Re-Defining School Leadership Responsibilities (part 2)

       In my last post, I discussed the first and most important category of leadership responsibilities, supporting, evaluating, and developing teacher quality. I went into quite a bit of detail because the authors of Improving School Leadership, Volume 1: Policy and Practice deemed it of high importance. However, that does not mean that the other three categories are not important, but rather, if the primary goal is high student achievement, then supporting, evaluating, and developing teachers will be first priority. Now that that is said, I will head right into the rest of the discussion of what Pont, Nusche, and Moorman see as being the four main categories of leadership responsibilities -- setting learning objectives and implementing intelligent assessment systems, strategic use of resources and their alignment with pedagogical purposes, and taking school leadership beyond the school’s borders.

       The second category, setting learning objectives and implementing intelligent assessment systems, does not have as many subcategories as the first.  But there is an informative discussion about curriculum aligning to standards, which is an issue all schools have to address. There is also significant emphasis on data driving instruction and how to hold schools and teachers accountable for showing appropriate student achievement. The authors cite evidence that shows holding schools and teachers accountable for student growth actually encourages student growth. Of course, this is highly controversial, as one of the only ways to do this is with standardized testing and that is not a conversation to be had in this particular blog. So, without stirring up any emotionally charged pots, I will instead focus on the positive aspects of testing, which is that it provides data for school leaders and teachers. School leaders need to then take this data and plan appropriate strategies to improve instruction and student performance. In fact, school leaders play a major role in using these “accountability systems” (standardized tests) when they support their staff to align instruction to learning goals and performance standards. (Pont, Nusche, and Moorman, 2008) Whether this support comes in the way of forming groups that take on this task or simply by providing time and coverage so teachers can attend professional developments that are focused on using data to drive instruction, it is vital for school and student success.

       The third category, strategic resource management, deals with financial and human resources. This category is somewhat difficult to discuss because national policy has so much influence on how much power the school has when it comes to budget and to the hiring and firing of teachers. In many countries, schools are given a budget based on the number of students enrolled or the state/city/district has outlined how much each school gets. Some countries, like England and Belgium, have formed co-operatives between schools in an effort to pool resources and design a model in which schools and school leaders are more autonomous when it comes to resource management. There is a general movement toward collaboration and cooperation among schools.

      Which brings us to the fourth, and final category, leadership beyond the school borders. This category of leadership responsibilities takes the collaboration and extends it into the surrounding communities. The goal is to form networks and connections between the school, where education is attained, and the world in which education is applied. If done well, these connections can change the way public education is seen. I know that in my town there are a lot of retired or childless people in the community and getting these voters to vote to increase school funding is a challenge. This challenge could be lessened if there are strong connections formed – if the community members could see the work that is put into creating, educating, and investing in our future.

       Before I end this post, I would like to clarify that the purpose of redefining school leadership responsibilities is to give clear guidelines to teachers or professionals who are thinking of entering this field. The authors recognize that there is not currently a framework in place that outlines what is and is not expected of someone applying to be a school principal. In addition, Pont, Nusche and Moorman claim that this kind of framework provides a reference to evaluate leadership quality, and will make it clear that “certain conditions need to be in place for school leaders to be able to perform effectively. (2008, p.62) For example, if the principal has no say over resource management, there is a potential area for inefficacy. These guidelines will also help us as we explore distributed leadership in the next two posts.

Works Cited

Pont, B., Nusche, D., & Moorman, H. (2008) Improving School Leadership Volume One: Policy  and
        Practice. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/school/44374889.pdf