By Earl Moxam, Senior Gleaner Writer 
Henry-Wilson
A PROGRAMME is being developed under which groups of schools will be clustered for the purpose of having common services delivered, such as plant management, says Education Minister Maxine Henry-Wilson. This, she argues, will allow the principals more time to provide instructional leadership in their schools.
The Minister's comments, in an interview with The Sunday Gleaner, followed complaints from some principals that their other management functions, including plant management, detracted from their primary task instructional leadership in their schools.
The call for action is based, in part, on the findings of a doctoral study (Ed.D - University of Bath, England), conducted by the Rev. Barrington Buchanan, principal of Black River High School. The study, focusing on 10 high schools in St. Elizabeth (Balaclava, B. B. Coke, Black River, Hampton, Lacovia, Lewisville, Maggotty, Munro, Newell, and STETHS), found that at most of the institutions surveyed, the principals were failing to provide the desired level of instructional leadership.
UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE
In the survey, the principals and 10 teachers from each of the 10 schools were asked to rate the performance (satisfactory/unsatisfactory) of the principals in their instructional leadership role. The results were less than flattering, with most of the respondents expressing dissatisfaction with the principals' performance on such tasks as developing school academic goals that seek improvement over current levels of academic performance, and communicating the schools' academic goals to teachers, students and parents at school. Rev. Buchanan cited a comment from one principal who admitted that his school's academic goal was limited to at least score some good marks at the end of the year.
In some instances, the teachers complained that they were not clear what their schools academic goals were, laying the blame on the principal who had not communicated these to them. In the area of managing the curriculum and instruction, the principals received generally poor marks, with only 46 of 110 respondents expressing satisfaction when asked whether the principals met with teachers to identify curriculum or learning goals at the subject level. Seventy-one of the 110 surveyed noted dissatisfaction when asked to rate the principals on the review of student work products when evaluating classroom instruction.
MARGINAL IMPROVEMENT
The marks were only marginally better on the question of the level of participation shown by the principal in the review and or selection of curriculum material. Sixty out of the 110 were dissatisfied with the performance of the principal. Given the many difficulties cited in curriculum delivery and instructional leadership, Rev. Buchanan concluded that the principal should have oversight responsibility for some roles, but should not be expected to have direct responsibility.
In the wake of the generally poor ranking received by high schools in the recent survey conducted by the A-QUEST education group, based on results in the CXC examinations, Rev. Buchanan has reiterated his call for principals to be given more time for instructional leadership. The solution, he argued, rested with the Ministry of Education delegating ultimate responsibility for these aspects and leaving the principal, not exclusively, but primarily, with the instructional leadership function.
