GDE GE UPS Project

1

Turning around 14 Under-Performing schools inGauteng East District

Presenter: Dr Muavia Gallie (PhD)

1 September 2009

2

Content1. Introduction2. Rationale3. Conceptual Framework of the

Intervention4. School Readiness Components5. Research on Turn-around strategies6. Planning, PD & Time-on-Task7. Project Plan8. Conclusion

3

Introduction• To ensure that all 14 schools within this

project;• That are currently having learner

achievement (Matric) results below 60%(and one primary school);

• Should improve by at least 30% over thelifespan of the project;

• And that sustainable measures be put inplace to prevent them ‘sliding back’ afterthe completion of the project.

4

Rationale (1)• Poor leadership - poor communication,

conflicts, disruptions, no managementprocesses, no monitoring and support, etc.;

• Poor governance – lack of consultation, abuseof power, undermining of education laws andpolicies;

• Poor curriculum delivery – no functionaltimetable, disputed teaching allocation, nomonitoring and evaluation, lack of operationalprocedures, underutilisation of resources, nolearning and teaching support materialmanagement system.

5

Rationale (2)• Improve the effectiveness of curriculum planning;• Improve the implementation process of policies;• Improve the management capacity in assessment;• Improve the management of the curriculum process;• Improve the management of all resources;• Improve the assessment structures and the quality of

their work;• Improve the quality of assessment for learning;• Improve the management of external examination

processes and;• Improve the management of learner and learning

support;• Improve the quality of teachers.

6

Conceptual Framework of the Intervention

School ReadinessComponents

30%

Teaching40%

100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%

Current Academic YearPrevious Year

Learning50%

Assess-ment10%H

FSLF

SD

FS

School ReadinessComponents

30%

School ReadinessComponents

30%

Teaching30%

Teaching20%

Disrup-tions10%

Assessment20%

Learning for Assessment

20%

Learning20%

Disruptions& Chaos

20%

Learn-ing

10%

90%

50%

30%Time-on-Task

7

School Readiness Components 8

School ReadinessComponents

30%

100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%

Current Academic YearPrevious YearH

FSLF

SD

FS

School ReadinessComponents

30%

School ReadinessComponents

30%8. Learner and Teacher

support materials

7. Organogram

6. Quarterly Teachingschedules

5. Implementable andflexible timetable

5. Unclear academic standards

4. Annual Planning4. High level of disruption and violence

3. Learner Information3.1 Low learner performance

3.2 High dropout rates of learners

2. Teacher Information2.1 High rate of staff turnover

2.2 Negative school atmosphere

1. Teacher and LearnerAttendance

1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism

1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism

SRC ComponentIndicators of DFS

8 School Readiness Components

8

Operation of the NCS in schoolsMacrolevel

issues

• Working week• Timetable time• Staffing numbers• Rooming• Class-size-ratio• Timetabling• Assessment - Recording - Reporting• Continuous Teacher Professional Development• Governance involvement

Mesolevel

issues

Microlevel

issues

Learning Areas/Subjects

* Planning * Time * Delivery * Testing

School

Departments

Teacher

9

Career stages and CPTD

10

Time-on-Task 2.3

Teaching40%

100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%

Current Academic YearPrevious Year

Learning50%H

FSLF

SN

FS

Teaching30%

Teaching20%

Learning20%

Learn-ing

10%

90%

50%

30%

•4.5 days p.w.•176 days p.a.

•2.5 days p.w.•98 days p.a.

•1.67 days p.w.•65 days p.a.

11

Time-on-Task 3

Teaching40%

100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%

Current Academic YearPrevious Year

Learning50%H

FSLF

SN

FS

Teaching30%

Teaching20%

Learning20%

Learn-ing

10%

90%

50%

30%

4.5 days p.w.

2.5 days p.w.

1.67 days p.w.

12

5 Levels of Learning

Wisdom1755Comprehension1404Know-How1053Information702Facts351

Type ofTeaching

TeachingDays

Level

13

Anti-Traditional Approach (Innovative)

School ReadinessComponents

30%

Teaching40%

100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%

Current Academic YearPrevious Year

Learning50%

Assess-ment10%H

FSLF

SD

FS

School ReadinessComponents

30%

School ReadinessComponents

30%

Teaching30%

Teaching20%

Disrup-tions10%

Assessment20%

Learning for Assessment

20%

Learning20%

Disruptions& Chaos

20%

Learn-ing

10%

90%

50%

30%Time-on-Task

14

15

16

17

18

19

Project Plan• Now until March 2010 - Establish the ‘Eight

School Readiness Components’ in order toallow these schools to start the new school-year in 2010 on the same footing as otherschools [Rules and Regulations];

• April 2010 to December 2010 - Strengthenthe working relationship between the people[People Relationship Development];

• January 2011 to December 2011 - Engagein Continuous Professional Development torestore the ‘skills gaps’ among staff[Individual and Collective Development].

20

• Teacher andLearner attendance(punctuality);

• Commitment tooperational systemsand procedures.

• Internal andexternal community

• SGB

• SMT andteachers

• Rules,regulations,policies andaccountability

1. Schoolculture andclimate

Systems

• Operationalconditions

• Administration andmanagementprocedures

People

• Capacity

• Networking

• Service delivery

Programme

• SRC

Phase 1 - School Readiness Components

21

• Organogram

•Timetabling

•Quarterly TeachingSchedules

•Teacher and LearnerInformation

•Teaching and LearningSupport Materials

• Teachersand SMT

• NCS

• Barriers to learning

• Curriculum Instruction(Didactics, Pedagogyand Methodology)

•Coaching and Mentoring

• Learner achievement

2. Time-on-Task

Systems

• Operational conditions

• Administration andmanagementprocedures

People

• Capacity

• Networking

• Servicedelivery

Programme

• SDP

Phase 2 - Staff Development Programme

22

• Annual Planning

• Quarterly TeachingSchedules

• Assessment strategies

• Teacher and LearnerInformation

•Teaching and LearningSupport Materials

• Principal

• SMT andteachers

• ManagingTeaching andLearning

• High pressureaccountability;

• Focusing onLearnerAchievement

3. InstructionalLeadership

Systems

• Operational conditions

• Administration andmanagementprocedures

People

• Capacity

• Networking

• Servicedelivery

Programme

• CPD

Phase 3 - Continuous Professional Development

23

Project Goals or Objectives

1. Improve the results of all the grades from 2010;2. Improve the school culture and climate in

support of quality teaching and learning;- Improve the ‘time-on-task’ through staffdevelopment programmes;- Improve the ‘instructional leadership’ throughcontinuous professional developmentprogrammes;

3. To achieve an acceptable level of functionality inall the schools.

24

Key Project Deliverables1. Baseline evaluation of results of the past five years before end of

December 2009;2. Establishing the eight School Readiness Components in all the

schools by January 2010;3. Increase the learner achievement results, with at least 30%, in all

grades for 2010 and 2011;4. Focusing the schools on their core responsibility and delivery -

Teaching and Learning;5. Developing a culture and climate where teachers respect, commit

themselves, and honour instructional delivery, and time-on-task;6. Develop a positive attitude towards institutional change and

improvement; and7. Ensure a smooth handover of schools in order to ensure

sustainability of successes.

25

Risk/Limitation ManagementThe following possible risks/limitations will need to be managed:1. External provider lacks positional power and authority;2. Need employer commitment to enforce compliance/impose

extraordinary decisions that may require fast-trackingbureaucratic processes eg: disciplinary;

3. Processes to deal with individuals and groups not responding tothe project- and other challenges;

4. A dedicated champion and project manager within thedepartment;

5. Stakeholder commitment to holidays and weekends whereneeded;

6. Implementers need authority and space to enter schools;7. Need to follow a more radical model, rather than the traditional

model of school improvement;8. Need political and public will at all levels; and9. Starting with the project towards the end of an academic year.

26

Progress and Status Report

• School Readiness Componentsreports for 2009 bi-weekly;

• Progress reports bi-monthly;• Project quarterly reports;• Urgent matters reported

immediately.

27

There is noManagement

withoutMonitoring and

Evaluation

28

Monitoring

29

Evaluation

30

There is noLeadership

without QualityAssurance.

31

Quality Assurance

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

100%

• •

•

• • • • •• • • •

••

1413121110987654321

2009

2011

2010

32

Team Members

• On-site Support

• Evaluation of Project

Mr Nasser Ebrahim

072 888 6807

nasser@efunda.co.za

• Facilitation of sessions

• Develop Instruments

• Monitoring of Project

Mr Faruk Hoosain

083 786 3793

faruk@efunda.co.za

• Research and ProjectManagement

• Quality Assurance ofProject

Dr Muavia Gallie

082 822 9494

muavia@mweb.co.za

ResponsibilitiesMembers

33

Project Activity Plan

Management4. Annual Planning

7. Organogram5. Nov 2009

Professional Leadership4. Oct 2009

Professional Leadership6. Quarterly TeachingSchedules,

8. Teaching and LearningSupport Materials

3. Oct 2009

Mid Oct 2009, One-daycomputer session

5. Timetabling2. Sept 2009

Administration1. Attendance,

2. Teacher Information

3. Learner Information

1. Sept 2009

FocusSRCJoint Sessions

34

Features of the Project• “Whatever it takes - no excuse!”• “Failing is not an option.”• Principal is the driver of the project;• Rest of staff are ‘in support’;• Networking with others;• Evidence based (File of all 8 SRC at first joint

session);• You judge yourself - learn from others!;• Support (face-to-face; telephone; sms; e-mail);• 60 on-site visits during next 3 months (5 p.s.).

35

Example: Self-Assessment

36

Example:Teacher

Attendance• No attendance system;• Tick next to name ();• Sign their names;• Indicate ‘time in & out’;• Comments from Principal;• Number of days absent, latearrival, leaving early;

• Leave form submitted (24h);• Leave form processed;

37

Exemplars for the Project• Randfontein High School;• Groenberg Secondary School;• Springs Muslim School;• 100 school principals from Mpumalanga

in the ACE - School Leadershipprogramme at the University of Pretoria;

• Examples we will get from amongst the14 schools, as well as from others in theDistrict.

38

Conclusion• Voice of the District Director;• Voice of the District Project Manager;• Voice of the UPS team members;• Any voice from the participants in the

project.

Thanks you!