How Educational Leaders Can Ensure Compliance with Ethical Standards - Case Study Example

Ethical issues for educational leaders: Introduction: Contemporary society has raised new challenges for educational leaders. “In the 21st Century, as society becomes more and more demographically diverse, educators will, more than ever need to develop, foster, and lead tolerant and democratic schools” (Shapiro, and Stefkovich, 2010, p. 4). Many a times, the constantly modifying technology inspired society compliments the sober environment maintained in the educational setup that is conducive to effective learning. This has given rise to many behavioral problems among the students. Educational leaders frequently find themselves in dilemma where they have to choose between two wrong options or in other cases, two right options. Choosing between a right and wrong option is never an issue. However, owing to the challenging nature of the educational matters, educational leaders are subjected to making decisions, that require adequate understanding of the underlying facts. There has to be considerable rational behind the decisions in order for them to be acceptable. This paper discusses some ways in which the educational leaders can ensure the compliance with ethical standards in their decision making. Common ethical issues: 35.98% of the 164 ethical issues highlighted by principals involved in the research conducted by Dempster, Freakley and Parry (1998) pertain to staff. External relations were found to have least share in the ethical issues school principals are normally subjected to. This is fairly understandable since the relationship between the staff and students is limited to the intrinsic traits of school. Principals interrogated in the study also revealed that most of the ethical issues concerning students arose from their behavior. The distribution of different behavioral problem areas among students is shown in the following diagram: Figure: Students related Ethical issues (Dempster, Freakley and Parry, 1998). Violence, physical and verbal abuse, drug addiction are some of the most fundamental causes of behavioral problems among students. Display of extreme agitation on the part of students may lead them to expulsion from school. Such decisions are equally difficult for the educational leaders as detrimental they are to the academic career and social life of a student. Although the suspension of problematic students from schools makes the educational environment favorable for the rest, yet the expelled students remain a big issue for the state as they need to be accommodated in the society since they make a fundamental and undeniable part of it. On the other hand, they can also not be retained in the schools as this would generate negative signs for other students. This and such other issues subject an educational leader to decide between a wrong vs wrong option. Educational leaders hence assume, a very important responsibility as the decisions they make have numerous social implications. Ways to satisfy ethical standards in decision making: Educational leaders should always analyze the ethical implications of their approach in decision making. What particularly makes the compliance of an educational leader’s decision with the standards of ethics is the tension between what is right and what is wrong. It is a well established fact that no decision is 100% right or 100% wrong. The decision is right with respect to some aspects and wrong with respect to others. This causes a leader to take such a decision that would ensure optimum level of righteousness and rationality. This can be achieved by means of a framework of “double headed arrows”. The arrows depict opposite or contradicting qualities of various factors on which decision needs to be based. Certain factors can be generalized for all matters pertaining to a certain educational setup. The educational leader should mark various double headed arrows relevant to a particular matter as per the biasness of decision while ethics is respected. Use of this framework can be best demonstrated with the help of an example. Let’s suppose a student violated a rule of school. Let’s assume that the student should have been expelled from the school as per the rules of school for the mistake, though the principle chose to issue him a warning letter. In this case, a principal would find three dimensions most applicable on this matter which are as follows: Fig: Dimensions of tension applicable on the case (Duignan, 2007, p. 67). By issuing the student a warning letter instead of expulsion, the principle made his approach biased towards left side of the care-rules continuum, thus allowing him to compete and improve his behavior. By letting the student stay, the principal preferred individual good over common good, because unlike him, the previous principal had expelled students for displaying similar acts. Also, the principal had considered the long term effects of the decision on the student’s academic and professional career. The student was susceptible to be negatively affected by expulsion and might experience social exclusion because such cases had happened in the past. Students expelled from the school in such a way are not only ridiculed and made fun of by the friends, but also incur the insult of parents and siblings, thus getting cut off from the society. Therefore, the principal chose to keep the student and warn him instead of expelling him, thus preferring the left side of the long-term-short-term continuum. Tension situation’s profile can be generated by evaluating a particular situation at hand according to the relevant double headed arrows. The profile in turn, generates informed choices that correspond with the complexity of the issue. Educational leaders can then evaluate these choices using the best information available and take their decision accordingly. The process highlights important dimensions of a problematic scenario. Making use of such a framework for decision making ensures consideration of all potential implications of the decision. Although an educational leader would not derive a “cut and dried” answer using this framework, yet the approach would generate a considerably positive outcome in that the framework considers and prefers complementarity and relationship over the conventional consideration of disagreement and conflict resulting from such situations. The framework also encourages the leaders to discuss various aspects of the matter with one another prior to making decision. This helps alleviate the differences among stakeholders who might feel their interests subdued. However, it is noteworthy here that all dimensions of tension signified by the double headed arrows above are not applicable to all situations simultaneously. It is for the educational leader to decide which dimensions apply to a particular matter. Therefore, different leaders might evaluate a particular scenario using different dimensions depending upon their individualistic thinking, approach, perception, competence and capability. In addition to that, ethical behavior needs to be modeled on all levels in the hierarchy of the educational organization. In order to achieve this, the educational leader first needs to clearly demonstrate to the staff all ethical traits that actually need modeling. The educational leader on the top must model the behavior for other leaders working underneath him/her, so that they may follow him/her in the same footsteps so as to set an example for their subordinates down the line. “It is a trickle down system that will allow the top educational leader to put forth the ethical decision in a format which all can be understand and modeled” (Water, 2010). Incorporation of ethics in decision making ultimately develops a normative culture in the organization that in turn, cultivates an ethical culture. Ethical models of decision making lay basis for successful leadership that is vital for adequately meeting the challenges of higher education (Wilcox and Ebbs, n.d.). Educational leaders should both practice the decision making framework themselves, and also encourage all subordinates to rationalize their approach in all decisions in the same way. References: Dempster, N., Freakley, M., and Parry, L. (1998). A study of the ethical decision-making of school principals. Retrieved from http://www.aare.edu.au/98pap/fre98168.htm. Duignan, P. (2007). Educational Leadership: Key Challenges and Ethical Tensions. Cambridge University Press. Shapiro, J. P., and Stefkovich, J. A. Ethical Leadership and Decision Making in Education: Applying Theoretical Perspectives to Complex Dilemmas. UK: Taylor & Francis. Water, D. (2010). How can an educational leader provide an ethical environment for their institution. Retrieved from http://hubpages.com/hub/How-Can-an-Educational-Leader-Provide-an-Ethical-Environment-For-Their-Institution. Wilcox, J. R., and Ebbs, S. L. (n.d.). The Leadership Compass. Values and Ethics in Higher Education. ERIC Digest. Retrieved from http://www.ericdigests.org/1992-1/compass.htm. Read More