The Ministry of Education and Research has submitted to public consultation a new methodology project for the organization of competitions for principals and deputy principals in state pre-university education. The document brings a series of important changes both in terms of the structure of the competition, as well as the method of evaluation, the composition of the commissions and the appeal deadlines.
Sample structure: standardized tests and managerial interview
The competition, as proposed in the new methodology, includes three tests:
- the test for the assessment of skillsduring which the personal capabilities and skills of the candidate are tested. ,,It consists in solving by the candidates, in a maximum of 60 minutes, a standardized test with 20 items, with only one correct answer (each correctly solved item is marked with 0.5 points). The evaluation is carried out by using the IT platform. The candidate is declared “passed” if he obtained at least grade 6. The exam is eliminatory, the grade obtained is not included in the final average“, says the Ministry of Education.
- the written test, in which knowledge of school management and legislation is evaluated. ,,Consists of candidates solving, in a maximum of 90 minutes, a standardized test with 25 items, with only one correct answer. Each correctly solved item is marked with 0.4 points. The evaluation is carried out automatically, by using the IT platform. The candidate is declared “promoted” if he obtained at least the mark 7″
The topics for these tests will be developed by the National Center for Curriculum and Assessment and the Institute for Educational Sciences, in collaboration with experts in the field of educational sciences and specialists in psychometrics.
The interview test, with the following stages:
- “administrative evaluation of the managerial project and the action plan made by the candidate for the educational unit to which he is applying (based on the evaluation grid provided in annex no. 6 to this methodology project). The candidate is declared “passed” if he obtained at least grade 7. The exam is eliminatory, the grade obtained is not included in the final average.”
- “assessment of personal capacities and skills, digital skills and problem-solving skills, as well as assessment of the quality of supporting the management plan.”
Less time for appeals
One of the major changes is aimed at drastically reducing the period in which candidates can challenge the results.
Thus, the grades obtained in the skills assessment test and the written test can be challenged within 2 hours at the most from the results being displayed, compared to 48 hours in the old methodology. For the interview sample, the proposed appeal deadline is 24 hours.
Who will be part of the evaluation commissions
The draft introduces a detailed structure of the interview committee, consisting of five members:
-
a school inspector/methodist (chairman);
-
two representatives of the educational unit;
-
a representative of the mayor;
-
a representative from the human resources area or the university environment.
In addition, the document states that in the absence of official designation of members by the responsible institutions, the general school inspector can appoint substitutes from within the school inspectorate.
A similar provision also applies to the appeals committee, which is constituted by the decision of the general school inspector, who also designates the president and some of the members.
At the end of the procedure, the appointment of the winning principals is also made by decision of the general school inspector.
Who can apply for the position of director
According to the project, teachers who cumulatively meet several conditions can participate in the competition, including:
-
higher education with bachelor’s degree;
-
tenure in pre-university education;
-
minimum five years old;
-
rating “Very good” in the last two years;
-
lack of recent disciplinary sanctions;
-
lack of prohibitions or convictions that affect the right to hold management positions;
-
medically fit;
-
without the status of collaborator or worker of the former Security.
What the experts say: “The competition is not a magic portal”
Education specialist Gabriela Bartic believes that the introduction of a structured competition is a positive step, but insufficient for a real reform of the system.
“The fact that we have a competition is, in itself, a good thing. Any system needs a selection mechanism, and this methodology tries to introduce more structure and some diversity into the assessment — from skills testing, to the interview and managerial project. It is also important that more perspectives appear in the assessment, including from outside the school, which can bring more balance.”she explains.
However, he points out that the mere existence of a procedure does not guarantee the quality of school leaders:
A competition is not a “magical portal” where you enter without skills and come out trained and ready for a job, any job, let alone a school principal. It is, at best, a mechanism that can filter candidates and leave the best-prepared of those who choose to participate in the race.
Asked if we will see real changes in the system with the new methodology, Gabi Bartic answered:
The real transformations come not only from the methodology, but from the quality of the training of the people who enter the system and the support they receive afterwards.
At the same time, he emphasizes that a competition can select candidates, but it cannot compensate for the lack of managerial training or the absence of clear performance standards.
“If we want real change, we must look not only at how we select principals, but also at how we form managerial skills, how we build and cultivate relationships in schools, how the collective whole relates to management, essentially – how we evaluate them (formally, informally and informally) and what expectations we have, concretely, from them”added Gabi Bartic.
Among the directions needed for real reform, it lists:
-
clear performance criteria related to student outcomes and well-being;
-
solid management training programs;
-
a continuous evaluation and feedback system.
“Otherwise, we risk changing the procedure without actually changing the results,” attracts Gabi Bartic’s attention.
