Regulation

"Regulation" is a discredited concept these days (2009), because of the financial meltdown the world is experiencing. But in the long term view, regulation provided - and still provides - us with a very flexible and reliable market in food, medicine, insurance, banking, etc. So, looking forward, we can talk about regulation as a useful tool.

Why regulate at all? Why not let the good judgement of individual educators be their guide? Who are we to say what is acceptable and what is not acceptable? The general answers are the same as for any other regulation: Regulation is a service provided to the citizens, to save them the need to become experts in food, medicine, law, finance, civil engineering, etc etc. Also, regulation helps protect the public from incompetent practitioners, and from competent practitioners of unacceptable practices.

There are a few tools of regulation. The negative tools - withholding resources or licenses - should be rarely used, but when there is a decision to withhold a license, it must be strictly enforced

• Financing: 0-100%

• Licensing of schools. Only a licensed school can operate

• Banning individuals from work in an education institute

• Criminal litigation against individuals, for example when they continue to operate an unlicensed school

Non tools of regulation: the regulator may not use certain techniques, which are destructive:

• Professional support from the system may not be withheld. Full support must be provided to all licensed schools, otherwise, the regulator ends up penalizing the students, rather than the school

• Bad-mouthing: A school is either licensed or not licensed. No "soft" efforts to discredit a school

Education regulation should be structured in layers:

• A national layer with a minimal set of interests. For example, make sure the core curriculum is being taught; make sure information is being shared freely among schools and the system; make sure the interpretation of the core mission is acceptable to society and the state - E.g., no-one is teaching lawlessness, or hatred

• A regional layer, which may have its own general interpretation of the core mission. For example, in a region where most of the inhabitants are recent immigrants, may decide that a necessary part of social participation is becoming comfortable with the language and culture of the host country. (Notice the choice of the word "comfortable" rather than a word like "proficient." This comes directly from the core mission statement - to develop the joys of learning, teaching and social participation, every day: Proficiency in itself doesn't necessarily mean a person enjoys the skill, while being comfortable with a skill or a habit at least borders with enjoying it.) In such a region, the regulators will need to make sure the students acquire such skills and habits in all schools

• The school layer, with its more or less specific curriculum, more or less specific research plan, methods and social values

On a deeper analysis, more layers may be added, but this seems like a reasonable minimum.

The basic roles of the regulator should be clearly defined. Mostly around the following:

• Ensure schooling is enjoyable for all involved. The "every day" makes it easier to measure, and more difficult to confuse the regulator with claims of long term effects.
  There is an open question of how to measure joy and other attitudes, but the working assumption should be that it is possible, and now we only need to find the ways

• Strict testing of core curriculum, though ages may vary - some schools may teach literacy at the age of 4, some at the age of 7. We should develop methods for comparing between schools, that will overcome the age differences, as well as differences in emphasis within the core curriculum

• Ensure ongoing improvement in learning, teaching and social participation. The "every day" requirement is hard to test, but if we zoom out and compare longer periods of time - maybe quarters - then it is much easier

• Ensure all stakeholders learn, and improve their learning

• Ensure all stakeholders teach (reminder: including the pupils), and improve their teaching

• Ensure all stakeholders improve their social skills

• Keep track of research, possibly enforcing some limitations, similar to those stated in the Declaration of Helsinki

• Ensure the sharing of knowledge between schools, such as knowledge coming from local research

• Ensure effective communication lines: within the school, going out of schools and going into schools

Above all, the regulator should retain its wisdom, and not descend into legalistic formalities and political games. The regulator must keep an open eye for problems beyond the formal definition. The regulator can decide that a certain behavior is unacceptable, even if it doesn't go against a written rule. The regulator can also take a positive role, and notice when an opportunity presents itself, such as the use of a new technology for knowledge management, if such a technology appears. Giving the regulator such a generally defined mandate is not a new idea - many existing comptrollers and regulators have such authority to practice common sense.