تحلیل چالشهای سیاست خصوصیسازی آموزش و پیامدهای آن بر منزلت حرفهای معلمان
محورهای موضوعی : مسائل اجتماعی مرتبط با نهاد آموزش و پرورش
علی اکبر تاج مزینانی
1
,
زهرا درویشی
2
1 - دانشیار گروه تعاون و رفاه اجتماعی، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران
2 - دانشجوی دکتری رفاه اجتماعی، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران
کلید واژه: خصوصیسازی, مدارس, منزلت حرفهای, معلمان, ایران,
چکیده مقاله :
پژوهش حاضر با هدف تحلیل چگونگی تأثیر سیاست خصوصیسازی مدارس بر منزلت و توسعه حرفهای معلمان انجام شده است. برای رسیدن به این هدف از روش کیفی، و برای تحلیل دادهها از تحلیل مضمون و برای گردآوری دادهها از تکنیک مصاحبه استفاده شده است. با استفاده از نمونهگیری هدفمند 21 نفر از معلمان و مطلعین در حوزۀ خصوصیسازی مدارس شناسایی شده و مورد مصاحبه قرار گرفتند. یافتههای پژوهش بیانگر این است که خصوصیسازی مدارس نهتنها موجب ارتقا توسعۀ حرفهای معلمان نشده است بلکه موجب عدم امنیت شغلی نیز شده است. با نداشتن ثبات شغلی معلمانی که احساس ناامنی شغلی دارند کمتر تمایل به سرمایهگذاری در توسعه حرفهای خود دارند. همچنین کاهش نقش راهبردی و فرهنگی آنان باعث ازبینرفتن انگیزۀ و توانمندی شده و بر توسعۀ حرفهای معلمان نیز تأثیر منفی گذاشته است. کاهش تمرکز بر یادگیری عمیق و تأکید بر نتایج آزمونهای نهایی و کنکور موجب شده معلمان بیشتر وقت خود را صرف آمادهسازی دانشآموزان برای این آزمونها کنند و این امر موجب کاهش کیفیت آموزش شده است. یافتهها همچنین نشانمیدهد دانشآموزان به دلیل پرداخت شهریههای بالا خود را از معلمان برتر دانسته و این امر موجب پایینآمدن شأن معلمان شده و بر انگیزۀ و عملکرد آنان تأثیر منفی گذاشته و همچنین موجب شده درک متقابلی بین معلمان و دانشآموزان شکل نگیرد. نتایج نشان میدهد سیاست خصوصیسازی مدارس اگرچه منافعی برای کمکردن بار اقتصادی دولت دارد اما بواسطۀ تبعات سنگین اجتماعی و فرهنگی برای معلمان، نیازمند بازنگری و تأمل جدی است.
Analyzing the Challenges of School Privatization Policy and Its Implications for Teachers’ Professional Status
Aliakbar Tajmazinani*
Zahra Darvishi**
The policy of school privatization in Iran, despite its economic objectives, has created profound professional and social challenges for teachers. The aim of this study is to analyze the challenges of privatization for teachers’ professional status and professional development. This research was conducted using a qualitative approach and thematic analysis method. The participants included 21 teachers and key informants in the field of private and public schools, who were selected through purposive sampling and interviewed in depth. The findings indicate that school privatization has led to consequences such as the reduction of teachers’ cultural and strategic role, the weakening of professional development and motivation, occupational and economic insecurity, a decline in educational quality and superficial learning, and disruption in teacher-student relationships. The results show that, in its current form, privatization has severely undermined teachers’ status and job security by reducing their role from a cultural pillar to a mere instructional executor. To reform this trend, it is recommended that the government revise the labor laws governing private schools and prioritize measures such as requiring long-term contracts, ensuring insurance and benefits, establishing supportive unions, and changing school evaluation criteria from a result-oriented approach to a process-oriented and skill-based approach.
Keywords: Privatization, Schools, Professional Status, Teachers, Human Capital.
Introduction
In recent decades, privatization has become one of the most influential trends in educational reform across the world. Governments have often promoted private sector participation as a strategy for reducing public expenditure, increasing efficiency, diversifying educational provision, and expanding parental choice. From a market-oriented perspective, privatization is assumed to create competition among schools, improve accountability, and encourage better educational outcomes by making institutions more responsive to families’ demands (James, 1987; Teske & Schneider, 2001). Within this view, schools are treated as service providers and parents as rational consumers capable of selecting the best educational options for their children.
Despite these claims, privatization has generated extensive criticism, particularly from scholars who regard education as a public and social good rather than a market commodity. Critics argue that the expansion of private schooling may deepen inequality, weaken democratic accountability, and reorient educational goals toward profitability, branding, and customer satisfaction. In such contexts, teachers are often among the first groups affected by market reforms. Their roles, autonomy, and employment conditions may be reshaped in ways that undermine their professional identity and social position. Rather than being recognized as intellectual and cultural agents, they may increasingly be viewed as flexible labor operating within competitive institutions.
This issue is especially significant in countries where privatization has grown faster than the development of effective regulatory mechanisms. The Global Education Monitoring Report (2022) warns that privatization can create fragmented systems and unstable working conditions for teachers if not accompanied by strong governance. In Iran, the expansion of non-governmental schools has become an important part of educational policy, yet discussions have focused more on efficiency and school performance than on the professional consequences for teachers. The present study addresses this gap by examining the challenges of school privatization policy and its implications for teachers’ professional status.
Methodology
The study employed qualitative design using thematic analysis. This approach was selected because the research aimed to understand participants lived experiences and interpretations of privatization rather than to test predefined quantitative variables. Data was collected through semi-structured interviews with 21 participants who had direct knowledge of non-governmental schools, including teachers and educationally informed individuals. Participants were selected through purposive and theoretical sampling to capture diverse experiences and to ensure relevance to the research problem.
Interview questions focused on teachers’ working conditions, job stability, salary and benefits, school management practices, professional development opportunities, relations with parents and students, and perceptions of educational quality. Data collection continued until theoretical saturation was reached. All interviews were transcribed and coded in NVivo 10.
Thematic analysis followed a systematic process: repeated reading of transcripts, open coding, categorization of related codes, identification of recurrent patterns, and final refinement of major themes. This process resulted in five central themes and eighteen subthemes. To enhance trustworthiness, member checking was used, allowing participants to review and confirm interpretations. Ethical considerations such as informed consent, confidentiality, and voluntary participation were observed throughout the study.
Results
The findings reveal five major dimensions through which privatization affects teachers’ professional status.
First, participants described a reduction in teachers’ cultural and strategic role. In many non-governmental schools, key decisions are concentrated in the hands of school owners and administrators. Teachers have limited influence over policy, curriculum-related decisions, and institutional direction. As a result, they are often treated as implementers rather than as professional contributors to school culture and strategy.
Second, the study found a weakening in professional development and motivation. Participants reported that many private schools provide limited support for sustained learning, pedagogical reflection, or collaborative growth. Training activities, when available, are often instrumental and linked to immediate institutional goals. This weakens intrinsic motivation and contributes to professional stagnation.
Third, occupational insecurity emerged as one of the most significant themes. Teachers described short-term contracts, uncertain renewal, delayed or low salaries, inadequate insurance, and weak retirement prospects. Employment security was often tied to enrollment levels and parental satisfaction rather than professional competence. This created chronic anxiety and reduced teachers’ sense of dignity and long-term stability.
Fourth, privatization was seen as contributing to a decline in educational quality through superficial learning. Participants explained that schools often emphasize grades, examination performance, and parental approval because these are visible indicators that help maintain market reputation. Consequently, deeper learning, critical thinking, and holistic education may be sidelined in favor of short-term measurable results.
Fifth, participants highlighted the disruption of teacher-student relationships and the weakening of teacher authority. In a customer-oriented school environment, parents may view themselves as clients whose preferences should override educational judgment. Managers, in turn, may prioritize parental satisfaction over pedagogical principles. This undermines teachers’ authority and alters the ethical basis of educational relationships.
Discussion and Conclusion
The study indicates that school privatization is not simply a technical policy for improving efficiency; it is a structural shift that reshapes the teaching profession. Although privatization may offer organizational flexibility and increased parental choice, its consequences for teachers in this study were largely negative. Teachers experienced reduced autonomy, weaker participation, insecure employment, limited professional growth, and growing pressure to satisfy market expectations.
These findings are consistent with critical interpretations of educational marketization. Shore and Wright’s (2015) concept of audit culture helps explain why measurable outcomes and institutional image become more important than deeper pedagogical values. The results also align with international studies showing lower job security and professional support in private schools (Akhtar et al., 2010; Chudgar & Sakamoto, 2021; Mohammad & Borkoski, 2024). Overall, the evidence suggests that evaluating privatization solely in terms of efficiency is inadequate. Teachers’ dignity, autonomy, and professional security must be treated as central indicators of educational quality.
References
Akhtar, N., Hashmi, S. A., & Naqvi, S. I. H. (2010) A comparative study of job satisfaction in public and private school teachers at secondary level. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 4222–4228.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.668
Ball, S. J. (1993) Education markets, choice and social class: The market as a class strategy in the UK and the USA. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 14(1), 3–19.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0142569930140101
Baudrillard, J. (1994) Simulacra and Simulation (S. F. Glaser, Trans.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.9904
Chudgar, A., & Sakamoto, J. (2021) Similar work, different pay? Private school teacher working conditions in India. International Journal of Educational Development, 86, 102478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102478
Darling-Hammond, L., Burns, D., Campbell, C., Goodwin, A. L., Hammerness, K., Low, E.-L., McIntyre, A., Sato, M., & Zeichner, K. (2017) Empowered educators: How high-performing systems shape teaching quality around the world. John Wiley & Sons.
Fidan, T., & Oztürk, I. (2015) The relationship of the creativity of public and private school teachers to their intrinsic motivation and the school climate for innovation. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 195, 905–914.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.370
Global Education Monitoring Report. (2022) Non-state actors in education: Who chooses? Who loses?
Hashemian, F., Zandian, H., & Aghamohammadi, J. (2015) Analysis of private sector participation in Iran’s education system. Strategic and Macro Policies Quarterly, 3(12), 1–26. (In Persian)
Kambutu, J., Akpovo, S. M., Nganga, L., Thapa, S., & Mwangi, A. M. (2020) Privatization of early childhood education (ECE): Implications for social justice in Nepal and Kenya. Policy Futures in Education, 18(6), 700–724. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210320922111
Mahmoudzadeh, A. (2023, October 9). Activities of non-government school teachers to be regularized. Iran Daily. Retrieved October 8, 2024. (In Persian)
Mehralizadeh, Y. (1998) Privatization of schools in Iran. Journal of Educational and Psychological Sciences, 3(3–4). (In Persian). https://doi.org/10.22055/psy.1999.16443
Mohammad, A., & Borkoski, C. (2024) Organizational conditions and teacher turnover in private schools of United Arab Emirates. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 9, 100801.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100801
Mohammadpour, A. (2011) Antimethod: Logic and design in qualitative methodology (Vol. 1). Tehran: Sociologists Publications. (In Persian)
Molaei, A., Kalbasi, A., & Zehbion, Sh. (2023) Privatization of education in Iran: Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (A case study of evaluating the educational service purchase plan in primary schools). New Approaches in Educational Management, 14(1), 143–157. (In Persian).
https://doi.org/10.30495/jedu.2023.28502.5720
Papanastasiou, E. C., & Zembylas, M. (2005) Job satisfaction variance among public and private kindergarten school teachers in Cyprus. International Journal of Educational Research, 43(3), 147–167.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2006.06.009
Shore, C., & Wright, S. (2015) Governing by numbers: Audit culture, rankings and the new world order. Social Anthropology, 23(1), 22–28.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12098
Strathern, M. (Ed.). (2000) Audit Cultures: Anthropological Studies in Accountability, Ethics and the Academy. New York: Routledge.
Teske, P., & Schneider, M. (2001) What research can tell policymakers about school choice. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 20(4), 609–631.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.1020.
* Associate Professor, Department of Cooperation and Social Welfare, Faculty of Social Sciences, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran.
tajmazinani@aut.ac.ir
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4379-3461
** Corresponding Author: Ph.D. Student in Social Welfare, Faculty of Social Sciences, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran.
zahradarvishi29@gmail.com
https://orcid.org/0009-0000-7899-3186
جمالی، جمال و محمد سلطانی (1399) تأثیر خصوصیسازی مدارس و مدیریت آن بر کیفیت آموزش در ایران، جهان نوین، سال سوم، شماره 12، صص 35-47.
مولایی، علیرضا و افسانه کلباسی و شهلا ذهبیون (1402) خصوصیسازی آموزش در ایران: نقاط قوت، ضعف، فرصتها و تهدیدها (مطالعه موردی: ارزیابی طرح خرید خدمات آموزشی در مدارس ابتدایی)، دو ماهنامه رهیافتی نو در مدیریت آموزشی، سال 14 شماره 1، صص 143-157.
https://doi.org/10.30495/jedu.2023.28502.5720.
مهرعلیزاده، یداله (1377) خصوصیسازی مدارس در ایران. مجلۀ علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی، دورۀ سوم، سال پنجم، شمارههای 3 و 4، صفحات 105- 126.
DOI:10.22055/psy.1999.16443.
محمودزاده، احمد (1402) فعالیت معلمان مدارس غیردولتی قانونمند میشود، ایران، مشاهده در تاریخ 17/07/1403 از https://irannewspaper.ir/8391/1/81998.
هاشمیان، فخرالسادات و هادی زندیان و جواد آقامحمدی (1394) تحلیل مشارکت بخش خصوصی در نظام آموزش و پرورش، فصلنامه سیاستهای راهبردی و کلان، سال سوم، شماره دوازدهم، صص 1-26.
Akhtar, N., Hashmi, S. A., & Naqvi, S. I. H. (2010). A comparative study of job satisfaction in public and private school teachers at secondary level. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2 (2), 4222–4228.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.668.
Ball, S.J. (1993) Education markets, choice and social class: The market as a class strategy in the UK and the USA. _British Journal of Sociology of Education, 14 (1), 3–19.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0142569930140101.
Baudrillard, J. (1994) Simulacra and Simulation (S. F. Glaser, Trans.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.9904.
Chudgar, A., & Sakamoto, J. (2021). Similar work, different pay? Private school teacher working conditions in India. International Journal of Educational Development, 86, 102478.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102478.
Darling-Hammond, L., Burns, D., Campbell, C., Goodwin, A. L., Hammerness, K., Low, E.-L., McIntyre, A., Sato, M., & Zeichner, K. (2017). Empowered educators: How high-performing systems shape teaching quality around the world. John Wiley & Sons.
Fidan, T., & Oztürk, I. (2015) The Relationship of the Creativity of Public and Private School Teachers to their Intrinsic Motivation and the School Climate for Innovation, Social and Behavioral Sciences, Volume 195, p.p. 905-914.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.370.
Friedman, M., & Friedman, R. (1980) Free to choose: A personal statement. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Global education monitoring report summary, 2021/2: non-state actors in education: who chooses? who loses? James, E. (1987). The public/private division of responsibility for education: An international comparison. Economics of Education Review, 6(1), 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-7757(87)90028-8.
Kambutu, J., Akpovo, S. M., Nganga, L., Thapa, S., & Mwangi, A. M. (2020) Privatization of early childhood education (ECE): Implications for social justice in Nepal and Kenya. Policy Futures in Education, 18(6): 700-724.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210320922111.
Mohammad, A., Borkoski, C. (2024) Organizational conditions and teacher turnover in private schools of United Arab Emirates, Social Sciences & Humanities Open, Volume 9, 2024, 100801.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100801.
Papanastasiou, E. C., & Zembylas, M. (2005) Job satisfaction variance among public and private kindergarten school teachers in Cyprus, International Journal of Educational Research, Volume 43, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 147-167.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2006.06.009.
Shore, C., & Wright, S. (2015) Governing by Numbers: Audit Culture, Rankings and the New Word Order, in: Social Anthropology, Vo1. 23 (1), p.22-28.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12098.
Strathern, M. (ed) (2000) Audit Cultures; Anthropological Studies in Accountability, Ethics and the Academy, New York: Routledge.
Teske, P. & Schneider, M. (2001) What research can tell policymakers about school choice. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 20(4), 609-631.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.1020.