Leading for Effective Learning: II & III

Part II & III

Part II
Leadership and Curriculum:

Education systems today must ensure that students are learning what teachers are teaching, and that teachers are teaching what is, in fact, the “official”, or intended curriculum: the state and/or national standard student outcomes and expectations. This responsibility is clearly on the shoulders of the school leader who must empower and enable teachers and students to learn and grow. The school curriculum is the meat and potatoes of this growth. Often the school leader has had little if any involvement in the development of district curricula, yet is held accountable for its delivery as the vehicle of education and learning. Michael Fullan tells us that “The principal has to become directly involved. He may not know mathematics or science or history; but he can [be], and the teachers can see him as an expert in curriculum planning”. Easy to say but is this really possible? I have known quite a few “principals” in my time and they are simply not equipped to have the depth and breadth of profound knowledge necessary to effectuate this proactive practice. Often I have observed various school leaders attempting to engage professional staff in the development of curriculum during faculty meetings, at district curriculum council meetings, and teaching team planning sessions. The sad reality is that most often teachers have little respect for the school leader’s input in this area. The school leader is viewed as a resource for the management functions of the school but not the instructional practices in the school. The exception has been the school leader who recently came from the classroom and may very often continue to practice the craft of teaching by being in and/or visiting classrooms regularly. It seems, experience of the school leader in the practice of teaching, establishes a credibility that courses, titles, and certifications can at best validate through “official” documentation.

In a future posting I will offer a much more extensive discussion of curriculum. However, you will find that that offering is much more teacher-centered and teacher-directed.

Part III
Leadership and Development:

Developing, promoting, and working to provide a learner-centered school becomes the primary focus of today’s educational leader. Today’s school leaders must have a clear vision of what an ideal teaching and learning environment should be and be able to articulate that vision. An incredibly profound thinker and educator, Seymour Sarason tells us that “[A] person cannot become a principal without first being a teacher for a number of years...unless a principal has had long experience in teaching and managing children in a classroom, he or she cannot appreciate or understand the goals and problems of a teacher...”. Today’s school leader must have an extensive classroom foundation to fully understand and comprehend implications and applications of current learning environments. Further, (s)he must insure a safe school climate, deeply and passionately understand current pedagogy, and be technologically competent while managing and publicly promoting the school. Tom Sergiovanni, a renown educator who has spent his life researching school leadership, recognizes these educational and instructional leaders as having a foundational sense of where the school is going and just how to get there. Rather than mandating direction, the educational leader looks for or creates opportunities that will affect what is going on in the school.

Development depends on experience and can occur naturally or as the result of planned educational programs. The school leader needs to consider the natural opportunities within the school to promote both student and teacher development. Recently an art teacher, who was left without a room for her classes to work in as a result of construction activities within a school I was part of, was encouraged to blend her instructional program with the librarian’s instructional program. As school leader, I facilitated the planning and discussion sessions for these two professionals. With opportunity, encouragement, planning, restructuring of schedules, and consistent administrative support, the art teacher and librarian developed a program that found children working in multi-age groupings for extended periods of time in a learning centered program. Children researched, created, planned and learned while in a hands-on, minds-on educational environment. The classroom teachers, being accreted into this dynamic teaching and learning environment also found themselves learning, growing and developing professionally to the extent that it altered their teaching practice and found them sharing with, and encouraging others to consider this collaborative instruction process for their own classes.

The school leader must also create opportunities for both students and teachers to grow and develop based on their experiences. In another collaborative teaching partnership that was growing in our school, I found myself with the opportunity to foster teacher growth and thereby stimulate student learning. Questions about appropriate content, amount of material to be taught, student expectations, development of lessons, and the general flow of learning electrified the air as I began spending time with this teaching team listening to their concerns. The philosophy of practice was being challenged by both educators of this “inclusive” collaboration. Privately, the general educator shared her feeling that there was a lack of support being offered for her style of teaching, her methods of instruction. Concurrently, the special needs teacher shared her concerns about feeling like an intruder when she was in the classroom with the general educator. She challenged the methods and style of teaching; she expressed concern they were “covering too much information too quickly” to be of any benefit to the children and pointed out quite emphatically that “pages covered were not necessarily content learned!” Most importantly, she felt the children were developing a general dislike for learning. I seized this opportunity to facilitate dialogue, provide information, and expand discussions about the learning environment, learning styles, and philosophies of teaching and learning. Having this teaching team engaged in “frequent, continuous, and increasingly concrete talk about teaching practice”, as Michael Fullan urges, began to impact what was occurring in the classroom. I was able to encourage these practitioners to utilize reflective practice as a means to develop awareness of their actions and consider their actions relative to their intentions. In this manner, this teaching team was afforded the opportunity to grow and develop professionally. It became THEIR responsibility to recognize student needs and provide instruction that would meet student needs. They had ownership!