Ministry must set more rigorous criteria for promotions to leadership in schools

Dear Editor,
I noticed a section of the media reported that some GTU teachers wore black in protest against a Ministry of Education (MOE) decision to award one point for every five years of teaching experience in determining teacher promotions. These teachers did not wear black when many of our students did not do well at NGSA, when they did not do well at CSEC, and when matriculation rates were dismal. What seems to matter most here are “adult agendas”, not student achievement and student outcomes, where we “put children first”. Parents should be concerned about this. Apparently, there are several hundred vacancies for leadership positions becoming available, and some teachers are angling to get a senior slot. Why should the MOE promote someone who did not go and sharpen their saws by doing additional studies but sat on their aspirations all those years? I support the Ministry’s reallocation of points limiting what I call the “Methuselah” principle (where older age and the number of years you worked have undue weighting). Appointment to school leadership positions should never be based on how long one has been teaching, as that does not necessarily translate to leadership skills, leadership aptitude, leadership propensity, and leadership competency. The failures in education today are due to incompetent leadership at all levels. An education system needing to reform itself must abandon old practices that do not correlate with effective school leadership. There has to be urgent reform and change, and teacher organisations must embrace a new unionism that supports leadership for impact and higher student outcomes. Not every teacher can be a school leader, which is a speciality skill. Most teachers will not make good Principals.
In North Carolina, USA, for instance, most teachers do not want to become Principals. To become a Principal (Guyana still uses the old colonial term of “Headmaster/Headmistress”) seems difficult. To shake off the colonialism in our structures, you have to complete a master’s degree in school leadership and obtain a “licence” or certification from the State Department of Education. Heads of Departments are not paid, and there are no “Senior Masters”. Administrative vacancies are advertised widely. There is no entitlement to seniority based on how long you have worked. From the applicant pool, a small number are shortlisted for interviews based on information in their applications. The interview team recommends an applicant for the position. The selection is made based on qualifications, experience, accomplishments documented in a portfolio, your presentation on a topic, and how well you did in the interview. The number of years you have worked does not matter. They look for initiative, creativity, what co-curricular things you did for your school, and the school leadership things you do at your school (sponsorship of clubs, volunteerism, time you spent helping in various ways, including voluntary tutoring of students who are behind, etc.). In NC, at the dismissal bell, teachers do not jostle with students to see who can get out of the campus quicker, as happens in Guyana.
Given the crisis we have in educational outcomes, we have to support the MOE when it tightens up its rules and enforces stronger accountability. The fingerprint sign-in for attendance is a great move by the MOE. We need to resume teacher evaluations too. A union that opposes everything the MOE does must examine whether it is on the side of hapless students or whether it is committed only to teacher interests. Put Children First, Put Guyana First!

Yours sincerely,
Dr Jerry Jailall