The article examines the issues of improving the effectiveness of public administration in the field of higher education in a philosophical and ideological aspect. Education is characterized as the basis of the social, political, economic, spiritual and cultural development of the nation. The importance of modernizing management mechanisms at the state level in the field of higher education is proven. The conditions for ensuring the proper level of development of the educational market are investigated. The importance of decentralization in the field of higher education and expanding the autonomous capabilities of higher education institutions in Ukraine is substantiated. The challenges facing the national system of higher education as of today are characterized. Higher education is considered as a sphere for the activities of public administration bodies. The importance of applying the methodology of social and organizational design in reforming public administration of higher education is substantiated. It is proved that the essence of social and organizational design lies in the scientifically based determination of opportunities for the implementation of targeted organizational changes in social systems and institutions, which is used to solve specific management tasks. The fact is substantiated that with the introduction of the principles of humanism, democracy, autonomy of higher educational institutions, as well as public-private partnership and public-public management into the legislation, the main scientific research in Ukraine will be focused on the development and implementation of effective mechanisms for implementing legislative changes in the management system of higher education. The essence of public management in the field of higher education is determined, as well as the most important principles according to which it is carried out at the current stage of development of social relations, in particular in our state. The functions of public management in the field of higher education are presented.
The article highlights the models of inclusive education of Italy, Germany, Sweden, Norway, and Great Britain. Inclusion models can be classified into three basic ones, according to the ratio of the number of primary school-aged children at general and specialized schools, namely: full inclusion, partial inclusion with a predominance of pupils at general schools, partial inclusion with a predominance of pupils at specialized schools. Full inclusion is present in Italy and Norway, partial inclusion with a predominance of students at specialized schools is observed in Sweden (88.40%), partial inclusion with a predominance of students at general schools is present in Germany and the UK.Models of inclusion differ on the following aspects: legal regulation, funding and amounts of financing for teachers’ trainings, initial and ongoing teachers’ training, an approach to the organization of inclusive education (partnership, peer-to-peer approach, centralized, decentralized), the practice of exchanging experiences of inclusion’s organization within the country, the ratio of the number of primary school-aged children at general and specialized schools. The factors specified determine the role of teachers in the organization of inclusive education of primary school pupils. In countries, support and assistance of teachers is provided at different institutional levels: in Germany – through the center for psychological and pedagogical support, inclusion support services; in Great Britain – by assistants; in Italy – by consultants, healthcare service professionals; in Sweden – through resource centers; in Norway – through state centers. Support of teachers’ professional development throughout life and teachers’ financial motivation have been introduced in the countries; thus, these measures have a positive effect on the integration of primary school pupils in the society.
The article is aimed at determining the mechanisms of improving the management of the system of higher education in the context of the current regulatory support, which will be the means to solve the problem of inefficient functioning, lack of financing, and low quality of higher education. The factors, causing negative impact on development of the higher education system were analyzed, the most important of which are the lack of financing and the shortcomings of the legal support of the education sector. It has been determined that a shortage of funds and lack of communication between the education sphere and employers reduces the efficiency of management of the system of higher education. The legal support of the educational activities requires improvement due to the declarative nature of individual provisions on the management of the system of higher education. Consideration of the legal factor is necessary for regulating the decentralization of management in the education sphere, improvement of financing, perfection of the system of control of the education quality. Ways for decentralizing the management of the education sphere, increasing its effectiveness, and improving the economic status of higher education institutions, have been suggested. The scientific-practical recommendations have been formulated to attract potential consumers of educational services to reforming the higher education system and increasing its effectiveness.
An increased scientific interest in studying different models of education management systems is conditioned by the fact that the quality of education depends significantly on the management style. Thus, the process of creation of efficient systems of management and financing of the education presents a priority in educational policies of contemporary societies. The paper analyses different approaches to the education management systems in some European countries, on the comparative basis, with the aim of achieving as much of a total insight into contemporary courses of such processes as possible. The results of analysis show that the traditional division into centralized and decentralized systems of management is relativized, with a tendency to achieve an optimal relationship among different subjects in the process of management on the central, regional and local level of authority.