Education District Office support for teaching and learning in schools: the case of two districts in the Eastern Cape
- Authors: Mavuso, Mzuyanda Percival
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: Schools -- Development -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School management and organization -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Educational change -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School management teams -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School administrators -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School supervision -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School improvement programs -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Educational leadership -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Educational evaluation -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Doctoral , PhD (Education)
- Identifier: vital:16194 , http://hdl.handle.net/10353/d1006259 , Schools -- Development -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School management and organization -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Educational change -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School management teams -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School administrators -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School supervision -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School improvement programs -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Educational leadership -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Educational evaluation -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape
- Description: The idea of district support for schools is based on the view that local education offices are best placed to play a critical role in the promotion of quality teaching and learning. In performing this mandate whose characterisation has, over time, moved away from ‘inspection’ and ‘supervision’ both of which are seen as old fashioned and undemocratic, to support, which is seen as developmental. The aim of this study was to understand how three categories of district based officers, Subject Advisors, Integrated Quality Management System Coordinators and Education Development Officers support teaching and learning in schools. This was a case study of two districts in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. A total of six district officials and four school based officials participated in this study. In-depth interviews and document analysis were carried out. There were four main findings. First, support for schools by three district based officials was understood and practiced as administrative tasks, mainly consisting of monitoring policy implementation and monitoring resource provision to schools. School Management Teams saw district officers’ visits as focussing on compliance rather than support. Second, some pedagogical support was given by Subject Advisors through training teachers in subject content and methods of teaching that subject. This was done through workshops and demonstration lessons. However Subject Advisors did not at any time observe actual classroom teaching to see if teachers were implementing what they had learnt at workshops. Third, none of the officers mentioned direct support for teaching and learning at classroom level. Visits by officials were not directly linked to influencing teaching and learning classroom level. Fourth, schools saw district officials as working in separate pockets and sometimes sending different signals to them, despite claims by district officials that inter-disciplinary meetings were held among district officials, however, the nature of the coordination and the use to which it is put remains unclear. There were three main conclusions, first that although the district officials’ visits to schools were described as support, they exhibited the trappings of technicism of inspection; supervision and control; and appeared to neglect the developmental aspects implied in the notion of support. Second, the conception and practice of support visits by district officials were characterised by tension between support and control. Third, at district level support to schools lacked coordination among the three categories of officers who visit schools. This has implications for quality management in schools. Given the findings and conclusions of this study; it is recommended that the issue of support for schools be the focus of a survey research for which a probability sample must be drawn in order to generate findings that are generalisable across the participating target population. Other research could focus on investigating mechanisms by which the tension between support and control can be resolved. To improve practice of a framework for the development of a coordinated district support focusing on the core business of teaching and learning is suggested.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
- Authors: Mavuso, Mzuyanda Percival
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: Schools -- Development -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School management and organization -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Educational change -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School management teams -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School administrators -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School supervision -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School improvement programs -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Educational leadership -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Educational evaluation -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Doctoral , PhD (Education)
- Identifier: vital:16194 , http://hdl.handle.net/10353/d1006259 , Schools -- Development -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School management and organization -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Educational change -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School management teams -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School administrators -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School supervision -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School improvement programs -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Educational leadership -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Educational evaluation -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape
- Description: The idea of district support for schools is based on the view that local education offices are best placed to play a critical role in the promotion of quality teaching and learning. In performing this mandate whose characterisation has, over time, moved away from ‘inspection’ and ‘supervision’ both of which are seen as old fashioned and undemocratic, to support, which is seen as developmental. The aim of this study was to understand how three categories of district based officers, Subject Advisors, Integrated Quality Management System Coordinators and Education Development Officers support teaching and learning in schools. This was a case study of two districts in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. A total of six district officials and four school based officials participated in this study. In-depth interviews and document analysis were carried out. There were four main findings. First, support for schools by three district based officials was understood and practiced as administrative tasks, mainly consisting of monitoring policy implementation and monitoring resource provision to schools. School Management Teams saw district officers’ visits as focussing on compliance rather than support. Second, some pedagogical support was given by Subject Advisors through training teachers in subject content and methods of teaching that subject. This was done through workshops and demonstration lessons. However Subject Advisors did not at any time observe actual classroom teaching to see if teachers were implementing what they had learnt at workshops. Third, none of the officers mentioned direct support for teaching and learning at classroom level. Visits by officials were not directly linked to influencing teaching and learning classroom level. Fourth, schools saw district officials as working in separate pockets and sometimes sending different signals to them, despite claims by district officials that inter-disciplinary meetings were held among district officials, however, the nature of the coordination and the use to which it is put remains unclear. There were three main conclusions, first that although the district officials’ visits to schools were described as support, they exhibited the trappings of technicism of inspection; supervision and control; and appeared to neglect the developmental aspects implied in the notion of support. Second, the conception and practice of support visits by district officials were characterised by tension between support and control. Third, at district level support to schools lacked coordination among the three categories of officers who visit schools. This has implications for quality management in schools. Given the findings and conclusions of this study; it is recommended that the issue of support for schools be the focus of a survey research for which a probability sample must be drawn in order to generate findings that are generalisable across the participating target population. Other research could focus on investigating mechanisms by which the tension between support and control can be resolved. To improve practice of a framework for the development of a coordinated district support focusing on the core business of teaching and learning is suggested.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
The principal factor : examining the role of principals in the success of their schools
- Authors: Dubula, Nomvuyo Mildred
- Date: 2011
- Subjects: School principals -- Training of -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School improvement programs -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Educational leadership -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MPA
- Identifier: vital:8240 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1010881 , School principals -- Training of -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School improvement programs -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Educational leadership -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape
- Description: In this Treatise, a study is undertaken to analyse and examine the role of school principals in the success of their schools; with specific reference to township high schools in the Port Elizabeth district (P.E. district). The study assumes that P.E. district principals, as leaders and managers should deliver essential services effectively, efficiently, and with optimal use of resources to attain maximum results in school performance. The same is expected of their counterparts in any part of the country, it is not exclusively demanded from PE district principals. In terms of the current education legislation and policy framework, the principals have to account for the performance of their schools. To this end the National Department of Education introduced legislation in 2007 to ensure that principals account to the Head of The Department of Education of the relevant province. Section 16 A of the South African Schools Act (SASA) was introduced by the Education Law Amendment Act 31/2007. The provisions of this section deal with “the functions and responsibilities of principals of public schools.” Specifically section 16A (1) (b) states that “The principal must prepare and submit to the Head of the Department an annual report in respect of: (i.) The academic performance of that school (ii.) The effective use of available resources.” Since the enactment of section 16 A as referred to above, the Provincial Departments have begun to make principals account for the success or failure of learners, for human resource development, financial management, parent involvement in school matters and the active participation of school governing bodies. What should be clear is that the above encompasses all the critical and fundamental aspects that have an impact on the progress of any educational institution. The combination of the two requirements stated above reflects the extent to which the Department of Education is committed to making certain that principals in their respective schools create an environment where learners can achieve their full potential. It is such creation of conducive environments that will enable all learners in the country to achieve equal opportunities in society irrespective of their original backgrounds. This ideal is consistent with section 9 of the Constitution, 1996 which provides for the right to equality of all people. The research, also assumes that leadership is about direction and purpose, while management lays emphasis on effectiveness and efficiency. Leadership and management are fundamental aspects of those duties and responsibilities associated with the position of a school principal. It is further postulated that, a good principal understands that circumstances determine the proportion of each of these elements that is required by any given situation i.e. whether more of leadership or bigger dose management is appropriate in dealing with a certain set of circumstances or not. The study identifies variables that make a school principal a strong leader and good manager and lists the following as the critical focus areas: Balancing instructional and managerial leadership Strengthening the connection between school and home Developing effective leadership Effective teaching practices Staff development The study also assumes that township schools are no exception to those in different parts of the country. Despite some serious daily challenges peculiar to the township situations, these schools still have to perform satisfactorily like all other institutions of learning. The legislative and policy framework applies equally to all schools. The study argues primarily that all schools can perform well and develop the potential of their learners to the fullest. The difference lies in the leadership and management of the respective institutions by their principals. All stakeholders are presumed to posses the potential, the ability and the urge to do their utmost best to render quality services that would lead to the attainment of excellent results. It is worthwhile for the system that those who show themselves to lack these attributes should be identified, not to weed them out but to assist so that they acquire the necessary skills and expertise. After all it is by strengthening the weakest link that a chain becomes strong.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2011
- Authors: Dubula, Nomvuyo Mildred
- Date: 2011
- Subjects: School principals -- Training of -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School improvement programs -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Educational leadership -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MPA
- Identifier: vital:8240 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1010881 , School principals -- Training of -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , School improvement programs -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Educational leadership -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape
- Description: In this Treatise, a study is undertaken to analyse and examine the role of school principals in the success of their schools; with specific reference to township high schools in the Port Elizabeth district (P.E. district). The study assumes that P.E. district principals, as leaders and managers should deliver essential services effectively, efficiently, and with optimal use of resources to attain maximum results in school performance. The same is expected of their counterparts in any part of the country, it is not exclusively demanded from PE district principals. In terms of the current education legislation and policy framework, the principals have to account for the performance of their schools. To this end the National Department of Education introduced legislation in 2007 to ensure that principals account to the Head of The Department of Education of the relevant province. Section 16 A of the South African Schools Act (SASA) was introduced by the Education Law Amendment Act 31/2007. The provisions of this section deal with “the functions and responsibilities of principals of public schools.” Specifically section 16A (1) (b) states that “The principal must prepare and submit to the Head of the Department an annual report in respect of: (i.) The academic performance of that school (ii.) The effective use of available resources.” Since the enactment of section 16 A as referred to above, the Provincial Departments have begun to make principals account for the success or failure of learners, for human resource development, financial management, parent involvement in school matters and the active participation of school governing bodies. What should be clear is that the above encompasses all the critical and fundamental aspects that have an impact on the progress of any educational institution. The combination of the two requirements stated above reflects the extent to which the Department of Education is committed to making certain that principals in their respective schools create an environment where learners can achieve their full potential. It is such creation of conducive environments that will enable all learners in the country to achieve equal opportunities in society irrespective of their original backgrounds. This ideal is consistent with section 9 of the Constitution, 1996 which provides for the right to equality of all people. The research, also assumes that leadership is about direction and purpose, while management lays emphasis on effectiveness and efficiency. Leadership and management are fundamental aspects of those duties and responsibilities associated with the position of a school principal. It is further postulated that, a good principal understands that circumstances determine the proportion of each of these elements that is required by any given situation i.e. whether more of leadership or bigger dose management is appropriate in dealing with a certain set of circumstances or not. The study identifies variables that make a school principal a strong leader and good manager and lists the following as the critical focus areas: Balancing instructional and managerial leadership Strengthening the connection between school and home Developing effective leadership Effective teaching practices Staff development The study also assumes that township schools are no exception to those in different parts of the country. Despite some serious daily challenges peculiar to the township situations, these schools still have to perform satisfactorily like all other institutions of learning. The legislative and policy framework applies equally to all schools. The study argues primarily that all schools can perform well and develop the potential of their learners to the fullest. The difference lies in the leadership and management of the respective institutions by their principals. All stakeholders are presumed to posses the potential, the ability and the urge to do their utmost best to render quality services that would lead to the attainment of excellent results. It is worthwhile for the system that those who show themselves to lack these attributes should be identified, not to weed them out but to assist so that they acquire the necessary skills and expertise. After all it is by strengthening the weakest link that a chain becomes strong.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2011
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »