PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
4.5 Teacher leader roles
According to Katzenmeyer and Moller (2003, p.11), “all teachers can select appropriate leadership roles for themselves, given their own experience, confidence level, skills and knowledge”. In my case study school, each teacher leader took on a role according to their interests and competence, as well as wanting to make a difference to the overall improvement of the school. These roles were both formal and informal as described by Leithwood et. al (1999).
In keeping with this idea, TL C served in a formal role as a teacher representative on the School Governing Body (zone three, role six). There he led in school-based planning and decision-making processes (indicator five). He stated in his journal: “I also serve on the School Governing Body which has empowered me on how the school should be run. More knowledge is gained on policy formulation and documents. (I) gained experience on how the interview process is done “(journal p. 22). TLC had been nominated in a staff meeting and was in his second term of office at the time of the study. This is an example of the “extended”
professional referred to by Hoyle (1980) where teachers serve in leadership roles beyond the confines of the classroom.
On the other hand, TLC in the focus group interview, on taking up the grade head position, stated that “we don’t get formally elected to be grade heads. The teachers in that phase elect us and we work with them in the curriculum and lessons together” (focus group, p.5) (zone two, role 2). TLA was also democratically elected as the second member of the School Governing Body during the time of the study, and contends “I serve on the SGB as teacher representative. We basically deal with teacher concerns, budgeting, and the basic running of the school” (interview p.3) (zone three, role 6).
Furthermore, TL A stated “I’m also a bus driver. I’m one of five designated drivers at school so whenever learners have to go out on an excursion or day trip, the duties get split among us” (focus group, p.5). According to Zimpher and Howey (1992) cited in Wynne (2002), teachers should not be coerced into leading in areas where they lack skills, confidence and competence. I am of the view that competency is an inherent ingredient in the volunteerism process. Additionally, TLA confidently contended that “I serve on the finance committee where I’m constantly involved with fundraising” (interview, p.3) (zone three, role six). This served to highlight that TLA was in control of the leadership roles and decisions he took as
school. Ash and Persall (2000) indicate that teachers do not feel intimidated with external pressure to meet expected standards if they are in control of their actions. He was the tour- coordinator for the senior class at the time of the study and led all logistical preparations as the school undertook trips out of the province each year.
The time consciousness of TLA was evident in that he was the official bell ringer of the school (observation schedule p.11). He confirmed as follows: “I’m very punctual. I believe eight o’clock is eight o’clock. I’m very diligent in doing my duties and work above and beyond my calling” (interview p.1).I found him driving the school bus voluntarily and transported learners who had returned from a distant sport event long after the traditional close of school in the afternoon, and this pointed to his commitment, passion and confidence to lead (observation schedule p.6). This is unlike the trivial and menial leadership tasks depicted by Singh (2007, p.67) where she states “I won’t consider that as leadership. It’s just passing the buck”, in depicting that the SMT pass on additional administrative work to teachers masquerading as leadership opportunities.
Similarly, Troen and Boles (1994), Katzenmeyer and Moller (2001) and Harris (2005) emphasise that teachers need to be empowered with leadership roles, ultimately resulting in an increase in their confidence, self-esteem and job satisfaction. Although TL C was a level one teacher, he was appointed as an acting Head of Department for the senior phase of the school. Given his lack of self-worth alluded to in the introduction of this chapter, he argued
“I am also an acting H.O.D which has helped me to gain more confidence. This made me realise that the SMT see certain leadership abilities in me. I play a more administrative, academic role such as doing IQMS, having parent meetings, chairing meetings...”(journal p.
22-23) (zone three, role four and six).
Noting that TL C occupied a ‘formal’ leadership position as acting H.O.D, he continued to involve many of those in his team in networking in order to achieve desirable results. Gunter (2005) describes this as authorised distributed leadership. He stated in the interview: “there’s one or two teachers and they’ve been here for years...if they don’t prep lessons... I make a note of that and refer it and tell them to correct that...there’s no way I can force them but report it to the DP. I organised workshops to remedy the problem on prep” (interview p. 2).
However, TLC indicated levels of improved confidence later in the research period and said
“whether on the sport field or curriculum, like the parent meeting I asked MRS P, the DP to assist in addressing the parents. He said there was no need to. What she also said just builds
you” (interview p.6). This indicated that the SMT were willing to grant TL C greater control of his leadership, and Katzenmeyer and Moller (2003, p.82) confirm that “teachers will be motivated to remain in leadership roles if they experience greater control over their work and if the organizational structures support their efforts to make changes”.
In addition, TL A bemoaned the lack of SMT take-up on his experience gained during his tenure in the private sector with regards to safety at school. However, he was pro-active in his actions: I’ve been leading in the area of fire- fighting, first aid, evacuation procedures, discipline, safety and security (interview p.1) (zone three, role six). Lieberman, Saxl and Miles (1998) indicate that effective teacher leadership occurs when a school develops a culture that supports collaboration, partnership and collective decision-making. Little (2000) confirms that top-down approaches are a major hindrance to the development of teacher leadership. This is explored later within this chapter as a possible barrier to teacher leadership.
TL B was an executive member of organised labour during the year of the study. She
attended meetings away from the school and although she represented a minority of educators on the staff, took the role very seriously. As a union member, she arranged a District
HIV/AIDS symposium for her cluster. She asserted as follows: “I attended a workshop in June on HIV/AIDS and was a trainer for the District Office. I was amazed at the questions these teachers asked. The educators present were grateful for the information they received”
(journal p.13) (zone four, role three). She consequently asserted:
“As a member of the Circuit Committee, I was responsible for the coordinating of the Circuit cultural competitions. I was the deputy chairperson in 2008. I drew up duties for each
member of the committee and was responsible for hiring the hall, arranging awards and liaising with the local media” (journal p.16). Such distributive leadership is described dispersed distributive leadership by Gunter (2005) and represents a good example of the
“extended professional” and is typical of a typology in zone four, role three. More
importantly, Spillane (2006, p.14) indicates that “distributive leadership takes shape in the interactions of leaders, followers and their situations which stretches over individuals who have the responsibility for leadership roles”.
This gave TL B the confidence to take on a mentoring role of newly appointed educators (zone four, role 3). She assisted a colleague during recess at school with the detailed planning
of assessment techniques and equipment for the foundation phase (observation schedule, p11). Katzenmeyer and Moller (2001, p.34) support mentorship and state that “holding the respect of their colleagues, capable teacher leaders can mentor new teachers, assist in improving instructional practice, and help to develop the capacity of others”.
All three teacher leaders displayed a natural propensity to mentor learners and colleagues alike. This was not confined to the classroom, but in all areas of school and community life.
Leadership narrowly defined as classroom activity is referred to as the “restricted professionalism” and should ideally be substituted with the notion of “extended professionalism”, as described by Hoyle (1980) and Broadfoot (1988).
For example, TL A had direct mentorship with grade five, six and seven boys in a scouting project he led (interview p.2). He stated: “I’m very involved with scouts. Together with the school principal, we are speaking to the department to have a scout group in each school of the District. We train other teachers in scouting matters” (zone two, role three). This clearly points to his leadership skills and can be regarded as an example of dispersed distributive leadership described by Gunter (2005). This project was also practicalised in his classroom to reinforce discipline and accountability with a reward system. In class he had placed learners into groups with leaders that rotated each week. Innovatively, TLA allowed the leaders among learners to keep careful records of school attendance, marks allocated per group per task, as well as the overall contribution to the fundraising drives of the class and school (journal p.18). At the end the group with highest points received an incentive in the form of delicacies and cash.
In the interview TL A also announced his willingness to mentor learners.
“I coach sports, tennis in particular. This gives me an opportunity to guide the learners on the court on life lessons like punctuality, sportsmanship and perseverance” (interview p.2) (zone three, role five).
To summarise the discussion so far, the figure below gives a graphical description of the various zones in which all three teacher leaders in the case study school.
Without contrasting their scope and degree of leadership, it was apparent that they led equally in zone one, role one. They continued to teach and
Without attempting to contrast the scope and degree of their individual leadership, it was apparent that the three teacher leaders led equally in zone one, role one. They continued to teach and improve their classroom practice, with only TL A and TLB improving their studies and attending workshops. TL A was completing her Bachelor of Education (Hons) degree and attended labour related workshops and HIV/AIDS at district level (journal p. 5), while TLB was completing an Master of Education degree (journal p.3). There was little leadership among all three teachers in zone four, role two by “providing curriculum knowledge across schools into the community” (Grant, 2008, p. 93). There could have been barriers that prevented such leadership, as I discuss in the next section.
What has been presented above is a comprehensive response to my first research question that is the enactment of teacher leadership. What now followers are some barriers and opportunities that emerged from the study. These represent the second question of my research that aimed to explore the factors that hindered or promoted teacher leadership in the school.