
Educative Essays

Volume 3

Benjamin L. Stewart
Educative Essays

Volume 3

By

Benjamin L. Stewart

Smashwords Edition

Copyright © 2013 Benjamin L. Stewart

This work is licensed under a

Creative Commons Attribution

4.0 International License.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

ISBN: 9781301279104

# Table of Contents

Dedication

Preface

Becoming a Community of Leadership

Assessing Community Relations

Improving Communication

Course Project

Supervision for Successful Schools

Interpersonal Supervisory Behaviors

Assessment and Planning

Clinical Supervision

Moral and Value-Added Leadership

Course Research Project

About the Author

# Dedication

This book is dedicated to Beny and Oliver, who have taught me how to truly appreciate my own educative experiences as a father.

# Preface

Why a series of educative essays?

I began studying a doctoral dissertation from Northcentral University (NCU) in September of 2007. NCU is an online university, accredited by the Higher Learning Commission and is a member of the North Central Association. The first two years of the doctoral program consists of graduate courses whereby learners upload essays to the NCU platform for credit. Having completed all of the course work for the program, I realized that I had accumulated quite a few essays over the years, covering a variety of topics within the field of education. So, why a series of educative essays? Here are a few reasons:

1. I realized that I had no personal copies of any of the essays that I had written for NCU - they all resided on the NCU platform for a definite period of time.

2. The essays were all spread out over various courses and quite difficult to find. Having them all in a book format would allow for easier access.

3. I've been blogging for several years and have never gotten into the habit of reading prior posts, even when someone would post a reply. It was just something I hardly ever did, for better or for worse. The same applied to the essays written for my doctoral program. I thought having them as a single collection would force me to look at how I viewed various educational topics in the past as well as my own writing style. It has now been long enough that I feel that I can step back and appreciate them for what they are. Not literary classics, nor excessively profound statements on education written in clear, academic style and tone, but a realization and some satisfaction in reflecting on how my perspective in some cases had changed over the years while in other cases a perspective that continues today.

4. Never having published a book before, I thought pulling these essays together would justify going through the self-publishing process from start to finish. I will leave it up to the reader to judge whether doing so was actually worth it or not.

5. I wanted to offer a book on educational topics under a Creative Commons License so that others could reuse, revise, remix, and redistribute it to give back to the profession of education in some way.

Why order essays by date?

The essays are ordered by date so to respect the order in which I wrote them, spanning a period of about two years. It also provides a way to reflect on how my writing style and ideas developed during this period. Some topics jump around between chapters while others are more aligned. Thus, you may want to skip around to different chapters of the book to read those essays that interest you the most, or you may decide to read them in order, from start to finish.

Yielding to Dewey (1938), the term educative in the title of this book is meant to promote, "the growth of future experience" (p. 13). My sincere hope is that to some small degree that this will be the case for the reader - I know the process of putting these essays together has certainly been educative for me.

Benjamin L. Stewart

July 4, 2013

# Becoming a Community of Leaders

October 12, 2008

This essay begins by defining leadership and then connects leadership to community building. The community is laid out in terms of a social network that includes individual nodes and ties in depicting interactions between individuals. The number and strength of ties an individual has dictates to what degree knowledge, influence, and power exist. Power laws can present learning inequities if relationships within the network remain central to only a few individuals providing the knowledge and having the majority of the influence. Collectives, connectives, networks, groups, and rhizomatic communities are laid out in terms of community building, all stressing the importance of achieving group goals while at the same time achieving individual goals as well.

Leadership and its connections to community building rely on a connectivist approach in how the overall dynamic of the social network influences equitable learning. Although current literature expresses the importance of leadership in schools (Copland and Knapp, 2006; Gupton, 2003; Blase and Blase, 2004; DuFour, DuFour, and Eaker, 2008) and establishing a community of leaders as a whole (Sergiovanni, 1999), the actual interaction between the stakeholders (i.e., the actors within the network) and the power within those relationships provide a better means for describing the effect the networked community has on improving education. In order for community building to be an effective means for improving education, leaders must understand their role and its influence on the community, always acting in the best interest of an improvement to education in schools.

The notion of instructional leadership generally relates to the behaviors of administrators and teachers as they relate to instructional outcomes. Hallinger and Murphy define instructional leadership as "...interactions between leaders and followers wherein the follower's beliefs and perceptions are viewed as important" (as cited in Blase and Blase, 2004, p.11). Given this definition for instructional leadership, Sheppard went on confirming a "positive and strong relationship between effective instructional leadership behaviors exhibited by principals and teacher commitment, professional involvement, and innovativeness" (as cited in Blase and Blase, 2004, p.11). Although this perspective is focused primarily within the school, the essence of teachers working with administrators in a non-hierarchial way, administrators providing teachers the space to try new teaching practices and then reflect on them, and administrators promoting individual goal-setting as part of the overall school policy applies to teacher and student relationships as well. Extending the idea of instructional leadership to an idea of leadership in general removes the centrality position from within the school and applies it to the entire community.

Leadership at the community level requires a commitment of becoming a "community of leaders" (Sergiovanni, 1999). Instead of emplacing leadership as a dyadic phenomena in terms of employment position (i.e., administrator-to-teacher, teacher-to-student, etc.), all stakeholders are allowed to take on leadership roles as part of a complex system. Sergiovanni states, "What matters most is what the community together shares, what the community together believes in, and what the community together wants to accomplish" (1999, p. 170). Leaders that maintain this commonality are less likely to let ulterior motives or false pretenses get in the way of achieving the goals and objectives of the community. Thus, extending the notion of community as a social network can provide a clearer view as to the role and influence a leader has when engaging with other stakeholders.

Social network theory looks at relationships and interactions between individuals and groups. Breiger defines social network analysis as "the disciplined inquiry into the patterning of relations among social actors, as well as the patterning of relationships among actors at different levels of analysis (such as persons and groups) (2004, p. 505). The relationship between the actors is called ties, which may be unidirectional or bidirectional, and the actors themselves are referred to as nodes. Ethier states that the more ties or "mappings" a person has the more "knowledge, influence, and power" (n.d.) the person has within the network. The use of this knowledge, influence, and power within the social network is the root of analyzing the effectiveness of leadership within a community.

Within a social network system, the level of engagement between actors can vary. Siemens draws a distinction between three types of levels of engagement between actors within a network: "individuals", "collectives", and "connectives" (2008). Individuals have weak ties to a network and require self-motivating forces in order to drive their own learning. An example would be an individual choosing to use the internet to increase knowledge through the aggregation of information; that is, through peripheral participation. In contrast, collectives sacrifice their sense of self as the identity of the group is being formed. This happens all too often in today´s classrooms around the world where students play a passive role in the learning process. The final type, connectives, views actor autonomy within the network just as important as the social network itself. Strong ties exist between the actors as networked interactions are negotiated towards group and individual objectives.

In contrast to Siemen's individual, collective, and connective distinction (each being a type of network) Downes puts forth the notion of a group-network dichotomy (2006) and how power laws can influence the flow of information. Having a centrality position within the network with many strong ties to other nodes (i.e., networked participants) can go beyond simply obtaining knowledge and influence but also can create a position of power. When creating a community of leaders, the network is best served when relationships are more evenly dispersed as opposed to having a centralized cluster that exhibits many ties connected to a few nodes, or worse off, a single node (e.g., a teaching providing the only means of new information to students). If connected to the entire network, cliques, or "mini networks", might specialize in certain areas that might offer a level of diversity in concentrating on certain areas while still maintaining ties to the network. The key is for leaders to recognize the dynamic of the entire network and to promote community leaders to work in concert for a common cause.

A final notion that pertains to leadership perspectives in a community is Cormier´s metaphorical explanation of a "Rhizomatic" education. Cormier explains the metaphor as follows: "A rhizomatic plant has no center and no defined boundary; rather, it is made up of a number of semi-independent nodes, each of which is capable of growing and spreading on its own, bounded only by the limits of its habitat" (2008). Although the reference is to education in general, the principal applies to community building as well. A leader must recognize that each stakeholder (i.e., school administrators, educators, learners, parents, and community leaders) comes from a particular place and each is looking for a particular benefit that the community (i.e., network) can provide them. In other words, the benefits that stakeholders seek should not be at the expense of others. Leaders need the insight to recognize which actions best serve the community as an integrated network of relationships.

The individual, collective, and connective distinction, the network-group dichotomy, and the rhizomatic metaphor share many common attributes that connect leadership to community building. The community is recognized as a group of participants that have the potential to contribute to a common cause. The leaders within the community are those that bring that potentiality to fruition. Leaders bring awareness and purposeful dialog that builds on the fact that each participant has a voice. Participants may vary in the level of their participation, but all are essential in the creation of a diverse set of relationships that are based on a value set. It is precisely this value set that leaders must affectively communicate. A leader - not in position but in terms of knowledge, influence, and power – works selflessly for the betterment of the community at the same time looking out for individual interests as well. Through compromise and conflict resolution, leaders have the forethought to drive participants towards consensus. Leaders are not the "authority", but are recognized as those that bring out the strengths of a diversified group of individuals. Whereas teacher leaders are seen as both teachers and learners simultaneously, so too are leaders. They direct and are directed upon. The listen as well as speak. They act and they reflect on their actions. Leaders delegate responsibility thus empowering others to pursue their potential. As in the rhizomatic plant, each node (i.e., administrator, educator, etc.) has their own starting and ending point, still being connected and contributing to a common cause. A leader brings participants together in a collective sense but maintains the connective aspects of individual choices and pursuits.

To conclude, the notion of leadership best relates to community building through a set of social network concepts. Leaders interact with other participants in a variety of ways through establishing both weak and strong ties. The level of participation may be peripheral or centralized as long as the network does not have one or a few centralized nodes that is providing the bulk of the knowledge, influence, and power. Power struggles are important phenomena in the networked community since benefits of some are at the expense of others. Respecting all participants is vital when establishing a set of common values among the community in order that individual efforts are rewarded as well as group efforts. Administrators, educators, learners, parents, and community leaders all have the right to take on leadership roles. Open engagement between all stakeholders as part of a connective community brings a more democratic approach to achieving a shared vision.

References

Blase, J. and Blase, J. (2004). Handbook of instructional leadership: How successful principals promote teaching and learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Breiger, R. (2006). Handbook of data analysis. London, UK: Sage Publications.

Cormier, D. (2008). Rhizomatic education: Community as curriculum. Retrieved on October 8, 2008 from http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=550&action=article

Copland, M. and Knapp, M. (2006). Connecting leadership and learning: A framework for reflection, planning, and action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).

Downes, S. (September 25, 2006). Google video: networks. Retrieved on October 8, 2008 from http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4126240905912531540

DuFour, R., DuFour, R., and Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at work: new insights for improving schools. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree (formally National Educational Service).

Ethier, J. (n.d.). Current research in social network theory. Retrieved on October 6, 2008 from http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/perrolle/archive/Ethier-SocialNetworks.html

Gupton, S. (2003). The instruction leadership toolbox: A handbook for improving practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Siemens, G. (October 5, 2008). Groups and networks: Connectivism and connective knowledge. Retrieved on October 6, 2008 from http://elearnspace.org/media/CCK08_Wk5/player.html

Sergiovanni, T. (1999). Building community in schools. New York, NY: Jossey-Bass.

# Assessing Community Relations

October 26, 2008

This essay assesses community relations within a language department at a Mexican university. A single perspective study investigated accessibility and structured-to-flexible networked groups in determining if this particular group leaned more to a gemeinschaft (community) or gesellschaft (society). Although there were exceptions, the findings indicate a tendency to a more societal approach when analyzing the communication practices of teachers and their students, between teachers themselves, and between administrators – primarily the head of the language department – and teachers. The purpose of conducting this assessment was so develop a year-long action plan that would help shift communication practices from a societal to a more communal paradigm. It was determined that future assessments regarding community relations would be better served if all the stakeholders were involved in this assessment process as well as being facilitated from administrators.

Action research building a networked community: a language department perspective

Establishing a learning community provides affordances that permit teachers, administrators, and students to work collectively towards a goal while simultaneously respecting and promoting individual goals and objectives as well. To achieve these goals and objectives, community relations becomes imperative. Proper internal and external relations brings all stakeholders together towards a common endeavor through colleagueship among all of its members (i.e., communities, schools, classrooms, teachers, students, and parents). In order to assess community relations, the process of conducting action research will provide the means for educators and administrators to begin reflecting on current practices so that all community participants begin to work in a more collegial fashion.

The action research to assess community relations focuses on the language department at a public university in the country of Mexico. The language department consists of the following four areas: a) bachelor's in English language teaching, b) general language courses for tourism majors, c) general language courses for undergraduate university students as part of a language proficiency requirement specific to their major area of study, and d) general language courses for university students who have already met their language requirement which includes courses for the general public as well. The rationale behind choosing this particular context was due to how each of the above four areas tend to work in isolation. Moreover, within each of the four areas, teachers tend to work individually with little-to-no reflection as part of their current teaching practices. The community relations assessment and subsequent action plan are to address this phenomenon in such a way that promotes a shift from what Sergiovanni refers to as gesellschaft (i.e., society) to a gemeinschaft (i.e., community) (1999, p. 6).

The community relations assessment was conducted from a single perspective based on three years of interaction with its participants. Parsons (1951) distinguishes the following as a variety of community relationship patterns as continua:

  * "affective – affective neutrality

  * collective orientation – self-orientation

  * particularism – universalism

  * ascription – achievement

  * diffuseness – specificity" (as cited in Sergiovanni, 1999, p. 22)

Based on these community relationships as they each pertain to teacher´s relationships with students, relationships among teachers, and administrator's relationships with teachers, an assessment was conducted (see table 1) throughout the language department as a whole. The findings show that although there is a mix between both community and society relationships, there is a stronger tendency for the latter.

The largest variances in this assessment deal with collective – self-orientation and diffuseness – specificity continua particularly when comparing these results between the teacher's relationship with students and the administrator's relationship with teachers. Regarding the former, teachers tend to be more self-oriented when it comes to working with students and colleagues as most teach in isolation having an "every man for himself" attitude about their practice. In contrast, administrators (i.e., the head of the department) tends to favor a collective orientation for the most part whereby decisions are made on behalf of the entire community as a whole. Regarding the latter relationship, the diffuseness – specificity continuum, the head of the department has a more societal perspective when it comes to viewing teachers based on their roles, experience, and agendas. For example, teachers with opposing views are often not encouraged to pursue their interests for fear of a non-productive, conflictive result. On the other hand, teachers tend to take a diffuseness stance when it comes to their students – viewing the whole student within the learning process. Interestingly enough, teachers tend to hold more of a specific view of other teachers, in part due to the influence the head of the department has on the learning community in general.

When looking at the language department in terms of "dimensions of schooling" (Wiles and Bondi, 2007, p. 46), from a community involvement perspective, the results indicate more flexibility when addressing legal, participatory, intellectual, and general access (see table 2).

Physical access is typically limited to school events with an occasional convention that does allow the community with limited access to the facilities. External opportunities do exist for some English language learners who are in the undergraduate program (i.e., BA in English language teaching).

The head of the department does a fair job in maintaining open communication with internal publics (see table 3). When dealing with internal publics, the department head maintains fluid communication with the dean and other departments throughout the university. For example, periodic reports are provided to university board members on how yearly objectives are being completed. Also, the department head maintains an "open door" policy which allows teachers time to discuss important issues at any time. However, relations among teachers from a curricular, instructional, and assessment perspective is lacking.

Bagin, Gallagher, and Moore include the following as pertaining to relations among teachers: "lack of administrative leadership, instructional practices, unethical conduct, division of responsibility, and formation of cliques" (2008, pp. 94-96). The lack of instructional practices and the formation of cliques are two areas where open communication and more input with all teachers and the head of the department could be improved. Instructional leadership is virtually non-existent except for a very few who take on the role on their own. Also, cliques prevent open communication and collaboration among all teachers since personality conflicts tend to interfere at times with professional development.The action research provided here is critical in nature and is a single perspective on a possible future plan that addresses how all teachers within the language department might shift from gesellschaft to gemeinschaft. Gay, Mills, and Airasian define critical action research as "action research in which the goal is liberating individuals through knowledge gathering" (2006, p. 500). Therefore, the first semester would include putting together a committee (of teachers) in looking for some social networking sites that would allow all teachers to better share ideas and teaching practices. The latter half of the first semester would include training on how to use the new site. At the same time, new policies would be established that gave all teachers opportunities to create presentations, performance tasks, etc. that would be shared with the rest of the learning community. Teacher workloads and compensation would account for the added work required to complete these additional tasks. The second semester would being the new presentations, discussions, etc. that all would be conducted in the new social networking site and would require some level of participation among all the teachers. Also, the Downey walk-through (Downey, Steffy, English, Frase, and Poston, 2004) would be common practice for the head of the department in working closer with all teachers in promoting more reflective teaching practice that later could be shared throughout the learning community. Subsequent semesters would include the rotation of teacher participation in the social networking site and further input from the head of the department based on the walk-throughs with the teachers. Everyone would be encouraged to share thoughts, concerns, and experiences so to move from working alone to working collaboratively without fear of making a mistake. The head of the department would also be considered as a facilitator and coach as opposed of an authoritative figure who is out to catch teaching mistakes.

In summary, this action research was taken from a single perspective in conducting a top-down approach to analyzing how current practices lean towards gesellschaft as opposed to gemeinschaft. The intention was to bring to the forefront how current communication practices are perceived in order to generate more dialog from the rest of the educators. The assessment might be reapplied but throughout the language department in order to get different perspectives in how community relations is being applied. A top-down and bottom-up approach serves well the assessment process in that all opinions are valued. The head of the language department will have better insight into how to best approach the shift to a more community-based teaching and learning practice. In addressing this challenge of cultural change, John Maynard Keynes stated, "The difficulty lies not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping old ones" (as cited in DuFour, DuFour, and Eaker, 2008, p. 89).

References

Bagin, D., Gallagher, D., and Moore, E. (2008). The school and community relations. New York, NY: Pearson.

Blase, J. and Blase, J. (2004). Handbook of instructional leadership: How successful principals promote teaching and learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Breiger, R. (2006). Handbook of data analysis. London, UK: Sage Publications.

Cormier, D. (2008). Rhizomatic education: Community as curriculum. Retrieved on October 8, 2008 from http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=550&action=article

Copland, M. and Knapp, M. (2006). Connecting leadership and learning: A framework for reflection, planning, and action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).

Downes, S. (September 25, 2006). Google video: networks. Retrieved on October 8, 2008 from http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4126240905912531540

DuFour, R., DuFour, R., and Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at work: New insights for improving schools. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

Ethier, J. (n.d.). Current research in social network theory. Retrieved on October 6, 2008 from http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/perrolle/archive/Ethier-SocialNetworks.html

Gay, L., Mills, G., and Airasian, P. (2006). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Gupton, S. (2003). The instruction leadership toolbox: A handbook for improving practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Siemens, G. (October 5, 2008). Groups and networks: Connectivism and connective knowledge. Retrieved on October 6, 2008 from http://elearnspace.org/media/CCK08_Wk5/player.html

Sergiovanni, T. (1999). Building community in schools. New York, NY: Jossey-Bass.

Wiles, J. and Bondi, J. (2007). Curriculum development: A guide to practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

# Improving Communication

November 8, 2008

This essay assesses a language department at a Mexican public university in how current technologies can be used to build stronger public relations with both external and internal publics. A shift from traditional forms of public relations to a more modern form creates stronger and a more diverse set of ties between all stakeholders, thus providing a more productive and relevant learning environment for the learner. It was determined that the language department primarily relies on a one-to-many communicative approach with limited use of technology in providing bidirectional relations that promote information sharing and program improvement efforts. Social networks provide a current solution to this problem.

Public relations (i.e., community relations) within an educational setting require the ability to effectively communicate a message to a given audience. Whether addressing teachers, students, parents, school boards, or civic leaders, administrators must find appropriate channels and use fitting language to communicate ideas to an audience who each have distinguishable needs and interests. Board meetings, press conferences, periodicals, and online publications are just a few examples of communicative means of transmitting a message to what Bagin, Gallagher, and Moore refer to as "external publics" (2008). In contrast, "internal publics" (Bagin, Gallagher, and Moore, 2008) refer to those stakeholders that interact within the school environment, such as students, teachers, and administrators. Online communication in particular, now affords both external and internal publics to share common information in a more transparent way. The following includes an assessment of how public relations is being used to bridge external and internal publics in a way that fosters accountability and openness into the advancement of English language learning. Current technologies provide the means for all stakeholders to actively participate within an educational environment that sets out to continuously improve English language learning among pre-service English language teachers. Although these technologies exist, leadership and direction is required in order for stakeholders to fully take advantage of the opportunity.

Public relations assessment: School setting

The language department consists of approximately 20 full and part-time teachers (tenured and non-tenured) who educate more than 300 pre-service English language teachers (henceforth PELTs) in a bachelor´s degree program that lasts four-to-five years. The bachelor's program in English language training (henceforth ELT) consists of three strands: early education, research, and business. Once the PELTs have entered their sixth semester of study (out of eight total semesters), they choose electives for the remaining three semesters that support the respective strand of their choice.

In order to enter into the ELT program, PELTs are required to take the Test of English as a Foreign Language, or TOEFL, and obtain a minimum score of 450. PELTs who achieve the minimum score, enter into the first semester of the program. PELTs who fail to meet the minimum score are required to take a year of remedial courses that include of the following skills and competencies: reading, writing, listening, speaking, grammar, and computer technology. Once they complete these courses, without failing any one of them, PELTs then enter the first semester of the ELT program.

Public relations within the language department largely rely on technologies based on unidirectional communication. The head of the department is the primary administrator in the language department and tends to be the hub of communication flow. Since there only about 10 tenured teachers in the language department which maintain offices on campus, online communication is often used to communicate a message. Nicenet (2008) is used most frequently to communicate general messages, allowing for threaded discussions as well. In the Spring of 2008, the university opened a Moodle page but has been virtually unused by the faculty. E-mails are also used to communicate and share files between the head of the department and faculty.

To communicate with the external public, the language department uses the university website (2008b). This type of communication is restricted to a one-to-many form of transmission thus, hindering communication from the external public back to the language department. There is a contact form that can be used in the website should users wish to contact the language department, but a single form is used by the entire humanities department which later is directed to the appropriate area (i.e., communication, law, education, philosophy, history, language, psychology, sociology and anthropology, and social work). Moreover, each department within the website appears to have a link although the links fail to direct the user to another website.

Discussion

The language department has a variety of ways to use technology to improve communications, thus improving public relations as well. External and internal publics can in many cases share the same technologies, enabling a more accountable and transparent learning environment. Once technologies are put in place, it is the responsibility of the department head to see that information and communication remains fluid between both external and internal publics.

External publics. With a few modifications, communicating with external publics can be greatly enhanced, or in some cases put into existence. Having a limited space in the humanities section of the university website only offers one-way publication of infrequent events and does little to promote relations. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language defines relation as "A logical or natural association between two or more things; relevance of one to another; connection" (2000). This "connection" is what is lacking between the language department and external schools, language learners, and civic leaders. Moreover, the language department is not only responsible for the ELT program, but is also responsible for extension courses offered to the general public and general language courses that are offered to undergraduate university students through another program titled Programa de Fomento a las Lenguas Extranjeras, (i.e., PFLE). Therefore, technologies can be used to clarify which program corresponds with each respective audience.

In bridging the gap between the language department and the external public, a social network site such as a Ning (2008) can help in this regard. The head of the department can design a Ning in order to simplify how the public learners about the different programs that the department offers. This can help avoid misunderstandings as to which programs correspond to which audience. Instead of using traditional forms of communication such as newspaper publications, press releases, television ads, and radio spots, Nings provide the means for distributing video and audio to the intended audience, making it available over a period of time. For live, two-way communication, other websites are available for free or for little cost that enable the head of the department and the external public to conduct online conferences (UStream, 2008; BlipTV, 2008; DimDim, 2008). Technologies, therefore, are now creating more open and direct contact possibilities that enable the external public to address issues with the head of the department regarding not only areas of general interest but also topics regarding how programs might be improved upon.

Internal publics. Social networks, like Nings, also provide the means for establishing open communication between not only the department head and the internal public, but also a three-way communication channel between the department head, internal public, and the external public. Websites can link program information to learner events and learner products, demonstrating academic development thereby providing future teachers with authentic audiences early on in their development. Social networks give relevance to the learning process that does not exist in the absence of technology; now PELTs have more of an opportunity to use their English in developing a need that a community can benefit from. Additionally, electronic portfolios can be included in Nings that better show individual progress, and at the same time affords a greater level of feedback not only from the course instructor but also from other teachers, the head of the department, or an outside audience as well. Finally, social networks provide the means for schools to work and collaborate together although current practices tend to "work within the parameters of a local administrative unit and universities generally serve individual educators [and students]" (Veugelers and O'Hair, 2005, p. 19).

Current technologies (e.g., social network sites, video-blog sites, and learning management systems) afford all stakeholders the means for communicating and collaborating within an overall learning environment. Specially, as the head of the language department, social network sites creates transparency and increased information flow thus developing relations between administrators, teachers, students, parents, and community leaders. Moreover, academic work take on a new meaning since instant contact between PELTs and the public create a wider array of feedback possibilities, as opposed to relying solely on the teacher as the only "audience". The future resides in the use of current technologies that will continue to shift from traditional means of establishing public relations (e.g., press releases, board meetings, radio spots, exhibits, etc.) to a more centralized form of communication that utilizes networked properties in building ties with all stakeholders.

References

Bagin, D., Gallagher, D., and Moore, E. (2008). The school and community relations. New York, NY: Pearson.

BlipTV. (2008). Retrieved on November 8, 2008 from http://www.blip.tv/

DimDim. (2008). Retrieved on November 8, 2008 from http://www.dimdim.com/

Nicenet. (2008). Retrieved on November 8, 2008 from http://www.nicenet.org/

Ning. (2008). Retrieved on November 8, 2008 from http://www.ning.com/

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. (2000). Retrieved on November 8, 2008 from http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/relation

UStream. (2008). Retrieved on November 8, 2008 from http://www.ustream.tv/

Veugelers, W. and O'Hair, M. (2005). Network learning for educational change. England: Open University Press.

# Course Project

November 20, 2008

This essay suggests the importance of having a community that shares a common interest in improving academic achievement. A network of people who share both a collective and connective goal is best served when diversity is welcomed and a shared responsibility is acknowledged. Community relations sustain a level of communication between internal and external publics in a way that maintains a level of transparency between the school system and the local community. In order to provide school-wide accountability, all stakeholders must share in the successes and challenges that schools face in order to better reap the benefits that schools provide the global society.

Living in a small town in the mid-west of just over 6,000 people provided opportunities for schools to get involved with the community. Having the high school jazz band play at a nursing home, promoting various local businesses to sponsor a school publication, and celebrating the passing of local bond issues to support schools were examples of common events that brought all stakeholders together for a common cause: increased learner success. Now, in an age of accountability (e.g., the No Child Left Behind Law), parents and civic leaders require a higher level of transparency than before if school issues are to be handled in an open and direct way. In larger cities, where diverse classrooms are more common, the shift in accountability has placed issues such as teacher merit pay, language learning development, and special education topics (U.S. Department of Education..., 2008) to the forefront. No longer are school-wide problems thought to require solely an internal solution among administrators and educators; they require a school relations program that invites the students, parents, and civic leaders to participate in finding the best solutions. All stakeholders benefit from having a sound school district and therefore have a vested interest in how schools handle issues. In order to address school issues in such a way that creates a more mutual and equitable education for learners, a community must be built and maintained in such a way that networks a diverse set of people towards a collective and connective goal.

The community

When working within a community, group goals should not be at the expense of individual goals. For the purpose of this discussion, a community is defined as a network of individuals that maintain a series of weak and strong ties with other participants over time in an effort to achieve a collective goal, while at the same time failing to diminish the individual goals of its participants to a degree that causes individuals to become nonparticipants or participants of little-to-no benefit to the network. Siemens (2008) makes a distinction between two types of individual participation within a group (e.g., community): "connective" and "collective".

Individuals...in some type of a connective relationship [italics added] to each other retain a high autonomy of self. Rather than blending, they exist in a mosaic – namely they retain their unique identify even though they contribute or relate to the larger whole. In contrast, a collective [italics added] is a subsumption of self. An example that is often used is the notion of a melting pot where our individuality is absorbed as we contribute or become part of the larger whole (slides 14-15). Therefore, a community is best served when leadership takes into account both connective and collective goals.

When building a community, communication among both internal and external publics is necessary. Bagin, Gallagher, and Moore (2008) put forth the following reasons why school districts see a good internal communication program as important: a) "a good external communication program cannot survive without it", b) "constructive ideas will be suggested by employees because someone is listening and informing them", and c) "human needs, such as recognition and a sense of belonging, will be met, thus making employees more productive" (p. 90). In other words, effective and efficient school relations come from within first and then extend out to parents and community leaders. Without proper buy-in to an established mission statement and collective vision among administrators, teachers, and students, establishing a network with the external public is futile.

Instituting a shared mission and vision statement transpires either in a top-down or bottom-up fashion, the former clearly losing out to the latter (DuFour, DuFour, and Eaker, 2008). Teachers, for example, who have a voice in how to develop a given mission and vision statement for their particular school, will be more open in maintaining that mission and pursuing the vision through collaborative efforts. The process of developing a mission and vision statement also allows teachers to reflect on their own practice and goals which brings connective goals to the forefront of discussion. When pursuing a vision statement, collective goals are being developed while at the same time considering the connective goals (i.e., individual goals of the teachers) as well. Stated another way, if teachers see that by pursuing a collective goal or vision, they can at the same time benefit by achieving their own personal goals, they will be more likely to accept the change required to pursue new teaching practices.

As administrators and teachers work collaboratively to develop a mission and vision statement, so too do teachers and students who work within a classroom setting. At this point, a clarification in the difference between collaborative and cooperative learning is in order. Hollins (1996) describes the distinction as follows:

In the collaborative learning community, relationships and collaboration among the students are naturally occurring and purposefully focused on learning while minimizing individual and group competition. In contrast, in cooperative learning, relationships are structured, manipulated, and controlled by the teacher with group competition replacing individual competition in many cases (as cited in Rothstein-Fisch & Trumbull, 2008).

Moreover, building a "classroom as a learning community" (DuFour, DuFour, and Eaker, 2008) or a "classroom as a democratic community" (Sergiovanni, 1999) has not only an epistemological perspective but an ontological one as well. Instead of focusing on the "what" and "how" of knowing and learning, the "learning" or "democrat" community also focuses on an existential perspective: Who are the learners that make up learning environment? and What do educators want them to become? The interaction and engagement between teacher and student develops classroom norms in a collaborative way while also adhering to the established curriculum.

Leadership drives change. Whether administrators are presenting a press release, principals are working with teachers towards a shared vision, or teachers are establishing classroom rules the first day of school, the ability to empower others to take on leadership roles in pursuit of collective and connective goals is crucial in order to create a democratic relationship that celebrates the diverse identities of the participants within the community. Improved academic achievement is the underpinning notion that drives the community to recognize the individual strengths of its participants as opposed to alienating those who hold divergent views or who are simply different in some other way. Schools have a responsibility in setting the example as to how a diverse group of individuals can come together for a common good.

A mutual and equitable education

The purpose of establishing a learning community is to offer a more mutual and equitable education for all students. Getting the local community involved in the successes and challenges of the educational system can bestow learners a sense of support in how they progress through the learning process. Furthermore, orchestrating a diverse group within a classroom depends upon how learners interact with each other and how engaged they are in the task.

To motivate students to higher levels of achievement often involves bringing together the community and the learners. Price (2008) mentioned a case where the community rallied together to address low SAT scores by having the Columbia Urban League, the Educational Testing Service, parents, and students join together in a series of meetings in order to discuss ways of improving test scores. The bulk of the students who were suffering from low SAT scores were low-income minority groups who were not given the same opportunities to learning about test-taking techniques that would provide them the equitable education they are entitled to. Moreover, since the event was novel, the event drew news coverage that provided further exposure to the importance of community-based efforts to improve academic achievement. Academic issues that need improving are better handled when there is a sense of responsibility by all stakeholders to assume their part when designing and carrying out a solution.

Internally, a school that celebrates diversity (e.g., gender, family, race, socioeconomic, etc.) is viewed in terms of a sum of its parts, as opposed to looking at the educational environment in terms of a "target" with various "home" cultures. Exposure to the "target" culture should not mean compromising one´s own culture, but instead should be a blending of the two. Referential content that includes learner´s experiences can stimulate classroom dialog as a way to gain an appreciation for other cultures. Cultural appreciation helps learners to be better citizens as society as a whole becomes more global in nature.

Within the classroom, interaction between learners is best served when the educator designs a safe space for learners to engage in meaningful tasks through the creation of personal learning networks. In Storch´s research (2002), dyadic groups were analyzed and classified as dominant/dominate, dominate/passive, novice/expert, and collaborative, using mutuality and equitably as dual criteria (See Table 1).

Storch defined mutuality and equitable as... and determines that mutuality is more important than equitable. Therefore, educators who promote equitable and mutuality can help learners create their own personal learning networks aided through the use of technology. Wikis, blogs, and personal websites provide the means for learners to have access to an authentic audience, thus providing a more relevant learning experience.In establishing a collective goal of improved academic achievement in schools, all stakeholders must network together in such a way that individually remains intact. All learners regardless of economic status, race, gender, or cultural background deserve the same affordances to a relevant and meaningful education as those learners who might be considered as "privileged". Community relations, whether between internal and external publics (i.e., administrators and the public, principal and school board, etc.) or between internal publics (i.e, administrators and teachers, teachers and students, etc.), are essential in providing a level of transparency needed to bring academic successes and challenges to prominence. Successes and challenges are considered responsibilities of the entire community and are handled through the efforts of the entire network as opposed to only certain stakeholders – stakeholders that are assumed to have a more vested interest in the outcome. Through shared responsibility, the community that works selflessly to improve academic achievement will reap the benefits of having an educational system that better supplies the human capital needed to improve a global society.

References

Bagin, D., Gallagher, D., and Moore, E. (2008). The school and community relations. New York, NY: Pearson.

DuFour, R., DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at work: New insights for improving schools. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

Price, H. (2008). Mobilizing the community to help students succeed. Alexandria, VA: Association for supervision and curriculum development (ASCD).

Rothstein-Fisch, C. & Trumbull, E. (2008). Managing diverse classrooms: How to build on students' cultural strengths. Alexandria, VA: Association for supervision and curriculum development (ASCD).

Sergiovanni, T. (1999). Building community in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Siemens, G. (October 5, 2008). Groups and networks: Connectivism and connective knowledge. Retrieved on November 15, 2008 from http://elearnspace.org/media/CCK08_Wk5/player.html

U.S. Department of Education: Promoting educational excellence for all Americans. (2008). Retrieved on November 15, 2008 from http://www.ed.gov/news/landing.jhtml?src=gu

# Supervision for Successful Schools

December 15, 2008

This essay addresses instructional supervision and its function within a school. The network metaphor is used to describe the importance of connected knowledge in providing equity among all the stakeholders of the school – administrators, teachers, students, and parents. Knowledge, influence, and power are not static phenomena that one or a few individuals enjoy as directives are pushed down throughout the ranks, rather they are dispersed and utilized by all stakeholders at appropriate times, based on the collective strengths of the participants. It was determined that effective instructional supervision is the ability to interpret congeniality, collegiality, and communities of practice all in terms of a shared vision, assuring that there remains a level of cohesion and consistency towards a collective goal.

The schoolhouse is a complex system. Too often, teachers are considered the "experts" who teach "novices" new information in a linear fashion, handing out grades that rank learners often discouraging those who learn at a slower rate. Similarly, administrators who provide clinical supervision often end up influencing how teachers perform when being observed little assurance that observed practices will have any sustaining effect in subsequent lessons. Defining instructional supervision and developing a legitimate rationale for pursuing a shared vision create a basis from which to interpret and evaluate how the interactions of stakeholders work influence improved student achievement.

From a traditional perspective, the term instructional supervision implies an individual or a group of individuals, higher in position, observing the instructional practices of others in an evaluative manner – as if there were a prescribed way of teaching whereby all students magically benefited equally from a given class lesson. Unfortunately, learners (and teachers) are much too complex to have preconceived notions of what instructional method(s) to be implemented, especially when top-down directives are being imposed. Siemens describes complex theory within the social sciences as, "numerous interacting elements [producing] various outcomes" (Complexity..., 2008). In other words, the exact same teaching scenario produces very different learning experiences depending on the learners needs, interests, and learning styles. From a research standpoint, cause-and-effect relationships are difficult (if not impossible) to generalize given the variety of circumstances that exist in a single scenario. Therefore, when defining instructional supervision, principles of complex theory push the leadership paradigm to a more distributed and connected relationship among administrators, teachers, students, and parents.

Instead of viewing instructional supervision as a hierarchy relationship (e.g., principal and teacher), interactions among all stakeholders ought to be aligned with a shared vision in terms of congenial, collegial, and communities of practice.

Congeniality has to do with the climate of interpersonal relationships in an enterprise. "Collegiality has to do with the extent to which teachers and principals share common work values, engage in specific conversation about their work, and help each other engage in the work off the school" (Little). [And] teachers and principals...need to be involved in a shared practice for which all are responsible (as cited in Sergiovanni, 2005, pp. 12-13).

Thus, instructional leadership implies interpreting the positive and negative effects of congeniality, collegiality, and communities of practice all within the context of a school vision. In doing so, provides a rationale for looking at instructional supervision in a more connected and distributed way.

Understanding conflict puts the notion of instructional supervision in a perspective that is more conducive to improved efforts that lead to student achievement. Thompson, L, Aranda, E., Robbins, S., et al. distinguish between two types of conflict: "emotional" and "cognitive". They go to say, "Emotional conflict is personal, defensive, and resentful, [and] cognitive conflict is largely depersonalized [which] consists of argumentation about the merits of ideas, plans, and projects" (2000, p. 218). In a traditional supervisory model, principals and administrators are less likely to be questioned about the directives they are promoting, thus avoiding cognitive conflict for fear that it might lead to emotional conflict. But instructional leadership that recognizes cognitive conflict for what it is, is better positioned to take on tasks that promote "direct assistance" to teachers, "group development, professional development, curriculum development", and "action research" (Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007, p. 10), all of which are designed to improve student achievement.

When looking at instructional supervision and the interactions between administrators and teachers, a network metaphor provides the means for showing how participants play various roles within a complex community. A network is made up of a series of nodes (i.e., a person, a book, the Internet, etc.) that are linked through unidirectional and bidirectional ties. For example, a teacher reading a book would involve two nodes connected by a unidirectional tie (i.e., information transmitting primarily from the book to the teacher). A unidirectional tie can also be seen in a traditional principal-teacher relationship whereby interactions tend to be top-down. Conversely, teachers who collaborate well together, such as being able to resolve cognitive conflict, maintain a bidirectional tie through dialogic interaction. The quality and frequency of a tie determines how strong or weak the relationship is and at a macro level, provides insight as to how knowledge is distributed throughout the entire network. Instructional supervisors, then, must understand the overall dynamic of their network (i.e., community, group, etc.) through the interactions (i.e., congeniality, collegiality, and communities of practice) of its members in determining how the shared vision is being achieved.

As stated earlier, complex theory assumes that strong and weak ties remain in a state of flux, and that connected knowledge contains emergent properties (i.e., the sum being greater than the sum of its parts). Therefore, in order for instructional supervision to be most effective, teachers, administrators, students, and parents – all nodes within the network – collectively play various roles in how knowledge, influence, and power is distributed throughout the school (i.e., network). The ability and support that stakeholders have to supervise supersedes the traditional notion of supervision based on rank or position. For those teachers, for example, that lack the experience and ability to lead are encouraged to take on this new role, as the notions of leading and learning come to the forefront of day-to-day practices. As roles and responsibilities change, teachers and administrators begin to address change by capitalizing on the strengths of network depending on the circumstances.

A successful instructional supervisor has the ability to empower teachers, students, and parents to work more interdependently towards a collective goal or vision. Moreover, control is preferred over power in avoiding marginalizing those participants who have opposing views. Giving each teacher a voice provides the means for consensus building in determining how decisions are to be reached. Instead of imposing a given educational philosophy (i.e., essentialism, pragmatism, existentialism, etc.), teachers are given the chance to reflect and share on their own philosophy in determining its appropriateness in light of a collective vision. The instructional supervisor facilitates this process by maintaining close contact with all teachers and by providing the ways and means of sharing ideas with the entire faculty. The Downing walkthrough (2004) is a useful technique in this regard.

To conclude, effective instructional leadership within a complex network (i.e., faculty, students, parents, etc.) assumes that information and knowledge are a set of relationships that promote and empower all participants to take on leadership roles at various times. The basic premise is that a school can be "smarter" if the knowledge, influence, and power are distributed throughout as opposed to residing in just one or a few individuals. Additionally, congeniality, collegiality, and communities of practice are descriptive representations of how instructional supervisors interpret the interactions of its participants. Empowering all participants by providing equal opportunities to have a voice and act towards a collective goal is at the heart of building a learning community that celebrates diversity and welcomes change as a continual process for improved student achievement.

References

Downey, C., Steffy, B., English, F., Frase, L., and Poston, W. (2004). The three-minute classroom walk-through: Changing school supervisory practice one teacher at a time. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Glickman, C., Gordon, S., and Ross-Gordon, J. (2007). Supervision and instructional leadership: A developmental approach. Boston, MA: Pearson.

Sergiovanni, T. (2005). Strengthening the heartbeat: Leading and learning together in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Siemens, G. (October 12, 2008). Complexity, chaos, and emergence. Retrieved on December 14, 2008 from http://docs.google.com/View?docid=anw8wkk6fjc_15cfmrctf8

Thompson, L, Aranda, E., Robbins, S., et al. (2000). Tools for teams: Building effective teams in the workplace. Boston, MA: Pearson.

# Interpersonal Supervisory Behaviors

December 27, 2008

This essay presents distributed leadership within the context of supervisory practice. Leadership as an entitlement attempts to close the ability-authority gap by providing teachers the support and giving them the responsibility to effectively carry out leadership roles of their choice. Based on the knowledge, skills, and dispositions of each teacher, different approaches to supervisory practice may range from directive to non-directive. Specifically considering Mexican teachers, the Downey walk-through (2004) holds the most promise due to its non-directive and collaborative approach based on frequent supervisor-teacher reflective dialogs.

As an American teaching in Mexico, evaluating how to put different leadership styles and supervision approaches into practice has proven to be an interesting and worthwhile endeavor. Although current literature covers a variety of concepts related to supervision and leadership within the context of an American school system, the purpose here is to provide a perspective on how teaching and learning are currently being addressed in Mexico. Because this is a Mexican perspective and not the Mexican perspective, no presumption is made that the facts presented are to be generalized across all teaching contexts throughout the country. Thus, the purpose is to provide insight on current literature given a teaching and learning context as a means for reflecting on past practices and acting on future practice in an effort to improve student achievement.

The title of this essay, Interpersonal distributed leadership behaviors: A Mexican perspective, addresses how the interaction between administrators, teachers, and students influence the distributed leadership process. Leadership that is distributed provides opportunities for all administrators, teachers, and students to take on leadership roles based on their ability and will. Sergiovanni (2005) uses the term "leadership as entitlement" when discussing leadership in terms of authority and ability: "[Leadership as] entitlement seeks to place those who have the ability to act in the forefront of decision making" (p. 43). Giving teachers, for example, the authority and ability means that tenured and non-tenured teachers have the same opportunity to lead if they choose to. Similarly, seniority has little influence on whether teachers are given the support and encouragement they need to lead others. In Mexico, teacher leaders are not given the "social capital" (Sergiovanni, 2005) needed to assume leadership responsibilities. The notion of leadership is still primarily seen as based on position, which is usually driven by prescribed "profiles" that specify certain educational and professional requirements. As a result, many teachers have the ability to lead but lack the authority.

But what is leadership and how does it relate to supervision? Many terms are used to describe leadership in education such as instructional leadership (Gupton 2003; McEwan, 2003; Blase and Blase, 2004), dispersed leadership (DuFour, DuFour, and Eaker, 2008), and distributed leadership (Sergiovanni, 2005) to name a few. A definition from Acheson and Smith (1986) (with one slight addition) will provide a starting point: "Instructional leadership is leadership that is directly [and indirectly] related to the processes of instruction where teachers, learners, and the curriculum interact" (as cited in McEwan, 2003, p. 6). Because leadership can also be indirectly related to instruction, the term distributed leadership takes this definition one step further. Instead of leadership coming strictly from the top down, distributed leadership adds a bottom-up approach to leadership as well. As discussed earlier, teacher leaders are given the support, authority, and responsibility to assume leadership roles at their discretion. This process is backed by what Elmore (2006) refers to as "reciprocal accountability – for every increment of performance I demand of you, I have an equal responsibility to provide you with the capacity to meet that expectation" (as cited in DeFour, DeFour, and Eaker, 2008, p. 312). This dual responsibility between relationships provides the basis of what productive supervision is all about.

Borrowed from the business field, the term supervision frequently conjures up feelings of pressure and anxiety driven from rank-and-file directives that are implemented in a top-down fashion. In fact, it is best to completely avoid the word when working in Mexico due to the negative connotation. Regardless, Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon (2007) define supervisory behavior in terms of interpersonal skills using a continuum that begins with maximum teacher responsibility and minimum supervisor responsibility on the left to minimum teacher responsibility and maximum supervisor responsibility on the right. Moving from left to right, they categorize these behaviors as non-directive, collaborative, directive informational, and directive control (pp. 118-119) (see Appendix). In Mexico, a directive approach to supervision tends to be more common than a collaborative and non-directive approach. A non-directive approach in particular is sometimes seen as a supervisor not fulfilling proper job responsibilities. At times, the expectation is that the supervisor should always provide the correct answer or the most pertinent advice in all teaching circumstances. Additionally, supervisors may tend to overuse a directive position with teachers who really need collaborative or non-directive supervision - this is more than likely due to power struggle issues, ulterior motives, and the like. To put these different types of supervisor-teacher relationships in a more applicable context, Downey, Steffy, English, Frase, and Poston (2004) provide an alternative that will serve well teaching and learning in Mexico.

Downey et al. focus on the types of supervisor-teacher relationship first in determining what type of dialog is best suitable for each teacher. They link Covey's stages of dependency (i.e., interdependent, independent, and dependent) with Berne's transactional analysis (i.e., adult-adult, adult-adolescent, and adult-child) in establishing the type of dialog or interaction (i.e., collaborative, indirect, and direct) ( Downey, Steffy, English, Frase, and Poston, 2004, p. 11). This approach to supervisory practice directs teachers from dependent to interdependent status by conducting frequently and brief observations that lead to a series of reflective questions that foster reflection on current teaching practices. Supervisors are seen as collegial counterparts and not as a boss-subordinate relationship, and observations are not part of the evaluation process; that is, they are strictly formative in nature. The Downey walk-through assumes that changed behavior can only come from individual awareness on the part of each teacher. Individual awareness of the need to change can be facilitated through proper reflective questioning in a trusting and non-threatening dialog with supervisors and other teachers.

The Downey walk-through has some advantages over Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon's approach to supervisory practice in that the former stresses a more indirect, collaborative approach that stems directly from the practice of teaching itself. In Mexico, an indirect approach to feedback is more productive due to the push on trust building and collegiality that are seen as the building block to the reflection and sharing process. Unless a marginal teacher, a directive approach will unlikely produce the desired results.

In summary, teachers who are given the support and authority to lead should be encouraged to take on leadership roles at their discretion. Leadership as entitlement and distributed leadership are two aspects of supervision that encourage both a top-down and bottom-up approach to the collaborative teaching practice. Supervisory practice that is more formative and less summative creates a more trusting environment for trying new things in the classroom. Supervisors, as instructional leaders, should provide the avenues for teachers to experiment, reflect on their past practices, and then given the opportunity to modify future practices all in an effort to improve academic achievement. Although teachers in Mexico may not be used to a non-directive approach, the Downey approach to supervisory practice provides a more effective way to address the supervisory-teacher relationship. The frequent contact between the supervisor and teacher along with the ongoing opportunities to reflect on the teaching practice align instruction, assessment, and the curriculum in an effort to better achieve the shared vision of the school.

References

Blase, J. and Blase, J. (2004). Handbook of instructional leadership: How successful principals promote teaching and learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Downey, C., Steffy, B., English, F., Frase, L., and Poston, W. (2004). The three-minute classroom walk-through: Changing school supervisory practice one teacher at a time. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Glickman, C., Gordon, S., and Ross-Gordon, J. (2007). Supervision and instructional leadership: A developmental approach. Boston, MA: Pearson.

Gupton, S. (2003). The instructional leadership toolbox: A handbook for improving practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

McEwan, E. (2003). 7 Steps to effective instructional leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Sergiovanni, T. (2005). Strengthening the heartbeat: Leading and learning together in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

# Assessment and Planning

January 13, 2009

This essay discusses the need for values in building a culture of collaboration when building improvement processes in schools. Differences in educational philosophies that are explicit create an open platform that deals with cognitive dissonance in a more productive way. Supportive supervision links these differences and provides the social capital required in order for teachers to determine their own means and ways towards individual goals. This is done through establishing values, namely hopefulness, trust, piety, and civility (Sergiovanni, 2005), in such a way that individuality is not compromised. Thus, building a culture of collaboration is balanced with the implementation of communities of practice in order for teachers to strive for individual goals while at the same time working towards a collective goal.

The presidential election of 2008, as many have in the past, promoted the need for change through the virtue of hope. To undergo such a change, the task then becomes how to lead a group of people collectively while respecting individual interests. The United States has often been referred to as a melting pot which later was more accurately expressed through the "salad bowl" or "cultural mosaic" metaphor; shifting the notion of a singular culture to one that is multiple (i.e., cultural pluralism or multicultural) (Answers, 2009). When pursuing a vision or ideal in schools, a similar phenomenon occurs. Instructional leaders are viewed as promoting change that seeks to close the gap between the ideal (i.e., the written curriculum) and reality (i.e., the taught curriculum). Support through formative means helps assess whether a changed behavior is making a difference for the better. Therefore, developing a culture of collaboration in schools through the promotion of values can set the stage for finding the means, ways, and ends for closing the ideal and reality gap.

A school curriculum comes from a philosophical base, whether implicit or explicit. Wiles and Bondi (2007) mention five main educational philosophies that range from the more traditional to the more progressive: "perennialism", "idealism", "realism", "experimentalism", and "existentialism" (p. 43). Teaching and testing the written curriculum discloses how these educational philosophies are viewed from both a collective and individual perspective. For example, if teachers have a more perennial educational philosophy; that is, they are extremely rational in their practice and beliefs, they will tend to stick to historical norms and view truths as givens. If these same teachers are trying to teach a curriculum that is based more on critical thinking skills whereby learners are encouraged to pursue individual means for their own learning, then this could lead to a degree of cognitive dissonance or "the mental conflict that occurs when beliefs or assumptions are contradicted by new information" (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2009). The way in which this cognitive dissonance is handled will depend on how implicit or explicit the differences in educational philosophies are and whether the pursuit for change is occurring is a top-down or bottom-up fashion.

Clearly, having differences in educational philosophies within a school that are not well-communicated or even realized for that matter are destined to create more contention between all stakeholders. The best approach is to make these differences as explicit as possible. Schools that have a well-defined and shared mission (i.e., reality) and vision (i.e., ideal) statement are in a better position to deal is cognitive dissonance. A shared mission and vision statement implies a bottom-up approach and not one that is imposed on teachers by administrators. As a result, stakeholders feel a personal investment in working towards a vision they helped to create.

Collaboration among all stakeholders, administrators and teachers in particular, is best served when various forms of supportive supervision are recognized. Gupton (2003) identifies five different forms of supportive supervision as follows: a) "cooperative clinical supervision, b) collegial coaching, c) collegial study groups, d) individualized, mediated entry programs, and e) self-directed development activities" (see Appendix) (p. 107). Regardless of the form of supportive supervision a school adheres to, the notion of formative change continues to be at the forefront. The Downey walk-through (2004) is another example that takes a formative approach in promoting reflective practice that is shared with other faculty members. Instead of judging teaching practice by looking back on a particular performance, formative assessment in supervisory practice looks at how past performance can be modified, revised, and enhanced so that future teaching practices can improve student achievement. For teachers, peer teaching, reflection, and mentor programs are examples of how collaboration can foster forward-thinking practices as well. Thus, supervision and instructional leadership responsibilities are distributed among administrators and faculty based on ability and authority, both of which require support in order be fully achieved.

A collaborative community promotes improved processes in schools by adopting a common set of values. Sergiovanni (2005) puts forth the following four core values that are necessary in any learning community: "hopefulness, trust, piety, and civility" (p. 77). Being hopeful and optimistic advances realistic expectations that are based on sound conditions. Relational trust pushes for the creation of relationships among faculty and administrators that allows participants to take chances without fear of subsequent consequences. Having a sense of duty, being respectful, and being loyal (i.e., piety) also require a level of civility whereby diversity is encouraged while at the same time not marginalizing those with opposing views. Balancing these four values within a learning community begets an environment that links instruction and assessment such that administrators, teachers, and students are then able to work through the means, ways, and ends towards a more productive community of practice.

Leadership and rationality are of great importance when working with a mission statement, vision statement, and a value set in schools. Shulman (1989) classifies human rationality into the following three areas:

1. "Humans are rational; they think and act in a manner consistent with their goals, their self interests, and what they have been rewarded for.

2. Humans are limited in their rationality; they can make sense of only a small piece of the world at a time and they strive to act reasonably with respect to their limited grasp of facts and alternatives.

3. Humans are rational only when acting together; since individual reason is so limited, men and women find opportunities to work jointly on important problems, achieving through join effort what individual reason and capacity could never accomplish" (as cited in Sergiovanni, 2005, p. 37).

Sergiovanni (2005) stresses that ends, ways, and means – in that order – apply more to humans as rational (option #1), whereas humans as limited in rationality (options #2 & #3) work in reverse: means, ways, and ends – in that order. He supports the notion of offering the social capital needed in order for teachers to develop the means and ways in pursuit of corresponding ends. This approach has various implications when put into practice.

Working with teachers in developing a mission and vision statement is a good way to build consensus in why the school exists (i.e., mission statement) and what the school is to become (i.e., vision statement). The shared values (i.e., collective commitments) that teachers incorporate into their everyday practice relates to how their actions, behaviors, and commitments will close the gap between their vision and the current reality. In closing this gap, teachers must have the social capital needed for them to develop and choose between the best means and ways for developing their own personal goals. For example, teachers may need training on digital media like wikis, blogs, aggregators, podcasting, social networking sites, etc. in order them to decide which ways are most appropriate for them in developing their own personal learning environment (PLEs). To motivate teachers to pursue their own PLE, they need to see some value in it, so there will need to be examples set out from the beginning clearly illustrating the benefits of creating a PLE (i.e., networking with other teachers, increasing knowledge, improving pedagogical skills, and transferring PLEs to the classroom).

In summary, building a collaborative community in schools is best served when key values such as hopefulness, trust, piety, and civility are exercised. Closing the gap between the ideal and reality is an ongoing effort towards school improvement that celebrates diversity and opposing viewpoints through consensus building practices. Teachers who are given the support and choice for determining the means and ways are in a better position to achieve their respective ends (i.e., goals) because there is a level of choice based on personal interests, needs, and learning preferences. A balance between communities of practice and institutionalized collaborative cultures recognizes teacher individuality and autonomy while at the same time working towards collective goals (Sergiovanni, 2005) which are congruent with a shared vision. Metaphorically, a mosaic that depicts a single image from afar is actually made up of individual pictures that are distinct but necessary in creating the final impression. In Siemen's (2008) words, the self is not created, but shaped and expressed through socialization.

References

Answers.com. (2009). Retrieved on January 10, 2009. from http://www.answers.com/topic/melting-pot

Downey, C., Steffy, B., English, F., Frase, L, and Poston, W. (2004). The three-minute classroom walk-through: Changing school supervisory practice one teacher at a time. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Inc.

Encyclopedia Britannica. (2009). Retrieved on January 10, 2009 from http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/124498/cognitive-dissonance

Gupton, S. (2003). Instructional leadership toolbox: A handbook for improving practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press Inc.

Siemens, G. (October, 5, 2008). Groups and networks. Retrieved on January 10, 2009 from http://elearnspace.org/media/CCK08_Wk5/player.html

Sergiovanni, T. (2005). Strengthening the heartbeat: Leading and learning together in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Wiles, J. and Bondi, J. (2007). Curriculum development: A guide to practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Appendix

Cooperative clinical supervision. Teacher and supervisor (or master teacher) work together to establish goals, plan observations, and perform follow-up conferences. Administrators and teachers should become skilled in observing, analyzing, and conferencing for improvement. These can be intimidating processes, but tackled head on by the whole faculty, they can become valuable tool for improving teaching and sharing the expertise among the staff. This form of supervision is intensive and reflective, and requires in-depth dialoguing to be maximized. Short-circuiting the complexity of the elements of good clinical supervision can reduce it to a robotic process – something that is more a liability than an asset.

a. Collegial coaching. A master teacher teams with a novice or veteran teacher needing assistance with an identified pedagogical skill.

b. Collegial study groups. Small groups of teachers (may also include administrators) work toward the accomplishment of a shared professional development goal.

c. Individualized, mediated entry programs. Long-term, team-based, tailored support systems are established for new teachers (e.g., may include several years of close mentoring, nurturing, and support before the teacher is assigned a full load of students; team-based support available; plenty of coaching and opportunities to work with master teachers and administrators provided).

d. Self-directed development activities. Teachers audio or videotaped themselves (or work with a colleague) for self-analysis and follow that by reflections in a journal or log leading to plans for improvement. Teachers may dialogue with colleague(s) and draw on feedback from students and parents to incorporate their own improvement plans. Professional reading and reflecting and attending professional conferences are also conducted.

# Clinical Supervision

January 26, 2009

This essay discusses how curriculum development, professional development, and action research are linked within an educational system. Language learning is used as an example throughout in order to provide a subject-area example. Professional development and action research are considered part of closing the gap between the ideal (i.e., the written curriculum) and reality (i.e., taught curriculum) as teachers develop not only pedagogical skills but also their personal development, career development, moral development, overall school improvement, and improvement of the teaching profession as a whole. Action research permits teachers to be part of the solution as learning principles are to be established and adhered to. It was determined that shifting teachers to become more curriculum functioning will better provide the knowledge and skill necessary to increase understandings among learners and common assessments across disciplines.

Curriculum development, professional development, and action research: A foreign language perspective

If the hypothesis is true – that any subject can be taught effectively in some intellectually honest form to any child at any stage of development – then it should follow that a curriculum ought to be built around the great issues, principles, and values that a society deems worthy of the continual concern of its members (Bruner, 1960, p. 33 & p. 52)

Bruner's hypothesis, now almost 50 years old, not only is still relevant to the general classroom of today but is also relevant to foreign language learning as well. Curriculum development, professional development, and action research provide the means for linking the desired results with individualistic and collective ends. In language learning, like other skill-based subjects (e.g., sports, drama, and music), the curriculum tends to focus on behavioral objectives for each skill (Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007) which then leads to professional development and action research - should the gap between the desired results and current reality warrant it. Instead, a more integrated curriculum merges concepts, understandings, facts, and skills such that subsequent professional development and action research would together establish language acquisition as both means and ends.

Building a curriculum around the acquisition of a language is bested served when based on the growing of understandings. Wiggins and McTighe (2005) highlight several distinguishing features of understandings as follows:

1. an important inference, drawn from the experience of experts, states as a specific and useful generalization

2. referring to transferable, big ideas having enduring value beyond a specific topic

3. involving abstract, counterintuitive, and easily misunderstood ideas

4. being best acquired by "uncovering" (i.e., it must be developed inductively, co-constructed by learners) and "doing" the subject (i.e., using the ideas in realistic settings and with real-world problems).

5. Summarizing important strategic principles in skill areas (pp. 128-129)

Thus, instead of adhering to a curriculum that is based on a behavioral-objective format – one that progresses from an objective to an activity then concludes with an evaluation – an integrated curriculum begins with creating the overall desired results in the form of understandings. For language learners to achieve understandings, they must demonstrate a level of communicative competence that provides the evidence of both language skill and content knowledge. Fisher and Frey (2007) list the following formative assessment means for checking for understanding: a) oral language, b) questioning, c) writing, projects and performances, d) tests, and e) common assessments and consensus scoring. Recognizing that all these techniques should be a part of any assessment program, the focus here remains on performance tasks and the importance of building common assessments as part of an overall curriculum development practice.

Once the desired results have been established, designing common performance tasks precedes the instructional planning through a "backward design" (Wiggins and McTighe, 2005). Fisher and Frey (2007) add that "creating an assessment, even an imperfect one, allows groups of teachers to talk about the standards, how the standards might be assessed, where students are performing currently, and what learning needs to take place for students to demonstrate proficiency" (p. 122). Having teachers collaborate in this ways provides the means for identifying the gap between the ideal (i.e., the written curriculum) and reality (i.e., the taught curriculum). To close this gap, professional development may need to be considered in order to give teachers the necessary knowledge and pedagogical skill to improve current practice. Similarly, action research provides a more collectivist approach to closing the gap by implementing a more formalized plan that extends over a longer time frame.

In developing common assessments across disciplines, professional development needs to address more than pedagogical skill. "In recent years the field has expanded to include a variety of other purposes: a) personal development, b) career development, c) moral development, d) school improvement, and e) improvement of the teaching profession (Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007, p. 366). When teachers have the support and opportunity to work together on common assessments they also build their personal network with others that can lead to a variety of professional development purposes as mentioned here. Since performance tasks are included in the curriculum, their efforts are directly related to school improvement as well. The act of developing assessments can also be the basis for conference talks, thus extending the applicability of common assessments throughout the teaching field as well as promoting one's career.

Action research can also help closing the gap between the written and taught curriculum. "Action research in education is study conducted by colleagues in a school setting of the results of their activities to improve instruction" (Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007, p. 406). Since common assessments are the link between planning for learning and the desired results (Wiggins and McTighe), collaboration between teachers can foster improved practice that extends to all areas of teaching in the form of learning principles. The premise of basing teaching practice on a set of shared principles is to not leave the details of teaching to the teachers alone but rather share the commitment with administrators as well (Sergiovanni, 2005; Wiggins and McTighe, 2007). This allows for a more collaborative action research as the process proceeds through a series of five stages: a) "select focus area, b) conduct needs assessment, c) design action plan, d) carry out action plan, and e) evaluate effects and revise action plan" (Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007, p. 408). In language learning, action research that adheres to individual professional development better prepares teachers to gain the expertise and experience needed to close the gap between what teachers say should be done and what they actually do on a day-to-day basis.

In summary, language teachers who pursue learner understandings and communicative competencies work together in designing the most appropriate common assessments that can be implemented across different language levels. Professional development and collaborative action research assist in shifting language teachers to a higher level of "curriculum functioning (as displayed by initiating and suggesting ways to change an knowing how to proceed in creating curriculum)" (Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007, p. 393) that addresses both personal professional development goals as well as school-wide objectives. By giving teachers a level of choice, responsibility, support, and authority, teacher leaders emerge that then become agents for change instead of objectives of change.

References

Bruner, J. (1960). The process of education: A landmark in educational theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Fisher, D. and Frey, N. (2007). Checking for understanding: Formative assessment techniques for your classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).

Glickman, C., Gordon, S., and Ross-Gordon, J. (2007). Supervision and instructional leadership: A development approach. New York, NY: Pearson.

Sergiovanni, T. (2005). Strengthening the heartbeat: Leading and learning together in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Wiggins, G. and McTighe, J. (2007). Schooling by design: Mission, action, and achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).

Wiggins, G. and McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).

# Moral and Value-Added Leadership

February 4, 2009

This essay takes an emergent perspective to two educational philosophies: essentialism and existentialism. Learning is considered both an epistemological and ontological process that is best driven by value-added leadership and moral reasoning. Leadership that promotes freedom, trust, justice, compassion, connectedness, and peace, for example, demonstrates that besides having knowledge and skills in order to be productive members of society, it is also important to develop a good disposition. Aligning curriculum, assessment, and instruction that merges both core subjects and values better address not only what students should know but what they are to become.

Assuming a progressive educational philosophy, students learn best when their cognitive (i.e., academic), social, and emotional needs are taken into consideration. Although common phrases such as teaching the whole child and no child left behind are left open to a certain degree of interpretation, the need for teaching in a more moralistic and equitable way remain an essential part of the learning process. Likewise, teacher development includes a moral facet that compliments other facets that include "cognitive", "conceptual", "ego", "levels of consciousness", and "teacher concerns" (Glickman, Gordon, Ross-Gordon, 2007, p. 67), which collectively address a humanistic need to personal and professional development by providing the social capital necessary to pursue this end. Thus, learning not only takes on an epistemological perspective but also an ontological one as well; therefore, leadership that takes into account both what teachers are to learn and what they are to become reaches out to the entire faculty in a way that is more just and appropriate for building a community of practice.

The essence of judging moral behavior is determining what is good or bad (The Free Dictionary..., 2009). But what is good or bad for one person could be interpreted differently for another person, especially when people come from different cultures and share different beliefs within the same social group or context. For example, when given a certain amount of freedom to exercise a degree of choice in a teaching technique, some teachers may feel motivated to try new things while others may feel lost if they are used to having authoritative leaders dictate teaching practices to them. In other words, the value of freedom in one case is seen as something "good" because it leads to having a choice, but is can also be seen as something "bad" because it can be interpreted as failing to provide direction to faculty.

In addition to the moral behavior judgment, establishing values is also a related concept that contributes to an ontological view of education. Sergiovanni (2005) puts forth the notion of "value-added leadership" that "calls attention to that which is intrinsically important and desirable, as in ´What values do we believe should guide our actions?´ ´What values define us, give us a sense of significance, and provide the norms that anchor our lives in a culture of meaning?´" (p. x). Leadership as a quest for values directs faculty towards a collective group of values that a school is to abide by. As teachers reflect and share on their own values, certain moral behaviors then become expected. Thus, the spaces and structures for formalizing values develop in a top-down fashion, but the values themselves are reached through consensus on the part of each of the teachers. Gordon (2001) suggests the following moral principles that drive "the good school": "compassion, wholeness, connectedness, inclusion, justice, peace, freedom, trust, empowerment, and community" (as cited in Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007, pp. 452-455). As these are more than likely to be some examples of what teachers reach as a consensus, the next stage is to convert these principles into collective commitments or actions that are expected that demonstrate said moral principles.

Leadership becomes crucial when moral principles merge with core subjects (i.e., reading, writing, and arithmetic), and teachers and administrators have different views on prioritizing. From a philosophical standpoint, an essentialism versus existentialism approach to education can cause a level of conflict unless there is clear direction and expectations are made clear. Moreover, with the push for standardized testing established by the No Child Left Behind Law, many schools are forced to a more epistemological view of learning that ignores the value set required for students to be productive and responsible citizens. Value-added leadership finds ways to merge "soft skills" with the "hard skills" throughout curriculum, assessment, and instruction, and does so both at the faculty level as well as the student level. This emergence of moral principles with core subjects undoubtedly requires change.

In order to better promote change within a school, it is best to have an understanding of chaos theory and the notion of complexity. Siemens (October, 12, 2008) states that although chaos theory comes from a mathematics and advanced physics, the theory can broadly be applied to two areas within the social sciences: "1) the concept of sensitivity of initial conditions, and 2) recognizing that learning similarly consists of unpredictability that occurs within certain structures of form (deterministic unpredictability)". In other words, chaos theory states there is a specific reason, justification, or rationale behind what appears to be random. Similarly, the notion of complexity is best described by an example. Imagine viewing a seashore from high up. At a distance, the seashore seems fixed, but upon closer examination, one realizes that there are many factors that influence or form the seashore: tides, man-made formations, weather patterns, etc. In fact, a seashore is in a constant state of flux depending on how all these factors interact at any given moment. Indeed, it becomes difficult in predicting to what degree each factor had on the final outcome – seashore. A similar phenomenon occurs in education. Of all the factors that influence one´s learning, it is difficult if not impossible to know with certainty which factor or factors contributed more to the learning process.

Taking chaos theory and complexity into account, change occurs in a more nonlinear fashion dependent on the actors of the social group. A more "rhizomatic educational" (Cormier, 2008) approach to change views each teacher, administrator, or student as an emergent figure, each having a particular journey as the change process unfolds. Professional development that focuses on incorporating values in the core subjects, for example, can take a diversified group of teachers in the same direction but recognizes that each will have different understandings, knowledge, pedagogical skills, and disposition as they pursue the objectives of the course, workshop, or conference. The goal of the instructional leader is to facilitate these journeys in a respectful way so that each teacher is motivated to reflect on current practice and to share ideas with others, each having their own starting and ending point.

When undergoing change within a school, leadership undertakes certain stages as well. Sergiovanni (2005) defines these stages as follows: a) "bartering, b) building, c) binding, and d) bonding", and adds that these stages can move one to another or they can be combined depending on the situation (p. 173). The goal, however, is to lead to a more binding or bonding relationship, one that fosters transformational development for the entire faculty. And although a school may be categorized as being at a particular stage, it may also involve a variety of stages depending on the faculty and leadership styles that are involved.

To conclude, value-added leadership and moral reasoning address learning from both an epistemological and ontological perspective. Instead of looking at essentialism and existentialism as a dichotomy, the new learning paradigm blends both philosophies within the educational design. By doing so, curriculum, assessment, and instruction are aligned in order to adhere to core subjects and to promote good moral judgment. Values such as trust, freedom, justice, and the like build the necessary base for becoming better citizens. With the advent of technology, the lifespan of content and knowledge is becoming shorter, so students who develop their moral reasoning skills will emerge as more competitive in the workforce as well as developing relationships through social networks. As a result, schools become a home to a democratic process whereby the "gifted" and struggling students share or have the same opportunities to share the same spaces and thus allowing students and teachers to interact, develop, and emerge into more educated individuals.

References

Cormier, D. (2008). Rhizomatic education: Community and curriculum. Retrieved on February 3, 2009 from http://innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=550&action=article

Glickman, C., Gordon, S., and Ross-Gordon, J. (2007). Supervision and instructional leadership: A development approach. New York: Pearson.

Sergiovanni, T. (2005). Strengthening the heartbeat: Leading and learning together in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Siemens, G. (October 12, 2008). Complexity, chaos, and emergence. Retrieved on February 3, 2009 from http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=anw8wkk6fjc_15cfmrctf8

The free dictionary: Moral. (2009). Retrieved on February 3, 2009 from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/moral

# Course Research Project

February 22, 2009

This essay discusses how supervision and leadership in education advances knowledge, skills, and dispositions through a set of assumptions and skills that empower teachers through an ongoing change process. Knowledge, educational philosophy, adult learning, and value-added leadership are introduced through an epistemological and ontological perspective in a way that encourages moral reasoning and has an important role in how teachers approach their teaching practice. Supervisory tasks such as walkthroughs and clinic supervision are mentioned that tend to favor a nondirective stance to leadership over a directive one. It was determined that closing the written and taught curriculum gap requires distributed leadership that embraces diversity, resolves conflict, and reaches a consensus in a way that adheres to both the individual and collective goals of the entire school.

Supervision in education: A perspective on knowledge, skills, and moral reasoning

Most people can relate to a supervisor who demanded a lot from fellow-subordinates, who perhaps was unfair, and who looked at job performance in a judgmental way, all of which are especially common in the business world where the overall objective is to gain a profit. In the educational field – where the assumption is to gain intellectual property as opposed to monetary property – the terms supervision, supervisor, or to supervise have the risk of being misinterpreted. To address this potential for misinterpreting on how a person is to lead (i.e., one who supervises), a school administrator's knowledge, skill, and moral reasoning all mesh together in determining how effective the behavior is when leading faculty, parents, and the community towards a common good. Moreover, empowering other teachers to take on leadership roles often extends beyond the traditional notion of supervision in a way that does away with idea of "subordinates" or the "novice" and instead creates a culture of collaboration or community of practice that embraces diversity through the pursuit of both individual and collective goals. Therefore, an epistemological and ontological look at supervision is presented that recognizes learning and leading as an emergent, complex system.

Supervisory knowledge

Knowledge. When defining what knowledge is, definitions abound. Generally, knowledge is defined by a "familiarity, awareness, or understanding gained through experience and study" (The American Heritage Dictionary..., 2000). Knowledge can also be defined as facts and figures and knowing how to do something. According to Bloom (1984), knowledge was at the lowest level of the cognitive domain – below comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. For Wiggins and McTighe (2005), knowing discrete information and knowing how to do something was necessary but not sufficient in developing the six facets of understanding: explain, interpret, apply, perspective, empathy, self-knowledge. Finally, for connectivists, knowledge resides within the connections which occur at a neural, conceptual, and social level (Siemens, 2008). Defining knowledge, therefore, influences how supervision is applied within a school. Depending on how one defines knowledge and learning will greatly influence how one supervises and leads.

Instructional leaders who view knowledge as a collection of discrete facts and figures will certainly have a different supervisory approach than someone who considers knowledge from a connectivism perspective. The former leads instructional leaders who settle for the status quo and perhaps belong to a more didactic, lock-step approach to leading and learning. Alternatively, a connectivists approach suggests that the content is of lesser importance than the actual connection itself. In other words, knowing when, where, and why become more important than knowing what and how. In a digital age where content knowledge is changing at a rapid pace teachers who learn how to be critical of what they find on the Internet, for example, become better life-long learners. Additionally, teachers who are able to establish networks for their own learning and teaching practice will be better prepared to improve over the long run.

Educational philosophy. Just as knowledge (i.e., epistemology) influences teaching and supervisory practice, so too does an overall educational philosophy: "metaphysics [and ontology], axiology, ethics, aesthetics, and logic" (Gutek, 2004, p. 4). One´s own perception of what is real, knowing what is means to be someone, determining what is valuable, distinguishing between right and wrong, recognizing beauty, and applying appropriate logic (i.e., inductive and deductive) all contribute to a perspective on teaching and learning that is certain to be varied among faculty. The job of the supervisor then becomes how to create a more productive community of practice given that teachers are likely to have a slightly different educational philosophy. Is the job of a supervisor, then, to persuade teachers to uphold a particular educational philosophy?

Leadership and rationality are linked through the ends, ways, and means process. Sergiovanni (2005) states that rationale people are more inclined to work through the process in the order of ends, ways, and means – having established goals set from the beginning and then later find the ways and means to achieve that particular goal. He then goes on to say that "Because of the unpredictability of the world and the limits of human rationality, it makes sense to emphasize building capabilities of people and then to encourage them to develop the ways and means for using their capabilities [following a means, ways, and ends process]" (p. 39). Thus, forcing a teacher to prescribe to a particular educational philosophy as a collective goal will have a less desirable effect than if adequate support is provided in developing the competencies of the teacher such that individual means and ways develop in reaching individual goals. As long as individual goals are aligned, and teachers are collaboratively working towards an overall school vision, then a community of practice exists.

Adult learning. Although the theory of andragogy has faded in popularity to a certain extend (Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007), it is important to recognize its relevance to supervision and leadership. Knowles (1980) proposed the following basic assumptions of adult learning:

* "Adults have a psychological need to be self-directing.

* Adults bring an expansive reservoir of experience that can and should be tapped in the learning situation.

* Adults' readiness to learn is influenced by a need to solve real-life problems often related to adult developmental tasks.

* Adults are performance centered in their orientation to learning – wanting to make immediate application of knowledge" (as cited in Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007, p. 53).

* Knowles (1984) later added a final assumption: "Adult learning is primarily intrinsically motivated" (as cited in Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007, p. 53).

Although one could argue how really different these assumptions are to those of a child, the validity of how these assumptions work in the day-to-day operations of a school remain intact. Instructional leadership is best served when professional development sessions take into consider the experience and motivational disposition of the teacher. A workshop, for example, should include teaching and learning techniques and strategies that teachers feel have a practical application to their own practice. As do most learners, adults bring a vast amount of knowledge and experience to the learning environment; therefore, administrators, supervisors, and teacher-leaders who can build on these schemata will have more motivated teachers involved in the change process.

Value-added leadership. Value-added leadership ties educational philosophy and adult learning together in a way that benefits student achievement. Sergiovanni believes there are two areas of value-added leadership: "as an economic concept and as moral reasoning" (pp. ix-x). Getting the most out of professional development meetings, workshops, and conferences are one way to seek value-added leadership throughout schools. Workshops that are more directive in nature and require little-to-no participation or input from teachers fail to add the "economic" value groups ought to seek. Moreover, promoting moral values throughout a school shifts learning from an epistemological perspective to an ontological one. Working collaboratively thus brings about emergent properties to the overall learning community, both at a school level as well as at a classroom level.

In Mexico, value leadership tends to overshadow value-added leadership. Sergiovanni (2005) makes the distinction between value and value-added leadership as follows:

Value Leadership | Value-Added Leadership

---|---

Management | Leadership

Participation investment | Extraordinary performance investment

Manipulating situations | Providing symbols and enhancing meaning

Planning | Purposing

Giving directions | Enabling teachers and the school

Monitoring system | Building an accountability system

Extrinsic motivation | Intrinsic motivation

Congeniality | Collegiality

Calculated leadership | Leadership by outrage (pp. 2-3)

Value leadership that is directive and goal-oriented typically moves in an end-ways-means direction. A calculated management style leaves little room for collegiality creating cliques that hamper the distribution of leadership that is needed to build a more advanced knowledge-based network. Being congenial is not enough if the objective is to create a community of practice that builds on the theory of andragogy in fostering the connectivity of knowledge across the faculty absent of title or position. Therefore, supervision and leadership deploys the social capital necessary so that each teacher has a choice in developing individual leadership abilities towards a shared vision.

Supervisory skills and tasks

When creating value-added leadership, cooperation becomes crucial. Sergiovanni (2005) states three levels of cooperation in a school: "congeniality, collegiality, and community of practice" (p. 13). Faculty may get along with each other but they may not share beliefs or teaching practices. Or teachers may share beliefs and teaching practices but may not take responsibility for their general teaching practice overall. Ideally, a community of practice shares the distribution of responsibly among all teachers whereby individual interests are pursued for the betterment of the collective good of the entire group. It is oftentimes more difficult to move from collegiality to a community of practice than it is to move from congeniality to collegiality. Getting teachers to take responsibly for the entire teaching practice of a school is a change in culture and one that requires a certain set of supervisory skills.

A range of supervisory skills that promote a community of practice are required and depend on several factors. Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon (2007) discuss how teacher and supervisory responsibilities shift when moving from a directive control to a nondirective relationship. They put forth a continuum that goes from directive control to a directive informational supervision, then to a collaborative relationship, and finally to nondirective behavior (pp. 118-119). Similarly, Downey, Steffy, English, Frase, and Poston (2004) advocate moving teachers from dependence to independence, and finally to a preferred interdependence stage whereby teaching experiences are reflected upon and shared with other faculty members in building a community of practice. Novice teachers, for example, may seek more direct control in how they are being supervised. But this type of relationship between supervisor and teacher should only be considered temporary since ideally the apprentice later becomes more knowledgeable and develops more pedagogical skills as a new school culture comes to fruition.

Moving from a directive to a nondirective-type of relationship requires specific ways for evaluating teachers. One technique for evaluating teachers is through the application of clinical supervision. Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon (2007) simplify this structure into "five sequential steps:

1. "Preconference with teacher

2. Observation of classroom

3. Analyzing and interpreting observation and determining conference approach

4. Postconference with teacher

5. Critique of previous four steps" (p. 302)

In a directive relationship, the supervisor and teacher chart out certain objectives for a particular class that later lead to a critique (i.e., good or bad techniques; or strengths and weaknesses). Although clinical supervision can be formative in nature, teachers are placed in an "artificial" scenario since the teacher responses may be influenced by what the supervisor wants to hear and observed behaviors might not continue when not being observed later on. Clinical supervision begins with an end (i.e., objective) in sight, then moves to a ways and means. However, there are other evaluative techniques can move in the opposite direction: means, ways, and ends.

The Downey walkthrough (2004) offers an alternative technique to evaluating teaching practice in order to improving student achievement. Brief and frequent visits to classrooms allow supervisors to see how curriculum, assessment, and instruction are aligned. Through reflective prompting, supervisors are the vehicle for self-affirmation and contemplation on the part of the teachers. Although walkthroughs are an evaluating technique, they are not meant to be judgmental in nature. Teaching practice is not viewed as good or bad. Strengths and weaknesses are not discussed, and teachers are not asked why they did a particular activity or exercise in class. Instead, the supervisor creates a dialog with the teacher that embeds suppositions related to what was observed in class.

The suppositions frame the reflective question such that general practice is addressed as opposed to a particular teaching practice observed in the past. For example, a reflective question might be framed as follows:

When you are planning your assessments based on the objectives of your class and you are thinking about error correction as a means for providing timely feedback for the language learner, what thoughts come to mind in determining what error correction techniques to use that best assist the acquisition of a foreign language?

The opening phrase, "When you are planning your assessments based on the objectives of your class", creates a context and is based on something observed in a prior class. Also, the assumption is that the assessment techniques are aligned with the objectives. By phrasing the sentence this way from the beginning, the teacher is made aware of the importance of aligning curriculum and assessment without the supervisor having to make this explicit during the postconference. The phrase, "...and you are thinking about error correction as a means for providing timely feedback...", supposes the teacher reflects on how error correction can provide feedback at appropriate teaching moments. This part of the reflective question is vital since each teacher will be at varying degrees of personal reflection of individual teaching practice. The phrase, "...what thoughts come to mind..." provide the means for the teacher to consider a personal choice about the teaching practice. The phrase, "in determining what error correction techniques to use..." relates the decision to the general context of the discussion. And finally the phrase, "...that best assist the acquisition of a foreign language" makes explicit why a particular teaching practice is worthy of reflecting upon in the first place. Unlike the clinical supervision method, walkthroughs do not contain a preconference with the teacher; therefore, there is no preconceived notion of what the observed class should include. The idea is to observe teaching practice as often as possible in order to get brief ideas as to what and how the curriculum is being taught. It is important to note that this approach to observing is not appropriate for marginal teachers who would in most cases need a more directive approach to supervision.

Distributed leadership

The Downey walkthrough affords the structures and spaces necessary in order to build a distributed leadership; leadership by position gives way to leadership by ability. Teachers, regardless of position, are given the choice, support, and responsibility needed to take on leadership roles, driven by the development of teacher-to-teacher relationships and teacher-supervisor relationships. All teachers have a voice and final decisions are reached by consensus. Knowledge flows between the entire faculty network that avoids ego distributions and cliques. Professionalism is maintained and diversity is celebrated. Distributed leadership brings "novices" and "experts" together in bringing about the strengths of each. Since walkthroughs allow supervisors to be in close contact with teachers, the teaching practice as a whole becomes more transparent. Supervisors can tailor workshops based on areas of practice that need improvement, and because teachers develop into more reflective learners, risk-taking becomes more prevalent as self-assessment and self-affirmation take on a more forward-looking direction.

Distributed leadership is fundamental in how professional development closes the gap between the written and the taught curriculum. A gap exists between the written curriculum (i.e., the ideal) and the taught curriculum (i.e., reality) requiring instructional leaders to take notice and to act. Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon (2007) put forth the following characteristics of what makes a professional development program successful:

1. "Involvement of participants in planning, implementing, and evaluating programs

2. Programs that are based on schoolwide goals, but that integrate individual and group goals with school goals

3. Long-range planning and development

4. Programs that incorporate research and best practice on school improvement and instructional improvement

5. Administrative support, including provision of time and other resources as well as involvement in program planning and delivery

6. Adherence to the principles of adult learning

7. Attention to the research on change, including the need to address individual concerns throughout the change process

8. Follow-up and support for transfer of learning to the school or classroom

9. Ongoing assessment and feedback

10. Continuous professional development that becomes part of the school culture" (pp. 353-354)

Although this list gives teachers and administrators an idea of what a professional development program looks like, it is the networked relationships among teachers that make it work. Technology now affords teachers also to cultivate personal learning networks to other teachers around the world. As knowledge and skills are gained through a distributed leadership, a community of practice forms that addresses closing the ideal and reality gap within a school.

In order to close the gap between the written and taught curriculum, the expectation is that teachers assume a role in the development of the curriculum. Wiggins and McTighe (2007) state that as a "contributor to the curriculum", a teacher must specifically assume the following roles: a) "curriculum designer, b) critical friend reviewer, c) field tester, and d) troubleshooter" (pp. 155-160). Since all teachers are given the choice, support, and responsibility for the curriculum, no single person, department, or agency develops the curriculum alone. Teachers have a vested interest in the improvement of the school since they have a voice in how the curriculum is being written, taught, and tested.

In deciding what to include in a curriculum, there are several approaches. Sergiovanni and Starratt´s (1993) offer some ideas.

1. "The aims of education.

2. Major achievements of students this year.

3. The social significance of the student´s learning.

4. The image of the learner.

5. The image of the curriculum.

6. The image of the teacher.

7. The preferred pedagogy.

8. The preferred school climate" (as cited in Sergiovanni, 1999, pp. 97-99).

This list expands on having just an educational philosophy for the school, but also includes teacher and student roles and responsibilities, the content of the curriculum, and the overall image of the school. A learning community works collaboratively in creating collective commitments that later may become action research for finding ways of improving student achievement. Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon (2007) define action research in education as a "study conducted by colleagues in a school setting of the results of their activities to improve instruction" (p. 406). Thus, those teachers who participate in action research are also taking on an instructional leadership role as well. So although the term "supervisor" might be reserved for a particular position, it does not necessarily mean that the abilities to lead are any less to those who are instructional leaders perhaps who hold a lower position or status.

Another type of curriculum is a behavioral-objective curriculum. This approach is heavily based in Bloom's taxonomy (i.e., knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation) whereby specific outcomes are explicit and are stated beforehand. Although still a common type of curriculum, there is a debate of its efficiency and effectiveness in reaching the desired results. For example, DeSilets (2007) argues that behavioral objectives "should accomplish their purpose – to describe the behaviors that can be expected at the completion of the learning activity". Although DeSilets is not necessarily for using the Bloom´s taxonomy for creating behavioral objectives, she tends to agree with Mager (1997) that Bloom's taxonomy can serve as a "reminder of the range of objectives that can be written or the words that can be used to describe a learning intent" (as cited in DeSilets, 2007). "Learning intent" is precisely the problem with having preconceived behavioral objectives. Intentionalism simplifies the learning process by assuming that all students will learn the same thing at the same time, per the explicit behavioral objective or objectives. Given that the chaos theory and complex systems are now becoming more evident in the social sciences and education in particular, an alternative approach to curriculum design is entertained.

Building understandings through a backward design offers a way of planning, assessing, and instructing classes that recognize that the process of learning is a personal journey. This personal journey takes the learner in a means, ways, and ends direction whereby an "intentional behavior" remains unpredictable. Wiggins and McTighe (2005) put forth the notion of designing understandings as an objective for either a content or skills-based course. They define an understanding through the inclusion of six facets:

1. "Can explain

2. Can interpret

3. Can apply

4. Has perspective

5. Has empathy

6. Has self-knowledge" (p. 84)

Unlike Bloom's taxonomy, the six facets represent six groups of performance verbs that fall under each category that represent different levels of cognitive, affective, and psychomotor skills. In other words, the six facets of understandings are not hierarchical. To understand a concept, learners must demonstrate a range of these six facets in order to provide the evidence needed for teachers to give the appropriate feedback. Moreover, the facets of understanding are not explicitly stated as behavioral objectives, rather they are brought about through performance tasks and other forms of assessment in a way that is more authentic in nature. For example, some students may show empathy and self-knowledge about a particular task where others may be able to interpret and have perspective. Thus, it is possible for different students to exhibit the same level of understanding but via different facets. The teacher´s role is to facilitate and coach learners to demonstrating their level of understanding based on the learner's prior knowledge, skills, and disposition. Finally, skills-based courses (i.e., sports, music, language learning, etc.) also focus on "concepts, contexts, strategies, and purpose (Wiggins and McTighe, 2005, p. 133) in developing understandings. Indeed, considering all the factors that influence one´s learning, building understandings through facilitative support guides learners to explore and pursue the six facets as they learn content and competencies.

In Mexico, supervisory skills and tasks are still more grounded in traditional approaches. For example, the clinical supervision approach to classroom observation often gives way to a more directive control or directive informational behavior. Generally, clinical supervision is conducted only when there is a problem such as student nonconformity (i.e., student grades, instructional methods used in class, etc.). Walkthroughs have been introduced but many teachers are not accustomed to the nondirective approach to leadership. Reflecting on teaching practice through open dialog – among teachers and with supervisors – is still a novel idea. In addressing the gap between the written curriculum to that of the taught and tested curriculum, the written curriculum remains at the forefront. For example, working within and across disciplines on common assessments is rare. Gathering data (e.g., descriptive information, standardized tests, and local assessments such as grades, portfolios, etc.) and sharing it with teachers is even rarer when assessing the curriculum as a community of practice. Granted, these types of changes imply a change in culture which one develops from the bottom up, but supervision and leadership are also needed in order to create the structures and spaces needed so that teachers have access to the social capital needed in order to develop individual leadership abilities towards this end.

Looking forward

Creating a culture of change within a school assumes a level of chaos and complexity. As mentioned earlier, teachers (as well as students) gain knowledge and skill in a variety of ways, none of which occur in a linear fashion. Schools looking forward will need to know how to handle change and look at learning not only from a cognitive perspective but also from an affective one. The good schools of the future will incorporate both a set of learning principles and a set of moral ones as well.

How do change and chaos relate to each other? When considering what change is, it is best to follow Fullan's (1991) assumptions:

Do not assume that your version of what the change should be is the one that should or could be implemented; stated another way, assume that successful implementation consists of some transformation or continual development of initial ideas...

Assume that any significant innovation, if it is to result in change, requires individual implementers to work out their own meaning.

Assume that conflict and disagreement are not only inevitable but fundamental to successful change...

1. Assume that people need pressure to change (even in directions that they desire), but it will be effective only under conditions that allow them to react, to form their own position, to interact with other implementers, to obtain technical assistance, etc.

2. Assume that effective change takes time.

3. Do not assume that the reason for lack of implementation is outright rejection of the values embodied in the change, or hard-core resistance to all change.

4. Do not expect all or even most people or groups to change.

5. Assume that you will need a plan that is based on the above assumptions and that addresses the factors known to affect implementation...

6. Assume that no amount of knowledge will ever make it totally clear what action should be taken.

7. Assume that changing the culture of institutions is the real agenda, not implementing single innovations" (as cited in Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007, pp. 430-431).

The second assumption relates a lot to chaos in how individual implementers work through the process of interpretation. There is no designated time frame as to when the change process is complete; in fact, change is ongoing. Some teachers will agree with change but many will not; for those teachers who do agree, they will need to be motivated to carry out the change. Therefore, chaos theory is applicable to the change process because although schools may rely on certain assumptions, the predictability of the change process appears to be at random. Sardar and Abrams (1999) offer a variety of definitions for chaos theory:

1. "A kind of order without periodicity.

2. Apparently random recurrent behavior in a simple deterministic (clockwork-like) system.

3. The qualitative study of unstable aperiodic behavior in deterministic nonlinear dynamic systems.

4. The ability of simple models, without inbuilt random features, to generate highly irregular behavior" (p.9)

Relating change to chaos theory verily demonstrates how even though instructional leaders may have an idea of what constitutes change (i.e., via a "simple deterministic system") the predictability of how the process of change will transpire is probabilistic at best (i.e., "apparently random"). The objective then becomes what key factors should instructional leaders contemplate when undergoing change.

Most would agree that change, thus the learning process is one of complexity. Learners – whether teachers or students – have a variety of needs, interests, and learning competencies (i.e., visual, kinesthetic, musical, etc.) that collectively factor into how one learns at any given moment. Moreover, outside factors may positively or negatively influence how one learns such as room temperature, personal problems, dietary factors, and overall health or physical condition. These same factors may also influence how the change process is accepted within a school. Complexity theory forces instructional leaders to recognize that change is incremental and that determination is required in order to persistently promote research-based, common-sense approaches to improved learning achievement. It also supports how implementers of change can somewhat influence other non-implementers to accept change through the notion of the "butterfly effect" (Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007, p. 434). A change effort that prepares a school for the demands of the future considers learning and leadership through both an epistemological and an ontological lens.

Change often includes the "what" of it, but should also include the "why, where, when, and how" of it as well. By including these vital aspects of change, moral reasoning becomes equally as important as learning the enabling knowledge and pedagogical skill. Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon (2007) list the following moral principles that make a good school:

1. "Compassion: Truly effective leaders and teachers are fired by a spirit of compassion for all other members of the school community.

2. Wholeness: Authentic compassion for students leads to the realization that one cannot separate different aspects of student growth.

3. Connectedness: Schools have an obligation to break down artificial barriers to natural relationships in students' lives and learning.

4. Inclusion: Inclusion, as a moral principle, combines the beliefs in equality and equity.

5. Justice: Teaching about social justice certainly has its place in the school curriculum...and providing justice as a means of facilitating teaching and learning.

6. Peace: Student misbehavior is one of the major school problems reported by supervisors and teachers.

7. Freedom: Learning and freedom – freedom to dream, to explore, to take risks, and to learn from failures – go hand in hand.

8. Trust: Consistent efforts on behalf of compassion, wholeness, connectedness, inclusion, justice, peace, and freedom can lead to trusting relationships among members of the school community.

9. Empowerment: As a moral principle, empowerment certainly includes involving members of the school community in decisions about matters that affect them.

10. Community: A good school is a community of leaders, teachers, and learners, with individual members assuming all three roles" (pp. 452-455).

Moral principles demonstrate what it is to be someone. Affective leadership paves the way for teachers to realize their own morals through the expressed moral principles of the school. Leadership and learning is conducted through the use of these moral principles in a way that supervisors and teachers experience the benefits as opposed to only being handed down as a directive. The relationships between supervisors, teachers, students, and parents all benefit from living the moral principles that a school promotes.

In Mexico, the change process and chaos theory has little to do with ideological beliefs in general. Although teaching practice might be seen in a more traditional view, the assumptions of change and the principles of chaos theory still apply. What may be unique is the communicative discourse required to adequately promote change in a way that also develops professional and personal relationships. Culturally driven, confrontation oftentimes is avoided to the degree that it hinders the change process if not properly addressed. For example, opposing views may not be communicated out in the open for fear of retribution, and conversely, opposing views may be brought up at inappropriate times which later turn out to be non-constructive for the learning community.

Although considered a moral country, in a school setting, some morals are exercised more than others. Among the more prevalent moral principals include compassion, justice, peace, and freedom. The two moral principles that could stand to be implemented to a higher degree include connectedness and community. Despite strong relationship ties between teachers, cliques may form to the degree that communication flow is limited. Additionally, community-building is also affected since collective goals and values are often not pursued whereby the entire faculty freely assumes leadership, learning, and teacher roles. Increasing the connectiveness of a learning community requires supervision that brings diverse opinions and perspectives together in a way that appreciates the voice of each teacher and recognizes the importance of reaching a consensus.

Conclusion

Supervision and leadership involves actors taking part in a variety of roles not only based on position but also on ability. The school, as a learning community, is a complex system that comprises of adult learners learning in a variety of ways, and oftentimes having different educational philosophies. Given that people today are less rational than was once thought of during the eighteenth century (Lakoff, 2007), working in a means, ways, and ends fashion better addresses how individual and collective goals work in tandem toward a shared vision. Leadership through the learning of knowledge, the development of skills, and the pursuit of moral reasoning amelioration becomes the main focus as different leadership tasks are implemented throughout the school (i.e., clinical supervision, walkthroughs, workshops, etc.). Therefore, a community of practice through empowerment replaces teachers working in isolation often marginalizing teachers who have different educational philosophies. The ongoing process of pursuing goals and objectives within a learning community succeed when a democracy exists that embraces diversity such that all actors have a voice, can work through conflict, and have the wherewithal to reach a consensus for the betterment of the school and all its members.

References

Bloom, B. (1984). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Book 1, cognitive domain. New York: Longman.

Glickman, C., Gordon, S., and Ross-Gordon, J. (2007). Supervision and instructional leadership: A development approach. New York: Pearson.

Gutek, G. (2004). Philosophical and ideological voices in education. New York: Pearson.

DeSilets, L. (2007). Using objectives as a road map. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 38(5), 196-7. Retrieved February 14, 2009, from ProQuest Education Journals database. (Document ID: 1364053411).

Lakoff, G. (2007). Authors@Google: George Lakoff. Retrieved on February 17, 2009 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNLP88aTg_8&feature=related

Sardar, Z. and Abrams, I. (1999). Introducing chaos. New York: Totem Books.

Sergiovanni, T. (1999). Building community in schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Sergiovanni, T. (2005). Strengthening the heartbeat: Leading and learning together in schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Siemens, G. (2008). Siemens' interview on connectivism. Retrieved on February 10, 2009 from http://omegageek.net/rickscafe/?p=1193

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. (2000). Retrieved on February 10, 2009 from http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/knowledge

Wiggins, G. and McTighe, J. (2007). Schooling by design: Mission, action, and achievement. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Wiggins, G. and McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

# About the Author

Benjamin L. Stewart holds a PhD in curriculum and instructional leadership and a master's degree in education, curriculum and instruction: technology. He is a full-time EFL teacher educator and researcher at the University of Aguascalientes with an interest in researching personal learning networks and language teaching and learning. To know more, visit http://www.benjaminlstewart.org/
