Reaction to Zepeda Article

I agree with the majority of the tenets of the article by Zepeda. The author illustrates the difficulties with school administration – the job is just too big for one person. Zepeda asserts that all other duties of the principal should be subjugated to the role of instructional leader. This is easy to put down on paper and very difficult to practice. In addition to the long list of “other principal duties” that the author provided, principals in Catholic school are typically involved with marketing, enrollment, and development. These additional duties further inhibit the principal from his/her role as the instructional leader. However, Zepeda offers a model of shared leadership that is a step in the right direction for all stakeholders in the school community. I believe that leadership must be diffused and teachers must share the leadership responsibility for improved instruction and learning.

The author also asserts that school cultures resist change. I have personally experienced this reluctance to change and have ended up on the “outside” of the organization. Through self-reflection, I have been attempting to determine whether it was leadership failure on my part with navigating the change, or was the school culture and the faculty unwilling to change because they were satisfied with the status quo? Zepeda, in a side note on Leadership that Transforms, quotes Komives who states that there are two types of transformational leadership – one where the leader transforms the organization and views people of instruments of that change, and two where the leader focuses on transforming people as individuals. This was a very enlightening statement that has caused some cognitive dissonance and will require further reflection on my part. Nonetheless, Zepeda states, “that school wanting to improve will need to change patterns of thinking, cultures entrenched by past practices, and the climate in which the school’s culture rests.” The key element here is “schools wanting to improve.” How do instructional leaders initiate change when school cultures are entrenched in tradition, apathy, and status quo even when they are faced with evidence to the contrary? Which method of transformational leadership should be employed at this cross road?

Reflections on Senge Readings

From my experience in Catholic schools, teaching and learning primarily reflects the Industrial-Age approach, however many efforts are underway to incorporate elements of the New-Science thinking. Elements that resonate with the Industrial-Age approach include students being viewed as empty vessels in which the teacher must impart his/her knowledge, thereby reinforcing the “deficit perspective.” I believe that most teachers, although they would deny it, teach class as though all children learn the same. In my experience, those learners who are wired differently are either forced to “get it” or their parents are required to look for other ways to supplement their child’s learning. These same students are the ones who are labeled as “ADD” or “learning disabled” and are made to feel “dumb” in our Industrial-Age approach. Nonetheless, we still proclaim in our beautifully written philosophy statements that “all children” are gifts from God endowed with unique gifts. This is a glaring contradiction between our actions and beliefs. Other elements that reflect the Industrial-Age approach include the fragmentation of learning and the parental (and sometimes teacher) assumption that all learning takes place in the classroom.

Great strides have been made towards eroding the Industrial-Age assumptions of learning. Many teachers and administrators have introduced new methods of teaching to reach all learning styles including the kinesthetic, visual, and auditory. Whole programs in literacy and mathematics have been developed and implemented aimed at achieving success for all students and meeting students “where they are” versus where the teachers want them to be (or think they should be). In other words, programs and teaching methods are becoming more student and learner centered versus teacher centered, and the programs encourage variety by embracing multiple intelligences and diverse learning styles. Additionally, I believe that we are doing a better job at making learning more relevant to the real world, helping students connect what they are learning with everyday life.

Major Question about Teaching and Learning re: Catholic Education

Are Catholic Elementary Parish Schools prepared to adopt new teaching methods and assessments in order to improve teaching and student learning?