Leaders don’t operate in a vacuum

Tshwarelo Hosia | Monday April 4, 2022 18:26

Student outcomes continue to be a source of grave concern. It is clear that our public schools require lifeline - fresh and alternative approaches. It is against this background that this column has consistently made a case for adoption of a turnaround school programme to change the performance trajectory of our public schools and stamp out chronic low performance. Even though turnaround is touted as what the doctor has prescribed for persistently low achieving, one wonders why it is not enjoying massive appeal. The answer is that there is no easy road to success. The programme is demanding and taxing. Turnaround is an ambitious school programme seeking to achieve change the fortunes of schools overnight. It does not tolerate mediocrity nor does it entertain slow incremental progress. For instance, moving from very low to low (15% to 25% is a good upward mobility but many not qualify as turnaround. From the very onset turnaround begins with “setting sights high” (Bryan Hassel). Setting ambitious and challenging goals can be a discomforting experience for both teachers and students. It goes without saying that executing a successful turnaround programme requires a lot of energy, resources and above, all some personal sacrifices.

This, in the case of teachers may include creating time (outside working hours more often without additional remuneration) to provide special care and remedial teaching to underachieving students. Turnaround distinguishes itself from other interventions by placing the learners at the centre of everything that a school does. The one thing that has proved to be a source of distress particularly on the side of teachers and school managers is that under a turnaround dispensation there are consequences for failure to achieve set goals. There is greater accountability and turnaround (unfortunately) does not guarantee job security. It does not shy away from releasing ineffective staff. Everyone is required to take responsibility of what is happening and not happening in their respective areas of assignment. Turnaround schools have a ‘notorious’ distinction of frequently changing leadership and reorganising staff when performance targets are not met.

The turnaround strategy is also notoriously known for its disruptive behaviour. The strategy by nature cannot thrive in a business as usual environment. It is always a threat to the status quo. It requires an enabling policy environment, realignment of resources, removal of rigid financial regulations and other barriers. For turnaround to take root in our public schools, it may be necessary to revise the policy environment by creating a fully-fledged school turnaround office. This would be in line with the example set by the USA. The office would be charged with the responsibility of instituting and working closely with chronically low achieving schools. On the finance side of things, it would be desirable to grant schools greater autonomy over their budget allocations. Schools should enjoy some degree of flexibility to determine their priorities and it should be permissible for schools to transfer funds from less promising areas to high impact areas. Although a turnaround strategy might appear like a no go area for some, it also offers some goodies. True to the carrot and stick principle, turnaround schools create an environment where high performers feel valued and appreciated. Turnaround schools have clearly defined rewards and incentives aimed at motivating high achievers. In some jurisdictions, teachers who excel in their subject areas would be given a wider jurisdiction over a cluster of struggling schools to render technical assistance and build capacity. The same applies to successful school leaders.