and advisor. This happens when I approach them in the correct manner. I explain my role to them, and let them know clearly what I expect from them…I discuss policy matters and make sure that it’s carried out…I actively provide support for all teachers and impart new strategies through on-going workshops. New teachers are inducted into the school and are guided with respect to the function of the school and so on, by myself…
The views expressed above by both Mrs Alark and Mr Pillay with regard to assistance and guidance offered to professionally develop her teachers, are congruent with the accompanying conceptions by Niyazi (2009) that when teachers engage in such PD activities to professionally develop themselves and improve their subject content knowledge. Niyazi (2009) further argues that it is those teachers who lack sufficient knowledge about their subjects, who are resistant to innovative teaching techniques, and demonstrate no desire to develop themselves professionally, are the ones whom the SMT needs to inspire to participate in PD projects. In congruence, the ELRC (1998) advocates that SMT members be responsible for heading their subjects or phase levels.
Together with this, they are required to offer guidance and to facilitate the current innovations regarding subject approaches, methods, assessments, resources, and so on. Similarly, SMT members are expected to facilitate professional development activities in their departments, subjects or phase levels. It is purported by Bolam and McMahon (2010) that engagement in PD assists teachers to become more effective individuals and team-players. Besides providing advice and guidance, the SMT members also organised their own workshops to build or enhance capacities of their teaching staff. Highlighting the claim that in their attempts to develop teachers professionally, the SMT members also presented workshops, Mrs Alark advanced that she coordinated two workshops recently. In recounting this, she espoused:
I took the entire staff through the process, step-by-step, of how to teach reading to their learners. This was after I attended a one-day session at UKZN, where I was taken through the process myself. It was very empowering, for myself and the teachers whom I work-shopped. Together with this, I co-facilitated a writing and phonics workshop with the Foundation Phase teachers, especially for the new teachers at our school. I feel that these workshops definitely make a difference…. Because now all teachers are on the same wave-length…
In like manner, Mr Ken declared that he re-designed the Intermediate Phase report and work- shopped teachers on how to implement this. According to him, this new format took away the large volume of paper work which was time-consuming, offering their teachers added time to focus on lesson preparation and teaching. Believing this to have immensely and positively impacted on the COLT of this school, Mr Ken submitted:
…Basically the one activity that I’d like to speak about, is about getting the senior primary teachers to do their reporting in a more efficient way. I designed the report programme myself. I then work-shopped teachers and showed them how to do their learners’ reports using this new system, which they have since implemented this past term.
It is thus clear, from the assertions made by the participants above, that they developed their teachers with the anticipation that such support would then filter into the classroom and impact on learners’ success, as suggested by Weldy (2009). This scholar makes an argument that, in order to address problems in terms of learner progress, members of the SMT are encouraged to focus on the COLT. This requires instructional leaders to concern themselves with developing their schools’ vision, to share leadership with their teachers, and to influence their schools to function favourably.
In fulfilling these initiatives, SMT members are advised by Weldy (2009) to identify their school’s shortcomings, and to supervise teachers’ practice to ascertain whether or not these identified weaknesses are being addressed. To this end, the above appears to be aligned with the practices of Mrs Alark, Mr Pillay and Mr Ken, together with their other two colleagues. It is proposed that such members of the SMT, in their quest to mentor novice teachers, need to practise those qualities of an effective school manager as cited by Tienken (2010), who posits that instructional leaders consciously strive towards creating a positive and open school climate.
It is likewise observed by Tienken (2010), that when the right kind of school climate is created, this has a strong directive influence on the motivation and achievement of teachers and learners.
It is surmised by Kools and Stoll (2016) that in a school as a learning organisation, staff is fully engaged in identifying the aims and priorities for their own professional learning in line with
school goals and student learning needs, as defined in the school’s improvement plan (SIP).
Thus, Kools & Stoll (2016) advance that teachers’ professional learning ought to be based on continuous assessment and feedback that needs to be built into their daily practice. These reflections, analysis and challenges experienced are necessary to bring about change and innovation that may become embedded in educational practice (Kools & Stoll, 2016). It is evident that all the four SMT members from GPS reasoned that it was imperative to continuously develop oneself professionally.
There were various reasons advanced by the four participants from GPS regarding the need for Continuous Professional Development of teachers. These are succinctly captured in this section. Some of the recurring sentiments expressed by the four SMT members were that CPTD has the potential to help teachers “keep abreast” (Mrs Maharaj); upgrade yourself (Mrs Alark); develop yourself (Mr Pillay) and keep up with the latest trends (Mr Ken). Drawing from my own experience of participating in CPTD projects, I tend to share the participants’
sentiments. I also felt as confident about the value of professional development as these leaders did. Elaborating further, Mrs Maharaj asserted that CPTD expected teachers to continuously update themselves and move ahead, so as to avoid the danger of being “left in a rut.” She added that after teachers completed their qualifications, they just relaxed, confident in the assurance that their jobs were permanent and secure. With this in mind, Mrs Maharaj warned that there was so much more to CPTD, advising:
…Because we are working with the human mind, we need all the latest so that we can move our children ahead too. Times are changing, technology is changing, and it’s up to us to make sure we give off our best. Doctors and lawyers always do so. We all belong to one body, and as teachers, SACE expects us to develop ourselves professionally… to make sure we keep in touch with the latest developments.
Aligned to Mrs Maharaj’s argument that teachers are accountable to the SACE, it is submitted that the SACE is an independent professional body whose task is to ensure that teachers, as professionals, function ethically so that greater teacher pedagogical commitment are established. Together with this, they serve to motivate teachers to commit themselves to engagement in PD initiatives that are aligned to acceptable principles, values, standards, criterions and norms (SACE, 2005). It is thus argued that teacher professionalism occupies itself with ensuring the internal excellence of the pedagogy of teaching, thereby empowering
teachers to take control by making their own choices regarding their teaching practice (SACE, 2005).
Like Mrs Maharaj, De Clercq (2013) espouses that teachers' professional attitude determines their delivery in the classroom and whether or not they desire to contribute to enhancing the COLT in their school as a learning organisation. As such, Wing (2013) suggests that the relationship between the principal as instructional leader and the learners’ achievement, especially in South African primary schools, may be enhanced when the principal assumes responsibility for the key management aspects that build a productive school culture. As the instructional leader of the school, Wing (2013) proposes that principals inform teachers about new educational strategies, technologies, and other tools that promote effective teachers’
instruction, leading to learners’ learning.
With this in mind, these SMT members of GPS were invited to offer their perception of the current CPTD management system that has come into operation since 2014, which is aimed at measuring and monitoring teachers’ professional development. Furthermore, in being a tool for recognising superior and premium PD quality and programmes, this system awards and records points for individual teacher’s engagement with such high quality activities. In reiterating its purpose, it is claimed that this management system compels teachers’
participation, so as to improve schools’ COLTs, and to emphasise and reinforce the professional status of teaching (NPLCDP, 2012). Bearing the above in mind, all SMT members from Glow Primary School were invited to present their opinion of the CPTD management system. Their voices revealed a common foresight in that the inherent processes of this system may not be feasible and practical to complete. The opinions of Mrs Maharaj, Mrs Alark and Mr Pillay will now be considered.