Free Custom «Instructional Leadership Plan Project» Essay Paper

Education systems in the vast majority of Asian countries undergo considerable changes within a short period of time, and Thailand schools are not an exception (Waugh & Ketusiri, 2009).  Education in Thailand is the issue that causes a number of controversies and misinterpretations: teachers have to spend much time to understand their main goals, parents should pass through numerous evaluations to define what type of education is better for their children, and students, in their turn, have to be adopted to the offered conditions and try to learn as much necessary material as possible. A kind of education failure is inherent to numerous schools in Thailand: inappropriate class sizes influence teachers’ work: 1 teacher has to take care of more than 40 students day by day having low salary and inabilities to focus on teaching properly. To make an attempt and improve the current conditions of education in Thailand, it is possible to develop a timeline for teachers and try to help them set the goals properly and provide students with good level of knowledge.

6 months are taken to implement the plan for teachers in Thailand schools.

1^st Month: First 10 days: evaluation of the class and the possibilities of students (each teacher has to realize what kind of work is required, what level of knowledge is observed among the students, and what strong and weak points students have).

 

Type of service

Type of assignment

Title of your paper *

Academic level

Pages

Timeframe

Spacing

Currency

  Order now

Next week: identification of possible purposes for teachers (teachers should define which results they want to observe in 1 year and introduce the methods which may be used).

The last days of the month: close cooperation with students and parents (a teacher informs about the plan according to which students will be educated, parents should be aware of possible financial costs with the help of which it is possible to improve students’ knowledge, and students should realize that their participation in the process is integral).

2^nd Month: First half of the month: students learn new material, are able to visit some places to find a kind of practical application to their theoretical knowledge, and share their opinions (a teacher should not interrupt the way of how students understand new information: their main task is to give facts, make sure students accept the chosen way of education, and observe the reactions among students).

Table1: Tenth Graders attendance

This data was collected from the school of a total of 122 students. The school has 10 more males than females (54% - 46% = 8% of 122 = 9.76 or 10). The school uses percentages every day to describe its average daily attendance.

One week of the month: a teacher should create a criterion according to which students’ knowledge is evaluated and students may improve their knowledge by means of repetitions, practical assignments, and discussions.

The teacher can use this assessment table to determine how his or her students are performing in a specific subject for example mathematics. The scores are indicated in the last column while the total score can be obtained showing how the student has performed for a particular period of time.

Last week of the month: final check of students’ knowledge (written assignments, tests, quizzes, and oral presentations should help to identify the level of how students grasp new material and may use it in everyday life). 

Table3: Tenth Graders math percentile Ranks by Gender (N=122)

According to Creighton (2006) the percentile ranks in the above table portrays a picture of where students are scoring when compared to national averages. We can see that 11 females scored in the 25^th percentile with only 6 males scoring at that rank. From the data the teachers can establish a clear picture of the schools tenth graders and their achievement level in mathematics. It can also be observed that the majority of female students scored in the 25^th and 50^th percentile while more of the male students are in the 50^th and 75^th percentile. This shows a pattern that warrants a closer look at what is happening in the school.

 The above table shows the statistical analysis of only one subject that represents the other subjects in the school. It can be observed that males have a higher average performance in mathematics of 79.1% than females who have 60.5%. The standard deviation is an implication of how the students mean scores have deviated from the average mark with 15.9 deviation witnessed in female performance. This implies that there is a need to devise a new approach in the entire mathematics faculty. Possibly male may demonstrate an unknowing and unconscious instructional delivery weighted toward the male students.

Next 3 months the same activities should be taken but still, they are devoted to different themes and aspects of life (students should have enough time to learn and evaluate the material).

6^th month: evaluation of the material studied during the last 5 months is required (tests and presentations should help to check long- and short-term memory of students, make the conclusions about student knowledge, and define the activities which may be taken later).

If the offered plan is implemented by teachers, they have to be ready to give clear and powerful explanations, be confident in their ideas, and be ready to assist students who are in need for some additional help. Though money plays an important role in the current educational process, teachers should mind their main purpose that is students and their knowledge.

Four frame analysis

For the school each of these frames begins with very different strategies and solutions and also provides a particular insight in the dynamics of the school (Rice & Harris, 2003). The purpose of this frame analysis is that it will broaden the leaders perspectives and mental models so as to effectively focus their attention and organize their assumptions on how to lead the school. Cameron & Mitchell (2007) says that the process of framing revels key questions about what has happened or what is likely to happen in the future running of the school. In addition the four frame analysis naturally integrates disciplinary perspectives thus constructing a common language that encourages a more efficient and collaborative approach of school leadership.  

Stay Connected

Live Chat Order now

Structural frame

According to Cameron & Mitchell (2007) the structural frame is concerned with with maximizing the efficiency and performance of formal structures and processes in the pursuit of clearly understood and shared goals and objectives of the school. In this context problems are usually viewed narrowly as structural deficiencies and besides that the leaders of the school will view them as amendable to rational analysis, expertise, formal modes of communication and subsequent forms of coordination and control in the school. Under this frame the school leadership is capable of restructuring and implementing policies and procedures.

Affordances

The affordance in this frame is that the leaders of the school will make organized attempts to minimize and manage uncertainties using rational analysis and formal mechanisms of control (Cameron & Mitchell, 2007). The changes in the structure and focus of school are closely tied to impacts within the school workforce. Zepeda (2004) says that under this frame the decision teams should be addressing the issues that are related to the school being able to move in a direction of improvement while the teachers are actively involved in the process working alongside the administration in making and implementing decisions. Zepeda (2004) indicated that “another affordance under this frame is that the teams can accomplish a great deal to enhance the learning environment and the duties of the workforce that will be focused on the efforts of the administration team in provision of the required support teachers and staff needed” (p. 113).

• The school should come up strategies for providing student academic achievement or substantially increasing the knowledge and teaching skills of teachers.
• Regularly evaluate the impact on increased teacher effectiveness and improved student academic achievement, with the findings of the evaluations used to improve the quality of professional development.
• Encourage and support school based and teacher initiatives.
• Provide adequate time and follow-up support.

Constraints

One of the major constraints of the structural frame to the school is that shifts in focus and structure of the delivery system in the school will reduce or increase the size of the workforce because new technologies and approaches of delivering education will be adopted within existing systems. Cameron & Mitchell (2007) also say that introducing new roles in the school leadership, retraining the existing workforce and support of rapid shift of focus and practice is also a major constraint of the structural frame to the school. Besides that the school faces the constraint of legal and regulatory environment which may still entail it meet certain obligations within the structural frame.

Human resources

The human resource frame has foundations in psychology with the fundamental thought that the school and humans have needs that the other is required to assure. Cameron & Mitchell (2007) says that using data driven decision making in the human resource frame the leadership of the school should narrowly focus on the school workforce (p. 304). This means that the school will put more emphasizes on employee development and empowerment and the management of interpersonal and group dynamics.

Affordances

The school will be required to create mutual benefit and gain trust. Cameron & Mitchell (2007) says that “in this frame actions and attitudes of the leaders in the school will be driven more by the subjective speculation and perceived self interest that rational analysis” (p. 304). In this aspect the effective use of data will play a major role in the development of the school improvement plans. Creighton (2006) adds that the workforce in the school will gain meaningful information from a proper analysis of data. He further says that using the many different kinds of data collected in the school the human resource will be able to make informed decisions that will legitimize the goals and strategies we create for change improvement. It will be important for the school leadership to understand that data driven decision making and instructional leadership must go hand in hand with the human resource frame (Creighton, 2006).

• Human resources frame will create programs to enable assisting teachers employed by a local educational agency receiving assistance to obtain the education necessary for those professionals.
• Implement school improvement in the workforce by trying new strategies and procedures and professional development in practices, attitudes and beliefs.

Constraints

A major constraint of acceptance of this frame is the perceived benefit or harm. Cameron & Mitchell (2007) says that if changes in the school delivery system will affect the teachers qualifications or at the same time reduce the need for segment of the current teaching staff, they will then resist the implementation of the instructional plan based on the potential for economic instability and job security of the school workforce. Also if the school employees are not likely to equally benefit data driven instructional plan then resistance is likely. This is because they may feel left out and unjustly overlooked.  

Political

The political frame within the school will provide another view because it will focus on the power relationships within organizations and the ways in which scarce resources influence the school dynamics. Rice & Harris (2003) in their article say that school members will under this frame form coalitions and interest groups across formal organizations divisions and with external allies in order to negotiate for resources. The most fundamental effect of this frame is that conflict cannot be avoided because the coalitions normally vie for influence among groups with competing goals and interests.

Affordances

This frame will greatly influence how decisions are made in the school, resources are allocated, and networks and alliances developed all of which may lack the endorsement of either the structural or human resource frames. Cameron & Mitchell (2007) say that an important insight of this frame is that although it is infused with narrow self interest and the potential for power abuse, nothing much gets done in organizations without a healthy and a dynamic political frame.

Maintain contact with professional organizations, county and state departments of education and local colleges and universities to get updated recommendations about integration programs (Brooks-Young, 2002).

• Encourage the school staff members to attend conferences and workshops where the interest groups issues are addressed.
• They should also make visits to recommend sites and take staff members and other stakeholders along with them.

Constraints

The major constraint of this frame in the school is that it may be based narrow self interests of the school. Cameron & Mitchell (2007) says that the frame is faced with a lot of uncertainty in the school on how to rev it up as stakeholders assess both threats and opportunities and begin to maneuver for power and advantage. Streifer & Goens (2004) says that another constraint of this frame is that using data to make decisions in a poisoned environment can be more harmful than not using it at all in a neutral environment. The political frame in the school may miss the key links to success of the school that are rooted in the intangibles of motivation, commitment, imagination, and creativity.

Cultural/Symbolic

In the symbolic frame the school will seek to answer questions from deep-seated cultural assumptions about social class, market driven economics and traditional values of fairness and due process. Cameron & Mitchell (2007) say that the school leadership should explicitly choose to take position of societal obligation rather than individual rights. The teachers and the parents should realize that if someone has an obligation then he or she must have a right.

Affordances

The symbolic frame is more dramatic in nature. Cameron & Mitchell (2007) say that the symbolic issue that cuts the most deeply across cultural and spiritual assumptions of all the stakeholders of the school. The society at large will be required to accept the paradigm of shift as the leadership focuses on fueling changes through the cultural frame. The cultural frame sends a clear signal to the community of what is important because it deals with changing the mindset of the parents and teachers. Cameron & Mitchell (2007) says that in the symbolic frame the policymakers and educators of the school must be ready receive mixed responses from the community. This means that there will be a need for critical thinking skills and collaborative skills.

• Accept the paradigm of shift within the running of the school by parents, teachers, and students.
• The leadership of the school should build capacity by developing the institution as a learning community.
• The school community should be principled, inclusive and value driven

Constraints

The constraints in this frame are on the basis that individuals feel that it entails the misuse of scarce resources in the school. Parents in this case may feel that it will widen social and economic gaps through the promotion of social conformity and homogeneity. Cameron & Mitchell (2007) indicated that at the start people will feel that there is an erosion of free choice and opposition to the means on moral grounds.

Strategies to address constraints

The school leaders must play a key role in articulating and setting standards and measures of accountability while aligning local expectations and accountability with the four frames. Goldring & Berends (2008) says that to counter the constraints the school leaders need to engage teachers and parents in meaningful, collaborative discourse around standards and measures while at the same time providing professional development opportunities and other supports to help them meet established goals.

To effectively counter the structural constraint, the school leadership should develop an implementation calendar and include activities and a time frame. Zepeda (2004) says that “this constraint can be addressed through developing a staff development plan for the school related to the expectations of the school improvement plans” (p. 131). The human resource constraints can be addressed through thorough communications of expectations. It will be important that the school identifies the people responsible for implementing strategies, collecting the assessment data, and monitoring overall progress.

The political frame constraint can be addressed through giving the schools interest groups and administrators the knowledge and skills to provide students with the opportunity to meet challenging state academic content standards and student academic achievement standards. Zepeda (2004) says that another important feature in this constraint is to improve classroom management skills besides supporting the recruiting, hiring and training of highly qualified teachers, including teachers who became highly qualified through state and local alternative route to certification.

The ongoing nature of school improvement, including data collection and analysis along with issues related to implementation and refinement of strategies based on data analysis (Zepeda, 2004). The leadership should promote discussion and support the students and teachers through peer coaching, mentoring and action research. Furthermore Donahoo & Hunter (2007) added that to overcome the symbolic challenge the leaders should be instructionally focused which implies that the teachers and the administrators should identify good studies that can help them to improve the studies offered to achievement of and learning outcomes among their students