Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Educational reform at the general secondary schools in Armenia
(USC Thesis Other)
Educational reform at the general secondary schools in Armenia
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UM I films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough. substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send U M I a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these w ill be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. ProQuest Information and Learning 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor, M l 48106-1346 USA 800-521-0600 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. EDUCATIONAL REFORM AT THE GENERAL SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN ARMENIA by Arpineh Matnishyan A Thesis Presented to the FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTERS OF SCIENCE (EDUCATION) May 2000 Copyright 2000 Arpineh Matnishyan Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 1409646 ___ < g > UMI UMI Microform 1409646 Copyright 2002 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA THS OKAOUATS SCHOOL UNIVSKStTV H U M LOS SHOSLSK, CALirOHHIA SOOOT This thesis, written hy under the direction of h Thesis Committee, and approved hy all its members, has been pre sented to and accepted by the Dean of The Graduate School, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of cA fgste/ Jc/ence. t* Date. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. AKCNOWLEDGEMENTS After several months o f work, this endeavor comes to an end. This endeavor would be very tough for me if I didn’t get the support o f the people who believed into success of this work. My husband Mihran has been the most faithful, patient supporter. He has supported me through the course of this work with his belief into what 1 was so committed to do during a new stage in my life: becoming a mother. 1 would like to thank my extended families (Matnishyan and Aslanyan) for believing in me and for supporting me with their love and patience. I would like to express my appreciation to my professors at USC: Dr. Rideout, Dr. Stromquist and Dr. Eskey. Dr. Rideout has known me from the very first day of my arrival at USC. His support and guidance have meant a lot for me professionally and as a foreigner in this country. I would like to express my gratitude to him for his support, which I will carry with me to my faraway country. His guidance in this particular endeavor has been very valuable and useful. Dr. Stromquist has known me since the first semester at USC. I have always been filled with awe and delight to her strong personality and professionalism. I was particularly gratified and delighted to get her generous support for this work. Her guidance has helped me a lot in getting a deeper insight o f what I have been doing. Dr. Eskey has been very supportive as well. Knowing me from the class he taught he immediately gave his agreement to support me through this work. His support meant a lot to me, too. ii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Last but not the least, my deepest appreciation to the Ministry of Education and Science o f Armenia and the Center for Educational Projects (CEP) in Yerevan, particularly to the director of the CEP Karine Harutyunyan, the SIP Manager Alexander Hovhanissyan and the SIP Appraisal Officer Nune Davtyan who have hosted me during the summer of 1999 in their organization as an intern. They gave me a wonderful chance to get a deeper understanding of the process of current educational reform in Armenia. I would also like to express my gratitude to Gayane Meroyan, Senior Research Associate at the Educational Research Institute in Yerevan, who has provided me with useful information as well as relevant to my study literature. Thanks to all o f you this work has become possible. THANK YOU cunrsuiiU Lnhffr3nK u Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements u List of Tables VI List of Appendices VI Maps vn List of Used Abbreviations vui List of Definitions IX Abstract XI Chapter I. Introduction Background of the Topic Statement o f Purpose Research Questions Significance of the Problem Assumptions Limitations Delimitations Methodology Organization of the Remainder of the Study Chapter II. Review of the Literature.....................................................................................14 Educational Development in Armenia since Independence Current or Resisting Problems of Education Educational Change in the Context of Transition Chapter III. The Armenian Context..................................................................................... 30 Cultural Background General Overview of the Education in Armenia Social, Political and Economic Factors Impacting Education Chapter IV. Development of Educational Reform since Independence............................ 42 School Rationalization School Autonomy and the SIP IV Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Chapter V. Methodology......................................................................................................62 The Setting and Data Collection Process Interviews Chapter VI. Analysis and Interpretations............................................................................ 66 Discussion Chapter VII. Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations............................................82 Bibliography..........................................................................................................................86 Appendices............................................................................................................................91 Maps.....................................................................................................................................118 V Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. LIST OF TABLES 1. Public Expenditure on Education in Armenia..............................................................22 2. StudentyTeacher Ratio at General Secondary Schools: 1990-1998............................ 24 3. Number o f general Secondary Schools and Students by Marzes: 1996-1997............33 4. General Education Institutions...................................................................................... 34 5. Public Expenditure on Education by Level and Type of Education........................... 35 6. Distribution of Reduced Classes by Towns..................................................................49 7. Distribution of Reduced Classes by Regions................................................................49 8. Distribution of Funds by Area.......................................................................................55 9. Amount o f Funds for Micro-projects by Area and by Time........................................56 LIST OF APPENDICES 1. Human Development Indicators for Armenia.................................................................92 2. Education Funding............................................................................................................ 93 3. Class consolidation at schools in Kotaik. Ashotsk and Amasia regions........................ 94 4. Class consolidation at schools in Amasia, Goris and Akhurian regions........................ 96 5. Class consolidation at schools in Kapan and Meghry regions........................................ 98 6. Class consolidation at schools in Sisian and Eghegnadzor regions............................... 1 00 7. Class consolidation at schools in Vaik, Ijevan, Dilijan and Noyemberian regions..... 102 8. Class consolidation at schools in Ararat, Masis, Echmiadzin, Krasnoselsk and Vardenis regions....................................................................................................................................104 vi Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 9. Class consolidation at schools in Aragats, Aparan and Talin regions............................ 1 0 6 10. Class consolidation at schools in Tashir, Gugark, Stepanavan and Tumanian regions.................................................................................................................................... 1 0 8 11. SIP Goals and Objectives................................................................................................1 1 0 12. SIP Board......................................................................................................................... Ill 13. List of Interviewees........................................................................................................ 112 14. Questionnaire in Armenian............................................................................................113 15. Questionnaire in English................................................................................................ 115 MAPS 1. Regional Map...................................................................................................................119 2. Administrative Divisions of Armenia............................................................................120 vii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. LIST OF USED ABBREVIATIONS CEP-Center for Educational Projects FSU-Former Soviet Union GDP-Gross Domestic Product GoA-Govemment o f Armenia MOES-Ministry o f Education and Science OM-Operational Manual PMU-Project Management Unit RA-Republic of Armenia SIP-School Improvement Program UNDP-United Nations Development Program UNICEF-United Nations Children Fund Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. LIST OF DEFINITIONS Command Economy-characterized by central planning Decentralization-assignment of responsibility for education to an institution or level of government other than the central government Educational Research Institute- a scientific research institute which is involved in the development of innovative educational methodologies and technologies. It is also an institution which is involved in consulting and guiding the decision- making at the ministerial or government level. It is under the direct subordination of the MOES. It is located in Yerevan. General Secondary Education - this includes primary, intermediate or low secondary, and high or upper secondary school education. All these levels are found within the same institution. Micro-project- A short-term project directed at improving several areas of the general school. It is organized and carried out by a school under the guidance from the central or regional educational department. Ministry of Education and Science (MOES)- the central authority which handles policy making, core curriculum design, and is responsible for amendments to the Education Law of the Republic of Armenia as well as decrees and regulations. Operational Manual - represents a comprehensive organization of the main goals, objectives and target areas of a program. It points to the responsibilities of the program implemented and direct beneficiaries. It also contains information about the iiscal characteristics of a program. ix Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. School Autonomv-A process during which a school gets legal and financial autonomy. Autonomy permits flexibility in the combination of inputs. School autonomy is established by the MOES and the Regional Education Departments. School autonomy is supported by the SIP. School Rationalization- includes increase in the efficiency of state allocations, school and class consolidation, teaching staff reduction, and creation of double or triple grade classes. School Improvement Program- the two main goals of the program are to increase the efficiency of the school program and support schools in the process of gaining autonomy. The SIP Cycle- consists of the following phases: promotion for information dissemination about the SIP; acceptance of letters of inquires and pre-appraisal; technical assistance to schools in writing school improvement plans; acceptance of school improvement plans; appraisal and approval of school improvement plans; signing of contracts; implementation of approved micro-projects; monitoring and impact evaluation; and micro-project progress report. Technical Assistance- one of the phases in the SIP program. Technical assistance comprises one phase of the SIP cycle. During a technical assistance session officers the SIP officers give guidance on how to organize school improvement plans, school budget what statistics to include in the school improvement plans and respond to the questions related to the micro-projects. Transition State- a state that is subject to change in political, social and economic relations. Typically a state that goes from central planning economy to free market economy. x Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ABSTRACT This study presents an analysis of the two key areas of current educational reform in Armenia' school rationalization and school autonomy— taking place at the general secondary schools. The two educational reform programs are presented along with the Armenian government's reform strategy and policy. The problems and issues related to these programs are analyzed through interviews held with a number of educational officials and experts, who have been directly involved in the process of development of reform strategy and policy and decisions regarding the reform implementation. The paper also examines the sustainability o f two key areas of educational reform and presents a number o f recommendations that can be considered during the process of reform implementation. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. C h a p t e r I Introduction Background of the Topic Armenia declared independence from the Soviet Union in 1991 and became a democratic sovereign state. Immediately following independence and the breakdown of the command economy, the socioeconomic conditions of the country underwent a long path of aggravation that adversely affected all the realms of the society. The foundation of a market economy as well as the development of qualitatively new societal relations called for a number of changes. One of the spheres that has become subject to change is the country’s educational system. Once the educational system of the Former Soviet Union (FSU) was believed to be strong, well functioning and effective. During the economic transition it has become apparent that changes in both structure and content of the education system are urgent. The changes are taking place in all the spheres of life. Educational reform should go hand -in-hand with the other reforms developing in other spheres of the transition of the state (World Bank, 1996). After gaining independence there was a certain resistance to introducing any fundamental changes in schools, particularly in terms of school finance and management (Meroyan, 1999). The underlying reason was a failure to understand that the sphere l Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. of education had to be changed parallel with changes taking place in other spheres of life. The system inherited from the Soviet years had many glorious achievements, particularly in regard to student achievement in various spheres of science and math. However, the system could not live in an outdated reality. Despite the efforts to maintain the old system everything was pointing to the urgent need to look at the ways that the education system could be changed and select a path for its further development (Mkrtchyan, 1998). In the early periods of independence it was commonly perceived that the quality of the inherited educational system was excellent and access was equitable (World Bank, 1996). In the 1990s, however, the existing problems within the system became obvious. Problems were connected with the line item budgeting, which meant no flexibility in using state allocations except for the purpose determined by the central authority or the Ministry of Education. For instance, schools got an annual state allocation for acquiring desks. Obviously the need for them could not arise every year, so if the school did not use the money for that specific purpose it would go back into the state treasury. Teachers with years of experience and novice teachers got similar salaries; as it was an expression of Soviet equalization, which was applied in almost all the social institutions, school being no exception. The curricula and methodology inherited from the Soviet system were rigid, emphasizing conformity, factual content and rote learning. Teaching was characterized as “directive”, with the teacher as a center of activity. Schools were still governed from the center (i.e., Ministry of Education). This left little room for local decision-making and action directed towards meeting the pressing needs and priority issues of schools, such as more efficient distribution of the existing school resources and facilities, efficient use of state allocations to best serve the school needs. 2 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Furthermore, there was also little if any freedom in deciding on curricular modifications to meet the individual learning needs. There were no elective classes enabling students to reinforce their knowledge and skills in particular disciplines. Very often the students particularly during the last years of secondary school, that is grades 9-10, started taking tutorial classes outside of school. That meant that the knowledge provided at school was not sufficient for the rigid university entrance examinations. The schools were and are still unable to meet the needs of those students who want to continue their education after finishing general secondary school. The Soviet schools relied on knowledge-based methodology. Now there is a need in shift from the previous practices to the practices or methodologies that encourage the development of adaptive skills, practical problem solving and individual initiative. This requires a major shift in teacher training and assessment methodology, from subject content to learning process. Despite this necessity some educational experts and parents are still dubious about changes particularly in the teaching approach, in part because of strong concern that the rigorous standards achieved in the past will be jeopardized. This approach is quite viable. It is not possible and there is no need to discard the previous practices, particularly the most successful ones. It is important to maintain the previous successful practices combining them with the new ones which focus on the acquisition of practical skills and maintain the high standards. During the first years of independence, the government was rather passive in regards to bringing changes into the education system. The underlying reasons were other priority issues particularly of both a social and economic nature, as well as the shrinking financial means available in the country. Despite this, the government has had an 3 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. understanding of the need for reforming the education system and consequently of creating a legal framework for implementation of these changes. Thus the National Parliament started preliminary discussions on the draft of New Education Law of Armenia as early as in 1991. Further, the government, including the Ministry of Education and a number of international organizations, initiated studies on educational reform that could modify the existing system. Thus it was in 1993 when Government of Armenia, in collaboration with UNESCO, carried out research which resulted in the publication of a book on educational reforms in the transition state, with a particular focus on the educational system of Armenia (Meroyan, 1999). According to Meroyan, who was involved in the process of preparation of this book, the outlined tendencies for change are somewhat similar to changes taking place in other former socialist countries. The main focus of change is granting schools autonomous status and fostering local decision-making. All information about it has been achieved through communications with educational experts at the Educational Research Institute and UNICEF. In 1994-1996, the Ministry of Education was rearranged into two ministries: the Ministry of Higher Education and the Ministry of General Secondary Education1 . The acting authorities at the time believed that this division would help to more efficiently deal with the problems at various levels of education. They believed that this division would also be an effective way of distributing responsibilities according to the level of education. The power of the central authority was gradually becoming more dispersed to regional or local educational departments. Thus the process of decentralization was 'Secondary general education comprises primary, intermediate or low secondary and high . or upper secondary school. All these levels are found within one institution. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. gaining pace. Decentralization of school management started in 1996. Management of the school then was transferred from the central government office to newly- established Education Departments in the Regional Government Offices. These departments became responsible for organization and coordination of all educational activities and appointments of school directors. Bank accounts were opened for all schools, and schools, according to their needs, could use money allocated directly from central treasury for schools. Indeed, these were quite profound changes, especially in comparison with the “static” history of the Soviet schools. The shift to independence caused some turbulence in the society, which led to an evaluation of the existing system. The pivotal questions for the government were: which parts of the FSU school system could be maintained and which parts of it should be altered. Schools were not yet ready and did not expect to take the initiative for change. All the decisions for change rested with the National Parliament and the Ministry of Education. It was obvious that the system of education could no longer rely on central planning, nor only on state allocations which were shrinking every year. Central planning had been imposed from Moscow. Schools were getting funding from the central state budget of the FSU. That could no longer continue after independence. The independent country now had to meet the financial needs of schools with its own provisions, which were decreasing year by year after independence due to social, economic and political factors (Mkrtchyan, 1998). The debate over the educational reform has indeed been part of this national political turbulence, since maintenance of the previous high levels of education and further development of the education sector have been considered to be matters of national 5 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. importance by the Armenian government. Educational reform, therefore, could help maintain the previous successful practices while also changing the education to fit the needs of the transition state. Difficulties in the Transition The inconsistencies and delays in implementation of the changes have been connected with a number of factors. First, the frequent changes in political life and the government did not allow for the consistent development of strategies and practices related to reform implementation; in other words, the government was not clear about the types of reforms and how to implement them. Second, the aggravating socioeconomic environment further complicated problems particularly connected with the financing of the schools. Third, sufficient support mechanisms were not created for the promotion of the reforms. These matters were further complicated by: (1) outcomes of the devastating earthquake of 1988 which changed the demographics of 1/3 of the country, and as a result of it some of the educational institutions either were completely destroyed or were severely damaged; (2) the ongoing conflict with neighboring Azerbaijan over the Armenian populated enclave of Nagomo-Kharabagh, due to which some of the schools particularly at the borderline were either shut down or were moved to safer locations, and a large part of state money was directed into warfare; (3) the economic blockade of Armenia by Azerbaijan and Turkey, during which most of the schools of the country did not function during the winters; and, finally, (4) the political collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. These events obviously affected the economic development of the country and, indeed, the attempts at educational reform became more complicated. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Education has historically been considered to be one of the most valuable assets in Armenia. It continues to be an important national value despite the existing problems; a strong supportive fact to this is that Armenia is a country with an almost universal literacy rate (Appendix 1). This fact, combined with the present initiatives, targeted towards improving the educational system through implementation of educational reform, makes one optimistic about the success of these efforts. Statement of Purpose The objectives of this study are to examine and analyze the following: (1) the reform strategy and policy of the government; particularly in regards to the two key areas of current educational reform, namely school rationalization and school autonomy at the general secondary schools; (2) the process of implementation of school rationalization and school autonomy realized mainly by the MOES and School Improvement Program (SIP); (3) factors supporting or hampering the reform implementation; and (4) the sustainability of the school rationalization and school autonomy programs. These issues were investigated through: (1) interviews with officials and educational experts at the MOES, MOES PMU (Project Management Unit), also called the Center for Educational Projects (CEP), UNICEF and the Educational Research Institute; and (2) study of the accumulated documents and literature, particularly the reform program of the government for the rationalization of general secondary schools through reduction of teaching staff, school and class consolidation, and the school autonomy component of the 7 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. rationalization program implemented by the School Improvement Program (SIP) of the CEP. Research Questions The pivotal questions guiding the investigation are: 1. What are the Armenian government’s strategy and policy for educational reform at the general secondary schools? 2. What are the target areas of the two key components of the current educational reform, namely school rationalization and school autonomy at the general secondary schools? 3. How are school rationalization and school autonomy implemented by the MOES and the SIP? 4. What is the impact of the social, economic and political factors on the implementation of the school rationalization and school autonomy? 5. What are the factors that can impact sustainability of school rationalization and school autonomy? Significance of Problem Armenia is living through a dramatic time of fundamental changes in its society (Dimmitt, 1994). The direction of these changes, the dedication as well as efforts 8 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. directed to these changes, are playing important roles in determining the future of the various spheres of life in the country. In this regard it is interesting to examine the government’s strategy and policy for educational reform, the impact of social, economic and political factors on the educational system and the impact of the government’s school rationalization and the school autonomy programs. Assumptions The following methodological assumptions were made for this study: 1. The sample of the interviews (the list of the interviewees is provided in the appendices) is quite representative of the main decision making authorities for the educational reforms in the republic. The interviewees occupy high positions at the MOES, CEP, UNICEF, and the Educational Research Institute; 2. The methods of data collection were reliable; 3. Interview procedures were appropriate to obtain valid responses from the respondents; 4. Procedures used in data analyses were appropriate to obtain the information necessary to answer the research questions; 3. Respondents provided accurate and sufficient information on the questionnaire used for the interviews. The preliminary questionnaire was pilot-tested at the CEP in order to see if it were understandable and if it reflected upon all the questions of interest related to this research. 9 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Limitations The focus of the study was to investigate main areas of the government’s reform strategy, particularly school rationalization and school autonomy and their impact on the general secondary school level. In this study there was a reliance on the standpoints of the government officials and education experts involved in the educational reform development and implementation process; there is also reliance on the official sources of information, therefore, data directly from school sites or alternative views to the government have been included as part of this study. Information obtained from the official sources was juxtaposed to information obtained at a couple of technical assistance sessions organized by the SIP for the school principals in one of the districts in Yerevan. Observation and collection of the information took place in the summer of 1999, during an internship the author had in the CEP. The study used mostly interviews to obtain information. Delimitations Due to the qualitative methods of data collection, generalization based on findings of the educational environment in Armenia may be restricted. The recommendations of the study may be of further interest for the researchers and educators particularly interested in the development and implementation of educational reforms in Armenia. They can be utilized by researchers who carry out studies in similar settings as well. to Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Methodology This study is descriptive and exploratory in nature. It relies particularly on qualitative methods for gathering information and analyzing the results of the interviews about the educational reform policies and strategies, factors impacting reform implementation, problem areas of school rationalization and school autonomy, problems related to the sustainability of the current reform. Quantitative techniques were utilized for the analysis of the tables and the results of interviews. Qualitative techniques enabled the examination and analysis of external (outside of school) and internal (at school) realities and reactions of participants to these realties. The collected data can be classified into the following groups: information provided in the relevant literature, particularly publications by the MOES, the Educational Research Institute, CEP, World Bank and UNICEF; opinions and reactions of the educational officials and experts, gathered through interviews; the government policy and strategy for educational reform at the general secondary schools; and the political, economic and social situation as reflected in the pertinent documents. The section on the historical development of educational reform shows the tendencies and directions of educational development particularly during the years of independence. The following section provides information about the formal education in Armenia and its current state. An historical review of the Armenian education system and description of recent and present social, economic and political factors affecting Armenian education were based on analyses of primary and secondary sources and through interviews with education officials and experts. 1 1 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. A questionnaire was prepared for guiding the interviews. The questionnaire was prepared in the Armenian language. It was pilot-tested for the accuracy and comprehension at the CEP. Samples of the questionnaire were distributed to the CEP staff and feedback was elicited mainly in the oral form. Based on the results of pre-testing the preliminary questionnaire was modified. The questionnaire is presented in the appendices in both Armenian and English languages. The CEP, where the author did a summer internship, was supportive and helpful both in providing necessary information and organizing some of the meetings with interviewees particularly at the MOES. The CEP’s support has played a tremendous role in helping to get better and insightful perceptions about the current ways of promotion of educational reform particularly at the general secondary school level and its sustainability. Organization o f the Remainder of the Study The remainder of this study is organized in the following manner. Chapter II reviews the literature on the problems of educational reforms and educational changes in the context of transition. Chapter m provides information about the cultural and educational background of Armenia. Chapter IV provides information about the development of educational reforms since independence and includes a section on the government’s strategy and policy for the current reforms. It also provides information about the current school rationalization and school autonomy promoted by the SIP. Chapter V presents methodology used for the study. Chapter VI analyzes data and reports the findings. 12 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Chapter VII summarizes the study, with conclusions and recommendations. The final section of this study contains a bibliography and appendices. 13 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. C h a p t e r n Review of Literature Educational Development in Armenia Since Independence This chapter reviews research and publications in the sphere of educational reforms in Armenia as well as research carried out in other countries particularly the former socialist bloc countries in Central and Eastern Europe. The choice of these countries is deliberate, because the development of the educational systems of these countries has much in common with the development of the education system in Armenia. The most important issues included in this chapter are the review of the literature on the current problems of education and the main features of educational change in the republic in the context of its transition. Current or Resisting Problems of Education Foremost of the theoretical issues critical to this investigation is an examination of relevant studies on problems of education (Dimmitt, 1994). The review of literature on educational reforms offers the following problem areas in education: societal, socio cultural, political, economic, structural, administrative, educational, attitudinal and 14 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. informational (Russian Committee on Educational Reform, Working Group, report 1997). The transition to a market economy made obsolete much of the education system inherited from the past, making education itself ineffective, particularly in regard to the structure and content of education (World Bank, 1996). The societal problem is the inadequacy between the modem “demands” of the society and the actual “supply” of schools, or, in other words, the inability of schools to go side by side with the evolutionary development and needs of the transition state. It also deals with the inability of schools to provide adequate knowledge for the newly emerging spheres of specialization peculiar to the market economy. The political problem is connected with unsustainable and inconsistent policies of the government and the backwardness of education in comparison with reforms taking place in other spheres of life. The reasons for unsustainable and inconsistent policies have been the frequent change in the leadership (i.e., within 10 years of independence there have been 9 ministers of education) and the unwillingness of the ministers to continue what their predecessors have started due to their political ambitions. It also has to do with the timeliness and effectiveness of those decisions and regulations of the government that impact the education system. The economic crisis in education is connected with the inability (i.e., the state budget is not as generous as it used to be in the Soviet times) of the central government to maintain the old way of financing or the insufficiency of financing, and its inability to find alternative sources of financing as well as the low financial capacities of alternative funding sources (i.e., schools, communities, businesses). Reduced education 15 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. spending and the subsequent demise of educational opportunity cannot possibly produce good results (Arnove et al., 1992). In regard to these issues school remains a lagging sphere in the newly forming market economy of the country, and there emerges an ever increasing need to establish a closer link between education and the demands of the labor market; adapting the supply of education to the need for on-going adaptation throughout life plus civic education (Tedesco, 1997). The structural nature of the problem has to do with the centralized government becoming obsolete or inadequate in meeting the pressing needs of today’s schools and the process of school decentralization, which are further exacerbated by inadequate preparedness and insufficient knowledge at local school sites about how to organize and run decentralized schools at the municipal, marz (regional) and school levels. Indeed, today changes are leading schools towards more decentralization. And yet, there is a need in knowledge about how the system is going to benefit from this process as a whole. The administrative aspect of the problem is connected with the inefficiency of the existing administrative structures of schools and necessity of community participation in decision-making and school governing processes. In the past schools used to be mini models of centralized administration, where the principal of the school was the leader (Carlos, 1993). Today, the need for changing the decision making structure means putting more pressure on the principals and yet they are unable to carry the burden of responsibilities alone. Therefore they need more support from the teachers, parents and community members as well as central government and organizations that can help them through training. After a long period during which teachers had been relegated to an inferior role, not only from the point of view of their working conditions, but also 16 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. from that of teaching itself, we are today observing a significant upward re-evaluation of their functions and their roles (Tedesco, 1997). Today the schools are taking the first awkward steps towards organizing school boards consisting of municipal or marz administration representatives, schoolteachers, administrators and community members (World bank Report, 1997). It is hard to predict the long-run effectiveness of the current changes, because school-wide reform requires a substantial amount of training and planning that involves the whole staff in a variety of formats (Gandara, 2000). At any rate school-wide capacity for collective problem solving is essential to any serious change (Darling-Hammond, 1998). The educational nature of the problem has to do with disharmony between the content of education with the development of the other spheres of life, the absence of qualitatively new methodologies, approaches and technologies for the further development of the educational system, since, according to House et al. (1998), the three critical dimensions necessary for successful school reform are: technological, political and cultural. To push the educational system out of recession and to prevent its backwardness it is important to induce or shape optimistic attitudes or shape a vision of the effectiveness of this or that initiation directed towards improving schools nowadays. Collective vision building is a deepening, reinforcing process of increasing clarity, enthusiasm, communication and commitment (Senge 1990). The positive attitude should be shaped not only within the educational system but outside of it as well, taking into consideration the immense impact of external forces on education (Murphy, 1990). So, there is an increasing necessity to raise public awareness about the importance of changes. 1 7 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Finally, we will emphasize the need for information provided on time. Mass media, and particularly the specialized educational newspapers have done quite a lot of work in shedding light on the needs and wants of schools as well as the importance of the changes that can improve today’s schools (Khachatryan, 1999). However, there is still a need to provide more information to shape deeper understanding of changes at schools. In fact, there is still strong resistance and skepticism about the nature of changes and the changes proposed by various programs in general. For this purpose it is important to be selective about the changes not putting at the stake the previous achievements and gradually introducing new practices combining them with the old ones. There is a wrong perception that a program directed towards meeting the financial needs of schools can bring a one- shot cure to the urgent needs of school, which is not completely so. In the spectrum of the outlined problems we may say that there are two contradicting processes impacting the education system of Armenia. External processes, in other words processes occurring outside school site and impacting school, like lack of financing, investing, material, technical and human resources that push education towards further deterioration. Internal processes, or processes occurring at the school site, like local initiatives, local development, growth of the existing human and material potential at particular school sites that try to put education on the path of survival and further development (Russian Committee on Educational Reform, Working Group, report 1997). The internal processes are quite positive; however, they don’t always get the necessary support from the MOES. Today’s school initiatives can not bring long-term solutions to the education system only because schools have no sufficient support mechanisms, such as knowledge on how 18 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. to run autonomous schools, how to differently handle decision-making process, how to mobilize additional funding. All they can do is to learn things through trial and error, which unfortunately can be very costly. As a result of these controversial processes there are three coexisting processes going on in the system of education: reform implementation, recession and digression or backward movement or willingness to maintain the old Soviet school (Russian Committee on Educational Reform, Working Group, report 1997). In both developing and developed countries, educational reform continues to be an important priority. A common feature behind reforms in education is that in most cases the spark behind the change begins with political not technical considerations (Hanson 1995). Educational Change in the Context of Transition The transition to a free market economy places tremendous burdens on a nation emerging from seven decades of socialism (Hamot, 1998). Transition becomes particularly difficult for the institutions that in the past heavily relied on the governments’ support and resource allocations. The institutional structures of schools (incentives, accountability mechanisms and, ultimately, their culture) become challenged in the context of market-driven changes taking place in various spheres in the state in transition (Boyd, 1998). Deprived of the former provisions these institutions find themselves in despair, because they have difficulties in envisioning alternative ways of obtaining provisions for the school needs. The transition to market economy places school 19 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. administrators and teachers in the unfamiliar position of having to master the issues related to educational finance and equitable distribution of resources (Hamot, 1998). Schools previously supported only by the state are not quite prepared to look for private funding for on-site micro-projects. This situation often makes teachers and school administrators doubtful about the changes taking place in education and some of them see getting back to the former centralized pattern as a solution (Halasz, 1999). At the same time the state is leaving more freedom for bottom-up or local initiatives. Let’s examine the characteristic changes that took place during the years of independence particularly in the early phase of transition. During the early years of transition the number of students at the general secondary schools declined by 125,000(MOES, 1997). The reason of the decline is connected mainly with the economic factors, which caused a high rate of migration and emigration in the country. At the same time the official statistics on the demographics show that the number of students between 3-20 years of age has increased by 100.000. So, there is certain incongruity between these numbers. It may be explained by the poor or inadequate statistics provided by the State Statistics Department. There are no concrete numbers on the exodus of citizens during the decade of independence either. This reality may be explained by the fact that in the Soviet times there was a tendency to misrepresent certain realities to better serve the ideological interests of the country. If there was a need to show to the rest of the world that we were doing fine in education then certain numbers were changed. Perhaps, this heritage has impacted in some way the presentation of certain facts even today. Today steps are taken to improve the statistics and make them as accurate as possible. There is much to learn in this direction. 20 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. The number of general secondary schools has increased since independence. Thus in 1998 the number of general secondary schools was 1403 compared to 1,313 in 1990. It may be explained with the emergence of the private schools, which, however, make up only one percent compared to public education, and a number of public schools that were organized particularly in the municipal areas. The number of the students has remained almost unaltered: in 1990 there were 393.000 students at general secondary schools, in 1998-384.218 (UNICEF, 1998). So there has been a slight decline in the number of students. It is also important to look at the relation between the development of the GDP and total public expenditure on education; the earnings in relation to levels of education attained and unemployment ratios to education attained (Cerych, 1999). Prior to independence, education expenditure was supported by the general budget of the Soviet Union at an estimated average cost across all levels equivalent to approximately US $300-600 per student in the late 1980s. The first budget of independent Armenia, in 1992, was based on a per student allocation of US $24. This figure fell even lower in 1994 to US$ 9. Since then it has had tendency towards growth, thus in 1998 it grew up to US$36. Today per student allocation is equal to US $ 40. The household survey carried out in 1996 for the social assessment suggests that the average costs to parents of general education, per child per year are US$ 200.This sum of money hardly covers the direct and indirect costs, such as the expenditure on the clothes, basic school supplies, indirect fees to schools plus the annual contribution of 3,000 drams per student (about US$10), which makes up the 10% of the annual school investment. To better explain the situation let’s look at the example of teacher salaries. The teacher 21 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. salary per month varies between US$ 15 and US$ 20. If the child comes from a family where both parents are teachers, it is obvious that the child can hardly have all the necessary things, such as basic school supplies and clothes (in some schools students have to have uniforms). Further, the survey also showed that today almost 5% of school age children do not regularly attend school because they are unable to buy necessary school supplies and clothes. For this purpose each school identifies the poorest population and tries to cover their expenses through subsidies provided by the government. As a share of GDP, public expenditure on education has fluctuated in the range of 2.5% within the last three years (Table 1). Table 1: Public Expenditure on Education 1985 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 Public Expenditure on 11.2 6.0 4.5 8.1 8.4 11.0 10.5 Education (% of total Government Expenditure) Public Expenditure on 7.2 4.9 2.0 2.7 2.5 2.1 - Education (% of GDP) Public Expenditure per 600 24 9 - 63 36 Student (in US dollars) Source: MOES, 1999 The declines in public funding, together with the impact of the 1988 earthquake, have contributed to the deterioration of the quality, demand and equity throughout the education system. The relations between education and earnings have not become closer: most of the graduates of higher education institutions face the gloomy prospect of 22 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. unemployment or underemployment Those who succeed in finding a job corresponding to their field of study, particularly in a state enterprise, can hardly make both ends meet In this regard it is important to mention also the on-going loss of the good-quality teachers from the schools, due to the low salaries that are mostly below the minimum cost of living. The salary of the elementary school teacher is about US $10-20 per month, when the minimum cost of living in the country is equal to US $ 100. Thus if salary is a criterion for a teacher’s status, it is quite low today. Although there is a need to reduce the number of teachers, the shortage of high quality teachers is becoming an issue. The main causes of the shortage are: first, the declining interest in, and lack of motivation for, acquiring the profession of teacher; and, second, the switch of many trained teachers into other better-paid professions (Bartz et al, 1991). Furthermore, the full-time workload of a teacher is eighteen hours per week, and the minimum acceptable workload is twelve hours. There is an increasing tendency for teachers to work fewer hours in order to hold down a second job for additional income. Despite the low student/secondary teacher ratio, the quality of education continues to deteriorate, indicating much deeper problems with the teaching system. Due to the low salaries, many qualified and experienced teachers avoid working full- time (18 hours), preferring to teach 9-12 hours per week and holding second job for the their primary source of income. Therefore, non-qualified personnel are recruited to fill in the teaching gaps. This results in the increase of the proportion of unqualified teachers. Currently, the student/secondary teacher ratio is Armenia is approximately 11:1, a slight decrease from 1990(Table 2). This ratio is very low in comparison to the ratio in developed countries (25: l)(MOES report, 1997). The decrease since 1990 is due to 23 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. a 9.2% increase in the number of teachers during the 1990-1997 time period, while the number of students remained almost the same (584.218). The low ratio, combined with the drop in the birth rate and projected decline of students over the next decade, highlights the need for a strategy for reducing the number of teachers and schools. Table 2: Student/Teacher Ratio at General Secondary Schools: 1990-1998 1990- 1991 1991-1992 1992-1993 1993-1994 1994-1995 1995-1996 1996-1997 1997- 1998 10.7 10.8 10.3 9.8 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.8 Source: MOES, 1998 There has been an ever-increasing decline in the quality of education particularly in terms of the content. This decline may be related to the above-discussed teachers’ problems, that are the low salaries, no incentives to teach long hours; as well as the overall persisting social and economic problems the nation faces. Another factor that has impacted the quality is the reduction of the school year particularly during the winter months. The country in its transition is facing a number of serious issues, among which we will emphasize; recovering from the collapse of the former political and economical structure and establishing a new regime with new values and new approaches across all the spheres of life in the country. These approaches are directed at overcoming the mistakes of communist heritage and developing a free market economy. The country faces a challenge at making decisions on what extent the free market economy should impact the nation’s spheres of life, like education. Time seems to be one of the most crucial 24 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. factors of change (Gandara, 2000). Change is a constant for educational systems (Darling-Hammond, 1998). There can be no doubt that the years 1991 to present represent a period in which quite a large number of educational changes took place parallel with political and economic transformations (Cerych, 1999). These changes are typical for the educational landscapes of the FSU countries as well as many of the former socialist countries of Central and Eastern Europe. The context in which the educational system is situated is now changing rapidly as economic, social and political systems change (Reynolds, 1998). After liberation from the totalitarian regime the newly formed national government of the country was advocating the dissemination and reinforcement of national identity. This reality found its immediate reflection in the schools. Education became depoliticized; it meant the end of ideological control over the system (Cerych, 1999). Subjects, which previously were disseminating ideologies of the former government, were discarded from school curricula and were replaced by subjects about national history and identity (e.g., history of Armenia, civics, religion). Some of the textbooks were updated; some of the topics or texts in the books were replaced by new topics (Osipov, 1994). This liberation, however, sometimes led to extreme actions. For instance, most of the Russian schools in Armenia were immediately transformed into Armenian schools without enough consideration given to the sufficiency of Armenian textbooks for all these schools (Meroyan et al, 1998). Teachers were given freedom with regard to the choice of methodologies for teaching various disciplines, particularly those which were newly introduced at schools (e.g., 25 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. civics, Armenian history, environmental education), but did not get enough support. The MOES advocates that teachers utilize new methodologies and approaches in teaching practices. However, teachers still get insufficient guidance from the government on how to use their newly found freedom in the classroom (Safir et al., 1996). In recent years the management and administration of education have become decentralized. This has involved some level of transfer of fiscal and /or administrative control from the central government to sub-national jurisdictions such as regional governments, municipalities or the schools themselves (Gershberg, 1999). During the first years of independence the problems of schools were often times linked to the inefficient work of the school principals, thus they were frequently fired and replaced by new principals. However, after 4-5 years of independence this tendency ceased, because of the growing understanding that the school weaknesses were far beyond the scope of the school principals’ responsibilities. The responsibilities of school directors underwent changes, too. They became more responsible for admitting and relieving teachers, organizing staffs to carry out their tasks and to be responsible for the result of their work, controlling school regulations and how the students adhere to them, inspecting lessons, taking part in extra-curricular activities, and evaluating and giving marks to teachers for their practical work, for continuity between the existing school year and the plan for the next school year (Peck et al, 1998). Since independence quite a few private and denominational schools have been established (Waldorf schools, Frenet schools, etc.). Alternatives to the upper secondary schools, like varzharan or colleges, were established. Some of these schools are not only providing the same program as the secondary school, but also skills, which the 26 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. participants can use in their future work. The role of market demands has acquired increasing importance in validating the skills to be obtained at schools (Safr et al., 1999). Parental involvement has increased since the schools have become more autonomous. Parents become members of the newly forming school boards, they are responsible for collection of direct and indirect fees for schools (e.g., extracurricular activities, school performances, school indirect fees). It is estimated that today parents contribute 62% of the total school expenditure. The educational experts, officials and particularly teachers acknowledge that the greatest educational change since independence has been the introduction of a certain pluralism in the school system (Safr et al., 1999). Educational changes are taking place in the context of severe economic constraints and highly dynamic, but at the same time unstable, political situations (Pachocinski, 1997). There are frequent changes in education ministries, key personnel, and policy direction. Within the years of independence the MOES has hosted nine ministers of education, who have had different approaches to the solution of the educational problems, and have been mostly inconsistent with the policies advocated by their predecessors. Not only have they had different approaches to educational issues, but also they have “manipulated” the educational system or in other words have used it as a field for expressing and enhancing their own political ambitions. Prior to independence the education sector got financing from the central state budget of the FSU. There is no official information about the size of the state allocations for Armenia from Moscow, and yet it is known that the state allocations corresponded to the norms set up in Moscow and they were slightly different for the various former 27 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Soviet republics. The state allocations to education have been shrinking since independence. Today, schools that are situated particularly in the high mountainous villages or close to the borderline are facing a question of dissolution, because the government of the country is unable to continue providing subsidies to maintain these schools mainly due to the general decrease in the state budget. The differences between the rural and urban schools are becoming increasingly obvious. The urban schools are getting more attention and assistance from various organizations or social investment funds, whereas the poor conditions rural schools experience face on-going aggravation. This is explained by the fact that the schools in urban areas are better aware of the organizations existing in the city and take more initiatives to get their assistance, whereas the rural schools are far from these organizations, and they frequently don’t know who to address their problems, except for the Regional Educational Departments and the MOES. The MOES is endorsing the decentralization of the system and school autonomy, primarily because of its reduced ability to finance the educational system. However, the present day school is still not prepared to meet some of its needs without assistance from the central government. On the one hand schools welcome the increasing freedom of action but on the other they still seek assistance, particularly financial assistance, from the central government. The political, structural, and economic reforms undertaken in the country after 1991 produced some rapid changes in the education sector that are subject to further development (Zachariev, 1999). In spite of economic and financial constraints the new Education Law of the country (ratified in 1999) confirms the nation’s commitment 28 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. to equal educational opportunities for all (Pachocinski, 1997). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER HI The Armenian Context Cultural Background In this section we will provide some information about the country and the cultural background of the country. This will help to better understand the realities within which the educational system of the country had evolved and functions. Armenia is a landlocked country with a land area of 29,800 square kilometers or 11, 500 square miles and a population of 3.75 million (Map 1). It is approximately the size of the state of Maryland. It is quite arid and mountainous. The terrain creates quite a few difficulties for promotion of agriculture, because most of it (70%) has an elevation of more than 4,900 feet. The neighboring countries are: Turkey in the west, Azerbaijan in the east, Georgia in the north and Iran in the south. Armenia is a Christian state with 1700 years of Christian legacy. Throughout its history the Armenian Church has been responsible for preserving national identity mainly through education that historically had been handled by the Church. One of the main factors preserving national identity has been the national language, which was created back in the 5th century. It belongs to the family of Indo-European languages; however, it cannot be related to any of the other languages in that family. 30 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Armenia has been one of the most homogenous states in the family of the Former Soviet Socialist Republics; thus approximately 94% of the population are Armenians; the remaining are Russians, Kurds, Assyrians, Greeks and Jews. Following the breakup of the FSU and Armenia’s subsequent independence in 1991, it inherited a distorted, inefficient and obsolete national economy strongly affected by the collapse of the central planning system and the disruption of traditional trading arrangements within the FSU. The consequent economic and social problems were compounded by the continuing impact of the devastating earthquake ofl988, and by the economic blockade that resulted from the political conflicts in Georgia and the dispute over the Armenian populated autonomic enclave of Nagomo-Kharabagh within Azerbaijan. From 1992 to 1994, living standards fell sharply and poverty became widespread throughout the country, especially among urban residents. Meanwhile the inflation rates grew making the access to necessary social services and commodities even more difficult for most of the population. Changeover to a market economy has brought galloping inflation impacting all the spheres of life in Armenia (Sutherland, 1999). Nowadays, Armenia is making efforts at improving the impoverished economy and raising the living standards. Within recent years quite a few international joint ventures as well as local factories were opened and reopened offering jobs to some part of the population. Thus we can say that despite the difficulties of the first years of independence, there has been an increasing tendency towards improvement of living standards particularly within the last 3 years. 31 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. General Overview of the Education in Armenia Education in Armenian has 1,600 years of literary heritage. Throughout Armenia’s history education has been one of the crucial factors for maintaining national identity. Before the establishment of Soviet power in the country the Armenian schools were tightly linked to the Armenian Apostolic Church. During the 10-15th centuries schools were offering 10-12 years of education under the Church.The first secular Armenian schools emerged in the 1 8 1 1 1 century. The present system of education was founded during the short period of the first Republic of Armenia (1918-1920) and was later developed during the seventy years of Soviet rule from 1920-1990. The Soviet schools were based on the model of the 10-year Prussian Gymnasium, were established and functioned all over the Russian empire before the October revolution. By the time the Soviet Union was established, the parish schools had been secularized and the Armenian Church had lost much of its influence. In the 1920’s the schools became coeducational, and religious teaching was banned (Dimmitt, 1994). According to constitution 8 years of secondary education is compulsory for all citizens and is free of charge. The further 2 years of general secondary education are based on the selective examination at the 8th grade and are also free of charge (UNICEF, 1998). Education of the citizens is considered to be a national value, that is why, despite the existing fiscal constraints the constitution of Armenia ensures the rights of all its citizens for free education with a particular focus on the general secondary education. At present the number of operating educational institutions and people involved 32 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. in them is as follows: 995 kindergartens, 1,403 general secondary schools serving 584,218 pupils and 57.200 teachers, with a pupil/teacher ratio of 11:1,42 boarding schools, and 57 professional technicums (Table 3). The serving schools’ staff number totals 28.500. The average class size in Armenia is 19.4, although it varies considerably between urban and rural schools. One may notice the incongruity between the average class number and the student teacher ratio. It is explained by the fact that one class may have more than one teacher. Table 3: Number of General Secondary Schools and Students by M anes (Regions) (1996-1997) Marz General Secondary Schools Students 1. Yerevan 213 166257 2. Aragatsotn 121 28253 3. Ararat 112 52144 4. Armavir 120 53659 S. Gegharkunik 128 49263 6. Lori 171 56463 7. Kotayk 113 58032 8. Shirak 174 55239 9. Syunik 120 27327 10. Vayots Dzor 50 12608 11. Tavush 81 24973 Total 1403 584218 Source: MOES, 1997 According to the statistics provided by the World Development Indicators, the enrollment rates at the primary and secondary levels for 1996 were 87 and 90 percent respectively. Even though this statistics is for 1996 we can presume that there is a minor 33 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. difference in these figures at the present. The general education system is divided into four levels: pre-primary (ages 3-6), primary (grades 1-4), intermediate (grades 5-8) and senior (grades 9-10). Schools may include one, two, three or four of these levels within the same institution (Table 4). Table 4: General Education Institutions 1980-81 1990-91 1996-97 Schools with gradesl-4 32 18 15 Schools with grades 1-8 342 211 184 Schools with grades 1-10 959 1,087 1,204 Total number of schools 1,333 1,316 1,403 Total enrolments 559,400 593,200 584,300 Student/teacher ratio (all grades) 11.4 11.1 Source: World Bank, 1997 Special institutions (boarding schools) are for the children with special health-related needs, orphaned or abandoned children. Today steps towards mainstreaming those in special education are underway. Public expenditure on education by level is quite different (Table 5). Pre-school education, is not compulsory, it consists of creches (i.e., pre-nursery) for infants under three years of age and of nursery schools for the three- to-seven year olds (Kuebart, 1992). Pre-schools have always been important in Armenia since children do not begin formal schooling until the age of six or seven and resources available to the family for early childhood development activities are restricted. During the Soviet years the number of the preschools grew rapidly to accommodate working mothers. The pre- 34 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. schools are dependent on state funding, with parental contributions towards the cost of food. Today parents pay monthly fees, which cover mostly the attendance and cost of food. It is about US $ 5-10 per month or about 5000 drams s(see the currency equivalents in the preface). Table 5: Public Expenditure on Education by Level or Type of Education 1995 Billion Drams (%) 1996 Billion Drams (%) 1997 Billion Drams (%) Kindergarten 2.268 (16.2) 2.268(17.1) 2.157 (12.9) General education 6.135 (43.7) 5.408 (40.9) 8.568(51.4) Boarding schools 0.773 (5.6) 0.836(6.3) 1.147(6.9) Professional schools 0.700 (5) 0.651(4.9) 0.595 (3.6) Technicums 0.800 (5.8) 0.720(5.4) 1.184(7.1) Out-of-school institutions 1.530(10.9) 1.425 (10.8) 0.847 (5.1) Higher education 1.700(12.1) 1.890 (14.3) 2.141(12.8) Other entities 0.100(0.1) 0.38 (0.3) 0.40 (0.2) Total 14.006(100) 13.236 (100) 16.679(100) Source: World Bank, 1997 As we can see from the table there has been an increase in allocations particularly at the general secondary school, technicum and higher education levels. The allocations for the remaining levels have decreased within the years due to several reasons, such as the decreasing number of entrants at these levels, the shrinking job market, particularly 35 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. for those who get education in professional schools and technicums. The allocations for the kindergarten have decreased, but they still rely on the state allocations that are combined with the parental investments towards the cost of food and other services. The highest increase in allocations has taken place at the general secondary school level. This is explained by the fact that within the recent years the government has prioritized the issue of financing this level of education in comparison with the other levels. At the age of six or seven a child enters the first grade of the primary school, which comprises one part of the general or secondary-general education school. Primary schooling comprises four years. The curricular content of this level of education is quite diverse: mathematics, Armenian, Russian and English languages, drawing, physical training, etc. Upon graduation from primary schools students take a test and pass on to the next level of education: intermediate or low secondary level (grades 5-8). The eight years of “incomplete secondary school’' provide general education to the students from 7 to 14 and represent the common core of the compulsory education. Most subjects that are started at this level are continued in the upper secondary stage (grades 8-10). In the senior grades the curricular content is highly academic. Within the last two years students decide on the choice of the higher education institution and often times start taking private tutorial classes outside of school, which will prepare them for the university entrance examinations. Upon graduation from the secondary general schools students get Certificates of Secondary Education, which are a necessary prerequisite for admission to an institution of higher education. Some children who leave school at grade 8 continue their education in separate technical vocational schools. Prior to independence, upon finishing the first eight 36 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. years of study about 80% of students continued on to the ninth grade for the upper secondary education. The other 20% of students either entered the job market or continued their studies in the vocational schools (9th and 10th grade) and technicums (further advanced technical training) (UNICEF, 1998). Many vocational schools experienced gradual deterioration during the years of transition and were shut down. Fourteen technicums had been upgraded to the status of college as of 1996, and now offer three -year degrees to 10th grade graduates. The higher education institutions offer 4-5 years (with the exception of the medical university, which offers 6-7 years) of study and upon graduation students get the Diploma. Those students who get the Diploma of excellence or else called the Red Diploma, may continue education in post-graduate courses -Aspirantura, which are usually attached to higher education institutions or to a research institutes, often within the system of National Academy of Sciences. Doctoral degrees are obtained from the National Academy of Sciences as well. The responsibility for provision of pre-school and out-of-school services was transferred in 1997 to municipalities, which receive a lump sum from the central treasury to be allocated as they see fit (Appendix 2). Funds for basic schooling are channeled directly from the central treasury to the 11 man (regional) education offices (Map 2). This new level of regional administration is a consolidation of the 57 former regions. Ma/z officials are not elected but are appointed by and accountable to the central government. Man education departments are responsible for disbursing funds to individual schools, on the basis of centrally determined line item budgets, and for managing the regional school inspectorate. 37 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. The RA Government’s decree No.263, made substantial changes to the 1996 Charter and new mechanisms for school management and school director appointments were defined (UNICEF, 1998). Specifically, the supreme body of school management is now the Council, which approves cost estimates and financial-economic reports, and appoints school directors. Although the changes were a positive step towards improving school management, they were incomplete in terms of lack of proper implementation mechanisms. Another problem that is thus far unresolved is the need to limit the participation of self-interest groups in the governing of school, so that public interest remains a top priority. Currendy, school councils are direcdy appointed by marzpets (governors), and a marzpet has the right to appoint a council that would in turn elect school director to serve the interests of particular group. This creates the potential for self-interest groups to gain power over schools. The only institutions still managed by the MOES are the boarding and special schools, and some of the post-secondary institutions. The MOES is also responsible for curriculum and textbook development, teacher training and qualifications, and for monitoring and assessment. MOES continues to remain the traditional source of guidance (Mann et al., 1998). Social, Political, and Economic Factors Impacting Education Armenia historically has rarely been a stabile country in terms of political and geological stability (Dimmitt, 1994). The decade of independence presents a period of natural and political upheavals that have adversely impacted many social institutions 38 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. in the country, including the education system. The three major crisis that impacted and continue to impact on political, economic and social life of the country are: consequences of the disastrous earthquake of 1988, the on-going political debate over the Armenian populated enclave of Nagomo-Kharabagh within Azerbaijan and the breakup of the Soviet Union. These realities complicate the economic recovery and development of the country. The demographic picture of one-third of the northwest of the country has changed since the 1988 earthquake. It has forced many to leave their hometowns after losing their living accommodations. This part of the country has a particularly high rate of migrating and emigrating population. The earthquake has damaged hundreds of institutions, including schools. Hundreds of primary and secondary schools at various levels collapsed or got damaged. Another 60 schools were damaged or destroyed by shelling in the border zone. Some of the schools were reconstructed, some still work in the damaged buildings and are very ill equipped. The absence and shortage of electricity supply further has aggravated the poor conditions of the remaining schools in the earthquake zone. Less than ten percent of the destroyed schools have been rebuilt. The attempts at reconstruction of the northwest part of the country have been delayed and hampered by the economic blockade imposed on Armenia by Azerbaijan and Turkey (Dimmitt, 1994). The collapse of many industries located in this part of the country has made the country more dependent on imported goods. Within the recent years some of the industries have been completely or partially recovered. During the first 4 years of independence the country lived through severe winters with limited supplies of electricity and gas due to the economic blockade. This situation also impacted the closure of all but 5 % of the 39 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. factories and businesses, causing high rates of unemployment. Nagomo-Kharabagh is an Armenian populated enclave within Azerbaijan. Since 1988 it has struggled for human rights and independence from Azerbaijan. The consequences of the dispute between the two neighboring countries were the influx of over 260,000 refugees to Armenia and a large part of the budget money flowing into war action (Cox, 1994). The breakup of the Soviet Union has been a major factor impacting the political, economic and social life of the country since independence. A country that lived through 70 years of centralized governing and central planning, subsidized economy and system of social order, had a hard time dismantling its centralized structure and entering the reality of the market economy. The first four years of independence after the breakup of the FSU were the most difficult. The country was sovereign, but it lacked many of its basic necessities. Schools’ calendars were reduced from nine months to almost six months due to severe winters and acute shortages in supplies of electricity to schools. Many teachers, especially male teachers, quit their positions during these years because the salaries became hardly sufficient for survival. The quality of education of education thus suffered due to these factors. The reopening of the nuclear power station in 1996 brought relief to the devastated economy of the country and since then the positive tendencies towards reopening factories, running social institutions, including schools, at full capacities has been achieved. However, these events still have ramifications on various realms of Armenian society. Obviously, decisions on educational reform implementation also have been and 40 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. continue to be, impacted by these factors. The tendencies of digression and recession of current reform, delays in implementation, and the direction in which the current reform is going to impact the educational sector are explained by these factors. The shift to independence was followed by a number of political, natural and social upheavals. During the first years of independence it seemed that these upheavals would last long, but the positive tendencies towards improvement within the recent years make one believe that things can change to the best given the intellectual potential and educational level of the people. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. C h a p t e r IV Development of the Educational Reform since Independence In order to understand the essence of the current reform process it is important to examine its historical background, particularly during the years of independence (Safr et al., 1999). At various times, high hopes have been attached to a general strategy of planned reform (McCuloch, 1998). The attempts at the last educational reform o f the FSU took place in 1984. In essence they were not very different from the preceding two reforms of the Soviet schools (1958,1972). The problem of funding for school- wide reform was one of the major problems (Slavin, 1998). It was further compounded with a number of other critical issues. The underlying reason for the 1984 reforms had to do with the increasing gap between the tendencies of the socio-economic development of the society and the curricular content in the schools (Meroyan et al., 1998). The pressure of external forces impacting education was increasing (Murphy, 1990). Schools were directed from the center, and they were the institutions that transmitted the ideologies o f the Soviet government to the new generations. The educational policies of the Soviet government were directed towards equalization of the schools, there was no flexibility in the policies to meet the specific funding, curricular and other needs of the schools. It left no room for development of effective teaching methodologies and practices that would create a healthy environment of competition among the schools. Gradually schools became 42 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. non-reflective of the main societal processes and they were not meeting the needs of the constantly evolving society (Ananyan 1999). This was the situation at the schools when Armenia became independent. It was expected that the reforms would enter a new phase after independence (Slavin, 1998). In the early years of independence it was expected that the school change process would become one of the priority issues of the newly formed government of the country. The school change would manifest the liberation of the sovereign state from the totalitarian regime and mentality of the FSU. The new government together with the MOES was making attempts at bringing changes to the schools. During the first years of independence these attempts, however, were sporadic in nature since the new government’s focus was on the solution of other problematic issues that occurred shortly after independence. It was also connected with an incomplete understanding of school processes and problems (House et al., 1998). Despite the shrinking resources and instability created in the early years of independence the newly elected parliament of the country realized the need for reforming education, thus it started preliminary discussions on the new Education Law of RA, a major legal document determining the content, structure and standards of education. The poor financial capacities, lack of policies and strategies made the government turn to external organizations for help. Thus in 1995 the Government of Armenia approached the World Bank with a request to prepare a project directed at implementing reforms at general secondary schools (World Bank, 1997). The World Bank agreed with the government’s request and began project preparation. Two working groups were established at the Ministry of Education, charged with the definition of reform 43 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. measures and implementation plans. One group was responsible for developing the new strategy and implementation plan for increasing the number of core curriculum textbooks (i.e., this work includes both publishing more textbooks than have been in use and are now unavailable in sufficient numbers as well as development of several new textbooks, e.g., workbooks for mathematics, Armenian, English, Russian). And, in coordination with curriculum planners, basing the detailed designs on extensive consultation with parents, teachers and principals in each region of the country. The other group was responsible for the development of a computerized management information system in the Ministry of Education and for development of a strategy to reform educational finance and management. The objectives of the latter are: to prioritize state funding of the compulsory core curriculum, establish norms and standards for rationalization of schools and staffing in urban and rural areas, to analyze savings from rationalization, define per capita funding formula, to define the legal and regulatory framework for the autonomous schools establish accountability responsibilities at the central, man, hamaink (community) and school levels, and to define needs for increasing public awareness. Indeed, it was the first consolidated effort of the central government at developing a reform program for general secondary schools. This way state actors were trying to pursue more vigorous roles in the shaping and propelling of the reform agenda (Murphy, 1990). The strategies of projects of the World Bank have been twofold: a) facilitating improvements in the quality of general education by promoting school-level initiatives, by increasing opportunities for innovation throughout the system, and improving the supply of quality textbooks mainly for the core curriculum and teaching materials; 44 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. and b) helping build the necessaiy institutional framework and capacity at all levels, for more efficient and sustainable operation of the basic education system (World Bank, 1997). In 19% before the preparation of reform implementation strategy and supporting reform policy, the Government, the World Bank experts and the Social Investment Fund (SEF) carried out a social assessment, which showed that the public concern about education was very high: 50% of respondents in a household survey named education as a number one problem in the country, while 83% named education in the top three problems (UNICEF, 1998). Further, the social assessment pointed that only 30% of students had access to all required textbooks (World Bank, 1997). The outcomes of the social survey as well as the observation of the pressing needs of general secondary schools helped the government start developing an educational reform policy and come up with a strategy, comprising three main areas: textbook provision, school consolidation (rationalization) and school autonomy. First we will examine government’s strategy and policy for educational reform particularly at general secondary schools and then we will discuss the two key areas of reform: school rationalization and school autonomy. The government in July, 1997, formally adopted the strategy prepared by the MOES. The two key areas of the strategy are: increasing efficiency of general secondary schools through rationalization of schools and staff, and improving resource mobilization and school performance by granting legal and financial autonomy to schools. The government strategy for education reform is based on improving the quality and efficiency of compulsory general education by providing more autonomy to schools, increasing 45 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. parents’ and community contributions for non- core curriculum activities, redirecting public funding to general education, and rationalizing education expenditures. The government has estimated the entire period for carrying out school rationalization to be 10 years: 1996-2006. Despite preliminary estimations, school rationalization started at the end of 1997. So, we may say that this process has been delayed by almost two years. The details of rationalization are discussed in the following section as well as in the appendices. The government also estimated that implementation of the school autonomy strategy would require 4 years, starting inl996: 10% the first year, 20% the second year, 30% the third year and 40% the fourth year. Despite the proposed plan the granting of school autonomy started in 1997. At this point, about 50 % of schools throughout the country already have autonomous status. This process is still underway and according to preliminary estimations will come to an end in 2001. The development of the educational reform policy followed the definition of the government’s strategy. The government’s policy, however, is not yet completely formed. It is expected that it will develop based on experience gained in pilot implementation of the school rationalization and school autonomy programs. The responsibility for the development of the educational reform policy rests with the Inter-ministerial Working Group on Education Finance and Management. The reform policy of the government includes definition of the compulsory core curriculum that should get state funding. It also elaborates on the norms and standards for the rationalization of schools and staffing in urban and rural areas, analyzes savings from the implementation of school rationalization; defines per capita funding formula, 46 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. based on the revised norms; defines appropriate legal and regulatory frameworks for school Boards of Trustees and the governance of autonomous schools; operation of private general secondary schools; and establishes accountability and defines responsibilities at the central, man. hamaink (community) and school levels. The policy still needs to further define some of the areas, such as: the ways of implementation and monitoring of the pilot operations, systems for monitoring and assessments consistent with the new institutional framework and the legal status of schools and school autonomy. School Rationalization The existing allocation of school buildings, teachers and other staff to general education in Armenia is very generous and unsustainable under the present levels of funding. Many schools have idle capacity while some are overcrowded. In addition there is great variation between schools and even between regions in class sizes and staffing ratios. Therefore, the first crucial element under the reform strategy is the rationalization program that will ensure more efficient use of buildings, teachers, staff, and class and school size. Given this situation at general secondary schools, three key elements of the rationalization of the general secondary schools by the MOES, are: a) reform of the finance and management of education, developing more efficient ways of using state allocations through the rationalization of the system of education (i.e., reduction of teaching staffs, consolidation of classes and/or schools) and the gradual 47 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. decentralization and establishment of school autonomy; b) active involvement of communities and parents in the decision -making structures at schools and their participation in the development of policies of education; and c) expanding the private provisions of education for non-core subjects and services in basic education, and for pre school and post-secondary programs. The government projected that the reform implementation would occur within the same time period. In the preliminary phase of implementation it would be necessary to restructure or reorganize the education system in order to make the distribution of pupils, teachers and school facilities across the general secondary education sector more even and efficient. In other words, rationalization of the resources within general education through school consolidation on the basis of more cost effective norms and standards for school size, facilities, class size and staffing ratios became urgent and important. The piloting of the rationalization strategy was implemented in 1998 in Yerevan and in two other regions. During the pilot implementation 18 schools in Yerevan underwent consolidation resulting in 12 consolidated schools. Although the full capacity of these schools was estimated for 17686 students, only 10412 students were involved, leaving room for another 7294 (MOES report, 1997). The strategy for Yerevan varies from the strategy implemented elsewhere in the republic taking into account specifics of various localities. It is estimated that in Yerevan and other towns (Gyumri, Vanadzor, Hrazdan, Abovyan) it is more efficient to consolidate schools and classes, so that the average class size in Yerevan for grades I- Vm becomes 30, for grades IX-X--25 students. In other towns the average class size will be 28 and 25 respectively. The total number of reduced classes will be 1502 48 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. (Appendices 3-10). The distribution o f reduced classes by towns is as following: Table 6: Distribution of Reduced Classes by Towns Yerevan 950 Gyumri 358 Vanadzor 115 Hrazdan 58 Abovyan 24 Souce: MOES. 1997 The government has estimated that in the regions outside of Yerevan it is more efficient to integrate several classes into one, in other words to have multi-grade classrooms (it is believed to be particularly effective in remote regions)(Appendices 3- 10). The examples of Aragatsotn, Ararat, Gegharkunik, Lori, Kotaik, Shirak and Vayots Dzor show that integration of grades into one class, in other words creating multi-grade classes, will result in reduction of 738 classes. The distribution of reduced classes by regions is the following: Table 7: Distribution of Reduced Classes by Regions Syunik 230 Shirak 132 Lori 99 Aragatsotn 93 Gegharkunik 57 Vayots Dzor 57 Tavush 31 Ararat 23 Kotayk 16 Source: MOES. 1997 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. It is estimated that these reductions will bring to a new teacher student ratio: 20:1. The creation of the multi-grade classes is viewed upon as a positive tendency, because this way the schools may utilize their potential better, in terms of resources and teachers. This, of course, presupposes a reduction in the teachers’ numbers, which can positively impact the teachers’ salaries. Teachers will have to work longer hours or in other words, they will have full workloads (i.e., at least 18 hours per week instead of present 9-12 hours). This is indeed an early prognosis in regards to anticipated positive attainments; the experience of integration of classes within a longer time period will point to more realistic results of these efforts. The integration of classes will result in the reduction of some 2240 classes, as well as in the reduction of 6450 teaching and 2016 non-teaching staff positions. The estimated annual saving will correspond to 581.004 million dram, which can be used for the increase of the teachers’ salaries and other purposes taking into consideration the priority issues of schools. The class and school consolidation will result in the emergence of vacant spaces in the schools that could be utilized preferably for educational services (payable extracurricular activities, etc.) and will bring additional funding to schools. Schools can also rent these areas and acquire income in this way. The difficulties with state allocations and their reduction over the years have played a crucial role in the present day critical situation at schools. In this regard it has been particularly important to prioritize the state funding for the general secondary schools. According to Michael Fullan (1998), neither centralization nor decentralization works: that is, systems cannot change schools by mandate, widespread school change 50 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. cannot occur by school invention alone without support and leadership from the system’s policy. Nowadays, there is an ever-increasing appeal to decentralize schools. But it cannot be a snapshot cure for the system. The pressure both from the top and the bottom causes it. On the one hand central authorities may have to carry fewer responsibilities particularly in regards to financing, on the other, local schools will get more freedom of action and they will have to rely on their organizational potentials. Decentralization should be gradual and partial. In the case of Armenia the more optimal variant seems to be the coexistence of centralized and decentralized patterns: schools should get more flexibility and freedom of action, but at the same time the central government should impose policies and regulations for school accountability, standards, make decisions regarding the core curriculum, etc. Thus, it is important to decide on the distribution of roles between the state and local schools (Darling-Hammond, 1998). Historically parents have always dedicated a lot of time to their schoolchildren by attending monthly “class” meetings (mainly mothers), paying extra fees for extracurricular activities, participating at school renovation works, helping their children with homework. Today’s parents received their education during the Soviet period. Most of them feel that teachers and educational administrators are better able to make decisions regarding the education of their children. They believe that the role of parents is limited to discipline and helping with homework. A survey carried out by UNICEF throughout the republic showed that the overwhelming majority of parents (91%) felt that they were unable to influence the education system. Teachers’ feelings regarding parental involvement are also interesting. Some 67% of teachers feel that parents’ participation in their children’s education is not sufficient. 51 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Although 50% of the teachers think that parents can participate in decision-making through suggestions, the other 50% think that parents should participate at home, not at school, and that parents’ opinions generally mean very little. Nevertheless, although the involvement of parents in decision-making school boards is a new phenomenon, it seems to be quite promising. However, since the involvement of parents in decision-making school boards is a new practice, school administrators do not always know how to involve parents and teachers (Mann et al., 1998). The involvement of the communities is also something relatively new, particularly in terms of the involvement of businesses located in the vicinity of schools. In the early years of independence the community got involved by providing fuel to schools and doing renovation of some school facilities. Today there is an increasing tendency to involve community in the school decision-making. Increased community and parental involvement in the organization and management of their children’s education seems to be necessary in order to ensure a high standard of quality in the education system. The government in this regard has much to do in order to increase awareness of the society, communities and parents about the goals and objectives of education, reforms of the education system and forms of reform implementation. Indeed, it is difficult to give any valid evaluation to the school rationalization at this point since it is still an on-going process. However, taking into consideration the scope of the impact of school rationalization, one may assume that it has both its positive and negative sides. School rationalization is positive due to the estimated savings that can positively impact teacher salaries and increase state allocations and also help to 52 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. better utilize the school resources through school and class consolidation and teacher reduction. It is negative, because it is difficult to estimate the long-term effectiveness of particularly class consolidation, which can impact the quality of education and the amount of time a teacher may dedicate to individual work. It is also not quite clear how the teachers are going to manage multi-grade classrooms, whether or not it is going to impact the quality of learning as well. Another issue is whether it is really effective to engage parents in decision-making and if so, to what extent. Should there be limits to their involvement These are some of the concerns related to school rationalization component of educational reform. School Autonomy and the SIP Since 1996 Go A has pursued the strategy of giving autonomous status to schools, which will help more effectively to direct state allocations according to school priority needs. School autonomy is one of the key areas of the present reform. The establishment of school autonomy is the responsibility of the MOES and the Regional Educational Departments. The school autonomy component of the current reform is promoted and supported by the School Improvement Program (SIP) unit within the CEP. The role of the SIP is important as that of a supporter .When schools get autonomy they need some assistance at the outset particularly about learning what are their new rights and responsibilities. So this is where the SIP comes to help. Its role in this sense is very significant. The SIP is compliant with the new Education Law of the country and MOES 53 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. decrees and regulations, particularly the Government’s decree No.263, issued on 11 July 1997, on new mechanisms of school management and school director appointment. Promotion of school autonomy by the SIP is realized mainly through training of school directors, school boards and Regional Education Department staff and gets financial support from the World Bank (US$ 2 million), UNDP and UNICEF (US$1 million). The SIP promotes improvements within general education schools and supports the decentralization of the system by providing direct assistance to schools (Appendix 11). The objectives of the SIP are promotion of local initiatives for improvement of school performance, assistance to schools in mobilization of additional resources and formalization of community contributions for school funding and management. The SIP makes grant funds available to qualifying individual schools on the basis of expenditure priorities determined by the schools’ parent-teacher boards. Any school that can demonstrate that it meets specified criteria may submit proposals on an annual basis for micro-projects to a maximum of US$10,000. Community contributions of 10% of the project cost are required. Other criteria of eligibility include: autonomous status, with an active school board composed of the principal and elected teachers and parents; a business plan for improving school performance, based on locally defined objectives, prepared by the board and adopted by a majority vote of parents; and commitment to on going monitoring and reporting of performance indicators-including those defined by the MOES and those defined by the boards themselves. Schools are supported in meeting these criteria by training programs and by the Regional Education Department staff. A special committee appraises micro-project proposals, which is responsible for ensuring that school eligibility criteria are met. The SIP provides the financing of micro- 54 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. projects based on competition among the most successful micro-projects compiled by schools. SIP also provides training for the school principals, school boards and m an level Education Department staff in advising and supporting those schools that want to participate in the program. The piloting of the SIP program started in 1998. It was successfully implemented in Kotayk man. SIP targets the funding of about 200 schools, which actually include only a small portion of the entire number of general secondary schools. However, the success of this project can positively influence other schools and make them more confident in undertaking local initiatives. Those schools that will get the grants for promotion of micro-projects also can serve as role models for other schools. The SIP has quite a large scope of activities ranging from the training of teachers and administrators as managers, leaders and accountants, to be active participants of the decision-making processes, introducing them to new methods of accounting, familiarizing them with the legal mechanisms, increasing school autonomous management and raising educational quality by introducing new subjects and supporting extracurricular activities. There are two stages of targeting: geographical (Northern, Central and Southern areas) and school conditions’ similarity. Total available funds are distributed in the following proportions according to the number of schools in each target area (Table 8). Table 8: Distribution of Funds by Area Northern area 30% Central area 50% Southern area 20% Source: SIP, CEP. 1999 55 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. As it is presented in this table the Central area (i.e., maizes: Kotayk, Armavir, Gegharkunik and Yerevan city) are getting the highest percent of funding. This is mainly explained by the fact that this area is the most densely populated one and the number of schools there is the highest This area used to be and is still an important industrial and agricultural area. The following table specifies amount of funds (US$), which are designed for micro-projects financing in each area in a given period (Table 9): Table 9: Amount of Funds for Micro-projects by Area and Time Year/Area Southern Central Northern Total 1999 400,000 200,000 - 600,000 2000 - 600,000 100,000 700,000 2001 - 200,000 500,000 700,000 Total 400,000 1,000,000 600,000 00 Source: SIP, CEP. 1999 By the same token, the amount of money awarded for micro-projects for the Central area has been the highest due to the facts mentioned for Table 6. We should say that the schools in Northern and Southern areas perhaps need more assistance. Schools in the Northern area are in the earthquake zone. These schools have the worst facilities and are worse equipped than the schools in the Central area, and perhaps taking this fact into consideration, it would be better to channel more funding into these schools. SIP advocates the idea of parental and community involvement in the decision making and funding processes. This approach of SIP is reflected in the Operational Manual (OM) and comprises an integral part of the school improvement plans at individual 56 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. schools. SIP staff actively work with schools throughout the country. It performs a lot of work in familiarizing schools with new ideas and concepts like, writing school business plans and budgets, ways of involving parents in decision-making, ways of evaluating the micro-projects using school provisions and potential. It helps schools in organizing their micro-projects based on the local community needs. So far it has been quite effective in its work. However, there are certain points that SIP should continue working on. SIP has put together a rather comprehensive and clear Operation Manual (OM), which guides the work of the project and introduces schools to the goals and objectives of the program (Appendix 11). Some of the points that need further clarification in the project are: the explanation of criteria for clustering schools (second stage of targeting), school monitoring indicators (which should be defined by the school community as well), organization of the technical assistance sessions at schools (clarifying the roles and responsibilities of the SIP staff in participating at the technical assistance sessions), further development of sound evaluation practices by SIP and assistance to local schools in that process and clarification regarding the transfer of the funds by three installments. The OM states that the disbursements should be transferred in the following manner: 20%, 70%, and 10%. The disbursements are quite uneven in the time frame. The final disbursement of 10% takes place at the very end of micro-project implementation and it seems that holding anything back as a “final payment” is quite difficult since schools are unable to finance anything in advance. The OM should also clarify the exact time for the 10% school investment. Another question has to do with the SIP board or the SIP steering 57 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. committee, which is the governing body supervising the implementation of the SIP in accordance with the SIP OM. The board consists of 12 members (Appendix 12). It consists mainly o f ministerial, municipal and regional authorities. There is only one school principal on the board. The chair of the committee is the Minister of Education and Science of RA. It seems that it would be better to have at least three principals on the steering committee: one from Yerevan, two from different regions. That way the SIP steering committee or board would have a clearer picture of the needs and what works and what doesn’t at different sites. In general, SIP is well accepted by the public and schools, since it stands close to the problems of schools and tries its best at helping them. However, it seems that it should become even more active, particularly in organizing training sessions at schools (before schools submit school improvement plans and budget), during which school administration and teachers will get more opportunities to familiarize themselves with the concepts of running autonomous schools, organizing business plans and school budget. Within this year SIP has worked on the following: it has carried out training of principals of 154 pilot schools (CEP report, 1999). Since December, 1999, training of 340 school board members has been started. The observation of the technical assistance sessions2 by the author showed that school principals, who are the main participants of these sessions, need more than one or two sessions to be able to organize their business plans and school budgets. However, due to time limitations, the SIP typically organizes only one technical session. School principals as well as teachers and parents need more time for understanding new concepts before writing micro-project proposals. Some of 2 Technical assistance precedes the appraisal and approval of school improvement plans. The author ^g attended technical assistance sessions in Erebuni district of Yerevan of principals. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. them are not familiar with working with such organizations as CEP. It is especially difficult for older principals who have years of experience and yet have a hard time with this type of work. They have difficulty in formulating goals and objectives of the micro projects, organizing business plans; as was observed at the technical assistance sessions. The appraisal and approval of school improvement plans and the implementation of micro-projects is fair and is based on the priority and importance of educational issues raised in the school improvement plans. SIP is currently one of the most successful programs going on in the republic. It addresses a large scope of issues regarding school autonomy, organization of school boards, organization of school budget, and schools becoming more self-sufficient institutions. Despite its success there are still some aspects of the project that need further work and improvement. Although the SIP staff actively supports the schools, it needs to dedicate more time to helping schools become familiar with new concepts and ideas guiding schools towards more decentralized status. Sustainability of the Current Educational Reform The government believes that if the rationalization of the general secondary school doesn’t take place the present crisis in education can stretch until 2004. Rationalization of the educational system can bring noticeable change to schools. The sustainability of rationalization is connected with a number of issues, such as: ensuring timely state allocations; giving schools an opportunity to utilize the vacant areas and resources emerging as a result of school and class consolidations; rationalizing the school textbooks so that they can be used for several years in a row and support the development of Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. better teaching methodologies; maintaining the current differential (depending on local specifics) per student funding mechanism; and promoting and supporting the on-going process of acquiring school autonomy. Other factors impacting sustainability of current educational reform are: stability in the political and administrative leadership for the sake of developing consistent and sustainable policies; fiscal constraints that can impact the timely implementation of reform; the size of public funding; the increasing focus of the MOES particularly at the general secondary schools; permitting more efficient allocation of funds within the education system by consolidating schools, reassessing staffing norms; giving schools an opportunity to utilize the emerging vacant areas as a result of consolidation; facilitating the mobilization of additional funds by schools; the commitment of the school communities to cany out school rationalization and school autonomy; the readiness and knowledge of the schools to run autonomous schools, to make decisions using own provisions, etc. We have discussed the development of educational reform since independence. One thing that is important to remember is that the change process is uncontrollably complex, and in many circumstances “unknowable”. The solution lies in better ways of thinking about, and dealing with, inherently unpredictable processes (Fullan, 1993). The processes of rationalization and school autonomy are new phenomena in the country. There is still much to learn from the present experience and pilot efforts that will point to the feasible long-run sustainability of the present educational reform. The factors that seem the most important for the further sustainability of the present educational reform are the timely and fairly constant state allocations, more comprehensive legal support for the promotion of the educational reform at present and in the future by developing and finalizing 60 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. the educational reform policy of the country; support from the central, municipal, regional Education Departments particularly in advising and supporting school initiatives; sustainable training programs for the school principals, school boards as well as Regional Education Departments; support to schools in mobilization of additional financial resources from diverse sources; further training and familiarizing schools with the new concepts, such as running autonomous schools, writing business plans and school budgets, familiarizing them with the accountability practices and procedures; increasing public awareness about the importance and need of current educational reform. In summary, we can say that the current educational reform has been through three main phases: preparatory (1988-1993), characterized by shaping a new philosophy of education- the ideological and methodological basis of the upcoming reform; launching (1994-1997), characterized by five main factors: demolition of the previous chain of command to some extent, outlining the new policies and strategies of education, decentralization of the school and its democratization as a social institution, changes in the curricular content of education, particularly connected with the introduction of new disciplines establishing the foundations for the further implementation of the reforms; and current or implementation (1997-1999), characterized by two main ideologies and strategies: experimentation and the implementation of a number of pilot projects to probe their functionality, efficiency and sustainability for the educational system and its proposed innovations, when a number of essentially new ideas and strategies are making their way into schools in order to bring changes both to the structure and content of education as a whole. 61 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. C h a p t e r V Methodology The Setting and the Data Collection Process The descriptive study was conducted in Yerevan, Armenia during a summer internship by the author in the Center for Educational Projects (CEP) of the MOES of the Republic of Armenia. The location of the CEP created a wonderful chance to meet and have interviews with the experts working in the CEP as well as the officials at the MOES. The CEP assisted the author in meeting a few educational experts at the UNICEF and the Educational Research Institute. The interviews were held mainly during the months of July-August 1999. It is a particularly busy time for the MOES officials, connected with the school leaving and school entrance examinations, however, all three heads of departments as well as the chief editor of the leading official education newspaper “Krtootyoon” agreed to participate in the interviews. That time was also tense for the experts of the CEP due to the field trips for promotion and technical assistance work at various schools throughout the republic; however, they (four respondents) found time for the interviews as well. It was quite easy to meet the other two respondents: one at UNICEF and the other at the Educational Research Institute, who agreed not only to participate, but also provided some valuable relevant literature for this study. 62 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. The CEP gave the author an opportunity to participate in a couple of technical assistance sessions organized for school principals (17) of Erebuni district in Yerevan. This created an excellent chance for observing the reactions of the school principals to the goals and objectives of the SIP and to see what were some of the difficulties in organizing school micro-projects. This also was a wonderful chance to juxtapose the information obtained from the educational officials to the reactions from the school site levels and to get a better picture of how the changes advocated by current educational reform were perceived by schools. Despite a few restrictions (limited office space and time restrictions) the CEP staff has shown tremendous assistance to the author in participating in various office works, sharing information, data and literature. The CEP staff has been the primary source of information for the author. Interviews There were two ways of gathering data for this study. The main data collection was with the interview instrument. The investigator interviewed a total of ten educational experts. They represented mainly MOES and CEP and have years of experience in the field of education. The gender distribution of the respondents was 50-50 (i.e., 5 male and 5 female respondents). The list with the names and characteristics of the interviewees is provided in the appendices. These educational experts occupy high positions at the MOES and are involved in main decision-making processes at the central government level. Three heads of 63 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. departments at the MOES participated in the interviews. The interviews with government officials and education experts were conducted for two reasons: to gather data on the government position regarding the educational reform currently being implemented and to better understand the educational reform situation in Armenia. The main procedure used in obtaining information from the respondents was a one-on- one interview using the preliminarily prepared questionnaire. Data were collected between June-September, 1999, using an 18-item questionnaire. The interview instrument, a series of open-ended questions, was utilized for the interviews. Prior to the actual data collection, the instrument was pilot-tested with a small group (4 employees) at the CEP. The data provided by participants in the pilot tests were not a part of actual data collected and used in the study. The 18-item questionnaire (Appendix 14) elicited information about the current state of education in the republic in the present social, economic and political context of the country; its educational reform policy; the main areas of currently implementing reform; the rationalization process in education; difficulties connected with the school autonomy; newly forming school boards; per student funding; taking into consideration the local specifics during the reform implementation; and other issues. The questionnaire was prepared in Armenian, since the respondents were local experts. The author translated the questionnaire into English for the purpose of including it in the present study. Both Armenian and English versions of the questionnaire are provided in the Appendices. Quite a substantial literature review has contributed to this study, however, the main documents used were: “ Education Financing and Management Reform Project” prepared by the MOES in collaboration with the World Bank and the “The Strategy for the 64 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Development of Education System in Armenia” prepared by the MOES and the Educational Research Institute. The choice of these documents is explained by the fact that they contain important information about the government’s reform strategy, reform policy, as well as information on the directions of reform implementation, such as school rationalization and school autonomy. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. C h a p t e r VI Analysis and Interpretations The author gathered data to determine the current state of educational reform in the republic, problems related to implementation, its legal aspects, and particularly the educational reform strategy and policy of the government. The author also examined the effectiveness of the current school rationalization and the school autonomy programs; their reflection on regional peculiarities; and the sustainability of reform in the present political, social and economical context of the country. The following section is the analysis of the questions used for the interviews held at the MOES, CEP, Educational Research Institute and UNICEF. Questions 1 and 2 Current Situation at the General Secondary Schools. Insufficient State Allocations. Ways of Coming out of the Present Critical Situation Some of the respondents (5) think that the present situation at the general secondary schools is critical. The physical structures are deteriorating; schools are not running at full capacity, the curricular content does not match the present day demands of the developing independent country. The curricular content is still emphasizing the 66 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. accumulation of knowledge, rather than providing skills for the implementation of knowledge. Schools continue to emphasize the knowledge for school leaving and university entrance examinations. Most of the respondents agree that it is important to prioritize the issue of state financing for the general secondary schools. They think that the underlying reasons for the present day critical situation at schools is connected with instability in the government, the inadequately defined legal status of schools, and the inefficiency of the legal educational framework. Taking into consideration the current low capacity of state financial allocations it is important to endorse school autonomy, that will enable schools to leant how to mobilize additional sources for the schools’ needs. In this regard the educational experts should develop accountability mechanisms for fiscal investments in schools. They also see the need for further defining and modifying the per capita funding formula. Although most of the respondents agreed that the present situation at schools is critical, some of them (3) think that the present state of the education system is satisfactory, given the existing social and economic conditions. Despite the fact that most of the respondents favor the idea of granting autonomy to the schools, they still tend to believe that the MOES has to maintain a constant amount of state allocations and should try to seek ways of increasing it above the present 11 percent. In this regard some of the respondents (4) think that the situation, particularly the financial situation, will start improving only when the industries reopen and start working at full capacity. When this happens the government can generate more funds for the state budget that can be directed into schools and if this takes place then the tendency to rely on assistance, particularly from external organizations or donations from the Diaspora, will gradually decrease. 67 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Question 3 Opinions about the Educational Reform Policy of the Government The respondents agree that the direction the educational reform policy has chosen is the right way. Taking into consideration the scale of its impact it is going to be a success in case of timely and reliable investments. The overwhelming majority of the respondents (9) agree that the reform policy is going to help assure the efficient organization of the reform implementation process. The reform goals are not, however, well defined and need further modification and verification, particularly in terms of taking into consideration regional specifics and defining the ways of fund-raising. The current educational reform policy is not well coordinated; it is partial or non-reflective of certain realities in the education system (e.g., the new roles of communities, new ways of fund raising, etc.). Thus, it is necessity to improve the reform policy so that it becomes a fully- fledged policy reflective of the important realities existing at the general secondary schools. “Indeed, within the recent years much work has been done towards development of the reform policy, and yet, there is an issue of what sequence of actions should be taken during reform implementation” (Hovhanissyan, 1999). Thus we can say that the legislative involvement in education at this point is between low and intermediate. The MOES plays the lead role in the development of policies and implements without significant approval from the national legislature. The MOES emphasizes; operational viability, local responsiveness, learning by doing, and 68 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. putting reform in hands of educational officials. Some of the disadvantages of this process are: reforms are subject to reversal and may create confusion or lack of transparency. Despite this all governments learn by doing to some extent and make changes in initial policy formulations irrespective of the chosen reform strategy. Furthermore, it is impossible simply to design and implement a perfect set of reform policies given the complex web of powerful institutional and political interactions in the education sector (Gershberg, 1999). Question 4 The New Education Law of the Country and the Process of Reform Implementation The majority of respondents (8) agreed that the new Education Law of RA creates the necessary legal framework for reform implementation. It took a long time to ratify the law (preliminary discussions started back in 1991, it was ratified recently, in July, 1999). This delay has evidently slowed down the reform process in the republic, but there is much hope that it will now provide an important legal basis for its current implementation as well as its further promotion. Some of the respondents (5) think that despite the fact that there is a ratified law, sufficient support mechanisms; particularly regulations and decrees, that could make the implementation process more sound, have not been created yet. The new Education Law needs to better define the legal status of schools, particularly in regard to achieving school autonomy. It seems important for the current decentralization process during which schools are getting autonomous status. 69 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Further, the new Education Law needs to better define educational standards at various levels. The standards included in the law are mostly related to the school leaving examinations. Within recent years the testing system has been introduced at various grade levels. In this regard it is important to come up with a more complete set of standards for each grade level. Some respondents believe that the new Education Law not only supports the current reform implementation, but also helps organize the process of implementation. The respondents are convinced that the Education Law may become a more complete document when its development goes beyond the ministerial and governmental decisions and reflects the realities at the school sites based on the ideas and suggestions elicited from the individual schools. Indeed, the New Education Law of the country is a breakthrough, in the sense that it includes all the ideology and the direction of the development of the educational system of the sovereign state. And yet, there are points that need further definition and clarification particularly in the decentralization process. Question S The Most Important Concepts in Pilot Program of Reform Implementation This item elicited a similar range of answers. “Some of the important concepts that will have long- run effects and implications on the education system are: the current process of decentralization, the transfer of schools to the new mode of per student financing, training of the administrators, teachers and school council, familiarizing schools 70 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. with the new ideologies and methodologies of teaching, improving the curricular content according to the local specifics, running autonomous schools, and parental and community involvement in the school decision- making process” (Davtyan, 1999). Indeed, these are the key elements of the pilot program. The most important step that is underway, seems to be the ongoing training at the school sites which gives an opportunity to the school principals, teachers and school boards to get acquainted with some new concepts and to learn how to organize school finances and how to organize site-based management of schools. It helps schools to become more self-sufficient and to learn to utilize their potential without turning to the MOES and the Regional Education Departments for help. A few of the respondents (2) still see difficulties and are suspicious, particularly about the effectiveness of per student funding. In fact, one of the respondents was very negative about this. Questions 6 and 7 The SIP Goals and the Priority Issues of Schools SIP is addressing a large scope of issues concerning the curricular content of the schools, particularly in terms of employing new methodologies and practices of teaching; organizing site and regional professional development sessions and workshops; introducing new subjects; training the school administrators to become managers and leaders. It is welcoming the introduction of new subject, which can better serve a 71 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. particular community. For instance, in one of the school micro-projects in Abovyan region, a school is introducing fishery and bee- keeping. These activities are typical to this locality and the school board wants to teach the students skills which they can apply in the future working for this community. It is training teachers to become involved in the school-decision-making; and teaching how to employ local initiatives directed at attracting diverse sources of funding for schools. And yet, SIP is only partially meeting the needs of today’s schools. It is not addressing issues like improvement or reconstruction of school facilities nor it is assisting schools in acquiring all the school supplies. It is providing a limited sum of money to acquire some supplies, like maps, chalkboards, books, however, this assistance is quite limited. In terms of financing, it is awarding grant money to selected schools (those which won in the competition). It is giving these schools some guidance on how to utilize this money within the school year (the time of the micro-projects). It is also giving schools guidance on how to mobilize additional investments mainly from the parents and the community. In other words, the SIP is giving guidance to schools on how to utilize the available resources at the present and how to seek additional money in the future without any external help. In general, SIP is well accepted by teachers and administrators; however, the reflections on its goals are not always positive and / or well understood by them. There is not yet complete understanding of the new concepts and ideas advocated by SIP. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Question 8 Acceptance of the SIP Goals by the Community Indeed, much depends on how these goals are presented to the community by the school principals and the SIP representatives and who meet with the community particularly for the program promotion work and the technical assistance. It also depends on how and to what extent these goals are represented in the mass media. Presumably, if it is a thorough presentation of the SIP then the community has a tendency to accept these goals positively. In general the SIP officers expressed the opinion that the community is welcoming the assistance coming from an organization like CEP. It welcomes this initiative also because the CEP offers more than the MOES can offer at the present. And yet, the acceptance of the goals and objectives differs in various communities. The observations at the technical assistance sessions showed that not all the school principals are ready to completely accept the competition offered by the SIP. They are not yet completely ready to take the challenge of the competition and they reject it as soon as possible. Perhaps, they expect that school improvement should be handled by the MOES through one program covering all the schools, not dismissing those which fail do go through with the competition offered by such a program as the SIP. The school autonomy program gets both acceptance and resistance for two reasons. Schools accept school autonomy, because this way they become more independent entities, able to make their own decisions. Schools have a fear of accepting 73 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. autonomy because they don’t know what sequential actions they should take after the preliminary phase of external assistance in this process is withdrawn. Also they fear that school autonomy can create some chaos, because they are not ready to fully accept the new status of schools. They think that at least they are aware of how the centralized system works and they feel more comfortable with that. Question 9 Consideration of the Marz (regional) Specifics in the SIP Operational Manual Although there is nothing referring to the marz specifics in the SIP OM, they are taken into consideration during the appraisal and approval stages. They are also taken into consideration during ins organization of various site works, such as the initial works of program promotion and technical assistance. The SIP gives high credit to the micro projects that aim at improving the curriculum by introducing new subjects which better match the local needs. In the analysis of questions 6 and 7 we discussed the example of a school in Abovyan marz. The micro-project of this particular school was approved because it is going to address some local needs. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Question 10 The Main Difficulties for the Autonomous Schools in the Implementation of New Ways of Financing Most of the respondents gave a similar range of answers, which may be characterized by the following statement. “The schools still have many problems in formulating the goals and objectives of the local micro-projects. They have a hard time also in organizing their budget. The schools’ accountants are not well aware of how to organize their budgets; they are not aware of the accountability mechanisms as well” (Harutyunyan, 1999). This standpoint was general among the respondents and was well confirmed during the observations at the technical assistance sessions. Question 11 Evaluation Mechanisms for the Pilot Implementation of the Reform The development of the evaluation mechanisms is still in process. There are already three evaluation versions prepared by the MOES. These versions have been submitted to the Ministry of Finance. The schools are also trying to develop their own evaluation criteria for the pilot micro-projects, getting external assistance from the MOES and CEP. The CEP and the MOES also get some professional help from the international 75 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. experts who share their experience based on the visits to schools throughout the republic. Both the MOES and the CEP admit that the evaluation mechanisms are not completely developed. They believe that the current implementation process can help them develop more effective evaluation procedures. Question 12 Expectations from the Pilot Reform Implementation At this point it is hard to judge the outcomes of the pilot implementation. It is obvious that the implementation is connected with a number of problems that have to do mainly with the current conditions at schools plus the social, economic and political context in the country as well as public awareness about reform. The overwhelming majority of the respondents see the success of the current reform in the consistent and sound development of educational reform policy and strategy, which is directly connected with stability in the leadership of the MOES. Although the respondents think that the present situation with pilot implementation is quite promising, they resist giving long-term predictions regarding the sustainability as well as the tendencies of development of the educational sector of the country as a whole in the future. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Question 13 Evaluation of the Transfer of the Education System from a Centralized to a More Decentralized One The school decentralization started back in 1996. Schools are now becoming autonomous institutions, and yet, the success of the decentralization process has to do with knowledge about school administration and teachers and how to run autonomous schools, the knowledge at Regional Education Departments on how to support and guidance for the schools in promoting their autonomy. Respondents agreed that the school autonomy component should be supported through the reform policy which defines the legal status of schools. Most of the respondents agreed that it is important to combine centralized and decentralized patterns of governance, or, in other words, the central and school levels have to have distinct decision-making responsibilities. Question 14 Evaluation of the School Rationalization Program as an Inseparable Part of Current Reform It is going to bring some flexibility to state allocations according to the priority 77 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. needs of schools. And yet, it is connected with a number o f social issues, such as the reduction of teachers. Two of the respondents expressed rather negative opinion in regards to school consolidation, particularly for those schools that are located in the remote mountainous villages, which in the past used to rely on the state subsidies. They believe that it may have consequences such as the dissolution of many village communities. Indeed, the rationalization process, which is a general tendency typical in many post-socialist countries, seems to have both advantages and disadvantages. The main advantage is the anticipated savings through the reduction of teaching staffs, schools and class consolidations. And yet the rationalization program does not give any approximate predictions about the possible increase of the teachers’ salaries due to these reductions. Further, the questions regarding class consolidations and multi-grade integrations seem to be confusing. It is not quite clear how the learning process is going to benefit from the last two undertakings. Question IS Evaluation of the CEP Work in the Process of Reform Implementation The CEP is not developing policies, it is only implementing projects working in collaboration with the MOES and realizing the strategies of the government. At this point the CEP is doing a substantial amount of work at the schools throughout the republic, in that sense the CEP work can be assessed as good. Indeed, the CEP is working in collaboration with the schools, and yet, in order to better serve the schools, it should 78 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. perhaps go beyond the schedule and time limitations in trying to meet the specific needs of individual schools. Question 16 The Collaboration of the Local and Foreign Experts During the Reform Implementation Process In general we may say that the foreign experts have worked quite successfully with the local experts. They mostly come to a consensus regarding the reform implementation. Foreign experts almost always take into consideration the opinion of the local experts. In general the observation of the author was that the collaboration of the local and foreign experts was quite successful. However, there were times when the international experts would promote their ideas and the local experts did consider their inputs. Question 17 Sustainability of the Current Micro-projects A similar range of answers was obtained for this question. We will generalize those answers by the following general statement. “The sustainability of the present initiatives is connected with the further development of the educational reform policies, the social, economic and political landscape of the state in transition as well the local potential 79 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. for maintaining present micro-projects, based on the training and outcomes of the present micro-projects” (G. Meroyan, 1999). Indeed, the sustainability and the future of the current educational reform depend on the general tendencies and direction in which the Armenian society will develop. The sustainability also depends on the effectiveness of the present initiatives. This viewpoint was general among the elicited answers. Another general trait was that almost none of the interviewees gave any long-term predictions both about the sustainability of the current reform and the development of the entire educational system in the future. Discussion The results of the interviews show that within recent years there has been a transfer from preparation and development of educational reform to its direct implementation at schools, which, as the situation analysis shows, has to go a long way from the present state of experimentation to a more sustainable development at state, marz and local levels. Government educational reform policy is still subject to many changes based on the present learning experiences. Although some educational experts express some concerns about the fact that the reform policy is not completely developed, it seems that this way the policy is more flexible and able to reflect on current implementation experience and eventually can become a comprehensive and reflective one. Educational experts think that the new Education Law of the country creates a necessary legal support for reform implementation and yet it has some points that need further consideration, like the definition of the legal status of schools. Educational experts also have 80 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. concerns about the educational reform strategy; some of them believe that it is not quite clear and needs further development The government comes up with strategies and policies that often do not reflect the reality outside the MOES; in other words it still does not reflect the public’s opinions. In the future, however, they expect to see more governmental regulations and decrees that will reinforce the supportive legal mechanisms. Current programs, particularly the SIP and school rationalization, that are addressing a multitude of issues, ranging from the establishment of school autonomy, enrichment of the curricular content to parental and community involvement in decision making, and school and class consolidation, are generally believed to be successful. And yet, there are issues like monitoring of the school improvement plans, ways and criteria of evaluation of the micro-projects, transfer of disbursements and school investments, consideration of regional specifics, that need further modification and clarification. In this respect, the SIP needs to dedicate more time to the training of school principals and teachers and familiarizing them with such issues as: new responsibilities of school principals and school boards, the ways to promote parental and community involvement, developing school micro-projects and evaluation mechanisms. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. C h a p t e r V II Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations This study of educational reforms at general secondary schools in Armenia has: 1. Examined the educational changes in the context of transition and particularly in terms of the historical development of educational reform in the country since independence; 2. Outlined the educational reform policy and strategy of the government; 3. Examined the social, economic and political factors impacting the educational system of Armenia; 4. Outlined the areas of impact of school rationalization and the SIP programs; 5. Analyzed the current educational reform pointing to successful practices and areas that need further consideration and development; and 6. Discussed the issues connected with the sustainability of the current reform. The history of educational reform in Armenia shows that there has been a transfer from the initial stage of preparation to the current stage of implementation. There has been a shift in government strategy and policy of reform from more sporadic educational changes to more specific attempts at formulating the strategy and policy of reform 82 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. implementation. One of the fundamental legal frameworks for reform implementation has become the new Education Law of RA, which was ratified in 1999. The current programs at reforming General Secondary School are underway. It is hard to evaluate the long-term impact of these programs at this point However, the tendencies outlined in the school rationalization and the SIP programs are quite promising, despite certain existing problematic issues connected with the lack of full understanding of new concepts and ideas as: organization of the school boards and the ways of involvement of parents and community, ability to make collective efforts at decision-making, alternative ways of fund-raising, organizing school budgets, promoting local various initiatives, etc. The sustainability of the current educational reform is connected with the further development of the social, economic and political contexts of the country; continuous consistency and development of the existing policies and building on the accumulated experience; maintaining and building on the achievements of the current reform at the state, marz and school level; and continuous and consistent training of the school principals, school boards, teachers, parents and community. The reform process is still at the outset of its implementation and may be quite a success if all the involved parties realize its complexity, reveal commitment, be unequivocal in uniformity of implementation and provide adequate resources for its realization (Lockhead et al., 1991). Armenia needs to reinvent many of its social and political institutions and it needs to re-engineer its economy. For the economy, schools may be a long-term brake; they are not a short-run accelerant (Mann et al., 1998). Educational reform, when linked with reforms in other sectors of society as part of a consistent and compatible development strategy, represents a potentially powerful force for changing society in desired 83 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. directions (Fagerlind et al., 1989). Recommendations Due to the nature of this study and qualitative methods of data collection, recommendations are limited to the educational setting of Armenia. The particular group of interviewed education officials and experts, who participated in this study, may limit the generalization of the results. The suggested recommendations can be utilized by the MOES and other implementing organizations during the process of implementation of the educational reform. The recommendations derived from this study are the following: 1. To make attempts at ensuring timely state allocations to general secondary schools; 2. To investigate sound ways of increasing teacher/ student ratio, bringing it to at least to 20:1, and direct the savings from teacher staff reduction to increasing teacher salaries to at least the minimum living cost in the country (US $ 100); 3. To give general secondary schools that undergo rationalization an opportunity to utilize their vacant areas and resources to provide additional funding for schools; 4. To create and maintain an information system on the current school rationalization and school autonomy process; 5. To continue to examine sound ways of reform implementation that can be beneficial for the entire educational system in the long-run; 84 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 6. To continue working on the development of monitoring and evaluation mechanisms better suited to the Armenian context; 7. To involve many parties (i.e.. Education Research Institute, education experts at the higher education institutions) in decision-making processes and tap their potential in the process of further development of reform policies and strategies of implementation; 8. To study the accumulated practices of reform implementation in similar settings, particularly in other former socialist countries and other developing and developed countries and to implement some of those successful practices taking into consideration the local specifics; 9. To develop training modules for school principals, teachers and other staff members familiarizing them with the legal mechanisms, introducing them to new concepts and ways of organizing school budgets, running autonomous schools, and ways of tapping parental and community potential in decision-making processes in newly- forming school boards; 10. To continue and diversify the means of information dissemination about the current reform; 11. To coordinate various on-going projects directed towards reforming general secondary schools; and 12. To create an incentive based mechanism for proposing and developing various projects directed at reforming general secondary schools by schools themselves. 85 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Bibliography Ananyan, A. L. (1998). The Crisis of General Secondary Education: The Ways of Overcoming the Crisis. Journal of Management of Education in the XI Century. 10-15. Amove, R.F., Atbach, P. G. & Kelly, G.P. (1992). Emergent Issues in Education: Comparative Perspective (p. 227). Albany: State University of New York Press. Bartz, B. & Kullas, Z. (1997). The Essential Aspects of Educational Reform in Poland. European Education. 16-21. Boyd, W. (1998). Markets, Choices and Educational Change. International Handbook of Educational Change (pp. 350-354). New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Carlos, L. (1993). Site-Based Management: An Experiment in Governance. Policy Briefs. 5. Center for Educational Projects. (1999). Education Financing and Management Reform Project for the Period of Januarv-December. 1999. Annual Report. Document. Yerevan. Armenia: Center for Educational Projects and the Ministry of Education and Science. Center for Educational Projects. (1997). Operational Manual for School Improvement Program. Yerevan, Armenia: Center for Educational Projects and the Ministry of Education and Science. Cerych, L. (1995). General Report on the Symposium "Educational Reforms in Central and Eastern Europe: Processes and Outcomes". European Education. 6-32. Cox. C. (19941. Armenia and Nagomo Karabakh: A Struggle for Survival. Paper Presented at the Meeting of the Armenian Children’s Milk Fund Society. Boston. 86 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Policy and Change: Getting Beyond Bureaucracy. International Handbook of Educational Change (pp. 642-665). New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Dimmitt, N. J. (1994). Language Choice and Language Use in the Armenian Education System: The Impact of Independence on Educational Language Policy in the Republic o f Armenia (pp. 15-40). Los Angeles: University of Southern California Press. Education Financing and Management Reform Project. (19971. Report. Document. Yerevan, Armenia: World Bank. Fagerland, I. & Saha, L.J. (1989). Education & National Development: Comparative Perspective (p. 166). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Fullan, M. (1991). New Meaning of Educational Change (pp. 650- 665). New York: Teachers College Press. Fullan, M. (1993). Change Forces: Probing the Depths of Educational Reform (pp. 19-31). Boston: The Palmer Press. Fullan, M. (1998). The Meaning o f Educational Change: A Quarter of a Century of Learning. International Handbook o f Educational Change (pp. 222-227). New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Gandara, P. (2000). The Dimensions of Time and the Challenge of a School Reform (p. 47) Albany: State University of New York Press. Gershberg, A.I. (1999). Education ‘Decentralization’ Processes in Mexico and Micaragua: Legislative versus Ministry-led Reform Strategies. Comparative Education. 63-69. Halasz, G. (1990). School Autonomy and the Reform of Educational Administration in Hungary. European Journal of Education. 57-65. Hamot, G.E. (1998). A Case of Teacher Education Reform in Poland’s Transitional Democracy. European Journal of Education. 5-15. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Hanson, M.E. (1989). Democratization and Decentralization in Colombian Education. Comparative Education Review. 100. House, R. E. & Mcquillan P.J. (1998). Three Perspectives on School Reform. International Handbook of Educational Change (p. 98). New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Kubart, F. (1988). Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. In G.T. Kurian World Education Encyclopedia (pp. 1297-1299). Boston: Palmer Press. Lockheed, M. E. & Verspoor, A.M. and Associates. (1991). Improving Primary Education in Developing Countries (pp. 219-232). Washington: World Bank Publication. Mann, D. & Briller V. (1998). School Administration in Russia: Centralization Versus Decentralization. International Handbook of Educational Change (pp. 790-795). New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Mcculloch, G. (1998). Curriculum Reform: Educational Change and School. International Handbook of Educational Change (p p . 1203-1204). New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Meroyan, G. & Davtyan N. (1998). The Strategy o f Development of General Secondary Education in Armenia (pp. 17- 23). Yerevan, Armenia: Noyan Tapan Publishers. Mkrtchyan, L.A. (1997). The Strategy for the Development o f Education System in Armenia. Report. Document. Yerevan, Armenia: the Ministry o f Education and Science. Mkrtchyan, L. A. (1998). Educational Reforms in Armenia. The Newsletter of the Lecture Series Program at American University o f Armenia. 3-6. Murphy, J. (1990). The Educational Reform Movement of the 1980s: Perspectives and Cases (pp. 7-9). Washington: Scotchman Publishing Corporation. 88 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Osipov, V. & Mkrtchyan A. (1994). Conceptual Framework for Elaboration o f the State Program of the Development o f School in Armenia: Sociological & Socio- Philosophical Perspectives (pp. 12-15). Yerevan, Armenia: the Ministry of Education and Science. Pachocinski, R. (1997). Educational Development in Central and Eastern Europe: Trends, Perspectives, and Barriers. European Journal of Education, 9-23. Peck, B.T. & Ramsay, H.A. (1998). Managing Schools: The European Experience: 26 Country Case Studies (pp. 164-168). Commack, New York: Nova Science Publishers. Reynolds, D. (1998)." World Class" School Improvement: An Analysis of the Implications of Recent International School Effectiveness and School Improvement Research for Improvement Practice. International Handbook of Educational Change (p. 1275). New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Russian Committee on Educational Reforms The Main Concepts of the Current Phase of Educational Reform in Russia. (1997). Report. Document. Moscow, Russia: the Ministry of Education and Science. Safr, V. & Woodhouse, H. (1996). Eastern, Western, or Pan-European? Recent Educational Change in the Czech Republic. European Journal o f Education. 73- 80. Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline (p.227). New York: Doudley Press. Slavin, R. E. (1998). Sand, Bricks, and Seeds: School Change Strategies & Readiness for Reform. International Handbook of Educational Change (pp. 1299-1311). New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Sutherland, J. (1999). Schooling in the New Russia: Innovation and Change. 1984- 1995 (p.91). London: MacMillan Press, LTD. Tedesco, J.C. (1997). Educational Changes from the Perspective of Decision- Makers. www.ibe.unesco.org/publications/pr97int.htm Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UNICEF. (1998). Situation Analysis of Women and Children in Armenia. Report. Document. Yerevan, Armenia: UNCEF, Government of Armenia, Save the Children. World Bank. (1999). Improving Education and Reforming Education Systems in Central and Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. World Bank, Education Sector: www. worldbank. org/html/extdr/offrep/eca/ecaedu. ht m World Bank. (1995). Priorities and Strategies for Education. A World Bank Review. Washington: World Bank. World Bank. (1999). World Development Indicators Participation in Education. World Bank. OECD, United Nations. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. APPENDICES Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 1 HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS FOR ARMENIA Human Development Index (HDI) HDI Ranking out of 173(1996) 90 Land Area (sq. kms) 29,800 Population Estimated population (million) 3.7 Population distribution (%) (1993): Urban 68 Rural 32 Gender Distribution (%) Females 51.6 Males 48.4 Age Distribution:; Population: Under 16 31.6 16-59 54.9 Over 60 13.5 Ethnic Distribution (%): Armenians 96 Russians 1.2 Kurds 1.8 Economy Total GNP(US$ billion) Real GDP per capita ($PPP), 4610 (1993) 510 Real growth in GDP (1994) (%) 5.5 Inflation (1994) (%) 1862 Employment by sector (%): Agriculture 29 Industry 26 Services 45 Unemployment (%) (93): Open 5.3 Hidden Education Adult Literacy rate 98.8 School Enrolment (%) 57 Mean Years of Schooling (1989) 10.4 Government Expenditure as % of GDP (1993) 38.2 Total of which: Defense 6 Education 4.8 Health (1992-1993) 3.6 Social Protection 13 Source: http7/www.undp.org:8(Vrbec/nhdr/1996/summary/annenia.htni 92 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Education Funding Appendix 2 Determination and Allocation I U i Each Marz Decide* how money distributed by treasury will be spent on education in the more. S pends money on goods and services for Budget schools B anks money into Lump-sum schools' bank accounts each month. The am ount is calculated by the per-pupil formula. Provides information about each school to the Ministry o f Finance and to the Ministry o f Education and Science M oE S Inspectors at the marz monitor curriculum delivery o f each school Receive m onthi; payments from the marz S pend money according to school budget plan. Lump-sum Schools Receive goods and services from the marz. C ollect salary payments from the marz Treasury branch. Budget Schools D ecides on the level o f the Education Budget Government P re p are s annual Education Budget request. Advice about the amount is based on new policy, previous levels of spending, predicted school rolls and norms for services. Ministry of Finance A llocates money to Education sector according to the level of funds received from taxes etc. D istributes money to marz Treasury branches to spend on education as directed by the marz Treasury Develops policies and gives advice to: M onitors how money is allocated by marzes. M onitors a n d Reviews the annual reports received from the L um psum funded schools. Ministry of Education and Science the Ministry o f Finance about costs: and Marzes about spending decisions. Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 3 Class consolidation at schools in Kotaik, Ashotsk and Amasia regions of Armenia proposed by the school rationalization program o f the Ministry of Education and Science. REGION CITY/VILAGE 1 -4 grades 5-8 grades TOTAL Reducing class Types o consolic class ation 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 number 1-4 grades 5-8 class student class student class student class student class student 1 1 class student grades KOTAIK REGION 16 1 Jraber 4 47 2 47 4 41 2 41 8 88 4 88 4 double1 double 2 Gami-Granit 4 26 2 26 4 30 2 30 8 56 4 56 4 double double 3 Gejard 4 36 2 36 3 23 1 23 7 59 3 59 4 double triple5 4 Zovashen 4 20 2 20 4 20 2 20 8 40 4 40 4 double double ASHOTSK REGION 55 5 Dzorashen 4 27 2 27 4 22 2 22 8 49 4 49 4 double double 6 bavra 4 48 2 48 4 41 2 41 8 89 4 89 4 double double 7 Musaelian 6 49 2 49 4 60 2 60 10 109 4 109 double double 8 Zuygakhbyur 4 59 2 59 4 44 2 44 8 103 4 103 4 double double 9 Sizavet 4 37 2 37 4 24 2 24 8 61 4 61 4 double double 10 Tavshut 4 36 2 36 4 24 2 24 8 60 4 60 4 double double 1 1 Goghovit 4 36 2 36 4 24 2 24 8 60 4 60 4 double double 12 Arpeni 4 38 2 38 4 36 2 36 8 74 4 74 4 double double 13 Krasar 4 54 2 54 4 49 2 49 8 103 4 103 4 double double 14 Saragyukh 4 18 1 18 4 10 1 10 8 28 2 28 6 double double 15 Torosgyukh 4 31 2 31 4 22 2 22 8 53 4 53 4 double double vO Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 3 (continued) REGION CITY/VILAGE 1-4 grades 5-8 grades TOTAL Reducing class number Types o consol ic class ation 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 1-4 grades 5-8 grades class student class student class student class i student class student class student ASHOTSK REGION 16 16 Karmravan 4 26 2 26 4 7 1 7 6 33 3 33 3 double double 17 Hartashen 3 16 1 16 4 8 1 8 5 24 2 24 3 triple double 18 Pokr Sepasar 3 17 1 17 2 3 17 1 17 2 triple 19 Kakavasar 2 14 1 14 2 2 14 1 14 1 double AMASIA REGION 40 20 Magarajukh 4 42 2 42 4 24 2 24 8 66 4 66 4 double double 21 Berdashen 4 28 2 28 4 25 2 25 8 53 4 53 4 double double 22 Gamarich 4 20 2 20 4 27 2 27 8 47 4 47 4 double double 23 Tsakhkut 4 20 2 20 4 15 2 15 8 35 4 35 4 double double 24 Alvar 4 14 2 14 3 13 1 13 7 27 3 27 4 double triple 25 Hoghmik 4 46 2 46 4 36 2 36 8 82 4 82 4 double double 26 Meghrashat 4 36 2 36 4 32 2 32 8 68 4 68 4 double double 27 Bandivan 4 26 2 26 4 32 2 32 8 58 4 58 4 double double 28 Zorakert 4 12 2 12 3 7 1 7 7 19 3 19 4 double triple 29 Jradzor 4 38 2 38 4 27 2 27 8 65 4 65 4 double double double1 - double grade class; triple2 - triple grade class Source: The Strategy for the Development o f Education System in Armenia. 1997, Ministry o f Education and Science o f Armenia, Report (In Armenian). Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 4 Class consolidation at schools in Amasia, Goris and Akhurian regions o f Armenia proposed by the school rationalization program o f the Ministry of Education and Science. REGION CITY/VILAGE 1 -4 grades 5-8 grades TOTAL Reducing class number Types ol consolic 'class ation 96 97 97 98 96 97 9 7 98 96 97 9 7 98 1 -4 grades 5-8 grades class student class student class student class student class i student class I student j AMASIA REGION 9 30 Aghvorik 2 9 1 9 2 1 1 1 1 1 4 20 2 20 2 double' double 31 Shaghik 2 8 1 8 2 5 1 5 4 13 2 13 2 double double 32 Zarishat 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 double 33 Ardenis 4 13 2 13 4 13 2 13 2 double 34 Hovtun 3 19 1 19 3 19 1 19 2 triple3 AKHURIAN REGION 28 35 Sarlar 4 39 2 39 4 50 2 50 8 89 4 89 4 double double 36 Lernantsk 4 27 2 27 4 20 2 20 8 47 4 47 4 double double 37 Getk 4 54 2 54 4 50 2 50 8 104 4 104 4 double double 38 Nor Akhurian 4 40 2 40 4 34 2 34 8 74 4 74 4 double double 39 Hovit 4 45 2 45 4 34 2 34 8 79 4 79 4 double double 40 Krashen 4 39 2 39 4 26 2 26 8 65 4 65 4 double double 41 Lernot 4 23 2 23 3 9 1 9 7 32 3 32 4 double triple s O O v Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 4 (continued) REGION CITY/VILAGE 1 -4 grades 5-8 grades TOTAL Reducing class number Types o consolic 'class ation 96 97 97 98 96 97 9 7 98 96 97 9 7 98 1-4 grades 5-8 grades class student class student class student class student class student class student GORIS REGION 9 42 Avarants 4 31 2 31 3 14 1 14 7 45 3 45 4 double triple 43 Khosnavar 4 39 2 39 4 31 2 31 8 70 4 70 4 double double 44 Karashen 4 44 2 44 4 50 2 50 8 94 4 94 4 double double 45 Bardzravan 3.5 20 2 20 2.5 12 1 12 6 32 3 32 3 triple triple 46 Vorotan 4 35 2 35 4 25 2 25 8 60 4 60 4 double double 47 Tandzatapy 1.5 4 1 4 1.5 3 1 3 3 7 2 7 1 double double 48 Shumukh 4 22 2 22 3 II 1 1 1 7 33 3 33 4 double triple 49 Aravan 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 II 2 triple 50 Ncrkin Khndzoresk 3 16 1 16 4 19 2 19 7 35 3 35 4 triple double double1 - double grade class; triple2 - triple grade class Source: The Strategy for the Development o f Education System in Armenia. 1997, Ministry o f Education and Science o f Armenia, Report (In Armenian). s O Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 5 Class consolidation at schools in Kapan and Meghry regions o f Armenia proposed by the school rationalization program o f the Ministry o f Education and Science. REGION CITY/VILAGE 1 -4 grades 5-8 grades TOTAL Reducing class number Types of class consolidation 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 1-4 grades 5-8 grades class student class student class student class student class student class student KAPAN REGION 97 51 Eghek 2.0 7 1 7 3.5 13 1 13 5 20 2 20 3 double1 triple 52 Shrvensay 4 9 2 9 4 9 2 9 double 53 Gehji 4 19 2 19 3 7 2 7 7 26 4 26 4 double triple 54 Khalage 3 7 1 7 4 10 1 10 7 17 3 17 4 triple2 double 55 Shikahogh 23 2 23 6 19 2 19 12 42 4 42 triple triple 56 Eghvard 5 26 2 26 4 20 2 20 9 46 4 46 5 triple double 57 Tsavi 7 31 4 31 5 29 3 29 12 60 60 double double 58 Okhtar 4 II 2 II 4 1 1 2 1 1 8 22 4 22 4 double double 59 Verin Godaklu 4 8 2 8 4 9 2 9 8 17 4 17 4 double double 60 Musalam 3 7 1 7 4 1 1 2 II 7 18 3 18 4 triple double 61 Khurani 4 16 2 16 4 18 2 18 8 34 4 34 4 double double 62 Dovrus 4 20 2 20 4 12 2 12 8 32 4 32 4 double double 63 Qacharan No6 3 4 1 4 2 4 1 4 5 8 8 3 triple double 64 Didmairy 3 7 1 7 2 3 1 3 5 10 2 10 4 double double 65 I.ernadzor 4 30 2 30 4 24 2 24 8 54 4 54 4 double double 66 Agarak 4 13 2 13 3 II 2 1 1 7 24 3 24 4 double double 67 Tandzaver 4 14 2 14 4 12 2 12 8 26 4 26 4 double double 68 Aghvanu 2 3 1 3 4 7 1 7 6 10 3 10 3 double double vO 00 Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 5 (continued) REGION CITY/VILAGE 1 -4 grades 5-8 grades TOTAL Reducing class number Types ol consolic class ation 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 1 -4 grades 5-8 grades class student class student class student class student class student class student IL4PAN REGION 69 Norashenik 4 13 2 13 4 7 1 7 8 20 4 20 4 double double 70 Arachadzor 2 3 2 3 1 3 2 3 3 6 2 6 1 double double 71 Chakatony 4 14 2 14 3 5 2 5 7 19 3 19 4 double triple 72 Geghanushy 4 27 1 27 4 29 1 29 8 56 4 56 4 double double 73 Nerkin Gidaklu 3 9 1 9 4 12 2 12 7 21 3 21 4 triple double 74 Sevakar 2 3 1 3 3 6 1 6 5 9 2 9 3 double double MEGHRY REGION 28 75 Lehavaz 4 38 2 38 4 38 2 38 8 76 4 76 4 double double 76 Aldara 4 35 2 35 4 39 2 39 8 74 4 74 4 double double 77 Shvanidzor 4 22 2 22 4 36 2 36 8 58 4 58 4 double double 78 Lichk 4 14 2 14 3 9 1 9 7 23 3 23 4 double double 79 Karchevan 3 12 1 12 4 18 2 18 7 30 3 30 4 triple triple 80 Tashtan 4 26 2 26 3 14 1 14 7 40 3 40 4 double triple 81 Vartani Dzor 4 22 2 22 4 21 2 21 8 43 4 43 4 double triple double1 - double grade class; triple3 - triple grade class Source: The Strategy for the Development o f Education System in Armenia. 1997, Ministry o f Education and Science o f Armenia, Report (In Armenian). $ Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 6 Class consolidation at schools in Sisian and Eghegnadzor regions o f Armenia proposed by the school rationalization program o f the Ministry of Education and Science. REGION CITY/V1LAGE 1 -4 grades 5-8 grades TOTAL Reducing class number Types o consolic 'class ation 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 96 97 9 7 98 1-4 grades 5-8 grades class student class student class student class student J class student class student SISIAN REGION 68 82 Dastakert 4 27 2 27 4 37 2 37 8 64 4 64 4 double' double 83 Noravan 4 51 2 51 4 47 2 47 8 98 4 98 4 double double 84 Vagharan 4 52 2 52 4 51 2 51 8 103 4 103 4 double double 85 Shamu 5 51 3 51 5 42 3 42 10 93 6 93 4 double double 86 Spandarian 4 39 2 39 4 39 2 39 8 78 4 78 4 double double 87 Akhlatian 4 46 2 46 4 48 2 48 8 94 4 94 4 double double 88 Bnunis 3 II 1 1 1 3 14 1 14 6 25 2 25 4 triple2 triple 89 Moreni 4 26 2 26 1 7 1 7 5 33 3 33 4 double 90 Ishkhanasar 4 13 2 13 2 9 1 9 6 22 3 22 double double 91 Akhita 4 26 2 26 4 20 2 20 8 46 4 46 3 double double 92 Lori 4 31 2 31 3 15 1 15 7 46 3 46 4 double triple 93 Lernashen 4 29 2 29 4 19 2 19 8 48 4 48 4 double double 94 Tasik 6 34 4 34 4 16 2 16 10 50 6 50 4 double double 95 Hayavan 4 21 2 21 4 23 2 23 8 44 4 44 4 double double 96 Salvard 4 32 2 32 4 25 2 25 8 57 4 57 4 double double 97 Barzavan 4 41 2 41 4 32 2 32 8 73 4 73 4 double double 98 Vorotan 4 23 2 23 3 20 1 20 7 43 3 43 4 double triple 99 Balak 4 21 2 21 4 21 2 21 2 double Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 6 (continued) REGION CITY/VILAGE 1-4 grades 5-8 grades TOTAL Reducing class Types o consolic ' class ation 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 number 1-4 grades 5-8 class student i class student class student class student 1 class student class i student grades EGHEGNADZO R REGION 23 100 Hermon 3 23 2 23 4 20 2 20 7 43 4 43 3 double double 101 Hors 4 33 2 33 3 25 2 25 7 58 4 58 3 double double 102 Vardahovit 4 18 2 18 3 15 1 15 7 33 3 33 4 double triple 103 Sali 4 22 2 22 3 19 1 19 7 41 3 41 4 double triple 104 Gokhtanik 2.5 13 1 13 3.5 16 2 16 6 29 3 29 3 double double 105 Horadir 4 29 I 29 2 19 1 19 6 48 3 48 3 double double 106 Mozrov 4 21 2 21 1 6 1 6 5 27 3 27 3 double double1 - double grade class; triple2 - triple grade class Source: The Strategy for the Development of Education System in Armenia. 1997, Ministry o f Education and Science of Armenia, Report (In Armenian). o Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 7 Class consolidation at schools in Vaik, Ijevan, Dilijan and Noyemberian regions o f Armenia proposed by the school rationalization program of the Ministry o f Education and Science. REGION C1TY/VILAGE 1 -4 grades 5-8 grades TOTAL Reducin g class number Types o consolic 'class ation 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 1-4 grades 5-8 grades class student class student class student class student I class student class student VAIK REGION 27 107 Barzruni 4 32 2 32 4 28 2 28 8 60 4 60 4 double1 double 108 Karmishen 4 23 2 23 4 25 2 25 8 48 4 48 4 double double 109 Azatek 4 50 3 50 4 63 4 63 8 113 7 113 1 double 110 Gomi 3 18 1 18 12 1 12 5 30 2 30 3 triple5 double 111 Sers 3 16 1 16 2 10 1 10 5 26 2 26 3 triple double 112 Artavan 4 35 2 35 4 21 2 21 8 56 4 56 4 double double 113 Saravan 4 41 2 41 4 18 2 18 8 59 4 59 4 double double 114 Nedea 2 9 1 9 3 II 1 1 1 5 20 2 20 3 double triple IIS Pori 3 16 2 16 3 16 2 16 1 double IJEVAN REGION 33 116 Acharkut 3 19 2 19 14 1 14 5 33 3 33 2 double double 117 Kajanavan 4 29 2 29 4 42 2 42 8 71 4 71 4 double double 118 Ditavan 4 34 2 34 4 36 2 36 8 70 4 70 4 double double 119 Kirants 4 28 2 28 3 14 1 14 7 42 3 42 3 double triple 120 Berkaber 4 41 2 41 4 44 2 44 8 85 4 85 4 double double 121 Aknakhbyur 4 34 2 34 4 31 2 31 8 65 4 65 4 double double 122 Tsakhkavan 4 43 2 43 4 50 3 50 8 93 5 93 3 double double Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 7 (continued) REGION CITY/VILAGE 1 -4 grades 5-8 grades TOTAL Reducing class number Types of class consolidation 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 1 -4 grades 5-8 grades class student class student class student class student class student class student 1 D1L1JAN 5 REGION 123 Goshi 4 50 3 50 4 53 2 53 8 103 5 103 3 double double 124 Nerkin Gosh 4 47 3 47 3 30 2 30 7 77 5 77 2 double double NOYEMBER1AN REGION 125 Lchkadzor 4 37 2 37 4 37 2 37 2 double double1 - double grade class; triple3 - triple grade class Source: The Strategy for the Development of Education System in Armenia. 1997, Ministry o f Education and Science o f Armenia, Report (In Armenian). o u > Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 8 Class consolidation at schools in Ararat, Masis, Echmiadzin, Krasnoselsk and Vardenis regions of Armenia proposed by the school rationalization program of the Ministry of Education and Science. REGION C1TY/V1LAGE 1-4 grades 5-8 grades TOTAL Reducing class number Types o consol ic class ation 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 9 6 97 97 98 1 -4 grades 5-8 grades class student class student class student class 1 student class student class student ARARAT REGION 7 126 Lamejar 4 24 2 24 3 21 1 21 7 45 3 45 4 double1 triple3 127 Urtsalanaje 14 1 14 2 14 1 14 1 double 128 Vardashat 4 27 2 27 4 27 2 27 2 double MASIS REGION 8 129 Azatashen 4 58 2 58 4 37 2 37 8 95 4 95 4 double double 130 Sipanik 4 51 2 51 4 36 2 36 8 87 4 87 4 double double ECHMIADZIN REGION 8 131 Lernamerdz 4 40 2 40 4 44 2 44 8 84 4 84 4 double double 132 Ferik 4 43 2 43 4 28 2 28 8 71 4 71 4 double double KRASNOSELSK REGION 33 133 Getik 4 48 2 48 4 47 2 47 8 95 4 95 4 double double 134 Martuny 4 45 2 45 4 52 2 52 8 97 4 97 4 double double 135 Antaramech 4 22 2 22 4 15 2 15 8 37 4 37 4 double double 136 Kalavan 3 10 2 10 4 1 1 2 II 7 21 4 21 3 double double 137 Dparak 4 55 2 55 4 56 2 56 8 111 4 111 4 double double o Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 8 (continued) REGION CITY/VILAGE 1 -4 grades 5-8 grades TOTAL Reducing class Types o consol ic 'class ation 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 number 1-4 grades 5-8 class student class student class i student class student class student class student grades 138 Jil 4 55 2 55 4 42 2 42 8 97 4 97 4 double double 139 Artanish 4 40 2 40 4 40 2 40 2 double double 140 Ashbery 4 32 2 32 4 45 2 45 8 77 4 77 4 triple double VARDEN1S REGION 24 triple 141 Kutaval 3 18 2 18 5 39 3 39 8 57 5 57 3 double double 142 Tretok 2 10 1 10 4 23 2 23 6 33 3 33 3 double double 143 Norabak 3 27 2 27 5 32 3 32 8 59 5 59 3 double double 144 Dzaghatsadzor 2 1 1 1 1 1 5 15 2 15 7 26 3 26 4 double double 145 Akhpradzor 3 32 2 32 5 39 3 39 8 71 5 71 3 double double 146 Geghakar 2 7 1 7 2 8 1 8 4 15 2 15 2 double double 147 Geghamabak 2 9 1 9 4 14 2 14 6 23 3 23 3 double triple 148 Avazan 2 12 1 12 3 14 2 14 5 26 3 26 2 double double double1 - double grade class; triple2 - triple grade class Source: The Strategy for the Development o f Education System in Armenia. 1997, Ministry o f Education and Science o f Armenia, Report (In Armenian). o IS) Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 9 Class consolidation at schools in Aragats, Aparan and Talin regions o f Armenia proposed by the school rationalization program o f the Ministry of Education and Science. REGION CITY/VILAGE 1 -4 grades 5-8 grades TOTAL Reducing class number Types of class consolidation 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 9 6 97 97 98 1-4 grades 5-8 grades class student class student class student class student class student class student ARAGATS REGION 16 149 Sanglar 4 48 2 48 4 32 2 32 8 80 4 80 4 double1 double 150 Avghen 2 15 2 15 4 23 2 23 6 38 4 38 2 double 151 Amre Taza 4 25 2 25 4 23 2 23 8 48 4 48 2 double double 152 Ortachai 2 8 1 8 2 12 1 12 4 20 2 20 2 double double 153 Cham shlu 2 14 1 14 2 15 1 15 4 29 2 29 2 double double 154 Sheniani 4 25 2 25 4 26 2 26 8 51 4 51 4 double double ARARAT REGION 16 155 Arai 4 30 2 30 4 27 2 27 8 57 4 57 4 double double 156 Ttujur 4 41 2 41 4 31 2 31 8 72 4 72 4 double double 157 Chinagh 4 26 2 26 4 22 2 22 8 48 4 48 4 double double 158 Saralanje 4 19 1 19 4 21 2 21 5 40 4 40 4 double double TALIN REGION 74 double double 159 Sgharashik 4 40 2 40 4 24 2 24 8 64 4 64 4 double double 160 Vosketas 4 31 2 31 4 34 2 34 8 65 4 65 4 double double 161 Partizak 4 40 2 40 4 47 2 47 8 87 4 87 4 double double 162 Avtona 4 29 2 29 4 27 2 27 8 56 4 56 4 double double i Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 9 (continued) REGION CITY/VILAGE 1-4 grades 5-8 grades TOTAL Reducing class number Types o consol ic 'class ation 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 1 -4 grades 5-8 grades class student class student class student class student class student class student 163 Barozh 4 21 2 21 4 22 2 22 8 43 4 43 4 double double 164 Getap 4 24 2 24 4 17 2 17 8 41 4 41 4 double double 165 Giazto 4 28 2 28 4 25 2 25 8 53 4 53 4 double double 166 Eghnik 4 37 2 37 4 29 2 29 8 66 4 66 4 double double 167 Task 4 31 2 31 4 31 2 31 8 62 4 62 4 double double 168 Lusakn 4 31 2 31 4 24 2 24 8 55 4 55 4 double double 169 Hayko 4 25 2 25 4 36 2 36 8 61 4 61 4 double double 170 hastashen 4 38 2 38 4 31 2 31 8 69 4 69 4 double double 171 Ghabaghtapa 4 24 2 24 3 24 2 24 7 48 4 48 4 double double 172 Sorik 3 25 2 25 3 36 1 36 6 39 3 39 3 double triple 173 Suser 4 35 2 35 4 31 2 31 8 67 4 67 4 double double 174 Verin 4 47 2 47 4 24 2 24 8 78 4 78 3 double double Bazmaberd 175 Verin Sasnashen 4 19 2 19 2 14 1 14 6 27 3 27 4 double double 176 Tsamakasar 4 42 2 42 4 32 2 32 8 66 4 66 4 double double 177 Bayos 4 23 2 23 4 23 2 23 2 double 178 Dian 3 9 1 9 3 9 1 9 2 triple2 double1 - double grade class; triple2 - triple grade class Source: The Strategy for the Development o f Education System in Armenia. 1997, Ministry o f Education and Science o f Armenia, Report (In Armenian). o -j Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 10 Class consolidation at schools in Tashir, Gugark, Stepanavan and Tumanian regions o f Armenia proposed by the school rationalization program of the Ministry of Education and Science. REGION C1TY/VILAGE 1-4 grades 5-8 grades TOTAL Reducing class number Types of class consolidation 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 1 -4 grades 5-8 grades 1 class i student class student class student class student class student class student TASHIR REGION 21 179 Dzoramuty 3 33 2 33 4 30 2 30 7 63 4 63 3 double1 double 180 Dashtademy 3 39 2 39 4 41 2 41 7 80 4 80 3 double double 181 Saratovka 3 44 2 44 3 44 2 44 1 double triple2 182 Dzunashoghy 4 25 2 25 4 17 1 17 8 42 3 42 5 double double 183 Medovka 6 52 4 52 6 46 3 46 12 98 7 98 5 184 Blagorodnoye 4 30 2 30 4 24 2 24 8 54 4 54 4 double double GUGARK REGION 20 double double 185 Antaramot 4 35 2 35 4 25 2 25 8 60 4 60 4 double double 186 Dzoraghyookh 4 27 2 27 4 26 2 26 8 53 4 53 4 double double 187 Dzorages 4 18 2 18 4 33 2 33 8 51 4 51 4 double double 188 Vahagnadzor 4 30 2 30 4 20 2 20 8 50 4 50 4 double double 189 Pambak 4 24 2 24 4 34 2 34 8 58 4 58 4 double double STEPANAVAN REGION 190 Urasar 4 41 2 41 4 25 2 25 8 66 4 66 4 double double 191 Lory-Berd 3 24 2 24 4 33 2 33 7 57 4 57 3 double double o 00 Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 10 (continued) REGION CITY/VILAGE 1-4 grades 5-8 grades TOTAL Reducing class number Types ol consol ic 'class ation 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 96 97 97 98 1-4 grades 5-8 grades class student class student class student class student class student j class student i 192 Koghes 4 19 2 19 4 27 2 27 8 46 4 46 4 double double 193 Yeghdan 3 16 1 16 3 12 1 12 6 28 2 28 4 double double TUMANIAN REGION 43 194 Shamut 4 25 2 25 4 33 2 33 8 58 4 58 4 triple double 195 Atan 2 20 1 20 4 32 2 32 6 52 3 52 4 double double 196 Haghvy 4 36 2 36 3 20 1 20 7 56 3 56 4 double double 197 Tsater 4 32 2 32 4 32 2 32 8 64 4 64 4 double double 198 Mghart 4 50 2 50 4 29 2 29 8 79 4 79 4 double double 199 Aigehat 2 II 1 1 1 4 15 2 15 6 26 3 26 4 double double 200 Ahnidzor 2 12 1 12 4 15 2 15 6 27 3 27 3 double double 201 Tsaghkasar 3 24 2 24 4 24 2 24 7 48 4 48 3 double triple 202 Neghots 4 51 2 51 3 40 2 40 7 91 4 91 3 double double 203 Chiliza 3 17 1 17 3 16 1 16 6 33 33 3 double double 204 Karmir Azegy 3 19 1 19 2 12 1 12 5 31 2 31 4 double double 205 Chkalov 4 24 2 24 3 13 1 13 7 37 3 37 3 double triple double1 - double grade class; triple2 - triple grade class Source: The Strategy for the Development o f Education System in Armenia. 1997, Ministry o f Education and Science o f Armenia, Report (In Armenian). o vO Appendix 11 SIP GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The SIP goals are: ❖ Improvement of school performance and the quality of education; •> Support to the schools in the process of achieving autonomy. The SIP objectives are: ❖ Increase parent and community involvement in school management and operation; ❖ Support the school capacity building; ❖ Assist in full utilization of school potential and mobilization of out-of-budgetary funds. Source: SIP Operational Manual, 1999 110 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 12 SIP BOARD The Board is assigned by the Minister of Education and Science and has the following members: 1 .Minister of Education and Science of Republic of Armenia (RA); 2.Deputy Minister of Education and Science; 3. Head of the Education Department of Yerevan City; 4. Head of the Education Department of any Marz; 5. Head of the Education Department of the Marz where SIP is implementing a project; 6. Director of the PMU of the Ministry of Education and Science; 7. Director of the Center for Reform Projects of the Ministry of Education and Science; 8. Head of the Department of General Education of the Ministry of Education and Science; 9. Head of the Pre-school, Out-of school. Special Education and Strategic Patriotic Department of the Ministry of Education and Science; 10. One Representative of the Department of General Education of the MOES; 11. One School Principal; 12. SIP Manager. Source: SIP Operational Manual, 1999 111 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 13 LIST OF INTERVIEWEES 1. Karine Harutyunyan, Director of the PMU of the Ministry of Education and Science; CEP; SIP Board; (July 5); 2. Marine Sukhudyan, Assistant, Project Officer Education and CEDC; UNICEF; (July 10) 3. Gayane Meroyan, Senior Research Associate at Educational Research Institute also called Center for Reform Projects, Consultant in the National Parliament on Educational Issues; (August 4) 4. Nune Davtyan, Appraisal Officer, SIP; CEP; (July 16) 5. Gayane Gasparyan, Educational Management and Information System Officer, SIP; CEP; (July 17) 6. Ara Avetisyan, Head of the Department of the General Education of the Ministry of Education and Science; SIP Board; (July 7) 7. Robert Stepanyan, Head of the Pre-school, Out-of school, Special Education and Strategic Patriotic Department of the Ministry of Education and Science; SIP Board; (July 3) 8. Albert Ananyan, Representative of the Department of General Education of the MOES; SIP Board; (August 3) 9. Serob Khachatryan, Chief Editor of “ Krtootyoon”, the Official Newspaper of the MOES; (July 3) 10. Alexander Hovhanissyan, SIP Manager; CEP; SIP Board; (August 10). 112 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 14 Questionnaire in Armenian (English translation is provided in Appendix 15) RuijbpbG 3uipguipbpp|il{ UGmG, UqquiGniG, ^u^innG , Uduuippij___________________________________________________________________________ 1. hG iujb'u LtqGuihuiuibp IjppmpjuiG Gbpljui 4fu£ujl||]: 2. <uijuiGfi t, np puipngGbph GbpL|Ui diuGp ilfuftuljG l{uiuit{uj6 t $h&wGuujtjiuG uiGpunliuptup GpgngGbph hbin: hGj bp huipdm d, h&iujb*u Ifujpbih t oqGbi rpqpngGbppG q m pu q w i u j j u duiGp 4hAujl|hg: 3. h'G* Ifiupdheh bp pujpbitinfunitiGbph uiuipijnri ptuqtupuiliujGnipjuiG diuufiG: 4. Uprynp « UppnipjuiG opbGpp hGuupunlnpnipjruG uuuih'u t ppuiliuuGujgGbi puipbihnjunnlGbph ptuqujpuiljujGnipjruG: 5. n*p hpGGujLiuiD ryimjpGbpo llhuipbnpbhp puipbipnfunidGbph ijinpfiGujljujG dpuuqpnni: 6. Uprynp OPO-fi Gujiuinujl|GbpG huuihuhni'G* b& pujpngGbph uumugGurhbpp luGpppGbppG: 7. Uprynp ryiipngGbpp niunigfcGbpQ G in&opbGGbpp i3|iujG2UjDijuI| qptuliiuG dninbgnnJ niGb‘0 O PO -fi Guyujuiujl{bbphb: 113 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 8 . hO£U|b*u bG QGriniGtJmii rlP O -h GuiuiuuuljGbpc hwtiujjGpti GnrpJftg: 9 . Uprynp O PD -ntil hui24h uifjG4ni*iJ bG inbquijhG (dwpqujjpG) UJnwGaGuihuiinljnipjniGGbpD: 10. hG^uihuh* QdiliupnipjnLGGbp IjuuG qujpngGbph $fiGiuGutu4npiJijuG Gnp l^uipqfiG uiGgGbini dbj: 11. Uprynp il2Uil{i|b*i bG ryqpngGbph piupbipn|uiJuiG 4inpdGwljujG dpuiqph qGiuhujmduiG iltiujuGuiGujb dlibp: n ilp b 'p bG uiGgljuigGbtni qGwhuimtfwG ui2|uuiinujGpGbp|i: 12. h*G* uujuiubihpGbp niGbp qujpngGbpp ptupbJinluikuG ipnpiGiuljujG dptuqppg: 13. hG*ujb*u 4qGiuhiuinbp IjppnipjujG huiduj^iupqp uiGgnidp fupuui GbGmpnGuig4unShg luiqujl^bGinpnGuiguidhG ( GuijuiupujpnipfniG-iIuipq-riuipng): 14. hG£U|b*u IjqGujhiuinbp pujpbgGbph owgpnGwiiugniiJQ, npuqbu pGptugplj ptupbi^n|uniiIGbph ujGpuidiuG dtuu: 15. hGiujb'u bp qGhuuinnit! MDM w 2|uuiuiuiGpGbp[i puipbipn|imiiJGbpp ppwqnpddwG qnpdniil: 16. hGiujb’ubG inidilnii] w bq ujgp L wpuiwuwhtfujGjuiG ifinpfiwqbmGbph m wpw^ujpdnipjniti& bpoiUprynp ilbpgpGGbpp huJ24h ujnGnid bG mbquijpG uuijiuGfiGujhwinljnipjniGGbpQ: 17. h&£iL|b*u GqGiuhujmbp pGpuighlj OhMpn-dpiuqpbph 2wpniGuiljuj4 Gnip)UjG hGuipiuilnpnipjniGGbpp: 18. hG*ujb*u bp iguuinl^bpuigGnii] l^ppnipjujG hbinuiquj quipquigniilp <wjiuumuiGnii5: Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix 15 Questionnaire in English Name____________________________________________________________________ Position___________________________________________________________________ Date______________________________________________________________________ Questions 1 How will you evaluate the current state of the education system? Question 2 It is known that the main problem of the general secondary schools is connected with the insufficient state allocations. Is it possible to help schools come out of the present critical situation? Question 3 What is your opinion about the educational reform policy of the government? Question 4 Is the new Education Law of the country allowing reform implementation? Question 5 What are the most important concepts of pilot program of reform? Questions 6 Are the SIP goals addressing the priority issues of schools? Question 7 How is SIP accepted by the school administrators and teachers? Question 8 us Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. How are the goals of the SIP accepted by the community? Question 9 Are the marz (regional) specifics considered in the SIP OM? Question 10 What are the main difficulties for the autonomous schools in the implementation of new ways of financing? Question 11 Have you developed evaluation mechanism for the pilot implementation of the reform? Question 12 What are your expectations from the pilot reform implementation? Question 13 How will you evaluate the transfer of the education system from centralized to more decentralized one? Question 14 How will you evaluate the School Rationalization Program as an inseparable part of current reform? Question IS How will you evaluate the work of the CEP in the process of reform implementation? Question 16 How do the local and foreign experts come to an agreement on the reform implementation? Are there any incongruities and how are they solved? Question 17 How will you evaluate the sustainability of the current micro-projects? 116 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Question 18 What are your expectations regarding the development of education system in the future? Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. MAPS Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. REGIONAL MAP S m m m 119 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Source: Environmental Research a n d Management Center, American University of Armenia, 1998 Map 2 ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISIONS OF ARMENIA ARAGATSOTN ARARAT ARMAVIR SHRAK i G E G H A R K O U N D C I 1K0TAIK i | L O R I ] SUUNK ■ H TAVOUSH HI VAYOTS DZOR I YEREVAN M t G H g l 100 100 200 200 Kiemetm Source: Environmental Research and Management Center, American University of Armenia. 1998 120 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Education for change in a changing Nigerian Igbo society: Impacts of traditional African and western education on the upbringing of Igbo children
PDF
Educational opportunism as the traditional policy of the South Caucasian international schools
PDF
Cultural tourism and educational development: Creating new realities in the inner city
PDF
Higher education reforms in Belarus: Initial goals and results in the context of globalization and internationalization of higher education
PDF
Gender, learning, and trafficking: Helping vulnerable Thai women through NGO and government non -formal education programs
PDF
A quantitative/qualitative analysis of student achievement among Latino immigrant students with a general educational development diploma and United States-born Hispanic students with a high scho...
PDF
Dealing with the United States' educational crisis: Studying baccalaureate programs
PDF
Environmental education in community -based coastal resource management: A case study of Olango Island, Philippines
PDF
Educating women on sexual health and reproductive rights: A case study of a prevention program in Peru
PDF
Exploration of the role of nurses in caring for children in foster care
PDF
Educational development aid and the role of language: A case study of AIT -Danida and the Royal University of Agriculture in Cambodia
PDF
A study of the significant changes in a small urban school district from 1991--2001 as perceived by educators in the city of Pereslavl -Zalessky in the Russian Federation
PDF
Computation and validation of circulating blood volume with the indocyanine green dilution technique
PDF
Engaging Latino families parents in their children's educations
PDF
Cellular kinetic models of the antiviral agent (R)-9-(2-phosphonylmethoxypropyl)adenine (PMPA)
PDF
A contemporary urban ethnography of Pakistani middle school students in Oslo, Norway
PDF
Biological materials investigation by atomic force microscope (AFM)
PDF
A preliminary investigation to determine the effects of a crosslinking reagent on the fatigue resistance of the posterior annulus of the intervertebral disc
PDF
Interactive C++ program to generate plank system lines for timber rib shell structures
PDF
Bilingual education in California: A policy debate
Asset Metadata
Creator
Matnishyan, Arpineh
(author)
Core Title
Educational reform at the general secondary schools in Armenia
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Master of Science
Degree Program
Education
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
anthropology, cultural,Education, Finance,engineering, biomedical,OAI-PMH Harvest
Language
English
Contributor
Digitized by ProQuest
(provenance)
Advisor
Rideout, William M. (
committee chair
), Eskey, David (
committee member
), Stromquist, Nelly (
committee member
)
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c16-288854
Unique identifier
UC11341503
Identifier
1409646.pdf (filename),usctheses-c16-288854 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
1409646-0.pdf
Dmrecord
288854
Document Type
Thesis
Rights
Matnishyan, Arpineh
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA
Tags
anthropology, cultural
Education, Finance
engineering, biomedical