Continuous Quality Improvement: Issues in School Improvement Plan and Use of Data in Decision Making
Nur Asyikin Ab Latif1, Mohd Izham Mohd Hamzah1, Mohamed Yusoff Mohd Nor1
1 Fakulti Pendidikan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Malaysia
*Corresponding Author: [email protected]
Accepted: 15 March 2021 | Published: 1 April 2021
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Abstract: This concept paper aims to discuss the challenges and issues faced by principals and the school in carrying out school improvement plan involving the use of data in decision making. School improvement planning is one of the strategies in continuous quality improvements practice in schools. The findings from previous studies showed that there are challenges in terms of satisfactory behavior of the principal in planning as well as challenges in managing a lot of data. In addition, the principal also found that there was no clear guide in carrying out the school improvement plans. The findings from this concept paper have implications for the national education policy through the implementation of the Malaysian Education Development Plan. In implementing the school improvement, the commitment of principals, school staffs and the top administrations are needed to ensure effective and quality results.
Keywords: School Improvement, Continuous Quality Improvement, Planning, Use of Data in Decision Making
___________________________________________________________________________
1. Introduction
Continuous quality improvement (CQI) is an important element in quality management and is a key goal in quality management (Sallis, 2002) and organization (Arcaro, 1995). Continuous improvement is required to ensure the quality is continuously improved and maintained. This is because the standards and quality requirements are always changing. The continuous improvement allows organizations to monitor work processes in order to identify opportunities for improvement (Arcaro, 1995). This shows that continuous improvement is important in every organization including educational institutions.
The practice of CQI in educational institutions is important to ensure that the vision, mission and goals of education and learning outcomes can be achieved as well as to continuously improve the quality assurance system. This process usually begins with a strategic planning through a more specific improvement plan that involves specific processes. In the context of education, CQI focuses on the effectiveness of strategic plans and improvement plans in terms of administrative structure, leadership and governance, planning and monitoring and review mechanisms (MQA 2014).
Therefore, in order to improve the quality and ensure that CQI practices are implemented in schools, school improvement plans need to be implemented. In the guidelines of good practice issued by MQA (2014) for higher education, among the improvement practices implemented are improvements for minor issues and developing improvement plans for more complex
issues. The development of the improvement plan is assisted by using performance data compared to the target and suitability of the strategic plan (MQA2014).
In the school context, improvement is an effort to enhance the school. School improvement is a change that is made in a planned manner and step by step. This effort comes either from within the school or from outside the school. The focus of school improvement is everything that benefits students, especially improving their learning in the classroom (Hussein Mahmood, 2008). The main goal in the school improvement plan is the modernization of the school system which uses a top - down approach by changing the whole school through the active involvement of all parties (Noriadah & Amirmudin, 2014)
This school improvement action requires a systematic planning and this planning is implemented and managed continuously. In school improvement, the internal aspects of the school, such as the culture and the enabling conditions that affect the teaching and learning in the classroom, are the target of change (Hussein Mahmood, 2008).
The main idea in the improvement plan is for school leaders to come up with a plan with achievable goals. Thus, when implemented, will result in improvements in school and organizational achievement (Meyers & VanGronigen, 2019). School improvement planning requires schools to collect and use data to set goals, monitor activities and make decisions. One of the goals in strategic planning in the United States is to improve school ability and improve student achievement through systematic planning and data-driven decision making (DDDM) (Demir, Kim, Current, & Jahnke, 2019).
Decision making based on data is a process in which school administration and teachers collect and analyze data as a guide for various forms of goals or decisions in education. The use of data has been a key feature in reform policies and agendas in various countries (Levin &
Datnow 2012). An effective school improvement planning model emphasizes on comprehensive assessment of needs, prioritizing needs and data-based decision making (Hanover Research, 2014).
However, the most important element in the school improvement process is school leadership.
Principals are seen as important as a role model of effective data use and in influencing teachers to use technology (Levin & Datnow 2012). Effective principals are the ones who set the vision and explain the mission, formulate lessons related to data and cultivate learning as well as actively involved in planning (Meyers & VanGronigen, 2019).
In school improvement efforts, principals play a variety of roles, such as setting the visions, managing staffs, leading and monitoring teaching delivery, allocation management and providing feedback to the community. Thus, it can be proven that principals are the main pillars and influence the planning and process of school improvement (Hanover Research, 2014).
Therefore, improvement requires leadership, especially from the principal and then teachers who are at various levels in the school structure hierarchy (Hussein Mahmood, 2008).
In the context of educational development in Malaysia, school improvement is an effort that needs to be implemented by the Ministry of Education and all agencies under it including schools (Hussein Mahmood, 2008). Therefore, various efforts are being made to ensure success in school improvement. However, there are challenges that must be met in carrying out the school improvement. Therefore, this concept paper aims to discuss the issues and challenges
2. Theory and Model
School leaders are associated with decision making because of their position which is closely related to administrative matters (Norlita & Mohd Izham 2018). Planning a school improvement plan also requires leaders to make good decisions. Therefore, school leaders need to have the right decision-making skills. Thus, Herbert Simon's classical decision-making theory is used in this concept paper.
The classical decision-making theory was introduced by Herbert Simon in 1956. This theory assumes that decision-making is based on the concept of rationality as a whole. Based on the rational process, one can make structured decisions when there is enough information.
However, if there is no data or information, one will decide to use experience, self-judgment and logic.
Herbert Simon (1978) also introduced the Administrative Model in decision making. He stated that there are two concepts in forming the administrative model, namely Bounded Rationality and Satisficing. The concept of bounded rationality stated that the rationality of each individual is limited due to the knowledge, time constraints and complexity of the problems encountered.
The second concept, satisficing, is where decision makers choose only satisfactory solution alternatives or make a minimal decision.
The task of administration is to create an atmosphere of administrative duty that brings individuals closer to rationality. Herbert Simon formed three steps namely intelligence, design and choice. The three steps involved the problem-solving process, generating ideas and alternatives, preparing plans and taking action.
School Improvement Plan uses the PDCA Cycle Model or also known as the Deming-Shewhart Cycle Model introduced by Edward Deming in 1950. This model is very synonymous with the continuous improvement plan in the organization. This cycle model showed the steps required in implementing the improvement cycle. It includes four main components namely planning, implementation (do), evaluation (check) and improvement (act) as in Figure 1. It can be explained as follows (Masturah et al. 2016):
1) Plan
Identify and analyze opportunities for improvement.
2) Implementation
Implementation of plans for improvement and introducing new approaches to implementation for the first time in a situation over a set period of time.
3) Evaluation
Evaluation includes evaluating and recording achievements in the implementation of a plan.
4) Improvement
This step includes the implementation of necessary improvements or corrective actions based on the evaluation conducted.
Figure 1: Deming - Shewhart Cycle Model
3. Literature Review
Continuous improvement is an important component of school as well as quality improvement, in which quality focuses on the use of data to impact change (Arcaro, 1995). School improvement is an action that has been planned at the school level that meets the criteria of an effective school improvement framework and is supported at the district and national levels (Rusmini, 2010). The School Improvement Plan (SIP) contains the organizational goals to be achieved within the allotted time, actions to achieve the goals, implementation timelines and measurable results to determine the level of achievement (Meyers & VanGronigen 2019).
According to Fernandez (2011), the school Improvement Plan (SIP) has many features similar to Strategic Planning. Strategic planning involves looking at the environment and conditions faced by the organization, setting goals, developing action plans to achieve goals and designing methods of monitoring and controlling implementation. While SIP is often described in the same way in which staff analyze problems, identify causes, produce measurable goals, combine strategies and adopt problem-solving policies as well as monitor implementation.
In the current context of education, schools have to deal with extensive data collection and analysis (Fernandez, 2011). Therefore, strategic planning as a management tool can help determine the data that needs to be analyzed. This data will then be used to create improvement plans and other actions. Here lies the role of principals and school leaders in ensuring that the data obtained is analyzed so that decisions can be made and planning can be implemented well (Levin & Datnow 2012).
SIP is important for schools to be excellent and improve student achievement. It is also important to improve low-performing schools (Strunk, Marsh, Bush-Mecenas, & Duque, 2016). SIP provides a comprehensive plan for school improvement rather than just proposing a specific policy (Fernandez, 2011). Several studies have found that quality SIP can improve student achievement despite being controlled by factors such as demographics and past student achievement (Fernandez 2011, Huber 2015).
Plan-Planning
Do - Implementation
Check - Evaluation
Act- Improvement
While there are various positive impacts on school progress, SIP has challenges that leaders and schools must face (Demir et al., 2019). The main challenges in school improvement refer to the tendency of attribute responsibility for student education to external socio-educational agencies, exclusive focus on self-assessment of students to track student needs, diagnosis of student learning deficit not based on cognitive processes, poor autonomy and lack of originality in carrying out improvement activities (Caputo & Rastelli 2014).
3. Findings
The results of a study from Meyers & VanGronigen (2019), found that only 18 out of 364 school improvement plans submitted by the schools did not show satisfactory behavior in their plans. There are five main satisfactory behaviors that have been identified in SIP. They are:
1) The content of the plan is the same and consistent between schools in the district 2) The master plan has been resubmitted
3) The priority of the plan is to focus on test scores 4) Plan duration is not considered
5) The individual responsible for the action is not considered.
A study that qualitatively analyzed the plan submitted by the school principal also found that the quality of SIP produced is weak and not authentic. However, the plan submitted by the principal has been reviewed by the district administrator. Thus, this indicates that there are also district leaders involved with satisfactory behavior. The results of this study raise various questions about the involvement of principals and district administrators on SIP. That is, do principals understand the importance of SIP? , does the principal understand how to run an SIP? or what are the challenges faced by principals in conducting SIP?.
The results of a study by Demir et al. (2019) found that principals and schools faced challenges in implementing SIP from several aspects. The first is that there is no clear guide in the SIP process. Thus, the principal conducts SIP according to his own understanding. Only one principal from the study participants attended the course and conducted the SIP according to the DMR Model (Decision Making For Result).
In addition, principals faced problems in the collection and management of large amounts of data. Data are collected from a variety of sources which are not integrated with each other.
Studies showed that principals and schools need guidance in planning, implementing and monitoring SIPs. Demir et al. (2019) proposed five improvements to data structure in SIP namely clarity, flexibility, communication between data, no data overlap and analytical data.
Table 1: Summary of data from the study of Demir et al. (2019) Study Participant
Groups SIP Activities Challenges
Model A (from
teachers’ perspective) Study participants stated that the principal is the main catalyst in starting the SIP process throughout the year.
There are 4 main activities in SIP 1. Plan and evaluate
2. Obtain and integrate data.
3. Carry out SIP 4. Monitoring
● Lack of guidelines for the SIP process.
● The goal of improvement is too broad or too narrow and cannot be adapted to the specific circumstances of other schools.
● There are many databases, teachers need to enter the data repeatedly in different systems.
● Teachers are unable to access data at the state and district levels to compare achievement.
● Communication between schools in the same district
Model B (from the principal's perspective)
Principal activities are divided into several parts, namely:
1. Identify what can be improved.
2. Set the focus area.
3. Set goals.
4. Implementation
5. Monitor by evaluating student assessment.
6. Evaluate the steps of action.
7. Discuss the progress of SIP These activities are branched and non-consecutive.
● Difficult to monitor the SIP process and manage data.
● The SIP process is complex but there are no clear guidelines to follow.
● SIP practices indicate unclear and unstructured activities.
● Unable to compare goals and objectives with other schools.
● The data obtained from the database are different and unrelated.
Model C (from the principal's perspective)
A principal has undergone training in DMR and followed the steps in SIP.
1. Collect data 2. Analyze the data 3. Identify the cause 4. Prioritize options 5. Set goals.
6. Design a strategy.
7. Identify Results 8. Monitoring
● Challenges in managing data and using quality data.
● Lots of data
● Overlapping work
● No access to old data
● Inconsistencies between the data obtained and SIP actions.
.
4. Discussions
Based on the findings of this study, it was found that principals face several challenges in implementing SIP, among them are involving a lot of data management, no guidelines in SIP, communication problems between data and aspects of the principal's own behavior. As a result, the quality of SIP produced is poor and not authentic. This is in line with the statement of Caputo & Rastelli (2014) who stated that among the challenges in school improvement is the lack of originality in school improvement.
Due to the poor quality of SIP produced, it cannot improve student and school achievement.
This is because the quality of the plans produced affects the implementation and in turn affects student achievement (Demir et al., 2019). Therefore, the principal needs help in planning the SIP because the unclear steps in the SIP also do not help the principal in the decision-making process. This is because SIP is also used in decision making about schools (Huber & Conway 2015).
Education administrators such as district administrators can play a role in helping schools build skills in using data (Levin & Datnow 2012). This is because, building school excellence also requires clear support and policies from the top so that there is no role conflict among principals (Hussein 2008).
As there are no clear guidelines and steps in the SIP, it is recommended that relevant organizations and principals examine the SIP planning process conducted by VanGronigen et al. (2017) as shown in Table 2. This planning process has 12 steps divided into five main groups.
Table 2: SIP Planning Process by VanGronigen at al. (2017)
Planning domain Description
Overarching Vision
1. Turnaround Vision Principals lead schools in formulating goals and objectives that determine how school improvement outcomes will occur
Activities and Program Measures
2. Priorities School principals identify 2 - 4 priorities that can help remove barriers to change and provide a foundation for improvement 3. Process Outcomes Results are achieved when priority is successfully obtained 4. Progress Indicator Steps to progress
5. Action Steps List the critical steps, outline the actions that need to be taken to achieve the results and priorities
Context
6. School Context Arrangement of circumstances, facts into a school environment that requires adaptation.
7. Root Cause Analysis An approach to problem solving used to identify the cause.
Organization
8. Sequencing Arrangement of priorities, decision-making process and action steps in the correct order
9. Schedule/Timeline Schedule for critical events and procedures that need to be completed within the planning period.
10. Alignment Proper coordination or relationship for components in planning (For example, priorities should be in line with vision)
Resources
11. Directly Responsible Appoint PIC to complete action steps
12. Supports Materials and resources (capital and human resources) are considered important in implementing recovery.
In addition, it is also proposed to improve the structure of the data system as proposed by Demir et al. (2019) namely:
1) Clarity
The steps in SIP need to be clarified and coordinated. Goals, plans, actions and outcomes need to be connected seamlessly.
2) Flexibility
The structure of the system needs to be more flexible for the convenience of all users 3) Communication
System structures can interact with other systems to facilitate the transfer of information.
4) No Overlap
Reduce duplication in data and information entry.
5) Analytical data
Data can be examined for conclusions. Data can also be analyzed and monitored.
5. Issues in Malaysia
Although school improvement efforts have been carried out in Malaysia for a long time, there are various responses to the success and change (Noriadah & Amirmudin 2014). School improvement is generally an ongoing effort in making the school a better place for the student learning process. Various measures have been taken for the purpose of school improvement including quality school leaders, active involvement of parents and community, quality of teachers and administrative support (Noriadah & Amirmudin 2014).
In the current context of education, the application of technology (Johan, 2010) and the use of data in decision making (Mandinach, 2012) has given a new shift in the field of education.
However, some studies have found that many school leaders have moderate levels of ICT
knowledge and skills (Kannan et al. 2012, Ain et al. 2013). Principals are also found to be important as a model of data use and enable teachers to use technology. However, a major obstacle in principals' efforts to apply data usage is their lack of data literacy (Levin & Datnow 2012).
Therefore, school leaders need to be prepared and improve their competencies and knowledge in ICT in order to carry out school improvement as a whole. When school leaders are ready to play their role as technology leaders, then teachers will also be positively influenced and become supportive to accept technological integration (Norhayati & Aida Hanim, 2018). This is because, apart from the principal's leadership, school improvement is very much in need of teacher leadership because teachers are the implementers of all efforts in school improvement (Hussein Mahmood, 2008)
In addition, according to Zaidatul and Foo (2003), data and information for planning are often difficult to obtain, not ready for use and difficult to reach when needed. Issues regarding information access and dissemination often arise in school improvement efforts. Among them are the effort to improve student achievement through school-based assessment (PBS), teachers face challenges with the dissemination and the liquidity of information and the challenge of filling marks in the system (Talib & Abu Naim 2015, Khalil et al. 2016). Therefore, the administration needs to implement a method to ensure that the delivery of information is carried out effectively and the decision-making cycle driven by data occurs at all levels.
According to Hussein (2008), the improvement approach should be in line with the development of a school. It needs to be authentic and focused on a specific context, therefore, the same approach may not be appropriate or ineffective for another school. This is because the development of each school is different and the same method is not effectively used because one size does not fit all. In this regard, the role, assistance and guidance of the District Education Office (PPD) is needed in order to develop schools in its own district. Integration and cooperation from various parties can ensure that the school improvement efforts run smoothly and achieve the expected goals.
6. The Implications on Malaysian Education System
From the discussions, some implications can be identified. Through the Malaysian Education Development Plan (PPPM), the government has identified 11 shifts that will be implemented in order to improve the quality of education in the country. Among them is the 5th shift which is to ensure high performance leadership is placed in every school. Through this shift, school leaders will be given continuous professional development by improving the mechanism to track and match programs to meet individual needs so that the impact of professional development can be achieved (Ministry of Education Malaysia, 2012). With this, school leaders can improve their knowledge and competence in the use of technology and data management for better school improvement.
In addition, building school excellence requires clear support and policies from the top so that there is no role conflict among principals. Studies showed that school excellence is also influenced by the district (PPD) and state (JPN) policies (Hussein, 2008). Therefore, through the 6th shift in PPPM, the government will empower JPN and PPD and focus on efforts to support student learning and improve school achievement as a whole (Ministry of Education Malaysia, 2012).
Through the District Transformation Program (DTP), four key support programs will be conducted including performance dialogue programs to monitor, resolve and take action to assist schools. This program is also conducted to ensure the effective delivery of information and data-driven decision-making cycle occurs at all levels (Ministry of Education Malaysia, 2012). In addition, the guidance provided by the School Improvement Partner (SIP+) should be extended to the aspects of content knowledge, interpersonal and intrapersonal skills and play a role in improving the school (Zabidah Muhammad, Azlin Norhaini Mansor, & Mohd Zabil M.N., 2019). However, studies on the effectiveness of the programs implemented are still poorly conducted. The effectiveness of these programs need to be tracked and monitored so that it can be improved and bring positive impact on the national education.
In addition, teachers need to support the efforts undertaken because ultimately the school improvement program should be an internal development action (Hussein 2008). In the improvement of the school, the involvement of every member of the school is very important and efforts to improve the school need to be appreciated and addressed together.
7. Conclusions
This concept paper provides an overview of school improvement plan and issues encountered in its implementation. School improvement plan is an effort to improve achievement of schools and organizations. Admittedly, there are challenges that need to be addressed in implementing them. Therefore, the commitment of principals and school staff is needed to ensure effective and good quality results. The role and support from PPD and JPN is also a pillar of success in the implementation of improvement in schools. If it is practiced well, national education will achieve the desired goals.
References
Agensi Kelayakan Malaysia. (2014). Garis Panduan Amalan Baik : Pemantauan, Penyemakan dan Penambahbaikan Kualiti Institusi Berterusan. In Agensi Kelayakan Malaysia.
Selangor: Agensi Kelayakan Malaysia, MQA.
Ain, N., Abdullah, W., Dewitt, D., & Alias, N. (2013). School Improvement Efforts and Challenges : A Case Study of A Principal Utilizing Information Communication Technology. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 103, 791–800.
Arcaro, J. S. (1995). Quality in Education An Implementation Handbook. Florida: St Lucie Press.
Caputo, A., & Rastelli, V. (2014). School improvement plans and student achievement:
Preliminary evidence from the Quality and Merit Project in Italy. Improving Schools, 17(1), 72–98.
Demir, F., Kim, S. M., Current, N., & Jahnke, I. (2019). Strategic improvement planning in schools: A sociotechnical approach for understanding current practices and design recommendations. Management in Education, 33(4), 166–180.
Fernandez, K. E. (2011). Evaluating school improvement plans and their affect on academic performance. Educational Policy, 25(2), 338–367.
Hanover Research. (2014). Best practices for school improvement planning. Retrieved from https://www.hanoverresearch.com/media/Best-Practices-for-School-Improvement- Planning.pdf
Hussein Mahmood. (2008). Kepemimpinan dan Keberkesanan Sekolah (Edisi Ke-2). Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Johan, E. L. (2010). Perkembangan, Cabaran dan Aplikasi Teknologi Maklumat Dalam
Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Di Malaysia. Jurnal Fakulti Pendidikan, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 1(9), 1–16.
Kannan, S., Sharma, S., & Abdullah, Z. (2012). Principal’s Strategies for Leading ICT Integration: the Ma-laysian Perspective. Creative Education, 03(08), 111–115.
Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2012). Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia 2013 - 2025.
Khalil, F. A., Mohd, &, & Awang, I. (2016). Isu Kesediaan Guru dalam Amalan Melaksanakan Pentaksiran Berasaskan Sekolah Teacher Readiness Issues in Implementing School-based Assessment. EDUCATUM – Journal of Social Science ISSN, 2, 2289–9391.
Levin, J. A., & Datnow, A. (2012). The principal role in data-driven decision making: Using case-study data to develop multi-mediator models of educational reform. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 23(2), 179–201.
Mandinach, E. B. (2012). A Perfect Time for Data Use: Using Data-Driven Decision Making to Inform Practice. Educational Psychologist, 47(2), 71–85.
Meyers, C. V., & VanGronigen, B. A. (2019). A lack of authentic school improvement plan development: Evidence of principal satisficing behavior. Journal of Educational Administration, 57(3), 261–278.
Norhayati, M. D., & Aida Hanim, A. H. (2018). Kepimpinan Teknologi Pengetua Dan Hubungan Terhadap Kompetensi ICT Guru Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Daerah Seremban Dan Kuala Pilah. Prosiding Seminar Kebangsaan Majlis Dekan Pendidikan Universiti Awam 2018, (November), 1–9.
Noriadah, A. K., & Amirmudin, U. (2014). A Review of School Improvement Programme in Expediting Malaysian Educational System Reforms. International Education Postgraduate Seminar, (IEPS2014).
Norlita, I., & Mohd Izham, M. H. (2018). Amalan Perancangan Strategik dan Kemahiran Membuat Keputusan Dalam Kalangan Pentadbir Sekolah. Advanced Science Letters, 24(1), 128–135.
Rusmini, K. A. (2010). Kerangka Komprehensif Untuk Penambahbaikan Sekolah Berkesan, Satu Kajian Eksploratori. Institut Aminuddin Baki, 1–18.
Sallis, E. (2002). Total quality management in education: Third edition. In Total Quality Management in Education: Third Edition.
Strunk, K. O., Marsh, J. A., Bush-Mecenas, S. C., & Duque, M. R. (2016). The Best Laid Plans:
An Examination of School Plan Quality and Implementation in a School Improvement Initiative. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 259–309.
Talib, R., & Abu Naim, H. (2015). CABARAN PENTAKSIRAN BERASASKAN SEKOLAH :DILEMA GURU. RESEARCH GATE, (June).
Vangronigen, B. A., Meyers, C. V, & Hitt, D. H. (2017). A Rubric for Assessing Schools’ Plans for Rapid Improvement. Retrieved from http://centeronschoolturnaround.org
Zabidah Muhammad, Azlin Norhaini Mansor, & Mohd Zabil M.N. (2019). Amalan Kepimpinan Transaksional. Bangi: Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Zaidatul Akmaliah Lope Pihie, & Foo Say Fooi. (2003). Pengurusan dan Kepimpinan Pendidikan Satu Langkah Ke Hadapan. Serdang: Penerbit UPM.
