The one factor is internal while the other is external. Undoubtedly, the two factors influence teaching and learning and student achievement levels albeit in varying degrees.
There is therefore, a continuing debate on what carries more weight between issues within the locus of control of school systems and those outside their sphere of influence and jurisdiction.
Without necessarily discounting the fact that every school system exists and functions within a unique geographical setting and a peculiar social milieu, there is a school of thought which mainly places the fate and destiny of students within the boundaries of a school itself.
Notwithstanding, whatever happens outside the school perimeter fence, principally internal factors, should be held more accountable for the performance trajectory (good or bad) of a school system.
Clearly, a school system with a good grasp of its purpose and mandate should develop processes and quality assurance systems granting it some considerable degree of control over its affairs and destiny as opposed to a school that cuts a sorry figure and appears like a hapless victim of external forces and pressures beyond its jurisdiction.
Expressing faith and confidence in the power and might of internal school factors is a research anchored position. It is not one based on whims and caprices of any individual.
Renowned authors and educators Rachel E. Curtis and Elizabeth A. City subscribe to the notion that school systems can support and inspire powerful teaching and learning. As City and Curtis see things, success begins with “embracing the notion that what school systems do matters.” Underachieving school systems tend to overrate external pressures while underestimating the strength of internal factors.
However, powerful external negative influences can be, experience has shown that effective school systems can prevail and deliver as expected. The two scholars (City and Curtis) have expressed unwavering faith in the game changing prowess of a teacher in the classroom. “Research tells us that if a child has a quality teacher for three years, that child performance can increase dramatically.”
They further stated that, “In school systems that are improving and succeeding in helping children to learn, people embrace the notion that what they do matters and focus on improving what they can control rather than excusing results on the basis of what they can’t control and look at student data and other evidence of their practice as information not as a commentary on their personal value.”
Resilience is the name of the game in the enterprise of teaching. Selebi-Phikwe has a shining example of a robust and resilient school system that continues to thrive in the midst of adversity.
Mining of copper and nickel has been part and parcel of life and the mainstay of the town and the sudden and unexpected closure of the mine has not impacted negatively on teaching and learning. Elsewhere it would have been convenient to use this powerful and distressing external factor - the collapse of the mine as a pretext for collapsing the education system in this part of the world. But Phikwe has remained defiant.
The schools continue to show a rare indefatigable fighting spirit and inspiration against all odds. Indeed internal school factors count more. Another example would be Moeng College of old. Moeng College never allowed its isolation and insulation from development and modern conveniences to affect the core business.
The generation of teachers and non-teaching staff and the discipline of students of the time combined to unleash a top notch education which was the envy of all. Now that the school is a shadow of its former self presents a challenge to those in charge to find ways of going back to the cross road in order to craft a return the school to its glory days.
A school system should always be beacon of hope and inspiration not only to the learners it was directly created to serve but also to the community in which it exists. Robust school systems never show signs of stagnation, fatigue, desperation and hopelessness.
When confronted with challenges and changing circumstances, school systems should not desperately look out the windows because help may not come from outside.
Viable solutions are within. Worrying and lamenting about a frustrating, rigid and inflexible policy environment is worthy and understandable. But too much investment in worrying about the policy environment outside the control of the school may not be a worthy exercise. Success in this regard may change things for the better in the long-term but unfortunately may not necessarily yield a swift and immediate impact on learning outcomes of the present generation of students. Lack of synergy and strong communication link between the junior certificate and senior school curricular may be a source of legitimate concern but a school that preoccupies itself with this matter may not find sufficient to time to empower its teachers to navigate challenges revolving around delivery in the classroom. If the policy of automatic progression of standard seven leavers regardless of the quality of grades gives schools sleepless nights then it might affect the focus on investing in raising the bar in the classroom to bridge identified performance gaps.
The number priority of a school should be investing in teacher professional development and holding every teacher accountable for learning outcomes. Funds permitting, incentives should be offered to teachers who exceed expectations and meet accountability targets. There should be less emphasis on measuring compliance targets because satisfying what the system desires is not synonymous with what the students need in the classroom. For example, a regular and uninterrupted presence of a teacher in the classroom can be a compliance exercise, which does not translate into effective teaching and learning.
Setting out ambitious targets, which exceed those the system has set, is a sign of a school that has assumed greater accountability and responsibility over its own affairs. But merely striving to meet mediocre standards set elsewhere is an indication that a school does not have faith in its own abilities. It is sign of succumbing to peer pressure and an overestimation and glorification of the might of real and imagined external factors.
