I acknowledge that the framework is limited as it speaks to the restricted or expanded opportunity for participation in decision making structures at the case school. However, this framework might be able to be utilised by other schools as a gauge to examine the level of participation in decision making in the various structures within their context and, in so doing, confirm or refute my findings or expand upon the framework.
5.5 PROPOSITIONS TO ENHANCE THE PRACTICE OF SHARED DECISION MAKING
My research, being a small-scale case study, cannot be generalised. Thus the proposals to enhance the practice of decision making are highly contextualised and are applicable only to the case school. However, other schools that share a parallel context to the case school may find these recommendations applicable to their milieu. While in the main my study found that there existed a committed ethos of shared decision making in the case school, there was still space to strengthen the practice of shared decision making. It is to the propositions for enhancing shared decision making that I now turn.
5.5.1 FORMALISE LINES OF COMMUNICATION
This study established that, at times, decisions taken at SMT level or at the SGB level were not formally or timeously communicated to the staff. Decisions were often casually communicated at break time in the staffroom. At this forum, all educators were not present as these were not scheduled briefings. To formalise the announcement of decisions and allow for teachers’ inputs, I suggest that more frequent staff meetings be held. This will not only keep educators updated on school related matters, but could
108
also allow more time for discussion at staff meeting as fewer items would be on the agenda. Some participants alluded to the staff meeting at times being a rushed event, limiting opportunities for contributing to the decisions. To formally keep teachers in the know, I suggest staff briefings be held before the start of the formal school day on a regular basis. I acknowledge that it is not always possible to schedule frequent or daily meetings in a vibrant school, thus an additional mode of communication could be in the form of a written memorandum. This would keep all educators in the loop as to the happenings of the school.
5.5.2 CREATE TIME AND SPACE FOR STAFF REPRESENTATIVES TO ENAGE WITH THE STAFF
The staff representative on the SMT and the educator representatives on the SGB allows for educator inputs in decision making on these bodies. To enhance the contribution of these representatives on staff related matters, I propose a formal channel be established for input from staff before an SMT or SGB meeting. The staff representatives sitting on these decision making bodies must not be seen as mere recorders of minutes, but rather their leadership potential should be allowed to flourish at these meetings. Space and time could be created by the SMT for the representatives to communicate with educators to facilitate effective inputs at the SMT or SGB meetings. I further recommend that opportunities for feedback on sanctioned matters for staff consumption be made available to these representatives. Greater educator involvement would ensure educators taking ownership for decisions which would instil a greater sense of work ethic.
5.5.3 ESTABLISH A FORMAL MENTORSHIP PROGRAMME
Besides the case school having a large cohort of highly experienced educators, there were a number of novice educators at the school. These inexperienced teachers often shied away from taking a leading role in decision making. To build these educators confidence levels and leadership skills, an opportunity exists for the launch of a formal mentorship programme. Such a programme would initiate educators that lack confidence to take a leading role in decision making to self-reflect and explore their leadership potential. Partnering novice educators with skilled educators, not only opens the up avenues for the novice educators to dabble in school leadership, but would also enhance the value of the experienced educators as leaders.
109
5.5.4 SCHOOL BASED CAPACITY BUILDING
Although the DoE has committed itself to decentralisation, as reflected in the South Africans schools Act of 1996, there was consensus amongst the participants that the DoE has been silent on the issue of empowering all levels of educators on enhancing shared decision making in schools. Grant (2010) correctly assesses that “despite an enabling education policy framework, participation and collaboration of all educators in essential leadership practices such as school-level decision-making, remained largely at the level of rhetoric” (p. 343) and the “most serious challenge to education transformation continues to be effective policy implementation” (Motala, 1998, p. 498).
In order to bridge the policy-practice divide, the SMT and the staff at the case school have an opening to explore avenues to enable greater on site capacity at the case school.
Rizvi (1989) advocates that “we use this rhetoric in creative ways to ensure the extension of democratic forms with which we are familiar” (p. 232). At the time of writing, the DoE had given no indication that Foundation Phase educators would be orientated to implement the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statements (CAPS) for implementation in 2012. The DoE’s shortcoming in this and other areas, while not the ideal situation could be turned into a capacity building exercise for the school.
Educators in teams could interrogate the policy statements and make decisions on the way forward for implementation. Such an exercise could create opportunities for educators to play a leading role in curriculum related decision making. I agree with Beadie (1996) who argues that “shared decision making can help bridge the pedagogical and political gap” (p. 79).
5.5.5 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR SMT
The SMT participants viewed themselves as transformational leaders and much of this trait was evident in the manner in which these participants led the school. Being educators that once practised in a highly centralised and authoritarian system of schooling and school management, it is not easy to completely liberate oneself of these traits and, as observed in the case school, a top-down approach was sometimes the default position. Based on the premise that leadership can be learnt (Katzenmeyer and Moller, 2001), it is recommended that the SMT enter a leadership programme at a higher education institution. Such a programme would sharpen and enhance the SMT’s leadership skills and, in so doing, become more transformational and participatory in their approach. Programmes such as the Advanced Certificate in Education in School Leadership) and post graduate education leadership and management degrees could aid
110
school leaders to “re-evaluate the balance between individual authority and a more democratic dimension of leadership” (Mestry & Singh, 2007, p. 483).