Paradigm reflection and theoretical frameworks

Public School Paradigm

Paradigm Reflection of a School Administrator

According to the article, "Leadership Characteristics that Promote School Change," authored by the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, one of the most currently problematic aspects of the paradigm of leadership offered for public school administers is that in all educational organizations there is an assumption that all leaders of educational change should be both leaders and managers. For instance, the administering principal is usually responsible for the school's vision as well as setting forth the practical policy and in-class steps needed to attain that vision. (SEDL, 2004)

Additionally, another assumption about leaders who change their school organizations is that only administrators can and will be competent leaders, in other words that teachers cannot otter both management and administration capacities in addition to their educational responsibilities within the classroom. (SEDL, 2004) Thus, administrators are left with much to do in terms of goal setting, but teachers have little input into those goals, while administrators have little say in how teachers achieve that vision within their classrooms.

But the instructional leadership paradigm denies both assumptions of administrative and teacher responsibilities. It attempts to integrate teachers, administers, and other personnel in achieving an educational vision and implementing that vision in a constructive and practical fashion. Also described as a multidimensional construct. Instructional leadership is defined by such managerial characteristics such as high expectations of students and teachers, an emphasis on instruction, provision of professional development, and use of data to evaluate students' progress among other measures. Instructional leadership has also been found to be a significant factor in facilitating, improving, and promoting the academic progress of students.

For instance, in a school that was recently subject to new standardized testing standards, the students would not simply be 'taught the test,' in a narrow fashion. Rather teachers would receive instruction in terms of their professional development as to the new testing protocols and educational standards demanded of the proficiency test. Then, the administers of the public schools under examination would engage in dialogue with the instructors as to how to best integrate potentially new material in a constructive fashion into the curriculum as a whole, for all students in all classes. They would do so in a fashion ideally, so as to not merely prepare students to take the test in rote fashion, but to make the new information a vital part of the extant educational process. (SEDL, 2004)

Such instructional leadership is subject to quality controls in-house. As part of the paradigm, public school teachers are consistently and regularly evaluated by administers, while administers receive feedback in a concrete and constructive fashion through evaluations by instructors, students, and parents that come into contact with them. Learning becomes a holistic experience of the school, and there is a strong trust, responsibility and faith placed in teachers by administers as teachers are assumed to have a vested interest in, and a sense of history of, the school community.

It is said that "while administrators' visions tend to focus on district- or school- wide instructional issues, teachers' visions tend to address teacher roles and student outcomes." (SEDL, 2004) This does not mean that the two 'camps' must have split functions or identities, rather the two of them out to have similar functions but with different responsibilities in context. No greater vision can be realized without specific classroom attention, however to function to their maximum degree in the classroom, all teachers must have an idea and ideal of a larger goal for the district.