In Stage 1 I found that the role of donors did not seem to have much direct impact on school leaders, but with further investigation and research it became apparent that their project
design and funding initiatives did have a direct impact on educational practice at schools via the SoQ and school feeding program. In Stage 2 I undertook further investigation on donor roles at my research sites. Last year there were two donors actively involved in school improvement in Sing. UNICEF supported the implementation of the SoQ program while the World Food Program assisted in a student feeding program.
Research in Stage 2 suggests that donors’ approach in delivering aid at the school levels was one of piecemeal development, based on inadequate local consultation and constant change in educational concepts. These issues have significant impacts on school leaders and school. While the school meal program supported every school in the district, only a small number of the schools were involved in the SoQ program (28 out of 63 schools.) A school head in Sing district claimed,
I want my school to be involved in SoQ program because we have a limited budget for teaching and learning materials
This suggests that an incomplete school located in a poor village still struggles as a result of the piecemeal approach by donors. It also suggests, despite best intentions, there is a lack of understanding of the real needs of schools in a rural remote area by donors and the MOE. The piece meal approach also tended to benefit children in complete schools. This situation made it even harder for school leaders who were expected to provide equal support to all satellite school students.
Lack of consultation at all levels also contributes to this piecemeal approach. A principal reported,
Any schools that accept a school meal program from the WFP will be involved in the SoQ program and receive materials from UNICEF. Phoudonthan school is not involved in the SoQ program because a village chief didn’t want to accept the school meal program. This was because the women don’t want to cook meals for students because they have to collect fire wood and this takes away their time from farming. When the senior level brings a project whether it is good or bad we have to accept it and we have to do the same, otherwise we’ll be seen to be a weak point.
This suggests that lack of consultation at the grassroots level creates some tension between donors and communities. This situation also adds complexity to a principal’s job in dealing
with his/her community because most donor funded cooperative projects now require community participation in education. It is not always easy to encourage poor communities to become involved in supporting their schools as it takes away their working time to earn a living. In addition, this data implies that most school leaders had very limited involvement in designing the new programs and they were told to perform new tasks or functions without explanation and support. In this case it was the role of a school leader to be the implementer. If a school principal is to be a school leader who is an effective agent for education improvement at the grassroots level, he/she should be involved in decision making processes, project planning and design because they are the key implementers at the community and school levels.
Further investigation provided an additional insight into the SoQ program (see section 5.2.2.1.) This research implies that donors tend to come up with a change in educational concepts. The SoQ appeared to be a new fashion in Sing district and it was hard for school leaders to resist because it was introduced by the MOE and a key donor. The concepts underpinning the SoQ program had now become the official new inspiring framework for school improvement in the district. One senior DEB official commented,
Cluster schools were replaced by the Child Friendly School initiative and now we have the Quality School Program. I don’t understand why the cluster schools stopped running because I think they are good for regular grade meetings for all teachers in the cluster.
I acknowledge that the issue of lack of recurrent funding in support of the operation of the cluster school system creates problems. However, this research suggests that the cluster is an effective way to improve school leadership and student learning and make best use of available capacity and resources. Based on information provided by a PES official, UNICEF previously launched the Child Friendly School initiative but has now had shifted to the SoQ Program. The introduction of new educational concepts repeatedly reoccurred. I saw the five- pointed star picture hanging on the wall in one of the principal offices in Sing district. I remembered the five-pointed star because it was once used to be the ideal for teaching and learning flowing from one of the cooperative projects on education back in the 1990s.
The five-pointed star encompasses five concepts including activity-based learning, improving teacher questioning, using illustrations effectively, application to daily life and group learning and group discussion. This concept was useful twenty years ago and is still seen to be a useful guide to teaching and learning.
It can be seen from the above narratives that the implementation of the SoQ program would be another new challenge to school leaders and a useful conceptual tool was increasingly overlooked. To implement this program required a different training focus, job expectations and additional resources. It was also foreseen that this program would direct the development of future in-service training activities that should be directly linked to improving school and student outcomes. And the complexities and challenges and new fashions continue.