The thesis analyses the interpretation of terms and concepts in the field of education management/governance used abroad. Transformational processes in the governance of education in the last quarter of the 20th– early 21st centuries are characterized by a movement towards multidimensionality. In the context of the struggle for quality improvement, the classical model of school management is being transformed into a multilevel one, which, in addition to the local national levels, also includes elements of internal school management and public-private partnership. It intensifies the research in the field of education management, stimulating new ideas in a market-oriented philosophy of educational services and open educational space in the world and in Ukraine. The author has analyzed the studies of foreign and domestic researchers, acquainted with the concept of governance developed by UNESCO, international agencies such as World Bank, Organization for Economic Community and Development, etc., carried out terminological analysis of concepts such as «management», «governance», «administration». The analysis showed strengthening of the vertical management block in terms of existence of the above-mentioned multilevel approach to the studied pedagogical reality and at the same time preservation of traditional management at the level of local bodies of education in England. In particular, the Eurydice study presents governance at the central/ regional and local levels, as well as at the school level. Thus, the key notions of research, i.e. «system», «management», «governance» in the projection to the field of education are the subject of research of both home and foreign scientists. Based on the above mentioned analysis, the school education management system can be interpreted as a holistic, dynamic and exposed formation that is developing dynamically and consists of subsystems that interact in a coordinated and interconnected manner. Its purpose is to formulate, implement and evaluate educational policy, as well as governance at various levels (national, regional, local) through management institutions.
The thesis (on the basis of an authentic source base and using comparative analysis, characterizes management system of secondary education in England in a set of theoretical principles, periods of development, essential characteristics of an organization and content. A periodization of the development of the system of secondary education management in England within certain chronological framework was worked out, which covers three periods (the beginning of the reform of the traditional model of secondary education management (1980th-1990th), the period of improvement of a new model of secondary education management (2000th); enrichment of a new model of secondary education management with new characteristics (starting from 2010). The complexity of the concept of education management in England has been substantiated on the basis of classical management theories and innovative guidelines of networking, social partnership, autonomy theories. The structure (combination of vertical (central level, local level and level of educational institution) and horizontal (multiacademic trusts) planes) has been revealed and the content of secondary education management (which is the activity of its subjects on the integration such directions of activities as marketing (“quasi-market” model), strengthening of participatory activities in the framework of establishment school governing bodies, strengthening the role of educational institutions within the framework of school-based management. Recommendations have been proposed in order to take into account the positive experience of England as to secondary education management to Ukraine (at the national, regional and school level).
The following criteria were used to formulate recommendations for the use of British experience acceptable for Ukrainian realities: expediency of borrowing (compliance with the goals of domestic education); noncoverage by national reform (lack of similar proposals in the modern reform of the education management system); focus of novelty to real needs of education (assistance in solving urgent problems of Ukrainian schooling); the possibility of scientific creativity in the implementation of innovation (not blind copying, but analysis, interpretation, rethinking of the new in accordance with peculiarities and needs of domestic realities).
