ACADEMIC PAPER
INTRODUCTION
This
academic paper is addressing and encircling the issues related to education, in
my context, which are strongly rooted and have become chronic in nature. Consequently
the quality of education is declining day by day. West-Burnham (1992, p.26)
identifies the key features of quality as quality consists of meeting stated
needs, requirements and standards. Schools led by non-professionals leadership,
lack of realization of having proper school
frameworks, work plans, or structures,
non-effective utilization of human resource and other resources and
moreover, absence of a proper and continuous monitoring and evaluation system
are the causes of failure of education in my context. “Pakistani education
system fails because in its present form it is simply not valuable or important
enough to the society” (Hoodbhoy, 1998 cited in Retallick, J.2005). Investors
In People (IIP) is discussed in detail which is a summative solution for all
the above mentioned problems.
BACKGROUND, CONTEXT AND ISSUES
The
scenarios encompassed here are in my context where I have been working as a
principal and as a teacher for the last twenty years. Here I am taking schools
in both the private and public sectors simultaneously as reference. I am
witness of the fact that many educational planners, mostly through NGO grants,
hired by the government educational department who have been sorting out
effective strategic and intellectual planning for the schools to improve their
performance. But the day by day worsening and declining quality and image of public
schools in particular and private schools in general, can easily be seen. The
made, thereof, frameworks and implementation plans do not work because they are
not calculated on contextual requirements rather based on theoretical and ideal
understanding so, it is difficult to know for which context have those been
developed and to which context are those applicable? Thus the work plans for
schools become merely attractive part of books and articles and never get a
room to be implemented in the schools in a real setting. I also observed a school in my context that hired
the services of a professional development center to make a development work plan
but after some months of its implementation the system was dragged back to its previous
and traditional position. The stated reason was; the school leadership was not
efficient and it was much influenced by the old teachers so they could not stay
up with the change any longer. Ultimately the plan was diminished with the
time, and got decayed at last.
Another
factor of low quality education in public schools is the leadership that is not
subject to result-driven for their promotions and demotions and so they are not
interested to understand the loosing performance of the schools. While in
private sector the management does not believe in taking measures to increase
performance because they cannot gauge the outcome against the expenses they
made. So the schools’ management and stakeholders rely on providing a good
infrastructure, a computer lab and other secondary requirements in the name of
quality education and scared children, through punishment, in the name of
discipline. Skinner (1968) says the cane is still with us. And efforts to
abolish it are vigorously opposed.
WHAT
COULD BE THE SOLUTION?
What
the solution comes in my mind for the rectification of all these above stated issues
is a standard and a benchmark the change desiring schools should come up with to
maintain a minimum required standard of education. There should be a standard
maintaining board which could be capable of to develop effective frameworks for
the schools according to their specific needs, global, national and local trends,
challenges and priorities and the specific context of the schools. Livingston &
McCall (2005) in today’s global society schools find themselves operating in a
new educational context that brings a new set of challenges and opportunities.
The suggested board should also ensure the
continuity of the practices assigned by it. Livingston, K. & McCall, J.
(2005) At the education authority level
there is a requirement in terms of the Standards in Scotland’s Schools
(Scottish Executive Education Department, 2000) to prepare a local quality and
improvement plan which will, while demonstrating the ways in which the Education
Authority will address the national priorities, also includes scope for the
inclusion of local initiatives.
Due
to the researchers’ three-decade-long pursuit of the question ‘What makes an
effective school? Evaluating schools has been a major thrust of policy in the
last two decades in the UK (Thrupp, 1999). A continuous monitoring and evaluation
system would be proven as a milestone in our educational system. Frankly speaking, before joining IED, as a
principal I did not know how to evaluate the performance of the school. More or
less all the schools’ managements are not aware of the importance of monitoring
and evaluation. Although it is carried out in public sector by internal and
external audit teams but it occurs once a year and that is also confined to
financial matters. This is almost the scenario of all schools in my context in
particular and in Pakistan in general.
It
is suggested that all the schools need an expert educational frame work,
including an M&E plan, comply with the contextual needs based on the issues
and priorities as indicated by the stakeholders and those factors which are
necessary to bring the quality education in schools.
INVESTOR IN PEOPLE (IIP)
WHY TO DISCUSS IIP?
While
giving presentation on Investors In People (IIP) this struck to my mind that
why should we not seek services of such a standard maintain institution like
IIP for attaining quality education in our schools. One of the reasons of
failure of our education system is lack of such a standard. So it is worthwhile
to discuss the ways the IIP works and the areas it focuses to improve the
performance of the schools.
WHAT IS IIP?
Investors
In People is a framework, along with other business organizations it renders
services to improve the performance of educational institutions of all sizes in
all sectors through people in the UK. Now it is so spread that it is working
around in fifty countries in the world. The vision of the framework is to
increase the productivity of the UK economy by improving the way in which
organizations manage and develop their people.
IIP was launched by
Michael Howard in 1991. By recognizing its value in April 2010 it was
strategically owned by UK Commission for Employment and Skills.
The
DfES has recommended IIP as an important tool for school improvement for nearly
17 years and according to the department 6,867 primary schools have used the
IIP standards as part of their school improvement agenda and are now boasting
the IIP badge.
IIP
has planned approach to setting targets and objectives and developing people.
They have three main principles with ten indicators.
Planning:
To develop strategies to improve
performance
Doing: To take action to improve performance
Reviewing: To monitor and evaluate the impact
of
the actions that has been taken.
It is easy to relate
the three principles to all our schools. IIP develops standard with respective
to teachers.
WHAT SHOULD WE EXPECT TO ACHIEVE USING
IIP?
In
one of the monitoring and evaluation sessions at IED the teacher had said that
there was 80% role of human resource in developing an organization. Thus pupils
learning objectives at schools can be achieved through staff development.
Mostly
our education system fails because we are always lacking a sound staff
development structure. The IIP gives a staff development structure to our
schools according to our priorities. IIP identifies the roots in the real
context to enhance greater motivation of teachers and ancillary staff to ensure
the more effective use of people as resources.
We
need an education system which complies with the societal needs of our children
having unique social, cultural and religious values. So we usually hesitate to
hire the services of an institution which is different from us in these
attributes. “Communitarian” framework for viewing schools, positive social
interactions should be viewed as important social goals, fostering students’
social and emotional development, as well as academic goals, encouraging
students’ engagement, and increasing academic achievement. (Bryk et al. cited
by Schussler, 2003)
But
IIP say that they develop a culture embedded in values and ethos of client’s society
in a way that students learning achievement could be linked with considerable cultural
values. It also builds a structure that all stakeholders like teachers,
supporting staff, parents and management should be involved for the concern
ethos in the benefit of the school.
We
are producing rote learners in the name of quality education for the last many
decades because we do not know what is a real learning? IIP demonstrates the importance of teaching
and learning with its real essence. IIP standard develops strategically clear frameworks
based on our requirements that help us to bring improvements in our learning
achievements. It sets targets and objectives for us and develops plans for us
to achieve those targets and objectives.
During
our visits to schools on IED[1]
assignments I perceived that most of the managements of private schools think
that as professional development sessions are only conducted in professional
centers outside the school and so they are reluctant to develop their teachers
professionally because along with spending a huge amount they have to manage substitute
teachers in place of the PD[2]
course participants. IIP provides suitable professional development
opportunities as the need areas identified by our school according to its scope
and capacity within the school environment.
Teachers’
hiring, firing and particularly retention has also been a major issue that
affects the learning outcomes in all our contexts. IIP frames the structure to
tackle with this issue.
EVERY TEACHER IS A LEADER
IIP
defines the roles of each academic and non-academic staff member according to his/her
skills and expertise to get maximum utilization of their skills. IIP says that
performance of the schools can be enhanced by recognizing and valuing the
contribution of each staff member. Such acts increase the morale of the
teachers. It suggests that involving staff members in decision making and
encouraging them develops the sense of ownership and responsibility.
HOW DOES IIP START WORKING?
Before
working with a school IIP arranges meeting of their assessors and evaluators
with the principal, teachers, management and other auxiliary staff to see past
practices, and to address the needs and to develop an understanding on the
school needs accordingly. Later, an overall assessment of framework is carried out
formally for reporting and action plan. It involves shaping local staff
development policy to improve communication, management skills, and guide lines
for part-time staff. It starts developing the framework or work plan when
school management and staff agree. School reaches an appropriate standard; the
external assessor is invited to carry out a formal assessment.
IIP IN SCHOOL MAPPING
The
popular quality framework used by schools since it’s launched in the 1990s. A
school can gain Bronze, Silver, and Gold as IIP recognition to have a progressive
route towards optimal success.
OUT COMES
It
is believed that unless there is a standard to match with; quality cannot be
gauged. IIP leads the schools to an external recognition comparing with defined
standards and pre-requisites. IIP’s working towards the school improvement is
made in a way that teachers become more self-reflective practitioners. It is
said that every development is change but every change is not development. Bringing change without proper planning
raises issues so IIP manages change process. There is a huge fund allocated to
the schools in public sector for staff development in my context but those are
not utilized efficiently due to lack of staff development skills. IIP defines
the ways how to use staff-development resources effectively. It also ensures a
holistic approach to planning and raises pupil achievement. It provides a
self-evaluation framework based on national standard.
ELIGIBILITY
Those
schools are encouraged to seek support from IIP which intend to improve their
school in a holistic manner. For a client school it is necessary for the
principal’s and senior staff to attend all the sessions.
CONCLUSION
Schools
are the places where our future generation nurtures and nourishes. Dewey, J.
(1929) the school is primarily a social institution. To maintain the essence of
a school a standard like IIP should be established in Pakistan, which will be
dedicated only to monitor and evaluate the minimum criteria set by it, in terms
of teachers’ qualification, teachers’ professional development, availability of
computer technology, playgrounds and teaching resources, throughout the year. In UK indeed the slogan ‘Improve through
inspection was adopted by OFSTED, the national inspection body responsible for
judging the performance of schools and quality of pupil’s education (Summons,
1999).
West-Burnham, J. (1992)
Managing Quality in Schools, Harlow: Longman.
Schussler, L. D.
(2003). School as Learning Communities: Unpacking the concept. Journal of
School Leadership, 13, 498-528
Livingston, K. &
McCall, J. (2005) ‘Evaluation: Judgemental or developmental’
University
of Strathclyde, UK, European Journal of Teacher Education Vol. 28, No.2
Thrupp (cited by
MacBeath & Mcglynn, 1999) ‘ Self-evaluation: What’s in it for schools?’
Summons, P. (1999) ‘School
Effectiveness: Coming of age in the 21st Century: Evaluating
No comments:
Post a Comment