"Indicator Approach and Role Approach in School Effectiveness" is a topic from the educational psychology 3rd year syllabus. This talks about these two approaches in school effectiveness

1. INDICATOR APPROACH
AND ROLE APPROACH
In School Effectiveness

2. SCHOOL EFFECTIVENESS
• An effective School is a school in which an optimum learning environment where
cognitive, emotional, social, psychomotor and aesthetic development of students are
most properly provided is established.
• An effective school is related to results such as development in social, academic,
emotional, moral and aesthetic aspects, teachers satisfaction, effective use of
sources.

3. THE INDICATOR APPROACH
The Goal Indicator
External Resource Indicator
The Internal Process Indicator
The Satisfaction Indicator
The Legitimacy Indicator
The Organizational Indicator
The Ineffectiveness Indicator
The Indicator Approach (TIA), and are based on earlier research into the issue of school effectiveness
and include below mentioned indicators:

4. THE GOAL INDICATOR:
• This indicator assumes that there are clearly stated and generally accepted goals,
relevant and important both to teachers and the school, for measuring school
effectiveness, and that a school is effective if it can accomplish its stated goals
within given inputs.
• These goals or objectives are quantifiable, are set by the authorities or school self
and can be measured against predetermined criteria such as the objectives in SDPs
and academic achievement in tests and/or examinations.

5. • This indicator is widely used in schools for evaluation purposes due to the fact that
goals and tasks assigned to teachers are clear and specific, outcomes of teachers’
performance are easily observed and the standards upon which the measurement of
teacher effectiveness is based are clearly stated.
• A limitation of this indicator is its dependence on the quantifiable, which is often
impossible to ascertain.

6. THE EXTERNAL RESOURCE INDICATOR:
• This indicator assumes that because scarce and valued resource inputs are needed
for schools to be more effective, the acquisition of resources replaces goals as the
primary criteria of effectiveness.
• An example of this indicator is financial support from outside the school. This
indicator is limited by its overemphasis on the acquisition of inputs from external
sources and its failure to look at the efforts made by the school itself to maintain its
effectiveness.

7. THE INTERNAL RESOURCE INDICATOR:
• This indicator assumes that a school is effective if its internal functioning is
effective. Internal school activities are often taken as criteria for school
effectiveness.
• This indicator includes aspects such as leadership, communication channels,
participation, adaptability and social interactions in the school. Some of the
disadvantages of this indicator are that it is difficult to monitor and that it
overemphasizes the means of obtaining school effectiveness.

8. THE SATISFACTION INDICATOR:
• This indicator defines an effective school as one in which all the stakeholders are at
least minimally satisfied. It assumes, therefore, that satisfying the needs of the
principal, teachers, SMT, governing body learners and the public is the school’s
main task.
• Satisfaction is, according to this view, therefore the basic indicator of effectiveness.
This indicator may, however, not be appropriate if the demands of the stakeholders
are in conflict with each other.

9. THE LEGITIMACY INDICATOR:
• According to this indicator, a school is effective if it can survive undisputed and
legitimate marketing activities.
• This indicator is applicable only if the school has had to strive for legitimacy in a
competitive environment.

10. THE ORGANISATIONAL INDICATOR:
• This indicator assumes that environmental changes and internal barriers to school
functioning are inevitable and that a school is effective if it can learn how to make
improvements and adaptations to its environment.

11. THE INEFFECTIVENESS INDICATOR:
• This indicator assumes that it is easier for stakeholders to identify and agree on the
criteria of school ineffectiveness than on those of effectiveness. It is easier to
identify strategies for improving school effectiveness by analyzing school
ineffectiveness rather than by analyzing school effectiveness.
• This means that a school is effective if there is an absence of characteristics of
ineffectiveness. This indicator includes aspects such as conflicts, problems,
difficulties, weaknesses, poor performance and poor results.

12. Assessment framework for school effectiveness based on the different categories of and indicators
for school effectiveness

13. THE ROLE APPROACH
• The Role Approach focuses on the different roles of School Management Teams in
pursuing school effectiveness, and does not include or consider the various
indicators/categories of effectiveness as conceptualized in the Indicator Approach.
This approach describes, among other things, how successful School Management
Teams can affect change in schools and improve school effectiveness.
• The Role Approach consists of three interrelated components that serve as
evaluation or assessment criteria, each of which is associated with and linked to a
series of characteristics that describe each criterion.

14. • Team capacity:- This criterion is characterized by features like sharing information,
team member effectiveness, access to information, requisite knowledge and skills,
participation in goal setting, participation in the development of strategies and focus
on complex rather than simple tasks.
• Team cohesion:- This criterion is characterized by cooperative, competitive and
autonomous goal interdependence (i.e. a common purpose and sense of
interdependence) and productive controversy (i.e. pitching views against each other
deliberately or learning to fight over issues).
• Team effectiveness:-This criterion is characterized by the quality of decisions and
the capacity to implement such decisions.

15. Assessment framework for school effectiveness based on the different roles of school management
teams in pursuit of school effectiveness.

16. SUBMITTED TO:
Mrs. Monika Choudhry,
Assistant Professor,
Prarambh State Institute of Advanced Studies in
Teacher Education, Jhajjar, Haryana, India
SUBMITTED BY:
GROUP 5
(GROUP REPRESENTATIVE – VAIBHAV VERMA)
Prarambh State Institute of Advanced Studies in
Teacher Education

17. GROUP DETAILS & CONTRIBUTION
• The members were divided into two parts as there were
only two sub topics. Group one included roll nos
18121,22,24,26,27,28,29 was assigned TIA and group two
included roll nos 18130,31,32,33,34,35,36 was assigned
TRA and both the topics were prepared by these groups
collectively, each individual was indulged in some work.
Roll no. 18126 work was to collect the material and
designing, formatting as well as correspondence.
Group 5 members of B.A.B.Ed. 6TH Sem Batch 2018-2022:

18. 1. School effectiveness
• Some Model Suggestions For Measuring Effective Schools by İzzet DÖŞa
• https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042814004327/pdf?md5=7d54d06
e8c35cab5a5c3ce54c3ee85c1&pid=1-s2.0-S1877042814004327-main.pdf
2. TIA and TRA
• School effectiveness: Conceptualising divergent assessment approaches by RJ (Nico)
Botha
• (PDF) School effectiveness: Conceptualising divergent assessment approaches
(researchgate.net)
3. ClipArt's were retrieved from: http://clipart-library.com/
SOURCES