Content uploaded by Rfah Alyami
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Rfah Alyami on Jul 30, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Educational Reform in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Tatweer Schools as a
Unit of Development
Rfah Hadi Alyami
Institute of Education: University of Reading, United Kingdom
Abstract
Globalization has a significant influence on the
educational system of Saudi Arabia. Therefore, this
study is the first to investigate the impact of
educational policy development on practice within
Tatweer Schools in this country, to seek in which
aspects they are innovative and to examine the level
of autonomy. This study is important in terms of
timing, as the Tatweer Programme is a new policy
innovation. It is hoped that the research will provide
policy-makers with insights into actual practice and
the real-life context within such schools. This
preliminary study uses qualitative data obtained in
semi-structured interviews, focus groups and
documentary analysis. The majority of the
participants have a positive attitude about the
Tatweer Programmes. It is a major shift of Saudi
educational policy; moving from centralization to
decentralization, from focusing on the individual to
team learning; from being isolated schools to be
open schools and having a partnership with society.
Despite these significant developments, however, the
level of students’ achievement has not been changed.
1. Introduction
In recent decades, globalization has had a
significant effect on education in a great number of
countries. Masri [1] argues “it can be taken for
granted that good quality education at all levels and
in all fields, through formal and non-formal systems,
is a major tool in dealing with the challenges of
globalization, utilizing its potentials and avoiding its
pitfalls” (p.142). As a result, many countries have
sought to reform their educational system to address
perceived weaknesses in their global standing. This
paper gives an example of Saudi educational reform.
In the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), King
Abdullah bin Abdul-Aziz Project for Public
Education Development1 was established to reform
Saudi educational system in 2007. This project
initially sat up 25 girls’ secondary schools and 25
boys’ secondary schools (Tatweer2 Schools: smart
1 This organization will be called Tatweer Project in this paper.
2 Tatweer Arabic word, it means development.
schools) across 25 provinces in Saudi Arabia, and
these were in the first phase of the project. The
philosophy that guides education development in
Saudi Arabia from the Project vision was to focus on
school development, and this was because of the
school as a unit of the educational system, where
efforts of reform and improvement of the education
system can be made [2].
The second phase of this project called School
Development Model (Tatweer Schools: self-
evaluation schools). Tatweer Schools consider as
innovative in terms of embedded theories concerned
with Professional Learning Community, self-
planning and evaluation and professional
development [2].
2. Research Rationale
2.1. Smart Model (Tatweer schools: Phase
One)
Tatweer School in the first phase offers new
option for schools to change its role from traditional
school to smart learning school that shifted from
being only a place of education to be educational
environment, for learning that includes modern
educational technology with activated educational
leader and qualified teachers, who assist to facilitate
and direct learning processes with using safe and
appropriate methods [2].
However, this model has been considered as a costly
model to generalize it to cover all Saudi public
schools. As a result, they modified the pilot scheme
of such project and have planned to create a new
model to be in the phase two.
2.2. School development model (Tatweer
Schools: Phase Two)
Implementing this model started in 2011, schools
have to be self-evaluation and planning schools.
These schools have to conduct the project from their
potential instead of providing them with high
advanced technology as in phase one.
The school development model is based on a set of
principles [2]:
Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal (LICEJ), Volume 5, Issue 2, June 2014
Copyright © 2014, Infonomics Society
1515
Excellence for all: every student deserves to excel,
and reach his maximum capacity. Each teacher also
deserves to be excellent and develops in his career in
order to efficiently perform his role in the school.
Commitment from everyone: all school employees
are committed to school values, and believe in its
mission, dedicated to achieve its objectives, and
follow policies and regulations.
Accountability for all: each one in the school is
responsible for his performance, and that the school
employs reinforcement (positive and negative)
according to the quality of performance for all school
employees.
Professionalism from everyone: school employee’s
practices are driven from educational reliable
knowledge and that practices and decisions are based
on scientific reference frames.
Transparency and clarity by everyone: transparency
and clarity in showing results and performance
levels, and display of negatives and positives in the
school's performance to stakeholders.
In any innovative programme of school reform,
however, questions have to be asked:
“Was the innovation ever really implemented?
…Once implemented, did the innovation maintain its
integrity and purpose? ... Have students been
positively and significantly affected? ... Did the
innovation become integrated into the school’s
mission and organization? ... Did successful
programmes continue to exit? ... Was it possible to
transfer the innovation from one school context to
another?” [3]
Change is conceived as an intervention in
the processes of meaning making and
understanding, which is then translated into
everyday practice. Reform programmes in
sense making organisations are initiated
through collaborative work on the
simultaneous construction of new ways of
doing things and new ways of talking about
what is happening. If a programme to
encourage creativity was introduced to a
school as a sense-making collective, then an
evaluation would show how the language,
metaphor and symbolic systems of the
school were changed, how dramas of change
were enacted and played out, and how
narratives about the school were
transformed (p.22)
While the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has
implemented a large number of educational reforms,
the empirical evidence base linked to the evaluation
and impact of these is relatively sparse. This study,
therefore, aims to fill this gap exploring the impact
of educational policy development on practice within
Tatweer Schools, to seek in which aspects they are
innovative and to examine the level of autonomy.
This study is a preliminary study undertaken as part
of a large research in this area.
3. Policy of Education in Saudi Arabia
Saudi Arabia is a nation where the Islamic Code
of life is being practiced in all aspects, from personal
habits to education system. The government also
keeps in mind these codes before setting any sort of
policy for the nation. Children are required to attend
6 years of primary, 3 years of intermediate and 3
years of secondary schooling in order to complete
their education. All these levels are free of charge for
the students of this nation as stated by the
government [4].
After the event of Sept 11, it was required that the
policies regarding education must be altered in Saudi
Arabia. Their curriculum must not consist of any
subject that stresses upon extremism [5]. Thorough
evaluation of the curriculum has been demanded by
officials within and outside the nation in order to
refrain from introducing such concepts in the
classroom. King Abdullah has demanded the
implementation of the Tatweer project which
requires improvement within the educational system
and managing the issues present in the curriculum of
the schools, which are under his region [6].
In Saudi Arabia and before 1960, women were
only provided with informal education. The girls
were required to be educated at home as per their
culture. The women cannot be negatively impacted
by society, which is why they were kept at home
mostly. At this point of time, different stories have
been stated for girl’s education. Some of the
individuals sent their daughters only to the school of
Kutab, where they would learn how to recite the holy
Quran. Many sent their daughter to learn about
religion as well as other subject matters so they may
be able to implement this knowledge as an efficient
wife, mother or daughter. These women were not
allowed to complete their higher education. The rest
and a few of the individuals allowed their daughters
to not only receive primary and intermediate
education but they were also allowed to attend
college. Religious opposition existed upon all these
aspects and also the culture of the society found it
strange for women to attend schools or colleges [7,
8].
The people, politics and specifically the ulama
(clerics) show much resistance if any change in the
education system. The future of the country needs to
be kept in mind before making any changes to the
curriculum of the schools. This is a political concern
and affects the national identity which is why it form
a strong connection between the people, ulama and
the government [5]. However, based on global
requirements, Saudi Arabia has introduced many
changes as part of its educational policy.
Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal (LICEJ), Volume 5, Issue 2, June 2014
Copyright © 2014, Infonomics Society
1516
4. School management in the KSA
Headship in Saudi schools is gendered, where the
male leader has to manage boys’ schools and the
female has to manage girls’ schools. The culture
associated with religion is one component that
represents the education culture in Saudi Arabia [3].
Head teacher is the person who is responsible for the
management of the educational processes within the
school, and to enhance its effectiveness. Perhaps the
most important factor to develop the school
administration is to grant the head teacher wider
power. This is to ensure freedom of action and
independence, which to some extent will enable
them to achieve the desired goals.
Many studies have illustrated that one of the most
important field problems that head teachers face in
the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a few power granted
to head teachers [6, 9-14].
A study by Alsayqh [9] reveals the insights about
power of head teachers in the decision-making
process in regard to educational regulations. She
found that the authority of the Department of
Education is the most influential factor on the
powers of the head teachers. The researcher
recommended that it would be worth granting head
teachers more power, which is comparable to the
responsibilities as well as maintaining professional
development. Another study by Alzaidi [15] shows
that there is a lack of school autonomy, because of
the centralized system, which characterized by a
weak authority has been given to head teachers in the
Saudi educational system. He presents some factors
that lead to dissatisfaction; the most important factor
according to the participants is the lack of authority
to undertake responsibilities.
Alshihri [12] stresses the importance of parity
between the authority and responsibility, where it is
important to balance between the responsibilities and
the amount of the authority that help to conduct the
responsibilities. If the head teacher in charge of the
responsibilities, he or she must be given an
appropriate power to undertake these responsibilities.
Alsahli [11] points out that each employee who
has responsibility should be given power to achieve
the goal of his or her job. It is expected that the
employee would perform duties in the best way
when authority linked to responsibility. The authority
and responsibility are two opposite factors. The
balance between them leads to resolve the
undertaking function. Asfoor [16] supports this
notion; he claims that the responsibility needs to be
matched with sufficient authority. As delegating, any
task must be paired with delegating an appropriate
authority in practice; the power has to be placed in
the hands of the employee or the principal in order to
achieve specific goals.
A study prepared by Muzm [10] aimed to identify
the extent of the level of power with the
responsibilities of head teachers. The study found
that there were too many responsibilities received
from the regulations and circulars. These
responsibilities required review and reconsideration
to enable school administrators to do better; the
granted powers to head teachers were not appropriate
with their responsibilities. In addition, Mathis [6] in
her study claims that in order to develop the system
and achieve educational reform, it is essential to
regard the role of leadership as a significant aspect
that leads to changes in any organization. She
concludes that the head teachers in Saudi Arabia do
not have enough autonomy to act or to make the
decision; they describe their role as a manager rather
than being a leader.
Despite these difficulties, however, Saudi
educational system has an intention to shift its policy
to decentralize towards significant autonomy within
schools, which requests from head teachers more
knowledge of their responsibility [2]. Albahiri [17]
argues that:
It is noteworthy that the Ministry of
Education has not revised and updated its
general policies and goals since 1970
although it has changed and updated many
aspects of its system, such as curricula,
plans for teachers’ preparation and
qualification, study plans, etc. Moreover, the
rapid changes worldwide in all aspects of
education require rapid revision and change
in all educational systems, and this is what
the Saudi education system has been trying
to do but without official long-term goals
(p.23).
Elmore and McLaughlin [18] reveal that to enable
reforms in a large-scale plan, dialogue must be
considered among three dimensions: policy,
administration and practice where policy can make
an effective administration and practice by setting
the conditions. The problem as Elmore and Wallin
view is that it is difficult to predetermine the way
that decisions would make.
To identify the reality of leadership in Saudi
educational institutions from the top of the pyramid
(Ministry of Education) to the bottom of the pyramid
(School) in making decisions it must knowing the
pattern of regulation which is applied by the
departments of these educational institutions.
As a result of widening the geographical area of the
Kingdom and having a massive number of schools,
the Ministry of Education as the central supervisor
upon education find it difficult to supervise these
schools, so the ministry tended to create departments
of education in Saudi districts to be responsible of
supervision of schools in all administrative and
technical aspects [19]. Management scholars assert
that administrative decentralization in any
organization would be significant in the following
Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal (LICEJ), Volume 5, Issue 2, June 2014
Copyright © 2014, Infonomics Society
1517
cases: If the number of decisions that are taken at the
lowest administrative levels is increased, if the
importance of the decisions that are taken at the
lowest administrative levels is becoming great, if the
number of jobs that are affected by decisions taken in
lower administrative levels is increased, if the
number of audits for decisions in lower
administrative levels is reduced [20]. These
dimensions are not the case in the Saudi educational
system, where these factors can be held at the top of
the pyramid.
The centralization in administration means
dominance the senior management upon decision-
making power. On the other hand, decentralization
means distribute the power to all administration
levels, despite the theoretical division of
centralization and decentralized; the real life does not
absolutely apply centralized or decentralized in all
institutions whether at the level of the school
administration, the department of education or
Ministry of education. Accordingly, there is a degree
of central authority as well as part of decentralized
authority delegated to the following administrative
levels to achieve the objectives of the institution [12]
5. Methodology
This study is a qualitative one, and it uses
qualitative methods: focus groups, semi-structured
interviews and documentary analysis. In this paper,
the constructionism dimensions are adopted, which
can allow a better understanding of the experiences
of administrators and practitioners of the Tatweer
Schools’ system in Saudi context among the
perceptions of Tatweer Schools’ actors. The study
has adopted interpretivism as an epistemological
paradigm. The variation will be life-changing
phenomenon within Tatweer Schools, where
“Different perspectives about such things as truth
and the nature of reality constitute paradigms or
worldviews based on alternative epistemologies and
ontologies. People viewing qualitative findings
through different paradigmatic lenses will react
differently” [21].
Main questions themes of this preliminary study:
• The role and practices of head teacher,
educational experts and the members of
Tatweer Units.
• The differences between Tatweer Schools
and no Tatweer schools.
• Identify how autonomy is thought to
influence school effectiveness.
• Identify the degree of innovation taking
place in Tatweer schools.
• The difficulties encountered in conducting
such programmes at schools.
5.1. Interview
In this preliminary study, eight participants were
interviewed: five head teachers, one deputy (ex-head
teacher), one educational expert and one Tatweer
Unit’s members. These interviews were in three
cities: Riyadh, Alqassem and Jeddah. The interviews
were conducted in Arabic and were recorded after
obtaining permissions from interviewees. The
interviews were transcribed in Arabic text. Following
transcription, I coded the themes manually and then
summarized them for each interview.
Table 1. Overview of participants’ information and
the interviews
Name
Position
Date
Years
in
educat
ion
Duration
Qualificatio
n
City
Reem
Head
teacher
7-5-
2012
12
years
45
minutes
Bachelor’s
degree in
English
Riyadh
Nora
Deputy of
head
teacher
7-5-
2012
29
years
One hour
Bachelor’s
degree in
Geography
Riyadh
Farah
Head
teacher
8-5-
2012
16
years
3 hours
Bachelor’s
degree in
microbiolog
y
Riyadh
Lubna
Head
teacher
13-5-
2012
17
years
3 hours
Bachelor’s
degree in
Maths
Alqasseem
Hind
Education
al expert
14-5-
2012
25
years
50
minutes
Bachelor’s
degree in
English
Riyadh
Hana
Head
teacher
15-5-
2012
29
years
One hour
and 15
minutes
Bachelor’s
degree in
media
Riyadh
Rana
Head
teacher
21-5-
2012
31
years
One
hours
Bachelor’s
degree in
English
Jeddah
Suha
Tatweer
unit’s
member
23-5-
2012
25
years
40
minutes
Bachelor’s
degree in
Geography
Jeddah
5.2. Focus group
My plan was to interview three focus groups in
three cities; however, upon arrival at the venue of
Tatweer Unit in Jeddah I found that the whole group
was busy. Unfortunately, only one member of the
group was willing to do the interview. However, I
interviewed two groups in two cities: Riyadh, the
capital of Saudi Arabia and Alqasseem.
Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal (LICEJ), Volume 5, Issue 2, June 2014
Copyright © 2014, Infonomics Society
1518
Table 2. Overview of focus groups’ information
Ite
m
Date
Members’
number
City
Length of
interviewing
1
12-5-2012
6
Alqasseem
120 minutes
2
19-5-2012
4
Riyadh
80 minutes
6. Ethical considerations
At an early step of research project preparations,
it is essential to think about ethical issues that might
arise from conducting the study [22]. What is vital is
to avoid harming participants, to be not deceitful, to
give them informed consent and to avoid privacy
invasion [23]. For ethical considerations, the first
step to be taken is to review the application
following the procedures of the University of
Reading Ethics Committee to give a favourable
ethical opinion for conducting this research.
Moreover, approval was granted by the Ministry of
Education to access Tatweer schools before
conducting this study. In addition, I ensured that all
information and participants are kept strictly
confidential and I made clear that participation is
voluntary and that the participants can withdraw in
any time when they want. I also kept the data
anonymous, where I made names for them.
7. Findings
Five themes have been identified after analyzing
the data. These themes helped to answer the main
question: what is the impact of educational policy
development on practice within Tatweer Schools.
These themes are: Innovation; Autonomy; Tatweer
Schools and Non-Tatweer Schools; Tatweer
Programme one and two; and the Difficulties.
7.1. Innovation
According to the participants that innovation
could be seen in different levels:
School level: in Tatweer Schools innovation
could be seen in technology, smart classes (in
phase one), the implementation of projects and
the use of Intel program and projects in learning.
There were also intensive training courses for the
head teachers and teachers, which lead to
professional development and helped to enhance
schools’ capacity. The programme gave schools
internal capacity gradually, in order to create
autonomous schools. These schools can be able
to solve its problem and build its programme
according to its mission and goals.
Students’ level: Many students have won various
national and international awards. In addition,
students have acquired the skills needed to
conduct their own research. Students have gained
self-confidence, self-reliant and communication
skills. Learners also are looking for information
rather than receive it. The enterprise and the
ability to express opinion have been promoted at
students. In addition, they reach a high level of
attainment and ability to debate. Students in these
schools learn by doing research. Many academic
trips have been held for students; however, the
level of students’ achievement has not been
changed as the participants reported. This
finding was unexpected and suggests that it is
helpful using the value-added tool, which
measure students’ achievement in order to assess
the impact of the change on students’ progresses.
“This programme is very useful. It takes all time
of students.... Some parents come to me and say God
bless you, our children become busy of doing their
homework and doing research, our children do not
have much time to think in other things... one of the
pretty thing of this programme is that the wrong
behavior is reduced to 80-90% because they are
always busy and may be this programme gave them
self-confidence, gravity and promoting their
thinking” (Lubna, HT, p.38, 13-5-2012)
7.2. Autonomy
The freedom: This programme gave head teachers
a broad area of autonomy in which to do their best;
most reported no restrictions. The head teachers
reported that their task became easier as a result of
working with teams. The head teachers involved
others in decision-making. Teachers had more
autonomy in the way that they evaluated and
prompted students’ skills. Additionally, Tatweer
Schools' members reported that they have acquired
autonomy in their decisions.
Nature of work: The work ethos within these
schools became established and professional.
“Excellence Team” played the most important role in
decision-making. These schools also opened their
doors to train other schools in certain skills, such as
co-operative learning and using technology in
teaching. In Tatweer School, autonomy associated
with self-evaluation of the school’s performance. In
addition, each Tatweer School built its plans by
itself, based on its own needs. Moreover, Tatweer
Schools had a new agenda concerned with promoting
partnership with community.
As Altrichter [24] argues “Change’ may be used to
argue for more autonomy in order to allow and
enhance self-management of schools or for stricter
central surveillance, accreditation and evaluation, or
for both; it may be used to argue for more room for
market forces or for more parent participation in the
governance of schools”. It has also been stressed by
Fidler and Edwards [25] that self-assessment is the
centre of school improvement.
Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal (LICEJ), Volume 5, Issue 2, June 2014
Copyright © 2014, Infonomics Society
1519
Head teachers found themselves free to be
creative and innovative as one of them reports that:
“The role of the head teacher was inspector and her
task was documentary and field, but now with
Tatweer Programme her task is becoming creative,
developing, schematic and leading the team work”
(Hana, HT, p.88, 15-5-2012, interview).
The results of the study did not show any
significant increase in the financial autonomy, which
would help the school to undertake its programmes.
It did not also show any freedom in hiring and firing
staff. This finding can be explained by the need to
consider many factors to implement fiscal and
appointment autonomy within schools, for example,
taken into account the culture, people trust, and
corruption level. These factors could help to enhance
the freedom in fiscal and appointment delegation.
7.3. Tatweer Schools and non-Tatweer
Schools
The Tatweer Schools are different from non-
Tatweer Schools in the following aspects:
The autonomy: The Tatweer programmes gave
the head teacher more autonomy to manage the
school, to achieve her school’s vision and purposes
as well as give more autonomy in decision-making
inside school.
The technology: In Tatweer Schools there are
advanced technological equipment especially in
Tatweer Smart schools.
The Decision- making: In Tatweer Schools, the
decision has been made in team. Every single person
from the teacher to the student involve in decision-
making as well as parents and the society.
The professional development: Teachers and head
teachers have had intensive trainings to gain a high
level of qualifications.
The plan: These schools have done self-
evaluation as one step of building its plan for the
following year. The school also builds its plan based
on its needs whereas in non-Tatweer Schools, they
receive their plan from the ministry of education.
The pedagogy: Tatweer Schools are different than
other schools in the way they teach.
These differences can be summarized by saying
that Saudi educational system tends to transform its
schools from centralized schools to semi-
decentralized schools. It gives Tatweer Schools more
autonomy in their decision-making and more
freedom in the way they manage and teach.
“The distinctive of the programme is that it seeks
to provide an autonomous school, which can perform
self-evaluation and planning by itself, like a small
ministry… It also aims to create different models of
Tatweer Schools” (Salma, TU, p.21, 12-5-2012,
focus group).
7.4. Tatweer programme one and two
The differences between Programme one and two
can be distinguished in the following elements:
The supervision: A considerable difference is that
in phase two there is a Tatweer Unit, which contains
nine members. These members work in team and
support Tatweer Schools, but in phase one there was
one member called educational expert who supported
and visited Tatweer School weekly.
The organization: Tatweer Schools were
connecting with the Tatweer Project directly, so it is
believed that when there was a desire goal to expand
schools in a big country such as Saudi Arabia, the
education system had to be decentralized. Therefore,
programme two sat up seven units in seven districts
at the beginning to support Tatweer Schools instead
of Tatweer Project.
The cost: Programme one was extremely costly;
accordingly, programme two was established as an
amendment of programme one. In the programme
two, schools were not supplied with advanced
technology as in programme one. Officials realized
that applying ideal technology at schools would cost
a huge amount of money, which was one target of
programme one. Therefore, Tatweer Project
modified programme two to be, more pragmatic.
Namely, programme two has focus on internal
capacity where schools will be able to manage itself.
“The difference between Tatweer Programme in
phase one and two is that the school in phase one
was like a small educational directorate; there were
sections, units and departments and every single
member had her profile, but in phase two the work
runs by the team, it becomes better in terms of being
cooperated and interdependent. Now, the team
member is sharing each other in school’s mission,
targets and planning (Noon, TU, p.30, 12-5-2012,
focus group). The sense of responsibility is
becoming a collective sense rather than individual
sense because the school’s matter is becoming an
important notion for every single person (Joana, TU,
p.30, 12-5-2012, focus group). We are also as
Tatweer Unit members are become one team” (Huda,
TU, p.30, 12-5-2012, focus group). This finding
compatible with the previous planned organization of
the Tatweer system that has been sat by Tatweer
Project the following diagrams by this Project
explain this finding.
Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal (LICEJ), Volume 5, Issue 2, June 2014
Copyright © 2014, Infonomics Society
1520
Tatweer School system programme one 2007
* The leader has freedom to choose any certain unit to meet the school needs
The leader of school
Evaluation and quality unit
School governors unit
Secretaries unit
Deputy (1)
Deputy (2)
Activity leader
Unit of………………..*
Unit of………………..
Students’ tutor
Unit of………………..
Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal (LICEJ), Volume 5, Issue 2, June 2014
Copyright © 2014, Infonomics Society
1521
These results might be explained by the fact that
any pilot scheme (as in programme one) needs to be
modified based on what the reality requests, so
programme two was based on the dilemmas that had
been faced in programme one.
7.5. Difficulties
Human resources: schools need additional
members and more incentives to undertake these
programmes, but they have a lack of these resources.
Evans [26] also argued that teacher’s pay system
must be related to performance in order to generate
motivational impact. However, this system does not
occur in Tatweer Schools as the participants reported
and criticized.
Provisions: There is a lack of technical provisions
for schools in the second phase.
Change resistant: almost 70% of staff at schools
refused the change and resistant it as reported by
some participants, some of them transferred to other
schools, and they attributed this attitude to consider
the change as an additional burden. Moreover, there
was an incident of teachers dropping out, which is
represented in hiring them by the Educational
Department or having vacations in a long- scale. The
head teacher did not have authorities to stop hiring
teachers from her school. In addition, some teachers
do not be able to interact with technology because
Tastweer School system programme two 2011
The leadership
The School board of
governors
The excellence team
Head teacher
Deputies
Administrative
supervisor
School tutor
Lead teacher
3 students
3 parents
2 members of private
sectors
The deputy of
students matters
The deputy of
learning matters
2 members of private
sectors
School tutor
Lead teachers
Special needs learning
co-coordinator
Activity specialise
Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal (LICEJ), Volume 5, Issue 2, June 2014
Copyright © 2014, Infonomics Society
1522
they old or not be motivated. This finding supports
the idea of Thomson [16] that careful attention for
time provision of teachers’ practices has to be
considered when schools implement reform. It is also
important to consider the culture shift and its
implications.
“There was a problem when the programme
began in 2007, the culture about Internet was
different; there was a fear of using it, some parents
did not have Internet at home. As a result, there was
a rate of withdrawing of students (50 students out of
360 dropped out from the school); parents refused
the idea of having a laptop and Internet with every
single student. This was one of the dilemmas, but
now most of the students have a smart mobile”.
This finding supports the claim of Fidler [17] that
the leader “needs to be very aware of the ethos and
culture of the school and recognize when it is
becoming a handicap to the school change of
direction” (p. 270).
8. Conclusion
It is believed that giving school more autonomy in
its decision –making will lead to school effectiveness
and help to achieve the desired goals. It is also
important to consider the perceptions of head
teachers and teachers about any planned changes for
school reform, if they wish to implement it
effectively [27], where it did not happen with
Tatweer Project.
In terms of autonomy, self-managing school,
delegation, devolution and decentralization, all imply
power’s redistribution within a system of the school,
which has been part of the school reform in many
countries [28]. These terms have been considered in
Saudi educational reform and were represented in
Tatweer Schools’ system. Tatweer Schools idea
brings lessons and experiences can be reviewed and
might be useful to consider in the area of schools
reform.
9. Acknowledgement
I am deeply grateful for Prof. Naz Rassool and
Dr Alan Floyd and Prof. Brian Fidler (my previous
supervisor) for their support and encouragement
during the period of the work; for the Ministry of
Education in Saudi Arabia and the Saudi Cultural
Bureau in London for making it possible to
undertake this wok; for my beloved husband for his
support and patience and my lovely children.
10. References
[1] Masri, M., Policy process and education reform in the
Arab world. Mediterranean Journal of Educational Studies,
2009. 14(1): p. 129-144.
[2] King Abdulla Bin Abdul-Aziz Project for Public
Educational Development, 2011. King Abdulla Bin Abdul-
Aziz Project for Public Educational Development, ed. T.
Project. Riyadh: King Abdulla Bin Abdul-Aziz Project for
Public Educational Development.
[3] Riley, K.A. and K.S. Louis, leadership for change and
school reform: international perspectives 2000, USA and
Canada Routledge Falmer.
[4] Document of the educational policy of the kingdom of
Saudi Arabia. 1970: Saudi Arabia: Riyadh.
[5] Prokop, M., Saudi Arabia: The Politics of Education. In
International Affairs (Royal Institute of International
Affairs 1944-), 2003. 79(1): p. 77-89.
[6] Mathis, B., Educational leadership: a description of
Saudi female principals in the eastern, in Education. 2010,
the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State
University Oklahoma State
[7] Roy, D.A., Saudi Arabia education: Development
policy. Taylor & Francis, 1992. 28(3): p. 477-508.
[8] Al Rawaf, H. and C. Simmons, The education of
women in Saudi Arabia. Comparative Education. Taylor
and Francis, Ltd, 1991. 27 (3): p. 287-295.
[9] Alsayqh, N., Authorities of head teachers in decision-
making in light the regulations: survey, in Umm Alquraa
university. 1989, Umm Alquraa university: Makkah.
[10] Muzm, M., The extent of the balance between the
responsibilities of school administrators and the level of
the powers granted to them in middle school in the city of
Riyadh. Athesis. 1997, King Saud University: Riyadh.
[11] Alsahli, M., Comparative study for the reality of head
teachers’ authorities in public schools: survey. A thesis, in
King Abdulaziz University. 2000, King Abdulaziz
University: Almadenah Almonawarah.
[12] Alshihri, A., The reality of the practice of head
teachers to delegate powers to teachers and its relationship
to the achievement of school effectiveness. A thesis, in
King khaled University. 2005, King khaled University:
Abha.
[13] Alzaidi, A., Job satisfaction among male head
teachers in secondary schools in Saudi Arabia, in
Newcastle University. 2008a, Newcastle University:
Newcastle.
[14] Al-Dhuwaihi, A., New head teachers in Saudi Arabia:
Professional identity and learning leadership. A thesis, in
University of London. 2011, University of London:
London.
Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal (LICEJ), Volume 5, Issue 2, June 2014
Copyright © 2014, Infonomics Society
1523
[15] Alzaidi, A., Secondary school head teachers’ job
satisfaction in Saudi Arabia: the results of a mixed
methods approach. ARECLS, 2008b. 5: p. 161-185.
[16] Asfoor, M., Approaches and organisations originality
(5th Ed), ed. 5. 1983, Jeddah: Dar Alshrooq.
[17] Albahiri, M., Online CPD for teachers in Saudi
Arabia: aptitude, attitudes and barriers. A thesis, in
University of Strathclyde. 2010, Strathclyde: Glasgow.
[18] Elmore, R. and W. McLaughlin, Steady Work Policy,
Practice, and the Reform of American Education. 1988,
California, United States.: RAND Corporation, Santa
Monica.
[19] Zamil, S., Define the powers of the school
administration: a field study of impediments to delegate
some powers of the departments of education to school
administrations, in Education. 1998, King Saud University:
Riyadh.
[20] Al-Zahrani, M., Directors of education’s powers and
its role in improving some elements of the educational
process, in Education. 1993 Umm Al-Qura University:
Mecca.
[21] Patton, M., Qualitative research & evaluations
methods. (3th Ed). 2002 California: Sage.
[22] Robson, C., Real world research: a resource for users
of social research methods in applied settings. Third ed.
2011, United Kingdom: John Wiley.
[23] Bryman, A., Social research methods. Fourth ed.
2012, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[24] Altrichter, H., ed. ‘Introduction’. In H. Altrichter & J.
Elliott, Images of educational change. Introduction, ed. H.
Altrichter and J. Elliott. 2001, Open University Press:
Buckingham. 1-10.
[25] Fidler, B. and M. Edwards, Strategic planning for
school improvement. 1996, London: British Educational
Management and Administration Society. xxv,268.
[26] Evans, L., Developing teachers in a performance
cutlure, in The Performing School: Managing, Teaching,
and Learning in a Performance Culture, D. Gleeson and C.
Husbands, Editors. 2001, Routledge Falmer: London.
[27] Al-Taneji, S. and L. McLeod, Towards decentralized
management in United Arab Emirate (UAE) schools.
School effectiveness and school improvement, 2008.
19(3): p. 275–291.
[28] Simkins, T., Autonomy and Accountability, in
Choices for self-managing schools: Autonomy and
Accountability B. Fidler, Russell, S., and Simkins, T (eds),
Editor. 1997, P. Chapman Publication: London.
Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal (LICEJ), Volume 5, Issue 2, June 2014
Copyright © 2014, Infonomics Society
1524
