167
make informed decisions on how to provide the necessary support. Having these meetings also enhanced the management structure of the SMTs in that Deputy Principals (DPs) were able to refine their roles in teaching and learning in their schools. These sessions seemed to assist high schools to detect curriculum-related gaps that emanated from primary schools. In that way, DOs managed to intervene to support those primary schools. The following theme deliberates on how DOs provided professional development to support teaching and learning.
168
The District Director, DD1, described the importance of capacity development for teachers and HoDs. He believed that by focusing on teachers and HoDs, his focus is on the classroom where teaching and learning is taking place. This what he said;
But then we have got quarterly training programs for our teachers and HoDs on content coverage, you know. So, when you talk of quality, I am focusing on what is happening in the classroom.
It emerged from the DOs that professional development was also done through the induction of newly appointed personnel, including teachers, SMTs and principals. DCLI1 shared his experience;
At the beginning of the year, we identify novice educators and who’s new in the subject and then they will target those educators specifically as well. We also have sessions with newly appointed HoDs and SMTs.
CLI1 shared their perspective on the need for the DOs to provide induction programmes for novice teachers. They explained;
We are saying; we are going to concentrate on the novice teachers. These are the teachers that, sometimes we forget because when you call a group of teachers, thirty teachers, some teachers, you find that, you know, they are there, they are just, you know, talking and all that. Now we forget about this. We orientate new teachers on CAPS, content training, teaching methodologies and all that.
CLI2 shared similar sentiments on the induction of teachers. She further indicated that these induction programmes are done on a termly basis for both teachers and SMTs as well as subject advisors. CLI2 explained:
We ensure that like, every term, there are new appointments, we ensure that we induct our subject advisors, school leadership teams and Educators on what are the expectations for the term so that they can know. We take them on a term basis.
And then, we also have these support sessions for SMTs and then support sessions for staff.
169
From the district directors’ perspective, districts had mentorship programmes for principals experiencing difficulties in leading and managing their schools. They assigned other principals as mentors to these principals. DD1 and DD2 explained;
I have principals whom I know that those ones are struggling. Then I have appointed mentors for them, be with them, and make sure that they come in once a week. And it was negotiated because the staff must also understand that I am bringing in a mentor, not because the principal is useless, but I am bringing another layer of support, you know. DD1
Underperforming principals. It is either we put those principals under mentorship, on-site or in another school and place a person that would manage the school for the duration. So, we give them support. As a strategy, we have monthly sessions with principals. DD2
While on mentorship for principals, DD1 shared another strategy that mainly focused on weekly planning for activities that pertain to day-to-day activities. He explained;
What we do is, we have termed it, one plus four (1+4) at 2 o’clock. We are saying, once a week at 14H00, né, on Thursday, we need to discuss and give support on activities for the following week, so from 2 o’clock to 5 o’clock, we sit with those principals we are supporting, to say, these are the activities for the following week, where are your challenges, how do we support you? So, that at least, they go into the next week knowing exactly, to say, these are the things that is going to happen.
In that, we are able to cover as many principals through that particular format.
Data also revealed that DOs fostered conditions that supported collaboration among subject advisors, teachers, and SMTs. This was done by providing settings that allowed for information sharing and collective problem-solving curriculum-related issues as well as management- related challenges. DD1 had this to say;
We have established what we call a community of learning, you know, where we have grouped people with the same skills, you know, to say, let them work hand-in- hand and support each other, you know. So, we have got learning groups that we have established so that we do not find our facilitator being exposed alone, you know. So, when we hold workshops, for example, we try and sell them, ja.
170
DD2 elaborated on how teachers and subject advisors collaborated and shared expertise among themselves in the PLCs. She elaborated;
We also have our own PLGs, Professional Learning Groups. In other words, it is Maths teachers together, and it is Life Science teachers together with the facilitator.
What happens with the teachers also happens with the facilitators; they also have provincially their own PLGs, or PLCs, you know, Professional Learning Communities. We have subject information sharing meetings. Okay, so we are reflecting, subject information sharing meetings, it is cluster meetings. But that is the way each and every subject advisor, for example, a Maths subject advisor’s meeting his or her teachers.
Two other DOs shared consistent views on collaboration among teachers and SMTs. This is what they said: We have the professional learning groups of teachers that are dealing, you know, sharing practice, sharing how they approach the different aspects of the subject DCLI1.
CM2 indicated: But at the circuit level, circuits have Communities of Practice, and Communities of Practice are used to share skills, you know, to transfer skills among teachers and SMTs. DOs responsible for curriculum support appeared to be receiving support by collaborating with the provincial head office's curriculum structures. DCLI1 stated: We have developmental sessions, for instance, workshops, we call it subject information-sharing meetings, where subject advisors go once every month, they go to Head Office, and there they get important information. Participants highlighted that these forums support subject advisors on content-related issues. CLI2 summarised how CIF (Curriculum Information Forum) supported DOs:
The CIF is the Curriculum Information Forum; it is led by the Coordinators from Head Office. They are the ones who meet with us, all facilitators and DCESs, from the fifteen districts in the province. We will talk issues of the curriculum, what is it that we need to do to improve. So, we meet once a term. There are no other issues, we just talk about subject-specific issues, for example, we have issues like, teachers cannot do tessellations in Mathematics, let us talk as a province in the subject, what can we do? What are you doing? And then we share good practices and so on and so on.
171
All extracts in this theme seem to highlight the importance of developing the capacity of SMTs as well as DOs so that teaching and learning can improve. It emerged that HoDs are key in ensuring that teaching and learning in schools is monitored and teachers are supported.
Collaboration through PLCs by teachers and subject advisors appeared to be helping districts to support teaching and learning subject and content related sharing meetings. Induction of newly appointed personnel from schools, including principals, emerged from DOs’ accounts.
Another leadership practice that DOs could use to enhance teaching and learning that also emerged was the mentorship of principals experiencing challenges regarding their role in managing teaching and learning. While DOs used their strategies to develop the capacity of teachers, SMTs and DOs, initiatives from the provincial head office and external provincial funded agencies strengthened the capacity of these individuals. The literature review showed that if districts invest in professional development, teaching and learning in schools improve (Bantwini, 2012; Fullan, 2009; Honig & Rainey, 2015; Levin et al., 2012). PLCs also emerged in the literature as key in sustaining teaching and learning improvement (DuFour & Marzano, 2011; Honig & Copland, 2014; Horton & Martin, 2013). The culture of collaboration between DOs and school personnel came out as important (Leithwood & Louis, 2012; Knapp et al., 2014).