School autonomy – the good, and the downright ugly

In July 2011, Federal Education Minister Peter Garrett announced a plan to provide states with funding for “Empowering local schools”, which he said would see “a major shift away from centralised decision-making and into a more localised, community-based school governance.” The plan provided little detail, and little awareness of the dangers inherent in pursuing the ill-conceived but populist notion that giving school principals more responsibility (without sufficient extra) would in any way improve education “outcomes”.

Both the ALP State Government and the LNP opposition have since responded to the federal proposal, in vastly different ways. There is so far very little detail from the LNP on their policy, but both positions are broadly compared in the table below.

School Autonomy – Features Compared
  State Government Proposal:
Local decisions: stronger school communities		 LNP Proposal:
Independent public schools
1.Consultation with the Profession A discussion paper rather than policy after thorough consultation with the QTU, QSPA, QASSP and the QCPCA. Released as a one-page A4 policy statement without any consultation and modelled on the failed Western Australian scheme
2. Selection of Schools to Participate Applicable to all schools with the possible exception of small schools 120 public schools in Queensland be allowed to “OPT IN” as Independent Public Schools (30 schools each year over four years)
3. Funding Amounts dependent on federal government “school autonomy” initiative Participating schools will receive $50,000 as a transitional grant to assist in the change.  They will also be eligible to receive up to a further $50,000 for administration purposes
4. School Budgeting Increase to $500,000 the value of capital works programs that principals could approve; “give schools more input into the way school maintenance programs are run”; schools to develop master plans to inform future capital investment decisions by the school and DET; and give school communities “the capacity to negotiate with local government authorities, industry and the community to develop joint facilities"  “The general funding level for each school will not change, but will be delivered as a ‘one-line budget’ so the school can better direct resources to address their unique needs.”
 5. Staffing Principals could make early offers to final-year teaching students; “decide which teaching staff are transferred to their school to ensure they have the skills and capabilities the school is looking for”; and, with school communities, “could recruit a percentage of teaching staff”.  This model allows the current teacher transfer scheme to remain in operation.

 “Although Principals will have the power to make decisions to benefit their schools, such as hiring teachers, they think best fit their school needs, teachers will still be subject to the teacher transfer scheme and employed under existing Enterprise Bargaining arrangements.” 

No information on how these claims would, or could, work in practice.
 6. Learning Principals and school communities to: approve responsible behaviour plans for students (currently approved by principals’ supervisors); establish new learning programs eg gateway school in an emerging industry; and “make decisions about the best way to use the school’s resources to meet the needs of their students”. No information in policy document or Q & A document, other than “government Principals have lacked the ability to enforce high behaviour standards” and “Queensland’s literacy and numeracy results are ranked last or near last of all states across all year levels”.