170


Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies


Slađana Zuković and
Jovana Milutinović

Let./Vol. 69 (135)
Št./No. 3/2018
Str./pp. 170–187
ISSN 0038 0474

Teachers, parents and students
attitudes towards private and
alternative schools: The case of Serbia
Abstract: This study aims is to understand the attitudes of teachers, parents and students of pedagogy
towards private and alternative schools. The applied instrument consists of two sub-scales, and the
sample included 441 subjects. The results indicate that respondents have neither expressed negative
nor expressed positive opinion about private and/or alternative schools; they believe that there are no
significant differences between them. Based on the results of the study, it is possible to conclude that in
order to improve the conditions for opening and developing alternative and private elementary schools
in Serbia, it is necessary to disseminate information about their activities to professionals and parents.
Keywords: school pluralism, Serbia, private and alternative schools,school choice, quality of education.
UDC: 37.091.33
Scientific article

Slađana Zuković, PhD, full professor, University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Philosophy, Department of
Pedagogy, Dr. Zorana Đinđića 2, 21000, Novi Sad, Serbia, e-mail: sladjana.zukovic@ff.uns.ac.rs
Jovana Milutinović, PhD, full professor, University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Philosophy, Department of
Pedagogy, Dr Zorana Đinđića 2, 21000, Novi Sad, Serbia, e-mail: jovanajm@ff.uns.ac.rs



Zuković, Milutinović    171

Introduction
In the modern world, education plays a vital role in responding to challenges
of global development changes. From the 1970s through to the present day, the
problems of school and education in almost every country have been treated as a
significant social issue. However, the continued dissatisfaction with the quality of
education has led to attempts to improve its quality. The literature about the analysis
of the school system quality stresses the need to overcome certain approaches and
practices that have not proved to be efficient enough to respond to the needs of a
modern society (OECD 1998; Ridl 2003; Strategy of education ... 2012; Vrcelj 2000).
There is, therefore, a need for reforms and changes that in various parts of the world
emerge with different intensities and with varying degrees of success (Ridl 2003).
These reform demands are not new, and they are mainly focused on establishing
student-based teaching, on developing education closer to the child’s needs, on
promoting the pedagogy of active learning and acquiring of useful knowledge and
skills and on developing democracy in society.
The movements of reform pedagogy, of new or progressive education, appeared
in Europe and the United States in the first half of the 20th century, and numerous
trends and models strove to overcome the weaknesses and short comings of schools,
teaching and education. Critical review of conventional schooling continued in
the period that followed. The result of this struggle was the introduction of new
legislative giving greater freedom of action to the parents, as well as establishing
private and alternative schools (where the democratic social system so permitted).
Generous financial was provided by the state, so long as the schools met the clearly
defined quality standards (OECD 1998).
Private and alternative education
One of the main characteristics of pluralistic societies is that they offer alternatives in different areas of life, including in education. Hence, school pluralism
grows alongside political pluralism in societies with a developed democracy. This

172

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Zuković, Milutinović

means that in addition to schools established and funded by the state, compulsory
schools may also be established by certain groups of citizens, citizen’s and teacher’s
associations, religious communities, as well as by local governments and other legal
entities (Matijević 2009). Although school pluralism is associated with the work of
private and alternative schools, it is important to note that these two concepts are
not synonyms; the terms private and alternative education do not equate.
The term ‘private education’ is often used to indicate the education that does
not belong to the category of public education. However, private education is a
concept that encompasses a range of highly diverse situations. According to the
most common interpretation, the term ‘private education’ refers to the kind of
education established and funded by an individual, a non-governmental body or
an association, all of which are still subject to the relevant laws (Eurydice 2000,
p.10). Within this sector, however, there is a difference between private education in its strict sense and budget-supported private education. While private
educational institutions in the strict sense are entirely funded by an individual
or a non-governmental body, budget-supported private educational institutions
receive some financial assistance from public authorities, which may or may not
be significant.
Regarding alternative schools, they became particularly relevant after state
schools were criticised for not satisfying the needs of society and its citizens (Vrcelj
2000, p. 34). This raises the question of the different ways the term ‘alternative
school’ is defined in the literature (Milutinović 2011; Nagata 2006; Raywid 1999;
Sliwka 2008; Spevak 2001). Some authors (Ridl 2003) point out that any school or
movement could be considered ‘alternative’ depending on the criteria used to define
it. This is using the term ‘alternative school’ in a broader sense. More narrowly
speaking, it refers only to schools labelled by the term ‘alternative’ in the 1970s
at the time of public dissatisfaction with the content and organisation of public
education and the establishing of schools based on the perceptions of certain social
groups. From this point of view, the priority criterion applied to define the term
‘alternative school’ is the pedagogical specificity of certain educational institution
itself. Seen in this context, alternative schools — including classical ones founded
in the 1920s — are characterised by education focused on a child. The innovative
and flexible curriculum is based on the students‘ needs and interests; the active
participation of students, parents and stakeholders in the school life and school
development is encouraged. In this framework, alternative education implies it is
different from the dominant educational trends represented by the state, represented in public and private schools.
Although most EU Member States have decades of experience in managing
private and alternative schools, it is important to point out that at the very end
of the 20th century, these schools attracted the interest of countries in which
pedagogical and academic pluralism had been impeded (Milutinović and Zuković
2013). In many countries of Central and Eastern Europe the educational reforms
— which have been initiated by transitional processes of political democratisation
and pluralisation — have also encompassed the re-establishment of private sector
education and the establishment of alternative schools.


Teachers,
parents and students attitudes towards private and alternative schools: The case of Serbia

173

Such a transformation is imperative for educational reform in the Republic
of Serbia as well. In Serbia, there is a definite need not only to adjust the current
school system to the requirements of the new era, but also to listen to the attitudes
of various relevant stakeholders towards the development of school pluralism. When
it comes to the functioning of private and alternative schools in Serbia, this kind
of school pluralism in the Republic of Serbia is still in its developmental phase.1 It
should be noted that The Law on Primary Education (2013) introduced the term
‘schools of special pedagogical orientation’, and permitted the establishment of
private schools as well as alternative schools (Montessori, Decroly, Steiner and
similar programs),once them Ministry determines that the realization of its program provides achieving standards for completion of the elementary education. In
addition, this law does not mention budgetary support for private education — the
cost of schools with a special pedagogical orientation is neither fully nor partially
covered by the state.
Starting from presumption that the existence of private and alternative
schools can bring dynamism and innovation into educational institutions (Spevak
2001), we shall continue our study by dealing with the opinions on private and
alternative schools. We look at the perspective of teachers as direct stakeholders
in the educational process, the perspective of parents as direct participants in the
choice of school, and the perspective of students of pedagogy as future leaders and
important disseminators of the idea of pedagogical and school pluralism.
Method
The aim and objectives of the study
This study aims to understand the attitudes of teachers, parents and students
of pedagogy towards private and alternative schools. The study is operationalised
through two research tasks: (1) examine the opinion of the respondents about the
significance of the role and impact of private and/or alternative schools; and (2)
examine the opinion of respondents about distinctive features of private schools
compared to public schools.
1
In Serbia, private education is most developed at the pre-school and higher education level, while
the number of private primary and secondary schools is significantly lower. The private educational
institutions require verification by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development,
and their work is not funded by the state, except for the preschool sector where certain compensations
are being made (Spasenović and Vujisić Živković 2017). Most private schools operate in accordance
with the official curriculum, while some of them include elements of certain alternative pedagogical
conceptions in their programs. When it comes to alternative schools, there is only one Montessori
elementary school in Serbia, which has not been verified by the Montessori Association, but it applies
the principles of Montessori pedagogy. This school operates according to the national curriculum and
has been accredited since 2015 by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development.
The alternative pedagogical concept ‘Step by Step’, which is a model in some state schools, has a somewhat longer tradition of operating in Serbia; in fact, since 2002-3, the Step-by-Step model has been
implemented into elementary schools as an educational practices aimed at children.

174

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Zuković, Milutinović

Study instrument
In order to achieve the study tasks, we have applied the instrument designed
for the purpose of this study2 which consists of two sub-scales.
The first sub-scale consists of 10 items relating to the significance of the
role and impact of private and/or alternative schools. The respondents were given
the opportunity to choose one of the offered answers on a five-point Likert scale
(1 – strongly disagree, 2 – partially disagree, 3 – undecided, 4 – partially agree,
5 – strongly agree). The results of the factor analysis indicate that it is a onedimensional scale. The percentage of the explained variance of the first isolated
components was 41.27, and the other was strikingly lower result at 12.82. This
is also supported by the correlations of items with the first principal component,
which were all high, exceeding even .44. In addition, the results of the factor
analysis indicate a high level of internal consistency of items. The alpha coefficient
was 0.83.
The second sub-scale contains 11 items used for assessing the distinctive features of private schools compared to public schools. The respondents were given
the opportunity to choose one of the answers on a three-level scale (1 – disagree,
2 – there is no difference, 3 – agree). The results of the factor analysis used to
check the main components of scales show that it is a one-dimensional scale. The
percentage of the explained variance of the first isolated component was 35.31, and
the other was markedly lower at 12.31. This is also supported by the correlations of
items with the first principal component, which were all high, exceeding .30. Item
no. 1 has a markedly lower (.36), but it still is a significant correlation with the
first principal component. The results of the factor analysis indicate a high level of
internal consistency of the items, as evidenced by the coefficient of reliability (the
alpha coefficient), which was 0.81.
In addition to the presented scales, the questionnaire also included questions
about socio-demographic characteristics of respondents: teachers – seniority (years
of work experience) and type of teaching process; parents - education level and
financial status of the family and students of pedagogy - year of study.
The study sample
The study was carried out in eight elementary schools within the territory
of the City of Novi Sad and at the Department of Pedagogy, Faculty of Philosophy,
University of Novi Sad. The study sample consisted of 441 respondents. It is a
convenience sample, and a generalisation of the data can only be made on the
hypothetical population. The sample consisted of three groups of sub-samples:
2
The instrument was designed according to the model of a similar instrument used in the Republic
of Croatia (Rajić 2008). Certain questions, though, were modified and adapted in accordance with the
specific characteristics of the current educational context in the Republic of Serbia. The preliminary
validation of the metric characteristics of the instrument has shown that all the claims have satisfactory
factorial saturation.


Teachers,
parents and students attitudes towards private and alternative schools: The case of Serbia

175

teachers who work in public elementary schools (with mainstream educational
programs) (N=153); parents whose children attend public elementary school
(with mainstream educational programs) (N=189) and students of pedagogy at
the University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Philosophy (N=99). The structure of the
sample according to measured socio-demographic characteristics are the following:
a) teachers – years of work experience (fewer than 5 years – 15.7%, from 5 to 15
years – 34.6%, more than 15 years – 49.7%) and teaching process type (class teaching
- 45.8%; subject teaching - 54.2%); b)parents – level of education (elementary
school – 4.2%, secondary school –38.1%, higher school university – 52.4%, MA/MSc/
PhD – 5.3%) and estimated financial status of family (good – 28%, average – 67.2%,
bad – 4.8%); c) students of pedagogy – year of study (second year – 54.5%, fourth
year – 45.5%).
The statistical analysis
For statistical analysis of the data, we used the software package SPSS 12.0.
Within the descriptive statistics, we measured average values (arithmetic mean
value) and the dispersion of results (standard deviation). To investigate the latent
structure of the measured variables, we applied factor analysis, and to analyze the
statistical significance of differences, we applied the t-test and χ² test and one-way
variance analysis (F-test), as well as post hoc analysis (Scheffe’s Test).
Results
The role and impact of private and/or alternative schools
Based on the analysis of descriptive statistical data obtained at the level of the
entire sample, it was determined that the overall average score for the first was
M= 3.35, with SD= 0.69, which means that the respondents do not have either an
emphasised negative or an emphasised positive opinion about the significance of
the role and impact of private and/or alternative schools. Table 1 provides a detailed
overview of the average scores of teachers’, parents’ and students’ responses for
each item.

176

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Items

Teachers

Parents

Zuković, Milutinović

Students of
pedagogy

M

SD

M

SD

M

SD

1. Public schools should offer a variety
of alternative concepts of education so
that parents can choose the model that
they think is best for their child.

2.9

1.2

3.6

1.1

3.9

0.9

2. Alternative schools provide greater
opportunities for students to fully
accomplish their potential.

3.4

1.4

3.1

1.2

3.8

1.1

3. Private and alternative schools provide
greater opportunities for the teachers
to use their creativity.

3.3

1.3

3.6

1.1

4.0

0.9

4. Private and alternative schools open
more opportunities for introduction of
innovations in the education contents.

3.3

1.2

3.1

1.2

3.6

1.0

5. Students in private schools are better
2.3
prepared to continue their education at
higher levels.

1.1

2.5

1.0

3.0

1.0

6. Teachers in private schools have have
better working conditions.

3.5

1.1

3.5

1.0

4.0

0.8

7. In alternative schools, more attention
is paid to the needs and interests of
each child.

3.5

0.9

3.4

0.9

4.2

0.8

8. The communication between teachers
and parents is of better quality in
alternative schools.

3.2

0.9

3.2

1.0

4.1

0.8

9. Private schools provide a higher level of 3.1
student safety.

0.9

3.0

0.9

3.6

0.9

10. The state should financially support
3.1
the opening and operation of private
and alternative schools so that they can
be equally accessible to all children.

1.1

3.2

1.1

4.2

0.9

M= 3.17, SD= .70

M= 3.24, SD= 0.66

M= 3.85, SD= 0.44

Table 1: Opinions of respondents on role and impact of private and alternative schools

Teachers’ responses. The results obtained in the sample of teachers show that
the arithmetic mean value of average scores for the entire scale is M= 3.17, with
SD= 0.70, which does not differ largely from the findings obtained at the level of
the entire sample. The analysis shows that the highest average scores were obtained
in items no. 6 (M= 3.5), no. 7 (M= 3.5) and no. 2 (M=3.4). Namely, most teachers
partially or strongly agree with the statements that teachers in private schools have
better working conditions, that in alternative schools, more attention is paid to the
needs and interests of each child (although there is also a very high percentage of
undecided when it comes to this statement – 43.8%), and that alternative schools


Teachers,
parents and students attitudes towards private and alternative schools: The case of Serbia

177

provide greater opportunities for students to fully accomplish their potential. On
the other hand, the lowest average score is for item no. 5 (M= 2.3), which indicates that most teachers do not agree either at all or partially with the statement
that students in private schools are better prepared to continue their education
at higher levels. A high percentage of ‘undecided’ responses are evident for item
no. 8 (The communication between teachers and parents is of better quality in
alternative schools – 50.3%) and for item no. 9 (Private schools provide a higher
level of student safety – 41.8 %).
Parents’ responses. The results obtained in the sample of parents show that
they have very similar opinion as teachers: the arithmetic mean value of average
scores for the entire scale is M= 3.24, with SD= 0.66. The analysis shows that the
highest average scores were obtained for items no. 1 (M= 3.6), no. 3 (M= 3.6), and
no. 6 (M= 3.5). Most parents agree strongly or partially with the statement that
public schools should offer a variety of alternative concepts of education, so that
parents can choose the model that they think is best for their child, that private and
alternative schools provide greater opportunities for the teachers to use their creativity, and that teachers in private schools have better working conditions. On the
other hand, the lowest average score is for item no. 5 (M= 2.5), with most parents
not agreeing either at all or partially with the statement that students in private
schools are better prepared to continue their education at higher levels. However, a
significant number of parents (31.7%) are undecided about this statement. In addition, a high percentage of ‘undecided’ responses are noted for item no. 9 (Private
schools provide a higher level of students’ safety – 45.5%).
The responses of students of pedagogy. The results obtained in the sample of
students of pedagogy show that the arithmetic mean value of average scores for
the entire scale is M= 3.85 with, SD= 0.44, which represents a somewhat higher
result compared to the previous two groups of respondents. Therefore, it can be
concluded that the responses of pedagogy students are more inclined towards a
positive opinion on the significance of the role and impact of private and/or alternative schools. After the analysis of students’ responses, it is possible to note that
the highest average scores are for items no. 7 (M= 4.2), no. 10 (M= 4.2), and no.
8 (M= 4.1). This means that most students of pedagogy agree either strongly or
partially with the statements that in alternative schools, more attention is paid to
the needs and interests of each child, that the state should financially support the
opening and operation of private and alternative schools so that they can be equally
accessible to all children, and that the communication between teachers and parents
is of better quality in alternative schools. The lowest average score is for item no. 5
(M= 3.0); most students, however, remain undecided (41.4%) concerning the statement that students in private schools are better prepared to continue their education
at higher levels. Furthermore, the results show that an undecided attitude is also
present with respect to statement no. 9 (Private schools provide a higher level of
students’ safety – 38.4%) as well as with statement no. 4 (Private and alternative
schools open more opportunities for introduction of innovations in the education
contents– 35.4%).

178

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Zuković, Milutinović

Differences in responses depending on the measured socio-demographic characteristics. The testing of differences in the responses of teachers and parents show
no statistically significant differences for any of the measured socio-demographic
characteristics: teachers – the length of work experience (F(149.2)= 0.74; p= .48)
and the teaching process type (class teaching and specific subject teaching) (t(149)=
0.36; p= .72); parents3– level of education (t(184)= 0.53; p= .60) and financial status
of the family (t(183)= 1.53; p= .13). Statistically significant differences are evident
only in the responses of pedagogy students, depending on the year of study (Table 2).
The attitudes about the significance
of the role and impact of private and/
or alternative schools

Year of study M

SD

t

df

p

2nd

3.76

0.46

-2.21

7

.029

4th

3.95

0.40

Table 2: Differences in responses of students of pedagogy depending on the year of study

The obtained values show that the students in fourth year achieve higher
scores; they have more positive attitude towards private and alternative schools
compared to in second year.
The differences in the responses of teachers, parents and students of pedagogy.
Applying a one-way analysis of variances shows that there are significant differences in the obtained responses between teachers, parents and students of pedagogy
(F= 39.33; df1= 2; df2= 435; p= .000). The post-hoc Scheffe’s Test shows that
there are significant differences between the students and other groups (p< .001)
— students of pedagogy have a more positive attitude about the role and impact
of private and/or alternative schools than parents and teachers. The differences in
responses between parents and teachers are not statistically significant (p> .05).
Distinctive Features of Private Schools vs. Public Schools
Based on the analysis of descriptive statistical data obtained at the level of
the entire sample, the overall average score for the second scale is M= 2.42, with
SD= 0.37. This means that most respondents believe that there are no significant
differences between private and public schools, whereas for some features they
give a slight advantage to private schools. Table 3 provides a detailed overview of
the average scores of teachers’, parents’ and students’ responses for each item.

3
	 At the level of the sample of parents, we merged certain categories in order to obtain a balanced
number of subjects within the categories: two groups for the education level (1 – elementary and secondary education, N= 80, and 2– higher university education, MA or PhD degree, N= 109), and two
groups for the financial status of the family (1 – bad and medium financial status of the family, N=
136, and 2 – good financial status of the family estimate, N= 53).


Teachers,
parents and students attitudes towards private and alternative schools: The case of Serbia

Items

Teachers
M

Parents

Students of
pedagogy

SD

M

SD

M

SD

1. Private schools provide better quality
2.8
work due to a small number of students
in classes.

0.5

2.5

0.7

2.8

0.4

2. Private schools have better conditions 2.5
for teachers working with children with
disabilities

0.6

2.5

0.6

2.9

0.4

3. Private schools open more
opportunities for introduction of
innovation in the educational process
organisation.

2.3

0.5

2.4

0.6

2.8

0.4

4. Parents are more involved in school life 2.3
and work in private schools.

0.6

2.3

0.6

2.5

0.6

5. Private schools are characterised by
greater care for the child before and
after school.

2.4

0.6

2.4

0.6

2.4

0.6

6. Private schools are more focused on
healthy diet and sports activities.

2.5

0.6

2.5

0.6

2.5

0.5

7. In private schools, children learn
foreign languages more.

2.5

0.5

2.6

0.5

2.7

0.5

8. Private schools are more focused on the 1.9
development of social sensitivity and
tolerance among students.

0.7

2.0

0.7

2.3

0.7

9. Children with behaviour problems are
better disciplined in private schools.

1.8

0.8

2.0

0.7

2.2

0.7

10. The communication between teachers 2.2
and parents is better in private schools.

0.6

2.3

0.6

2.7

0.5

11. Children are provided better computer
literacy in private schools.

0.5

2.5

0.6

2.7

0.5

2.6

M= 2.35, SD= 0.59

M= 2.36, SD= 0.61

179

M= 2.59, SD= 0.44

Table 3: Opinions of respondents on distinctive features of private schools vs. public schools

Teachers’ responses. The results obtained in the sample of teachers show that
the arithmetic mean value of average scores for the entire scale is M= 2.35, with
SD= 0.59. The obtained values do not differ greatly from the findings obtained
at the level of the entire sample. Based on an overview of the average scores of
teachers’ responses for each item, the highest average scores are for features no.
1 (M= 2.8), and no. 11 (M= 2.6), which means that most teachers believe the advantage of private schools over public schools is reflected in features referring to
the class size and the possibility of being trained in computer literacy. On the other
hand, the lowest average score is for features no. 9 (M= 1.8), and no. 8 (M= 1.9),
which shows that most teachers believe that disciplining of children with behaviour

180

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Zuković, Milutinović

problems and development of social sensitivity and tolerance among students are
not the features that could be considered as the advantage of private over public
schools. It is also important to note that many “there is no difference” responses
are notable in features that refer to better possibilities for introduction of innovations in the educational process organisation (67.3%) and communication between
teachers and parents (55.6%).
Parents’ responses. The results obtained in the sample of parents show that
the arithmetic mean value of average scores for the entire scale is M= 2.36, with
SD= 0.61. Similar to teachers, parents believe there are no significant differences
between private and public schools; they give a slight advantage to private schools
in some of the features. The results of average scores of parents’ responses for
each item show that the highest average scores are for features no. 7 (M= 2.6),
no. 1 (M= 2.5), no. 2 (M= 2.5) and no. 11 (M= 2.5). Thus, the majority of parents
believe that the advantage of private over public schools is largely reflected in
features related to foreign language learning. Furthermore, parents recognise the
advantage of private over public schools in items related to the class size, conditions for teachers working with children with disabilities, as well as opportunities
to be trained in computer literacy. On the other hand, the lowest average score is
for features no. 8 (M= 2.0) and no. 9 (M= 2.0). The obtained result coincides with
the result obtained from the sample of teachers; thus, the majority of parents
also consider that there is no difference between private and public schools when
it comes to disciplining of children with behaviour problems and development of
social sensitivity and tolerance among students.
Responses of students of pedagogy. The results obtained in the sample of
students of pedagogy show that the arithmetic mean value of average scores for
the entire scale is M= 2.59, with SD= 0.44. The resulting value of the average
score for this group is slightly higher than for the previous two groups. For most
of the measured features, these responses are more inclined to highlight the
advantages of private over the public schools. Based on overview of the average
scores of students’ responses for each item, the highest average scores are for
features no. 2 (M= 2.9), no. 1 (M= 2.8) and no. 3 (M= 2.8). Thus, the majority
of students of pedagogy believe that the advantage of private over public schools
is mostly reflected in the conditions for teachers working with children with disabilities, class size and the better possibilities for introduction of innovations in the
educational process organisation. Furthermore, it is also important to note that
the obtained average scores for all other measured features show that the student
responses are mainly inclined towards emphasising the advantage of private over
public schools.
Differences in responses depending on the measured socio-demographic characteristics. The testing of differences in responses obtained at the level of the sample
of teachers and parents shows no statistically significant differences for any of the
measured socio-demographic characteristics: teachers – length of work experience
(F(145.2)= 0.07; p= .93) and type of the teaching process (class teaching – specific
subject teaching) (t(145)= 0.97; p= .33); parents – level of education (t(182)= 1.39;
p= .17) and financial status of a family (t(181)= 1.43; p= .16). Statistically signifi-


Teachers,
parents and students attitudes towards private and alternative schools: The case of Serbia

181

cant differences are evident only in the responses of pedagogy students, depending
on the year of studies (Table 4).
The attitudes about distinctive
features of private schools vs. public
schools

Year of study M

SD

t

df

p

2nd

2.51

0.29

-3.12

97

.002

4th

2.68

0.26

Table 4: Differences in responses of students of pedagogy depending on the year of studies

The obtained differences show that students in fourth year have higher scores,
as compared to students in their second year of studies; the fourth year students
emphasise more the advantages of private schools over public schools.
Differences in responses of teachers, parents and students of pedagogy.
Applying a one-way variance analysis determines that there are significant differences in the obtained responses between teachers, parents and students of pedagogy
(F= 14.93; df1= 2; df2= 428; p= .000). The post-hoc Scheffe’s Test shows that
there are statistically significant differences between students of pedagogy and
other groups of respondents (p< .001) — students of pedagogy emphasise much
more than parents and teachers the advantages of private over public schools.
The differences in responses between parents and teachers are not statistically
significant (p< .001).
Discussion
The fact that the introduction of pedagogical and school pluralism in Central
and Eastern Europe largely represented an attempt to deviate from the readymade public schools typical of previous school systems is very important for this
study. In many countries of this region, high expectations from private education
have emerged equally from the political and educational aspirations, and they
have been founded on the assumptions of on the superiority of private education
sector and possibilities of self – generating of changes in the educational process
(Klus-Stanska and Olek 1998). However, the success of a new education system is
contingent upon a high level of awareness among parents. Thus, for example, an
analysis of the situation in the Slovak Republic (Matulčikova 2003) showed that the
current problem of school choice resulted from the lack of experience of parents in
deciding which school to choose for their children among those available to them,
which are often attractive but insufficiently known.
Although our research was conducted on a convenience sample, which makes
it difficult to generalize the findings, the results suggest that a similar problem
exists in Serbia. The results of the study show that surveyed teachers and parents
have neither an emphasised negative nor an emphasised positive opinion about
the significance of the role and impact of alternative schools, which is probably due
to the general absence of school pluralism in Serbia, especially when it comes to
alternative schools. Most surveyed teachers agree with the statement that alterna-

182

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Zuković, Milutinović

tive schools pay more attention to the needs and interests of each individual child.
However, there are many undecided responses when it comes to this statement,
although almost by rule, these schools have a qualitatively different approach to the
educational process and to the orientation towards children’s needs and interests
(Milutinović 2011; Sliwka and Istance 2006; Sliwka 2008). A similar situation in
response analysis can be observed with the statement that communication between
teachers and parents is of better quality in alternative schools, although the distinctive feature of alternative schools is the joint participation of students, teachers
and parents in the school life (Nagata 2006; Spevak 2001). In addition, although
the introduction of elements of alternative pedagogical concepts in Serbian public
schools is a much more realistic expectation than the rapid development of school
pluralism, a small number of surveyed teachers are of the opinion that public
schools should offer diverse concepts of education so that parents can choose the
model they think is best for their child. The study also shows that the majority of
surveyed teachers and parents alike do not agree with the statement that students
in private schools are better prepared to continue their education at higher levels,
which can probably be attributed to their previous experience or information about
the work of private educational institutions in Serbia. In contrast, many parents
in Poland (as in the United States, for example), are turning to the private education because of the expected high educational outcomes for their children (Johnson
1995; Klus-Stanska and Olek 1998; Plank 2006).
However, the surveyed students of pedagogy have a different opinion. They
have a more positive attitude towards private and alternative schools than parents and teachers. Many students of pedagogy at the Faculty of Philosophy at the
University in Novi Sad (the curriculum of the Pedagogy Department includes
contents from the areas of school and pedagogical pluralism) partially or strongly
agree with the statement that public schools should offer a variety of concepts of
education so that parents can choose the model that they think is best for their
child. Also, in comparison to the other two groups of respondents, the students of
pedagogy recognize the importance of public (co)financing of private and alternative education as a way of achieving higher accessibility and greater possibility of
choices regarding education.
The respondents’ opinions about the distinctive features of private schools
compared to public schools show that most surveyed teachers and parents think
that there are no significant differences between them. For example, while some
authors (Cox and Witko 2008) argue that private schools are regulated in a less
bureaucratic way, which results in a greater degree of autonomy and in a more
favourable environment for parental involvement in school activities. The results
of our study, however, indicate that a significant number of surveyed teachers
and parents think that there is no difference between private and public schools
in terms of parents’ involvement in school life. In the sample of teachers, many
‘no difference’ responses are also present when it comes to the features related
to better opportunities for innovation in the educational process and the quality
of communication between teachers and parents. A similar situation can be


Teachers,
parents and students attitudes towards private and alternative schools: The case of Serbia

183

observed in Poland, where some authors (Klus-Stanska and Olek 1998) reported
data indicating that when it comes to educational innovations, many schools
in the private sector provide supplementary education to the public education
system. The private sector offer education slightly different from that provided
in public schools, which has been conditioned by economic, social and political
factors. However, in studies of the development of the private education sector in
Poland, and its contribution to the democratisation process and quality of education, conclude that private education has contributed to a variety of educational
choices to innovation in the education system, particularly in comparison to
earlier periods.
Despite there being no significant difference in preferences between private
and public schools in this study, teachers and parents give a slight advantage
to private schools for some features — the size of classes, training in computer
literacy, learning foreign languages and teachers working with children with
disabilities. These answers potentially suggest the tendencies of development of
private education in the Republic of Serbia, which is similar to the condition of
the education systems of certain Central and Eastern European (Bulgaria, Czech
Republic, Hungary and Poland) in the 1990s, when the transitional processes of
political democratisation and pluralism initiated the opening of private schools.
Some authors (Kozakiewicz 1992; Sliwka and Istance 2006) indicate that in this
period organisers of private schools sought to limit the number of children in the
class so to individualise teaching and to intensify foreign languages learning, which
started from the first grade of elementary school.
Finally, the differences in the responses of teachers, parents and students
of pedagogy show that students of pedagogy emphasize the advantages of private
over public schools to a significantly greater degree than parents and teachers.
Regarding the advantages of private schools, they emphasise the conditions for
teachers working with children with disabilities, class size and better opportunities for innovation in the educational process. The obtained average scores for
other measured features suggest that surveyed students of pedagogy, especially
in the senior years of their study (after studying within the fields of school and
pedagogical pluralism), note numerous advantages arising from implementing a
policy of school choice. In this context, this study confirms the findings of some
authors (Rajić 2008) that the level of information is very important when it comes
to attitudes about private and alternative schools. To improve the conditions for
opening and developing alternative and private elementary schools in Serbia, it is
necessary to disseminate relevant information to teachers and parents. It is clear
that alternative and private schools, whether defined through academic results or
social contexts, do not guarantee a positive deviation in relation to the majority
standard, but they certainly do provide an opportunity for the development of pluralism in education. Therefore, providing information about school choices (about
their benefits but also about their potential risks and challenges) can empower
the parents to make the best choice for their child regarding the types of schools
offered and can empower teachers to creatively use the curriculum.

184

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Zuković, Milutinović

Conclusion
Judging from the assumptions about private and alternative education, the
openness towards the development of school pluralism is still in its initial stage
in Serbia. A general finding from this study is it is important continuously inform
parents about private and alternative schools. The results also indicate the need
to introduce contents in the fields of pedagogical and school pluralism into the curricula of teachers’ faculties. They also reveal a need to continue educating teachers
in this area through seminars and professional development programmes, which
would be implemented by the relevant educational institutions.
All of this is very important, since the introduction of school choice in the education system raises many questions. Thus, for example, experiences from Europe
and the United States suggest that this school choice has a tendency to increase the
educational gap between the privileged and underprivileged (Ambler 1994; Butler
and van Zanten 2007). The problem certainly arises from the fact that members
of different social classes significantly differ in motivation, their effort and time
spent in obtaining information on educational options. It seems that school choice
can contribute to social stratification, and create more opportunities for better
informed parents to enrol their children in the best schools.
The limitations of our research include, foremost, the research sample. The
possibilities for generalization are limited also results from the fact that since the
sample consists of teachers, parents and students from only one city – Novi Sad
(even though it is the second largest city in Serbia as well as a major industrial and
financial centre, university city and school centre of AP Vojvodina). To overcome
these limitations, similar research should be conducted through examining the
opinions of respondents from other parts of Serbia. This is related to the need for
further comparative study about positive foreign experiences (especially in countries with a developed democracy and healthy economy) and the possible ways of
applying those experiences to different education levels in Serbia (Savićević 2000).
Western European countries follow somewhat different educational policies in terms
of private and alternative schools (for example, the different amount of financial
support that individual countries provide to private and alternative schools). Given
the similarities between Serbia and these other transitional countries, it is very
important to understand their histories of transition to avoid repeating the same
mistakes in the development of educational policies in Serbia.
References
Ambler, S. J. (1994). Who benefits from educational choice? Some evidence from Europe.
Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 13, issue 3, pp. 454–476.
Butler, T. and van Zanten, A. (2007). School choice: A European perspective. Journal of
Education Policy, 22, issue 1, pp. 1–5.
Cox, H. J. and Witko, C. (2008). School choice and the creation of social capital re-examined.
American Journal of Political Science, 52, issue 1, pp. 142–155.


Teachers,
parents and students attitudes towards private and alternative schools: The case of Serbia

185

Eurydice (2000). Private education in the European Union: Organisation, administration
and the public authorities’ role. Brussels: Eurydice.
Johnson, J. (1995). Assignment incomplete: The unfinished business of education reform.
New York: Public Agenda.
Klus-Stanska, D. and Olek, H. (1998). Private education in Poland: Breaking the mould.
International Review of Education, 44, issue 2-3, pp. 235–249.
Kozakiewicz, M. (1992).The difficult road to educational pluralism in Central and Eastern
Europe. Prospects, 22, issue 2, pp. 207–215.
Matijević, M. (2009). Školski i pedagoški pluralizam u zemljama u tranziciji [School and
pedagogical pluralism in the countries in transition]. In: N. Potkonjak (ed.). Buduća
škola I [School of the future I]. Beograd: Srpska akademija obrazovanja, pp. 193–206.
Matulčikova, M. (2003). Alternativne škole u Slovačkoj – savremeno stanje i perspektive
[Alternative schools in Slovakia – Contemporary situation and perspectives]. Pedagoška
stvarnost, 49, issue 3-4, pp. 347–357.
Milutinović, J. (2011). Alternative u teoriji i praksi savremenog obrazovanja: put ka kvalitetnom obrazovanju [Alternatives in the theory and practice of contemporary education:
A way to high quality education]. Novi Sad: Savez pedagoških društava Vojvodine;
Vršac: Visoka škola strukovnih studija za obrazovanje vaspitača “Mihailo Palov”.
Milutinović, J. and Zuković, S. (2013). Educational tendencies: Private and alternative
schools. Croatian Journal of Education, 15, issue 2, pp. 241–266.
Nagata, Y. (2006). Alternative education: Global perspectives relevant to the Asia-Pacific
region. Dordrecht: The Netherlands: Springer.
OECD. (1998). Škole i kvalitet [Schools and Quality]. Beograd: Zavod za udžbenike i nastavna sredstva.
Plank, D. (2006). Unsettling the state – How ‘demand’ challenges the education system in
the US. European Journal of Education, 41, issue 1, pp. 13–27.
Rajić, V. (2008). Stavovi učitelja i roditelja o razvoju privatnog i alternativnog osnovnog
školstva u Republici Hrvatskoj [Attitudes of teachers and parents on the development
of private and alternative elementary education in the Republic of Croatia]. Odgojne
znanosti, 10, issue 2, pp. 329–347.
Raywid, M. A. (1999). History and issues of alternative schools. Education Digest, 64, issue
9, pp. 47–51.
Ridl, K. (2003). Alternativne škole i inovacije u obrazovanju [Alternative schools and innovations in education]. Pedagoška stvarnost, 49, issue 3-4, pp. 337–346.
Savićević, D. M. (2000).  Put ka društvu učenja [The way to learning society]. Beograd: Đuro
Salaj, Prosvetni pregled.
Sliwka, A. (2008). The contribution of alternative education. In: Innovating to learn, learning to innovate. Paris: OECD. pp. 93–112.
Sliwka, A. and Istance, D. (2006). Choice, diversity and „exit” in schooling – A mixed picture.
European Journal of Education, 41, issue 1, pp. 45–58.
Spasenović, V. and Vujisić Živković, N. (2017). Pokušaji ostvarivanja pedagoškog pluralizma
u obrazovnoj politici i praksi u Srbiji [Attempts to achieve pedagogical pluralism in
education policy and practice in Serbia]. Acta Iadertina,14, issue 1, pp. 1-14.
Spevak, Z. (2001). Alternativne škole – razvoj, pojmovni okvir i funkcije [Alternative schools
– Development, conceptual framework and functions]. Pedagoška stvarnost, 47, issue
9-10, pp. 659–665.

186

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Zuković, Milutinović

Strategija razvoja obrazovanja u Srbiji do 2020. godine [Strategy  of education development
in Serbia by the year 2020]. (2012). Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije – Prosvetni
glasnik, Br. 107/2012.
Vrcelj, S. (2000). Školska pedagogija [School pedagogy]. Rijeka: Filozofski fakultet.
Zakon o osnovnom obrazovanju i vaspitanju [The Law on Primary Education]. (2013).
Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije – Prosvetni glasnik, Br. 55/2013.

Slađana ZUKOVIĆ, Jovana MILUTINOVIĆ (Univerza v Novem Sadu, Srbija)
ODNOS UČITELJEV, STARŠEV IN ŠTUDENTOV PEDAGOGIKE DO ZASEBNIH IN
ALTERNATIVNIH ŠOL: PRIMER SRBIJE
Povzetek: Namen študije, ki smo jo opravili, se je nanašal na razumevanje odnosa učiteljev, staršev in
študentov pedagogike do zasebnih in alternativnih šol. Inštrument, ki smo ga uporabili, je sestavljen
iz dveh podlestvic, nanj pa je odgovarjalo 441 posameznikov, ki so bili vključeni v vzorec. Rezultati kažejo, da respondenti nimajo niti izrazitih negativnih niti pozitivnih stališč o zasebnih oz. alternativnih
šolah, pri čemer verjamejo, da med javnimi in zasebnimi šolami ni pomembnih razlik. Sklenemo lahko,
da bi bilo za zagotavljanje boljših pogojev za delovanje in razvoj alternativnih in zasebnih šol v Srbiji
nujno prizadevanja usmeriti zlasti v širjenje informacij med strokovnjake in starše o dejavnostih, ki
jih te šole izvajajo.
Ključne besede: šolski pluralizem, Srbija, zasebne in alternativne šole, izbira šole, kakovost izobraževanja.
Elektronski naslov: sladjana.zukovic@ff.uns.ac.rs