While I agree that her members play a vital role in transforming
education, an honest evaluation of past performance, especially in the inner
city, suggests that there leaves much to be desired in their ability to affect
meaningful change in their schools.
Let me be clear that I don’t lay blame squarely on the shoulders of
principals and supervisors, but my own experience, and the experiences of
colleagues that I have interviewed and casually spoke with, suggests that
changes must be made if these administrators are to be truly effective.
My own observations and anecdotal information identifies five glaring
problems with school administration today:
1)
In highly successful schools like the one I
taught in, administrators become intellectually lazy, feeling that there is
little they need to do in providing leadership, vision, and the creation of a learning
culture that is ethical and value driven
2)
In inner city schools, administrators are
driven by a bureaucratic mindset that is to a great degree the result of State
oversight and the demands for data
3)
In too many schools the administrator/faculty
relationship is “personality driven,” with too many teachers being identified
as “favorites” and “annoyances.” This leads to a real problem with
administrators being objective in their assessment of teacher performance.
4)
A lack of time to
become skilled, effective “clinical supervisors,” a problem that exacerbates
the current problem of new and “at risk” teachers not getting the type of
effective guidance and supervision they need to produce exemplary leadership
for their students
5)
The last two
problems lead to a cascade effect on what I believe will be the next major
problem facing our schools, particularly our inner city schools, which will be
a truly objective and meaningful system to evaluate teachers.
To me, the single greatest need for New Jersey schools is the placement
of full time clinical supervisors in every school district, the number to be
determined by some ratio to faculty. These supervisors- using both
collaborative and directed models- will provide the kind of meaningful feedback
and assistance that teachers need as they work to perfect their craft. These
supervisors should also become part of the teacher evaluation process, lending
an air of objectivity to a process that teachers are justifiably concerned with,
especially now that tenure may be held in the balance.
I have been trying to start a business that will provide clinical
supervisors to school districts to work with new and “at risk” teachers; we
would contract with schools for a semester or full year to provide something
other than the typical summative evaluations most teachers receive. And even
when administrators voice a commitment to providing clinical supervision to the
faculty, they do not have the time that is needed to do a thorough job, a job
that requires pre and post conferencing.
Administrators have so much on their plate that they need to admit that
their school would benefit from the addition of full time clinical supervisors,
or at least contract with outsiders to provide help with specific faculty
members. This would be the most effective use of professional development money
that I can imagine. The biggest problem I have found is that principals see bringing
in outside professionals as a “slap in the face,” an acknowledgement that they
are not up to the job. But I would rather these principals see it as
acknowledgement that their jobs are difficult and complex, and that they simply
do not have the time to either relearn “how” to conduct effective clinical
supervision, or that they simply don’t have the time to do the job as
thoroughly as they would like.
Our inner city schools are failing, there is just no other conclusion that can be drawn from the graduation rates and other assessments of performance. Leaving aside the issue of clinical supervisors, I think the biggest problem is the preponderance of bureaucratically minded principals and administrators in our urban schools, and for that I place the blame on our politicians in Trenton and their craven desire to “run” these schools. The oversight they demand and the data they require place an onerous burden on school administrators. It may sound counter-intuitive, but what these schools need- both administrators and teachers- is to be liberated from state control and allowed to design a culture of learning that is tailored to meet the needs of their constituent families and their communities. I truly feel that only then will be able to find the kind of visionary leadership these schools demand. We don’t need to look to the business community for these leaders, as some contend; I think they are among us already. They may already be in place, but have simply been stifled by state mandates. Whatever the case, the salient fact is that while it is perfectly right to honor these administrators during National Principals Month, we cannot be content with the work that is currently being done. We can do so much better, we can do so much more.
No comments:
Post a Comment