Different forms of compromise

There are different forms of compromise. The common and often poorer solution is to take two productive but polar view points, mash them together and end up with a result worse than either of the original suggestions. In this instance often neither side is willing to respect the view of the other and a compromise is the only solution - ill will felt on both sides and the solution is truly compromised.

A second type of compromise is to allow one or both methods to proceed and then objectively evaluate which is the better method. This is much harder to do, is rarer for the management required to position the parties positively, but shows real leadership when done well. Hopefully a third solution could be developed in this instance, superior to the original ideas and developed by all interested parties and that was not compromised by process (in the true spirit of searching for a win-win).

Sadly, in our land of committees and the wariness of managers to take the time required to make gutsy decisions, the perils of the first solution occur all too often. It is also frustrating to watch scrutiny be attacked as criticism when questioning whether a method is valid or whether a better solution exists. The scrutiny is interpreted as disharmony and the opportunity for developing innovative solutions is lost.

The effects of standardised testing

I've been critical of the outcomes of standardised testing and its effects on teaching. I was reading the following and seeing some of my predictions come true in the US, home of the standardised test and the no child left behind program. We have only a limited time to reverse direction before we repeat the mistakes of others. I'm sure more articles like this will start to appear.

http://www.educationcrossing.com/article/470176/Is-It-Time-For-Teacher-Free-Agency/

No effective public school system will leave whole generations behind.

(I've rewritten this twice and can't seem to get rid of the double meaning. One meaning is that an effective public school system will prevent generations being left behind, the second meaning is that without a public school system generations will be left behind. It's interesting that they are similar in effect, but the second meaning implies that a loss of the public school system will result in a negative consequence - which was the intent of the sentence - I wonder how people read it!)

The power of encouragement

Regular readers will know I take inspiration from my 2 year old daughter. Yesterday, we were at the playground and she ran herself silly but was afraid of the slide. To be honest, it was high and a bit fast for her but I figured she went on a roller coaster, why not a slide.

The first time, I held her hand and let go half way down. We yelled whhheeee and clapped when she reached the bottom. Needless to say she was soon going down on her own and started attempting other things that were previously impossible like the climbing frame and firemans drop..

How many times have we, as teachers, faced students that refused to try because it was too hard. Maybe this is a wakeup call to provide more encouragement first, scaffold a little more initially and then let go for a while whilst watching and enjoying their progress.

Leadership breeds competition

Staff in an education environment have little reason to be competitive. There is little opportunity for advancement, extra work brings no monetary reward or toil and the more done, the more is expected.

There is a form of anti competition. Those that do succeed are compared to other successes and compared using the strengths of each. The perceived lesser of the two is denigrated and the greater of them is tall poppied.

I call teaching the pirahna occupation because it feeds on itself. It never seems to gain momentum to do the great things it has the promise to do. I fault here the leadership models it creates. Teachers are not great managers, managers are not great administrators, administrators are not great businessmen. Put this together and you get very average in most cases - especially when there is an unwillingness to learn new skills.

Leadership in a school environment requires a vision of the big picture and then a plan to enact the vision. Without a plan, progress cannot be measured and people can't be held responsible. Circuit breakers need to be kept in place to ensure that senior management is not restricting access to information, typically to hide inefficiency and incompetency in leading repair and refinement of the teaching model.

It's not rocket science, but it's not easy to overcome organisational inertia and friction either. Gaining momentum takes time and needs ongoing breaking of ground to keep going. Finding those willing to break ground for little reward is difficult, luckily there are still vocational teachers in the system - seeking stability and job satisfaction over monetary reward.

Thankfully when these people lead, others must follow or look lazy and incompetent. Loss of face is what pushes education forward more than PD or organisational goals. This is wrong but without structural changes, it's the main process for improvement. I don't think I have the answers, but I feel I am starting to ask the right questions.