TLC+Leadership

Some working hypotheses about the connections between leadership, transformational learning and organizational transformation.


 * 1) The Transformation of schools is different from the Improvement of schools.
 * 2) Schools Improve by building on what they already know and do.
 * 3)  “School improvement can be accomplished, for example, by adopting a new curriculum, finding a new approach to teaching reading, or implementing extended learning time. School improvement often leans toward what various theorists call “technical” (Heifetz, 1994), “Discourse I” (Eubanks, Parish, & Smith, 1994), or “first order” (Cuban & Usdan, 2002) approaches. The list of improvements schools regularly adopt is long and varied: teaching phonemic awareness, writing across the curriculum, wearing uniforms, single sex classrooms, and expanded AP programs are just a few examples. Most of these improvements are research-based, and often make schools better places for kids. Each one has their advocates. However, each of these changes could be considered “technical” or “first order” because they do not necessarily require fundamental shifts in the way adults in schools think about and enact their work. School reinvention is different. “ (Towards a General Theory of SRI’s Intentional Learning Communities p.6 [|__http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/SRI_General_Theory_update.pdf__] )
 * 4) Some selected resources:
 * 5) Cuban, L. (2003). Why Is It So Hard To Get Good Schools?
 * 6) David, J. L., Cuban, L., & Harvard University, G. S. o. E. (2010). Cutting through the Hype: The Essential Guide to School Reform. Revised, Expanded, and Updated Edition: Harvard Education Press.
 * 7) Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward Utopia: A Century of Public School Reform.


 * 1) Schools transform themselves when they question, challenge and reinvent what they already know and do.
 * 2)  “The reinvention of schools might be considered “adaptive” (Heifetz, Grashow, & Linsky, 2009), “Discourse II” (Eubanks et al., 1994), or “second order” (Cuban & Usdan, 2002) work. School reinvention asks educators to not only adopt a new program or approach, but also to rethink what it means to be a teacher and to challenge closely held assumptions about schools, teaching practice and students. School reinvention requires us to rethink fundamental aspects of schooling such as who students are, how students are grouped for instruction, how we choose to use time, or what it means to be an educator committed to equitable teaching practice. “ (Towards a General Theory of SRI’s Intentional Learning Communities p.6 [|__http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/SRI_General_Theory_update.pdf__] )
 * 3) Some selected resources
 * 4)  Bryk, A. S. (2010). [|__Organizing Schools for Improvement__] . Phi Delta Kappan, 91(7), 23-30.
 * 5)  McDonald, J. P. (2014). [|__American school reform: What works, what fails and why__] . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
 * 6)  Eubanks, E., Parish, R., & Smith, D. (1994). [|__Changing the Discourse in Schools__] . In P. Hall (Ed.), Race, Ethnicity, and Multiculturalism: Policy and Practice. (pp. 35-35). Columbia, MO: University of Missouri.
 * 7) Hilliard, A. (1995). Do we have the will to educate all children? The maroon within us: Selected essays on African American community socialization. Baltimore, MD: Black Caucus Press.
 * 8) Heifetz, R., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership: Tools and tactics for changing your organization and the world. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press.


 * 1) The transformation of schools requires capacity for transformational learning, which is a function of adult development. The deeper the transformation the more capacity it requires.
 * 2) Transformational learning is learning that changes not only what we know, but also how we know what we know, and even who we are. Transformational learning is required for school transformation.
 * 3)  Mezirow (2000) explains, Transformative learning refers to the process by which we transform our taken-for granted references (meaning perspectives, habits of mind, mind-sets) to make them more inclusive, discriminating, open emotionally, capable of change, and reflective so that they may generate beliefs and opinions that will prove more true or justified to guide action. Transformative learning involves participation in constructive discourse to use the experiences of others to assess reasons justifying these assumptions, and taking an action decision based on the resulting insight. (p. 7) (Towards a General Theory of SRI’s Intentional Learning Communities p.7 [|__http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/SRI_General_Theory_update.pdf__] )
 * 4) Selected Resources:
 * 5) Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as Transformation: Critical Perspectives on a Theory in Progress. The Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series.
 * 6)  Wiestling, T. L. (2010). The Relationship between Transformational Leadership Practices and Developing a Professional Learning Community. ProQuest LLC. Retrieved from [|__http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&res_dat=xri:pqdiss&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:3408773__] Available from EBSCOhost eric database.
 * 7) Capacity for transformational learning is related to adult development. Constructive- Developmental Theory is one way of understanding adult development.
 * 8) The fundamental tenets of Constructive Developmental Theory are:
 * 9) Adults continually work to make sense of their experiences (constructive).
 * 10) The ways that adults make sense of their world can change and grow more complex over time (developmental).
 * 11)  Four of the most common ways adults understand their worlds can be described as instrumental, socializing, self-authoring, and self transformational. (Towards a General Theory of SRI’s Intentional Learning Communities p.7 [|__http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/SRI_General_Theory_update.pdf__] )
 * 12) Selected Resources:
 * 13)  Breidenstein, A., Fahey, K., Glickman, C., & Hensley, F. (2012). [|__Leading for Powerful Learning: A Guide for Instructional Leaders__] . New York: Teachers College Press.
 * 14)  Drago-Severson, E. (2008). [|__4 practices serve as pillars for adult learning__] . Journal of Staff Development, 29((4), 60-63.
 * 15)  Guskey, T. R., & Yoon, K. S. (2009). [|__What Works in Professional Development?__] Phi Delta Kappan, 90(7), 495-500.
 * 16) Kegan, R. (1998). In over our heads: The mental demands of modern life. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

TLC - Home TLC - Mind the Gap TLC - NDFL TLC - Professional Culture
 * 1) The engine that drives transformational learning is reflective dialogue.
 * 2) Transformational learning theory suggests that the engine that propels transformational (as opposed to informational) learning is reflective discourse.
 * 3) “Reflective discourse involves a critical assessment of assumptions. It leads towards clearer understanding by tapping collective experience to arrive at a tentative best judgment” (Mezirow, 2000, p. 11). Reflective discourse is the engine that drives the transformational learning that moves adults to more complicated ways of knowing and equips them for the adaptive work needed to reinvent schools.
 * 4) Reflective discourse that leads to transformational learning is a complicated learning event that, like most SRI work, is typically enacted over a significant period of time in very complex contexts. Mezirow states:
 * 5) Feelings of trust, solidarity, security and empathy are essential preconditions for full participation in discourse. Discourse is not based on winning arguments; it centrally involves finding agreement, welcoming difference, “trying
 * 6)  on” other points of view, identifying the common in the contradictory, tolerating the anxiety implicitly in paradox, searching for synthesis, and reframing. (Mezirow, 2000, p. 12) (Towards a General Theory of SRI’s Intentional Learning Communities p.7 [|__http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/SRI_General_Theory_update.pdf__] )
 * 7) Selected Resources:
 * 8) Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as Transformation: Critical Perspectives on a Theory in Progress. The Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series.
 * 9)  Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (2011). [|__Learning Communities: The Starting Point for Professional Learning Is in Schools and Classrooms__] . Journal of Staff Development, 32(4), 16-20.
 * 10)  Allen, D., & Blythe, T. (2004). [|__The facilitator’s book of questions: Tools for looking together at student and teacher work__] . New York: Teachers College Press.
 * 11)  Daly, A. J., & Chrispeels, J. (2008). [|__A Question of Trust: Predictive Conditions for Adaptive and Technical Leadership in Educational Contexts__] . Leadership and Policy in Schools, 7(1), 30-63.
 * 12) It is the work of leadership (both formal and informal) to foster the adult development that supports transformational learning and the reinvention of schools.
 * 13) The defining characteristic of transformational leadership is that it aligns an organization around widely accepted and pervasively articulated values and culture rather than policies, procedures, and events as is common in most organizations today . This new alignment as entailing ten “shifts” away from typical, event-based, authoritarian leadership:
 * 14) From planning to vision
 * 15) From goals to priorities
 * 16) From policy to opportunity
 * 17) From problem-solving to capacity-building
 * 18) From isolation and fear of separation to relationships and teamwork
 * 19) From controlling managers to shared leadership
 * 20) From hidden agendas to authentic listening
 * 21) From conformance to performance
 * 22) From tradition to reflection
 * 23)  From arrival to growth (Doblar, Easterling, & Reigeluth, unpublished paper) full text available at [|__https://www.dropbox.com/s/blgiex9op5wuypt/Transformational%20Leadership-Learning%20final_report%20%282%29.docx?dl=0__]
 * 24) Selected resources
 * 25)  Bryk, A. S. (2010). Organizing Schools for Improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(7), 23-30. Retrieved from [|__http://corvette.salemstate.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,cpid&custid=ssc&db=eric&AN=EJ882366&site=ehost-live&scope=site__]
 * 26) [|__http://www.pdkmembers.org/members_online/members/orders.asp?action=results&t=A&desc=Organizing&text=&lname_1=Bryk&fname_1=&lname_2=&fname_2=&kw_1=&kw_2=&kw_3=&kw_4=&mn1=&yr1=&mn2=&yr2=&c1=__]
 * 27)  Heifetz, R. A., & Linsky, M. (2004). When Leadership Spells Danger. Educational Leadership, 61(7), 33. Retrieved from [|__http://corvette.salemstate.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,cpid&custid=ssc&db=eric&AN=EJ716736&site=ehost-live&scope=site__]
 * 28) Drago-Severson, E. (2009). Leading adult learning: Supporting adult development in our schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
 * 29)  Daly, A. J., & Chrispeels, J. (2008). [|A Question of Trust: Predictive Conditions for Adaptive and Technical Leadership in Educational Contexts] . Leadership and Policy in Schools, 7(1), 30-63.
 * 30) Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences student learning. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Center for Applied Research & Educational Improvement, Institute for Studies in Education.
 * 31)  Newmann, F. (1994). [|School-wide Professional Community] . Issues in Restructuring Schools(6).
 * 32) Newmann, F., & Wehlage, G. (1995). Successful school restructuring. Madison: Wisconsin Center for Education Research, Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools.