From the Emergenetics perspective, my thinking attributes land mostly in the "social" (relational, intuitive, socially aware, empathetic) category as I love connecting and learning from others, but I could equally be considered “conceptual” in that I am a big picture thinker.  My behavior scores indicate that I am introspective and an easy-going peacekeeper who prefers a win-win approach to conflict resolution. Generally this makes me quite flexible and open to new ideas and change. 

I certainly see the value in taking such tests but equally I think we must be mindful about how we use the results. In my experience these measures become problematic when results are used to justify the bad behaviors of certain users. Imagine an assertive colleague saying, “I am sorry interrupted you and lost my temper, but I am a GOLD person and it is more important to me that we get through our to-do list in this meeting first” or if a colleague who identifies as GREEN excuses confrontational behaviour by stating, “I am sorry, but I am not a people person" or "unlike you, I am a scientific and logical thinker so this makes it difficult for me to see your point”. We must understand that these tests are tools that provide us with some, but not all of the data we need to help build our collaborative competencies. That being said, I feel that the results of the tests I have taken offer me a useful personal inventory of my personality traits  and help me to better understanding the kind of leader I want to become.

 

Pfau (2015) details how a damaging generated mindset, formed by our lived experience, can bind us. I have come to believe that the most damaging lies are not necessarily the ones we tell ourselves, but those that others tell us. We internalize these harmful narratives and assumptions, sowing the seeds of self-doubt. One such lie is that I am too nice or too kind to ever be an effective leader. “Nice” is not a quality commonly associated with traditional definitions of leadership (Bass & Riggio, 2006). Pushovers are not be leadership material; they are less ambitious, less intellectual, less resilient, and less driven (Hauser, 2018). Once, a principal made it their personal mission to “toughen” me up and “make a leader” out of me. In the end, trying to please this person by becoming someone I wasn't left me feeling inauthentic and lost. 

Combs, Miser & Whitaker (1999) stress the importance of leaders taking personal and professional inventory towards cultivating positive self-belief. This process requires we acknowledge, embrace, and further cultivate our strengths. Pfau recommends that you “orient your life around your wiring – your strengths, personality, values, gifts and talents. Look for ways to use them every day so you can lower the time you work outside your zone of strength” (Pfau, 2015, p.1).  In The Myth of the Nice Girl, Fran Hauser (2018) challenges the faulty assumption that being nice and being a leader are mutually exclusive. Today, I have come to know that being “nice” is my personal and professional capital. I am coming to learn that as a transformational leader  - my kindness, and similar core values and beliefs such as fairness, courage, resilience, integrity, and empathy - are all essential leadership assets that I possess.

Lynch (2015) asserts that “what distinguishes a transformational leader is the combination of head and heart, and the ability to understand and apply emotions effectively to connect with and influence followers” (p.1). I have always been human centered in my daily life and my work. My ability to lead with both head and heart, coupled with my core values and beliefs will inform a leadership style that works to foster effective relationships by leveraging individualized consideration (Bass & Riggio, 2006). I have learned to foster relational trust by prioritizing connection, empathy, listening over talking and by always assuming positive intentions. I fundamentally believe  that we must “behave our way to trust” (Fullan, 2018) and that transparency, honesty, and integrity are paramount. The trust and respect that I have earned from colleagues by living my core values openly and honestly has inadvertently blessed me with opportunities to mentor and build professional capacity in others.  I have become passionate about helping others to achieve their goals and reach their full potential in our profession and expect this will become a foundational part of my emerging identity as a transformational leader. 

Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership. Psychology press.

Combs, A. W., Miser, A. B., & Whitaker, K. S. (1999). On becoming a school leader: A person-centered challenge. ASCD.

 

Fullan, M. (2018). The principal: three keys to maximizing impact. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, a Wiley brand, Ontario Principals Council.

 

Hauser, F. (2019). The myth of the nice girl: achieving a career you love without becoming a person you hate. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

 

Lynch, L. (2015). Becoming a Transformational School Leader. Retrieved from https://www.theedadvocate.org/becoming-a-transformational-school-leader/

 

Phau, M. (2018). Mindset: The Lies that Bind. Retrieved from https://www.chrisheinz.com/blog/mindset-the-lies-that-bind

 

The Principal: In other contexts the principal noted the positive impact of special reward days on community building and student motivation. He assumes this formula will translate to CGCS. He deals directly with the students because he feels this decision is theirs. When he senses mutiny, he doubles down on his decision and tells the staff the non-uniform day will proceed as planned. He engages in self-protection becoming more assertive and confrontational.

 

The Student and Parent support for a non-uniform day is overwhelming. The students and parents were informed before the teachers.

The Staff perspective varies. Previously they were consulted when similar decisions were made. The “traditionalists” (who founded CGCS) feel antagonized, some remain neutral and some are in favour. A few staff members launch a whispering campaign. Others complain directly to the principal’s line manager. The staff meeting ends in a standoff.

 

Me - I am neutral in the beginning as I can see both perspectives. I prefer to listen and gather information to inform my perspective towards making a final decision.

 

The Principal is confused because he is an analytical communicator who deals with issues logically. Communication is direct and to the point. He attaches no meaning or emotion to the uniform and has told the students/parents decision. The staff reaction is confusing for him. 

 

The Staff: A collaborative, community-based approach to decision is the norm. Many of the teachers are “personal communicators”. Additionally, they feel their institutional knowledge is not being valued. The uniform, part of the original Charter, holds deep meaning. It “levels the playing field” by engineering social equity. With the social barriers of fashion removed, teachers can more easily teach our unique Go Girls curriculum. 

Students and Parents: They are excited about donning “onesies” and pyjamas. Let’s be honest, who wouldn’t be? When they are told the day is cancelled they complain for three seconds and then move on, because that’s what kids do. Parents want a break from laundering uniforms. 

 

Me - Frankly,  I am confused by the assumptions and lack of professionalism on both sides. I have a low tolerance for game playing and power plays.  I am usually the peacekeeper but even I know a lost cause when I see it.  I chose “avoidance”. 

 

Interpretive Question: What appears to be the key problem(s)?

1. Meaning and Belief: The lack of understanding around the meaning of the uniform was a key problem. Our school’s vision, beliefs, and values align with the Charter’s mandate and the uniform is a key part of this. When “needs”, beliefs, and/or informal group norms of the various stakeholders are not fully understood and/or disregarded conflict bubbles.

2. Communication and Decision Making: Those involved have different approaches to decision making and communication. When two groups have vastly different views on how organizational decisions are made and subsequently communicated, conflict is inevitable. Established norms around communication/decision making were not understood. 

3. Power:  Power struggles were common at CGCS, especially when organizational change was on the table. At the time, a small group of teachers held a lot of social currency and power and were capable of wielding this to influence others and to achieve their desired outcomes. 

At the time it was critical to ask “What is this really about?”. The uniform-day was not the real issue, it was only the catalyst that revealed much deeper, systemic problems in the school. As a result, assumptions were made, communication broke down, and relational trust was damaged. 

 

Beginning with organizational “norming” would help to clarify existing processes around decision making and communication before a conflict escalates. This helps to build shared frameworks, common language, and shared understanding (Bolman & Deal, 1991). Setting intention around building individual and organizational capacity in effective communication is key. For example, we traditionally began each school year with the “4 Compass Points” or similar activity to help understand our differences and common ground. This fact wasn’t shared with the principal so it wasn’t done. Was he really set up for success?

 

Since this situation escalated so quickly, an impartial moderator would have proven useful. Having someone mediate a focussed conversation supports open communication and facilitates the safe space necessary to publicly address misconception and assumption openly by combining advocacy with inquiry. Sharing and recognition of perspectives using empathy fuels connection and paves the way for a strengths-based solution that will “emphasize mutual goals and common influence” (Bolman & Deal, 1991, p. 164). This type of win-win solution would also effectively shift the dynamics of conflict and redistribute the balance of power. 

 

If the conditions are right, an open and honest discussion would make room for change and new ideas. Could a compromise be found or maybe even a collaboration where the realm of possibilities be expanded? I always wondered if a non-uniform day might be attached to fundraising for a charity of the students’ choice?  

 

I suppose we will never know in this case. The superintendent’s intervention ended the situation in “avoidance” – neutrality was maintained and everyone withdrew (Thomas, 1992). A teachable moment/opportunity was missed. The conflict went unresolved. The principal in the end didn’t keep his job and to this very day, the staff still talks about “that staff meeting”. 

     Very few acted professionally during the fallout. The principal’s style of “direct leadership” and micromanaging had not earned him the trust of the staff and the uniform debacle added insult to injury. Direct communication broke down. The “constructive personal responses” necessary to navigate conflict were nonexistent from either side (Bolman & Deal, 1991, p. 161). The next Monday staff meeting was tense. Some chose courage and expressed their viewpoints but the meeting quickly devolved into what can only be described as a shouting match. Feeling threatened, everyone mobilized in self-defence and the resulting “tunnel vision” further escalated the conflict (Combs, Miser, & Whitaker, 1999). Despite the concerns raised the principal said his decision was final and the meeting ended when a large group just got up and walked out. To keep the peace, the superintendent stepped in and cancelled the plans for the non-uniform days. However, nothing was resolved and the power struggles only worsened.

 

     The Thomas-Kilmann model (attached below) shows us the options we have when faced with conflict. The model details the pull between assertiveness or a “zero-sum” position focused on satisfying our personal needs, desired outcomes and agenda, versus cooperativeness focusing the needs of others, building mutually beneficial solutions and relational trust (Thomas, 1992). 

     In the scenario described, there was room for compromising and collaboration towards a win-win solution of sorts by collaboratively exploring a wider range of options through focused conversation, however the situation devolved into the kind of win/lose power struggle in the assertiveness/competing zone of the model. Mayer (2012) states that, “Power is the currency of conflict. Whether its exercise is intentional or not, when we are engaged in conflict our power is in play” (p. 67). For some this conflict framed a larger power struggle that lasted the entire year. 

     Bolman and Deal (1991) detail the consequences for the behaviour world and for learning under the “theory-in-use” leadership model where a leader who makes unilateral decisions and no apologies for their rational, top-down style is increasingly seen as defensive and unapproachable. This results in a defensive and mistrustful organizational culture as everyone goes into self-protection mode (p. 162). The core assumption is that others are the problem, so they need to change. Problems and conflicts are resolved in one’s private eco-chamber and pressure and indirect influence (manipulation, direct critique) are applied to get others to bend. This results in strained relationships and ultimately a deterioration in decision making and personal/organizational reflection and learning (Bolman & Deal, 1999, p. 162). 

References

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1991). Reframing organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

 

Combs, A. W., Miser, A. B., & Whitaker, K. S. (1999). Beliefs about People and Change. In On becoming a school leader: A person-centered challenge. ASCD.

Lynch, L. (2015). Becoming a Transformational School Leader. Retrieved from https://www.theedadvocate.org/becoming-a-transformational-school-leader/

Mayer, B. S. (2012). The dynamics of conflict: A guide to engagement and intervention. John Wiley & Sons.

Thomas, K. W. (1992). Conflict and conflict management: Reflections and update. Journal of organizational behavior, 13(3), 265-274.

At Queens, I trained as a middle school/high school social science teacher and taught History 10 in Ontario for several years. Fast forward to last year when I attended a PD session “Understanding the Indigenous Metis’ Dynamic Inclusive History” hosted by Darcy McRae, Metis Nation of Alberta, Region 3, Historian. My long-held belief that Metis people were only of French-Indigenous descent and that the culmination of their peoples' history was the Red River Rebellion Louis was fiction. How many young minds had I led astray? Misinformed? This experience made me recognize the depth of my own miseducation and the importance of dispelling the myths and “untruths” surrounding indigenous history in Canada. 

 

This past year, my focus has been on discovering the so what with a professional focus on (1) “Learning to Be” or developing an understanding and awareness of the importance of embedding indigenous ways of knowing and (2) “Learning to Know” or working to develop foundational knowledge and understanding of historical events/current contextual realities (source). This has meant building my foundational knowledge around the terminology and diversity, particularly as it relates to the Alberta context. One useful PD experience I recommend is the Stepping Stones workshop.  

 

So.....Now What? 

 

In reviewing the Empowering Spirit resources I have much work to do. In all honesty, the fear of getting it wrong is holding me back. Last year my colleagues and I shared this fear with Cheryle Chagnon-Greyeyes who was in our school to perform a blanket ceremony and sing traditional songs with our students. She reminded us that there is no roadmap to chart our course - that we must assume positive intentions and set out with good intentions in the work that we do. If we set out with good intentions and we misstep this will be alright as long as we are humble as learners, reflect on this learning, and then set out to do better in collaboration with the indigenous community. This mindset creates a safe space for teachers like myself as we embark on the work of “Learning to Do” and “Learning to Relate”. I feel that this work is still very much an “add on” in my practice and I have to set intention around making it a way of doing. As Math teacher, I am continuing to look for ways to incorporate into my practice and am finding inspiration in the work of other teachers. For example: 

 

 

Additionally, think my next steps might be well informed by the Weaving Ways resource found on the Empowering the Spirit Classroom Resources page.  The guiding questions (see below) provide useful tools to frame my next steps in my classroom practice. Definitely a lot to think about.

 

In my early career my Why was founded in academic achievement and the importance of instilling a passion for lifelong passion learning in my students. This passion would fuel their success, where success meant going to college or university, so they might have a fulfilling career. A Why influenced my strict upbringing in a privileged, middle-class family. I can still hear my father's voice.

 

Today, my Why has done a complete 180. I no longer correlate success and lifelong happiness with good grades and a white-collar career.  Education is about building relationships and about service. Everyone deserves to belong - this is my Why. I believe that as educators we must establish a school climate where all learners can feel safe, cared for, and experience a true sense of belonging. A place where they can first and foremost have their needs met. Today, my Why centers around helping my tiny humans to become the very best grown up humans they can be. 

As an educator this meant focusing my practice on character education and most importantly, on putting Maslow before Blooms. Before we focus on "quality teaching and learning", or on "assessment or performance skills", we must first focus on establishing relational trust and ensuring our students feel respected, cared for, valued, and safe. 

 

The same rule applies to school Leadership. Maslow before Blooms. Leadership founded in relationship and servitude, where the basic needs of any and all members in a school community, whether child or adult, are acknowledged and met. George Couros (2019) states “ If we want to do what is best for kids, we have to ensure that the people closest to them have what they need to do the best job possible. You can’t “serve” students unless you “serve” the people that work with them” (p.1). When all members of a school community feel valued, listened to, respected, supported, and celebrated, then we can move forward and learn and lead together. Couros suggests that transformational leaders invest in the people that invest in students (p.1)

 
References

Couros, G. (2019, April 14). Invest in the People that Invest in Students. [Blog post].Retrieved from https://georgecouros.ca/blog/archives/tag/simon-sinek

 

Michael Jr., (Sept 10, 2015). Know Your Why [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=LZe5y2D60YU&feature=emb_logo

  

Sinek, S. (March 10, 2014). How Great Leaders Inspire Action: TED Talk [Video File]. Retrieved from 

 

Sinek, S. (2015). The golden circle. Gumroad. com, http://tinyurl. com/golden-circle-sinek.

“Our great collective calling in the world today is to enhance joy. That takes leaders with great hearts and great courage who seek only to serve, to imagine a better future, and to devise ways in which we can realize it together” 
                                                                 (Blanchard and Broadwell, 2018, p. 25). 

It takes great heart and great courage to build and lead a learning community. Kouzes and  Posner (2012) emphasize that strong leaders model the way, inspire a shared vision, clear the path for innovation and positive change, enable others to act, and encourage the heart. This requires having the courage to go first, to lead and light the way, and then the love to step aside so that others can take the lead and truly shine. 

What do I connect with? What will I carry into my leadership practice?

1. The Power of Inclusion and Enabling others to ACT 

In my early career, I was a lone wolf and a glory hog. Look at me! Look at me! I grew up believing that if you want something done right, do it yourself. So, this is precisely what I did. I took on large projects and never asked for help because this was a sign of weakness. My reward? Burnout and isolation. 

Kouzes & Posner (2012) emphasize that “leadership is a dialogue, not a monologue” (p.20), proving the old adage that there is no I in team. As a school leader, I am learning that the pronoun We must be a staple in my vocabulary. A strong leader “enables others to act not by hoarding the power they have but by giving it away” (p. 21). Enabling others to act and to lead, by stepping aside is an act of trust, of respect, of selflessness, of grace, and of love. Today, nothing brings me more joy than watching others realize their goals. 

When leaders extend opportunities to a chosen few - a small group of loyalists - a culture of distrust results. People feel they don’t belong. Nothing frustrates me more than feeling like I am on the outside looking in. Under my leadership, I don’t ever want anyone to experience this loneliness. Everyone must be inside the loop (Kouzes and Posner, 2012, p. 21). Then, servant leaders step aside and empower others to implement the collective vision. Servant leaders lift others up, rather than tearing them down. This turns the traditional hierarchical implementation pyramid upside down; servant leadership means building capacity in our teachers and feel a sense of personal ownership and accomplishment (p. 21).

2. Servant Leadership - Love and Safety

The themes of LOVE and Safety in leadership keep resurfacing. The humanness of this really resonates with me and my practice. Kouzes and Posner (2012) assert that servant leadership encourages the hearts and minds of staff to “encourage them to carry on” (p.22). Recognizing, valuing, and celebrating contributions takes intention and time. A leader must slow down, live in the moment, and really connect with others to be successful here. This must be perceived a genuine: “Celebrate with authenticity and from the heart to build a strong sense of collective identity and community spirit that can carry a group through extraordinarily rough times” (Kouzes and Posner, 2012, p. 23). Further, Blanchard and Broadwell (2018) define Servant Leadership as “Conscious Leadership” and point to the importance of “being a conscious human being” in this role (p.23). My leadership must come from a genuine place of caring.

Being an empath, the idea of keeping others safe rouses deep, motherly instincts in me. We have all worked for leaders that ruled through intimidation and fear. Fear is antithetical to love. Blanchard and Broadwell (2018) maintain that “Conscious leaders seek to drive fear out of their organizations” (p.22). This quote has inspired me to think about ways of a leader to accomplish this. How can I help everyone in my organization grow and thrive? Overcome and conquer fear? Again,I have drawn strength and inspiration from the work of Simon Sinek. The concept of the “Circle of Safety” and Why Good Leaders Make You Feel Safe and “Why Real Leaders Eat Last” have helped me envision what Love and Safety will look like as I move forward in my leadership practice. 

Blanchard, K., & Broadwell, R. (2018). Servant leadership in action: How you can achieve great relationships and results. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2012). The leadership challenge: How to make extraordinary things happen in organizations. Panarchy, the collapse of the Canadian health care system, 124.

Sinek, S. (December 4, 2013). Why Real Leaders Eat Last: TED Talk [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReRcHdeUG9Y

 

Sinek, S (2014). Why Good Leaders Make You Feel Safe: TED Talk [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_why_good_leaders_make_you_feel_safe/transcript?language=en

 

I still worry about my mindset of self doubt (Phau, 2018). Classic imposter syndrome. I doubt my accomplishments and have a persistent secret fear that I will be exposed as a fraud. However, this course has begun chipping away at this self-doubt by teaching me the importance of being my authentic self towards becoming a school leader. I do not have to suppress the best parts of myself  - it is these parts that will mark my path towards becoming a transformational leader. 

 

Now, my thinking has shifted. I believe that leadership is for the courageous of heart. Transformational leaders are not unicorns, they are real, and I have the capacity to be one. Empaths with a human-centered view of the world can be school leaders. The recurring and overlapping themes in the literature detailing the common characteristics of strong leaders (Sisodia, 2018; Spears, 2018) have helped me to see that my core values, belief system, and characteristics uniquely qualify me for leadership. I just have to remain posed, confident, and possess a strong sense of self-belief (Phau, 2018). My humanistic perspective and extension of self that includes others (Combs, Miser, & Whitaker, 1999) are assets, rather than weaknesses.  Leaders light the way by living and behaving their espoused values. The mantra lead by example holds true. How we conduct ourselves earns us the respect of those around us (Combs et al., 1999) and facilitates a culture shift, to one that values people first, knowing that results will follow. A transformational leader is someone who “empowers followers to become leaders through mutual responsibility and trust” (Lynch, 2015). Through self-reflection and self-awareness, they nurture a positive self-concept (Combs, Miser & Whitaker, 1999, p. 97) and work to “support the development of positive self-belief in others and promote the acceptance of different beliefs and perspectives” (p. 109).

 

 

 

I once overheard an AP comment to a former principal that they would be happy to provide internal coverage for an absent teacher. The response was roughly “leadership leads, teachers teach, and we don’t blur the lines”.

 This left me wondering, Why are there lines? Are we not all in this together for the common good? 

The example of transactional leadership model (depicted above) has no place in schools. Leadership is about SERVICE, not about POWER and keeping the balance of it. Blanchard (2018) assures us that this is not about letting the inmates running the prison. Rather, school leaders know that true leadership is the responsibility of everyone. Leadership takes a village.  Servant leadership turns the traditional power leadership model on its head. The result? Leadership becomes less about Me and more about We. Servant leaders possess a serve-first mindset. They opt for service over giving orders, and choose humility over brandishing power. They empower others to lead. They place those on the front lines, who serve children, at the top and they act in servitude from the bottom up. The ultimate goal is to develop and align a staff's sense of purpose with the shared vision of school. This serves to build a culture where a Circle of Safety exists and where employees feel supported, cared for, and protected. They know that Leaders Eat Last and are further empowered to take risks, ask for help, to solve problems and make decisions towards a common vision. 

 

 Clear Leaders are Kind, but Firm Leaders 

Brown’s (2018) advice that “Clear is kind; unclear is unkind” (p. 46) was important learning for me. Leadership is a relationship (source) and building strong relationships requires we communicate openly, honestly, and clearly. Not my strength, I’ll admit, albeit for all the right reasons - I avoid clarity to spare others' feelings. However,  Brown (2018) reminded me that “feeding people half-truths or bs to make them feel better is not helping them” (p. 46). Clarity is kindness. Honestly and openly sharing expectations, ideas, feelings, understandings, and vulnerabilities all promote clarity and build trust. Communicating truths in a kind way will be an important next step for me.

Faced with conflict, I will often attempt to keep everyone happy, usually at the expense of my sanity. I am learning that I can be firm and still work towards win-win resolutions.  I appreciated Brown’s (2018) model of “tough rumbles”. Further, Brown taught me that “other people’s emotions are not our jobs. We can't both serve people and try to con­trol their feelings” (p. 69). 

Establishing a school culture that is person-centred (Combs et al., 1999) and employ consultative, collaborative approaches to organizational decision making will minimize strife. Agreeing upon and embedding group rules/norms clarifying what open communication and shared responsibility for productive conflict resolution looks like into our daily practice ensures these processes become part of our school’s DNA or “fixed social reality” (Bolman & Deal, 1991, p. 172).

 

Leaders withhold judgement and seek understanding. They check assumptions at the door and if they need to judge, they judge circumstances, not people. Leaders are curious. They seek understanding rather than let assumptions colour their perspective. They are not worried about not appearing to have all the answers. Brene Brown (2018) reminded me to adopt positive assumptions, meaning to generously operate from the position that everyone is doing the best they can. If motivations are unclear, I must use advocacy and inquiry to seek understanding instead of judging too quickly or too harshly. 

 

An important part of getting informed requires that school leaders step away from the “dance floor” and day-to-day minutiae of school life to get a broader perspective of school context or culture by “getting on the balcony”. The more we can see, the more we understand so that we can effect change. 

 

 

I used to think that school leaders were responsible for driving change. I have seen countless school leaders try to persuade their staff to join the latest educational fad or bandwagon. The role of the principal was to be an expert of the WHAT and the HOW. To disseminate expertise about the latest pedagogy, technology, assessment strategies. 

 

In considering Sinek’s Golden Circle of Why, the norm in education is to work from the “outside in” and school leadership delivers and implements the What and How using top down approaches. As a school leader, I plan to start from the “inside out” with our Why. This will mean  establishing a shared philosophy and common vision in and through community. 

 

 

I am not very good at "upsetting the Apple Cart" but as a future leader I need to step into the uncomfortable and always model standing up for what is right. One area I need to get informed and get going so that I may lead, is FNMI. Leaders challenge the process and work to correct injustices. 

 

I was really proud of myself this past week when I waded into discomfort. I was acting Admin and was contacted by a parent who was threatening to unenroll her child. She took exception to the GSA activities in school and was further displeased that one of her child’s classmates and teachers were both openly gay. I was shaking with rage, but remained measured and composed. I listened, asked clarifying questions, and reiterated that she was entitled to her perspective. In the end however, I clarified and communicated our school values based in inclusion and celebrating diversity. She un-enrolled her daughter. I thought my principal (who was out of the building that day) would be p-o’ed. She wasn’t. She backed up my choices and told me she valued me. In a follow-up communication with the parent, she reiterated our shared narrative. We both wished the student and her family all the best. We took the high road and modeled grace.  We lost a student that day, but stood up for our community members and for our truth. I felt really proud.

  

 

I have attached a copy of my LQS self-assessment indicating room for growth. I am pleased with my growth and look forward to the next steps in my learning. (see following references)

References: 

Brown, B. (2010). Courage, compassion, and connection. In The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You’re Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are. 

Brown, B. (2018). Dare to Lead: Brave Work. Tough Conversations. Whole Hearts. Random House.

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1991). Reframing organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Combs, A. W., Miser, A. B., & Whitaker, K. S. (1999). Beliefs about People and Change. In On becoming a school leader: A person-centered challenge. ASCD.

Evans, R. (1996). The Human Side of School Change: Reform, Resistance, and the Real-Life Problems of Innovation. The Jossey-Bass Education Series. Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers, 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104.

 

Lynch, L. (2015). Becoming a Transformational School Leader. Retrieved from https://www.theedadvocate.org/becoming-a-transformational-school-leader/

Phau, M. (2018). Mindset: The Lies that Bind. Retrieved from https://www.chrisheinz.com/blog/mindset-the-lies-that-bind

Porter, G. L., Wilson, M., Kelly, B., & Den Otter, J. (1991). Problem Solving teams: a thirty-minute peer helping model. Porter, G., Richler, D.(comps.), Problem Solving teams, 219-237.

Sinek, S. (2015). The golden circle. Gumroad. com, http://tinyurl. com/golden-circle-sinek.

Sisodia, R. (2018). Servant Leadership is Conscious Leadership. In K. H. Blanchard & R. Broadwell (Eds.), Servant leadership in action: how you can achieve great relationships and results (pp. 19–25). Oakland, Ca: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., a BK Business Book.

 

Spears, L. (2018). Characteristics of Servant Leaders. In K. H. Blanchard & R. Broadwell (Eds.), Servant leadership in action: how you can achieve great relationships and results (pp. 19–25). Oakland, Ca: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., a BK Business Book.

     In the interim, I have begun posting some (draft) documents above. A synthesis of learning and reflections through the lens of  the GET (Growth in Educational Transformation) model of Transformational leadership. I will post these ideas in order and number/date the posts for coherency.  I intend to post my early artifacts, ideas, and written reflections related to this framework and the LQS indicators in this space by the end of day Sunday.

Wish me luck :)

Colleen

--------------------------------
This heart-shaped rock (below) embodies integrity, authenticity, and honesty. It is humble and doesn't pretend to be anything other than is - a heart shaped rock. It is solid and consistent. Strong, yet vulnerable and moveable. This rock patiently rests on the riverbed, connected in community, exchanging wisdom with the surrounding world. It is happy to step aside and share the spotlight with other beautiful rocks so that they too, may shine. The heart-shaped rock says less and listens more, but equally possesses a calm, steady voice. It doesn't judge, but accepts and embraces imperfections and flaws because it knows that we are all in this together and even a rock can have a bad day. Conflict? A rock handles conflict like a rock star. Ha, ha.

My photograph titled "#obsession #heartshapedrocks" (see artifact below) is a reflection of my commitment to and belief in leading with Heart (kindness, empathy, listening/understanding, vulnerability and compassion; humility and integrity) and by my moral compass


in order to: 

Relationship is fundamental. Page & Wong's (2000) model shown above (LQS 3 Artifact) references the "People Orientation" or a leader's capacity to develop those around them - their capacity to care for, empower, and develop the strengths of those around them. Please read my Reflections on "Getting Along" posted above to better understand my beliefs and leadership strategies related to this indicator.
 

#obsession #heartshapedrocks 

---------------------------------------------------------
Artifacts here might include a photo of my MEd Convocation and the photograph below titled #faceyourfears. On my website, I imagine that this section will include a collection of artifacts (layered beneath a main artefact) on a webpage detailing my contributions/work in educational research. Artifacts on that page would include exemplars such as:

https://iaea.info/documents/integrating-technology-into-mathematics-teachers-design-and-use-of-authentic-assessments/

I really value career-long professional learning and development. These artifacts embody my passion for, commitment to, and engagement in  educational research and willingness to collaborate with others (teachers, admin, school leader, educational researchers) to build personal and collective professional capacities and expertise. I have done a great deal towards developing my professional knowledge and competence and tried to engage with professional organization beyond my context by attending and presenting at professional conferences alongside research partners from the wider educational community. I have been intentional in working as an 'informal research lead' in my school community towards building colleague capacity "in seeking, critically reviewing, and applying educations research towards to inform effective practice" and building a shared understanding of current trends in educational research. Although I prefer to say "wise" practice.
The collection of artifacts offered point towards my "strengths" in this LQS indicator and highlights "gaps" or areas for improvement. While reflecting on my https://abselfreflectiontool.com/survey/NEy8PSkjHumAMpxjn
I still need to find ways to improve the following: 

1. Enhancing my Leadership Practice
      In an effort to grow here by "assisting with teacher preparation" I recently attended the Werklund School of Education's Field Experience Advisory Working Meeting. Here we worked with various stakeholders from across Alberta to consider ways teacher training and field experience could be improved.
     I need to think of ways I can "actively seeking out feedback and information from a variety of sources to enhance my leadership practice". This means growing my network of transformational school leaders and soliciting feedback from others as I take on more formal leadership roles. Additionally, I can look to more actively engaging in the leadership community by holding membership in and engaging with professional organizations through the lens of leadership. The local area charter schools in Calgary have recently begun holding Leadership days for their members and my principal (and mentor) has suggested I attend.

2. Establishing a shared understanding of priorities
     Each year I work with our whole staff to help decide upon priorities for the school development plan. One way I could extend my learning here is to possibly 'audit' the development/writing of the plan by the school leadership team and reflect on how this plan fits into the wider priorities for Charters in Alberta. 
     I have been relentlessly banging on the "educational research" drum at my school and I think leadership may be listening. Charter schools are mandated to participate/engage in educational research and it looks like this will be added to our list of priorities next school year. Persistence pays off :)

Next Steps: 
- work towards formalizing my role in order to maximize impact
-to engage more actively in professional organizations beyond my school

#faceyourfears,#educationalresearch,#IAEA2015

This really points to part III of the model below. The success and sustainability of a leader's "Task Orientation" or visioning, goal setting, and leading towards organizational growth and change. Achieving productivity and success will never happen without a clear sense of shared moral purpose, relational trust, and collaborative decision making and implementation.

(text here)
Big Ideas....This image conveys to me the importance of cultivating the following in my leadership practice:

*communion
*inclusion, belonging, relationship & "collecting", "braver" spaces (wraparound philosophy of care)
*Collaboration and unity
*establishing shared dialogue and responsibility in community for student success
*Celebrations of success

------------------------------------------------

_________________________________

The artifact below will lead to a page with a series of "collages" representing my belief in and commitment to growing student and teacher leadership within and beyond the school.

This will reflect my deeply help belief that effective servant leaders tap into the talents of those around them and and empower them (students, teachers, etc.) to engage in collaborative decision making and to lead. Strong leaders understand the power of shared leadership and diversifying the leadership base in schools towards the goal of school improvement.

Interesting to see how the donuts are made....

Words that come to mind are Awareness, Engagement, Advocacy, Voice, and Innovation. This means dipping into our collective wisdom to identify and address key priorities using a proactive, responsive, and solutions-oriented mindset. 

Areas where I bring strength to the table include my expertise in:

Brown’s (2018) statement “Clear is kind; unclear is unkind” (p. 46) will advance my leadership skills. I often avoid clarity to spare others' feelings, but Brown (2018) asserts that “feeding people half-truths or bs to make them feel better is not helping them” (p. 46). Clarity is kindness. Honestly and openly sharing expectations, ideas, feelings, understandings, and vulnerabilities all promote clarity and build trust. 

     Evans (1996) asserts that achieving clarity of focus necessitates a leader be able to tolerate conflict and resentment as they challenge and work to reframe deeply held beliefs and assumptions related to a school’s Why.  Conflict still frightens me, so I appreciated Brown’s (2018) model of “tough rumbles”. Faced with conflict, I will often attempt to keep everyone happy, usually at the expense of my sanity. Brown reminds us that “other people’s emotions are not our jobs. We can't both serve people and try to con­trol their feelings” (p. 69). She offers some useful strategies to navigate tough conversations and conflict that will definitely inform my leadership practice.