Providing sound planning

The literature suggests that the actual management process starts with planning. According to Lourens (2012:19), planning is the management function that involves forward thinking as it determines where the organisation wants to be in future. In accordance with this view, Smit et al.

(2011:9), Van Deventer (2008a:80) and Steyn (1999:211) suggest that when planning for teachers’

CPD for curriculum change implementation, CPD managers should seek to determine the following in advance:

 What are the needs? (the needs of the individual teachers, schools and department concerning curriculum change implementation)

 How are the identified needs going to be realised? (the nature of professional development activities to meet the CPD needs)

 When and where will the needs be addressed? (determine the dates and venues for the delivery of the CPD activities)

 Who will do it and what is needed? (the necessary resources: the teachers to be involved, the facilitators, financial and material resources required to complete the delivery of the CPD activities); and,

 How is the plan going to be implemented? (establish and adopt a plan of action to make sure that the CPD goal are reached as efficiently and effective as possible).

The nature of the above questions underline the notion embedded in the TQM theory that quality depends on a vision of excellence and that vision can become a reality through excellent and compelling planning (Nigam, 2005:66). Furthermore, the questions suggest that when planning for teachers’ CPD for curriculum change implementation, CPD managers should contexualise the process and ensure that the anticipated activities help address the unique circumstances of their individual organisations (Mafora & Phorabatho, 2013:118). The following activities can be identified as prerequisites for sound planning regarding teachers CPD for curriculum change implementation:

 assessing teachers’ CPD needs for curriculum change implementation;

75

 formulating pertinent objectives;

 determining the implementation plan; and,

 formulating policy relating to teachers’ CPD needs for curriculum change implementation.

These activities are explained in the next sections.

2.5.7.2.1 Assessing teachers’ CPD needs for curriculum change implementation

The first step in planning is to assess the organisational needs in accordance with the vision, mission and goals of an organisation (Van Deventer, 2008a:80; Swanepoel & Erasmus, 2000:236). This constitutes the essence of the customer satisfaction in the TQM approach (cf. 2.5.3). Lourens (2012:19) and Van Deventer (2008a:80) suggest that sound planning for teachers’ CPD for curriculum change implementation hinges on the ability of CPD managers to diagnose the exact nature of the problem that needs to be addressed. In support of the above view, Schmuck (in Bush &

West-Burnham, 1994:293) contend that needs assessment pertaining to teachers’ CPD for curriculum change implementation should be determined and managed with organisational constraints and opportunities in mind. In accordance with Schmuck’ contention, Mathekga (2004:27) emphasises that for teachers’ CPD for curriculum change implementation to succeed, it must be based on careful assessment of the real and perceived needs of the teachers.

According to Dunlap (1995:156), “needs” represent a felt gap between the existing and desired condition. Deriving from the above definition, the concept of teachers’ CPD needs for curriculum change implementation can be described as the measurable discrepancy between the current conditions that impede effective implementation of curriculum change and the desired state of affairs (Bubb & Earley, 2007:41). This means, the process of assessing teachers’ teachers’ CPD needs for curriculum change implementation is essentially the process of determining the discrepancy between existing and needed competencies of the teachers (Rebore, 2001:176). Steyn (2009:207) states that the needs stem from a current problem, or arise from the introduction of a new system, process, a new curriculum or a need that will occur in future. Nonetheless, the task of assessing the teachers’ CPD needs for curriculum change implementation may not be carried without difficulties.

The next section briefly highlights some of the complexities that may be involved in the process.

76 2.5.7.2.1.1 Difficulties involved in teachers’ CPD needs assessment concerning curriculum

change implementation

Performing the needs assessment activity may not be a straightforward task. Bush and West-Burnham (1994:293) concur that the analysis and assessment of CPD needs seem particularly complex inasmuch as they relate to both the priorities of the education system and to the particular needs of the individual teachers. As likely as not, the said sources of complexity can be increased by the varied and divergent CPD needs from one school to another, and likewise, from one teacher to another. Teachers’ CPD for curriculum change implementation affects three strands, namely, the needs of the school (as reflected in school improvement plan), the needs of latest government or local initiatives and the needs of individual teachers (Bubb & Earley, 2007:42; Hopkins, Ainscow &

West, 1994:115). Bubb and Earley (2007:42) confirm that prioritising the teachers’ CPD needs based on the above entities often creates tension in most educational organisations. A major problem stems from prioritisation of the identified needs (Steyn, 1999:208).

To deal with the problem of prioritisation in CPD needs assessment, Steyn (1999:209) suggests that CPD managers have to assume the role of a broker to mediate among the disparate needs. They should guide the planning of CPD to display awareness of the different types of development needs (Bush & West-Burnham, 1994:293). This approach can enable CPD managers to provide guidance necessary for the establishment of a coherent balance through integration of government and individual teachers’ development needs into CPD plans that relate to school development priorities (Desimone, 2009:184; Bubb & Earley, 2007: 41). In this way, they can build coherent and consistent relationships between teachers’ individual development needs and school development priorities. It can be concluded that because CPD for curriculum change is basically job-embedded, and primarily concerned with school improvement (Gough & James, 1990:14), CPD managers should prioritise the overall CPD activities that benefit the whole school and not teachers as individuals per se. The focus on development needs, however, assumes the requirement of appropriate tools for their identification and assessment implicitly.

2.5.7.2.1.2 CPD needs identification tools

The literature provides numerous suitable tools through which data concerning teachers’ CPD needs can be collected. The most common of these include, questionnaires, observation, personal growth plan (PGP), critical incidents, SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) analysis and developmental appraisal system (Bubb & Earley, 2007:45; Coetzee, 2007:102; Grobler et al., 2006:306; Sallis, 2008:126). The effectiveness of some of the above tools seems to have not been

77 proven, if not widely reported in the related literature. Bubb and Earley (2007:45) are particularly critical about the interviews and questionnaires as CPD needs identification tools. They maintain that they are unlikely to give accurate results as “some people do not know what they need”. The SWOT analysis and developmental appraisal system, however, appear to be the mostly preferred of the above CPD needs identification tools.

A number of scholars, including Glover and Law (2004:40), Blandford (2000:122) and Craft (1996:62), observe that teacher appraisal system, which embraces ‘lesson observation’, is increasingly adopted in most education systems as a useful tool in securing a better match between the needs of an individual with the planned CPD programmes and activities. The current South African education system requires schools to implement the Developmental Appraisal, as part of the IQMS policy (cf.

2.4.3). According to the Education Labour Relations Council (2003:3), the Developmental Appraisal is intended to assess the teachers in an objective and participative manner with a view to determining their individual areas of strength and weakness, and to draw up programmes for their professional development.

In spite of the above plausible attributes, the implementation of the Developmental Appraisal is not without limitations (Van Deventer, 2008a:81; Blandford, 2000:122). Predominantly, the implementation of the Developmental Appraisal is debilitated by elements of subjectivity such as bias, favouritism and the lack of honesty on the parts of the appraisees and appraisers (Letlhoo, 2011:62; Biputh, 2008:205; Blandford, 2000:122). CPD managers, should, however, take heed of - and deal with - the above limitations in order to make the Developmental Appraisal worthwhile.

Alongside or as a subsidiary to the Development Appraisal, the SWOT analysis appears to be a commonplace tool to identify the potential of an organisation or areas on which the organisation requires development (Sallis, 2008:126; Blandford, 2000:122). In relation to managing teachers’ CPD for curriculum change implementation, the SWOT analysis as a tool can be of immediate help to audit how effectively or otherwise the teachers implement curriculum change, focusing on their strengths and weaknesses as well as on the opportunities and possible threats. The SWOT analysis tool, according to Sallis (2008:126) seeks to maximise the strengths, and minimise the weaknesses, reduce the threats and improve on the opportunities for improving the quality of the teachers, in the context of this study. It is a considered view of the present researcher that regardless of the needs identification tool used, CPD managers should ensure that the teachers’ CPD needs assessment aims to address both the teachers’ CPD needs and the expectations of the schools in order to improve the quality of curriculum change implementation.

78 2.5.7.2.1.3 Advantages of successful CPD needs assessment

Successful analysis of teachers’ CPD needs provides extensive benefits to the planning phase of CPD management. Among the most important, the Department of Basic Education (2011a:76) outlines that if appropriately identified and defined, needs assessment helps to clarify teachers’ medium- and long-term needs, provides a framework for assessment of the results of the training, and further assists in the identification of existing appropriate development programmes while informing service providers of those programmes that have to be improved or replaced.

It also encourages education policy-makers and providers at all levels to reflect on and, where necessary revise, practices and programmes for the benefit of all role-players and the system itself.

In this sense, effective needs assessment also helps to contextualise CPD planning and actual management thereof (Education Labour Relations Council, 2009:27). Moreover, this can culminate in the formulation of a set of objectives which outline the purpose of the training and the outcomes or competencies expected of the trainees once they have completed the training programme (Bubb &

Early, 2007:41; Swanepoel & Erasmus, 2000:236).

In pursuit of the above view, Grobler et al. (2006:309) and Desimone et al. (2002a:1272) agree that subsequent to an assessment of training needs, appropriate CPD objectives should be formulated and written to reflect what teachers should be able to do on completion of the development experience. This view implies that effective CPD needs assessment underpins the process of formulating CPD objectives. For this reason, the next section focuses on formulating CPD objectives as another important activity involved in the planning phase.

2.5.7.2.2 Formulating pertinent objectives

Following the needs assessment is the formulation of objectives. Rebore (2001:175) suggests that the genesis of teachers’ CPD for curriculum change implementation originates from its objectives and goals. In line with the above view, Smit et al. (2011:316) agree with Lussier (2009:12) that the objectives specifying the expected results should indicate what needs to be done in order to reach the set goals.

From the above views, it can be deduced that the formulation of CPD objectives should be predicated on the relevant needs of teachers. Implicitly, CPD objectives should reflect the kinds and levels of skills, knowledge, and attitudes that the teachers should possess and possibly demonstrate after the programme has been completed (Grobler et al., 2006:309).

79 2.5.7.2.2.1 Guidelines of formulating CPD objectives

DuBrin (in Swanepoel, 2009:114), suggests the following guidelines for CPD managers to consider when formulating CPD objectives:

 formulate clear, concise and unambiguous objectives;

 the goal must be consistent with the general aim;

 set interesting and challenging objectives whenever possible;

 specify what is going to be accomplished, when it is going to be accomplished, and how it is going to be accomplished; and,

 review the objectives from time to time.

The above standards seem to emphasise a useful key concept that CPD objectives should be SMART.

Van Deventer (2008:84) breaks down this acronym as: