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
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 : ………..
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.
__________________ ________________
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
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
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
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
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
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
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;
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.
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.
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.
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
