This document discusses accountability in decentralized education systems. It identifies several challenges with accountability, including determining who is accountable and for what outcomes. The document also outlines different modes of accountability, such as vertical regulatory accountability, horizontal professional accountability, and multiple stakeholder accountability. Finally, it argues that for accountability to be effective, systems need a whole-of-system approach that aligns different accountability pressures, manages knowledge and data, and builds capacity to prioritize competing accountability demands.

1. Florian Köster
17 October 2016
Brussels
Making
accountability work
in education

2. • In decentralized systems, the question of
adequate forms of accountability take a
greater role
• Who is held accountable and for what?
• Punish vs. improve
• Legitimacy
2
Challenges in accountability

3. 3
Modes of accountability
Vertical
Regulatory
accountability
Performance
accountability

4. • Difficulties in holding non-governmental
actors accountable
• Measuring the full range of education
outcomes
• Potential trade-offs
– Innovation
– Trust
Challenges in accountability
4

5. 5
Modes of accountability
Horizontal
Vertical
Regulatory
accountability
Professional
accountability
Performance
accountability
Multiple/
stakeholder
accountability

6. • Aligning vertical accountability pressures
from different policies
• Aligning vertical and horizontal processes
of accountability
• Building capacity to reconcile multiple
accountability pressures
6
Making accountability work:
3 important dimensions

7. • Whole-of-system approach
– Aligned accountability to mitigate tensions
across different policy programmes
– Alignment of accountability particularly across
different levels
7
Aligning vertical accountability
pressures from different policies

8. The Swedish case
• Increased school competition and
municipal autonomy did not trigger
demand sensitivity of local education
• Lacking understanding of new
responsibilities; avoiding responsibilities
• Widespread use of only limited data (e.g.,
easily communicable rankings)
8
Aligning vertical and horizontal
accountability

9. • Managing knowledge and data vital for
responding to accountability pressures
• Capacity to prioritize competing
accountability pressures
• Other negative factors affecting capacity
– lack of leadership, resistance to change
– Importance of adaptation (e.g. Sweden with
small and remote municipalities)
9
Building capacity to reconcile multiple
accountability pressures

10. www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/gces
florian.koester@oecd.org