Assessment of Needs and Capacity of District Office Professional Staff

Fragmentation of Responsibilities in Professional Development
The responsibility for training and professional development does not have a clear
home and a single source for co-ordination in the Department. Although the HRD
Directorate is technically charged with this responsibility, professional development
activities occur throughout the organization, often times without any knowledge or
intervention from the HRD Directorate. In spite of the role of the HRD Directorate in
the development and management of the Workplace Skills Plan, and in spite of their
responsibility for reporting on training activities within the framework of this plan, each
Chief Directorate pursues a separate training agenda. In particular, significant
training responsibilities lie with the Professional Development Directorate in the
Curriculum Management Directorate. And, consistent with this fragmentation, the
HRD function and resources are distributed as sub-programmes within the 8 major
programmes of the allocation of funds. This fragmentation affects not only the
allocation and use of funds, but the capacity of the Department to derive a truly
articulated and cohesive approach to professional development. This is one of the
core considerations in the design of a programme of professional development based
on the inputs provided in this report. The various professional staff in the District
Office will not be well served with a fragmented view of professional development for
the District Office.
Differences in District Capacity
When reference is made to the District Office, care should be taken in noting the vast
differences in the capabilities and circumstances of District Offices. District Offices
are not all in the same place in terms of development and capacity to delivery. Apart
from the minor difference in the size of their establishment, differences exist in the
level of resources available, staffing, the adequacy of their physical infrastructure,
their ICT capabilities and readiness and most significantly, the scope and complexity
of their development agenda based on the backlogs that exist. As a result, Districts
are not equally attractive for accessing the most capable staff, and may have vastly
different workloads and delivery circumstances based on their current infrastructure
and developmental demands.
This is of critical importance, since the capacity of staff may differ as well as the
intensity of their responsibilities and the structure of their needs for training. Staff in
Districts which have significant backlogs, and which experience more developmental
challenges, may have a different structure in the training needed to enhance their
ability to cope with and undertake their responsibilities. This is clearly noted in the
data collected, and must be taken into account in the design and delivery of
professional development programmes.
Policy Framework for Professional Development
There is no overall policy framework to govern all training and professional
development in the Department. While much training is provided based on the needs
and circumstances of educational delivery, a significant portion of the Department’s
training effort and resources is undertaken in response to the National Policy Agenda,
particularly in respect to curriculum. Less reliance is placed on training generated
through skills audits, needs assessments, problems and challenges faced and what
seems necessary to advance particular agendas of the Province, the Department or
the School Community. There is no policy framework which covers the assignment of
training responsibilities, the need for articulation and accreditation, the modes of
19