Posts
Some quick hit comments from LYS readers over the past couple of days…
“Friendly fire? Check fire? Isn’t that a little extreme?”
SC: There was no offense taken. The writer and I go way back. Sometimes, half the fun is disagreeing at full speed.
“Congratulations on the blog birthday. In the past 6 months, I have learned more about school leadership than I had learned in six previous years as a teacher.”
SC: Thanks, for reading. I know at times the blog doesn’t seem like it applies to teachers, but I believe that informal leadership is equally as important as formal leadership (if not more so). So I think the blog is a critical resource for teachers who take their role as informal campus leaders seriously.
“Now the blog is awesome again, it was getting stale for a week or two. Controversy brings out the real problems and issues!!!”
SC: What do you mean again? The blog is always awesome. But as I always remind the LYS Nation, a dialogue is easily more entertaining and enlightening than a monologue. Keep your comments, questions, concerns and issue coming. And if you don’t like the direction of the conversation, interject something new.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
Saturday, February 20, 2010
A Reader Writes... (Advice 2/7/10 - Part 5)
In response to the posts relating to, “A Reader Shares… Sunday Advice (2/7/10),” a reader writes:
"SC, as a former principal and a current assistant superintendent I think you are dead on in your analysis of positional roles and agendas. There are many of my decisions that I now have to make knowing that no matter how bad it tastes, my decision will at least put more principals in the position to be successful. Which admittedly is a couple of degrees off of “Student First.”
SC Response
I think what is important about Brown’s Rule boils down to two critical points.
1. If you are a principal, it reminds you what a pivotal role you have in the overall system. A role that is rarely filled by others if you abdicate your responsibility or compromise the principles.
2. If you are not a principal, it serves to remind you that there is sometimes a need to question your motives at regular intervals and to realize that many of the conflicts that involve you and the principal are strictly contextual, not personal.
When I was promoted to central office, Brezina gave me this piece of advice, “A good principal is difficult to manage. A great one is damn near impossible.”
As usual, he is right. And what I have found is that this good vs. great dynamic generally hinges on the principal’s definition of “win/win.” If the principal’s definition of “win / win” means the compromise between her position and your position, there will be occasional friction, but there is some give to adult considerations. Relationships will remain unruffled, but “good” becomes the performance potential of the school.
If the principal’s definition of “win/win” means that “my kids win / my school wins,” then there will be regular friction. Relationships will sometimes be bruised. However, “great” becomes the performance potential of the school. But only if executive leadership values the particular role that the great principal serves. That role is to keep the system honest. If executive leadership does not value that role, then the great principal becomes the “cancer” in the system and will either be forced out or leave on her own accord.
To sum up, working for a great principal is harder than working for a good one, but much more rewarding. Having a great principal work for you is often a royal pain, but if you can deal with being reminded that sometimes “the emperor wears no clothes,” your district will reap the benefits of her labor and single minded passion. And finally, if you notice that occasionally great principals arrive in your district but never stay, that is one huge red flag.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn…
"SC, as a former principal and a current assistant superintendent I think you are dead on in your analysis of positional roles and agendas. There are many of my decisions that I now have to make knowing that no matter how bad it tastes, my decision will at least put more principals in the position to be successful. Which admittedly is a couple of degrees off of “Student First.”
SC Response
I think what is important about Brown’s Rule boils down to two critical points.
1. If you are a principal, it reminds you what a pivotal role you have in the overall system. A role that is rarely filled by others if you abdicate your responsibility or compromise the principles.
2. If you are not a principal, it serves to remind you that there is sometimes a need to question your motives at regular intervals and to realize that many of the conflicts that involve you and the principal are strictly contextual, not personal.
When I was promoted to central office, Brezina gave me this piece of advice, “A good principal is difficult to manage. A great one is damn near impossible.”
As usual, he is right. And what I have found is that this good vs. great dynamic generally hinges on the principal’s definition of “win/win.” If the principal’s definition of “win / win” means the compromise between her position and your position, there will be occasional friction, but there is some give to adult considerations. Relationships will remain unruffled, but “good” becomes the performance potential of the school.
If the principal’s definition of “win/win” means that “my kids win / my school wins,” then there will be regular friction. Relationships will sometimes be bruised. However, “great” becomes the performance potential of the school. But only if executive leadership values the particular role that the great principal serves. That role is to keep the system honest. If executive leadership does not value that role, then the great principal becomes the “cancer” in the system and will either be forced out or leave on her own accord.
To sum up, working for a great principal is harder than working for a good one, but much more rewarding. Having a great principal work for you is often a royal pain, but if you can deal with being reminded that sometimes “the emperor wears no clothes,” your district will reap the benefits of her labor and single minded passion. And finally, if you notice that occasionally great principals arrive in your district but never stay, that is one huge red flag.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn…
Friday, February 19, 2010
A Reader Writes... (Advice 2/7/10 - Part 4)
In response to the posts relating to, “A Reader Shares… Sunday Advice (2/7/10),” a reader writes:
“Well, SC, if the intention was to get a powerful response, then this reader doesn't mind speaking up.
Maybe there should be some sensitivity to the designation of "principal as the only pure advocate for students on campus" especially when it comes to the position of principal.
Who is the principal on campus? According to my understanding of the interpretation used by TEA, the principal is the person who provides instructional leadership which defines the culture and climate of a campus serving the best interest of students. Coincidentally, there are no assistant principal or vice-principal or associate principal certificates earned in the State of Texas. If you look on the wall of our offices, you will probably find a Principal's Certificate prominently displayed. While job descriptions may delineate a variety of duties and responsibilities from one position to another the bottom line remains advocacy for all students on campus.
The writer was correct that everyone on the campus team should be embracing the role of advocacy for student success. To suggest the principal (senior, building, headmaster) is the pure advocate may lend itself to then stating all else have ulterior motives for their service to students, faculty and the remaining stakeholders. Dare I say, they have impure advocacy? If that is the case, then I know of "principals" who have sacrificed certain principles in order to maintain the principalship, including students. By the same token anyone who is in this vital and vibrant profession for anything less than what is best for all students should be asked politely but resolutely to hit the door and be careful not to let it hit them in the proverbial butt on their way out.
Finally, let me respond to the "sweet spot of student interest and community interest" which is apparently reserved for the principal. There are AP’s who may take on the role of "bad cop" without a heart for what is good for all students. Resolutely, there are APs, and perhaps even P’s, who take on the role of "bad cop" with a heart for all students and protects the interest of students and community alike. I believe this is the core understanding for what defines a principal. Mainly, that a principal with principles understands the need to be a part of a strong team working collaboratively, seamlessly and cohesively for providing every effort to see that "no student is left behind" even if it is there choice to be left out.
I read and reread your response and found myself at the core value over and over again. While you promoted principals you also promoted the rest of the team. No one is nor can be greater than the other in the function of exemplary education and leadership. However, I understand and agree that ultimately the buck stops with the "principal" and so they are not necessarily the pure advocate or primary advocate but the ultimate advocate of student success, community relations and staff viability.
In proverbial SC style...
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn..."
SC Response
OK, I’m thinking. Yes, the intent always is to get a powerful response. Can you be timid and be a member of the LYS Nation? And, as generally happens, you and I arrive at a similar destination even though we took different routes to get there.
Brown’s Rule does not imply that the principal is the only source of leadership on a campus. Nor does it imply that the principal is the only source of student advocacy. It does recognize the fact that the principal is ultimately responsible for the success and failure of the campus. It does recognize that the principal occupies the sweet spot where self interest and community interest intersect, as defined by student performance. And it recognizes that there are role specific agendas, that left unchecked, can circumvent the needs of students. In a perfect world, at a perfect school, this may not be the case. And when you find that school, call me because I can end my search.
You ask a great question, “Can there be impure advocacy?” The answer is “Absolutely. And don’t be ashamed by it or apologize for it.”
The ideals that make our country great have their foundation in the concept that the best solutions and best government occurs at the intersection of community and self interest. And here is the ultimate litmus test. Would you go to your school and work everyday if you did not get paid. Of course not. But public service is important enough to you to sacrifice private industry remuneration for the intrinsic reward derived from service to others. So as a field can we assume some level of heightened moral/social sensitivity. Possibly, but not anymore that anyone else committed to public service (fire, police, medical, military, etc). On the whole, educators are good people, but we aren’t perfect. Not even close.
Finally, as we both recognize, the moral and ethical tone of the organization is set by leadership. I am acutely aware of this fact because I am a product of this. I worked for Brezina and Neeley, because they focused my energy on helping schools that needed it, as opposed to those who wanted it or paid for it. I quit working for and with those whose did not share a similar moral code. And yes, I did then and still do expect to get paid. As are most of us, I'm motivated and mission oriented, not saintly.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
“Well, SC, if the intention was to get a powerful response, then this reader doesn't mind speaking up.
Maybe there should be some sensitivity to the designation of "principal as the only pure advocate for students on campus" especially when it comes to the position of principal.
Who is the principal on campus? According to my understanding of the interpretation used by TEA, the principal is the person who provides instructional leadership which defines the culture and climate of a campus serving the best interest of students. Coincidentally, there are no assistant principal or vice-principal or associate principal certificates earned in the State of Texas. If you look on the wall of our offices, you will probably find a Principal's Certificate prominently displayed. While job descriptions may delineate a variety of duties and responsibilities from one position to another the bottom line remains advocacy for all students on campus.
The writer was correct that everyone on the campus team should be embracing the role of advocacy for student success. To suggest the principal (senior, building, headmaster) is the pure advocate may lend itself to then stating all else have ulterior motives for their service to students, faculty and the remaining stakeholders. Dare I say, they have impure advocacy? If that is the case, then I know of "principals" who have sacrificed certain principles in order to maintain the principalship, including students. By the same token anyone who is in this vital and vibrant profession for anything less than what is best for all students should be asked politely but resolutely to hit the door and be careful not to let it hit them in the proverbial butt on their way out.
Finally, let me respond to the "sweet spot of student interest and community interest" which is apparently reserved for the principal. There are AP’s who may take on the role of "bad cop" without a heart for what is good for all students. Resolutely, there are APs, and perhaps even P’s, who take on the role of "bad cop" with a heart for all students and protects the interest of students and community alike. I believe this is the core understanding for what defines a principal. Mainly, that a principal with principles understands the need to be a part of a strong team working collaboratively, seamlessly and cohesively for providing every effort to see that "no student is left behind" even if it is there choice to be left out.
I read and reread your response and found myself at the core value over and over again. While you promoted principals you also promoted the rest of the team. No one is nor can be greater than the other in the function of exemplary education and leadership. However, I understand and agree that ultimately the buck stops with the "principal" and so they are not necessarily the pure advocate or primary advocate but the ultimate advocate of student success, community relations and staff viability.
In proverbial SC style...
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn..."
SC Response
OK, I’m thinking. Yes, the intent always is to get a powerful response. Can you be timid and be a member of the LYS Nation? And, as generally happens, you and I arrive at a similar destination even though we took different routes to get there.
Brown’s Rule does not imply that the principal is the only source of leadership on a campus. Nor does it imply that the principal is the only source of student advocacy. It does recognize the fact that the principal is ultimately responsible for the success and failure of the campus. It does recognize that the principal occupies the sweet spot where self interest and community interest intersect, as defined by student performance. And it recognizes that there are role specific agendas, that left unchecked, can circumvent the needs of students. In a perfect world, at a perfect school, this may not be the case. And when you find that school, call me because I can end my search.
You ask a great question, “Can there be impure advocacy?” The answer is “Absolutely. And don’t be ashamed by it or apologize for it.”
The ideals that make our country great have their foundation in the concept that the best solutions and best government occurs at the intersection of community and self interest. And here is the ultimate litmus test. Would you go to your school and work everyday if you did not get paid. Of course not. But public service is important enough to you to sacrifice private industry remuneration for the intrinsic reward derived from service to others. So as a field can we assume some level of heightened moral/social sensitivity. Possibly, but not anymore that anyone else committed to public service (fire, police, medical, military, etc). On the whole, educators are good people, but we aren’t perfect. Not even close.
Finally, as we both recognize, the moral and ethical tone of the organization is set by leadership. I am acutely aware of this fact because I am a product of this. I worked for Brezina and Neeley, because they focused my energy on helping schools that needed it, as opposed to those who wanted it or paid for it. I quit working for and with those whose did not share a similar moral code. And yes, I did then and still do expect to get paid. As are most of us, I'm motivated and mission oriented, not saintly.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
A Reader Writes... (Sunday Advice 2/7/10 - Part 3)
In response to the posts relating to, “A Reader Shares… Sunday Advice (2/7/10),” a reader writes:
"When I first heard Brown's Law I too felt insulted. I didn't believe it and even discussed the issue with close friends who felt the same as I. But, after years of hard bumps and bruises, my friends and I accept Brown's Law as Truth.
I have seen it proven true time and again. Principal's who don't embrace Brown's Law are likely a detriment to their campus. Going farther, principal's who do not embrace Brown and Brezina are the likely the reason we have accountability.
Put another way: How did we get to the point where the government had to step in and do what's right for kids?
Answer: Because there were (and still are) a whole lot of principals out there who reject the Brown/Brezina principles of leadership.
On the issue of you being comfortable in your current position, this sailor will be bold and fire a shot over your bow. Marine, Move up or move out.
You are obviously talented, trained, and smart enough to be a LYS Leader. There are districts out there playing with the idea of just giving assistant principals a few years to move up; after the timeline expires they are out and new talent is brought in for potential development for the big chairs. Leadership is too important to let talented people get comfortable in positions that are key for developing leaders."
SC Response
When I was principal I was invited to be a part of a group of educators that meet with a group to state representatives to discuss accountability issues. As I explained how I thought a fair and productive system should be designed, the room got more and more quiet. So concerned, I quit talking. Someone said, “We could never agree to this. Where did you get these ideas?”
I said, “It’s not an idea, it’s how I operate my school and our school system.”
My boss at the time, Brezina. My coach, Wayne Schaper (who then unknown to me was a mentor, colleague and close personal friend of E. Don Brown.) So yes, I agree with you. The failure to embrace what Brezina, Brown, and those of their ilk modeled and taught has resulted in politicians making political hay by seeing who can slap us around the most. The bottom line is that great schools and their leaders don’t define themselves by meeting state minimum standards. They define themselves by the next mountain they are attempting to conquer.
As to your comment about how it is time for the Marine to move up, I could not agree more. He has been trained by the best and has been tested under fire. All that is left is to find the superintendent that values everything that a member of the LYS Nation brings to the table. And since I know the Marine personally, I’m not worried about him growing stagnant in his current role. Like you, he was trained by Brown and Brezina and actively looks for the good fight to engage in, everyday.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
"When I first heard Brown's Law I too felt insulted. I didn't believe it and even discussed the issue with close friends who felt the same as I. But, after years of hard bumps and bruises, my friends and I accept Brown's Law as Truth.
I have seen it proven true time and again. Principal's who don't embrace Brown's Law are likely a detriment to their campus. Going farther, principal's who do not embrace Brown and Brezina are the likely the reason we have accountability.
Put another way: How did we get to the point where the government had to step in and do what's right for kids?
Answer: Because there were (and still are) a whole lot of principals out there who reject the Brown/Brezina principles of leadership.
On the issue of you being comfortable in your current position, this sailor will be bold and fire a shot over your bow. Marine, Move up or move out.
You are obviously talented, trained, and smart enough to be a LYS Leader. There are districts out there playing with the idea of just giving assistant principals a few years to move up; after the timeline expires they are out and new talent is brought in for potential development for the big chairs. Leadership is too important to let talented people get comfortable in positions that are key for developing leaders."
SC Response
When I was principal I was invited to be a part of a group of educators that meet with a group to state representatives to discuss accountability issues. As I explained how I thought a fair and productive system should be designed, the room got more and more quiet. So concerned, I quit talking. Someone said, “We could never agree to this. Where did you get these ideas?”
I said, “It’s not an idea, it’s how I operate my school and our school system.”
My boss at the time, Brezina. My coach, Wayne Schaper (who then unknown to me was a mentor, colleague and close personal friend of E. Don Brown.) So yes, I agree with you. The failure to embrace what Brezina, Brown, and those of their ilk modeled and taught has resulted in politicians making political hay by seeing who can slap us around the most. The bottom line is that great schools and their leaders don’t define themselves by meeting state minimum standards. They define themselves by the next mountain they are attempting to conquer.
As to your comment about how it is time for the Marine to move up, I could not agree more. He has been trained by the best and has been tested under fire. All that is left is to find the superintendent that values everything that a member of the LYS Nation brings to the table. And since I know the Marine personally, I’m not worried about him growing stagnant in his current role. Like you, he was trained by Brown and Brezina and actively looks for the good fight to engage in, everyday.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
A Reader Writes... (Advice 2/7/10 - Part 2)
In response to the posts relating to, “A Reader Shares… (Sunday Advice 2/7/10),” a reader writes:
"Great explanation, I stand corrected. I thought that the philosophy the LYS team was using was aimed at incompetency and not systems. I fully understand and agree.
Check Fire! Check Fire!"
SC Response
Just to confuse the situation even more, we actually target both. We work to build systems that maximize student opportunity (effective) and maximize the success of the adults in the system (efficient). Obviously, in that pursuit, the incompetent often end up in the crosshairs. For us, that is neither good nor bad, it just is. This is why we operate under the assumption that the only unforgivable sin is not being coachable.
Incompetence is generally the result of either misguided ignorance or a calculated endeavor to further self-interest. Neither of which has to be terminal. Over the course of my life and career I have suffered from both, been cured and then relapsed. We are all human and suffer the passions and frailties of our existence. But a strong system, coaching, reflection and leadership can make us better than who we are. As you might guess, in the nature vs. nurture argument, I take the optimistic “nurture” side.
Mission, purpose, vision and leadership can either augment our base character or erode it. Hence, the principal is in the best position to focus the collective will (service to students) on the collective purpose (student performance). Or the principal can abdicate that responsibility and let factions and adult interests trample over those that have no voice, yet have the most to gain and lose, our students.
Which brings us to the need to:
1. Understand the complexities of social systems.
2. Work to build checks to overcome the frailties of those systems.
3. Work to build fulcrums to leverage the strengths of those systems.
4. Coach the people in those systems.
5. Identify, remediate or remove those that are detrimental to the system.
As you can see, Brown’s Rule is useful construct to further this pursuit.
By the way, as you will see in the next couple of days, you have kicked over a hornets’ nest. It’s good to know that I can again count on the Marines to have my back.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
"Great explanation, I stand corrected. I thought that the philosophy the LYS team was using was aimed at incompetency and not systems. I fully understand and agree.
Check Fire! Check Fire!"
SC Response
Just to confuse the situation even more, we actually target both. We work to build systems that maximize student opportunity (effective) and maximize the success of the adults in the system (efficient). Obviously, in that pursuit, the incompetent often end up in the crosshairs. For us, that is neither good nor bad, it just is. This is why we operate under the assumption that the only unforgivable sin is not being coachable.
Incompetence is generally the result of either misguided ignorance or a calculated endeavor to further self-interest. Neither of which has to be terminal. Over the course of my life and career I have suffered from both, been cured and then relapsed. We are all human and suffer the passions and frailties of our existence. But a strong system, coaching, reflection and leadership can make us better than who we are. As you might guess, in the nature vs. nurture argument, I take the optimistic “nurture” side.
Mission, purpose, vision and leadership can either augment our base character or erode it. Hence, the principal is in the best position to focus the collective will (service to students) on the collective purpose (student performance). Or the principal can abdicate that responsibility and let factions and adult interests trample over those that have no voice, yet have the most to gain and lose, our students.
Which brings us to the need to:
1. Understand the complexities of social systems.
2. Work to build checks to overcome the frailties of those systems.
3. Work to build fulcrums to leverage the strengths of those systems.
4. Coach the people in those systems.
5. Identify, remediate or remove those that are detrimental to the system.
As you can see, Brown’s Rule is useful construct to further this pursuit.
By the way, as you will see in the next couple of days, you have kicked over a hornets’ nest. It’s good to know that I can again count on the Marines to have my back.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Happy Birthday to the LYS Blog
That’s right LYS Nation, the daily blog is one year old today. It alternately feels like it just started yesterday and that we have been doing this for years. I have to admit when I started a year ago I had no expectations and no idea where this would take us. My biggest fear was that I would have writer's block after the first two weeks. Fortunately, the blog struck a cord with you and the Nation was born. Writers block was never an issue because the LYS Nation quickly formed and took over the topics of discussion. As you can guess, it is much easier to participate in a dialogue than support a never ending monologue.
I thought it would be fun to re-visit the first post I wrote for the blog, and yes, exactly one year later, I’m in an airport at 6:00am waiting for my flight, writing this post on my laptop.
Thank you for a great year and who knows where we’ll go in the upcoming year.
Getting Started: An Introduction
Here I am sitting in another airport terminal at 6:00 AM in the morning. I wish I could say that this was unusual, but it’s not. I’m now a school road warrior. For the past 5 years I have lived on the road, 3, 4 and too often 5 nights a week. Going where schools and principals have needs and problems that they need help with.
There are some perks, because of the travel points I’m a Hilton Diamond member and a Continental Elite member. That means on a big jet and in a big city, I get upgraded. That happens a couple a times a month, but most of the time I’m on a small plane going to a small town. I also get a lot of free Southwest Airline tickets. Congratulations, you fly a lot, do you want to fly some more?
I’m not complaining, I’m just making the case that I have seen a lot, worked with a lot of principals and schools and have fixed a lot of problems. All that to say, that what I’ve seen, what I’ve learned and what I do may be useful out there.
I have found that school leaders for the most part live on islands. Islands that have been built by isolation, misinformation, wishful thinking and petty jealousies. Hopefully, I can help get some of you off the island, or at least make the island more hospitable.
So here’s what I’m going to do. I’m going to write about school leadership and school operations. The focus will mostly be on improvement and what works. But I’ll also write about the tools that I find useful, books that I have read, conversations that I have had and respond to your comments. Who knows where this will go, but I hope that every once in a while, you’ll find something that is useful to you, your school and/or your staff.
Time to board now, off to another city and another school.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
I thought it would be fun to re-visit the first post I wrote for the blog, and yes, exactly one year later, I’m in an airport at 6:00am waiting for my flight, writing this post on my laptop.
Thank you for a great year and who knows where we’ll go in the upcoming year.
Getting Started: An Introduction
Here I am sitting in another airport terminal at 6:00 AM in the morning. I wish I could say that this was unusual, but it’s not. I’m now a school road warrior. For the past 5 years I have lived on the road, 3, 4 and too often 5 nights a week. Going where schools and principals have needs and problems that they need help with.
There are some perks, because of the travel points I’m a Hilton Diamond member and a Continental Elite member. That means on a big jet and in a big city, I get upgraded. That happens a couple a times a month, but most of the time I’m on a small plane going to a small town. I also get a lot of free Southwest Airline tickets. Congratulations, you fly a lot, do you want to fly some more?
I’m not complaining, I’m just making the case that I have seen a lot, worked with a lot of principals and schools and have fixed a lot of problems. All that to say, that what I’ve seen, what I’ve learned and what I do may be useful out there.
I have found that school leaders for the most part live on islands. Islands that have been built by isolation, misinformation, wishful thinking and petty jealousies. Hopefully, I can help get some of you off the island, or at least make the island more hospitable.
So here’s what I’m going to do. I’m going to write about school leadership and school operations. The focus will mostly be on improvement and what works. But I’ll also write about the tools that I find useful, books that I have read, conversations that I have had and respond to your comments. Who knows where this will go, but I hope that every once in a while, you’ll find something that is useful to you, your school and/or your staff.
Time to board now, off to another city and another school.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
Monday, February 15, 2010
A Reader Writes (Sunday Advice from 2/7/10)
In response to the post, “A Reader Shares… Sunday Advice - 2/7/10,” a reader writes:
“I do not like to disagree with Don Brown, Sean Cain, or Bob Brezina but I am going to have to on this point.
The principal is NOT the only pure advocate for students on the campus and to make that flippant statement is ludicrous! I know several campus administrators and I am one of them, who are not the head principal but are very happy with where I am placed at the current time and we are powerful advocates for the students, sometimes MORE than the principal.
Not every assistant principal is striving for a seat in the big chair, and I absolutely do not put any other need before the students. I do not know where this philosophy was born, but is has become a common philosophy among the LYS staff and it really pisses me off! Counselors, nurses, special education teachers, and AP's can sometimes be the best advocates for students.
As far as I am concerned, many principals spend a little too much time at central office worried about their next promotion to central office. Head principals are sometimes the most out-of-touch people on the campus. So to say they are the only true advocate is idiotic and stupid.
Don't piss off this Marine, I will send rounds down range without aiming first. Friendly fire can be the deadliest.”
SC Response
Oh, the power of context. The pure (not only) advocate rule is short hand for a longer explanation, which is obviously warranted at this time. The rule is not meant to imply that individuals, regardless of position, are not motivated to ensure that student needs are met and can not set aside adult wants. This occurs all of the time. Instead the rule recognizes that certain roles can have role specific agendas that can be contrary to a student first agenda.
For example, teachers do all of the heavy lifting in education. They are where the rubber hits the road and student learning is directly correlated to their sweat equity. But it is human nature to want to reduce your work load and take labor saving short cuts. Saving labor and maximizing instructional effectiveness is often a mutually exclusive proposition.
Assistant principals, as a role, often serve as the “bad cop” on the campus. In this role, sacrificing the needs of a few students to facilitate order and effective school operations can be a logical course of action. As an aside, you were trained in a program specifically designed to protect students from this type of situation, so you know first hand the fights we had everyday with adults who did not share our philosophy.
Central Office personnel are generally focused on the “big” picture. Even with the purest of hearts, they make decisions that are best for the whole, even when they know that those decisions, by necessity, will be detrimental to some individuals.
Board members, as elected officials are naturally oriented toward political necessities, which by definition are the needs and wants of adults.
The principal, due to the fact that she is most directly accountable for the performance of her campus, is put in the position to be the best pure advocate for each individual student. The principal occupies the sweet spot where self-interest and community interest is best defined by student performance. Thus, Brown’s Rule.
Brown’s Rule is not meant to be insulting. It is meant to stimulate awareness and to serve as both a warning and a challenge to rise above ourselves and set aside our personal needs. This recognition of positional roles and the need to balance their destructive “passions” is not a new concept or dilemma. Brown’s rule simply recognizes at a school level what Adams, Hamilton, Madison et.al. identified and then built organizational structures to overcome at the nation building level.
Now to your comment, which fired me up. If you are going to disagree, do so at full speed! First, hopefully you can now see that the comment is not flippant. Plus, you know that Brown (and Brezina) is very deliberate in what he says. A skill that he has honed through decades of leadership at the campus, district, community, state and national levels.
Second, we all agree that individually, educators in all positions make numerous decisions each day the place the needs of students over their individual wants. Again, the rule illustrates that there are position based agendas that if not checked, can easily run counter to the needs of students.
Third, yes, there are ineffective, lazy, and just plain bad principals. And for as tough as some people think I am on teachers, I’m ten times as tough on leadership in general and principals in particular (again, as you have witnessed first hand). A bad teacher can sink a class, but a bad principal can sink an entire school.
So hold your fire Marine. There’s no need to frag the messenger. E. Don, is there anything that you want to add?
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
“I do not like to disagree with Don Brown, Sean Cain, or Bob Brezina but I am going to have to on this point.
The principal is NOT the only pure advocate for students on the campus and to make that flippant statement is ludicrous! I know several campus administrators and I am one of them, who are not the head principal but are very happy with where I am placed at the current time and we are powerful advocates for the students, sometimes MORE than the principal.
Not every assistant principal is striving for a seat in the big chair, and I absolutely do not put any other need before the students. I do not know where this philosophy was born, but is has become a common philosophy among the LYS staff and it really pisses me off! Counselors, nurses, special education teachers, and AP's can sometimes be the best advocates for students.
As far as I am concerned, many principals spend a little too much time at central office worried about their next promotion to central office. Head principals are sometimes the most out-of-touch people on the campus. So to say they are the only true advocate is idiotic and stupid.
Don't piss off this Marine, I will send rounds down range without aiming first. Friendly fire can be the deadliest.”
SC Response
Oh, the power of context. The pure (not only) advocate rule is short hand for a longer explanation, which is obviously warranted at this time. The rule is not meant to imply that individuals, regardless of position, are not motivated to ensure that student needs are met and can not set aside adult wants. This occurs all of the time. Instead the rule recognizes that certain roles can have role specific agendas that can be contrary to a student first agenda.
For example, teachers do all of the heavy lifting in education. They are where the rubber hits the road and student learning is directly correlated to their sweat equity. But it is human nature to want to reduce your work load and take labor saving short cuts. Saving labor and maximizing instructional effectiveness is often a mutually exclusive proposition.
Assistant principals, as a role, often serve as the “bad cop” on the campus. In this role, sacrificing the needs of a few students to facilitate order and effective school operations can be a logical course of action. As an aside, you were trained in a program specifically designed to protect students from this type of situation, so you know first hand the fights we had everyday with adults who did not share our philosophy.
Central Office personnel are generally focused on the “big” picture. Even with the purest of hearts, they make decisions that are best for the whole, even when they know that those decisions, by necessity, will be detrimental to some individuals.
Board members, as elected officials are naturally oriented toward political necessities, which by definition are the needs and wants of adults.
The principal, due to the fact that she is most directly accountable for the performance of her campus, is put in the position to be the best pure advocate for each individual student. The principal occupies the sweet spot where self-interest and community interest is best defined by student performance. Thus, Brown’s Rule.
Brown’s Rule is not meant to be insulting. It is meant to stimulate awareness and to serve as both a warning and a challenge to rise above ourselves and set aside our personal needs. This recognition of positional roles and the need to balance their destructive “passions” is not a new concept or dilemma. Brown’s rule simply recognizes at a school level what Adams, Hamilton, Madison et.al. identified and then built organizational structures to overcome at the nation building level.
Now to your comment, which fired me up. If you are going to disagree, do so at full speed! First, hopefully you can now see that the comment is not flippant. Plus, you know that Brown (and Brezina) is very deliberate in what he says. A skill that he has honed through decades of leadership at the campus, district, community, state and national levels.
Second, we all agree that individually, educators in all positions make numerous decisions each day the place the needs of students over their individual wants. Again, the rule illustrates that there are position based agendas that if not checked, can easily run counter to the needs of students.
Third, yes, there are ineffective, lazy, and just plain bad principals. And for as tough as some people think I am on teachers, I’m ten times as tough on leadership in general and principals in particular (again, as you have witnessed first hand). A bad teacher can sink a class, but a bad principal can sink an entire school.
So hold your fire Marine. There’s no need to frag the messenger. E. Don, is there anything that you want to add?
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)