"Chapter 3 examines the concept of traditional management theory, with its generic, research-based responses to pre-determined problems, and the need for an educational leader to look beyond these traditional practices. No matter how reflective a principal, effectiveness will remain elusive if it is based on traditional management theory. So, how can we as new school administrators change our mindscapes and move beyond traditional management to true effectiveness?"
I think the fact that we will be new administrators and not seasoned administrators will help in that we really don't have our own traditional management issues. It will be much easier for new administrators to look to new theories of management when trying to define their own principalship. Being a potential new administrator, I believe that I will look toward new managemant strategies. Students are changing therefore the way they are managed needs to change
I agree with Randy....our classes our preparing us to go beyond the traditional management style. We realize that we must think beyond just school management. We know that using inclusion with our staff and using a team approach to problem solving is crucial. Also, the dialog that we are having now relating to different approaches will be valuable resources for us in the future.
I think we also have to be careful because we are new administrators because we will think we "know everything," and somethings just come with experience. We also have to make sure we don't dismiss traditional practices because some have worked and will continue to work. I think it is important to be take small parts and make them into larger parts in order for your building to run smoothly. As educators, we need to understand that learning styles, teaching styles, and management styles are all recycled and we need to capture the style that works best for each individual, as well as for the building. Change is good, but it sometimes it is not heard if it happens too quickly.
Good start to Chapter 3 discussion. The hard part of being new is doing what is right and making sure that those who evaluate you understand what is right. It will take time and balance.
Sergiovanni's descriptions of "mystics," "neats," and "scruffies" seems to me to be somewhat contrived. While I understand and appreciate his point that we should be aware of our "mindscape" when analyzing a problem, I wonder: Do school leaders really tend to fall into one of the three categories?
The principals that I have worked under have all been "scruffies." Have any of you actually worked for a principal who was primarily a "mystic" or a "neat"? I'm having a hard time envisioning how either of those could survive in these days of NCLB. Just wondering...
To be effective educational leaders, we have to take into account the diversity of the stakeholders we administer. Traditional management theory tends to deskill and dehumanize the people involved, essentially viewing them as cogs in a machine. I am not saying that we should never consider this theory. However, I feel that the case studies we have been doing have proven that whereas you may consider the norm when actively pursuing solutions to a problem, you can’t assume that the standard is the best practice for every situation. You have to modify your response with regard to the individual and the situation, always mindful of the school’s vision of learning.
I think that as a starting administrator, it might be wise to stick with the traditional management theory. As much as I do not want to admit it, I would use it until I have become comfortable with the community and the job itself. Following that, mindscape certainly should be comfortable enough to be applied to better the school and students.
I think how we act as new administrators has a great deal to do with what kind of teacher you are. Personality traits and assumptions about human interaction shape how we do everything from the type of employee you are to if you say hello to people in the grocery store. I think the key to the chapter is understanding how to properly utlilize reflection in your craft. Taking time to reflect and being able to critically think about your performance will force you to be a "Scruffie". If you can't critically analyze your role in a situation you have no chance for growth or to achieve the "maximums".
I agree with Ken that self-reflection is probably the most important aspect of being effective, not just as an administrator but, any job for that matter. The best way that I can see to achieve positive reflections are by surrounding yourself with strong role models and admitting that you're the "new kid in town." The longer we work in this field the more we will be effective leaders, so the traits we need to hold closest are patience and humility. We're all going to make mistakes. The key is to try not to make the same mistake twice.
"It's not how many times you fall down, it's how many times you get up."
Good conversations, especially the neats, mystics and scruffies. Jonathan, yes there are still neats existing and even being reported by students in this Chapter's assignment. I agree it is hard to see 100% of the characteristics any of these "types", but most leaders do exhibit primary traits that can be attributed to one of the models.
I agree with the text that the traditional management theory works with linear conditions. Why throw the baby out with the bath water. If it works then don't fix it. But there are many cases where you as a principal knows what is best for your students. Every school is different and the same rules and theories doesn't apply to everyone. As a principal you need to look at both sides and choose what you think best fits the situation. As long as you believe in your heart that it is the "right" thing to do then you are being a true leader!
I agree, Amanda. Reflecting on administrators who have served my school in the past, I can't help but remember one principal who has since been promoted who would justify his decisions or actions under nonlinear conditions as simply being the "right thing to do" for the student(s). He didn't have to say another word. However, I also recall another leader who needed to focus on doing things right when dealing with nonlinear conditions instead of trying to please everyone and ending up pleasing no one. It does depend on the situation.
I feel to be an effective administrator, there are many things that need to be taken into consideration. One of the things is to reflect on our own teaching styles, as Ken and Mike state. Our personality will effect what kind of administrator we are, no matter what old or new theories are out there. I think it is also just as important to reflect on past and current administrators that we have worked for. I'm sure we all have agreed and disagreed with things they have done, and have opinions on what should/could have been done differently. Taking that "experience" will also shape what kind of administrator we will be. I believe that new theories are important, and being new will help us to adopt those strategies, but I also think there are some very valid old theories that need to be taken as well. It is a big juggling act, just like teaching, and by reflecting and trying all possibilities, over time, we will discover what works and what doesn't work.
I agree with the text and Amanda regarding the use of traditional management in linear situations. However, an effective leader must know when those situations become nonlinear. Therefore, he/she must be able to quickly change management styles.
I really enjoyed this chapter. I particulary liked the story of Jane. It was interesting to read about someone who changed for the purpose of bettering others and her school.
I agree with Amanda in doing what is right in our hearts. I also think that it is hard for us as aspiring administrators to criticize the principals that we have worked for in the past. We have to break apart the decision that was made by them and not really agree but just understand why it was made. Sometimes it is easy to point a finger and blame how certain traditional theories have worked or not worked. It really doesn’t matter what we call the mindscape or the theory, it’s what works best for each individual school and how to make that school successful. With SOL and NCLB we can tell who is not accomplishing certain goals. We must keep in mind that we have no idea what it is like to run a school or step into the shoes of a principal. We will make mistakes and as long as we learn from them and others, well that is all we can ask for. When we lay down at night one question has to be asked, “Did I do what was right for children?”
I beleive to be an effective leader you have to start with your vision or goal of what you would like to accomplish. I don't think you can be successful until you have a hold on that. I agree with Michael that in the beginning I would have to gravitate towards the neat scenerio just to make sure no avoidable mistakes were made. We all know that at times there are no easy answers, but not allowing ourselves to react to a situation and taking the time to reflect and research hopefully the best solution will become apparent.
We are learning exciting and new ideas to try as new school administrators, however I also think that we will feel pressure to do things "as they have always been done". It will be important to find a good balance between the "old" and the "new". We will need to initiate changes in small steps and work to have the support of our stakeholders, as we work to promote the success of each child.
Learning about the limitations of traditional management theory will help us be better administrators. I think the natural response as new administrators would be to "do things right" or "as they always have been done" because of our inexperience. As we gain experience and confidence, we will adapt our management skills into leadership skills to "doing the right things" Judy Willis
I think that most new educational leaders probably "play it safe" in the beginning, following traditional management practices. Several posts have mentioned this so far. I agree with the statement that Ken made, that we will be the kind od administrators that we have been teachers. Hopefully, that means that we will strive to do what is right, rather than focus on doing right things. If not, then we should consider how a change of mindscape will best serve us in our new roles.
As new administrators we will have an oportunity to introduce new and fresh ideas that go beyond those of the traditional management theory. As an administrator we need to make sure we are looking at ways to make the teaching and learning process more exciting on a daily basis for both teachers and students, which will help develop that true school community.
I agree with Amy. In order to make changes we have to take small steps. Taking leaps can create a panic. You don't want to turn everyone against you before you get started.
I could really see myself starting out like Jane as a new principal. It seems like the right mindscape for me to have a streamlined management practice, especially since I know my personality falls under the "concrete sequential" category that we learned about in the last class with Dr. Flora. I really liked the description in the text of all the pressure being put on Jane from the powers above because it is a very realistic picture of schools today. The problems that arose as a result of Jane's traditional management practice were also well described and realistic. It was nice to have a good example of HOW to rise above the traditional management theories called for in our standarized world. By the end of Jane's story, I was beginning to envision how my administrative mindscape might evolve from the very structured and safe "neat" world to the unsure and ambiguous reality of the "scruffy" world. I think true effectiveness will come when we begin to put into practice the ISLLC standards in such a way as to build a team that is all about accomplishing the same goal -true student learning.
This was an exciting chapter. I have taught under all three types of principals and have struggled adjusting to the different leadership types. I have found peace in looking to the past to see where the school was and trying to understand the reasons behind the leadership decisions. I hope that these experiences will help me to lead where ever I end up with a combination of the linear and nonlinear.
As new administrators we will have the opportunity to introduce new ideas and theories, we just have to be careful as to how we introduce them. We have to make sure that it is done in a way that encourages teachers and students alike to follow along with those ideas. It is our job to make sure that when we do try to change a system from a traditional past to newer theories that we get the best out of everyone involved.
Adam J said... I had a lot of fun trying to figure my administrator to be a Neat, Mystic or Scruffie. It forces you to realize that, hopefully, I'll one day be categorized. How do I want to be seen? There is a fine line that must be traveled trying to be the best administrator. I can't help but mention the fact, again, that this book is really good at delivering the human aspect of leadership. Something we all know defines a good administrator. These 3 descriptions offered another lesson about how doing it the traditional way isn't always the best way! (See Jane)
I very much agree with Patricia's comment about the importance of a goal and vision. I think this is key in advoiding the pitfalls of traditional managment theory. I felt that much of Jane's revelation about her shortcomings as a "Neat" leader resulted from her finally seeing the big picture and realizing that her actions and practices were not in line with a broader school vision. I think there's a reason that the first ISLLC standard focuses on vision, because without vision, nothing else can fall into place, and this was Jane's problem. Secondly, I agree with many of you that how we are as teachers will influence how we lead as principals. I think one advantage we may have over many current principals is that we have had to teach under the mandates and pressures of SOL tests and NCLB. Yet, hpefully, we have found success in dealing with those requirements while still making our classrooms dynamic, engaging and focused on learning, not just test-taking. I think if we take those lessons and memories into our administration positions, we can follow a more reflective and "Scruffie" mindscape and avoid the trap of total traditional management.
While reading the chapter, particularly Jane’s metamorphosis, I was reminded of a former professor’s advice. He urged us as educators to only work for a division that demonstrates constant and uninhibited ethical integrity in which advocating students’ best interest is of utmost concern. Administration, at the school level particularly, is a notably political position. Principals must cater to the needs of teachers, parents, administrators higher up on the chain of command, and most importantly students. It would be a grueling task to maintain one’s own identity while simultaneously addressing the concerns of so many. I also thought back to the need mentioned in chapter 1 to lead by management of trust. Bennis’ definition of 'constancy' was a clear connection to this chapter’s information regarding the various mindscapes; earning trust and respect is an important dimension of administration regardless of whether or not the entire school community is in constant agreement with the principal’s decisions.
In today's society we must be able to explain why we do what we do. We can't merely make a decision and the explanation be "I just felt it was the good thing to do." Therefore, since theories are based on research, I do believe it is important for school administrators to understand theory.
That being said, just as no single teaching strategy is effective with every student, no single theory will always hold the answer or solution to the problems administrators must solve.
We must get to know the school-students, faculty, staff, and the community. Then we should reflect on current research and practices that best meet the needs of our school. At anytime we discover that we are doing is ineffective, it is time to reassess and try something different. However, if what we try is not research-based we will have nothing to stand on if our practice is called into question.
Ultimatley, I think it all goes back to a couple of chapters ago, we must balance head, heart, and hand in making the decisions, if those decisions are to best serve our students, school, and community.
Good thoughts, Sherry. Our assistant principal reminds us often that without research and data, all we have is an opinion. Our leadership should be informed by research, but sometimes we must think "outside the box" and do what we believe is right even if it doesn't match the traditional response.
Traditional managment theory has its place. We are wise to use the lessons learned from the practicing of such techniques. If we can't use what we've learned from traditional theories, then we are reinventing the wheel all of the time. Taking what we've learned and finding its application in today's world of education is where it gets hard. We live in a world much different than when the traditional theories were created, but we would be ignorant if we didn't use those ideals for as a starting point to determine our mindscapes of today. In our classes, we are always taught to "think outside the box", "be creative", and set a precedence for our own cultures.
Following traditional managemnent theories may limit the effectiveness that an educational leader can have. As new administrators we must go beyond the roles of traditional management to ensure success of all involved. I can understand Jane's way of thinking. I think at the time she was going what had to be done for success of all, only to find out it was not the best way to go. Looking at other ways to get the best out of everyone gives the change in mindscapes (scruffies) for Jane.
I know principals have a very tough job trying to balance everything they have they have to do on a daily basis. They have to answer to the higher powers and also be a support person as well as an instructional leader. Because of all these responsiblities I can see where some people may take the "neat" approach. Probably at some point in time most principals have tried the "neat" control. After they have worked for a while I bet they have realized that instead of control, what teachers need is support and occasionally some guidance to do their job effectively. I think that good principals even if they started off as a "neat" at some point in time turn into a "scruffie."
I think as a new school administrator you probably do start out as a "neat." But through time and experience becoming a "scruffie" should be our goal. I think back to the administrators that I have been in contact with and starting out the first year ones were "neats." But after observing more seasoned administrators you could see the change to a scruffie being made.
With the state standards, I can understand why a lot of principals are of the "neat" mindscape. However I think for schools to be successful, a principal must possess a "scruffie" mindscape. In my school, I view my principal as a little bit "neat" and a whole lot "scruffie". Directives from the principal are sometimes not well received, but when we have autonomy within our job, I feel most people will be more willing perfom to the best of their ability.
I think principals could be in all three, neat, scruffie, and mystic. I mean look at everything they have to deal with. Not to mention all the attitude they get from teachers.
I agree with the comment made about being a combination of all three: mystic, neat, and scruffie. Administrators have a lot to deal with. Maybe the mixture of all three would not be a bad thing.
I feel to be a truly effective administrator you will need to be able to go back and forth between the mystic, scruffie, and neat mindscapes. This way, you will be highly adaptable as situations change sometimes from minute to minute in this role. By being effective and being able to go between the perceived mindscapes, traditional management naturally would have to break down and a more integrated management form would emerge. One, in which I think, could meet the needs of most in the school setting.
39 comments:
"Chapter 3 examines the concept of traditional management theory, with its generic, research-based responses to pre-determined problems, and the need for an educational leader to look beyond these traditional practices. No matter how reflective a principal, effectiveness will remain elusive if it is based on traditional management theory. So, how can we as new school administrators change our mindscapes and move beyond traditional management to true effectiveness?"
I think the fact that we will be new administrators and not seasoned administrators will help in that we really don't have our own traditional management issues. It will be much easier for new administrators to look to new theories of management when trying to define their own principalship. Being a potential new administrator, I believe that I will look toward new managemant strategies. Students are changing therefore the way they are managed needs to change
I agree with Randy....our classes our preparing us to go beyond the traditional management style. We realize that we must think beyond just school management. We know that using inclusion with our staff and using a team approach to problem solving is crucial. Also, the dialog that we are having now relating to different approaches will be valuable resources for us in the future.
I think we also have to be careful because we are new administrators because we will think we "know everything," and somethings just come with experience. We also have to make sure we don't dismiss traditional practices because some have worked and will continue to work. I think it is important to be take small parts and make them into larger parts in order for your building to run smoothly. As educators, we need to understand that learning styles, teaching styles, and management styles are all recycled and we need to capture the style that works best for each individual, as well as for the building. Change is good, but it sometimes it is not heard if it happens too quickly.
Good start to Chapter 3 discussion. The hard part of being new is doing what is right and making sure that those who evaluate you understand what is right. It will take time and balance.
Sergiovanni's descriptions of "mystics," "neats," and "scruffies" seems to me to be somewhat contrived. While I understand and appreciate his point that we should be aware of our "mindscape" when analyzing a problem, I wonder: Do school leaders really tend to fall into one of the three categories?
The principals that I have worked under have all been "scruffies." Have any of you actually worked for a principal who was primarily a "mystic" or a "neat"? I'm having a hard time envisioning how either of those could survive in these days of NCLB. Just wondering...
To be effective educational leaders, we have to take into account the diversity of the stakeholders we administer. Traditional management theory tends to deskill and dehumanize the people involved, essentially viewing them as cogs in a machine. I am not saying that we should never consider this theory. However, I feel that the case studies we have been doing have proven that whereas you may consider the norm when actively pursuing solutions to a problem, you can’t assume that the standard is the best practice for every situation. You have to modify your response with regard to the individual and the situation, always mindful of the school’s vision of learning.
I think that as a starting administrator, it might be wise to stick with the traditional management theory. As much as I do not want to admit it, I would use it until I have become comfortable with the community and the job itself. Following that, mindscape certainly should be comfortable enough to be applied to better the school and students.
Michael Southee
I think how we act as new administrators has a great deal to do with what kind of teacher you are. Personality traits and assumptions about human interaction shape how we do everything from the type of employee you are to if you say hello to people in the grocery store. I think the key to the chapter is understanding how to properly utlilize reflection in your craft. Taking time to reflect and being able to critically think about your performance will force you to be a "Scruffie". If you can't critically analyze your role in a situation you have no chance for growth or to achieve the "maximums".
I agree with Ken that self-reflection is probably the most important aspect of being effective, not just as an administrator but, any job for that matter. The best way that I can see to achieve positive reflections are by surrounding yourself with strong role models and admitting that you're the "new kid in town." The longer we work in this field the more we will be effective leaders, so the traits we need to hold closest are patience and humility. We're all going to make mistakes. The key is to try not to make the same mistake twice.
"It's not how many times you fall down, it's how many times you get up."
Good conversations, especially the neats, mystics and scruffies. Jonathan, yes there are still neats existing and even being reported by students in this Chapter's assignment. I agree it is hard to see 100% of the characteristics any of these "types", but most leaders do exhibit primary traits that can be attributed to one of the models.
I agree with the text that the traditional management theory works with linear conditions. Why throw the baby out with the bath water. If it works then don't fix it. But there are many cases where you as a principal knows what is best for your students. Every school is different and the same rules and theories doesn't apply to everyone. As a principal you need to look at both sides and choose what you think best fits the situation. As long as you believe in your heart that it is the "right" thing to do then you are being a true leader!
I agree, Amanda. Reflecting on administrators who have served my school in the past, I can't help but remember one principal who has since been promoted who would justify his decisions or actions under nonlinear conditions as simply being the "right thing to do" for the student(s). He didn't have to say another word. However, I also recall another leader who needed to focus on doing things right when dealing with nonlinear conditions instead of trying to please everyone and ending up pleasing no one. It does depend on the situation.
I feel to be an effective administrator, there are many things that need to be taken into consideration. One of the things is to reflect on our own teaching styles, as Ken and Mike state. Our personality will effect what kind of administrator we are, no matter what old or new theories are out there. I think it is also just as important to reflect on past and current administrators that we have worked for. I'm sure we all have agreed and disagreed with things they have done, and have opinions on what should/could have been done differently. Taking that "experience" will also shape what kind of administrator we will be. I believe that new theories are important, and being new will help us to adopt those strategies, but I also think there are some very valid old theories that need to be taken as well. It is a big juggling act, just like teaching, and by reflecting and trying all possibilities, over time, we will discover what works and what doesn't work.
I agree with the text and Amanda regarding the use of traditional management in linear situations. However, an effective leader must know when those situations become nonlinear. Therefore, he/she must be able to quickly change management styles.
I really enjoyed this chapter. I particulary liked the story of Jane. It was interesting to read about someone who changed for the purpose of bettering others and her school.
I agree with Amanda in doing what is right in our hearts. I also think that it is hard for us as aspiring administrators to criticize the principals that we have worked for in the past. We have to break apart the decision that was made by them and not really agree but just understand why it was made. Sometimes it is easy to point a finger and blame how certain traditional theories have worked or not worked. It really doesn’t matter what we call the mindscape or the theory, it’s what works best for each individual school and how to make that school successful. With SOL and NCLB we can tell who is not accomplishing certain goals. We must keep in mind that we have no idea what it is like to run a school or step into the shoes of a principal. We will make mistakes and as long as we learn from them and others, well that is all we can ask for. When we lay down at night one question has to be asked, “Did I do what was right for children?”
I beleive to be an effective leader you have to start with your vision or goal of what you would like to accomplish. I don't think you can be successful until you have a hold on that. I agree with Michael that in the beginning I would have to gravitate towards the neat scenerio just to make sure no avoidable mistakes were made. We all know that at times there are no easy answers, but not allowing ourselves to react to a situation and taking the time to reflect and research hopefully the best solution will become apparent.
We are learning exciting and new ideas to try as new school administrators, however I also think that we will feel pressure to do things "as they have always been done". It will be important to find a good balance between the "old" and the "new". We will need to initiate changes in small steps and work to have the support of our stakeholders, as we work to promote the success of each child.
Learning about the limitations of traditional management theory will help us be better administrators. I think the natural response as new administrators would be to "do things right" or "as they always have been done" because of our inexperience. As we gain experience and confidence, we will adapt our management skills into leadership skills to "doing the right things"
Judy Willis
I think that most new educational leaders probably "play it safe" in the beginning, following traditional management practices. Several posts have mentioned this so far. I agree with the statement that Ken made, that we will be the kind od administrators that we have been teachers. Hopefully, that means that we will strive to do what is right, rather than focus on doing right things. If not, then we should consider how a change of mindscape will best serve us in our new roles.
As new administrators we will have an oportunity to introduce new and fresh ideas that go beyond those of the traditional management theory. As an administrator we need to make sure we are looking at ways to make the teaching and learning process more exciting on a daily basis for both teachers and students, which will help develop that true school community.
BJ Lasley
I agree with Amy. In order to make changes we have to take small steps. Taking leaps can create a panic. You don't want to turn everyone against you before you get started.
I could really see myself starting out like Jane as a new principal. It seems like the right mindscape for me to have a streamlined management practice, especially since I know my personality falls under the "concrete sequential" category that we learned about in the last class with Dr. Flora. I really liked the description in the text of all the pressure being put on Jane from the powers above because it is a very realistic picture of schools today. The problems that arose as a result of Jane's traditional management practice were also well described and realistic. It was nice to have a good example of HOW to rise above the traditional management theories called for in our standarized world. By the end of Jane's story, I was beginning to envision how my administrative mindscape might evolve from the very structured and safe "neat" world to the unsure and ambiguous reality of the "scruffy" world. I think true effectiveness will come when we begin to put into practice the ISLLC standards in such a way as to build a team that is all about accomplishing the same goal -true student learning.
This was an exciting chapter. I have taught under all three types of principals and have struggled adjusting to the different leadership types. I have found peace in looking to the past to see where the school was and trying to understand the reasons behind the leadership decisions. I hope that these experiences will help me to lead where ever I end up with a combination of the linear and nonlinear.
As new administrators we will have the opportunity to introduce new ideas and theories, we just have to be careful as to how we introduce them. We have to make sure that it is done in a way that encourages teachers and students alike to follow along with those ideas. It is our job to make sure that when we do try to change a system from a traditional past to newer theories that we get the best out of everyone involved.
Keith Davis
Adam J said...
I had a lot of fun trying to figure my administrator to be a Neat, Mystic or Scruffie. It forces you to realize that, hopefully, I'll one day be categorized.
How do I want to be seen? There is a fine line that must be traveled trying to be the best administrator. I can't help but mention the fact, again, that this book is really good at delivering the human aspect of leadership. Something we all know defines a good administrator. These 3 descriptions offered another lesson about how doing it the traditional way isn't always the best way! (See Jane)
I very much agree with Patricia's comment about the importance of a goal and vision. I think this is key in advoiding the pitfalls of traditional managment theory. I felt that much of Jane's revelation about her shortcomings as a "Neat" leader resulted from her finally seeing the big picture and realizing that her actions and practices were not in line with a broader school vision. I think there's a reason that the first ISLLC standard focuses on vision, because without vision, nothing else can fall into place, and this was Jane's problem. Secondly, I agree with many of you that how we are as teachers will influence how we lead as principals. I think one advantage we may have over many current principals is that we have had to teach under the mandates and pressures of SOL tests and NCLB. Yet, hpefully, we have found success in dealing with those requirements while still making our classrooms dynamic, engaging and focused on learning, not just test-taking. I think if we take those lessons and memories into our administration positions, we can follow a more reflective and "Scruffie" mindscape and avoid the trap of total traditional management.
While reading the chapter, particularly Jane’s metamorphosis, I was reminded of a former professor’s advice. He urged us as educators to only work for a division that demonstrates constant and uninhibited ethical integrity in which advocating students’ best interest is of utmost concern. Administration, at the school level particularly, is a notably political position. Principals must cater to the needs of teachers, parents, administrators higher up on the chain of command, and most importantly students. It would be a grueling task to maintain one’s own identity while simultaneously addressing the concerns of so many. I also thought back to the need mentioned in chapter 1 to lead by management of trust. Bennis’ definition of 'constancy' was a clear connection to this chapter’s information regarding the various mindscapes; earning trust and respect is an important dimension of administration regardless of whether or not the entire school community is in constant agreement with the principal’s decisions.
Amber Lam
In today's society we must be able to explain why we do what we do. We can't merely make a decision and the explanation be "I just felt it was the good thing to do." Therefore, since theories are based on research, I do believe it is important for school administrators to understand theory.
That being said, just as no single teaching strategy is effective with every student, no single theory will always hold the answer or solution to the problems administrators must solve.
We must get to know the school-students, faculty, staff, and the community. Then we should reflect on current research and practices that best meet the needs of our school. At anytime we discover that we are doing is ineffective, it is time to reassess and try something different. However, if what we try is not research-based we will have nothing to stand on if our practice is called into question.
Ultimatley, I think it all goes back to a couple of chapters ago, we must balance head, heart, and hand in making the decisions, if those decisions are to best serve our students, school, and community.
Sherry Greer
Good thoughts, Sherry. Our assistant principal reminds us often that without research and data, all we have is an opinion. Our leadership should be informed by research, but sometimes we must think "outside the box" and do what we believe is right even if it doesn't match the traditional response.
Traditional managment theory has its place. We are wise to use the lessons learned from the practicing of such techniques. If we can't use what we've learned from traditional theories, then we are reinventing the wheel all of the time. Taking what we've learned and finding its application in today's world of education is where it gets hard. We live in a world much different than when the traditional theories were created, but we would be ignorant if we didn't use those ideals for as a starting point to determine our mindscapes of today. In our classes, we are always taught to "think outside the box", "be creative", and set a precedence for our own cultures.
Following traditional managemnent theories may limit the effectiveness that an educational leader can have. As new administrators we must go beyond the roles of traditional management to ensure success of all involved. I can understand Jane's way of thinking. I think at the time she was going what had to be done for success of all, only to find out it was not the best way to go. Looking at other ways to get the best out of everyone gives the change in mindscapes (scruffies) for Jane.
Paul Love
I know principals have a very tough job trying to balance everything they have they have to do on a daily basis. They have to answer to the higher powers and also be a support person as well as an instructional leader. Because of all these responsiblities I can see where some people may take the "neat" approach. Probably at some point in time most principals have tried the "neat" control. After they have worked for a while I bet they have realized that instead of control, what teachers need is support and occasionally some guidance to do their job effectively. I think that good principals even if they started off as a "neat" at some point in time turn into a "scruffie."
I think as a new school administrator you probably do start out as a "neat." But through time and experience becoming a "scruffie" should be our goal. I think back to the administrators that I have been in contact with and starting out the first year ones were "neats." But after observing more seasoned administrators you could see the change to a scruffie being made.
With the state standards, I can understand why a lot of principals are of the "neat" mindscape. However I think for schools to be successful, a principal must possess a "scruffie" mindscape. In my school, I view my principal as a little bit "neat" and a whole lot "scruffie". Directives from the principal are sometimes not well received, but when we have autonomy within our job, I feel most people will be more willing perfom to the best of their ability.
I think principals could be in all three, neat, scruffie, and mystic. I mean look at everything they have to deal with. Not to mention all the attitude they get from teachers.
I agree with the comment made about being a combination of all three: mystic, neat, and scruffie. Administrators have a lot to deal with. Maybe the mixture of all three would not be a bad thing.
Sherry Looney
Cheryl Burrell-Graves
I feel to be a truly effective administrator you will need to be able to go back and forth between the mystic, scruffie, and neat mindscapes. This way, you will be highly adaptable as situations change sometimes from minute to minute in this role. By being effective and being able to go between the perceived mindscapes, traditional management naturally would have to break down and a more integrated management form would emerge. One, in which I think, could meet the needs of most in the school setting.
Post a Comment