El axioma de completitud

The importance of framing vision, mission and goals as a pillar of instructional leadership is well argued by Hallinger and Murphy (1985); Locke and Lathan (1990); Waters and Marzano (2006); Mason (2013); Leithwood, Louis, Anderson and Wahlstrom (2004), as indicated in the theoretical framework (see Chapter 3). In line with this, circuit managers and principals, in

171

fulfilling their instructional leadership roles, must explicitly frame the school goals, purpose and mission. This is important because these provide the circuit with a criterion for judging whether it is successful in that process of providing education. Against this important claim, this study discovered that circuit managers that participated in the study work without a vision, mission and set of goals for their circuits, with the exception of one circuit manager. The circuit manager who had a vision and mission, and collaboratively set goals, also followed an exhaustive and stakeholder-inclusive process of developing a vision, mission and goals for her circuit. This circuit manager had a circuit with fewer schools that were in challenging contexts than the other circuit managers, though most of her schools are in poor Indian and African townships.

While some circuit managers were found to be working without a collaboratively set vision, mission and goals, it was established that, nonetheless, these circuit managers understood the importance of having a circuit vision and mission as well as goals. This is echoed by utterances of one circuit manager who said…things like vision, mission statement and goals while I know their value and that they are very important, we do not have. The challenge of framing the vision, mission and goals of the circuit emanates from the assumption underpinning instructional leadership, that vision, mission and goals must be framed in a collaborative manner (Waters & Marzano, 2006). This study has found that it is this collaborative framing of vision, mission and goals which seemed to be a hindrance; hence, some circuit managers do not have the vision, mission and goals. The challenge, one circuit manager argued, stems from the fluid situation they deal with in his circuit where the attrition rate is very high among teachers, especially principals; as a result they always work with acting principals. To re-visit the data, one of these circuit managers was very clear as to why he did not have a vision, mission and goals: “my principal and teachers leave from left and right”. This circuit manager was indicating that her principals are leaving the profession in numbers. The circuit manager looked at the principal (and teachers) as the very important stakeholder(s) in the process of framing a vision, mission and goals.

Secondly, the study found that the fluid environment that circuit managers work in subjects them to the ‘fire extinguisher’ role. This role of fire extinguisher emerged in data chapters (see Section 6.2.5); Circuit managers are called upon to attend to multiple-emergent issues that interfere with the creation of a conducive environment for teaching and learning, which is one of their core duties. One circuit manager explained this when he stated that “as a circuit

172

manager, you are a fire extinguisher”. This finding was also reported in a previous study conducted by Mthembu (2014). Mthembu’s (2014) study found that circuit managers were frequently spending their time dealing with crises and putting out fires. The study further found that during any given week there were a million things a circuit manager was called upon to do. I therefore argue that for the circuit manager who has schools located in challenging contexts, the role of a fire extinguisher is even greater. This circuit manager is always on the road, putting out fires in their circuits that make it difficult for them to be forward looking and be able to have time, energy and resources to lead a process of vision, mission and collaborative goal setting.

Furthermore, circuit managers are expected to work with many stakeholders, thus developing a vision, mission and goals in a collaborative manner through getting views from all stakeholders, takes time and resources. In a circuit there are many stakeholders, which includes the circuit management and all the staff members based there, school principal, the teachers, SGBs, unions, AmaKhosi, Izinduna, the Councillor, non-departmental organisation and many others. This study conclude that circuit manager were found to be reluctant to start the process of consultation given the wide and diverse stakeholder constituencies they have in their circuits, thus reaching an agreement about the mission, vision and goals of the circuit may be difficult. This finding about the difficulty of developing a vision, mission and goals has been reported in previous studies. For example, Mason’s (2013) study, conducted in the United States, found that one of the greatest challenges of developing a vision, mission and goals was that it took considerable effort to synthesise. The same study further reports that, for the superintendent, the initial challenge for the development of the vision/mission was the lengthy process to collect input from all stakeholders. It took considerable time and energy and many staff members to analyse feedback from stakeholders. This key finding from this current study is also confirmed and expatiated on by another study conducted by Rueter (2009). This leads to the general view that the number and diversity of organisational stakeholder have the potential to add to the amount of work required to develop mission statement that guide effective operation in the schools, making it impossible to fully operationalise the school mission. Congruent to this finding in my study about working with multiple stakeholders, Brown and Hunter (1986) add that circuit managers are required to exhibit great patience regarding the possible abuse they may receive from those who work in collaboration with them. By way of extending or adding to the current body of literature, this study revealed that, the more

173

challenging the context where the circuit and or schools the is located, the more difficulties for the circuit managers to start a process of collaboratively developing a mission, vision and goals for the circuit.

Given the difficulty and the challenges associated with working towards the achievement of vision, mission and goals framing, circuit managers try to find other methods that they can used to guide their work and to supplement a vision, mission and goals. These included a mantra (a short statement aimed at motivating followers) that was personally developed, self-developed goals, a plan discussed with principals, while others used just a plan which may only be known by themselves. Some circuit managers have been found to use the provincial education department’s mission and vision and then develop goals from it. The circuit manager who used a mantra developed it and presented it to the school principals. The goals the circuit managers have set seem to be informed by the immediate problems the circuit manager is facing in the circuit. One circuit manager indicated that her goals are to “…improve matric results in schools…deal human resource challenges…ensuring that the ATP’s (Annual Teaching Plans) are completed…” (See Section 5.6). Another circuit manager who indicated that he used a mantra was very clear that the mantra was his, as did the circuit manager who indicated that he used goals (See Section 5.6). “It’s mine and I use it in my circuit with my principals. I came up with it.” The mantra was however different as it was more forward looking compared to the goals that these circuit managers had, which were short term.

However, my argument is that within the framework of instructional leadership set out in Chapter 3, using Murphy and Hallinger’s (1986) study, a clear vision and specific goals are not always the answer. Findings from this study generally indicate and lead to general implication that, in challenging contexts, the leader’s actions involve supporting and developing a strong academic culture rather than turning around a weak culture through goal direction. For the leader to be able to do this task, context-responsive leadership theory invites circuit managers to use their practical wisdom in action, a mix of knowledge, skills and dispositions to engage in fluid conversations with dynamic situation variables (Bredeson et al., 2008) (see Section 3.4). The logical deduction from this study is that, despite some circuit managers’ inability to develop a vision, mission and goals in a manner that may be consistent with instructional leadership theory, they have however been able to act in a context-responsive manner by developing a mantra, using the provincial and district vision and missionm and to be able to plan so that there is something that the circuit looks up to. Furthermore, circuit managers need

174

to be able find ways of developing a shared vision for the goal setting process (Walter & Marzano, 2006) because a clearly focused vision also helps the superintendent shape the context of their professional work (Bredesen et al., 2008).