The overarching goals of any system of education especially in poverty stricken and underdeveloped jurisdictions are rolling back the frontiers of poverty and also to paraphrase President Herbert Hoover to ensure a roof above every head, a chicken in every pot and an automobile in every garage.
In short, good and relevant education directly seeks to provide solutions to bread and butter issues vexing humanity in general and young people in particular. Winning the battle against unemployment and underemployment is the noblest battle that must be tackled with everything at the disposal of a learning institution. The fight to improve the school system means everything to a country and should never be allowed to fade into some obscure background or overtaken by any events. The battle should be pursued without ceasing at whatever cost.
Unfortunately, fixing a broken school system can be a long and protracted battle demanding serious sacrifices in the process. Heavy casualties are expected in a protracted battle. Some of the sacrifices involved in the quest of getting a system to perform are expanding budgetary provisions, redirecting funds from less promising to more critical areas, staff reshuffling and the most feared of them being dismissal of non-performers. The question is, to what extent are failing education systems ready for the price they must pay to get the train back on the rails? Many chronically low achieving education systems are stuck with counter productive traditions, which are considered part and parcel of the DNA of the organisation.
Unwillingness to break with the past is a sign of lack of will and readiness to pay the price that must be paid in the name of change. Normally, struggling systems do not have the nerve to make the necessary sacrifices. Sometimes a system can saddle itself with non-performing sacred cows not adding value to the system. Underachieving systems are more often than not dragged down by notorious underachievers, costing the system dearly yet nothing is done to show them the door.
Getting stuck with liabilities while running the risk of losing assets is a predicament facing many struggling education systems. But a turnaround can only come to a system that has the courage to do something about its liabilities while also knowing how to keep and incentivise its most valuable human assets. Lack of a strategy to retain high performers could be the undoing of struggling systems. What could be the most common problem/cancer eating non-performing institutions? It should also be remembered that when an organisation is not performing as expected, the biggest problem could be coming from the top. Yes, low ranking members of the team could be posing challenges but the biggest liability in a failing system is most likely to be a weak and fragmented management.
Management is the glue holding the organisation .
Fragmentation at the top sends mixed signals to the general membership, causing anarchy and chaos. Under the circumstances, the best remedy would be fixing the organisation from the top. A shake up or overhaul at the top is not an easy task to do as many people are too afraid to mess up with the powerful. But this is the only viable solution.
The source of fragmentation and lack of unity of purpose should be established. Usually, fragmentation is caused by a mixed bag of issues, which range from a reluctance to respect authority, and indecisiveness on the part of the head of the institution. Insubordination or refusal to be led when proved should be dealt with head on and weak leadership could require capacity building, failing which dismissal should be considered. Sometimes the size of management could be the source of the problem.
The bigger the composition of management the bigger the problem. A small and highly effective management can do better than an enlarged management involving too many people. If size matters in management, it is best to consider re-configuration of management teams in schools so that critical decisions rest with a people. We learnt this principle at the end of World War I, when leaders of the world met to chart the future and the conference proved to be too large for any effective decision making to be made. And at the end of the day, it was decided to allow the big three leaders of America, Britain and France the latitude to determine the future of the world.
The principle established, which was relevant then as it is today, is that too many people spoil the broth. Management in private schools is leaner as compared to public schools. The irony of the situation is that private schools are thriving while public schools are fading into obscurity. In the past, public schools also had smaller management teams. Should the system of education consider revising the composition of management in schools in order to create a better response to the scourge of underachievement?
