2.3 EDUCATIONAL CHANGE AND SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT
2.3.2 Approaches to School Improvement
2.3.2.2 The School-based Approach to School Improvement
This section discusses the school-based school improvement approach which, in South Africa, has been enacted through the SASA.
The school-based or site-based management (SBM) approach to school improvement gained prominence internationally in the 1990s. It entails devolution of authority and responsibility from the central office to the school (Hopkins & Lagerweig, 1996;
Department of Education, 1996) and it is given different names in different countries.
It is known as the ‘local management of schools’ in Britain, ‘self-managing school’, in Australia, ‘site-based management’ or ‘restructuring’, in the USA (Cadwell, 1993:
158-159; Hopkins & Lagerweig, 1996: 64) and ‘school-based management’ in South Africa. School-based management involves a process of decentralising decision- making concerning the allocation of resources to the school level and the democratisation of school governance and management. The processes and structures are related to a move towards institutional autonomy. In such schools management is shared with the school council or governing body (Caldwell, 1993; Hopkins &
Lagerweig, 1996; Calhoun & Joyce, 1998). The IP was introduced in SA at the time of transformation which was characterised by this decentralisation. This decentralisation and attendant responsibilities pose challenges and demands on the personnel in the schools as it gives them roles that demand expertise, resources of time and money that are usually limited or non-existent in certain schools in SA. This is not only a challenge to those in the schools but to those in authority since the school, even in a decentralised system, has to work collaboratively with the broader educational system.
As mentioned above, the SBM implies devolution of decision-making to the school, making the school the centre of change. In addition to the fact that the school is the centre for action, these school-based approaches have the following characteristics (Calhoun & Joyce, 1998: 1291):
• There is some degree of shared decision-making between teachers and administrators within the school.
• The parameters of this shared decision-making range from areas such as planning staff development at the school level to full participation.
• The breadth of participation ranges from all teachers being involved, to all staff, to parents, and to students.
• Frequently there is a representative decision-making council, such as a School Management Team or Executive Council (SGB), whose members are recruited, nominated, or elected.
• Schools using site-based approach must have district/school board approval for site-based management, and in most cases they must have approval for school-centred school improvement that uses shared-decision-making between teachers and administrators. In some districts, a school-based approach has been mandated for all schools; in other districts, schools try this approach on a voluntary basis.
• In some districts, school staff and Councils (SGBs) have control of the full school budget; in other districts schools have control of specific budget allocations, such as curriculum funds, material funds.
• Schools often belong to a network or group or cluster, composed of schools within and/or beyond the school district, in which members of the school Council and other staff members can share their experiences and support each other.
All the points listed above, have since the SASA, been applied to South Africa and the Eastern Cape. For example, SGB members are elected and some schools have been accorded the section 21 status, and full control of the budget allocated by the Department of Education; schools belong to clusters of five schools in proximity to
each other and within the same district, the presence of SMTs means that decision- making is supposed to be shared.
The main conclusions that have been drawn from the findings on the study of school- based approaches to school improvement include the following:
• The decentralisation of decision-making as part of school improvement establishes new roles and responsibilities for senior education officials at the centre and for school leaders, teachers and parents at the school level. As new roles are assumed, tensions inevitably develop. Approaches need to be put in place to respond to these tensions.
• Shifts of responsibility to the school level raise the possibility that some functions, formerly carried out at the centre, will not be effectively performed.
• Central authorities need to ensure, through guidance and support for pre- service, in-service and community-based programmes, that those assuming new roles have developed the capacity to meet their new responsibilities.
• External support for schools, re-oriented to meet specific school-defined needs, must also be sustained even if the services are no longer provided by the central authorities.
• The management of change, whether at the centre or at the school level, requires a strategy which considers change as a dynamic and evolutionary process.
• Following on from a clear vision of the expected results of the change, the strategy should anticipate tensions and difficulties but also allow for adaptations and adjustments as the change proceeds (Calhoun & Joyce, 1998:
1291).
The issues above raise a number of questions, which include the role of external support, the allocation of resources, the involvement of parents and the role of the principal. The same issues and questions are also the focus of this study with regard to the IP. Some of the questions and issues will be discussed in the following section.