THE DEVELOPMENT OF SCHOOL MANAGEMENT TEAM AND THE IMPLICATIONS OF TEAM LEADERSHIP PERSPECTIVES

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

Chapter 3 Exploring the significance and fundamental elements of moral purpose in schools

Introduction

In this chapter, relevant literature and themes that informed the purpose of this study and its four consequent research questions are examined. This review of literature forms the background to this study, a review whose conceptual framework has as its basis moral purpose as a central theme. Thus, this broadest theme, moral purpose, is explored first with clarification of its meaning. The core elements of moral purpose are also investigated. These fundamental elements are the core expressions of moral purpose and include values and ethics, authentic learning and educative leadership. The chapter also looks at how these elements interact with moral purpose to transform the lives of learners. The chapter concludes with an examination of the implications of focusing on moral purpose.

The meaning and significance of moral purpose

In the context of management and leadership, moral purpose is mostly accepted because it is regarded as a legitimate force that drives leaders to engage critically with organisational values and goals (Duignan, 2006, Sergiovanni, 1992, 2007, Starratt, 2004). This implies that in addition to possessing character, competence and commitment, moral leaders must make a strong commitment to their schools, their values and their constituents. Implicit within the framework of team management, the notion of moral purpose can be seen as being at the centre of leadership practices of the SMT in the school. It assists in establishing relationships and connections within the school management team, and its presence challenges teachers and leaders to move in one accord towards attaining common vision and goals.
The notion of moral purpose is, however, understood differently and has been labelled in various ways by many different international scholars. Notably, Cuttance, Stokes, McGuiness, Capponi, Corneille, Jones and Umoh (2003) labelled it ‘whole school vision and goals’, and Andrews and Lewis (2004) labelled moral purpose as ‘community values’. Fullan (2001) and MacBeath (2005, 2006) simply use the label ‘moral purpose’. Notwithstanding these descriptions, there is a general recognition in the literature that moral purpose is one of the fundamental necessities for bringing about the kind of change and improvement that will deliver desirable student learning in schools (Bezzina, 2007, 2010). Thus, “The central moral purpose consists of constantly improving student achievement and ensuring that achievement gaps, wherever they exist, are narrowed. In short, it [moral purpose] is about raising the bar and narrowing the gap”. (Barber & Fullan, 2005:3).
Barber and Fullan’s (2005) definition provides a background against which the concept of moral purpose is explored in this study. Their definition shows how moral purpose might facilitate the work of teachers and leaders in producing improvements in learning and learner achievement. This means that teachers and leaders who possess and understand their moral purpose have commitment to ends that express underlying values and ethics, and the commitment is ultimately to the gradual transformation of the learner into a fuller, richer, deeper human being (Bezinna, 2010). Commitment to ends implies clarity of the purpose of leading and teaching. Flowing from this argument and for the purpose of this study, moral purpose can be understood as the compelling motive that drives teams towards a gradual transformation of learners and improvement in learners’ achievements by closing the gap between higher performing and lower performing learners.
Therefore, a moral purpose of the team is postulated as a pressing imperative that facilitates commitment to the goal of making a genuine difference in the lives of the learners by transforming their learning. However, making a genuine difference in the lives of learners and improving their academic achievement is possible when moral purpose is enacted. This is because there is a “gap between moral purpose and moral performance” (Thompson, 2004:27). That is, while a deep moral purpose is generally admirable, it can have no impact on school improvement if it is not linked to performance, if it is not translated into action. Bezzina and Tauna (2012:11) link moral purpose and moral action through the important influence of moral potency. To them, moral potency involves “not just ownership [of moral purpose], but courage and a sense of efficacy [and] disposition to act morally and translate it into moral action”.
This is a very powerful notion that challenges school managers not only to believe in moral purpose and its underlying values, but also have a firm commitment to actualise it with the desire and belief in their power and ability to do so, that is a “sense of their own capacity to make a difference in pursuing this [moral] purpose, and ultimately act courageously in its pursuit” (Bezzina & Tauna, 2012:11). Moral potency, therefore, means moving from moral purpose to moral action or “realized moral purpose” (Fullan, 2010: 15). When outlining strategies for realising the moral purpose, Fullan (2011) suggests that school managers must develop the collaborative among other things. He argues that achieving the moral imperative or purpose is only possible via the collaborative, and when the group is mobilised with force and specificity, it can accomplish amazing results.
Therefore, moral purpose is enacted when there are shared values and vision directed towards the learning of all students, and greater reliance on collectivity to reinforce objectives, rather than on individual autonomy. Thus, a moral purpose belonging to an individual is “moral martyrdom” (Fullan, Bertani & Quinn, 2004:3). To me “moral martyrdom” simply means that moral purpose belonging to an individual brings great satisfaction to an individual soul, but it does not lead to sustainable school leadership and improvement. This argument finds support in Bezzina (2010:5) who argues that moral purpose has many expressions, but almost all of them include the notion that such purpose be shared and/or pervasive. He adds that, rationally, a purpose which is not shared belongs to the individual rather than the organisation, and is unlikely to impact on overall performance. Moral purpose becomes compelling when it is shared or owned by a team. This means that moral purpose needs to be widely shared to move schools substantially towards sustainability.
Therefore, school management teams should think of moral purpose as a quality of the school that should not be allowed to reside in an individual heroic teacher, principal, deputy principal or head of department. Once it is widely shared within the SMT and the school, moral purpose becomes the basis for all team interactions and engagements, with these engagements leading to commitment to and ownership of moral purpose. When leaders and teachers feel ownership of moral purpose, they become fully energised to participate in school improvement with greater commitment. Motivated leaders and teachers can engage in a dialogue around moral purpose with enthusiasm and, in so doing, they create and share knowledge. This means that when team members share moral purpose through interactions, they are automatically engaged in the process of sharing learning. As members of a team, individuals learn from and with each other and, in so doing, their leadership and teaching abilities improve.
Essentially, the sharing perspective addresses the purpose of this study. In this sense when all members start to share learning, they construct and reconstruct knowledge through interactions. In line with this thinking, Fullan (2002a:7) asserts that “information only becomes knowledge through social process”. Social processes such as dialogue among team members translate information into knowledge, with this knowledge becoming a basic device to accelerate teams to a level of team effectiveness. Team effectiveness is a zone where team members are able to solve problems together and have control over their work environment. In this regard, the major role of the SMT is to create the context conducive to the sharing and creation of knowledge.
The norm of contributing one’s knowledge to the other is the key to continuous growth for all. This demonstrates the existence of the relationship between a knowledge society and moral purpose. Contemplating this relationship and its significance in schools, Fullan (2002a) states that for a knowledge society to thrive on a deep and continuous basis, it must have a moral compass. The knowledge society and moral purpose need each other. It is easy to see why moral purpose will not go very far without knowledge, but I am also saying that the knowledge society literally will not sustain itself without moral qualities. It is argued therefore, that a balance needs to occur between moral purpose and knowledge generation and sharing if teams are to grow. This implies that the new ideas and new approaches generated from an encounter of multiple perspectives within team engagements cannot serve the purpose if they are not aligned to and guided by the moral purpose of that particular team.
Simply having stated the good consequences of the existing relationship between moral purpose and knowledge creation does not wipe away all obstacles that can challenge its realisation in practice. The sharing of knowledge requires mutual trust. Trust can be seen as being the issue that brings credibility to leadership and relationships. It is seen as being central to leadership and relationships because it develops an ethos of honesty, integrity and fairness, aspects on which leadership and relationships are most dependent on. This means that in the atmosphere of trust team members are being straightforward with each other and apply the same value system in all situations, whether in private or public life. Trust is thus acknowledged to be the root of success or failure in a relationship. For this reason, Covey (1990:31) described it as an “emotional bank account between two people”, that enables them to have healthy, engaging relationships.
In line with this, Bezzina (2007) argues that anxiety and lack of trust can work to prevent people acting in ways that will reflect their espoused values [moral purpose]. This implies that even in the presence of moral purpose anxiety resulting from lack of trust can act as an obstacle to sharing of knowledge, moral purpose and, ultimately, to shared leadership. I therefore argue that it is in the network of trusting relationships that leadership and moral purpose can intertwine to benefit the schools. Mutual trust establishes coherence in which all the components of the school are brought together to make a whole. Fullan (1993, 2001) calls this coherence ‘building relationships’. According to Fullan (2011), building relationships is critical with not just the cynics but with all people involved in enacting moral purpose is critical.
Therefore, Van der Mescht and Tyala (2008) view cohesion as the extent to which team members ‘cohere’, feel that they belong and are happy to work together. This is the “degree to which members of a team are motivated to remain on the team” (Shelly et al., 2004:181). In my view, cohesion is the extent to which right people are self-motivated to be part of the team that wants to create something great; hence, they are willing to remain in relationships that makes the creation of something great (academic success for all learners) possible.People remain in teams when trust has matured to produce openness amongst the people and willingness to participate in team activities.
Therefore, openness and participation are the other key values underpinning cohesion (Josephs & Winston, 2005, Bauer & Bogotch, 2006). The relationship between trust and openness in relationships testifies to the assumption that the levels of trust in SMTs can potentially affect the building of relationships in schools, hence affecting the sharing of moral purpose. The low levels of trust may result in members being reluctant to express their ideas and opinions openly, or contribute their knowledge and expertise as they will suspect others of being less receptive and cooperative. In addition, low levels of trust could affect new initiatives in the team as individuals question the true intent of the initiative. When individuals become highly suspicious of the motives of the individual presenting the initiative, they can exhibit distractive behaviours that reflect their unwillingness to embark on these initiatives.
Conversely, high levels of trust encourage people to communicate openly and productively and with empathy and synergy. Openness breeds an atmosphere where members participate in other members’ initiatives. Members can only participate in these initiatives when they have confidence that other members say what they say and do what they do out of a sense of responsibility to the team. According to Owens (2001:284), “participation is the mutual and emotional involvement of a person in a group situation that encourages the individual to contribute to group goals and to share responsibility for them”. When team members feel that they are part of the team, they begin to own the team goal, and also feel obliged to be involved in team activities and are willing to take responsibility in the team and commit to the tasks without being coerced to do so.
As seen from above assertion, trusting relationship depends on open and simultaneous flow of information and ideas. In the context of the SMT, this flow may be either top-down or bottom-up, resulting in a meaningful transfer of understanding from one person to another. In the process of communication, the moral purpose of the school is gradually painted until every member of the SMT understands and embraces it. Therefore, communication can be seen as the primary method by which the education leader can influence groups and individuals, and convince them to do their best for the learners in the school. This means that a team can only be task focused and coordinated only if its members learn to effectively share ideas, values, opinions and facts, thus encouraging each other to achieve the school goals and to ensure that action is taken to cultivate the moral purpose.
However, to succeed in communicating moral purpose, every manager’s communication role needs to be purpose directed and should in addition to other methods include strategic conversations (dialogue) (Van Deventer & Kruger, 2003). Buber (2007:26) agrees that “SMTs need to practice dialogue rather than monologue in their communication with those they care about”. Team members practising dialogue would openly and authentically engage with each other, that is, they would be who they are, rather than seeming to be someone they are not. As a result, they would engage in inclusion in that they would try to understand the experiences of their teammates. By understanding the experiences of their teammates, they create an atmosphere conducive to cooperation. For this reason, Tonduer (2008) views communication as the very means of cooperation. Teams that communicate effectively are able to elicit behaviours that promote cooperation rather than unhealthy competition within the team.

The overarching goal of moral purpose

According to Fullan (2002a:4), “In addition to the direct goal of making a difference in the lives of students, moral purpose plays a large role in transforming and sustaining system. Within the organisation how leaders treat others is also a component of moral purpose”. In line with this view, the ACE Module, Understanding school leadership and governance in the South African context (DoE, 2008a: 27-28), states that leaders with strong moral purpose, “have commitment to improving standards, no matter what, and ensuring that the gap between all students narrows when it comes to achievement, treat people ethically – with respect and concern – be it adults or learners”. Flowing from these two citations, the study postulates that the major goal embodied within moral purpose is to make a difference in the lives of learners by committing to transforming the learning of all learners in the school.
Therefore, leaders with moral purpose lead with a sense or vision of transformed learners, which is exemplified by their desire to raise the standards of achievement for all learners within the school. The vision embodied in moral purpose gives rise to a particular set of aspirations for the learners. The leaders’ and teachers’ aspirations for the learners results 44 in learners taking delight in both the subject and the process of learning, for which they take responsibility as part of a life-long journey (Bezzina, 2010). Bezzina adds that their growing understanding reflects a rigorous, critical and respectful approach to the subject matter and their fellow learners. However, achieving the goal of transforming the learning of learners and raising the achievement levels for all learners in the school requires the creation of a school culture that fosters respect for learners, teachers and parents.
Treating people with respect, particularly learners, means making decisions that are in the best interests of the learners. To do this, teachers and members of the SMT need to show respect for the uniqueness and diversity of learners in the school. The respect for the uniqueness of learners involves understanding that learners learn in different ways and at different paces. Therefore, SMTs have the responsibility to create this culture in their schools. If a culture in which respect is universal and expression of commitment to each other as human beings is created, then schools will have a foundation for designing ways for collaboration and mutual empowerment that are simply not possible in the absence of authentic respect. This means that without respect there will never be any possibilities for trust, sharing a vision, for empowerment or for creating powerful teams in schools.

The core elements or expressions of moral purpose in schools

Paying attention to the conceptual framework developed from the Leaders Transforming Learning and Learners (LTLL) project, the project that explored moral purpose in Australian Catholic schools, Bezinna (2007, 2008, 2010) and Bezinna and Burford (2010) identified fundamental elements of moral purpose which are also relevant to my study. These elements encompass values and ethics, the teacher as a leader, and authentic learning as core expressions of moral purpose. Bezzina (2008) asserts that moral purpose is expressed in the values and ethics espoused by the school. This moral purpose influences the exercise of leadership and the approaches taken to authentic learning and 45 gives rise to a strong sense of the teacher as a leader. These researchers suggested that leadership and learning practices based on moral purpose can facilitate the work of teachers and leaders in enhancing student learning. In the next section I describe the elements of moral purpose and how they impact on the vision of making a difference in the lives of learners by transforming their learning.

Values and ethics

Within a particular school context, the set of values and ethics capture the shared sense of moral purpose, with these values and ethics central to understanding the culture of that school. I reason this way in line with the definition of culture provided by Bush and Middlewood (2005:47) who assert that “culture relates to the informal aspects of organisations rather than their official elements. They focus on the values, beliefs and norms of individuals in the organisation and how they coalesce into shared meanings”. Emerging from this definition is the view that values and ethics not only underline school culture but also provide us with deep understanding of certain attitudes, behaviours and routine practices within the school management teams. Leaders work and interact with their colleagues according to their value system.
According to Hodgkinson (1978), values are a motivating force that is a characteristic of individuals, groups, organisations and societies, and influences choices they make from available resources and means. In line with this thinking, Begley (2006) describes the influence of values within individuals as the internal psychological reflections of more distilled levels of motivation that become tangible to an observer in the form of attitudes, speech and actions. This means that values are shapers of the human behaviour, and thus are seen as conscious or unconscious influences on attitudes, speech and actions of people within the school. Therefore, values held by the school are manifesting in the way people in that school do and say things. Values are central to the activities and practices of any school and the SMTs should ensure that there is an explicit and owned platform for these sets of values.
According to Bezzina (2010), by the end of their involvement with the LTLL programme schools were able to identify a broader range of evidence for the existence of the set of values which included commitment, integrity, justice, excellence and the common good. The forms of evidence for the value of justice included inclusion of special needs students, acceptance of diversity, equitable access to resources and equitable workload for staff. With regard to the value of excellence, it emerged schools experienced explicit articulation of the nature of good teaching and learning. This means that as evidence indicating the presence of excellence, the schools set high standards or expectations for student learning, achieved quality of student outcomes, and teachers, learners and their leaders jointly celebrated achievement. It also became apparent that schools set in place professional and staff learning programmes as evidence of their desire to achieve excellence in their classroom and leadership practices.
The major evidence for the value of common good was collaborated leadership practices and clarity of vision. This means that teachers and leaders were clear about the central vision of teaching and leading, and leadership was spread over multiple people. According to Bezzina (2008), the value of integrity was evidenced in the way the leaders interacted with other leaders, teachers and learners in the school. This means that if a leader highly prizes integrity as a core value, then this value would come through in the form of the following evidence, namely, their honesty (being straightforward with others) and truthfulness (DoE, 2008b). This manual further shows that the forms of evidence for the value of commitment can include “leaders meeting goals and targets”. If achievement is a central value for a leader, then his or her behaviour will show this. He or she will want the best for himself or herself and for others.
In addition to values, Robertson (2011) asserts that when leaders reclaim and strengthen their moral purpose they move into what Starratt (2004) called ‘ethical leadership’. While Starratt (2004:5) distinguishes between the two terms, ‘ethics’ and ‘morality’, he claims that they can be used to mean the same thing when characterising the work of leaders. He says ‘ethics’ is the ‘study of what constitutes a moral life’ and ‘morality is the living, acting out of ethical beliefs and commitments’. In line with this assertion, Bezzina (2010) argues that ethics are the way values are lived out, and are sometimes viewed as some sort of absolute values. Ethics are regarded as absolute values because Starratt (2004) understand them as maps to consult only when the terrain we are traversing becomes a tangle of underbrush. He names three significant ethics that leaders should consult when they are called upon to clear a path through the dense undergrowth conflicts within the SMT that challenges relationships between members, hence compromising teamwork. These are authenticity, presence, and responsibility.
The ethic of authenticity points educational leaders towards a more self-responsible form of relationships and leadership and they should act with the good of others as primary reference. Bezzina (2010) simply refers to it as calling for integrity in interactions, suggesting that its existence in schools can be evident in relationships and communication. The forms of evidence for the ethic of presence include collaborated learning and teacher reflective learning, which are the two important aspects of achieving the goal of raising achievement levels of learners (Bezzina, 2008). This means that teachers sit and plan together and reflect on their teaching together. For the ethic of responsibility, teachers become more focused on their responsibility for the learning of all students, showing a sense of accountability. Although, these ethics and values cannot fully address all the questions of this study, they inform the research observations. Therefore, it is assumed that the existence or non-existence of the values and ethics can prove to the existence or non-existence of moral purpose in the school.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 THE OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
1.1Introduction
1.2Research background
1.3Research purpose
1.4Research problem and questions
1.5Theoretical framework
1.6Significance of the study
1.7Research design
1.8Definition of concepts
1.9Structure of the thesis
1.10Chapter summary
CHAPTER 2 THE DEVELOPMENT OF SCHOOL MANAGEMENT TEAM AND THE IMPLICATIONS OF TEAM LEADERSHIP PERSPECTIVES
2.1Introduction
2.2The development of the model of team management in the context of South Africa
2.3The composition and the roles of school management teams (SMT)
2.4The implications of teamwork with the school management teams
2.5Two important leadership perspectives influencing the role of SMTs
2.6Chapter summary
CHAPTER 3 EXPLORING THE SIGNIFICANCE AND FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTS OF MORAL PURPOSE
3.1Introduction
3.2The meaning and significance of moral purpose
3.3The overarching goal of moral purpose
3.4The core elements or expressions of moral purpose
3.5The implications of moral purpose
3.6Chapter summary
CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
4.1Introduction
4.2The constructivism or interpretive paradigm: The worldview of the researcher
4.3The qualitative research design
4.4Case studies and sampling procedures
4.5Data collection
4.6Data analysis
4.7Trustworthiness
4.8Ethical issues
4.9Limitation of the study
4.10Delimitation of the study
4.11Chapter summary
CHAPTER 5 THE RESEARCH FINDINGS
5.1Introduction
5.2Sampled schools and participants
5.3Research question one: school management teams and moral purpose
5.4Research question two: shared moral purpose and modalities of sharing
5.5Research question three: the constraints of sharing moral purpose
5.6Research question four: the capacity of school management teams to overcome constraints of sharing moral purpose
5.7Chapter summary
CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS
6.1Introduction
6.2School management teams and moral purpose
6.3Shared moral purpose and modalities of sharing
6.4The constraints of sharing moral purpose
6.5The capacity of SMTs to overcome constraints of sharing moral purpose
6.6Chapter summary
CHAPTER 7 CONCEPTUAL MODEL FOR CULTIVATING MORAL PURPOSE IN LIMPOPO SECONDARY SCHOOLS
7.1Introduction
7.2Uncovering the model
7.3Limitation and future direction
7.4Chapter summary
CHAPTER 8 THE CONCLUSION OF THE RESEARCH
8.1Introduction
8.2Empirical findings
8.3Theoretical contributions of the thesis
8.4Policy and practical recommendations
8.5Suggestions for further research
8.5Recommendations for further research
Chapter summary
REFERENCES
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT