Once the future networks of general secondary education institutions had been approved, most communities moved on to the practical stage of implementing the decisions taken. One of the issues that is raised more and more often during meetings with the founders of educational institutions is whether it is appropriate to retain the status of a hub school after the transformation of the network. In particular, should this status be terminated if an educational institution has changed its type or its functional role in the network has changed?
The answer to this question requires first of all a distinction between two concepts which, in practice, are quite often mistakenly conflated – the type of general secondary education institution and the status of a hub educational institution.
According to Article 35 of the Law of Ukraine “On Comprehensive General Secondary Education”, the types of general secondary education institutions are primary schools, gymnasiums, and lyceums. The type of educational institution determines the level of comprehensive general secondary education that the institution provides, as well as its position in the education system.
Meanwhile, the legal status of a hub educational institution is defined by the Regulations on Hub Educational Institution, approved by Resolution No. 532 of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine dated 19 June 2019. According to paragraph 2 of the aforementioned Regulations, a hub educational institution is a general secondary education institution that is conveniently located for the transport of students, has qualified teaching staff, possesses modern material, technical, and teaching resources, and is capable of providing a complete general secondary education to the required standard.
Therefore, current legislation clearly distinguishes between the concept of the type of educational institution and the status of a hub educational institution. Whilst the type of educational institution determines its position in the system of complete general secondary education, the status of a “hub” institution characterises the functional role of the institution in the educational network of the community. Hence, a change in the type of educational institution cannot, in itself, be regarded as a legal basis for terminating the status of a “hub” educational institution.
According to Article 25 of the Law of Ukraine “On Education”, the founder of an educational institution exercises the rights and fulfils the obligations of its management within the limits of the powers defined by law and the founding documents. According to Article 32 of the Law of Ukraine “On Comprehensive General Secondary Education”, the founder is responsible for deciding on the establishment, reorganisation, reorientation, change of type and liquidation of general secondary education institutions, as well as for ensuring the formation of a capable network of educational institutions in line with the needs of the community.
Meanwhile, neither the Law of Ukraine “On Comprehensive General Secondary Education” nor the Regulations on Hub Educational Institution establish a link between a change in the type of educational institution and its status as a hub institution. The legislation also does not specify a separate procedure for terminating the status of a hub educational institution.
This legislative gap has been the cause of numerous appeals from communities during the implementation of the reform of the network of general secondary education institutions. In practice, founders often seek a legally defined procedure for removal of “hub” status; however, current legislation does not provide for such a mechanism.
However, an analysis of the current legislation provides grounds for asserting that the decision to preserve or terminate the status of a hub educational institution falls within the remit of the founder. This conclusion follows from a systematic analysis of Article 25 of the Law of Ukraine “On Education”, Article 32 of the Law of Ukraine “On Comprehensive General Secondary Education”, and the Regulations on Hub Educational Institution, since the founder is the body that decides which institution is to be designated as a hub educational institution and manages the network of educational institutions.
In view of the absence of specific regulatory provisions, it is advisable to take the decision to terminate the status of a hub educational institution at the same time as decisions on the reorganisation, re-profiling, or change of the network of general secondary education institutions. This approach ensures a logical link between a change in the functional role of an institution and the review of its status, facilitates the founder’s ability to make reasoned decisions, and ensures their consistency during the transformation of the network of general secondary education institutions.
In this regard, when taking the relevant management decision, the founder should assess not the name or type of the educational institution, but its real role in the existing network. If, after the transformation of the network, the institution continues to ensure access to quality education, meets the requirements of the Regulations on Hub Educational Institution, and performs the functions for which it was granted the relevant status, there are no legal grounds for its automatic termination.
However, during the process of transforming the network, situations may arise where the institution in fact ceases to perform the functions of a hub educational institution. For example, the organisation of the educational network may change, the institution may no longer fulfil the functions of an educational district centre, or such functions may be transferred to another educational institution. In such a case, the founder is entitled to review its previous decision on designating the institution as a hub institution by adopting a corresponding administrative decision.
Hence, the status of a hub school is a tool for organising an effective network of general secondary schools, rather than a characteristic of their type. The absence in legislation of a specific procedure for terminating this status does not imply that the founder lacks the relevant powers. The decision on whether to preserve or terminate this status should be taken not as a formal consequence of a change in the type of educational institution, but on the basis of an assessment of whether the institution continues to fulfil the functions of a hub educational institution in the established network. This approach is consistent with the principles of legal certainty, ensures the consistency of management decisions by local governments, and is in line with current legislation in education.
Share your own experiences in the comments or via private messages – we will publish the most interesting ones here and in the professional community of educators on Facebook.
Read more stories and blogs in the publications on our online resource Education. Experts Comment, created within the framework of DECIDE Project, implemented by a consortium of the NGO DOCCU and PH Zurich with the support of Switzerland.
#madewithswitzerland
