community participation in the programme of school improvement (psi) is being: case study of colombo...

Annual Research Conference (ARC) - 2012

Faculty of Management & Commerce

South Eastern University of Sri Lanka – Oluvil

Community Participation in the Programme of School Improvement (PSI) is being: Case Study of Colombo District in Sri Lanka.

By

Chandana Kasturi Arachchi University of Colombo

S.Damayanthi EdirisingheUniversity of Kelaniya

and P. Senavirathna

Open University of Sri Lanka

•Research Question

What is the nature of the community participation in the schools where the

Programme of School Improvement (PSI) is being implemented?

What is SBM/PSI1. Caldwell (2005) described SBM as the:

“systematic and consistent decentralization to the school level of authority and responsibility to make decisions on significant matters related to school operations within a centrally determined framework of goals, policies, curriculum, standards and accountabilities” (p. 3).

Cont.14/04/23 Chandana 4

Characteristics of SBM/PSI

a shared mission, school based staff development activities, participation of the principal, teachers, and parents in decision making, shared school leadership among administrators and teachers, participatory and democratic decision-making in the school, and power distributed throughout the school.

Raihani (2007), Briggs & Wohlstetter (2003) and Cheng (1993)14/04/23 Chandana 5

METHEDOLOGY

Nature of this study is

Interpretive paradigm

Qualitative research

and

Case study approach

Objectives of the study

• Identify the nature of school community relationship of the PSI schools

• Examine the participation of the community in the decision making process of the PSI schools

• Identify constraints and challenges related to the community participation in the PSI schools

ParticipantsFrom five Colombo district national schools,• Principals -5, • Deputy Principals – 5• Teachers – 15• Parents – 15• Past Pupils – 15were selected using purposive sampling technique to gather

information.

Research Methods• Semi structured interviews, questionnaires and

Document Survey were employed to collect data

• Analyzing data

Qualitative data gathered in this study was analyzed using

Thematic analytical approach

Findings

Community involvement in the school decision making process

• Community representation in the School Development Committee (SDC)s seems to be problematic.

• The mechanism of selection of the members to the SDCs is not clear.

• There is no democratic and genuine participatory decision making process in most of the schools.

• One teacher provides proofs for that as:

“Community involvement in the school SDC meetings are only a formality for the purpose of legitimacy...Everything is already prepared by the principal and what is needed from the members of the SDC is their agreement and signatures”.

• One parent indicated that,

“I think the SDC is important as a mediator for parents. It is impossible for us to negotiate straight to the school as we are powerless than the school”.”

Community financial contributions to the school

Community financial contributions to the school

Community contribution of financial resources has not changed as introduction of the PSI

• As one parent stated:

“The form of our participation is actually by contributing money to the school. Every time we are invited by the School Development Committee to have a meeting at school, what we are thinking about is money and money. Honestly, our expectation is that, they are going to explain to us the financial condition of the school”

• As one of the principal of a school noted:

“All of these became possible as a result of the community participation. Community participation has been increased since the PSI implementation. However, prior to the implementation of the PSI, this school had very good community participation”.

• One parent’s comments : “Since the school provide free education, there is no

more parents’ contribution”• The principals’ views : “Now, since the school provides free education,

parents are not aware about what happens at school anymore. They think that the government has already paid for them, so there is nothing else to do.

They are more concerned about school and encourage their children more, but not because of the PSI”.

• One teacher described:

“In my opinion, as a consequence of free education, parents act as if do not have any responsibility anymore since they feel they do not have to pay anything”

Since children of parents are provided free school education, parents seem not care enough.

Challenges faced by the school community

• Schools face challenges for selecting suitable, dedicated, committed and educated community members for the school governing boards like SDCs.

• Difficult for finding resources for school development, sufficient amount of resources are not provided by the MOESL or the government.

• Poor attitudes of the community members towards the development of the schools through participation.

Challenges faced by the school community

• Majority of community members are not having very good understanding about the concept of the PSI or SBM

• Most of the members of the SDCs have not been empowered to input their ideas and contribution in the SDC meetings for their respective school development.

Conclusions&

Recommendations

• After implementation of the PSI, parent participation has been increased slightly, however, it is not yet at the expected level.

• Introduction of the PSI appears to have significantly altered the roles of both parents and community members in the school planning process.

• Although community involvement within the SDC is likely to be low, from the parents’ and past pupils’ perspective the role of the SDC as their representative at school is important.

• Generally, parents and past pupils perceived the SDC’s role as a bridge between themselves and the schools.

• Community is benefited by the mechanism of representation in the SDC

• It seems that the schools unwilling to involve external community members may also lead to lack of trust,

• The lack of awareness of stakeholders of the schools on the concept and regulations of PSI, at least the SDC and SMT members should be given avenues to participate in the effective PSI awareness programmes.

• It should be established a better monitoring system or a governing body to supervise the schools where the PSI is being implemented.

• Relatively PSI is a excellent school management system in the world

• Responsibility of stakeholders of the schools is to utilize it effectively.

Thank you

Thank you