# data[].attributes.body
Hi Jarod.  I wasn't able to comment on the direct article.  I enjoyed reading the article.  It prompted me to reflect on my district and the supervision that our principal's receive.  We have principal supervisor's here and many view their roles as unneccesary and a waste of money.    It was stated that the role of the principal supervisor is one that is not understood.  I agree with this point.  In fact, I wonder if this is one reason it is met with resistance.  Many times we resist what we don't know.  Thank you for sharing.  I'm actually going to share this with my principal.  She and I have had discussions about this before.

# data[].attributes.headline
Module 7 Article- Theories of Leadership

# data[].attributes.subject
Module 7 Article- Theories of Leadership

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
September 1997 | Volume 55 | Number 1
Teaching for Multiple Intelligences Pages 30-31

Pat Burke Guild

Let's visit three schools. As we walk from classroom to classroom in the first school, we see students working on a variety of projects. In one room, a mural is in process; in another, a group of learners is building a bridge with various materials. Throughout the school, we see student work. In the library, many students' completed projects are on display. Sometimes we observe learners working together, other times alone. Older students are often working with younger ones. With some work, students are following structured directions; other times, they seem to be creating as they go along.

In the second school, groups of students are working at various learning stations. Some are sitting quietly, listening to tapes or working on written materials; others are playing games; still others are doing experiments and recording responses. The complexity of the tasks varies by age of the students and the content they are studying. In one classroom, the students are involved in a class meeting to discuss plans for their work at the centers.

In the other school, the visual displays make it immediately clear what content each class is studying. One primary grade is learning about desert animals. In an intermediate grade, the students are studying the culture of China. In another class, students are working on measurement. From classroom to classroom, we note a variety of group structures. Some students are working with a partner, some in small groups, and others in a large group with a teacher or older student directing the activity. In many classrooms, music is playing. Artwork is displayed throughout the building.

Three schools and three pleasant learning environments-with many common features: In each school, we find students actively involved in their learning, teachers talking with learners and with one another to make decisions and solve problems, students learning in a variety of ways, multiple resources available, displays of students' artwork, curriculum related to interests of students, parent volunteers working with learners, and regular assessment of the students' work as an integral part of the learning. When we talk to parents, they tell us about their satisfaction with their children's academic successes and with the emotional support the students feel at each school.

What is the mission of each of these schools? What are the goals and the beliefs? What was the catalyst for their particular approaches to learning? In one school, the teachers have studied and worked together to apply the theory of multiple intelligences; in another school, teachers are applying theories of learning styles; and in the third school, the teachers apply theories of brain-based education. Can you tell which school is committed to which of these theories by the descriptions of the visits?

Areas of Overlap

If we visited each of the schools for a longer period of time and talked with the teachers in depth, we would hear both similarities and differences in their beliefs and practices. Multiple intelligences, learning styles, and brain-based education have particular theoretical constructs, research bases, and applications. These fields are distinct and separate from one another in some ways, but in the practical environment of the school classroom, which calls for the application of the theories, the outcomes look strikingly similar.

Educators who believe in the concepts of learning styles, brain-based education, and multiple intelligences bring an approach and attitude to their teaching of focusing on how students learn and the unique qualities of each learner. Each of these theories offers a comprehensive approach to learning and teaching, not a one-shot program. Each can be a catalyst for positive student learning. Each forces us to examine our values about people, learning, and education to make the hundreds of daily decisions that put beliefs into practice. What are some of the commonalties of brain-based education, learning styles, and multiple intelligences? I propose six areas of overlap.

Each of the theories is learning and learner-centered. The learner is the most important focus of the educational system. In an appropriate way, students are the center of attention. Schools that are learner-centered focus their energies on helping all students to be successful learners. They weigh decisions about structure, rituals, routines, class composition, curriculum content and materials, and assessments and evaluation for their effect on the learners. Conversations center on learning. Outcomes emanate from the learners' needs and interests. Curriculum is organic, not preset to be covered in a specific time. The learning process is the dominant focus.

The teacher is a reflective practitioner and decision maker. In order to appropriately apply learning styles, multiple intelligences, and brain-based education, teachers must understand the theories, continue to study them, reflect upon them, and make appropriate applications for their own students and their own situations. The principles of the theories are a rationale for decisions and a catalyst for continual examination of schooling practices. Teachers have frequent and challenging conversations about their work.

The student is also a reflective practitioner. Students talk about their own learning and are active in the planning and assessment of the learning process. They are engaged in exploring, experimenting, creating, applying, and evaluating their ways of learning, as well as interacting actively with the content and concepts they are studying.

The whole person is educated. Teachers pay attention to the cultural, physical, social, and emotional life of the learner as well as to his or her academic life. Each of the theories promotes personalization of education by connecting the student's total life to the learning in the classroom. Educators acknowledge developmental stages and consider them in instructional and curriculum decisions. Respect for every individual is paramount and is evident in the climate of the school, including its management and its discipline procedures. When a child has a learning problem, comprehensive knowledge about the student becomes the basis of a solution.

The curriculum has substance, depth, and quality. Basic skills are treated seriously and frequently learned in the context of appropriate applications. Schools spell out high and sometimes uniform standards for learning outcomes, but they consciously avoid standardization of curriculum and methodologies. Proponents of brain-based education, learning styles, and multiple intelligences convincingly demonstrate that accommodating the students' learning strengths and individual intelligences and attending to ways the brain absorbs and processes information result in more effective learning.

Each of these theories promotes diversity. It is a core principle in each theory that individuals are unique and that this uniqueness has an effect on students' various ways of learning. Teachers and students celebrate and foster diversity.

Common Cautions

Each of these theories also offers similar cautions. None pretends to be the single panacea to educational dilemmas. Proponents of learning styles, multiple intelligences, and brain-based education acknowledge the importance of good, solid teaching skills. Those practicing these theories neither discard research nor the wisdom of the past. Rather, they integrate current promising practices into the applications of the theories.

Each theory also, while it presents specific terms, labels, and vocabulary, cautions against simplistic applications of those terms. The original researchers of the theories continue to explore and develop their ideas and they warn against trivial quick-fix practices in the name of the theory.

Finally, none of the original theories aims to be a cookbook approach to teaching. When a theory about how people learn turns into a standardized program, it is a contradiction in both philosophy and practice.

The bottom line is that learning is a complex process and students learn in various ways. The teacher who acknowledges and actively responds to these truths will facilitate learning success for more learners. The theorists and promoters of brain-based education, learning styles, and multiple intelligences can contribute to effective applications by pointing out the complimentary aspects of their work. The primary message should be the need for serious understanding of the learner and the learning process.

Currently, too many students are not learning successfully in our schools-for a whole variety of reasons. Application of the theories of multiple intelligences, learning styles, and brain-based education offers more students the opportunity to succeed by focusing attention directly on how they learn. This priority is long overdue in our schools. We would be wise to keep the common principles of the theories of multiple intelligences, learning styles, and brain-based education in mind and not let competitiveness and differences among vocabulary and specific applications threaten the positive impact for teachers and students.

Endnote

For a discussion of approach and attitude, see Pat Burke Guild and Stephen Garger, Marching to Different Drummers (Alexandria, Va.: ASCD, 1985).

Pat Burke Guild is a consultant and part-time faculty member at Western Washington University's Seattle Urban Campus. She can be reached at P.O. Box 99131, Seattle, WA 98199 (e-mail: patguild@isomedia.com).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
September 1997 | Volume 55 | Number 1 Teaching for Multiple Intelligences Pages 30-31 Pat Burke Guild Let's visit three schools. As we walk from classroom to classroom in the first school, we see students working on a variety of projects.

# data[].attributes.body
The Power of Collective Efficacy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the 1970s, Albert Bandura, a psychologist at Stanford University, uncovered an interesting pattern in working-group dynamics. He observed (1977) that a group's confidence in its abilities seemed to be associated with greater success. In other words, the assurance a person places in his or her tea

# data[].attributes.body
"How to Keep Mutiny from Sinking Your Change Effort."
http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/jun17/vol74/num09/How-to-Keep-Mutiny-from-Sinking-Your-Change-Effort.aspx

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Online June 2017 | Volume 74
Gearing Up for Change Pages 28-32

Lee Ann Jung

The usual narrative of school change is so often repeated that the story is familiar to nearly every educator. First, a teacher or leader attends a conference session or reads a book and becomes excited about a new research-based practice. An idea for school change is born! That person involves others, and discussion about the idea evolves either informally or as a part of a committee or professional learning community. A group of early adopters may even be identified to start implementing the new practice. Eventually, the leadership team agrees to try to spread this practice schoolwide, and a new initiative is presented to the faculty. Everyone behind the idea has studied-and invested significant time in-the new, research-based practice. They're enthusiastic about pushing it forward for the good of all students in the school. What could go wrong?

This story of school change would be simpler, although possibly less interesting, if the whole faculty agreed before the school adopted the practice, and then learning in the school improved. In fact, that kind of fairy tale ending rarely happens. Instead, as buzz generates about the policy or practice being considered, some degree of mutiny often begins to form in the school, and the shiny bubble of enthusiasm bursts. Teachers say or think things like: "It's just one more thing to do, and I don't have time." "What's wrong with the way we do it now?" "It's only a trend. I'll wait for the pendulum to swing back the other way." "Will this really help students? I don't see it." It's a well-worn path.

Sometimes, families even get into the conversation and oppose the well-intended change. Social media offers the perfect outlet for parents to band together and publicly oppose a new effort, garnering support from other families. The mutiny gains momentum. Disparaging comments and discussions online (easily seen by anyone) can become a source of embarrassment for leaders, who feel they have failed. In the most heated situations, school boards become involved. Thus, a promising effort can be thwarted before it ever gets off the ground. The once-enthusiastic change agents retreat in defeat, wondering what went wrong.

The Case for "Disagree and Commit"

What can teacher leaders and administrators do to prevent this kind of creeping rebellion from taking down potentially effective initiatives? There are many points at which an attempt at change can go wrong. After all, leadership and the change process are complex. In this article, I want to address just one point-how to prevent a mutiny from undermining a change effort. In doing so, I'll draw on lessons from the field of business, in particular from tech giants Intel and Amazon.

In Praise of Skepticism

As educators, we want our students to be critical thinkers-to question and show skepticism. We teach them to cite data to support their opinions and to test theories and hypotheses for evidence that supports a claim. But when it's time to implement school change, we often don't appreciate these same qualities in our colleagues. Wouldn't it be better if all teachers just followed suit, never offered any criticism, and made the job of the leaders easier?

Actually, if our fellow teachers are questioning our ideas and making change efforts difficult, someone along the way has done an excellent job of promoting critical thinking and skepticism in those teachers. But how do we both value constructive critique and move an initiative forward at a pace that leads to implementation in less than a decade? The key may lie in what Intel calls "disagree and commit."

How It Works at Intel and Amazon

At Intel and Amazon, when a new idea is on the floor for consideration, employees are invited to share their opinions, including their concerns. Disagreement at this early development stage is considered healthy and helpful to the process (Heath & Heath, 2010). After all, having many people engage and bring forward their individual ideas about a project can lead to significant improvement. An important part of Intel's culture is that all concerns and disagreements are brought forward publicly. Agreeing in the meeting but then disagreeing privately within small groups is unhealthy-a breeding ground for mutiny.

At some point, the newly proposed idea takes shape, and it becomes clear that the group behind it or the leadership is moving in a particular direction. At this point, Intel employees are encouraged to agree or disagree with that decision, but to commit to implementation. Often a person in the meeting will raise his or her hand and say, "I disagree, but commit." Others follow suit until there is universal commitment. Once the decision has been made to implement an idea, everyone recognizes the importance of getting behind that idea and doing their part to make it as successful as possible.

Fuel for Data-based Decision Making

Why might the disagree-and-commit approach be healthier than continuing to debate until there is universal agreement before implementation? Shouldn't a school wait to move forward until it has buy-in from everyone? Or at least a critical mass of buy-in?

In part, yes. We can't push an initiative forward without some level of agreement. But this doesn't mean we need everyone's agreement that the initiative is the best idea. What we are asking faculty to do, once a direction is determined, is to give it their best, to implement the initiative with their full commitment.

Agreement and commitment to implement aren't the same thing. Jeffrey Bezos (2016), founder and CEO of Amazon, suggests the wording, "Look, I know we disagree on this, but will you gamble with me on it? Disagree and commit?" He argues that without trying the new idea, no one really knows for certain whether it will work.

But why would we want school faculty to commit to implementing something they don't agree is the best direction to go? Quite simply, we want to fuel the school's ability to make data-based decisions. For every initiative we select, we are to an extent guessing that a research-based or promising practice will have a positive impact on our school. In reality, this is an empirical question that can only be answered after we implement the initiative and examine our data. There is, however, one certainty: If there is mutiny and the initiative is carried out only halfheartedly or with resentment, it will likely fail-and not necessarily because it was a bad idea.

By establishing a culture of disagree and commit, we create opportunities to test initiatives in our schools and to have honest discussions about what the data reveals after implementation. We can use that data to inform subsequent decisions. But to be able to prove or disprove our hypotheses about a new practice, we must have implemented it with fidelity. Real buy-in happens when teachers integrate a change and then see the positive effects in students.

Grading reform, to take one example, is an excellent opportunity to use disagree and commit. Subgroups of families or teachers often believe that traditional ways of grading are fairer, easier to use, and-as a result-better left alone. There may also be groups who feel the specific language being proposed for report cards or in policies to guide classroom assessment isn't quite right. In some schools, this debate goes on for years before any change is put into place. In other schools, however, decisions are made with purposeful input from stakeholders, new grading practices are implemented, and the school collects data.

I recently worked as a consultant with a school in which the leadership brought a representative team of teachers together to make initial decisions about grading policy and the documentation used to report students' learning. There was disagreement even in this small group. Two teachers felt that, for the language arts reporting categories, reading nonfiction and fiction should be reported separately. Others felt that the skills were transferable and that they didn't need to report those as distinctly separate categories.

In the end, although disagreement remained, the team chose to keep the categories separate and revisit the question the next year. From their data and reflections, they will be able to make decisions on how to revise or finalize their procedures. But debating for years would have left the school with no new information on which to base their decisions, and would have delayed or derailed implementation of grading reforms.

Five Initiative-Saving Steps

What can school leaders do to get staff members to disagree and commit to implement an initiative? Try these five steps.

1. Establish the protocol of school change.

Describe the disagree-and-commit model and the rationale behind it to the faculty. Impress on them the need for full commitment to implementation of ideas that are going forward, even when there isn't universal agreement about the practices, so the school can learn from data and grow. Invite disagreement and honest, open communication in public forums-while discouraging private mutiny, for the health of the school.

2. Involve families early on.

Families are often informed about a significant school change after that change has been made. Understandably, schools sometimes don't want to ruffle parents' feathers until all the kinks in a new initiative are ironed out. Many times, however, leaders can avoid massive turmoil by involving families earlier in the process. We can provide information on why we are considering a change and create opportunities for parents to voice their opinions on some of the negotiable aspects of the initiative. Most parents aren't experts in education, but they care deeply about the outcomes of their children's schooling. Many want to have an understanding of bigger school changes. Intentionally inviting families into conversations can be a wise investment in an initiative's success.

3. Be clear where the choices are-and aren't.

When presenting a new idea or practice to faculty members, it's important to be clear on what's fixed and what's flexed. That is, be honest about what has already been decided and what aspects you're still seeking input on. There is nothing more frustrating than being asked for input after a decision has already been made. That's not a good use of time, and it burns serious social capital with your faculty. Instead, as you present the initiative, describe the nonnegotiables (what's already been decided) and open up the floor for discussion on the components for which you're still seeking input.

4. Be prepared to shift from discussion to commitment to implementation.

As the discussion of the change initiative reaches the point of saturation and all points seem to have been considered, take a barometer of the group, summarize the discussion so far, and move forward. We want to give the faculty plenty of time to consider an initiative and ensure that we have everyone's feedback, but we don't want the discussion phase to carry on for months, or worse, years. Leaders must be prepared to close the discussion, make a decision with the input they've received, and call for commitment on whether to move forward with the initiative. Without a doubt, there will still be those who disagree, but this is the time to remind the group why implementing the change wholeheartedly and with fidelity is necessary.

There will, of course, be times when a small group pilots an initiative. The size of the group implementing the change is unimportant; what's important is that everyone in that group does so to the best of their ability.

It's also important for school leaders to remain open to changing direction as a result of the discussion of a change initiative-for example, because an overwhelming majority of teachers find the direction to be ill-advised and are unwilling to commit. Certainly, if a group finds the direction conflicts with a legal provision or a fundamental value held by the school or individuals within it, teachers can't be expected to commit. If the leadership team receives this kind of information from the discussion, they should reconsider the initiative.

5. Take data and make adjustments as you go.

Just as we do in the classroom, we should gather formative data on the effect an initiative is having, share that data, and make adjustments along the way. For more contentious initiatives, we may need to revisit our culture of disagree and commit regularly throughout the implementation period-and openly applaud the efforts of those who've made the decision to disagree and commit for the betterment of the school. Certainly, it's difficult to find yourself in a position of implementing an initiative the group has decided to take on that you don't fully support.

School Leader Be Nimble

Educational leaders are in the challenging position of shepherding forward school change, often in the face of heated opposition from faculty members or families. But shying away from school change is not the answer if we want to have progressive schools that respond quickly to the research and recommended practices from the field. We must remain actively engaged with the research and nimble enough to respond to it in our own schools. School leaders must also have the skills to guide difficult and productive conversations about implementation with faculty members. The disagree-and-commit approach, situated within the context of data-based decision making, offers leaders one more tool for successfully implementing difficult school change.

References

Bezos. J. (2016). 2016 letter to shareholders, Amazon.

Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2010). Made to stick: Why some ideas take hold and others come unstuck. New York: Random House.

Tracy, B. (2010). How the best leaders lead: Proven secrets to getting the most out of yourself and others. New York: AMACOM.

Lee Ann Jung is an education consultant and chief academic officer of the ASCD Student Growth Center. Follow her on Twitter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Keep Mutiny from Sinking Your Change Effort

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Online June 2017 | Volume 74 Gearing Up for Change Pages 28-32 Lee Ann Jung The usual narrative of school change is so often repeated that the story is familiar to nearly every educator. First, a teacher or leader attends a conference session or reads a book and becomes excited about a new research-based practice.

# data[].attributes.body
"Teacher Recruitment and Retention: It's Complicated"

https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2018/01/24/teaching-shortages-many-answers-for-a-complex.html?qs=educational+leadership+organization

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
At a broad national level, statistics tell us there is no teacher shortage. In fact, the number of U.S. teachers has grown by 13 percent in four years, far outpacing the 2 percent rise in student enrollment during the same period.

But that doesn't mean teacher shortages aren't real.

In certain states and districts, and in particular specialties like special education or foreign languages, teacher shortages are a recurring fact of life. An Education Week analysis of federal data finds that all 50 states and most territories reported experiencing statewide shortages in one teaching area or another for either the 2016-17 school year, the current one, or both. Besides special education and foreign languages, frequent problem areas included math, computer science, science, English/language arts, and English-as-a-second-language instruction.

But districts also struggle to find teachers who reflect the entirety of their student bodies-males and African-American and Latino teachers are in particularly short supply.

Rural districts are also perennially hard to keep fully staffed, though the problem is more acute in the remotest of rural districts than it is in those that are closer to cities.

As Dan Goldhaber, the director of the Center for Education Data and Research at the University of Washington, told Education Week last year, "it's not the case that we have a nationwide teacher shortage. It is the case that we have a shortage in particular schools and school systems. So if we try to apply a generic solution to what is a nuanced problem, we're not very likely to move the needle very much."

So what should districts do to better recruit teachers in the face of such complexity? The simplest answer, of course, might be to pay teachers more. U.S. teachers make less than 60 cents for every dollar paid to people with the same level of education in other professions, according to a 2017 report by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. That ratio puts the United States at the bottom of the more than two dozen industrialized nations in the study.

Short of offering top-dollar salaries, a handful of districts are experimenting with perks designed to appeal to teachers' wallets. The Niles Township district in Skokie, Ill., for example, built day-care centers for its employees. And, in California's Santa Clara Unified District, teachers are on a waiting list to get into one of the 70 townhouse units at Casa del Maestro. The below-market-rate units are available to district employees for up to seven years.

Across the country, in Guilford County, N.C., the school system has responded to a nagging shortage of teachers for science, technology, engineering, and math, or STEM, classes by creating its own licensure program -the first district in the state to do so. The new certification pathway allows the district to recruit professionals or graduate students steeped in those disciplines and train and mentor them to work in Guilford County schools.

And what keeps teachers around once they're hired? An Education Week survey of a nationally representative group of 500 teachers suggests that leadership may be even more important than salary in keeping teachers on the job. Eighteen percent of respondents saw leadership as a key factor in any decision about whether to go or stay on the job, while 17 percent cited salary considerations. School climate was also named by 17 percent of teacher-respondents.

Leadership support may be especially important for special educators, who arguably have the highest turnover rate. Conventional wisdom often suggests that challenging students, prickly parents, and crushing paperwork drive that attrition. But special educators also complain about a lack of support from principals, difficulty balancing competing priorities from various supervisors, and ignorance (and sometimes disrespect) about what they do from peers, among other factors.

In the end, what special educators want to spend their time doing is the same as what all teachers want to be doing: teaching children. The cross-cutting theme in this report may be that anything school leaders and districts can do to enable teachers to focus on teaching-rather than finding child care or getting principal support-is time well spent.

Published in Print: January 24, 2018, as Teaching Shortages: Many Answers for a Complex Problem

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Back to Top

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
getting and keeping good teachers series

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Teacher Recruitment and Retention: It's Complicated

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
At a broad national level, statistics tell us there is no teacher shortage. In fact, the number of U.S. teachers has grown by 13 percent in four years, far outpacing the 2 percent rise in student enrollment during the same period. But that doesn't mean teacher shortages aren't real.

# data[].attributes.body
"10 Rules for New Administrators"

http://web.a.ebscohost.com.easydb.angelo.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=5&sid=204c7ad9-5abb-4fb2-8fc0-f57402de4e91%40sessionmgr4009

# data[].attributes.body
"Impact of Instructional Supervision on Student Achievement:
Can We Make the Connection? "

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED496124.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
"Standards for Principal Supervisors Bring Sharper Focus to Role"

https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2016/01/06/standards-for-principal-supervisors-bring-sharper-focus.html?qs=instructional+supervision