Scribd Logo
Fazer o upload

Bem-vindo(a) ao Scribd!

  • Introdução - Advocacy Leadership

    Enviado por

    Alexandre Duarte
    5 visualizações11 páginas
    Anderson, Gary. Advocacy Leadership. Introdução.

    Direitos autorais

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Formatos disponíveis

    PDF ou leia online no Scribd

    Você considera este documento útil?

    Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

    Denunciar este documento
    Anderson, Gary. Advocacy Leadership. Introdução.

    Direitos autorais:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Baixe no formato PDF ou leia online no Scribd
    Sinalizar o conteúdo como inadequado
    5 visualizações11 páginas

    Introdução - Advocacy Leadership

    Enviado por

    Alexandre Duarte
    Anderson, Gary. Advocacy Leadership. Introdução.

    Direitos autorais:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Baixe no formato PDF ou leia online no Scribd
    Sinalizar o conteúdo como inadequado
    de 11
    Alluights reserved, No part of his boot may the Group informa business jeation Networs In. ‘Sts of America on aci-fee paper by Walsworth Publishing yrbe rp oe Series Editor Introduction ‘MICHAEL. W APPLE Foreword ‘Advocates, Managers, Leaders, and Socal Entrepreneurs? The Future of Educational Leadership JANELLESCOTT Acknowledgments 1 School Reform, Authenticity, and Advocacy ‘Authentic Leadership “The New Economy of Schooling ing Leaders the New Economy ‘Toward ar Authentic Distribution of Leadership 6 ‘Toward a Post-Reform Agenda Appendix A Notes References: Index Contents 37 2B m 137 187 189 193 207 Introduction grounded in large part in a new global ‘model du jour. shift in emphasis from gineering, and a deficit, longer has any a good one. it a high-stakes account- ial reforms rather than promote a balanced id achieve a just and democratic society In the ified ary scholarship on school reform. “Those promoting’ ices won't have to look far for evidence that market and test hools of authent teaching and leading practices and making schools more racially segregated and period in whicl falling are not pe to amass evidence ‘convince the skeptical reader that unless educators a orters of public schools become a stronger countervs ice of business and conservative logical ip. Educa urban settings, are experiencing a new work ind test scores are taking center: -managers that are increasingly expected to less like educators and more like MBAs the test, leaders are expected to ead to is exercised though higl cers are becomi develop a new “s While teachers increasingly the test. Since. . policy advecates, a is particularly true forleade's as NCLB, but rather to the end of an extx schools on a stort- and long-term paralyzed rights saying goes, than raising stud ry boundaries, or share saphy. The feld of educa probably more most ofthis tendency. The results that earning a dactorate to often ing more and more about less and less, We each have a well-honed the larger picture n of knowledge. And: has emerged. to recognize that redi if not more, than bounded area $0 shi zaw heavily on more empirical research to make ane toy apy lse draw on personal narrative and discourse analysis to co textualize ype of haat make my atgument more grounded, m not sure what hes ting dots that are currently left nected is worth tke tsk of igher rences. This atop te ea ten By goal of challenging the ideological nature of ahs attempts to pass for “evidence-based” reform. {ost reformers want us to believe that see Iie ina postidea form is merely a pragmatic attempt rac ue thatthe current approach to school eform is ‘also true that ideologically inspired reforms are they always successful: local contexts, resistarces, and ‘moslfy their intent. This current reform, which has rede ro Powtr by critiquing public schooling, has already built a record thar reformers are finding difficult to deiend, luthermore, current chool reform isnot ideologically coherent Mixed in mp these largely corporateinspired reforms are some reloore pigh schools that progresive educators have promoted for sea JPel Klein and Al Sharpton have exemplified this “hy approach by creating [he Equality project that promotes New York Gity reforms carrying on the {c8#¢y ofthe civil rights movement, Many thoughtfl ca agues and friends both in universities and schools agree with former Secretary of Education Rod attack the soft bigotry of low expecta- schools to be more responsive to those comm mities While defending or critiquing the current reform model has become small a dy Of ite, erties appear to have litle o offer as an allem Mont provide a laundry list of changes tht would make the ng a ion less flawed, while others seem to imp {0 past compensatory or remedial programs th low-income students and students of color, “post-reform” agenda might for 4 new vision of what a ok like and how se might get there, advecates ange will have few toc to work with. While I respectfully disgree with defenders of thee "my proposal fora postreform era will retain some ofthe current reform, In creating my own hbo cd way” of “new Democra int reform paradigm, entially progressive aspects ‘ecommendations, [aim not ‘approaches. Such approaches al backsliding, boughtinto ll social sectors, including sky, 2006), see my proposal : cheap reforms taat rely on bully pulpits, paper and pencil and prvi autonomy an book is orgs ind school reform direction of great els ofthe system, and greater a nd society ABrief Ci strategies from below in the form should have to tolerate lec groups that our curtext economic model reneed i sake of low-income urban children of colo th have generally been de make the current system inauths ‘teen the state-controlled pu Nor will more standardized tests cause tea and authentic academic exper to narrow the curric ichers to provide more re 1s of NCLB have become increasingly common, what have not ely analyzed are the s for school leadership in such a sys- tem. The current state of school leadership and the prepar leaders rein need of serious reevaluation according to critiques such as the Levine Report that they fel are Larson & Murtadha, 200: in this book as advocacy leaders The new cadre of managerial advocates aga leaders, many of whom are young and nonedu hhad just discovered the syone who has flown oF read about our new privatized army (Sea or transparent, Pul lanced discussion oftheir benefits and liabilities (see defense of bureaucracy), ‘myself have struggled within and railed against the publieschool reaucracy for decades. We also bi tobereformed by bein im social advocacy national pol the genuine goal of cre ss rigid on some issues, more demo space we have within which (o create a more just and democratic society. nodels developed by at the University of Chicago during the mi large gap between the theot 1d the actual imp “There is a growing body of data to show that where implemented, ne a country where necliberal educational walkouts and pressures we absence of leadership preparation programs that >rovide an analysis of this global shift in political economy an jors for public school what appears to be a logic of logic sd system and appro; spreneurial leader. Those who are more sk ‘hegemony of neoliberal ideology. ‘The Incredible Shrinking Life World o System World joling and the Colonizing, While neoliberals have appro, que of bureauera Past reforms that created the factory model school ba monotonous experience and the world view of schools as bureaucratic and inauthentic is sives throughout the 20th century. Callahan (1962) and others have documented how business leaders in the early 20th century created thefactory- mode! school that processed and measured children tl measured product qu ‘of meritocracy, and White fight to the su system: One has well-esourced schools, authentic instruction for middle classe schools, less well-qualified eachers,. and working cass, groups that consist disproportionatly of children of color. To hear some neoliberal commentators on educational reform, one would think that the American public school systema was designed by th boro, not y policy makersar+ onceagain being lobbied bythe bi icy solutions, but this time they seem to have a new too ance of the business community and policy makers has resulted business-orientedrestructaring schemes involving merit pay statistical control, site-basec| management, high-stakes assessments, incentive seremes, privatization, and marke Though some ofthese business reforms mi if properly trans: ferred between sectors, many believe the cure has so far been worse than the ioughtfully reform schools will have to address the cteation of schools as authentic social spaces in which students, their parents, school professionals, andthe surrounding community are deeply undeistood, respected, and empowered. Some scholars, like Cuban (2004), suggest I may be b atthe track record of business reforn and while believing by be parti such as vouchers site-based! management, total quality management (7QM), and experiments with school-business partnerships in the 1980s have either not been effective or popular or have not taken hold. However, there is glowing evidence that we may not be looking in the right places for where these reforms are taking hold. Burch (2005) documents an unprecedented privatizaticn that has already taken place in outsourcing of services in school districts around the country. Balls (2007) and Gewirt’ (2002) research on matketiatien and 1g a dead horse, as not been good, ss reformers will persist, does not think th Furthermore, and p: s testing linked to standa ‘ment and autonomy (MeNe Looking atthe relative fa 2s, such as school business partnerships and TQM to capture the ways ideology spreads among school professionals and the general population. Business and. Fcommon sense in educatio ade high-stakes accountabi e ground had been laid for a business logic of outcomes-based measurement of product cuality. While promoted as an antidote to bureaucracy, current high-stakes account ability systems have resulted in the cancerlike growth of the system world, and the shrinking ef the life world of schools (Habermas, 1987; Sergiovanni, 2000) the syst2m worlds the set of rules, procedures, accountability measures, ' required for the effective and efficient functioning of an arning that occur in classrooms and throughout the school and commu nity. At present, in too many schools, these two dimensions of our schools are ‘on of authentic activities inclassroomsand of relationships among students, teachers es. ic schools that serve low-income children have 1 developed sense of internal accountability that functions within the life world of the schools. imore, and Siskin, (2003) these internal forms of ac~ beliefs about teacaing and learn- ing, their shared understanding of who their students are, the routines they develop for getting their work done, and the external expectations from parenls, communities, and administrative agencies under which they work. (p.3) ‘This life world level of accountability is where authentic forms of accountabi ity operate, because they are the spaces in which a community of professional pparents, and cam: wembers come to agreement abou the well-being of have always been those that bring ‘coherence to these varicus forms of accountability, and the best leaders have known how to maintain balance and coherence among them. ‘The current reform movement has added new external forms of accountability, incloding high-stakes testing, the discipline of the market, schoo! reeo ition ifannual targets are not a W system world of high-stakes formal accountability measures has made it more difficult to achieve coherence and balance among the various forms of cccount- ability: Teaching staffs, p-ncipals, and often parents are finding that thei shared understandings of good teaching and learning and other aspects of the life world of the school clash with the demands of the formal accountabi authentic schools are hard to sustain overtime, sustainability depe fon a certain amount of s ability. The current frenetic churn of policy changes awakes sustaining good schools more difficulty. While high-stakes accountability targets underperforming schools in an attempt to “motivate” teachers ‘0 teac does so with a punitive, zero tolerance ing of what motivates professionals. ‘This imbalance between the system and life world of school ‘overbureaucratization of schooling has hada si reforms claim to eliminate bureaucracy, and indeed Chicago, New York, and others, we have seen infamous bureaucracies reduced dramatically “However, these bureaucracies have largely been replaced by a system of steering from a distance” in whick: high-stakes testing and incentive systems drive the life world of schools in more effective, but also more distorting ways, Whereas, school professionals found the old bureaucracy to be maddening, they could ‘usually—for good or ill—keep it from encroaching into the classroom. Tisis no longer the case, as curriculum standardization and high-stakes testing regimes force teachers to use scriped curricula and gear thei teaching more clesely to the test, which often leadsto “gaming” the system, Furthermore, as nonprofit and for-profit partnerships and educationel ma ‘agement organizations (EMOs) grows, they are creating that are farless acco icksan understand: he years. Current ‘own bureaucracies cracies were, new system world is increasingly faceless and impersonal, but more powerful and controlling and less publicly accountable. Through the rhetoric of increasing school autonomy, principak and teachers are brought under greater c ‘new business model hasa new system world that more efficiently co izesthe ie \orld without appearing todo so, The unsubstantiated premise of these systems ‘faccountabilty and contol is that incompetent or lazy teachers and principals are the reason millions of low-income students do pooriy in school ging greater socal justice to low-income schools and radership. Traditionally, the idea of advocacy has been viewed as the occasional trip to by for increased resources or specific policies (Fowler, iaker, 2007). However, while advocacy leaders enéct these traditional advocacy and policy roles, am calling here for a much breader reorientation of leadership

    Você também pode gostar