My Ethical Platform

In the course of the readings I have done recently, I had been exposed to many new, at least to me, concepts which I found to be appealing, fascinating and useful in understanding ethics and morality. They helped me develop new understandings about life and to a certain degree re-define the meaning of my work. As I am gathering the ingredients of my own ethical platform, I am finding that I need to borrow elements from different authors even though their views of morality sometimes contradict each other. As my journey meanders through my personal and professional life, I am seeking to find the best of all ethical worlds which resonates with my sense of right and wrong. Having said that, there is one approach to ethics that I was originally tempted to adopt as my own platform.
The situation matters the most......at first
Fletcher's Situation Ethics described by Markham was appealing to me at first because I believe that an ethical person should approach any situation with an open mind in a manner not restricted by preconceptions, rules or principles. I firmly agree that "people matter more than principles" and therefore "needs of people should [always] take priority". I am also in agreement with the idea that the only intrinsically good "thing" is love, which to me means love for all humanity. Then, like many others before me, I ran into an ethical road block when I realized that the logic of situation ethics doesn't address the possibility of justifying universally negative actions, such as killing, in situations where it could be rationalized to be the most loving action. Just a mere possibility of such paradox made me decide to look further. Although I have moved on to consider other ideas, situation ethics contributed to my platform by providing me with what I consider to be the necessary first step, or the fundamental principle, to apply to any ethically challenging situation.
The fundamental principle
I believe that one of the most basic forms of showing respect towards people is acknowledging the context of the situation they are in rather than blindly applying moral prescriptions or rules. After all, human beings are not machines and their behavior cannot be fully analyzed using the concepts of physical science. Understanding humans takes more than applying formulas, algorithms and equations and from a perspective of a logically oriented mind understanding human behavior is a messy and ambiguous process. What complicates understanding human behavior even more is that each of us functions among a group of people equally unpredictable, illogical and non-linear. Although we should be held accountable for our actions, I believe that by at least recognizing the complexity of the situational context of human behavior we acknowledge each other's humanity. Paraphrasing Markham's description of situation ethics which he defines as acting "situationally, not prescriptively", I think that we should think situationally and not prescriptively first.
In other words, to act morally, a leader must avoid applying ethical rules or prescriptions before taking into consideration all possible perspectives and gather the necessary background knowledge. Conversely, an unethical leader would make decisions and render judgments without considering the level of uniqueness of the situation and circumstances surrounding it. An ethical leader approaches each situation as if it were a unique, one of a kind event, unlike anything that happened before. After that, and only after that, the leader is free to apply any ethical platform he/she might have.
In search of balance
Since our actions have great impact on the most easily influenced members of the society, their families and the people who serve them, our teachers and staff, I think that we have a moral obligation to consider a multitude of ethical platforms and not just settle on one prescription for what is right or just. Following just one, strictly described doctrine, would put us in situations where too many unresolved moral conflicts would arise. The two approaches to ethics which influenced me the most, and are equally important to me, are the deontological ethics and consequentialism. As I am developing my platform I am in a constant search for finding balance between those two approaches.
My categorical imperative
As moral leaders we are often on a search for what Kant referred to as a categorical imperative or a golden rule that will lead us to judgments and decisions that are always right, regardless of the context or situation. I think that looking for categorical imperatives is essential in creating the points of moral reference that can circumscribe for what we fundamentally stand. Following this logic I have developed a list of imperatives for educational leaders first of which I consider to be categorical in nature.
No person should use their position of influence to intentionally or unintentionally harm a person with less power or influence. Since adults have inherent advantage over children the above also means: No adult should ever intentionally and unintentionally harm a child. I am using "unintentionally" because I think that it is one of our obligations to be informed and inquisitive even if this mandate appears to be unfair to us. "I did not know" is not a valid excuse for those who are sometimes the only people our students can rely on. By "harm" I mean a lot more than distress, pain or discomfort. I extend the meaning of this term to not meeting all, and not just educational and emotional needs, no matter how extensive they might be. This imperative should guide our actions well beyond the basic premise of not causing harm and has implications for creating a specific type of learning environment.
As an urban educator I am well aware that we must do everything we can to create learning conditions that are focused on a lot more than reading, writing and achievement measured with standardized testing. Negative voices sometimes claim that the negative forces outside of the school are so strong that teaching institutions will never be able to overcome them. I wholeheartedly disagree with these theories. Our students spend many hours of their lives inside our buildings where we control most aspect of their surroundings including the food they consume and the air they breathe. We carefully select and supervise the people who work with them, choose appropriate books and materials and arrange space for the maximum learning and comfort. We even provide training for parents and family members on anything they need to learn in order to be better at caring for their children. To the skeptics I say that we have an overwhelmingly enormous potential to overcome any barriers to students' achievement provided we open our minds and commit ourselves to this cause.
My categorical imperative leads me to defining the most critical mandate for urban school leaders which in my opinion should be: "Creating and supporting learning communities which are designed to unequivocally meet a multitude needs of all students and all adults who surround them at school and outside the school". In other words, it is a part of my ethical platform that our duty extends beyond just a child alone and includes everyone who has direct impact on their well-being: parents, siblings, friends, classmates and extends to every staff member of their school.
Imperatives for educational leaders
The following imperatives, while less "categorical" than the one described above, are nevertheless, in my opinion essential for moral educators and leaders in our schools. Part of my ethical platform is that I firmly believe that:
• Each leader must have a clear vision of what is an equitable and fair quality education because schools sooner or later become an incarnation of what a leader envisions or fails to envision.
• Each educator must cultivate the meanings of essential components of schooling such as teaching, learning, achievement, data use and ect.
• Each leader is responsible for collaboratively cultivating these meanings on the school-wide scale and include all stakeholders in the process of public discourse about these meanings.
• Each leader must promote reflective learning for everyone and especially for himself/herself and must create the conditions for others to become reflective learners as well.
• Each leader must consider all possible, intended and unintended, outcomes of his/her actions and take responsibility for these outcomes.
Important as these imperatives are to me, after reading about Kant's ideas on ethics, I was left with a feeling that they were not fully aligned with my sense of right and wrong. I realized that the source of my uneasiness was the possibility that someone could act on his or her ethical imperative in such was manner as the outcomes of their action yielded results that were against what their ethical imperative was intended to accomplish. Considering the consequences
According to Kant, the morality is based on a single imperative from which all duties are derived. Although Kant didn't did think that his ideas on ethics can be summed up as a search of a golden rule, his concepts nevertheless resonate with this way of thinking. Golden rules of any kind are appealing as they provide an ethical "short cut" to solving moral dilemmas. They work well in theory yet in practice they seem tricky.
We all agree that killing innocent people is wrong, all children should learn and everyone should have an equal opportunity to succeed but the real life often presents us with situations that are not clean cut or straight forward. One of the challenges to categorical imperative approach is that the golden rule or imperative must be formulated in such way as it would apply, without modifications or alterations, to all situations. That, in my opinion, is nearly impossible. I cannot envision an ethical leader who would not consider the outcomes of his/her actions regardless how convinced he/she was of the universality of their categorical imperatives. As long as there is the slightest possibility to make a "wrong" decision on the basis of our imperatives, which is always the case, we have to consider the consequences by asking the following questions:
• What are the immediate consequences this particular action or decision?
• What are the long term implications?
• Is there a conflict between the short term gain and long term results?
• Am I seeing this situation from all possible perspectives?
• Did I consider everything and everybody who can possibly be impacted by what I am about to do?
• Did I consult a sufficient number of people whose interests are at stake?
Of course, for a reflective ethically serious leader, this list might include many other questions specifically relating to a given situation. In fact, my work and life experience has taught me that being able to reflect is one of the most important characteristic of a successful leader. This reflection is most productive when specific questions are guiding our thinking process.
Questions to consider
As an opponent of tayloristic, modernism-laden scientific management practices I believe that human endeavors are non-linear and sometimes not entirely logical and therefore their exploration must involve wide, open-ended themes that allow for building self-awareness, understanding around the meanings behind the purpose for schools' existence or mission. I believe following questions reflect this type of thinking:
• What is the purpose for my school to exist?
• Is there a better way to serve our students and teachers?
• What type of public life is the institution I lead promote or encourage?
• To what degree is my school reminiscent or similar to a turn of the century factory?
• Do my actions impact students and teachers that way I intended for them to do?
Pondering questions like these speaks to my sense of what rational thinking process progressive school leaders must be constantly engaged in which is described by Ravitch as follows:
Doubt and skepticism are signs of rationality. When we are too certain of our opinions, we run the risk of ignoring any evidence that conflicts with our views. It is doubt that shows we are still thinking, still willing to examine hardened beliefs when confronted with new facts and new evidence.
Our thinking must go beyond mere analysis of our opinions and possible predictions of our actions. We must constantly examine the role of our beliefs in decision making process and help others do this as well. As the lead learners in our school communities, we also need to cultivate a culture of reflection of the meanings that surround us.
The meanings must be cultivated
I believe that one of the moral imperatives for educational leaders also ought to be to define and promote the meaning of the work every member of our learning communities should be involved in. The word "meaning" signifies more than wanting to convey, expressing intentions and denotation and connotation of words. According to Starratt, "the term meaning refers to the cultural and personal meanings that are attached to or embedded in events, circumstances, information, and symbols". Those personal meanings of all members of our learning community will come together in a cohesive, and powerful way when they are viewed through the lens of common myths, beliefs and convictions expressed as a school vision which is also a personal vision of the leader.
While I am a strong believer in developing school visions, I see them as a lot more than the fancy documents prominently displayed throughout our buildings. I think that vision statements are only valid when they are closely tied to the meanings promoted by the school leader and a community of teachers and learners. It is the responsibility of the leader to do what is necessary to ensure that there is a common understanding among all stake holders on important aspects of schooling by defining the meanings behind essential questions such as:
• What does it mean to provide a quality education to all students?
• What is "excellence" and what is "not good enough"?
• What does it mean to meet the needs of students, parents or teachers?
• What does it mean to "collaborate"?
• What does "working hard" and "working smart" mean in our building?
• What are the definition of "teaching" and "learning"?
• How do we define "leadership" and "teacher leadership"?
All I have considered so far leads me to the conclusion that all ethical situations need to have a backdrop which provides an environment that supports collaboration, communication and respect of diverse point of views of the school so it can become a true community. The most critical element of this type of democratic environment is the relentless, even if overly idealistic, pursuit of intellectual solidarity discussed by Hollenbach.
Intellectual Solidarity
Since our schools are filled with people coming from various cultural and religious backgrounds, meaningful discussions on important issues usually stir up emotions and make agreements more difficult. Seeking ideas and concepts that allow us to connect and agree on an intellectual level can eliminate or at least weaken the boundaries that divide us and ultimately bring us closer together.
The following quote, although referring to the issue of human rights, resonated with my sense of what the public school should represent and therefore contributes to my ethical platform as an urban school leader.
Intellectual solidarity as a dimension of common good also has important implications for the institutions that shape public life. In particular, it suggests that institutions that secure and protect human rights for all are essential to the common good of a community of freedom. (Hollenbach, 2002, p. 159)
When I envision an ideal learning environment, I see a close knit community of learners involved in a complex matrix of inter-personal communications around a common purpose. While I still consider human aspects of school, educational leadership, teaching and learning, to be the most essential element of public schooling, I now see it in a different light; as an institution that by the virtue of impacting the youngest members of our society has a profound impact on our public life and our freedoms. In other words, I now fully understand that the school structures do a lot more than communicate priorities and regulate behavior. They set the stage for what the future would entail. A question can be raised as to whether the schools should re-create the reality as it is or the reality as it ought to be.
Reality... as it ought to be.
The final element of my ethical platform is the notion that educational leaders cannot blindly accept the reality as something final that cannot be changed. In fact, I think that we need to think of the students and their families as the agents of positive societal change. It is our responsibility to communicate this idea both individually and as a shared knowledge. "What is common and what is individual are both required in any successful communication. The common and the individual mutually interpenetrate and mutually determine each other." (Hollenbach, 2002, p. 74).
More important than the manner of communicating it, is the specific content of the vision of the future of the world we are communicating and that must not be just the outcome of our creativity and desire of dominate. When formulating our vision we need to take into account the needs of all people we serve and what our civilization, in general, needs to allow our future generations to thrive in the atmosphere of trust and respect. Now more than ever, we need all people to realize that collaboration is the new competition our survival depend on how well we work together to solve global problems. This vision needs to be built slowly and by consensus so goals of individuals are alligned with the common good which should always be about justice and equity. This entire process must take place as we consider, with a great attention to the detail, all points of our ethical platforms like the one described above.

Now, that you know where I am coming from, it's your turn. What is your ethical platform?

WANTED: Transformational Leaders for the 21st Century

In the field of education there are many "buzzwords" that come and go as the winds of change blow, reforms are instituted or perhaps even popular trends alter our conversations and work practice. As the time passes by, most of them go through supernova type of life-cycles. They appear with an explosive burst of energy overshadowing educational landscape and slowly dissipate into oblivion. At times, some of them linger a little longer, first becoming ancient artifacts of our professional past and eventually fade away into extinction. Every once in a while, a new phrase comes along that breaks that predictable pattern, provides a long-term inspiration and becomes permanently etched in our professional vocabulary. In the recent years we were fortunate to have two such phrases. They are already resonating within our learning communities influencing the dialog about the state of our profession and have a big potential to re-frame our work for the years to come. These phrases are "transformational leadership" and 21st Century Skills Framework. In addition to recognizing the importance of these terms and ideas they represent, one might consider both of them to be a perfect match that has a potential to create an ideal learning experience for success in the future.

While it is impossible to predict with certainty what the future work place and school will look like, what we see around us can lead us to the conclusion that a great changes are on their way. The notion that innovation can be ignored, which might have been uncontested in the past, is no longer valid and exponential rate at which our lives are changing cannot continue to go unnoticed. More and more people realize that the global transformation, which we are experiencing, opens up new windows of opportunities for those who are well prepared to benefit from it.

Every law of economics tells us that if we connect all the knowledge pools in the world, and promote greater and greater trade and integration, the global pie will grow wider and more complex. And if America, or any other country, nurtures a labor force that is increasingly made up of men and women who are special, specialized, or constantly adopting to the higher-value-added jobs, it will grab its slice of that growing pie. But we will have to work at it. (Friedman, 2005, p. 248)

As the above quote implies, there is a need for different skills, knowledge and perhaps definitions of what it means to be successful in the future and we are not yet ready to take advantage of this information.

The Partnership for the 21st Century Skills outlines "the knowledge, skills and expertise students should master to succeed in work and life in the 21st Century." and specifies the following elements:

• Skills:
  Life and Career
  Learning and Innovation
  Information, Media and Technology
• Core Subjects and 21st Century Themes
• Support Systems
  Standards and Assessment
  Curriculum and Assessment
  Professional Development
  Learning Environments
  

As we can see, it is a very comprehensive list with each bullet addressing an area that is rich with challenges and possibilities. While leadership has enormous impact on every aspect of an organization, the last two, Professional Development and especially Learning Environments will capitalize on the characteristics of transformational leadership and quite possibly make this style of working with people the most desirable for the 21st century teaching and learning.

While discussing the very subjective and often personal topic such as leadership, it is important to either create or at least agree on its definition. I decided to adopt the definition of leadership which was crafted by Peter G. Northouse but with a simple modification which makes it more relevant to a learning environment. According to this author, "Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal." (Northouse, 2007, p. 3) I propose that instead of using "common goal" we use "shared mission" because transformational leadership is closely tied to the concept of vision and a mission as being in the center of what leaders ought to do in order to be successful.

Out of the many definitions of mission and vision that can be found in books from the fields of business and school leadership, the one that is proposed by the authors of "Learning by Doing" seems to be the most logical and applicable to school environment. The mission answers the fundamental question "Why do we exist?", so that we can "reach agreement regarding the fundamental purpose of the school" (DuFour, 2006, p. 23) which is important because "this clarity of purpose can help establish priorities and become an important factor in guiding decisions." (DuFour, 2006, p.23). Values on the other hand, guide our behavior and help us define our collective commitment. The connective tissue that bridges those two concepts is the vision which give us direction towards "compelling future" and answers the "what" question, "What must we become to accomplish our purpose?" (DuFour, 2006, p.24). As we can see, the vision which is so essential to the concept of transformational leadership plays a pivotal role in going from why we do what needs to be done and how we will accomplish it.

According to Northouse (2007) transformational leadership is a process that transforms people and it is concerned with emotions, values, ethics, standards and long-term goals. It includes assessing followers' motives, satisfying their needs and treating them as human beings rather than gears in the educational machine whose role "can be reduced to the replication of behaviors that have proven to be effective and efficient" (English, 2005, p. 34) . Transformational leaders seek to change company's values by promoting justice and fairness in the process during which leaders and followers are inextricably bound together. Transformational leadership includes the following factors:

• Idealized Influence when followers identify with and emulate the leader
  
• Inspirational Motivation to become committed to a shared vision
  
• Intellectual Stimulation stimulating creativity and challenging their values, supports followers as they try to think things out and engage in problem solving
  
• Individualized Consideration in order to supply supportive environment and listen to the needs of individuals
  

The transformational leadership theorists were the first ones to distinguish the four varieties of leadership: directive, supportive, participative and achievement oriented (Northouse, 2007, pp. 175-204) each appropriate for different situation and different type of a follower.

One of the most significant aspects of 21st century world is that although we try to make assumption of what the future world will be like, we will most likely be surprised with what tomorrow brings. Even the framework presented by the Partnership for the 21st Century Skills is just an approximation of where we think we might be in the near future. The framework is guiding us through bringing ourselves up to speed, or to catch up. Indeed, many changes must take place right now and since transformational leadership "has been associated with producing change in groups and organizations." (Bass, 2006) this approach to leading seems to be the most logical choice. Many skills that will make us successful are sometimes referred to as "soft skills" because they deal the human aspects of work: collaboration, creativity and problem solving, all of which are grounded in inter-personal dynamics and being in tune with the needs of the followers. If we accept the notion that this type of leadership "involves inspiring followers to commit to a shared vision and goals" (Bass, 2006, p. 4), once our vision is clearly communicated the necessary changes will soon follow. The problem with our times is that the notions of any static form of mission, vision, goals and objectives becomes absolute the moment they are created. The only approach to leadership that can be useful to us is the one which is dynamic, flexible, ever changing and improving. I propose that transformational leadership has these characteristics.

"Transformational leaders pay special attention to each individual follower's needs for achievement and growth" (Bass, 2006, p.7) and therefore they are well equipped to lead companies that resonate with the people they serve including the youngest members of the changing society. They" constantly encourage members to develop their own personal vision" (Senge, 2006, p. 197) because they believe that "genuine caring about a shared vision is rooted in personal visions" (Senge, 2006, p. 197). If we desire to have educational institutions which are prepared to deal with problems that we don't yet know about which will happen in the world that we can't envision yet, we need leaders who are prepared to see their subordinates to "exceed expected performance" (Bass, 2006).

Most forms of leadership involve setting goals and objectives for the followers and finding the best ways to influence their attainment. In a global community, which is constantly changing and developing, rigidly set goals, objectives and expectations have a great chance of becoming irrelevant as soon as they are conceived. Transformational leadership provides solution to this problem because it "involves an exceptional form of influence that moves followers to accomplish more than what is usually expected of them." (Northouse, 2007, p. 176). This kind of investment in the human capital, to make it flexible, creative and inspired, is what is needed to offset the remnants of the 20th century factory-style management which is still too often holding us back. In addition to that, transformational leaders have a potential to transform more than just the companies they lead and their immediate subordinates. Transformational leaders "are those who stimulate and inspire followers to both achieve extraordinary outcomes and, in the process, develop their own leadership capacity" (Bass, 2006). In other words, transformational leaders create a legacy that can transform the world in the 21st century and beyond.

Circular Approach to Coaching

Traditionally the position of a coach has been a part of a linear continuum of teacher-coach-supervisor and as such has been seen as a stepping stone to other positions. When a coach didn’t meet the expectations, they were returned to a teacher position. While often not a demotion in terms of salary, removal of a coach and assigning him/her in the classroom has been viewed as a move down in the hierarchy and associated with failure.

I propose that we consider looking at coaching in a more circular way. At the heart of this approach, is the idea that each pedagogue should have an equal chance to become a coach on the basis of his/her teaching skills, knowledge and the willingness to serve in this position for a maximum of one year. In other words, being a coach would become a part of a learning and self-reflecting cycle which any willing teacher would have the opportunity to go through. The teacher would be able to move in and out of the coaching position, grow, learn and experience educational process from different perspectives. To be successful, this system would require that all staff be officially informed of the opportunity to be considered for the coaching position and those not chosen will have the opportunity to apply again the following year.

The criteria for selection would include: minimum of 3 years of teaching service, professional portfolio documenting work done with students and work done with adults, evidence of implementation of school-wide initiatives, evidence of professional growth (workshops, training etc.), evidence of facilitating at least one workshop in the course of the year, evidence of collaborative work and planning with other staff members.Candidate would be required to participate in a two-step interview process including: portfolio presentation, facilitating a problem-solving focus group consisting of teachers and an interview with the principal.

By re-framing coach position this way we will accomplish the following:

• Motivate teachers to be lifelong learners and to document their learning with portfolios.
• Build coaching capacity by having a large number of teachers who have taken turns coaching and teaching.
• Remove the stigma of “not making it” as a coach or becoming a coach to “get away from the classroom”.
• Build higher personal and collegial expectations for teachers.Raise the competitive and collaborative spirit among staff.
  

What do you think of this approach?

Are you ready for a School War in the Flat World?

Some, if not most progressive educators agree that we are entering critical times that call for fundamental changes in how we teach, learn and lead. For that reason, it is imperative that our educational leaders and policy makers learn from the past, pay close attention to the current trends and try to predict what the future will bring. Good sources of information and ideas that make this possible are books written by insightful researchers such as Thomas Friedman who wrote “The World is Flat” and Diana Ravitch, the author of “The Great School Wars”. Themes that emerge from both works give us clear indications of what urban school leaders need to become in order to effectively serve our communities and what way of thinking is necessary to lead successful urban schools in the future. The implications for the urban school leaders are not only clear but they also raise a sense of urgency as to how soon these transformations will need to take place.

In “The Great School Wars”, Diana Ravitch walks us through the history of the New York City public schools since the events leading to the passing of the Maclay bill on April 8, 1842. On that day, “For the first time in its history, New York City would have a school system that was directly controlled by the people and entirely financed from the public treasury.”(Ravitch p.76). The book continues until the reorganization of the schools guaranteed by the “New Law” passed on April 30, 1969 and ends with describing the aftermath of what the author refers to as the “Forth School War”.

Over the years, The New York public schools went through many transformations. These transformations were mainly driven by the shifts of the population of the city, changes in economy and the political climate of the time. Whether it was “denying [public] funds to religious schools” (p.79), improving physical conditions, improving teaching quality, providing upward mobility for recent immigrants or dealing with racisms, the powers that be, as well as the general public often succumbed to the temptation to use either centralization or local school control to improve the system. This constant shift which Ravitch appropriately refers to as “a pendulum movement” (p.401), is one of the themes that has been occurring and re-occurring even beyond the scope of the book, up to the most recent districts-to-regions-back-to-districts shift of the most current administration of the New York City public schools. Although, according to the author, “one of the persistent ironies of reform is the impossibility of predicting the full consequences of change”(p.400), one prediction can safely be made. Neither centralization nor local control can solve problems of the school system, because neither of them provided real solutions in the past (p.401). Extensive reforms instituted by William Henry Maxwell and Nicolas Murray Butler in 1980s can serve as illustrations of this phenomenon. These reformers succeeded in their efforts to centralize the system in order put it in the hands of experts rather than politicians. The end result of their efforts was a system that was highly bureaucratized and removed from the people for which its creators “would later become targets of public school critics” (p.186). These criticisms and growing disillusions of progressive reformers eventually sparked urgency for more reforms that would give the public more control over the schools.

Another theme that runs throughout the book is the ever-evolving concept of what defines the society that public schools should serve. Since “The public school operates on behalf of the community” (Ravitch, p.402), this issue was and still is very essential in making system-wide decisions if they are to benefit our schools and positively impact our society. The needs of our schools were quite different before and after the first waves of Irish immigrants arrived at the New York harbor. When eastern Europeans became the fastest growing immigrant group in the city, the public schools were seen as a way to succeed in the new world by the way of learning the language, crafts and professions. With the arrival of African Americans from the South, the need for Americanization was replaced by the need for racial integration and when a large number of Puerto Ricans arrived, the school system faced yet more new challenges. The future changes to our system will be effective only if we clearly define, and if necessary, constantly-revise the definition of the community our schools ought to serve.

One side of this issue is quite obvious. The New York City schools are located in one of the most diverse places in the world and therefore must acknowledge this diversity by learning about and from the many cultures represented here. At the same time, since different areas are often dominated by specific ethnic groups, schools should also reflect those regional differences. The other, more complicated side of this issue connects directly to what Thomas Friedman refers to as Globalization 3.0 (Friedman p.10) and how this concept redefines what type of community our schools must serve in order to prepare our students for the future.

According to Friedman, we have entered Globalization 3.0 which “is empowering individuals” (p.10) and supplies “the newfound power for individuals to collaborate and compete globally.” (p.10). While students in other countries already take full advantage of this opportunity, many American students don’t. To illustrate changes that already took place, Friedman reflects on what his mother was telling him when he was growing up, which was: “Tom, finish your dinner-people in China and India are starving” and shares new advice for his own children, and we can assume for all of us, which is to finish our homework because people in those countries are starving for our jobs. (p.237). One implication is that we must immediately start thinking of our schools as serving the global community as much as serving the local communities in order to give our students and teachers more opportunities “to compete and collaborate globally” and ultimately succeed in the “Flat World” where competition and collaboration know no geographical or cultural boundaries. I think the phrase “our homework” is also symbolic of what we as urban leaders need to do and how much we must learn in order to serve our communities in the future.

Another theme in Friedman’s work is the complexity of Globalization 3.0 and a grim reality of our students’ readiness for success in the Flat World.

"Every law of economics tells us that if we connect all the knowledge pools
in the world, and promote greater and greater trade and integration, the
global pie will grow wider and more complex. And if America, or any other
country, nurtures a labor force that is increasingly made up of men and
women who are special, specialized, or constantly adopting to the
higher-value-added jobs, it will grab its slice of that growing pie. But we
will have to work at it." (p.248)
Optimistically, he claims that “There are plenty of jobs out there in the flat world for people with the knowledge and ideas to seize them.” (p.237) and provides practical advice by saying that “To survive, you want to be specialized, anchored and most of all you actually want to become really adaptable.” (p.239). Friedman poses an essential question “But have we really been investing in our future and preparing our children the way we need to for the race ahead? He answers this question, so important to urban school leaders, and without hesitation by stating “The answer is no.” (p. 249).

The implications for urban school leadership seem very clear. We need to resist the urge to use either centralization or local control to solve our problems as we often tried and failed in the past. We need to look beyond approaches that appeal to politicians and to the uninformed and create schools systems that are inspired by current research. Also, we should focus on building consensus on how we define the term “community” and what must take place among our leaders, teachers and students in order to serve its needs. We need to admit that we are now living in the ever-changing global economy which requires different skills than what made us successful in the past. And, since we are not “preparing our children the way we need to for the race ahead” (Friedman, p.249), we need to change the way we teach, lead and learn in order to prepare our students, parents and teachers to be successful in the future. If we really believe Friedman that “In a flatter world, you don’t really want to be mediocre” (p.236), we must take drastic steps to lead our schools away from mediocrity and towards excellence with the speed appropriate for the “exponential times” in which we live (Kurtzman, 2009). One question comes to mind.

What will be the next great school war, who will be fighting it and what weapons will be used to win it?

Reference List

Kurtzman, Wayne (2009, May 14). We Live In Exponential Times. Message posted at http://mediabullseye.com/mb/2009/05/we-live-in-exponential-times.html

Ravitch, Diane (2000). The great school wars: A history of the New York City public schools. Baltimore and London: The John Hopkins University Press.

Thomas, L. Friedman, (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century.New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jacek Polubiec was born and raised in Powisle, a small picturesque neighborhood near downtown Warsaw, Poland. Working on archeological excavations in his youth invigorated his interest in higher education after years under very traditional, teacher-centered school system. Self-driven and taught, he applied and was accepted to the Institute of Archeology, one of the most elite departments of Warsaw University, where he completed three semesters of studies. Upon coming to the United States, Jacek started a family and pursued his passion for music. He earned a Bachelor of Fine Arts Degree from City College and M.A. in Jazz Performance from Queens College. He held many roles in the music world: jazz guitarist, band leader, composer and teacher. His satisfaction from seeing adults and children learn inspired him to work with the New York City Board of Education. There he has worked as a music teacher, a Project ARTS Coordinator, and after graduating from the Principals Institute at Bank Street College, an Assistant Principal—a position he has served in for the past 7 years. Jacek feels strongly about bringing progressive thinking and innovative approaches to teaching and educational leadership. He is a transformational leader passionate about emotional intelligence, teacher and student leadership, collaboration and technology. He is currently pursuing doctoral degree in Urban School Leadership at Fordham University. He is a proud father of two girls ages 15 and 20. When he is not working or studying, he enjoys surf fishing, camping, photography, cooking and salsa dancing.