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.