Three types:

(1) centralized system. According to the viewpoint that education is a national cause, the Central Ministry of Education, which represents the state power, is established to lead and supervise the national education in a unified way. All local schools must follow the principles and policies formulated by the central government. France is an outstanding representative of this type.

(2) Decentralization. The idea of local autonomy in education is dominant, and the central government is only in the position of guidance and funding. The United States and the Federal Republic of Germany belong to this type.

(3) Central and local cooperation system. This is a system between the above two, such as Britain and Japan.

the above-mentioned

These three types have their own characteristics and advantages and disadvantages:

The first one can mainly give play to the enthusiasm of the central government in running education, but it is easy to be divorced from the reality of various places and constrain the creativity of local education.

The second can generally arouse the enthusiasm and creativity of local education, but it is also easy to cause local autonomy, complicated system and uneven education quality.

The third kind can correct the shortcomings of the first two kinds to some extent, but it is not perfect in fact. Therefore, countries are still constantly reforming their educational administrative organizations.

Three different forms of educational management organization have their own characteristics and advantages and disadvantages;

centralism

It is conducive to giving play to the role of unified leadership and formulating unified laws, regulations, policies and educational standards throughout the country; It is convenient to promote the national unified education reform, which is conducive to unifying thoughts, making overall plans and developing national education in a balanced way; It can also effectively adjust the imbalance of educational development in various places and give full play to the enthusiasm of central management education. However, the centralized system insists on centralization, and the power is highly concentrated, which is easy to produce bureaucracy; High above, giving orders, divorced from local reality, can not adapt to local conditions; The system is the same, lacking flexibility and elasticity; Using uniform standards and procedures to manage local education with uneven economic and cultural levels often leads to counterproductive results. The actual needs of various places are easily overlooked, which will restrict and affect the initiative, enthusiasm and creativity of local governments in developing local education.

Decentralization system

Generally, it can mobilize the enthusiasm of local government management education and develop local education according to local conditions; It is conducive to enhancing the sense of responsibility and practical actions of local governments to attach importance to, care for and promote the development of education; Education in all parts of the country will not be damaged by the mistakes made by the central education decision. However, the local decentralization system is easy to cause local governments to be fragmented, with scattered power and lack of authority, complicated and chaotic management system, difficult administrative orders, difficult to see actual results, uneven education quality and unbalanced education development.

Central and local cooperation system

The purpose is to foster strengths and avoid weaknesses, to some extent, to correct the shortcomings of centralized and decentralized education management systems, and to ease the contradiction between the central and local governments, but it is not perfect at present. Therefore, major developed countries are still trying to explore ways to reform the education management system, and tend to equalize power. In other words, centralized countries attach importance to decentralization and give full play to local enthusiasm, while decentralized countries attach importance to strengthening state intervention in education and promoting the balanced and upward development of national education.