In Bray’s article Control in Education: Issues and Tensions of
Centralisation and Decentralisation (2013), he reiterated that the
study of control in education, in particular the nature and degree of
centralisation and decentralisation, is important in order to understand
how the education systems are shaped. Centralisation and
decentralisation are not two polars of concepts, instead Bray saw
‘-isation’ as a process which is ”deliberately initiated by the apex of
hierarchies or a pattern change by default” (Bray, 2013, p.202).
The HKSAR Government Education Bureau (‘EDB’) oversees policies and
implements the facilitation and monitoring measures on international
schools in Hong Kong. However the bureau does not run international
schools. Instead the bureau promotes vacant school premises and
greenfield sites through an Expression of Interest (‘EoI’) exercise on
government bulletins and its website. The EoI exercise is open to all
interested school sponsoring bodies (‘SSBs’), including churches and
private corporations. SSBs who have met the requirements are invited to
the School Allocation Exercise (‘SAE’) which is a bidding process for
the allocation of vacant school premises and greenfield sites, and
fulfil a set of mandatory requirements and a service agreement (EDB,
2014). Depends on the location and neighbouring community of the school
site, applicants sometimes need to seek the approval and agreement from
different government departments such as the Environment Bureau, the
Town Planning Board and the Transport Department, and local legislative
bodies such as district and legislative councillors.
“It should not be thought that a decentralised structure implies a weak
centre; it is simply an alternative mechanism for maintaining control,
only it operates on terms laid down by the centre and is still control.
It is maintained not be centralising tasks, rules and procedures within
which people can operate. This less visible form of power sets limit on
what subordinates might do, and provides a kind of freedom of manoeuvre
within bounds; but it is still bureaucratic control.” Rowe (1986,
p.100)
Private international school operators (i.e. the SSBs and schools) at
the allocated premises and sites are required by the EDB (2014b) to
register as a charity under section 88 of the Inland Revenue Ordinance
(Chapter 112 of the Laws of Hong Kong) and incorporated under the
Companies Ordinance (Chapters 32 and 622). However, the Secretary for
Financial Services and the Treasury, Professor K C Chan, admitted that
“there is no statutory definition of what constitutes a charity, nor is
there a single piece of legislation which governs charities in Hong
Kong” (Legislative Council, 2011). For the Companies Ordinance (2012),
it requires corporates to have at least one director and at least one of
the directors must be a natural person. However a board is not required
and any person aged 18 or above can be a director.
This is different from the School-based Management governance framework
of all aided schools and direct subsidy schools open on or after 1
January 2005 which aims to enhance transparency and accountability of
the schools through a participative incorporated management committee
with the school head and representatives of parents, teacher and alumni
(EDB, 2013, p.2). The EDB believes that the private corporates will
adjust in the free market (EDB, 2013, p.23)
A participative school board may not necessarily imply harmony
relations. The governance row of Canadian International School erupted
since several board members resigned in 2014 and the new head fired nine
teaching staff provoked anger among teachers, parents, alumni and
students. A governor at the school pointed the finger at some teachers
and parents blaming that they ”divided the school with really poor
consequences.” (Lee and Zhao, 2015)
Some of the core questions are: What are the differences in the power
relations between a participative school board and a school board with
all members appointed by SSBs? What is the position of school heads in
the contracted relations with the school boards? What is the role and
power of parents in a school? Who are the other actors in the power
relations?
These questions are always complex as they ask for an in-depth analysis
of an abstract power relations. The concept of control (and power) does
not have a universal definition. In order to understand how comparative
analysis can expose the multi-dimensional topic, first this article will
start understanding the concept of control through the classic of
political science — Robert A. Dahl’s The Concept of
Power (1957) whose work has laid a valuable foundation for the future
study of power compatibility. Second, we explore the ways to compare
power and problems of ranking power relations with standardised
properties. Third, we look at comparative studies on policies and its
relations with control in power relations using Principal-Agent (‘P-A’)
Theory, which emerged from the combined disciplines of economics and
institutional theory to study the allocation of power, organisational
control and decision-making. The article concludes with the
identification of grey areas in the current school system in Hong Kong.