A Milestone on the Path to Leadership

When I was selected by my principal to serve on the campus instructional leadership team in spring of 2009, I frankly felt some reluctance to serve.  I would finish a two-year rotation on the campus improvement committee (site-based decision making) in a few short weeks, and I had found the experience to be frustrating.  The committee served essentially in a compliance capacity:  the principal completed the campus needs assessment and the improvement plan each year, and the members would simply endorse the document after only the most cursory of reviews.  The instructional leadership teams were required by the district, and I had little confidence that the team on my campus would play any real role in campus decision making. 

Less than a week after being appointed to the committee, my principal announced his departure from the campus.  After an awkward and contentious transition to new leadership, the team had a tenuous start in the 2009-2010 school year.  However, even in that first year it became clear: under new campus leadership, this team would serve as a critical component of decision-making and continuous improvement.  As I began my coursework and internship at the end of that year, two surprises awaited me:  first, I learned that my campus would receive a campus-wide technology upgrade to interactive whiteboard technology; second, I was asked to serve in a new, more visible leadership role on campus as head of the quality instruction sub-committee.  I was thrilled about the prospects of having such an avenue to promote and model constructivist teaching practices with the integration of technology. 

At the start of the 2010-2011 school year, I assembled a robust, cross-curricular, and vertically representative team to begin framing goals for professional development, peer coaching, and professional learning.  As I mentioned in last week’s posting, the committee worked with me to set a new framework for professional development in technology integration and instructional practices.  In a comparison between initial and summative staff surveys, staff related an increased confidence in new instructional techniques and technology integrations and a more consistent use of the same.  It was an excellent first step and a proud moment for me as a developing leader.