Schools leadership critical to educational improvement

Dec 10, 2017 Education Corner, Features / Columnists

---

By Olato Sam

It is widely accepted that one of the most essential elements in defining successful schools is strong leadership. Research shows that quality school leadership is second only to teacher quality in its impact on student achievement.
School leadership is a cross-cutting issue that cannot be overemphasized in our desire for improved educational output. The quality of school leadership has been an area of concern for the Ministry of Education, the Teaching Service Commission (TSC) and education stakeholders at large for some time.
At the core of the recent court case between the Guyana Teachers Union and the TSC was the issue of what criteria should serve to determine promotion of school administrators, who should determine same and how. What is undebatable is the need to ensure that individuals chosen to head our institutions demonstrate the required competencies to move institutions forward and not simply manage the status quo.
A major area of concern is the absence of effective preparatory learning opportunities and experiences for aspiring administrators to equip them with the skills required to fulfill these expectations.
In addition, there is a need to provide professional developmental support to existing Heads, to keep them abreast of contemporary leadership expectations. Traditionally, the system operated on the fallacious assumption that over the countless years of moving through the ranks and ultimately arriving at the headship position, educators would have amassed the requisite skill sets for the effective execution of their duties.
Experience has taught us the folly of such a mindset and would have been at the base of the decision to develop the Education Management Certificate Programme conducted by the National Centre for Educational Resource Development (NCERD) for some time.
At the time of its conception such a programme would have had relevance; however, there has to be some re-orientation of education practitioners to appreciate the fact that the system now requires strong leaders in addition to effective managers—a critical point of distinction.The base knowledge captured in the education management programme must be restructured, expanded and upgraded to include a focus on education leadership training.
Emphasis must now be placed on first identifying and selecting individuals who are ideally suited for the functions and rigorous demands of contemporary headship. This is a key component given that the system currently forces everyone into these administrative positions as they are the only upward mobility options available.
Educators who are better suited for or more interested in other functions become heads by default. For years there have been discussions regarding developing alternative career pathways such as the Master Teacher category that would allow teachers to remain in the classroom and deliver quality instruction while receiving the benefits of senior administration positions provided they meet some well-defined criteria.
This would provide the basis from which interest and suitability could be included in the long list of criteria—well beyond simply years of experience—aimed at the identification of candidates for school leadership.
There has to be a preparatory track defined for aspiring Heads. There are key competencies and knowledge bases that must be acquired prior to ascension to these critical positions. Heads must appreciate the importance of being the instructional leaders of their institutions and not simply administrative heads.
Equally important is the appreciation of the transformational leadership roles they must fulfill with clear, well-defined plans for moving schools they lead to higher levels. They must be taught to deftly integrate their roles in relation to leading the teaching and learning experiences, managing people, developing the organization, building strong community relationships and managing the financial and other material resources of the institution.
Support and continuous professional development programmes must also be devised to adequately equip existing Heads for these new school leadership expectations. This is a significant and immediate challenge for the Ministry of Education since the newly restructured performance appraisal expectations for Heads and Deputy Heads have theseeducation leadership principles at their core.
For the most part, our educators have not been adequately trained to fulfill these contemporary expectations.
This has implications for NCERD, the Cyril Potter College of Education (CPCE) and the Faculty of Education at the University of Guyana (UG). There must be consistency in the teacher education and training experiences being offered across the board for education leaders.
The existing Education Administration courses at UG need to be re-examined and possibly restructured to be in-line with instructional experiences in the education leadership domain. Likewise, CPCE must reevaluate its curriculum to identify any existing gaps and ensure that education leadership and the principles for the training of teacher leaders is fully embedded in its training experiences.
These cannot be addressed in isolation, however; they must be guided by the Ministry’s policy structures and involve the input from the Union, TSC as well as education practitioners themselves. Attention must be given to defining leadership expectations at all levels within the career structure and the professional expectations that apply as one moves through the pathway to senior administration and ultimately headship.
More importantly, the existing Draft Standards for School Principals must be revisited to ensure consistency and relevance as a precursor to their official adoption to guide these initiatives.
Attention will have to be given to the Ministry of Education’s Continuous Professional Development Policy, to ensure that it speaks to education leadership as a distinct area of focus. Programmes must be devised to address the key expectations for the tenure of existing Heads with an appropriate incentive structure as motivation for excellence in this regard. One of the greatest challenges the Ministry and other stakeholders will face relates to providing access to such training and professional development experiences across the entire education system. Given the geographic and human resource challenges facing the system, attention will have to be given to the issues of equity.
This will require strategic partnerships with a range of entities to ensure effectively delivery and full coverage.Too often various segments of the education system are excludedfrom participating in and reaping the benefit of such important initiatives—something that must be addressed in the planning for improved school leadership.
School leadership has to be regarded as a key dimension of focus for the system supported by a well-defined policy framework. School leaders must now be held accountable for the performance of their institutions and given the appropriate incentives and disincentives where necessary.
Currently, no structure exists for recognizing and rewarding excellence in leadership. Likewise, no system of accountability for underperformance exists. The introduction of the new performance appraisal system provides an ideal opportunity to effectively re-evaluate all relevant structures to bring the system more in-line with contemporary leadership practices aimed at improving output.
Critical to this reorientation is an integrated preparation and continuous learning school leadership programme designed to retool and support our aspiring and practicing educators through this new phase which, if done effectively, will significantly impact performance output.

---

---