Abstract
Largely following the advice of and loans from the World Bank, many Latin American countries decentralised education to the state, municipal and local levels. Such decentralisation was part of an effort to provide universal access to primary education with massive investments near one billion dollars per year during the 1990s. The rationale was simple and appealing: The more local the decision, the greater the voice of the voter-consumer was supposed to be; while the larger number of suppliers was assumed to lead to greater variety. Research documented here shows that while authority and resources could be transferred downward in the system in a short amount of time, the so-called ‘autonomous schools programs’ failed to generate significant improvement in pupils’ achievement. Decentralisation could be successful, however, when combined with reliable strategies such as good initial teacher-training employing a wide set of teaching models; the use of well-tested scripts, guides or frameworks; and the systematic assignment of the best teachers to first grade.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arregui, Patricia. 2001. Systems of Determination and Assessment of Learning Achievement Goals. In: Analysis of Prospects of Education in Latin America and the Caribbean, 252--277. Santiago: UNESCO-OREALC.
Daniel J. Brown (1994) Decentralisation in Educational Government and Management Torsten Husen T. Neville Postlethwaite (Eds) The International Encyclopedia of Education Pergamon Oxford 1409–1412
Martin. Carnoy (1998) ArticleTitleNational Voucher Plans in Chile and Sweden: Did Privatization Reforms Make for Better Education Comparative Education Review 42 IssueID3 309–337
Martin Carnoy P. McEwan (1997) Public Investments or Private Schools? A Reconstruction of Educational Improvements in Chile Stanford University Mimeo
Françoise. Delannoy (2000) Education Reforms in Chile, 1980–1998: A Lesson of Pragmatism Washington DC: The World Bank
Elley, Warwick. 1992. How in the World do Students Read? The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. Hamburg: Grindeldruck.
Education Testing Service (ETS). 1992. The International Assessment of Educational Progress: Learning Mathematics. Princeton: ETS.
Mark Hanson (1997) ArticleTitleStrategies of Educational Decentralisation: Key Questions and Core Issues Journal of Educational Administration 36 IssueID2 111–128
—. 2000. Educational Decentralisation Around the Pacific Rim. Journal of Educational Administration 38(5): 406–411.
Operations. Human Capital Development (1995) Involving Schools and Communities in Education, Dissemination Notes, No 58 2 October 1995, Human Capital Development and Operations Policy, 2. Washington, DC: The World Bank
InstitutionalAuthorNameIEA (2000) Third International Mathematics and Science Study International Mathematics Report. Chestnut Hill MA: Boston College
Emmanuel Jimenez Sawada Yasukudi (1998) Do Community-Managed Schools Work? An Evaluation of El Salvador’s EDUCO Program The World Bank Washington, DC
Noel. McGinn (2002) Best Practices in the Installation of Local Governance of Education Washington DC: Creative Associates International
Noel McGinn Borden Allison (1995) Framing Questions, Constructing Answers Cambridge MA: Harvard Institute for International Development
Allan. Odden (1995) Critical Issue: Transferring Decision-making to Local Schools: Site-Based Management, North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL) http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/envrnmnt/go/go600.htm accessed 2 November 2003
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 1998. Education at a Glance. OECD Indicators. Paris: OECD.
OECD-UNESCO. 2003. Literacy Skills for the World of Tomorrow. Further Results from PISA 2000. Paris: OECD-UNESCO.
Carlos. Ornelas (2000) ArticleTitleThe Politics of the Educational Decentralisation in Mexico Journal of Educational Administration 38(5) 426–441
Ernesto. Schiefelbein (1995) ArticleTitleEducation Reform in Latin America and the Caribbean: A Program for Action The Major Project of Education Bulletin 37 9–19
—. 1991. Restructuring Education through Economic Competition, Journal of Educational Administration 29(4): 17–29.
Schiefelbein Ernesto Schiefelbein Paulina (2000) ArticleTitleThree Decentralisation Strategies in Two Decades: Chile 1981–2000 Journal of Educational Administration 38 IssueID5 412–425
Ernesto Schiefelbein Wolff Laurence Paulina Schiefelbein (1999) ArticleTitleCost Effectiveness of Education Policies in Latin America: A Survey of Expert Opinion The Major Project of Education Bulletin 49 54–79
InstitutionalAuthorNameUNESCO-LLECE (2001) Primer Estudio Internacional Comparativo Informe Técnico Laboratorio Latinoamericano de Evaluación de la Calidad de la Educación, Santiago, 269. http://www.unesco.cl/llece, accessed 12 November 2003
UNESCO-OREALC, 1992. The State of Education in Latin America and the Caribbean, 1980–1989. Santiago: UNESCO-OREALC.
Donald Winkler Gershberg Alec Ian (2000) Education Decentralisation in Latin America: The Effects on the Quality of Schooling Human Development Department LCSHD Paper Series No. 59, Washington, DC: The World Bank
Donald Winkler T. Rounds (1996) ArticleTitleEducation Reform in Chile: Municipal and Private Sector Response to Decentralisation and School Choice Economics of Education Review 15(4) 365–376
Laurence. Wolff (1998) National Educational Assessments in Latin America, Current Progress and Future Challenges Washington DC: PREAL
The World Bank (1995) World Bank Support for Education Decentralisation: FY1970-95 Washington DC: The World Bank
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schiefelbein, E. THE POLITICS OF DECENTRALISATION IN LATIN AMERICA. Int Rev Educ 50, 359–378 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-004-2628-0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-004-2628-0