EDU 6600 - Reflection #2

Teacher Leadership Standard #6 - Communicates and collaborates with a variety of stakeholders

Theories of Adult Learning

Takeaways:

            In summary of this week’s readings three important overarching themes presented themselves:

1.      Relevance

2.     Organization

3.     Mobilization

Adults must connect to the material being presented in a personal and meaningful way.  As stated by Zepeda (2013), “Regardless of its form, professional development is effective if it is ongoing, long term, and related to the teacher’s content area” (p. 8).  The last portion of this quote struck me as a key ingredient to adult learning.  Teaching students is a multi dimensional, complex practice with too many ideas for improvement, however PD opportunities must contain information in which the faculty agrees is relevant and useful.

Tying into last weeks takeaway’s of distributed leadership, Conley and Muncey (1999) state the important and subtle difference between teaming and leadership. As stated in the text:

Thus, to some extent, when viewed as distinct strategies or practices, teacher teaming might appear more closely aligned with the organic professional model than teacher leadership; it seems to envision a less hierarchical mode of school organization. (p. 47)

The practice of teaming feeds the notion of a social learning environment and natural interactions between peers.  Adults learn better in social environments and this egalitarian structure helps foster this community.

            Lastly teacher leaders mobilize the learning practices within the school and guide adults to deeper understandings.  As stated in the article Redefining the Teacher as Leader (IEL, 2001) “it is about mobilizing the still largely untapped attributes of teachers to strengthen student performance at the ground level” (p. 3). Adults do not want to be ruled or controlled but rather guided to a sense of understanding.  Similar to the the previous point of teaming, the idea of mobilization helps establish a culture of unity amongst the faculty, rather than a dictatorship.

Reflection:

            Using the points mentioned above I have reflected on my practices as a teacher leader and my ability to implement these ideas.  During “leveled” meetings, I lead the primary grades through tasks and discussions. it is my job to organize and mobilize the faculty.  Through these readings I learned the importance of taking a step back from the “expert” role.  Most discussions are centered around large topics in which do not have a clear end point.  In past meetings I tried to control the discussion into certain “right” answers, which is impossible and not appropriate for adult learning.  This is simply my nature.  I like control in all aspects of what I do and who I am.  However during group discussions this level of control might not be the best for the other professionals in the room and I need to facilitate and listen, not control and dictate.  Upon  reflection, I am effective in maintaining relevance during meetings.  Even though I do not have control over the agenda, I keep the topic of discussion relevant and prevent thoughts which drift into irrelevant territory.  This is not as easy as it sounds as I do not want to impede any useful thoughts or discussions. 

            One key thought regarding teacher leadership, which is in a constant state of flux in my mind, is the necessary balance needed to be an effective teacher leader. This weeks readings, coupled with everything learned thus far in the program, paints an even more detailed picture of how to lead within the school.  Conley and Muncey state the different organization models in a school.  One model conducive to teacher leadership is the organic model of organization.  This model is defined as a:      

"network structure of control, authority, and communication," a "lateral rather than vertical direction of communication," and "a content of communication which consists of information and advice rather than instructions and decisions" (Burns & Stalker, 1961, p.421).

But how do you balance this with a assertiveness? Do teacher leaders need to flex their “power muscle” or is that a myth?  These are the questions I’m wrestling with as my thinking has shifted over the course of this program.

            Moving forward I will focus on implementing these three ideas during meeting discussions.  When moderating discussion I will step back and allow for the teachers to interact in a social and curious yet relative manner. This week has showed me the important distinction in which teacher leadership does not equal teacher power (IEL, 2008).  In future discussion I will mobilize the thought process by using guiding questions.  My job is to stimulate thinking.  I will set up the environment for the faculty to explore ideas and interact with each other in a meaningful and social way.       

References

                                                           

Burns, T., & Stalker, G.M. (1961). The management of innovation. London: Tavistock Publications.

Conley, S. & Muncey, D. (1999). Teachers talk about teaming and leadership in their work. Theory Into Practice, 38, 46-55.                               

Institution for Educational Leadership. (2008). Teacher leadership in high schools: How principals encourage it how teachers practice it. Washington, DC.                       

Zepeda, S. (2013). Professional development: What works. New York, NY: Eye on Education.