implementation of the integrated quality ... of the integrated quality management system (iqms) in...
TRANSCRIPT
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE INTEGRATED QUALITY
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (IQMS) IN SELECTED SCHOOLS IN
THE LIBODE DISTRICT OF THE EASTERN CAPE PROVINCE
by
MBANGATA LUVUYO STANLEY
A mini-dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
of
MASTER OF EDUCATION (M.Ed) (Educational Management and Policy)
WALTER SISULU UNIVERSITY
SUPERVISOR: DR. C.D. MANTLANA
SEPTEMBER 2013
ii
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to investigate the extent to which Integrated Quality Management System (IQMS) is implemented in schools in the Libode education district. The study focused on the existence of IQMS documents as evidence or proof that IQMS is being implemented. In addition, the study looked at the existence and functionality of structures and processes for the implementation of IQMS in the selected schools. Lastly, the study focused on the deliverables and outcomes arising out of the implementation of IQMS in schools.
The pragmatic paradigm and the case study design were used to frame and focus the research. Data was obtained from sixty (60) educators who were surveyed, principals of the three (3) selected schools, and three (3) Education District Officials (EDOs) selected on purpose for interviews. Data thus obtained was analysed both quantitatively using descriptive statistics, and qualitatively through extraction of themes. The study draws conclusions on findings based on the attendance of IQMS workshops meant to capacitate teachers on the conceptualisation and practice of IQMS; the availability and quality of IQMS workshops; understanding of IQMS processes by teachers and the officials; IQMS evaluation processes underwent by teachers; alignment between School Improvement Plans and the District Improvement Plan, and the connection between individual growth and school improvement; the constitution and functioning of IQMS structures; and the form and content of IQMS deliverables and outcomes.
This research makes recommendations for IQMS implementation and further research.
iii
DECLARATION
I, LUVUYO STANLEY MBANGATA, STUDENT NUMBER 204605067, of the Faculty of
Education at WALTER SISULU UNIVERSITY, solemnly declare that the copy of the
mini-dissertation submitted by me for the degree of Master of Education is truly
original. It is the product of my efforts through the guidance of my Supervisor,
whose name and signature appear below:
Candidate’s name : Luvuyo Stanley Mbangata
Candidate’s signature : ...………………………………………..
Date : …………………………………………..
Supervisor’s name : Dr C. D. Mantlana
Supervisor’s signature : …………………………………………..
Date : ………………………………………….
iv
DECLARATION ON PLAGIARISM
i. I am aware that plagiarism is defined at Walter Sisulu University (WSU) as the
inclusion of another’s or other’s ideas, writings, works, discoveries, and
inventions from any source in an assignment or research output without the
due, correct and appropriate acknowledgement to the author(s) or source(s)
in breach of the values, conventions, ethics, and norms of the different
professional, academic and research disciplines; it includes unacknowledged
copying from intra - and internet and peers or fellow students.
ii. I have duly and appropriately acknowledged all references and conformed
with requirements in order to avoid plagiarism as defined by WSU
iii. I have made use of the citation and referencing style stipulated by my
supervisors.
iv. This submitted work is my own.
v. I did not, and will not, allow anyone to copy my work and present it as
his/her own.
vi. I am committed to upholding academic and professional integrity in any
academic/research activity.
vii. I am aware of the consequences of engaging in plagiarism.
__________________ ________________
Signature Date
v
AKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Many thanks go to my supervisor, Dr C.D. Mantlana for her excellent professional
guidance, support, educational advice, and for a thorough supervision of this study.
My gratitude also goes to my study peers for their words of encouragement, and my
colleagues especially the School Management Team for keeping up with my tight
schedule at times.
Participants and respondents in this study are highly appreciated and thanked for
their time and thoughtful responses they gave, and this study would not have been
possible without them. Showers of blessings go to all those who helped my efforts of
completing this dissertation.
vi
DEDICATION
I dedicate this piece of work to my dear children Sinelizwi and Qhawe Mbangata for
being my source of strength, my dear brothers and sisters for being my pillars of
strength especially when my life was facing serious challenges, Holy Cross Computer
College Staff for their unconditional support, and my Pastor and congregation at
AFM-ANEF Assembly for their prayers, and my friends for their kindness.
vii
KEY WORDS
Integrated Quality Management System; Implementation; teacher evaluation;
appraisal; performance management; whole school evaluation; self evaluation; peer
evaluation; professional development; accountability.
viii
ACRONYMS USED IN THE RESEARCH
DAS : Developmental Appraisal System
DIP : District Improvement Plan
DoE : Department of Education
DSG : Developmental Support Group
EDO : Education District Official
ELRC : Education Labour Relations Council
IQMS : Integrated Quality Management System
PDoE : Provincial Department of Education
PED : Provincial Education Department
PGP : Personal Growth Plan
PM : Performance Management
PMS : Performance Management System
SADTU: South African Democratic Teachers Union
SDT : School Development Team
SIP : School Improvement Plan
SMT : School Management Team
SPSS : Statistical Package for Social Sciences
WSE : Whole School Evaluation
ix
Contents Page
Abstract...............................................................................................ii
Declaration..........................................................................................iii
Declaration on plagiarism......................................................................iv
Acknowledgements...............................................................................v
Dedication............................................................................................vi
Keywords............................................................................................vii
Acronyms...........................................................................................viii
List of tables........................................................................................xv
List of figures......................................................................................xv
List of appendices......................................... .....................................xvi
x
CHAPTER 1: ORIENTATION AND BACKGROUND
1.1 Background and Introduction 1
1.2 Statement of thee problem 6
1.3 Purpose of the study 7
1.4 Rationale for the study 8
1.5 Significance of the study 10
1.6 Theoretical framework 10
1.7 Research Design and Methodology
1.7.1 Population and Sampling
1.7.2 Data Collection Methods
1.7.3 Data analyses and Interpretation
1.7.4 Validity and Reliability of the Instruments
11
11
12
13
14
1.8 Ethical Consideration 15
1.9 Limitations and Delimitations
1.9.1 Limitations
1.9.2 Delimitations
16
16
16
1.10 Definition of pertinent terms 17
1.11
1.12
Summary and Conclusions
Overlay of the study
17
17
xi
CHAPTER 2: THE IMPLEMENTATION OF IQMS AND OTHER
TEACHER EVALUATION PROGRAMMES FOR PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT AND QUALITY ASSURANCE PURPOSES
2.1. Introduction 19
2.2. Evolution of the IQMS evaluation instrument
2.2.1 Developmental Appraisal System
2.2.2 Performance Management
2.2.3 Whole School Evaluation
21
21
23
26
2.3. Purposes and goals of IQMS 28
2.4. Structures and processes for the implementation of IQMS
2.4.1 The Principal
2.4.2 The Educator
2.4.3 School Management Team
2.4.4 The Staff Development Team
2.4.5 Developmental Support Group
32
33
34
34
35
35
2.5. Teachers’ perceptions and their bearing on IQMS implementation 36
2.6. IQMS implementation challenges
2.6.1 Factors within the school
2.6.2 Factors located within the district offices and officials
2.6.3 Monitoring and evaluation of the IQMS policy and
programme
39
43
44
44
2.7. Summary 45
xii
CHAPTER 3 : RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction 46
3.2. The Pragmatic Research Paradigm 46
3.3. The Research Design 47
3.4. Population and Sample 48
3.5. Data Collection Instruments
3.5.1 Teacher Questionnaire
3.5.2 Interview Protocols
49
49
52
3.6. Data Collection and field work 52
3.7. Data analysis procedures
3.7.1 Descriptive data
3.7.2 Analyses of qualitative data
53
53
54
3.8. Validity and reliability
3.8.1 Validity
3.8.2 Reliability
54
54
56
3.9. Ethical Considerations
3.9.1 Permission
3.9.2 Voluntary participation
3.9.3 Confidentiality and anonymity
3.9.4 No harm to the participation
56
56
57
57
58
3.10 Limitations 58
3.11 Summary 59
xiii
CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSES AND PRESENTATION OF THE
FINDINGS
4.1. Introduction 60
4.2. Presentation of educators’ responses to closed questionnaire items 61
4.3. Presentation and analysis of open-ended responses
4.3.1 Reasons for improper constitution of structures
4.3.2 Factors enhancing or hampering the functionality of the SDT
and DSG
69
69
69
4.4. Findings from interviews with principals of the sampled schools 70
4.5. Findings from the EDOs 75
4.6 Summary 78
xiv
CHAPTER 5: SYNTHESIS OF THE FINDINGS,RECOMMENDATIONS,
AND CONCLUSIONS
5.1. Introduction 80
5.2. Synthesis of the findings
5.2.1 Availability and attendance of IQMS workshops by
educators
5.2.2 Understanding of IQMS processes
5.2.3 IQMS evaluation processes
5.2.4 Availability of IQMS implementation structures
5.2.5 outcomes of IQMS evaluation processes
80
80
81
82
83
84
5.3 Recommendations 85
5.4 Recommendations for further research 86
5.5 Reflections 87
5.6 Summary and conclusions 87
List of References
90
xv
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NUMBER
TITLE OF TABLE PAGE
Table 3.1 Number of schools and participants
49
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NUMBER
TITLES OF FIGURES PAGE
Figure 4.2.1 IQMS implementation workshops attended by educators
61
Figure 4.2.2 The number of IQMS workshops attended by educators 62
Figure 4.2.3 IQMS process (es) undergone by educators 63
Figure 4.2.4
Educators with Personal Growth Plans (PGPs) 64
Figure 4.2.5
Teachers’ PGPs informing the development of the School Improvement Plan (SIP)
65
Figure 4.2.6 Proper constitution of the SDT and the DSG 66
Figure 4.2.7 Functionality of the SDT and the DSG 67
Figure 4.2.8 Developmental outcomes arising out of IQMS evaluation processes
68
xvi
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX NUMBER
TITLE OF THE APPENDIX PAGE
1 Letter to the District Director asking for permission to conduct research
94
2 Permission letter from the District Director 95
3 Letter to school principal asking for permission to conduct research
96
4 Permission letter from the school principal 97
5 A teacher questionnaire on the implementation of IQMS in selected schools in the Libode Education district
98
6 Interview protocol for school principals 101
7 Interview protocol for district official 102
8 Sample of informed consent form 103
1
CHAPTER 1
ORIENTATION AND BACKGROUND
1.1 BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION
The Integrated Quality Management System (IQMS) is a system of teacher
evaluation. Wanzare (2002, p.214) describes teacher evaluation as a process of
calculating the extent to which teachers measure up to pre-existing standards, that
may include a programme, goal, teaching intent, a list of ‘desirable’ teaching
competencies or performance criteria. This process involves collecting and using
information to determine, the worth – goodness or badness of something. Wanzare
(2002, p.214) argues that it is a reflective process which makes teachers aware of
their practices, challenging them to think about their practices, encourage them to
analyse and evaluate them, and to implement changes as needed. It is also viewed
as a system with a diagnostic role in which an educator seeks assistance in
determining his or her performance.
Experiences from other countries suggest that there are implementation challenges
associated with teacher evaluation systems of all sorts. In the United States of
America, for example, Bradley (1991) points out that the ‘differing weightings and
emphases’ attached to appraisal goals, namely the accountability and the
professional development goals and the conflict of interest that arises in the
integration of these goals. After having analysed the differing and contradictory
demands for the introduction of teacher appraisals, Evans and Tomlinson (1989)
2
point out that the nature and effectiveness of appraisal schemes depend on the
recognition of the fact that, there is an irreconcilable conflict between a scheme
based on accountability and one whose purpose is professional development. He
also suggests that implementation challenges with appraisals are often related to the
context in which the thinking developed, that is in industry where productivity is
measured in quantitative terms.
Similarly, studies in New Zealand show that there is no clear consensus on the
purposes of and desirable practices in teacher appraisals and other performance
measurement initiatives (Gratton, 2004). The possible purposes are accountability
(a summative approach which may be used for competency and promotion),
professional development (a formative approach to identify and fulfil professional
development needs) or a combination of both. The Integrated Quality Management
System is the combination of both the formative and the summative approach.
Findings by Gratton (2004) suggest that there is uncertainty as to the purpose of
appraisals and other quality management initiatives with the general tendency to
overemphasize procedural matters and assessment of educators against
performance indicators taken directly from professional standards. Gratton (2004)
further suggests that if perceptions of the appraisal systems implemented in the
school are unclear, the consequences may be found in how educators went about
implementing it with indications of low levels of commitment, defensive behaviour
and the general perception that appraisals are threatening.
3
In South Africa, the Department of Education (DoE) has the responsibility of
constantly improving the quality of learning and teaching so that quality public
education for all is achieved. With regard to the provision of quality education,
educators are not only accountable to the Education Department but also to the
wider community. The DoE has the responsibility of providing facilities and resources
to support learning and teaching. Successful education outcomes also depend upon
empowering, motivation and training of educators. Quality management seeks to
monitor and support these processes. Evaluation of programmes and practices is
essential to any ongoing effort to improve any profession. Evaluation is not apart
from but part of the education process. However, sound evaluation practices must
be based on a set of beliefs and principles that are congruent with the desired
outcomes.
To achieve this end of improving the quality of teaching and learning, three separate
programmes in South Africa were established by the Education Labour Relations
Council (ELRC) in order to monitor and enhance performance in the education
system. The first is Developmental Appraisal (DA), the purpose of which is to
appraise individual educators in a transparent manner with a view to determining
areas of strength and weaknesses, and to draw up programmes for individual
development. The second is Performance Measurement (PM), the purpose of which
is to evaluate individual educators for salary progression, affirmation of
appointments, rewards and incentives. Finally, is Whole School Evaluation (WSE),
the purpose of which is to evaluate overall effectiveness of a school, including the
4
support provided by the district, school management, infrastructure and learning
resources, as well as the quality of teaching and learning (ELRC, 2003).
All of these management initiatives outlined above should be planned for together in
schools, and aligned in a coherent way to avoid duplication, repletion and an
unnecessary increase in workload. To this end an agreement was reached in the
Education Labour Relations Council (ELRC) resolution 8 of 2003, to integrate the
existing programmes outlined above on quality management in education to form
IQMS. The philosophy underpinning IQMS is based upon the fundamental belief that
the purposes of IQMS are fivefold:
To determine competence,
To assess strengths and areas of development,
To provide support and opportunities for development to assure continued
growth,
To promote accountability, and
To monitor an institution’s overall effectiveness (ELRC, 2003).
IQMS is informed by schedule 1 of the Employment of Educators’ Act 76 of 1998
where the Minister is required to determine performance standards for educators in
terms of which their performance is to be evaluated.
5
The researcher therefore sought to establish the extent to which, and the manner in
which IQMS is implemented in selected schools in the Libode district. Some of the
issues looked at during the implementation of IQMS included the following aspects:
the establishment of the Staff Development Team (SDT) in schools. The SDT
includes the Principal, Senior Management (Deputy Principal, HoDs), and educators.
The school should decide for itself on the size of the SDT and how many educators
should be included. The SDT together with the School Management Team (SMT),
are responsible for liaising with educators and the department officials to co-ordinate
the provision of developmental programmes for educators for developmental
appraisal. The SDT is responsible for monitoring the process of Developmental
Appraisal. The Developmental Appraisal (DA) includes self-appraisal by the educator,
mentoring and support by the educator’s personal Development Support Group
(DSG). The SDT must co-ordinate the observation of educators in practice and the
appraisals for Performance Management (PM) and must keep the records of these
processes.
The Staff Development Team (SDT) and School Management Team (SMT) must also
develop the school’s own School Improvement Plan (SIP), incorporating strategic
objectives of the Strategic Plan of the Department of Education and the Personal
Growth Plan (PGP) of individual educators. In the School Improvement Plan targets
and time-frames for school improvement should be set using the Whole School
Evaluation instruments, and the SDT must monitor and measure progress against
these targets. The SIP should be revised periodically and new goals/priorities should
6
be set to reflect the progress already made. Records of WSE processes should also
be kept by the SDT.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Since the advocacy of IQMS in 2004, the researcher suspects that things have not
been going well, especially that one of the unions namely, the South African
Democratic Teachers’ Union (SADTU) was counteracting the IQMS advocacy. SADTU
was telling teachers not to co-operate with the DoE in the implementation of IQMS.
This was not really directed at IQMS per se but to the misunderstanding between
SADTU and the DoE. The implementation of IQMS was adversely affected by the
SADTU’s call to teachers not to co-operate with the DoE. The researcher has
observed, during moderation of continuous assessments and summative evaluation
of assessment tasks and portfolios in the Libode district, that there are challenges
surrounding the implementation of IQMS in schools. This research sought to
understand where Libode education district is with respect to the implementation of
IQMS.
The costs of not knowing about the successes and challenges with IQMS
implementation means that there is little or no knowledge about where the Libode
district is, with respect to the implementation of IQMS. Further, customised
interventions cannot be thought of, planned and dispensed by the IQMS programme
7
administrators in the Libode district office and the Provincial office of the
Department of Education.
Out of the above-mentioned statement of the problem, the following questions have
emerged:
Main Research Question
To what extent is IQMS being implemented in schools in the Libode district?
Sub-research questions
Which documents exist in schools as evidence or proof that IQMS is
implemented?
What structures and processes exist for the implementation of IQMS in
schools in the Libode Education district?
To what extent are IQMS structures and processes functional in schools in the
Libode Education district?
What professional development outcomes have come out of the
implementation of IQMS in schools in the Libode Education district?
1.3 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study was to survey the implementation of IQMS in schools in
the Libode district in order to ascertain the current state of affairs with respect to
8
the actualisation of the IQMS policy and programme. It was thought that information
cast would point out areas of success as well as areas of failure in the
implementation process. In order to achieve this purpose the objectives below were
formulated by the researcher.
To find out if there is any sufficient documented evidence that IQMS is
implemented in schools in the Libode district.
To investigate if there is any existence of IQMS structures aimed at the
implementation of IQMS in schools.
To ascertain the extent to which IQMS structures and processes are
functional.
To establish whether there are any professional development outcomes that
have come out of the implementation of IQMS in schools in the Libode
district.
1.4 RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY
The researcher’s interest in the topic arose out of his experiences and observations
as a teacher and a school manager. The researcher observed that there are
variations in the implementation of IQMS in schools in the Libode district. Whereas in
some schools all the IQMS processes, namely self evaluations, peer evaluations, and
class visits are conducted, there are schools where these processes are ignored.
There are claims amongst teachers that IQMS scores are simply awarded without
9
the due processes being followed to arrive at those scores. Related to the above
observation is the fact that subject advisory services and teacher in-service training
programmes which ought to be tailored to the needs of teachers depend on the
IQMS processes. In the researcher’s experiences and observations he has not had an
intervention or programme in his school or district that arose out of the analysis of
the IQMS scores. In his view, the IQMS implementation cycle is not completed if
feedback and interventions are not forthcoming from the district officials.
In the researcher’s opinion and observations, IQMS implementation is fraught with
challenges of insufficient resources, absent or dysfunctional IQMS structures in
schools, lack of capacity on the part of the school managers, slack monitoring by the
district officials, with resultant lack of genuineness in the scores that should inform
teacher professional development programmes and instil a sense of accountability
on the part of teachers. This research sought to gather data that would
confirm/reject these observations, approve or disprove the researcher’s expressed
opinions, and find out about other implementation levers that have a bearing on the
implementation of IQMS in the Libode district. The researcher’s other observation
from the survey of literature is that there is limited research on IQMS
implementation, particularly in the Libode district. Thus, this research sought to add
to the body of knowledge about IQMS implementation.
10
1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The findings of this study might benefit the School Management Teams (SMTs),
educators, Staff Development Teams (SDTs), Development Support Groups (DSGs)
and the Department of Education. It was hoped that each of the above-mentioned
structures would be properly discerned so that those who act in them would be
better positioned to play their roles as expected as far as their roles and
responsibilities are concerned. The relevance and importance of this study is that it
shows where teachers are with regard to the implementation of IQMS. The results of
this implementation study highlight niches for intervention by IQMS programme
administrators and educational planners.
1.6 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
In framing and focusing this research, use was made of the pragmatic paradigm.
The pragmatic theoretical framework holds no commitment to any one philosophy or
reality. It focuses on ‘what’ or ‘how’ of the research problem. It places the research
problem as central and applies all approaches to understanding the problem. The
method that works best in solving a particular problem is employed. Thus, the
pragmatic paradigm claims no philosophical loyalty to any alternative paradigm
(Mackenzie and Knipe, 2006). The proponents of this paradigm are not influenced by
any ideological stances or nuances in the determination of research questions,
research design and the methodology to use in conducting research. Chapter three
of this dissertation elaborates on the assumptions underlying the pragmatic
paradigm.
11
1.7 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
The research made use of the survey design. A survey research involves the
distribution of questionnaire to the research participants. The survey is useful in the
description of attitudes, opinions, behaviours or characteristics of the population
(Creswell, 2005: 354). Another related function of surveys is that they are used to
gather data at a particular point in time with the intention of describing the nature of
existing conditions, or identifying standards against which existing conditions can be
compared, or determining the relationships that exists between specific events (Cohen,
Manion, and Morrison, 2007:205). For this particular research a quantitative survey
augmented by qualitative descriptions, explanations and justifications were used to
survey the implementation of IQMS in selected schools in the Libode Education district.
1.7.1 Population and Sampling
A population includes all people or items with the characteristics one wishes to
understand. Struwig and Stead (2001, p. 109) define a population as the universe
that is composed of the combined total of all the elements about which information
is sought. In this study the Libode Education district is universe composed of the
aggregate of all the schools. A sample is a proportion of the population and all its
characteristics. Struwig and Stead (2001, p. 109) define a sample as elements from
which information is solicited. In this research the sample refers to those schools
from which data for this research was collected. Three (3) schools in the Libode
Education district were used as cases for the purposes of evaluating the
implementation of IQMS. The sample consisted of educators, principals, district
12
officials, particularly the Education District Officials (EDO’s) of the sampled schools.
This research made use of convenient and purposive sampling strategies. Cohen,
Manion, and Morrison (2007, p. 113) hold that convenient sampling involves
choosing the sample from those to whom they have easy access, and that a
convenience sample may be the sampling strategy selected for a case study. The
criteria used for the inclusion of schools in the sample were based on accessibility,
that is, convenience and willingness of staff to co-operate and collaborate with the
researcher. In addition, purposive sampling was employed for the conscious
purposes of tapping into all the viewpoints, and experiences whilst also ensuring that
there is adequate representation of views. Purposeful sampling allows for the
selection of the sample in a deliberate and non-random fashion to achieve a certain
goal. Thus, the study made use of the convenience sampling strategy. The
researcher collected data from schools located in both rural and urban settings of
Libode.
1.7.2 Data Collection instruments
Data was collected from educators, principals, and the Education District Officials
(EDO’s). A variety of instruments were used for the purposes of collecting data.
These included questionnaires and interviews. It was thought that questionnaires
with closed questions would yield quantitative data. The responses from the
interview protocol would yield rich and thick qualitative descriptions. Educators from
the sampled schools were asked to respond to the questionnaire. Principals and the
13
Education District Officials were asked to respond to the interview protocol. Chapter
three elaborates on the formulation and administration of these instruments.
1.7.3 Data Analyses and interpretation
Data analysis involves categorising, organising and summarising data into
meaningful information (Struwig and Stead, 2001, p. 150) in order to provide
answers to the research questions, and achieve the objectives of the study.
Descriptive statistics (frequencies and percentages) were employed to analyse
quantitative findings from the closed questionnaires. Themes, categories and
patterns were extracted from the interview data, that is, interview transcripts
(Struwig and Stead, 2001, p. 171).
For the interpretation of the findings, each result or finding was examined and
explanations offered to justify and account for the occurrence of any trend or
pattern. Also, previous research theories and findings were used to explain the
results, and to find out if the results of this research are confirmed or refuted by
prior research findings.
14
1.7.4 Validity and reliability of the instruments
Validity refers to the appropriateness, accuracy, trustworthiness or credibility of a
study (Struwig and Stead, 2001, pp. 136-143). Validity was achieved through the
following ways, triangulation and respondent validation. Triangulation involved use
of more than one method of data collection, namely: questionnaires and interviews,
which resulted in different sorts of data sets (Struwig and Stead, 2001, p. 145). This
expanded the picture which the researcher had to look at so as to ensure that the
findings of this research are credible. Finally, the researcher took the field notes or
other observations back to the subjects in order to check that the researcher is got it
right. This exercise was necessary in terms of avoiding misrepresenting the research
participants. This is known as respondent validation (Cohen, Manion and Morrison,
2007, p. 149).
The instruments for data collection were subjected to reliability testing to determine
the consistency (quantitative) and confirmability (qualitative) of the findings. The
questionnaire was subjected to the test-retest method of establishing reliability. The
questionnaire was administered twice to a group of teachers over a period of two
weeks. The responses from the two independent questionnaire administrations were
correlated to establish the reliability co-efficient which is a measure of consistency.
In order to establish reliability of the interview findings member checking and
triangulation alluded to above ensured conformability, dependability, and
trustworthiness (Cohen, et al., 2007, p. 148).
15
1.8 Ethical Considerations
Permission to conduct this research in schools in the Libode Education District was
sought from the Provincial Department of Education (PDoE) which referred the
researcher to the Libode Education District Office. Permission was granted formally
in writing by the Libode Education district office (see appendix 2). Informed
consent was solicited formally from the educators, principals and education district
officials who responded to questionnaires and interview protocols. The WSU
informed consent letter was modified to suit this particular research. The informed
consent form is attached as Appendix 8. Participation in the research was
voluntary. This ensured that the rights of educators with respect to participation in
the research were respected, and that participants were not coerced into
participation.
The researcher informed the respondents about the nature of the research, the
purpose for which the research is conducted, and their rights during the study.
Specifically, respondents were informed about their right to withdraw their
participation at any time and that they could refuse to participate in the research
project. The names of the participating schools and educators remained
confidential and anonymous. To this end, the real names of educators, or other
forms of identification were not asked. The researcher used codes and pseudo
names instead. With respect to harm and risk, the researcher did not anticipate
that the respondents would suffer any mental or physical discomfort. To ensure that
potentially discomforting questions were eliminated, the researcher ran the research
16
instrument through experts and the pilot group before the full scale administration
so that factors that might cause harm were eliminated from the questionnaire.
1.9 LIMITATIONS AND DELIMITATIONS
1.9.1 Limitations
The population that is targeted for the study are educators, Development Support
Groups (DSGs), School Management Teams (SMTs) of selected schools in the Libode
district. This is the limitation of the study because the researcher has not covered
the whole district for the purposes of generalising the findings. It could happen that
some schools do not experience any problems in so far as the implementation of
IQMS is concerned. However, the researcher believes that the findings and the
results gathered in the study yield a significant contribution to the target group, and
future researchers may be assisted a lot by the study as it forms the basis for further
studies.
1.9.2 Delimitations
The study is about the evaluation of the implementation of IQMS in selected schools
in the Libode district. Its focus is on structures and processes for the implementation
of IQMS, as well as the extent to which IQMS is delivering on its professional
development mandate. This research involves educators, principals and the EDOs of
the selected schools.
17
1.10 DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS
Implementation: is an interpretation of policy and/or programme and it
application to particular cases by actors. It is an enactment of policy. It also refers to
means, strategies and ways of giving effect to policy (Freeman and Rossi, 1999).
Evaluation: is the process of determining the value or worth of a policy,
programme, or course towards the ultimate goal of making decisions about
adopting, rejecting, or revising the innovation (Freeman and Rossi, 1999).
1.11 SUMMARY
In this chapter the background and origins of the study, research questions and
objectives are described. The researcher provided the rationale for the study,
introduced the research design and methodology, and elaborated on the importance
and also why this research is warranted. The next chapter on literature review
draws on literature related to the implementation of teacher evaluation policies and
programmes in general, and more specifically on the implementation of the
Integrated Quality Management Systems (IQMS).
1.12 OVERLAY OF THE STUDY
Chapter 1 presents orientation and background of the study.
18
Chapter 2 reviews literature on the implementation of IQMS and other teacher
evaluation programmes for professional development and quality assurance
purposes
Chapter 3 describes and justifies the research design and methodology in details.
Chapter 4 is the presentation of data, data analysis and interpretation of results.
Chapter 5 provides a synthesis of findings, recommendations and conclusions.
19
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION
Creswell (2005, p.79) defines literature review as “a written summary of journal
articles, books, and other documents that describes the past and current state of
information, organises the literature into topics, and documents a need for a
proposed study.” This particular review on the evaluation of the implementation of
IQMS draws from international and South African literature on teacher evaluations of
all sorts and purposes. The implementation issues of teacher evaluation programmes
extracted from literature are used not only to foreground this particular research,
but are also used later in the research to provide an explanatory framework for the
findings.
A survey of literature through scanning and mapping of the field of teacher
evaluations, and IQMS in particular suggested that research has been conducted on
teacher appraisals, performance management, and whole school evaluation both
locally and internationally (Monyatsi, Steyn and Kamper, 2006; Fletcher, 1996;
Loock, Grobelaar and Mestry, 2003; van Deventer and Kruger, 2003; Umalusi, 2007;
Gratton, 2004). However, there is a noticeable trend that these studies were
conducted on the above evaluation instruments independently and separately. With
respect to IQMS, there are limited studies internationally owing to the fact that the
integration of appraisal, performance management, and whole school evaluation is
not the norm in other countries. Thus, the concept IQMS as it pertains to teacher
20
evaluations is unique to South Africa. The limitation that emanated from this
uniqueness is that the researcher could not find literature on the international
perspective on IQMS even with the use of alternative search terms such as
integrated teacher evaluations. This limitation explains why most of the literature
reviewed is South African.
As regards IQMS studies in South Africa, the researcher picked up that studies on
teacher perceptions of IQMS straddle across provinces with more published studies
done in Mpumalanga, KwaZulu-Natal, and the Eastern Cape (Mathula, 2004; Nkonki,
2009; Maphutha, 2006; Nkambule, 2010). Though studies on teachers’ perceptions
of IQMS prevail over studies on IQMS implementation issues, there is quite a
sizeable number of studies done on IQMS implementation (Sambumbu, 2010;
Bisschoff and Mathye, 2009; Umalusi, 2007; Buthelezi, 2005).
An elaboration on the findings of the above studies and the bearing that they have
on this particular research are reported in the paragraphs below. This review begins
with the evolution of IQMS, and then looks at the purposes and goals of IQMS.
Documents on the structures and processes for the implementation of IQMS are
reviewed, followed by a closer look on teachers’ perceptions of IQMS, and the
bearing that these perceptions have on IQMS implementation. Lastly,
implementation challenges of IQMS and other teacher evaluation programmes are
sourced from literature.
21
2.2 EVOLUTION OF THE IQMS EVALUATION INSTRUMENT
The Integrated Quality Management System is a result of ELRC’s Collective
Agreement Number 8 of 2003, which sought to integrate quality management
systems into one. The purpose of this agreement was to align and integrate the
three different instruments which aimed at enhancing and monitoring the
performance of the education system. These three integrated systems are the
following: Developmental Appraisal System, Performance Measurement and Whole
School Evaluation. The main objective is to ensure quality public education for all,
and to consistently improve the quality of learning and teaching (ELRC, 2003). The
Department of Education has a responsibility to provide essential resources for
effective quality learning in schools as well as essential teacher empowerment
programmes. In this manner, teachers will be efficient and effective in their delivery
of services to their clients thus, improving the quality of teaching and learning. The
paragraphs below elaborate on the constituent teacher evaluation instruments that
were fused to form IQMS.
2.2.1 Developmental Appraisal System (DAS)
The Developmental Appraisal System (DAS) forms Chapter C of the terms and
conditions of Employment of Educators determined in terms of Section 4 of the
Employment of Educators Act of 1998. The Developmental Appraisal System (DAS)
formed part of a large scale reform effort in performance management and
22
evaluation. The Developmental Appraisal System (DAS) is a component intended to
appraise individual educators in a transparent manner with a view to determine
areas of strength and weakness, and to draw up programmes for individual
development (Loock, Grobler and Mestry, 2006, p.64). The main aim of this
evaluation policy is to facilitate personal and professional development of educators
in order to improve the quality of teaching practice and education management. It is
based on the fundamental principle of life-long learning and development. In a
sense, Developmental Appraisal identifies individual development needs and
subsequent training or self-development, on improving the ability of the employees
to perform in their present or future roles (Poster and Poster, 1991, p.1).
This system looks at the developmental needs of each individual educator in order to
develop a plan of action that will be used to address those needs. An appraisal is
concerned with educator’s professional developmental needs and training
opportunities in order to improve their performance in present and their future roles.
It is a transparent and open process since educators have access to their appraisal
documents including their performance outcomes. Fletcher (1996, p.77) contends
that developmental appraisal is needed to assist educators in their development by
helping them to see their shortcomings, and commit themselves to improvement.
However, for the effective implementation of this evaluation policy it had to be well
communicated in terms of its operation. Van Deventer and Kruger (2003, p.211)
recommend the following guidelines that must be taken into account for the
implementation of the developmental appraisal system:
23
The process of appraisal should be open, transparent and developmental.
The appraisal of educators is in essence a developmental process, which depends
on continuous support.
The process of appraisal should always involve relevant academic and
management staff.
The stakeholders involved should be trained on the appraisal process.
Prompt feedback by way of discussions and written communication to those who
are being appraised should be one of the indispensible elements of appraisal.
The appraisee has the right to have access to and respond to the appraisal
report.
Within IQMS, there is alongside the Developmental Appraisal System (DAS),
Performance Management System (PMS) which is elaborated on, in the paragraphs
below.
2.2.2 Performance Management System (PMS)
The purpose of the performance management system (PMS) is to evaluate individual
educators for salary progression, affirmation of appointments, rewards and
incentives (Loock, et al., 2006, p.64). The Performance Management System (PMS)
is a collective Agreement Number 2 of 2002 of the ELRC. The PMS links the need for
effective staff performance with the corporate planning cycle. Performance
24
Management is concerned with quantitative judgement based on the rating and
grading of performance. It is a summative evaluation and is linked to pay or grade
progression in the IQMS.
According to Gleeson and Husbands (2001, p.20), performance management is a
strategic and an integrated approach to delivering sustained success to organisations
by improving the performance of the people who work in them, and by developing
the capabilities of teams and individual contributors. They further identify four main
characteristics of performance management arising from the definition. First, it is a
process rather than an event. Performance management must permeate the school
culture on a day- to- day basis which must not be considered as an annual form-
filling exercise to gain instant reward. Second, the process must be used to generate
an increased understanding of what the organisation is trying to achieve. Third, it is
a way of managing people to ensure that aims are met through appropriate lines of
accountability. Fourth, it is about people sharing in the success of the organisation to
which they have contributed.
The IQMS is a quality management system which advocates a holistic and integrated
approach to managing schools and the performance of staff. In the IQMS policy,
quality is related to teacher performance and school performance in order to ensure
effectiveness of schools. The IQMS utilises performance standards to measure
performance and quality. The data collected through IQMS enables the Department
of Basic Education to assess the effectiveness of teachers and reward good
performance. IQMS asserts that the improvement in schools and elsewhere will
25
probably be enhanced and encouraged by a system of quality assurance that
involves and supports educators and other stakeholders in their schools.
If schools are to improve and thereby enhance the quality of education they offer,
the aims of the Performance Management System must be known by the educators
to be evaluated in order to ensure the effectiveness of the evaluation process. In
this regard Mathula in Umalusi (2007) proposes the following aims of a Performance
Management System:
Evaluate performance fairly and objectively;
Ensure that individuals know how their performance against these standards is
perceived;
Improve individual’s awareness and understanding of their work objectives and
the performance standards expected of them;
Provide opportunities to identify individuals’ development needs and to devise,
with their supervisors, plans to address those needs;
Facilitate the effective management of satisfactory performance; and
Provide a possible future basis for decision on rewards (Umalusi, 2007).
In every evaluation process feedback is an important element of performance
management which must be made immediately after evaluation has taken place in
order to highlight areas of concern, and to reward educators’ good achievement
since IQMS is linked to rewards in the form of pay and grade progression. The
26
facilitation of this process is the responsibility of the District offices, and its prompt
response in this regard will ensure the effectiveness of the evaluation programme.
Linked to DAS and PMS is Whole School Evaluation (WSE) which is hereafter referred
to as WSE.
2.2.3 Whole School Evaluation (WSE)
Whole School Evaluation is an interactive and transparent process used to evaluate
the holistic performance of the school measured against agreed criteria with a view
to improve the quality of education (ELRC, 2003, p.3). The policy on Whole School
Evaluation (WSE) is a notice in terms of Section 3(4)(1) of the National Policy Act,
1996. The purpose of WSE is to evaluate the overall effectiveness of a school,
including the support provided by the district, school management, infrastructure
and learning resources as well as the quality of teaching and learning (Loock, et al
2006, p.64). The policy is aimed at improving the overall quality of education in
schools and to ensure that learners are given the opportunity to develop to the best
of their abilities. However, for the effectiveness of this evaluation method to the
performance of educators, it must be supportive and developmental rather than
punitive and judgemental (Umalusi, 2007).
The Whole School Evaluation policy is rooted on quality assurance, quality
management and total quality management principles, hence it is a policy that is
ideally the most suitable and important tool for measuring the performance of
27
schools (Department of Education, 2001, 24). Quality Assurance (QA) is a system of
ensuring quality in schools and in the Education Department as a whole through
monitoring and evaluating performance (Department of Education, 2002, p.7).
Quality cannot be dictated, it must be led and managed from the top of the
organisation. The best performing schools are constantly aware of the need to
evaluate standards, and they now have the means to do so effectively through the
Whole School Evaluation (WSE). However, this evaluation policy should not be used
as a coercive measure but it must comply with the national and local policies. In
order to improve and to ensure that schools perform effectively, the findings made
by evaluation team on the performance of the school must be reported back to the
relevant stakeholders.
Although this evaluation policy had clear aims in order to ensure its effectiveness,
the Department of Education together with school principals has been severely
criticised by teachers for implementing IQMS before proper training. As a result,
Mathula (2008) maintains that the following problems were encountered during its
implementation:
Flawed consultation process;
Flawed advocacy;
Level of readiness not established before implementation;
Flawed implementation management process;
Inconsistent intervention strategies;
28
Myths and inaccurate perceptions about the use and interventions of WSE; fear
of victimisation by the school;
Apathy and resistance to change; perceived hidden agenda; and
Lack of trust (Mathula, 2008).
WSE was introduced to ensure an effective monitoring and evaluation process which
is vital to the improvement of the quality and standard of performance in schools
(Steyn, 2003, p.607). This author contends that the process to evaluate schools by
external supervisors is carried out with integrity and respect, taking into
consideration the various contextual conditions. After the WSE has been conducted,
a school needs to get a feedback from the WSE team.
This elaboration on the constituent elements of IQMS necessitates a careful look
into purposes and goals of IQMS, particularly that IQMS is formed by integration of
three instruments of evaluation for different purposes.
2.3 PURPOSES AND GOALS OF IQMS
The Integrated Quality Management Systems (IQMS) is informed by schedule 1 of
the Employment of Educators Act no 76 of 1998 where the minister is required to
determine performance standards for educators in terms of which their performance
is to be evaluated. These standards are measured against pre-set criteria which spell
29
out indicators of performance. The purpose of IQMS according to the Education
Labour Relations Council (2003) is to:
identify the needs of educators, schools and district offices for support and
development;
provide support and opportunities for development to ensure continued growth;
promote accountability;
monitor an institution’s overall effectiveness, and
evaluate an educator’s performance.
The conceptualisation of the above purposes and goals of IQMS has a bearing on
the actual implementation of IQMS. Gratton (2005, p.295) argues that the purpose
of teacher appraisal policy is a matter for confusion. He observes the general
tendency on the part of teachers to formulate their views on the purposes,
indirectly. He suggests that the schools’ policy documents did not make any
particular purpose clear. The same could be said about the purposes and goals of
IQMS outlined above, since they are not explained or elaborated on. As they are,
there is possibility for multiple interpretations of these purposes and goals. The
bearing that clarity of purpose has on the implementation process is captured by
Gratton (2004, p.295) in the following way:
30
“If the perceptions of the purpose of the appraisal system implemented in the school
are very unclear, the consequences may be found in how teachers went about
implementing it.”
Therefore, clarity in the understanding and interpretation of these purposes and
goals is emphasised by Nkonki (2009). In his review of literature on the purposes
and goals of IQMS, he breaks down, expands and elaborates on the above IQMS
purposes and suggests the following possible IQMS functions (Nkonki, 2009, pp. 32-
34):
Monitoring of educators’ performance with sole purpose of making sure that
educators do their work effectively. He further argues that when viewed as
monitoring, IQMS serves a line management function of watching over,
supervision, providing checks and balances so as to safe-guard educational
standards.
IQMS is a means of facilitating salary and grade progression. When viewed this
way, IQMS is looked at as an appropriate system that fosters a healthy
relationship between remuneration, responsibilities and performance.
When IQMS is viewed as informing subject advisory and in-service training of
educators (INSET), then IQMS aims at developing educators’ knowledge, skills
and competencies for the sake of improving performance and further
development of teaching practices. In this fashion IQMS is used to customise
Continuing Teacher Professional Development (CTPD) interventions to the needs
of educators.
31
IQMS has its goal the improvement of the quality of educators’ teaching. The
outcomes of this goal would thus be improved teacher performance, improved
teaching skills, and positive impact on teaching. Thus, IQMS is thought to be
enabling educators to cope with instructional issues in their schools. The ultimate
goal is to change educators’ behaviours towards more effective working habits.
The accountability purpose of IQMS aims at fostering compliance with the
standards and expected competencies through application of rewards and
sanctions. Sanctions and rewards aim at changing educators’ orientations and
work efforts. The accountability function asks questions about the
appropriateness of educators’ practices, whilst also providing safety nets for the
standards of practice expected of educators.
Professional development aims at empowering and capacitating educators so that
they become effective practitioners who benefit their learners. Further, IQMS
facilitates career advancement and improved performance.
IQMS as a means for needs assessment help determine the gap between what is
(actual performance) and what ought to be (the acceptable standards of
performance) of educators. Needs assessment help to identify areas of practice
in which educators’ knowledge, skills, and performance abilities are weakest, and
determine which of these are amenable to an educational intervention.
For the effective implementation of IQMS, the following principles must also be
taken into account:
32
The need to ensure fairness, for example an educator must not be sanctioned in
respect of his/her performance before a meaningful opportunity for development.
The need to minimise subjectivity through transparency and open discussion.
The need to use the instrument professionally, uniformly and consistently
(Education Labour Relations Council, 2003).
The paragraphs below consider clarity of roles of various role-players, structures and
processes for the implementation of IQMS.
2.4 STRUCTURES AND PROCESSES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF IQMS
The following individuals and structures are involved in the implementation of IQMS
at school level, namely: the principal; the educator; school management team; staff
development team and the development support group. Each role player has its
specific function in the implementation of the IQMS programme. One should also
hasten to add that clarity of roles for each role player will ensure not only successful
implementation, but also the effectiveness of IQMS in its mandate of teacher
evaluation for professional development and accountability.
Various structures fulfil various functions towards ensuring that the IQMS mandate
is put and carried. For IQMS to be successfully implemented, the following
structures need to be in place in all schools, namely: School Management Team
(SMT), School Development Team (SDT) and Development Support Group (DSG).
33
The SMT is comprised of the principal, deputy principal and heads of department.
The role of the SMT is to inform educators of in-service training programmes to be
offered after the evaluation process. The SMT has to assist with the entire planning
and implementation of IQMS (ELRC, 2003, p.12).
The Staff Development Team (SDT) is comprised of principal, whole school
evaluation co-ordinator and democratically elected post level one educator. Its role
is to manage the process and coordinate activities pertaining to staff development
as well as prepare and monitor the management plan of the IQMS (ELRC, 2003,
p.1). This will improve the effectiveness of IQMS in schools. The Development
Support Group (DSG) is comprised of an educator’s immediate senior and a peer
educator (ELRC, 2003). The DSG is responsible for baseline evaluation of educators
(for developmental purposes) as well as summative evaluation at the end of the
year (the performance measurement) (ELRC, 2003, p.5). The main purpose of the
DSG is to provide mentoring and support. The principal plays a crucial role in the
implementation of the IQMS but he has to work with the DSG and ensure effective
implementation of the evaluation process.
2.4.1 The principal
As the head of the school, he/she has the overall duty to ensure that the
IQMS is implemented uniformly and effectively at school.
Organises IQMS workshops at school level.
Provides relevant IQMS documentation to the staff.
34
The principal advocates and train staff and facilitates the establishment of the
Staff Development Team (SDT) democratically.
Monitors internal moderation of IQMS results and ensures consistency and
fairness (ELRC, 2003).
2.4.2 The Educator
Must undertake self- assessment.
Must identify DSG.
Must develop Personal Growth Plan (PGP) together with the DSG.
Must cooperate with the DSG.
Must attend in-service training for development.
Engage in feedback and discussion with the DSG.
Cooperate with external team on WSE (ELRC, 2003).
2.4.3 School Management Team (SMT)
Must inform educators on INSET and arrange for the attendance.
Helps in IQMS implementation.
Monitors school evaluation in terms of policy (ELRC, 2003).
35
2.4.4. The Staff Development Team (SDT)
a) Is made up of Principal, the WSE coordinator, democratically elected
members of the school management and a democratically elected post level 1
educator
b) School decides on the size of SDT.
Roles and Responsibilities
a) Work together with SMT and train on IQMS processes.
b) Coordinates all activities on staff development.
c) Prepares and manages the IQMS programme.
d) Monitors effectiveness of the IQMS and report to relevant persons.
e) Develops school improvement plan (SIP).
f) Coordinates ongoing support to teachers.
g) Completes necessary documentation for performance measurement.
h) Ensures IQMS is applied consistently (ELRC, 2003).
2.4.5 Development Support Group (DSG)
i. Each educator must have a DSG who is his/ her immediate senior.
ii. In respect of one teacher schools, the district provides support.
36
Roles and Responsibilities.
To provide mentoring and support to teachers.
Responsible for baseline evaluation as well as summative evaluation.
Assist educators in the development and refinement of his / her PGP and for
work with SDT to incorporate plans for educator development into school
Improvement Plan (SIP) (ELRC, 2003).
It is against the background of structures and processes outlined above that this
particular research set out to ascertain whether these structures and processes are
present, properly constituted, and functional in schools.
2.5 TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS AND THEIR BEARING ON IQMS
IMPLEMENTATION
Teachers’ perceptions have a bearing on the implementation of IQMS. Gratton
(2005) argues that the perception that accountability is the main purpose is likely to
produce defensive behaviours, since teachers expressed a feeling of threat about the
use of appraisal. He notes that the development objectives of appraisal are poorly
recalled by teachers. Perceptions about the clarity of the purposes of IQMS have a
bearing on its implementation. A study on the educators’ perspectives of the
implementation of IQMS in secondary schools in the Umlazi district of KwaZulu-Natal
(Buthelezi, 2005) revealed that many educators are still confused, not only about the
37
process of implementing IQMS, but also about the concepts used by the IQMS. It
stands to reason that one cannot be expected to implement that which he/she does
not understand. Thus, it can be argued that conceptual mastery of the programme
and its purposes has a bearing on its implementation.
Taylor (1998, p.10) illustrates the importance of purposes to the effectiveness of the
evaluation process. He argues that if the educators know and understand the
purposes of the teacher appraisal, they are bound to be committed, and that this will
contribute to increased performance in their work. Therefore, clarity of purpose
plays a very crucial role to the effectiveness of the evaluation process. This
understanding of purpose by the key role players in the programme implementation
helps them to understand the returns, as well as the organisational benefits of
implementing the whole evaluation programme. Furthermore, if teachers are not
aware of the purpose of teacher appraisal, they become anxious and suspicious of
the whole process (Monyatsi, Steyn and Kamper, 2006). The effectiveness of the
appraisal system could be undermined by the lack of understanding and
inappropriate preparation and training. In order to curb the reaction of educators
against the effective implementation of IQMS, it is quite essential to ascertain that
all programme implementers have been equipped about the significance of the
evaluation programme in their professional growth.
The perceptions of teachers determine the extent to which they will be committed to
the IQMS processes. The research by Maphutha (2006) investigated the perceptions
of educators in Sasolburg primary schools on IQMS. The researcher discovered that
38
educators had different perceptions with regard to IQMS implementation, some
regarded IQMS as a good practice while others had developed negative attitude
towards this evaluation programme. However, the study fails to acknowledge that
perceptions of educators towards the IQMS programme have a bearing on its
implementation.
The research done by Nkambule (2010) sought to establish how School Management
Teams (SMT’s) view and experience the implementation of the IQMS in schools. The
study explored the views and experiences of SMT’s when implementing the
Integrated Quality Management System (IQMS) in three primary schools in the
Nkangala Region of Mpumalanga province, South Africa. The emphasis of the study
is on the views of the school management teams. The findings of this study suggest
that the principals and deputy principals’ experiences with the implementation of
IQMS in schools is that educators inflate their scores and do not identify areas where
they need development. The Development Support Groups (DSGs) do not conduct
authentic evaluation since they serve the purpose of helping educators to qualify for
salary progression. The participants of this research recommended external
evaluation as a solution to subjective ratings since external evaluators have a
potential to provide objective and credible evaluation because they are unfamiliar
with educators and do not experience the pressure to maintain collegiality in schools
However, in Butterworth District the research study conducted by Nkonki (2009)
focused on educator’s career stages, perceptions, concerns and dispositions towards
39
Integrated Quality Management System (IQMS) in schools. The findings in his study
illuminate the tensions in the IQMS and how these play out and affect educator’s
dispositions to adopt the policy and its programmes. Particularly, this study found
that educators who either contemplate diversification or career move, those who
have stagnated, and those who are withdrawn because they are approaching
retirement tended to misconstrue IQMS goals, entertained more concerns, and
became negatively disposed towards IQMS. Surely, such negative dispositions have
the power to subvert and defeat IQMS implementation. The study further highlights
the role that subjectivity and inwardness play in the implementation of IQMS and
other policies and programmes.
2.6 IQMS IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGES
Bisschoff and Mathye (2009, pp.393-404) revealed challenges around the advocacy
of IQMS. These authors uncovered that there are problems with the advocacy
process itself as well as the content of that which is advocated, namely: IQMS
purposes and processes. Findings on the IQMS advocacy process revealed that there
was insufficient funding, ineffective training, problems with the cascade mode of
delivery, lack of clarity on the roles of the different structures, failure to anticipate
and bargain for the reactions of teachers, and lack of monitoring of the
implementation process. With respect to the content of IQMS this study by Bisschoff
and Mathye (2009, p.400) revealed lack of clarity on the IQMS content which
manifested as lack of understanding, uncertainty, and knowledge gaps on the part of
the facilitators of workshops that were meant to orientate and prepare educators for
40
the implementation of IQMS. The conceptual framework of IQMS was also found to
be problematic particularly the protocol which set out step-by-step the process that
must be followed during class visits and observation of teachers.
The findings of this study also cast a shadow of doubt on the practicality and the
cost-effectiveness of IQMS given the many processes, administrative paperwork, and
organisation of intervention based on the results of IQMS. This research also found
that educators were adamant that the IQMS is flawed in its content because it does
not consider the contextual factors that impact on the performance of a teacher.
According to Marneweck in Umalusi (2007) implementation of IQMS had some
challenges which made it very difficult to produce the intended results and this
contributed to the ineffectiveness of this evaluation programme. The challenges
mentioned include the following aspects: The purpose of the IQMS is neither explicit
nor clear, for example there is no clarity between the relationship of Developmental
Appraisal System (DAS) and Performance Measurement (PM). This lack of clarity
according to Marneweck cited in Umalusi (2007) hampers full scale successful
implementation of the IQMS system. Furthermore, the design of the IQMS is
problematic because the language used within the instrument is ambiguous,
rendering its design unclear.
Similarly, the findings by Sambumbu (2010, pp.105-114) on the implementation of
IQMS in Queenstown district schools point out some implementation challenges. He
points out educators in these schools were initially sceptical, apprehensive, reluctant,
41
and anxious. He attributes these reactions to the subjectivity of the IQMS system,
the composition of panels, the amount of paperwork the process entails, the long-
drawn process, the lack of time to implement the process and its impracticalities.
This author suggests that the training model used to cascade the IQMS needs
rethought in order to reach more users of the system easily. He further suggests
that the training needs to be ongoing rather than once-off and the training needs to
be quality assured to ensure its effectiveness. With respect to training and support
he points out the shortcomings of the cascade model of implementing IQMS. This
study reveals that many schools were left on their own to unpack the IQMS process.
There is mention by the author that there was no support from the Department in
the IQMS implementation processes.
The school culture is also mentioned by Sambumbu (2010, p.107) as having a
bearing on the implementation of IQMS. The findings of his research suggest that in
schools with a democratic and participative culture, the implementation of IQMS
proceeded smoothly. He argues that these schools were able to allay fears, focus on
the rationale of IQMS, and made some modifications to the IQMS system so as to
make it work. However, he notes that in schools were autocracy reigned, and where
teamwork and accountability lacked, the implementation of IQMS was problematic.
He observes that educators resisted the IQMS processes.
Furthermore, Marneweck in Umalusi (2007) also highlights the need to deal with the
negative legacy of inspection that was created by the previous political regimes
42
which has engendered fears which have not been forgotten by the programme
implementers at school level. Given the said implementation challenges the
effectiveness of the Integrated Quality Management System (IQMS) can be
compromised, thus impacting on the intended goals of the policy (Mathula, 2008).
Wanzare (2002, p.222) maintains that teacher evaluations of any form, be it
developmental appraisal, performance management or Integrated Quality
Management System (IQMS), are riddled with the following challenges:
Top down bureaucratic character
Lack of a comprehensive evaluation policy
Mixed functions of teacher evaluation
Inadequate evaluation
Lack of expertise in teacher evaluation
Lack of productive evaluation feedback and follow-up
Lack of empirical research that reveals the current state of practice of evaluation
and from which to draw best practices.
Other factors which hamper the implementation of IQMS are described categorically
by Nkonki (2009) as including problems with the IQMS policy and programmes. The
fact that IQMS is linked to remuneration compromises and defeats its intention of
43
developing teachers to being effective practitioners who benefit students. The
freedom given to the person being evaluated to challenge the score given to him is
also seen as defeating the purpose of objective evaluation because no one will feel
comfortable to agreeing that he or she is incompetent, and therefore is not entitled
to the one percent pay rise.
Other IQMS implementation challenges are considered as factors located within
individual educators. In this regard Nkonki (2009) mentions collusions between
educators in the scoring, overrating when educators score themselves, and the fact
that self evaluation reports do not give a true picture of educators’ strengths and
weaknesses. The fear that IQMS evaluation conjures up is reported as having a
bearing on IQMS implementation.
2.6.1 Factors within the school
In consideration of factors within the school, Nkonki (2009) found that in some
schools teachers are not evaluated, they are just given scores so that they can get 1
% pay rise. This means that educators do not undergo the evaluation processes but
are simply awarded scores from nowhere. Another factor identified by this
researcher is that in some schools educators were given books to read about IQMS.
They were not trained on the procedures and processes of IQMS. In some schools it
is reported that educators who underwent training through workshops moved to
other schools. The formation of the DSG in some schools is not genuine in that
44
educators identify friends instead of people who are experts in the learning areas or
subjects. It is also reported that it is not easy to form the Developmental Support
Groups in some schools as there are few educators, whereas IQMS structures in
some schools are not established. Heavy workload on the shoulders of teachers was
also identified as another factor that hampers IQMS implementation.
2.6.2 Factors located within the District offices and officials
The subject advisors who were entrusted with the training of educators on IQMS
processes were not all well-versed about IQMS. Also, the studies report that there
are no systems in place that thoroughly satisfy the improvement of areas identified
by educators and their respective DSGs. Although IQMS was meant to facilitate pay
progression, salary progression was negotiated by the teacher unions and no
account was taken of IQMS evaluations and that defeated the purpose of IQMS.
Also, it is noted that although educators submit their school developmental plans
and personal growth plans, but there is no feedback from the district office to the
educators (Marneweck, 2007; Nkonki, 2009).
2.6.3 Monitoring and evaluation of the IQMS policy and programme
Studies found that no monitoring of IQMS implementation has been done by the
district office in some schools. There are no follow-ups when the IQMS forms are
submitted owing to the fact that there are no adequate structures for the monitoring
of IQMS. It is also reported that the fact that the government does not have a clear
45
mechanism to enforce IQMS implementation hampers its effectiveness (Sambumbu,
2010; Nkambule, 2010).
With respect to the issue of time research reports that some educators feel that
IQMS has no time-frame, as they do not know whether the process is still on or has
passed. Other findings point that educators feel that there is not enough time to
process IQMS thoroughly. Other evidence points out that in certain schools IQMS
tends to be treated as a once off event per year, and not as an on-going process
(Monyatsi, Steyn, and Kamper, 2006; Nkonki, 2009).
2.7 Summary
The discussion of the evolution of the Integrated Quality Management System, the
purposes of IQMS, teachers’ perceptions of the IQMS evaluation instrument,
structures and processes for IQMS implementation, and IQMS implementation
challenges have provided an invaluable insight into dynamics of implementing IQMS.
This review has illuminated the need to bargain for conceptual mastery and clarity of
purpose and goals of IQMS if implementation is to succeed. Other IQMS
implementation levers such as advocacy, implementation strategy, monitoring and
support by the district office, proper constitution and functionality of structures and
processes in schools, feedback to the implementers of IQMS are highlighted.
Chapter 3 discusses in detail the research design, methodology and field work.
46
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter outlines the research design and methodology, and explains and justifies
the strategies of inquiry used in this study. Data collection techniques and procedures
suited to the design and issues of measurement such as formulation, compilation,
development of the instruments, reliability and validation of the instruments are
outlined. Sampling and the selection of respondents for inclusion in the study, and
also field work are also described. Data capturing and coding, including the rationale
behind the selection of data analysis procedures as well as the actual procedures are
described. The chapter concludes with a note on ethical issues, the limitations and the
effects they have on the quality of data collected.
3.2 THE PRAGMATIC RESEARCH PARADIGM
Mackenzie and Knipe (2006, p.2) define paradigms as interpretive frames of
reference characterised by logically related assumptions, concepts or propositions
that orient thinking and research. Paradigms influence the way knowledge is studied
and interpreted. They offer debating voices and spell out the intent, motivation and
expectations for the research.
47
The pragmatic paradigm which foregrounds this particular research holds no
commitment to any one system of philosophy or reality. It focuses on ‘what’ or ‘how’
of the research problem. It places the ‘research problem’ as central and applies all
approaches to understanding the problem. The method that works best in solving
that particular research problem is employed. Thus, the pragmatic paradigm claims
no philosophical loyalty to any alternative paradigm. The proponents of this
paradigm are not influenced by any philosophical or ideological stances or nuances
in the determination of research questions, research design and the methodology to
use in conducting research (Gephart, 1999, p.6). Pragmatic researchers thus, make
use of both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods.
3.3 RESEARCH DESIGN
Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2007) define a research design as an action plan that is
governed by the purpose of the research. These authors further describe the research
design as a plan or a blue print according to which data is to be collected to investigate
the research hypotheses or question. Included in the research design are preparatory
issues such as constraints, purposes, foci, approaches and ethics. It includes methods
of collecting and analysing data, as well as sampling and instrumentation issues. The
research design also considers reliability and validity as well as the timing and
sequencing of research activities.
48
This particular research made use of the survey research design. The survey is useful
in the description of attitudes, opinions, behaviours or characteristics of the population
(Creswell, 2005: 354). Another related function of surveys is that they are used to
gather data at a particular point in time with the intention of describing the nature of
existing conditions, or identifying standards against which existing conditions can be
compared, or determining the relationships that exists between specific events (Cohen,
Manion, and Morrison, 2007:205). For this particular research a quantitative survey
was used. Creswell (2005:354) describe a survey as collecting quantitative, numbered
data using questionnaires and statistically analyse the data to describe trends about
responses to questions, and to test research questions or hypotheses. For this
research, the survey solicited opinions of teachers, principals and EDOs with respect to
the implementation of IQMS in selected schools in the Libode Education district. The
survey also allowed for qualitative explanations and justifications. Thus, the survey had
quantitative as the main section augmented by the qualitative descriptions. Therefore,
the design for this study can aptly be described as a qualitative survey.
3.4 POPULATION AND SAMPLE
The Libode Education district consists of a population of 427 schools. Of these 25
are Junior Primary Schools (JPS), 99 Senior Primary Schools (SPS), 251 Junior
Secondary Schools (JSS), and 42 Senior Secondary Schools (SSS). There are 5671
teachers, 420 of which are school principals (Libode Education District statistics,
2012).
49
Leedy and Ormrod (2005) describe a sample as a portion of the elements in a
population from which generalisations about the population could be made.
However, such generalisations could be made to the extent that the sample is
representative of the characteristics of the population. For the purpose of the study,
the sample group comprised of sixty (60) educators and the three (3) principals who
are working at the three (3) selected schools. Also, three (3) district officials who
overseer the sampled schools constituted the sample. The sample size which is
inclusive of the educators, principals and education official went up to 69.
The table below shows the number of schools and participants in each school and
Libode education district as well as methods used by the researcher to conduct the
research.
Table 3.1: Number of schools and participants
School A B C Total
Questionnaire 25 teachers 23 teachers 12 teachers 60
Interviews 1 principal 1 principal 1 principal 3
Interview 1 EDO 1 EDO 1 EDO 3
3.5 DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS
3.5.1 Teacher Questionnaire
The questionnaire consisted of both statements with fixed format responses and
open-ended questions. The statements with fixed format responses were compiled
for the following reasons:
50
Respondents’ lack of time had been identified as a factor which might affect
response rates, and carefully worded statements with fixed format responses are
considered to be less arduous than formulating and writing replies to open-ended
questions.
Carefully worded statements give respondents some insight into the issues that
would have to be addressed by the research. Thus, the closed questionnaire
format was therefore thought to be less threatening than asking open-ended
questions.
A closed-question questionnaire can be more easily coded for quantitative
computer data analysis than an open-ended questionnaire.
The teacher questionnaire (see appendix 5) on the evaluation of the implementation
of IQMS is comprised of three sections. Each section has a heading and brief
instructions. These sections are meant to orientate the mind of the research
participant to questions that relate to specific aspects of the research.
Section A of the questionnaire consists of five questions or statements relating to the
extent to which IQMS is implemented in schools in the Libode education district.
Nominal scales were used to categorise possible responses which research
participants must check to indicate their responses. Questions and statements
included the form and number of IQMS implementation workshops attended, IQMS
51
processes underwent, as well as Personal Growth Plans (PDPs) and School
Improvement Plans (SIPs).
Section B focused on questions relating to IQMS structures and processes, namely:
the School Development Teams (SDTs) and the Developmental Support Group
(DSGs). Questions asked are meant to solicit responses on whether these structures
are properly constituted and functional. Nominal scales with ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ responses
are used. Research participants were asked to provide reasons and explanations and
justifications for improper constitution of the structures. With respect to the
functionality of these structures, educators were asked to provide factors that
enhance and/ or hamper the functionality of these structures. These open-ended
questions allowed research participants the freedom to answer in their own words
and express any ideas they think are appropriate. The disadvantage with these
questions is that the researcher might have many responses – some short and some
long – to analyse. In the design of the open-ended questions eight lines were
provided to regulate the length of the educators’ responses so that they are
manageable (Creswell, 2005; Struwig and Stead, 2001).
Section C focused on the benefits that have accrued for the individual educators
arising out of IQMS evaluation processes. A nominal scale is used to reflect plausible
and potential developmental activities, interventions, and processes. Included in the
list are subject advisory workshops, seminars on selected topics, colloquia, short
52
courses, crash courses, et cetera. The response categories also have an option for
those educators who have not received any developmental feedback.
3.5.2 Interview protocol for School principals and the District official
The interview protocol was designed to elicit qualitative responses from the school
principals as well as the district official on the extent to which IQMS is implemented
in the Libode Education district, issues around IQMS structures and processes, as
well as potential benefits of IQMS for educators (see appendix 6 and 7). The
interview schedule ask principals and district officials about enabling and
constraining factors, and also about the alignment of the District Improvement Plan
(DIP), School Improvement Plans (SIPs), and the Personal Growth Plans (PGPs).
3.6 DATA COLLECTION AND FIELD WORK
The teachers’ questionnaire was administered by the researcher during school hours.
Permission to conduct the research was sought from the Provincial Education
Department (PED) of the Eastern Cape. In turn, the researcher was asked to seek
permission from the district office. Thereafter, authorisation to conduct the research
with schools in the Libode Education district was sought from the District Director in
the Libode Education District (see appendix 5). To gain entry to the research sites,
that is, partaking schools, permission had to be obtained from the school principals
of the schools concerned.
53
In each of the participating schools, willing educators were informed about the
purpose of the research, and their rights with respect to participation and
withdrawing participation, and were then each handed with the questionnaire
together with the consent forms. The researcher offered to come and collect the
questionnaires after three (3) days so as to allow the respondents time to collect
their minds and make informed decisions when responding to the questionnaire.
3.7 DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
3.7.1 Descriptive data
Quantitative data was analysed using statistical procedures. Creswell (2005, p.182)
describe the purpose of descriptive statistics as summarising the overall trends or
tendencies in the data, provide an understanding of how varied the scores might be,
and provide insight into where one score stands in comparison with others. In this
particular research, descriptive statistics in the form of frequencies, percentages and
modes were used to summarise data and provide an overall or general impression
about educators’ opinions on the implementation of IQMS in the Libode Education
district. The researcher sought to establish the overall impression or tendency of
responses from individual educators and to note how these tendencies varied
amongst educators (Creswell, 2005, p.45). Bar graphs with frequencies and
percentages are used to present the data in Chapter 4.
54
3.7.2 Analysis of Qualitative data
The educators’ written responses on open-ended part of the teachers’ questionnaire
as well as data from the interviews with principals and the district officials were
analysed through thematic analysis. Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2007, p.183)
define analysis of qualitative data as involving organising, accounting for, and
explaining the data. These authors further suggest that thematic analysis involves
making sense of the data in terms of the participants’ definitions of the situation,
noting patterns, themes, categories and regularities. The research data was
analysed through extraction of topics, themes, categories and patterns that emerge
pertaining to the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for IQMS. These
emerging themes are presented in the form of narrations and representative quotes
in the subsequent chapter 4. All the written views, reasons, explanations,
justifications are brought to bear on the extent to which IQMS is implemented in the
Libode Education district. Furthermore, quantitative and qualitative data are brought
together in the final analysis to offer a broader understanding of the implementation
of IQMS.
3.8 VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY
3.8.1 Validity
Struwig and Stead (2001, p.138) define validity of a measuring instrument’s scores
as the extent to which the instrument measures what it is intended to measure.
Validity also refers to the appropriateness, meaningfulness, correctness, and
55
usefulness of any inferences a researcher draws on data obtained through use of an
instrument (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2006, p.165).
Fraenkel and Wallen (2006, p.153) advise about the other aspect of content
validation which has to do with the format of the instrument. This includes clarity of
printing, font size, adequacy of response space, appropriateness of language, clarity
of instructions and directions. Content-related evidence of validity about the above
aspects was obtained from the supervisor who looked at the content and format of
the instrument and judge whether or not it is appropriate. Thus, the feedback from
the research supervisor was used to re-write any item or question checked as
unclear, ambiguous or inappropriate. The research supervisor provided valuable
comments and suggested improvements with respect to the following:
The accuracy and clarity of statements;
The appropriateness of the statements for measuring the effectiveness of IQMS;
The appropriateness of response categories;
Subdivision of the questionnaire into sections;
Apparent duplication.
Validation of qualitative findings was achieved through use of the perspectives and
language of the participants rather than the interpretation and terminology of the
researcher. Struwig and Stead (2001, p.144) calls this interpretative validity. Also,
use was made of observer checking. In instances where the researcher could not
56
read or make sense of the respondents’ narrative in the open-ended section of the
questionnaire as well as from the interview transcripts, the researcher asked for
clarity from the research participants. This type of validation is referred to as
respondent validation.
3.8.2 Reliability
The instruments for data collection were subjected to reliability testing to determine
the consistency (quantitative) and confirmability (qualitative) of the findings. The
questionnaire was subjected to the test-retest method of establishing reliability. The
questionnaire was administered twice the same group of teachers over a period of
two weeks. The responses from the two independent questionnaire administrations
were correlated to establish the reliability co-efficient which is a measure of
consistency. Ten educators from one of the schools in the Libode education district
constituted the pilot group. The reliability coefficient produced a high standardized
alpha of r = 0, 83 (N=10). In order to establish reliability of the interview findings
member checking and triangulation alluded to above ensured confirmability,
dependability, and trustworthiness (Cohen, et al, 2007, p. 148).
3.9 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
3.9.1 Permission
To conduct this research with educators in schools in the Libode Education district
permission was sought from the Provincial office of Department of Education. The
57
researcher’s request was directed to the Libode district office (see appendix 1). A
letter of permission was obtained from the District Director for conducting research
with schools in the Libode Education district (see appendix 2). This letter was used
later by the researcher for introduction to the school principals, and as a means of
gaining entry to the schools.
3.9.2 Voluntary participation
Educators’ participation in the study was completely voluntary. Educators were
informed about the nature of the research, the title and the purpose of the research.
They were informed about their rights during the study. Specifically, they were
informed that they could withdraw their participation at any time and that they could
refuse to participate in the research project.
3.9.3 Confidentiality and anonymity
The names of participating schools and educators remain confidential and
anonymous. To achieve this end, the real names of educators, principals, and the
district officials, or other forms of identification, such as persal number or identity
number, were not asked for in the questionnaire or any other document associated
with this research. Hard copies of the questionnaires are securely kept under lock
and key in the researcher’s steel cabinet. All the captured data is securely stored on
a locked computer file and the researcher is the only person with access to the data.
58
3.9.4 No Harm to the Participants
The researcher also assured the participants that there would be no danger, harm or
discomfort, and that they could withdraw at any stage.
3.10 LIMITATIONS
One of the limitations of this research is the use of self-reported data which is not
always reliable since individuals tend to describe things as they would like them to
be rather than the way they are. Thus, there is a general tendency for research
participants to hide their lack of knowledge and other inadequacies that they have
with regard to the object of inquiry. Respondents have a tendency of reporting what
they think is desired by the education authorities, the employers and also by the
researcher. Thus, social desirability might cause some research participants to
deliberately distort facts or simply refuse to divulge certain information.
However, the integration of quantitative and qualitative data sought to triangulate
educators’ opinions, to lessen the effects of social desirability effect thereby
validating the findings of this research. The qualitative findings (open-ended
questions, as well as interview data) justified and accounted for the occurrence of
trends and patterns in the quantitative data (questionnaire and records data).
Another limitation of the study is that it was conducted in the Libode Education
district, and so the findings can only be generalised to the Libode Education district.
Thus, this research has limited generalisability of the findings.
59
3.11 SUMMARY
This chapter has presented and described the design and methodology followed
during field work. Aspects of the research design which included issues of
measurement such as formulation, compilation, development of the instrument, and
validation of the instrument were outlined. Details of the data collection process,
including gaining access to the research participants, data collection techniques and
procedures used were described. Data capturing and the rationale behind the
selection of data analyses procedures, as well as the actual procedures were
described. Shortcomings, limitations and the quality of data collected are also
described.
The results are presented in the following chapter 4.
60
CHAPTER 4
DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
4.1 INTRODUCTION
This particular research is set out to ascertain the implementation of IQMS in
selected schools in the Libode district of education. It sought to find out whether
structures like the SDT and the DSG are in place in the selected schools, whether
these structures are properly constituted, and functional. In addition, this research
sought to find out whether there is actualisation of the developmental outcomes
articulated in the School Improvement Plans (SIPs) and Personal Improvement Plans
(PIPs). It also looked at the outcomes or deliverables arising out of IQMS evaluations
from the vintage point of the educators, principals, and the EDOs.
This chapter begins by presenting data from the descriptive survey of educators of
the three selected schools with respect to the issues of this research stated above.
Use is made of the frequencies and percentages as well as graphics for the
presentation of the data. Mean scores are also used to give an overall impression.
Following the presentation and analysis of quantitative data is the presentation
qualitative data in the form of the narratives of principals and Education District
Officials (EDOs) with respect to the state of IQMS implementation in the Libode
district of education. Emerging themes are presented narratively and buttressed by
profound quotes.
61
4.2 PRESENTATION OF EDUCATORS’ RESPONSES TO CLOSED
QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS
The graph below shows IQMS workshops attended by the sampled educators since
the implementation of IQMS was cascaded down to educators using a series of
workshops meant to orientate and prepare educators for IQMS evaluations.
The Figure below shows IQMS implementation workshops attended by
educators
Figure 4.2.1: IQMS implementation workshops attended by educators
Seven 7 (11.7%) of the sampled educators attended district office based workshops
whilst 11 (18.3%) became aware of IQMS through school based workshops. Six (6)
(10 %) purported to have known of IQMS through workshops by teacher formations.
62
The majority of educators, that is, 32 (53.3 %) sampled claimed to have attended all
the workshops, namely district office based, school based, as well as workshops
organised by teacher formations. Only 4 (6.7%) indicated that they attended two of
the different IQMS workshops. Though the mean score (4.13, SD= 1.43) suggested
that all educators attended all the IQMS workshops, the mode (5) suggested that
two IQMS workshops, namely: district based and school based workshops were
attended by most educators.
Figure 4.2.2 below shows the number of workshops attended by the educators who
participated in the study.
63
Twenty 20 (33, 9%) attended just one IQMS workshop, whereas 13 (22%) claim to
have attended two IQMS workshops. However, the majority of the educators
sampled, that is 26 (44.1%) claimed that they attended at least three IQMS
workshops. The mean (2.12, SD= 0.89) suggests that generally two workshops were
attended by the educators sampled whereas, the mode (3) suggests that the
majority of educators attended at least three IQMS workshops.
With respect to the IQMS processes undergone by the educators sampled, the
following responses in figure 4.2.3 below were obtained.
64
Three 3 (5%) claimed to have underwent evaluation by peers, whereas 1 (1.7%)
indicated that she was evaluated by the panel, the Developmental Support Group
(DSG). The majority of the sampled educators who constituted 47 (78.3%)
purported to have undergone all the IQMS evaluation processes, namely: self
evaluation, peer evaluation, evaluation by the DSG, and class visitations. The other 3
(5%) of the educators claimed to have undergone three of the evaluation processes
mentioned. 2 (3.3%) indicated that they have not yet gone through any of the
evaluation processes mentioned above. The average score (4.87, SD=0.87) and the
mode (5) both suggested that the first three processes enlisted on the
questionnaire, namely: peer evaluations, panel (DSG) evaluations, and class
observations were generally and mostly underwent by the sampled educators.
The results in figure 4.2.4 below with respect to whether educators have Personal
Growth Plans (PGP), showed that 59 (98.3%) of the sampled educators do have.
Only 1 (1.7%) claimed not to have a personal growth plan.
Figure 4.2.4: Educators with Personal Growth Plans
65
With respect to whether the development of PGP has informed the development of
the school improvement plan, table 4.2.5 and the accompanying graphic below show
that 50 (83.3%) affirmed, whereas 3 (5%) denied that their PGPs were used to
develop the school improvement plan. The 7 (11.7 %) were not sure whether the
school improvement plan took cues from their Personal Growth Plans (PGPs).
Figure 4.2.6 shows the distribution of the responses for whether SDTs and DSGs are
properly constituted in the sampled schools in the Libode education district.
66
On the issue of proper constitution of the School Development Team (SDT) and
Development Support Group (DSG), the findings showed that 51 (85%) of sampled
educators are of the opinion that these structures are properly constituted in their
respective schools. However, 9 (15 %) of these educators were of the view that the
SDT and the DSG are not properly constituted in their respective schools.
Figure 4.2.7 below show responses to the question posed about the functionality of
the SDT and the DSG in the three sampled schools.
Figure 4.2.6: Proper constitution of the SDT and the DSG
67
Figure 4.2.7: Functionality of the SDT and the DSG
The majority of the sampled educators, that is, 49 (83.05 %) held the view that
these structures were functional in their respective schools. However, the 10 (16.95
%) educators who answered ‘no’ disagreed that the SDT and the DSG are functional
in their schools.
Figure 4.2.8 below shows the distribution of responses for the questionnaire item
that asked respondents to indicate the developmental outcome that came through
as a result of the IQMS processes.
68
Figure 4.2.8: Developmental outcomes arising out of IQMS evaluation processes
The figure shows that 15 (25%) claim to have received subject advisory workshops
arising out of the IQMS evaluation processes. Other interventions such as seminars
on selected topics and short courses were received by only 2 (3.3%) each. The
majority of the sampled educators, that is, 33 (55%) claimed to have received both
subject advisory and short courses as deliverables of the IQMS evaluation processes.
4 (6.7%) claimed to have received both subject advisory and crash courses. There is
however, 4 (6.7%) educators who claim to not have received any developmental
intervention arising out of the IQMS evaluation processes. Though the majority as
reflected by the mode (8) indicated subject advisory and a short course, the average
score (4.13, SD=3.15) suggested that the general tendency is that IQMS
interventions take the form of subject advisory and crash courses.
69
4.3 PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE OPEN-ENDED RESPONSES TO
THE QUESTIONNAIRE
4.3.1 Reasons for improper constitution of these structures
The most frequently appearing reasons in the responses were those suggesting that
“no workshops were properly conducted, except for the schools to read to
[educators] what is expected in the IQMS form and to fill it”. Other responses
suggested that there are “not enough training” opportunities for IQMS
implementation. Other teachers pointed “failure to attend workshops” as resulting in
the improper constitution of IQMS structures.
4.3.2 Factors enhancing and/or hampering the functionality of the SDT
and the DSG
When educators from the sampled schools were asked about the factors that
enhance and/or hamper the functionality of the SDT and the DSG, the responses
suggested “lack of resources” in the schools. Some educators sighted “lack of
knowledge” about IQMS. Others pointed out that not all the educators in the schools
are engaged in the workshops, but that only those in the committee are sent to the
one day workshops. Related to this is the issue of “non-attendance of IQMS
workshops” and the issue of “non-availability of IQMS workshops for educators”. The
“lack of co-operation among educators”, as well as “lack of understanding of the
whole implementation of IQMS” were cited as other factors hampering the
functionality of IQMS structures. Other educators cited knowledge of roles and
70
responsibilities by the SDT and the DSG as rendering the IQMS structures
dysfunctional. The willingness of the educators to engage with the IQMS processes
also emerged as factors in the functionality of IQMS structures. Uncertainty about
the IQMS processes which educators described as a feeling of being “unsure of what
this [IQMS] is all about” was mentioned as another factors hampering the
functionality of IQMS structures. “Transparency” was another theme that emerged
as defeating the work of IQMS structures, namely: the SDT and DSG.
4.4 RESULTS FROM INTERVIEWS WITH PRINCIPALS OF THE SAMPLED
SCHOOLS
The paragraphs below present the narrations of themes and representative quotes
extracted from the responses of school principals to the interview questions.
4.4.1 The existence of the SDT and DSG structures
The principals of the three sampled schools reported that the School Development
Team (SDT) and Development Support Group (DSG) are in existence in their
respective schools. Though the responses were crispy, the “yes”, “yes, they do
exist”, by interviewees 1 and 2 were expressive of how the principals’ were confident
and certain about the existence of these structures in their respective schools.
71
4.4.2 Constitution of the SDT and the DSG, and reasons for improper
constitution
The structures in the sampled schools were reported as properly constituted. In not
so many words, one of the principals said “yes, they are.” Interviewees 2 and 3 also
affirmed by their “yes” responses that the SDT and DSG were rightly constituted in
their respective schools. No responses were offered as reasons for improper
constitution since the SDT and the DSG were reported as properly constituted in the
sampled schools.
4.4.3 Functionality of the SDT and DSG structures in the schools, and
factors enhancing and/or hampering the functionality of these structures
The principals reported that the structures in their respective schools are in the
words of interviewee 1, “very functional”. One of the reasons advanced by
interviewee 2 was that “functionality [is] being enhanced by the proper
implementation of the [IQMS] policy”. However, interviewee 3 reported that the
structures are not properly functioning because of the changes in the composition of
these structures. According to interviewee 3 “these changes break continuity in
understanding IQMS.” Thus, changes in the composition of these structures, that is,
the SDT and the DSG are seen as having a bearing on their functionality.
72
4.4.4 Positive outcomes arising out of the functionality of the SDT and the
DSG
The benefits that accrue out of the functionality of the SDT and the DSG were
reported by interviewee 2 as “improved academic performance” and “improved
supervision of work”. Interviewee 1 viewed successful implementation of IQMS, and
improvements in the quality of teaching and learning as dependent on the
functionality of the SDT and the DSG. Interviewee 1 said “... [the] proper functioning
of the SDT and DSG gives rise to proper implementation of IQMS and also to
improvement of teaching and learning.”
4.4.5 Outcomes associated with non-functional or dysfunctional SDT and
DSG
The outcomes of non-functional and dysfunctional SDT and DSG were reported by
interviewee 1 as teacher stagnation with no improvement and further development
on the teachers’ competencies and performance. The responses of interviewee 2 and
3 suggested that there are no negative ramifications arising from non-functioning
SDT and DSG since according to these structure were functional in their own
schools.
4.4.6 School Improvement Plan (SIP) and the reasons for the school not to
have an SIP
The responses to the question about whether the sampled schools have School
Improvement Plans (SIPs) suggested that the sampled schools have SIPs. There
73
were no responses to the question soliciting reasons for the school not having
School Improvement Plans (SIPs).
4.4.7 Alignment between the School Improvement Plans (SIP) and the
District Improvement Plan (DIP)
There were mixed reactions on the issue of School Improvement Plans synchronising
with the District Improvement Plans. Whereas, two of the principals agreed, one
disagreed that there is alignment between the School Improvement Plan and the
District Improvement Plan. No reasons were offered by the research participants as
to the reasons for misalignment.
4.4.8 Teachers’ interactions with the SIP and the DIP
The “Yes” and “no” responses suggested that some educators have interacted with
the SIP and the DIP whereas others have not.
4.4.9 Availability of Personal Growth Plans (PGPs)
The “Yes” responses suggested that educators in the sampled schools have personal
growth plans.
4.4.10 Alignment between Teachers’ Personal Growth Plans (PGPs) and
School Improvement Plans (SIPs)
The response of principals suggested that the SIP is out of synch with the educators’
PGPs. The response of interviewee 1 mentioned the reason in the following way
“teachers do not relate their PGP to the areas of development in their performance
74
in teaching”. The other reason for misalignment was according to interviewee 2 due
to some teachers viewing improvement, growth and development as dependent “...
mainly on the situation in the class or school environment”.
4.4.11 Teachers’ and schools’ needs addressed through IQMS evaluations
The principals claimed improved academic performance as one of the offshoots of
IQMS evaluations. Interviewee 2 mentioned “in-house in-service capacity building”
that they conduct within the school arising out of IQMS evaluations. Interviewee 3
mentioned “effective supervision and class visits” that the school is conducting
because of IQMS.
4.4.12 Deliverables, outcomes, interventions for the improvement of
teaching and learning in the schools that came through as a result of
IQMS evaluations
One of the deliverables of IQMS was mentioned by interviewee 1 as “improvement in
proper planning and preparation for teaching” by teaching educators. There was
mention by interviewee 2 of “improved financial management skills” on the part of
teachers involved in school management. The “improvement on poor supervision
strategies” was also mentioned by interviewee 3 as an outcome arising out of IQMS
evaluations.
75
4.5 RESULTS FROM INTERVIEWS WITH THE EDOS
4.5.1 The existence of SDT and DSG structures in the schools
The “yes” responses by all the EDOs suggested that these structures do exist in the
schools. There were no reasons offered by all for non-existence of these structures
in schools.
4.5.2 Proper constitution of the SDT and DSG in the schools, and the
reasons for improper constitution
The “yes” responses by all EDOs suggested that these structures are properly
constituted. The respondents ascribed this to “IQMS is being implemented according
to the policy”. There were no reasons furnished for the improper constitution of
these structures.
4.5.3 Functionality of the SDT and DSG structures in the schools, and
factors enhancing and/or hampering their functionality
The responses offered by EDO 1 and 2 lay claim to the seemingly well functioning
IQMS process enhanced by “proper policy implementation”. EDO three described it
as satisfactory functionality. This functionality was according to EDO 2 and 3
evidenced by “documentary proofs in schools…like the implementation plans for
IQMS, minutes for SDTs, PGPs, et cetera.”
76
4.5.4 Positive outcomes arising out of the functionality of the SDT and the
DSG
The following outcomes were reported as arising out of the functionality of the SDT
and the DSG. The three EDOs reported “satisfactory performance of learners in their
examinations, improvement of financial management” in schools. The EDOs also
reported that there is “availability of minutes, school improvement plans” in schools
entrusted under their care.
4.5.5 Outcomes associated with non-functional or dysfunctional SDT and
DSG in the schools
The three EDOs claimed to be having no knowledge of non-functional or
dysfunctional SDTs and DSGs in the schools under their jurisdiction.
4.5.6 Availability of the School Improvement Plans (SIPs)
All the three EDOs claimed that the schools under them have School Improvement
Plans (SIP). They all claimed that all the schools submitted their School
Improvement Plans to the district office. No reasons were offered by the three EDOs
for the schools that do not have SIPs.
77
4.5.7 Alignment between the School Improvement Plan (SIP) and the
District Improvement Plan (DIPs)
Though the EDOs 1 and 3 indicated that the general tendency is for “SIPs to
synchronise” with the DIP, EDO 3 was quick to point out that “not all of them
synchronised due to certain technicalities” which he did not elaborate on.
4.5.8 Teachers’ interactions with the School Improvement Plan and the
District Improvement Plan
The EDOs “Yes” responses suggested that all the EDOs in the schools interacted
with the SIPs and the DIPs.
4.5.9 Availability of Personal Growth Plans
The “yes” responses by all three EDOs suggested that all the teachers in the schools
have the Personal Growth Plans.
4.5.10 Alignment between teachers’ Personal Growth Plans (PGPs) and
the School Improvement Plans (SIPs)
The “Yes” responses by all the three EDOs indicated that the PGPs synchronised with
the SIPs. However, no responses were given by all three about the reasons for
misalignment.
78
4.5.11 Deliverables, outcomes, interventions for the improvement of
teaching and learning in schools that have come through as a result of
IQMS evaluations
According to the EDO 1, IQMS evaluations resulted in “improved teaching and
learning strategies and satisfactory learner performance in the exams”. EDO 2
suggested “better teaching strategies”, and EDO 3 suggested “improved
performance in general”.
4.5.12 Needs for individual teachers and the whole schools addressed
arising out of IQMS evaluations
The responses of the EDOs suggested that the following educators’ and schools’
needs were addressed as a result of information obtained from the IQMS
evaluations, namely: teaching and learning strategies, financial management skills,
extra-mural programme performance; team teaching, lesson preparation, and record
keeping.
4.6 SUMMARY
This chapter presented quantitative data from the educators surveyed. Narratives
from principals and EDOs are presented as themes. These findings on the IQMS
implementation processes underwent by educators, constitution and functionality
IQMS implementation structures, as well as factors enhancing or hindering their
functionality showed differences in the sampled schools with respect to how IQMS is
79
implemented in the Libode district. The results also revealed some mismatches
between Personal Growth Plans and the School Improvement Plans, and offered
some explanations for these mismatches. The results also revealed some of the
needs of individual educators and schools that have been identified by the IQMS
evaluation processes, and the interventions that have been instituted in some of
these schools in an attempt to address the identified needs.
Chapter 5 looks at the summary of the findings, recommendations, and conclusions.
80
CHAPTER 5
SYNTHESIS OF FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
5.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter synthesises the findings, makes recommendations and draws
conclusions for the implementation of IQMS in particular, and for the implementation
of educational policies and programmes in general. This chapter provides
recommendations for the IQMS policy, IQMS programme administrators, as well as
recommendations for further research. It also reflects on the findings in terms of
providing answers to the research questions and objectives.
5.2 SYNTHESIS OF FINDINGS
5.2.1 Availability and attendance of IQMS workshops by educators
With respect to the attendance of IQMS workshops by educators, the research found
out that nearly half, that is, a cumulative 47% of the educators sampled did not
attend all the IQMS workshops meant to orientate, prepare, and capacitate them so
that they have mastery of the conceptual and praxis bases of the IQMS policy and
programme. The quality of IQMS workshops is an area of concern since some of the
findings suggested that the facilitators merely read what is in the implementation
manuals, and in some instances asked attendees to read on their own what is in the
manuals. Surely, this should explain and account for some of the IQMS
implementation challenges.
81
The findings on the non-availability of IQMS workshops, non-attendance to IQMS
workshops by educators, as well poor quality workshops, and lack of understanding
of the roles and responsibilities of the SDT and the DSG find support from the
findings of earlier studies. For example, findings on the IQMS advocacy process
revealed that there was insufficient funding, ineffective training, problems with the
cascade mode of delivery, lack of clarity on the roles of the different structures,
failure to anticipate and bargain for the reactions of teachers, and lack of monitoring
of the implementation process. With respect to the content of IQMS the study by
Bisschoff and Mathye (2009, p.400) revealed lack of clarity on the IQMS content
which manifested as lack of understanding, uncertainty, and knowledge gaps on the
part of the facilitators of workshops that were meant to orientate and prepare
educators for the implementation of IQMS.
5.2.2 Understanding of IQMS processes
The study found out about the lack of knowledge and understanding of the IQMS
process not only by teachers, but also by the officials who were tasked to orientate
and prepare teachers for the implementation of IQMS. These findings confirm the
findings of other studies on IQMS. For example, a study on the educators’
perspectives of the implementation of IQMS in secondary schools in the Umlazi
district of KwaZulu-Natal (Buthelezi, 2005) revealed that many educators are still
confused, not only about the process of implementing IQMS, but also about the
concepts used by the IQMS. Therefore, one cannot be expected to implement that
which he/she does not understand. Thus, it can be argued that conceptual mastery
82
of the programme and its purposes has a bearing on its implementation. This is
particularly important for lead teachers serving the IQMS implementation structures,
namely the SDT and the DSG.
5.2.3 IQMS evaluation processes
The majority of the educators sampled underwent all the IQMS evaluation
processes, namely: peer evaluation, DSG evaluation, and class visits/observations.
This counts as evidence of IQMS implementation in the sampled schools. That said,
it is also concerning that in some schools not all of these IQMS processes are
observed. The quantitative findings about the IQMS processes underwent by
educators suggested in some schools these processes: self, peer, DSG evaluations,
class visits, are not conducted at all in some schools, while in some schools only
peer evaluation and DSG evaluations are observed. These findings find confirmation
in Nkonki (2009) who found that in some schools teachers are not evaluated, they
are just given scores so that they can get 1 % pay rise. This means that educators
do not undergo the evaluation processes but are simply awarded scores from
nowhere.
Also, the issue of misalignment between the Personal Growth Plans (PGPs) and the
School Improvement Plans (SIPs) means that some educators and some schools
cannot draw the connection between individual growth and school improvement.
The issue identified in the Personal Growth Plans is that of attributing to situational
factors and not individuals and collectives, personal growth and school improvement.
83
Therefore, there is tendency to ascribe personal growth and school improvement to
improvement in the schooling situation rather than to individual and school effort.
Although the findings suggest that teachers have Personal Growth Plans, and that
they have interacted with the SIP and the DIP, and that there is synchrony between
these documents, at least in most schools, it remains to be seen whether there is
co-ordination of efforts towards achievement of the same goals of improving the
quality of teaching and learning in schools by all responsible owners of these
documents. The findings confirm the IQMS implementation challenges in the
Umalusi (2007) report.
5.2.4 Availability of IQMS implementation structures
With respect to the availability of IQMS implementation structures, that is, the
School Development Teams (SDTs) and Developmental Support Groups (DSGs), this
research found out that these structures are available in all schools. However, it was
noted that these structures are not properly constituted and fully functional in all the
schools. Dysfunctional and non functional IQMS structures have negative
ramifications for the improvements and further development of teaching and
learning sought. Another factor identified by this study is that in some schools
educators were given books to read about IQMS. They were not trained on the
procedures and processes of IQMS. It is also reported that it is not easy to form the
Developmental Support Groups (DSGs) in some schools as there are few educators,
whereas IQMS structures in some schools are not established. Heavy workload on
84
the shoulders of teachers was also identified as another factor that hampers IQMS
implementation.
The study also uncovered that most of the educators in the schools have the
Personal Growth Plans (PGPs), and that schools have School Improvement Plans
(SIPs). Though interaction with these documents is claimed by educators and
principals, there is also an observed asynchrony or misalignment between these
documents in some of the schools. Though EDOs claim this anomaly to be a
technical problem, the researcher submits that this is a substantive problem that has
negative ramifications in the co-ordination, mobilisation and actualization of
interventions, activities, and programmes meant to address the assessed needs of
educators and schools.
5.2.5 Outcomes of the IQMS evaluation processes
As far as the outcomes, deliverables, programmes and activities arising out of IQMS
evaluations, this research revealed that IQMS has delivered on a narrow range of
activities, namely: lesson planning and preparation; financial management; and
supervision of work. The form in which these interventions are delivered is in most
cases subject advisory services and crash courses. Thus, this research uncovered
that IQMS deliverables and programmes are narrow in form and content. One of the
earlier studies on IQMS reported that there are no systems in place that thoroughly
satisfy the improvement of areas identified by educators and their respective DSG’s
(Marneweck, 2007). With respect to the outcomes of the deliverables of IQMS, the
findings of this particular research suggested otherwise. The principals suggested
85
that there are in-house capacity development workshops organised by the educators
within the school. The findings also suggest that workshops on supervision
strategies, financial management have been conducted arising out of IQMS
evaluations. Thus, the findings of earlier studies (Marneweck, 2007; Nkonki, 2009)
indicated that although educators submit their school developmental plans and
personal growth plans, there is no feedback from the district office to the educators
are refuted by the findings of this research.
5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS
Arising from the findings the researcher recommends that:
Attendance of all the IQMS workshops by educators is a niche for
intervention. Whilst it is the responsibility of the IQMS programme
administrators to ensure the quality of training provided by the facilitators, it
is also the responsibility of school principals to ensure that all educators in
their respective schools attend IQMS workshops of all kinds. The district could
also help in this regard by using the “carrot and stick” approach in a bid to
foster attendance of all IQMS workshops by educators.
Areas of success in implementation of IQMS, such as setting up of structures
(SDTs and DSGs) and processes (self, peer and DSG), and the availability of
documents such as PGPs and SIPs should be consolidated. IQMS programme
administrators should ride on and build on these successes which signal the
adoption and institutionalization of IQMS.
Principals, EDOs, and IQMS programme administrators should ensure that
PGPS, SIPs and the DIP talk to each other, and that individual and school
86
improvement plans are geared towards the achievement of the goals of the
district. In the same vein, the district should support the improvement efforts
of the individual educators and schools. This can only come through if the
educators and the schools are aware of the district plans, and the district is
aware of the individual teachers’ and schools’ improvement plans.
The form or nature of the IQMS programmes and interventions need to be
diversified. The heavy reliance on workshops by subject advisory services only
should be reconsidered. Other interventions, in the form of seminars,
colloquia, crash courses, et cetera should be explored. The IQMS
administrators should rope in other role players such as subject/learning area
associations, and teacher professional development agencies.
The programme contents of the IQMS interventions should be reflective of the
diverse needs of educators. A range of programmes addressing a variety of
issues, as reflected in the IQMS documents, such as content gaps, pitching of
assessments, classroom management, understanding contemporary learners,
sequencing and pacing of topics, et cetera should be offered to individual
educators and schools.
5.4 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
In view of the findings of this research and the conclusions drawn thereof, certain
issues about the implementation of IQMS need further investigation. Henceforth:
This particular research could be replicated for a full picture on the
implementation of IQMS in the Libode and other education districts.
87
Further research needs to be conducted about the impact of IQMS on the
quality of teaching and learning in schools.
Research also needs to be conducted about the efficacy of IQMS as a
performance management and evaluation tool in schools in the Libode and
other education districts.
Research needs to be conducted to ascertain whether IQMS facilitates the
achievement of professional and/or bureaucratic accountability goals.
5.5 REFLECTIONS
Upon reflection on the research questions and objectives in relation to the data
collected and findings of this research, the researcher concludes that this research
succeeded in terms of providing answers to the key questions which were further
unpacked in the research instruments. Though most of the narrative responses were
crispy, lacked details and not thick and rich articulations, they were however
sufficient for a mini-dissertation in terms of providing answers to the research
questions. The other point of note has to do with the smaller sample size for the
survey administered to educators of the three sampled schools. Though sufficient for
the sampled schools, the picture might have been different had more schools and
educators been involved in the study.
5.6 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The purpose of this study was to investigate the extent to which IQMS is
implemented in schools in the Libode education district. The study focused on the
88
existence of IQMS documents, namely: Personal Growth Plans, School Improvement
Plans, and the District Improvement Plan as evidence or proof that IQMS is being
implemented. In addition, the study looked at the existence and functionality of
structures and processes for the implementation of IQMS in the selected schools.
Lastly, the study focused on the deliverables and outcomes arising out of the
implementation of IQMS in schools.
The pragmatic paradigm and the survey design were used to frame and focus the
research. Data was obtained from sixty (60) educators who were surveyed. The
study also selected principals of the three (3) selected schools, and three (3)
Education District Officials (EDOs) for interview purposes. Data thus obtained was
analysed both quantitatively and qualitatively.
The study concludes that a large number of educators did not attend all the IQMS
workshops meant to orientate and prepare teachers on the conceptualisation and
practice of IQMS; The non-availability and the poor quality of IQMS workshops has
negative ramification for IQMS implementation; There is lack of understanding of
IQMS processes by teachers and the officials of the Department of Education; Not all
the IQMS evaluation processes were underwent by all teachers; There is
misalignment between School Improvement Plans and the District Improvement
Plan, and that there is no connection drawn between individual growth and school
improvement; though IQMS structures (SDT and DSG) are available in schools, they
89
are not properly constituted and fully functioning in all schools; and that IQMS
deliverables and outcomes are narrow in form and content.
This research recommends the fostering of attendance of IQMS workshops by the
principals and the district officials; riding on the areas of success; ensuring
alignment of PGPs, SIPs and DIP and the connection between individual
development and school improvement; diversification of form of IQMS interventions
through involvement of other role players and agencies; and that the programme
contents of IQMS interventions should be reflective of the diverse need of educators.
The study also made recommendations for further research.
90
LIST OF REFERENCES
Bisschoff, T. Mathye, A. 2009. The advocacy of an appraisal system for teachers: a
case study. South African Journal of Education. [online]. Vol. 29, No 3. pp 393 –
404.
Bradley, H., 1991. Staff Development. London: The Falmer Press.
Buthelezi, C.T.N., 2005. Educators’ perspectives of the implementation of the
integrated quality management system (IQMS) in secondary schools within the
Umlazi district of KwaZulu-Natal. Unpublished M.Ed dissertation. University of
Zululand.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., Morrison, K., 2007. Research Methods in Education. London:
Routledge Taylor and Francis Group.
Creswell, J.W., 2005. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating
Quantitative and Qualitative Research. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Department of Education (2001). The National Policy in WSE. Pretoria: Government
Printers.
Education Labour Relations Council., 2003. Policy Handbook for Educators. Pretoria:
Government Printers.
Employment of Educators Act 76 of (1998). Pretoria: Government Printers.
91
Evans, A., and Tomlinson, J., 1989. Teacher Appraisal: A Nationwide Approach.
London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Fletcher, T., 1996. Conducting Effective Interviews. London: Clay.
Fraenkel, J.R. and Wallen, N.E. (2006) How to Design and Evaluate Research in
Education. New York: McGraw-Hill International Edition.
Freeman, H.E., Rossi, P.H., and Lipsey, M.W., 1999. Evaluation: A Systematic
Approach, 6th Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers.
Gephart, R., 1999. Paradigms and Research Methods in Research Methods Forum.
Vol. 4. Retrieved on the 28 /02/2012 from
http://division.aomomline.org/rm/1999_RMD_Forum_Paradigms_and_Research_
Methods.htm.
Gleeson, D. Husbands, C. 2001. The performing school: Managing, teaching and
learning in a performance culture. London: Routledge Falmer.
Gratton, R., 2004. “Teacher Appraisal: A Lesson on Confusion over Purpose”.
International Journal of Educational Management, 18 (5), pp. 292 - 296.
Leedy, P.D., and Ormrod, J.E., 2005. Practical Research: Planning and design. 8th ed.
New Jersey: Pearson Educational International and Prentice Hall.
92
Loock, C., Grobler, B. and Mestry, R., 2006. Management of educator performance
in Human Resource management in Education: Rebalancing the scales. Pretoria: Van
Schaik.
Mackenzie, N. and Knipe, S., 2006. Research Dilemmas: Paradigms, methods and
methodology. Issues In Educational Research, 16 (2), pp. 193 - 205.
Maphutha, M.A., 2006. The perceptions of educators in Sasolburg Primary Schools
on the implementation of IQMS as an appraisal sytem. Unpublished M.Tech
dissertation. Tshwane University of Technology.
Marneweck, L. 2007. IQMS implementation review: A DoE commissioned report.
Johannesburg: Class Act.
Mathula, K., 2004. Performance Management: From Resistance to IQMS: From policy
to practice. In: 5th Educationally Speaking Conference: Boksburg.
Monyatsi, P., Steyn, T., and Kamper, G., 2006. Teacher appraisal in Botswana
secondary schools: a critical analysis. South African Journal of Education, 26(2), pp.
215-228.
National Education Policy Act 1996 act 27 of 1996.Pretoria: Government Printers.
Nkambule, S.G., 2010. How School Management Teams view and experience
implementation of the Integrated Quality Management System. Unpublished M.Ed.
dissertation. University of Pretoria.
93
Nkonki, V. J. J., 2009. Educators’ Career stages, Perceptions, Concerns and
Dispositions towards the implementation of Integrated Quality Management System.
D.Ed. Walter Sisulu University.
Poster, C. And Poster, D. 1991. Teacher appraisal: A guide to training. London:
Routledge.
Sambumbu, A.M., 2010. The Implementation of an IQMS in Queenstown District
Schools: Experiences from Isibane Circuit. Unpublished Master of Public
Administration (MPA). Alice: University of Fort Hare.
Steyn, G.M. 2003. Cardinal shifts in School Management in South Africa. Education
Chula Vista, 124 (2), p. 607.
Struwig, F.W. and Stead, G.B., 2001. Planning, designing and reporting research.
Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman.
Taylor ,G. 1998. Effective appraisal skills. Pembury: David Grant Publishing.
Umalusi. 2007. Do we need an inspectorate? Seminar series on making a difference
in public schooling. Improving Public Schooling Seminars, 3 October 2007. Centre for
Education Policy Development Series.
Van Deventer, I. and Kruger, A.G., 2003. An Educator’s Guide to School
Management Skills. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
Wanzare, Z.O., 2002. Rethinking Teacher Evaluation in the Third World: The Case of
Kenya. Educational Management and Administration, 30(2), pp. 213 - 229.
94