El empoderamiento en el contexto sociopolítico y económico

The SASP (2005b p 5) suggests that principal use better recruitment and selection procedures. The whole process of recruitment and selection as observed by the researcher is based on the educators who are available for selection but too few are trained every year to meet the needs of the country. Although the principal is an ex-officio member of the selection process the selection panel is made up of

members who may select according their own bias and the final selection is made by the Department of Education based on the recommendations. The school ends up appointing someone who may not fill the post adequately. The educator’s often remain in the position for many years even if they are unsuitable for the position. This policy of recruitment and selection poses challenges as many personnel take up leadership promotion posts for various reasons. School C, for example, require HODs and educators who are pedagogically strong and innovative to make a

difference to the instructional core but the main body of the teaching cohort remains the same for many years.

Tomlinson (2004 pp 133-134) regards the setting of performance targets as one of the core roles of the management team. Performance management thus also involves provision of feedback to the monitored people and the determination of the needed improvements where and when possible. Coleman, et al. (2003 p 84) claim that such monitoring can promote people’s accountability for their work, provided that it is conducted in a structured and well-managed manner. They recommend the drafting of monitoring policies, which clarify aspects such as quality teaching,

effective learning, assessment and recordkeeping.

In School B, according to the HODs, monitoring is done by moderation “within the different grades” and “within the different subjects”. The Grade heads check the “mark books, files and small book control”. The subject head also does the same. “There is book controls, monitoring of assessments, there’s post and pre

172

the school knows exactly what is happening in the school in terms of teaching and learning. The quality of curriculum delivery is monitored very closely. Educators are encouraged to improve pedagogy by using practical situations and experiential learning. Every opportunity is used to improve the quality of learning and the quality of teaching.

However, the educators of the other two case schools stated that much of their supervision is conduct for IQMS purposes and they receive a report where improvements are recommended with timeframes to make sure that they have attended to it. In School C the district and the SMT do monitoring of educators work. The educators are given feedback and then the HODs and principals call individual educators for discussion on areas of development.

The FP HOD says that the school has set up a School Based Support Team to “monitor the children who have problems in learning”. If the school fails to address the problem the learner is referred to the District where additional help could be sought. The school enjoys a healthy relationship with the District. They also have a separate “school assessment team” which deals specifically with assessments so that “tasks are monitored for suitability and standardization”. Interventions come in the form of setting up Saturday classes were educators take the initiative to helping learners with learning difficulties.

The Deputy Principal of School C explains that class visits were conducted to see “how the educators are delivering lessons”, which is not real monitoring. The monitoring panel then identifies the development aspects of each educator. The School Development Team then draws a development plan. This Intermediate Phase HOD is involved in checking the educators’ registers, moderates and checks examination scripts and work with the DP and the educators’ performance.

Monitoring takes place by “checking educators’ files with work schedules”. While Earley and Bubb (2004 pp 77-82) recommend that data collection instruments, such as questionnaires, observations, participants’ portfolios and interviews be used for progress monitoring purposes and stress the importance of regular and constructive feedback to the monitored and evaluated parties, Rhodes, et al. (2004 pp 25-31) promote classroom observation as a form of performance

173

management. These may be essential for performance management but are very hard to achieve in any school. The staff of all three schools has a full teaching load and daily schedule. HODs teach a full day with one or two hours of management time that it is impossible to do justice with performance management.

7.11 Professional development

The SASP (2005b p5) identifies “the basis of improved performance management and processes applicable to principals” and “the professional development needs of principals and aspiring principals.” (Van der Westhuizen & Van Vuuren, 2007 p 439). Seyfarth (1999, p. 7) sees instructional leadership as an “electric merging of instructional supervision, curriculum development and staff development.”

The view is endorsed by Blasé and Blasé (1999) who argue that instructional leadership is a blend of tasks, such as shaping and communicating goals,

supervising and evaluating instructional practices, developing and co-ordinating the curriculum, developing staff and evaluating progress in learner achievement.

However, Krajewski (1996) argues that instructional supervision is not entirely collaborative but is moving from control to collaboration because power differentials still exist between instructional leaders and teachers. Given the hierarchical nature of the South African school as an organisation and the SMT’s role of evaluation responsibilities the teachers find themselves in power play situations since in this relationship exists a strong element of power and judgment. In all three schools that were studied it was found that thorough supervision of the teachers work is not carried out because of time constraints, workloads and other interferences such as highly unionized teachers who sees their role as professionals and questions classroom visits.

Most of the supervision and class visits in all three schools are done because of the Integrated Quality Management System (IQMS) which requires each teacher to be evaluated, a professional growth programme to be developed and then each teacher to be given a time frame to develop in those identified areas. However, professional development is then fragmented due to constraints in funding, service providers and trying to satisfy the structured options and individual need of

174

Lambert’s study (2003) found that teachers performing at a high level of personal and professional capacity tended to become involved in external opportunities, networks and graduate programmes. Similar types of opportunities should be available to all our educators to develop them on an ongoing basis. The principal of School B tries hard to implement developmental programmes with her teachers. School B designs a “development plan” where educators that are “very weak gets on a form of some sort and we (HODs) write down exactly their weak points and how we’re going to improve on them”. Educators are also given the minutes of the meeting indicating their weaknesses and they sign to acknowledge that they have “listened and are aware of their “development areas” and have to try “out everything into practice” and when it is not done by the time suggested then they are made accountable for their actions or lack thereof. This is “ongoing” and support and guidance is given to those that require it and they are visited in the classroom more than once.

Older educators “don’t appreciate it because they think that they’ve been teaching for many, many years and they know everything. This poses a problem but the HOD says that she needs to change her stance by being sensitive to the “educators needs” and their feelings by wording it in such a way that “they don’t think that you are there to invade their teaching or their territory”. “you may do so by giving suggestions on “how a worksheet can change” or by using some “new textbook”. The approach of leadership must change to suit the purpose and the individual. Younger educators are more “willing” and “will do whatever you ask them to do”. The instructional leaders will suggest workshops for educators to attend. It depends on the educator what development they may need.

A senior educator in School B specifies that “English is the learners’ second or third language, concepts cannot be understood” so they have to do “a lot of visual work, you’ve got to give them things like measuring tapes ...as “language is the biggest barrier” to learning. They had to “lower the language for understanding” and make adjustments to their pedagogy by using the environment to make learning more meaningful. Much communication is encouraged between educators who take over new learners at the beginning of the year to understand each learner’s potential and where he left off.

175

She indicated that the various changes pertaining to the curriculum had forced change in pedagogy and teaching style and when she finds it difficult to implement she is “always going back to the Grade heads and subject head” for guidance and support. Instructional teams provide instructional leadership and set up teams to assist with problems. Although much of her teaching is class teaching she is aware of the learners who are struggling and she gives them individual attention.

Thembi from the SP says that she “goes to anyone” for help but not so much to the principal. Shawne says that they “have a good team of educators at this school and the school is managed by a good principal”. The “focus is mainly on the academic side of the school and you are always expected to be busy and working”. Mary points out there is “a really great system of communication and that if you need to talk to somebody you can go to absolutely anybody”. She says that “we are valued as teachers in the school as much as we value our principal and management team”.

The HODs and the principal in School C identify areas of development. These are written into the minutes to formalise the discussion. The HOD says that the

educator is given an option to select a peer to help develop them. Peer teaching and peer coaching are used and the educators are sent to various district

workshops to help them improve. The HOD indicates that the educators are monitored for IQMS purposes as well and that they are given their professional growth forms which indicate their areas of growth.

In School C the Intermediate Phase HOD states that that when an educator has a problem “they will approach the DSG to monitor or do class visits and discover where the problem lies”. The PGP will indicate, “what areas he wants developed and also who must develop them – it can be the SMT, the principal or the district”. They will attend workshops arranged by the district, Sadtu or Naptosa. “Educators must attend courses and cluster meetings” and report to relevant educators and the principal when they are finished.

One method of developing teachers can be the use of teacher leaders who

according to Lieberman et al state “teacher leaders gain credibility with their peers through their classroom practice” (2010, p. 665). However, Grant et al (n.d) in their

176

paper looked at this important debate in South Africa and found that teacher leadership was generally supported across the schools but the extent to which it operated in practice was limited.