Responses by the majority of the participants indicated that most of the
participants were of the view that departmental representatives should be included in Selection Committees. This view was held by seven (88%) of the eight
interviewed respondents comprising one principal, two deputy principals, two heads of department and two post level one educators. The following reasons were cited for this view:
- since they are knowledgeable they give guidance to Selection Committees, - departmental representatives oversee the selection process and make sure that
the right candidates are selected,
- departmental representatives assist Selection Committees by explaining the procedures, the seriousness of confidentiality and the importance of fairness, - they give guidance on the type of questions to be asked in the interview,
expected answers and qualities of the best candidate,
- they also help in the clarification of Departmental Acts, thus, minimizing the number of disputes,
- departmental representatives see to it that during interviews scores are given correctly and consistently,
- departmental representatives help solve problems that may arise, minimize corruption and bias, demonstrate the importance of the task and play a mediation role between Selection Committees and unions,
- departmental representatives present the position of the Department of Education, and
- the principal is introduced to her/his prospective senior.
Contrary to the above, one of the interviewed principals (12% ) was of the view that the inclusion of Departmental representatives was unnecessary because they make no contribution at all to the selection process. The reasons he gave are as follows:
- Departmental representatives do not influence the process
and they do not present the position of the Department of Education.
- The situation was even worse where principals from other schools were appointed to represent the Department. They kept quiet because they do not want to commit themselves for fear of being involved in disputes.
The responses by this principal who had just been promoted suggest that the failure of Superintendents of Education Management (SEMs) to be available during the selection process is quite-common and is viewed as a problem by some educators_
The above indicate that the overall view of the interviewees were that Departmental representative should be included in the selection process of
principals to give guidance to Selection Committees. The perception was that these officials are knowledgeable on the procedures and may therefore help resolve misunderstandings between teacher unions and the parent component in particular.
Question 2: What is your comment on the way interviews are conducted by Selection Committees?
The reason it was important to include this question on interviews in this study was because most of the selection process outcomes are determined at interview level of the process.
Only two participants (25%) of the eight interview participants, comprising one head of department who had recently attended an interview for the position of a principal and one post level one educator, felt that interviews are well conducted by Selection Committees. Their reasons were that:
- Selection Committees were able to make candidates feel at ease;
- allocation of time was fair;
- the panel was able to give clarity on questions;
- introduction of Selection Committee members was good; and - different people ask individual questions during the process.
One of the post level one educators pointed out that there had been a lot of
improvements compared with the time at which the process began in 1996 because the atmosphere is now conducive and dignity is facilitated by thorough
preparation.
On the other hand, the views of six of the interviewees (75%) comprising two principals, two deputy principals, one head of department and one post level one educator felt that the interviews were not well conducted because:
- selection committees had no capacity to conduct interviews;
- questions asked during interviews were not clear;
- expected answers were not known by members of the committee;
- questions asked were below the level of principals;
- candidates who are eloquent were awarded high marks;
- no consistency in scoring;
- in some cases scores were given verbally, and some members tended to wait for dominant members to give their scores after which they gave scores that are closer to those given;
- selection committee members were not accountable for the scores given as
they did not give reasons for their scoring;
- averages were reached in different ways;
- some selection committee members sleep while conducting interviews;
- selection committees were sometimes workshopped by Deputy Principals who were applicants; and
- language used is not friendly to everybody and this hinders the process.
The above findings indicate that educator perceptions are that practice is contrary to guidelines given by Lotter et al (2003:33) that Selection Committee members must ensure that all members of the interview panel have a very good
understanding of how the rating scale works and how to rate the responses of applicants. The recommendation is further that after completing the rating form the chairperson of the Selection Committee should ask a few members to share their ratings and the motivation for each rating with the committee. The committee could then negotiate an overall score that most of the members can accept.
Question 3: Should interviews be the only instrument used in the selection process of principals?
Only one participant, a principal, out of the eight participants interviewed, felt that the interview should be the only instrument used in the selection process of
principals because "the Department of Education decided it should be so." Seven
(87%) of the eight interviewed participants, were of the opinion that the interview should not be the only instrument. Their feeling was that:
- Interviews should be complemented by other instruments.
- like the assessment of learners which was based on summative assessment in which written examinations were the only instrument used and did not produce
the required results so interviews alone may not succeed. There needs to be a balance between presentation and the practical part of it.
This perception is in line with Southworth's (1990:44) statement that "the decision should not be based on the interview alone. The interview is merely one part of the process." Also in line with this is Thurlow's claim in Lumby et al (2003:75) that if the interview is the main or only instrument there is always the possibility that the person appointed may be merely the one who performs best at interviews, and not necessarily the person who will perform best in the tasks of the job. The reasons given by Thurlow are that:
interviewers' judgements of candidates can be affected by interviewee appearance, speech, gender and race either positively or negatively,
people tend to favor others whom they perceive to be like themselves, and few interviewers have undertaken any training in interview skills.
4.4Conclusion
In this chapter, I presented and discussed findings on Urnzinyathi educator perceptions of the selection process of school principals. In the next chapter,I present the summary of the study and recommendations drawn from conclusions drawn findings in this study.
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction
This chapter comprises two main components. The first part isa summary of the study which includes the main findings and conclusions drawn from the findings about the perceptions of educators concerning the selection processof principals in the Umzinyathi area of the KwaMashu Circuit. The last part ofthe chapter is on recommendations for issues viewed as having the capacity ofovercoming educator perceived weaknesses of the selection process. The recommendations also relate to
further studies on the selection of staff in the education system.
5.2 Summary of the research.
In this study I explored educator perceptions of the selection ofschool principals in the Umzinyathi area of the KwaMashu Circuit. The purposewas to contribute to knowledge on effective staff selection in the education system in general and as it relates to the selection of principals in KwaZulu-Natal in particular. Data was collected by means of questionnaires and interviews, with theschool sample consisting of two schools, a primary and a secondary schools. All the educators in both schools comprised the respondent sample. The case studymethodology was employed. This made the study mainly qualitative though a quantitative research
method was also employed. The former comprised data collectionthrough semi- structured interviews while the latter had data gathered through questionnaires.
The limitation of the study was that it was confined to only two schools in one circuit. However, of strength about the study despite this limitation is that its qualitative nature stands to contribute to better understandingof the current staff selection process and in so doing promote better effectiveness in schools.
5.2.1 Conclusions.
Findings in this study are hereby presented in response to eachof the key questions of the study.
Key Question One: What are educator perceptions of the selection of principals in the Umzinyathi area of the KwaMashu Circuit?
Findings are that educator perceptions of the selection processof principals in the Umzinyathi area of KwaMashu Circuit was partly open and fair. The majority of educators were of the opinion that criteria other than those prescribed by the KwaZulu-Natal Department of Education were used by SelectionCommittees in the Umzinyathi area of the KwaMashu Circuit. What this means is that the
selection process was perceived to be informed by the particularisticapproach and that this was shaped by personal affiliation such as political similarities, kinship and family background. Findings were also that educators were not satisfied with
the composition of selection committees and that their perceptions were that parents, educators and teacher unions were not ready for the task of selecting school principals. The perceptions were that as a result not the best candidates were selected into positions of school principals in this Umzinyathi area.
Furthermore, the findings were that the educator perceptions were that interviews were not well conducted. The educator views as a result that interviews should not be the only instrument used in the selection process of principals.
Key Question Two: What contributes to these educator perceptions of the selection of school principals in the Urnzinyathi area?
Findings were that the above perceptions arose from educator experiences in the selection process. For some of the educators such experiences had been gained when being involved as members of selection committees while for others the experiences were as applicants for promotions. Some of the perceptions also resulted from appointments that had been made after a long process of dispute resolution. Another contributory factor of the perceptions was poor performance in schools in the Umzinyathi area of the KwaMashu Circuit. For the educators this meant that individuals promoted into positions of school principals in this area were not always suitable for this task.
Key Question Three: What can be learnt from these perceptions?
Conclusions drawn from the above were that educators in theUmzinyathi area of KwaMashu Circuit are unhappy with the manner in which principals are selected and that the educators are therefore highly unlikely to find the promoted
principals' leadership acceptable. This is because the perceptions were that procedures and guidelines stipulated in the procedures and guidelines of the KwaZulu-Natal Department of Education are not fully applied by selection committees. These could mean poor performance in schools ifnot attended, for example, by implementing the recommendations below.
5.3 Recommendations
Based on the findings and conclusions in this study, I suggestthe following recommendations which I view as having the capacity to helpcontribute towards the improvement of educator perceptions of the selection of schoolprincipals. The recommendations are grouped in terms of the key questions.
5.3.1 Educator perceptions.
Educators are of the opinion that criteria used by selection committees are not those prescribed by the KwaZulu-Natal Department of Education. To address this perception the recommendation is that extensive workshops need to be organised
for Selection Committee members on criteria, procedures and guidelines to be followed in the selection process. Furthermore, follow up workshops need to be conducted to make sure that issues addressed in the workshops were well
understood. This should result on improved educator confidence on the selection process. Also, educators have no confidence in the selection process particularly regarding the composition of selection committees. In order to improve educator confidence on this issue it is recommended the composition of selection
committees need to be adjusted. For example, the Department of Education may either do this by appointing an independent committee to deal with the selection process or by having Selection Committee members being selected from
experienced principals, Superintendent of Education Management (SEMs), retired principals or from experienced principals from other districts. Educators seem to have no confidence in the involvement of parents in the selection of principals.
Educators need to be workshopped on the necessity of having parents in Selection Committees, for example, by indicating that parents are knowledgeable on the kind of principal they need to head "their" school and to guide their children.
5.3.2 Related further research.
This study only explored educator perceptions of the selection of principals in one area and one circuit. As already indicated, the weakness of this study was that the findings may in no way be regarded as generalisable. In view of this, my
recommendation is that further related studies be conducted inthe schools around Umzinyathi area and later in the whole KwaMashu Circuit in order to validate or invalidate findings in this study. The hope is that in so doing this will help find out how generalisable the findings are in relation to the whole of theUmzinyathi area and KwaMashu Circuit.
References
Akinnus, D. M. (1991), Personnel Management in Africa in Breuster, C. and Tyson, S. (eds), International comparisons in human resource management, London: Pitma.
Bernard, H. R. (2001), Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches, New Delhi: Sage Publications Inc.
Bless, C.T. and Higson, S. (1995), Fundamentals of social research methods:
An African perspective (2nd edition), Kenwyn: Juta& Co Ltd.
Bush, T. & Midd1ewood, D. (1999), Managing people in education, London:
Basil Chapman.
Cohen, L., Marion, L. and Morrison, K. (2001), Research methods in education (5th Edition), London, New York: Routledge.
Department of Education (1998), Employment of Educators Act of 1998:
Pretoria.
Department of Education (2000), School management teams employment, induction and orientation of school based educators, Pretoria: Department of Education.
De Vos, A. S., Strydom, H., Fouche, C. B., and Delport, C.S.L. (2002), Research at grassroots: For the social sciences and human service professions, Pretoria:
Van Schaick.
Fatima, H. (2003), An Evaluative study of the motivation ofbasic education and training in industry, Unpublished MED, Durban: Universityof Natal.
Foot, M., and Hook, C. (1999), Introducing human resource anagement, London: Practice Hall.
Foskett, N., and Lumby,1. (2003), Leading and managing education international dimensions, London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
Foster, W. F. & Smith, W. S. (2001), The governance of education in South Africa: An analysis of the legislative framework, Cape Town: Education Management Program.
Gerber, P. D., Nel, P.S, and Van Dyk, P. S. (1995), Human resource management, Cape Town: Southern Book Publishers.
Gumede, R.T. (2003), An investigation into the selection and appointment of educators to the position of Head of Department in three primaryschools in the KwaNdengezi Circuit of the KwaZulu-Natal Departmentof Education and Culture, Unpublished MED, Durban: University of Natal.
Human Resource Management Circular No 70 of 2005.
Jegede, J. O. (1999), A concise handbook of RESEARCH METHODS, Ibadan:
Pope Rising Press.
Kruger, N. & Adams, H. (2002), Psychology for teaching and learning: What teachers need to know, Sandton: Heinneman.
Lotter, M. J., Goolam, F., Christensen, P., Fisher, G., Cameroon, C., Pienaar, D., Naicker, S. and Waddy, C. (2003), Towards effective school management (Manual 4, Managing People), Durban: Natal Printers Pty Ltd.
Lundy, D. and Crowling, A. (1996), Strategic human resources management, London: Routledge.
May, T. (1997), Social esearch: Issues, methods and processes, Milton Keynes:Open University Press.
McMillan,1. H. and Schumacher, S. (1993), Research in education: A conceptual introduction, New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.
McPherson, G. L. (1999), A critical assessment of the current selection procedures for secondary principals in KwaZul-Natal, MED, Durban:
University of Natal.
Merriam, S.B. (1998), Qualitative research and case study applications in education, San Fransisco: Jessey-Bass Publishers.
Meyer, M. (2003), A guide to passing human resource management, Clermont:
New Africa.
Middlewood, D. and Lurnby, J. (1998), Human resource managementin schools and colleges, London: Paul Chapman Publishing LTD.
Morgan, C., Hall, V. and Mackay,H. (1983), The selection of secondary school heads, Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Morgan,
c.,
Hall, V. and Mackay, H. (1984), A handbook of selecting senior staff for schools,Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Nel, P. S., Gerber, P. D., Van Dyk, P. S., Haasbrook, G. D., Schultz, H. B., Sono, T. and Werner, A. (2001), Human resource management(5th ed), Cape Town:
Oxford University Press.
Riches, C. (1997), Human resource management in education,Milton Keynes:
Open University Press.
O'Nell, 1., Managing Resources in Bush, T. and Westburnham,1. (eds) (1994), Principles of education management,Harlow-London.
Small, H. (2003),A study of current processes for selection of school principals in Wentworth, KwaZulu-Natal, Unpublished MED, Durban:
University of Natal.
South African Schools Act 84 of 1996.
Terre Blanche, M. & Durrheim, K. (1999), Research in practice: Applied methods for the social sciences,Cape Town:University of Cape Town.
Thurlow, M. (2000), Recruitment and selection in Lumby,J., Middlewood, D.
Kaabwe, E. (eds) (2003), Managing human resource in South African Schools, London: Commonwealth Secretariat.
Waghid, Y. (2000), Quantitative research in education and the critical use of rationality, Journal of Education 2 (I).
Wisker, G. (2001), The postgraduate research handbook,London: Palgrave.
Appendix A The Circuit Manager
KwaMashu Circuit Office P. O. KwaMashu
4360.
Dear SirlMadam
My name is Sithembiso Selby Makanya. I am registered for the Master of Education degree at the University ofKwaZulu-Natal (Edgewood).
I request your permission and support to enable me to undertake a study at two schools in your circuit. The aim of the study is to explore educator perceptions on the selection process of principals in the Umzinyathi area of KwaMashu Circuit.
It will be a qualitative study which will involve questionnaires and interviews with the school personnel. This exercise will not disturb the functioning of the school. The study is purely academic. I will not disclose the names of the schools or the names of educators who will accept my request to use them as participants.
To ensure this, no real names of the schools will be mentioned and educators will be referred to as participants.
Participation will be voluntary. Participants are free to withdraw from the research at any time, should they so wish, without any negative or undesirable
consequences to themselves.
Should you wish to consult my supervisor her contact details are as follows:
Dr. T. M. Ngcobo Tel No.: 2602494
EMAIL: [email protected].
My contact numbers are: 031 - 510 I039 (W) 031 - 7740811 (H) Cell. No: 0722830641.
Thanking you in advance for your kind co-operation to my request.
S. S. Makanya.
Appendix B.
The Principal
Dear Sir or Madam:
My name is Sithembiso Selby Makanya. I am registered for the Master of Education degree at the University of KwaZulu-Natal (Edgewood).
I request your permission and support to undertake the study at your school. The title of the project is: Perceptions of educators on the selection of principals in the Umzinyathi area of KwaMashu Circuit. The aim of the study is to explore the educators perceptions on the selection of principals. Itwill be a qualitative study which will involve questionnaires and interviews of about 30 minutes with the school personnel. The exercise will not disturb the functioning of the school. The study is purely academic. I will not disclose the name of the school or the names of educators who will accept my request to participate in the project. To ensure this, no real name of the school will not be mentioned in the report and educators will be referred to as participants.
Participation will be voluntary. Participants are free to withdraw from the research at any time, should they so wish, without any negative or undesirable
consequences to themselves.
Should you wish to consult my supervisor her contact details are as follows:
Dr. T. M. Ngcobo Tel. No: 2602494