Introduction
Schools require coordinated support and control if they are to meet the demands of the targeted learners.
Different managerial options exist for most of the learning institutions at the local and national levels.
Educationists and policymakers need to be involved to ensure most of the institutions achieve their goals.
The inclusion of all key stakeholders in the management of schools is critical if schools are to operate optimally.
Thesis Statement: Local governments or organizations should be permitted to control schools because they can coordinate operations, have a clear understanding of the existing conditions, and can implement strategies that resonate with student’s changing needs.
Background Information
Existing policies require that learning institutions engage in relevant academic activities and implement decisions that can meet the needs of all learners.
Many countries in different parts of the world have put in place proper mechanisms to ensure that all students receive equal opportunities (Medina et al., 2020).
The existence of proper control strategies will guide educationists and curriculum developers to focus on the diverse expectations of learners with developmental disabilities (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020).
Federal control measures are essential since they promote uniformity in curriculum implementation. The purpose of such a model is to ensure that students have access to high-quality and equal educational instructions.
Local control mechanisms could allow educationists to focus on the changing needs of all learners from a culturally competent perspective. However, the approach creates a scenario whereby the level of coordination remains low (Pont, 2020).
In the recent past, several sources of control have been identified that can work efficiently for most of the learning institutions, such as local governments, federal governments, private companies, and board of directors.
Any form of control needs to be informed by the intended curriculum and the goals of the specific schools.
Despite the nature of these aspects, many people remain divided regarding the best form of management or control for schools.
Possible Sources of Control
Local Organization/Government
Local governments present the first possible for option for controlling and managing schools.
This choice seems favorable since these agencies can help educationists and leaders focus on the needs of learners.
Through this form of control, emerging curriculum will seek to meet the interests and expectations of most of the targeted learners.
Local agencies or governments have the potential focus on the outlined requirements for national standards to ensure timely results are recorded (Pont, 2020).
The ultimate aim behind this form of control is to make sure that all stakeholders meet the outlined standards
This source of control could be problematic since schools in a given country could have divergent goals, practices, and curriculum. This outcome has the potential to disorient the overall performance of the involved institutions at the national level.
Due to the challenges associated with any form of control by local governments, experts and policymakers recommend other plausible choices.
Private Companies or Agencies
Private companies and organizations could be allowed to control schools.
Such stakeholders have the potential to support learners’ needs using their financial resources.
The consideration of this model will ensure that the nature of management and curriculum implementation improves significantly.
The inclusion of private companies in the management of schools ensures that policies, guidelines, and decisions are made and implanted in a timely manner (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020).
Private organizations can liaise with other local or national agencies to ensure that the targeted institutions are capable of pursuing their educational goals.
This approach can result in better and sustainable curriculum that can guide more students to achieve their aims and eventually succeed in life (Medina et al., 2020).
However, these agencies might implement impractical guidelines and policy incentives that are intended to maximize profits.
The stakeholders might go further to ignore the initiatives and curriculum different government agencies put in place.
Federal Government
Many countries focus on the best approaches to provide equal learning opportunities to all children.
The involvement of federal agencies to control schools would be appropriate to maximize the level of equality in the sector.
Most of the children would be able to access similar opportunities and competencies.
The national government could be involved to control and manage the performance of schools.
This model is plausible since it allows schools to have uniform curriculum and strategies to pursue their goals (Pekkolay, 2021).
More learning institutions will be compelled to respond to the requirements outlined at the national level.
A sense of uniformity will emerge, thereby ensuring that most of the beneficiaries record positive results due to the availability of the same level or nature of education (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020).
However, this form of control could trigger a wide range of challenges, including the liability to appreciate and address the needs of learners at the local level.
The strategy might compel learning institutions to lose more time trying to learn more about formulated policies, curriculum, and streamline operations.
Board of Governors
The idea of board of governors has the potential to allow schools to make timely decisions and pursue their goals.
The involved members will monitor the changes of different and make informed decisions.
The professionals will consider the best ways to formulate curriculum and instructions based on the changing needs of the targeted learners.
Such boards will be aware of the demands of most of the learning institutions.
The boards will include people who are competent and capable of issuing guidelines that support the overall process of control (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020).
However, this model ignores the fact that coordination in the management of schools is critical if the targeted beneficiaries are to record positive gains.
The strategy fails to put into consideration regional and national requirements that would help more learners to receive timely and beneficial instructions (Medina et al., 2020).
Such boards might implement control mechanisms that are similar to the ones associated with corporate identities, thereby ignoring the unique needs and expectations of learners with diverse backgrounds.
Preferable Option
Each type of control for schools appears to be characterized by unique weaknesses and strengths.
Local governments or authorities are the most appropriate agencies to control and manage learning institutions.
This choice is informed about the idea that education is intended to meet the demands of students at the local level (Medina et al., 2020).
From a local viewpoint, stakeholders can find it easier to identify most of the issues affecting learners.
The authorities would be involved to develop culturally competent curriculum that is capable of empowering most of the targeted beneficiaries.
The consideration of the private sector could be erroneous since such organizations would be keen to focus on the best approaches to maximize profits (Pekkolay, 2021).
Local schools will find it easier to liaise with the established agencies at the lowest level to pursue the intended aims. Teachers, parents, and policymakers will be keen to remain involved and consider how they can deliver positive results.
At the local setting, the involved authorities and governments will find it easier to learn more about the changing needs of the students.
The emerging ideas will ensure that the control mechanisms put in place resonate with the needs and expectations of all key stakeholders.
Proposals
The proposed control by local authorities or governments is plausible to support the performance of schools.
Key stakeholders at the local level need to be involved to identify emerging gaps and consider the best ways to deliver positive results.
Local governments controlling curriculum and management of the targeted schools would need to liaise with agencies from other regions (Håkansson & Adolfsson, 2022).
This approach will maximize coordination and support the formulation of curriculum that resonates with the wider national educational goals.
Professionals in this field would need to undertake additional studies to ensure that any form of control for learning institutions meets the diverse needs of the targeted learners.
Conclusion
Control for schools is an evidence-based approach intended to support curriculum development.
While several options exist for most of the schools, the idea of local governments would be plausible and acceptable.
This approach will allow schools to develop culturally acceptable and beneficial instructions
Stakeholders at the local level will be involved to identify emerging challenges and consider the best ways to deliver positive results.
Continuous research would be recommendable to ensure that any form of control for schools is informed by the changing expectations of the anticipated learners.
Reference List
Darling-Hammond, L. et al. (2020) ‘Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development’, Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), pp. 97-140.
Håkansson, J. and Adolfsson, C. (2022) “Local education authority’s quality management within a coupled school system: strategies, actions, and tensions’, Journal of Educational Change, 23(2), pp. 291-314.
Medina, M.A. et al. (2020) ‘The power of community school councils in urban schools’, Peabody Journal of Education, 95(1), pp. 73-89.
Pekkolay, S. (2021) ‘Effective school management’, Journal of Advanced Educational Philosophy, 5(8), pp. 231-235.
Pont, B. (2020) ‘A literature review of school leadership policy reforms’, European Journal of Education: Research, Development and Policy, 55(2), pp. 154-168.