The impulse of an organisation

Tshwarelo Hosia | Monday May 27, 2024 09:50

This is the characteristic norm in hierarchical organisations where those sitting at the summit of the organisation expect and demand to be fed with relevant, accurate and timely information for various purposes ranging from ensuring accountability, transparency, proper planning and determination of the research agenda.

This is to name but key critical areas. Lower and peripheral structures are duty bound to act like tributaries of a great river to ensure a seamless functioning of the whole entity. The importance of collecting relevant, accurate data at the right time cannot be overemphasised. Organisations like school systems should make a conscious determination of what constitutes their core data set. Knowing in advance what sort of data the organisation requires helps those charged with the responsibility to prepare the data to do their assignment with relative ease. Save for emergencies such as the one occasioned by COVID-19, there should be hardly any surprise data requirements during the course of an academic year.

Any new development if not sufficiently justified can dampen the spirit of those supplying the data. Shifting goal posts is a demotivating factor.

Some organisations, especially underachievers, have the notorious distinction of overcrowding the situation with data, which may be overwhelming to handle but serving no useful purpose. Data should not be requested as the whims and caprices of any individual but at all times organisations should confine themselves to the core data set identified at the planning stage. Unnecessary and unplanned data enquires can lead to data fatigue where those responsible for supplying the data grow weary and tired of the exercise. When this happens, one can no longer guarantee the accuracy of the data given.

It is important to ensure that those who supply the data have the confidence in the process and to an extent possible should be helped to believe that their efforts add great value to the organisation. At this juncture, one can now shift attention to highlight the character of the data that school systems work with to run their day-to-day affairs.

For schools data that is commonly sought after revolves around critical teaching inputs such as supply and availability of textbooks, food, kitchen facilities, teachers, classrooms and vehicles, among others. The data enquiries from the central ministry seeks to know how many vehicles are down, how many are up and running, how many teaching posts are vacant and how many text books have been procured. This is good but it should not be seen as an end in itself but a means to an end.

There seems to be a primary focus on collecting this type of data as it prepares the stage for teaching and gauges the level of readiness of a school to begin the business of teaching. Usually policy makers concentrate on the supply side of things, getting right the processes behind teaching and learning.

There is hardly any attempt to check how useful the inputs are in producing improved learning outcomes. The approach of focusing on the inputs assumes that availability of critical inputs guarantees provision of quality teaching and subsequent attainment of improved learning outcomes. But the thinking is narrow and flawed. The presence of adequate teaching and learning inputs while desirable does not guarantee effective utilisation to achieve desirable outputs.

Focusing on availability of inputs is a process driven exercise, which does not yield much in terms of altering for the better the performance trajectory of the hitherto ailing public education system.

A paradigm shift is badly needed to give a bit of bias to data on outputs. It is vitally important now and then for policy makers to use student outcomes to gauge the competence of the teaching force, to establish whether there is proper and effective utilisation of resources provided.

Yes, the resources may be limited but each school must exploit its comparative advantage. For instance, given their sound credentials, teachers are capable of improvising to rise to the challenges. Many of their credits are doing well in this regard. Presently due to limited externally sponsored in-service interventions, a positive trend is developing in some high performing sub cultures where teachers are increasingly self-managing their own professional development.

One school grounded in teaching of Agriculture would selflessly arrange some training intended to empower those struggling. It is ironic that policy makers hardly request data on how well students are learning but now and then seek to know how many books have been bought.

The critical question in my world should be, how well are the books utilised to add value to the learning process? In my world, the performance instrument presently in use is worth reviewing, as it is too ambitious in its coverage of a whole spectrum of issues.

Sadly, such issues are sitting on the periphery of classroom teaching and learning matters. All in all, the process of collecting data should not be a haphazard process influenced by panic and fear or any external busy bodies. School systems must strive to stay on the lane of continuously interacting with student achievement data rather than giving supremacy to behind the scene processes. Otherwise next time when thinking data, the thinking should be driven by how relevant and accurate is it to the learning process.