Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

THE EFFECTS OF LOCAL INTERPRETATION OF DECENTRALIZATION POLICY ON SCHOOL AUTONOMY IN GUANGDONG PROVINCE OF CHINA

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Educational Decentralization

Abstract

The decision to decentralize education systems is often predicated on the assumption that such a move will enhance the autonomy of local schools. According to this line of reasoning, in a decentralized system, schools will use their heightened authority to make curricular content more relevant to local interests and demands. Such discussions, however, have largely ignored local interpretation of decentralization policies. It is important and necessary to examine educational decentralization policies from the local perspective, for the ways in which local education stakeholders understand, interpret, and react to policy changes will have a direct impact on their implementation in the schools.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  • Angues, L. (1994). Sociological analysis and education management: The social context of the self-managing school. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 15(1), 79–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apple, M. W. (2000). Between neoliberalism and neoconservatism: Education and conservation in a global context. In N. C. Burbules and C. A. Torres (Eds.), Globalization and education: Critical perspectives (pp. 57–78). London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apple, M. W. (2001). Market, standard, teaching, and teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(3), 182–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Astiz, M., Fernanda, W., Alexander, W., & Baker, D. P. (2002). Slouching towards decentralization: Consequences of globalization for curricular control in national education systems. Comparative Education Review, 46(1): 66–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, S. J. (1994). Education reform: A critical and post-structural approach. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, S. J. (1998). Performativity and fragmentation in ‘postmodern schooling’. In J. Carter (Ed.), Postmodernity and the fragmentation of welfare (pp. 186–203). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, S. J. (1999). Educational reform and the struggle for the soul of the teacher. Education Policy Studies Series No. 17. Hong Kong: The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Faculty of Education and Hong Kong Institute of Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bao, Q. (Ed.) (1998). Shijie jiaoyu fazhan qushi yu zhong guo jiao yu gai ge [World education development and Chinese educational reforms]. Beijing: Renmin Jiaoyu.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benveniste, L. (2002). The political structuration of assessment: Negotiating state power and legitimacy. Comparative Education Review, 46(1), 89–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjork, C. (2003). Local responses to decentralization policy in Indonesia. Comparative Education Review, 47(2), 184–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bottery, M., & Wright, N. (2000). Teachers and the state: Towards a directed profession. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bray, M. (2003). Control of education: Issues and tensions in centralization and decentralization. In R. F. Arnove and C. A. Torres (Eds.), Comparative education: The dialectic of the global and the local (pp. 204–228). Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bray, M., & Borevskaya, N. (2001). Financing education in transitional societies: Lessons from Russia and China. Comparative Education, 37(3), 345–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, K. L., & Wohlstetter, P. (2003). Key elements of a successful school-based management strategy. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 14(3), 351–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulkley, K. E. (2002). Recentralizing decentralization? Educational management organizations and charters schools’ educational programs. Occasional paper of National Center for the study of privatization in education of Columbia University, New York (Eric Document Reproduction No. 477185).

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, D. K. K. (2003). Education reform policy of one country, two systems: A comparison of Mainland China and Hong Kong. World Studies in Education, 4(1), 79–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chitty, C., & Lawn, M. (1995). Redefining the teacher and the curriculum. Educational Review, 47(2), 139–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dale, R. (1997). The state and the governance of education: An analysis of the restructuring of the state–education relationship. In A. H. Halsey, Hugh Launder, Phillip Brown, and A. S. Wells (Eds.), Education: Culture, economy and society (pp. 273–282). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delany, B., & Paine, L. (1991). Shifting patterns of authority in Chinese schools. Comparative Education Review, 35(1), 23–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eilason, L. C. (1996). Educational decentralization as a policy strategy in an era of fiscal stress. In J. D. Chapman, W. L. Boyd, R. Lauder, and D. Reynolds (Eds.), The reconstruction of education: Quality, equality and control (pp. 82–102). London: Cassell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elmore, R. F. (1993). School decentralization: Who gains? Who loses? In J. Hannaway and M. Carnoy (Eds.), Decentralization and school improvement: Can we fulfill the promise (pp. 33–54). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fergusson, R. (2000). Modernizing managerialism in education. In J. Clark, S. Gewirtz, and E. McLaughlin (Eds.), New managerialism, new welfare? (pp. 202–221). London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, E. B. (1996). Decentralization of education: Politics and consensus. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, A. (1997). Educational achievement in centralized and decentralized systems. In A. H. Halsey, H. Launder, P. Brown, and A. S. Wells (Eds.), Education: Culture, economy and society (pp. 283–298). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, A. (1999). Education and globalization in Europe and East Asia: Convergent and divergent trends. Journal of Education Policy, 14(1), 55–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadden, S. G. (1980). Controlled decentralization and policy implementation: The case of rural electrification in Rajasthan. In M. S. Grindle (Ed.), Politics and policy implementation in the Third World (pp. 190–211). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halsey, A. H., Lauder, H., Brown, P., & Wells A. S. (Eds.) (1997). Education: Culture, economy and society. Oxford: Oxford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, E. M. (1990). School-based management and educational reform in the United States and Spain. Comparative Education Review, 34(4), 523–537.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, E. M. (1995). Democratization and decentralization in Colombian education. Comparative Education Review, 39(1), 101–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, E. M. (1997). Strategies of educational decentralization: Key questions and core issues. Journal of Educational Administration, 36(2), 111–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, J. N. (2000). Centralization, decentralization, recentralization: Educational reform in China. Journal of Educational Administration, 38(5), 443–455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helsby, G. (1999). Changing teachers’ work: The reform of secondary schooling. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helsby, G., & McCulloch, G. (1996). Teacher professionalism and curriculum control. In I. F. Goodson and A. Hargreaves (Eds.), Teachers’ professional lives (pp. 56–73). London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karlsen, G. E. (2000). Decentralized centralism? Framework for a better understanding of governance in the field of education. Journal of Education Policy, 15(5), 525–538.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leung, Y. H. J. (2003). The politics of decentralization: A case study of school management reform in Hong Kong. In K. H. Mok (Ed.), Centralization and decentralization: Educational reforms and changing governance in Chinese societies (pp. 21–38). Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre of the University of Hong Kong and Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, B. (1998). An epidemic of education policy: (What) can we learn from each other? Comparative Education, 34(2), 131–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lo, L. N. K. (1993). The changing educational system: Dilemma of disparity. In J. Cheng and M. Brosseau (Eds.), China Review 1993 (pp. 22.2–22.42). Hong Kong: CUHK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundahl, L. (2002). Sweden: Decentralization, deregulation, quasi-markets—and then what? Journal of Education Policy, 17(6), 687–697.

    Google Scholar 

  • Majhanovich, S. (2003). Making sense of decentralization in education using a comparativist lens. Canadian and International Education, 32(1), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malen, B., Ogawa, R. T., & Kranz, J. (1990a). Site-based management: Unfulfilled promises. The School Administrator, 47(2), 30–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malen, B., Ogawa, R. T., & Kranz, J. (1990b). What do we know about school-based management? A case study of the literature—A call for research. In W. H. Clune and J. F. Witte (Eds.), Choice and control in American education Vol. 2: The practice of choice: Decentralization and school improvement (pp. 289–342). London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCulloch, G., Helsby, G., & Knight, P. (2000). The politics of professionalism: Teachers and the curriculum. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGinn, N., & Street, S. (1986). Educational decentralization: Weak state or strong state? Comparative Education Review, 30(4), 471–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menter, I., & Muschamp, Y. (1999). Markets and management: The case of primary schools. In M. Exworthy and S. Halford (Eds.), Professionals and new managerialism in the public sector (pp. 66–82). Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mok, K. H. (2000). Social and political development in post-reform China. London: Macmillan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, J. (1991). Restructuring schools: Capturing and assessing the phenomena. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ornelas, C. (2000). The politics of the educational decentralization in Mexico. Journal of Educational Administration, 39(5), 426–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paine, L. (1998). Making school modern: Paradoxes of educational reform. In A. Walder (Ed.), Zouping in transition: The process of reform in rural North China (pp. 205–273). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patrinos, H. A., & Ariasingam, D. L. (1997). Decentralization of education: Demand-size financing. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pye, L. W. (1995). Factions and the politics of guanxi: Paradoxes in Chinese administrative and political behaviour. The China Journal, 34, 35–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhoten, D. (2000). Educational decentralization in Argentina: A ‘global–local conditions of possibility’ approach to state, market and society change. Journal of Education Policy, 15(6), 593–619.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharpe, F. G. (1996). Towards a research paradigm on devolution. Journal of Educational Administration, 34(1), 4–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory and procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tatto, M. T. (1999). Education reform and state power in Mexico: The paradoxes of decentralization. Comparative Education Review, 43(3), 251–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tracy, M. (1997). To transfer power to transfer responsibility: Educational decentralization in Venezuela. International Journal of Educational Development, 17(2), 145–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walder, A. G. (1983). Organized dependency and cultures of authority in Chinese industry. Journal of Asian Study, 43(1), 51–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walder, A. G. (1986). Communist neo-traditionalism: Work and authority in Chinese industry. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiler, H. (1989). Education and power: The politics of educational decentralization in comparative perspective. Education Policy, 3(1), 31–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiler, H. (1990). Comparative perspectives on educational decentralization: An exercise in contradiction? Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(4), 433–448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitty, G. (1997a). Creating quasi-markets in education: A review of recent research on parental choice and school autonomy in three countries. Review of Research in Education, 22, 3–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitty, G. (1997b). Marketization, the state and the re-formation of the teaching profession. In A. H. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown, and A. S. Wells (Eds.), Education: Culture, economy and society (pp. 299–310). Oxford: Oxford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitty, G., & Power, S. (2002). Devolution and choice in three countries. In G. Whitty (Ed.), Making sense of education policy: Studies in the sociology and politics of education (pp. 46–63). London: Paul Chapman Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitty, G., Power, S., & Halpin, D. (1998). Devolution and choice in education: The school, the state and the market. Melbourne: ACER Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhonggong Zhongyang. (1985). Zhonggong zhongyang guanyu jiaoyu tizhi gaige de jueding [Decisions on the reform of the educational system] (Official document).

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhonggong Zhongyang & Guowuyuan. (1993). Zhongguo jiaoyu gaige he fazhan gangyao [Outlines for reform and development of education in China] (Official document).

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhonggong Zhongyang & Guowuyuan. (1997). Guanyu shehui liliang bianxue guiding [The provision regulations on social forces running schools] (Official document).

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhongguo Renmin Daibiao Dehui. (1993). Zhonghua renmin guongheguo jiaoshifa [Teacher laws in China] (Official document).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Jocelyn Lai-ngok Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, NY, USA

    CHRISTOPHER BJORK

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wong, J.Ln. (2006). THE EFFECTS OF LOCAL INTERPRETATION OF DECENTRALIZATION POLICY ON SCHOOL AUTONOMY IN GUANGDONG PROVINCE OF CHINA. In: BJORK, C. (eds) Educational Decentralization. Education in the Asia-Pacific Region: Issues, Concerns and Prospects, vol 8. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4358-1_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation