Transcript Dysfunctionality to functionality? Developing schools

Dysfunctionality to functionality?
Developing schools through an
informally structured professional
development programme
EMASA CONFERENCE
11-13 March 2011
Cape Peninsula University of Technology
Bellville Campus
Visvaganthie Moodley ([email protected])
Geeta Motilal ([email protected])
7/22/2015
1
DYSFUNCTIONAL SCHOOLS
Dysfunctional schools: schools
continue to ‘exist’ but do not
accomplish the purpose for which
they were created (Gallie, 2006).
Dysfunctional
7/22/2015
Functional
2
DYSFUNCTIONAL SCHOOLS
Gallie (2006)
7/22/2015
3
SYNDICATE GROUP STRUCTURE
7/22/2015
4
Why ‘informal’?
• Syndicate leader –
leadership styles
address the specific needs of their groups
kinds of assignments & tasks were specific
to the group
• Not an accredited programme
7/22/2015
5
Theories of Leadership and Teaching &
Learning
(that inform the ELP)
• Hallinger & Murphy’s Model (1985)
• Heneveld & Craig (1996)
• Sammons et al (1995) (findings)
7/22/2015
6
Revised Conceptual Framework
teacher
Attitude & Motivation
Time on task
Purposeful teaching
High expectations
Content knowledge
Pedagogical knowledge
Classroom management
Creating literacy rich learning
environment
Professional development
otherParent & community support
Resources
Conducive environment
Facilities
Co-curricular & Extracurricular
activities
7/22/2015
learner
Attitude & Motivation
Active participation
Desire to achieve
Time on task
Literacy rich
(esp. Reading & writing)
school principal
Professional leadership
Attitude & motivation
Vision for the school/ Shared goals
Knowledge of educator staff
Knowledge of learner population
Partnership with community
Visibility, monitoring, evaluation &
feedback
7
Mentoring strategies
AIMS
(i) To investigate the challenges that two school
principals (one primary school and one high
school principal in Gauteng) experience at
their schools and the extent of progress made
over 18 months, since the implementation of
the programme
(ii) To determine the effect that an informal,
unaccredited programme has on school
leadership development.
7/22/2015
8
ARGUMENT
Positive changes in school management and
leadership which affect classroom teaching
and learning practices can occur, in varying
degrees, within an informally structured PDP.
7/22/2015
9
METHODOLOGY & DATA COLLECTION
PROCEDURES:
• Qualitative paradigm
• Case study approach
DATA:
• School profile information sheet (provided in
questionnaire format)
• Participants’ portfolio of work (an essential
component of the programme)
• individual interviews
7/22/2015
10
FINDINGS: MAJOR CHALLENGES
SCHOOL P (PRIMARY SCHOOL)
SCHOOL S(SECONDARY SCHOOL)
(1640 learners & 43 educators)
(875 learners & 27 educators)
Educator subject expertise
Educator attitude & motivation
Text book use & management
Accountability
Overcrowding (48 - 55 per class)
Time on task
Numeracy foundations for learning
Literacy foundations for learning
Assessment
Focused monitoring
Professional development
Conflict with unions
7/22/2015
Socio economic problems
Learner attitude & motivation
Educator attitude & motivation
Educator subject expertise
Time on task
Teacher absenteeism
Self perception of ineffective
leadership qualities
Monitoring of curriculum
delivery
Professional development
Conflict with SGB
11
FINDINGS: SCHOOL P
Language scores: Pass – 50%
60%
52%
49%
50%
45%
40%
42%
40%
30%
Series1
25%
20%
10%
0%
1
2
3
4
5
6
GRADE
7/22/2015
12
FINDINGS: SCHOOL P
Maths scores: Pass – 50%
70
70
60
57
54
50
40
30
30
25
20
Series1
22
10
0
1
7/22/2015
2
3
4
5
6
13
SCHOOL P: ACTION
• Focused monitoring: Time on task
• Text book use & management
• Professional development
7/22/2015
14
FINDINGS: SCHOOL P
focused monitoring: time on task
‘... before I never calculated the wasted minutes. I’d just scold and say
“we are wasting time” and all that. But when you just highlighted
what about the 15mins you waste in the morning before you er start
school, what about the minutes after break when learners must go to
the classroom’ … the (programme) ‘really raised the bar’ then I went
back to school … we (the deputy principal & speaker) took our pens
to the assembly and we just monitored about 5 teachers. Ok. ... we
recorded the time learners took to move from the assembly to the
classroom and then we looked at the teachers. Teachers were busy
talking to others and we counted the minutes, then we saw one
teacher having a page walking towards the admin office, and saw she
wanted to make copies for that period. Then we saw her with a stack
of papers walking towards her class to teach. The period was 40 mins
7/22/2015
15
long
and now she was left with 15 minutes to teach. ...’
FINDINGS: SCHOOL P
Text Book Use & Management
• ‘... we were so scared to give the learners the books, we used to give
them in class but not to let them take them home’ ... ;
• ‘Because when a child has lost a book, the parent would say “I’m not
employed”, “I’ve got no money”. But after (you emphasised) “How will a
learner learn to read if they don’t have a book to read” and this thing
about writing notes on the chalkboard when it is in the book it’s a waste
of time. So we (the staff) decided that we call a meeting with the parents
and they must sign for the text books to look after them. ...’
• ‘So now more work is covered in the 40 minutes’ ... and the learners,
they are doing more homework. Ja, they are writing more... and the
spelling of words, they copy the correct spelling now’.
• ‘And we teaching them (the learners) to respect and love their books and
look after them.’
7/22/2015
16
Teacher absenteeism
• Monitoring of
i) educator’s attendance and
ii) going to class in time.
 drew up a monitoring tool in the form of a register where each
educator had to sign in and out.
 At the end of the week he summed up the data
 defaulters were called to account for their attendance.
 Monitored teachers time in class
Results: The monitoring tools had an immediate impact
whereby educators’ attendance improved dramatically.
7/22/2015
17
Monitoring of Curriculum delivery
• Principal B began effective monitoring of the curriculum by
indicating in his interview that
“I started analyzing data/test results… I learnt that through these results
you can determine curriculum performance… I then had term meetings –
we discussed where we are, how we were performing and how to improve
the performance…”
• Some of the solutions were
“to encourage those underperforming educators to develop
themselves”,
to “discuss with learners and to give learners incentives…”
Results: Results have improved from the first term to the second
term.
7/22/2015
18
FINDINGS: SCHOOL P
Professional development workshops
7/22/2015
19
Professional
development
Monitoring and mentoring of educators by HODs
•
• Induction of new educators
• HODs and Subject advisors to demonstrate lessons to
educators
• Educators were encouraged to consult HODs when they
have problems and avoid waiting until it is too late
• The IDSO to monitor and mentor principals
• Networking
• Ongoing collaboration with feeder schools so that
primary schools and high school have a good
understanding of each level and its requirements.
• The ELS group to meet every term to discuss challenges
and progress made thus far
Results: much more collaboration, sharing of ideas,
attitude change and overall improvement
7/22/2015
20
Conclusions
• Principal characteristics:
Positive attitudes
High expectations of self & school as a whole
Takes ownership of school
Presence is felt in school
Shares in the responsibility for learner performance
Collaborates with staff & community towards benefit of learners
Unafraid to approach teachers on a one to one
Draws on stronger teachers to act as mentors to those who need
development
Offers professional & academic leadership
7/22/2015
21
Conclusions
• That a professional development programme
need not be accredited to achieve its aims
• That positive changes can be made to dys- &
semi-functional schools, depending on the
attitude and motivation, and other qualities
(mentioned above) of the principal & staff
7/22/2015
22