Ethics in the Schoolhouse

     In education, we often speak of ethics in the profession.  The very word can create a charged atmosphere among teachers and administrators.  Where can we begin to frame the conversation?  I view the concept of ethics as a function of three core conditions: transparency, accountability, and trust.  When discerning the ethical ramifications of an action, we ask ourselves, “Am I comfortable with any and all persons involved having complete knowledge of my action and its consequences?”  We evaluate the decisions we make through the lens of the people our choices will affect.  We consider, “Am I comfortable with shouldering the responsibility for any outcomes that result from this action?”  As educators we live in a world of accountability, and no choice can be made simply for its own sake.  The decisions we make directly affect the lives of our students, and therefore the larger world:  we accept the burden when we enter the profession.  And finally, at the heart of all of our decisions, we ask, “Does this choice value the students to whom I have been entrusted?”  Educators are indeed custodians of the public trust.  We are the institution entrusted every day with the most valuable resource of our community, and that trust must be brought to bear on each and every decision. 

     An administrator is the face of the schoolhouse and acts as the north point on a campus’ ethical compass.  The decisions are not simple:  many opinions vie for attention, and the consequences of one action mix inextricably with the consequences of another.  There is also no question that the intersection of cultural value systems can create miscommunication and conflict.   Finding true acceptance that even some of our most cherished beliefs are not shared by all can be an enormous obstacle.  Morals by their very nature have a deeply emotional component:  they reside at the core of our character.  This makes conflicts in this arena all the more volatile and all the more challenging.  A leader cannot help but to fall back on their personal morality to discern appropriate action, and it would not be appropriate to ask them to do otherwise.  However, adherence to an accepted set of guidelines, such as board policies, creates a common language for dialogue and a standard that does not depend on emotional judgments.  And so administrators are called once again to strike a balance, between choices of value and policy, and between personal values and community norms. 

Building Leaders

     My district possesses its own leadership development program, entitled the Strand Program.  While I have always been aware of this program, I had not given it a serious investigation, as I never intended to pursue a principalship.  However, I was intrigued by the work mentioned in the article, “Bridging the Gap: Building Leadership Capacity” (Swinney, 2007), and I wanted to analyze the similarities and differences between the Strand Program and the program in Auburn City Schools.  The Auburn City school system recognized a human resource need evolving in their district regarding the retention of top level teachers and administrators and the development of leadership among the current staff within the district.  In response the district, in coordination with Auburn University, created a leadership academy available to teachers and administrators within the district.  This academy met on several occasions and worked with a variety of topics related to challenges and charges of administrators, from diversity to budgeting to site-based decision making.  The academy format built relationships and collaboration between teachers and administrators in attendance, and served the dual purpose of facilitating ongoing professional development for current administrators and encouraging the leadership potential of district teachers. 

     The main thrust of the reading involved a school system’s efforts to create collaboration between parties within the district and to facilitate growth and retention of quality educators and administrators through contextual, collaborative professional development.  This relates to the following State Board for Educator Certification’s (SBEC) principal competencies:

Competency 1: The Vision of Learner-Centered Leadership and Campus Culture

1:1 - implement strategies to ensure the development of collegial relationships and effective collaboration.

Competency 6:  Human Resources Leadership, Management, Professional Development and Appraisal

6:2 - facilitate the application of adult learning principles and motivation theory to all campus professional development activities, including the use of appropriate content, processes, and contexts.

6:4 - implement effective, appropriate, and legal strategies for the recruitment, screening, selection, assignment, induction, development, evaluation, promotion, discipline, and dismissal of campus staff.

6:7 - engage in ongoing professional development activities to enhance one’s own knowledge and skills and to model lifelong learning.

Competency 7:  Learner-Centered Organizational Leadership and Management

7:4 - use strategies for promoting collaborative decision making and problem solving, facilitating team building and developing consensus.

     The article speaks directly to the concerns that I stated in an earlier question:  professional development needs to have relevancy to its participants, and collaboration needs to happen at all levels within the organization.  This leadership academy could be a model for campus-level professional development as well, where campus administration does not merely sit in the back working on other projects during the presentation, or use professional development time merely as an avenue to further personal goals and objectives; rather, administration plays an active role in the learning and the dialogue, and uses feedback from the faculty to determine what specific concepts and subjects should be addressed in that forum.  This article prompts me to take a much more serious look at the Strand Program within my district.  Although I am still not inclined to actively pursue a principalship in my district, I recognize the need for all members of a school organization to be able to participate as faculty leaders.  The competencies addressed in this assignment are the rules of governance that all schools should be following, which means that any educational leader needs to have an awareness of the competencies and their application.  I would like to have any available resources in my toolkit to respond to situations in my classroom, on my campus, and out in the larger community.

Swinney, A. (2007, May/June/July). Bridging the Gap: Building Leadership Capacity. Best Practices , pp. 14-15.

Campus Culture in Transition

It is interesting that in this first step of my coursework's new management and leadership direction, the week’s discussion involves an analysis of school culture.  That very concept has been much on the minds of my faculty recently.  My school thrived for many years under a leadership team that had a unique sensitivity to balance:  balance between faculty and other stakeholders, between various teams, between administration and staff.  Achieving this balance is somewhat of a rarity, and the benefits of it showed in the staff and parent commitment to the school community.  However, no situation can remain static indefinitely.  Change comes, and I believe any organizational culture can be defined by how it responds to the natural process of that change.  A  new leadership team took the reins on my campus last year, and we are still adapting to a new leadership style and vision.  Equally strong, capable leaders can present with very different skill sets and challenges, and such is the case at my school.  To our credit, we have strong relationships with each other and with our community, and I believe those relationships help us adapt and embrace new ideas.  I do believe that even positive change throws a system out of its former patterns, and that readjustment can produce some ‘growing pains’.  Even in a seemingly "perfect" school, there are areas of growth, and a new leader is called to find those opportunities to refine and enrich the  a campus.  One of the most pressing and complicated challenges of a new administration is to look closely at the systems and relationships that were most effective on campus, and to work at preserving those standards of excellence even while implementing a new leadership vision.   Conflict is inevitable, and the new leadership will make its mark through communication, collaboration, and modeling of best practices as it resolves these differences and guides the campus.  I have high hopes that my campus will weather the rough seas of change and emerge even stronger and more effective on the other side.

A New Day, A New Plan

I finished my previous course about a month ago and took a much-needed hiatus over the holidays.  I prepared to jump back into coursework with curriculum design, only to discover on the Friday before class was to begin that the university had restructured my degree plan.  The new slate of coursework would enable graduates to take not only the technology facilitator's certification exam, but also the principal's certification exam.  I must confess that I have never been interested in becoming a campus principal.  Both my skill set and my interests lie in a completely different direction.  However, the choice to transfer into the new degree plan was nonetheless a simple one.  We work in an environment where ever more qualified candidates are competing for what  at times seems to be a dwindling pool of opportunities.  Much of principal certification involves leadership and management, including the human resource management course that I will now be offered.  The skills of a leader serve candidates in any number of fields, and so it seems apparent to me that an opportunity to both hone those skills and attain a certification of mastery is one to be seized.  In short, I am taking my own road less traveled, and we shall see where it leads.