成熟:英国多元、动荡与有效的学校治理

IF 2.5 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
M. Gibson, D. Outhwaite
{"title":"成熟:英国多元、动荡与有效的学校治理","authors":"M. Gibson, D. Outhwaite","doi":"10.1177/08920206211051473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"School governance in England has seen considerable change over the last decade as ongoing structural reform has produced a range of models affecting composition and roles of individual schools and the middle tier. Governance is important as school governing bodies have considerable powers and responsibilities for young peoples’ education (Young, 2017). There are some 300, 000 governors in England, the largest group of volunteers in England, whose work is prominently hidden from view but make a significant contribution not only to their schools, but also the educational system as a whole (James et al., 2010). The changes in particular have seen a move from a stakeholder to a skills-based model (Connolly et al., 2017), and are aligned with changes in school and middle tier structures (Bubb et al., 2019). We wish to argue that this turbulence, creating a series of crises which although centrally formed, are seemingly organic replicating differences across systems prohibits, or at least restricts, effective school governance. We argue this through an exploration of two vignette case studies of single Academy Trusts (SATS) and Multiple Academy Trusts (MATs), exploring changes in each and the vacillations in governance discourse.","PeriodicalId":40030,"journal":{"name":"Management in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"MATification: Plurality, turbulence and effective school governance in England\",\"authors\":\"M. Gibson, D. Outhwaite\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/08920206211051473\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"School governance in England has seen considerable change over the last decade as ongoing structural reform has produced a range of models affecting composition and roles of individual schools and the middle tier. Governance is important as school governing bodies have considerable powers and responsibilities for young peoples’ education (Young, 2017). There are some 300, 000 governors in England, the largest group of volunteers in England, whose work is prominently hidden from view but make a significant contribution not only to their schools, but also the educational system as a whole (James et al., 2010). The changes in particular have seen a move from a stakeholder to a skills-based model (Connolly et al., 2017), and are aligned with changes in school and middle tier structures (Bubb et al., 2019). We wish to argue that this turbulence, creating a series of crises which although centrally formed, are seemingly organic replicating differences across systems prohibits, or at least restricts, effective school governance. We argue this through an exploration of two vignette case studies of single Academy Trusts (SATS) and Multiple Academy Trusts (MATs), exploring changes in each and the vacillations in governance discourse.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40030,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Management in Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Management in Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/08920206211051473\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Management in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08920206211051473","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在过去十年中,英格兰的学校治理发生了重大变化,因为正在进行的结构改革产生了一系列影响个别学校和中产阶级组成和角色的模式。治理很重要,因为学校管理机构对年轻人的教育拥有相当大的权力和责任(young,2017)。英格兰有大约30万名州长,是英格兰最大的志愿者群体,他们的工作被明显地隐藏起来,但不仅对学校,而且对整个教育系统都做出了重大贡献(James et al.,2010)。这些变化尤其见证了从利益相关者向基于技能的模式的转变(Connolly等人,2017),并与学校和中层结构的变化相一致(Bubb等人,2019)。我们想说的是,这种动荡造成了一系列危机,尽管这些危机是集中形成的,但似乎是跨系统的有机复制差异,阻碍或至少限制了有效的学校治理。我们通过对单个学院信托(SATS)和多个学院信托(MAT)的两个小插曲案例研究的探索来论证这一点,探索每一个信托的变化和治理话语的摇摆。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
MATification: Plurality, turbulence and effective school governance in England
School governance in England has seen considerable change over the last decade as ongoing structural reform has produced a range of models affecting composition and roles of individual schools and the middle tier. Governance is important as school governing bodies have considerable powers and responsibilities for young peoples’ education (Young, 2017). There are some 300, 000 governors in England, the largest group of volunteers in England, whose work is prominently hidden from view but make a significant contribution not only to their schools, but also the educational system as a whole (James et al., 2010). The changes in particular have seen a move from a stakeholder to a skills-based model (Connolly et al., 2017), and are aligned with changes in school and middle tier structures (Bubb et al., 2019). We wish to argue that this turbulence, creating a series of crises which although centrally formed, are seemingly organic replicating differences across systems prohibits, or at least restricts, effective school governance. We argue this through an exploration of two vignette case studies of single Academy Trusts (SATS) and Multiple Academy Trusts (MATs), exploring changes in each and the vacillations in governance discourse.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Management in Education
Management in Education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
7.70%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: Management in Education provides a forum for debate and discussion covering all aspects of educational management. We therefore welcome a range of articles from those dealing with day-to-day management to those related to national policy issues. Our peer review policy helps to enhance the range and quality of the articles accepted supporting those new to publication and those that are more expereienced authors. We publish research findings, opinion pieces and individual stories and our contributors come from all sectors of education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信