They may operate under similar structures and nowadays even use the same language – but compared to most businesses, schools present veritable feast of management dilemmas.
For starters, schools are staffed by bunch of savvy, often sassy professionals. The customer base ranges from hyperactive five-year-olds to the local kaumatua, and the composition changes constantly. And every stakeholder thinks he or she is an expert on the product and right now most of them think it’s sub-standard – including some of the aforesaid sassy staff. And while schools may be answerable for the product they deliver, they can’t effectively change it (at least in the state system) because they are really only franchisee.
Managing change is now business norm, and educators have been facing fair whack of it in recent years. About decade and half ago New Zealand schools were cut loose from the great Ministerial mother ship to adopt self-management model – Tomorrow’s Schools – with its more business-like structure and market-led outlook.
The shift was biggie, both structurally and culturally. Top teachers were suddenly cast into business executive roles; enthusiastic bands of parents began struggling with the complexities of board governance, including the vitally important role of employer to the school’s “chief executive”.
There wasn’t much preparation provided for either role and, inevitably, some schools – notably the larger, better resourced, or socio-economically advantaged – fared better than others. Some principals segued gracefully into managerial roles, discovering hitherto untapped change management skills, entrepreneurial flair and capacity for visionary leadership. Others floundered.
Management in smaller schools tends to suffer because principals must also teach and there are simply too few hours in day. In poorer or rural areas, principals also frequently find themselves consumed by bringing an inexperienced board up to speed on its duties.
There are, at least in the state sector, other warning signs that management in some schools is problematic. One North Island high school is currently under investigation by Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) after complaints from nine staff members that stress in their work environment reached an unhealthy level. These included claims of harassment and bullying by the principal. One of the complainants, who has since resigned, notes that in one year 11 people took stress leave. Some never returned. Staff turnover rose to 59 percent with 18 of 31 staff either moving on or moving out of teaching.
This is not, apparently, an isolated case. Phil Smith, president of the Post Primary Teachers Association (PPTA), says his association knows of several schools where management practices are such that stress is at dangerous levels. “In secondary education in particular you see lot of managerial bullying going on. The PPTA would say teachers are some of the most bullied workers in the country. The bullying is subtle because it’s emotional. ‘If you don’t do this, the school won’t be competitive, the kids will suffer’, that sort of thing. Too little attention is paid to the human resource in secondary schools.”
Smith sees crisis in middle management in state schools as one likely outcome.
“There’s quite lot of support now available for new principals but the situation one layer down is not good at all. New Zealand secondary schools are going through mid-management crisis because people are not offering themselves for those roles or are leaving [the management positions] to go back to being teachers.”
Senior teachers find it increasingly difficult to juggle an expanding management role with their primary role of classroom teaching. As the management and administration component expands, and this year’s introduction of the third layer of the new and controversial National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) qualifications structure will extend it again, there are concerns that teaching standards are compromised.
Smith thinks the roles are incompatible and should be separated out. And there needs to be lot more training provided for those who take up management roles. “The job must be ‘do-able’ and you need support in there to help people do it. In private enterprise, you wouldn’t expect manager to come in without some kind of training or experience. In schools it’s case of picking someone who shows bit of promise and saying ‘do this’ without offering any extra training, time or financial recognition of the complexities involved.”
There might, as Smith says, currently be dearth of management support and training for the mid-level role. But help may be on its way. There is now greater recognition for New Zealand to lift education achievement, our state sector schools need strong professional leadership, and those providing it need more support in what is demanding management role.
A testing task
Compare managing business with managing school, and the former looks like bit of doddle.
As recent United Kingdom report pointed out, the financial rewards are worlds apart yet the social responsibilities of both roles are in most respects comparable. After studying 200 head teachers and 200 senior executives to tease out the strengths and weaknesses of school leadership in the UK, the report found that the role of head teacher is “stretching by comparison to business. Even highly successful business executives would struggle to exert outstanding leadership in schools.”
That’s partly because education is product most people take very seriously. Everyone has been on the receiving end of the education process at some stage. They tend, therefore, to hold strong opinions on both its content and delivery.
Right now the flak is flying around about the worth or otherwise of the new NCEA qualification – the replacement for School Certificate, University Entrance and Bursary level qualifications. Parents have difficulty understanding it; teachers are stretched by the additional assessment involved; and an increasing number of school principals are questioning its value – to children, employers and our falling standards of education.
School management has no choice but to engage with both internal and external stakeholders on this or other contentious issues. So principals must provide strong professional leadership at school and also be the institution’s public face, juggling the needs of students and staff with the high but often contrary expectations of parents and the community.
Principals are not divorced from the real world. They are on the frontline, daily dealing with socio-economic fallout realities including racial issues, dysfunctional families, financial hardship, poor nutrition or child abuse.
The complexity of principal’s role depends on variables such as school size, location, ownership and type. The principal is chief executive, board member and also classroom teacher in about 60 percent of New Zealand schools, according to an Education Review Office (ERO) report.
Being prepared
What sorts of skills are needed to handle these various roles and, more importantly, how are they acquired?
ERO has specifically identified 19 “core competencies” as the sort of behaviours principals must demonstrate to provide effective school leadership (see box). According to ERO chief executive Karen Sewell, good leadership is fundamental for the delivery of high-quality education in New Zealand schools. “One of the things that makes the job challenging is that you are leading team of people who are themselves professionals who are trained, qualified, highly skilled and often quite challenging. And you have to keep your community informed and actively engaged in the process of their children’s learning.”
A UK study of effective schools found that principals shared some common traits. They were values led, people centred, achievement oriented, inwards and outwards looking, and able to simultaneously manage number of ongo