英语论文网

the staff, students and parents to evaluate the past year’s SDP. Through it, the targets are designed according to the particular needs. However, the staff did not seem to acknowledge this as a part of the SDP process. This also includes collecting information of the present position about anything that seems to be in need of a change. After analysing what has to be done according to Miles (1986) and Fullan (1991) (cited in Hopkins and Lagerweij 1996, p69) the second stage of implementation is next. Through this phase plans are developed in order to adapt to the required change. It is important to learn new skills or to strengthen what is already present. When all this is done the third stage will follow. The plans become part of the school development system. This stage is called institutionalisation.

Conclusions

The extent to which development planning helps school improvement in School X is shown through students’ achievements. This supports what Hopkins and MacGilchrist (1998, p410), said about today’s school planning that is more student oriented than it was before. However, through this investigation one can say that the action plans are not always linked to students’ achievement and school’s success. (Analysis figure 1)

Another question investigated was the extent to which collegiality helps in school development planning. Participants do not seem to know what collegiality is all about although Hallinger and Heck (2010, p12) defines it as an important step in students’ learning. In contradiction, they all indicated that they are involved through questionnaires, talks, staff meetings, staff development days, discussions and direct contact with the principal. All their suggestions seem to be evaluated.

Related to this question it was examined how far the staff is involved in the development planning. Respondents seem to consider collaboration between the head and all the staff, together with students and their parents as beneficial to the development planning. However, with regards to the monitoring of targets and action plans, they do not feel that much involved.

The biggest preoccupation of the principal of School X as mentioned in the introduction was the ownership of the plan. So the last question researched was the extent to which the teaching staff owns the development plan. They truly own the SDP and work hard to achieve the targets that are related to their area. However, they do not seem convinced with regards to other colleagues’ cooperation. Bush and Coleman say that:

“It seems clear that the responsibility for strategy is firmly located with senior management, but that the involvement and understanding of all is desirable.” (2000, p69)

Recommendations

Nowadays the school is surrounded by a lot of pressures caused by change. School X must make sure that the changing strategies and areas are supported by all those involved in the school even parents. Hopkins and Lagerweij (1996, p67) suggests that this may take a number of years. It is important to strengthen the assignment of every target to particular people because this leads to a fruitful plan. From their research Hopkins and MacGilchrist concluded that it is necessary to have a focused SDP having many targets to focus on, makes it more difficult to complete the plan (1998, p419).

Not all the teaching st