Hot off the press. The largest school district in the country changes leadership. From one non-educator to another, the city of New York continues to select NYC School Chancelors from the ranks of business instead of professionally trained educators. Good or bad: This is indeed a sign of the times.
Outgoing NYC Chancelor Speaks:
November 10, 2010 NPR's Melissa Block talks to New York City Schools Chancellor Joel Klein, who announced this week that he will be stepping down from his post. ... Please listen to the podcast. Copy and paste into your web brower:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=131223278
[Click on the arrow to listen to the podcast]
Learn More about NYC New Chancelor
Copy and paste into your web brower:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=131194772
What do you think? Please share your thoughts on our blog: http://drorozco.blogspot.com/
1. Do you believe districts, or even schools, can/should be led by others not professionally trained in education?
2. What are the advantages/disadvantages?
3. At your current worksite, do you believe a non-educational leader do a good job? Why?
Schools and/or districts should not be led by people that are not trained in education professionally. There are many facets to education that are unique from other government positions or even the private sector. Although a person in these fields may have many skills that could eventually be useful in a school setting. These skills must be combined with the knowledge of the classroom and the facets of the educational system. On the job training would not suffice to meet those needs.
ReplyDeleteOnce a leader received this training, this person could bring any advantage another career field or any individual could bring. Passion, innovation, marketing, strategies for community involvement, a fresh outlook, etc. However, this can only be useful on top of educational training and experience
I do believe an educational leader can successful lead a school in some areas but will always be lacking as an educational leader. This person will lack in understanding the intricacies of education on given levels, in time this knowledge may develop but this person should not be in leadership while this knowledge is developing.
CARA
Okay, lets try this again (after spending 45 minutes composing my last piece only to have it not post and get deleted) grrrrrr....
ReplyDeleteMy initial, gut reaction to this situation is to say, no, of course not, a non-educator can not lead a public school system. How can they understand the intricacies of working at a school and in a classroom if they have never gotten their hands dirty, so to speak.
Taking a step back, though, and trying to look with a less biased view, I can understand the fascination with, and desire to hire business, military, and political executives to run our school systems, especially large, urban, mass-media market school systems. Leaders from these areas are used to large-scale public relations and usually have a proven track record of accomplishing goals and estabilishing profitability, skills highly desired in this day and age of school accountability and performance driven assessment. Plus, new ideas and differing opinions can always be of value in redesigning and restructuring any type of endeavor.
The problem is that too many of these outsiders are chosen because, and come into the position, with the stated goal of using their business acumen and methodologies not as a guide, but as a template. Schools are not factories and students are not toasters. The two systems may have similarities but they are not the same.
So, to answer the questions....
1. Districts can be led by outsiders. However, the outsider will only be effective if they are respectful of the people already in the system, and are willing to use the knowledge and expertise of the educators serving under them. Given a choice, most teachers, administrators, and parents would prefer the talented insider who isn't afraid to buck the system rather than the talent outsider who wants to fight the system. Our stakeholders are not buying products, they are participating in a grand endeavor and want to be included along the way.
2. The advantage to an outsider being hired to lead is the wealth of new ideas and experiences they bring with them. I'm a firm believer in "iron sharpens iron." Too often schools and school systems can become very isolated and insulated and bringing in someone new with ideas to discuss and debate can be very useful for personal and systematic growth.
3. Whether an outsider could lead my school or not would purely depend on the gifts and talents of that particular person. If they are looking for quick fixes, I'm not sure they will find success. If they are willing to look long term, implementing gradual systematic changes toward achieving desired goals, they will get more buy-in by staff and community which will lead to positive growth and success.
1. Do you believe districts, or even schools, can/should be led by others not professionally trained in education?
ReplyDeleteI believe that districts and schools should be led by professionals trained in education. While non-educators bring certain skills to the job, I really feel they will be unable to fulfill the job completely without the experience one would receive in the education field.
2. What are the advantages/disadvantages?
One advantage is the experience. Leaders in education need to understand what teachers and administrators go through on a daily basis. I love the saying about “walking a mile in their shoes.” How can someone tell educators what to do when they have never been in their position before? It would be quite difficult and could create conflict. Another advantage would include the proper training an educational leader receives with an educational background. While an outsider brings a new perspective, the lack of experience may enable their ability to lead a district. A disadvantage may include the educator’s familiarity with the budget and human resources. Many are able to receive an administrative credential by taking a test. I find it difficult that a test can justify if a person understands the budget and how to spend money. I also don’t think the test and determine ones knowledge about human resources since every district operates differently. Another disadvantage could occur if the educational leader is to closed minded. This individual could have worked through the rankings of a teacher, to an administrator, and then into the district office. They have seen the district function in a certain way and they may not be able to see other solutions from outside sources.
3. At your current worksite, do you believe a non-educational leader do a good job? Why?
It might not make sense given my previous answer, but right now I feel that a non-educational leader could do a good job. The superintendent of the district left recently. It was discovered that he hired some friends to work within the district. They were overpaid and did very little work. The budget of the district is a complete mess. The next superintendent needs to understand how the budget works and must be willing to make personnel decisions to get the district out of the budget crisis. I do think that someone with a non-educational background could fit into this role with the proper skills.
ERIKA
MOLLY
ReplyDelete1. I believe districts CAN be led by noneducators and they are being led by noneducators nationwide. However, I believe that districts should not be led by noneducators.
2. The disadvantages outweigh the advantages. The only advantages I can see are 2: these leaders' management skills may be better developed and they may be able to bring a different perspective in the way of not being wrapped up and entangled in the world of education. Whether or not that makes any sense, I believe it to be true. The disadvantages are numerous. An effective educational leader must have excellent management skills AND a background in education. They must know theory as well as the practical pieces that can only result from a variety of experience in the field, in classrooms, at school sites, in trainings, through interactions with parents, families, students, teachers, and all other stakeholders. Someone who has not had these pieces and cannot bring them to the table, cannot be an effective instructional leader.
3. At my current work site, I do not believe a non-educational leader could do a good job. Teachers are stressed and are being held to incredibly high expectations for student progress-and needing the support and guidance from a leader that has been there.
CECIL
ReplyDelete1. Non-educational leaders can and do head school districts. The question is, how effectively? I believe classroom experience is essential in being a school leader. More leaders will be brought in from outside education to lead school districts and there may be a push to get more of this type of leader to head individual schools as well. We must realize education’s focus is not a product people purchase but deals with individual students. The focus must remain on the children and how to most effectively teach them. Our leaders need to have experience in the classroom.
2. Advantages – education can learn some things from business and military leaders, such as organization and public relations.
Disadvantages – No classroom experience. They have no idea how children learn, what methods can be effective and ineffective. No experience with the standards based instruction or what good teaching looks like. Will their relationship with staff be adversarial or cooperative? There could be reluctance by teachers to accept leadership from someone outside education.
3. I do not believe a non-educational leader would do a good job at my school site. The primary job of a principal should be instructional leadership. What does a person from outside education know about this? It may sound strange, but to me this would be worse than a non¬-educator becoming superintendant. As previously mentioned, education can learn many things from business as far as organization and public relations are concerned. Instructional leader without any classroom experience—NO.
GREG
ReplyDeleteI love this because it is so divisive. I wonder what side of the fence Sandra is on…
The people above have done a very good job of describing the advantages and disadvantages of non-educators leading schools and districts. To summarize, non-educators bring a certain level of experience in leadership many educators do not possess and also bring new thinking to problems in order to create new solutions lifelong educators may not have considered. Conversely, non-educators who treat schools and districts exactly like non-education facilities are destined for failure because schools are not merely educational “factories” as dealing with children between the ages of five and 18 requires a completely different skill set than managing grown adults.
The problem, of course, is we as teachers are not completely objective. We take what we do very seriously and are proud of the fact that we are trained and experienced well enough to educate students. We find it very difficult to believe that someone could walk in off the street and do our job as well as we do it. Unfortunately, many people do not agree with this assertion. I have a friend who was appalled that an engineer friend of his would not be hired as a teacher without going through the credential program because he felt her grasp of mathematical concepts and real-life applications superseded any training she could receive in school. The idea that knowing the subject matter is not the same as being able to convey it was foreign to him. Undoubtedly, public perception of educational leadership is the same. Therefore, there will always be people who believe the problem with the educational system is the nepotistic way we promote and outside thinking is what is necessary. What about hiring someone who has experience both inside and outside the classroom? Many teachers come into teaching after trying their hand in something else. Perhaps this would appease both sides of the argument.
In terms of my individual school, a non-educator would struggle, if only because of the pride in teaching I mentioned earlier. The amount of effort it would take to convince teachers he or she has a better way of doing things would be so daunting and time-consuming it would leave no time to make any real reform.
SCOTT
ReplyDelete1. My initial reaction to this question is that leaders in the field of education should have professional education and experience in the field. However, many leaders without the formal experience or education have been successful in leading districts in the right direction. In order for these leaders to be successful they must have mentors and advisors within the district that are experienced in the field.
2. The advantages to having non-educators lead districts is that they often bring in different perspectives and strategies to districts that have been suffering for quite some time. After seeing the movie "Waiting for Superman" it is discouraging to see just how many districts have been failing to meet the needs of students. In districts like these, what do WE have to lose by allowing someone from outside the field to attempt to make a difference. (I hope Sandra doesn't read this).
The disadvantages to non-educators leading our districts is that lack of experience and education. Without consulting with teachers, students, leaders, and the community, it is hard for a non-educator to know what is needed.
3. For my school site it would be difficult for a non-educator to be an effective leader. As a special education school site, my site requires extensive knowledge and experience in meeting the needs of students with exceptional needs. Although the 2 on-site program specialists could help a non-educator lead the school, it would take quite a long time to develop the knowledge and experience needed to meet the needs of these learners.
3.
Is it just me or are we so consumed with "fixing" schools that we are placing too many cooks in the kitchen too soon and much too quickly? It's almost as if schools are adhering to the business model of planned obsolescence or perhaps following political timelines (4s and 6s people).
ReplyDelete1) Yes, I do believe a non-educator could lead a school. I would imagine in some cases, this person might do a terrific job. A school is an open system largely run by many factors. Teachers, students, parents, community members, politicians at various levels and School Board members play a hand in the sustainability of a school, so with so many factors at play, a poor leader may not be enough to completely unravel the system. After all, we have ample experience of sitting duck politicians and yet, our cities and country are still standing.
2) However, for long-term sustainability and progress, it is extremely helpful to have a leader who can evaluate and guide his or her employees with both the knowledge derived from intensive educational training and from personal experience as a practitioner in the field. Can a teacher lead a brigade at war? Yes, there are teachers who may have never fired a gun and could somehow squeeze out enough common sense or information from the people around him to keep his or her soldiers reasonably safe. Could an administrator run a Fortune 500 company having never worked as a salesperson or in a for-profit setting? Yes, I'd assume there are many people who would manage to do fairly well with enough guidance and personal leadership traits. However, major on-the-job training is never as effective as having someone who understands the intricacies and challenges of the tasks at hand having experienced them at multiple levels. After all, businesses, schools and armies work on deadlines, and with new educational legislation as education becomes increasingly nationalized, the demand is far stronger than the supply at hand. It is unlikely anyone has the luxury of time and follow through to teach a leader how to thrive in a vastly new environment nor is it feasible to "teach" personal and professional experience which are integral to understanding all facets of the environment in order to make sound and practical decisions. There are always benefits to bringing in diverse perspectives, but these new perspectives should not come at the detriment of a skilled and experienced practitioner.
3)At my current work site, there are 3 APs in addition to the principal. Replacing one of these leaders with a leader outside of the educational realm would be difficult, but the culture of the school and the expertise of the other leaders at the site would most likely absorb the ignorance of this new leader assuming he or she does not come in with brazen ideas of completely reconfiguring our school. If so, this person would be met with a great deal of resistance,and his or her lack of experience in education would foster greatly diminished trust from staff members in his or her ability to make decisions on any matters concerning teaching and education, in general.
NADIA
MICHELLE
ReplyDeleteOur country is starting a new focus on education questioning every influence and leadership position in education. Naturally the leadership positions will only continue to grow in scrutiny and blame for what "failing" our students.
1) I first viewed this interview and thought no way should a non educator lead our schools. However, after much thought I believe they can and will continue to grow in being our leaders. I see how a superintendent from a non-educational background could be a good leader. I have a hard time respecting a Principal who has no background in teaching.
2) Superintendents are more concerned with how to change an organization. How to set the vision and how to get people to work at their fullest potential. Non-educators can do this just fine. Every leader has a weakness and knowing what your weaknesses are and utilizing a strong team to make up for one's weaknesses is what one would have to do as a non-educator Superintendent. Business people have a good sense of how to create change in an Organization and we need to learn from the business world. HOwever, a Principal can't evaluate a teacher without fully knowing what makes a great teacher. To know about teaching you have to at least go through a credential program. I don't see any beneficial efforts in having noneducational people as a school site administrator.
3) We have district level people in leadership with no educational background and they have expertise in other areas that our district needs. However, they are not in the day to day practices of how to effectively teach students. They bring a business side to our district that is beneficial. We need both!
DANIELLE
ReplyDelete1. It is possible for someone without an educational background to be an effective educational leader at some levels. The closer these professionals would be to daily classroom decisions, the less effective they would be, having no experience with or training in classroom instructional practices. A possible successful scenario would be for members of the school board to be both educational professionals and professionals from other backgrounds. This would allow for fresh perspectives without compromising daily instructional practices.
2. Advantages- Having business professional and military members involved in the school system affords us the opportunity to look at problems from a different angle. Often, these people have extensive training and experience on teamwork, customer service, community relations, and other areas which would benefit a district. Additionally, it gives us another perspective on what students need to learn and be able to do to become successful in these professions.
Disadvantages- When the only person making decisions is either out of touch with the classroom or has no experience with it in the first place, they may make decisions which are ineffective or downright impossible to implement. Also, when teachers are directly led by someone who has never walked in their shoes, they have no respect or buy in. This can often create resentment and certainly reduce effectiveness.
3. Our current principal is a former music teacher, who has not had a classroom of her own. Despite the fact that she has educational training and experience, leading a school full of experienced teachers has been a difficult task. While she seems to have an understanding of many leadership techniques, she is constantly faced with the "you have never been a classroom teacher" attitude. I can only imagine the resistance a non-educator would face. While it is possible for a non-educator to be a principal, they would never be given an opportunity to succeed at my school.
1. Do you believe districts, or even schools, can/should be led by others not professionally trained in education?
ReplyDeleteI think of districts just like I view businesses. I know the idea applied across the board is anathema to many educators (myself included), so my viewpoint is a hybrid of both opposing views.
I consider the key players of administration/management in both districts and businesses to be equivalent, meaning that CEOs are equal to Superintendents and mid-level management is equal to principals. The CEO, like the Superintendent, does not necessarily have to be from the ranks to be effective at their job. Their main tasks are to create/maintain the long term vision of the company/district, be aware and mindful of the wants and needs of all stakeholders, and be effective at executing the plans of action in accordance to the vision. In a district, none of those qualities requires a background in education. They absolutely require the input of those who are in education though. I doubt many CEOs of large businesses know very much about the details of the products their company produces, and yet they are great CEOs. Great vision and knowing how to utilize assets is the key.
On the other hand, principals are like mid-level management in a company. They absolutely should have a wealth of knowledge about their "product", because they deal with it all day, every day. The vision of the district is set by the board and Superintendent, the principals make it happen on campus. This requires someone who has an education background. They already know the politics and culture of the position. An outsider has to learn that. With the revolving door model schools have with principals, I believe there is no time for people who require a few years to hit their stride because of a lack of training.
2. What are the advantages/disadvantages?
Advantages: New perspective
Disadvantages: "Trial by fire" approach, great resistance from teachers, gaffes by lack of experience
3. At your current worksite, do you believe a non-educational leader do a good job? Why?
Currently? No. Out Assistant Principal structure has changed dramatically, and I do not think it is strong enough to be able to carry the load of a principal who does not have an education background while he/she "gets up to speed".
In addition, if there was any sliding in our API score, that poor sucker would be crucified...
MATTHEW
PEREZ
ReplyDeleteDo you believe districts, or even schools, can/should be led by others not professionally trained in education? What are the advantages/disadvantages?
As an educator, my personal bias leads me to immediately respond no, non-educators should not lead school districts. School districts need leaders with experience and understanding of the unique issues and needs involved in education. How can someone new to education understand the disparities in English Language Learners test score data? How would they understand and respond to the unique cultures of individual schools? It just doesn’t seem logical to bring in non-educators to lead school districts.
On the other hand, it is difficult to ignore the inherent logic in bringing in the knowledge of proven leaders from the business world to help change struggling school districts. Clearly, large districts need leaders with management expertise to operate efficiently and effectively; however, is that leadership knowledge and experience enough? I would argue no, that experience and knowledge in education is still a necessity in order to understand and respond to the unique needs of the students, parents, teachers, and principals in the school district.
At your current worksite, do you believe a non-educational leader would do a good job? Why?
I do not believe a non-educational leader would do a good job at the schools in my district. Many of the day-to-day decisions involve curriculum, instruction, and instructional strategies and practices. Without the knowledge and understanding of classroom instruction and best practices, a leader would be unable to make the critical decisions required on a daily basis in order to maximize the instruction for all learners.
The invasion of other field expert in education is an epidemic in the education. Essentially as professionals we must be responsive to the fact that other fields might hold key solutions to the ever changing problems that education faces. Different points of views offer educational leaders different perspective that can be a critical ingratiate to problem solving, that is the benefit of different professions in education. The participation of these different points of view becomes a problem when the different perspectives take leadership roles that go beyond consulting. Policy and procedure must be created by people who have been in the trenches, individuals who know what it is like to have a classroom of 45 students, instructors who have battled with indifference, fund shortages and know the effects of such situations in the classroom. They are the people that must make decision because perhaps then policy makers would set policy that creates solution in the classrooms rather than set insurmountable goals with little to no support from the people in which have placed these standards.
ReplyDeleteOn a local level we see this effect when administrators have been out of the classroom too long let along those who have never been in the classroom. Typically what I have observed is that these individuals address their area of expertise exceptionally well but all other responsibilities are performed subpar at best. In a utopian society, we would have administrators whose foot never strays too far from the teaching arena.
SANDRA
Ross
ReplyDelete1. No, I do not believe that non-educators should run a school. Districts can be run like a business, but schools need to be lead by those who know the pedagogy.
2. I believe that a good outsider with accounting or financial background would make a great Asst. Superintendent of Business Services and that a supreme HR MPA type can run personal. I think though Superintendents need to come from the education field because employees want to have a sense that the leaders understand them. Then at school sites I completely disagree to having outside management run a school. To me it seems impractical.
3. At my school site a non-professional would do a horrible job. I cannot see someone dealing with IEP, Special Ed, discussing teaching practices, content standards, and discipline in an environment an outsider knows little about.