Rendimiento académico y evaluación

3.5.1 The purpose of teachers’ PDPs

The quality of education has been a major global concern for decades (Steyn, 2009:257). To address this concern many reform initiatives have focused on the quality of classroom teaching and more specifically on the teacher as a key to improving learner performance

(Knight & Wiseman, 2005:387). The effectiveness of reform initiatives depends on the quality of RSSTs and as a result the WIPD of teachers has become a major focal point of such initiatives (Desimone et al., 2006:181). Therefore, it is believed that RSSTs have the most direct, sustained contact with learners, as well as considerable control over what is taught and the climate of learning; it is reasonably assumed that teachers’ knowledge, skills and dispositions are one of the most critical steps to improving learner achievement (King & Newman, 2001:86). This explains the degree of pressure exerted on teachers to be competent in the classroom, and indicates a dire need for the WIPD of teachers to meet these expectations (Steyn, 2009:257).

In addition, Munonde (2007:34) states that the purpose of PDP is to promote a learning process which will enhance the performance of individuals and the organization as a whole. This implies that personal development, career development, as well as organization development, are regarded as the purposes of RSST professional development (Munonde, 2007:34). Moreover, Smith and Desimone (2003:119) assert that PD is considered as an essential mechanism for developing teachers’ content knowledge and developing their teaching practice. In addition, Fisherman, Marx and Revital (2003:645) suggest that a chief objective of PDP should be to foster changes in teacher’s knowledge, belief and attitudes because these components of teacher cognition show a strong correlation to classroom practices. However, for PDPs to be successful, they must prepare RSSTs to be able to address the challenges of the grades 10-12 NCS.

3.5.2 Teacher professional development plan

A recent research by Munonde (2007:109) in Limpopo (South Africa) found that facilitators of teacher PDPs have no teacher development plan. Facilitators indicated that it is difficult to develop a teacher PD plan on their own since they work according to instructions from the province, which are usually of short notice. On the other hand, Munonde (200:110) points out that, conducting needs assessment of teachers serves as an important step in planning a PD strategy that accurately addresses the strengths and weaknesses of teachers in a particular district. However, PDPs in KZN are provided according to the DoE’s needs rather than RSSTs’ needs (Nkosi, 2010). This makes PDPs more irrelevant to RSSTs’ expectations. Welton (2000:133) maintains that a plan for implementation of PDP should begin with a policy document which reflects a SMT’s desire to value and support staff. Munonde’s (2007:

112) study indicated that principals do not have specific plan to follow when they to engage in teacher PDPs in their schools. In effective schools, the choice about teacher PDPs is allocated in the overall policy of the schools (Munonde, 2007:112).

Van der Kadenburg (in Prinsloo 2003:134-134) points out that the teacher PDP should form an integral part of the school programme, and integrated into the educational and teaching aims of the school; all stakeholders such as teachers, SMT, SGB and learners, should be actively involved in the planning and organizing of the PDP. Various methods such as peer- mentoring and coaching, subject embedded, schools and phase meetings, clusters and video- based learning should be used over a wide spectrum to meet as many needs as possible. An integrated development approach should be followed so that demands and needs of both individual and school are met; developmental activities such as further studies, workshops should take the academic and intellectual needs of the RSST into consideration; and as far as possible, aspects such as motivation and job involvement should be addressed (Van der Kadenburg in Prinsloo, 2003).

3.5.2.1 Identification of training and development needs of RSSTs

According to Quan-Balfour (2007), a teacher who is competent and knowledgeable in his or her subject can teach well and is more likely to establish a good rapport with learners, create a demographic classroom climate, maintain an orderly and learning focused environment, motivate learners and provide co-operative interaction that maximizes learning. He further points out that to be competent and knowledgeable RSSTs must receive comprehensive training and continue to learn through WIPDPs. That is the reason why one of the purposes of the IQMS is to identify both the strengths and areas of development for teachers to draw up a professional growth plan (Nkambule, 2010:5). According to Barnett (2006:2), the purpose of teacher appraisal is to provide an opportunity for teachers to receive feedback and to be recognized for their skills, as well as to assess areas for additional growth. The IQMS policy further assumes that most teachers recognize the need for, and responsibility to improve themselves professionally (DoE, 2009b:17). However, the IQMS is failing in developing teachers (Lubisi, 2006; Nkambule, 2010).

According to Lee (2005:40), PDPs should be differentiated to meet teachers’ individual needs, since their professional growth occurs when PDPs acknowledge their needs. Mewborn and Huberty (2004) identify teachers’ needs that need to be addressed in PDPs: firstly, PDP

should be designed for teachers who teach particular grades (grades 10-12); secondly, PDPs have to be sustained, contextualized and relevant to teachers’ classroom practice; and thirdly, PDPs should be site-based so that teachers understand their learners, curriculum, and their school structure (Mewborn & Huberty, 2004:2). Needs-based PDPs are supported in the belief that SMTs could monitor and evaluate RSSTs and decide what kind of PDPs they need and then guide them in aligning programmes that fit teachers needs (Desimone et al., 2006). Additionally, a needs assessment study by Baid and Rowsey (in Zacharia et al. 2009:83) found that teachers were most interested in learners’ motivation, obtaining instructional materials, learning to use computers, and in updating their own personal knowledge in subjects they teach. However, performing clerical tasks, writing lesson plans, communicating with parents, and administering tests were the least pressing needs for teachers (Zacharia et al., 2009: 83).

According to Quan-Balfour (2007), teachers’ PDPs in South Africa are too general. In many cases, PDPs do not take into consideration the local contexts and the needs of individual schools particularly, RSSs. For instance, the needs of RSSTs are not being met like those of their urban counterparts (Lyons, 2008). Lee (2004) believes that the lack of motivation in teacher development might be due to the fact that PDPs are designed to cater for the masses in the district rather than appealing to specific needs of RSSTs. The latter can be one of the reasons why RSSs’ performance in KZN is poor.

However, a study by Hlongwane (2008:14) in KZN revealed that to identify the teachers’ grades 10-12 NCS implementation problems both schools used formal meetings, informal meetings, learners’ results and learners’ complaints. In meetings, teachers’ needs were reported by teachers and discussed by the SMTs and teachers. Class visits were not conducted in both schools to identify development needs. The HOD of the investigated RSS stated that as the SMT members, they did not believe in class visits since class visits are not the only way to identify RSSTs’ development needs (Hlongwane, 2008). Another study by Mestry, Hendricks and Bisschoff (2009:482) in South Africa found that observation of lessons were not conducted. This correlates with DoE (2009b) argument that classroom observation or supervision is not undertaken in many schools in South Africa. SADTU has disagreed with individual classroom observation on the grounds that teachers of poor struggling schools particularly RSSs, with difficult working conditions and demanding school policies such as grades 10-12 NCS, CASS and paperwork, are not backed with

sufficient support from the DoE (Mestry et al., 2009). In such a situation, RSSTs’ needs are not assessed and this could be the reason why PDPs are facilitator-based rather than teacher- based. This is supported by Munonde (2007:107) who found that PD facilitators did not engage teachers in a needs analysis to find out what teachers within the district require.

3.5.2.2 Implementation of the training and development needs of RSSTs

Implementation of the training and development needs deals with an action plan, particularly after the RSST has identified his or her strengths and weaknesses in terms of preferred learning PDPs. This is because teacher PDPs are successful when teachers are interested to learn new instructional practices and volunteer to participate as opposed to being required to participate (Duke in Laughridge, 2011:36). These effective teacher PDPs are aimed at the improvement of learner performance, involving RSSTs determining the focus of their learning and providing them with learning opportunities that are school-based, continuous and supported, together with information which is facilitating theoretical understanding and collaborated problem-solving (Todorova & Osburg, 2010:1). Effective PDPs involve RSSTs in authentic problems related to teaching and learning, deepen RSSTs’ pedagogical skills and include opportunities for practice, research and reflection (Todorova & Osburg, 2010). Furthermore, Guskey (in Steyn 2009:119) suggests that PDPs must be contextualized for the school and must extend teachers’ content and pedagogical knowledge and skills related to a particular topic. This is to ensure that RSSTs know and are able to teach their subjects using teaching and learning methods such as learner-centred and group work methods.

The duration of PD workshops requires time for collaborative goal setting, instruction sessions, and time for practice and planning (Guskey, 2006). Research indicates that activities of longer duration have more subject area content-focus, more opportunities for active learning and more coherence with teachers’ existing beliefs and practices than shorter activities (Lefever-Davis, Wilson & Moore, 2003). Lee (2005) contends that the duration influences depth of teacher change. However, the challenge in South Africa is that the main PD model for teachers is still one-shot programmes which often do not emphasise subject content or pedagogical skills (Mewborn & Huberty 2004; Desimone et al., 2006).

3.5.2.3 Monitoring of RSSTs’ PDPs

Supervision of PDPs by the subject advisers and SMTs consists of checking what has been planned has happened and this can be carried out in a wide range of ways, by reminding

RSSTs and asking for progress reports. In the ongoing approach to teacher PD, the importance of feedback to teachers on their development and the impact of learners’ performance is widely supported (King & Newman, 2001; Lam & Peng, 2003). This includes creating opportunities and professional understanding which will have far greater and more beneficial effects (Budd & Early, 2004). The RSSTs need to know whether they are making progress (Steyn, 2010b:162). However, the challenge in South Africa is that most PDPs are brief workshops and conferences that do not allow follow-up sessions (Malesa, 2007; Richardson in Steyn, 2010b). However, WIPDPs can be a solution for effective development of teachers (Dali, 2011).