TEACHING CONTENT AND PROCESSES

Content of the compulsory minimum curriculum Curricula content of optional subjects Choice of teaching methods Choice of text books Criteria for grouping pupils for compulsory learning activities Setting internal assessment criteria of pupils Decisions about whether pupils should repeat a year Setting the content of examinations for certified qualifications

UK SCT NIR ENG WLS IS LINO TR SE FI SK SI RO PT PL AT NL MT HU LU LT LV CY IT FR ES EL IE EE DE DK CZ BG BE nl BE de BE fr a b a b

Full autonomy Limited autonomy No autonomy

Decision-making powers may be delegated by the local authority Not applicable Source: Eurydice.

Additional notes

Belgium (BE fr): At ISCED level 1, heads of schools administered by the French Community, or the education provider in the case of grant-aided education, may raise the weekly timetable to 29, 30 or 31 periods; no further optional subjects may be selected. At ISCED level 2, the timetable includes four compulsory weekly periods of additional activities that the school must to choose from a list drawn up by the Community authorities.

Belgium (BE fr, BE de): (a) refers to schools for which the Community is directly responsible and a minister is the responsible authority; and (b) refers to schools in the public and private grant-aided sector. In the grant-aided sector, the responsible authority is deemed to be the school-based management body.

Belgium (BE de): Regarding capital expenditure, schools can decide within a certain level of expenditure, beyond this level decisions are taken by the ministry. At ISCED level 1, all subjects are specified in the decree and no further optional subjects may be selected.

Bulgaria: Schools have autonomy for some operating expenditure.

Czech Republic: The reform of the curriculum began in 2007/08. In 2006/07, selected schools tested their new ‘School Educational Programmes’. There are no optional subjects at ISCED level 1.

Estonia: The age of pupils is the main criterion determining whether they may be placed in separate groups. It is recommended that boys and girls should be separated for lessons in physical education from the fifth year of school. Where schools have sufficient financial resources, groups may be formed within classes for other lessons (such as languages).

Greece: Schools may be fully autonomous for some operating expenditure.

Spain: Selection of school heads is carried out by a committee comprising representatives of the school and the education authority. Regarding capital expenditure, schools propose expenditure but the education authority approves and provides finances.

France: ISCED 1: No autonomy with respect to use of public funds and teaching staff. ISCED 2: school is autonomous for substituting absent teachers for absences of 2 weeks or less. Only schools which have technology classes or a modified general/vocational strand (SEGPA) may receive funds from private enterprises.

Cyprus: At ISCED level 1 there is either delegation or no autonomy for the choice of school books. Regarding decisions as to whether pupils should repeat a year, at ISCED level 1 there is no autonomy since pupils progress automatically from one class to the next in all but exceptional circumstances; in these cases the agreement of both the school head and the school inspector is required.

Luxembourg: ISCED 1: In some municipalities the administration selects substitutes for absent teachers; the post of school head does not exist and there are no optional subjects; no autonomy is granted to schools regarding the management of public funds, the content of compulsory curricula and text books. Regarding decisions as to whether pupils should repeat a year, schools are autonomous in this area at ISCED level 1.

Hungary: Other acquisitions can be financed from the annual budget provided by the maintaining body. The purpose has to be declared and the amount has to be separated within the budget. Planning annual acquisitions is a task of the school head, and it is approved by the maintainer.

Additional notes (Figure B15 – continued)

Malta: School heads have to consult the Ministry of Education to see whether it is possible to offer the chosen optional subject in accordance with the number of students in each group setting.

Netherlands: Every school has its competent authority (bevoegd gezag) which may be responsible for one school or many schools. It has responsibility in all cases but it can delegate the power of decision-making to the school management or the school head. This delegation should be included in the management statute. Formally, the competent authority is responsible for everything and it is not possible to indicate which tasks are delegated or not in practice.

Austria: Regarding the leasing of premises for community use, Allgemein bildende höhere Schule may decide within established education guidelines.

Portugal: Schools may select staff only when posts are still vacant after the allocation of jobs at national level. Regarding disciplining and dismissing, schools begin and develop the procedures but the final decision is taken at a higher level. Pupils are submitted to exams in Portuguese and Mathematics only in ISCED2 and schools have no say in preparing the content of these examinations.

Romania: Selection of substitute staff and disciplinary measures depend on the particular situation, schools may not have autonomy.

Slovenia: Regarding the leasing of premises for community use, local councils (founders) have the right to draw up their own plan. Where premises are used for lessons in religion, the ministry of education must give approval. Investment is approved by the founding-municipality and/or the public financing body (ministry of education, ministry of finance). Autonomy depends on the source of the finance (the state, the municipality or the school). Teachers are free to choose textbooks from a list drawn up in advance.

Slovakia: Regarding the roles and duties and disciplinary measures for teaching staff, some aspects may be governed by established guidelines. The Schools can decide on some capital expenditure with the approval of the higher authority.

Sweden: Regarding disciplinary measures, some aspects may be governed by established guidelines. For the use of public funds, local authorities must follow national guidelines and therefore have to delegate at least a certain amount of decision- making powers to schools.

United Kingdom (ENG/WLS/NIR): Regarding the leasing of premises for community use, schools do not have autonomy where the building has been provided through a public-private partnership. Statutory curricula contain the minimum required for all pupils. They do not seek to determine the curriculum in its entirety, for which the school is responsible.

United Kingdom (SCT): The local education authority is ultimately responsible for disciplinary measures. In some cases, schools can widen the scope of a post which would lead to additional salary payments.

Iceland: Roles and duties of school heads may be subject to delegation by the local authorities.

Liechtenstein: Schools at ISCED 2 are only autonomous for raising and using private funds to finance minor projects. However, this practice is not common. They have full autonomy for expenditure below CHF 3 000; above this level their autonomy is limited or non-existent. At ISCED level 1 there is either delegation or no autonomy for the use of public funds. Schools have no autonomy regarding the content of optional subjects or the choice of school books. At this level, pupils progress automatically from one year to the next, i.e. schools are not autonomous.

Norway: School may only receive donations. Explanatory note

This indicator shows the degree of school autonomy with respect to local, regional and central educational authorities. Similarly, the way in which decision-making internal to the school (amongst school staff) is organised is not taken into account. ‘No autonomy’ means that decisions are taken only by the education authority, although the school may be consulted at a particular stage of the process. ‘Full autonomy’ means that the school alone takes decisions, within the limits set by national/local legislation or regulations. A recommendation by the education authority with no binding force does not restrict school autonomy.

‘Limited autonomy’ comprises four separate situations, namely:

¾ the school takes decisions together with the education authority or forwards its proposal to it for approval; ¾ the school takes decisions based on a set of options predetermined by the education authority;

¾ the school is autonomous with regard to some decisions relating to the aspect under consideration but must refer to the education authority – or is not autonomous – as far as the remainder of decisions are concerned;

¾ the school is autonomous in principle but is strongly encouraged to follow official recommendations.

‘Decision-making powers may be delegated by the local authority’ means that local authorities are responsible for decision-making and have discretionary powers, in law, to delegate decision-making to school level.