Educational Zones in Catalonia: Conference & Workshops Jornada Zones Educatives

In a context where schools are facing increasingly complex socio-educational challenges, there is a pressing need to articulate responses through forms of governance grounded in collaboration and shared responsibility at the territorial level. With this aim in mind, on June 2 UAB, the local education authority CEB, and the Catalan federation of teaching innovation entities FMRPC organized a conference on educational zones—an education policy that may help reduce inequalities and promote school improvement through stable alliances between schools, public administrations, and community actors. The event, held in the Rosa Sensat Auditorium (Barcelona), brought together policymakers, education professionals, and social actors.

The first part of the conference reviewed and discussed international and local experiences of school governance models operating at the zonal level. In the second part, participants worked in discussion groups focused on the hypothetical design of educational zones in Catalonia, identifying key challenges, opportunities, and debates relevant to this context. The record of this first part can be found here. 

Through a series of guiding questions—covering issues such as the territorial scale of educational zones, the competencies and functions to be exercised, the actors involved and forms of leadership required, and strategies for implementation—participants identified essential elements to consider in the development of this policy. The following text synthesizes the main agreements that should guide the configuration of such a policy, along with the challenges and tensions that must be addressed. The full report is available here.

Territorial scale: defining zones within a diverse education system

Although there is no single formula for determining the ideal territorial scale of educational zones, several shared criteria may guide their configuration and spatial definition. First, each zone should be adapted to the social, geographic, and educational characteristics of its territory, overcoming or flexibly interpreting administrative boundaries when necessary. This adaptation should be informed by a careful contextual analysis, ensuring organic coherence with existing local dynamics and identities. Second, the scale should be large enough to allow for the concentration of efforts and resources, but also sufficiently contained to enable interaction among actors and effective shared governance. The goal is for each zone to become a space for collaborative planning with common and achievable objectives, combining school autonomy with a collective educational vision that promotes shared responsibility and the strategic targeting of improvement actions and processes.

Defining the appropriate territorial scale entails significant challenges, particularly in a context as diverse as Catalonia. One of the most relevant tensions lies between proximity and efficiency: smaller zones may strengthen local identity and facilitate collaboration and pedagogical coordination, while larger zones may offer greater operational efficiency. However, small zones risk fragmenting or duplicating structures and increasing management costs, whereas larger ones may hinder the creation of meaningful relationships among actors. This tension is further accentuated by Catalonia’s territorial diversity, which requires adjusting scale to both urban and rural realities without undermining community cohesion. Moreover, functions and scale should be closely interlinked: pedagogical and community-related tasks require a manageable scale, while resource management may call for broader structures.

Participants also warned against confusing the “educational zone” defined in the Catalan Education Law (LEC)—as a space for the coordination of governance functions and activities—with other existing structures, such as school catchment zones, which could generate conceptual and operational overlaps.

Disparities in administrative capacity across municipalities add further complexity, making it necessary to explore inter-municipal cooperation arrangements or specific forms of support to ensure minimum operational capacity everywhere. Finally, zones should be defined based on educational objectives and the potential for coordination among local actors, taking into account both post-compulsory education stages and the need for sustained funding and governance oriented toward capacity-building and the consolidation of a zonal school system that avoids segmentation, guided by principles of equivalence and shared responsibility.

Competencies and functions: integrating structures without duplicating efforts

Educational zones must be endowed with a clear organizational framework and genuine operational capacity, allowing the principles of shared responsibility and cooperation to translate into concrete actions, defined by coherent and clearly delineated competencies and functions. Decisions about the scale and functions of zones are inseparable. There is also a need to advance toward a form of connected autonomy, in which schools cease to operate in isolation and become integrated within a collective strategy for social and educational improvement. Each zone should have its own educational project, developed collaboratively, aligned with the general goals of the education system, yet focused on achieving objectives adapted to local realities and priorities.

Among their core functions should be pedagogical support for schools, coordination among teachers, administrative assistance, joint planning with municipalities, and resource sharing. Zones should help strengthen educational continuity, improve staff management, reinforce links with community services, and promote professional development rooted in the local territory. To make this possible, zones need stable resources, shared governance between the Department of Education and municipalities, and school and teacher evaluation mechanisms combining peer review with external assessment. The implementation of these functions should build upon existing structures and foster a comprehensive conception of education, encompassing all learning stages and reinforcing system cohesion both vertically (across educational levels) and horizontally (among schools at the same level).

The debate on competencies and functions also raises important challenges. One key concern is the risk of lacking a sustained long-term strategy: without a far-reaching vision and stable funding, zones risk remaining unfinished projects or becoming yet another bureaucratic structure that generates dysfunctions. Participants also warned against assigning too many functions at the outset without ensuring the necessary conditions to carry them out. The distribution of competences—especially in administrative and planning matters—was also debated, as an overly broad role could overlap with other structures such as Territorial Services or the Inspectorate. This institutional redefinition generates inter-administrative tensions that should be resolved through careful coordination and recognized leadership, capable of bringing together diverse actors without duplicating efforts or issuing contradictory mandates. Furthermore, the territorial logic may clash with school autonomy if a balance is not struck between fostering cooperation and maintaining a degree of pedagogical independence.

Finally, participants stressed the importance of recognizing and integrating established initiatives—such as the Plans Educatius d’Entorn (Local Education Plans), local planning councils, or community networks—to avoid overlap and build on the experience accumulated in many municipalities, neighborhoods, and districts. The educational zone should complement these spaces, providing them with an institutional architecture that connects educational policies through a comprehensive vision extending beyond the school system, while avoiding duplication or the dilution of longstanding, legitimate initiatives. To this end, functions must be harmonized, roles redefined, and the zone’s added value made explicit through a shared project. In this regard, participants highlighted the potential role of Educational Services as zonal coordinators, provided they are reorganized and freed from overly administrative routines. Ultimately, educational zones should be locally grounded yet flexible and open, connecting and strengthening what already works within a new governance framework.

Actors and leadership: education as a shared public responsibility

At the organizational level, each zone should be structured around a basic triad of actors—the Department of Education, local authorities, and community agents—constituting the three essential pillars of territorially grounded and educationally shared governance. This structure should ensure the active participation of schools, families, students, social and cultural organizations, municipal services, and universities. Existing Municipal School Councils could be transformed into Zonal Education Councils, with broader, more functional, and deliberative compositions. Zonal governance should be genuinely inter-administrative. Participants advocated for a model of leadership that is system-oriented, institutionally recognized, and capable of strengthening relationships among actors while driving a territorially rooted education policy aimed at improvement and equity.

Regarding the most suitable type of leadership—internal or external, individual or collective—participants agreed on hybrid models: figures with both technical capacity and territorial embeddedness, complemented by collective bodies that ensure genuine participation and shared responsibility among all actors involved. In addition to the figure of a coordinator, zonal teams should include pedagogical advisors, non-teaching educational professionals, administrative support staff, and technical specialists (in IT, infrastructure, etc.), all integrated into the zonal structure.

However, establishing clear and shared leadership within educational zones poses several challenges. One major issue concerns the involvement of teachers, who may perceive zonal dynamics as an additional burden or a threat to their autonomy. To foster commitment, it will be important to promote spaces for pedagogical dialogue, professional development, and strong intermediate leadership. The need to strengthen the role of municipalities was also emphasized: despite their deep knowledge of local realities, they often lack the recognition or authority to strategically lead local education. Another challenge lies in family participation, as there is a clear gap between organized families and the large majority who remain disengaged. More horizontal and inclusive forms of parental participation will therefore be needed. In terms of leadership, participants noted the institutional vacuum at intermediate levels and the need to create specific figures endowed with legitimacy and authority to coordinate zones from a perspective of improvement rather than control.

The role of the educational inspectorate was also debated: while it provides institutional stability, its direct involvement may raise concerns unless its functions are adapted to a new, territory-based and supportive approach. The inspectorate can play a key role in evaluating and supporting zonal projects, moving toward a model where evaluation has a deeper impact on shared improvement. The information gathered through evaluation processes—and the feedback generated—represents an opportunity to foster collaboration and mutual support among schools. A key issue to resolve is how to reinforce, through evaluation, the principle of shared concern (incumbència), meaning that the challenges faced by one school or area are collectively assumed as shared responsibilities by all actors.

Implementation and scope of the policy: a firm commitment to universality

Should educational zones be conceived as a targeted policy focused on territories with greater needs, or as a universal strategy for the entire education system? On this point, participants reached broad consensus: zones should be conceived as a universal and preventive policy, capable of structurally transforming the education system and promoting equity through a proactive rather than compensatory logic. This does not preclude progressive implementation or initial prioritization of areas with greater socio-educational complexity. This approach combines universality and flexibility, enabling an equitable allocation of resources adapted to the specific needs of each zone. Moreover, committing to universal implementation does not mean homogenizing responses, but rather establishing a shared framework that guarantees educational rights across the territory while preserving the capacity to adapt and distribute resources according to the country’s diversity.

In conclusion

After identifying the main challenges and opportunities associated with developing a model of governance based on educational zones, the conference concluded with a collective reflection calling for action from both educational actors and public administrations. The Catalan education system, embedded within a rapidly changing social and territorial context, demands new structures of coordination and leadership capable of addressing an increasingly complex and unequal reality. While the difficulties of designing and implementing a model of shared territorial governance are considerable, inaction in the face of this scenario only serves to entrench existing dysfunctions and delay the structural changes required. Rethinking institutional arrangements through the lenses of shared responsibility, cooperation, and mutual concern is not merely a desirable option—it is a necessary condition for moving toward a more equitable, high-quality education system capable of responding to the challenges of both the present and the future.