Running head:  EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Effective Leadership:  Qualities of a Modern Educational Leader

Erin Peters

George Mason University

 


            When public education was originally established in America, the mission of schools was to education educate all residents to be citizens.  In the past, educational leaders were focused solely on the delivery of instruction and the maintenance of facilities. Modern public schools have a more complex mission.  Public education is expected to recognize undiagnosed learning disabilities, provide a caring social environment for students, support parenting efforts, and differentiate instruction for various cognitive abilities and multiple intelligences, to name just a few objectives.  Modern educational leaders need mechanisms to help them cope with the diverse and multiple inputs and outputs that are typical of education in America.  An effective leader who is well-equipped to drive a complex educational agenda in a positive direction should have an extensive repertoire of programs as described by Allison and Zelikow’s organizational behavior theory, should constantly assess limitations in decision making as expressed in Simon’s theory of Bounded Rationality, and should be adept at bargaining to find solutions despite inconsistent preferences among multiple actors, as suggested by James G. March’s theory. Great introduction. It sets up your thesis well, and the thesis is clear. I’m eager to read on.

            Large organizational structures such as a school district must have prior routines in place so that the people in the organizations can work cohesively.  According to Allison and Zelikow, the outputs of large organizations operate according to standard patterns of behavior which work collectively to define the organization.  By dividing labor into standard patterns, organizations can produce complex outcomes that would be impossible for an individual to accomplish.  For example, when students progress to the high school level, the subject matter is taught by experts, core content teachers.  Due to the intricacy of each subject, core teachers are only responsible for one subject in which they are knowledgeable.   Each student’s schedule is coordinated so that he/she can study core subjects from each expert.  When the student completes the high school program, he/she receives knowledge at a high level from all teachers.  One teacher would not be able to deliver instruction at that particular cognitive level for all required subjects.

Programs, as explained by Allison and Zelikow, allow for the coordination of complex tasks, such as the teaching of courses, which are essential for the smooth operation of large organizations.  Programs are subsets of routines that organizations have available for acting on situations, and organizations run more efficiently when there are a large number of programs that operate cohesively.  An immense amount of coordination is necessary for all objectives in the curricula to be addressed and administered during the appropriate times of the school year.  Although teachers are ultimately responsible for the delivery of instruction, administrators, curriculum developers, and subject matter specialists are necessary for the proper interpretation and support of the delivery of the curriculum.  Administrators are responsible for creating and environment conducive to the delivery of instruction.  Curriculum developers are responsible for informing teachers of the necessary objectives and best practices for the delivery of the objectives.   Subject matter specialists are responsible for establishing a deep understanding of the cognitive structures of the discipline in the teachers. An effective leader should be proficient at orchestrating the interactions of all of the educators involved in running a curricular program.  Yes, but A & Z don’t really talk about that, do they? They seem to see routines and SOPs as disembodied from leadership. What do you think?

            It is important to have an extensive repertoire of programs because the school environment is constantly changing, due to parent requests, litigation, and teacher union dialogue.  As neighborhoods change, so do school populations.  State and national curricular demands are in flux because they are constantly being reviewed and edited. Teachers leave the school for various reasons and new teachers arrive each year to take their place.  If an educational leader has only a few limited programs from which to draw, then he/she cannot be equipped to positively deal positively with the change in the environment.  As an example, consider a school that has a population of only white students and has many teachers in the building who are nearing the age for retirement.  A change in a zoning law allows more apartments to be built in the neighborhood, and the construction of a new manufacturing plant transplanted from South America (wishful thinking!) results in the enrollment of a more diverse student body, mainly students of Hispanic origin.  At the same time, many of the teachers decide to retire simultaneously which causes the hiring of many inexperienced teachers.  To avoid many problems that could occur for this school due to the complex issues that have suddenly appeared, the principal should invoke programs that will better suit the new populations.  Examples of new programs that would help the school maximize organizational outcomes are English as a New Language curricula and mentor relationships for the large number of new teachers.  And the new programs would have to have new routines and SOPs for their delivery, right? Because uncontrollable factors change in the outside environment, the school environment changes and the principal needs to have prior routines in place before the change impacts the school negatively.  If the principal did not have many varied programs to draw from, the experience the students receive at the school would not be supportive, and the leader would not be driving education in a positive direction.

            When prior routines used to form programs are established for a period of time, they become Standard Operating Procedures (SOP’s).  SOP’s are useful in maintaining an organization’s efficiency because the groups of individuals who need to take action to make the organization run are informed about the programs.  According to Allison and Zelikow, SOP’s tend to be drawn from a leader’s most successful experiences.   When the school environment changes, and a leader has a repertoire of various successful experiences, then the school’s organizational input can change to maximize the organizational output.  If the leader cannot create new SOP’s to match the needs of the change, then the outputs of the organization are not maximized.  Consider a school that has no Hispanic students and uses second-hand sources to create activities which celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month.  If this school suddenly had an influx of Hispanic students and continues the same SOPs regarding Hispanic Heritage Month rather than drawing on the experiences of the new Hispanic population, then the school is not maximizing the amount of information the non-Hispanic population can learn about the Hispanic population.  A leader who has various programs to draw from would realize that the school is not presenting a competent Hispanic Heritage presentation when the school uses only second-hand information.  A well-developed repertoire of programs can allow for flexibility in the organization when SOPs no longer maximize organizational output.

            The identities within a school play a part in the efficiency of the programs in an organization, This is confusing. so an effective leader must preserve identities that are productive and eliminate identities that produce negative outputs.  When a school replicates identities to the new incoming faculty that are obsolete, the programs do not function well.  New teachers may erroneously comprehend from their obsolete identities that a teacher-centered classroom and direct delivery of instruction is the most conducive to the coverage of the given curriculum.  The new teachers reproduce the misconception that was passed down from the veteran faculty.  The leader in the school should have a clear understanding of the identities present in their agreement problem school and investigate whether the identities help to progress the programs in the school.  If the leader can draw from a large library of identities, then the leader can suggest variations to the current identities in order to evolve the programs in the school.  Is the concept of identity included in your thesis? I think not. It comes from March in the context of our class.

            Some transition here would help. According to Herbert A. Simon’s theory of bounded rationality, whenever leaders make decisions, they are bounded by time, attention, cognition, information, and communication.  A sequential model of problem solving shows that in order to make a decision, a problem must be recognized, alternative solutions must be identified, and one solution chosen to address the problem.  Leaders cannot possibly create all the numerous possible solutions to a problem, so leaders must choose a solution that will avoid a disastrous result.  Leaders will satisfice, choose a solution that will drive the situation in a positive direction, so that they can make the decision and not be paralyzed by constant examination of the multitudes of options.  Although Because it is impossible to know all potential positive solutions to a problem, effective leaders must strive to understand the limitations involved.  In understanding the limitations, the leader can make the best possible choice of the restricted number of simplified choices available.  For example, a lead science teacher at a school is asked to make a decision about which brand of expensive computer/probe interfacing equipment to purchase for the science department.  Some of the possible choices of probeware are not compatible with the existing probes the school has on hand.  If the lead teacher can assess her/his limitations of information and recognize that she/he needs to know more about the compatibility of probeware, he/she may be more inclined to pursue more information.  Assessing the limitations caused the leader to make a more informed decision than if the limitations were not assessed.  Being aware of the limitations in making a decision can illustrate the lack of time, attention, cognition, information, and communication that a leader has in decision making and encourage a leader pursue more resources resulting in a better decision.

            Understanding the idea that decisions are limited due to the boundaries placed on them by time, attention, cognition, information, and communication helps to make the decision coherent and drives knowledge sharing as described by Michael Fullan. This is outside, but related to, your thesis. If leaders assess limitations on decisions, they will strive to gain more knowledge about a condition which leads to knowledge sharing.  Fullan advocates building in differences of preference into an organization because it will challenge the status quo if the status quo is no longer adequate.  Allowing skeptics a voice in an organization can help the leader assess limitations and reduce the chances of a competency trap.  For example, a high school has always offered seniors a mandatory study hall, one class that provides a space for students to do school work, but does not offer instruction.  Frustrated with observing most of the students sleeping during study hall, several teachers propose a plan which will remove the students from study hall and provide several electives in its place, such as girls’ science and engineering design.  It never occurred to the principal in the school to remove the study hall because it was not disruptive to the school and it had been in place for over ten years.  Had the principal constantly assessed the limitations of decisions, the principal could have acted to make the study hall more productive years before the teachers took action.  How does that relate to knowledge sharing? You have some implications (e.g., the teachers present alternative ideas and the rationale behind them), but you have not been explicit about the connection.

            Constantly assessing limitations in decision making can enhance action channels that were weak and establish new action channels.  A leader, in making a decision, can conclude that he/she does not have enough time to attend to the problem.  The leader can then delegate the problem to another person and maintain a briefing on the subject.  In doing this, the leader is establishing an action channel that was not previously present.  If the transaction is successful, the action channel may prove to be useful in the future.  The leader has also built upon the relationships in her/his organization, which is a critical feature of Fullan’s model.  If the action channels create positive outputs over time, relationships are developed among the people in the action channel. You’re not attributing action channels to A & Z, so this gets a little confusing. As an example, the superintendent needs to make a decision regarding a possible inquiry science curriculum piece that is to be implemented throughout the county.  The superintendent assesses her/his limitations and decides that he/she does not have enough time or expertise in the field of science to make an informed decision.  The superintendent asks the science specialist to enlist the help of several teachers to evaluate the program and to report back on the committee’s findings.  A new action channel between the superintendent and the selected teachers has been established.  The new relationship is productive, as the inquiry program is accepted among the faculty as a useful idea in teaching the nature of science.  When another science curriculum question arises in the superintendent’s office she/he does not hesitate to ask the science teachers who were on the committee, who also feel comfortable responding openly. The new action channel produces positive outcomes and has established a relationship between the teachers and superintendent.  As a result of realizing time and knowledge limitations, the leader sought more input from the organization and opened new action channels that progressed the organization in a positive direction. This is a great combination of BR, knowledge sharing, relationship building and action channels. Well done!

            A transition would be helpful here. Working in an organization requires working with multiple actors who have inconsistent preferences.  According to March, there are three major problems which arise when working with multiple actors:  conflict, communication and coordination.  When making a decision among multiple actors, each preference cannot be realized in the final decision.  Bargaining is one method to align preferences of multiple actors.  Through bargaining, the decision is the weighted average of each participant.  In one instance, a science department at a high school was deciding whether to maintain their independent student project program (science fair) or drop the current program for a competitive Science Olympiad program.  Since the science fair has been held annually for nineteen years, there were members of the faculty that who were comfortable with the established extracurricular activity and were very vocal about keeping the established program.  More members of the science department felt that the Science Olympiad had more to offer in terms of problem solving skills, but were not as vocal as the advocates for the Science Fair.  The leader in the group of science teachers saw advantages to both programs, and allowed each side to present their arguments.  After the presentations, the science teachers saw value to each program and embedded a small Science Olympiad competition within the established Science Fair.  The leader saw the conflict among the multiple actors and provided a forum for all parties to express their opinions.  Through bargaining, the inconsistencies among the multiple actors were aligned and a satisfactory solution was developed.

Preferences of the multiple actors in an organization are not readily apparent, and bargaining may be a key mechanism to illuminate these preferences. According to Allison and Zelikow, bargaining helps to evaluate a situation, prescribe solutions and evaluate the effectiveness of the chosen solution.  Offering a bargain to multiple actors can make each of the member’s preferences surface, judging by the positive or negative response to the offer. Once the preferences are revealed, the leader can begin to remove inconsistencies by negotiating a more attractive offer for all of the members. Once the preferences are revealed, the leader can begin to remove inconsistencies by negotiating a more attractive offer for all of the members. At this point, you are more explicit about what an effective leaders would do than you have been for quite some time in the paper. For example, consider a leadership team which that consists of a lead teacher from each core discipline and the principal.  The social studies representative on the team may not express his/her preference in a decision regarding the amount of time to allot for a pep rally.  The principalle suggests that the pep rally takes one hour and asks the preferences of the other members.  All members except the social studies representative agree with the allotted time, because the social studies state assessment is being held the following week.  The social studies representative knows that the other social studies teachers need the time to review for the assessment and expresses his/her view.  Other members of the team understand that having the pep rally at that time will limit the social studies objectives and suggest to the principal that they have the pep rally on a date after the assessment.  The preferences of the social studies representative were not known until the initial bargain was placed on the table.  Bargaining can help to extract concealed preferences among multiple actors and once the preferences are revealed, the leader can work to align the preferences.

Bargaining is an effective method to adapt a decision to a changing environment.  A leader can never be sure how the environment at a school will change due to the multitude of influential factors.  A leader who has one plan and will stick with that one plan no matter what happens is unlikely to be successful.  A leader who has insight into potential problems can negotiate with multiple actors to smooth out the difficulties before they become problems.  Being flexible in the course of a program helps the program to progress in a changing environment.  For example, a principal who leads a middle school that groups students into courses by ability is being asked by the community to change to more heterogeneous grouping in the classes.  The principal feels strongly that the community is correct in their preference and changes all courses into heterogeneous grouping.  However, the principal did not consult the teachers or the curriculum specialists, and they were not equipped with the proper instructional materials.  Although the science and history teachers could easily adapt the current materials to heterogeneous groups, the materials that math and English teachers had were specific to ability.  The students and parents experienced a great deal of frustration with the English and math classes that year.  The principal brought the community and the staff together to work out a compromise.  All of the actors involved were satisfied that the science and history classes maintain heterogeneous groups and the English and math classes were to be grouped by ability.  The following year yielded better assessment results and less frustration than the previous year.  Through the use of bargaining, the principal was able to move education in a positive direction given changes in the environment. I think your point is that bargaining can help the principal develop a larger repertoire of programs, but you didn’t quite say that.

An educational leader who is effective can benefit from having a large library of programs from which to draw given different circumstances, assessing limitations in decision making and utilizing resources from the school environment, and using bargaining to gain information regarding different preferences of the multiple actors involved in the school environment in order to align preferences. This long sentence is awkward and borders on being a run-on.  Leaders use these qualities to progress their organization in a positive direction in the face of change.  Much of the discussion in the decision making literature centers on change in the organization and the surrounding environment.  Through my own experiences in an educational organization, I have observed that dealing with change is a large part of a leader’s responsibility.  Discussion of Open System Theory is a topic I would like to further explore further because it seems to address many of the challenges due to change I see in my own environment.  I feel that if I could better understand how the Natural System Theory is imbedded in the porous Open System Theory, I could be more effective in reacting to the changes that are constantly happening in education.  In understanding Open System Theory more deeply, I could develop a larger repertoire of concepts which will lead to decisions that will drive the organization in a positive direction.  I feel that many changes in education are being made because deciding on a program shows administrative action, and action appeals to the general public, but the changes that are made are not well thought out.  If I could better analyze the internal and external reasons changes are being made in my organization, I could suggest more thoughtful solutions that will produce positive outcomes in a complex environment.

You’ve done a great job using concepts from the course to analyze how leaders might make better decisions. Your examples (I think they may have been both hypothetical and real) from practice were very helpful. In the middle of the paper, you seemed to lose sight of the effective leadership issue, but you picked it back up again after a while. Your thesis didn’t seem quite large enough for all of your ideas. I suspect this is a “listing” problem. Sometimes it is necessary to lump ideas together into larger categories in the thesis to make it broad enough to cover all of your ideas. Nice job!

 

Thesis: 3           Developing Arguments: 8          Conclusion: 7    Grammar & Mechanics: 2         Total = 20 points