modernising secondary school building in portugal.pdf

7/29/2019 Modernising Secondary School building in Portugal.pdf

1/74

Modernising SecondarySchool Buildingsin Portugal

Alastair Blyth, Rodolfo Almeida, David Forrester,Ann Gorey, Gaby Hostens


2/74


3/74

Modernising SecondarySchool Buildings

in Portugal


4/74

This work is published on the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The

opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official

views of the Organisation or of the governments of its member countries.

This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of or

sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries

and to the name of any territory, city or area.

ISBN 978-92-64-12877-4 (PDF)

Photo credit: Salvaterra de Magos Secondary School, Salvaterra de Magos Joo Morgado.

Corrigenda to OECD publications may be found on line at: www.oecd.org/publishing/corrigenda.

OECD 2012

You can copy, download or print OECD content for your own use, and you can include excerpts from OECD publications, databases and

multimedia products in your own documents, presentations, blogs, websites and teaching materials, provided that suitable

acknowledgement of OECD as source and copyright owner is given. All requests for public or commercial use and translation rights should

be submitted to [email protected]. Requests for permission to photocopy portions of this material for public or commercial use shall be

addressed directly to the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) at [email protected] or the Centre franais dexploitation du droit de copie (CFC)

at [email protected].
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_3/http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_3/


5/74

Foreword 3

OECD 2012 Modernising Secondary School Buildings in Portugal

Foreword

The quality of school buildings is criti-cally important in the drive for improvingeducation. Good quality facilities provideteachers and students with supportiveenvironments which are responsive totheir changing needs and can make a real

difference to learning and teaching.This report is the outcome of the rstnational review by the OECD Centre forEffective Learning Environments (CELE).It draws on the experience of interna-tional experts and the work of CELE.

Many countries face challenges with theirschool building stock which are similar tothose which Portugal is addressing in itssecondary school building modernisationprogramme (SMP). As well as suggestingrenements that could be made in theSMP, the review reects experience that

other countries can draw upon.Not only is Portugal investing in renovat-ing and reconguring these schools, butit is investing in their long-term mainte-nance, and that is crucial for the sustain-ability of the system in the years to come.

Education is one of the key investmentsfor society in the twenty-rst century.I hope that this report will help makebest use of that investment.

Richrd Yelld

Hed o the OECD Cetre or EectieLeri Eiromets

August 2011

Front entrance,Rainha Dona Leonor Secondary School, Lisbon Joo Morgado


6/74

Table of contentsAcknowledgements4


Acknowledgements

Portugals participation in the reviewfrom February 2009 was co-ordinated byTeresa Valsassina Heitor, Deputy Directorof Parque Escolar since February 2007.The background information prepared byJos Freire da Silva with Rafaela Pinto and

Joana Azevado formed a valuable contri-bution to the review and much supportwas provided by Joo Sintra Nunes, Di-rector general of Parque Escolar and theOfce for Education Statistics and Plan-ning (GEPE, Gabinete de Estatstica e Pla-neamento da Educao) in the Ministryof Education, with co-ordination by Isa-bel Almeida, Deputy-Director, GEPE, andDelegate of Portugal to OECDs Educa-tion Policy Committee.

The Review Team (photo, right) wouldalso like to acknowledge the contribution

of the large number of people who gavevaluable time from their busy schedulesto assist in this work. The team would liketo thank Joo Sintra Nunes, Teresa Heitorand her team, in particular Rafaela Pintoand Jos Freire da Silva, for their invalu-able help in facilitating the review, organ-ising meetings, responding to questionsfrom the Review Team and facilitatingthe teams travel to the various meetingsthroughout Portugal.

The Report is issued under the respon-sibility of the Review Team. The ndings,

analyses and conclusions which arebased on information provided as wellas observations are also those of theReview Team. Whilst the Review Teambenetted greatly from discussions andinput from a wide range of people, any er-rors or misinterpretations in this Reportare its responsibility. It was assembled byHannah von Ahlefeld, with editorial sup-port from Carola Miras.

OECD Review Team, with staff at Parque Escolar

Rodolfo Almeida


7/74


Table of contents 5

TaBLE Of COnTEnTS

0. Executive summary................................................................................................................................................................................... 9

Background..............................................................................................................................................................................................................10The physical quality and suitability of school buildings ................................................................................................................10

Meeting Portugals strategic objectives for secondary education........................................................................................10

Governance and relationships ...................................................................................................................................................................10

Funding .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................11

Funding mechanisms ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 11

Delivery .....................................................................................................................................................................................................................12

Options for rationalising the School Building Modernisation Programme .....................................................................12

1. Introduction.................................................................................................................................................................................................... 13

1.1 The Secondary School Building Modernisation Programme ...........................................................................................14

1.2 Objectives of the review ....................................................................................................................................................................... 14

1.3 Structure of the report ........................................................................................................................................................................... 14

1.4 The review visit ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 14

2. Context and features of the SMP .........................................................................................................................................15

2.1 Secondary education in Portugal ...................................................................................................................................................... 16

2.1.1 The secodry school system.....................................................................................................................................................16

2.1.2 Demorphic d erolmet treds ......................................................................................................................................16

2.1.3 Qlity d stdrds ......................................................................................................................................................................17

2.1.4 The wider edctio policy cotet ........................................................................................................................................17

2.2 The SMP............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 18

2.2.1 aims d objecties o the SMP ................................................................................................................................................18

2.3 Administration and delivery ................................................................................................................................................................ 18

2.3.1 Remit o Prqe Escolr .................................................................................................................................................................18

2.3.2 Memet strctre o Prqe Escolr ............................................................................................................................182.4 Funding the SMP .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 19

2.4.1 Cost............................................................................................................................................................................................................19

2.4.2 allocti d prioritisi ds .................................................................................................................................................19

2.4.3 fdi or the cotied mitece o schools .......................................................................................................20


8/74

Table of contents


6

2.5 The process of implementation.......................................................................................................................................................... 20

2.5.1 Timerme d phsi o the prormme .........................................................................................................................20

2.5.2 Selecti the schools or moderistio ...............................................................................................................................20

2.5.3 The process or moderisi ech school ...........................................................................................................................21

2.5.4 Teder d ppoitmet procedres .....................................................................................................................................222.5.5 Post-completio memet model ....................................................................................................................................24

3. Strengths and challenges of the SMP ...............................................................................................................................27

3.1 Meeting the strategic objectives for education in Portugal .............................................................................................28

3.2 Governance..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 29

3.2.1 Importce o stro idepedet body to me the SMP ...........................................................................29

3.2.2 Specic concerns about the governance of the SMP ...................................................................................................29

3.2.3 Communication and information ow between Parque Escolar and stakeholders ....................................30

3.3 Funding ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 303.3.1 fdi leels d cost cotrol ................................................................................................................................................30

3.3.2 fdi sorces d mechisms ...........................................................................................................................................31

3.3.3 Deelopi sstible di process............................................................................................................................32

3.3.4 Cost eectieess ..............................................................................................................................................................................33

3.4 Quality, suitability and sufciency of the modernised schools .......................................................................................33

3.4.1 Qlity ......................................................................................................................................................................................................34

3.4.2 Oristio o the desi, moitori d eltio it t Prqe Escolr ............................................35

3.4.3 Deelopi the ctiol prormme..................................................................................................................................35

3.4.4 Desi idelies ..............................................................................................................................................................................35

3.4.5 Spporti the school oce the bildi is completed d hded oer........................................................37

3.4.6 Reiewi the bildis ter hd-oer ...............................................................................................................................37

3.4.7 Leri rom iotio ..............................................................................................................................................................38

3.4.8 Reltio o costrctio i Portl ..................................................................................................................................38

3.4.9 Costrctio .......................................................................................................................................................................................39

3.4.10 Oerll coclsios o oristio d desi ...........................................................................................................404. Conclusions and recommendations ....................................................................................................................................43

4.1 The impact of the SMP on the quality and suitability of school buildings ...............................................................44

4.2 Meeting Portugals strategic objectives for secondary education ................................................................................45

4.3 Options for rationalising the SMP .................................................................................................................................................... 46

4.4 Governance and relationships ........................................................................................................................................................... 47


9/74


Table of contents 7

4.5 Funding............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 47

4.5.1 The leel o di ilble .......................................................................................................................................................47

4.5.2 fdi mechisms .......................................................................................................................................................................48

4.5.3 Efciency and effectiveness .........................................................................................................................................................48

References ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 51Annex A. Technical guidance for Parque Escolar ......................................................................................................53

Annex B. Additional information ................................................................................................................................................63

Annex B1. OECD/CELE review team..................................................................................................................................................... 64

Annex B2. Programme of the review visit and people interviewed....................................................................................65

Annex B3. Parque Escolar: Obligations, organisation and employees ................................................................................66

Annex B4. The process for modernising each school ..................................................................................................................69


10/74


11/74

ExECuTIvE SuMMaRY

0Common courtyard, Rodrigues de Fretas Secondary School, Porto Francisco Piqueiro / FotoEngenho


12/74

Executive summary10


BackgroundThis is the report of a review under-taken by the OECD Centre for Effec-tive Learning Environments (CELE) forthe Portuguese Government of the Sec-ondary School Building ModernisationProgramme (SMP) a major programme

to rehabilitate the secondary schools inPortugal. The programme is an ambitiousone, entailing the rebuilding, extension,adaptation and re-equipment by 2015 of332 of the 477 schools that provide uppersecondary education in Portugal, with atotal investment for the rst 205 schoolsof EUR 2.45 billion. The Portuguese Gov-ernment has established a state-ownedcompany, Parque Escolar, which has a highdegree of independence, to oversee andmanage all aspects of the SMP.

The OECD Review Team was asked to

focus on ve key issues: How effectively the SMP addresses the

physical quality of school buildings, thesuitability of the facilities for currentand future needs, whether there aresufcient spaces to meet these needs,and how stakeholders are engaged inthe process;

How the SMP can better meet Portu-gals strategic objectives for secondaryeducation;

Whether and how the overall pro-gramme should be rationalised;

The governance structure of the SMPand the relationship between ParqueEscolar, national educational authori-ties, school institutions and otherstakeholders; and

The funding mechanisms, levels offunding available, and the efciencywith which resources are used.

The physical quality and suitabilityof school buildingsParque Escolar has driven the SMPstrongly and effectively, drawing on inter-

national benchmarks and best practice.The SMP is set to secure a transforma-tion in the physical quality of the major-ity of secondary schools in Portugal, andensure their suitability for a more prac-tical, scientic and vocational curriculumand for changing educational needs. Thisis a challenging task. It is made more dif-cult by the speed of implementation ofthe SMP, which has been determined fora mixture of reasons related to the avail-ability of nance, the state of the globaleconomy and other factors exogenous tothe needs of the education service.

Meeting Portugals strategicobjectives for secondaryeducationThe SMP is intent on meeting the gov-ernments key objectives for secondaryeducation, and:

Forecasts of demand used to deter-mine the design size of each school inthe SMP, combined with space stand-ards that have some headroom orexibility by international standards, soas to ensure that the stock of schoolsis sufcient for the foreseeable future;

The implications for the size and char-acter of secondary schools in Portugalof the rise in the compulsory schoolparticipation age to 18;

Curricular developments towardsmuch greater use of ICT and morepersonalised and laboratory-based

teaching methods; Restoring a vocational curriculum op-

tion to all secondary schools.There are issues, however, as regards thecapacity of the remodelled secondaryschools to meet all the specialist educa-tion and training needs of young peoplethat elsewhere (e.g. in Australia or theUnited Kingdom) would be met in largerscale and more employer-focused special-ist facilities, or to motivate the kind ofyoung people who would previously havechosen to leave school but, in future, will

be obliged to stay on.

To address these issues, the government,along with Parque Escolar, should moni-tor the impact on demand and outcomesof the new vocational provision for15-18 year olds in secondary schools. Ifthere is evidence of gaps or failures tomeet demand, it will consider options forthe development of more specialist vo-cational provision serving a local area orcluster of schools.

Governance and relationshipsThe creation of Parque Escolar as aspecial-purpose state owned companywith specic responsibility for planningand delivery of the SMP has been a verysignicant, if not the crucial, factor in itssuccess to date. The model developed hasdrawn on international practice in othercountries where economic stimulus pro-grammes and public-private-partnership(PPP) programmes are being run; but ithas also drawn on Portugals own tradi-tions and its analysis of what combinationof public and private sector best practiceis most likely to work. The resulting bodyis well organised, and ably managed bypeople with appropriate expertise in ar-chitecture, engineering, nance and pro-ject management. It has succeeded im-pressively to date. It may serve as a modelfor international application.

The development of the design for eachschool and its execution have entailed

Figure 0.1. Dining area, Rocha Peixoto Secondary School, Pvoa de Varzim

Francisco Piqueiro / FotoEngenho


13/74

Executive summary 11


good relationships and close consulta-tion with the schools themselves andothers most directly affected locally; butat national level there has been relativelylittle consultation with the key nationalstakeholders. This may mean that valuableopportunities for developing ideas andfor integrating the SMP with developingeducation, economic and social policiesare being lost. The Government shouldappoint a national consultative body toprovide advice and feedback to ParqueEscolar.

To complement this, Parque Escolarshould introduce a number of renementsto its procedures, including: undertakingpost-completion reviews of each schoolunder the SMP; independent research toestablish how the spaces in a structuredsample of the schools are being used; de-velopment of a web-based design manual,

management guidelines for schools andshort-term training and workshops, eachembodying the best practice identiedby the above processes; and creation ofa specialised but widely accessible Tech-nical Documentation Centre relating tothe SMP.

FundingWith substantial support from the Euro-pean Union (EU), and taking advantage ofa political and economic climate in favourof such public investment, between 2007

and 2011, the Portuguese Government isinvesting EUR 2.45 billion in modernis-ing the rst 205 schools under a buildingprogramme that is intended to transform332 of the countrys secondary schoolsby 2015. In doing so, it aims to make upfor a generation of under-funding that hasresulted in the physical deterioration ofthe buildings, obsolete equipment, andspaces for learning which do not reect21st century needs. The indications arethat the sums allocated are sufcient forthe intended principal purpose.

There remain questions as to the pro-vision of funding for the similar updat-ing of at least some of the 145 second-ary schools which are not included, andwhich within the next few years mayshow similar deciencies to some ofthose now being remodelled. Primary andother schools delivering basic educationwill also need to be renovated.

The provision within the overall SMPfunding to provide for the repair and

maintenance of the 332 schools is an ad-mirable and possibly unique feature ofthe SMP. It is a potential model for inter-national application. It is not clear, howev-er, that the sums set aside (7% of the totalprogramme) will be sufcient for the pur-pose, i.e. whether they are to include pro-vision for updating and re-equipping theschools between now and 2037 in linewith the requirements for the changingcurriculum, pedagogy and learning styles.

Funding mechanismsAt system level, funding for the SMP hascome from a mixture of grants (EU Struc-tural Funds and the Portuguese Excheq-uer) and loans (long-term loans from theEuropean Investment Bank, Council ofEurope Development Bank and Com-

mercial Banks). Their negotiation hasrequired political commitment, profes-sional expertise and ingenuity, and timelyapplication. The SMP has benetted from

Figure 0.2.Social space, Soares dos Reis Secondary School, Porto Francisco Piqueiro / FotoEngenho


14/74

Executive summary12


enjoying political priority at a time whenthe circumstances of Portugal within theEU, and the world recession, have giventhe Portuguese Government a dual in-centive to press forward with an Inter-vention Programme with all due speed.Those concerned are to be congratulatedon having secured so large an injection offunding into the secondary school system.

Innovation has been shown in the devel-opment of the regime for the continuingmaintenance of schools after their remod-elling. There are, however, questions as tothe robustness of these arrangements forthe longer term. The contractual mainte-nance arrangements, and levels of nanceset aside under them for continuing re-pairs and improvement, should be keptunder review over the years ahead andbe adapted if it makes sense to align re-sponsibilities with new models of service

delivery.

DeliveryResponsibility for the whole process in-volved in the SMP rests with Parque Es-colar. So far, the indications are that it ison course to achieve the planned rateof delivery. That in itself would be an im-pressive achievement. Where there havebeen delays to individual projects, theyhave been no more than a few weeks. Inrelation to some concerns expressed asto the consultation process, the designand the exibility of the resulting build-ings, the arrangements seem well suitedfor their purpose. They reect or exceedinternational best practice and are likelyto secure the efcient achievement of itscompletion.

The speed of the build up of the SMP,however, is such that there is limitedscope for learning and applying lessonsalong the way as regards either educa-tion and design issues or nance and thebudget. A lot therefore depends on havingestablished a right rst time allocation

and control process. The process is clear-ly efcient. In the Review Teams view, it istoo early to be quite so condent aboutthe cost-effectiveness of the SMP:

The quality of nish of the buildings ob-served is commendable, but the designmay not always prove as exible andrepresentative of best 21st century in-novative practice as might have beenexpected of the learning environmentsof today and the foreseeable future.

The modernised schools need to in-clude appropriate spaces for the vo-cational education and training (VET)curriculum envisaged in each case lo-cally, but the specialist spaces may notalways prove to be t for purpose in afew years time as demand for differentspecialisations uctuates.

The space standards being appliedprovide generous spaces and give ex-ibility of delivery, but within nite re-sources may be at the cost of otherobjectives: schools that are unneces-sarily large will impose additional long-term energy, cleaning and maintenancecosts. It may be possible to make bet-ter use of the space and associated -nancial resources.

At a system level, the use of the re-sources available for schools that haveattracted priority allocations means

that the remaining secondary schoolsmay struggle to attract funding fortheir modernisation, as may schoolsfor younger pupils and alternativeforms of delivery of VET, which maybe needed for a proportion of youngadults.

The various processes advocated aboveshould be used to ameliorate the effectsof concentrating so large an investmentprogramme into so short a space of time,and to consider holding back a reserve toprovide for implementing desired modi-cations thus identied.

Options for rationalising theSecondary School BuildingModernisation ProgrammeBenetting from its independent statusand highly focussed remit, Parque Esco-lar has made a major impact and achieveda considerable amount in a short time.However, the very strengths of such inde-pendence are also a potential weakness.Questions arise as regards links with oth-er policies and programmes and engage-ment with other bodies and stakehold-ers. The Review Team has recommendedmeasures to address these. Nevertheless,the SMP is of a scale and importance tojustify and support the separate infra-structure created to manage it so long asthe active period of construction is un-derway. Thereafter, it will be necessary toconsider how to manage the transition tothe next stage.

Figure 0.3.New laboratories, Rainha Santa Isabel Secondary School, Estremoz Jos Manuel


15/74

InTRODuCTIOn

1 New circulation space, Rainha Dona Leonor Secondary School, Lisbon Joo Morgado

This chapter briey introduces the School Building Modernisation Programme(SMP) i Portl d how it ws reiewed by the OECD.


16/74

Chapter 1. Introduction14


1.1 The Secondary School BuildingModernisation ProgrammeIn January 2007, the Portuguese govern-ment launched a policy to rehabilitate332 secondary schools by 2015, with atotal investment for the rst 205 schoolsof EUR 2.45 billion (Figure 1.1). In doing

so, the Government had three principalconcerns in relation to the school build-ing stock:

Its physical deterioration. Poor environmental standards in terms

of energy performance, environmentalcomfort and sanitary standards.

Its functional inadequacy for teachingand learning.

The objectives of the SMP are fourfold:

To modernise the physical infrastruc-ture of secondary schools in Portugal,

addressing the three concerns above. To open schools up to the wider com-

munity; and to extend opportunitiesfor learning to the whole community.

To provide for the future maintenanceand conservation of the buildings thusmodernised.

To reduce their environmental impact.To manage this programme the Govern-ment created a special-purpose stateowned company, Parque Escolar, with ahigh degree of administrative and nancialautonomy, and its own assets.

1.2 Objectives of the reviewThe Portuguese Ministry of Educationasked the OECD Centre for Effective

Learning Environments (CELE) to carryout a review of the SMP with a view toproducing an objective assessment andevaluation of the effectiveness of the SMP.

The Review Team was invited to focus onve key issues:

The performance of the SMP in termsof emerging challenges in Europe, andin particular how it addresses thephysical quality of school buildings,the suitability of the facilities for cur-rent and future needs and whetherthere are sufcient spaces to meet theneeds, and how stakeholders are en-gaged in the process.

How the SMP can better meet Portu-gals strategic objectives for secondaryeducation.

Whether and how the overall pro-gramme should be rationalised.

The governance structure of the SMPand the relationship between ParqueEscolar, national educational authori-ties, school institutions and otherstakeholders.

The funding mechanisms, levels offunding available, and the efciencywith which resources are used.

The composition of the Review Team isin Annex B1.

1.3 Structure of the reportThe remainder of the report is organisedinto three main sections. Section 3 pro-vides the national context with a descrip-tion of the main characteristics of thePortuguese education system, and a sum-

Figure 1.1. Dom Dinis Secondary School, Lisbon, before and after modernisation. Parque Escolar

mary with key features of the SMP. ThisSection also aims to inform internationalreaders by identifying what is distinctiveabout the SMP and the context in whichit is being undertaken. Section 4 thenprovides analysis of the strengths of theprogramme together with the challengesand problems it faces. Section 5 drawstogether conclusions and recommenda-tions from the analysis.

1.4 The review visitThe review visit took place from11-15 May 2009 and covered four of theve education regions: the North, Cen-tre, Lisbon and Tagus Valley, and Alentejo.Algarve was not included as for the mo-ment no schools have been involved in theSMP, although they will be in later phasesof the programme. The programme forthe review visit is in Annex B2. The Re-view Team held discussions with a widerange of stakeholders including: Ministryof Education agencies; representatives ofeducational authorities; school principals,teachers, staff, parents and students; thenational parents organisation; teacher un-ions; teacher professional organisations;consultants to Parque Escolar; architectsand engineers involved in the programme.The Review Team selected seven schoolsfor in-depth visits across the four regions,which enabled interaction with schoolprincipals and school boards, teachers,

students, staff and parents. From this theteam was able to gain a range of perspec-tives and insights on the SMP.


17/74

COnTExT anD fEaTuRESOf THE SMP2

New gymnasium, Eng. Accio Calazans Duarte Secondary School, Marinha Grande

Joo Morgado

This chapter provides some background to the secondary education system in

Portl d the policy, demorphic, erolmet d other treds shpi it. Thechpter the presets the ims d objecties, dmiistrtio d deliery dimplemettio o the School Bildi Moderistio Prormme (SMP).


18/74

Chapter 2. Context and features of the SMP16


2. 1 Secondary education inPortugal

2.1.1 The secodry school system

Upper secondary education (ensino se-cundrio) in Portugal is separate struc-turally and pedagogically from basic edu-cation (ensino bsico). Basic education,which makes up the nine years of whatwas previously compulsory education,covers three consecutive cycles (twoprimary cycles at ISCED level 1 andone secondary cycle at ISCED level 2)and lasts for 9 years, from age 6 untilage 15. Compulsory education was thenfollowed by 3 years of non-compulsoryupper secondary education at ISCEDlevel 3 (Figure 2.1). The compulsory par-ticipation age was raised to 18 in 2009.

Despite the structural and pedagogical

differences between them, basic educa-tion and upper secondary educationcan both be found in the same schools.Indeed almost all of the schools includ-ed in the SMP include: upper secondaryeducation with 3rd cycle (i.e. 12-17 yearsinclusive) or with 3rd and 2nd cycles(i.e. 10-17 years).

Upper secondary education is organisedin several strands, with courses that aregeared mainly either to working life or tothe continuation of studies at higher edu-cation level. It currently includes: general

sciencehumanities courses, technologi-cal and specialised artistic courses. Thereare also professional courses geared to-wards an initial qualication, giving prior-ity to students entering the labour mar-ket, but allowing them to study further

Pre-school1st cycle

Basic education (compulsory)

2nd cycle 3rd cycle

Secondary

educationPolytechnic University

Higher education

General scientificand humanitiescoursesTechnology andarts courses

15 years 18 years3 years 6 years

Source: Based on the graph of Portuguese Educational Organisation chart printed in the bulletinEstatsticas de Educao 2006-2007 published by GEPE in the statistical department of the Ministryof Education.

Source: Data from 1990-91 until 2004-05 from INE in Portugal Statistical Yearbook 2006, 2007 edition;and from 2005-07 data from Education Statistics published by GEPE statistical department of theMinistry of Education.

Figure 2.1. Structure of the Portuguese education system

Figure 2.2. Student enrolment in secondary education in Portugal from1990-2007

as well. Upon successful completion ofgeneral scientic and humanities coursesstudents can enrol in higher education(polytechnic or university).

After the revolution in 1974 participa-tion in technological courses collapsed infavour of enrolment in general courses,which have been seen as a more attractiveoption mainly because they tended to leadto higher education. Now, however, thegovernment is reinvesting in these coursesin order to provide a balanced range ofeducation and training opportunities.

As a general rule, students enrol in aschool within their catchment area. Theycan only enrol in schools outside theircatchment area if places are available, orif the course that they want to take is not

available at their local school.Although the Ministry of Education de-nes the national curriculum and pub-lishes teaching guidelines and recom-mendations which need to be adhered

to in secondary schools, school teams orindividual teachers have some options toadapt the curriculum to local pedagogicalor societal needs. Also, professional andvocational courses have some leeway to

tailor the VET curriculum to respond toskills needs in regional socio-economiclabour markets.

2.1.2 Demorphic d erolmettreds

The total population of Portugal is a littleover 10 million. This has been fairly sta-ble overall in recent years: 10.4 million in2002, increasing slowly to 10.6 million in2006. Within these totals, however, therehave been signicant changes in the com-position of the population. As elsewhere

in Western Europe, the birth rate hasfallen (by some 10% since 2002) and, withrising life expectancy (to 77 years of agefor both sexes in 2004-05), the averageage of the population has increased sig-nicantly, and the young dependency in-dex has fallen (to 23% in 2004-05). Thesetrends are particularly marked inland.

The 0 to14-year-old population has fallenonly marginally, however: from 1.65 mil-lion in 2002 to 1.64 million in 2006 (Eury-dice, 2009). The 15-24 population has de-clined in the same period by rather more:

from 1.4 million to 1.27 million (Eurydice,2009).

Between 1990 and 2005, the pre-schoolto secondary school population inPortugal fell from around 2 million to1.7 million pupils (a loss of 15% or300 000 enrolled students). Within thesetotals, the number of pupils in publicschools declined from some 1.8 millionto some 1.6 million. Since 2005, however,preliminary gures indicate a reversalof this previous trend, attributable to acombination of factors: the expansion of

0

100 000

200 000

300 000

400 000

500 000

600 000

1990-91 1992-93 1993-94 1995-96 1997-98 1999-00 2001-02 2003-04 2005-061994- 95 1996-97 1998-99 2000-01 2002-03 2004- 05 2006-07

Total schools Public schools only

1991-92

Total enrolment


19/74

Chapter 2. Context and features of the SMP 17


the pre-compulsory school network, andmeasures to motivate and retain earlyleavers from secondary school, whichhave increased the proportions in schoolof those under and over the ages of com-pulsory education (Table 2.1).

The number of students in secondaryeducation (i.e. aged over 15-17 and there-fore past the age of basic or compulsoryeducation) grew from some 340 000 in1990-91 to a peak of 480 000 in 1995-96(an increase of around 40%), and then fellto a low point of 326 000 in 2005-06. Sincethen, there has been a modest increase(10 000 in 2006-07) and a further increasein 2007-08, on the basis of preliminary g-ures (Figure 2.2). This is attributed to re-cent measures to diversify the secondaryschool curriculum and the fact that moreyoung people have been encouraged to

stay on in full-time education.

2.1.3 Qlity d stdrds

Within the last generation Portugal hasseen signicant increases in the numbersand proportions of its population com-pleting secondary education and gainingqualications. But these improvementshave been from a relatively low base, andinternational comparisons give continuingconcern in Portugal about school stand-ards and quality. The Portuguese results inthree PISA surveys (2000, 2003 and 2006,

see Table 2.2) have each been well belowthe OECD average of 500 for the threedomains of reading, mathematical and sci-entic literacy (OECD, 2001; OECD, 2007).

As noted above, post compulsory schoolparticipation rates remain low by inter-national standards. Portuguese schoolsalso struggle more than most elsewhereto moderate the impact of socio-eco-nomic background on performances andto achieve equitable learning outcomesfor all. This is attested by the applicationof a PISA index of economic, social and

Table 2.1. Total student enrolments in Portugal, by level of education, 2006-07

Age range of students Enrolments (in 000s) As % of total

0-5 (Pre-school) 263.0 14.8

6-9 (1st cycle) 499.0 28.2

10-11 (2nd cycle) 255.2 14.4

12-14 (3rd

cycle) 398.4 22.515-17+ (Secondary) 336.9 20.2

Total 1 752.6 100.0

Source: Bulletin Estatsticas de Educao 2006-2007 published by GEPE in the statistical department ofthe Ministry of Education.

Table 2.2. PISA results for Portugal for each literacy cycle

PISA literacy domain 2000 2003 2006

Reading literacy 470 478 472

Mathematical literacy 454 466 466

Scientic literacy 459 468 474

Source: OECD PISA Database.

cultural status based on students homebackground factors: parental occupationalstatus, parental education, and the num-ber of books at home. This then measuresthe impact of the socio-economic back-ground of the students on their perfor-mance. In Portugal, the impact of socio-

economic background on performance isabove the OECD average for PISA 2003and 2006.1

2.1.4 The wider edctio policycotet

As in other OECD countries, the Portu-guese government has sought to improvethe standards and performance of educa-tion and training. It has introduced a rangeof education policies to take accountof developments in education thinkingwithin Portugal and internationally, and to

promote the desired improvements. Eachof these policies has implications for how,what and where teaching and learningtakes place. They include:

The development of a more practical,experimental, personalised and dif-ferentiated 21st Century School cur-riculum, particularly in the Third Cycle(12-14) and in secondary education, toreengage those not motivated by theexisting academic curriculum.

Much greater and more effective useof ICT and elearning, supported by

signicant investment in up-to-dateICT infrastructure. The Governmentis building local area networks, estab-

lishing broadband connections, pro-viding all schools with computers andelectronic whiteboards and organisingan ambitious in-service-training pro-gramme to make teachers procientin the use of ICT. Portals are being de-veloped and teachers are encouragedto produce content and share it withtheir colleagues.2

The restoration of a major technicaland vocational education (TVE) routein upper secondary education, whichwas abandoned with the democratic(carnation) revolution in 1974 and hasled to major deskilling of young peoplesince then. This has been promotedby a New Opportunities Programme,which has also sought to give adults(only a third of whom have graduat-ed from secondary school) a secondchance of gaining basic skills and other

qualications to equip them for workin the 21st Century. The restoration ofthe TVE route has major implicationsfor schools, which need the specialistspace and equipment as well as ethosto provide the new courses, and willneed to develop close links with em-ployers e.g. for work experience andinternships. Considerable progress hadbeen made on both fronts since 2006.90 000 students, a third of Year 10(the rst year of Portugals secondaryphase) are now on TVE courses: thetarget is to increase school enrolment

via the diversication of the educationstreams and have 50% of 15-17 yearolds enrolled on vocational coursesby 2010. This looks achievable. Second,900 000 adults (aged 16 to 65 years)out of the 3.5 million nationally thatdid not complete 12th grade of edu-cation have enrolled on courses since2006. The target of 1 million by 2010is again seen as readily within reach(Capucha, 2009).

The linked policy to open up schoolsto the community in evenings and atother times for adult and communityeducation and other community-relat-ed purposes, and by doing so provideopportunities to raise the levels of


20/74



education while making full use of thebuildings and equipment provided.

The existence of a parallel system ofMinistry of Employment funded Train-ing Centres, which has meant thatsome of the more practical training foryoung people can be left to institutionsbetter equipped to offer it.

The decision, embodied in law in Au-gust 2009, to raise the school leavingage to 18: this will signicantly increasethe number of 15 to 17-year olds fromthe current voluntary staying on rates:90% at age 16 and 80% at age 17. It willalso impact importantly on the charac-ter of school buildings required acrossthe country.

Steps towards devolution to self-gov-erning schools, with more powerfulappointed principals accountable totheir local communities through new

School Councils, supported by rigor-ous inspection and increased informa-tion, and with a shared responsibilitywith Parque Escolar for the mainte-nance of secondary school buildings.

None of these policies fall within the re-mit of Parque Escolar; but all have to betaken into account and form an impor-tant part of the context for the SMP.

Similarly, while not directly impactingon the SMP, it has also been importantpolitically that parallel programmes havebeen launched to refurbish primary

(1st cycle) and middle/lower secondaryschools (2nd cycle). This has been linkedto a national programme to rationalisesmall primary schools, combined withinvestment under the municipal authori-ties that are responsible for their main-tenance. Between 2005 and 2009 a totalof 194 school centres (combining 1stcycle with pre-schooling) were built. Afurther 437 school centres are approvedto start up to 2015, corresponding toEUR 691 779 915 of public investment(Ministry of Education, 2009).

2.2 The SMP

2.2.1 aims d objecties o theSMP

The Portuguese government has recog-nised that school buildings play an im-portant role in improving standards ofeducation (Council of Ministers, 2007). Itbelieves that providing the school com-munity with well-equipped and main-tained facilities is key to stimulating boththe younger generations and society as

a whole to develop and broaden theirknowledge and skills. Its perception hasbeen that the quality of school buildingsin Portugal has deteriorated to the ex-tent that they no longer provide envi-ronments conducive to contemporaryeducation. This has been supported byseveral surveys of facilities carried out inthe last decade.3

The SMP aims to address this by reno-vating and upgrading the schools. Its ul-timate goal is to provide the Portugueseeducational system not just with state-of-the-art new school buildings but with anew approach to the way the communitysees schools and relates with raising thelevels of educational achievement acrossthe community, the provision of academicand vocational education options, and theconcept of lifelong learning.

The strategy for meeting the objectives ofthe SMP falls broadly into three areas:

Modernisation of the physical infra-structure, including repairing existingstructures, providing buildings that meetcontemporary standards for habitabilityand environmental comfort, and creat-ing spaces suitable for contemporaryeducational needs and which are ex-ible enough to meet emerging demands.

Opening up schools to the local com-munity.

Maintenance and management of the

buildings after modernisation.The aim is to provide:

Attractive spaces that promote well-be-ing, allow good teaching practice, pro-vide access to information and supportteachers work outside the classroom.

Flexible spaces that can adapt quicklyand inexpensively to changes in thecurriculum, to evolving pedagogicaltheory and practice, to the demandsof the school community, and to fastdevelopments in ICT.

Multifunctional spaces for diverse and

widespread use by school communities. Safe, accessible and inclusive spaces

that provide users with a healthy en-vironment and support people withrestricted mobility and special educa-tional needs.

Durable and environmentally efcient so-lutionsto reduce energy consumption,as well as management and mainte-nance costs.

2.3 Administration and delivery

2.3.1 Remit o Prqe Escolr

To deliver the SMP, the Portuguese Gov-ernment set up an independent state-owned company, Parque Escolar, in Janu-ary 2007.4 Parque Escolar is responsiblefor planning, managing, developing andcarrying out the SMP. In many ways, itappears to function like a typical privatesector company: it has administrative andnancial autonomy and is free to take acommercial approach to managing theprocurement and maintenance of theschools. It is expected to be self-fundingfrom the fee that it is paid by the state formanaging the SMP, and from the rent paidto it by the state once the work has beencompleted. Nevertheless, it is closely su-pervised by the Ministries of Education

and Finance, which are directly involvedin all key management decisions such asappointing the board of directors.

The relationship between Parque Esco-lar and the Portuguese Government hasbeen regulated by two instruments: a pub-lic service agreement that sets out boththe obligations for implementing the SMPand the fee for managing the SMP; and aninfrastructure availability and operationsagreement which sets out the rent to bepaid to Parque Escolar and the obligationfor maintenance. The rst public serviceagreement ended on 31 December 2009and is automatically renewed for a subse-quent three year period unless the gov-ernment ofcially noties Parque Escolarotherwise.

To deliver the SMP, Parque Escolar is re-quired to work in partnership with boththe Regional Education Authorities andthe executive boards of the local schoolsto dene, among other things, the scopeof the projects, a timetable for the workand the maintenance services.

2.3.2 Memet strctre oPrqe Escolr

Parque Escolar is led by a ve-memberboard of directors appointed by theGovernment with a three year mandate.There is an independent auditor whomonitors Parque Escolars accounts andcerties its annual nancial reports. Alldepartments within Parque Escolar re-port directly to the board of directors.See Annex B3 for a comprehensive de-partmental breakdown.


21/74



In the two years following its inception,Parque Escolar grew to 101 employeesand estimates that it will reach a peak of160 to 180 during the investment phaseof the SMP. Once the investment phase iscompleted, it expects the number of per-manent employees to decrease to about75.

The staff are based partly in Lisbon andpartly in regional ofces across Portu-gal, to enable them to offer local sup-port to the SMP. Given that the focusof the SMP is to deliver a constructionprogramme and then manage the prop-erty, it is not surprising that most ofthe employees come from a construc-tion sector background. However, thereare also education and other specialistswithin Parque Escolar. Broadly the break-down by background type is as follows(see Annex B3 for details):

42 engineers (32 civil engineers);(10 other engineering specialisms)

23 architects 10 secondary education specialists 6 behavioural scientists and organisa-

tional psychologists 5 legal advisors 9 management/nancial specialists

6 other specialists

2.4 Funding the SMP

2.4.1 CostResponsibility for capital expenditure onschools of the second and third cycles ofbasic education and on secondary schoolsin Portugal rests with the Ministry ofEducation.5 With the support and activeengagement of the Portuguese Govern-ment, the Ministry allocated EUR 2 086

Table 2.3. Planned expenditure* onthe SMP from 2007-2011

Year Planned

expenditure

Cumulative %

of programmespent

2007 8 0.03

2008 84 3.7

2009 805 36.6

2010 1 360 92.1

2011 193 100.0

Total 2450 100.0

* All gures expressed in EUR million at 2008current prices.Source: Parque Escolar (2009)

million at 2008 prices, since increasedto EUR 2 494 million, over the period2007-11 to the SMP. The Budget for theSMP provided for over 90% of this to bespent by the end of the 2010 calendar year(Table 2.3).

The funding for the SMP came from threesources of debt nance and two grants:

Debt nancing

A long-term loan of EUR 1 085 million(44% of the total funding) from the Eu-ropean Investment Bank (EIB).

A long-term Council of Europe Devel-opment Bank (CEB) loan of EUR 175 250 million for the 205 schools.

Long-term commercial bank loans es-timated at EUR 480 million (some 20%of the total).

Grants

EUR 353 million grant from the Por-tuguese Exchequer; 300 million sup-ported by the Investment and Em-ployment Initiative (Law 10/2009 of10 March) and EUR 53 million fromthe PIDDAC Programme of Invest-ments and Expenditure of Develop-

Table 2.4. Planned disbursement of funds* for the SMP

Year EIB loan CEB loan Commercialmedium or long

term debt

Total

2009 300 36 336

2010 597 139 16 736

2011 186 388 574

2012 76 76

* All gures expressed in EUR million at 2008 current prices.Source: Parque Escolar (2009)

Table 2.5. Allocation of funds*, by phase

Year No. of schools

Planneddate for

completion

Construction/rehabilitation

costs incl.interest

Equipmentcosts

Totalcosts

Averagecost perschool

Pilot phase 4 2008 58.5 3.5 62 15.5

Phase 1 26 2009 306.3 20.7 327 12.6

Phase 2 75 2010 797.3 59.7 857 11.4

Phase 3 100 2011 n/a n/a 1 206 12.1

Total 205 2011 2 450 11.8

Final planned 332 2015

* All gures expressed in EUR million at 2008 current prices. Source: Parque Escolar (2009)

ment of the Central Administrationfrom 2007 to 2009.

EUR 354 million (14%) in grants toPortugal from the EU Structural Fund(ERDF) or Cohesion Fund, in relationto Portugals National Strategic Refer-ence Framework.

The funding for the SMP is being dis-bursed as in Table 2.4.

The allocation of these funds by phase,number of schools, category of expendi-ture and average cost per school is shownin Table 2.5.

2.4.2 allocti d prioritisi ds

The age of the existing stock of schoolbuildings in Portugal varies, with the old-est dating back to the 19th century. Theschool buildings fall into three broad

groups related to the building types usedsuccessively in the design and construc-tion of school facilities throughout the20th century. Of 477 secondary schools,77% date from 1970 or later, reecting themajor expansion in the school networkand extension of compulsory schoolingsince then. The distribution of the stock ofpublic secondary schools by age of con-struction is shown in Table 2.6.


22/74



Table 2.6. Distribution of schools, byage of construction

Group Date of construction

Percentage

1 Up to 1935 2

2 1935-49 5

1950-59 61960-69 10

Total 23

3 1970-79 16

1980-89 42

1990-99 12

2000-07 7Source: Parque Escolar (2009)

In January 2007 the government launchedthe SMP to renovate and modernise 332of the 477 schools by 2015, with the rst166 to be modernised by 2011. The selec-tion of schools to be included in the SMPhas been based on a comprehensive sur-vey of the age, characteristics and condi-tion of the stock. This has included de-tailed technical analysis of school buildingtypes that are best suited to remodellingin various ways; schools that with suchremodelling might have a considerablyextended life; and those schools (oftennewer buildings constructed with mate-

rials of lesser quality) that may be lesssuitable for refurbishment and may needreplacement.

2.4.3 fdi or the cotiedmitece o schools

An important component of the SMPstrategy is that it includes maintain-ing the schools once they have beenrenovated. Therefore, part of the ini-

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Phase 3

Phase 2

Phase 1

Pilot phase 4 schools

26 schools

75 schools

100 (61+39) schools

Construction phase

Figure 2.3. Timetable for the rst phases of the SMP

tial budgetary process for the SMP hasbeen to estimate the cost of maintain-ing the stock of the modernised schoolbuildings over the next 30 years. Thishas been done using four levels of main-tenance, from corrective to routine. Re-placement cycles for different elements(e.g. furniture is depreciated over8-10 years) are built into these estimates.For the initial 166 schools an estimatedEUR 175 million at 2008 prices (10% ofthe EUR 1 769 in construction/reha-bilitation) was built into the SMP budg-et for expenditure on functional andmajor maintenance and an estimatedEUR 141 million at 2008 prices for ex-penditure on preventive and correctivemaintenance up to 2037 (Business Plancited in Parque Escolar, 2009). A signicantpercentage of these costs are expected tobe required for two cycles of major re-

pairs on each school over this period ofnearly 30 years. Parque Escolars forecastsprovide for a bunching of such expendi-ture in three periods: 2018-23, 2026-27and 2035-36.

2.5 The process of implementation

2.5.1 The time rme d phsio the SMP

The deadline for completing the SMP isdetermined in part by the timetable foraccessing EU structural funds. Under the

agreement for those funds, the moneymust be spent by 2015. The initial planwas to complete 50% of the schools(166) by the end of 2011. However, aspart of a stimulus package announced inDecember 20086 in the context of theglobal recession, the government broughtforward a further 39 schools, so the SMPnow aims to complete 205 schools by theend of 2011 as shown in Figure 2.3.

Pilot Phase: 4 schools completed bythe rst quarter (Q1) of 2009.

Phase 1: 26 schools completed by Q32009.

Phase 2: the construction of 75 schoolsto start in Q2 2009 and be completedby Q3 2010.

Phase 3: the construction of 61 + 39schools to start in Q4 2009 and becompleted by Q3 2011.7

The four schools in the pilot phase havebeen completed; and construction ofthe schools in Phase 1 is under way. Tenschools were scheduled for completionby September 2009, a further 12 duringNovember and December and the nalfour of this phase by February 2010.Theconstruction contracts for the schools inPhase 2 have been signed, and the schoolsin Phase 3 have started preparing theirstrategic plans.

2.5.2 Selecti the schools ormoderistio

Schools are being selected for each ofthe main phases of the SMP, not only onthe basis of their condition (as describedabove), but also on the basis of projectedenrolments and the views of the regionaleducation authorities, which are con-sulted and asked to select schools with aview to their regional plans, the structureof the schools network and cluster or-ganisations. The regional directorates of

Parque Escolar make a preliminary selec-tion and draw up a shortlist from whichthe nal selection is drawn. A fair region-al distribution is an additional criterion.Parque Escolar wanted some exibility toachieve regional balance across the coun-try and meet political priorities. The re-maining schools will be selected after therenewal of the Public Service Agreementin December 2009.

However, for the pilot phase, selectionwas carried out on a different basis. Thisphase was intended as a learning process

and so it was important to have a sampleof schools that could provide models forall schools in Portugal: built in differentperiods according to different architec-tural designs and standards. Some are his-toric buildings and belong to the architec-tural heritage of the country, some showgreat architectural uniformity because ofstandardisation techniques, other are pa-vilion style structures based on a limitedset of standard architectural designs.

Source: Parque Escolar (2009)


23/74



Each of the pilot schools, two schools inLisbon and two in Porto, has some uniquefeatures: one school includes a musicschool (Rodrigues de Freitas in Porto,Figures 2.2, 4.2, 4.3 and B2); another isan arts school (Soares dos Reis in Por-to, Figures 0.2, 2.4, 3.1, 3.7, 3.11, 4.4 andp. 53); a third school (Dom Dinis in Lisbon,Figures 1.1, 3.4, 3.5, 3.10 and B1) com-bines middle and upper secondary school(from grade 7 up to grade 12) and thefourth combines regular and professionaleducation with a training centre for adults(D. Joo de Castro in Lisbon). Theseschools were seen as mirroring the cur-rent poor state of secondary educationlearning environments in the country.They also exemplied the complexity ofthe education and training system and thedifferent architectural designs and styles.

2.5.3 The process or moderisiech school

The process is broken down into threeprincipal phases: the pre-design, designand construction phases. Parque Esco-

lar has developed a process map for this(see Figure 2.6).

During the pre-design phase the schooldevelops a strategic plan which bringstogether the schools vision, pedagogicalapproach and main educational goals, andby looking at the weaknesses and oppor-

tunities of the schools existing infrastruc-ture, it identies the physical resourcesrequired to meet its educational needs.The school submits the strategic plan on-line. The information from the strategicplan is used to develop a functional pro-gramme and schedule of accommodationwhich are then given to the architects forthem to start their design work.

An in-depth technical survey of the con-dition of the structure and fabric of theschool, including a seismic analysis, is car-ried out. This is done through contracts

with faculties of engineering in the differ-ent regions where schools are located.The survey reports are used to informdecisions on what should be remodelled,pulled down and/or replaced; the opti-

mum design; and the detailed construc-tion work.

The design phase consists of ve stagesthrough which the design is gradually de-veloped: the functional programme; con-cept design; schematic design; buildingphase design; licensing project (preparing

the project so that the local authority cangive a license to build). The stages reectpractice in other countries and allow forprogressive decision-making with themilestones acting as gateways. Thus, inone case reported to the team, a decisionto remodel and extend upwards an exist-ing building was overturned at a late stagein favour of demolition following detailedinspection of the pillars and beams.

During the construction phase the build-ing contractor carries out the work su-pervised by a separate company. This su-

pervisor makes sure that the contractorfollows the contract and oversees on-sitesafety procedures. It also oversees any in-put from the design team that is neededduring construction. Another importantfunction that the supervisor performs is

Figure 2.4.Arts space, Soares dos Reis Secondary School, Porto Francisco Piqueiro / FotoEngenho


24/74



to co-ordinate with the school in particu-lar over the phasing of the constructionso that the school is able to vacate someareas and occupy others in sequencewith the contractor. This allows boththe school to continue to function safelyand the contractor to carry out its workwithout major disruptions.

2.5.4 Teder d ppoitmetprocedres

Procedure for selecting and appointingthe architects, other design specialistsand supervisors

The architects are contracted to work onindividual school projects. Their appoint-ment is negotiated and Parque Escolar hasdeveloped an evaluation method to selectpotential architects; it has a database with

details of some 200 architects. The crite-ria for evaluating potential architects arebased on the experience of the architectsgenerally and with education projects andcapacity to carry out the work. The super-visors are similarly appointed. The designspecialists such as engineers are contract-ed to Parque Escolar although they workunder the supervision of the architect.

Procedures for tendering and appointingconstruction and maintenancecontractors

The implementation of the SMP is beingcarried out through international publictender for the majority of the contracts.

The four pilot projects were contractedthrough direct negotiations followingprior consultation with ve constructioncompanies. This was done for two rea-sons: to speed up the process because itwas important to start the main phases ofthe SMP in 2007-08 to meet the sched-ule; and to test the process, in particularthe impact of construction on the normalactivities of the school, with experienced

contractors.The construction/rehabilitation and main-tenance contracts are awarded throughinternational restricted public tenders. Anadvertisement was placed in the OfcialJournal of the European Union and in anational bulletin. This is in line with theEuropean procurement directives whichhave been incorporated into Portuguesenational legislation.

Rather than put each individual schoolproject out to tender, schools are

grouped. For Phase 1 these groups in-cluded six to eight schools. Phase 1 wasorganised with four different bids with26 schools divided into four groups. Thebid for the fourth group was cancelled, sothe construction planning phase for thisgroup of schools was carried out underdirect procurement with prior consulta-tion of several rms. For the remainder ofthe construction work phases there weresix public bids.

For Phase 2A the schools were groupedinto 28 smaller units of mainly two orthree schools with one exception ofeight. Some of the work is being carried

out by individual companies, the rest byconsortia of various sizes.

The pre-qualication phase is used toselect companies against a range of cri-teria, for example, capital, workforceand experience. For Phase 1 the numberof pre-qualied organisations was lim-

ited to 15 although in later phases thiswas increased. During the main tenderphase, bidders present a xed price forconstruction and a fee for maintenance,which is based on a forecast of the likelymaintenance regime.

In the Portuguese construction industry

Figure 2.5. Reading room, Alves Martins Secondary School, Viseu

Arte Fotogrca / Andr Oliveira and Joo Pinto


25/74



Selection of designers

Contractors

Tender bids management

Schematic design validation: Draft presentation to

the school's Board of Management

National general overview meeting with allschools involved

Schematic design validation: Draft presentation to

PE

Brief development and delivery to designers

Schools selected according to condition, sufficiency,

enrolment and attractiveness criteria

REAs

Milestone

Schools

Milestone

Regional general overview meeting with schools,presenting on-line strategic plan questionnaire andinstructions for completion

Building survey(when needed)

Construction phase

Concept design validation

Schematic design: Formal presentation to the school

Seismic analysis

Concept design: Draft presentation to the school's

Board of Management

Detailed design development and delivery of

construction documents

Milestone

Project information delivery: Design guidelinesand photographic and building surveys

Schematic design validation

Milestone

Concept design: Draft presentation to PE

Project revision

Milestone

Time frameInspectors

Building phases preparation

School visit

PE

Physical condition and anomalies survey

Designers Consultants

Submission of strategic plan information

Milestone

Stakeholders

Tasks

Figure 2.6. Process map developed by Parque Escolar for the SMP

Source: Parque Escolar (2009)


26/74



most building contractors are relativelysmall so there is some reliance on con-tractors operating as consortia and form-ing joint ventures. Approximately one-third of those that tendered during thesecond phase are individual companies,one-third are joint ventures between twocompanies and one-third are joint ven-tures between three companies.

The construction companies that are en-gaged with the project so far are Portu-guese, although some may be owned byother companies based in Europe

Construction contracts

Fixed-price construction contracts were

drawn up. A separate component of the

contract covers post-completion mainte-nance work.

A rm of supervisors is employed byParque Escolar to administer the con-struction contract on its behalf, monitorthe costs, co-ordinate the project withthe school and liaise with the architect

over problems that may arise and needarchitectural input. They may also be re-quired to make design-related decisions,in particular those that relate to parts ofthe building or site which are inaccessibleuntil uncovered during construction.

2.5.5 Post-completio memetmodel

The Portuguese state, through the Region-al Educational Authorities, is responsiblefor maintaining and insuring the buildingsuntil the rehabilitation work is complet-

ed, even if the property asset has alreadybeen transferred to Parque Escolar. Oncework is completed, Parque Escolar be-comes responsible for the maintenanceand insurance. Since Parque Escolar is astate-owned company (functioning as acommercial entity) it must purchase build-ing insurance rather than rely on the gov-ernments self-insurance arrangements(Box 2.1). Consequently it is important tohave a clear understanding of the sites itis managing and the condition of the as-sets on those sites.

Parque Escolar is required to carry outthe maintenance of the school facili-ties and equipment as well as renewalof equipment in such a way as to ensurethat the school continues to be fully func-tional. This includes renewing all schooland technical equipment at the end of itsuseful life, which is calculated on a depre-ciation model commonly used in assetmanagement.

Contracts for conservation and mainte-nance are established with a duration of10 years. They include four components:prevention, corrective, functional and highmaintenance.

The functional component seeks to re-spond to any changes to meet new de-mands. It has a xed budget (limit) foreach period of ve years. When the in-tervention results from a schools own re-quirement, Parque Escolar must approveit. Major changes in the school building,resulting from specic programmes es-tablished by the Ministry of Educationshould receive special nancing.

Figure 2.7. New elevator, Alves Martins Secondary School, Viseu

Arte Fotogrca / Andr Oliveira and Joo Pinto


27/74



Once the construction work has nished,ownership of the school facilities is trans-ferred from the state to Parque Escolar,which is then responsible for carryingout the maintenance and renewal of theschool facilities and equipment. In returnParque Escolar receives an Availabilityrent of EUR 1.65 per m2/month of grossoor area (2008 prices), and a xed in-

come which is calculated every year andagrred with the Portuguese state. Thisxed income is estimated on the basis offull cost recovery, which should also en-sure the economic and nancial balanceof Parque Escolars activity. For areas of aschool that are not available, Parque Es-colar will be subject to a non-availabilitypenalty. The contracts between Parque

Escolar and the contractors responsiblefor carrying out the maintenance willinclude clauses that transfer this risk tothem. Parque Escolar signs an Infrastruc-ture availability and operations agreementwith the Ministries of Education and Fi-nance which is expected to last 30 years.

Box 2.1. Key roles of those involved in the SMP

Regional Education Authorities (REA)Responsible, along with Parque Escolar, for selecting the schools for modernisation.

Parque EscolarManages the project, denes the brief for buildings and provides support and guidance. Parque Escolar has regional infrastruc-ture departments which manage the projects in their geographical area, broadly dened by regions (North, Centre, Lisbonand South). There are two co-ordinators for each project: an architect and an engineer. The technical engineers are also costmanagers and review the cost budgets during project development.

SchoolSets out the strategic plan, and comments and reviews designs at concept, schematic and construction phases.

Consultants to Parque EscolarProvide specic expertise to Parque Escolar on the condition of buildings, seismic surveys, library design, workshops, museumand science laboratory design. Advice is also provided on the requirements for information and communication technology

(ICT).

ArchitectsResponsible for developing the design of the building and leading the design team. Their involvement begins when ParqueEscolar discusses the functional plan with the school. Once that is agreed, it is handed to the architect along with the designguidelines and survey information. During construction, the architect provides design advice and attends weekly site meetings.The architect also prepares the health and safety plan in line with health and safety legislation.

Specialist designersInclude engineers, lighting consultants and other specialists as appropriate. They generally work under the supervision of thearchitect, although they can be directly contracted to Parque Escolar. Generally get involved at the schematic design phase,although could be earlier if there are particular issues that need addressing during concept development such as seismic safety.

SupervisorCarries out a technical audit on the design on behalf of Parque Escolar; administers the construction contract; and makes surethat the contractor is constructing the building in accordance with the technical information. Validates the health and safetyplan prepared by the architect and passes it on to the contractor, who updates the plan to take account of construction, whichis validated by the supervisor. Responsible for co-ordination between the contractor and the school and arranging construc-tion phasing to align with the needs of the school and construction.

ContractorResponsible for carrying out the construction according to the specications and construction drawings and completing theconstruction work within the cost and timeframes set out in the construction contract. Responsible for updating the health andsafety plan, and for phasing the construction operations in line with the phasing plan agreed with the school and supervisor.


28/74



Notes

1. Figure 4.10 in Learning for Tomorrows World. First results from PISA 2003 (OECD, 2004) and Figure 4.10 in Science Competencies forTomorrows World. First results from PISA 2006 (OECD, 2007).

2. Portuguese Technological Plan Annex 1: Education. http://www.planotecnologico.pt/InnerPage.aspx?idCat=47&idMasterCat=30&idLang=2

3. The surveys revealed the extent of deterioration in the buildings caused through natural obsolescence and the lack of con-

tinuous maintenance. The reports also showed that the buildings were, by and large, functionally obsolete and not suitable formodern educational needs in terms of environmental comfort, security, accessibility, classrooms, libraries, laboratories, imageand information technology education. The poor condition of the schools came about because over the past 40 years moreattention was focused on expanding the school network with less attention being paid to systematic maintenance or upgradingof schools to meet changing needs (Parque Escolar, 2009b).

4. Parque Escolar is an Entidade Publica Empresarial(a state-owned company) of which there are 55 in different sectors in Portugal:42 in the health care sector; 5 in the transportation and infrastructures sector; 3 in the culture sector; 2 in the economic sector;2 in the nancing sector and 1 in the education sector (Parque Escolar). Source: Ministry of Finance and Public Administration,General Directorate for the Treasury and Finance.

5. As a result of decentralisation (Decree Law 159/1999 14th September), the local authorities have been granted some competen-cies for funding and spending on education which include the construction, maintenance, equipment and running of pre-schoolsand rst cycle school assets. In 2008 these measures were reinforced (Decree Law 144/2008, 28th July) and some local authori-ties also became responsible for the construction, furnishing, equipment and maintenance of second and third cycle school assetsin order to promote the creation of new schools or modernisation or conversion of the existing ones. The transfer of powersto local authorities was made by agreement with the central government. Not all local authorities accepted.

6. Decree-Law No 34/2009 denes the exceptional public contracting measures applicable to restricted calls for tender withprior qualication and direct award procedures for contracts including the modernisation of the school infrastructure network.

7. 39 schools were added to the 61 proposed for this.


29/74

STREngTHS anDCHaLLEngES Of THE SMP3

New library resource centre, Domingos Sequeira Secondary School, Leiria

Joo Morgado

I this chpter, the streths d chllees o the School Bildi Moderistio

Prormme (SMP) i Portl re elted i detil rom the perspecties ogovernance, funding and quality, suitability and sufciency of the modernisedschools. It proides oerll coclsios o the oristio d desi o the SMP.


30/74

Chapter 3. Strengths and challenges of the SMP28


3.1. Meeting the strategicobjectives for educationThe governments school policy in Por-tugal is, as elsewhere, focused on twofundamental objectives: rst, to provideschool places for the eligible popula-tion; and second, to support continuing

improvements in the quality of learningand outcomes from secondary education.However it also has a third policy objec-tive, not unique to Portugal but moreevident here than elsewhere: the restora-tion - in an updated 21st century form- of a vocational route that motivates andequips for a fullling working life thoseyoung people that have felt excluded bythe limited general academic curriculumavailable to them in the recent past.

It is clear that the SMP is strongly di-rected towards meeting all three of these

objectives. Taking them in turn: Providing sufcient school places: Parque

Escolar draws on informed forecastsof demand to determine the designsize of each school in the SMP. Thereare issues (discussed below underCost Effectiveness) as regards the rela-tively generous space standards beingapplied. But all in all, the SMP seemswell designed to meet this objective.

Ensuring quality of learning and outcomes:there is some international evidenceas to both the practical and the moti-

vational impact on outcomes of appro-priately designed new or remodellededucational buildings. The impactsseem particularly great in terms ofattracting and supporting the leastmotivated and the more vulnerablestudents. There are issues as regardsdetailed design to which the ReviewTeam return below. But, in general, theSMP which should transform thegreater part of the secondary schoolstock in Portugal seems well focusedon this fundamental objective.

Restoring a vocational route: a key pur-

pose of the SMP is to secure a majorexpansion and improvement of prac-tical laboratory and workshop facili-ties in Portugals secondary schools(Figures 0.3, 3.1, 3.5 and 4.1). This iscommendable, but may not be enough.International experience indicatesthat, in relatively small institutions witha comprehensive remit, it is difcultto offer students vocational educa-tion and provide them with a genuinechoice of relevant courses. Schoolswith a small number of students in a

given specialism cannot justify invest-ment in expensive facilities and infra-structure or support the necessarycritical mass of specialist staff. Withinthe context of the Portuguese edu-cational system, there could be ad-vantages in considering arrangements,whereby specic secondary schools in

each region are designated as specialistvocational centres for particular sub-jects or industrial sectors, with stronglinks with relevant enterprises in theregion.

Related to the second and third of theseprincipal objectives are a number of de-velopments in pedagogy, and it is a keypart of the SMPs mission to supportthem. They are reected in the third andfourth objectives of the SMP identied inthe Council Resolution (Council of Min-isters, 2007):

3. adpttio o the sptil d ctio-l coditios to the demds resltirom secodry edctio oristiod crricl, mely:a. Greater exibility in the organisationo the crricl;b. Diersity o pedoic prctices;c. Cotios ccess to dierse iorm-

tio sorces (resorce cetres);d. Improemet o eperimet-bsedtechi or scieces d techoloy(laboratories and workshops);e. Itesie se o iormtio d com-mictio techoloies (ICT);. Iclsio o ppils with specil edc-tio eeds;

. Cotios presece o techers dppils i the school throhot the dy; d

4. Opei the school to the commity.

The concept of quality lies at the core ofthe SMP, its mission and the strategic ob-jectives described above. The CELE Or-ganising Framework on Evaluating Qual-ity in Educational Spaces seeks to denequality within the context of policy issues,and according to a series of principles andcriteria of quality.1 Many of the qualityprinciples in the OECD Framework are

encapsulated in this Council Resolution.The Review Team discuss aspects of thedesign of buildings and their impact ingreater detail below. From conversa-tions with teachers and students as partof the Review Teams eldwork, it is clearthat the new upgraded infrastructure isseen as having a strong positive impact

Figure 3.1. Workshop, Soares dos Reis Arts School, Porto

Parque Escolar


31/74

Chapter 3. Strengths and challenges of the SMP 29


on teaching and learning: more attrac-tive, exible and multifunctional spaceswere seen as enabling teachers to diver-sify their teaching, e.g. providing for morepersonalised approaches and hands-onexperiments and supporting the devel-opment and application of ICT. The newbuildings were seen as likely to increasethe ambitions of studen

modernising secondary school building in portugal.pdf

Documents