wced institutional management and governance
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
1
Presenter: Dr Muavia Gallie (PhD)
Education Moving Up Cc. [email protected]
http://muavia-gallie.blogspot.com http://iwanttoturnaroundmyschool.blogspot.com
Western Cape Education Department�Management and Governance Indaba�
25 February 2012 ��
- The role of Institutional Management and Governance during an era of ‘Education Crisis’ - �
Content 1. Awareness: We don’t know what we don’t know – State
of Education in SA (4-17); 2. Proposition 1 – Human capital at layers beyond the
schools; 3. Proposition 2 – Education is a ‘people’ intensive activity; 4. Proposition 3 – The biggest Untruth about Education in
SA; 5. Proposition 4 – Compliance is a 25% level of
Performance; 6. Proposition 5 – Difference between Institutional
Management and Governance
www.slideshare.net Search “WCED Institutional Management and Governance”
2
Introduction • This presentation is not personal, but it is about
PEOPLE; • Since what is going wrong in the education system, has
nothing to do with money, but it is about the PEOPLE; • What I present is not based on opinion, but rather data
(information); • This conversation is certainly not about ‘being politically
correct’, but rather the ‘uncomfortable conversations’ we tend to avoid!;
• Finally, I don’t defend constituencies (learners, teachers, department, etc.), but rather Education and the future of our country!
Awareness Test
Do we know what we don’t know?
3
TIMSS Participation Countries 2007
TIMSS 2003 - Applying Maths
4
SACMEQ Countries
Botswana
Kenya Lesotho Malawi
Mauritius Mozambique
Namibia Seychelles
South Africa Swaziland Tanzania
Uganda Zambia
Zanzibar Zimbabwe
Source: SACMEQ Data, 2007
Pupil reading sco r e s
SACMEQ Results 6 2 12 15 4 7 13 1 9 5 3 10 14 11 8
6 5 13 15 3 12 9 2 10 4 1 11 14 7 8
7 2 11 13 1 4 14 3 9 6 5 8 12 10 15
6 2 12 14 1 11 13 4 8 5 3 9 15 10 7
5
1999-2010 + Ave Comparing Grades 1-12 from 1999 to 2010
450,000500,000550,000600,000650,000700,000750,000800,000850,000900,000950,0001,000,0001,050,0001,100,0001,150,0001,200,0001,250,0001,300,0001,350,000
Gra
de 1
Gra
de 2
Gra
de 3
Gra
de 4
Gra
de 5
Gra
de 6
Gra
de 7
Gra
de 8
Gra
de 9
Gra
de 1
0
Gra
de 1
1
Gra
de 1
2
199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010Ave.
Musical Chairs Game 24 1
23 2
22 3
21 4
20 5
19 6
18 7
17 8
16 9
15 10
14 11
13 12
12 13
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Gr1 Gr2 Gr3 Gr4 Gr5 Gr6 Gr7 Gr8 Gr9 Gr10 Gr11 Gr12
6
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Gr 3 Literacy Gr 3 Numeracy Gr 6 Languages Gr 6 Mathematics
Aver
age
Perc
enta
ge
Average % scores after re-marking
Eastern Cape
Free State
Gauteng
KwaZulu Natal
Limpopo
Mpumalanga
Norther Cape
North West
Western Cape
South Africa
7
Success rate = 8,1%
• Success-rate of the system = 8,1% • Of every 12 learners starting Grade One, only 1 learner attains what the system is promising them - data 2005!
Access vs Success
Whether you Pass! How you Pass!
Short-Listing
Employment Quantity
Quality
8
% Different Types of schools in SA
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% -10% -20%
Anti-Functional
Dysfunctional Under-Performing
High-Performing
Qua
ntity
of P
ass
Quality of Pass (Grades)
20% 50%
20% 10%
2011 Matric Results
9
Japp
So, if we spend all this money (2011/12 = R178b; 2012/13 = R190b; 2013/14 = R218b; R236b 2014/15) on education, why are the
children not benefiting?
10
Proposition 1
Human Capacity at layers beyond
the schools
Four Layers of Expertise
Faci
litat
ing
Lear
ning
Con
ditio
ns o
f S
ervi
ce
Man
agin
g Te
achi
ng a
nd
Lear
ning
Sup
port
and
Dev
elop
men
t
Sys
tem
s Th
inki
ng
Teac
hers
Teac
her
Uni
ons
Sch
ool
Lead
ers
Circ
uit a
nd
Dis
trict
Pro
vinc
ial,
Nat
iona
l, M
inis
teria
l
11
CDE – 7 September 2011
Proposition 2
Education is a ‘People’ intensive
activity
12
Thomas Jefferson
There is nothing more unequal, than the equal treatment of
unequal people.
80/20 Principle 20%
80%
80%
20% INPUT OUTPUT
13
Proposition 3
The biggest Untruth about Education in South Africa!
We have started to believe that the
Creator will apportion IQ based on your Economic/
Social Status!
14
52,48
43,42
49,11 52,94 54,07
49,55
60,23
52,48 49,53
46,27
35,51 34,18
56,25
45,4
65,99
45,61
37,5
64,75
48,57
36,82
56,67 57,86
65,99 66,08
47,62 49,54
28,51
67,58
52,8
74,4
49,6 52,5
65,7
74,5
52,9
67,7
60,5
88,2 88,2
82,8 86,2
52,6 49,3
67,5
39,6 39,8
44,2
54,5 57,4
63,7 64,7 67,9
77,7 80 80,4 81
82,9
94,3
66,3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GE UPS 14 Matric Results
2008 2009 2010 2011
35
24
51
30
27
50
26
33
29
55
47
29
39
12
42
55
27
40
46
56
38
45
48
30
42
48
66
48
29 29
39,2
49
26
46
16
34
53,4
46
68
52 51
46
38
22
30
46
54
39
96
28
73
48
39
63
38
65
38
66 66
85
76
46
49,8
62,8
29,2 30,2
49,5 52,2
90,9
56,7
67,6
53,1
73,4
57,9
78,4
73,7
83,8
57,7
66,7
49
64,5
57,8
83,3
41,7 39,2
77,8
62,9
88,2
61,2
94,9 92,2
84,3
64,9
35,1
41,7 43,2
44,9
53,3 56 56,6
58 59,7
61,8 62,4 62,9
66,7 66,7 68,1 68,6
70 70,6 71,2 73,5 74,2 74,5 75 75,2
79,8 80
83,8
88,8
92,2
98
67,1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Boikg
ethelo
Ed M
asha
bane
Sec
Nghu
nghu
nyan
e
Mphu
melom
uhle
Sec
Fonta
nus C
omp
Bona
Com
p
Illing
e Sec
Meme
zelo
Sec
Mead
owlan
ds
Thuto
pele
High
Ibhon
go
Itirele
-Zen
zele
Comp
Lobo
ne
Modir
i Tec
h
Ramo
suku
la
Thok
o-Th
aba S
ec
Moqh
aka
Ramo
lelle
KwaB
hekil
anga
Ikusa
sa C
omp
Wes
tbury
Sec
Jet N
teo
Sebo
keng
Tech
Katle
hong
Sec
Mine
rva
Mpilis
weni
Sec
Mame
llong
Com
p
Voslo
orus
Com
p
Senth
ibele
Sec
Kwad
ukath
ole C
omp
Kgok
are
Aver
age
% P
ass
GDE PPS Matric Results 2008-2011 (2011 ascending)
2008 2009 2010 2011
15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2008
2009
2010
2011
Domains of Change
30
Pla
nnin
g (S
choo
l Rea
dine
ss)
Curriculum Management Framework
(Education, Curriculum, Instruction, Teaching,
Learning, Assessment, Expectations)
Educator BEAR (Beliefs, Expectations,
Attitudes & Relationships)
Sustainability S
trategy (Learners, P
arents, Educators,
SM
T, Principal, S
GB
, C
omm
unity, Business, D
istrict, P
rovince) Ow
ners
hip
(Tak
ing
Res
pons
ibili
ty)
1. 2.
3.
4. 5.
16
Ownership
1. Individual Ownership 2. Co-Ownership 3. Co-Creation
Proposition 4
Compliance is 25% level of Performance!
17
ACCOUNTABILITY SCALE 25%: 50%: 25%
Compliance towards Seniors 50%
25%
Job Description -
Salary 25%
50% Support and Development
- Juniors
Example: Employment of Teachers
• Qualification as a Teacher in subject (whether he/she has the subject expertise);
• Registered with SACE (professionally and ethically accountable);
------------------------------------ • Whether he/she can teach the subject
(pedagogical skills); • History of success in teaching the subject
and particular grades, etc.
18
Proposition 5
Difference between Institutional
Management and Governance
Strategic Planning Process
INDICATORS (What is happening?)
SYSTEMS (Why is it happening?)
INNOVATIONS (What can we do about it?)
AGREEMENTS (Let's do it!)
STRATEGIES (How can we do it?)
GOVERNANCE Generic
MANAGEMENT Specific
19
Example: 15 Dec 2011 Regulations
AFS DFS UPS HFS
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
80% 50%
20%
20% 120%
Final Points: • Appoint people who can do the job, not people who
belong to a group; because they are connected; etc.; • As a principal – if you don’t care about every learner in
your school as much as you care about your own child, then you are in the wrong job …;
• As an official, if you don’t know, can’t do (display), or is not better than those whom you need to manage, guide, etc., they will never TRUST what you say;
• In a functional system, you can get away with people managing “generally”, but in a dysfunctional system, you have to have the specific (technical) capacity and skills to manage and lead – ability to show them how to do things – WALK THE TALK!
20
Thank You!!