Students Council in Georgian Schools - How it should work and how it works? A brief study of students council condition SCHOOL OF DEBATES PROJECT 2014 Tbilisi, Georgia 2014
This material is availablele under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported (CC BY 3.0) License, Some rights reserved by Center for Citizenship Education (Warsaw, Poland). The English text was created in frame of the Programme "Support for Democracy" funded by the Polish development cooperation programme of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Poland. Any use of this material is allowed under the condition of keeping the above information, including information about the used licenses and copyrights owners and about Polish development cooperation programme. The full licensee is available here: https://creativecommons.org/ /licenses/by/3.0/deed.en
Dear readers, We would like to present you this short publication as a result of a Polish Georgian project The School of Debates 2014 implemented by Center for Citizenship Education (Poland) and The Public Union Bridge of Friendship Kartlosi (Georgia). The project was focused on strengthening the social engagement of students by involving them and the entire school community into the decision-making processes that take place in the schools. The project also gave students a chance to express their opinions about issues and problems important for them and to develop the skills of critical thinking, argumentation and active participation in the school community. The project involved 16 schools from 4 regions of Georgia (Shida-Kartli, Kvemo-Kartli, Kakheti, Mtskheta Mtianeti). Each school was under the care of the pair of tutors young activists, Kartlosi trainers, who were prepared and trained in the frame of the project. There was a core team of project participants about 10-15 students and 2 teachers in each school. The core team was just an executive body for all school students and teachers taking part in decision making process. As the main aim of the project was learning real STUDENT PARTICIPATION, the project consisted of a few main activities in the school environment: 1 st workshop in the school integration of the group, learning what the participation is and how students in cooperation with teachers could influence school life. Workshops also included learning about the different methods on how to conduct school diagnosis how to involve other students and invite them to express their opinion about the school; School diagnosis project team organized and conducted diagnosis of the main problems of the school, collecting opinions of students and teachers; 2 nd workshop analyses of school diagnosis and choosing the subject for the debate, learning and experiencing different types of debates, planning preparation of the debate; DEBATE the project team conducted debate in the school on the most important issue. Participants of the debate included not only students, but also teachers, the principal, parents, local authorities and inhabitants. The debate helped to collect different problem solutions; Summing up meetings after the debate each project team met with their tutors to discuss the whole process and to develop future plans to implement in their school. All these activities were taken in the period from September through the November 2014. Due to the fact that school democratization, students real participation cannot be implemented without the active role of Students Council, which does not function effectively enough in Georgian schools we decided to conduct a small-scale research and data analyses, which You can find in this publication. The research analyses presented below gives information about the general picture of the Students Council in Georgian schools, based on the legal regulations and a survey of its performance in reality. The survey includes opinions of various educational experts and our small field research. We hope that this information will be useful for all of you students, teachers and principals and other activists in educational sphere. We believe that it will help you to develop effective participation in your schools and will make your schools more comfortable and friendly for all of you. Project team The Foundation Center for Citizenship Education (Poland) The Public Union Bridge of Friendship Kartlosi (Georgia) \
Katy Maghradze A tutor in the project School of Debates 2014 Students Council in Georgian Schools - How it should work and how it works? A brief study of students council condition Foreword Democratization and decentralization were selected as prioritized directions of the world educational reforms of resent past. Due to the fact that strengthening of schools self-governance has crucial importance for school democratization and besides Polish-Georgian project School of Debates 2014 is focused on implementation of real co-decision process in Georgian schools, we found it necessary to study a general state of students council (SC), one of the structural components of the school s self-government. This research does not represent a deep analysis of the subject matter, however the lack of quick and feasible information pushed us to conduct such a brief research in order to find out what is the legal conditions of SC in Georgian Educational System and how it is applied in school reality. Efficiency of a school self-government depends on various factors, although evaluation of SC as one of the main leverages of school s independence and democratization may reveal problems that still exist at schools and determine options for problem-solving. Methodology of the Research The research includes qualitative and quantitative components. Qualitative methods - In order to determine problems and their grounds, four interviews were conducted with experts of educational system of Georgia, representing the NGO (Civic Development Institute and SC Union of Georgia) as well as public sector (Teachers Professional Development Centre). Research also involves data analysis, which covered prior studies and publications related to the subject matter and legislative framework: Decentralization of the System of Secondary Education Civic Development Institute, 2013 This book is based on the research conducted by Georgian experts of the educational field. It represents analytical study of the legislative changes made to Georgian Law on Secondary Education since 2004; the influence of these changes on various processes in the educational field and case studies of different Georgian schools, used as an illustration of named changes; Participation in School Self-Government Project Harmony Inc. 2011 This book was published as an additional literature and guide for students and teachers (separate editions) giving basic idea of school democracy, functions of the SC and students role in the school life. It was published in the framework of the project aiming at strengthening of the SCs of public schools of Georgia, which also included trainings for SC representatives conducted by SC Union of Georgia; Georgian Law on Secondary Education. Quantitative component implies data obtained from 16 schools involved in Polish Georgian project School of Debates 2014 representing various regions of Georgia including regions of Shida-Kartli (5 schools), Kvemo
Kartli (3 schools), Kaheti (4 schools) and Mtskheta Mtianeti (3 schools). The schools are located in regional cities as well as small cities and villages. Part of the information collected about the schools was obtained during one of the initial phases of School of Debates 2014 project named as School Diagnosis that was conducted by project tutors (trainers). Tutors interviewed teachers, principals and some students about school reality and environment during their visit to above named schools. As a result, it occurred that in 6 schools, the SCs exist only formally. We decided to conduct the second phase of the research at the remaining 10 schools, where SCs exist not only on the paper but in the school life as well and where it was possible to interview the heads of SCs. The Heads of SCs were interviewed by telephone using the questionnaire that consisted of questions revealing the activities carried out by SC and the knowledge of SC heads about their functions, rights and obligations. General Comments Most of the interviewed students were eager to participate in the poll and were giving clear answers. Their majority is definitely actively involved in planning and implementation of various projects and events at their schools. Although, the functions of the SC named by several respondents provoked a new question of the research Are students properly and correctly informed/instructed about their participation in the school management and do those who consult heads of SCs have clear and appropriate understanding of the term Participation in School Governance? This short report will gives us some further comments on this issue.
1. Historical and general overview In the 70-ies of the last century, decentralization became very popular direction of the reforms of educational systems worldwide. The aim of this initiative was adjustment of the models already established in business to the field of education. In this regard, importance was given to a results-oriented planning, management of education, data-based decision-making and the commercialization of education. One of the cornerstones of the policy was introduction of free-market principles in educational systems. This basically resulted in expansion of rights related to the selection of educational institutions and the rule of funding by vouchers (Heyneman, 2003). One of the main directions of this process was decentralization of the system of education, the interest of which was still mainly conditioned by political, socio-economical and technical factors. Decentralization means transfer of decision-making authority of the management from the top to the lower levels of the organizational hierarchy. There is no unified standard for the quality of decentralization of educational systems. Use of decentralized or centralized methods of decision-making may vary from country to country and according to the issues to be resolved. A completely decentralized system in which every school makes independent decisions regarding all issues, or does not depend on the political authorities in any other way, do not exist in the modern reality. The pursuit of decentralization was based on the recognition that institutions are more efficient if less centralized and local governmental agencies or local communities more effectively identify and manage their own interests (McGinn & Welsh, 1999). Decentralization proponents believe that school possesses more comprehensive information about the needs and aspirations of particular student, than any top-level bureaucratic authority. Consequently, school has more potential to incorporated local circumstances into the decision-making process. In addition, frequent involvement of key stakeholders (parents and children) helps to increase the control and improves the quality of education (Levin & Belfield, 2003). Having in mind the economic efficiency, granting of more autonomy for the educational institution in the process of management, results in optimal and efficient use of resources. If management of educational institution involves local stakeholders, they prevent waste of financial resources, focusing on their own interests. Supporters of decentralization also believe that it encourages introduction of the principles of democratic governance at schools. According to these principles, without decentralization of not only administrative but also a learning process of the school, it is hard to believe that school may bring up citizens who are prepared to be effective participants in a democratic society. (Dewey, 2004). Students guide "Participation in School Self-Governance", which is the supplementary textbook for the Civic Education Club lessons, describes the following: Democratic governance of the school, is one of the most pressing issues for educational systems worldwide. Democratic management of the school implies active involvement of students, parents, teachers, community members, school community and other stakeholders in the school life and elaboration of important decisions, as well as granting them with certain rights in the
process of management. Students involvement in the processes of self-governance encourages teens to become active citizens, which, in turn, is one of the main guarantees of democracy. Georgian System of Education A large-scale reform of the educational system in Georgia began in 2001. The first steps in this direction were made in the framework of World Bank project "Realignment and Strengthening of Georgian System of Education". However, an active phase of the system s fundamental transformation started in 2004, with "Rose Revolution". In 2005, parliament passed the Law "On General Education", which reflected the vision and approaches to decentralization and accountability of public schools. Reform changed the models of management, financing and quality assurance of the system of education. However, over the period 2005-2011, as a result of various amendments and changes to the law, the Ministry of Education created or regained the leverages which still largely contributes to the strengthening of the centralized system of management. Efficiency of the School Self-Government The most notable steps in the process of decentralization in Georgian education are highly connected to the strengthening of schools self-governance. However, the efficiency of the bodies of the schools selfgovernance in Georgia is still questionable. Effectiveness of schools self-governance is mainly weakened by the shortage of a budget and the obligation of using its main part following the standards set by the state. The most part of the voucher funding (state funding, which is calculated by the number of students at the school) is spent on the teachers' salaries. And this part significantly increased when the government increased the minimum rate of teacher s salary, without increasing the amount of the voucher. In 2007-2011, the vast majority (nearly 50%) of schools had the shortage of the budget. As a result, the self-governance of the school, in particular the Board of Trustees (BoT the school highest elected body that consists of teachers, parents and students representatives) and the administration, were out of the option of making any realistic decisions related to the budget. Since one of the main functions of the BoT is to oversee the implementation and strategic planning of the budget, the shortage of the budget was greatly reducing the possibility of applying this function (Decentralization of the System of Secondary Education Civic Development Institute, 2013). Low budget, in turn, reduces the opportunity of making decisions necessary to the development and diversity of the school activity. This may complicate attraction of competent and motivated teachers or parents to BoT. Frequent changes in the government regulations, informal requirements, high number of money transfers, the voucher calculation method, which is sensitive to the number of students and causes a significant change in income prevents schools from strategic planning. Many schools find it difficult to develop not only a longterm, but even a one-year action plan. Implementation of decentralized systems in countries that have little experience with democracy, frequently results in situations when the self-government of the school serves the elites instead of introducing a participatory practices (McGinn & Welsh, 1999). Georgia may serve as an example. Some of BoTs here are used by influential groups to strengthen their power. This can be proved with the fact that during the first elections of school principals, some schools were rejecting all nominated candidates (sometimes rejected
were even six candidates), with the hope of keeping the existing principal. 47% of the schools failed to select a principal during first elections. This may indicate on low quality of exercising of the function of self-governance (Goglichidze, 2010). Evaluation of Decentralized Management of the Public Schools As a result of the reform, administrative and financial autonomy of the secondary school is determined by a self-government of the school (SGS), which is comprised of: Board of Trustees, Administration, Teachers' Council, Students Self-Government, Disciplinary Committee and Appeals Committee. Management System of the Public School Source: Participation in the School Self-Government Project Harmony Inc. 2011 The biggest role in ensuring the principles of democratic governance is granted to the Board of Trustees. School Board of Trustees is the highest elected body of the school s self-government. The initial Board of Trustees was comprised of: Parents (minimum 3, maximum 6), Teachers (minimum 3, maximum 6) The representative of students council (1 representative selected by students' council members of the secondary (higher) level (10-12 grades)). Local governmental authority - according to the current edition of the law, "local governmental authority is entitled to appoint one member to the board of trustees" and "the Ministry of Education and Science has the right to send a representative with a deliberate vote". BoT is authorized to elect and dismiss a school principal. It approves the school budget, school internal regulations, the disciplinary committee (which considers the issues of disciplinary misconduct of the school
community) and the use of the textbooks determined by the national curriculum and the school curriculum developed by the Teachers Council. The Structure of the BoT Source: Participation in the School Self-Government Project Harmony Inc. 2011
2. The Student s Council in Georgian law. Students Council is the structural unit of the school, that is set up in accordance with the Law on General Education and the school s internal regulations (Georgian Law on General Education, Article 47, paragraph 1). Students choose their own council representatives for basic (grades 7-9) and secondary (grades 10-12) levels on the basis of equality, by secret ballot, according to the principle of equal representation in each class. The main tasks of the Students Council listed in the Georgian Law on General Education are: 1) Development of recommendations about internal regulations of a school; 2) Submission of proposals to the Board of Trustees on all the important matters relating to the school; 3) Election of a representative to the Board of Trustees; 4) Participation in the disposal of allocated grant in accordance to the school s internal regulations and Georgian legislation; 5) Creation of various school clubs with the initiative of one-fifth of the members; 6) Election of its representative to the Disciplinary Committee at the secondary level. According to current legislation of Georgia, the head of students' council of the secondary level (10 th, 11 th, 12 th grades) represents SC at the Board of Trustees and through him/her students are involved in the management of all matters which fall within the competence of the board (approval of the school budget and regulations, annual report of the principal, election of the principal etc.). In the regulations there are some differences in describing the way SC should be represented at the BoT Article 37 on the Board of Trustees states that students are represented at the BoT by the Head of the SC of the secondary level, while Article 48 c. says that the SC "shall elect a representative to the board of trustees" (Article 48 c.) and does not specify the level (basic or secondary). Range of Practical Activity of SC The SC activity may be very diverse, and it should be based on the reality of a particular school. With SC the current legislation gives students the ability at minimum to participate in the management of school liferelated issues, such as approval of the school budget and internal regulations, agreement on the curriculum, resolve of disciplinary issues, etc. But, besides the issues foreseen in the legislation, students also have a right to use SC and work on any other matter, according to their own interests; to form clubs and various unions; create and implement projects; organize movements, seminars, exhibitions and other events.
Source: Participation in the School Self-Government Project Harmony Inc. 2011 The Structure of SC SCs can develop their own structure, in order to cope not only with obligatory functions but also with completely different activity and establishment of different clubs and associations. As an example, offered is the scheme of one of the public school s SC. Election of Students' Council Representatives The election of SC representatives from the basic and secondary levels is held no later than 1 month after the start of the academic year. The elections are appointed by the chairman of the Board of Trustees. Students of each class from the basic (7-9 grades) and secondary (10-12 grades) levels elect the SC representative of their class with the term of one year. The authority of the SC representative is automatically terminated if he/she leaves the school. All students of basic and secondary levels are entitled to participate in elections with a right to vote. Source: Participation in the School Self- Project Harmony Inc. Government 2011
Registration of Candidates Students who wish to be elected as SC representatives of the appropriate level, must register at their classmaster or in her/his absence at the school principal, no later than 3 days prior to the elections. Pre-election Campaign and Agitation Pre-election campaign and agitation by the candidates of the SC representatives is regulated by the rule established for pre-election campaign and agitation of BoT candidates. Voting Students of each class vote for 1 candidate from their class to be elected as a member of SC of the appropriate level. The winner of the election in each class is the candidate that gets the highest number of votes. Election of the SC Head Within 7 days, after the results of the class representatives election are announced, the SC members elect one chairperson for each level, by a majority of votes. Elected students lead the SC of relevant level. A head of the secondary level represents students of the school at the BoT (Goglichidze, 2010).
3. Student s Council in reality results of short survey conducted among the SC Heads As it was mentioned above, this research was based on the data obtained from 16 schools participating in the project School of Debate 2014. However, during initial phase of the research it occurred that in nearly 40% of the schools involved in the project Student s Council exist only formally it is appointed, it exist in the documents, but do not play the active role in a school life. Some teachers and principals saw the reason for that in the lack of financial resources or students engagement in other activities (as Civic Education Clubs 1 ) The short questionnaire was formed to reveal the real activity of the SC and the awareness of SC heads of their legal rights, functions and responsibilities. Heads of the SCs of the schools involved in the project proved to be active in terms of organizing various events but not all of them have a clear picture of the full spectrum of SC legal rights/responsibilities or SC structure. Even for the heads of SCs it s not so easy to define tasks and aims of the SC and their real possibilities that influence the school life. On the other hand, it appeared that students self government elections were conducted in all 10 schools. Initially the elections were held in all classes (from the seventh through twelfth grades) as a result of which the representatives of the classes to the SC were elected. Heads of SCs of both levels (basic and secondary) were then elected from the elected SC members (class representatives to SC). There are some differences how the class representatives were chosen in 8 schools the nominees were named by class students or students named themselves as candidates on their own initiative. In 2 schools the nominees were named by classmasters or other teachers. Unfortunately, only two students knew that the heads of SC are elected only by members of SC and not the whole school. In two schools, it appeared that in the classes with relatively active students, candidates for the Heads of SC even conduct pre-election campaigns and announce their programs in the school. It confirms observation of the former Chairperson of the SCs Alliance of Georgia, who stated that "There are schools where the election campaign looks just like the one for presidential elections, but this only happens in those schools where there are active and initiative children". It is also noteworthy that there is some lack of detailed information among students about the SC some of them did not know exact number of his/her deputies or the total number of SC members (2 respondents), one of them even supposed that he had deputies in each class, just a few knew about the exact dates/terms of the elections (1 respondent) or what the criteria must be met by SC eligible candidates (1 respondent). There were also some doubts, about who represents students at the BoT in two cases respondents stated that students are represented at the BoT by other student and not the head of SC. The Heads of SC were also asked about the main goal/purpose of the SC. The respondents gave controversial, but interesting answers: Encouragement of students active involvement 6 votes; 1 Clubs that were created (starting from 2010) in order to promote civic activity and initiatives at schools. Students who join this classes are free to initiate various civic projects and get the funding in the framework of the Civic Education and Teachers Retraining Program implemented by the Organization PH International, funded by USAID (Guideline of The School Civic Club Natia Giorgidze, 2011 http://www.dswy.eu/pdfs/gzamkvlevi.pdf)
Protection of students interests 5 votes; Promotion of the collaboration between students and teachers 2 votes; Experiencing the decision-making 2 votes; Usefulness for the country 1 vote; Encouragement of students' openness - 1 vote; Providing Support to the students - 1 vote; Event management - 1 vote; Teaching how to be independent - 1 vote; Parents involvement into the school life - 1 vote. This probably could be considered as a good result, since most if not all the above-mentioned can highly contribute students active and independent performance, even thought there was not mentioned participation in the discussions related to the school budget or any other decision-making processes. Another point of interest was the main activity of SC. Interviews revealed that these activities were: Organization of educational and recreational activities - 3 votes; Implementation of community projects providing support to socially vulnerable people, treeplanting, communication with the community etc. - 3 votes; Implementation of school projects equipment of libraries, street signs and crosses in vicinity of the school, support to the poor students - 3 votes; Promotion of the school - 1 vote; Encouragement of students activity - 2 votes; Presence at the BoT meetings and vote for various issues - 2 votes; Evaluation of the performance of the principal or administration - 1 vote. In two cases it was also noted that majority of the events are organized in a close cooperation with the Civic Education Club. So to compare this information with the list of responsibilities sat out in the law, we can see that first five activities named here can be considered as Submission of proposals to the Board of Trustees on all the important matters relating to the school or simple club activity. While only the last two activities named by respondents can vaguely correspond to more responsible performance of the SC such as Participation in the disposal of allocated grant. The functions of Development of recommendations about internal regulations of a school ; Election of a representative to the Board of Trustees and Election of its representative to the Disciplinary Committee at the secondary level were not mentioned by the respondents at all. The fact, that only three respondents name attendance at the BoT meetings, election of the principle and budgetary issues as the core activity of the SC, as well as before mentioned lack of information about how students are represented in the BoT shows that this is the sphere which needs more in-depth analyses and comprehensive work. These findings are also coherent with overall feeling of students participating in the project School of Debates 2014, who think that SC is not very influential body in a school, especially in terms of performance, more serious than just social activity.
The survey cover also the subject of the legal rights and responsibilities of SC. Majority of respondents gave vague answers, which creates the impression that students do not relate to the legal terms and their legal rights and obligations. However, their responses were close to the idea of their activity foreseen by the law. Among them were: Mediation between the school (administration) and the students 3 votes; Attendance at the BoT meetings and election of the principal 2 votes; Protection of students rights and interests 2 votes; Activity - 2 votes; Promotion of the school - 1 vote; Solving the students problems - 1vote. Moreover, 2 respondents couldn t name her/his any legal rights / responsibilities. In order to visualize how precise and accurate is the knowledge of SC heads about their particular rights and responsibilities, here is the list of the SC functions that are defined in the law and the textbook about SC. The column along each function indicates the number of respondents that mentioned fulfillment of the particular function. The functions of students council Function No. of respondents Develops recommendation about the internal regulation of the school; 0 Presents proposals to BoT regarding all important matters; 0 Elects representative to BoT; 2 Partakes in the exploitation of allocated grant; 2 Establishes school clubs on the initiative of the 1/5 th of its members; 0 Elects representative to Disciplinary Committee on the secondary level; 0 Develops and implements projects, conducts actions, seminars, exhibitions and various events. 9 Functions pertaining the membership of the BoT Elects/dismisses the principal; 2 Approves the use of text-books/curriculum; 0 Approves the disciplinary committee; 0 Approves the school s internal regulations and manages the discipline; 0 Approves the annual estimates; 1 Oversees the use of financial resources / school assets; 0 Deliberated the task of conduction of the final exam; 0 Registration and filing of the BoT election bulletins; 0 Demands termination of the teacher s employment agreement; 0 Agrees on the draft version of the school s internal code; 0 Approves the school budget. 2 It is also noteworthy that in spite of the fact that all respondents mentioned that they choose the representative to the BoT they don t discuss any of the activities or processes that take place at the BoT meetings as the part of SC performance.
Except finding out what s the knowledge about SC, we also tried to learn what are the opinions about the role of SC in decision making process. Mostly respondents (7 of them) stated that SC participates in the school management process. This indicates that SC heads definitely have a sense of being a part of decision-making process. However, it is interesting to know what kind of decisions are under the students competence according to SC heads. This is what students named: The approval of budget and the principal 2 votes; The issues discussed at the meetings of BoT 1 vote; The issues related to the events management 1 vote; Student-related issues - 1 vote (respondent failed to name the examples of these issues). Some other answers (2 votes) show that students relate involvement in decision-making just to attendance at the BoT meetings, which is a little bit passive understanding of the term decision-making process. Such answers show once again that the meaning of real participation is not understood well enough among students heads of SCs. Asking about the knowledge of the law about the SC revealed that majority of the students know that Georgian Law foresees students council, but they were not able to indicate what kind of law covers this topic. Respondents were asked about the source of knowledge about the legal rights and responsibilities of the council and the answers were the following: The school administration a principal and a deputy 6 votes; Training organized by the Ministry of Education and materials handed out at the trainings 3 votes; The text-book and other reading materials 2 votes; The Civic Education Club experience 1 vote. It is significant that only 1 respondent stated that he doesn t have any information about his rights foreseen in the law. It shows that the SC do not work everywhere in appropriate way, however students are less or more acquainted with the existing law and formal possibilities. The part of the research that related to the financial performance of the SC showed that in some cases respon dents lacked the information about the funding of the SC activities. The majority of respondents said that the S C does not have its own budget, but the principal is always ready to allocate the necessary funds from the sch ool budget for their upcoming event. One respondent stated that they are aware of the school financial abilitie s at the beginning of the year and try to make thrift estimate of the budget for their activities. 6 respondents s aid that they independently develop budgets for planned events and projects, and allocation of requested sum s occurs after they present the project and the budget estimates to the administration, prior to each event. Th e fact that none of the respondents had the experience of managing the budget allocated in the beginning of t he academic year for the SC performance (as it is foreseen in the law) could probably be explained with the lac k of the entire budgetary resources of the school. As the former chairperson of the Alliance of SCs of Georgia underlined, the template of school s internal regulation states that 3% of the school budget is assigned to SC and many of schools approve this template
without any changes. But this money is not spent on SC activity in reality, unless some students do not investigate and claim the sum. In order to discover the seriousness and importance of the SC performance for the students leading this body, the survey also covered an emotional aspect of the students attitude towards the SC. One respondent said that it is a pleasure to be the Head of the SC. While 5 felt responsibility for being elected on this position and 4 respondents noted that they feel both - joy and responsibility. All of the respondents, who consider this position as a responsible one, also added that in spite of this responsibility, they enjoy the position and do not think that it is difficult. Summarizing, it can be mentioned that in the schools involved in the project School of Debates 2014 the heads of the SC less or more understand their role in a school management and decision-making processes 2. However, it is not easy for them to point out the activities that supposed to be main for the SC (just 2 of 9 respondents pointed that) and they mostly are focused on organization of events and project implementation (4 respondents). It is clear that most of the functions are not experienced by SC heads or they simply don t remember these also are be the part of their performance. However the fact that SC heads mostly know what are their basic rights and responsibilities shows that there is a kind of a good environment for developing the participatory ability of Students Council in schools. 2 Although the level of SC activity or awareness of the term participation was not a criteria used during the selection of the schools to be involved in the project.
4. Key findings and conclusions The hypothesis which was considered at the beginning of this short research, that students are still unable to be fully engaged in participatory decision-making processes and do not understand what the management of the school mean, was confirmed in the schools involved in the project. However, it is important to correctly identify the reasons that cause this lack of awareness. Education expert of Teacher Professional Development Center explains the weakness of school democratization process with the lack of awareness, vague or inconclusive information about the structure of the school and procedures among the management team of the school: "Ask any person involved in the governance of the school to describe the structure of the school - It is rare that anybody gives organized scheme as a response to this question. Ask how decisions are made at school? Ask for the minutes of the meetings, documentation of the decisions made and you will see it is rare that someone knows and exactly follows the rules and procedures". Unfortunately, this research could not cover this direction in depth, however some data collected shows that there is a lack of knowledge and irregularities in implementation of the existing law (For instance, one of the teachers of civic education mentioned that the head of their SC doesn t have a deliberative vote when attending the meetings of BoT, which is against the law). There is a feeling that information about the functions and responsibilities of SC is diverse and doesn t disseminate in an organized and unified way. This results in diversity of views and believes about the purpose of the SC. Education expert of the Civic Development Institute criticizes the direction chosen by non-governmental and international organizations, since projects implemented by them are mostly focused on establishment of various clubs and encouragement of students social activity in the school rather than showing them how to fully participate in the school life. She noticed that there are too little efforts made to develop the real participatory engagement which gives the real effect to the school. "These projects are certainly good, children learn independence and implement a variety of initiatives, but this does not ensure their effective participation in school management and does not strengthen the school, as an independent institution. These kids leave the school and take their skills with them, and the school does not gain any management experience". According to the expert, it would be good to spend money not only on encouragement of students active involvement in various projects and events, but also on raising their awareness of the school management and democratic processes in general and on their participation in these processes. Curious is the fact that there are SC heads, who fail to describe their main activities or duties clearly in spite of trainings, guidelines and law. As well as the circumstance, that sometimes everyone knows how to properly execute a particular procedure (for example elections), but no one cares about the rules (for example, submission of programs of candidates). What causes this circumstance? - Distrust of procedural perfection? Inefficiency of the results? No need for the democratic governance of the school? Or the lack of knowledge about that need? The answers to these questions require farther research to be done. However, this survey gives us a ground to believe that students know that they can carry out different types of events; that it is necessary to actively implement various types
of projects; that they need to listen to all of the other students who wish to speak out; But very often they do not see the need to interfere in a more serious issues as the election of the principal or the teachers or budget management and its improvement. Trainer of Teachers House, gave wider development to this issue. He said that not only students, but teachers also do not feel as an important part of the top-level decision-making. The main, financial and administrative matters are considered at the higher level of administration, while teachers try to maintain collegial relationship with the management team and continue to care about their primary obligations such as development of the lesson plans. Heads of SC, sometimes were changing the intonation of their voices, when asked about their participation in the issues related to a principal or teachers. The students who had no as an answer were responding with a surprised tone like if they were asked about kicking off a teacher or a principle from the school. Sometimes the answer was "No, we never had to discuss such matters so far" whereas the election of the principal is a direct responsibility of SC head. So this provokes a question: Do students and teachers understand the purpose of their participation in resolving of such issues? Maybe they think that this kind of participation and initiative implies the wreck of good relations with the management team? As the former Chairperson of the Alliance of SCs of Georgia noticed, the awareness about the purpose of the SC is low in Georgian schools. "Sometimes elections and all other procedures are properly held at the school, but the vision is still wrong and they believe that organization of sport competitions or other activities is the goal of the SC. They can totally do this too, but it is not the main purpose of this structural unit. The main thing they need to do is for example the advocacy, identification of problems and work on solutions, fight against bulling, or a teacher that manipulates with marks and threatens students with low assessment. Sometimes a school does not have a playground and does not consider it a priority. SC has the opportunity to stress these priorities and manage the finances. The students do not even know about it. If not various projects and activities of non-governmental organizations, the Ministry of Education has never held any kind of training or information campaign to ensure that students and teachers are informed about the purpose of SC and school s self-government in general. There is no joint strategy and policy of the state showing that SC is necessary for the school development. State doesn t care about empowerment of students as managers. Our alliance provided a training for 120 students and in the framework of Ph International project materials and text-books were published as well, but this is not enough for a change to the overall picture". This short research together with data analyses leads to the conclusion that even though today we can hardly say about real students participation in Georgian schools and there is a lot to do in this sphere, it should be also noticed and underlined that there is a kind of good environment for developing the participatory ability of Students Council and all the others in the schools. Findings from our research confirm experts opinions, that it would be beneficial to focus the efforts on raising the basic awareness of students, teachers, parents and others involved in the school life about the idea and meaning of the real school democratization. It is necessary to spread the knowledge and experience, how the real school participation could work and how more democratic and participatory way of managing could lead
to the more effective and more friendly school. Sharing experienced about good practices in successful SC and effective participatory decision making process in the schools should help to implement the real democratization processes in the everyday life of the school. We hope that one day the way of understanding participation in all Georgian schools will be as follows 3 : In order to be actively involved in school life, you should participate in the processes that take place at the school. For this, you must first understand what it means to participate. The term 'participation' is the right entitled by the Children Rights Convention. The term means involvement of students / children as a social group in the process of decision-making and solving of problems of vital importance, as well as group, joint, voluntary activity. Participation helps a person to realize their abilities, needs, roles, benefits and responsibilities. References: 1. General Education Decentralization - USAID GEORGIA / Civic Development Institute, 2013. 2. Heyneman,S.P. (2003). The history and problems in the making of education policy at the World Bank 1960 2000. Inter-national Journal of Educational Development, 23 (3), 315 337. 3. McGinn, N., & Welsh, T. (1999). Decentralization of education: why, when, what and how? Unesco. 4. Levin, H.M., & Belfeld, C.R. (2003). The marketplace in education. Review of Research in Education, 27, 183 219. 5. Dewey, J. (2004). Democracy and education Dover Publications. 6. Participation in School Governance (Student's book, The supplementary material for Civic Education classes IX-XII) - Aluda Goglichidze, USAID GEORGIA / Ph International, Project Harmony, Inc. In 2011. 7. Guideline of The School Civic Club Natia Giorgidze, USAID GEORGIA / Ph International, 2011 http://www.dswy.eu/pdfs/gzamkvlevi.pdf). 8. Georgian Law on General Education. 3 Participation in School Governance - Aluda Goglichidze, USAID GEORGIA / Ph International, Project Harmony, Inc. In 2011.