Propiedades del supremo y del ínfimo

Circuit managers have also been found to develop the capacity of the support staff like school administration clerks. Schools are allocated administration clerks, cleaners and security guards. Circuit managers worked with administration clerks as they deal with technical work that directly impact the provision of education. Administration clerks run the principal’s office. They process data that is used by the school, using a computer programme called South African Schools Management System (SASAMS). Administration clerks need to understand many areas of school administration, as they deal with documents that are used to employ teachers, staff leave documents and financial records, as in most schools they are appointed as the financial officers.

As concluded in the work of Hallinger, Murphy and Petersen (1998), part of circuit managers’ instructional leadership role must be mandatory staff development for administrative staff that focuses on curriculum and instruction, thus preparing them for their role to improve teaching and learning. Circuit managers have been found in this study to be using workshops to build competency among administration clerks. The work done by these clerks is critical in assisting teaching and learning, given the amount of data they deal with in SASAMS. The data they process provides the school with valuable information on which decisions that impact on teaching and learning are based.

7.2.2.4 Circuit managers investing in the capacitation of School Governing Bodies According to the South African Schools Act no. 84 of 1996, the School Governing Body has a responsibility to promote the best interest of the school and to strive to ensure its development through the provision of quality education for all the learners in the school (Republic of South Africa, 1996b). Bischoff (1997) further adds that, for effective teaching and learning to take place, it is essential that the SGB is given empowerment to execute their functions. The Collective Agreement No.1 of 2008 states that circuit managers are responsible for assessing the support needs for capacity building of the SGBs (ELRC, 2008) (see Section 2.5). In their attempt to fulfil their role of capacitating SGBs, some circuit managers have been found to be

180

directly providing training to their SGBs themselves, whereas others indirectly provide capacitation through district-based governance directorate facilitators. Their discharge of this responsibility has been found to be underpinned by their understanding that it is their responsibility to facilitate the training of the SGB.

Furthermore, different methods are used by the circuit managers who have taken it upon themselves to train their SGB. These include workshops, circuit forums and meetings to explain certain things that need clarity. This is what Myeza had to say about her forums: “I also have forum where we meet with chairperson, treasurer and the principal twice a year.” The training provided by these circuit managers was geared to supplement the one provided by the Governance Section Directorate. This training given by these circuit managers was also intended to address areas that circuit managers may find to be problematic or to be the source of conflict. On the other hand, the reluctant circuit managers, who prefer that this task be done by the Governance Directorate officials, wanted their role to be that of facilitators. They preferred to deal with emerging issues only when there was a need for further clarification or when there are disputes. These circuit managers’ views were influenced by the contextual challenges they face when dealing with SGBs. These are discussed in the next section of this chapter. It is also argued by one participant that he preferred the Governance Directorate be responsible for SGB development, citing the low-level of education amongst the parent governors as a major challenge. Ntanzi stated that:

I try to organise workshops for them with School Governance Section …my SGBs are challenging to workshop because of their low levels of education.

It also been found that all circuit managers are at times mandated to train SGBs if there are special tasks that are to be undertaken, like the process of recruiting school principals or drawing up school budgets.

As explained in Chapter 3 (theoretical framework), Waters and Marzano’s (2006) model of instructional leadership encourages circuit managers as instructional leaders to provide access to professional growth opportunities through the design of a master plan to coordinate in-service activities of the circuit. Through their actions, circuit managers have been found to be providing some form of staff development for school principal, teachers, administration clerks and SGB members, while taking into consideration the resources they have and the difficult contexts within which they work. The staff development provided by circuit managers was however not

181

informed by a master plan. These staff development activities were informed by circuit managers’ identified development areas in the circuit, which were influenced by the findings of school visits conducted by educators. Drawing from context leadership theory, I argue that circuit managers should have the plan to ensure that their capacitation of school principals is informed by both the immediate and the long-term development needs of their circuit.