DISPOSICIÓN DE TIEMPO LIBRE

The descriptor, “Negative forces”, collectively describes the factors most closely associated with the study schools being at risk and declining. They are outlined in blue on the left side of Figure 13. While positive actions were taken in an attempt to develop, support and improve the schools, the schools became increasingly debilitated by negative influences. Unfortunately for the study schools, the negative forces far outweighed the positive forces, which resulted in the decline continuing and escalating.

Education policy

A number of changes to education policy in New Zealand, during the period when the study schools were in decline, put already vulnerable schools under increased pressure, thus

contributing to that decline. The policy changes, discussed in detail in chapter 5, included some of the demands associated with the introduction of Tomorrow’s Schools, de-zoning, initial refusal of the MOE to support schools, publicised ERO reports and the nature of the intervention processes of the MOE during the early stages of the Schools Support Project.

Leadership

Poor leadership or lack of leadership was a prevailing negative force at some stages during the decline in each of the study schools. There were nine principals, and many deputies and associates employed in the three schools over their decline periods. Some were regarded as effective and were respected by the majority of staff. Others, however, lacked the skills and experience to lead successfully and some exhibited a range of unethical and unprofessional behaviours that had negative consequences for their schools. During some stages of the decline, the ineffective and/or problematic senior leaders outnumbered and/or outranked the effective leaders.

S/he was a great DP and virtually ran the school. S/he went on to be a great principal at ---. At the time s/he was outnumbered by the other useless members of the team and eventually ran out of energy and left. (Senior leader)

One of the DPs was very able, and so were some of the HODs, but they had less authority and power than the principal and the other DP so they could not change things that needed to change. (Middle manager)

During the course of this assessment the principal handed in (his/her) resignation. This school is in need of the skills necessary to address the chronic problems with which it is afflicted. (Report to MOE)

Some principals were ineffectual in dealing with the increasing number of problems and the unprofessional behaviour of some staff.

While the principal is a genuine and respected person in the community, many people believe that s/he does not have the capacity to turn around the current state of decline of the school. (Report to MOE)

There were times when some school leaders condoned unprofessional and unethical practices and even participation in them. Standards and expectations dropped as a result of the behaviours being modelled by the leaders.

The principal was late to meetings. It became customary to be late to the start of class, and I’m talking about the teachers as well as the students. (Senior leader)

Even the students knew it was going on. It became accepted as almost normal to take school gear home whenever you wanted to. When the adults did it, it was called borrowing; when the students did it, it was called stealing. (Middle manager)

The school in this latter quote, developed a culture of acceptance around not expecting to have good equipment, not really caring for things, not questioning when something went missing, and not expecting to have things replaced. In all three schools there was a steady erosion of standards and expectations that was largely unchallenged by school leaders.

Governance

Poor quality governance and some dysfunctional boards were negative influences in the study schools. In all three schools, decline began shortly before the introduction of Tomorrow’s Schools, when the schools were governed by boards of governors. There is limited data in this research project about the boards of governors during that time, except in relation to some of the leadership appointments they made. There is general agreement by research participants that some principal and DP appointments were not successful. Study school trustees and senior leaders reported that four of the appointments made by Boards of Governors were controversial at the time they were made.

The board was divided. One of the board members told me later that some of them regretted agreeing to that appointment. They were pushed into it by the person advising them. (Senior leader)

After the introduction of Tomorrow’s Schools, trustees and school leaders in the study schools were mostly critical of the lack of effective governance training they received. Not all board members received training and the transfer of knowledge and skills back to individual study school boards was felt to be very fragmented. An area of training that was mentioned by several trustees as being largely overlooked was advice to boards about how

to be effective employers, including how to make principal appointments and manage the review of the principal’s performance. Trustee interviewees knew, on reflection, there were problems emerging that their principal seemed unable to manage. Several said they felt responsible for not doing more at the time.

We might have been able to sort things out if we had been stronger and more determined to take action. We convinced each other that things were under control, when I think we all knew they weren’t. (Trustee)

Another area which became increasingly important, in which trustees felt inadequate, was that of finances and property. Trustees said they were inexperienced at reading monthly accounts and were heavily dependent on the principal to manage the school’s finances and to provide explanations. Some trustees felt uncomfortable asking questions of their principal and some principals kept information from their boards. It is possible that a high trust model may have worked if there had been no financial problems and when the principal was honest and making wise decisions. There were examples in the study schools of one or more of these conditions not being met, resulting in financial mismanagement.

I think we all went into shock when we found out what had been happening. We really didn’t get proper financial reports and we did not think to check on school systems to make sure this sort of thing couldn’t happen. (Trustee)

The trustees who were interviewed strongly regretted not seeking effective training for their whole board, not questioning things that were of concern and not seeking independent advice.

Community conflict/contests

There were a number of instances where broader community conflicts and divisions impacted strongly on the declining schools. When an issue that divided people politically or culturally was being debated in the local community, the same issue tended to divide trustees and staff inside the school at a time when schisms and factions added to the fragility of the schools. There were also occasions when a school issue polarised parents and staff on the basis of groupings that existed outside of the school. Trustees reported that parents found themselves in the position of trying to decide which side of the story to

accept. Differing perceptions and values, as well as sources of information, played a role in the decisions that parents made.

The community was quite split in some ways …. Around (area A) you’ve got an urban, conservative, mainstream sort of community. Then around (area B) you’ve got the alternatives, far more liberal type of person. I think some of the board members lived in (area A) and they were supported by the staff that lived in that area, so they captured the thing and then tried to impose it on the school. (Senior leader)

Political frictions and rivalries of the past became evident between people. (Report to MOE)

The main way that community conflicts and issues escalated the decline was when families withdrew their children from the school, escalating the falling roll. As well as the impact of a falling roll, the tensions caused by conflict took their emotional toll on school staff and trustees.

Board meetings were tense and there was a sense of having to walk on egg shells. (Trustee)

(We lost) that sense of collegiality and being on the same page. Once relationships broke down, there were problems because a school is such a relational community. (Middle manager)

Teacher Unions

There were examples reported from all three study schools of the secondary teachers’ union67_{, PPTA, having a negative influence and contributing to the escalation of decline in} two ways. First, union field officers, acting as advocates for union members, sometimes contributed to a school’s decline by defending and protecting non-performing and/or badly behaving teachers. The principals and trustees were often frustrated in their attempts to require change and improvement from a teacher because the leaders were worn down by the process required by union advisors and/or by the unpleasant nature of the interactions.

67_{New Zealand has two main teacher unions. Post Primary Teachers’ Association (PPTA) is the voluntary} union and professional association of secondary school teachers. New Zealand Educational Institute (NZEI Te Riu Roa) is the largest educational union in New Zealand for primary, intermediate and middle schools’ teachers.

It was relentless and exhausting trying to do what we knew was right for the students. There was not a teacher in the school who would have wanted their child in ---‘s class. Year after year another cohort of students had their learning put on hold in that class because the union blocked all the school attempts to do something. (Senior leader)

The hours we spent were huge and it got us nowhere because the PPTA officer was an arrogant bully who kept threatening PGs68 _{and would not listen to any of our evidence. We could not afford}

to pay for a lawyer and the STA person just wasn’t up to the fight. (Senior leader)

We came out of each meeting feeling abused and as though the school was at fault. No matter how hard we tried to collect evidence there was always a reason why we could not use it. (Senior leader)

Interviewees reported that parents and students could not understand why it should take so long for poorly performing staff to change or be required to leave the school. School leaders, including trustees, were unable to explain and some felt guilty about not being able to take effective action.

Everyone knew s/he was a lazy and hopeless teacher. Parents complained and students got angry but no matter how hard we tried to do something s/he managed to keep the job. Each time we collected the evidence, the union said s/he was technically competent. S/he would put in a big effort for a few weeks and then just go back to being hopeless as soon as the pressure was off. (Middle manager)

I felt so embarrassed having to front up to parents. In the business world incompetent people would be gone but in schools it seems that you have to just about be an axe murderer to lose your job. (Trustee)

There were examples of principals who made mistakes implementing the employment process and who were challenged about such missteps. But there were also examples of teachers who used their union connections as a threat and there were leaders who felt intimidated by the prospect of litigation. As decline began in the study schools, the stress, pressure, time demands and financial costs made it difficult to work through a competency

68_{A Personal Grievance is a claim that can be brought by an employee against a school BOT if they believe} their employment contract has been breached.

or discipline process and it became increasingly beyond the capacity of the schools to accomplish.

The second way participants observed the teacher unions contributing to school decline occurred when the union branch in a school became the focal point for increasing negativity and resistance. This happened in all three study schools on a number of occasions. Teachers who were put under pressure to improve their performance, or those who were challenged because of their unprofessional behaviour, tended to group together and seek support from each other, from active union colleagues and from field officers.

The union meetings were a sham. They were where all the moaning and groaning people who complained about everything did their moaning. They did not represent the view of the majority of staff but they acted as though they did. (Middle manager)

Occasionally the negativity was seen as intensifying when the field officer visited the school, listened only to branch spokespeople and gave advice that strengthened the resistance.

It made us (senior leaders) so angry when they (PPTA branch members) called in the field officer, told him/her a lot of rubbish and then came back to us telling us what we could and couldn’t do. (Senior leader)

The role of union field officers in providing advice and advocacy for their members has the potential to be destructive for the school, if the advice is based on a one-sided or inaccurate account of events. The study schools appeared to suffer from the effects of unbalanced advice from field officers and from their protection of poorly performing teachers.

Destructive personal responses

Staff responded to being part of a declining school in a wide range of ways, some of which were destructive and which had negative consequences for their school. Negative responses included a lack of awareness of the decline beginning, confusion over mixed messages, divided loyalties, feelings of powerlessness, rationalisation of their own actions, finding coping strategies, and gate keeping of information. There were also active responses like resignation, sabotage and whistleblowing. The responses that especially contributed to the

escalation of the decline were those that blocked or hindered positive change and those that added to the negative forces.

There were lots of reasons why people did not do anything; partly lack of knowledge, partly everyone is on their treadmill and partly because you don’t get that big picture when you are in the middle of it. It’s a time when those factors which stop you doing anything are probably going to have a stronger effect on you if you do nothing. (Senior leader)

Personal responses that blocked or hindered change included attitudes of denial of the seriousness of the situation, blaming and scapegoating of individuals and agencies, the decision by highly regarded staff to leave, and the reluctance or inability of some MOE personnel to act decisively.

For us it was about survival. We were so focused on self-protection and getting through each day that we didn’t want to believe what people were saying. (Middle manager)

Even though we could prove it was happening, the ministry wouldn’t take any action to stop our local schools from blocking our access to parents. (Senior leader)

Personal responses that added to the negative forces included the unethical and unprofessional behaviour of some staff, ineffective leadership, the decision of poorly performing staff to stay, the protection of poor teacher performance by some union field officers and power plays by staff or trustees.

Unethical/unprofessional behaviour

Study school data provided wide-ranging examples of behaviours that were unprofessional and/or unethical and which resulted in negative impacts. As previously explained, behaviours ranged in seriousness from occasional illegal acts to more frequent unwise decisions and actions. Some of the serious behaviours gave rise to crises or, at least, adverse reactions within the schools. The less dramatic behaviours played a key role in changing the school culture into one that became accepting of unprofessional behaviour such as lies, bullying, backstabbing, rudeness, negative responses to suggestions and resistance to change.

More often than not at staff meetings someone would have a go at someone else. Lots of us avoided the staff room and stayed in our classrooms because the staff room was not a happy place to be in. (Middle manager)

In all three schools, the school PPTA branch became the channel through which disaffected staff united to express their anger and frustration and to resist and block changes that school leaders were trying to facilitate.

There were letters going backwards and forwards between the PPTA branch and the principal. (Trustee)

Every time the PPTA met it was a slanging match. It was all the teachers who were not performing because they supported each other and were threatened by what management were trying to do to improve things. (Middle manager)

Positive change was hindered and the negativity that was generated contributed to the decline escalation.

The problems were caused by some staff. This group (of staff) needled and needled away at (the principal) and as new staff came in they would gather them under their wing. We had a good board that were local businessmen and genuinely interested in the welfare of the school but they did not realise how serious things were. (Senior leader)

There is consistent evidence of conflict, resentment and resistance by many employees to management directives. (ERO report)

Some bad behaviours became frequent and almost accepted as normal or inevitable to the stage that they were rarely challenged. Some of these behaviours caused unpleasantness for staff, for instance rudeness, backstabbing and bullying. Other behaviours caused inconvenience to others such as lateness to meetings, not meeting deadlines and poor quality work.

There was so much backstabbing amongst the staff that you didn’t know who to trust and you were careful of who you spoke to. You didn’t know what to say to whom. (Support staff)

Changing attitudes and habitual behaviours was a challenge that could not be affected in a short time. Although this was sometimes recognised, it did not always result in long-term solutions being put in place.

The consultants won’t have sufficient impact to alter (staff) perceptions and deal with industrial problems. (MOE file note)

Ineffective performance

Poorly performing teachers and school leaders had a very negative influence on the reputation of the study school and on student opportunities. Evidence of problems with the performance of some teachers and leaders was provided in the interviews and in MOE documents. As the schools declined the remaining staff reported feeling under increasing pressure to perform effectively and make the necessary changes so that public perceptions about the school would improve. Some staff reacted badly to such pressure and their