An Inverted Idea

In many schools, the Pyramid Theory of leadership is often adopted. The Head of School leads from the top, followed by principals, then various team leaders, teachers and finally students. International scholar in educational leadership, Thomas Sergiovanni, suggests that this theory assumes that “the way to control the work of others is to have one person assume responsibility by providing directions, supervision and inspection” (Sergiovani 1994). This approach invariably relies on rules, guidelines, and protocols for its efficacy. Sergiovanni asserts that while the Pyramid Theory “works well for organizations that produce standardized products…it becomes a bureaucratic nightmare” when applied to schools because it “simplifies and standardizes” the work of principals and teachers. The focus is on process and not outcome. He cautions that “when means and ends are separated, not only is professional discretion compromised but so are democratic principles” (Sergiovani, 1994). Furthermore, the connections among the members in each hierarchy are contractual in nature, and leadership inevitably “takes the form of bartering between the leader and the led” (Sergiovani, 1994).

Instead, Sergiovanni suggests seeing the school as a “moral community,” which allows participants to connect to their work, to be “bound together in a shared vision” and committed to ideals that “tie them as a we” (Sergiovanni, 2007). When this happens, leadership changes from one that is “based on rules” to one that is “based on service” (Sergiovanni, 1994), with roots firmly planted in moral authority. Indeed, when we remind ourselves that we are a place that serves children - and in so doing, the community - we create an environment of joy, support and inclusion.

What would it be like if we were to invert the pyramid?

The triangle represents a re-imagined cultural paradigm. It is a system that must be in balance or else the triangle will topple. This model reframes and redefines the expectations seemingly inherent within a linear hierarchical structure. The students are placed at the very top because it is they who must be supported. We often hear in education literature the phrase “student-led.” In the truest sense of the phrase, the needs of the students must lead the curriculum and pedagogy, and subsequently, decisions and policy.

Supporting the students directly and intimately are the teachers. It is teachers who develop and nurture the potential of every child with expertise, compassion and respect. Team leaders and principals, in turn, support the teachers. The fundamental goal of leaders, therefore, is to create an environment that is conducive to learning for both students and teachers. While the child’s interests lie at the center of all school decisions, those interests must then be thoughtfully balanced with the demands of the school’s curriculum, current pedagogical research, and the expectations of all stakeholders, including the parents and the community.

The Head of School is situated at the bottom. That is not to suggest that this role is least important for that is hardly the case. At the very bottom of this model lies the crucial responsibility of holding everything together and in balance. The Head of School carefully balances out the needs of all stakeholders, including those within the system (students, teachers, leaders), those immediately outside but intimately involved with the system (board and parents) and those external to the system but still exert an impact (community expectations and state/government mandates).

The key words in this model are support and balance. One is the goal, the other the means. The goal of an educational system is to support students and all the members within the community. The means is through carefully recognizing and protecting their interests by balancing out the short-term and long-term needs, and their impact on the community. What brings them together is shared mission, and what holds them together is shared values.

Education is built on the idea of a noble sacrifice. Student-centered must mean placing the needs of the students above everything else and giving them what they need until they do not need you anymore. Until that happens, they need guidance, support and a strong sense of community to uphold them. Only then will their affective disposition and academic performance be transformed in positive ways that will allow them to become the creative explorers they were meant to be.

References

K. Seashore, K. Wahlstrom, Principals as Cultural Leaders, Kappan, 2011, V92 N5, p. 52-56

T. Sergiovanni, The Roots of Leadership, 1994, p. 82-95

T. Sergiovanni, Cultural and Competing Perspectives in Administrative Theory and Practice, 1984, p. 1-11

T. Sergiovanni, Rethinking Leadership: A Collection of Articles, 2007, p. 61-64

Students at a cafeteria in Ghana

#leadership #pedagogy #education