School-Based Management

School-based management (SBM) is a policy used in public schools to decentralize decision-making power. In this strategy, management decisions move from a larger, more centralized authority such as the school district, to smaller units that are closely adjacent to the school, such as teachers, parents, and administrators. Currently, the data on the relationship between school-based management and increasing students' learning is mixed, with uncertain conclusions. Nevertheless, the policy is growing and stakeholders including teachers, administrators, and community members are supportive of the concept.

Keywords Administrative Decentralization; Autonomous School Concept; Decentralization; Participatory Decision-Making; Restructuring; School Autonomy; School-Based Governance; School Empowerment; Shared Governance

School Administration & Policy > School-Based Management

Overview

School-based management (SBM) is a policy used in public schools to decentralize decision-making power. In this strategy, management decisions move from a larger, more centralized authority such as the school district, to smaller units that are closely adjacent to the school, such as teachers, parents, and administrators. Historically, public schools in the United States have been run by both the centralized power of state and district control, as well as smaller entities such as community school boards or parents (Darling-Hammond, 1988). While there have been many predecessors to school-based management as we know it today in American schools, the strategy became more defined out of the 1980s school reform movement. While there are many similarities between this policy and previous attempts at decentralization, school-based management is much more complex and requires more of an overhaul of organization at both the district and individual school levels than previous concepts of decentralization (Cotton, 1992).

In school-based management, the roles of different groups in and around a school may change drastically. The district and state lend more discretion in certain areas directly to the school, while still finding ways to support their endeavors. Principals tend to become facilitators rather than decision makers. Teachers, community members, and students may be called upon for input. It is important to understand that school based management is more than a change in the way schools work. It fundamentally alters traditional roles, while shifting responsibilities and authority (Cotton, 1992).

The logic behind school-based management originally lies in research from the business world. Studies found that when the decision-making process was restructured to include all levels of employees, worker satisfaction increased. Researchers found the process especially appropriate for work places that were evolving, fast paced, and required individuals to work together (Banicky, Rodney & Foss, 2000). The proliferation of school-based management in schools has increased rapidly across the United States and internationally in recent years.

Throughout the late 1980s, school based management was often seen as a political reform to shift power from central entities to those within the school community. Supporters hoped that the policy would engender a sense of community within those who were closest to the school, driving improvement and creating a sense of cooperation and ownership. Implementing the strategy of school-based management was the end goal in driving change when the policy first gained popularity. Today however, in the climate of accountability, SBM has increasingly come under question regarding how it affects student achievement (Briggs & Wohlstetter, 2003).

Proponents of school-based management today see it as a strategy to improve many aspects of schools. The topics for discussion as decentralization occurs may include budgeting, curriculum and instruction, and plans for student discipline (Oswald, 1995). Stakeholders that may be affected include administrators, teachers, parents, students, community members, school boards, and state and district offices. The core ideals behind this approach are rooted in the belief that school decisions should be made by those who are the closest to the impact of those decisions. Consequently, school-based management brings all of these stakeholders together in a more cooperative approach to solve problems and improve schools (Banicky, Rodney & Foss, 2000).

Because school-based management requires extensive changes, it is a challenging management strategy to implement, and requires the cooperation between various entities (Banicky, Rodney & Foss, 2000).

Applications

Students

Under school-based management, students, especially older students, may participate in the decision making process for their individual school. Students may serve on committees discussing topics from discipline to curriculum or data collection. When this method is employed, student satisfaction with schools has been shown to increase (Oswald, 1995). However, the statistics regarding student achievement and outcomes remains unclear.

Multiple studies have attempted to measure the effect of school-based management on student achievement. Outcomes have generally been very mixed, with no persistent link found between implementation of SBM and gains in academic achievement, attendance rates, or disciplinary issues (Oswald, 1995).

Increasing student achievement was not necessarily a primary goal of the original school-based management models. Rather than aiming to enhance student performance, school-based management was employed to shift the balance of decision-making power from centralized authority to individual schools (Banicky, Rodney, & Foss, 2000). Oswald (1995) states that some schools who implement SBM do not make instruction their top priority. Thus, it is perhaps not surprising that research has not found a persistent relationship that school-based management positively or negatively affects student learning.

While school-based management may not contribute directly to increased student achievement, several outcomes from successful implementation have the potential to improve grades and test scores of students. Drury and Levin (1994) found the following improvements: better use of time and resources, more involvement from the community, and improvements in curriculum. They also noted increased professionalism among teachers in the schools. However, the research as it stands today does not indicate school-based management largely affects student achievement.

Teachers

Teachers in schools have a variety of roles. In school-based management, these roles shift more towards working in teams with others. School-based management systems have focused on changing a variety of aspects in the management of a school, related or not to classroom practice. In some models, schools focus on classroom-based changes. In others, more administrative matters are addressed. Cotton (1992) concludes that research shows teachers want to be involved in decision-making regarding what to teach and how to teach it in their schools. However, school-based management systems that do not address these issues have often produced negative reactions from teachers. Nir (2002) conducted a longitudinal study in which he measured how school-based management implementation affects different areas of teacher work. He found that teachers felt the policy and implementation had both negative and positive aspects. Nir (2002) indicated that freedom in the classroom coupled with satisfactory rewards were imperative for teacher satisfaction and commitment in implementing a school-based management model. Without these elements, teacher commitment to their school and their students may actually wane. The topics which school-based management address are an important ingredient or barrier to success in the eyes of teachers.

While teachers are most interested in changes in curriculum and instruction, this is the sphere in which district and state policymakers are often least willing to give up control (Banicky, Rodney, & Foss, 2000). However, this area may be the one that stands to gain the most from school-based management. Studies conducted examining the relationship between teacher participation in decision-making and student outcomes indicate that the two are positively correlated – when teachers are more involved in decision-making, students tend to perform better (Banicky, Rodney, & Foss, 2000).

Administrators

School principals and other administrators may see their job descriptions undergo enormous changes under school-based management. A school principal, in particular, often plays a crucial role in the implementation's success. In school-based management, the role of the school principal changes from supervisor and manager to facilitator. The job function becomes much more collaborative and involves increased interaction with staff, students and the community (Banicky, Rodney, & Foss, 2000). Gaul, Underwood, and Fortune (1994) found that while school administrator's work hours increased during and after implementation of school-based management, administrators were most likely to embrace the new system.

District & State

School based management does not lower the importance of a centralized form of governance. Decisions being made at the school level need support from the district to be successful (Banicky, Rodney, & Foss, 2000). Working closely with schools and the constituents to assist them in making this transition is imperative. The district must make decisions on where it is more helpful to decentralize power, and what components are important to keep at a centralized level.

Issues

It is important to consider how the desired outcomes of school-based management have changed as we enter the twenty-first century in the history of American education. With current emphasis on accountability, closing the achievement gap, and achieving equitable educational opportunities for all, strategies such as school-based management are especially important to consider carefully before implementing in a school.

No management strategy should be considered without contemplating its effect on student learning. The earlier days in which decentralization and shared decision-making were the final goals of school-based management have given way to a larger question of whether or not school-based management affects student learning.

While the documented benefits of school-based management on specific players involved are inconclusive, there have been some studies that conclude school-based management has positive effects (Briggs & Wohlstetter). There needs to be further research conducted questioning whether school based management can increase student achievement by creating an environment that positively affects learning. However, it is widely agreed upon that highly qualified and committed teachers, coupled with a focused and challenging curriculum, are necessary ingredients for increasing student achievement. School-based management may be a worthy strategy for achieving these two goals, thereby increasing student achievement.

Empowering and engaging highly qualified teachers into the decision making process may help improve student outcomes. Centralized government officials who support decentralization see school-based management as an enabler – school officials will be better equipped to make decisions that supply the direct needs of their students (Wohlstetter & Mohrman, 1994). Studies of schools who have implemented school-based management have found that it can lead to teacher empowerment when the decisions teachers are making are directly linked to learning and curriculum (Marks & Louis, 1999). Other studies suggest a link between school-based management and other indicators of "a strong professional community" (Briggs & Wohlstetter, 2003). These indicators include increased collaboration, a greater focus on professional development, and increased awareness of accountability. Schools who are thinking of implementing school-based management should consider whether it would help teachers teach students. Highly qualified teachers are a significant indicator of student achievement, and schools should weigh carefully how much this type of management can contribute to that goal.

It is also important to consider the areas of control given the individual school. The breadth and scope of issues school-based management may address is enormous. Different schools may want to target different areas to implement this strategy. For example, a school that has a number of highly qualified teachers, and can create a community through school-based management where those teachers are empowered to make decisions regarding curriculum and instruction in the classroom, may work to give teachers increased control over classroom practices. Schools who are having trouble recruiting or retaining high quality teachers, or who do not have a high percentage of experienced teachers may choose to focus their school-based management strategy on giving teachers more professional development opportunities regarding classroom instruction and student learning, helping them make informed decisions about how best to reach their students in the classroom. Each of these scenarios can use school-based management, but the way in which the strategy is focused follows the issue of what is needed to improve student outcomes.

Research in recent years focused on the link between school-based management and new classroom practices related to the policy. Studies have found that when school-based management gives teachers more direct power to improve their classroom outcomes, the impact was twofold: teachers improved their teaching, and students learned more (Briggs & Wohlstetter, 2003). School-based management, when used in a way that directly addresses the issue of raising student achievement, may help students perform better. However, more research is needed to substantiate the specific features of school-based management that assist in this endeavor.

As with any new endeavor in schools, the strengths and weaknesses already present should be taken into account before any action is taken. In the example of teachers, a school with teachers who have one set of skills may approach school-based management differently than a school with teachers who are of a different background or skill level. The focus of the strategy is different, although the implementation can still use input from many different groups attached to the school.

Achievement Gap

The achievement gap and serving underserved students is one of the largest issues that American education faces today. Can school based management help schools achieve equitable education? Jenkins et al. (1994) studied the effects of school-based management on low performing students. The researchers found that while teachers appreciated and encouraged the change process, student outcomes were not affected in achievement or behavior. However, more research, especially longitudinal research, is needed on this topic. Again, previous elements of the individual school are important to consider before implementing school-based management. The population of students that are served by the school will impact if and how the policy is amenable to the situation.

There seem to be several key elements deemed as ingredients to success while implementing a school-based management strategy geared towards improving student achievement. First, it should concretely concentrate on improving teaching and learning, synchronized with high performance standards for students and teachers. Studies of school-based management have found connecting the restructuring process to higher performance goals was more likely to be accepted by teachers and administrators, as well as parents and other community members (Briggs & Wohlstetter, 2003). This aspect of change represents a significant difference in the way school-based management was approached in its early years.

Rather than focusing on procedural aspects, the power to change and improve classroom practices, instruction methods, and the delivery of curriculum are key ingredients to successful school-based management strategy (Cotton, 1992). This requires states and districts to allow those who are closest to the school control and direct issues of curriculum and instruction. However, these entities should still guide individual schools in ensuring that their changes will meet up to state and national standards. If the focus of change is on how to improve student achievement, teachers will likely take more interest, and the gains will be more than if the issue is not central to the reform.

Professional Development

As previously discussed, decentralization represents an enormous change in the workplace. The structure of a school and the roles of those individuals in and around it are transformed. One of the greatest opportunities that arise out of this policy is to focus and increase professional development opportunities (Cotton, 1992). Studies have found school-based management succeeds when a larger proportion of teachers and administrators participate in professional development opportunities. Professional development must be meaningfully connected to classroom (Briggs & Wohlstetter, 2003). Development focus includes topics such as team-building and group problem-solving.

Relationship building and increased communication are also essential to using school-based management to increase student learning and improve outcomes (Briggs & Wohlstetter, 2003). Involving a variety of groups within the school and community in the implementation process is important. Having formal and informal channels of communication for these parties is also imperative, as many more players are involved in the discussion and decision making process. Additionally, access to information will help participants make informed decisions, as will a clear mission statement (Banicky, Rodney & Foss, 2000).

School-based management requires increased time and energy on the part of many participants in and close to the school. Rewarding participation, through monetary or non-monetary means, plays an important role in successful implementation of school-based management. Schools that have successfully implemented school-based management have found rewards were used frequently for specific milestones or contributions. In struggling school based management schools, however, rewards were often scarce of vague (Briggs & Wohlstetter, 2003).

Organization of Power

School-based management implementation gives schools a large number of possibilities regarding what decision-making power may be brought down to the school level, and what remains centralized. Deciding the scope of power is important. Decentralizing power does not mean that all decisions are now made at the school level. It may be more beneficial to have greater power in one area than mediocre impact on several areas (Banicky, Rodney, & Foss, 2000). For example, schools may decide that they want to make more decisions on instruction methods, but do not want to change or discuss procedures for student discipline, depending on their larger goals.

As with any new implementation, time is an important factor. School based management is a complex endeavor, requiring alignment of resources and parties involved. Real change often takes years. Expecting results quickly is neither feasible nor realistic. Thus, three to five years should be allotted for school-based management to be implemented, take effect, and show outcomes (Banicky, Rodney, & Foss, 2000).

As a concept, school-based management may seem simple – localize and place power in the hands of those who best know the school. However, implementing the actual policy has a wide range of issues and permutations to consider. In previous educational eras the larger purpose was the decentralization of school governance, aiming to bring school decision-making processes closer to those who it actually affected. Today, policy officials have increasingly shifted to focus on improving student outcomes (Briggs & Wohlstetter, 2003). With this change, school-based management has evolved to become part of a widespread reform strategy for schools rather than a stand-alone restructuring.

Conclusions

Currently, the data on the relationship between school-based management and increasing students' learning is mixed, with uncertain conclusions. Nevertheless, the policy is growing and stakeholders including teachers, administrators, and community members are supportive of the concept. However, its widespread support can likely be less attributed to having a quantifiable impact on student learning; more likely, many stakeholders prefer decentralized and local control of a school rather than management decisions that come from an unseen and far off entity such as a central school district governance.

School-based management, in the context of today's education landscape, is not simply another method of decentralization. Rather, it is a strategy and process by which all stakeholders work together to increase and galvanize the learning process for students. However, the method is multi-faceted, and requires an increased workload and specific training over a long period. School-based management may require some infrastructure before the implementation can begin. These include but are not limited to the capacity of teachers and administrators in the schools, the support of community members, the foundation and reinforcement provided from the district or state level, and the students who are being served in the particular school (Fullan & Watson, 2000).

As school-based management becomes more prevalent, researchers will need to study if the policy can help schools positively impact student achievement. Furthermore, it will be necessary to compare successful implementations to unsuccessful ones so that components and practices that lead to student success are further identified. Armed with this knowledge, schools can then begin making changes to achieve their goals, based on sound research and knowledge.

Terms & Concepts

Administrative Decentralization: Administrative decentralization refers to bringing school management matters closer to the school, rather than keeping them centralized, i.e. at the school district level.

Autonomous School Concept: Autonomous school concept describes the concept of an individual school having more power over decisions regarding the individual school.

Decentralization: Decentralization is the redistribution of power from a central authority, to more local or regional authority.

Participatory Decision-Making: Participatory decision-making is a decision-making process marked by the participation of a diverse group of individuals in schools.

Restructuring: Restructuring refers to the process of changing elements of the school.

School Autonomy: School autonomy describes a school that is free from some or all centralized decision-making.

School-Based Governance: School-based governance is another term for school-based management, marked by decentralization of certain decisions to the individual school.

School Empowerment: School empowerment is giving official authority to make decisions to local and individual schools.

Shared Governance: Shared governance refers to the cooperation between individual schools and more centralized authorities in making decisions regarding school practices.

Bibliography

Banicky, L., Rodney, M., & Foss, H. K. (2000). The promises and problems of school-based management. Dover, DE: University of Delaware Research and Development Center.

Center.

Briggs, K. L., & Wohlstetter, P. Key elements of a successful school-based management strategy. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 14 , 351-372.

Bush, T. (2013). Autonomy and Accountability: Twin Dimensions of the Reform Agenda. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 41, 697-700. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=91668462&site=ehost-live

Cotton, K. (1992). School-based Management. Retrieved July 20, 2007, from Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory website http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/7/ topsyn6.html

Darling-Hammond, L. (1988). Accountability and teacher professionalism. American Educator, 12 , 38-43.

David, J. L. (1989). Synthesis of research on school-based management. Educational Leadership, 46 , 45-53. Retrieved July 20, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=8523747&site=ehost-live

David, J. L. (1996). The who, what, and why of site-based management. Educational Leadership, 53 , 4-9. Retrieved July 20, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=9601043063&site=ehost-live

Drury, D., & Levin, D. (1994). School-based management: The changing locus of control in American public education. U.S. Department of Education: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

Fullan, M., & Watson, N. (2000). School-based management: Reconceptualizing to improve learning outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11 , 453-474. Retrieved July 20, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=4670095&site=ehost-live

Gaul, T. H., Underwood, K. E., & Fortune, J. C. (1994). Reform at the grass roots. The American School Board Journal, 181 , 35-40.

Grimes, S. (2012). School-based model for struggling readers. Reading Today, 29, 34. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=74208721&site=ehost-live

Honig, M. I., & Rainey, L. R. (2012). Autonomy and school improvement: What do we know and where do we go from here?. Educational Policy, 26, 465-495. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=77340262&site=ehost-live

Jenkins, J. R., Ronk, J., Schrag, J. A., Rude, G. G., Stowitschek, C. (1994). Effects of using school-based participatory decision making to improve services for low-performing students. The Elementary School Journal, 94 , 357-372.

Marks, H. M., & Louis, K. S. (1999). Teacher empowerment and the capacity for organizational learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35 , 707-750. Retrieved July 20, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=2574117&site=ehost-live

Nir, A. E. (2002). School-based management and its effect on teacher commitment. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 5 , 323-341. Retrieved July 20, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=8974008&site=ehost-live

Oswald, L. (1995). School-based management. Retrieved July 20, 2007, from Clearinghouse on Education Policy and Management Web site http://eric.uoregon.edu/publications/ digests/digest099.html

Wohlstetter, P., & Mohrman, S. A. (1994). School-based management: promise and process. New Brunswick, NJ: The Consortium for Policy Research in Education. Retrieved July 20, 2007, from Department of Education website http://www.ed.gov/pubs/CPRE/fb5sbm.html.

Wohlstetter, P., Van Kirk, A. N., Robertson, P. J., Mohrman, S. A. (1997). Organizing for successful school-based management. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 413655).

Suggested Reading

Brown, D. J. (1990). Decentralization and school-based management. London: The Falmer Press, 1990.

Chion-Kenney, L. (1994). Site-based management and decision-making: Problems and solutions. Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.

Clune, W. H., & White, P. A. (1988). School-based management: Institutional variation, implementation, and issues for further research. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Center for Policy Research in Education.

Dee, J.R., Henkin, A.B., & Pell, S.W.J. (2002). Support for innovation in site-based-managed schools: Developing a climate for change. Educational Research Quarterly, 25 , 36-50. Retrieved July 20, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=7600676&site=ehost-live

Murphy, J. F., & Beck, L. G. (1995). School-Based Management as School Reform: Taking Stock. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Stock. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Race, R. (2002). Teacher professionalism or deprofessionalisation? The consequences of school-based management on domestic and international contexts. British Educational Research Journal, 28 , 4590-463. Retrieved July 20, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=6809753&site=ehost-live