Abstract
External school inspection and state supervision represent key instruments in many European countries for improving the quality of education. Although some countries, such as England, France, and the Netherlands, have a long tradition of school inspectorates, other countries such as Sweden only recently reintroduced a school inspection system (Johansson O, Holmgren M, Nihlfors E, Moos L, Skedsmo G, Paulsen JM, Risku M, Local Decisions under Central Watch – a new Nordic quality assurance system. In: Moos L (ed) Transnational influences on values and practices in Nordic educational leadership – is there a Nordic model? Springer, Dordrecht, 2013). In Denmark, the relationship between the state and the municipalities is conducted through a public governance contract. For example, subject matter aims that used to be very broad and loose at this level were supplemented with clear aims that were developed into shared aims from 2006 onwards. Moreover, a state supervision system was introduced to standardize the quality assurance procedure. In a similar vein, Norway conducted a national quality assurance system in 2006, paired with national achievement testing systems, to chart and publish the results and a state supervision system. In contrast to Sweden, the local governance level – municipalities – in Denmark and Norway is the target of state supervision; thus, inspection and control are more loosely coupled with schools and principals at the “street level.” In Finland, the National Board of Education conducts national evaluations, and this state agency is also responsible for the national evaluation of learning outcomes. Notably, in this respect, Finland deviates from the international stream of state quality assurance and inspection, not at least linked to the political system’s resistance to ranking schools and municipalities and the external publication of performance indicators.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Bakkenes, I., de Brabander, C., & Imants, J. (1999). Teacher isolation and communication network analysis in primary schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(2), 166.
Beck-Jørgensen, T. (1987). Control – An attempt at forming a theory. Scandinavian Political Studies, 4, 279–299.
Bryk, A., Camburn, E., & Louis, K. S. (1999). Professional community in Chicago elementary schools: Facilitating factors and organizational consequences. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(Supplementary), 751–781.
Bukve, O., & Hagen, T. P. (1994). New roles in political and administrative leadership in Norwegian local government. Aldershot: Dartmouth Publishing Company.
Conger, J., & Kanungo, R. (1988). The empowerment process: Integrating theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 13, 471–482.
Ekholm, M. (2012). Many cooks will not spoil the broth: Educational policy in Sweden. In K. S. Louis & B. Van Velzen (Eds.), Educational policy in international contexts. Political cultures and its effects. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Gambetta, D. (1988). Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations. Oxford: Blackwell.
Ganster, D. C. (1989). Worker control and well-being: A review of research in the workplace. In S. L. Sauter, J. J. Hurrell, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Job control and worker health. Chichester: Wiley.
Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital. Transforming teaching in every school. New York: Teacher College Press.
Hargreaves, A., & Shirley, D. (2009). The fourth way of change. In M. Fullan (Ed.), The challenge of change. Start school improvement now! Thousand Oaks: Corwin.
Høyer, H. C., & Wood, E. (2011). Trust and control: Public administration and risk society. International Journal of Learning and Change, 5(2), 178–188.
Johansson, O., Holmgren, M., Nihlfors, E., Moos, L., Skedsmo, G., Paulsen, J. M., & Risku, M. (2013). Local Decisions under Central Watch – A new Nordic quality assurance system. In L. Moos (Ed.), Transnational influences on values and practices in Nordic educational leadership – Is there a Nordic model? (pp. 173–192). Dordrecht: Springer.
Klausen, K. K. (2001). Skulle det være noget særligt? – organisation og ledelse i det offentlige [Is it supposed to be something special? – Organisation and leadership in the public sector] (1st ed.). København: Børsens Forlag A/S.
Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 28, 549–570.
Louis, K. S., & Marks, H. M. (1996). Teachers’ professional community in restructuring schools. American Journal of Educational Research, 33, 757–798.
March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1984). The new institutionalism: Organizational factors in political life. American Political Science Review, 78(3), 734–749.
March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions: The organizational basis of politics. New York: Free Press.
March, J. G., & Shapira, Z. (1999). Variable risk preferences and the focus of attention. In J. G. March (Ed.), The pursuit of organizational intelligence (IX, 397 s). Malden: Blackwell.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734.
Mc Laughlin, M. W., & Talbert, J. E. (2001). Professional communities and the work of high school teaching. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Meyer, H.-D., & Benavot, A. (2013). PISA and the globalization: Some puzzles and problems. In H.-D. Meyer & A. Benavot (Eds.), PISA, power and policy. The emergence of global educational governance. Oxford: Symposium Books.
Moos, L. (2009). Hard and Soft Governance: The journey from transnational agencies to school leadership. European Educational Research Journal, 8(3), 397–406.
Moos, L., & Kofod, K. (2012). Denmark: Bildung in a competitive state? In K. S. Louis & B. Van Velzen (Eds.), Educational policy in international contexts. Political cultures and its effects. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Nihlfors, E., & Johansson, O. (2013). Rektor – en stark länk i styrningen av skolan [The school principal – A strong linkage in school governing]. Stockholm: SNS Förlag.
Pedersen, O. K. (2011). Konkurrencestaten [The competitive state]. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Rosenholtz, S. J. (1987). Education reform strategies: Will they increase teacher commitment? American Journal of Education, 9(5), 534–562.
Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23, 393–404.
Rowan, B. (1990). Commitment and control: Alternative strategies for the organizational design of schools. In C. B. Cazden (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 16). Washington DC: American Educational Research Association.
Rowan, B., & Miller, B. J. (2007). Organizational strategies for promoting instructional change: Implementation dynamics in schools working with comprehensive school reform providers. American Educational Research Journal, 44(2), 252–297.
Rowan, B., & Miskel, C. G. (1999). Institutional theory and the study of educational organizations. In J. Murphy & K. S. Louis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration: A project of the American Educational Research Association. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Sahlberg, P. (2010). Finnish lessons. What can the world learn from educational change in Finland? New York: Teacher College Press.
Sahlberg, P. (2011). The fourth way of Finland. Journal of Education Change, 12, 173–185.
Scott, W. R. (1992). The organization of environments: Network, cultural, and historical elements. In J. W. Meyer & W. R. Scott (Eds.), Organizational environments. Ritual and rationality (Updated ed.). Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Scott, W. R. (2000). Institutional change and healthcare organizations: From professional dominance to managed care. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Shirley, D. (2011). The fourth way of technology and change. Journal of Education Change, 12, 187–200.
Silander, T., & Välijärvi, J. (2013). The theory and practice of building pedagogical skill in Finnish teacher education. In H.-D. Meyer & A. Benavot (Eds.), PISA, power and policy. The emergence of global educational governance. Oxford: Symposium Books.
Skedsmo, G. (2009). School governing in transition? Perspectives, purposes and perceptions of evaluation policy. PhD thesis, Department of Teacher Education and School Development, Faculty of Education, University of Oslo, Oslo.
Stoll, L., Fink, D., & Earl, L. (2003). It’s about learning (and it’s about time). London: Routledge Falmer.
Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Varjo, J., Simola, H., & Rinne, R. (2013). Finland’s PISA results: An analysis of dynamics in education politics. In H.-D. Meyer & A. Benavot (Eds.), PISA, power and policy. The emergence of global educational governance. Oxford: Symposium Books.
Weick, K. E. (1982). Administering education in loosely coupled schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 63(10), 673–676.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Höyer, H.C., Paulsen, J.M., Nihlfors, E., Kofod, K.K., Kanervio, P., Pulkkinen, S. (2014). Control and Trust in Local School Governance. In: Moos, L., Paulsen, J. (eds) School Boards in the Governance Process. Educational Governance Research, vol 1. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05494-0_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05494-0_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-05493-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-05494-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)