Page 1 of 20

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal – Vol. 9, No. 3

Publication Date: March 25, 2022

DOI:10.14738/assrj.93.12009. Kyeremeh, A., & Kor, J. A. M. (2022). Educational Management Decentralisation and Its Effect on Teacher Outputs: A Case of

Ghanaian Basic Schools. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 9(3). 235-254.

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Educational Management Decentralisation and Its Effect on

Teacher Outputs: A Case of Ghanaian Basic Schools

Alex Kyeremeh

College for Community and Organisation Development (CCOD)

Jacob Aaworb-nang Maabobr Kor (PhD)

Senior Lecturer

College for Community and Organisation Development (CCOD)

ABSTRACT

Although touted as having impacts on educational performance in some countries

not much attention has been given to investigating the relationship between

decentralisation of educational management and the teacher outcomes in the

Ghanaian context. The study thus sought to investigate the effect of decentralised

systems on teacher motivation in Ghanaian basic public schools, to determine the

effect of decentralised systems on quality teacher in Ghanaian basic public schools,

and to investigate the effect of decentralised systems on Teacher discipline in

Ghanaian basic public schools. A concurrent mixed design was employed in this

study, however only quantitative findings are reported. A multistage random

sampling technique was used to select 408 public and private schools from nine

regions. Primary data based on a Cross-sectional survey making use of a survey

questionnaire. Multiple Linear Regression analysis was employed for analysis.

Results from Multiple Regression analysis reveal adequacy of the models of the

study (R2 > 0.5). It was found that the District Education Oversight Committees roles

in Personnel management, Organization of Instruction, had significant effect on

teacher outputs including teacher motivation, teacher discipline, quality of

teaching, and opportunities to learn. It was recommended that various Assemblies

take the work of DEOC seriously and make resources available for their effective

role in the management of Basic School to ensure effective implementation of

decentralisation at the local level.

Keywords: Teacher Motivation, Decentralization, Teacher discipline, Quality Teaching

INTRODUCTION

The old forms of delivering of public goods is experiencing changes. One of such change

manifests in the provision of public services at the local or grassroots level with minimal control

by the central government. Decentralisation is a system of governance where central

administration transfers power to a local authority with the aim of being more responsive to

citizens at the grassroots, and to enhance their participation in decision-making (Barr & Reid,

2014). A long-standing but complex subject, educational decentralisation has a wide range of

implementation and impact options. Additionally, it is probably one of the most commonly

employed policy solutions for increasing educational access and quality all across the world

(Fiske, 1996; World Bank, 2007).

Page 2 of 20

236

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 9, Issue 3, March-2022

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

The implementation of decentralisation in the Education have been cited in prior research to

have resulted in positive results over time including accountability, teacher motivation and

teacher attendance (Snilstveit, Stevenson, Phillips et al. 2015; Litvack, 2017). According to

Carr-Hill, Rolleston, Schendel and Waddington (2018), a systematic review devolving decision- making appeared to have a beneficial effect on dropout, repetition and teacher attendance.

Studies including Skoufias and Shapiro (2006), Ikoya (2008), and Bruns et al. (2011), there are

certain benefits to decentralising educational functions. Decentralisation, in the view point of

Ikoya (2008), has led to less corrupt practices, better school infrastructure and security, and

better use of available resources.

Basically decentralization of educational system decision involve decision-making that affects

all four areas of education. These are decision relating to organization of instruction (curricula,

textbooks, teaching methods, and schedule), human resource management (hiring/firing; pay;

responsibility assignment; training); planning and structure; and financial resources and

spending. Education decentralisation can be assessed using this method (Organisation for

Economic Co-operation and Development 1998). With the advent of decentralisation in Ghana,

various communities saw the need to take active part in education at the community level, this

had push with ACT 506 of 1995 and ACT 778 of 2008 which place both basic and secondary

education in Ghana under the district assemblies. The two ACTS mandated the assemblies to

form educational oversight committees which is the highest education body in the districts,

among their functions are to provide education infrastructure and materials and to form

disciplinary committee to hear cases concerning pupils and teachers and prescribe sanctions.

The District Education Oversight Committees (DEOCs) are by this mandate to oversee

Instruction in schools, manage teaching Personnel, and engage in planning and provision of

structures for schools, although certain aspects like teacher recruitment still remain

centralized.

As one of the main expectations of decentralised systems is to employ its own competent staff

who it can hire, fire and promote, this study holds that the more a local authority has the powers

to hire, reward and fire a teacher, the more teachers would put in effort into their work to

generate the needed output. If teachers are aware of close monitoring, supervision, and

evaluation that would come from the local level instead of a national education office, they

would be more conscientious and up to task

While a great number of some studies including Carr-Hill et al. (2018) reveal positive

associations, others including Kuhon (2020) argue that there are no significant and even

negative impact of decentralisation on educational outcomes, particularly when there are

inadequate capacity to supervise and resource schools and also political influences at the local

level. Unterhalter (2012) have also mentioned that there is growing evidence including

Banerjee et al. (2008), Pherali, Smith, and Vaux (2011); Rocha, and Sharma (2008), and Rose

(2003) that decentralisation reforms may have unintended and sometimes negative effects in

certain political and economic circumstances. Surprisingly Leer (2016) found a significant

negative effect on the number of hours that teachers spend in the classroom, for schools in rural

communities. This finding could be due to low levels of monitoring by local and district

education inspectors.

Page 3 of 20

237

Kyeremeh, A., & Kor, J. A. M. (2022). Educational Management Decentralisation and Its Effect on Teacher Outputs: A Case of Ghanaian Basic Schools.

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 9(3). 235-254.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.93.12009

Indeed the concept of decentralization could be influence by political decisions in some

countries. Hence, country settings, political systems, and philosophical viewpoints on education

could influence implementation (Winkler, 1993; Karlsen, & Larrea, 2012). Some evidence from

Ghanaian studies have document the role politics in the operations of the DEOCs. Such district

and local power dynamics may affect participation, decision-making outcomes, and service

delivery, as documented by Essuman and Akyeampong (2011). A participatory process at the

local level, according to Hildyard, Pandurang, Wolvekamp, and Somasekhare (2001), may

simply give possibilities for elite members to use their power to preserve exploitation and

exclusion. While policymakers may believe that decentralising decision-making will improve

accountability, the reality may be quite different, since the agency and voice of individuals are

subordinated to the power dynamics working within a group. Unequal power relations

between the educated and ignorant, the old and young, the rich and poor, may marginalize the

contribution of the less powerful in the decision-making process (Botchway, 2000). According

to studies conducted in several African nations, inequalities in socioeconomic level, race, caste,

social class, location (i.e. urban/rural), and gender have resulted in unequal access to

involvement in organizations such as PTAs and SMCs (Bush & Heystek 2003; Rose 2003;

Essuman & Akyeampong, 2011).

Despite the widespread use of decentralisation strategies in educational systems globally, there

is a paucity of robust and empirical evidence linking decentralisation to educational quality.

Additionally, the association established by these extant studies (Skoufias & Shapiro, 2006;

Ikoya, 2008; Bruns et al., 2011; Sakyi, 2008; Sakyi, Awoonor-Williams, Adzei, 2011; Channa,

2016; Snilstveit, Stevenson, Phillips et al., 2015, Carr-Hill, Rolleston, Schendel, and

Waddington, 2018, Leer, 2016, and Kuhon, 2020) demonstrates conflicting findings about the

impact of decentralisation on teacher outcomes. Again most of these students focus attention

on a devolved educational context failing to establish the relationships of dencentralisation in

a deconcentrated context on teacher discipline, motivation, and teaching. Thus, the study's

findings provide context-specific evidence on the impact of decentralisation on students'

learning results.

Specifically this study sought to:

1 determine the effect of decentralised systems on teacher motivation in Ghanaian basic

public schools

2 determine the effect of decentralised systems on quality teacher in Ghanaian basic

public schools

3 investigate the effect of decentralised systems on Teacher discipline in Ghanaian basic

public schools

LITERATURE REVIEW

Studies including Ikoya (2008), and Bruns et al. (2011), and Osaigbovo (2013) support the view

that Decentralisation of education lead to certain benefits including better management of

schools, better utilization of school facilities, and more resources available for students.

According to Osaigbovo (2013), groups tasked with guaranteeing the implementation of

decentralised schools must be proactive in supervising school learning in order to maintain a

standard. Again, the researcher against existing implementation difficulties indicated that

timely provision of suitable resources, including teaching and learning materials, be made in

order to increase educational quality. Although Ikoya (2008), Osaigbovo (2013) suggest that