Management processes in education. Towards international exams: a case study

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Management processes in education. Towards international exams: a case study

Introduction

management educational competitive

In recent years there is a general disappointment with the achievements of the educational system, expressed by various elements, including the parent community, side by side with the challenge encountered by many countries: preparing the graduates of the educational system for life in a competitive environment by improving academic achievements. The hope of many that the school will manage to bridge gaps and give everybody equal opportunities, with an emphasis on weakened populations and peripheral areas, has almost disappeared. Does the use of these widespread tests result in the anticipated change, and do these tests have positive or negative implications for the schools? Are the tests indeed efficient? The current study addresses the question of the significance principals ascribe to investing in the Meitzav tests and allocating the necessary resources; Does the Meitzav have different significance as perceived by school principals in the southern and central districts? The qualitative analysis of the study, which was based on interviews with school principals, reinforced and supported the question that focused on the significance the principal gives to the Meitzav tests, the mechanisms and procedures and cultural features that helped prepare for the tests and enjoy their benefits, what are the processes and practices that the school utilizes and activates during the Meitzav year, and to what degree do the school principals believe in and agree with the Meitzav measurement tool.

Bode of article

management educational competitive

One conspicuous finding of the current study is the primary place of the principal in leaving an imprint on the school culture and influencing the organization. The school principal has considerable influence on the school's special nature and on the gathering of the teachers around a common vision and ideology, with a focus on pedagogy and learning. The principal has a major impact on the atmosphere in which the learning is carried out, even if pressures are applied in the school's external environment by decision makers or by the parents. The influence of the principal determines the teachers' state of mind to a large degree and dictates the teachers' commitment and responsibility to their students' learning. These findings are compatible with the approach claiming that the school leadership is perceived as affecting organizational processes such as forming a shared vision, generating goals derived from the vision, encouraging professional development, shared learning, and initiatives and actions for improving teaching and learning processes. The greater the significance of the Meitzav as perceived by the principal, he instructs the teachers and the different teams on how to utilize all the tools in order to succeed in the Meitzav. The principals see the Meitzav first of all as a measurement tool that is supposed to guide them and constitute a compass regarding the school's state and where the school should be improved and advanced. The Meitzav is perceived by the principal as a useful tool that can help him understand pedagogically what is happening over the years. The principal's perception of the Meitzav is critical for continued conduct in the Meitzav year and, in general, for understanding how this tool should be used. Principals who were very insistent regarding the need for the tool carefully followed administration of the test in the Meitzav year, as well as regarding the proper resources with which the principal should provide the staff in order to make sure that the test is administered well. Namely, from a wider perspective, principals who see the Meitzav as an important and necessary tool enlist for this purpose all the elements that might facilitate success in the test, both internal elements such as homeroom teachers, staff, resources, and others, and external elements such as the parents. Such principals, who perceive the significance of the Meitzav, will attempt to enlist the students' parents in order to affect the students' motivation to do well on the test. The interviews indicated that the principals who believe in the Meitzav measurement tool make sure to give it room in the school's schedule and also to instruct anyone in direct contact with it about its significance. The significance of the Meitzav as perceived by the principal can be manifested in the system's progress, promoting pedagogy, excellence, harnessing students, and more. The more the principal sees the Meitzav as an important component of the school's success he will strive to maximally utilize the entire system for organized preparations for the test, and this will also result in success with regard to the grades. In the interviews, principals from the southern district described all the problems with the Meitzav test and their distrust of the tool. This perception has a direct impact on the low grades as well and on their being `red' schools. Schools in the southern district that did carry out fundamental and pedagogic work to introduce the Meitzav in the curriculum and in the school, schedule saw certain progress. If these schools will maintain the pedagogic processes formed, reinforce and improve them, they will necessarily also see a rise in grades in the Meitzav tests. Namely, pedagogic work manages to reduce the discrepancy between peripheral and central areas. In addition, the study found that the principals wanted to be heard by the Ministry of Education and to find a way that will be accepted by everyone both regarding measurement and publicity. Namely, the integration of principals and teachers in the measurement process is critical for success in the Meitzav, and we found this significantly in the current study. The more enlisted the teachers and principal, the more they understand the rationale underlying an entire discipline called control and measurement; they will also have a certain say in designing the tool; they will have more faith in the Meitzav and will be active partners in facilitating its success in the school. The Ministry of Education, after the intervention of the Supreme Court and after the protest of the teachers' organizations in 2019, decided that the Meitzav would be held but its results would not be publicized. The Ministry of Education decided to hold regular meetings to work on developing a new measurement tool, and during this process they wish to hear senior educators, principals, and even teachers, in order to increase the tool's efficacy and construct something new that will be accepted by everyone.

Discussion

This seems to be the best way to integrate the measurement tool after everyone has taken part in its construction and understanding and then it is possible to feel part of the measurement issue, unlike previously. The principals claimed that in the southern district most of the work by teachers and principals around preparing for the Meitzav test is done primarily within the classroom in the teacher-student interaction. The more the teacher manages to convey knowledge in class via extra lessons, differential groups, attention to individual students, and focused study days, that is what will determine the student's level of preparation for the test and will probably also affect the result in the Meitzav. The principals claimed that the students do not study after school, do not practice, do not do their homework, and of course do not utilize private lessons due to various financial hardships and a poor family financial state. The fact that the parents have a high income allows them to take their children for private lessons in several subjects, and this lets the children make up disparities if necessary, and mainly advance and improve their studies and test results. Ben Amram presents the association between private lessons and the student's success in tests and in studies in general throughout the years. This has become a global phenomenon that successfully affects the student's success. The interviews with the principals indicate that the parents utilize private lessons throughout the school year. This helps improve and upgrade their children's grades and study level, and the principals are indeed seeing this also in improved grades in the Meitzav. In addition to the parents' income, their education also affects the student's knowledge. Contemporary approaches contend that it is necessary to examine the effect of factors that comprise the socioeconomic index separately. The education level of the parents, and particularly of the mother, constitutes the main factor affecting knowledge of parenting, parental beliefs and practices. In addition, consistent parental involvement was found to be positively associated with the child's academic performance. Namely, the principals' words indicate that the income and education of parents in the southern district has a negative effect on students' success in the test. The principals reported that what these students manage to acquire in class is the knowledge they will bring to the test, so the principals divert more resources, generate small study groups, and practice a lot with the students, in the understanding that they bear full responsibility for the students' grades as the students will not do this in their own free time through private lessons or any other way. Is the Meitzav a relevant measurement tool? This question was discussed at length in interviews with the principals. The Meitzav is a relevant and important measurement tool for the principals. In contrast, within the educational system opinions are mixed as to the question of whether the Meitzav is important, and lacking a better alternative, the principal or the school do have no real measurement tool that allows them to measure themselves objectively over the years. The principals want a monitoring tool that will provide them with reliable and objective information and measure the level of studies and of the pedagogy. This question remains open currently as well. In most places in the world standard external tests are utilized in order to inspect the quality of studies at the schools. Berliner, one of the most senior researchers of education in the US, presented a paradox when he showed that a rise in achievements on standard tests does not necessarily indicate better learning, and what's more might even indicate poorer learning. One of the simplest ways that schools can raise students' grades is by more intensive studying of the material included in the test, and more practice. In fact, it is necessary to invest a large amount of time in a small quantity of study material. This is usually done at the expense of other subjects or even at the expense of other topics in the same subject. Thus, through studying and revising the test materials the school can raise the students' grades even if in practice the students acquire less knowledge. Indeed, these data arose in the interviews with the principals, who divert resources in order to succeed in the Meitzav. Feniger and colleagues contend that intensive preparation of students for Meitzav tests is prevalent in Israel as well, and it appears that much time and many resources are devoted to preparing for the test. Thus, for example, a student who serves as a teaching assistant at the school related that before the Meitzav test she received an instruction to work with students, whom she helped individually only with the material on which they were supposed to be tested in the coming test. In all the interviews with principals from the southern district, we saw that the phenomenon of diverting resources is indeed common and utilized as the only way to pass the test, but regretfully the grades do not improve over time. In addition, we find a direct association between the grades in the Meitzav and the school's academic level. Schools that generate a high academic culture, a well-ordered pedagogic theory, and systematic pedagogic work, manage to reach high grades in the Meitzav. Struggling schools do not manage to attain high grades and sometimes even remain weak, with poor Meitzav grades over the years. From this respect the Meitzav indeed reflects what happens at the school from a pedagogic point of view. The Central Bureau of Statistics found a strong association between high results in the Meitzav test in eighth grade and eligibility for a technological matriculation diploma. According to the data publicized, 79.1% of students who obtained a high standard technological scientific matriculation diploma had high achievements in the Meitzav in the eighth grade (a raw score of 71 or higher for the math and science average). In addition, the likelihood of attaining a high standard technological scientific matriculation diploma among math and science examinees in the Meitzav in the eighth grade is 78%. The likelihood rises the higher the grade in these two subjects in the Meitzav. In addition, the Meitzav test in math has stronger prediction power than that of the science test, and when merging the two grades there is an even higher prediction power of success in the matriculation exam. Hence, there is an association between success in the Meitzav test and success in the matriculation exam. The Meitzav was introduced in the educational system, there is no comprehensive and significant tool that inspects the school in the core subjects and indicates over the years whether the school has become more professional and improved its study level. Systemic tests are, as stated, an important, major, and vital tool with regard to gathering data on the state of the educational system and reaching thoughtful decisions based on these data as a way of improving education. At times, when striving to improve achievements the system might be affected by a list of undesirable influences that are detrimental to its quality. In recent years evidence from countries that managed to effect a systemic pedagogic change to different extents is accumulating, for instance: the states of California and North Carolina in the US, South Korea, Singapore, and Finland. All these places have in common a policy that was initiated by the highest political ranks. The program was constructed as a long-term program that remained constant for several years running without being replaced, there was an explicit policy of improving teaching and learning, administrative and organizational infrastructure was constructed to support the teaching and learning improvements, and a huge investment in improving the teacher force was evident. All these generated the pedagogic improvement. Schools are first and foremost a pedagogic institution. Pedagogic change requires time and therefore a true change in the heart of the system can lead to significant results only if it perseveres for a lengthy period that makes it possible to reap the fruit of the process. The main purpose of the school is to convey knowledge, to make study materials available, to engage in innovative learning, to prepare the student for being an independent learner. Even those who claim that the school has lost its relevance long ago, and that the students can access knowledge in a variety of ways including on the web, found that there is no other alternative that gathers together all the subject s and different disciplines and provides a response for monitoring and supervision that the learning indeed takes place. Nonetheless, schools that have assimilated a pedagogic perception try to upgrade themselves in any way possible and to introduce innovative disciplines by means of innovative courses, study tracks, and enrichment. Namely, the school is still engaged in the pedagogic level with all its aspects. Those who understand this conception well concentrate all the school's energy and focus on pedagogy and do not retreat to other areas. Some schools declare very clearly that learning is not the most important thing for them, and that the significant thing is values, Zionism, contribution to the community, charity, significant service, and lots of other projects that take place within the school. The more the school sets itself apart and defines itself, this gives the students, the staff, and the parents a better feeling, as they are aware of the school's DNA. When the boundaries between the ethical and social field and the pedagogic field are blurred, the school's direction is unclear. Schools that excel in their academic achievements manage to integrate many projects and values side by side with a very high academic level. These schools do not compromise on studies, where it is clear to all that pedagogy is at the top of their priorities, and this is strongly felt and expressed by the matriculation results. In contrast, schools that do not excel elevate the social and ethical topics and try to blur any signs of pedagogy, for different reasons. The primary manifestation of such a course of action is a continuous drop in the grade level and the expansion of social activities, which are detrimental to the pedagogic process at the school. Sometimes the school has no well-ordered pedagogic theory and there is no figure from among the management team who leads it directly, rather everything is managed unprofessionally and the emphasis is on ethical-social topics. The Meitzav provides an indirect response to the problems formed, by reflecting to the school principal the two major axes present at the school. If the pedagogic axis is on a constant rise, together with the climate axis, then the school is in good condition and should check how to preserve the current state and improve additional things. If there is no compatibility the school must check itself and maybe also its way. From this respect the Meitzav measurement tool gives an indication despite all claims of its irrelevance. There is need to make deep calculations regarding the school's two main axes and to prepare a work and action plan as to how the school intends to define itself over the years with regard to these axes and in what manner it generates a division of energies and resources for this purpose. The main purpose of this study is to explain and understand how the Meitzav tests are perceived, what preparations are made for them, and what operations are undertaken consequently. The main findings of this study indicate that schools that manage to generate a well-ordered pedagogic culture over time manage to advance the school. Schools that use the results of the Meitzav s effectively and that have mechanisms and cultures of organizational learning, see the Meitzav as an opportunity to generate the desired change in order to improve the school as an organization. These schools develop processes, strategies, and organizational structures that facilitate their ability to respond effectively and to manage change in a complex and dynamic environment, and that is precisely the key to their success in improving their grades. In order for these schools to succeed, and for the improvement process to occur, the school must have an educational setup aimed at promoting professionalism. In the context of the Meitzav, in order for the test to be a force for change in the schools it is necessary to create a situation where the findings of the school's internal assessment will have equal value or equal status to that of the external findings. For this purpose, the schools must improve the internal assessment processes so that these will be professional and no less valued than external assessment processes. A combination of external and internal assessment processes can generate the desired change. Hence, it is recommended to plan an alternative model for external assessment, a model that includes widespread assessment but limits its role as the only decisive assessment and adds standards for adequate internal assessment. Various voices have been heard even in the current study whereby grades are not the only parameter and that the school is supposed to teach other values too, on which the students are not measured. A school that wishes to generate a different perception with regard to the school's components will have to measure itself in its own tools and therefore, the more space the principal and the teachers will have to measure themselves also by means of internal assessment, the more trust they will have for assessment tools in general and perhaps also for the Meitzav in particular.

Conclusions

The contribution of the current study is in understanding the pedagogic and organizational school processes that occur at the schools, which are required for the purpose of reaching measurable achievements. Understanding these processes and identifying them is extremely significant for the school principal and for the educational system in general regarding expectations of the school, its goals, and how they are achieved.

References

Ben Harush, A. (2021). The disparity between student and teacher reports regarding school climate in junior highs in the state religious educational system: An interpretive view of gender and selectivity [unpublished MA thesis].Ben Gurion University. [in Hebrew]

Размещено на Allbest.ru