Is all this ANA pressure warranted and fair to schools? Selvin John Daniels, The New Age, Johannesburg, 15 May 2015 The battle is on. Results of the Annual National Assessments (ANA) and the matric exams 2013 have been issued and school principals are under immense pressure from the Minister for Basic Education and MECs in the respective provinces and the public at large. They are demanding greater accountability and better performance from the school management team of which the school principal is the chief executive officer. The South African Democratic Teachers Union (SADTU) seems the only one who publicly stands in the corner of school principals, defending them against this huge onslaught. The million dollar question is whether all of this pressure is warranted and fair. I do not think so. SADTU had a national general council from October 25 to 27 in 2013 with the theme, Organise and Empower Education Workers to Deliver Free Quality Public Education and Build Socialism. It passed very progressive resolutions about pupils, teachers, assessment, schools and school principals. For two days teacher representatives of more than 65% of teachers in South Africa presented mandates and debated the best for our schooling system. The council resolved to protect school principals so I say "hands off our school principals". There is a reference "that those in glass houses should not cast stones and look at the block of wood in their own eye before you see the splinter in others". People were further challenged that "those without sin should cast the first stone". When we analyse the output and outcomes of schools the assumption is made that all is fine. The public and others assume that schools have been provided with the critical resources, competency and capacity to ensure successful delivery of its public mandate. In most cases this is lacking. Evaluating the fairness of this negative criticism are a few critical aspects about the job of the school principal. The Chambers English Dictionary describes the manager as a person legally appointed to manage and one who deals with administration. Management is referred to as the art or act of managing and directing. A leader is one who shows the way by going first while leadership is referred to as the office of the leader with collective leaders. The occupational specific dispensation for school principals refer to both management and leadership skills requirement. Management and leadership invoke different responsibilities and duties. When the argument is presented that school principals are both managers and leaders I am not sure people understand or appreciate the different nuances of both. The school principal as manager is appointed within the prescripts of law which clearly spell out administrative duties and responsibilities. The school leader is an ex officio with no legal prescript but with a great sense of duty and obligation. The duty and obligation of management and leadership is so often in conflict. The manager does things right according to the book representing the interest of a bureaucracy, while leaders act so often by doing morally (de jura) the right thing in defence of local school communities. Acting as a leader provides the school principal with no legal protection by the law. Some actions may even be unlawful as ultra vires (acting beyond the scope and powers of the post). So often the manager is referred to as a position or a post whilst the incumbent de facto implies the act of a person. The duty of managers can be divided into four clearly demarcated areas of responsibility namely, (1) Planning (setting of goals and objectives and make decisions) (2) Organising (the way and how we carry out decisions) (4) Directing (influencing your staff to achieve objectives) and (4) Controlling/Supervising (ensure results in accordance with plans). Managers in the private sector and school principals operate in different worlds. What is similar though is the kind of skills as mentioned above that is required to do the job successfully. The South African Schools Act recognises that the financial resources provided by the state are not enough and has regulated that school governing bodies, of which the school principal is ex-officio a member, are responsible to budget, plan and provide for this shortfall, setting poorer schools up for failure. This creates an expectation that important activities within the school happen although in cases it has not been budgeted or funded. Directing actions to achieve outcomes are not entirely in the hands of the school principal. These are determined by regulations beyond his or her control and only a fool would believe that the buck stops with the school principal. Regulations and rules have disabled him or her to act decisively and immediately. The minister and MECs must empower school principals to be the final act where the buck stops. I am aware that the regulatory framework cannot simply be wished away but the powers must be incrementally and speedily increase the scope of the school principal to act amongst others decisively. The demands of leadership must also be regulated in order to provide statutory protection for the incumbent. . Selvin John Daniels is a teacher and former trade unionist From: http://tnaepaper.co.za/ -- -- You are subscribed. This footer can help you. Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this message. You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership. To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): [email protected] . --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "YCLSA Discussion Forum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
