Sei sulla pagina 1di 27

School Leadership News

The Newsletter of AERA Division A: Administration, Organization, & Leadership

Issue 22

Fall 2008

The American Educational Research Association (AERA),

a professional membership

organization, strives to improve the educational process by encouraging scholarly inquiry related to education. AERA offers a comprehensive program of scholarly publications, training, fellowships, and meetings to advance educational research, to disseminate knowledge, and to improve the capacity of the profession to enhance the public good. Division A of AERA is devoted to furthering the aims of the organization

through scholarly contribution

in the areas of educational

administration, organization, and leadership.

In this Issue:

Vice President’s Column 1

Special Feature: Interview with Thomas Sergiovanni…… AERA Division A Outstanding Dissertation Award………………… 7 Listening to Leaders:

Interview with Gerald

… Graduate Students at UCEA ………… 11 AERA Division A Graduate Student Scholarship……12 Knock Down Old Walls by John Hoyle………………13

Zahorchak

3

8

Announcements……….15

IJLE Emerging Scholar

Competition…………….17

Globalization and

Leadership………………18

From the Editorial

Team

26

Division A Officers 27

Vice President’s Column Linda C. Tillman, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

“Bringing the gifts that my ancestors gave, I am the dream and the hope of the slave.” Greetings and I hope that you are all are having a productive fall semester!

hope that you are all are having a productive fall semester! UCEA Annual Meeting… It hardly

UCEA Annual Meeting…

It hardly seems possible, but many of us will be attending the University Council for

Educational Administration Annual

Convention in Orlando, FL very soon. The conference will feature many informative sessions including a graduate student poster session and several town hall meetings.

As I mentioned in the last newsletter, Division A will collaborate with the UCEA Diversity Committee to hold an Early Career Mentoring workshop for pre-tenure faculty of color at this year’s meeting. Pre-tenure scholars of color interested in attending this workshop should bookmark the following session:

*Scholars of Color: Early Career Mentoring Seminar, Session #35, Friday October 30, 8 a.m.- 9:20 a.m., Ireland B.

Division A Graduate Students…

I would like to take this opportunity highlight the work of our Division A graduate student leaders. As you know, graduate students make up a significant segment of the membership of AERA and Division A and have full voting privileges. Division A graduate students are making significant leadership contributions to the organization and to the Division.

John Oliver (Michigan State University) is chair of the AERA Graduate Student Council and is also a member of the AERA Council. In his dual roles John coordinates the policies and procedures of the Graduate Student Council, works with the Graduate Student Representatives in all twelve of the AERA divisions, represents these students on the AERA Council, and

Vice President’s Column (continued)

participates in the governance of AERA. John has been an effective leader in representing the interests of all graduate students. I am especially proud that he is member of Division A!

Danielle Hayes (University of Texas-Austin) is the Division A Senior Graduate Student Council Representative. Danielle attends the AERA Coordinated Committee Meeting, sits on the AERA Graduate Student Council, and confers with other Council representatives about graduate student programming. Danielle also plans the Division A graduate student activities. She is assisted by the Division A Junior Graduate Student Representative, Tirza White (Emory University). Tirza is responsible for coordinating the Division A graduate student scholarship selection process and assists with the planning of the AERA Division A Fireside Chat. She will become the Senior Representative at the end of the 2009 AERA Annual Meeting. Danielle and Tirza have been very instrumental in planning Division A activities at the UCEA Annual Meeting. I especially proud that Danielle and Tirza are also members of Division A!

I would also like to acknowledge the leadership of the Division L Graduate Student Representatives Maria Mendiburo (Senior Representative, Vanderbilt University) and Bradley Carpenter (Junior Representative, University of Texas-Austin). Maria and Bradley have worked collaboratively with Danielle and Tirza to make sure that graduate students in Divisions A and L feel welcome at the UCEA and AERA meetings, and to plan graduate student activities at the UCEA conference. Each of these students, as well as other graduate students in Division A who serve on standing and ad hoc committees, have exhibited the kind of leadership that we hope will help to shape the leadership skills they will need as professors and practitioners.

The leadership efforts and enthusiasm of our graduate students reminds us that we must continue to nurture and encourage them during their graduate work. We must be sure to provide graduate students with quality and consistent advising, provide them with opportunities for collaboration (research and writing, conference presentations) and networking, assist them with career preparation, and be committed to their success regardless of their race, class, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or theoretical or methodological orientations. Our graduate students are the future of educational leadership. Please encourage your graduate students to become active in Division A.

Closing notes….

Please be sure to consult the AERA website and Educational Researcher for news and updates on policies, procedures, and happenings in the organization. If you have any questions, comments or concerns, feel free to email me.

Finally, please let us know what is happening with you and about any innovative programs or research projects. You can always post your announcement on the Division A listserve at aera.net.

Thomas Sergiovanni An Interview with an Exceptional Scholar in Education: Part 4

Carol A. Mullen, The University of North Carolina at Greensboro camullen@uncg.edu

The subject of this leadership portrait is Thomas Sergiovanni of Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas. Sergiovanni is the Lillian Radford Distinguished Professor of Education and Administration at Trinity; senior fellow, Center for Educational Leadership; and founding director, Trinity Principals’ Center. His educational and supervisory focus is theories of schooling, moral leadership, and the learning community. He earned an EdD in educational administration from the University of Rochester in 1966 and has been at Trinity University since 1984. During the 1960s he also taught elementary school. Notable awards include the Distinguished Research Award in Instructional Supervision, AERA, 1993, and the Outstanding Leadership Award, 1975–2000, Council of Professors of Instructional Supervision. Since 1969 he has published numerous scholarly books. His scholarly work and life habits, direction and aspirations, assessment of trends in the profession, and advice for aspiring leaders and academics are the structural elements of this report. Democratic concepts and agendas for education emerged from the interview. Verbatim quotes reflect the words of Sergiovanni in the first section and of his referral colleagues in the one that follows. In spring 2005 I interviewed Sergiovanni and his colleagues who corroborated the accounts, without knowledge of the scholar’s reactions. This interview is part of a biographical portraiture study of exceptional scholars in education. Past issues of this newsletter have featured interviews with other top scholars. 1 Specifics regarding issues of research design, protocols, procedures, and analysis can be found in the formative (Mullen, 2004) and summative (Mullen, in press 2 ) publications.

2004) and summative (Mullen, in press 2 ) publications. Thomas Sergiovanni—Shepherd Sergiovanni, described as a

Thomas Sergiovanni—Shepherd Sergiovanni, described as a shepherd by educational leadership professors nationwide, exercises spiritual care over a community.” 3 His concepts of school community, moral leadership, and school improvement have been adopted worldwide.

Work as Play: Habits and Routines For years, Sergiovanni’s workweek has had a fluid, even unpredictable quality. Although he would like to write mornings, he has had to make time when he can. He has less free time now, as his work responsibilities have increased. Hence, his writing schedule is somewhat “scattered.” Nonetheless, he was busy completing the eighth edition of Supervision: A Redefinition (Sergiovanni & Starratt, 2006) and other more recent projects. School Community: Energy and Purpose Sergiovanni detailed several life-changing experiences that occurred years

ago. One resulted from his talk given in the Philippines, where someone’s question about what he meant by effectiveness touched him emotionally. The de facto definition of effectiveness (and effective schools) that he held until then “erupted as

a sore spot.” New thinking about the “life world of leadership” started to form. Using

as a compass what successful leaders deem important in their work, he came to distinguish effective from good schools. Effective schools “get the right rating based on the state’s accountability tests,” whereas good schools “provide a distinctive normative structure that supports teaching and learning” (Sergiovanni, 2000, pp. 94–

95).

After the overseas episode, Sergiovanni turned to principals and superintendents for help with exploring the “gap between what I thought educational administration was about and what those who work in and around schools every day think it’s about.” A breakthrough occurred upon realizing that

“school leaders were morally oriented, connected to a sense of purpose and feeling of responsibility.” Grasping these new ideas put him “on the path—that experience, that trip to the Philippines, and Moral Leadership [1992] changed my life.” Another transformational experience occurred during Sergiovanni’s work with

a group of aspiring leaders. An impromptu exercise revealed that not all

organizations are formal and that even families are social organizations. He recognized the richness of this insight for the field wherein the use of formal organization as a guide for leadership theory and practice misdirected educators and their democratic impulses, causing them to “lead with the wrong assumptions.” Moral Leadership: Sources of Contribution Moral leadership was “not previously safe” to explore. When Sergiovanni began writing about this area, it was “not yet acceptable to say ‘moral.’” The leadership culture of the past was simply not a world wherein “sacred things” or “moral obligation and other fuzzy concepts that have religious overtones” were discussed. The goal then was to develop a scientific field but Sergiovanni followed his own path, seeing the value of schools as social organizations. Inspired by Etzioni’s (1988) The Moral Dimension, Sergiovanni (1992) infused the concept of social organization with the new language of morality. Writing about the value of purposes as “covenant, not contract,” he applied this idea within schools. In one exercise he devised, adults and children created posters listing promises to one another. A group that functions according to its own covenants can transcend the authoritarianism of rule enforcers. Hence, collective promises “become a source of authority, binding people in moral ways.” Processes involved in site-based capacity-building fascinate Sergiovanni. Educators have yet to emphasize the “smart school” and recognize that smarter teachers are more effective. Building on Elmore’s (2004) distinction between learning as a private and public good, he argued that “the extent to which teachers share

their new knowledge is unknown.” Teachers in smart schools “develop a community of practice and share what they know.” Strengthening the Field: Major Trends Sergiovanni characterized the educational leadership field as having “several generative trends that are changing our practices for the better.” He feels that “there’s hope—some people are expanding themselves and hooking onto important ideas.” Regarding trends in school leadership, he encourages those who take his classes to work in the area of social organization. This scholar urges us to identify what is individually and collectively important, advising that we become “more deliberate by knowing what we’re about and what we believe in, and by selecting more carefully from among ideas.” About the attacks on educational administration from Arthur Levine and others, he thinks we need to learn from these “pin cushions.” Students as Inquirers: Advice for Budding Academics All doctoral students should be introduced to the notion of lines of inquiry: “If you want to have a research career, your work needs to be coherent.” Academics shift from one topic to another, making it “hard to build a profession.” In order to “build piece on piece all the way through,” faculty will need to work differently. One idea is to replace the traditional supervisory relationship with a multiteam, collaborative approach wherein faculty join forces to mentor. Committing to Commitment: Aspiring Leaders and Academics Sergiovanni believes that while the job of principal is worthwhile, certain conditions must be met for success. Exemplary leaders “share the principal’s role” with everyone in the school, understanding that the collective has “a responsibility for making the principalship work.” A goal for principals, then, is to figure out how to develop collective responsibility. For the sake of promotion, junior faculty must develop “a rather narrow agenda.” Impact, Sergiovanni reflected, is covert; it is difficult to know the extent to which our efforts change anything. Budding academics will “need to know what’s important to them” and to successful leaders, so they should “share their work with them to see if it passes the practitioner test.” Highlights From Sergiovanni’s Referrals Sergiovanni’s referrals are distinguished professors, both former school administrators interested in site-based change who worked with him for about 7 years. 4 In fact, the retired superintendent found Sergiovanni to be such an inspiration that he made a career change. In contrast with Sergiovanni’s portrayal of his scholarly regimen as “unpredictable” and “sporadic,” he was appreciated for modeling just the opposite:

“Tom has a laser-like focus” and is “protective of his time.” Not surprisingly, he “keeps regenerating” as teacher and writer. Sergiovanni has “established a good balance between his work and life.” With an engaging, relaxed style, “Tom develops a personal relationship with students, finding mentoring enormously rewarding.” The belief that social organizations are a type of family through which moral leadership is expressed shapes his teaching: “Tom’s the high priest of education,” it was concluded, “with a lifetime commitment to education and a personal touch.” His students become “Sergiovannied,” in that “he changes their perspectives,” making a “genuine impact.” These professors have themselves internalized Sergiovanni’s teachings: “He walks his talk, practicing the personal leadership he writes about.” The one who left

the superintendency pursued, under his wing, new learning; the other strove to capture moral dimensions of school leadership in ways that engaged students. Central to the scholar’s vision of moral leadership is the notion that people, relationships, and community are at the center of democratic practice. While we do not know for sure if Sergiovanni would in fact “define himself as a teacher first,” he did associate “significance” with high-quality, lasting contributions to teaching.

Scholarly Ideas and Productivity Tips Based on the stories narrated by Thomas Sergiovanni and his referral

colleagues, in addition to the other top leaders—John Goodlad, John Hoyle, and Joseph Murphy and their colleagues about the driving forces behind exceptional leadership—the following tenets might serve junior faculty in their work.

Focus on schools and school improvement, and integrate your practical and theoretical learning in your research, teaching, and service.

Develop a focused agenda, write routinely, and work hard for a sustained period—select issues for which you have a passion.

Collaborate with scholars, practitioners, and students on coauthored works and shared research programs, and develop your capacity for working alone.

Be active in professional associations and on the national and local scene, but find a way to compensate for the time you spend away from your desk. Endnotes

1 Each of the four interview reports is an adaptation of the larger study (see Mullen, 2006; in press). 2 NCPEA Connexions (www.cnx.org) is an online clearinghouse for educational leadership materials/modules; submitted manuscripts are externally reviewed even though this is not a journal, meaning that published articles can be submitted elsewhere for review and publication. 3 The source of the definitions (i.e., shepherd) provided is http://dictionary.reference.com. 4 Non-identifiers are used for the referral colleagues.

References Mullen, C. A. (in press). Exceptional scholarship and democratic agendas: Interviews with John Goodlad, John Hoyle, Joseph Murphy, and Thomas Sergiovanni. Interchange: A Quarterly Review of Education. Mullen, C. A. (2004). Perceptions within the discipline: Exceptional scholarship in educational leadership and administration. NCPEA Education Leadership Review, 5(1), 8-15. [Republished/refereed again. (2006, June). NCPEA Connexions. Connexions module (m13677) (available at www.cnx.org; search term “Mullen”). Sergiovanni, T. J. (1992). Moral leadership: Getting to the heart of school improvement. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Sergiovanni, T. J. (2000). The lifeworld of leadership: Creating culture, community, and personal meaning in our schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Sergiovanni, T. J., & Starratt, R. J. (2006). Supervision: A redefinition (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Editor’s note: This interview with Thomas Sergiovanni is the forth (and final) in a series of interviews with acclaimed educational leaders conducted by Carol Mullen, The University of North Carolina at Greensboro. Past issues of School Leadership News have featured the other three interviews.

AERA Division A 2009 Outstanding Dissertation Competition

AERA Division A 2009 Outstanding Dissertation Competition

Nominations are invited for the annual American Educational Research Association (AERA) Division A competition for the best doctoral dissertation in the field of educational administration. This award is intended to recognize outstanding dissertation research appropriate to the field, including the organization and administration of schools and the work and preparation of school leaders. Studies embracing both traditional and alternative conceptualizations and methodologies are welcomed. The Committee will consider work completed and accepted by the entrant’s dissertation committee between Jan. 1, 2008 and Dec. 31, 2008.

This year, a $200 honorarium will be given to the recipient of this award in addition to formal recognition at the 2009 AERA Division A Business Meeting. In the event that two (or more) recipients are selected for this award, the honorarium will be divided equally.

Evaluation Criteria

1. Significance and clarity of problem and/or investigation.

2. Effective conceptualization and development of research questions.

3. Quality of review pertaining to relevant theoretical and research literatures.

4. Appropriateness and rigor of research design and methodology.

5. Clarity of findings/results.

6. Appropriate explanation of research impact for theory, policy, practice, and further research.

7. Quality and clarity of writing.

Submission and Selection Procedures

All submissions must be made by active, dues-paying, members of AERA. In addition, nominees must also be members of AERA—both at the time of nomination and when the

award is announced at the 2009 Division A Business meeting (please visit the AERA website, www.aera.net, for membership information). All submissions must be sent via e- mail by 8pm (EST) on December 1, 2008. Incomplete or late submissions will not be reviewed. No faxes or paper submissions will be accepted. The following information should be in separate—but attached—files:

1.

A copy of the complete dissertation, in Word or PDF format, using 12 point font. This must be double spaced.

2.

A seven-page double-spaced abstract (in MS Word or PDF format, 12-point font) that provides a concise overview of the problem, design, findings, and interpretations. Abstracts longer than seven pages will not be reviewed.

3.

Complete mailing address, e-mail address, and telephone number of author.

4.

A letter from the dissertation chair confirming the date of the author’s successful defense.

5.

An endorsement letter from a Division A member (this can be but does not have to

be the dissertation chair) familiar with the entrant’s work. After reviewing and scoring the abstracts and supporting materials, the Committee will select no more than four finalists. The dissertations that accompany these abstracts then will be forwarded to the Committee for full review. The Committee expects to complete its selection of one award and two honorable mentions by the end of January 2009. The Committee reserves the right to award to more than one recipient, and conversely, not to select a recipient for this award.

Send submissions to:

George Theoharis, AERA Division A Awards Committee Chair gtheohar@syr.edu Phone: 315-443-5271

Listening to Leaders:

Gerald L. Zahorchak on Research-Proven Educational Programs

Interviewed by Theresa C. Norton, Beth Buckheit, Johns Hopkins University, School of Education, Center for Data-Driven Reform in Education thebee@bestevidence.org

Dr. Gerald L. Zahorchak has served as Secretary of Education for the State of Pennsylvania since 2006. Prior to his nomination, Dr. Zahorchak served as Deputy Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education where he was responsible for the education of more than 1.8 million school children in the Commonwealth. The Best Evidence Encyclopedia (BEE) (www.bestevidence.org) (developed by Johns Hopkins University) interviewed Dr. Zahorchak about his experience with using research-proven approaches to improving student achievement. Following is an excerpt from that interview. The full interview transcript can be found on the BEE website.

full interview transcript can be found on the BEE website. Certainly educators are always trying to

Certainly educators are always trying to improve student achievement. Would you talk about some examples where there have been activities to improve efforts in your state using real evidence? What we’re doing falls into three categories: we’re investing, we’re building, and we’re supporting those people who are building. First of all, we’re investing. We now have in this year’s legislative under the school code, a law that includes the targets per district. We have the unique dollar amounts per student, per district. We know how much of the money is due from the state for that district to get to its full capacity. For us, capacity is defined simply as having enough personnel (especially teachers), having enough resources and materials, and having enough funds to employ research-proven programs that are sustainable and based on proven practices through good, professional development.

In addition to investing, what building are you doing to increase student achievement? To get the student results, we’re building a standards aligned system. From the state level on down, we want our standards to be clearly and vertically aligned from pre- kindergarten to 12 th grade. We want to identify the standards and the vital few things that should make up the curriculum framework. So, standards are aligned to a curriculum framework, aligned to assessment systems, aligned to best teaching practices pedagogy and emotional support practices, aligned to proven research materials and resources, aligned to best interventions for accommodations for children who struggle. Those are the six component parts.

One statewide practice that’s research proven for mathematics, that is also in the President’s Advisory Panel and the National Council of Teachers, is cooperative learning. Cooperative learning teaching strategies lead to best results when they’re done with great fidelity. In mathematics, we’re systematically rolling out some of the

macro teaching strategies for formative assessment as part of what we’re calling Pennsylvania’s Power Math approach. We’ve developed the Power Math approach in partnership with the Johns Hopkins University School of Education based on the Best Evidence Encyclopedia’s best evidence on what yields effective math results.

Would you talk more about your approach to assessments? We’re doing assessments at three levels. First, we’re doing assessments at the formative level. For example, I may have five hinge questions that make sure I know that every kid is getting the competency or concept that we’re dwelling on in today’s lesson. I’ve engineered the questions against the state’s framework.

Above that is a second layer. The school needs to have teacher, diagnostic, and benchmark assessments (benchmarked against the summit of assessments from the state). We use something that again came out of our partnership with Johns Hopkins University. We use the 4Sight Assessments that are congruently valid here in Pennsylvania against our Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA). Three hundred and ten districts collect data and compare their end results with these benchmarks.

To help us analyze the data, we’re partnering with Johns Hopkins University School of Education’s Center for Data-Driven Reform in Education, the Pennsylvania Value- Added Assessment System (PVAAS), and a Tennessee value-added model organization.

We’re using those partners with our regional service provider’s intermediate units. We’re teaching principals, teachers, intermediate units, and each other to use the data. There are ways to really analyze this data to find a system’s weaknesses or individual student problems. For example, we can use the data to perform root cause analysis to really find out if it’s a system problem with one of those six component parts at the three levels (school, classroom, or state) or if it’s a problem just unique to that individual child.

Would you talk about what this all means at the classroom level? All parts of a standards aligned system are important and equal, but the biggest part, in my view, is what goes on at the classroom level. For instance, what pedagogical tools, emotional support tools, and formative assessment tools does the teacher have? Rolling that out in a very coherent way is what we’re trying to do. We want to pick the vital few strategies for helping kids know how to think positively (emotional support), how to have responsive classrooms and routines in the building (emotional social context), and how to do the motivation of engagement with the power teaching cooperative learning kind of work (the pedagogy). When we do those kinds of things, we’re giving teachers the capacity inside their classrooms for every child to win.

As you have implemented your research-proven approach, where have you seen real improvement in student achievement? We’ve seen it across the board. When we started, we had somewhere around 50% of the kids reach proficiency in all third grades. We’re about to announce in August that this year [2008], 80% of our third grades are proficient. In the eighth grade, we have proficiency in the mid-to-high 70’s in math.

Where we see individual successes, we can pull out schools that started to employ the effective strategies. I can pull out a school in western Pennsylvania that had 9% of their children with disabilities make proficiency and now they’re at 45%. The Power Teaching experience for Furness High School is a story all unto itself. They have Power Teaching as a math experience and are having success. It’s really a project that was designed for middle school, but as we’re testing it, we’re finding that high schools need to understand more pedagogy and emotional support strategies, as well as engagement strategies, for kids. We went with Furness High School in Philadelphia and the environmental turnaround was incredible. There are pockets of schools all over PA that are doing Power Teaching, and they’re all showing evidence of turnaround.

If you look at our progress in closing the achievement gap, we’ve tripled the number of kids with disabilities in PA who are making proficient scores and we’ve doubled just about every other group. That number grows every year.

Do you have any advice for other states that would want to take a similar approach with blueprinting new architecture and creating a standards aligned system? First of all, understand it. It may take multiple repetitions before you have an “aha” moment. Understand the thinking of a standards-based system and understand that it is an antithesis of a bell curve world. Once you have that value, you can embrace the idea that all kids can get to a level of proficiency. We’re not talking about everybody slam dunking or bowling 300 games, we’re talking about levels of proficiency in math, science, social studies, and communicative skills across the 21 st century dimensions.

When we understand that all kids can get to a level that we would say is competitive, a level that can take them to high cognitive skills jobs or even expert jobs, we’ve placed our values first. If any, I think my advice would be to those around the country, if you find someone without those values, think about who’s driving your bus.

Announcing publication of the SAGE Handbook of African American Education

Edited by Dr. Linda C. Tillman, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

The Handbook of African American Education reflects historical and current perspectives on African Americans in secondary and post-secondary education. Its content promotes inquiry and development of questions, ideas and dialogue about critical practice, theory, and research about African Americans in the United States educational system.

The Handbook serves as a comprehensive collection of scholarship that presents theoretical and empirical work on historical perspectives, teaching and learning, secondary school leadership, higher education, current issues, and education policy. This comprehensive body of work will also make significant contributions to the scholarship on African Americans in the broad context of United States education and society. Learn more about this title at:

http://www.sagepub.co.uk/refbooksProdDesc.nav?level1=300&currTree=Subjects&prodI

d=Book229131

Graduate Student events at UCEA

Graduate Student Orientation- Thursday, October 30th at 1:00pm Graduate Student Job Search Seminar – Thursday, October 30th at 3:00 pm. Both sessions will be held in Scotland suite B.

Graduate Student Reception: An Evening with the Scholars- Friday, October 31st at 6:30pm in Scotland B/C. Co-sponsored by UCEA, and AERA Divisions A and L. This event will afford graduate students an opportunity to hear from outstanding scholars in educational leadership.

Saturday morning’s AERA Division A and L Graduate Breakfast is in its third year and continues to serve as a networking event for graduate students interested in learning about the American Educational Research Association (AERA), the largest, most recognized association in the field of education research. At over 15,000 in annual attendance, graduate students will learn about various leadership and research affiliated positions in addition to receiving useful strategies for making the most out of attending the conference. We thank the University of Texas’ Department of Educational Administration, chaired by Dr. Walter Bumphus for co- sponsorship of this event.

For more detailed information on these and other graduate related event at UCEA, please see the convention program online at:

http://www.ucea.org/convention/convention2008/program.html

AERA Division A member on the move!

Recent moves for members during the 2007-2008 academic year include:

Pauline Stonehouse, Ph.D., joins the Department of Educational Leadership at the University of North Dakota. Prior to completing her doctorate and making the career shift to higher education, Dr. Stonehouse served as an Assistant Head-Teacher at The Priory School in Dorking, Surrey. Her research interests and teaching responsibilities are in the area of teacher evaluation and curriculum.

AERA Division A Graduate Student Scholarship

All applications must be received electronically by January 30, 2009. Email completed applications to Tirza Wilbon White at twwhite@emory.edu.

Purpose The purpose of this scholarship is to recognize and promote scholarly excellence in aspiring doctoral students who are members of Division A and who are enrolled in an educational administration/school leadership program.

Award Awardees will receive $300 to assist with expenses related to attending the AERA annual meeting in April 2009 in San Diego, CA.

Criteria for Eligibility

Applicants must be members of AERA Division A at the time of submission.

Applicants must be current graduate students.

Annual dues for membership to AERA and Division A must be current.

Paper must be single authorship and accepted for presentation in any section of Division A at the AERA annual meeting in April 2009 (San Diego, CA).

Awardees are expected to attend the Division A Business Meeting to receive the award.

Application should include:

A letter of support from your graduate advisor (this can be signed with an electronic signature or submitted as a PDF)

Completed application form

Electronic copy of accepted proposal (not to exceed 6 pages)

Electronic copy of notification of acceptance from AERA NOTE: No incomplete application packages will be reviewed.

Evaluation Criteria

Contribution to the Field - Importance of the problem studied to the field of educational administration/school leadership

Theoretical Framework - How well the theoretical framework is supported and explained in the paper

Research Design – How appropriate and sound are the design and its execution in the paper

Quality of Literature Review- How well the paper is grounded in relevant literature

Originality of the Topic of Investigation

Scholarship Review Process

A panel of individuals on the Division A Graduate Student Committee will review the scholarship applications.

Applicants will be notified of the award recipients via email by February 27,

2009.

Questions? Contact Tirza Wilbon White, Division A Junior Graduate Student Representative

It is Time Knock down Old Walls and Create a Single Education System

John R. Hoyle Professor of Educational Administration and Future Studies Texas A&M University

Our education system has been the foundation for America’s greatness, but in 2008 it is failing to educate millions of our children and youth. Patchwork reforms without financial backing including No Child Left Behind (NCLB), have constructed walls that confine over one-half of our urban youth who become dropouts.

According to the Wall Street Journal “The profound failure of inner-city public schools to teach children may be the nation’s greatest scandal.” Presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama offer widely differing solutions to the urban school problems. Senator McCain wants more alternatives for the failing system, while Barack Obama calls for more money to help the “kids at the bottom” in the public schools. Both positions are short sighted to solve this urban school “scandal.” America is far beyond the time when band-aid or patchwork solutions of the past appeared feasible. Thus, the problem requires a radical solution—unify the American education system! Unless radical solutions are initiated the future of the public school system may implode within 20 years under the weight of its layers of patching.

While greater numbers of students are graduating from high schools in middle to high income neighborhoods, the numbers surviving urban schools has been 50% since 1970 and is likely to increase through 2020. Urban dropouts make up more than 50% of prison population; they earn thousands less per year than high school graduates and one million less than college graduates over a lifetime. The implications for this growing loss of human capital loom large when China, India, and other nations are vying for global economic supremacy. In addition, approximately one-half of urban high school graduates who enter higher education require costly remedial education to compete with classmates from upper income, second generation degree holding parents.

Well-intentioned credit-based programs such as Advanced Placement, Dual Credit, and International Baccalaureate are designed to help close the gap between high school and higher education curriculum. Education policy makers are attempting to increase student financial aid and create bridges between high schools and colleges to close the achievement gaps between economic and ethnic groups. In addition most states are requiring more rigorous high school standards in English, mathematics, science, and social studies. However, under our outdated, walled and disjointed school system less than one-half of urban students will survive these more demanding steps. The greatest hurdle for students living in poverty is progressing beyond the 9 th grade. They lack the skills in math, and language to pass the high stakes examinations for promotion to the 10 th grade. Thus, they become part of the growing “bulge” of 9 th grade failure. Less than one-half of this bulge will eventually graduate. Thus, this exodus of school failures will increase the numbers of Americans who endure grinding poverty, turn to crime and lose hope for the future. Dropouts rarely vote, participate in community projects, and become economic burdens. The United States cannot remain competitive or egalitarian by perpetuating disjointed patchwork reforms that leave behind one-half of our urban and poor children.

It is time for radical changes in America’s education system to focus on the well-

being of all American children and stop their fall into a downward spiral of failure.

The walls must be removed that separate the

intermediate, middle, junior high, high school, community college and the university.

A new unified system would provide the necessary basic skills and a learning

community for all students to find success.

The Unified System It is time to stop the urban school “scandal” and create a single unified system beginning at age three and continuing through graduate and adult education. Rather than legislators, educators and the public blaming each other for the failures at lower levels, education and other leaders would share visions of success for every child and engage business and community members in supporting an egalitarian system for all students.

Unifying the system would go far beyond current well intentioned collaborations between higher education and school districts to capture the talents of educators, university researchers, developers and policy makers. All students would be prepared to become successful in higher education or to enter a more technologically advanced job market or a military career. The unified system would begin with clusters of 150 students beginning at age three (with parental consent) through

seven. Each cluster would consist of five “fully qualified teachers,” one university or community college professor advisor, three student teachers/tutors, retired teacher volunteers, and a part-time health care professional. This team would work together

in a family environment for five years. After five years, five new teachers with

different levels of expertise would be responsible for moving the 150 students aged 8 through 12 toward more advanced learning. The final cluster would include ages 13 through 17. At this point, other scholars and specialists, including those from the community college and university would assist the teaching staff of five in teaching a wider and more challenging range of classes that rely on the internet for global research data. This final cluster would prepare students for more advanced technical and professional degree programs since approximately 50 hours of degree course work would have been accumulated since the last year of cluster two. The unified system curriculum is a seamless upward spiral based on knowledge that is age and experience appropriate as the student progresses to the highest level of the system. Dropouts would become minimal with a few years in the unified system.

The governance of the unified system would include an elected K-20 State Board of Education and a K-20 Education Department responsible for coordinating the new curriculum, instructional systems, quality assessments and funding mechanisms. This coordination would include numerous Education Centers in the state that would organize and administer the clusters discussed above. Each Education Center would include a state university, one or two community colleges, and several public schools systems within a contiguous area.

A child entering school at age three would not be left behind due to poverty or

other social realities. Let us remove the walls and unify the system. American Poet Robert Frost expressed the importance of removing unnecessary walls between people this way; “Something there is about a wall that wants it down.”

pre-schools, elementary,

Two Announcements!

Karen Crum and Steve Myran, both assistant professors of educational leadership at Old Dominion University, have been awarded a United States School Leadership Program grant. The five- year grant is a collaborative project between ODU and Northampton Public Schools which is located on the Eastern Shore of Virginia. The award will support a new generation of school leaders who will obtain their master's degrees in educational leadership and are prepared for school administrator certification and the unique demands of rural school leadership. Crum (PI) and Myran's (Co-PI) initiative features specially designed courses that meet Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium standards and Virginia accrediting standards, as well as address the identified needs of the school division. The project also includes a strong mentoring component, plus a three- semester internship that provides in-depth, authentic experiences. This grant is one of twenty-two awarded nationally in 2008. Other grant recipients are highly encouraged to send in details about their projects to share with Division A.

Editorial Planning, a refeered journal and the official journal of the International Society for Educational Planning (ISEP), invites submission of original manuscripts for publication consideration. Linda Lemasters, associate professor at The George Washington University,is editor. The journal serves as a meeting place for both the scholar-researcher and the practitioner-educator through the presentation of articles that have practical relevance to current issues revolving around educational planning. ISEP was founded in 1970 and holds an annual conference that brings together researchers and practitioners interested in issues surrounding educational planning on an annual basis. This year's Annual Conference took place in October 2008 in Istanbul, Turkey. Next year's conference will be held in Savannah, Georgia. Individuals who are interested in submitting a manuscript for review to Educational Planning or who would like to learn more about ISEP should visit http://www.isep.info/ for more information.

Announcing a New Information Age Publishing Book Series:

Educational Leadership for Social Justice

Series Editor: Jeffrey S. Brooks, Auburn University. Series Editorial Team: Denise Armstrong, Brock University; Ira Bogotch, Florida Atlantic University; Sandra Harris, Lamar University; Whitney Sherman, Virginia Commonwealth University; George Theoharis, Syracuse University

Contact Jeffrey S. Brooks at: jeffreysbrooks@auburn.edu for more information about this series.

The purpose of this book series is to promote research on educational leadership for social justice. Specifically, we seek edited volumes, textbooks, and full-length studies focused on research that explores the ways educational leadership preparation and practice can be a means of addressing equity concerns throughout P-20 education. Possible topics include, but are not restricted to the following issues:

Race and educational leadership

Class and educational leadership

Gender and educational leadership

Ethics and educational leadership

Ethnicity and educational leadership

Culture and educational leadership

LGBTQ issues and educational leadership

Equity and educational leadership

Access to educational leadership

International and Comparative perspectives on leadership for social justice

Research methodologies and educational leadership for social justice

And many, many others

please

contact us with your ideas and questions!

Proposal and Manuscript Submission Process

We invite you and your colleagues to submit a book proposal of approximately 5-8

pages. All proposals will undergo editorial team and/or blind peer review. Proposals should include the following sections:

1. Introduction and overview: Explain the scope of the book project and describe how it is grounded in and extends the extant educational leadership for social justice research base, broadly conceived. Proposals should be aligned with the purpose of the Information Age Publishing Educational Leadership for Social Justice Book Series.

2. Summary of contents: Provide a proposed table of contents, brief synopsis of each chapter, and an approximate page count for each chapter, including any references and appendices.

3. Timeline: The timeline should include initial phases of the publication

process that will lead to initial submission of chapters. From that point, accepted manuscripts will undergo editorial and blind peer review. Please note that while we encourage many kinds of proposals, including textbooks, edited volumes, and full-length studies, we expect all proposals to be grounded in

relevant and appropriate inquiry and perspectives. We look forward to hearing

from you!

School Leadership News, Fall 2008 17

Globalization and Educational Leadership: International Perspectives

In order to offer a more nuanced international perspective, this Point/Counterpoint feature includes responses to questions from educators in three countries. Dr. Esmeralda Cunanan is Executive Director of the Philippine-American Educational Foundation (PAEF), based in Manila. Dr. Francis Cimene is Dean of the Graduate School at Capitol University in Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines. Michael F. Watts is an Associate at the Centre for Educational Research and Development in the Von Hügel Institute, St. Edmund's College, Cambridge, England and Co-convenor of the Social Justice Special Interest Group of the British Educational Research Association (BERA). Dr. Anthony H. Normore is an Associate Professor in the Educational Administration/Leadership Program in the College of Education, California State University-Dominguez Hills, United States. Each of these scholars responded to these questions separately. Questions were posed and answers compiled by Dr. Jeffrey S. Brooks, Auburn University. An abbreviated version of this interview was previously published in the UCEA Review (Volume XLIX Number 2, Summer 2008 available at:

www.ucea.org).

From your perspective, what are some of the most pressing educational issues in your country?

Michael F. Watts: Perhaps the most pressing educational issue in the UK is that there are pressing educational issues. After all, we have one of the world's richest economies and, whilst simply throwing money at a problem is unlikely to resolve it, money nonetheless removes many of the constraints other countries have to contend with. The economy, though, does frame some of the concerns I have as someone who researches higher education policy and practice—particularly the on- going drive to widen participation beyond the historic middle class base of higher education. There has always been an economic imperative in making higher education more accessible to more people. This can be seen at the global level as more and more countries, including those in the Global South invest more and more money in their higher education sectors (which, of course, also involves sending increasing numbers of students to study in countries such as the UK and paying full international fees to do so). The argument, at its simplest, runs something like this: the greater earnings potential of university graduates enhances the economy so more university graduates will enhance the economy further still. Running alongside this argument in the UK is the government's desire to boost the newer knowledge-based industries to counter the decline of the old manufacturing industries as jobs are shipped overseas where production costs are lower. These newer industries supposedly demand the higher levels of skills and knowledge supposedly provided by a higher education, which thereby fuels the drive to increase participation. There is a small but increasing body of research indicating the falsity of the economic argument (after all, whilst it holds true to an extent, it cannot just run and run until the country is full of graduates all of whom are busy boosting the economy) and there is not much more evidence supporting the industry concern for more graduates (although there are now more graduates trying to pay off their student debts whilst working in non-graduate-level employment). There is a second policy imperative for widening participation: to tackle the

social injustices that are sustained and reproduced by access and non-access to higher education. However—and at the risk of skipping too lightly over a vast sociological literature—socially-embedded attitudes towards education, and particularly here higher education, are not always easy to overcome. Moreover, the rapid expansion of higher education over the past few decades has done little to open up graduate-level opportunities: those who get 'good' degrees from 'good' universities are more likely to get 'good' jobs than those do not get to go to the 'good' universities. In short, the same problems of a stratified society exist but a few more people have been given a higher education fig leaf to cover that embarrassment. And, as students are required to pay more and more for their higher education in both direct and indirect costs, those fig leaves are becoming more and more expensive. This is certainly not to deny the potential benefits of higher education (and it certainly is not an argument against widening participation). From my perspective, though, there are three significant problems here. The first is that those who are least able to recognise the shortcomings of current higher education policies may well be those who are least likely to benefit from them: lured into higher education on the promise of better employment prospects, they may well find themselves paying off their debts in non-graduate employment. Secondly, partly in order to prime the higher education pump, government policy is causing schools to become like Fordist production lines squeezing out teacher initiatives and, with an alarming predictability, further disengaging far too many of the very students these policies are intended to help. Yet, having been put off their compulsory education, these students are expected to aspire towards a higher education. Thirdly, higher education can provide many benefits (such as second opportunities to engage with learning, acquire greater literacy and numeracy skills and so on) but it is a very expensive means of doing so and the resources being pumped into it could, perhaps, be better spent in other ways—such as providing greater resources for students to return to part-time study when, older and wiser, they can more readily appreciate its benefits. Anthony H. Normore: In broad terms the most pressing educational issues in the U.S are directly linked to the economy, politics, literacy, health and welfare, social and cultural understanding, moral responsibilities as global citizens, and issues of social justice. From my perspective, public education is the government activity with the most profound and far-reaching effect on the national character. It seems that attempts to improve American schools and the educational system have garnered much attention at the national level with far fewer answers than questions and more conflict than consensus about teaching, learning, schooling and education. In more specific terms the issues begin with early childhood education to K-12 to postsecondary education and exist in rural and urban settings. These range from issues of literacy, social skill development, health and nutritional assets, homelessness, affordable housing, poverty, accessible and affordable postsecondary education, preventions and interventions for struggling students, inadequate resources and funding, overcrowded classrooms, unsafe schools, and schools in need of extensive repair. Other issues are equally as pressing. For example, throughout the education system our students have limited understanding of the world, our global role, and place insufficient importance on basic geographic skills that might enhance their knowledge. In my opinion many lack relevant and action-oriented learning experiences that require action and commitment at the individual and collective levels to everyday life and local and global issues. If this trend continues, surely our students will be unprepared for the increasingly global future. The same applies to

education for sustainability for balancing today’s needs with future consequences, environmental degradation, and issues of social justice. Esmeralda Cunanan: The Philippines needs an educational system that not only meets the national priorities but are sustainable with the available national resources, and that lead towards the international objectives of quality education for all which should start at basic education. The continuing erosion of achievement in the system, including the dismal performance of Filipino students in the regional tests in math and sciences, brought about by other problems of a contributing nature such as population increase, lack of resources, poor management of schools, lack of proper preparation of teachers in content and teaching methodologies illumine the downbeat impact of basic education on student performance or today's problem of underachievement. Francis Cimene: The most pressing educational issues: (a) many in-coming students especially in the basic education (due to an ever increasing population) but not enough teachers, school buildings, and books; (b) Poverty hinders children to go to school (and the number is increasing every year): they don’t have money for fare, tuition, school supplies; they have to work to augment the family income to meet the basic needs; (c) The educational system is faulty. Students perform poorly in national achievement tests. One reason is pedagogy. Higher order thinking skills are not mastered. What are educational leaders (administrators, teachers, community leaders, researchers, etc.) doing to address these issues, and what more could they do?

Watts: Educational leaders in schools in publicly-funded schools are extremely constrained in what they can do by the heavy hand of government regulating what goes on in the classroom - even down to the minute details of lesson planning. Greater freedom is given to the new academies which are (very) partly-funded by private individuals in some awful experiment to encourage philanthropy but that freedom is typically given to the would-be-philanthropist rather than to the professional educators. In the higher education sector, government funding is partly determined by institutional efforts to increase participation. Within these constraints, educational and community leaders continue to protest against such authoritarian policies but they are rarely listened to by the highly centralised government we currently have. More positively, educational and community leaders continue to lead by example, encouraging young people to engage with and benefit from the educational opportunities (including higher education opportunities) available to them. As is so often the case, though, there is a fine line to tread between raising people's aspirations and holding out unrealistic expectations. Nonetheless, there is evidence to show the benefits of such role-modelling and, in much of my own work, for example, it has been encouraging to see many young people aspiring to higher education for non-financial reasons. As for educational researchers, I often find myself at loggerheads with colleagues in this field. All too often, it seems, many researchers (as well as other educationalists) are too intent on working towards widening participation without pausing to query why they should be doing this. There is a lot of good research being done but not enough of it, to my mind, asks the fundamental question: What are the real benefits of widening participation in higher education? Normore: In the U.S. state-level policy and the market force are generally the linchpins that reinforce university control in the area of teacher education and

leadership development, training and licensure programs. Earlier widespread complacency about these programs among educational leaders is being challenged as veteran members of the professoriate retire and new faculty members begin to assume the reins of the profession. In my opinion, educational and community leaders continue to battle with top-down policies in efforts to garner resources and funding to support effective education programs. From my personal experience as a former public school teacher and administrator I do believe that the larger majority of educators want children to leave school prepared to contribute to their communities in a positive and meaningful way. I’ve seen school leaders engaged in active partnerships with community-based organizations and outreach services on how to best address the needs of their service areas. On the other hand, as a professor of educational leadership I’ve witnessed widespread resistance of partnerships and mini “turf wars” created between school districts and universities. Cunanan: The Philippine government through congressional allocation has allocated a higher budget for the Dept of Education. The thrust of the Department of Education is capacity-building. However, there is no system in place to achieve this. Cimene: Administrators are trying their best to make use of the limited resources; teachers give their share of personally helping the students through they are underpaid; with limited learning materials, teachers try to innovate. Sad to say innovations are not fast and sufficient enough to create an impact on the kind of education the Philippines need to move forward. The government is putting in new secretaries (Deped and CHED) from time to time (say less than 2 years) to troubleshoot the problems. We are expecting two new secretaries this year. What more could they do? The constitution spells out clearly that every Filipino should have access to quality education that will result in improved quality of life for all citizens. If all stakeholders from government, educational sectors, church, business sectors, families, and individuals will think critically at this point and think about the value of education to obtain the quality of life, there is hope in solving these problems. The government should increase the budget for education; the education sector should make education relevant to what we really need to obtain that quality of life we are aiming for; at least someone has to start/initiate and others have to cooperate. Do you have any particular thoughts about educational administrators' roles, as they relate to these issues?

Watts: The real problem for educational administrators is that they are hampered by government constraints. Moreover, given the social justice aspects of widening participation, it can be all too easy to fall victim to accusations of seeking to perpetuate social injustice if the bases of widening participation policies are questioned. It should be remembered, too, that the social justice argument is very seductive. After all, who does not want to promote greater opportunities for those who are disadvantaged? Yet this, to me at least, seems to be the real issue: Who are we (and I take the liberty here of assuming that the audience is educationally privileged) to determine what opportunities should be promoted for those we may consider to be disadvantaged? This is a highly complex social arena to enter but I cannot help feeling that those very people we may consider to be disadvantaged may have greater opportunities to benefit from their education if we could spend more time listening to them and their aspirations and a little less time being told by government what is best for them. But the government seems reluctant to allow anyone else to have much of a say.

Normore: As teachers of prospective educational leaders we must get involved, spend time in schools, learning to understand and appreciate the daily routines of our students,and work as genuine partners to help secure adequate funding to support effective programs for our students. In my opinion, we need to continue searching for ways to consistently support increased funding for programs that are targeted to disadvantaged students, students with disabilities, and other programs that benefit our children. Adequate funding for education is very important to ensure that young people have access to effective programs. It’s reasonable to assume that our programs can only be effective for our students if they are prepared for an increasingly global future. As educators, policymakers, and members of the local, national and global community it's only fitting to embrace opportunities and experiences that provide skill sets to our young people for understanding the relationships among people and places that provide critical contexts for world events. I’m sure we’d all agree that “none of us is as smart as all of us”. Cunanan: Educational administrators must possess the knowledge, skills, and abilities with respect to effective teaching/pedagogies to successfully empower and support their teachers. The integrity of educational administrators must be unquestionable. Administrators at all levels should not allow themselves to be "corrupt," which is a widespread issue in the Philippines. Cimene: Educational administrators roles are to influence policy-makers to make the policies that would address the issues raised. We have many sound laws and they are even copied by other countries. Administrators should be innovative and creative in the implementation of these educational laws such as the empowerment act of the school administrators. Administrators see to it that objectives of the school have corresponding plan of action, but these should be monitored and evaluated periodically to check whether we are achieving our objectives. The low performance of our students should be a wake up call for the school administrators.

Should educators have a local, national, global perspective on their work, or some combination of these? Watts: It is something of a commonplace to note that technology and travel are making the world smaller and that hitherto faraway places are now easier to reach. Higher education, whether through distance learning programmes or the diasporas of international students, has a potentially important part to play in this global phenomenon and in the general sense that intercultural contacts can be beneficial, this would seem to be a good thing (although see, for example, Rebekah Nathan's My Freshman Year: what a professor learned by becoming a student for an anthropological critique of some of the more optimistic claims held out in the name of international studenthood). What, though, of those responsible for designing and implementing higher education programmes? As I suggested above, there is a growing impetus to adapt higher education to the dynamics of globalisation so that it can prepare students to take their places in the interconnected local-national-international economies. In response to the never-ending complaints of industry that students are graduating from their universities ill-equipped for work, there is a growing trend to develop courses specifically tailored to certain professions. This, of course, brings us back to the vocational origins of the university: in medieval times it was a place to train the doctors, lawyers and priests of the future; at the beginning of the 21st Century it is now also training people for many more professions. With increasing importance being attached to workplace learning, many of these courses will have been designed with at least some consideration of the local economy. Furthermore, as

higher education seeks to engage a wider cross section of society, it must respond to the needs of students who, for a wide range of reasons, do not wish to study away from home as young middle class students have historically done. There is, then, a growing demand for the educational services of the 'local' university in the UK (similar, say, to the community colleges in the US). Thus, the economic and social drivers for widening participation demand that higher education have a local perspective. This local perspective, though, is just one amongst several: higher education has to respond to national demands (whether they be from students or government) and needs to remain located on the global stage. We should not overlook the economic arguments of widening participation (providing that we do not make fiscal fetishes of them) because increasing the individual's earning potential not only satisfies these economic arguments but also the social justice arguments. If the social justice argument for widening participation is to have any real meaning, those students who may otherwise drift towards their local universities should be encouraged to look further afield (after all, excellence - however that may be defined - cannot always be located locally) even if they eventually conclude that their local universities offer them their best opportunities. Educators therefore need to have appropriate perspectives of higher education's various purposes if they are to negotiate the potential conflicts between the economic and social justice arguments for widening participation. Normore: Absolutely—a combination! I cannot stress enough the power of global knowledge and appreciation. We need to increase global learning in our schools, at our homes and in our communities. I recently read a study conducted by Roper Public Affairs in 2007. One statement in particular struck me with great force. It read “Americans are far from alone in the world, but from the perspective of many young Americans, we might as well be”. From interviews conducted among a nationwide representative sample of 510 adults age 18-24 in continental U.S. the results revealed the following: only 37% of young Americans can find Iraq on a map – even though the U.S. troops have been there since 2003; 6 in 10 young Americans do not speak a foreign language fluently; 20% of young Americans think Sudan is in Asia (It’s the largest country in Africa); 48% of young Americans believe the majority population in India is Muslim (It’s Hindu – by a landslide); half of young Americans cannot find New York on a map. In a 2005 speech given in Seattle for the National Association for Independent Schools, Fareed Zakaria, Editor of Newsweek, garnered much attention when he stated that the most important thing that schools can do in America is to make people aware that understanding the world is very much part of the requirement of being an educated person. He went on to say that if we look at what's happening in India, China and Brazil, we are seeing the rise of a new world, where these countries see themselves as equals…But we're a country where very few people…know much about the world. In my opinion, as educators, public servants and human beings we all have a responsibility to our students, to our profession, to our communities, to our nation and to our world. Our schools have a responsibility to equip students to live in the global community – to teach students global awareness about the social, political, and cultural issues facing people. Whether identifying geographic locations, discussing political ideology, culture, or day-to-day life, most American students do not know how people in other countries live. This is a critical disadvantage to students who will be joining a job market heavily influenced by international economics and politics. Cunanan: To avoid parochial thinking, there should be a combination of local, international and global perspectives. A contextualized set up with a combination of

these perspectives would be progressive response to the changing times. Cimene: Although global framework should be appreciated, what we need now is the local perspective. Once we have stabilized our own issues, that’s the time we can explore global perspectives. Educators should see to it that students learn how to think. The best way to teach them how to think is to give them problems to solve. The process of coming up with the right solutions should be the gauge whether students learn how to think. This is the kind of perspective we need so that we can solve our own problems.

Is there any tension between these perspectives or do they co-exist harmoniously?

Watts: Cooperation and competition are often the two sides of the same coin. Higher education institutions in the UK broadly have local, national and international significance - although there is some inevitable jostling around these distinctions. The problem (or, rather, one of many problems) is that the competition for students and for funding is all too often overshadowed by status. This is, in part, a historical problem as the newer universities with a greater remit to serve local needs are all too often seen as the poor cousins of the older universities. Nor is this merely a figure of speech: the older universities are more likely to be more research intensive and are therefore considered to be more prestigious and also attract more of the government funding that is allocated on the basis of research output. In short, until such time as greater recognition is given to those institutions meeting more local needs, the stratification of higher education will continue. Normore: This is certainly a very thought-provoking question. I think we'd all agree that it's difficult to make sense of what's happening around us unless we are aware of the impact of the global context on daily events and actions. I can only reiterate the importance for educators in America - and around the world - to understand their own situation in a wider context and to appreciate what each other has to contribute. We all benefit greatly when we can make connections between local and global events and understand causes of global inequality, justice and solidarity. If there are indeed tensions among perspective one way to work through these tensions is to focus on our own personal development by identifying common interests, and develop solidarity with diverse communities throughout the world. In this way, we can avoid "myopic" or "hyperopic" views of ourselves and learn to appreciate that the world is much larger than our immediate context. Cunanan: for most Filipinos (especially those with no international perspective), tension could exist amongst these perspectives (especially by nature, humans resist change). Could they co-exist harmoniously? I believe they could. Cimene: There are circumstances when these perspectives clashed and there are circumstances that they co-exist harmoniously.

How can educators, educational communities, researchers and more importantly students benefit from international collaborations?

Watts: It is fairly easy to address this question with the fairly hackneyed statement that international collaborations not only enable a greater sharing of knowledge but also promote greater understanding of other countries and cultures. Hackneyed as it may be, the importance of this point should not be dismissed lightly and higher education can play an important role in addressing it. However, there is another aspect that should be considered here: along with understanding more about other countries and cultures, international collaborations - where they work well - can also

initiate the sort of reflexivity that enables a greater understanding of our own countries and cultures. Whether the university student is an eighteen year old leaving home for the first time, an older student carving out the chance to study part-time at her local university or an international student travelling to a distant country, engaging with higher education typically involves leaving behind at least some old certainties and comforts. The opportunity to enter a new social environment holds out the opportunity to take stock of who we really are and what we really want to be - to take a good look at ourselves (even if that can only be done in between all the rushing around this new environment). At the same time, it typically demands a different and deeper approach to learning that involves more than the simple acquisition of knowledge. Taken together, these aspects of higher education - the opportunity to enter a new environment and the requirement to engage with new forms of learning - can combine to form a reflexive catalyst from which a new understanding of our own selves may emerge. It can be a very unsettling experience but such reflexivity is an important element of the higher education experience. Normore: I’d like to respond to this question from the perspective of educational leadership. It seems reasonable for these research communities to engage in comparative research studies of leadership preparation and training programs in diverse countries outside the United State. While several international scholars are engaged in the international research on leadership programs in other countries I do not often see the research published in American journals. Instead most of this research appears in prestigious international journals such as Educational Management, Administration and Leadership; Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy; Journal of Educational Administration; European Journal of Education; International Studies in Educational Administration. I believe that in order to fully capture the impact of international collaborations, we could benefit from seeing more of the global research appear in American journals. Our sense of ourselves, as well as what others think of us, often rests on the extent to which we live up to our virtues. By engaging our educational communities and our students in international research, they can harness understanding of responsible leadership and learn the reflective practices that can filter throughout school system and connect to local, national, and global awareness. As professional educators, I believe it is our duty to engage students in meaningful and critical discourse that focuses on ecological, political, economic, cultural and social issues. In doing this we harness the energies and imaginations of our students in the reconstruction of life in our neighborhoods, our communities, and our larger society. Cunanan: All stakeholders must be open to intenationalization efforts. In general, Filipinos welcome international collaboration. Cimene: International collaborations can help us see the big picture. We will be learning from their best practices. For instance, I believe the Philippines can learn so much from the Singaporians in terms of how education created an impact on their political climate, we can also learn entrepreneurship from the Chinese, innovations from the US, Japan, etc.

From the Editorial Team Hello all! It is with some regret that I announce this as the final issue of School Leadership News that I will contribute to as editor. First and foremost I thank Linda Tillman for her tremendous support of the newsletter. I also thank the editorial team that has made these last several issues happen: Gaetane Jean- Marie and Curt Adams of the University of Oklahoma; Whitney Sherman, Virginia

Commonwealth University; Karen Crum, Old Dominion University, and; Danna Beatty, Tarleton State University. If you have any comments, ideas or announcements, please contact me at: jeffreysbrooks@mac.com until a new editor is named.

Thank you for your support! Jeffrey S. Brooks, Auburn University

Call for Support Our goal continues to be expanding the content and distribution of the

Division A Newsletter. To make our Newsletter a “must read” for our entire membership, we are seeking:

commentaries that focus on topical issues

perspectives that provide readers with insights about Division A concerns

critiques and recommendations to improve the newsletter content and format

information and announcements to include in future issues

volunteers to serve as reporters, historians, and so forth

calls for proposals and papers relevant to Division A members

Submissions or suggestions for improving the newsletter should be sent to Linda Tillman ltillman@email.unc.edu or to Jeffrey S. Brooks jeffreysbrooks@mac.com. Please help us keep each other well informed about Division A and our fields of interest.

Submission Guidelines and Deadlines In addition to the sections included in this issue, School Leadership News periodically considers publication of brief articles on issues that are trenchant and of interest to Division A members. Restrictions for publication will apply (preferably no more than 1,000 words or 5 to 7 pages of double-spaced text) in order to meet newsletter page limitations (2-3 pages). The editors reserve the right to edit for style and length. Suggestions for articles will be accepted from Division A officers, committee chairs and members, and members of Division A and related Divisions or SIGs. Please contact Jeffrey S. Brooks at jeffreysbrooks@mac.com for specific information about specific details and deadline.

We invite you to browse both the AERA Division A Web Site and the Archives of the Division A Newsletter, both available at www.aera.net.

Division A Officers and Committee Chairs

Vice President Linda C. Tillman University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill

Immediate Past President Rodney T. Ogawa University of California-Santa Cruz

Secretary (2006-2008) Michelle D. Young University Council for Educational Administration

Division A 2009 Program Chair Len Foster, Washington State University

Section I (Leadership) Pamela Salazar, University of Nevada, Las Vegas and Kathleen Jorissen, Western Carolina University

Section 2 (School Organization & Effects) Curt Adams, University of Oklahoma

Section 3 (School Improvement) Rosusan Bartee, University of Mississippi

Section 4 (Leadership Development) Paul Pitre, Washington State University

Section 5 (Leadership Development) Mark Gooden, University of Cincinnati

Affirmative Action Chair Grayson Noley, University of Oklahoma

Membership Committee Rosemary Papa, Northern Arizona University

Nominating Committee James Earl Davis, Temple University, Chair Arnold Danzig, Arizona State University Betty Merchant, University of Texas-San Antonio

Dissertation Awards Committee George Theoharis, Syracuse University

Newsletter Editorial Team Jeffrey Brooks, Auburn University Gaetane Jean-Marie and Curt Adams, University of Oklahoma; Whitney Sherman, Virginia Commonwealth University; Karen Crum, Old Dominion University; Danna Beatty, Tarleton State University

Ad Hoc International Committee Paula Cordeiro, University of San Diego

Graduate Student Planning Committee Andrea Evans, Northern Illinois University

Graduate Student Representatives Danielle Hayes, University of Texas-Austin Tirza White, Emory University

Division A Webmaster Scott McLeod Iowa State University

Practitioner Committee Margaret Terry Orr, Bank Street College