Efnahagshrunið og skólastarf í Reykjavík

Abstract

Í þessari rannsókn voru könnuð áhrif efnahagshrunsins á Íslandi árið 2008 á skóla í Reykjavík. Gagnaöflun fór fram á árunum 2013 og 2014. Tekin voru viðtöl við einstaklinga og í rýnihópum. Rætt var við fulltrúa hjá Reykjavíkurborg og í mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneyti, skólastjórnendur, kennara, foreldra og nemendur í völdum leik-, grunn- og framhaldsskólum. Niðurstöður benda til þess að tekist hafi að vernda kjarnann í skólastarfinu fyrir niðurskurði en þó í meira mæli í grunnskólum en í leik- og framhaldsskólum. Niðurskurðurinn olli því ekki skólakreppu í þeim skilningi að grunngildum skólanna væri ógnað. Öðru máli kann þó að gegna um leikskólana sem urðu fyrir þyngri áföllum en skólarnir á hinum skólastigunum.Þótt ekki kæmi til skólakreppu í framangreindum skilningi þá hafði niðurskurður margvísleg áhrif á skólastarfið. Stjórnunarstöðum fækkaði umtalsvert, einkum millistjórnendum, forfallakennsla var unnin af skólastjórnendum, annað starfsfólk var ráðið í hlutastörf og framlög til tómstundastarfs og náms- og starfsráðgjafar skert. Yfirvinna starfsfólks var ekki leyfð, minna fé var veitt til samstarfs, bekkir urðu fjölmennari og dregið úr fjárveitingum til kaupa á efniviði og námsgögnum og til viðhalds tækja og húsa. Loks voru skólar á leik- og grunnskólastigi sameinaðir. Fram kom að sú aðgerð hefði aukið mjög á þá erfiðleika sem af niðurskurðinum hlaust. Ekki voru nefnd dæmi um að fólk missti vinnuna þótt talsvert væri um uppsagnir, starfsmönnum var þá boðin vinna að nýju en stundum í skertu starfshlutfalli.Þótt viðmælendur teldu að ekki kæmi til frekari niðurskurðar sögðust þeir ekki vongóðir um bjartari tíma framundan. Að mörgu leyti voru áherslur hagsmunaaðila skóla í samræmi við ráðleggingar fræðimanna um fagleg viðbrögð við efnahagsþrenginum. Sú áhersla sem lögð var á að vernda nám og kennslu og standa vörð um velferð nemenda eru dæmi um slík viðbrögð. Á hinn bóginn komu upp mál þar sem bæði starfsmenn skóla og foreldrar kvörtuðu yfir þeim skorti á samráði sem yfirvöld hefðu viðhaft við ákvarðanir um mikilvæg málefni skólanna.Rannsóknin var unnin af fimm fræðimönnum Rannsóknarstofu í menntastjórnun, nýsköpun og matsfræði við Menntavísindasvið Háskóla Íslands.

This paper explores the impact of the economic collapse in 2008 on schools in one Icelandic municipality, Reykjavík, the capital of Iceland. Earlier, a similar study was conducted by the same research team in two Icelandic municipalities, one in an agricultural area, and one in a fishing and service community.Information about staff and school costs was gathered for the years of 2013 and 2014. Interviews with individuals and in focus groups were carried out with represenatives at the ministry of culture and education, the Local Education Authorities in Reykjavík, school administrators, teachers, other staff, parents and pupils of six selected schools: two preschools, two primary and lowersecondary schools and two upper-secondary schools. Information about staff and school costs was also gathered. The research was qualitative in nature, primarily based on interviews and documentary data.Interviews were conducted with individuals and in focus groups with representatives of the municipalities and the state, school administrators, teachers, parents and pupils of selected pre-, primary-, and upper-secondary schools.The research sought answers to the following questions: How did educational authorities and school professionals respond to budget cut requirements? Did the reductions cause a school crisis and did they have different consequences depending on the school level?The findings suggest that the core functions of the schools, teaching and learning, were to a large extent protected as stipulated by school authorities. Reduction in expenditure, therefore, did not cause a school crisis in the sense, that the basic values of the schools were threatened. This, however, may not apply to the preschools and the schools at the upper secondary level, which were harder hit by the cut-backs than the other school levels.Even if the schools were able to protect the core school activities, finanicial cutbacks had serious implications for the schools. Various cutbacks were made at all school levels; administrative positions, especially at the middle levels, were cut considerably, principals served as substitute teachers, classes became bigger, no overtime was paid, extracurricular activities and specialist work, such as counseling, and maintenance of equipment and buildings were all cut.Finally, at the preschool level, and primary and lower-secondary school levels, schools were amalgamated. Interviewees in these schools agreed that the merges had been an additional challenge to deal with while trying to come to terms with reduced funding. Findings, moreover, indicate, that while all school members were affected by the bad economy, school principals at all school levels carried the heaviest burdens.While interviewees agreed that further cutbacks were unlikely, they did not envision better times ahead. In many ways school stakeholders, within and outside of the schools, responded to the cutbacks in a manner recommended by experts on school crisis, such as by protecting the core activities of teaching and learning. There were, however, instances when school personnell and parents complained, that school authorities had failed to consult them on relevant matters. The discussion highlights the impact of values on policy and decision making in general, but in times of austerity in particular.The research was carried out by five academics at the School of Education, University of Iceland and sponsored by the by the Center for Research on School Administration, Innovation and Evaluation at the School of Education, University of Iceland and carried out by five of its members.