edleadership

Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership, Matthew Lynch

The Case for Utilizing the Invitational Leadership Model

The current climate in the education system indicates a rising need for leadership that will surpass all previous models and theories. Many of the concerns raised include increased standards for accountability issues, the need for effective leadership that will live up to the demands of these progressively difficult times. Other concerns include the need for growth in organizational health, perception of the leader as someone who can create real change, and the creation and development of a positive school culture.

Many researchers are now calling for a more participatory approach to leadership in these difficult times in education. Several challenges (e.g., cost restraint, public accountability, globalization, integration of technology, and measurement of student outcomes) require more participatory forms of leadership than those exhibited in the past. The evidence available suggests that the existing theories of leadership don’t fully reflect or explain the current practices of effective leaders. The hope is that more participation on the part of school leaders will help to improve student outcomes.

Current theories of leadership are not good enough to meet the needs of current day leaders. We therefore find that, as public scrutiny and accountability standards increase, a change in leadership theory is likely warranted. In addition to the above challenges, there is growing demand for today’s schools to become institutions of academic excellence, and also for schools that are effective at serving the needs of all interested stakeholders. There is an increased need for caring school systems that serve the best interests of the institution and its various stakeholders. This implies a more profound and challenging responsibility for leaders to understand the growing concerns of those they serve.

The above challenges and concerns are uniquely answered by the invitational leadership model. Invitational leadership can step in to satisfy the need for a leadership model that consistently and completely addresses both the internal and external elements of an organization. Invitational leaders focus on creating organizations that are people-centered and success-oriented, while at the same time dealing with all the other necessary aspects of the organization.

Invitational leaders model school culture through the thousands of daily interactions by which common standards, relationships, visions, expectations, and definitions of what works were created, framed, supported, and tested. Invitational leadership also provides required guidelines and direction to support the organizational growth and success of the school. Invitational leadership contributes positively to the school, because it cares for and supports the efforts of others. The invitational leadership model will serve as a positive source to assist in the preparation of tomorrow’s school leaders.

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, EdTech & Innovation, Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform, Teachers

6 Ways to Help K-12 Students Fall in Love with Learning

What students desire from their school experience is not necessarily what their parents and members of the larger community want them to learn or experience. Only a small percentage of students come to school with an overwhelming desire to learn. Many attend school on a daily basis because that is simply what they are supposed to do. That doesn’t mean they don’t end up finding subjects they enjoy, but American students do not make the active choice to begin attending school.

So teachers come to the table already behind, in some ways. Not only is it the job of educators to teach, but they must also find ways to make the learning process enjoyable and desirable to students who didn’t make the choice to be in the classroom in the first place. With authentic lessons and inquiry learning, educators can clear this hurdle, though. Here are a few ways how:

1. Seek feedback. To assist in motivating students, schools could put out a survey asking them what they want to learn, what they have already learned, and what the teacher could do to make learning more exciting. With the stress of standardized tests, it might be difficult to take the time out of the day to distribute the survey, but every effort should be made to do so.

2. Create safety. Students are more prone to become engaged in assignments when the teacher has created a safe and inviting learning environment. Students want to work in an educational environment where a teacher’s expectations are explicitly outlined. In order to be successful, students must be given the opportunity to engage in activities just above their abilities.

3. Prioritize learning. It may seem like a smart idea to entertain students to motivate them, but solid learning is always the best path. The teacher also has an obligation to create a teaching environment that promotes learning. This means, for example, that teachers should not embarrass students for a wrong answer or a below-standard test score—nor should they allow other students to make fun of wrong answers and below-standard test scores. We need to make sure that the debate on the quality of American schools focuses on the academic practices directly affecting student learning.

4. Strive for equality. Schools are not only concerned with test scores, but are also concerned with equality. All students should be considered equal, regardless of their age, race, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, cultural beliefs, and ability levels. If all students feel they are being treated equally, then they will be more motivated to work. Students will feel intrinsically motivated to learn when they feel respected by teachers and the staff, and will work harder to achieve the goals that teachers and schools have outlined.

5. Consider outside support systems. Student-teacher and family-student relationships also influence intrinsic motivation. In order for students to perform well in school, they will need to have the proper support system both in school and at home. Most students are only interested in performing for the people that matter most to them. If these people do not hold education in high regard, then the student will not hold education in high regard either.

When students are in the elementary grades, they will usually perform for their parents and for their teachers with little to no resistance. Once students develop social networks, parents and teachers are quickly replaced by peers. Adolescents are prone to peer pressure and succumb easily to their peers’ suggestions and viewpoints. It is important for high school teachers to create strong student-teacher relationships, in order to more effectively motivate the students to remain engaged in behaviors that lead to positive academic achievement and outcomes.

6. Encourage collaboration. It is also important for teachers to create and support opportunities for students to collaborate with others. Schools and teachers that create the high levels of student engagement understand the possibilities learning group collaboration affords. Teachers can also provide opportunities students to collaborate with students in other countries. Collaboration among students in and outside the classroom will have to be closely facilitated by the teacher. If carried out appropriately, outcomes for this strategy can be very positive for all students concerned.

Why is it so important to have motivated students?

Student engagement is one of the potential indicators of the effectiveness of a school. Educators and administrators have to concentrate their efforts on activities that engage students in order to foster academic achievement. If they do not, they will have a room full of students who are either academically disengaged or who are merely giving the impression that they are academically engaged. Students are less likely to pay attention when they are on board with what is being taught.

If students complete a task they feel is boring, then they do so to comply with the teacher’s directions, and not because they are intrinsically motivated to do so. In too many instances, students operate from a point of extrinsic motivation, sadly to include the motivation to avoid being singled out or to incurring the teacher’s wrath. If school is not fun and exciting, students won’t develop the love of learning—leaving them less likely to move on to higher education.

What do you think are some ways to get students excited to learn? Share your insights and experiences in the comments below.

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here. 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership, Matthew Lynch

Distributed Leadership as Distributed Influence Processes

Leadership is an influence process that changes how others act or think. Therefore, one way of determining leadership is by investigation of its consequences. There are many ways of exercising influence that do not qualify as leadership. These include force, coercion, and manipulation, which are in no way related to leadership. The difference between all these influence processes is based one factor: the source of influence.

These sources of influence— positional authority, personal qualities, and rational persuasion—often separate leadership from any other form of power relationship. Distributed leadership is an influence process, since it embraces the social side of leadership. This is accomplished through an expansion of the specific influence processes that distinguish it from force, coercion, and manipulation. It uses influence processes that make use of the power of ideas, logical thinking, and evidence. This is particularly important in schools, since the professional culture of most schools typically makes it difficult to rely on the power of position alone.

There are some negative aspects of this concept. First, it lacks any educational content, and consequently, provides little or no guidance to the types of leadership practices that are likely to influence teachers, in ways that make a difference to students. Also, this leadership concept has been criticized for not identifying those particular leadership traits that are most likely to improve student outcomes. Instead, it focuses on distribution of leadership. Most of the available research shows that the knowledge needed to identify and define the types of leadership tasks that deliver these credible benefits are found in educational texts, and not in leadership literature.

Yet another limitation of this concept of distributed leadership is that it overlooks some of the ways leadership can be exercised indirectly. Not all interaction is through direct person to person communication. The three sources of leadership influence suggested—acceptance of orders from those in positions of power, response to essential personal characteristics, and acceptance of requests and ideas as reasonable—assume that all leadership influence is exercised through direct face-to-face interaction. This is simply not the case.

However, this conception ignores the most indirect ways in which educational leaders lend their talents to teaching and learning, such as the creation of the conditions that enable independent and unique patterns of thought and actions in others. This leadership practice is known as empowerment, and plays a huge role in the influence process.

A more powerful model is needed for measuring educational worth, if studies of distributed leadership are to give a greater understanding of how it can improve current teaching and learning processes. Recent research into distributed leadership has expanded the unit of analysis from that of leader-follower, to include the interactions among leader, follower, and other aspects of the situation, like the tools that guide and regulate teachers’ work. In summary, the concept of “distributed leadership as distributed influence” helps us distinguish between leader-follower interactions and how they produce change; this is a determining feature of what qualifies as leadership.

References

Distributed leadership is a theory of leadership that was developed by Peter Gronn, and has been written about by many other scholars since then. To read more of his work on distributed leadership and other topics, click here to visit his Amazon.com page.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, Matthew Lynch, Teachers

Here Are 4 of My Thoughts on Whether Universal Pre-K is Necessary

In his State of the Union address, President Obama brought up the topic of universal Pre-Kindergarten learning and praised the programs already in place in states like Florida, South Carolina and New Jersey. He connected Pre-K initiatives to his Race to the Top program that has the lofty goal of making the U.S. the worldwide leader in college attendees and graduates.

His administration claims that the academic skill sets needed to reach that goal must have their foundation before Kindergarten and that the responsibility for that lies in public funding.

But is this true? Here are my thoughts from an educator’s view.

1. First, it’s no secret that the U.S. lags behind other developed nations, especially when it comes to science and math. To compete as a nation on a global scale, this generation of K-12 (or P-12) students simply need to know more than their parents did as children. This fact has led to some passionate discourse both for and against more stringent academic standards that start in early childhood and extend into the college years.

2. Universal Pre-K programs tend to benefit disadvantaged and at-risk students the most. Children from middle-to-high class socioeconomic backgrounds do not feel the positive effects of preschool as strongly as their low-income and minority peers. In families where at least one parent can be home with children in the early years, and able to do basic learning activities with them, the impact of Pre-K programs are virtually non-existent by the time the child is in mid-elementary school. Children that participate in play-oriented preschool programs but have attentive parents that expose them to minimal learning fare just as well, or better than, peers who attend regimented Pre-K programs.

3. Socialization and preparation are two other reasons for pre-Kindergarteners to attend school. Of course, academics are not the only benefit to Pre-K programs. Socialization and an idea of what to expect when the school years come along are also an integral part of the Pre-K process. Kindergarten used to be an adjustment year for children, but now kids who arrive in these classrooms are expected to know much more.

4. Be aware of how preschool can affect these same children when they reach kindergarten and beyond. As I have said before, being prepared for the next school year is also an important part of the Pre-K process. Kindergarten used to be an adjustment year for children, but now kids who arrive in these classrooms are expected to know much more. Common Core standards exist at the Kindergarten level, with the expectation that these students will know how to read simple sentences competently, do basic addition and subtraction problems and understand basic time concepts. States that already have tax-funded Pre-K programs test Kindergartners and report back to the preschool provider the results. In some cases, future funding rests on whether or not the Pre-K program adequately prepared enough students for the academic rigors of Kindergarten.

So then the question becomes one of impact. Will universal learning at a younger age make a big enough difference long-term to justify the added cost and resources? How much time do children really need to learn what they will need to know to compete globally?

Parents seem to be split on the issue, with one side affirming the need for stronger academic standards and the other side bemoaning the difficulty of material their young children bring home from school. Districts throughout the country have listened to parents’ complaints when it comes to implementation of all-day Kindergarten (versus the traditional half-days) and some parents have even decided to homeschool their children because they so strongly disagree with the academic rigor. Given this cultural climate, I wonder what is to be expected when more states roll out

Pre-K programs? Right now it is voluntary for families – but will that always be the case?

Is universal Pre-K a necessity – and if so, are American educators, parents and young students really ready for it?

Leave a comment—I’m looking forward to hearing your thoughts.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Matthew Lynch, Teachers

The 5 Obstacles You Must Overcome As a Tech-Savvy Educator

As amazing an impact as technology can have on education, modern digital resources are unfortunately far from evenly available. Do you know what technological poverty can look like? Do you know what causes lie behind it? Below, we’ve listed the top five most common barriers to introducing technology to the classroom.

1. The Digital Divide

Earlier in this chapter, we looked at the digital divide and broke it down by race, class, and gender. The digital divide is considered one of the biggest barriers to introducing technology into the classroom. All students are expected to have computer skills, and often it is just assumed that they all do. Unfortunately, this is not the case: access to technology is still not equal. Students who have less access to technology are mostly those living in low-income homes. Even if these students have a technology-based education at school, with a computer and Internet access, they will still not have the same advantages as those who have computer access at home. Access to technology by itself, however, is not a guarantee of computer literacy and skills. It also depends on how the technology is used. Some schools use computers for drill-and-practice exercises, while others foster problem-solving activities, challenging students to develop deeper levels of understanding.

The digital divide has been closing recently, due to lower prices for computers, new mobile phone technology, and a growing number of schools that have computer equipment. But the digital divide in the differences in the quality of hardware, software, and connectivity resources doesn’t seem to be closing. More wealthy homes will always be ahead of homes living in poverty, and urban and suburban students will always have better and faster Internet connections than rural students, who sometimes don’t have an Internet connection at all.

2. Lack of Funds

Maintaining a network within a school with decent hardware and software requires a considerable amount of money, which many schools simply do not have. Information technology is expensive. State and local governments spend more than $5 billion annually to equip schools with computers, networks, hardware, and software. Apart from the cost of providing the school with the necessary equipment to maintain this, schools have to have a technology budget each year that includes hardware and software maintenance, in addition to the hiring of trained personnel to handle technical issues.

3. Lack of Training

To achieve a successful introduction of technology into the classroom, trained support personnel and training for teachers are essential. Teachers can’t be expected to use technologies that they’re not comfortable working with. Technical problems can discourage teachers from using the technology, so it’s important to have a technical support professional available at all times. This way, problems will be only minor inconveniences. Providing teachers with complete training on the technology they will be using, as well as the possible problems and how to solve them, is a valuable investment for education. Teachers who are comfortable with and understand these technologies are the most likely to effectively use these technologies in the classroom.

In response to the fact that teacher training on technology is “hit and miss” in American schools, many educational institutions are including technology training in their course work for obtaining an initial teacher license.

4. Internet Access

Access to cyberspace—the world of information provided through the Internet—is of huge benefit to students and teachers. Access creates opportunities for communicating with any part of the world, opportunities for online simulation applications, social networking, Web-based documents, and endless other sources of information. These are just some of the benefits that a school without Internet access misses out on. During the 1990s, President Bill Clinton created the National Information Infrastructure (NII), the goal of which was to encourage all schools, hospitals, and government agencies to become connected to the Internet. This program included an E-rate, or Education Rate, which were discounted rates for schools and libraries, based on the income levels of the students’ families and location of the school. Since NII was implemented, the number of public schools with Internet access has risen dramatically. By 2005, fifteen years after the NII was established, there was virtually no difference in access between poorer and wealthier schools.

5. Access to Technology

As mentioned, differential access to technology creates a digital divide. Schools are making big efforts to reduce this gap, and making it possible for all students have access to high-end technology in both poor and wealthy schools. Schools have been able to reduce the number of students per computer, but despite this, the digital divide concerning the difference in technology access at home has not changed as much. This gap between quality technology access in low-income homes and more affluent homes remains wide.

Does your classroom experience any of these issues? If so, have you taken any steps to try to overcome the obstacle? Talk to the other teachers in your school and to your administrators about how you can work together to remove the hurdles standing between your students and their chance at a maximized education.

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here. 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Teachers

Student surveys: Measuring what tests cannot

Student surveys are being viewed by an increasing number of school officials, policymakers and researchers as the most effective tool currently available in measuring social and emotional goals for schools and their students. Qualities such as student-teacher relations, student engagement and growth mindset are not only being examined, but incorporated into accountability systems. This means that along with test scores and graduation rates, student state of mind will come into play when rating schools.

Researchers are convinced that students’ attitudes regarding learning, their skillfulness in working well with others and ability to self-regulate and persevere account for more than half of their long-term success.

Students will now be able to rate themselves on important indicators of achievement, such as social awareness and self-management. It has been documented that short, 20 minute surveys, in addition to teacher reports can accurately predict test scores, GPA, suspension and attendance outcomes.

Several school districts have joined forces with Panorama Education, a for-profit startup to analyze and administer these school surveys. With Panorama’s tools, schools are able to ask questions about what they deem important. Guidance is also provided by the company on which type of questions are backed by the best research. Access to questions other school systems have asked and what they have done to improve results is also provided.

Many school leaders find these non-academic factors crucial and are searching for means to document their progress. Increasingly, schools are viewing the academic component and standardized test results as only a fraction of the puzzle.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Education Leadership, Matthew Lynch

Beyond Principals: Leadership Assessment Tools for All Educators

As the end of the school year approaches, plans are already being made for the fall in schools throughout the nation. Much-needed summer improvements will take place, along with retiring teachers cleaning out their classrooms and new ones coming in. For areas that observe the traditional “summers off” school calendar, those months are still busy ones on schools grounds. Along with the physical maintenance of schools during the time when students aren’t on the premises, what if schools did some non-physical improvements too?

Two education college professors from The University of Wisconsin-Madison and a consultant from the Wisconsin Center for Educational Products and Services have developed a survey-based system that calculates areas of strengths and weaknesses in schools, and creates an action plan for improvement. The Comprehensive Assessment of Leadership for Learning, or CALL, does not single any particular educators but rather takes a snapshot of what is happening as a whole entity. It is a smart assessment tool to implement at the end of the year and then brainstorm actionable steps on improvement when school is back in session.

The survey and results-delivery system were born of necessity. More than ever, schools are in need of transformational leadership that creates learning opportunities for students but also prepares them for the real-world economy. The pressure has never been greater, particularly as Common Core Standards and other state-based ones heighten accountability for teachers, administrators and other instructional staff. The belief used to be that principals were responsible for all the leadership roles within a particular school but that theory is starting to fade. While principals certainly need solid leadership traits, distributing those responsibilities can actually lead to stronger school systems that are able to better support student bodies.

The problem with existing leadership assessment tools is that they only evaluate people on an individual basis, instead of looking at how school personnel can work together to achieve maximum effectiveness. CALL was developed with funds from the U.S. Department of Education and tested in more than 150 schools containing thousands of educators. The survey itself has over 100 questions and takes around 40 minutes to complete and is thorough in its approach, thereby making it more of an “activity” than a “survey.” It has five main areas of concentration, including:

  • Focus on learning. Essentially, this portion looks at the way school leaders practice what they preach. Do school leaders do classroom visits, and engage with students? Do they participate in the team-building and leadership programs that they design for others? Collaboration and staff buy-in to school learning initiatives is an integral part of this portion of the survey.
  • Monitoring teaching and learning. School leaders should be able to not only make sense of their student performance, but know how to communicate it to teachers. Monitoring of school successes does not need to mean constant micromanagement; rather, leaders should understand the scope of their students’ strengths and weaknesses and know how to empower improvements.
  • Building nested learning communities. While educators are ultimately responsible for their own teaching successes, school leaders must provide the support and resources to make effective teaching possible. Leaders should have ways to measure teacher/student performance and be willing to put improvement plans in place.
  • Acquiring and allocating resources. Time spent on whole-school, grade-level and subject-matter reflection is just one aspect analyzed in this part of the survey. If external leaders are part of a school’s leadership and decision-making process, then they are asked to give input on this section. The school’s communication with its community through things like social media, and email, are also assessed in this portion. How are schools making the best use of their resources?
  • Maintaining a safe and effective learning environment. Above all, schools must be safe places for students, teachers and administrators. This starts with the basics, like cleanliness, and extends to factors like schools as safe havens for the students who may be struggling. The safety of students and their perception of being in a “safe” place do make a difference in learning effectiveness and this portion of the survey analyzes ways in which schools can maximize that fact.

It really is true that “it takes a village” and understanding how each educator in a school can best contribute to its success leads to stronger student outcomes, and stronger schools. By implementing the in-depth CALL survey, schools can see exactly HOW to get where need to be when it comes to school leaders.

If you are interested in learning more, you can register to join a free webinar on CALL. The webinar will discuss the theory behind CALL as well as provide a demonstration of the CALL automated data feedback report system.

This is a great opportunity for schools to obtain data on leadership effectiveness in order to support school leaders’ professional growth and school improvement.

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here. 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership, Matthew Lynch

The 4 Attributes of Transformational Leadership

Leadership – it’s not just giving orders. The role of school administration is about more than just making schedules and disciplining children. Transformational leadership offers administrators the opportunity to drive organizational change and to create strong schools by fostering a culture of learning and growth in educators that then gives children an environment in which to grow.

It’s not difficult to see how Transformational Leadership would fit well into the school setting, as its attributes line up perfectly with the goals of education. In fact, when transformational leadership is applied to school setting the results are quite remarkable. So what are the attributes of transformational leadership, and how can administrators go about implementing them?

1.    Idealized/Charismatic influence

A leader must be able to inspire the people who they are leading. How? Through language, etiquette, mannerisms and lifestyle. Those being led must have great amount of trust in their leader in order to allow themselves to be guided. Living by example is essential, because just as this model demands that educators look beyond self interest, by extension the leader must look beyond their own self interest as well. High levels of integrity and moral values are absolutely essential.

In order for leadership to be transformational, a charismatic leader has to spread out responsibility and to take it on without compromising. That means that their followers must follow because they are committed to the cause and confident in their leader’s ability to get things done. Charisma isn’t some ethereal quality that’s limited to politicians and movie stars – in the real world it is derived from respect and a visible projection of responsibility. The other point here is that followers will follow other followers. If a leader is able to distribute tasks and have those tasks completed effectively by subordinates, then others will latch onto that and naturally follow. In effect a leader can grow their charisma by utilizing their resources effectively.

2.    Inspirational Motivation

The top goal of a transformational leader is to get the full support of everyone involved, all with an eye for the common goal. The best way to do this is to be open and honest about challenges. When people feel that their leader is willing to face known issues rather than brushing them aside, they become invested. The aim is to develop that sense of belonging within the school culture, which then supports everyone involved.

Transformational Leadership takes the compartments out of the school. Rather than teachers being focused only on what’s going on in their classrooms, their vision becomes expanded to see how their relationships with others in the school affects the outcomes of students. There is an investment in the success of other teachers, who are all working toward the same goal of brightening young minds. The core of transformational leadership is employee commitment, which then creates opportunities for the goals of the entire school environment to be achieved.

  1. Intellectual Stimulation

Education is at it’s core about getting those neurons to fire. Leaders who encourage their employees to stay rational in the face of emotional challenges that come with the educational setting are creating an environment that will have less conflict and more growth. Innovation and hard work are encouraged through intellectual pursuits like problems solving. Just as keeping students intellectually engaged in the classroom keeps them on track, so too does keeping teachers intellectually engaged keep them on track.

It’s so important that there is an understanding that education is about growth. Any good teacher will tell you that teachers learn as much from their students as their students learn from them. There is an organic understanding among educators that teaching and learning are partners. Educators cannot help their children to grow if they are not growing themselves, and in fact educators want to grow. Educational leaders should use this desire for growth to keep their followers actively engaged.

  1. Individualized Consideration

Creating relationships is essential, and that means two-way communication. Followers who feel heard and valued are much more invested in the process and interested in pursuing the larger, organizational goals. Not to mention this individualized process allows leaders to then know the strengths of the people within the organization, so as to better structure the group for success. In a school setting, this translates to interactions beyond the mandatory observations and meetings. Administrators who seek connection with their staff in smaller, more regular ways are able to build trust and a sense of shared service that leads to a better and more productive relationship overall.

Best practice for a transformational leader is to have opportunities to work with individuals on a one-on-one basis in at least some form. While in large settings this might be more of a challenge, nonetheless it is the individualized communication that creates the right environment for transformational leadership. There are myriad ways to make this happen, without having to pile on undue stress or time commitments. Transformational leaders employ creative means to create those relationships.

References

Transformational leadership is a theory of leadership that was developed by James Burns (1978), and has been written about by many other scholars since then. To read more of James Burns’ work on transformational leadership and other topics, click here to visit his Amazon.com page.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership, Higher Education, Matthew Lynch

Reasons for the Emergence of Distributed Leadership

Two explanations have been offered for the emergence of distributed leadership. The first is the failure of the “charismatic hero” associated with transformational leadership. The second is that school leaders now handle tasks of much greater complexity. . It is not the heroic leader who makes an organization function well, but rather the “mundane,” everyday activities that matter.

Distributed leadership is well within the broader policy spectrum for public services. In a government’s emerging model for public services, we see the three modes of leadership that the government favors. These are hierarchy, market, and network. If we overlay the school setup on the government model, then we see where the schools’ “capability and capacity” fits in relation to the network regime of governance, where distributed leadership is positioned.

Distributed leadership can therefore be said to be similar to the broader policy process, since government will construct a need, goal, or objective that would require both school actors and non-school actors to distribute their efforts between organizations and/or within organizations to achieve this end. It also provides a cultural reference to the official structural similarities of two traditionally separate organizations.

Distributed leadership fits well with the merging or networking of work-based activities according to current trends on inter-agency working in schools; with the joint production of personalized needs and solutions; and finally with the changing workforce . All these efforts seek to merge the professional cultures of different groups.

With the above in mind, the emergence of distributed leadership is not only a reaction to the recent policy shifts; it also reflects changes in contemporary culture. Organizations can no longer control their workers through the so-called rational or bureaucratic structures of the past. Those out-of-date methods inhibit the kind of independent work that relies on solidarity, respect, or mutual trust, since all they end up doing is bringing about authority conflicts.

The present focus on distributed leadership is not so much related to the cultural turn toward taking emotions into account, like transformational leadership, but is more of an example of management theory resonating with a contemporary shift toward the weakening of traditional logic. Organized social structure, as a result, has given way to a “network culture.”

These new changes also indicate a change in the knowledge economy. We have begun to see a form of “socialism” in education, proven by the use of terms such as “universal education” to symbolize the trend toward viewing education as something other than a market commodity in this age. Governments around the world are now keen to set up a policy that ensures that literacy is achieved by all, with no regard to social status. The role of the school leader is therefore shifting from economic management to social management.

References

Distributed leadership is a theory of leadership that was developed by Peter Gronn, and has been written about by many other scholars since then. To read more of his work on distributed leadership and other topics, click here to visit his Amazon.com page.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in list, Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform

3 Real Facts About Behind the Senate’s Refusal to Consider Climate Change Education

The latest version of “No Child Left Behind” had a section that would have created climate change curriculum for K-12 students.

However, the Senate said “no” to this portion of the bill.

Why did this happen? Let’s look at the facts behind this decision.

  1. According to theHill.com, the measure failed 44-53.

“The measure, from Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), would have created a grant program for school districts to “develop or improve climate science curriculum and supplementary education materials,” according to the amendment text. It failed on a 44-53 vote.”

  1. Chair of the Senate H.E.L.P. Committee (Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions) Lamar Alexander said that he wasn’t fond of the measure because it further inserts the federal government into public education. But that wasn’t all…
  2. Alexander believes in climate change but is afraid that allowing the amendment to pass would, in essence, create a slippery slope due to political partisanship.

Interesting that politics is the reason why a measure like this failed. Climate change is real and has been proven by simple science. While the development of the curriculum hopefully wouldn’t grow around partisan ideas, giving baseline information on climate change and its impact on the earth seems fairly logical.

Explaining why temperatures in the ocean continue to rise, why the polar ice caps are melting, and why tornadoes have gotten more powerful is information all students should know. This attack on climate change as “made up” is not helpful to anyone — least of all the next generation of adults who will deal with this on an even larger scale.

Hopefully the Senate tries again with rewritten language and passes the measure. Our students need to learn about climate change and at an early age.

  • no reactions
0
Share