# data[].attributes.body
Week 7

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
April 2015 | Volume 72 | Number 7
Communications Skills for Leaders

Eric Sheninger

In 2009, as principal at New Milford High School in New Jersey, I made a small change that ultimately transformed my leadership style and my school. I shifted from using traditional forms of communication with families and community members-newsletters and e-mail-to using social media. With a click of a mouse, I set up my Twitter account and changed the course of my instructional leadership.

Twitter was my first step in a social media communication strategy that expanded to include a range of tools and approaches. What made these tools different from any I'd used before was their power to reach in all directions. Whether sending updates on school cancellations or tweeting about great student projects, with a few keystrokes, I could share ideas and information with students, students' families, community members, and the larger world-while inviting everyone's responses.

This transformation involved more than new tools. My colleagues and I had to make pedagogical and philosophical shifts, which had a deep impact on New Milford's students and our community. Each of these transformations was powerful for me personally. Watching my colleagues and me learn new things, reach out across geographic divides, and take risks offered a powerful model for students.

As I leveraged social media to enhance our school's impact on learning and our image, I discovered key principles for effectively communicating through digital tools: transparency, flexibility, and accessibility.

Tapping the Power of Transparency

The power of using social media rests in the ability to engage stakeholders in two-way communications. Tools like Instagram, Twitter, Google+, and YouTube let me share information about New Milford more frequently and accurately and provide updates in real time-which engaged more stakeholders than traditional methods had. Teachers, parents, and even outsiders began contributing ideas to New Milford's work.

For this to happen, I had to commit to a new level of transparency and openness. This sometimes meant sharing challenges as well as successes and opening myself to feedback from anyone.

This was the case when I tackled the grading culture at New Milford High School in 2012. At the time, our grading policies were similar to those of most U.S. schools. However, after reviewing the latest research on grading and considering what was best for our students, I knew our current behaviors had to change. Getting detailed information to everyone in the community would be crucial.

The grading shift was one of the most difficult changes to make. When I broke the news to my staff that we were going to revise our grading culture, they reacted with questions, skepticism, and resentment. During initial conversations, I presented up-to-date research, some of which I gathered through social media, to serve as a foundation for changing our system. Social media also enabled me to share with staff perspectives on grading from other educators across the Unites States. Showing teachers how their colleagues in other schools were tackling grading to make learning assessments more beneficial for students went a long way in moving this change forward.

Together, we tackled difficult questions (What does a letter grade actually mean? How do you measure student learning?). A group of teacher volunteers helped establish new grading guidelines and support structures focused on student learning. These included

Using multiple forms of assessment.

Promoting retests and retakes.

Eliminating zeros; students had to keep trying until they got a score of 50 or higher on any graded assignment.

Requiring teachers to meet seven criteria before they gave any student a failing course grade.

To ensure that parents and students were fully aware of the changes and why we made them, I began posting about these new policies on my principal's blog. Before adopting social media, I would have written a traditional memo about the new policies-that might or might not have made it to parents-and placed the information on the school's website. Visibility and access to the information would have been limited. We did place the information in the student handbook, which was linked to from the school website, but blogging enhanced the chances that the entire school community would see it. I pushed out the message using an arsenal of social media tools and our school app, with a hyperlink to my blog posts included.

I received a tsunami of tweets and comments on the blog. Many comments were from other educators offering insights on grading philosophy, including feedback from colleagues around the world as my posts were shared. A handful were from parents asking for more clarification. One student commented openly in support of creating a system that focused more on learning than on quality stamping effort with letters and numbers. A greater discussion on effective grading practices transpired before my eyes.

Reviewing and responding to this feedback took time, but as a leader looking to improve ineffective practices, I felt it was time well spent. The transparency and open dialogue allowed us to build stakeholder support.

Many comments supported our rationale for creating a different system, comments representing different points of view challenged my thinking and afforded me the opportunity to further refine the grading changes we'd made. One comment focused on the importance of avoiding a situation in which one major project has the potential to very negatively affect a student's overall grade. With this information in hand, we made sure to shape our policy to avoid this scenario.

Flexibility: Checking How Our Community Wanted to Communicate

One important aspect of our approach was involving students, parents, teachers, and community members in shaping the tools and processes we would use to communicate. We invited many stakeholders into our leadership and decision-making process.

Students, teachers, and administrators collaborated to develop our school communication app in partnership with a company called Beeonics. The only way we could create a tool that met everyone's needs was to invite representatives from the community to lead the design process. This team shaped the app's requirements and features, a process that involved both face-to-face brainstorming and eliciting feedback through online tools like Facebook and Google Apps.

The result was an app that supported communication in every direction: between students and teachers, between families and school staff, and across the faculty. It enabled students to check grades and submit work, teachers to share assignments and information, and parents to easily connect with teachers and view student progress. It also made it much easier for me to share updates and announcements quickly with all members of the school community.

This experience helped cultivate leadership skills across our student body. It also made clear to families that they were a valued part of the school community. And modeling transparency in school policy changes set an expectation of transparency across the school. Students' focus, too, shifted to sharing work and getting feedback at all levels, including creating work for a wider audience. This increased the quality of work across the board.

Expanding Access to Learning

Digital connections helped me grow professionally. Through Twitter, I discovered like-minded, passionate educators from all over the world. When struggling with a challenge, I could collect diverse ideas-more than my staff and I could have generated-from these colleagues. I engaged in conversations that ultimately improved my professional practice. How liberating to acquire new knowledge, resources, ideas, and feedback from anyone anywhere-while sitting at home in my pajamas!

For the longest time, I felt that professional development was something done to me. It lacked meaning and rarely helped me acquire skills and knowledge that enabled me to create a better school culture. Social media put me on a path to becoming the driver of my own professional learning.

Inspired to offer this kind of learning to my entire school, I began sharing with groups of teachers several ideas, strategies, and tools I'd acquired from my personal learning network. We worked as a team to create a shared vision for integrating social media to enhance teachers' learning, with an emphasis on free web-based tools. At targeted learning sessions after school, I demonstrated how to integrate these tools to enhance learning. Teachers chose from a variety of topics throughout the school year. I followed up with teachers who attended-and used social media to celebrate their successes! As we removed the fear of failure and provided necessary support for a culture of experimentation, teachers began to leverage their newfound autonomy and online tools.

Soon, instructional practices shifted and students also began to harness social media to support their own learning. Rather than limiting themselves to the expertise available within our school, students became part of a global classroom, drawing on expertise from leaders and thinkers around the world.

To provide students and teachers with access to this global classroom, I also needed to make sure the path was clear. Many districts block social media sites to "protect" students. Policies like these can be counterproductive; students will access social media outside school, so why not provide a supportive environment in which they learn to use these tools productively and safely? Digital leaders' work involves helping community and district leaders understand the power of social media for learning and creating tech policies that support access.

Sharing Positive News

From Communications Boost to Public Relations Strategy

Once students and staff embraced this shift of learning from-and sharing with-a wider network, my job was to communicate this positive change far and wide. New Milford's communications strategy evolved into a powerful public relations strategy of targeted blog posts, tweets, and Facebook updates. These communications about the work taking place in our school caught the eye of national media outlets, which began producing news stories focused on our innovative practices.

Educators make a difference every day, but mainstream media often focus on the negative stories. Subtle but hopeful stories-such as a teacher's conversion to a paperless digital learning environment-go unseen and unheard. Social media give school leaders the means to shape and share their school's narrative on their own terms, to highlight the everyday successes and hard work of students and teachers.

Amplifying Students' Stories

As well as raising New Milford's profile and enabling school leaders to tell a more nuanced, optimistic story about our work, digital communication tools empowered students to tell their stories to new audiences. This was the case with a presentation created with digital tools and shared through social media by sophomore Sarah Almeda.

As part of our Academies program, in addition to the added coursework students must complete to receive an Academies certification, students engage in authentic learning activities-field trips or special projects-outside the school day. For one such project, students read Out of Our Minds: Learning to Be Creative by Ken Robinson (Capstone, 2011); watched a video on the importance of creativity in learning; then created a presentation sharing their creative experiences with their Academies group. Students could use any format they wanted-a written document, poster, collage, pin board through Pinterest, or any other media or combination thereof-as long as they answered these questions:

Tell about your creative self and how you are creative.

When do you feel the most inspired?

What stifles your creativity?

Tell about (at least) one other person whose creativity you admire.

What do schools need to do better to enhance students' creativity? Provide an example of something that helped you be more creative-or that would have helped you.

In the resulting presentations, student after student explained the essential role of creativity in their learning-and how they yearned for freedom over how they might demonstrate their present and emerging learning. All students shone as they presented meaningful learning artifacts that reflected their own choices and voices.

Sarah's video (created with a graphics tablet, Bamboo Pad, the iMovie editing program, and QuickTime to record, on the computer screen, Sarah in the act of drawing) was one of the most thought-provoking student presentations I've seen. Not only was it created entirely through self-directed learning, it also sent a strong message about the power of creativity. In the video, Sarah articulated how schools strip creativity away from students and how schools could change this situation.

Social media amplified Sarah's voice and took her project to a whole new level. She uploaded her completed video to YouTube, and we were able to share her project well beyond our school community. To date, it's been viewed more than 10,000 times. With her permission, I shared the link to her video through my Twitter and other social media accounts and posted it on the school Facebook page. Other students, teachers, and schools could now see Sarah's exemplary work. Ken Robinson himself commented on Sarah's project on Twitter and posted the YouTube link to it on his official Facebook page.

The Most Important Transformation

To use social media effectively, I had to see myself as a learner, not just a leader. Making the shift from traditional to digital leadership demanded that I question my own assumptions, acknowledge how much I don't know, take risks, and learn from failure. This transition from a fixed to a growth mind-set was probably the most important component of the transformation at my school.

Just as teachers differentiate instruction for a variety of learning styles in the classroom, school leaders should differentiate our communication efforts if we want true partnerships between home and school. As leaders, we have the power to shape the culture of our schools. Using social media and digital tools as a lever, we can open the door to new ways of learning, thinking, and communicating for all members of our community.

Endnotes

Sheninger, E. (2014). Digital leadership: Changing paradigms for changing times. Thousand Oaks: CA: Corwin Press

In 2013, Newsweek identified New Milford High School as one of the top 2,000 U.S. high schools (and I immediately took to Twitter to share the article)!

Eric Sheninger is a senior fellow with the International Center for Leadership in Education and Scholastic Achievement Partners, and K-12 Director of Technology and Innovation in the Spotswood School District in New Jersey. He is author of Digital leadership: Changing Paradigms for Changing Times (Corwin, 2014).

KEYWORDS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Transforming Your School with Digital Communication

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
April 2015 | Volume 72 | Number 7 Communications Skills for Leaders Eric Sheninger In 2009, as principal at New Milford High School in New Jersey, I made a small change that ultimately transformed my leadership style and my school. I shifted from using traditional forms of communication with families and community members-newsletters and e-mail-to using social media.

# data[].attributes.body
Week 6

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The approach that you take will have a significant impact on your ability to motivate your team members. So, it's important to understand how your perceptions of what motivates them can shape your management style.

We'll now take a more in-depth look at the two different theories, and discover how and when they can be useful in the workplace.

Theory X

Theory X managers tend to take a pessimistic view of their people, and assume that they are naturally unmotivated and dislike work.

Work in organizations that are managed like this can be repetitive, and people are often motivated with a "carrot and stick" approach. Performance appraisals and remuneration are usually based on tangible results, such as sales figures or product output, and are used to control and "keep tabs" on staff.

This style of management assumes that workers:

Dislike their work.

Avoid responsibility and need constant direction.

Have to be controlled, forced and threatened to deliver work.

Need to be supervised at every step.

Have no incentive to work or ambition, and therefore need to be enticed by rewards to achieve goals.

According to McGregor, organizations with a Theory X approach tend to have several tiers of managers and supervisors to oversee and direct workers. Authority is rarely delegated, and control remains firmly centralized.

Although Theory X management has largely fallen out of fashion in recent times, big organizations may find that adopting it is unavoidable due to the sheer number of people that they employ and the tight deadlines that they have to meet.

Theory Y

Theory Y managers have an optimistic opinion of their people, and they use a decentralized, participative management style. This encourages a more collaborative, trust-based relationship between managers and their team members.

People have greater responsibility, and managers encourage them to develop their skills and suggest improvements. Appraisals are regular but, unlike in Theory X organizations, they are used to encourage open communication rather than to control staff.

Theory Y organizations also give employees frequent opportunities for promotion.

This style of management assumes that workers are:

Happy to work on their own initiative.

More involved in decision making.

Self-motivated to complete their tasks.

Enjoy taking ownership of their work.

Seek and accept responsibility, and need little direction.

View work as fulfillling and challenging.

Solve problems creatively and imaginatively.

Theory Y has become more popular among organizations. This reflects workers' increasing desire for more meaningful careers that provide them with more than just money.

It's also viewed by McGregor as superior to Theory X, which, he says, reduces workers to "cogs in a machine," and likely demotivates people in the long term.

When to Use Theory X and Theory Y

Most managers will likely use a mixture of Theory X and Theory Y. You may, however, find that you naturally favor one over the other. You might, for instance, have a tendency to micromanage or, conversely, you may prefer to take a more hands-off approach.

Although both styles of management can motivate people, the success of each will largely depend on your team's needs and wants and your organizational objectives.

You may use a Theory X style of management for new starters who will likely need a lot of guidance, or in a situation that requires you to take control such as a crisis.

But you wouldn't use it when managing a team of experts, who are used to working under their own initiative, and need little direction. If you did, it would likely have a demotivating effect and may even damage your relationship.

Circumstance can also affect your management style. Theory X, for instance, is generally more prevalent in larger organizations, or in teams where work can be repetitive and target-driven.

In these cases, people are unlikely to find reward or fulfilllment in their work, so a "carrot and stick" approach will tend to be more successful in motivating them than a Theory Y approach.

In contrast, Theory Y tends to be favored by organizations that have a flatter structure, and where people at the lower levels are involved in decision making and have some responsibility.

The Disadvantages of Theory X and Theory Y

However, both theories have their challenges. The restrictive nature of Theory X, for instance, could cause people to become demotivated and non-cooperative if your approach is too strict. This may lead to high staff turnover and could damage your reputation in the long term.

Conversely, if you adopt a Theory Y approach that gives people too much freedom, it may allow them to stray from their key objectives or lose focus. Less motivated individuals may also take advantage of this more relaxd working environment by shirking their work.

If this happens, you may need to take back some control to ensure that everyone meets their team and organizational goals.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Theory X and Theory Y - Understanding People's Motivations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The approach that you take will have a significant impact on your ability to motivate your team members. So, it's important to understand how your perceptions of what motivates them can shape your management style. We'll now take a more in-depth look at the two different theories, and discover how and when they can be useful in the workplace.

# data[].attributes.body
Week 5

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Effective school leaders are key to large-scale, sustainable education reform. For some time, educators have believed that principals must be instructional leaders if they are to be the effective leaders needed for sustained innovation. Newmann, King, and Youngs (2000), for example, found that school capacity is the crucial variable affecting instructional quality and corresponding student achievement. And at the heart of school capacity are principals focused on the development of teachers' knowledge and skills, professional community, program coherence, and technical resources.

Fink and Resnick (2001) examined school districts' efforts to develop principals into instructional leaders who could achieve a large-scale turnaround in literacy and numeracy. They described some core strategies for developing the role of the principal as instructional leader, including five mutually reinforcing sets of strategic activities: nested learning communities, principal institutes, leadership for instruction, peer learning, and individual coaching.

Characterizing instructional leadership as the principal's central role has been a valuable first step in increasing student learning, but it does not go far enough. Literacy and mathematics improvements are only the beginning. To ensure deeper learning-to encourage problem solving and thinking skills and to develop and nurture highly motivated and engaged learners, for example-requires mobilizing the energy and capacities of teachers. In turn, to mobilize teachers, we must improve teachers' working conditions and morale. Thus, we need leaders who can create a fundamental transformation in the learning cultures of schools and of the teaching profession itself. The role of the principal as instructional leader is too narrow a concept to carry the weight of the kinds of reforms that will create the schools that we need for the future.

Principals Who Lead Cultural Change

Leaders have a deeper and more lasting influence on organizations and provide more comprehensive leadership if their focus extends beyond maintaining high standards. Collins (2001) examined 11 businesses with a minimum of 15 years of sustained economic performance each. The study identified the effective leader, who "catalyzes commitment to a compelling vision and higher performance standards," as well as the executive leader, who goes beyond performance standards and "builds enduring greatness" (p. 20). The best examples of school system success represent accomplishments at the effective level-high performance standards with corresponding results. These accomplishments may be impressive, but they do not represent the kinds of deep, lasting reforms implemented by executive leaders, who establish the conditions for "enduring greatness."

When the goal is sustainable change in a knowledge society, business and education leaders increasingly have more in common. Like the business leader, the principal of the future-the Cultural Change Principal-must be attuned to the big picture, a sophisticated conceptual thinker who transforms the organization through people and teams (Fullan, 2001). Cultural Change Principals display palpable energy, enthusiasm, and hope. In addition, five essential components characterize leaders in the knowledge society: moral purpose, an understanding of the change process, the ability to improve relationships, knowledge creation and sharing, and coherence making.

Moral Purpose

Moral purpose is social responsibility to others and the environment. School leaders with moral purpose seek to make a difference in the lives of students. They are concerned about closing the gap between high-performing and lower-performing schools and raising the achievement of-and closing the gap between-high-performing and lower-performing students. They act with the intention of making a positive difference in their own schools as well as improving the environment in other district schools.

Let me be clear: If the goal is systemic improvement-to improve all schools in the district-then principals should be nearly as concerned about the success of other schools in the district as they are about their own school. Sustained improvement of schools is not possible unless the whole system is moving forward.

Student learning is paramount to the Cultural Change Principal. This principal involves teachers in explicitly monitoring student learning. But the Cultural Change Principal is also concerned with the bigger picture and continually asks, How well are other schools in the district doing? What is the role of public schools in a democracy? Are we reducing the gap between high-performing and lower-performing students in this school? district? state? nation? The Cultural Change Principal treats students, teachers, parents, and others in the school well. Such a principal also works to develop other leaders in the school to prepare the school to sustain and even advance reform after he or she departs. In short, the Cultural Change Principal displays explicit, deep, comprehensive moral purpose.

Understanding Change

The goal is not to innovate the most. Innovating selectively with coherence is better.

Having the best ideas is not enough. Leaders help others assess and find collective meaning and commitment to new ways.

Appreciate the implementation dip. Leaders can't avoid the inevitable early difficulties of trying something new. They should know, for example, that no matter how much they plan for the change, the first six months or so of implementation will be bumpy.

Redefine resistance. Successful leaders don't mind when naysayers rock the boat. In fact, doubters sometimes have important points. Leaders look for ways to address those concerns.

Reculturing is the name of the game. Much change is structural and superficial. Transforming culture-changing what people in the organization value and how they work together to accomplish it-leads to deep, lasting change.

Never a checklist, always complexity. There is no step-by-step shortcut to transformation; it involves the hard, day-to-day work of reculturing.

The Cultural Change Principal knows the difference between being an expert in a given content innovation and being an expert in managing the process of change. This principal does not make the mistake of assuming that the best ideas will carry the day. Instead, the Cultural Change Principal provides opportunities for people to visit sites that are using new ideas, invites questions and even dissent, and expects the change process to proceed in fits and starts during the first few months of implementation. Nevertheless, such a principal forges ahead and expects progress within a year because he or she has nurtured the conditions that yield results sooner rather than later.

Improving Relationships

The single factor common to successful change is that relationships improve. If relationships improve, schools get better. If relationships remain the same or get worse, ground is lost. Thus, leaders build relationships with diverse people and groups-especially with people who think differently. In complex times, emotional intelligence is a must. Emotionally intelligent leaders are able to build relationships because they are aware of their own emotional makeup and are sensitive and inspiring to others (Goleman, Boyatzis, &amp; McKee, 2002).

The Cultural Change Principal knows that building relationships and teams is the most difficult skill for both business and education leaders (Hay Management Consultants, 2000). This leader works hard to develop the full range of emotional intelligence domains, especially self-management of emotions and empathy toward others (Goleman et al., 2002). Focusing on relationships isn't just a matter of boosting achievement scores for next year, but rather a means of laying the foundation for year two and beyond. The Cultural Change Principal's efforts to motivate and energize disaffected teachers and forge relationships among otherwise disconnected teachers can have a profound effect on the overall climate of the organization. Well-established relationships are the resource that keeps on giving.

Knowledge Creation and Sharing

Creating and sharing knowledge is central to effective leadership. Information, of which we have a glut, only becomes knowledge through a social process. For this reason, relationships and professional learning communities are essential. Organizations must foster knowledge giving as well as knowledge seeking. We endorse continual learning when we say that individuals should constantly add to their knowledge base-but there will be little to add if people are not sharing. A norm of sharing one's knowledge with others is the key to continual growth for all.

The Cultural Change Principal appreciates that teaching is both an intellectual and a moral profession. This principal constantly reminds teachers that they are engaged in practicing, studying, and refining the craft of teaching. The Cultural Change Principal is the lead learner in the school and models lifelong learning by sharing what he or she has read lately, engaging in and encouraging action research, and implementing inquiry groups among the staff. Teachers who work with the Cultural Change Principal know that they are engaged in scientific discovery and the refinement of the teaching knowledge base. Knowledge creation and sharing fuels moral purpose in schools led by Cultural Change Principals.

Coherence Making

Because complex societies inherently generate overload and fragmentation, effective leaders must be coherence-makers (Fullan, 1999, 2001). The other characteristics of the change leader-moral purpose, an understanding of the change process, the ability to build relationships, and the creation and sharing of knowledge-help forge coherence through the checks and balances embedded in their interaction. Leaders with deep moral purpose provide guidance, but they can also have blinders if their ideas are not challenged through the dynamics of change, the give-and-take of relationships, and the ideas generated by new knowledge. Coherence is an essential component of complexity and yet can never be completely achieved.

Principals not attuned to leading in a culture of change make the mistake of seeking external innovations and taking on too many projects. Cultural Change Principals, by contrast, concentrate on student learning as the central focus of reform and keep an eye out for external ideas that further the thinking and vision of the school. They realize that overload and fragmentation are natural tendencies of complex systems. They appreciate the creative potential of diverse ideas, but they strive to focus energy and achieve greater alignment. They also look to the future and strive to create a culture that has the capacity not to settle for the solution of the day. Cultural Change Principals value the tensions inherent in addressing hard-to-solve problems because that is where the greatest accomplishments lie.

Leadership and Sustainability

To develop and support Cultural Change Principals, we must turn our attention to sustainability-the likelihood that the overall system can regenerate itself toward improvement. Key components of sustainability are developing the social environment, learning in context, cultivating leaders at many levels (and ensuring leadership succession), and enhancing the teaching profession.

Developing the Social Environment

Those concerned about the depletion of resources in the physical environment were the first to discuss the issue of sustainability. Our concern is the depletion of resources in the social and moral environment (Hargreaves, in press). In the social and moral environment of the school, we need the resources to close the achievement gap between high and low performers, to develop all schools in the system, and to connect schools to the strength of democracy in society. Further, if school leaders do not concern themselves with the development of the social and moral environment of the entire district (in addition to the development of the environment within their own school), then not only will the school system deteriorate, but eventually their own school will also fail.

Learning in Context

Recruiting top-performing principals and rewarding good principal performance are both important. Providing strong principal training is useful, too. But as Elmore (2000) points out,What's missing in this view [of focusing on talented individuals] is any recognition that improvement is more a function of learning to do the right thing in the setting where you work [my emphasis]. (p. 25)

Learning at work-learning in context-occurs, for example, when principals are members of a district's intervisitation study team for which they examine real problems-and the solutions they have devised-in their own systems. Learning out of context takes place when principals go to a workshop or conference. Such learning can be valuable for further development, but it is not the kind of applied learning that really makes a difference.

Learning in context has the greatest potential payoff because it is more specific, situational, and social (it develops shared and collective knowledge and commitments). This kind of learning is designed to improve the organization and its social and moral context. Learning in context also establishes conditions conducive to continual development, including opportunities to learn from others on the job, the daily fostering of current and future leaders, the selective retention of good ideas and best practices, and the explicit monitoring of performance.

Cultivating Leaders at Many Levels

An organization cannot flourish-at least, not for long-on the actions of the top leader alone. Schools and districts need many leaders at many levels. Learning in context helps produce such leaders. Further, for leaders to be able to deal with complex problems, they need many years of experience and professional development on the job. To a certain extent, a school leader's effectiveness in creating a culture of sustained change will be determined by the leaders he or she leaves behind.

Also crucial to sustained improvement is the effective succession of leaders. Leadership succession is more likely if there are many leaders at many levels. Organizations must set their sights on continual improvement at all levels, and for that they must nurture, cultivate, and appoint successive leaders who are moving in a sustained direction.

The good news for most of us is that charismatic leaders are actually a liability for sustained improvement. Collins (2001) compared 11 companies with long-term, positive financial performance profiles (a minimum of 15 consecutive years) with other companies that made short-term shifts from good to great, but failed to sustain their gains. Collins suggests that leaders who build enduring greatness are not high-profile, flashy performers but rather "individuals who blend extreme personal humility with intense professional will" (p. 21). Sustainability depends on many leaders-thus, the qualities of leadership must be attainable by many, not just a few.

Enhancing the Teaching Profession

We will not have a large pool of quality principals until we have a large pool of quality teachers because quality teachers form the ranks of the quality principal pipeline. Individualistic strategies-signing bonuses, pay hikes-will not work to boost the ranks of quality teachers; the conditions of teacher work must be conducive to continual development and proud accomplishment. And this is certainly not the case now.

In 2001, PriceWaterhouseCoopers published the results of a teacher workload study they had conducted in England and Wales. The researchers concluded that if the government is to transform the teaching force,An essential strand will be to reduce teacher workload, foster increased teacher ownership, and create the capacity to manage change in a sustainable way that can lay the foundation for improved school and pupil performance in the future. (p. 2)

Principal-leaders should work to transform teachers' working conditions. From the standpoint of sustainability, the principalship itself benefits from these improved conditions: We will only get quality principals when we have quality teachers.

The role of the principal as instructional leader has taken us only so far in the quest for continual school improvement. We now must raise our sights and focus on principals as leaders in a culture of change. School improvement depends on principals who can foster the conditions necessary for sustained education reform in a complex, rapidly changing society. Never has the time been riper for change leaders than right now.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Effective school leaders are key to large-scale, sustainable education reform. For some time, educators have believed that principals must be instructional leaders if they are to be the effective leaders needed for sustained innovation. Newmann, King, and Youngs (2000), for example, found that school capacity is the crucial variable affecting instructional quality and corresponding student achievement.

# data[].attributes.body
Week 4

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
by Charlotte Danielson

School organization" refers to how schools arrange the resources of time, space, and personnel for maximum effect on student learning. The school's organizational plan addresses those issues that affect the school as a whole, such as the master schedule, the location of staff in different rooms, and the assignment of aides to teachers or teams. (Matters that affect only individual teachers or teams-how to form reading groups for all 2nd graders, for example-are addressed in Chapter 11: Team Planning.)

Relationship to the Framework

How a school is organized is a matter for the staff to determine, and a school's organization should reflect the staff's commitment to the success of all students. Every aspect of the instructional program will convey the values and goals of the staff toward students and their learning.

High-Level Learning for All Students

Through a school's organizational patterns-whether the school is divided into teams or houses, for example, or whether it adopts a traditional or a block schedule-the staff can convey to both students and their parents that learning is important, that the business of the school is learning, and that the different elements of the school's organization are structured to support that learning. The master schedule, for example, is not established merely for the convenience of the transportation department, although bus schedules are important and must be accommodated. Nor are teams established only so that members of the faculty who are friends can work together. All arrangements must reflect an unwavering focus on student learning.

A Safe and Positive Environment

The wise deployment of space can go a long way toward ensuring a physically safe environment, particularly for young children. If classrooms, the art room, restrooms, and the library are all within easy walking distance, and if the paths to each are safe, children will feel secure going alone. In addition, a school's arrangement of teachers into teams, houses, and the like can contribute to a feeling of community, and therefore emotional safety, for students; they should feel part of a group small enough that their absence or illness would be noticed.

A Culture of Hard Work and Opportunities for Success

A focus on success is not a matter of spoon-feeding. A good school organization will offer students the optimal degree of challenge, stretching them while at the same time ensuring that they can succeed if they exert the necessary effort. Students need to know (and may need to be reminded) that it is up to them to exert the effort. For example, elementary-school teachers might let their students know that they are free to go to the computer lab or learning center once they've completed their work and mastered certain tasks; similarly, students in middle or high school could be told that if they are willing to commit to a heavy workload and fill any gaps in their understanding, they can enroll in Spanish II or an advanced placement course. Such opportunities should not constitute an exclusive club, open only to a few students; they should be open to any students willing to commit to them. The master schedule must be arranged to permit students to make these commitments and demonstrate their desire to participate in the most challenging opportunities the school has to offer.

When a school adopts a success orientation, it also commits itself to a flexible deployment of resources: nothing is carved in stone, and no one adopts a "take it or leave it" attitude. Students are assumed to be capable learners, and the school accepts its obligation to ensure successful learning by all students. Students should be able to get additional help when they need it, and to challenge the curriculum when they so choose; they should not be obliged to sit through a year of algebra if they can demonstrate, through a valid assessment, that they already understand the content. On the other hand, a student struggling with how to write a clear paragraph, for example, should be able to get help as needed.

School Organization

The research on school organization is clear: in general, small schools yield better results than large ones. This suggests that educators at large schools can help more students learn by creating subunits-schools within a school. Moreover, studies on teacher collaboration and teaming have shown that students benefit when teachers work together to promote student learning. Some schools in rural areas, of course, are too small, unable to provide a reasonable range of curricular or extracurricular offerings. But while educators in large schools can generally devise ways to break up into smaller units, those in small schools can't usually do much about their limited resources (although the Internet now provides students with learning opportunities that were not previously available).

Components of School Organization

Of course, most school staffs inherit a preexisting organizational structure. For many educators, certain aspects of the school's organization-such as the number of classes in the master schedule in a high school or the houses in a middle school-are part of the school's very identity. This reality can make altering the school's organization slow and difficult. Still, educators should consider the following aspects of the school to determine which ones, if any, should be changed.

At the elementary-school level, units are usually instructional teams or grade-level groups, in which teachers work with students from classes other than their own homerooms. For example, three 4th grade teachers might choose to work together to teach all 100 children in the grade. Many middle schools have houses in place, which might be led for instance by four teachers, each representing core curricular areas, working together with a group of 100-125 students. (When these are multi-age groups and students remain with the same teachers over several years, teachers and students grow to know one another particularly well.) Many high schools establish schools-within-a-school to create smaller and more personal learning communities. Some of these are grade-based, whereas others are organized around an instructional focus, such as technology or the arts.

Master Schedule

The influence of the master schedule is hard to overstate. The schedule structures the pace of the interactions between students and teachers, and class length affects the nature of instruction and the depth to which students are able to go at any given time. At the elementary- and middle-school levels, the master schedule conveys the relative importance of different areas of study: for example, when language arts are allocated 90 minutes a day, and science is allocated 30 minutes twice a week, students and teachers receive powerful messages about the supposed value of each subject.

Alternatives to traditional scheduling practices at the middle- and high-school levels have been widely discussed in the educational literature under the general heading of "block scheduling." Although not a panacea, block scheduling can materially affect the quality of student-teacher interactions and the nature of teacher collaboration. The main characteristic of these approaches is that they organize instructional time into longer blocks than the traditional pattern, thus allowing teachers and students greater flexibility in how they use their time. With longer blocks of time, students can embark on projects that would be difficult to complete in only 43 minutes. Teachers accustomed to relying on lecturing find that they need to vary their approach under block scheduling, enabling students to engage in deeper and more sustained exploration of content.

Deployment of Instructional Personnel

Most elementary schools assign classroom teachers groups of 20-30 students, although there are usually other teachers available as well: specialists for subjects such as art, music, and physical education; state-funded remedial reading or math teachers; Title I teachers; and teachers funded through district or external funds to serve migrant students, ESL learners, or "gifted" students. In fact, some elementary schools have more "extra" teachers than they do regular ones! The situation is different at the middle- and high-school levels, where students rotate among content specialists. In schools committed to enhancing student learning, teachers go to considerable effort to integrate "special" subjects with more "academic" disciplines. Even when the schedule demands that a class of 3rd grade students goes to art class at, say, 11:00 a.m. on Thursdays, the art teacher and the home-room teacher work to ensure that what the students are learning in the two classes is not completely separate.

Many schools-particularly at the elementary level, and sometimes motivated by state statute or by the promise of additional funds-have created more classes with fewer students in each. These efforts have had mixed results, partly because when overall class sizes are reduced, other expenses are inevitably increased-for more classroom space and for additional content specialists (and the classroom space that they need). In addition, there are frequently not enough qualified teachers to teach the new classes, especially at very large schools, resulting in at least a short-term reduction in teaching quality.

Although the research on class size has been inconclusive, studies suggest that reductions in size don't have much of an effect on student achievement unless the classes consist of 15 students or fewer. In any case, it is not the size of the homerooms that matters, but the size of instructional groups; consequently, if the entire teaching staff can be deployed in a manner that greatly reduces the size of instructional groups, results are likely to improve. A school organizational structure that supports the use of all teaching staff (including those paid for by categorical funds) to provide basic instruction can result in much smaller instructional groups than are traditionally found in schools. (For more on this subject, see Chapter 12: Learning Support.)

Grouping Strategies

A school aiming to improve student performance must develop a reasoned approach, even a philosophy, toward the grouping of students for instruction. Such an approach should not include permanent tracking. When elementary-school students are clustered as "bluebirds" or "canaries" according to their real or perceived abilities, the groups often become permanent: those who are identified early on as particularly able tend to be the ones permitted to enroll in advanced courses in high school.

Permanent tracking harms all but the highest-performing students, who themselves gain only slightly from the practice. Short-term skill grouping, however, can be highly beneficial for all students. Students who do not understand, say, subtraction with regrouping should receive targeted instruction on the concept before moving on to a skill that depends upon it (such as division). But there is no reason for students who have already grasped subtraction with regrouping to spend any more time on the topic; they should instead be more productively engaged in other topics. Hence teachers need the flexibility to create skill groups when needed, particularly for concepts that are prerequisites for later lessons.

The school's approach to scheduling and deployment of staff must support the formation of short-term skill groups when needed. In addition, the school's organization must allow for skill groups to be formed quickly and changed frequently; flexibility, in other words, is the key.

Implications for Different Levels

I have discussed the above issues separately, as though educators addressed them one at a time. In reality, of course, the various aspects of a school's organizational structure are highly intertwined and tightly related to other aspects of the school, such as curriculum, student assessment, and learning support. Still, there are important differences among schools at different levels.

Elementary Schools

Teacher teams at the elementary-school level may comprise anywhere from two to eight teachers each; more than eight, however, can become unwieldy. These teams may be organized around a single grade level (a "2nd grade team") or as "family" teams of, for example, the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades. Each arrangement has its advantages and disadvantages. Students in single-grade teams, of course, tend to be closer to one another academically than are those in family teams. On the other hand, these same students must relearn the ropes each year with a different group of teachers, and the teachers must become acquainted with a large new group of students. Academic levels may vary in family teams, but students stay with the same group of teachers for several years, reducing the startup time required at the beginning of the school year.

Middle Schools

The "middle-school philosophy"-which recognizes that young adolescents learn best when given a fair degree of autonomy, while at the same time "belonging" to a relatively small group of teachers and other students-has become dominant in schools serving the 5th or 6th to 8th grades. Students at this period in their lives experience rapid physical, emotional, and intellectual growth, matched in scope only by the first three years of life; they are experiencing fast and sometimes confusing changes. Middle schools, therefore, must provide both stability and stimulation, respecting the students' age-related concerns.

I have already suggested the major recommendation for middle schools: teachers should work in small teams, composed typically of four teachers, representing the core subjects. Additional subjects should be offered as "exploratory" opportunities for students. In addition, time should be scheduled- and instruction provided. in long blocks, permitting teachers the maximum degree of flexibility to meet student needs (and to alter internal arrangements as these needs change). When the school organization allows for the integration of various . support. teachers. Title I, remedial, migrant, gifted, and so on. teachers within each team have the best opportunity to arrange a combination of core and supplementary instruction for each student.

High Schools

Some high schools institute schools-within-a-school (SWAS), often for their 9th grade students. This structure is designed to mirror (and hence ease the transition from) the middle-school experience. If they can be managed, SWAS are recommended, as they provide students with smaller instructional units and permit them to learn the ropes of the high school-by interacting with a greater number of students and teachers, not to mention abiding by typically more structured rules of conduct-without also having to learn how to find a classroom or juggle the multiple demands of too many different courses.

Scheduling is the main aspect of school organization at the high-school level. Many high schools have by now implemented some form of block scheduling, in which students attend three to four classes on any given day rather than seven to nine. There are two basic patterns for block scheduling: four-by-four and A/B. In four-by-four schedules, students complete four "yearlong" courses each semester in periods of about 90 minutes each day. In the A/B schedule, classes are held on alternate days over the entire year; students may still be carrying six to eight courses, but they attend only half of them on any given day.

In general, block scheduling is advantageous because it provides longer instructional time and more opportunities for engaged learning. When teachers must plan for 90-minute classes, they are likely to employ different approaches than when classes are limited to 40 minutes; they can engage students more deeply in investigations, and will probably vary their instruction more. On the other hand, if teachers don't plan their time effectively, much of it may be wasted; students might devote considerable class time to independent work, for example, that might otherwise be assigned as homework. But in general, block scheduling tends to improve the school climate, with fewer discipline referrals, fewer class changes each day, greater student commitment to the work, and the potential for more engaging instruction.

The two major approaches to high-school block scheduling carry different advantages and disadvantages. Before implementing one or the other, educators are well advised to consult one of the many excellent books that have been written on the subject.

Summary

A school's organizational structures can go a long way toward promoting student learning. At all instructional levels, the school's organizational pattern can materially affect the manner in which students and teachers interact. All of these schoolwide structures should be designed to maximize teacher and student flexibility, encourage in-depth teaching and learning, and integrate as many different resources as possible.

The chart on the following page is intended to help educators examine their own school's approach to school organization and determine whether changes should be made. I have provided a similar chart at the end of each subsequent chapter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
by Charlotte Danielson School organization" refers to how schools arrange the resources of time, space, and personnel for maximum effect on student learning.

# data[].attributes.headline
Effective Communication as an Administrator.

# data[].attributes.subject
Effective Communication as an Administrator.

# data[].attributes.body
Week 3

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
One of the first lessons I learned when I became a leader with Choice was "days are for people and nights are for paper."

What does this mean?

It means that I spend my days pouring my attention and passion into the people I serve and spend the rest of my work time completing the business of being a leader. Sharpening my proverbial communication axe is something I spend a tremendous amount of time on. After all, it is commonly said that good communication skills can turn a good leader into a great one; nobody wants to be just good - we all want to be great! It's not only essential for school leaders to understand the importance of effective communication but to continually implement practices in an effort to improve their communication skills.

Here are four key ways that have helped me build a solid foundation of communication in my role:

1. Learn their style

Leaders must take the time to get to know their staff members, including making an effort to learn how they communicate best. Whether it's an email, a phone call, a text, a visit or a chat over a cup of coffee, knowing employees' preferences and outside commitments can impact effectiveness of conversations and ultimately the outcomes. This may be a trial-and-error process, but it will help narrow down solutions by being conscious of it.

When managing a large amount of staff members, it's understandable that it may become difficult to remember everyone's preferences. Try keeping a list of employee information where you can mark down notes to easily refer to.

2. Take time to digest messages

Effective communication is a two-way street. It needs to involve both how we send messages and how we receive them. As a school leader, quickly responding to messages without giving them much thought is often the easy route. This approach is something I'm personally guilty of at times. I constantly remind myself to take the time to step back and really digest what I'm reading. This means I may save emails as drafts until I have time to silence my cell phone, clear my mind of the million other thoughts racing through it and give it my undivided attention. After all, what may seem like a quick way to save time in the short-term may lead to problems in the future.

3. Be careful how you communicate

School leaders need to understand that if a staff member takes the time to send an email, schedule a meeting or bump into you in the hallway, they are doing it for a reason. On the flip side, a school leader must understand that everything written or spoken, even nonverbal cues, can being read and taken at face value. Be sure you're cognizant of your body language and tone of voice to eliminate any misunderstandings. In addition, communication can be misread or misinterpreted when it is only received in print, which is why it's important to really think about what you are sending. Sometimes a face-to-face conversation or phone call is necessary for more serious discussions. You can't always hide behind a computer screen.

If body language is something that you struggle with, I recommend reading Skill with People by Les Giblin. Remember, a smile goes a long way.

Choice uses a framework for navigating conflict or communication breakdowns in a book called Difficult Conversations: How to Discuss What Matters Most . This book has been instrumental in creating a culture of shared ownership and open communications.

4. Follow Choice's 24 Hour Rule

For communication to be effective, it must happen in a timely manner, preferably within 24 hours. When you receive an email or phone call, try to respond as soon as you can (with giving it sufficient thought). Even if you don't know the answer right now, let the staff member know you've received the message and will look into finding the answer. If a phone call or a meeting is set, remember that it was set for a reason, thus, a solution, difficult conversation, or rescheduled meeting time is expected as an outcome. School staff members want their voices heard, so it's important for school leaders to acknowledge them because we truly want to address their concerns or questions in a way that results in positive relationships.
Take the time to learn and implement these four practices, and see if you notice a change in your communication skills. Remember, school leaders and leadership teams are the face of the academies and are the key builders of relationships with the school community. W e must set the example for positive, effective communication which will, in turn, create the collaborative atmosphere in the building and relationships that stand the test of time.

Cheryl joined the Choice family in 2008. She began her journey with the company as a 2nd-Grade teacher at Global Preparatory Academy, before moving into a Curriculum and Instruction role at Bradford Academy. Cheryl's natural leadership abilities promoted her into dual role serving as an Area Superintendent and interim school leader at Macomb Montessori Academy. In 2014, Cheryl was named Principal at Bradford Academy, located in Southfield, MI - serving more than 1,400 students in grades PreK - 12. Cheryl is married with two children, Mason Gamble, 4, and Mila Avery, 2. Cheryl credits her children for keeping her grounded and ecstatically happy every day.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
4 Key Ways to Effectively Communicate with Your School Staff

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What does this mean? It means that I spend my days pouring my attention and passion into the people I serve and spend the rest of my work time completing the business of being a leader. Sharpening my proverbial communication axe is something I spend a tremendous amount of time on.

# data[].attributes.body
Week 2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Thanks to its partnership with publisher Eye on Education, Education World is pleased to present this administrator tip from School Leader Internship (4th Edition): Developing, Monitoring, and Evaluating Your Leadership Experience, by Gary E. Martin, Arnold B. Danzig, William F. Wright, Richard A. Flanary, and Fred Brown. This article provides school leaders with five factors to consider when making quality decisions.

Decision making is sine qua non to education administration because a school, like all formal organizations, is basically a decision-making structure (Hoy and Miskel, 2001). Decision making is a process that guides actions. Decisions are based on the beliefs, values and previous experiences of individuals. Leaders must know themselves, know why they choose particular paths, know whom to involve, and know which particular decision-making model to use. Today, researchers and theorists know that those at the top cannot accurately gather or predict all alternatives. They know that followers deserve to be involved and that input and collaboration result in better decisions. The first decision is to decide what level of involvement is most effective.

Leaders have at least four options of involvement in decisions: deciding alone, seeking participation and input, seeking collaboration, and letting others decide. These approaches are termed autocratic, participative, collaborative, and laissez fair, respectively. A wise leader uses participative and collaborative strategies for all important decisions. However, such an approach is not always possible, nor is it preferable in all situations. The leader must assess 5 factors to decide on the level of involvement:

Time

Urgency may require the leader to make his or her own decision without consulting others. Participative decisions, especially collaborative decisions, require more time than a decision made alone. If important decisions are at stake, the leader must schedule more time for involvement.

Staff Interest in the Decision

Barnard (1938) found that individuals have a "zone of indifference" in which they simply accept the leader's decision and are apathetic toward the decision. In these cases, the leader would not benefit from trying to gain participation or collaboration. At higher levels of interest, however, more participation or collaboration is appropriate. Leaders who desire more collaboration must generate interest in the decision.

Staff Expertise

Followers who have very low levels of expertise accept the decisions of leaders. Staff members who have higher levels of expertise require either participation or collaboration to arrive at successful decisions. The leader who desires collaboration must raise levels of expertise to successfully involve subordinates.

Importance or Need For a High-Quality Decision

Some decisions are much more important and carry significant consequences. This is usually the case for instruction and learning, whether directly or indirectly. For important questions that demand high-quality decisions, collaboration is the best model. If the decision is relatively unimportant, then the leader should simply make the decision.

Degree of Need for Buy-In or Support for the Decision

Many decisions in schools need staff support for successful implementation and results. A collaborative model often increases buy-in and support.

Education World®
Copyright © 2012, 2017 Education World

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Decision-Making for School Leaders: Five Tips | Education World

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Thanks to its partnership with publisher Eye on Education, Education World is pleased to present this administrator tip from School Leader Internship (4th Edition): Developing, Monitoring, and Evaluating Your Leadership Experience, by Gary E. Martin , Arnold B. Danzig , William F. Wright , Richard A. Flanary, and Fred Brown .

# data[].attributes.headline
Influences of Theory and Practice in the Development ofServant Leadership in Students 

# data[].attributes.subject
Influences of Theory and Practice in the Development ofServant Leadership in Students 

# data[].attributes.body
Week 1