Expression of stakeholder involvement in education governance: involvement of teachers' trade unions in shaping regional and national education policies

The articulation of multi-stakeholder participation implies some reconstruction of public governance structures towards a more participatory democracy with a significant impact on public governance. This reconstruction implies incremental decision-making methods. Pluralistic incremental decision-making is based on the hypothesis that decisions are made under pressure, compromises, coalitions, and negotiations between interdependent actors. The aim is to reach an agreement that reconciles the diversity of interests resulting from coordination of the parties involved. However, stakeholder involvement in the public governance process faces significant contradictions based on methodological, theoretical, and ethical issues. From the methodological point of view, it is very difficult to define who a legitimate stakeholder is. There is no objective method to distinguish between individuals and groups who should be considered as stakeholders and those who should not. Another issue is the extent to which the stakeholder should / could be involved in the decision-making process. We explored the relationship / collaboration between bureaucrats and interest groups in education. The key questions we raise in the study are: What stakeholders are invited to take part in the decision-making process and when? What are the reasons for stakeholder involvement? and To what extent is that involvement reflected in the decisions made? In the education system, the main stakeholders are teachers', school leaders', parents' and students' organizations. In the first stage of the research, we chose the largest interest group - the teachers' trade union, which unites more than 10 thousand pedagogical staff (about 1/3 of all teachers). We must point out that there is a quite fierce competition in Lithuania between the two trade unions representing teachers‘ interests. In terms of the results of the research, it is worth noting that public authorities have a particular interest in encouraging stakeholder involvement in high-risk, uncertain and complex decisions. These features are characteristic of the decisions taken during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially at the very beginning of the pandemic. I myself was working in the ministry at the time, holding the position of deputy minister, so I was directly involved in the process when the emergency required urgent decisions. The pandemic disrupted normal life around the world, as well as the functioning of education systems. Most students were unable to attend school, and educational institutions had to adapt quickly to new conditions and challenges. The extreme situation called for urgent solutions. No one was prepared for the pandemic, and urgent solutions covering the entire education system were needed in its presence. No one knew what the right solutions would be. It was difficult to select the best solutions and predict the consequences, as no country had such extensive experience in distance learning, no research was carried out, and there was a lack of reliable data on the IT infrastructure and digital literacy levels of schools and students. In the case of Lithuania, it was understood that it was important to involve stakeholders in the decision-making process as early as possible: the school leaders' association, teachers' unions, the parents' forum, the students' union, the municipal association, INFOBALT, an association uniting business enterprises in the IT sector, the media, etc. Assuming that stakeholders play an active role in the decision-making process, the need for an evidence-based policy, a policy of openness, public awareness and, at the same time, responsibility and control for the decisions taken will be at least partially met. Undoubtedly, due to tensions and very limited time, it was difficult to find compromises. On the other hand, the key actors involved in the discussions did not have enough time to discuss solutions with their wider group. However, the involvement of stakeholders led to more informed decisions that were more acceptable to the educational community. Some argue that public involvement in policy-making is a positive change that increases the legitimacy of public policy and can lead to more accurate and innovative decisions (Bingham et al., 2005; Fung 2006), while others argue that involvement has minimal impact on decision-making and best practice. serves as a buffer for elected officials to reject criticisms of the legitimacy of the process (Rowe and Frewer 2000). Now, the conducted survey and discussion with the largest education union in Lithuania reveals that involvement and role of the union differs from the level of governance at which they participate. Trade unionists, whose activities cover the municipal level, focused most on cases where they were involved in resolving conflict situations. In other words, they were not involved in shaping proactive policies or strategic education policies in the region. However, trends show that agreements between trade unions and local authorities on matters in which they are invited are being legitimized at the initiative of the trade unions themselves. This tends to institutionalize their involvement in decisions related to teacher issues. This can be identified as a kind of expression of neo-corporatism. It can also be assumed that there is still a lack of participatory democracy practices in local authorities and the culture of stakeholder involvement. This is probably why the education system in Lithuania is still quite centralized, and municipal institutions do not feel ready for greater decentralization and a different relationship of powers and responsibilities. Meanwhile, trade union leaders at the central / national level are characterised as more proactive policy actors who not only see problems and raise them, but also offer measured solutions to public authorities. There is now a tendency for trade union involvement in educational decisions and negotiations to improve teachers‘ working conditions and foster a culture of evidence-based policy, as they increasingly base their proposals on research and analysis carried out independently by the authorities. Stakeholder involvement in decision-making at the national level ensures a comprehensive representation of the needs of the modern society or relevant policies. However, the growing power of interest groups, such as trade unions, raises the question of the levers of power and participation in democratic decision-making. On the one hand, municipal level government is rather of a closed nature due to fear of losing the decision-making power, and openness at the national level to recognize major interests as a mechanism to strengthen their legitimacy and ensure the legitimacy of their decisions by involving certain stakeholders in political decision-making. However, groups with power in solving one problem will not necessarily have power in solving others. In this context, the approach of deliberative democracy (Macedo 1999; Dryzek 2010; Mansbridge 2012), which is characterized by innovative alternatives to involving the population in decision-making or empowering a wider range of interest groups in the municipality, is becoming relevant. It is a direction towards reforms of municipal government decentralization and towards the changing logic of political power systems. It is also worth emphasizing that an active trade union can be seen as a guarantor of policy continuity. On the one hand, trade unions have an interest in signing agreements between political parties on the future of education and are active participants in shaping those agreements, while on the other hand, trade unions "monitor" compliance with those agreements. Thus, in a sense, trade unions monitor education policy. Thus, it can be concluded that the teachers' trade union is an important player in education policy, that influences not only tactical / operational educational decisions, but also raises the quality of general, forward-looking decisions and ensures the preconditions for finding the form of democracy in question.