Hypothesis I:
Ho: IQMS has not contributed to a perception of more structure to the performance management of educators.
HI: IQMS has contributed to a perception of more structure to the performance management of educators.
Hypothesis 2:
Ho: IQMS has not contributed to a perception of more improved staff development.
HI: IQMS has contributed to a perception of more improved staff development.
Hypothesis 3:
Ho: IQMS has not contributed to a perception of more motivated educators.
HI: IQMS has contributed to a perception of more motivated educators.
Hypothesis 4:
Ho: IQMS has not contributed to a perception of more improved class visits.
HI: IQMS has contributed to a perception of more improved class visits.
Hypothesis 5:
Ho: IQMS has not contributed to a perception of more improved feedback to educators on their performance.
HI: IQMS has contributed to a perception of more improved feedback to educators on their performance.
Hypothesis 6:
Ho: IQMS has not contributed to a perception of more improved educator performance.
HI: IQMS has contributed to a perception of more improved educator performance.
Hypothesis 7:
Ho: IQMS has not contributed to a perception of more improved goal setting by educators.
HI: IQMS has contributed to a perception of more improved goal setting by educators.
Hypothesis 8:
Ho: IQMS has not contributed to a perception of more improved problem solving.
HI: IQMS has contributed to a perception of more improved problem solving.
Hypothesis 9:
Ho: There is a perception that the IQMS scores are not inaccurate.
HI: There is a perception that the IQMS scores are inaccurate.
Hypothesis 10:
Ho: There is a perception that the IQMS forms are not adequate.
HI: There is a perception that the IQMS forms are adequate.
Hypothesis 11:
Ho: There is a perception that IQMS is not a disciplinary tool for management.
HI: There is a perception that IQMS is a disciplinary tool for management.
Hypothesis 12:
Ho: The perception of improved structure to the performance management of educators is not positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
HI: The perception of improved structure to the performance management of educators is positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
Hypothesis 13:
Ho: The perception of improved staff development is not positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
HI: The perception of improved staff development is positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
Hypothesis 14:
Ho: The perception of improved class visits is not positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
HI: The perception of improved class visits is positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
Hypothesis 15:
Ho: The perception of improved staff development is not positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
HI: The perception of improved staff development is positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
Hypothesis 16:
Ho: The perception of improved staff motivation is not positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
HI:The perception of improved staff motivation is positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
Hypothesis 17:
Ho: The perception of improved class visits is not positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
HI: The perception of improved class visits is positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
Hypothesis 18:
Ho: The perception of improved feedback is not positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
HI: The perception of improved feedback is positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
Hypothesis 19:
Ho: The perception of improved goal setting is not positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
HI :The perception of improved goal setting is positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
Hypothesis 20:
Ho: The perception of improved problem solving is not positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
HI: The perception of improved problem solving is positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
Hypothesis 21 :
Ho: The perception of inaccurate IQMS scores is not negatively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
HI:The perception of inaccurate IQMS scores is negatively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
Hypothesis 22:
Ho: The perception of adequate IQMS forms is not positively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
HI:The perception of adequate IQMS forms is positively and significantly correlated to the
perception of improved educator performance.
Hypothesis 23:
Ho: The perception of IQMS as a disciplinary tool for management is not negatively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
HI: The perception of IQMS as a disciplinary tool for management is negatively and significantly correlated to the perception of improved educator performance.
Hypothesis 24:
Ho: The perceptions of: structure in performance management, class visits, staff development, motivation, feedback, goal setting, problem solving, adequate forms as well as inaccurate scores and IQMS as a disciplinary tool for management together do not significantly influence educator performance.
HI: The perceptions of: structure in performance management, class visits, staff development, motivation, feedback, goal setting, problem solving, adequate forms as well as inaccurate scores and IQMS as a disciplinary tool for management together significantly influence educator performance.
Hypothesis 25:
Ho: There is not a linear (multiple regression) relationship between the perceptions of: structure in performance management, class visits, staff development, motivation, feedback, goal setting, problem solving, adequate forms as well as inaccurate scores and IQMS as a disciplinary tool for management and educator performance.
HI: There is a linear (multiple regression) relationship between the perceptions of: structure in performance management, class visits, staff development, motivation, feedback, goal setting, problem solving, adequate forms as well as inaccurate scores and IQMS as a disciplinary tool for management and educator performance.
4.12. The Educator Performance model
The model that we were attempting to prove was that class visits, structure in staff development, motivation, feedback, goal setting, problem solving and adequate forms (the independent variables) are significantly positively related to the perception of improved Educator Performance (the dependant variable) and that the perception of IQMS as a disciplinary tool for management and the perception of inaccurate IQMS scores were significantly negatively related to the perception of educator performance. Furthermore, it will be attempted to prove a linear
relationship between theses independent variables and the dependant variable. The above concept is illustrated with the aid of Figure 4.2 below.
Figure 4.2: Educator Performance Model
a) Structure
t) Goal setting d) Class visits
h) Accurate scores
k) Educator Performance Feedback
e)
g) Problem solving b) Staff development
c) Motivation
i) Disciplinary tool
4.14. The questionnaire
Wegner (2002, 17) points out that the questionnaire is the data collection instrument that is used to gather data in all the interview situations. The questionnaire used in this study was attached as appendix A. The design of such a questionnaire is critical to ensuring that the correct research questions are addressed and that the data that is collected is accurate and appropriate. It should consist of three sections: the administration section records the identity of the respondent by name, date, address, where the interview is conducted and an interview number. In this case the respondents were assured that the information would be treated confidentially and given the
option of filling in the questionnaire anonymously. In this case the respondents were asked to state whether they are post level one educators, the chairperson of a School Development Team or both so that the perspectives of the different groups could be determined. The information sought section makes up the major portion of the questionnaire and it consists of all the questions that extract the data from the respondents to address the research objective. The questionnaire used in this research consisted of thirty four specific close ended multiple choice questions to which respondents could reply on a Likert scale ranging from strongly disagrees to strongly agree. Clear instructions were given in writing as well as verbally as to the meaning of the questions and how the questionnaire is to be completed. Each question addressed a specific aspect of the system or the implementation thereof. Some questions were alternated to counteract the possible effect of acquiescence. The questionnaire was concluded with an open ended question asking for any suggestions on how the system or its implementation can be improved upon in order to determine if anything of importance to the respondent has been omitted.
The questions were designed as a result of the experiential data and personal interviews. The questions related to the same topic were grouped together in the following manner:
The reason for formulating the particular questions and the grouping of the questions
The grouping of the questions is based on the variables depicted on the model depicted in Figure 4.2. In section 4.13 of this chapter.
a) Structure
During the course of the literature review (2.13) it was revealed that Armstrong (1994, 76) argued that it is vital that performance management be implemented as a continuous process.
The review of the Departmental literature about the IQMS system (3.4) revealed that it prescribed two developmental cycles built into the annual programme. The researcher experienced an improvement in educator performance at the school he was managing as principal when the implementation of IQMS ensured more structure in staff development. The feedback from the workshops he presented to train principals in the implementation of IQMS was that there was more structure in the Performance Management of educators since the introduction of IQMS and that this facilitated improved Educator Performance. The interviews during the pilot study confirmed that the structure provided by the implementation of the IQMS
system improved Educator Performance. Therefore, three questions in the questionnaire were designed to determine if structure in staff development was significantly related to perceived improvement in Educator Performance.
4.16. Summary
The previous two chapters reviewed the available literature on performance management in the business world and the performance management system used in South African public schools, the Integrated Quality Management System (IQMS). This chapter discussed the problem statement of this study; the research questions, objectives and hypothesis were also defined.
Research methodology approaches were discussed, quantitative versus qualitative research and the different sampling methods were pointed out. The method of research for selected for this study was discussed. The questionnaire and correlation between variables were discussed. The model developed in this study was reviewed. The next chapter deals with the results and findings of the field study.
Chapter 5
Findings of the Field Study
5.1. Introduction
The general problem was that vast resources (time, money, etc.) have been invested in the Integrated Quality Management System. Besides the generally positive feedback it was not yet known for certain to what extent IQMS contributed to the perception of improved educator performance and the problems which existed with the implementation.
The objectives of this dissertation were to determine what the perceived impact of the Integrated Quality Management System on Educator Performance was and prove the validity of a proposed model of factors ( please refer to Figure 4.2 below) related to Educator Performance.
Based on the literature study, objectives and hypotheses a questionnaire was designed using a five point Likert scale. The KZN Department of Education has been divided into several districts. Everyone of the 595 schools in the Pietermaritzburg district was invited to send 2 delegates to the IQMS Indaba held at the Northdale Technical College on 10 March 2006. This indaba was attended by 812 educators. All of the delegates were given the questionnaire to measure their perceptions of IQMS. At the end of the indaba 450 questionnaires were returned.
(This convenient sample therefore consists of 98 School Development Team chair persons, 222 post level one educators and 56 educators that were both post level one educators and chairpersons of school development teams. Of the returned questionnaires there 15 that were not suitable for using in this study and were rejected.) This questionnaire was also used to measure the perceptions on IQMS of 36 of the 50 school principals attending the meeting of the Midlands -East and Midlands North wards on 16 March 2006. The total population of these convenient samples therefore consisted of a total of 412 respondents.
The demographic composition of the 412 respondents to the questionnaire in terms of their position were: 36 principals; 98 School Development Chairmen; 56 were School Development Chairmen as well as post level 1 educators and then there were 222 post level 1 educators.
Figure 5.1: Educational Position
Frequency
250""""'=__~' -'--'--""""'---'-"--"---'----'---"'--"---1
200 +----:c~~""r_~~-'-,;;,---,~'-"-_-~---'-'---
150 +.-"~_---"-''+-'-...,,-,-=----,;- - - - ' : - - - _ - ____
100 +---"~---':----'--,'----~
50 +-"---'--'---0::--=--'-
o+---"-=="-'---,-_...J::
principal SOT Chair SOT Chair&
Pl1
Pl1
Table 5.1: Educational Position
Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid
I
principal 36 8.7 8.7 87SOT Chair 98 23.8 23.8 32.5 SOT Chair &
56 13.6 13.6 46.1
PLI
PLl 222 539 53.9 100.0
Total 412 100.0 100.0
There were more respondents from the PLl group (53.9%) followed by the SDT Chair (23.8%), SDT Chair&PLl (13.6%) and the Principals (8.7%).