Search results

It is argued that schools will need to adapt their management structures in order to meet the changing demands brought upon the education service by new legislation. In the same way as colleges of further and higher education, polytechnics and universities have all had to find new structures, schools will need to do the same in the 1990s.

Student support in higher education (HE) is a matter that has received, and is still receiving, rigorous attention in the research environment. HE faces challenges related to the throughput rates nationally and internationally and, as a result of that, most African countries have prioritised support in HE institutions, particularly universities. Amongst the groups of students targeted to receive student support are the marginalised students,¹ particularly students with visual impairments (SWVI). Developed countries have tirelessly attempted to ensure that SWVI are supported through aggressive policy positions and technological interventions. This chapter seeks to provide insights on the support programmes for SWVI in HE institutions in Africa. The chapter follows a qualitative approach and uses the social justice theory (Rawls, 1971) as a conceptual lens. Drawing on this theory, it can be argued that the support programmes and services provided to SWVI in Africa limit their participation in HE and constrain effective learning and, ultimately, perpetuate social injustice.

Higher education as a field of study has been relatively ignored by social scientists. Yet it is a growing area of research, especially applied research, as higher education itself becomes more visible and important within advanced ‘knowledge economies’. Higher education is seen by some to hold the key, at least in part, to the achievement of both greater wealth and greater social equity; the former through the creation of new knowledge and the production of new ‘knowledge workers’, and the latter through the provision of opportunities for all to develop, contribute to and benefit from the greater wealth. For others, however, the role of higher education is seen to lie more in the reproduction of existing social inequalities.

Schools and colleges have been placed firmly in the marketplace and are adopting appropriate strategies. Companies facing severe competition have learned to look at the quality, both of product and process, of their competitors, giving rise to the growing practice of benchmarking. Schools and colleges are currently being judged by a mechanistic, outcomes‐based inspection method which could provide the only benchmark for most teachers. Argues for collaborative benchmarking where schools and colleges examine in particular the quality of their processes in a search for how value is really added to the students′ experience. Emphasizes the need for an alternative perception of schools to that represented by OFSTED and suggests that benchmarking could be an important, and subversive, alternative.

Points out that the last decade has seen the education service go through phases from inertia to turbulence to consolidation; a really radical programme of reform has been enacted. How did the Government manage its programme of reform and achieve almost all of its objectives? Argues that schools and colleges have cloned their organization to match the Government strategy and now face the prospect of alienating their staff in the same way as the Government lost touch with educational stakeholders. Suggests that other features need to become part of these management structures to raise morale.

The emotional aspect of headship caused not by the decision‐making process itself but by the pressures and conflicts resulting from a conscientious desire to run a stable, participative school is examined. The need to give balanced judgements causes emotional stress on the head who can make a school stable or turbulent, give general direction or intervene constantly.