systems is the main reason for the slow pace of their reform and adaptation to the requirements of the present, the need for the use of the theory and practice of educational management is essential [1].
Analysis of recent publications on research issues. The problem of modern educational management has different aspects and has always been the subject of study of many Ukrainian and foreign scholars, including G. Dmitren-ko, G. Yelnikov, I. Zyazun, V. Kremen, V. Lugovy, V. Madzigon, V. Maslov, N. Nichkalo, V. Oliynyk, M. Potashnik, T. Shamov, I. Likarchuk and others.
Today, in the scientific literature from the point of view of educational management, the theoretical foundations of scientific management education are thoroughly presented, on the basis of which one should consider the development of educational systems, the quality of education, the system for managing education development, the system-targeted management of educational institutions, the theoretical foundations and technologies of pedagogical education, theoretical the basis of continuing education, etc. [2].
Formulation of goals (goals) of the article — analysis of the essence, content of the structure of educational organization.
Presenting main material. Educational management is considered as a specific type and art of management activity, which includes a set of principles, methods, organizational forms and technological methods of management
of educational systems of various types and types, aimed at their formation, effective functioning and development
[3].
On this basis, attention should be paid to optimizing the structure of educational institutions as the most stable form of their existence.
From our point of view, for the correct and thorough solution of the problems of modern educational institutions, it is worthwhile, including focusing on considering the structure of the educational organization as an object of system management. Effective solution of the questions of constructing the structure of a modern educational institution will give an opportunity to influence the specifics of its management. It should be noted that the issue of the structure of the educational organization as one of the objects of management is not enough attention in the theory of educational management.
Management of modern educational institutions should be based on methodological principles as a system of provisions based on a clear understanding of laws, laws, principles, and the use of diverse approaches as a combination of methods, techniques for addressing managerial problems that more fully provide the theoretical basis of governance [4].
Concept-management in our time is used by numerous sciences. But the content of this concept is largely determined by the specifics of the object being studied. Yes, it is right to speak about the management of technical devices, machines, the management of biochemical processes in living organisms, and the management of social processes [5].
In this regard, the question naturally arises: what is common for the management of any processes, regardless of the framework within which the system, biological or social, they develop? The answer to it gives the possibility of cybernetics, which characterizes management as "the ability of holistic dynamic entities to carry out a purposeful rearrangement of their organisms in accordance with changes in the conditions in the internal and external environment of their existence" [6]. This reorganization takes place by processing the information circulating on the principle of direct and feedback between the control device and the managed system. Thanks to management, one or another system not only maintains its integrity, but also optimizes its functioning.
Management as an integral part of the educational system of the educational institution, its system-forming ambush, has an objective nature, but according to the mechanism of implementation — this is a subjective process. It can be mostly intuitive or rely on the theoretical foundations of science. In this regard, it is extremely important to determine how the relationship between practice and management theory [7].
Educational institution is an organization that continuously and continuously carries out an educational process for the purpose of studying, upbringing, developing and self-improvement of the individual. The educational institution is a link of the educational system and the institutional basis of pedagogy.
The structure of management of an educational institution is due to its structure and is complex. The complexity is determined by objective fac-
tors — size, object, differentiated directions of work, etc. So in the organizational structure of a comprehensive educational institution there are three levels: the director, deputy directors, heads of methodological associations, psychologists, social educators, organizers of educational work. Some scholars highlight the fourth level to which the bodies of class and school self-government refer to to emphasize the subject-subject connections. But the leaders of methodological associations work mostly on a voluntary basis, and the functions of psychologists, social educators, organizers of educational work are only partially managerial, student self-government is guided by the three previous levels. Therefore, in fact, the management function is performed by the director and his deputies with the delegation of authority to other members of the team. This kind of control is called linear, and the director and his deputies are linear leaders.
In this context, E. M. Khrikov notes that for the structure of the management of a comprehensive school characterized by the presence of a significant number of collegial bodies: the pedagogical council, the board of schools, scientific methodological council, the board of trustees, council of senior pupils, councils of clubs, museums. Each of these bodies performs certain managerial functions. An important task of the head of the school is to promote the clear definition and implementation of these functions.
It should be noted that another link of the control subsystem of the school is a collegial body — a certification committee, which has a rather narrow specialization, solves the issue of at-
testation of teaching staff, regulated by relevant documents and is aimed at self-development and self-improvement of teachers. Involving collegial bodies in solving management tasks is a step towards self-management and self-organization that is characteristic of the system.
One of the links in the management is work with personnel. This work is key. Its main component is the development of human resources, increasing the efficiency of work on the basis of a comprehensive, continuous, diversified personality development. In recent years, the staffing of schools has been replenished by psychologists, social educators, and deputies from scientific and methodological work, which testifies to the transition of educational institutions to a qualitatively new level.
Currently, a person-oriented management model is quite effective in Ukraine, according to which an educational institution is considered as a system integrity. The system management of an educational institution is to understand the organization as a whole. It is necessary to manage simultaneously the whole structure. Delegation of the head of his authority; the participation of subordinates in decision making, when everyone feels that he has direct relation to the management of an educational institution; Awareness of subordinates is an important part of the system. Nowadays, in the context of educational reform, it is important for a school head to be able to plan, systematically build management activities. For this, the head of the educational institution must know what students, teachers, parents and, ultimately, society want [8].
When developing a management system, it is important to put the management flexibility at the forefront, which manifests itself in the mandatory agreement when making managerial decisions. We make any decisions, show solidarity with all members of the team. This is an indication that the administrative activity of the administration of an educational institution is based on the principles of democracy.
The second important point is decentralization, that is, the strengthening of the division of responsibility and the distinction between collegial and administrative management. It is impossible today to completely abandon administrative management and replace it with a collegiate one, because the initiative of the head of the educational institution is too important and it is very important that it meets the interests of the subordinates. No matter how creative the team was, it needs an administrator, leader, creator, leader.
The next priority is the reorientation of the activity of the educational institution to meet the needs of parents, students and educators. The study of these needs is carried out through questionnaires, interviews, and individual work.
Another stage in the modernization of management is the focus on the result; continuous processing of information; readiness to predict the result when making non-traditional decisions.
The use of managerial innovation technologies is justified on the current stage of management of an educational institution. I. Y. Kovalenko refers to the management innovative technologies of modern economic, psychological, diagnostic, information technologies,
which create conditions for prompt and effective acceptance by the manager of a managerial decision.
Features of the organizational structure and management structure are determined by the type of educational institution. The main components of the management structure of an educational institution include: collegial management bodies; administration; bodies of public self-government.
Organizational structure of a comprehensive educational institution is determined by the tasks facing the sphere of general secondary education, and contains the following components: elementary, basic, senior school. These components are stable for the structure but are characterized by temporary signs due to changes in the participants of the educational process.
For example, consider the authorities in a general education institution, which, in general, recreate the structure of governing bodies of domestic educational institutions. Their activity allows to take into account the needs of participants in the educational process and optimize the functioning of the institution as a whole. The presence of an extensive structure of administrative bodies in the school requires the organization of their interaction, coordination of the work of all units.
The structure of the governing bodies at the school includes:
• bodies of collegial management of the school (conference, council of the school, pedagogical council, meeting with the director, his deputies);
• school administration (director, his deputies for educational, scientific, educational, methodical, economic work);
• bodies of public self-government (students (school), teachers (trade union committee, methodical council), parents (parent committee).
The bodies of collective management of the school are the conference, the school board, the pedagogical council, the meeting with the director, and his deputies. Their activities are coordinated according to the needs of the team and the tasks of the school [9].
The conference is the highest collegiate body of public self-government of the school (in small schools — the general meeting of the school staff). The delegates of the conference with the right to vote choose a meeting of students of II and III degrees, a meeting of teachers and other staff, a meeting of parents and representatives of the public in the same amount from each category. The conference approves the charter, makes corrections, develops the directions of school development, increases the efficiency of the educational process, searches for additional funding, and strengthens the material and technical base. If necessary, they create temporary, permanent commissions on different activities of the school, determine their authority. Summoned by the school board once a year.
Board of the school is a body of collective management of school affairs, solving the most important issues concerning the improvement of the educational process. Council boards are selected at a conference or general meeting of the school.
The Board of Directors selects representatives of the pedagogical staff, students of II and III grades, parents (or persons who replace them) and the public. It is headed by a school princi-
pal. At the next election, the board shall be updated at least one third.
The board of the school is engaged in managerial problems, which previously belonged to the sole competence of the director. She implements the decision of the conferences of the school team; represents the interests of the school in state and public bodies, provides social protection of minors; defines content, methods, forms of organization of education and education; sets the school's working conditions; carries out control over the work, conducts the certification of pedagogical workers, makes proposals to the qualification commission on the assignment of teachers to qualification categories; controls the expenditure of budget allocations to the school, forms its own material fund of the school; hears reports on the work of the director, his deputies, teachers, makes proposals for the continuation or termination of their powers; protects school staff and administration from unwarranted interference with their professional and official activities, etc.
Management of modern educational institutions is a complex system with many internal interconnections. Its effectiveness largely depends on the management activities of the school administration, which is based on the correct division of responsibilities of the administration, which includes the director, deputies of educational, educational, scientific, methodological and economic work.
Management of modern educational institutions should be based on theoretical and methodological principles as a system of provisions, based on a clear understanding of the principles of management, the use of various approaches
as a set of methods, techniques, consideration of managerial problems that provide the basis of management.
The analysis of scientific literature on the concept of "management" and "management of educational organization" gives grounds to assert that this complex multifactorial process, which is an integral part of the educational system of the educational institution, its system-forming ambiguity, has an objective nature, but according to the mechanism of implementation there is subjective process[10].
Different approaches to the management of an educational organization are distinguished. Among them we distinguish: procedural, logical-informative, reflexive, synergetic, systemic, innovative.
The management of an educational institution is a consistent and purposeful process, which is cyclical and is formed through functions — specific types of management activities that provide the formation of techniques, methods of managerial influence on the educational sphere. These include analysis, planning, organization, control.
Conclusion. The educational institution as an object of management is considered from the point of view of the organizational structure and management structure. The main components of the organizational structure are the division of the school system into the structural components, which are: collegiate bodies; administration; bodies of public self-government.
The management structure of an educational institution is the bodies of labor, advisory bodies, bodies of public self-government.
The structure of management of an educational institution is due to its structure and is complex. Complexity is determined by objective factors — size, object, differentiated directions of work, etc. [11]
The manager's ability to see the set of really existing structures of an educational institution as a system and management objects allows:
• highlight underdeveloped structures, weaknesses, the elimination of which improves the efficiency of the system;
• to see the institution in a complex way, and therefore consciously raise it
the level of system integrity;
• to recognize the educational institution as a system from the point of view of the new.
Thanks to such actions, it is possible to improve the system of management of education in general, to increase its efficiency, to eliminate unnecessary links and bureaucracy.
REFERENCES -
1. Bereznyak E. S. (1977). Rukovodstvo sovremennoy shkoloy (Nekotorye vo-prosy i problemy) [The management of the modern school (Some issues and problems)]. Kyiv: Rad. shkola [in Russian].
2. Weill P. (1993). Iskusstvo menedzh-menta [Managing as a Performing Art]. Mocow: Novosti [in Russian].
3. Fedulova L. I. (Eds.). (2005). Aktu-alni problemy menedzhmentu v Ukraini [ Actual problems of management in Ukraine]. Kyiv: Feniks [in Ukrainian].
4. Khrykov Ye. M. (2006). Upravlinnia navchalnym zakladom [Educational institution management]. Kyiv: Znannia [in Ukrainian].
5. Bakumenko V. D. (2000). Formuvannia derzhavno-upravlinskykh rishen: Problemy teorii, metodolohii, praktyky [Formation of state-management decisions: Problems of theory, methodology, practice]. Kyiv: Vyd-vo UADU [in Ukrainian].
6. Vesnyn V. R. (1997). Osnovy menedzh-menta [Fundamentals of Management]. Moscow [in Russian].
7. Bebyk V. M. (2005). Menedzhment os-vity hlobalnoho suspilstva [Education management of a global society]. Hlo-balizatsiia i Bolonskyi protses: problemy i tekhnolohii — Globalization and the Bologna process: problems and technologies. Kyiv: MAUP [in Ukrainian].
8. Dmytrenko H. A. (1999). Stratehichnyi menedzhment u systemi osvity [Strategic Management in the Education System]. Kyiv: MAUP [in Ukrainian].
9. Berdnik U. V. (1997). Menedzhment v organizatsii [Management at the organization]. Moscow: Infra-M [in Russian].
10. Vasyliev I. B. (1998). Pedahohichne proektuvannia profesiino-tekhnich-nykh zakladiv osvity novoho typu [Pedagogical design of vocational and technical educational institutions of a new type]. Prof. osvita: teoriia iprakty-ka — Prof. education: theory and practice, 1/2, 43-52 [in Ukrainian].
11. Dmytrenko H. A. (1999). Stratehichnyi menedzhment u systemi osvity [Strategic Management in the Education System]. Kyiv: MAUP [in Ukrainian].
12. Bereznyak E. S. (1977). Rukovodstvo sovremennoy shkoloy (Nekotorye vo-prosy i problemy) [The management of the modern school (Some issues and problems)]. Kyiv: Rad. shkola [in Russian].
13. Bondar V. I. (2006). Upravlinskyi aspekt planu roboty shkoly [Management aspect of the school working plan]. Pidruchnyk dlia dyrektora -
Textbook for the principle, 1, 4-6 [in Ukrainian].
14. Bobrov V. Ya., Butivshchenko S. V. (2000). Upravlinnia profesiinoiu os-vitoiu yak faktor vplyvu na formu-vannia tvorchoi osobystosti fakhivtsiv Ukrainy [Management of vocational education as a factor of influence on the formation of the specialists' creative personality in Ukraine]. V. Andru-shchenko (Eds.). Filosofiia osvity XXI stolittia: problemy perspektyvy - Philosophy of Education of the XXI Century: Perspective Problems, 3, 443-447 [in Ukrainian].
15. Vasyliev I. B. (1998). Pedahohichne proektuvannia profesiino-tekhnich-nykh zakladiv osvity novoho typu [Pedagogical design of vocational and technical educational institutions of a new type]. Prof. osvita: teoriia iprakty-ka - Prof. education: theory and practice, 1/2, 43-52 [in Ukrainian].
16. Weill P. (1993). Iskusstvo menedzh-menta [Managing as a Performing Art]. Mocow: Novosti [in Russian].
17. Vesnyn V. R. (1997). Osnovy menedzh-menta [Fundamentals of Management]. Moscow [in Russian].
18. Holovatyi M. F. (2004). Osvita Ukrainy: zupynytysia i ohlianutysia // Bolonskyi protses: perspektyvy i rozvytok u kon-teksti intehratsii Ukrainy v yevropeiskyi prostir vyshchoi osvity [Education of Ukraine: Stop and Look // Bologna Process: Prospects and Development in the Context of Ukraine's Integration into the European Higher Education Area]. V. M. Bebyk (Eds.). Kyiv: MAUP [in Ukrainian].
19. Dmytrenko H. A. (1999). Stratehichnyi menedzhment u systemi osvity [Strategic Management in the Education System]. Kyiv: MAUP [in Ukrainian].
20. Khrykov Ye. M. (2006). Upravlinnia navchalnym zakladom [Educational institution management]. Kyiv: Znannia [in Ukrainian].
21. Shevchenko V. M. (2012). Osoblyvosti formuvannia mekhanizmiv derzhavnoho upravlinnia navchalnymy zakladamy v umovakh yevrointehratsii ta innovat-siinoho rozvytku Ukrainy [Features of the formation of mechanisms of public administration in educational institutions in the conditions of European integration and innovation development of Ukraine]. Retrieved from http://www. kbuapa.kharkov.ua/e-book/db/2010-1/doc/5/07.pdf [in Ukrainian].
22. Shershnova Z. Ye. (2004). Stratehichne upravlinnia [Strategic management]. (2nd ed., rev.). Kyiv: KNEU [in Ukrainian].
23. Yakunin V. A. (1988). Obuchenie kak protsess upravleniya: Psikhologicheskie aspekty [Learning as a management process: Psychological aspects]. Leningrad: LGU [in Russian].
24. Chaplai I., Romanenko E. (2017). Advertising communicology as an essential factor of democratization of public administration. International Journal of Legal Studies, 1, 193-201 [in Ukrainian].
СПИСОК ВИКОРИСТАНИХ ДЖЕРЕЛ -
1. Березняк Е. С. Руководство современной школой (Некоторые вопросы и проблемы) / Е. С. Березняк. К.: Рад. шк., 1977. С. 11-17.
2. Вейлл Питер. Искусство менеджмента / Питер Вейлл. М.: Новости, 1993.
3. Актуальш проблеми менеджменту в Украшк монография / за ред. Л. I. Федулова ; 1н-т екон. прогно-зування НАН Украши. К.: Фешкс, 2005. 320 с.
4. Хриков G. М. Управлшня навчальним закладом: навч. поаб. / е. М. Хриков. К.: Знання, 2006. 365 с.
5. Бакуменко В. Д. Формування дер-жавно-управлшських ршень: Про-блеми теори, методологи, практики: монографiя / В. Д Бакуменко. К.: Вид-во УАДУ, 2000. 328 с.
6. Веснин В. Р. Основи менеджменту / В. Р. Веснин. М., 1997.
7. Бебик В. М. Менеджмент освгш глобального сусшльства / В. М. Бебик // Глобалiзацiя i Болонський процес: проблеми i технологи: кол. монографiя. К.: МАУП, 2005.
8. Дмитренко Г. А. Стратепчний менеджмент у системi освiти: навч. поаб. / Г. А. Дмитренко. К.: МАУП, 1999.
9. Бердник У. В. Менеджмент в организации: учеб. пособие / У. В. Бердник. М.: Инфра-М, 1997. С. 23-25.
10. Васильев I. Б. Педагопчне проек-тування професшно-техшчних за-кладiв освгги нового типу / I. Б. Васильев // Проф. освгга : теорiя i практика. 1998. № 1/2. С. 43-52.
11. Дмитренко Г. А. Стратепчний менеджмент у системi освгш: навч. поаб. / Г. А. Дмитренко. К.: МАУП, 1999.
12. Березняк Е. С. Руководство современной школой (Некоторые вопросы и проблемы) / Е. С. Березняк. К.: Рад. школа, 1977. С. 11-17.
13. Бондар В. I. Управлшський аспект плану роботи школи / В. I. Бон-дар // Пщручник для директора. 2006. № 1. С. 4-6.
14. Бобров В. Я. Фiлософiя освгш XXI столптя: проблеми перспективи : зб. наук. пр. / В. Я. Бобров, С. В. Бу-пвщенко // АПН Украши, Т-во "Знання" Украши; за заг. ред. В. Ан-друщенка. К., 2000. Вип. 3. С. 443447.
15. Васильев I. Б. Педагопчне проек-тування професшно-техшчних за-
кладiв освгш нового типу / I. Б. Васильев // Проф. освгга : теорiя i практика. 1998. № 1/2. С. 43-52.
16. Вейлл Питер. Искусство менеджмента / Питер Вейлл. М.: Новости, 1993.
17. Веснин В. Р. Основи менеджменту / В. Р . Веснин. М., 1997.
18. Головатий М. Ф. Освгга Укра!-ни: зупинитися i оглянутися // Болонський процес: перспективи i розвиток у контекст штеграци Украши в европейський проспр вищо! освгш: монографГя / за ред. В. М. Бебика. К.: МАУП, 2004.
19. Дмитренко Г. А. Стратепчний менеджмент у систем! освгш: навч. поаб. / Г. А. Дмитренко. К.: МАУП, 1999.
20. Хриков G. М. Управлшня на-вчальним закладом: навч. поаб. / е. М. Хриков. К.: Знання, 2006. 365 с.
21. Шевченко В. М. Особливост формування мехашзм1в державного управлшня навчальними закладами в умовах евроштеграци та ш-новацшного розвитку Украши / В. М. Шевченко. Дншропетров-ський ун-т економки та права, 2012.
22. Шершньова З. G. Стратепчне управлшня: пщручник / З. е. Шершньова. 2-ге вид., перероб. i допов. К.: КНЕУ, 2004. 699 с.
23. Якунин В. А. Обучение как процесс управления: Психологические аспекты / В. А. Якунин. Л.: ЛГУ, 1988. 160 с.
24. Chaplai I. Advertising communicol-ogy as an essential factor of democratization of public administration / I. Chaplay, E. Romanenko // International Journal of Legal Studies. 2017. № 1. С. 193-201.
