In this series on the education sector I have so far been attempting to draw attention to some basic beliefs that are bound to affect our theorising a way forward. Like few others, the various parts of the education system are interrelated towards a single important outcome: providing ever-developing universal quality education however that is defined in the given jurisdiction.
Whatever the ideological excursions of various systems leaders, so as to have some kind of measurable comparative yardstick, the McKinsey studies are based on a country’s standing at the PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment), i.e. countries are judged according to their performance at examinations.
It is most important that we note that the 2007 McKinsey report argued that, ‘although it is true that the systems context, culture, politics and governance will determine the course which system leaders must follow, the cumulative experience of the high-performing systems we studied indicates that focusing on … three drivers is essential for improving student outcomes and, more importantly, that reform efforts which fail to address these drivers are unlikely to deliver the improvements in outcomes that system leaders are striving to achieve.’
The three drivers are: getting the right people to become teachers, developing them into effective instructors and ensuring that the system is able to deliver the best possible instruction for every child.
Two weeks ago I spoke to methods that exist in the top performing education systems that help them to reach the individual child and gain a place at the top of the PISA table. Last week I spoke about the importance of teachers.
Of course, getting the right people into the classroom requires a very focused process which, among other things, makes teaching a desired profession that draws upon some of the best graduates and involves life-long training designed to bring the best out of the teacher (McKinsey, 2007).
Today I will present what I consider some basic but related elements of the two studies that I believe can help us to develop a better appreciation of the way forward for our education sector.
Those leading the sector can adopt the following pathway when crafting and implementing policy to improve educational performance. They should assess where the system stands in terms of student outcomes, consider the interventions necessary to achieved the desired results, adapt those measures to the cultural milieu, put in place measures to spark reform and finally establish arrangements to ensure long term sustainability.
The 2010 McKinsey claimed that the ‘improvement journey’ contains the following stages and ‘Systems at all performance levels can improve outcomes substantially in as short as six years’.
Poor to fair is characterised by the scaffolding and motivation for low-skill teachers and principals, getting all schools to a minimum quality and meeting students’ basic needs (transportation, clothing, school feeding, toilets). Fair to good – the usual interventions here are setting the foundations for data and accountability, financial structure, organisational structure and pedagogy. The usual effort for the move from good to great is raising the calibre of entering as well as existing teachers and principals and cultivating school-based decision-making. Great to excellent is concerned with raising the calibre of new teachers and principals, creating additional support mechanisms for professionals and encouraging innovation across schools through sponsorships.
Based upon a sample of twenty school systems the 2010 McKinsey report identified some 575 interventions and recognised six of these as occurring at all stages in the development from a poor to an excellent system. These are: revising curriculum and standards; reviewing rewards and remuneration structures; building the technical skills of teachers and principals through group or cascade training; assessing student learning; utilising student data to guide delivery, and establishing policy documents and education laws.
As indicated above, the studies utilised the PISA to help determine the level at which each country is. Sometime around 2004 there was a proposal that CARICOM countries should become involved in international assessment, but the cost of some US$30,000 per annum was perhaps too prohibitive and so far as I am aware nothing came of that proposal.
But all the countries in the study that spend below US$1,000 per child on education (Guyana averages about US$550) are in the poor to fair category. Furthermore, the kinds of interventions suggested for countries at the poor to fair level dominate the 2008-2013 Strategic Plan of the Ministry of Education.
Firstly, as in Guyana, in the journey from poor to fair, attempts are made to achieve universal access and provide for the basic needs of students to help avoid absenteeism.
Secondly, efforts are made to get the schools to a minimum quality standard. School facilities and other resources are improved and minimum attendance targets are established. Textbooks and other learning materials are provided and other support to low performing schools. The system sets minimum proficiency targets for students and there are frequent student learning assessments.
Finally, the focus is also on providing basic literacy and numeracy by firstly attempting to scaffold and motivate low skilled teachers who are provided with scripted lessons, making them executioners rather than designers of the lessons. Coaches are available to work with and encourage teachers, rewards are given for improvements in student outcome and tellingly, the system increases student instructional time.
The impetus that ignites and propels the reform, according to the report usually results from the existence of about two of the following factors. A political or economic crisis, the impact of a high-profile, critical report on the system’s performance or the energy and input of a new political or strategic leader. Of the three, the injection of new leadership is said to be by far the most important factor.
The task of that leadership is to develop tactics to overcome the obstacles found in their context at the same time as they use context to their advantage. Here, a major objective is usually to gain the requisite support of the various stakeholders for the interventions being made.
Further, any new pedagogical practices need to be internalised if they are to be sustained and three methods of doing this – by ‘establishing collaborative practices between teachers within and across schools, by developing a mediating layer between the schools and the centre, and by designing and building the future leadership of the education system’ – have been observed.
As is obvious from the above, even with the conceptual framework presented by the McKinsey studies, trying to figure out what are the desired measurable goals, where the system now stands in relation to those goals, what are the policies to take one to those goals and how to initiate and sustain the reforms, will be a major task.
henryjeffrey@yahoo.com
