Areas deserving transformation
There is absolutely no doubt about the desirability and inevitability of change in an educational milieu, which does not offer students opportunities to learn better and achieve improved learning outcomes.
What perhaps may be a matter of dispute and contention could be the identity of appropriate areas deserving transformation and much more importantly determining the magnitude , scale and the speed that should characterise the desired transformative agenda. Even those elements in the system that may elect to stubbornly cling to a failing and misfiring status quo and defend it to the last man, do so not so much because they do not see the value and suitability of change. They dig their heels in to parry any signs of change not on account of a lingering doubt about the efficacy of the change process but on account of the fear of the disruptive and costly nature of the envisaged transformation agenda.
Resistance to change becomes even more dangerous when it is fueled and predicated on a desire to serve and perpetuate narrow and parochial self serving interests. The prime goal of any change is to serve the greater picture. Narrow sectional interests should never be allowed to thrive and assume primacy over the bigger picture of enabling and facilitating more and better learning. Those who are not so keen to change should never be judged harshly and labelled enemies of progress, rather they should be handled with great care and sympathetic understanding. This is the way to go if the school principal is to maintain some semblance of team unity. Being kind and sympathetic to the voice of resistance should not be misjugded as a failure of will. Rather it is a strategic and cautious way of managing change designed to carry everybody on board and avoid the risk of leaving any one behind.
The bigger the numbers rallying behind the cause of building a thriving school, the better. If not managed with great sensitivity and sympathetic understanding, change can produce the unintended consequences of dividing a school into hostile camps, one camp rooting for change and the other clinging to a hopeless and broken culture. The possibility of running a divided house, which obviously does not stand, should be avoided at all costs. A few examples can illustrate the discomfort and distress associated with change. Loss of stability, comfort and a possible change of fortunes are some of the nightmares that accompany a change process. Every system, good or bad, has its beneficiaries. A new dispensation could realign forces pushing into the background those who were benefitting from an old dispensation and catapulting into the limelight and prominence those who were on the periphery. A worse case scenario presents itself in the form of job losses or staff movements.
Some cannot withstand the mounting pressure occasioned by a new sense of urgency accompanying change. Leaders managing change cannot succeed unless they do a bit of pushing and some panel beating of the existing pattern of behaviour.
Not everyone familiar with a culture devoid of a sense of urgency responds well to a sudden push to a different dispensation. The more school principals push for change, the more their efforts are met with resistance and a counter force. When this ensues, it becomes a ding dong struggle, which may threaten the very survival of the reform process. But the reform process should continue unabated because it is the right thing to do to secure the bigger picture. Having chosen to forge ahead with transformation, it is important, however, to pay attention to the what and manner (how) of execution. Beginning small and gathering momentum in the process is vitally crucial. An overnight overhaul may be considered too ambitious and drastic. And the approach may be overwhelming and can give the dissenting voice some credibility. Voices whispering in the dark raising concerns about the risks of mission failure should not deter anybody from proceeding with the task.
Side remarks can be unsettling and distractive if given attention. But leaders should mainly focus on addressing concerns formally presented in properly constituted platforms. Whatever reforms school principals contemplate, it will be a remiss not to zero in on issues sorrounding pedagogy and governance across all facets of a school.
Addressing management challenges of a school begins from the smallest cell being what class teachers do to manage student attendance, inspire and counsel students, to how subject teachers manage instruction and to the biggest level of how the school principal and his/her lieutenants navigate the whole school.
Change can only come about if each constituent of a school accepts accountablity and whatever role (perceived or real), it may have played in the dissolution of a high performing culture. Where every body refuses accountability, the prospect of change becomes slimmer. Any change will always attract some pocket of resistance and leaders should not crack or jump ship at the slightest provocation. It is advisable to stay the course and remain firmly rooted on the transformative agenda even in the midst of a storm.