What Happens When Education Leaders Learn to Think Differently?

In the realm of education, the tension between institutional structures and the individual needs of students has long been a subject of debate. Traditional educational models often emphasize standardized curricula, rigid schedules, and uniform assessment methods relying on hierarchical administrative models, departmental divisions, and standardized teaching methodologies. While these structures aim to maintain order and ensure measurable outcomes, they can become inflexible, hindering innovation and responsiveness to the diverse needs and potential of individual students—leading to disengagement, absenteeism, and a lack of motivation among learners.

Standout School Leaders play a pivotal role in navigating this balance, ensuring that educational institutions serve not just as centers of academic learning, but as nurturing environments that foster the overall growth and well-being of every student.

What is a Standout School Leader? Within the context of the delicate yet crucial balance between institutional structures and the needs of individual students, educational leaders can be categorized into two distinct groups: Administrators Good at their Jobs (AGJs) and Standout School Leaders (SSLs). AGJs excel in maintaining effective school operations, ensuring that institutional functions such as credentialing, accreditation, standardization, regulation, and accounting are efficiently managed. Their focus is predominantly on the “what” and “how” of schooling—the managerial aspects that keep the institution running smoothly.

In contrast, SSLs focus on the “why” of schooling.

They recognize the limitations of traditional institutional frameworks and strive to bridge the gap between institutional and educational goals. SSLs think differently about educational practices, often challenging the status quo to implement student-centered approaches. They prioritize the well-being and personal growth of students, ensuring that institutional objectives align with individual needs.

My first effort to address the disconnect between established school operations and the goals and values in our mission statement focused on a group of freshman students, who, in the words of the Director of Pupil Personnel Services, “refused to do school.” Students in this group were fourteen and fifteen years old. Every member of the group had missed over thirty days of school by November and were failing every subject.

This effort began with a simple brainstorming session. After I described the profile of our missing students to our truant officer Sarah, she responded, “I know what will work with these kids, but you won’t do it.”

“That’s not true, Sarah. I’m willing to try anything to help these kids through school.”

“Anything?” she asked.

Sarah proceeded to describe a school structure that would work for students who “refused to do school.” Students would begin school at ten o’clock. The course of study would be designed by the students in consultation with the director of the program. The physical education program, which was a constant nemesis for these students, was redesigned to be more user friendly to students who disliked both “dressing” for gym and traditional activities that emphasized competition and team sports. The maximum class size for the program was set at fifteen. The classroom for the program would be located away from the normal distractions of the high school day.

Project STARS (Success Through Accepting Responsibility) began that day in my office. I was able to secure money for materials and a salary for the teacher. I found a room in a remote part of the building. I worked with the physical education chairperson to modify the program for these students. STARS was a huge success. By the end of the first semester, students who were virtual dropouts were now attending school on a regular basis, arriving on time to the program and successfully completing self-selected correspondence courses in academic and elective courses. Over the next seventeen years as principal, I handed out over seven hundred diplomas to students who, without the STARS program, would have become statistics on a dropout report.

The years that I worked with staff and students in the STARS program taught me that traditional institutional approaches to improving achievement—doing more of the same, only harder, or searching endlessly for pathologies in students—only alienated students from purposeful approaches to learning. STARS freed professional staff from the constraints of institutional schooling, allowing them to stop the blame game—if only students would, if only parents would, if only the administration would.

Now staff focused on asking the right question: “How can we help this student be successful in our school and beyond?”

 

This experience underscores the importance of flexibility and innovation in educational leadership. By challenging traditional structures and adopting a student-centered approach, SSLs can create environments where all students have the opportunity to succeed. This involves not only rethinking schedules and curricula, but also fostering a culture of empathy, collaboration, and continuous learning among staff and students alike.

While AGJs ensure the smooth operation of educational institutions, SSLs take it a step further by aligning these operations with educational goals that focus on the holistic development of students. The journey from being an AGJ to an SSL involves reauthoring the professional self from managing institutional functions to embracing and putting into practice the educational goals and values written into their schools’ mission statements. This process provides school leaders with the narratives and managerial tools to bridge the gap between systemic goals and individual needs, and to create what educators must aim for – a more inclusive and effective learning environment.