 
Week 3 - Outcomes and Standards
|  | Outcomes-Based Assessment of Principals: Is It Feasible? |
| |
Listing of Papers | |
MR DENNIS SLEIGH
ACT, Australia
A DOMINANT BUZZ-PHRASE in schools today is Outcomes Based Education. OBE seems like a good idea, and like most good ideas, is hardly new. Good teachers have been establishing goals for ages and assessing their students' performance against these goals. However, if the idea is old, the title is new - and that's all you need to recycle a proven practice.
The point of this article, however, is not to outline the history of the term but to discuss its application to our work as principals. If I ask you whether you are a successful principal, and you say 'yes', I might then ask another question: how do your measure your success?
We can't assess our students' performance without stated outcomes to measure them against. The same is true when looking at the performance of principals. Education authorities acknowledged this in issuing criteria to be used when reviewing our performance . . .and here is where the problem arises.
In setting goals, we run the risk of 'either too much or too little'. Our goals risk being be so general as to be useless (e.g., 'Students should be able to demonstrate an appreciation of technology in their daily lives.') or so limited that we need hundreds of outcomes to show pupil progress (e.g., 'Students should be able to add two rows of digits using units and tens.') We must strike the balance so the outcomes are challenging without simultaneously burying teachers in paper work. The same applies when assessing the performance of principals.
The Hidden Curriculum
Every good teacher knows a large part of the school day is spent doing things outside the stated curriculum objectives. The 'hidden curriculum' is far more labour-intensive than spelling, maths or Australian history. When I'm teaching, I devote more energy to helping my students to stay on task or to respect the rights of their peers or to think through an issue before seeking help than I do on helping them learn to spell or to count. These study skills and other life skills might not get as much attention on the report card as they deserve, but teachers know they cannot be overlooked.
Again, the need for balance applies when judging the performance of principals. The skills measured in performance appraisals are often the minor elements of our life - they are the easily assessed items but their place in the total operation of the school might be minimal.
This has major implications in two areas, both of which I wish to raise in this discussion paper. The first relates to the effectiveness of assessment and evaluation procedures and the second relates to the perception that the task of the principal today has been 'randomized - and sometimes even trivialized'.
Expectations: Are They Realistic?
Expectations about principals vary according to the school, the system and the State in which they work. However, most systems have listed their expectations of senior educators, and they use these when appraising our performance. For example, working in the Catholic system in Canberra, I am told there are four major roles for principals. We are expected to be educational leaders, religious leaders, community leaders and administrative leaders. As we go through the hoops associated with appraisal at different stages of our contracts, these four criteria will be repeated and the appraisal is constructed around them. To help applicants decide whether the principalship is indeed for them, or to help others decide whether principals have been wisely selected for the positions they now hold, these four aspects are outlined in application and appraisal documents.
The process is probably one all principals on contracts are familiar with, but the question must be asked: is it adequate? Do such devices really measure what we want to measure - the performance of the principal? Just as it would be false to suggest that tests in mathematics, English and other KLAs would show all that our students learn at school, so it could be argued that any assessment of the performance outcomes listed in appraisal programs for principals only touch the surface.
I know that during my daily work I am an educational leader (helping staff and students to come to grips with ways to enhance the teaching/learning process), a religious leader (supporting the spiritual ethos of the school), a community leader (developing links with the parents that will improve the operation of the school) and an administrative leader (maintaining the necessary records that enable a system to be accountable). However, it could be argued that these headings are so wide that virtually every activity I can imagine would be covered. How helpful is that when assessing a person's performance?
If I spend an hour talking to the person who is tendering to lay the carpet in the school, it could be argued that this is part of my administrative role, but is that really what is meant by the high-sounding phrases such as: 'The Principal develops and implements a program for the acquisition and maintenance of resources, plants and grounds?' If it is, how does this task compare with the time I spend unblocking the toilet or trying to contain the damage from a burst tap while waiting for the plumber.
If I devote time to a young mother who is considering leaving her husband, or a stressed parent who is afraid that her teenage daughter is on drugs, this might be seen as a part of my role as religious leader, but again, is that what the authors had in mind when they wrote: 'The Principal leads in the development of an authentic faith community?'
Real Life and Stated Outcomes
The examples could be multiplied many times but every experienced principal has examples of their own. The point is that when the time comes to assess my performance, against the stated outcomes listed in my employment schedule, the items that have taken most of my time often don't get a mention. I can just see the look on the assessment panel's collective face as I tell them that I have failed to implement the stated outcome of ensuring every child learns to read, but I have prevented two suicides and saved three marriages!
To make this comment is not to belittle the process. I am quietly confident that the people on assessment panels who will determine the fate of my contract when the time comes will be smart enough to know that the stated outcomes are only part of the picture. My real concern is that as I make my way through my busy day, I know that there are a lot of noble goals that I am not touching. How, then, do I - a typical principal - react?
Which Road do I Follow?
I suggest that the answer to this query is simple: forget the outcomes and follow your professional judgement. Earlier I mentioned the article by Jeanne Adams. In this article she relates a conversation with some South African principals. They were complaining about the multiple roles they were expected to fulfil. 'We're told we're now to be instructional leaders' one of them lamented, 'but, in fact, my most pressing priority each day is getting water to my school'. This is reminiscent of the management adage: It is hard to remember that your primary goal is to drain the swamp when you are up to your waist in alligators.
I don't think that many principals would quibble with the fact that we are supposed to be instructional leaders, charged with creating and maintaining an environment in which our teachers can teach and our students can learn. However, there is no way that this is our only task, or even our most pressing one.
Time to Start a Conversation!
It seems to me that an online conference of practising principals is the time to raise this issue because if we don't start a conversation about it, you can be sure that the people in our head offices won't! In these days of school-based management, of intensive school marketing, of increased social worker roles, it is easy to forget our prime objective. It is tempting, perhaps, to embrace these other roles because they add to our sense of importance. However, these exciting days are also the time when we are being assessed as never before and this assessment is based on our performance of established outcomes - so let us, at least, have a say in just what it is that we are really supposed to be doing.
It is small wonder there are fewer applications these days for principalships. David Gurr warned us three years ago that the toll on principals was starting to show. Are we listening to our own advisers?
In this national/global conversation on the leadership challenge, let us not be afraid to ask the hard questions and, if necessary, to provide the unpleasant answers. The schools of the twenty-first century may, indeed survive - or even thrive - without principals. However if such a transition does occur, it will only be because we, the current leaders on the ground, have given the matter the serious thought that it deserves.
Some Basic Questions
As practising principals, I suggest we answer these basic questions, and then make sure that our answers are shared with the wider community.
1. Am I employed as an educator or an administrator?
2. How much of my professional time is devoted to tasks that could be done by others, relieving me to do the more important work for which I am qualified?
3. Am I so busy 'getting water to my school' (or counselling parents whose marriages are on the rocks) that I never get a chance to address serious educational issues? (And if the answer is 'yes', is this what my paymasters really want me to do?).
4. How long is it since I spoke to a child and asked what he or she had learned about in school today?
5. Am I satisfied that what I am doing is what I am supposed to be doing - and if not, why not?
No Point Complaining Later
Our willingness to ask, and to answer, these questions will determine whether the role of the principal is determined by us - the people in the field - or by politicians and bureaucrats who don't any real understanding of what we do. One thing is certain: if we don't take part in this debate, there will be no point in complaining later when we discover that the objectives against which we are being assessed bear little similarity to the work we are doing.
_____________________________________________________________
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Mr Dennis Sleigh is currently Principal of Sts Peter and Paul Primary School, in Garran, in the ACT. He was first appointed principal in 1975 and since then, as well as running four schools, has also been a regional consultant, a university lecturer and a prolific writer. His special interests are legal issues for schools and educational leadership. He regularly lectures teachers in government and non-government schools on legal issues and is regular contributor to 'Directions in Education' on this topic. His latest book, due to be released this year, discusses what principals need to know about the law.
Dennis has graduate qualifications in education, religious education and educational administration. He is currently working (very slowly) on a Doctorate in Education.
Married with three adult children, Dennis is actively involved in his principals' association (he is Secretary of the Archdiocesan Catholic Principals Association), his union (he is Principals' representative in the Independent Education Union of NSW/ACT), and in various system-wide committees (he is Chair of the Schools Permanent Committee of the Canberra-Goulburn Catholic Education Commission).
Dennis Sleigh can be contacted by email at:
dws@macquarie.matra.com.au
|
|
| | |
