Theory of Action Shapiro

7/31/2019 Theory of Action Shapiro

1/36

Theory of Action 1

Running header: THEORY OF ACTION

Theory of Action

Matthew Shapiro

Educational Leadership

Module 3

Boise State UniversitySummer, 2009


2/36

Theory of Action 2

THEORY OF ACTION FOR EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP

Every person is a walking environment. Everything we do influences the person next to us.

Our actions either validate or challenge other peoples sense of what is the right thing to do. In this

sense, everyone is an unconscious leader. I feel that this is important to consider when we speak of

leadership, because it takes us directly to the reason that we speak of and study leadership. We

know that unconscious leadership can maintain norms that we consider good (like helping

someone who has fallen down), and we know that unconscious leadership can suggest norms that

we might not consider good (like engaging in discriminatory behavior toward people of different

skin color). What unconscious leadership does notnecessarily do is foster creativity, nor catalyze

transcendent ideas that might be beneficial or critical to a community, nor encourage people to act

according to their conscience and become conscious leaders in their own spheres of life. It is

because of the need for conscious and conscientiousleadershipthe kind that achieves these

transcendent goalsthat we speak of and study leadership today. This leads to my own definition

of leadership, which is, like the definitions of many words central to our culture, necessarily

normative. This definition is as follows: leadership is a process by which energies are guided

toward transcendent purposes. What are transcendent purposes? Those that allow us to reflect

upon practice, always seeking purpose, and always seeking better ways of doing and truer ways of

being. To paraphrase Quinn (2000), a transcendent purpose involves a thing changing into

something greater than itself. (p. 1)

This definition of leadership contrasts with those that characterize leadership as a traitof

individuals, but does not exclude leadership being a characteristic process of individuals. It also

allows for the notion of leadership as a distributed phenomenon. In fact, I will suggest that the

ultimate purpose of leadership is to create a leaderful community, full of people who are


3/36

Theory of Action 3

conscientious about what they do and ready to support each other in exploring transcendent

potential. A leaderful community is a new form of community, one in which ordinary people can

generate extraordinary results. (p. 28)

Foster (2002) expresses well the notion of a leaderful community: Leaders are embodied

individuals, while leadership is a shared and communal concept...Leaders, in short, create other

leaders, and it is in this fashion that leadership becomes a shared and communal process. (p. 57)

Speaking specifically to the concept of schools, Foster continues: In a school setting it should be

recognized that followers come in all sizes, ages and shapes; that each of these, from students to

teachers to administrators, can in fact be leaders with respect to their influence over other. (p. 60).

I include one more passage from Foster because I feel it is particularly powerful:

Leadership, in the final analysis, is the ability of humans to relate deeply to each other in

the search for a more perfect union. Leadership is a consensual task, a sharing of ideas and

a sharing of responsibilities, where a leader is a leader for the moment only, where the

leadership exerted must be validated by the consent of followers, and where leadership lies

in the struggles of a community to find meaning for itself. (p. 61)

Leadership and Leader

I have articulated my operational definition of leadership. But what is a leader? If every

person is a walking environment, influencing the behavior of others, then everyone is a leader.

Some of those leaders, i.e., some people, are conscious and conscientious about how they affect

others. Among those individuals, some actually seek to guide the energy of a community (which

can be as small as a club or a classroom or as large as the world) toward transcendent purposes. As

Quinn (2000) notes, We do not need to be in positions of high authority to be transformational. In


4/36

Theory of Action 4

fact, we need to have no authority except the authority of our own souls. We are all change

agents. (p. 25-6).

Many individuals remain in the realm ofinformalleadership until they gain significant

authoritysomething ascribed by others to that person which recognizes theirauthorship of

opportunities and situations. At some point this level of authority crosses from the informal to the

formal. This usually happens when there is aposition of authority within a system.

Are there people in formal leadership, in positions of authority, who do not act to release

energy for transcendent purposes? Clearly, yes. Are there people in formal leadership who are not

even conscious and conscientious about how their actions affect others? Unfortunately, the answer

is also yes. But I will focus in the remainder of this theory of action on the desiredleadersthe

ones who meet the definitions of leadership that I have expressed.

Who am I as a leader? What is my mission?

Evans (1996), Quinn (2000), Bennis (2003), and Palmer (2007) all underscore the

importance of knowing the self as crucial to leadership. Palmer (2007) inspires me to consider that

knowing who I am as a person (who is teaching) is probably more important than the why and

how of what I do. Knowing the self is crucial to helping us know why we react as we do to things,

and to hearing in yourself what others may be hearing in you. Evans (1996) notes that with leaders,

as with good teachers, it is not so much technique but integrity (and savvy) that distinguishes. In

short, the good leader is authentic and acts with integrity (p. 184). Bennis (2003) articulates four

lessons of self-knowledge: (1) You are your own best teacher; (2) Accept responsibility; blame no

one; (3) You can learn anything you want to learn; and (4) True understanding comes from

reflecting on your experience. (p.50)


5/36

Theory of Action 5

I consider myself fortunate in that Ive had a sense of mission since early adolescence. That

mission has evolved in form, but it has always been related to protecting others, freeing others,

inspiring others to think and to act. At some point in the past decade my focus shifted from

building democracy to building democratic systems of learning. Along the way I seem to have met

the right people to validate or advise the direction I was taking in the fulfillment of this mission.

The late Jonas Salk called me a mutant and said that certain groups non-inclusion of me was

part of my evolutionary path. The late Bela H. Banathya strong advocate of the transformation

of public education (1991) and the one who first introduced me to the likes of Gutmann and Follett

brought me (at the time, a college drop-out) into a circle of mostly PhDs and treated me as an

equal. These and so many more mundane experiences have shaped who I am. Over the past several

years, teaching has been the greatest mirror.

I have learned many lessons about myself, how I operate and where I have failed and

succeeded in working with othersparticularly in my efforts to share ideas and attempt to lead

new initiatives. I have settled into a pragmatic idealism that is as passionate as any spirit Ive

ever had, but probably more effective. As a leader, while I am always ready with ideas and a

vision, I am much more a facilitator than a commander. I take a transformational approach as

opposed to a transactional one (Northouse, 2007). I seek to penetrate to the core purpose, and to

what is in peoples hearts. Like all people, I seek belonging and significance, but I do not need to

be at the top of a pyramid to have those. I shy away from praise but recognize that it is important to

accept appreciation (and to give it). I aspire to be a transformational non-presence. As for my

mission, it exists on several levels. But for purposes of educational leadership, I will articulate it in

this way: my mission is to maximize learning and development for students, my staff, and for my

learning community as a whole.


6/36

Theory of Action 6

What do I believe to be the purposes of public education?

Everyone involved in public education must have, at some level, beliefs and assumptions

about the purposes of public education. After all, there is a reason for what they are doing in the

role that they play. These assumptions are preferably conscious ones, reflected upon, and

conscientiously chosen. Of course, different people will give different purposes for public

education. And the tacit purposeswhat is not officially stated but is implied by the tension

between the explicit, the implicit, and the null curriculum (Eisner, 1994), as well as the grammar of

schooling (Tyack & Cuban, 1995)have shifted slightly over the years. As McMannon (1997)

points out, the vocational purpose that won out long ago remains, but there has always been

tension between that purpose and the purpose of training for democratic citizenship, as Gutmann

(1999) and Barber (1997) would advocate. In my view, the currently dominant NCLB law

straddles the two purposes, because it is based on the establishment of equality of graduates in

terms of basic skills, presumably to allow for equitable participation both in the workforce and in

democratic processes. Of course, the law is voiceless when it comes to either preparing students to

engage in deliberation about the good society (Gutmanns emphasis) or the kinds of skills and

dispositions particularly suited to a 21st-century economy (e.g., the ability to work with others,

flexibility in career choices, creativity, and enterprise among them).

My belief about the purposes of public education embraces preparation for the world of

workandpreparationfor full involvement in democratic processes. But these are subsumed under

a larger purpose: to engage human beings (of all ages) in encountering their selves, others, and the

world in ways that are empowering and transformative. I also believe that since the way we

educate shapes the future of our society, we must recognize that another purpose of public


7/36

Theory of Action 7

education is to move our society in a desired directionwhether that direction is consciously

reflected upon or not. I sympathize with the view of George S. Counts (1932) that education

should help us to re-establish a democratic spirit and move us toward an emancipatory social order.

There is a third purpose which, to me, is one of the saving graces of the cause of education

as a public (shared) endeavor. It is based on the potential for public education to provide a vital

forum for dialogue about the nature of our society, both what it is and what it could and should be.

I do not believe that it yet fulfills this purpose because the dialogue is currently impoverished,

most people are not ready to be involved in it, and the institution of schooling controls the channels

of communication on the issue of public education. I believe that it will take visionary leadership

to change this situation, and that such leadership will emerge both within and outside of the

institution of schooling.

What is instructional leadership?

Earlier I defined leadership as a process by which energies are guided toward transcendent

purposes. What would be the transcendent purposes to the instructional aspect of formal

education? I believe that the transcendent purposes for instruction are to allow human beings to

transcend current understanding, current capabilities, current personal limitations, and current

societal limitations. My definition of instruction leadership is therefore as follows: a process by

which energies are guided to maximize the potential for human beings to transcend current

understanding, capabilities, personal limitations, and societal limitations. In the context of a

school, the guiding of energies includes the design and manifestation of both structures and

processes, within and around the classroom, that mediate learners encounters with themselves,

with others, and with their world.


8/36

Theory of Action 8

Who am I as an instructional leader?

My identity as an instructional leader is bound with my belief that a true leader is one who

builds a leaderful community. As an instructional leader, I may well be one who has deep

knowledge about learning, a language by which means I organize the many aspects of instruction

so as to be clear about their relationship, a wide repertoire of instructional strategies and tactics,

and experience in using them to meet the needs of diverse learners. But it is equally important that

I cultivate the same or greater qualities in the teachers who work directly with students, and I can

only achieve this through encouragement to do things differently, empowerment in decision-

making, the provision of development resources, and by creating space, time, and expectation for

individual and collaborative reflection. I would even go so far as to extend the idea of an

instructionally leaderful community to the students themselves, in whatever ways are appropriate

to given developmental levels and given communities of students (also known as classrooms).

All of the above involves, at a minimum, the development of a community of professional

learning, and a learning community that fosters professionalism, coupled with a learner-centered

democratic spirit. I will discuss these details later, when I address the specifics of how I will carry

out my mission.

What is my mission as the instructional leader of my school organization?

As the instructional leader of my school organization, my mission is to build an

instructionally leaderful community.

What are my core values as an instructional leader?


9/36

Theory of Action 9

Henderson and Gornik (2007) argue that it is essential to build a table upon which the

stakeholders in a school can articulate their core values and core ideas. Thirteen years ago I began

collaborating with the late Bela H. Banathy on a mission to introduce participatory educational

systems design to the masses through grassroots channels. A fundamental step in the process that

we advocated, and which I continue to advocate, is the articulation of core values and core ideas

about learners, learning, and the nature purpose of instruction and schools. Banathy called these

markers. These do not just form a list, however; they must be organized as a system, to

constitute an imagea quasi-pictorial object that can inform and inspire.

Five years ago, as part of a project I conceived in a class on educational philosophy, I

collaborated with several other students to create just such an image of education out of our own

personal beliefs. Not much later, I was facilitating the design of an image of education for the

Garden City Community School, and quite a few of the core values and core ideas from the

classroom project image became adopted. Some were modified; new markers were introduced

and adopted by consensus, and I embrace those as well. 136 core values and core ideas went into

what is known as the image of education. Today, I continue to personally embrace and stand for

this set of markers, regardless of the context of my educational work. Since I authored most of the

core values and core ideas in this image of education, and embrace those I did not author, I will

include them as an appendix (see Appendix A) to represent my core values as an instructional

leader.


10/36

Theory of Action 10

How do leaders influence, manage, and monitor curriculum, instruction, and

assessment to achieve excellence in teaching and empowering learners?

I would like to begin with a discussion of curriculum. I begin with a very broad definition

that I feel serves as a background to all other uses of the term: curriculum is what the older

generation chooses to tell the younger generation (Pinar, 1995, p. 847). Any school really has

several curricula operating at once. There is, as Eisner (1994) has pointed out, an explicit

curriculum, an implicit curriculum, and a null curriculum. The explicit curriculum is what is

written and what is expected to be taught. The implicit curriculum is the set of messages sent to

students through the features of the system, from the discipline system to the way they are treated

by teachers to the furniture. As Eisner suggests, the implicit curriculum may be far more powerful

than the explicit curriculum. The null curriculum is comprised of what is not taught, the ideas

whose absence is also powerful. An educational leader should be aware of all of these levels of

curricula at his or her school.

In addition to the various levels of curricula, there are different kinds of curricula that are

present in various proportions of emphasis. Corsini (1979) distinguishes three primary types as the

academic curriculum, the creative curriculum, and the social curriculum. An educational leader

should be aware of the particular balance of these and always considerate of the dominance of one

(usually the academic) over the others.

In order to best influence, manage, and monitor curriculum to achieve excellence, leaders

must know well the explicit, implicit, and null curricula. With regard to the explicit curriculum,

they must know what mustbe taught and what is not really required. But they should also seek to

go beyond the minimum, to discover as a school community what students should learn beyond


11/36

Theory of Action 11

what the official curriculum prescribes. They should also know the difference between what is

taught and what is learned; whether or not the system they work within has learneroutcomes (as

opposed to mere achievement outcomes), the leader (in the role of instructional coach) should have

an understanding of what shifts they are really looking for in the learner themselves. I personally

believe that this involves paying conscious attention to the levels of cognitive processing being

exercised in the classroom, which leads into the influence, management, and monitoring of

instruction.

I believe that teachers are professionals and should not be micro-managed. However, my

mission is to maximize learning and development for my students, staff, and the whole school

community. Therefore, I would help engender in teachers a sophisticated understanding of

instructional repertoires that take them beyond a single dominant method. I would want to see a

wide range of instructional strategies and tactics, ranging from the individual to the cooperative,

from basic skills development to higher order thinking, involving student voice as much as

possible, and differentiation to meet the needs of every learner. A key to this would be an emphasis

on teacher inquiry (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2001) and reflection above and beyond one-off

professional development opportunities. Hand-in-hand with this goes collaboration and peer

mentoring. Whether this involves models such as professional learning communities (DuFour &

Eaker, 1998; I address these below) or something else, it is critical to foster a true learning

community. In fact, I am beginning to entertain a healthy skepticism of the very notion of best

practices and as a leader would favor home-growni.e., contextually- and reflectively-developed

solutions. We can look at good practices and decide for ourselves whether they are best in

our contextuntil we improve upon them, that is.


12/36

Theory of Action 12

When it comes to influencing, managing, and monitoring assessment to support excellence

in achievement, my emphasis would be on balancing the use of assessment oflearning (as via

standardized tests) with assessmentforlearning (non-threatening assessment integrated into the

normal course of instruction) and assessment as learning (involving students in assessment, as with

rubrics and reflection). Putting assessment in its place and removing any trace of fear associated

with it would be a priority of mine as a leader.

The idea of assessmentforlearning and assessment as learning applies to supervision and

evaluation of teachers as well as to students. As DiPaola and Hoy (2008) point out, the traditional

notion of observing a teachers lesson once or twice a year is not a valid means of assessment the

quality of teaching. I embrace the supervisory model that these authors advance, as it seeks to shift

toward a more frequent, friendly, constructive, collaborative mode of knowing the instructional life

within a given classroom and throughout the school. I also embrace DiPaola and Hoys integrated

approach that focuses on a three-way interrelationship between supervision, evaluation, and

professional development, and how those feed into student learning and achievement.

How do leaders create cultures and conditions that support

high levels of achievement for all students?

I must first distinguish between learning, performance, and achievement. Learning is the

development of understanding, skills, and dispositions in my students (or staff or system).

Performance is what students do with their learning. Achievement is the measuremed level of some

aspect of performance. As my stated mission is maximize learning, rather than achievement, I will

interpret this guiding question as how do leaders create cultures and conditions that support high

levels of learning and for all students? That said, I realize that my system will probably hold me


13/36

Theory of Action 13

accountable for achievement rather than learning. They are certainly not mutually exclusive, and in

fact the one will tend to drive the other.

I fully embrace the three streams model advanced by Donaldson (2006). He recognizes that

we must start with relationships. Relationships are the key to trust and the free flow of feelings,

ideas, and information. The notion of crucial conversations (Patterson, Grenny, McMillan, &

Switzler, 2002) speaks to this stream. Too often we avoid talking about the things that need to be

talked about the most. When we establish the conditions that make us feel safe to speak, our

professional relationshipscrucial to fulfilling our purposewill deepen and expand. This, in

turn, helps us toward the goal of a leaderful community. Consistent with the idea of a community

of leaders, Donaldson notes Every person who shares the trust, openness, and affirmation that

mobilizes is, to some degree, a leader. (p. 54).

The second stream is commitment to (moral) purpose. Mary Follett (1949)one of my

chief inspirationssays that purpose is the invisible leader. I absolutely agree; if we do not know

why are we doing what we are doing, and keep it in mind, how can we function with integrity?

Donaldson also notes the importance of having a means built into the school to formalize

collective reflection on purpose: [Those who share in leadership] are constantly at work mingling

the practical, daily work of staff, students, and parents with the ideals of the schools purposes. (p.

58) This resonates with the ideas of Banathy (1991) who highlights the importance of a living

design culture in any kind of human organization. People often shy away from the explicit talk of

ideals as unrealistic yet we are driven by our ideals all the time!

Donaldsons third stream is a shared belief in action-in-common. Just as we would do with

a child struggling in school, we need to provide encouraging feedback to fellow educators by

showing them the successes they have made, and build from there. The leader must encourage


14/36

Theory of Action 14

people to believe in the power of their ideals by building faith. Not groundless faith, but faith that

is affirmed by practice. Otherwise, the purposes are empty and hypocrisy undermines all we have

worked for.

Also essential to influencing that culture and conditions that fulfill the purposes of the

school is a deep understanding the culture of the school. Schein (2004) has identified three levels

to an organizational culture: the artifacts level (what can be seen), the espoused values level (what

people say they believe in and value), and the shared tacit assumptions level, which is the real

driver of the organization. This has significant implications for leadership. Schein (1999) advises:

As a responsible leader, you must be aware of these assumptions and manage them, or they will

manage you. Awareness of tacit assumptions is critical to what Argyris and Schon (1978) call

double-loop learning, by which means reflecting upon our experiences can allow us to adjust our

assumptions. My study of school culture so far suggests that this is absolutely critical to becoming

a community that learns. As a way of addressing the debate about whether to focus change on

structures or on cultures, I have developed the following schema. Note that the term affordance

(Gibson, 1979) refers to a persistent feature of the environment that influences or directs behavior:

1. Assumptions (Culture) build affordances (Structure).

2. Affordances (Structures) perpetuate themselves through patterns of the flow of energy and

information.

3. Affordances (Structure) may limit the capacity to reflect on assumptions (Culture).

4. Assumptions (Culture) remain passively in effect.

5. Before the affordances (Structures) can be changed, new affordances (Structures) must be

built that afford reflection on assumptions (Culture). This requires an intervention into

assumption (Culture).


15/36

Theory of Action 15

On the other hand, an affordance (e.g., a new opportunity for people to get together to collaborate)

could afford a reflection on structures. So there is something of a chicken and egg question here.

The solution? Work from both directions.

One of the most promising paths for ways that has emerged for the creation of an insightful

and reflective educational institution is the concept of professional learning communities (Dufour

& Eaker, 1998). As Fullan (2006) points out, PLCs are not just another innovation or fad, but the

serious attempt to build real culture-shifting capacity into each school. He does caution, however,

that PLCs need to be developed across an entire system, rather than an individual school, in order

to work. This is due to the systemic limitations on what can be done within individual buildings.

It occurred to me, after reading Fullans article, we should look at and implement PLCs

from two directions: P(LC) and PL(C). First, lets look at a P(LC): a learning community that is

professional in its operation. The implied question: what makes us a learning community and not

just a school? To me, this says we need to be a community; that our community is about learning;

and, finally, that our community learns. Next, lets look at a PL(C): a community of professional

learning. Professional learning encompasses building enduring capacities for continuous

improvement through collaboration and reflection.


16/36

Theory of Action 16

How does an instructional leader address social justice in her or his school?

How do we make sure all children have access to quality instruction?

I define justice as the continuous opening of pathways and possibilities. Justice is served

when obstacles give way to new wholes. Social justice is inherent in the very purpose of public

education in America because it is intended, in part, to create equitable opportunities for learning

and thus equitable opportunities for participating in defining the good life and for pursuing it. I

believe that an instructional leader can work for social justice in several ways. First, he or she must

ensure that instructional practices recognize each learner as unique and grant every learner the best

opportunity for learning authentically, meaningfully, and powerfully. This goes beyond merely

eliminating prejudices and having high expectations for all, to the heart of how instruction is

designed and carried out. Second,the instructional leader can work for social justice by breaking

down walls between school, community, and family (Barr & Parrett, 2007). This can be done

through outreach, convenience of scheduling for working families, maintaining multiple channels

of communication (phone, paper, e-mail, and personal visits), ensuring that key information is

printed in languages other than English; other forms of cultural sensitivity (holidays, diets); home

visits; family nights; parenting classes; a policy of welcoming and accessibility; and a recognition

of mixed and single-parent households.

Third, the instructional leader can work for social justice by advocating for learners in the

face of any unjust effects of politically-driven educational policies like No Child Left Behind.

For example, I believe it would be morally incumbent upon the instructional leader to ensure that

just because high-stakes testing focuses on fundamental reading and math skills, curriculum and

instruction should not be narrowed to exclude what is essential for all children in his or her school

to develop the social capital needed to engage in democratic deliberation (Gutmann, 1999)


17/36

Theory of Action 17

including the skills of inquiry, critical thinking, deliberation, debate, and expressive and expository

writing.

Fourth, the instructional leader can work for social justice by personalizing the issue of

social justice and encouraging making social justice itself a theme of the school through

discussion, curricular integration, and service. It is not necessary to look far beyond the school

walls, in most American communities, to find opportunities for healing social injustice that are

also, without doubt, opportunities for learning.

Finally, it is important for the instructional leader to require himself or herself to reflect

upon his own position of privilege, and to help his or her staff reflect upon the same, and consider

the ways in which it may influence their expectations of students and families who come from a

less privileged position. McIntosh (1989) models a reflection upon privilege by creating a

considerable list of ways in which she saw herself having access and freedom that people of color

often do not have. I think such reflection would be important for many educators particularly

those from more privileged backgrounds to engage in. I am not as quick as McIntosh to indict us

all as oppressors, nor do I think it is helpful to be saddled with guilt. Rather, I find it more hopeful,

useful, and empowering to identify ourselves as responsible to and with others for what goes on in

our world.

Fullan (2003) says that it is a moral imperative for school leaders to ensure equity of

learning for all. But he suggests that this imperative goes beyond the school level.

As an educational leader, to whom or what am I accountable? Whose interests do I serve?

As a human being, I am responsible to and responsible with everyone around me. As an

educational leader, I am responsible to my students, my staff, my families, my community, and my


18/36

Theory of Action 18

board of directors. But responsibility is not the same as accountability. Accountability implies a

feedback mechanism by which I may be held accountable. If there is no such mechanism, then am

I truly accountable? This is specifically an issue when it comes to my accountability to students. I

maintain that I am responsible to them and that I serve their interests. But there is no specific

means by which I am held accountable to them. Therefore, in our current educational environment,

since I am held not accountable to students by any outside force, I mustas a good leaderhold

myselfaccountable to them.

I am also accountable to the physical, geographic, and cultural context in which I am

situated. I recall that during the problem-based scenario involving race relations, as a new principal

I had to factor in the emphasis that my stakeholders placed on tradition, family, and sports. Being

responsive to the needs of the community is not only essential for community ownership of the

school but also provides opportunities for students to use the community as a classroom. There

may even be ways for the school to help address issues facing the community (Budge &

Gruenewald, 2005; Theobald, 2006).

As an educational leader, I am also responsible to the past and the future (and perhaps, in

some subtle karmic manner, I am accountable to these as well). I am responsible to the past

because no story is ever finished. The past is ever-unfolding, and we bear some responsibility for

how it will unfold. If I shirk this responsibility or handle it poorly, then I say to those who came

beforethose who directed their energies toward some transcendent purposeyour efforts were

in vain. As to the future, I am passing on a set of conditions to those who do not yet have voices.

This is obvious in working with the children of my school, but it goes far beyond themto every

future generation.


19/36

Theory of Action 19

Theory of Change

Moving in the direction of a leaderful community of learning that empowers every learner

implies the need for change. This is not a one-time change or a series of changes that lead to an

end-point, but change as a constant. And it is not constant change for changes sake, but constant

change with a direction. That direction is informed by a vision whose scope goes beyond the

school we see before us. It needs to be a societal vision because education is a societal undertaking

from the level of each individual learner on upwards. That vision needs to address the standard

raised by Henderson and Gornik (2007) for curricular wisdom: how do we best support the

development of knowledge in a manner that enhances students self-knowledge and their ability to

inhabit and sustain a democratic society? The vision for how to do so also needs to be built at a

table which seats all of the stakeholders, because no expert can tell us what we should want in

our lives and in our societies (Banathy, 1991). Furthermore, the vision should never be considered

finished, for we need to let our purpose itself evolve.

Cuban (1988) makes the distinction between first order change (transactional) and second-

order (transformational). The change that I am speaking of might be called third order change. If

second order change involves fundamental changes to structure and culture in schools, then third

order change would involve changing the very context of schooling. This relates to Fullans fourth

level of moral purpose (society), but works in both ways: making a difference from the classroom

level up to the societal, but also starting with a societal scope of view in the creation of purposes,

and concomitant curricular, instructional, and structural features, that penetrate all the way to the

classroom level. Such purposes, in my view, would include democratic empowerment, social

justice, and environmental sustainability.


20/36

Theory of Action 20

How is this order of change brought about? One key element, I believe, is for the people

who must change the most arguably, school leaders and teachers (but I would add parents as

well) to gain an awareness of tacit assumptions driving both their beliefs and actions and the

aspects of their systemic environment that steer and constrain the magnitude and direction of

change. One way to raise this awareness is to compare our espoused beliefs with what can be

observed in the patterns of life in our school and in our district. Doing so with the participation of a

wide variety of stakeholders increases the likelihood of dissonance, which is necessary at this

stage. Along with the surfacing and confrontation of tacit assumptions should go the rejection of

those not embraced, and the articulation and reaffirmation of those assumptions which we truly

embrace. This oft-overlooked step goes hand in hand with (but is not synonymous with) the

creation of a shared vision.

Along with our work with assumption and creation of shared vision, we need to consider

what really gets people impassioned to change. Fullan (2003) cites Kotter and Cohen (2002) and

their observation that change is truly more of asee-feel-changeprocess than an analysis-think-

change process. This makes sense to me because emotions truly are more powerful in our lives, not

matter how surrounded we are in a culture of data and analysis. But in the context of complex

systems like education, I firmly believe that we do need both. The full cycleif it can be called

thatmight be something likesee-feel-analyze-think-feel-change-see We witness (see) a

phenomenon (e.g., students struggling with writing skills); we mustfeelsome discomfort or

urgency about it; but before we change, we should collaboratively explore and analyze the

situation; search for and thinkof solutions;feelthe commitment to make a change, as well as the

encouragement, safety, and/or courage, to make a change; and thensee what happens (because we

are never done in a world of unlimited potential).


21/36

Theory of Action 21

All of the above takes time. Fullan (2007) emphasizes that it takes a minimum of two to

three years to implement systemic changes in an elementary school, and at least five years at a

district level. The third-order change that I speak of will undoubtedly take longer. When thinking

in terms of such time frames, turnover becomes a clear obstacle. This is why the movement toward

professional learning communities is potentially so important, not only at the level of a school but

across entire district (Fullan, 2006). This recognition of the need to go beyond individual buildings

is why Comers school development process (Comer, 1996) requires the participation of several

schools within a district, the support of the superintendent, and the support of the school board,

across a five-year implementation cycle.

Most importantly, we need to get to the point where, as Follett (1949) long ago advocated,

leader and followers are both following the invisible leader: the common purpose (p.55). This

needs to occur at a systemic level because the environment must change in order to sustain any

significant change within it. And it needs to embrace a societal context while being embedded

rootedin the context of place.

How do I express or manifest that theory in my actions?

Much of this theory of action piece has underscored and implied my theory of education as

well as my theory of change. Education, change, and action: all three have the same root. We

educate ourselves, our students, our staff, and our community to evoke change so that individuals

and eventually society as a wholemay act in accordance with ethical and transcendent

purposes. It is as much about the present as it is about the future. Everything I do as a leader is in

accordance with this theory. I must begin by knowing myself; then I must know my context, my


22/36

Theory of Action 22

community, and my staff; I must also know my students, and I must know my cultures espoused

beliefs and tacit assumptions. I must know the curriculum (explicit, implicit, and null), and I must

know instruction. I must allow every participant in the learning community to feel safe to speak

and to dare, and to do so together. I must shift focus away from formal authority and toward

recognition that the true leader is our common purpose. Finally, my ultimate objective as leader

is to create a leaderful community.

I manifest my theory of action in several ways. First, and most generally, I try to live in

accordance with my principles. Given the opportunity to speak for principles, I do so, even at the

risk of political, social, or economic harm to myself. I believe that this is necessary in order to give

others the courage to do the same, perhaps with less harm risked with each wave. Second, when I

am working in a school as an educator, I seek to be very clear about the core values and core ideas

guiding practice. I challenge myself and others to be conscious of why we do what we do, in the

way we do it. And if the answer is not clear, then I know we have a problem. I also keep in mind

the larger context within which we are actingboth in time and in spaceand try to raise this

consciousness in my fellow educators as well as in my students. Finally, when I am launching

initiatives, such as the design of the Garden City Community School or the current Boise Open

Learning Network effort, I seek to explicate core values at the outset and open them to debate. I

then seek to design based on those, drawing in as much broad input as the effort can handle at each

given moment of development. Then, when the initiative has taken on a life of its own, I let go

of my vision and let the new creation grow, or even die, in the hands of those who have chosen to

run with it. I have been on a steep learning curve as a leader, and expect to continue to be on such a

curve for a long time to come.


23/36

Theory of Action 23

References

Argyris, C. & Schon, (1978). Organizational learnings: a theory of action perspective. Reading,

Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.

Banathy, B.H. (1991). Systems design of education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational

Technology Publications.

Barr, B. & Parrett, W. (2007). The kids left behind. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

Bennis, W. (2003). On becoming a leader. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books Group.

Budge, K. & Gruenewald, D. (2005). The need for a critical leadership of place.A closer look @

place-based education, p. 10-11. Olympia, WA: Educational School District 113.

Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle, S.L. (2001). Beyond certainty: Taking an inquiry stance on practice.

In A. Lieberman & L. Miller (Eds.) Teachers caught in the action: Professional

development that matters. New York: Teachers College Press.

Comer, J. et al (1996). Rallying the whole village. New York: Teachers College Press.

Dufour, R. & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work. Bloomington, IN:

Solution Tree.

Corsini, R. (1979) Individual Education. In Alternative Educational Systems.Itasca, IL: F.E.

Peacock Publishers, p. 200-57).

Counts, G. (1932). Dare the school build a new social order? New York: John Day Co.

Cuban, L. (1988). Constancy and change in schools (1880's to the present). In P. Jackson (ed.),

Contribution to Educational Change: Perspectives on Research and Practice (pp. 85-106).

Berkeley, CA: McCutcheon.

Bolman, L. & Deal, T. (2002). Reframing the path to school leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA:

Corwin Press.

DiPaola, M. & Hoy, W. (2008). Principals improving instruction. Boston: Pearson Education.


24/36

Theory of Action 24

Donaldson, G. (2006). Cultivating leadership in schools (2nd ed.) New York: Teachers College

Press.

Dufour, R. and Eaker, R. (1996). Professional learning communities at work. Bloomington, IN:

Solution Tree.

Eisner, E. (1994). The Educational Imagination: On the Design and Evaluation of School Programs

(3rd ed.) New York: Macmillan College Publishing.

Evans, R. (1996). The human side of change: Reform, resistance, and the real-life problems of

innovation. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Follett, M. (1949). Freedom and coordination: Lectures in business organization. London: Garland

Publishing.

Foster, W. (2002). Toward a Critical Practice of Leadership. In J. Smythm (Ed.), Critical

Perspectives on Educational Leadership. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4 th edition). New York: Teachers

College Press.

Fullan, M. (2006). Leading professional learning. The School Administrator63 (10), p. 10-14.

Fullan, M. (2003). The moral imperative of school leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Gibson, J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.

Goodlad, J. & McMannon, T. (1997). The public purpose of education and schooling. San

Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Gutmann, A. (1999). Democratic education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Henderson, J. & Gornik, R. (2007). Transformative curriculum leadership, Third Edition. Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Merrill PrenticeHall.

Howard, G. (2006). We cant teach what we dont know. New York: Teachers College Press.


25/36

Theory of Action 25

Kotter, J. & Cohen, D. (2002). The heart of change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School

Press.

McIntosh, P. (1989). White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack.Peace and Freedom,

July/August 1989, p. 10-12.

Northouse, P. (2007). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Palmer, P. (2007). The courage to teach (10th anniversary edition). New York: John Wiley.

Pinar, W., Reynolds, W., Slattery, P., & Taubman, P. (1995). Understanding curriculum: An

introduction to the study of historical and contemporary curriculum discourses. New York:

Peter Lang Publishing.

Schein, E. (1999). The corporate culture survival guide: Sense and nonsense about culture change.

San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Theobald, P. (2006). A case for inserting community into public school curriculum.American

Journal of Education, 112 (3), p. 315-331.

Schein, E. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley.

Tyack, D. and Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Tye, B. (2000). Hard truths: uncovering the deep structure of schooling. New York: Teachers

College Press.


26/36

Theory of Action 26

APPENDIX A:

Image of Education (Representing my Core Values and Core Ideas about Learning, Learners,

Instruction, and the Ideal Nature and Purpose of School; Implemented at Garden City

Community School but representing my values about education in general)

SCOPE of Education

CONTEXT OF LEARNING

We recognize that a childs education does not begin when they arrive at school, and it does not

stop when he or she leaves the school setting at the end of the day. We also realize that in order to

take advantage of the richness and diversity of life and of the community itself, the schools

learning experiences should take place in a variety of settings throughout the community.

FAMILY & HOME

We recognize that families exist in a variety of forms today, and that regardless of the form, the

family remains a cornerstone of the community. We recognize families as a teacher of their

children, and we consider whole families rather than just individual children to be the learner.

Therefore, the parents of children that we serve are very involved with their childrens education

and with supporting the school.

WHO IS SERVED

Learning is a continuous process ofbecomingas well as it is a continuum of acquiring knowledge

and skills. It is a process that begins before birth and continues until death. Therefore, an

educationalsystem should seek to support learning in people of all ages, from the pre-natal stage

through adulthood until death. We also take a broad view of who education can effectively serve,


27/36

Theory of Action 27

considering individuals with physical or mental challenges to be as worthy of educational

opportunity as those who do not have those challenges.

RESPONSIBILITY & SERVICE

We take a long term view of our impact on the world. From major policy decisions to day-to-day

practices, we act with future generations in mind. As part of this consciousness, the curriculum

supports awareness of the environment and our responsibility toward it. The system lives up to this

ethic by acting in an ecologically responsible manner. This sense of responsibility extends to the

learners, who help care for their school, their home, their community, as well as their natural

environment. School grounds are always clean and well cared for because everyone involved in the

school considers it their personal responsibility to maintain it.

DIVERSITY

Recognizing human diversity, respecting human diversity, and exposing learners to human

diversity are vital to education. Learners are thus presented with information about cultures,

religions, genders, history, politics, and other aspects of human societies in a manner that

represents many voices and viewpoints.

FOCUS of the System

BASIC NEEDS

We recognize that the learning experience is maximized when children have their basic needs met,

including food, shelter, and health care. We work to ensure that children begin school well rested

and well fed.


28/36

Theory of Action 28

BASIC RIGHTS

Reflecting the principles of a just and equitable society, we recognize certain basic human rights.

We maintain that, at a minimum, every individual has the right to an education, the right to

freedom of speech, the right to live in a protected and safe environment, the right to needed health

care, the right to choose their own personal belief system, and the right to be respected.

LEARNER PERSPECTIVE

Our educational system will not serve as an obstacle to the in-born passion for and activity of

learning which life in itself would normally support in abundance. Every child has an innate desire

to learn, and we must not do anything to inhibit that desire. We recognize that the source of

motivation and the ultimate source of responsibility for learning is the learner, not a school or

system. To the greatest extent possible, we preserve the intrinsic motivation for learning. Learning

is pursued for learnings sake. At the same time, children will understand how learning helps them

in their lives.

In order to support intrinsic motivation for learning, the system should allow for self-determined

levels of challenge, letting learners up the ante themselves as they master skills and seek to

improve them. Learners will be encouraged to explore the things that interest them. They can

expect that their own styles of learning will be accommodated.

In further support of self-responsibility for learning, our education system emphasizes self-

improvement rather than comparison to others.

The children attending our school love to come to school because it is a safe, fun, and challenging

place where they are respected, free to be themselves, and able to make a difference. All children

feel accepted as part of the school family, and have a true sense of belonging.


29/36

Theory of Action 29

GOALS & OUTCOMES FOR LEARNING

The educational experience will support the learning and development of the whole person,

moving learners from dependence to independence. Our learners will able to explore and bring

about worlds through the languages of the spoken word, the written word, mathematics, scientific

inquiry, and the arts. They will become critical thinkers, able to see things from multiple

perspectives, to test out new ideas, to apply values and to make judgments. Learners will be

empowered by becoming aware of how they learn.

Learners will be able to express themselves creatively through all kinds of aesthetic forms, and

they will become confident speakers in both formal and informal settings. Children will leave our

system equipped to handle both cooperative and competitive situations in life. Learners will come

to appreciate the past in their present as it becomes the future, taking responsibility through

realizing that history continues to unfold through them.

The educational experience will cultivate more than knowledge and skills. It will foster the

development of wisdom. It will foster development of a sense of connection to the universe in a

manner that is participatory and free from dogma. It will wean learners away from affordances in

the home life that inhibit learning and development and the richness of experience. We will foster

positive self-images in all learners, and enhance self-esteem through the achievement of goals. Our

children will learn to be proud but gracious when they are successful in their efforts, as well as

gracious when they are not successful. Our learners will continue to learn throughout their

lifetimes.


30/36

Theory of Action 30

Our educational system will be so effective that learners could leave the system at any time and

have a great chance of thriving in the world.

ASSESSMENT & EVALUATION

The role of assessment and evaluation is to help and encourage the learner. In our system,

assessment and evaluation are utilized by learners for empowering feedback rather than being

feared as extrinsic and authoritarian judgment. Furthermore, assessment and evaluation are

designed to measure and reflect true understanding and application of knowledge rather than

memorized facts and rote skills. While learners will take standard and standardized tests, we

recognize that not every learner tests well, and grades will not be driven by test scores alone. Our

learners will accept the fact that tests are games and they will become avid test-takers when they

see that learning and assessment are part of the same experience.

PEDAGOGY: THE PRACTICE OF TEACHING

We recognize that while learning can be guided in part, a healthy learning environment encourages

flexibility and creativity. Learning does not always go according to plan, and it occurs in a large

variety of ways, forms, and contexts. In our system, learning opportunities will be seized upon,

both in terms of developmental windows and in unique moments. Teaching methods will not be

bound by or limited to textbooks, and the use of imagination in the design of lesson plans will be

encouraged.

Knowledge is something that is actively constructed by the learner; it cannot be imparted or

received. Our learning experiences and instructional methods reflect this understanding of the

mind. Inquiry-based and discovery-based methodologies will be used throughout the curriculum to

engage learners in authentic and powerful learning. In-depth research and other resources will be


31/36

Theory of Action 31

available to learners to support their inquiries. Learners will be encouraged to find alternate ways

to solve problems, both in the technical disciplines of math and science and throughout the

curriculum in general. Dialogue the practice of extended and in-depth conversation about

assumptions, ideas, issues, and solutions is embraced as essential for learning and fostered from

an early age.

Instructional approaches will reflect the reality that not all learners learn the same way; learners

have preferred styles of learning that are dynamic and vary by age, experience and learning setting.

Instructional approaches will permit learners to learn as fast as they can master new skills,

concepts, and processes. Learning situations will also give children opportunities to provide

feedback to each other, thus encouraging cooperation.

Lessons and learning activities will be not only geared toward learning a subject, but also as an

application to life and aiding in continuation of learning throughout life.

CURRICULUM BALANCE AND INTEGRATION

Recognizing that the world is not isolated into separate parts, and that life experience should not be

fragmented, subject matter and learning experiences are designed with an integrated, systems view.

The interconnected nature of phenomena, issues, and actions is demonstrated. Hand-in-hand with

an integrated curriculum is a balanced curriculum. The arts and humanities are recognized for their

value alongside any other subject. Physical activity is a daily part of the curriculum, and

community service learning is an integral aspect of the curriculum. Bringing it all to life, subject

matter and learning experiences are realistic and relevant to learners lives.


32/36

Theory of Action 32

SELF-DISCIPLINE

The educational experience will move learners from a reliance upon external sources of discipline

to self-discipline. It will cultivate manners, self-respect, and respect for the rights of others.

Expectations for behavior, which are co-authored by learners themselves, will be clearly stated and

understood by the children. Discipline will thus be easily maintained.

COMMUNITY OF LEARNING

We recognize that learning is largely a social experience. Embracing this, a spirit of cooperation is

fostered in every classroom. Children are given opportunities to provide feedback to each other.

There is an each-one-teach-one friendship in learning. Older learners accept the position of

mentorship to younger ones. The system provides for continuity of peer relationships and mentor

relationships across time.

CARING FOR SELF

We promote good health and encourage healthy lifestyles among our learners. Doing all that we

can to support learners in this regard, our learning environment provides learners with

opportunities and resources for taking care of themselves in ways that complement their particular

life and home situations. Promoting fitness and wellness also requires that daily physical activity

be a part of the educational experience.

TIME

The schedule and structure of the learning day takes into account the physical realities and

biological needs of learners. It also avoids interrupting the flow of learning, which cannot be

determined by a clock.


33/36

Theory of Action 33

RELATIONSHIP between the System and the Community

COMMUNITY INTEGRATION

The failure or success of any child affects the entire community, and an educational institution is

most successful when it has the support of the community around it. Therefore, our school is a

true community center, a hub of neighborhood life. Our education system is integrated with other

social services to most effectively serve and provide resources to learners, families, and the

community. The Garden City community supports the school and its values, and is an active

partner in its ongoing governance.

Another aspect of community integration is the sharing of news and information. News and

information that affects the community is freely shared between the school and the community,

and community news and events will be utilized as teaching and learning opportunities. We

encourage open forums of dialogue between community members, and social relationships

between learners and community members are encouraged and fostered.

RESOURCES

We maintain that resources for supporting learning should be equitably available across

communities, schools, and learners. Working for that equity, we always seek to provide more for

our learners. The system will effectively draw from public, private, and non-profit sources for

financial, material, personnel, and learning opportunity resources. Everyone from learners to

educators to community members work together to bring in resources that will supplement funds

received from the public education budget. The system will be versatile and flexible in its use of

resources, so that even when funds are less available, learning does not suffer.


34/36

Theory of Action 34

TYPE of System

SCHOOL CULTURE

We are creating a school culture that is supportive, encouraging learning at every level, and free

from fear at any level. Learning professionals, paraprofessionals, and non-professionals in the

system regard and treat each other with equal respect. We form a healthy and dynamic community

of practice, in which the system itself learns as it fosters learning among individuals. We practice

what we preach.

Our education system does not, either intentionally or unintentionally, limit the learning of any

child. It allows the in-born passion for learning to flourish. To this end, initiative and curiosity are

supported to the greatest extent. Learners in our school are seldom bored, and if they are, the

situation is always used to point toward new and engaging activities. We recognize individual

learners unique talents and interests and nurture them without sacrificing the broad course of

study that has been adopted by the community.

Fear and comparison to others are not used to motivate or control behavior. Children in this

learning community are not afraid to ask questions about anything, and all learners are willing to

ask for help in the pursuit of self-improvement. Initiative and curiosity are supported to the greatest

extent. We also recognize that learners cannot be shielded from knowledge about the world, but

should be exposed to it in an empowering manner.

We maintain that the means in learning are more powerful than the ends. The educational

experience will value risk-taking in learning, even if it leads to failure, because that failure is part

of fruitful learning in the long run.


35/36

Theory of Action 35

CONTINUOUS DESIGN

A public education system should be always seeking its purpose within the larger context of

stakeholder aspirations and the conditions of a changing world. The term stakeholder includes

everyone that is affected by the education system, which means everyone in the community,

children and adults, present and future. We maintain that educational programs and policies should

be adapted to the community, the school, the classroom, and the learner. School curriculum should

continually be examined and constructed to reflect community ideals. We also seek to foster a

system that learns as it fosters learning among individuals. Therefore, the system is built around a

living spiral of design that explicitly bridges aspirations, assumptions, values, intentions, plans,

actions, and results. Extending this self-guidance to the learners themselves, learners in our system

co-design their learning program, more extensively as they demonstrate their capacity to do so.

GOVERNANCE

We embrace the idea that decisions affecting the livelihood of a community should be decided

upon by the community, and we apply this idea to the life of our school. The greater Garden City

community is invited to be an active partner in the governance of the school. With its broad base of

participation, we can trust that governing members of our school will act in the best interests of the

community.

Extending this principle to the learners, our learning system affords opportunities for the

development of basic attitudes and skills needed for participatory democratic life, beginning in but

not limited to the classroom. The schools code of behavior is democratically created.


36/36

Theory of Action 36

EDUCATORS

We work for a community that honors those who dedicate themselves to nurturing learning among

others, one in which educational leaders and teachers are considered an integral part of the larger

community and are treated as such. Within our school, we extend equal respect to all who play a

role in education professionals, paraprofessionals, and non-professionals alike and we form a

healthy and dynamic community of practice.

Our expectations for teachers are high. The preparatory and continuous education of teachers who

work in our system is hands-on, and our teachers never stop learning and growing. We also

maintain that teachers should not only be educators, but true mentors for the students and other

teachers. Living up to the principle of mentorship, our system provides for continuity of mentor

relationships across time.

As part of our recognition of the value of teachers, teachers can expect a livable salary and good

benefits in order to allow them to focus on teaching.

Theory of Action Shapiro

Documents

Transcript of Theory of Action Shapiro