Joel Zehring

Teachers can be leaders. This doesn’t mean they get to call all the shots in their schools. It means that teachers can influence other teachers and even administrators, and they can help to direct the course of their schools.

Steven DeMaio wrote a post over at Harvard Business where he describes some of the leadership principles he follows as a teacher. Steven doesn’t wait to be vested with authority. He simply thinks about how he might use his everyday words and actions to influence others. The leadership he describes isn’t heavy-handed, but he is intentional about his attitude and demeanor:

“In essence, the effective informal leader is inquisitive rather than watchful.”

I’ve seen a number of teachers lead with answers and proclamations and complaints. A far more effective approach might be to lead with questions. The questions I ask reveal my values and beliefs, as well as engaging others in thinking about their own values and beliefs. A conversation about values and beliefs is a leader’s conversation, rather than an administrative conversation.

In part 1, I mentioned the characteristics of a change agent by describing who I am (or at least who I would like to be). In part 2, I’ll suggest some specific actions to move toward positive change.

What I do

Affirm the good in teachers. I’m always way more receptive to suggestions and even criticism (gasp) from people that have previously recognized my skill and value as an educator. Teachers want to know that they are worthwhile educators before they try to improve what they do.

Ask teachers what they want. There is no use pushing tools and techniques that no one has asked for. Don’t be surprised if “web 2.0 tools” is not high on the list. One trick that I use is wrapping up my suggestions in a web 2.0 package:

“I wish we had a list of behavior interventions to share with teachers before they refer their students to CST.”

“I’ve devoted an entire category on my blog to interventions. I’ll email you the link.”

Admit when I don’t know the answer. In true conversation, people run into dead ends and find new paths. A sure-fire way to close the door on collaboration is to share half-truths and opinions masked as research.

Ask how it may hurt, as well as how it may help. I heard Chris Lehman say on an EdTechTalk show that one job of an educator is to not get sued. That’s a bit hyperbolized, but the foundational truth remains: teachers must keep their students from harm as much as is reasonable.

Neil Postman said in a speech, “Technological change is not additive; it is ecological.” When I introduce a teacher to a new tool or technique, I am introducing a whole set of potential benefits and dangers. What’s more, these benefits and dangers are amplified in unique ways by a teacher’s individual strengths and shortcomings, as well as by the specific school situation and community. As a leader, I need to complete my due diligence by knowing my audience and the full ramifications of the tools and techniques I am recommending.

Big thanks to Lisa Parisi, Maria Knee, and EdTechTalk for the inspiration.