Chapter 2
Public Education Administration

2.1. The main factors affecting the administration of public education

The basic framework of administration remained unchanged in the period in question (1999–2003), however, the active role and direct involvement of the state increased. New regulatory instruments (e.g. quality assurance, frame curricula) were introduced to ensure better adjustment of administration to the decentralized context. The state continued to develop the system of assessment and evaluation for the monitoring of local and in-school processes, and established new programmes. The state was also fairly active in the field of educational legislation and organizational development. In the first half of the period in question (from 1999 to 2002) the priorities of the educational policy concerning the system of administration were quality, stability, transparency, and the strengthening of welfare and compensatory functions, while less emphasis was placed on financial efficiency, institutional autonomy, improving adaptivity and incentives for innovation. In 2002, the new government rearranged these priorities. The medium term strategy for public education development identified the improvement of educational management and the cost-effectiveness of public education to be top priority, which will inevitably affect the system of administration.

Public administration and educational administration

Contrary to the majority of OECD countries, no comprehensive public administration reform has taken place in Hungary. Instead of introducing new forms of governance, Hungarian efforts were devoted to reviewing the scope of regulatory authority on the different levels of administration, and at improving the capacities of public service personnel, and screening the legislation in effect. Following the elections in 2002, the public administration strategy of the new government envisaged the current system of county governance to be replaced by elected regional governments by the end of the parliamentary term (2006). The government programme emphasizes limited state intervention and the general decentralization of tasks. Another important change from the point of view of public education is the development of micro-regional partnerships supported through regional development policy-making. New governmental policies intend to strengthen the available institutions of the reconciliation of public interests and consultation, both of which may affect the state of public education administration and the conditions of the decision-making process. The new challenges generated by the European integration process have also significantly influenced the development of financial and administrative relations of education. Such factors increased the importance of cross-sectoral policy issues, particularly the linking of educational development to employment, regional development and social policy issues and its inclusion into a comprehensive human resource development policy. The various administrational methods may be greatly affected by the open method of policy-coordination begun at European Community level as a result of the ‘Lisbon Conclusions’.

2.2. Educational administration at national level

From 1998 to 2002, the Ministry of Education assumed all responsibility for education and training and the supervision of scientific research and technological development. The Ministry’s position was determined by the fact that there was no strong and independent representation of labour affairs in the government. After the new government assumed office in 2002, some of the responsibilities for human resource development were handed over to the newly established Ministry of Employment and Labour. The Ministry assumed the supervision of vocational training for adults and the co-ordination of the Human Resource Development Operational Programme (HEFOP) of the National Development Plan.

One characteristic feature of the administration of Hungarian public education on the national level is the relatively small number of direct administrative tasks, compared to the large number of regulatory and developmental duties. Following the change of government in 2002, the scope of the Minister’s responsibility was further extended. The Amendment to the Public Education Act allocated several new tasks to the Minister, such as the operation of the system of quality assurance and the establishment and management of a national counselling service for the support of Roma children.

The central responsibility for education is still shared by a number of Ministries. The relatively strong responsibility of the Ministry of the Interior concerning public education has remained unchanged. The co-operation between the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Finance has continued in the elaboration of budgetary parameters of education. Collaboration with the ministries responsible for pursuing employment and social policies has been of vital importance, especially in the interconnected fields of education and the labour market, and in dealing with disadvantaged, underprivileged youth with no qualification. The Ministry of Children, Youth and Sports also has important educational duties. Additionally, both the co-operation with the Prime Minister’s Office, responsible for the PHARE programmes and for the developmental tasks concerning the EU accession, and – due to the increasingly intensive co-operation with international partners, and the EU accession process – co-operation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has played a key role in this process.

In the late 1990s, the Ministry of Education established the Office of the Commissioner for Educational Rights. The Commissioner for Educational Rights is entitled to act in defence of the rights of parents, children, pupils, university students and teachers, particularly in cases when the offended party has exhausted all the possible legal actions with the exception of judicial proceedings. Furthermore, this office is authorised to carry out thematic investigations and take action if the infringement in question offends – or potentially offends – a sizeable group of citizens. The Commissioner for Educational Rights publishes his/her findings in an annual report.

The Statistical and Information System of Public Education

In a decentralized context of administration it is of crucial importance that the central administration have access to reliable data and information on the ongoing processes at local and institutional levels. The comprehensive reform of the statistical system of public education took place in the late nineties. A new database was established (Public Educational Information System – KIR), in which the various public education institutions were required to register themselves. Furthermore, a new system for statistical data collection (KIRSTAT) was devised, first introduced in the 2000/2001 academic year. The new system is based on up-to-date information technology applications. Additional data collection elements have also been included in the new statistical and information system, such as the textbook information system, the database of public education experts, and the information system on Secondary School Entrance Exams (KIFIR), which serves to examine and regulate the progression from general school to secondary education. Nevertheless, the new system has failed to meet some requirements. It is unable to provide adequate information on the fluctuation of the teaching staff or on student dropouts. The new system has developed a previously non-existent form of electronic publicity. The appropriate data is available at the website (http://www.sulinet.hu/) of the National Schoolnetwork, or from the separate website of the Public Educational Information System (http://www.kir.hu/).

2.3. Educational administration at regional level

One of the most significant changes taking place at the end of the nineties was the relative reinforcement of the control of education at regional level. The allocation of the vocational training development funds was redirected from the county level to the regional level. A new decentralized administrative body was established at the regional level, the National Public Education Evaluation and Examination Centre (OKÉV). A higher (regional) level administrative office was thus created, aside from the lower (county) level, dealing exclusively with educational matters. OKÉV’s function is to undertake tasks related to the evaluation, assessment and examination systems of public education. OKÉV’s tasks were modified to a certain extent by the 2003 Amendment to the Public Education Act.

Table 2.1.
Actors of public education administration at regional level

Administrative Body	Level	Political Status	Sector Involved	Main function
Regional units of OKÉV	Regional	government office	specialized for education	professional supervision
Regional Development Councils	County and Regional	elected/representative	integrated, non-education specific	allocation of regional development resources and infrastructural funds
Regional Development and Training Committees	Regional	elected/representative	integrated, non-education specific	allocation of vocational training development funds
County Governments	County	elected/representative	integrated, non-education specific	service provision and regional coordination/planning
County Public Foundations for the Development of Public Education	County	elected/representative	specialized for education	allocation of funds for professional developments in public education
County-level Public Administration Office	County	government office	integrated, non-education specific	legal supervision
Regional Central Governmental Office (TÁH – formerly called TÁKISZ)	County	government office	integrated, non-education specific	providing financial information, including the financial data of education from local governments

In the administration system of public education, county governments are responsible for all the tasks that the local governments are not required to perform (such as secondary education, special and arts education). At the same time, local governments may perform such tasks by their own will. There is a growing tendency for towns facing financial problems to relinquish the administration of their secondary schools to county governments. The county governments are legally bound to take over these schools, even though they do not always have the appropriate funds available for their maintenance.

2.3.1. Regional planning

Since 1996, the Public Education Act has required county governments to develop plans for the maintenance, development, and administration of the educational institutions. The 1999 Amendment to the Public Education Act ordered the inclusion of new elements into the county development plans. The plans have to deal with the actions required for obligatory county tasks and the necessary steps for creating the opportunities for progression to secondary education. Furthermore they are required to include guidelines for the co-operation of local governments, and the conditions and safeguards for the permeability of the institutional system of education. Since county development plans are only recommendations for local governments, the implementation of the elements detailed in the plan can only be guaranteed through the establishment of contracts. In many instances, the local governments were only provided with access to the necessary funds allocated by the county public foundations on the condition that they accepted the county development plan. These public foundations form the backbone of regional educational development. From the second half of the 1990s, public foundations have received increasing financial support from the budget, thus allocating resources devoted for development to schools and their maintainers.

With the increased importance of planning, there is a noticeable lack of adequate methodological guidelines for planning as well as a weak level of professional background support. There is little harmonization between the county level and the various other levels of planning. Furthermore, there is a lack of clarification in the strategic role of plans – whether their dominant element should be the day-to-day operation of education or the strategic-developmental plans aimed at the improvements of structural issues of education. The inadequate representation of education in regional development remains an urgent problem.

2.4. Educational administration at local level

The local governments have preserved all their extensive administrative powers granted by the 1993 Public Education Act. At the same time, in a financial sense, the opportunities of the local governments have been significantly restricted and – due to unfavourable demographic trends – the ability of the smaller settlements to maintain their local educational institutions has also considerably decreased. The number of local governments with maintenance duties has declined by the new millennium, yet a substantial number of schools (at least 53% of general schools with at least eight grades) are still maintained by local governments in settlements with a population below 2000. The number of local governments maintaining secondary schools has also dropped due to relinquishing of such institutions to the county-level administration.

Table 2.2.
Number of local governments with educational responsibilities, 1994/1995, 1999/2000, 2001/2002

	1994/1995	1999/2000	2001/2002
Total number of local governments	3,147	3,153	3,177
Local governments maintaining no educational institutions	704	721	828
Local governments providing place for school-sites only	N/A	69	7
Total number of local governments maintaining educational institutions	2,443	2,432	2,349
Local governments maintaining pre-school institutions only	177	201	229
Local governments maintaining general schools only	116	44	49
Local governments maintaining pre-school institutions as well as general schools	2,149	2,072	1,849
Local governments maintaining at least eight-grade general schools	1,822	1,798	1,721
Local governments maintaining secondary schools as well	223	233	200

Source: Data from the Regional Central Governmental Offices (TÁH)

2.4.1. Planning at local level

The 1999 Amendment to the Public Education Act required local governments maintaining at least two educational institutions – on their own or in partnership – to develop a local action plan to give support to decision-making and scheduling of tasks. The 2003 Amendment extended this obligation to all school-maintainer local governments. The central administration aims at strengthening the harmonization of the local and regional levels planning by requiring local governments to take into consideration the county-level action plan. The local plan must elaborate on (1) the performance of obligatory tasks; (2) the range of non-obligatory tasks; and (3) the outlines of the operation, maintenance, development and reorganization of the institutional system. The implementation of the plan is to be evaluated and, if necessary, reviewed on a two-year basis. The management of the institutions, parent and student organizations, settlement-based trade unions, non-governmental and non-local-governmental maintainers, as well as the ethnic minority governments involved should all be consulted in the course of the development of the action plan. The action plan is a tool for local governments to express their expectations towards the school, thus bridging the gap between school-level planning and the maintainer. The action plans were to be initially submitted by 31 July 2000. Local governments received little methodological support in the development of the plans. Lack of the necessary competency was a particular issue in the case of several villages, therefore the new documents greatly varied in depth and quality. According to a regional survey conducted in 2000, less than half of the plans contained the necessary strategic elements, the majority simply listed the tasks and the actions to be taken. However, the vast majority of plans met the minimum legal requirement of specifying the obligatory and voluntary tasks. 68% of the action plans examined the costs of implementation, and only 25% accounted for the demands of the labour market.

2.4.2. Organizational and human resource conditions of local administration

No substantial change has taken place in the organizational and personnel conditions or the professional skills of local administrations. According to the findings of a survey conducted in 2001, in smaller settlements (with populations below 3000) there is usually no one specialized in educational affairs. Education administrators – officers independently performing educational tasks – are present in many settlements with 3000 to 8000 inhabitants (48.5%), however, nearly half of these settlements have no educational experts. In the case of local governments employing only one officer, approximately 75% of the individuals involved in public education administration have tertiary qualifications, while the same rate is 80% in settlements where there is an independent educational unit.

Figure 2.1.
Absence of dedicated educational body or staff, by settlement size, 2001/2002 (%)

Source: Data Collection on Local Governments 2001/2002, OKI KK
Question asked: “Who is responsible for educational affairs in the mayor’s office? (1) An independent organizational unit (department, team, bureau etc.); (2) The Education Officer (lacking an independent organizational unit); (3) There is no separate educational unit or staff in the mayor’s office.”

The purpose of the SZAK fund, initially introduced in 1999 by the central administration, is to encourage the demand for educational counselling services. The fund allows local governments to apply for counselling services that improve and expand their educational competencies. Local governments with the professional capacity for the accommodation of these resources, and with the ability to utilise the results of the financed projects, enjoyed an advantage over other local governments in the allocation of grants. The availability of central fund failed to reduce the administrative disadvantages of local governments without the appropriate expertise since they often had no idea about what services to order and which areas required such support.

One of the main goals of the central administration from 2000 was the introduction of a system of school level quality improvement and quality assurance. The quality assurance programme began with the introduction of the institutional (school level) model, therefore local governments showed little interest in the quality improvement and quality management of education. Due to the change of government, the new scheme of quality assurance programmes for school maintainers has not been completed. At the same time, the 2003 Amendment to the Public Education Act requires school maintainers to develop their own local quality management programmes.

2.4.3. Relationship between maintainers and institutions: evaluation and supervision

Evaluation and supervision are important elements of the relationship between school maintainers and institutions. According to the 2001 Data Collection on Local Governments, at county level, and in settlements with populations over 8000, 85-90% of local governments completed the audit of the financial management of general, secondary, and vocational schools between 1993 and 2001. Approximately 50% of local governments carry out supervision of financial management every two years. 66% of local governments evaluate the educational work in general schools every one or two years, and 50% of local governments also assess the financial state of secondary schools. However, village governments with fewer than 1,000 inhabitants only conduct limited evaluation and supervision. When they do conduct such evaluations, 68% would rather assess the educational work, which they usually do with the help of experts. It is noteworthy, that only 50% evaluate the institution for the purpose of allocating the educational budget, which seems to prove that the more or less regular assessments of financial management are carried out in compliance with regulations rather than in order to achieve various goals of education.

Table 2.3.
Conclusions of school evaluation used for certain purposes (percentage of local governments selecting a given objective)

	General Schools		Secondary Schools
	Yes	No	Yes	No
To support decisions on the appointment of the school head	52.3	47.7	59.5	40.5
To support decisions on the future of the school	79.2	20.8	84.7	15.3
For the purpose of allocating the budget	53.8	46.2	48.9	51.1
To develop the educational programme of the local government	65.9	34.1	78.3	21.7
To devise a system of evaluation	42.6	57.4	54.2	45.8
To inform parents	50.9	49.1	39.8	60.2
To collect general information, to gain nowledge	81.1	18.9	88.8	11.2

Source: Hermann, 2002
Question asked: “For what purpose does the local government use the conclusions of school evaluation?”
Note: The total sample included 495 general schools and 141 secondary schools. Evaluations were carried out by the local government in 401 and 105 cases, respectively.

Local governments most often use the method of school self-evaluation in both general and secondary schools. These are essentially based on the institution’s report, while subject tests are used less frequently. In both school types approximately one thirds of the local governments used evaluations based on parental satisfaction with the school.

Table 2.4.
Percentage of local governments that use the various forms of school evaluation, 2001 (%)

Form of evaluation	General Schools		Secondary Schools
	Used	Not used	Used	Not used
Self-evaluation of the school	77.3	22.7	88.1	11.9
Evaluation by the school board	23.7	76.3	24.5	75.5
Supervision by officials of the local government	42.6	57.4	63.1	36.9
Opinion of Counsellors from the County Educational Institute	36.5	63.5	44.6	55.4
Supervision of the school by educational experts	42.7	57.3	68.9	31.1
Student grades and exam results	41.1	58.9	54.4	45.6
Awards won at student competitions	47.2	52.8	62.3	37.7
Indicators of student progression to the next level of education	46.5	53.5	68.0	32.0
Special subject tests designed for evaluation	17.0	83.0	35.7	64.3
Student and/or parental satisfaction	36.5	63.5	44.6	55.4

Source: Hermann, 2002
Question asked: “Has the educational work of the schools been assessed since 1996 in your local government? If yes, what form did it take?”
Note: The total sample included 495 general schools and 141 secondary schools. Evaluations were carried out by local governments in the cases of 401 and 105 institutions, respectively.

The 2003 Amendment to the Public Education Act may bring about considerable change in the process of school evaluation, as it requires maintainers to assess the management of public educational institutions and their educational success as well as the effectiveness of their operation and the compliance with regulations at least once in every four years.

2.4.4. Co-operation between settlements and partnerships

As far as size efficiency is concerned, the merger of the institutions of smaller settlements would be a favourable phenomenon. In the period under review, the educational policy gave priority to the support of partnerships and the encouragement of co-operation of settlements. Incentives included (1) the per student grant for the non-residential students in attendance; (2) supplementary grants for students attending schools maintained by partnerships; (3) four times the amount of the additional grant allocated to institutions in settlements with a population below 1100, and where the primary cycle (first four grades) of general school are provided locally, while the lower-secondary phase of general school is operated in partnership. In 2003, the volume of these incentives remained at the 2000 level, and therefore the number of partnerships failed to increase following the initial upsurge. Another obstacle in the way of co-operation between settlements is the relatively low number of advantageous and adaptable models.

2.5. Administration at institutional level

The legal framework for the management of institutions did not change much in the second half of the nineties. Teaching staff still has decision-making powers related to educational and operational matters. However, in most cases, the documents regulating the life and work of the school require the approval of the maintainer before coming into force. Contrary to the powers of the teaching staff, school heads have a narrow scope of authority, but a diverse range of functions. They are responsible for the professional and legally appropriate operation of the institution, as well as the cost-effective management, and they exercise the rights of employers. The regulation requires school heads to continuously seek the approval of their staff, since in strategic issues they only have the right to submit proposals for decisions. In the period in question, educational leadership was faced with multiple challenges: the adaptation of the school educational programmes in 2001, the emergence of the issues of quality assurance, the review of training programmes and profile, and the adaptation to the needs of parents and the market. According to the results of a school survey, school heads played a key role in the adjustment of the educational programmes in 2001. Those questioned considered that school heads conducted the bulk of the work both in terms of volume and significance.

Table 2.5.
Division of tasks in the modification of the educational programme

Contributors	Percentage of contributors (%)	Size of the completed task (average score on a 1-to-5 scale)	Significance of the completed task (average score on a 1-to-5 scale)
School head	52.7	4.6	4.8
Deputy school head	40.6	4.4	4.5
Heads of specialized classes	19.8	3.9	4.2
Heads of professional teams of teachers teaching the same subject	34.6	4.0	4.2
Teachers	33.8	3.6	3.9
Other people (by position)	8.4	3.4	3.7

Source: Simon, 2002
Question asked: “Who was involved in drawing up the educational programme in your school? To what extent were they involved? How significant were their contributions? Evaluate on a 1 to 5 scale. 1 = involved in minor tasks, 5 = involved in large tasks; 1 = involved in a less significant task; 5 = involved in greatly significant tasks.”

2.5.1. Connection between institutional and local planning

The changes in the demands of the labour market and the increasing difficulties of enrolment have forced school heads to be continuously searching for solutions to prevent a further decrease in the number of students. From the second half of the nineties, functions of strategic planning gained importance at the institutional level. Since 2002, institutional planning has consisted of three main elements: (1) the school educational programme regarded as a strategic plan, which specifies medium term tasks and objectives, covering at least one educational cycle; (2) the operative plan, consisting of the annual work schedule, which essentially formulates the relevant goals and tasks for the given academic year and the institutional action plan; and (3) the quality assurance work plan, determining the quality improvement tasks of the institution. It is a normal expectation and it is also legally regulated that these plans be harmonized with the action plan of the maintainer. The approval of the local government’s action plan was scheduled one year before the modification of the school educational programme, therefore the institutions had an opportunity to familiarise themselves with the content of the former. According to research results, 98% of school maintainers consulted school heads in the course of the development of the action plan, which is of a significant importance, because the school educational programme may actually be rejected on the basis of this plan.

2.6. Educational counselling and professional services

2.6.1. Educational counselling and professional services at local and regional levels

The system of educational counselling and professional services is part of the educational administration, since in the course of its tasks it also performs administrative and regulatory functions. The Public Education Act required county governments to provide for educational counselling and professional services, but other educational actors may also undertake to fulfil this task on a voluntary basis. Educational counselling services include: educational assessment and evaluation, counselling, providing information (gathering, storing, processing and disseminating educational information), administrative services, assisting and organizing the in-service teacher training and self-development of teachers; organizing and coordinating student competitions and talent development; providing student orientation and advisory services. The county educational institutes maintained by county governments provide the vast majority of educational services. The county institutes for educational counselling services generally faced three challenges at the turn of the decade: (1) financial problems, (2) organizational change, and (3) increasing competition in the market.

Counselling

Educational counselling has a special place among other educational services, aimed at the direct assistance of teachers and schools mainly by the introduction and dissemination of various teaching methods. The service has two basic forms: it is either provided by permanently contracted advisors, or on the basis of ad hoc engagements by so-called ‘listed’ counsellors. The latter is commissioned to complete a number of tasks, the costs of which are often provided for by the institute or by the contracting party. While the number of permanently employed advisers steadily decreased in the nineties (by 25%), the number of listed experts continuously increased (by 41.8%). The reason behind the transformation in the employment structure of counsellors is partly due to financial difficulties, and changes in counselling practices and activities. Aside from subject-specific counselling activities, consultancy on quality assurance, the review of educational programmes, the utilization of textbooks and school equipment is gaining impetus.

In-service training and information services

By 2001, the number of in-service training programmes organized by local governmental educational service providers fell by 70% compared to the levels measured in 1999. This was partly due to the fact that by this time the majority of teachers had completed the 120 hours of training required by the Act every seven years, and also because the level of governmental funds allocated to the institutions had decreased. The need for in-service training services has changed. The interest in subject-specific methodological training has decreased, and training programmes in quality improvement, professional skills and personality development, conflict management, crime and drug prevention and information technology have become more popular.

Educational Assessment

Of all educational services, the greatest increase in demand has taken place in the field of educational assessment. The field of educational assessment has become a priority theme for national tenders. Of all the successful applications submitted by the county institutes for the first round of the SZAK-tenders in 1999, aimed at facilitating the purchase of educational services, educational assessment was the second most sought service after counselling. Of all the assessment activities of educational service providers, the development of subject-specific assessment tools is the favourite. The proportion of assessments focusing on the accomplishment of national-level requirements (56%) and on both local curricular and national criteria (44%) is also high. Non-subject specific assessments usually examine student motivation and school climate, which may be explained by the effects of the evolving systems of quality management.

Additional Services

In the group of additional services we may find the organization of student competitions, study circles, and other forms of support for gifted students. Administrative and educational services help schools prepare and review the institutional documents and internal regulations. Student information and advisory services are generally aimed at assisting the work of student unions. Educational service providers working in the counties and the capital carry out intensive project work. As a result of this work, methodological resources, training programmes, textbooks and supplementary materials have been published in great numbers. Some providers joined the Comenius 2000 quality management programme and were involved in the Hungarian adaptation of a model Internal Tutoring System (BGR) developed by a Dutch educational institute (CED Rotterdam).

2.6.2. National service, research and development institutions

National institutions for services, research and development play a significant role in the system of support and provision, primarily offering services to the central administration of public education. The task of the ‘Educatio’ Public Benefit Company is to organize the information- and ICT-related services of public education and the management of the Schoolnetwork Programme (Sulinet). The Public Foundation for the Modernisation of School Education (KOMA) offers financial support for the innovation projects of professional groups and schools. The key function of the National Institute of Vocational Education (NSZI) is to continuously update the National Training Register, and to develop its content accordingly, as well as to conduct research in the field of vocational training. The Hungarian Institute for Educational Research (OI) carried out research in all fields of education, including vocational and higher education. The National Institute of Public Education (OKI) conducts research and development in all spheres of public education, developing, for example, new curricular programmes. The National Educational Library and Museum (OPKM) is the main resource centre for research and development in the field of public education. The Methodology and Information Centre for In-service Teacher Training (PTMIK) is mainly responsible for the accreditation of in-service training programmes and related administrative procedures, and for the organization of national in-service training courses (its tasks are being completed with areas of evaluation and programme development). The TEMPUS Public Foundation is responsible for the co-ordination of all the educational programmes of the European Union.

2.6.3. Involvement of non-governmental organizations and consultants

In the 1990s, various businesses offering educational and consultancy services began to appear on the educational market of Hungary. Initially these were comprised of public institutions forced to increase their income, which led to the establishment of an increasing number of businesses offering counselling or other educational services to the schools and maintainers of the public education system. The supply was enhanced by the growing opportunities for tenders in the field of innovation. From the second half of the decade, the development was further facilitated by direct policy measures of the state (in-service training system, SZAK-tenders, Comenius 2000 quality improvement programme).

2.7. Civil society, partnership, consultation

In the decentralized Hungarian environment of education, numerous conflicts may arise between the individual participants and various autonomies, therefore reconciliation of interests and consultation functions play a significant role. Apart from the traditional parliamentary forms of political reconciliation, there are a number of forums present on many levels, enabling the involved social, professional and civil groups to influence decisions concerning the system of public education. In the nineties, a multitude of civil and professional organizations were established with various interests in public education. Yet this richness, remarkable even on an international scale, also means that the framework for reconciliation divided up into small fractions, jeopardizing the efficiency of the processes of reconciliation and consultation.

The professional and civil stakeholders in education acquire consultative rights upon their registration with the Ministry of Education, and may take part in deciding the composition of certain consultative bodies. The national level bodies of consultation and reconciliation are the primary forums for the representation of the interests of the professional and civil organizations of public education.

The national level is not the only level of consultation for social partners, since there are also local, regional and institutional levels for such activities. According to a survey conducted in 2001/2002, 98% of school maintainers consulted school heads in the course of the development of the local action plan, and 72% consulted parent and teacher lobbies. The efforts in achieving the synergy of local and regional planning are indicated by the fact that half of all local governments consulted the representatives of county governments. In contrast, 54% of smaller settlements considered this to be unnecessary.

The Regional Development and Training Committees, successors of county vocational educational committees, play a key role in regional consultation. In these committees we may find the regional organizations of employers and employees represented in the national forums for the reconciliation of interests, local governments responsible for maintaining vocational schools, the regional chambers of commerce, the advisory boards of county level public foundations for the development of education, labour offices, higher education institutions, and OKÉV members. This body is responsible for the regional level allocation of resources decentralized by the Council for Development and Training.

The most important school level forum for consultation and reconciliation is the school board. The school board has the right to express its opinions on school regulations and school affairs that may lead to increasing expenses for parents. The Public Education Act does not make the establishment of the school board compulsory. Within institutions, this untraditional body plays an influential role only at few places.