Deregulation, autonomy and bigger schools offer the education system many benefits. But there are downsides too. In 2004, a study conducted on behalf of the Education Council showed that a lot of money funds bureaucracy at educational institutions. Measures that could be taken against this include putting a brake on mergers and introducing quality milestones.
26 April 2004
In the 1990s, a lot of money was spent on meetings, reports and other paperwork. The Education Council has noted a visible increase in bureaucracy in all sectors of education, although there are differences between the sectors. In the vocational and adult education sector, the costs for secondary activities (in 2004) were the highest: 39% of the overall budget. At primary and secondary schools the figure is 11% and 12%, respectively.
Increased autonomy increases the administrative burden
Paradoxically, the government-driven increases in scale and decentralisation have left schools with greater administrative and reporting burdens. The policy of reducing red tape at schools did not lead to lower administrative burdens on a national level. In fact, there was actually an increase, largely attributable to executive bodies, such as the Education Inspectorate.
Scale increases also partly responsible
The institutions themselves also cause some bureaucracy. Bigger schools - originally intended to increase the efficiency of running schools by saving on buildings and support staff - are also responsible for a significant increase in bureaucracy. Schools that have grown too big have a large body of non-teaching staff. Because of a lack of competition, they lack the impulses needed to encourage better performance. Increased scale first leads to a reduction in the net cost per school pupil, but there comes a point when that gain turns into a loss.
Put the brakes on mergers and introduce quality milestones
To combat bureaucracy, the Education Council proposes that the brakes are put on mergers, especially for universities of applied sciences and regional training centres (ROCs). A ‘competition authority' for schools should make sure that regional monopolies do not lead to an abuse of a dominant position. Furthermore, the government should give schools an incentive to provide the highest possible quality with the available budget. This could be achieved by establishing milestones so that schools can see how they compare to other schools. All future policy measures should also include a cost-benefit analysis to examine whether the gains outweigh the administrative burdens.