Who should know better about the needs of a school? This is a rhetorical question not necessarily demanding an answer.
It goes without saying that school principals are responsible for the overall health of their institutions in general and in particular presiding over production of excellent student learning outcomes. The success or otherwise of a school rests on their shoulders.
The role of school principals in the critical decision making processes affecting schools they lead is a fundamental step towards the creation of a watertight and efficient school management.
Nevertheless, it seems across jurisdictions. There is question mark on the extent to which school principals are involved in the decision making processes on critical issues such as deployment of staff (especially their deputies), budget utilisation and mobilisation of teaching and learning inputs. The biggest issue worthy of a bit of attention is the appointment of deputy school principal. Who should have a final say?
Who should have the power of veto when there are contesting views? For a school to accomplish its mission the school principal and deputy principal should have a seamless and complementary professional relationship. They are partners in crime in the quest for improved learning outcomes. The deputy principal should possess expertise, which can help the principal to drive the goals of the school.
Apart from instructional leadership school principals have miscellaneous responsibilities. They represent their schools as ambassadors on stakeholder engagements. In our system they attend kgotla meetings and district extension engagements as well as customers seeking assistance. When away on ambassadorial duties, a school should not derail and experience a mission drift. Mission drift can only be avoided if the school principal and deputy are compatible professional partners bound by a shared vision and collaborative spirit.
When peace and harmony reign supreme in the upper room, between the school principal and deputy, the positive atmosphere and vibes would trickle down to the lower levels of the system. To ensure a seamless management of the affairs schools, principals of schools should have a greater say in the choice of their deputies. School principals understand the needs of their schools and therefore understand the attributes they need from a deputy school head. It is important to give them an opportunity to furnish the selection team with information on candidates they consider suitable for the position. The process of recruitment of deputy principals should be revised to note and accommodate the inputs and insights of school principals.
To achieve this end a formal structure should be instituted to solicit ideas and perspectives from serving school principals.
To formalise the partition of school principals in the selection process a promotion board could be established where principals could share their views. While there are other players involved in the process, it would improve school governance if school principals were to have a final say. Some kind of power of veto. After all accountability rests with school principals. The buck stops with them. By and large there is a need to perfect the recruitment process of deputy school principals with the aim of raising the bar. The participation of school principals in the process would enhance harmony and unity of purpose and mind.
This is not suggest a complete autonomy for school principals in this regard to bring about a hybrid approach that would accommodate critical stakeholders from the human resource division, school principals, patents, community and others. The same approach should apply on other areas such as budget utilisation. This is based on the fact that the school principal should have an upper hand on what tools the school needs. The role of the central ministry is facilitation and not the dominance of the decision-making processes or operational spaces.
