This week I watched three different interviews. My stated purpose was identifying perspectives on and identifying areas ripe for action research. While I gleaned some good information, what struck me was how I reacted to the interviewees themselves and how my reactions seemed to relate to their professional assignments.
Of the three interviewees, I found the first, an elementary school principal, to be the most accessible. Both his status as an elementary school principal and his concern for achievement test scores are facets of his leadership experience I can relate to. I have asserted in the past that the only administrative position I have interest in is in the elementary setting, because I believe that the greatest impact we can have as professionals on the lives of our students and on the whole of our society resides in the earliest years of education; much like steering an ocean liner, the earlier the intervention the better. Further, my entire professional life has taken place during the taking root of outcome based education and high stakes testing. ( I remember administering the TAAS test and not being threatened with the suspension of my certification for any "testing irregularities"! ) So, this principal's discussion on using action research to find ways of identifying and spreading successful classroom approaches within the campus for the purpose of improving student learning matches one of my first impulses when considering how to apply action research! This administrator also mentions wondering about the discrepancies in achievement test scores from one year to the next; exercising the wondering, "Why wasn't this student successful?", with the purpose of executing and honing student intervention. Both of the concerns that he invokes during his interview are immediately comprehensible and familiar to me. The second interviewee, in comparison, leaves me with a taste of concerns I may be growing into as the next phase of my professional life unfolds.
The Director of Research, Planning and Development of a large school district,and a PhD -whereas the first interviewee was not-, is the second participant. He approaches action research from a much broader view of student learning and everything that affects it. Some of the areas he touches on include: data management on campuses and throughout the district; teacher behaviors and beliefs (ethics) toward students and student learning; maximizing the use of district fostered data streams to change/guide/inform "what we do". The purpose, regardless of topic, is increasing student performance. Dr. Director-of-Research illuminated some of this goal's breadth by discussing data as a district resource and I thoroughly enjoyed the allusion to data as water-like in imagery, like "data pools" or "data streams"; his interview expanded my awareness of the multiplicity of systems involved in increasing student performance, their data/information-spheres and the idea of applying action research to maximizing their usage.
The difference between these two leaders was like the difference between a battlefield sergeant and a colonel. I, being "in the trenches" (wondering: why do we use such garish, wartime vocabulary in our profession? should education be "war"?), have 14 years of direct exposure to principal leadership, often up close as a teacher leader. However, my exposure to directors-of-anything is more selective. I was intellectually titillated by "the colonel's" presentation, his vocabulary, his "big picture" view. This person had much to teach. "The Sergeant", on the other hand, was familiar/comfortable/accessible; from the perspective of leadership, he clearly has more experience than I and plenty to teach... but his presentation was not as challenging.
The last interview was of a superintendent: The General. I'm not exactly sure what he said, but it was motivating and impressive! ;0)
No comments:
Post a Comment