I remember an old Big Dogs t-shirt - "When you're not the lead dog,
the view never changes." So David, I would answer you by saying I in
no way want the death of our leadership. But I want to be in a
position where the view does change, and at age 50, I do not want to
wait. I am perfectly willing (if greatly saddened) to leave behind
people who, to paraphrase Lee Iacocca of all people, neither lead,
follow, nor get out of the way. The questions to me are, where are we
going, where should we be going, and what is the role of leadership in
getting us there?
I see many of the visionaries in public schools moving towards the
idea of school as resource center. Traditional classes, online
learning, shop and vocational training, opportunities for
appprenticeship and mentorship, flexible hours, flexible programming,
and more would define this school of the future. It would try to be
all things to all students, or more precisely, different things to
different students. It sounds to me like a pretty exciting idea. It
also sounds like a long, complicated road to get there, with many
roadblocks along the way, especially for public schools.
Perhaps therein lies an opportunity for independent schools, who in
recent years have seemed increasingly willing and able to take
advantage of the flexibility to innovate which we enjoy, unfettered as
we are by NLCB, high-stakes exit exams and state testing, and all the
rigamarole that passes for "reform" among far too many politicians,
think tanks, and the media.
Maybe, too, part of the key here is to think about what the "death of
education" and "the birth of learning as we need it" actually mean.
When I think of the death of education, I think of the death of the
idea of a monolithic entity within which wise adults transfer their
hard-won knowledge to students. When I think of the birth of learning
as we need it, I think of finding a way to help each kid learn what
s/he needs to for that person's individual path in life, in some cases
learning what the path is in the first place, while doing a reasonable
job of keeping options open along the way.
I could easily see our leadership taking us in this direction. As I've
said before, I think there's a place for traditional education in the
mix. And within the world of independent education, we don't even need
a "one school for all" model as I outlined above. Different schools
could fill different niches depending on where they are and who they
might best serve. My school is the only all-girls school for some
distance in any direction, and might well want to shift one day in the
future toward a multiple pathways to learning model. But down near
Hartford, where there is a plethora of schools, maybe Westover, Ethel
Walker, Miss Porters, Avon, Westminster, et al each offer a different
focus - for example, maybe Westover focuses on a blend of face-to-face
and online learning for girls (given their major role in the excellent
Online School for Girls).
In short, I don't think the death of education means the death of
leadership. But I do think leadership needs to focus on the birth of
learning as we need it.
Take care,
Bill Ivey
Stoneleigh-Burnham School
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 7:46 PM, David F. Withrow
<DavidWithrow@harfordday.org> wrote:
> So after all the words have been said what are we gonna do ...
>
> Whose death is it? Education or our Leadership? =A0I wonder, Pat Bassett.=
I suspect it is our leadership. Can we wait?
[ For info on ISED-L see https://www.gds.org/podium/default.aspx?t=3D128874 ]
Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons, attribution, non-commercial, share-alike license.
RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=3DISED-L
