PRESENTATION OF THE META-ANALYSIS OF EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FROM NEEDU SYSTEMIC EVALUATIONS (2012-2016): Planned time versus implemented time: Making every minute to advance learning South African Principals Association 26 May 2017

OUTLINE Purpose Systemic evaluations: 2012-2016 Focus areas Centrality of teaching time Factors that lead to loss of teaching time A meta-analysis of NEEDU findings on teaching time Implications of NEEDU findings for the sector Concluding remarks

PURPOSE To provide opportunity to PASA representatives to: note and discuss the NEEDU meta-analysis of the first five-year cycle systemic evaluations (2012- 2016)

Systemic Evaluations: 2012-2016 Year Semester Location School Phase Province District School 2012 Second Urban Foundation (Grade 1-3) 9 15 134 2013 First Rural monograde Intermediate (Grade 4-6) 16 99 Rural multigrade Multigrade (Grade 1-6) 18 120 2014 Urban and rural FET (Grade 10-12) 12 93 Senior (Grade 7-9) 13 90 2015 Follow up visits 26 158 Special schools 27 176 2016   24 115 14 75 TOTAL 1 060 Data collection methods Document review: teacher and learner attendance registers teacher punctuality time books teacher early departures registers a sample of learners’ written work Observation of behaviour: punctuality both in the morning and after breaks use of time to provide meals through the NSNP availability of reading materials in F Phase Interviews with staff: interviews with a sample of teachers and SMT members

Focus Areas Time Management Support Programmes for English LoLT Support Programmes for Mathematics District Support Learning Outcomes in the LOLT Learning Outcomes in Mathematics Availability of LTSM Staffing In-service education Initial teacher education

Centrality of teaching time Time management OUTPUT GOAL To master minimum language and mathematics competence Curriculum Implementation Staffing District Support Strong predictor of higher achievement

Centrality of teaching time Empirical evidence points overwhelmingly to the powerful link between more teaching time in school and better outcomes for learners If time is not managed effectively, it has a negative impact on learner proficiency owing to limited learning opportunities (e.g., poor curriculum coverage) More compelling research findings consistently argue that the impact of time loss is often more detrimental in schools serving economically disadvantaged learners The meta-analysis of NEEDU findings shows that the amount of time that teachers and learners actually spend at school (implemented time) deviates substantially from the allocated time in the school calendar (planned time).

Factors that lead to loss of teaching time The variation between planned time and implemented time among schools is attributed to the following factors: non-adherence to notional time allocation prescribed in the curriculum, learner and teacher poor attendance, learner and teacher late coming, teachers leaving school early for a variety of reasons, teachers and learners returning to class late after break, poor time management for the NSNP, and Early commencement of June and November examinations.

A meta-analysis of NEEDU findings Indicator 1: Adherence to notional time allocation in mathematics and the lolt: Examined timetables in the 694 schools offering FP, IP, SP and FET Phases Many schools allocated less than stipulated notional time in maths (4.5 hours in FET & SP, 6 in IP, 7 in FP) & LOLT Concepts and content are not covered in sufficient depth Attempting to cover the curriculum in less time suggests only superficial coverage

A meta-analysis of NEEDU findings Indicator 2: Teacher and learner attendance: Data collected from 694 schools through interviews and review of attendance registers Teachers were asked to respond using the following rating scale: If teachers are not at school, time is lost entirely for all their learners Never a problem Seldom a problem Often a problem Always a problem

A meta-analysis of NEEDU findings Indicator 3: Teacher and learner punctuality: Data collected from 694 schools through interviews, review of time registers and observations Teachers were asked to respond using the following rating scale: If the teacher does not arrive on time, the whole class misses out Maths is mostly compromised; first periods are mostly allocated to maths lessons Never a problem Seldom a problem Often a problem Always a problem

A meta-analysis of NEEDU findings Indicator 4: Teachers leaving school early: Data collected from 694 schools through interviews and review of the so called “movement” registers In over 20% of the schools, teachers left the school early before the official closing time frequently or on a regular basis In 95% of schools, teacher early departure was the main reason for time loss Reasons for early departure are discused next

A meta-analysis of NEEDU findings Indicator 4: Teachers leaving school early (Reasons): Almost half (47.7%) of the days in high schools lost were to teacher training Union meetings and memorial services, which together account for a quarter (24.7%) add no benefit whatsoever to teaching and learning–they are time wasted Some extreme cases: One high school reported having lost 13 days to music concerts and another three schools lost more than 15 days to sports events.

A meta-analysis of NEEDU findings Indicator 5: Teachers and learners returning late to class after break: Data collected from 694 schools through interviews and observations Teachers were asked to respond using the following rating scale: Much time is also lost between lessons & at the end of breaks In schools offering SP and FET Phases teachers returned to class after break later than their learners Lessons taught immediately after break were affected Never a problem Seldom a problem Often a problem Always a problem

A meta-analysis of NEEDU findings Indicator 6: Poor management of the NSNP: Data collected from 604 schools through observations In most schools offering the NSNP, time for serving meals was well-managed and did not interfere with teaching time Few exceptions are illustrated in the graph

A meta-analysis of NEEDU findings Indicator 7: Early commencement of June and November examinations: Suspension of classes early in June and in November to write examinations reduces the length of the school year Schools start exams early for various reasons including: marking, preparing and issuing learner report cards on time allowing matric candidates to have enough space and furniture during the NSC exams allowing teachers who teach Grade 12 and other grades to finish marking before they go to mark in the NSC examination centres When internal half-yearly and yearly-examinations start, teaching is suspended Further investigation is needed to establish the amount of time lost as a result of early commencement of exams

Case study (School X): Early departure

Case study (School X): Early departure Factors that led to loss of teaching time   No. % Learner and teacher poor attendance 21  13.39 Learner and teacher late coming 1.98 1.26  Teachers leaving schools early for different reasons 133.85 85.35  Attending Workshops organized by the district 45 28.69  Attending teacher union meetings 1  0.64 Attending memorial services  0 Attending sporting or other cultural activities 16 10.20  Early departure for MEDICAL reasons Early departure for PRIVATE and PERSONAL Other 71.85 45.81 Teachers and learners returning to class late after break not calculated Poor time management for the NSNP Early commencement of June and November exams TOTAL TEACHER DAYS LOST 156.83 Number of teaching days in Term 1= 48 days 48 100 Number of teacher days 528 Total time lost divided by total teacher days 0.35 35.03 Number of days lost 16.82 Total time remaining out of 48 teaching days 31.18 64.97 By the end of Term 1, 157 teachers days were lost Teacher early departures accounted for 85% of teacher days lost Number of teaching days (planned time) in Term 1 = 48 days Number of teaching days used to teach (implemented time) in Term 1 = 33.74 days or 70.30% Number of teaching days used lost (wasted time) in Term 1 = 14.26 days or 29.7% Excluded time loss: late return to class after break, NSNP and early start of internal exams

Implications of NEEDU findings for the sector A meta-analysis of NEEDU findings between 2012 and 2016 on the use of teaching time was conducted in order to highlight the implications of these findings for education leaders and policy makers Factors that Lead to the Loss of Teaching Time Implications for the Education System Current Practice in Schools Addressing Gaps in the Current Practice Non adherence to notional time as prescribed in CAPS Examination of the timetables showed that many schools allotted less than the stipulated notional time to mathematics and the LOLT SMTs and Districts need systems to monitor timetables early in Term 1 to make sure that they comply with time allocations prescribed in CAPS. Returning late to class after break In more than a quarter of schools offering Senior and FET Phases, late coming after break is rife and teachers return to class after break later than their learners. This remains undetected because there are no systems to curb this practice. Schools need a system to ensure that no time is lost when periods change, teachers and learners return to class after break and when NSNP meals are served. Districts need systems to monitor if schools have systems to prevent unnecessary loss of time and that these systems are strictly followed. Poor management of the NSNP Time for serving meals interfered with teaching time in 9%, 5% and 2% of schools offering FP, IP and SP, respectively.

Implications of NEEDU findings for the sector Factors that Lead to the Loss of Teaching Time Implications for the Education System Current Practice in Schools Addressing Gaps in the Current Practice Learner and teacher poor attendance Most schools keep-up-to-date records on the following: Teacher & learner daily attendance Teacher late arrival/coming Teacher early departure Teacher leave While schools keep the above records, they do not: Analyse learner and teacher attendance and late coming patterns Take disciplinary action against teacher habitual absenteeism and late coming Many districts do not have systems to monitor time management in schools systematically. Attending workshops, union meetings and memorial services are the main reasons why teachers leave the school early and abandon their classes. Schools need a system and tools to: (a) analyse information collected through different registers or systems so that habitual late coming, early departure and poor attendance are identified quickly (at least on a weekly basis) and (b) teachers are held accountable within the confines of the Employment of Educators Act. Districts also need systems and tools to systematically and, on a regular basis, monitor how principals handle teacher absenteeism and late coming. Systems need to be put in place at all levels in the system to ensure that time loss by pulling teachers out of class to attend workshops is minimised. Learner and teacher late coming Teacher early departure from school

Implications of NEEDU findings for the sector Factors that Lead to the Loss of Teaching Time Implications for the Education System Current Practice in Schools Addressing Gaps in the Current Practice Early commencement of half-yearly and yearly exams The National Policy on Learner Attendance provides on paragraph 16 that “Except for Grade 12, a learner may not take leave from school to study for examinations or when examinations have ended.” This policy is not adhered to in many schools. While some provinces have some guidelines or circulars as to when half- yearly and yearly exams should begin, many schools hardly follow them. Schools decide when to start exams. As soon as half-yearly and yearly exams begin, teaching is suspended—teachers mark, learners stay home or idle at school or outside school premises. Systems need to be put in place at all levels of the system to ensure that the National Policy on Learner Attendance is strictly followed. There is a need for national guidelines that regulate the school-based half-yearly and yearly examinations. The national guidelines regulating school-based exams must prescribe exam starting time and suggest activities that teachers can do during the exam time. The amount of time lost as a result of early commencement of internal exams is unknown. Further investigation is needed. Inadequacy of time to complete the curriculum Anecdotal evidence suggests that curriculum is dense and that allotted notional time is not adequate to cover the breath and depth of the curriculum. A thorough investigation is needed to test the validity of this claim. A NEEDU study is underway to test validity of this claim in the F Phase

Concluding remarks The finding that poor time management practices are common in low performing schools in South Africa confirms other research findings (e.g., the 2007 SACMEQ study and the 2010 HSRC report) and those of the DBE’s own monitoring. The education sector has not been able to successfully turn the tide in respect of efficient and effective use of teaching time in schools. While some provinces have made some strides to guard and protect teaching time (e.g., Gauteng, Free State and Western Cape), in others (e.g., Eastern Cape and Limpopo), time is lost undetected and unabated. All role players—including DBE, PEDs, HEDCOM and its sub-committees, district directors, Principals’ Association of South Africa (PASA), the consultative forum of National School Governing Body Associations and teacher unions—must work collaboratively to abate the loss of teaching time