Expert approach to estimating the state and development of public governance by the regional educational system in Ukraine

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru

Expert approach to estimating the state and development of public governance by the regional educational system in Ukraine

Postupna О. Viktorivna

Postupna О. Viktorivna PhD in Public Administration, Associate professor, Associate professor of the Department of Management at Training Research and Production Center at National University of Civil Defence of Ukraine

Abstract. The article uses an expert assessment method that focuses on the competence and experience of experts in the field of education management. Using the results of a 2017-2020 survey of management in the field of education and citizens of Ukraine, the author made a comparative analysis of changes in the experts assessments of public education management development, education quality management and educational activities. Comparison of the collected data allowed to identify the most significant factors, opportunities and specific prospects for the development of public education management in the region, the necessary resources, possible difficulties and conditions for overcoming them.

Despite the involvement of a sufficient number of experts, the results obtained during the study cannot be considered representative, as respondents represented only the regions of the eastern part of Ukraine and cannot be fully extrapolated to the general population. However, comparisons of the results with the data of some national studies show that they do not differ significantly, and, therefore, can be taken into account by the subjects of public education management. The analysis presented in the article contains only generalized conclusions and raises only some problematic issues in the development of public administration of the regional educational system, while the depths of this issue are much more multifaceted and large-scale. Meanwhile, the obtained data provide an opportunity to carry out at least a superficial analysis of management activities and educational practices, identifying those problems that remain out of the attention of the state as unimportant or incomprehensible.

Keywords: public management of the regional educational system, state -public administration model, education quality management, expert approach, expert evaluation, comparative analysis.

Поступна Олена Вікторівна кандидат наук з державного управління, доцент, доцент кафедри менеджменту навчально-науково-виробничого центру Національного університету цивільного захисту України

ЕКСПЕРТНИЙ МЕТОД ОЦІНЮВАННЯ СТАНУ ТА РОЗВИТКУ ПУБЛІЧНОГО УПРАВЛЯННЯ РЕГІОНАЛЬНОЮ ОСВІТНЬОЮ СИСТЕМОЮ В УКРАЇНІ

expert education management

У статті використовується метод експертної оцінки, орієнтований на компетентність і досвід фахівців в області управління освітою. Використовуючи результати проведеного у 2017-2020 роках опитування керівників сфери освіти та громадян України, автор провів порівняльний аналіз змін експертних оцінок розвитку державного управління освітою, управління якістю освіти та освітньої діяльності. Зіставлення зібраних даних дозволило виявити найбільш значущі фактори, можливості та конкретні перспективи розвитку державного управління освітою в регіоні, необхідні ресурси, можливі труднощі та умови їх подолання.

Незважаючи на залучення достатньої кількості експертів, отримані в ході дослідження результати не можна вважати репрезентативними, так як респонденти представляли тільки регіони східної частини України і не можуть бути повністю екстрапольовані на населення в цілому. Однак порівняння отриманих результатів з даними деяких національних досліджень показує, що вони істотно не відрізняються і, отже, можуть бути враховані суб'єктами управління державною освітою. Аналіз, представлений в статті, містить лише узагальнені висновки і піднімає лише деякі проблемні питання розвитку державного управління регіональною системою освіти, в той час як глибини цього питання набагато більш багатогранні і масштабні. Тим часом отримані дані дають можливість провести хоча б поверхневий аналіз управлінської діяльності та освітньої практики, виявивши ті проблеми, які залишаються поза увагою держави як неважливі або незрозумілі.

Ключові слова: державне управління регіональною системою освіти, модель державно-громадського управління, управління якістю освіти, експертний підхід, Експертна оцінка, порівняльний аналіз.

Problem setting

Since 2002, the education management system in Ukraine has been developing as state-public, which “provides for public administration based on public opinion, resulting in changes in the workload, functions, structure and style of central and regional education management” [1]. From the point of view of V. Karlova, public participation is “the right and opportunity of citizens and their associations to participate in the process of development and implementation of public policy, public examination, monitoring and evaluation of government activities through public hearings, discussions, work in advisory bodies established under the authorities, public councils; real implementation of the constitutional right of citizens to participate in the management of state affairs” [2]. Therefore, the citizens of the country, either personally or through their associations, must influence the development and implementation of public policy for the development of education, using various methods and tools. Their opinion can influence changes in both the organizational and functional structure and the management process as a whole at all levels.

One way of public participation is to involve citizens as experts on a particular issue. In the theory and practice of public administration, the methods of individual expert assessments are increasingly used, which are systematized ways of formulating the final opinion of experts - experts in expertise - well-informed people on the research problem. According to the law dictionary, examination is an analysis, a study conducted by an expert, an expert commission; checking the quality of goods, works, services [3]. The content of the examination is revealed by contrasting with the concept of “assessment”. Expert assessments, according to the glossary, are "quantitative and / or ordinal assessments of processes or phenomena that are not directly measurable, based on the conclusions of experts." [4]. Expert assessment methods allow to get information that is used to determine the quantitative and qualitative assessment of the studied objects or phenomena, and to compare it with some previous data. This information indicates individual causal connections in specific conditions and is intended to develop and substantiate forecasts of further development. However, the information obtained during the expert survey, as O. Tytarenko states, is not a ready examination and only after processing can be considered as a solution to the problem [5]. However, the advantages of the individual expert assessment methods are the simplicity of the survey, clarity, consideration and use of knowledge and experience gained by experts during their lives.

With regard to education, the citizens of the country receive educational services that must be affordable and high quality. It is the citizens, as consumers of educational services, who can give an objective assessment of their accessibility and quality, determine the real state of development of education and point out current problems that need to be addressed immediately.

Recent research and publications analysis

Analytical reports of sociological, surveillance, and expert studies of the national education system state have been appearing on the Internet lately. At the same time, there are a large number of Ukrainian scientists' scientific works, which highlight the results of their personal research on various aspects of education, a comprehensive analysis of changes, identify current problems and contradictions, and suggest possible solutions. However, despite the significant contribution of various specialized institutions and scholars, whose research subject is the current state of the national education system, the problem of studying the development of public administration of the regional education system, the attitude or opinion of residents of a certain area to the process in general and the education sector development, in particular, remains out of focus.

The purpose of the article is to make a comparative analysis of changes in the experts assessments on the development of public education management based on the results of a 2017 - 2020 survey of management in the field of education, government officials, ordinary citizens of Eastern Ukraine; to compare the collected information with the information of national researches and to allocate the most essential factors influencing development of public management of regional educational system, as well as possibilities and concrete prospects of this process development; to outline necessary resources, possible difficulties and conditions of their overcoming.

Main body

Research methodology. One of the common methods of individual expert assessments is the method of questionnaires - analytical expert assessment, the content of which is to provide the expert with written answers to the questionnaire. We conducted a survey of citizens on the topic “Development of public education management”. The questionnaire consists of three blocks: 1) socio-professional characteristics of experts (10 questions); 2) assessment of the state of public education management (18 questions); 3) assessment of the state of education quality and educational activities management (20 questions). The purpose of the survey was to examine the views of regional community representatives, their attitudes and awareness of the nature of educational reforms (innovations) implemented in the country, current issues of public education management at the regional level, including the distribution of powers in management; identification of negative phenomena that exist in educational practice; determination of directions of regional management efficiency enhancement. The working hypothesis of the study was based on the assumption that today the organization of public administration of the regional educational system is inefficient; it has an excessive load (structural, functional, informational); and it is far remote from solving problems that really interfere with everyday educational practice.

The expert survey was conducted in person and remotely in three stages:

October - December 2017: experts were Master students of the Faculty of Public Administration of the Kharkiv Regional Institute of Public Administration of the National Academy of Public Administration under the President of Ukraine (hereinafter - KhRI NAPA);

April - June 2018: experts were administrators in the field of education of Kharkiv and Luhansk regions;

March - April 2020: experts were citizens of Kharkiv, Luhansk and Sumy regions.

A total of 949 respondents took part in the survey, including:

in 2017: 256 people, of which 253 people from Kharkiv, 2 people from Poltava and 1 person from Luhansk regions. The majority of respondents (93.8%) are educators representing the city (53.9%) or rural areas (46.1%) [6, p. 10];

in 2018: 490 people, of which 65 people from Kharkiv and 425 people from Luhansk regions. The majority of respondents (87.8%) are heads of public self - government bodies (heads of parents', pupils', students', listeners' committees), 11.8% are heads of educational institutions and 0.4% are heads of structural subdivisions of education management;

in 2020: 203 people, of which 137 people from Kharkiv, 37 people from Luhansk and 29 people from Sumy region. The majority of respondents (78.3%) are educators, the others - public representatives in the regions.

Socio-professional characteristics of respondents are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Socio-professional characteristics of respondents

As we can see from the table, respondents represent the eastern regions of Ukraine, most of them (81.0%) are in the age group from 20 to 49 years, 93.8% of all respondents are women, 89.1% are citizens living in urban areas. The vast majority of respondents (97.9%) are representatives of budgetary institutions. Also, it should be noted that 89.9% of respondents are not specialists in the field of management or public administration.

Research results

It should be noted that in the framework of human development as a basis for the growth of the national economy and strengthening Ukraine's competitive position in the world, a number of transformations in the medical, educational and pension spheres are envisaged at the state level. In the field of education it is planned to “implement a systemic transformation to ensure a new quality of education at all levels: from preschool education to higher education and adult education” [7]. In this regard, priority areas have been identified: affordable and quality preschool education; new Ukrainian school; modern professional education; quality higher education and adult education; science and innovation development. The content of the planned (or already implemented) transformations is posted on the government websites of different levels, a number of normative legal acts have been developed and adopted, which provide for relevant innovations, methodological and explanatory literature has been published. Therefore, every citizen has the opportunity to get acquainted with the main directions and content of the reforms introduced in the field of education. In this context, it is advisable to provide data on the level of respondents awareness about the essence of reforms and their opinion on the timeliness of their implementation.

First, let us consider the position of Ukrainian citizens on the need for educational reform. It should be noted at once that there were no significant changes in the answers of the respondents in 2020 compared to 2017: the majority of them (85.5%) believe that modern education needs to be reformed; at the same time, only 37.7% believe in its success, 24.4% of all respondents do not believe in it, and others are hesitant in their answers. As for the opportunity to exercise the constitutional right of a citizen of the country and participate in a public discussion of educational reforms, only 13.1% of all respondents express a desire to participate in the discussion of reforms, and 78.5% do not even consider such an opportunity. That indicates a low level of civic activity and, as a consequence, the organizational capacity of civil society in a particular territorial administrative unit.

Regarding public awareness of the changes envisaged by the reforms. It is safe to say that only those who work directly in the field of education, in the education authorities, are most aware and can name specific changes that have already taken place or are planned. Other citizens claim that they know the list of changes, but can name only the most popular ones that are constantly heard, such as the development of the New Ukrainian School, the introduction of 12-year education, a 12-point assessment system and External Independent Evaluation (hereinafter - EIE); ukrainianization of education (language aspect of teaching); transition to education of children from 6 years

old; introduction of a modular training system. And this situation remains unchanged, almost from the beginning of the process of reforming education [8; 9], which can be chronologically determined with the proclamation of independence of Ukraine, ie since 1991. In this context, we agree with V. Lunyachek, who notes that the period of independence “is a history of permanent educational reforms that replace each other without its logical completion and expected result” [10, p. 4].

It has to be recalled that the initiators of reforms in the country for almost 30 years are the authorities. In the approach to changes in education, a coercive strategy is used, ie communication takes place unilaterally - from the initiator to the executor. At the same time, the initiators have been constantly changing over the years, as well as the reform strategy, and the executors remain mostly the same. In addition, as noted above, no reform has been brought to its logical conclusion. Therefore, the population of the country is tired of constant reforms, of their chaos, inconsistency and incompleteness.

`'In 2017, a new Law of Ukraine “On Education” was adopted, the provisions of which laid down the main innovations of educational reform. This document was generally accepted positively in Ukrainian society, but one article - a language one of this legislative act, which established a norm on the level of introduction of the state language of instruction in educational institutions - caused a broad response mainly in some foreign countries.

In this context, it is appropriate to present the results of the survey regarding citizens' attitude to the above-mentioned legislation. The majority of citizens (97.1%) know that the country has adopted a new basic education law, 79.5% of all respondents say they are familiar with the main provisions of this document, but only 19.8% of citizens can confidently name the innovations. Less than half of respondents (41.4%) consider the new law timely and progressive, almost as many (39.8%) are hesitant to answer this question. At the first stage of the survey (in 2017) all these indicators were much higher, and in 2020 - 25% lower. This may indicate that in 2017 the new educational legislation was widely discussed in society, but today there are more pressing issues in education (organization of the newly created educational bodies in the amalgamated territorial communities, quarantine, transition to distance or blended learning in educational institutions, technologicalization, digitalization of the educational process, etc.), which require attention from both the authorities and average citizens.

Today, Ukrainians are convinced that educational reforms are aimed at the changes demanded by the international community and relate mainly to the renewal of the education paradigm. But, according to experts, it is necessary to change the approach to education management, to the formation of new education industry leaders, because it is the organizational and functional structure of management which is outdated and has many elements from the Soviet past. This is confirmed by the opinion of experts on the existence of district education departments. Respondents believe that they are redundant bodies that need to be reorganized or completely eliminated. Only 15% of all respondents support the activities of these structures, but it turned out that these experts are employees of structural units of education management in the field.

Regarding the assessment of the activities of the regional / local education management body in the context of the work of the educational institution (hereinafter - EI), the respondents called unnecessary the following functions that they perform: control over EI activities (73.2%); methodical help (69.7%); information/educational work (57.4%); organization of events between EI (55.9%) and the centralized personnel department (51.6%). At the same time, according to citizens, there are functions that EI performs for other structures. Such functions include: rehabilitation of children (53.5%) and the organization of children's participation in various contests, competitions, contests (51.7%). Meanwhile, respondents consider such functions as children's catering and preparation of graduate students for EIE to be important and necessary. Regarding the financial component of education management, the majority of citizens (78.1%) consider it necessary to maintain centralized accounting. At the same time, more than half of the respondents (51.3%) consider the financial independence of EI a mandatory component of its autonomy, but to introduce it, in their opinion, is possible only with the simultaneous introduction of such components of autonomy as public administration, economic and personnel independence.

It should be noted that there are constant discussions of the issue of granting educational institutions a certain freedom in the form of autonomy as a necessary condition for their effectiveness in society and it is reflected in legal documents. However, the level of practical application of autonomy in the country is very low. According to experts, the main obstacles to this process are: lack of funding for education by the state (67.4%); low solvency of the majority of students (44.1%); lack of the necessary legal framework (37.3%); lack of conscious need in society and desire to participate in the management and proper maintenance of educational institutions (35.6%); lack of desire in government (34.2%). It should also be noted that in 2020, compared to 2017, respondents are more convinced that the introduction of the autonomy of the EI should be a prerequisite for its effectiveness. However, a significant number of citizens (49.1%) have not yet decided on their position on this issue.

It is clear that the main activity carried out by the EI is educational, aimed at organizing, providing and implementing the educational process. Respondents emphasize the high level of bureaucracy (excessive paperwork, clericalism) that exists in the EI - 72.3%, considering this level as “very high” and “high”. In modern conditions - conditions of quarantine and distance learning - the burden on pedagogical and scientific-pedagogical workers has increased significantly. In particular, all teachers, in addition to their daily work, have to develop online materials (content, visual, scientific and methodological), and not only learn how to use information technologiesy, but also to involve students in this process. The modern teacher has to write instructions not only for himself and his students, but also for parents who take a responsible role in online learning and try to control this process. Thus, the time spent by the teacher to prepare for classes today, exceeds all the norms prescribed in regulations. In addition, there are significant problems with the use of the Internet, in some cases it is absent or interrupted. In this context, the answers of the respondents regarding the criteria for assessing the effectiveness of the work of EI are logical, among which the first places are occupied by: professional level of teachers (71.4%); quality of material-technical and educational-methodical base (66.3%); the level of partnership between the administration, teachers, students and their parents (43.0%) and the introduction of innovative technologies in educational institutions (42.1%). At the same time, no significant changes took place during the study period, and, conversely, in 2020, these criteria only gained their relevance and practical significance.

The position of the respondents to EIE and the Ukrainian Center for Educational Quality Assessment (hereinafter - UCEQA) as tools for ensuring the quality of education remains unclear. Thus, respondents have almost the same attitude to the independence of EIE: 28.4% of respondents believe that EIE is completely independent, 28.6% - consider EIE dependent, and others find it difficult to answer this question. Also, there is a problem of determining the place of UCEQA, which administers EIE, in the system of public administration: 36.5% of respondents believe that this institution should remain within the structure of the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine; 32.1% support the position on its independence (should be a separate state or public institution); others cannot determine. At the same time, the position of the respondents regarding the preparation of graduate students for taking EIE tests remains unchanged. The majority (51.3%) believe that higher education institutions should do this, because they are interested in future students.

Conclusions

The results of the study provide grounds for identifying significant problems that exist in educational practice: low level of education funding and, as a consequence, low wages of educators, the prestige of the profession, the provision of material, technical and scientific-methodological base; lack of professional staff for educational institutions - speech therapists, speech pathologists, rehabilitation specialists, etc.; lack of practical experience for young professionals to work in EI; existing training programs do not meet the modern needs of life and the labor market; cumbersome curricula, especially in schools; low level of involvement of parents in cooperation with the EI and in the development and implementation of regional educational policy (requires a clear legal definition of such cooperation mechanisms); bureaucratization of the educational process, etc. Another significant problem that has become important during quarantine is the increase in the workload of teachers, including work with inclusive students who need additional attention and time. It should be noted that there are no fundamental differences in identifying problems in the development of public education management both at the national level and at the regional level.

References

1. On the National doctrine of Education Development [electronic resource]: decree of the president of Ukraine No. 347/2002 of April 17, 2002. - Access mode: https://zakon.rada.gov.Ua/laws/show/347/2002#Text.

2. Public administration: terminol. words. / way of life.: V. S. Kuibida, M. M. Belinskaya, O. M. Petro and others; for the general purpose. edited by V. S. Kuibida, M. M. Belinskaya, and O. M. Petro. MOSCOW: NADU PUBL., 2018, P. 31.

3. Barykhin A. B. Bolshaya yuridicheskaya entsiklopediya [big legal encyclopedia]. (Series "professional reference books and encyclopedias") / A. B. Barykhin. Moscow: Knizhny Mir publ., 2010, p.938.

4. New Ukrainian Explanatory Dictionary. About 20,000 words and phrases / comp. N. D. Kusaykina, Yu.s. Tsybulnik; za zag. edited by Doctor of philology, Professor V. V. Dubichinsky. - Kh.: Book Club "Family Leisure Club", 2008. - P.185.

5. Titarenko O. R. expert research / O. R. Titarenko / / encyclopedic Dictionary of Public Administration / way of life.: Yu. P. Surmin, V. D. Bakumenko, a.m. Mikhnenko and others; edited by Yu. V. Kovbasyuk, V. P. Troshchinsky, Yu. P. Surmin. MOSCOW: NADU PUBL., 2010, P. 191.

6. Belova L. A., Bulba V. G., Progresnaya A.V. State and problems of implementation of quality management of education and educational activities in Ukraine: expert assessment / / theory and practice of Public Administration: collection. Nauk. PR. - Kh.: Publishing House of Harry Nadu "Magister", 2018.-Issue 2 (61). - P.8-17.

7. Reform of education and science [electronic resource]: State website of Ukraine. Government portal. Unified web portal of executive authorities of Ukraine. - Access mode: https://www.kmu.gov.ua/diyalnist/reformi/rozvitok-lyudskogo-kapitalu/reforma-osviti.

8. Comprehensive study of the state of the preschool education system in Ukraine. Gorsky A. E., Budanoa O. B., Barmatova I. V., Ovchar O. V. analytical report on the results of research. Moscow, 2013, 115 p. (in Russian).

9. Sociological research" education system in assessments of citizens of Ukraine "/ Institute of social technologies; joint project of the Ministry of education and science of Ukraine and the World Bank"equal access to quality education in Ukraine". Moscow, 2007, 233 p. (in Russian).

10. Lunyachek V. E. reform of the education management system in Ukraine: proposals for those who want real changes: sat. articles / V. E. Lunyachek. Moscow: FLP Mezina V. V., 2017.88 P.

Література

1. Про Національну доктрину розвитку освіти [Електронний ресурс]: Указ Президента України від 17 квітня 2002 р. № 347/2002. - Режим доступу: https://zakon.rada.gov.Ua/laws/show/347/2002#Text.

2. Публічне управління: термінол. слов. / уклад.: В. С. Куйбіда, М. М. Білинська, О. М. Петроє та ін.; за заг. ред. В. С. Куйбіди, М. М. Білинської, О. М. Петроє. - К.: НАДУ, 2018. - С. 31.

3. Барыхин А. Б. Большая юридическая энциклопедия. (Серия «Профессиональные справочники и энциклопедии») / А. Б. Барыхин. - М.: Книжный мир, 2010. - С. 938.

4. Новий український тлумачний словник. Близько 20 000 слів і словосполучень / укл. Н. Д. Кусайкіна, Ю. С. Цибульник; за заг. ред. д-ра філол. наук, проф. В. В. Дубічинського. - Х.:Книжковий Клуб «Клуб Сімейного Дозвілля», 2008. - С. 185.

5. Титаренко О. Р. Експертне дослідження / О. Р Титаренко // Енциклопедичний словник з державного управління / уклад.: Ю. П. Сурмін, В. Д. Бакуменко, А. М. Михненко та ін.; за ред. Ю. В. Ковбасюка, В. П. Трощинського, Ю. П. Сурміна. - К.: НАДУ, 2010. - С. 191.

6. Бєлова Л. О. Стан і проблеми здійснення управління якістю освіти та освітньої діяльності в Україні: експертна оцінка / Л. О. Бєлова, В. Г. Бульба, О. В. Поступна // Теорія та практика державного управління: зб. наук.пр. - Х.: Вид-во ХарРІ НАДУ «Магістр», 2018. - Вип. 2 (61). - С. 8-17.

7. Реформа освіти та науки [Електронний ресурс]: Державний сайт України. Урядовий портал. Єдиний веб-портал органів виконавчої влади України. - Режим доступу: https://www.kmu.gov.ua/diyalnist/reformi/rozvitok-lyudskogo-kapitalu/reforma-osviti.

8. Комплексне дослідження стану системи дошкільної освіти України. Аналітичний звіт за результатами дослідження / А. Є. Горський, О. Б. Буданоа, І. В. Барматова, О. В. Овчар. - К., 2013. - 115 с.

9. Соціологічне дослідження «Система освіти в оцінках громадян України» / Ін-т соціальних технологій; Спільний проект Міністерства освіти і науки України та Світового банку «Рівний доступ до якісної освіти в Україні». - К., 2007. - 233 с.

10. Лунячек В. Е. Реформування системи управління освітою в Україні: пропозиції для тих, хто хоче реальних змін: зб. статей / В. Е. Лунячек. - Х.: ФОП Мезіна В. В., 2017. - 88 с.

Размещено на Allbest.ru