Decentralising education in St. Lucia : the first steps

Abstract

For many years, there has been a growing interest in and a trend towards the decentralisation of control over the education service in almost all countries. 'Decentralisation of education' is a recurring theme currently in education circles. It is an attractive theme; and has almost become a bandwagon theme; many educationists and politicians take the chance of recording their adherence to it. Decentralisation has been seen as a way of increasing the effectiveness of development programmes by making them more relevant and responsive to local needs and conditions, allowing greater flexibility in their implementation and providing a means of co-ordinating the various agencies involved at the regional or local level The desire to increase popular participation in the planning and implementation of development programmes is sought partly also as a means of enlisting local support in their implementation. The term decentralisation is used to refer in a broad sense to any transfer of the authority to plan, make decisions and manage education functions from the national level to an organisation at the sub-national level. However, case studies of various countries engaged in decentralisation of education reveal different forms and levels of decentralisation. Hence one may conclude that decentralisation has multiple connotations and covers diverse realities. This study is intended to contribute to the growing discussion on educational decentralisation with particular bias towards St. Lucia Charter One contains a terse review of the Education System of St. Lucia including its history, structure and administration. The chapter shows how the State gradually assumed control of the education system resulting in what is presently a highly centralised education service. The next chapter contains a review of the literature available on the subject of decentralisation with particular reference to education services. Pertinent issues discussed include (a) ideological and administrative goals of decentralisation, (b) merits and problems of educational decentralisation, and (c) loci of power in education. Also, the chapter links decentralisation with new trends in education such as self-managing schools and school evaluation. Decentralisation in education has had important consequences for reforms in education in many countries. Two such countries are Britain and Malta. Their experiences with decentralisation are anecdoted in Chapter Three. Those two cases depict two countries at different points in their decentralisation process. The chapter also contains the findings of interviews of a sample of Maltese educators on issues related to decentralisation in general and decentralisation of education in Malta, in particular. Like any other form of change, educational decentralisation must be guided by certain principles and undertaken in a particular framework. Four regulatory principles - autonomy, accountability, efficiency and equity, are discussed in Chapter Four as the main underpinnings for decentralising education. The chapter also discusses the implications for decentralising some facets of the education system in St. Lucia. The final chapter provides some guidelines for developing a scheme for decentralisation. It explains the steps to be followed when a decision has been taken to decentralise a specific function. The chapter also succinctly presents the major findings of the research. Calls for decentralisation in education reflect a ubiquitous desire to transfer some degree of the authority to plan, make decisions and manage the education service from the national level to the school or district level. However, initiatives in decentralisation must be thoroughly informed by research and proper planning lest they be followed by a reverse to centralisation.