by Cathy Gassenheimer
Another school year begins in August. Anxious and excited five-year olds begin their school experience, as rising seniors are getting ready for their last year of high school. Most teachers have been working during the summer to get ready for the school year, focused on Alabama’s standards and working together to craft lessons that challenge, engage, and improve the learning of their students.
Recently I came across an interesting chart developed by Learning Forward’s Executive Director Stephanie Hirsh that describes the type of professional learning that schools and districts should embrace.
As a preamble to the chart, Hirsh stresses that effective professional learning causes two important results: (1) it improves teacher practice; and (2) it improves student learning. To ensure this type of effective professional learning, Hirsh points to some big shifts needed: moving away from the more traditional “workshop” approach to the type of ongoing powerful learning that improves practice and learning.
Take a few minutes to review this chart and think about your school’s current professional learning offerings. Which of these shifts are either already in place or planned? Which shifts require greater attention?Read More
I first met Aimee Rainey when she was assistant principal and then principal at Calcedeaver Elementary, a wonderful and often-recognized rural school in northwestern Mobile County.
A few years ago, Aimee and her family moved from "Lower Alabama (aka LA)" to North Alabama and the city of Florence, situated on the beautiful Tennessee River, to assume the principalship of another award-winning school, Florence Middle.
In both schools, Aimee has worked passionately and diligently to hone her leadership skills – and to develop and distribute leadership among her teachers and staff. This article, written for NASSP's Principal Leadership magazine (Jan 2014), offers some of her insights and lessons learned and is shared here with her permission.
– Cathy Gassenheimer
The True Measure of Leadership
By Aimee Rainey
Coming from a family of educators, I was firmly against pursuing a career in education. I have always had a heart for service, however, and others have commented on my leadership skills from a very early age, so I obtained a degree in speech and hearing sciences with the desire to work in a rehabilitation setting. But like most eager, young graduates, I took the first available job after graduation and became a public school speech pathologist.
I am sure my grandparents, aunts, and uncles who had lifelong careers as educators were quietly waiting and watching me fall in love with education, the field of work I so adamantly felt was not for me. It took no more than two weeks for me to realize that I was born to be an educator.
I spent five years serving 2-to-21-year-old students who had multiple disabilities and unique personalities. I worked in different schools under school leaders who practiced dissimilar leadership styles. During this time, I served on a school accreditation team and a grant-writing committee and periodically fulfilled the duties of the special education coordinator. Those opportunities taught me important lessons about special education law, budgets and documentation for federal programs, families in crisis, and time management. Those challenging and demanding lessons were preparing me to become a leader.Read More
by Cathy Gassenheimer
Why do organizations and individuals often work at cross-purposes that undermine progress and success? That is the guiding question of Chris Argyris’ 2010 book, Organizational Traps: Leadership, Culture, Organizational Design
(Oxford University Press
In this book, Argyris
, who developed the “Ladder of Inferences”
that explains how we often make decisions based on filtered data that may skew our judgment, describes two theories of action: Model 1, Defensive Reasoning; and Model II, Productive Reasoning.
He contends that we most often use Model I when facing threatening situations or in cases where we are worried about being embarrassed. Those using Model I, Defensive Reasoning, work to:
1. Be in unilateral control;
2. Win, don't lose;
3. Suppress negative feelings; and
4. Behave rationally
Argyris’ preferred theory of action is Model II, Productive Reasoning, where individuals:
1. Seek valid (testable) information
2. Create informed choice; and
3. Monitor vigilantly to detect and correct error (p.189, Kindle edition)
“As individuals become skillful at using Model II," he says, "they will also become skillful at using productive reasoning. Productive reasoning can be used to make personal reasoning transparent in order for claims to be tested robustly. Model II governing values can lead to openness, transparency, and trust.” (p. 190, Kindle edition)
Obviously, the Productive Reasoning model, while preferred, rarely comes into play because of human beings’ general nature. In fact, Argyris contends that our behavior is “self-fueling: or self-reinforcing in that the actions reinforce the defenses that caused the problems in the first place.” (p. 22, Kindle version).
As a result, we often create “traps” when we strive to use Model II reasoning, but our actions are more aligned with Model I.Read More