INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT IN CURRICULUM 2005: A ...

426 Pages·2008·1.52 MB·English

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT
IN CURRICULUM 2005: A QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSPECTIVE
By
TEBOHO MOTABOLI
BA HONOURS, MA ED.

THESIS
Submitted in fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of
PHILOSOPHIAE DOCTOR
In the
FACULTY OF HUMANITIES
(DEPARTMENT OF CURRICULUM STUDIES)

AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE
BLOEMFONTEIN
Promoter: PROF. Dr. G.F. Du Toit
January, 2008.

i
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND CURRICULUM
DEVELOPMENT IN CURRICULUM 2005: A QUALITY
ASSURANCE PERSPECTIVE

ii
DECLARATION
I declare that the thesis submitted here by me for the Ph.D. degree at the
University of the Free State, is my own independent work and has not been
submitted previously by me at another university. I further cede copyright of
the thesis in favour of the University of the Free State.

………………………………………..
Teboho Motaboli

Date

iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I thank God, the almighty, for his blessings of all our endeavours. Furthermore, I
acknowledge and thank my promoter, Prof. G.F. Du Toit, for the patience that he
had with me in my struggle to do justice to the topic and the research whose details
kept transforming with time as the DoE made new educational decisions. I thank
him for guiding me through the traditions, style, precision, brevity and high academic
standards that reflect his contribution to the scholarship of the University of the Free
State.
I also thank the following individuals and institutions: Prof. J.P. Strauss and Ms
Lorraine Botha, who indicated some of the sources of data on the research subject
to me. I am grateful to Messrs. De Villiers, Motsapi, Annmarie Mostert (of the
FSDoE), Mr Mofokeng of the Quality Assurance Directorate, at the Headquarters,
for discussing the subject with me. I thank Mr Sello and Ms Gaborone, of the
FSDoE, for their quick response to my request for permission to visit schools. I am
grateful to the principals and teachers of the schools that I visited and carried out
interviews. I am indebted to the librarians of Sasol library, especially Mrs Swart,
whose tray I used, to pass my work to my promoter. I thank Ms Shirley Moshou,
Mrs Makutoane Mokhachane for helping me type the work and Ms Frost for
language editing it. I thank my friends, Patrick Damane for friendly support at all
times, James Kamau and John Humphreys for computer work on the document,
and Mr Philip, Headmaster of Machabeng, for readily agreeing on occasion to give
me time to work on the project. Finally, I thank my wife Janet and my two
daughters, Malaika and Abena, who accepted my long absence from home and
encouraged me to go on and complete the project.

iv
DEDICATION

I dedicate this work to my family; my mother, my wife Janet Motaboli, my daughters
Malaika Motaboli and Abena Motaboli, for the spiritual support and the strength that
they gave me to work under challenging conditions up to the conclusion of this
research project.

v
SUMMARY

The primary aim of this research was to obtain first hand information from
instructional leaders (principals, Heads of Department (HoDs) and teachers), about
the ease and difficulties that they experience in interpreting C2005 guidelines and
translating them into classroom programmes in the Free State. Contingent to the
above aim, the research aimed to develop a quality assurance framework that could
enhance the successful implementation of C2005. The aim of the research was to
be achieved through a qualitative empirical study of the views, statements, opinions
and meanings that instructional leaders of the GET senior phase (grades 7 to 9)
give to their experiences.

To inform the empirical study, an extensive literature review of instructional
leadership, curriculum development and quality assurance in general and in C2005
in particular was undertaken. Functional aspects in which instructional leaders
experience difficulties were analysed under design, dissemination, implementation
and evaluation of C2005, or as the SA government prefers; context, inputs, process
and outputs. All these were discussed in detail in chapters 2, 3 and 4.

The following related difficulties were established through the research: instructional
leaders stated that the “top down” approach to design, dissemination,
implementation and evaluation of C2005 guidelines has alienated instructional
leaders. The change to C2005 was poorly financed, rushed and had little
preparation in training and resources. Furthermore in the absence of instructional
leaders’ input, the task teams that the DoE selected to design C2005 guidelines did
not capture the actual challenging and difficult conditions in the school and
classroom in which C2005 is implemented. The failure of the DoE to take
instructional leaders on board has resulted in technical and language difficulties for
instructional leaders; it has prevented instructional leaders from buying into C2005
processes and co owning them and hinders quality delivery of C2005.

vi
Moreover, a quality assurance system that could have ensured that most of the
problems are designed out in C2005 was not in place when C2005 was first
implemented in 1998. The quality assurance structures that exist at the time of
writing were only legislated in 2001. However, instructional leaders say that the
IQMS and its agencies such as the WSE, DAS and PMS do not address
instructional leaders’ classroom implementation problems. To address such
problems, some recommendations were made.

The most important recommendations that are made in chapter 7 are that besides
accreditation, the DoE should consider adopting a collaborative quality culture and
quality assurance systems in the further development of C2005. The research
recommends that the DoE consider allocating more money for transformation,
training more learning facilitators and instructional leaders thoroughly and strongly
support them. The research also recommends that the DoE selectively adopt
some elements of established quality assurance systems such as the Total Quality
Management and International Standards Organisation system (ISO 9000) to
inject quality culture into all planning and development of C2005. The DoE is
advised to take more time to plan and implement well-researched and piloted
recommendations resolutely. These improvements are provided for in the
guidelines of a quality assurance framework that is proposed by this research and
points to future research to achieve cohesive quality implementation of C2005 in
its latest form as NCS.
vii
Table of Contents Pages
CHAPTER 1 ........................................................................................................................ 1
ORIENTATION ................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Instructional Leadership and Development of C2005 .............................................. 3
1.2.1 Difficulties related to C2005 guidelines and practice .................................................. 4
1.2.2 Instructional leaders and “top down” policies .............................................................. 5
1.2.3 Curriculum Development of C2005 ............................................................................ 7
1.3 A quality assurance perspective ................................................................................ 9
1.3.1 Quality assurance of policy and practice .................................................................... 9
1.3.2 Top down quality assurance in C2005 ..................................................................... 10
1.3.3 Quality assurance of instructional leadership ........................................................... 11
1.3.4 The need for an holistic, diagnostic evaluation of C2005 ......................................... 13
1.4 Statement of the problem ......................................................................................... 13
1.5 The Aim of the study ................................................................................................. 15
1.6 Objectives of the study ............................................................................................. 16
1.7 Constructivist framework of the study .................................................................... 17
1.8 Demarcation of the study area ................................................................................. 17
1.8.1 Conceptual delimitation of the study area ................................................................ 18
1.8.2 Geographical delimitation of the study area ............................................................. 20
1.9 Research Methodology ............................................................................................. 20
1.9.1 Research design and field investigation ................................................................... 20
1.9.2 Adoption of inductive approach in the study ............................................................. 22
1.9.3 Sampling techniques adopted in the study ............................................................... 22
1.9.4 Execution of fieldwork .............................................................................................. 24
1.10 Value of the research .............................................................................................. 24
1.11 Validity and Reliability of the research instruments and procedure ................... 25
1.12 The research plan and layout of the research report ......................................... 26
1.13 Clarification of recurrent terms and concepts ...................................................... 27
1.13.1 Translation of C2005 guidelines to practice ............................................................ 27
1.13.2 Curriculum 2005 (C2005) ....................................................................................... 27
viii
1.13.3 Curriculum development ........................................................................................ 27
1.13.4 Instructional leadership .......................................................................................... 27
1.13.5 Outcomes Based Education (OBE) ........................................................................ 28
1.13.6 Quality Assurance .................................................................................................. 28
1.14 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 28
CHAPTER 2…………………………………………………….………………………..………..30
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP ..................................................................................... 30
2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 30
2.2 Perceptions of instruction ........................................................................................ 31
2.2.1 Definitions of the concept instruction ........................................................................ 31
2.2.2 Clarifying Instructional Leadership ........................................................................... 33
2.3 Philosophical underpinnings of instructional leadership ...................................... 34
2.4 Change in the conditions of knowledge production .............................................. 39
2.5 The vision of transformation and instructional leadership .................................... 43
2.6 Organisational change and instructional leadership ............................................. 46
2.6.1 Change of culture, indicators and instructional leaders ............................................ 46
2.6.2 Reinforcing change in education and instructional leadership .................................. 50
2.6.3 Alternative models of transformation and instructional leadership ............................ 51
2.6.4 Recognised stages through which change passes ................................................... 52
2.7 The place of Instructional leadership in the education system ............................. 54
2.7.1 Instructional leadership in a transforming education system .................................... 54
2.7.2 The legislative anchor of instructional leadership ..................................................... 60
2.7.3 The role of instructional leadership in curriculum dissemination ............................... 65
2.7.4 Instructional Leadership and the “top down” culture ................................................. 66
2.7.5 The demands of best practice on instructional leaders ............................................. 70
2.8 Instructional leaders’ problems with change at school level ................................ 71
2.9 The specific role of the principal as an instructional leader .................................. 72
2.9.1 The principal and transformation .............................................................................. 72
2.9.2 Evaluation of the instructional leadership role of the principal .................................. 74
2.9.3 The PIL and the Community ..................................................................................... 78
2.10 Instructional leadership role of the Head of Department (HoD) .......................... 79
ix
2.11 The Teacher as an Instructional Leader (TIL) ....................................................... 81
2.11.1 The teacher and classroom craft ............................................................................ 81
2.11.2 The TIL and Learners ............................................................................................. 85
2.11.3 Psychological principles of teaching ....................................................................... 89
2.11.4 Evaluation of the instructional leadership role of the teacher ................................. 91
2.12 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 95
CHAPTER 3 ...................................................................................................................... 96
CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................... 96
3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 96
3.2 Defining the concept curriculum ............................................................................. 96
3.3 Curriculum Studies ................................................................................................. 100
3.3.1 Different perspectives on Curriculum Studies ......................................................... 100
3.3.2 A change of paradigm in Curriculum Studies ......................................................... 104
3.4 Curriculum Development ........................................................................................ 108
3.4.1 Some theories of Curriculum Development ............................................................ 111
3.4.2 Curriculum Development in an education system .................................................. 113
3.5 Curriculum Development in SA from 1994 ............................................................ 114
3.5.1 The legislative basis of C2005 ............................................................................... 116
3.5.2 How policy directs curriculum design in C2005 ...................................................... 118
3.5.3 School level design of C2005 ................................................................................. 123
3.5.4 Dissemination of C2005 ......................................................................................... 126
3.5.5 Implementation of C2005 in the classroom ............................................................ 129
3.5.6 Examples of translating guidelines into programmes ............................................. 133
3.5.7 Assessment in C2005 ............................................................................................ 137
3.6 Evaluation of Curriculum Development in C2005 ................................................. 139
3.6.1 Training that teachers need for Curriculum Development ...................................... 142
3.6.2 Evaluation of buildings and logistics ....................................................................... 143
3.6.3 Evaluation of Classroom conditions ....................................................................... 144
3.6.4 Impact of the community in Curriculum Development ............................................ 144
3.6.5 Synthesising the challenges in the implementation of C2005 ................................. 146
3.7 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 147
x