Van T. Lac1 and Katherine Cumings Mansfield

 

Traditionally schools have been run by educated professionals that are doing what they are told they have to do by the federal and state governments.  A new age approach to school leadership is to include the student body in the decision-making process of a school.  Having students involved in making decisions for their own education makes them aware of the complexity of the education system, and also allows them to take ownership of their own education.  When someone takes ownership of something they have more pride in it and they also try harder to make it successful.  Not only does student voice help students, it helps educators.  Educators get to see the student’s ideas and they may potentially see a new way of teaching students content.  Allowing students to have a choice in their own education and a voice in the decision that affect them makes the educational system stronger and the school system more effective. 

Your article is very truthful about the models being used for teacher collaboration not being effective without true participation. I personally have been in PLCs that were extremely effective and helped me learn from my co-workers’ experiences. I have also attended PLCs, where I left feeling like I wasted valuable time of my day that could have been spent working in my classroom. There was a difference in the way the meeting was structured that affected the results. When the principal was part of the meeting with an agenda for us to discuss, the meeting flowed well with everyone participating as the principal always made sure everyone had a voice in the conversation. When the principal was not in the meetings and there was not an agenda, I felt like one issue was slightly discussed with no depth, then the entire time was filled with one teacher talking about other random issues that did not pertain to the other teachers. In “Leaders and Learners,” Hirsh and Hord (2008) stated that principal involvement impacts the effectiveness of the PLC since teachers notice the principal’s participation to determine the importance of the meeting. In my PLC experiences, the teacher participation changed as the leadership participation changed. I am sure the same results happen when a teacher does not have buy-in for the PLC meeting. Therefore, that teacher is not going to benefit from the meeting without his or her participation. 

Thank you for sharing this article. 

Crystal Berry  7/15/18

References

Hirsh, S., & Hord, S. (2008). Leader & Learner. Principal Leadership, 26-30.

I really enjoyed reading your article I think this article is spot on in regards to how important it is to have participation. I have not heard of this the different organization models that are a common element. Those three; common planning time, professional learning communities, and critical friends groups is interesting because one would not think that critical friends would be necessary. Professional networking is extremely important in helping to grow an educator mind and motivation. 

This article focuses on two different organizational structures of the today's schools and which one is more conducive to teacher leaders taking initiative to lead. In the traditional bureaucratic school structure schools are ran by administrators who set forth rules, regulations, and procedures and focus heavily on monitoring the implementation of these rules and regulations. Administrators in bureaucratic school systems observe teachers and students frequently to ensure these rules and procedures are being followed. The second school organizational system reviewed in this article is the enabling bureaucratic system. In this school system, professional development, autonomy, cooperation is promoted, and teachers are considered experts in their fields. All of these attributes make the enabling bureaucratic school system more conducive to teacher leaders (Parlar & Cansoy, 2017).

The theme of the findings of this article are that principals who are effective in creating an enabling bureaucratic system is that these principals are flexible. They are willing to forgo the bureaucracy in some cases so that teachers feel enabled to lead, but use the bureaucratic system when needed. When principals use power to maintain their positions and have no flexibility, then teachers are unhappy and begin to burn out. As for how a principal or administrator can help teachers be more effective in their occupation, this study showed that teachers need time to develop their own knowledge of educational systems and best practices. Teachers also need encouragement and guidance on how to become better teachers. Finally, this article addressed how and why the bureaucratic system was effective. Bureaucracy is needed for structure, organization, and a well run school while flexibility of this system is needed for a school system that produces teacher leaders and successful leaders (Parlar & Cansoy, 2017).