Performance Management in Schools - Coursework Example

31 July 2008 Performance Management in Schools Performance management is defined as a method to managing the performance process and development of individuals and groups within an institution in order to accomplish high levels of performance. It therefore builds a shared understanding as to what the goals are and the approaches made to ensure that those goals are achieved. (qtd. in “Performance Management: An Overview” para. 3 http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/perfmangmt/general/perfman.htm) In schools, this method is used as a way of helping teachers and head teachers to improve, both individually and in teams. (“Performance Management in Schools” pg. 3 https://czone.eastsussex.gov.uk) Students, on the other hand, are given a chance to develop because the teachers are more focused and have a better understanding of what the students can achieve. (“Performance Management of Teachers” pg. 5 http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/assets/3040.pdf) Performance management works best when it is handled fairly and openly. It functions best when it is central to the school’s culture. Its aim is to raise the standards of education for the students; to enhance professional development in teachers, focusing on their individual needs; to better manage the operations of the school; and to ensure that the process is fair and amenable for all while still maintaining a respectable amount of confidentiality. (“Performance Management Framework” pg. 5 http://www.ipfbenchmarking.net) Performance management in educational institutions was first introduced by the Office of Standards in Education or Ofsted, in 1991. Its goal was to develop the performance of individual teachers through the following elements: observation of teaching; an evaluation interview including identifying objectives to accomplish; organizing an evaluation statement; and a formal evaluation meeting to discuss their performance. The head teachers have similar procedures in evaluation to that of teachers save for different sets of elements to consider their managerial duties. In England, performance management was adopted by educational institutions in September 2000. It has been a mandatory move for them to make sure that the teachers, as well as the head teachers, perform well and are appraised annually. Now, different schools worldwide are adopting this method. (“Performance Management of Teachers” pg. 5 http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/assets/3040.pdf) Challenges in Working Together Surprisingly, some schools and teachers are very traditional when it comes to their organizational and teaching methods. That is, some of them work independently and are usually afraid to change from their traditions, thus refusing on collaborative work and isolate themselves from the community. This may be due to the fact that, in the past, social agencies urge schools to partake in the social development of the students, to which schools will turn away for lack of additional capability. (qtd. in Brindle para. 5-6 http://www.guardian.co.uk) It was also difficult to target poor performance, especially when the staff works closely together. (“Ratton Secondary School” para. 7 http://www.teachernet.gov.uk) It was also quite a challenge for some teachers to have confidence in the effectiveness of the performance management. Particularly, some teachers did not trust that their school executives will employ the method reverently and without favoritism. (Hogan, Down, and Chadbourne para. 14 http://www.aare.edu.au/98pap/dow98075.htm) What helped the teachers feel more at ease with the performance management process and working as a team is a “sense of ownership” – they were able to choose that they wanted to do, and were able to express their concerns if they are not comfortable with a situation. (Hogan, Down, and Chadbourne para. 16 http://www.aare.edu.au/98pap/dow98075.htm) It was also important for them to see how other people are doing in the process so as to avoid feeling threatened with the process. In Tysoe CE Primary School in England, the head teacher explained to the staff that he would be the only member to undergo external reviews. He was also was also eager to share his experience with the process to the staff. (“Tysoe CE Primary School” para. 16-17 http://www.teachernet.gov.uk) Success of the performance management process also depended on the quality of relationships among the team. A good, working relationship can be threatened by “contrived collegiality” or teachers convinced to work together as a team so as to put into practice other people’s authority. (Hogan, Down, and Chadbourne para. 19 http://www.aare.edu.au/98pap/dow98075.htm) A number of head teachers also have a less than satisfactory relationships with governing bodies. This is in relation that most governing bodies do not know where their role ends and the head teacher’s begins. (Cottrell para. 9-10 http://www.icponline.org/content/view/276/51/) The situation differs from school to school, however. Their social environment varies from one another. Problems that arise from one school do not necessarily apply to another school. Despite the initial difficulties faced, teachers and their team leaders were drawn together by one goal, and this made working together more conceivable – it was the collective aim to improve the performance of their students, a shared commitment (“Performance Management” pg. 3 http://www.dcsf.gov.uk) Performance Management: A Shared Responsibility An essential part of the performance management’s success is the cooperation of both individual and team performances. It is a shared responsibility between the governing body or the board of education, the head teacher or school principal, the team leader and the teachers. The governing body’s role is strategic. It is primarily in charge of approving the school’s performance management policy, of supervising its process as well as evaluating the teachers’ performance. It is also responsible for reviewing the head teacher’s performance, with help from an external adviser. It is not, however, responsible for gathering evidence or passing judgments regarding individual teachers. On the other hand, the head teacher’s task is to implement the policy and making sure that the evaluation is carried out. The governing body may ask them to draft the performance management policy. They are also responsible for ensuring that the team leaders carry out their responsibilities, that plans and standards are agreed upon by all parties involved, and that they monitor the teachings and participate in feedback discussions. The team leaders and the teachers ensure that the objectives are put forward and are agreed upon, that feedback is given, that training is given to improve an individual’s skills, and that the performance evaluation occurs. Moreover, an external adviser will direct the governing body’s representatives on dictating the performance objectives and collaborate with each other in reviewing performance at the end of the performance management cycle. They must be trained and accredited for they are expected to give high quality advice. They will also support the governing body in attending meetings in which the head teacher’s overall assessment of performance is discussed. (“Performance Management Framework” pg. 4, 9-10 http://www.ipfbenchmarking.net) The performance management cycle is an event that takes place over one year, connected to a school’s planning for management and objective setting. When the cycle starts is up to the school’s discretion. The cycle has three stages. The first stage is planning. This involves determining the focus of the teacher’s work, setting specific objectives, discussing their personal priorities, refining their professional practice and, most importantly, the needs of their students in line of their development. The objectives need to be comprehensible and brief. It is also important that it is neither too easy to attain or too difficult to achieve, but just the right amount of challenge. The second stage deals with monitoring the progress of the teachers and team leaders during the cycle. There are a variety of ways to monitor progress, including classroom observation and informal discussions. The third and final stage is reviewing the performance of teachers and their team leaders. It gives way to acknowledge their achievements and to distinguish areas of improvement. The third stage recognizes the teacher’s individual strengths and needs in order to achieve development. If a teacher is discontented with the review given, he or she can raise this issue to the head teacher or to the chair of the governing body. Likewise, if the head teacher is discontented, he or she can approach the chair of the governing body. The outcome of the review is used to determine, for example, pay incentives for a satisfying performance. (“Performance Management Framework” pg. 6-9 http://www.ipfbenchmarking.net) Impact on Student Achievement The change brought about by performance management in the way teachers go about their work had a positive effect on the students’ achievements. Incentives in the performance management process, such as performance-related pay, motivated the teachers to provide quality education. Performance-related pay contributed to the general improvement of the grades of students. In the research conducted by Atkinson, Burgess, Croxson, Gregg, Propper, Slater and Wilson, it was revealed that student effort and teacher effectiveness had strong connections. This means that better teachers draw out student effort, and diligent students promote more preparation from teachers. (pg. 15 http://image.guardian.co.uk) The test scores of students also improved in relation to the improvement of the teachers based on performance-related pay. Although it is not determined whether or not the teachers gave extra effort in teaching or sidetracked from other professional activities, results of the research suggest that performance management should be used to raise educational performance. (pg. 34 http://image.guardian.co.uk) In the Chicago Public School, for instance, adopted the performance management process to improve classroom, schoolhouse, central office and district performance. In 2007, it attained progress in student performance particularly in reading, math and science proficiency scores. (“Chicago Public Schools” pg. 1-2 http://www.msdf.org) In the case of Sweyne Park School, it was rather complicated because two different school communities were to form the school. Not only students, but the parents and school staff experienced a mix of emotions from anxiety, lack of interest and uncertainty during the transition period. Students decreased in attendance and their grades depleted. In order to make improvements and realize the goals of the school, it adapted performance management, staff training and thorough investiture. As a result, student attendance improved, and so did their grades. Its students received national recognition such as the Diana Memorial awards, which recognizes outstanding citizenship, and one student was a runner up to the ‘National Student of the Year Award 2005’. (“The Sweyne Park School” para. 5-10, 17 http://www.investorsinpeople.co.uk) But a relatively negative effect brought about by performance management was due to the fact that some teachers feel pressured to demonstrate a good performance. Teachers in areas like Portugal, Spain, Finland, Sweden, Scotland and England related that they had less time in focusing on students who had difficulties in their studies because they had to concentrate on students whose improvement would matter. Students who were in danger of failing and social rejection are more visible now to teachers than before. The demands of recording and reporting performance also had a substantial effect in their time and energy, thus contributing to more stress in their work. (Ozga pg. 3 http://www.ces.ed.ac.uk/PDF%20Files/Brief027.pdf) Impact on Teachers The introduction of performance management in schools was not warmly accepted at first. It was greeted by mainly negative reactions, such as reluctance, cynicism, anger and feelings of frailty and exposure. This was largely due to the fact that teachers who did better in their performances received an incentive. In addition, although performance-related pay was a welcome idea, it threatened the professional ethics of some teachers. It was also viewed as a basis for selfishness and competitiveness which was in contradiction to professional beliefs of teaching. Also, as performance management is widely based on the collective team efforts of the teaching staff, the individual grants of additional pay pose as a concern among teachers. (Mahony para. 2-3 http://www.esrcsocietytoday.ac.uk) Further evaluation of the impact of performance-related pay on teachers, however, showed that it had positive effects on them. The negative reception of the new method was quickly dispelled after it was evaluated on more than 300 head teachers and 1000 teachers. Some of them said that the extra pay gave them added effort in teaching. The majority of younger teachers surmise that the additional pay motivated them to stay in their profession. Performance management also helped improve goal-setting within their schools in general, according to majority of head teachers and teachers. At first, it was feared that the head teachers would implement one-dimensional goals. On the contrary, evaluating performance weaknesses of an entire class or an entire school year and setting objectives that would address these weaknesses proved how it can help focus more on the needs of the students and the school and less on the teachers’ efforts on potential weaknesses in individual performance. (Marsden and Belfield pg. 1 http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/CP183.pdf) Performance management has also been used to help teachers improve in their professions. In South Leys School in England, for example, after identifying a teacher’s difficulty attributed to a lack of awareness of the students’ previous experience, objectives were made to write lesson planners for general use and to develop cross phase plans for KS2 to KS3 transition. Senior staff and KS3 consultants have also imparted their support on the teacher. (“South Leys Secondary School” para. 17 http://www.teachernet.gov.uk) Conclusion Performance management is not a perfect course of action and therefore it is still open for development. Its effectiveness differs from school to school. In a large social institution such as a school, it is essential that all members of this institution work together hand-in-hand in achieving the goals set out by the school. Individual performances are as important as team performances. The flaws in the performance management process should be conscientiously be targeted in order to reduce and solve the challenges posed by the process. This should not be taken for granted, as with every school year passing by, new breeds of students are coming in. The quality of education that these schools provide are essential in shaping what is to be the future of our world today. The cons of adapting performance management in schools lie mainly in the way teachers work and the environment they are working in. Many teachers feel a great deal of unnecessary competition, distrust in their superiors and fellow teachers, and apprehension. These are due to inequality in incentives, pressure under scrutiny and job-related stress. Because of this, some students are at risk of failing because of the lack of attention. If done properly, however, the pros of performance management offset the cons. For teachers, having clear objectives gave them a more focused plan of action. They are also able to improve in their individual weaknesses and, therefore, develop in their profession at a positive rate. In addition, the performance-related pay offered a way for motivating them in increasing efforts. On the other hand, students are now dealt with more goal-oriented teachers who are now able to pay more attention to their educational requirements. This is evidence enough that it is not the lessons that students are unable to fully understand, but the way these lessons are taught to them. Works Cited “Performance Management in Schools: Model Performance Management Policy.” Czone. 27 pages. 03 Aug 2008. . “Performance Management in Schools: Performance Management Framework.” Index to the DfES Financial Management Standard and Toolkit. 2000. 19 pages. 03 Aug 2008. . Mahony, Pat. “The Impact of Performance Threshold Assessment on Teacher’s Work.” Economical and Social Research Council.19 June 2007. 03 Aug 2008. Path: Our Research; Governance and Citizenship; Structure, Governance and Constitutional Change Atkinson et. al. “Evaluating the Impact of Performance-related Pay for Teachers in England.” The Center for Market and Public Organization. December 2004: 61 pages. 03 Aug 2008. . Marsden, David and Richard Belfield. “Performance pay for teachers: is it working?” CentrePiece, Summer 2005: 1 page. 03 Aug 2008. . Brindle, David. “It’s All About Results.” The Guardian. 1 Nov 2006. 03 Aug 2008. . Hogan, Carol et. al. “How Are Teachers Managing Performance Management?” The Australian Association for Research Education. 1998. 03 Aug 2008. . “Performance Management.” Department for Education and Skills. 23 pages. 03 Aug 2008. . “Performance Management of Teachers.” Office for Standards in Education. 2002. 28 pages. 03 Aug 2008. . “Ratton Secondary School.” TeacherNet. 03 Aug 2008. . “Tysoe CE Primary School.” TeacherNet. 03 Aug. 2008. . “South Leys Secondary School.” TeacherNet. 03 Aug 2008. . “Chicago Public Schools: Driving Performance Management.” Michael and Susan Dell Foundation. 03 Aug 2008. . Cottrell, Sean. “Challenges of School Management.” International Confederation of Principals. 2008. 03 Aug 2008. . Ozga, Jenny. “Measuring and Managing Performance in Education.” Center for Educational Sociology. 27 Feb 2003. 4 pages. 03 Aug 2008. . “The Sweyne Park School.” Investors in People. 03 Aug 2008. Path: Case Studies; T “Performance Management: An Overview.” The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. Feb 2008. 03 Aug 2008. Read More