School Leadership: The K-12 Education System - Coursework Example

School Leadership al Affiliation) Albert Hirschman d an in his book Exit, voice and loyalty depicted the situations that individuals find themselves in when the services they previously received have experienced a quality deterioration. He observed that people often feel very frustrated and are torn between whether to exit from said service provider or stay and demonstrate loyalty in the hope that they will go back to their previous conditions. This is the situation prevailing in the United States education system. The education sector has been plagued by a lack of democratic appliance in administration and a resultant employment of centralized control in the k-12 education system. This paper’s aim is to focus on this issue from a school leader’s perspective of interaction with other stakeholders. The paper’s focal point is the United States education system as a representation of the status of the larger section of the free world. During the 1830s, the scholar Alexis de Tocqueville paid a visit to the United States. He observed that Americans had an incredible sense of loyalty to their education system. The local schools received a lot of support from the local citizenship. At the time, the American populace was of the opinion that schools were another extension of their family structures and neighborhood alliances (Kahan, 2010). Schools were linked to charity work and therefore society held them in high regard as the promoters of education in the search for sustainable development. They were the face and directors of civil societies. The education system was noble and had garnered the trust of those investing in it, even in the smallest capacities. All stakeholders were involved in activities and budgets for the education system. Today, the American populace still holds the education system in high regard; the sentiments that were made in Tocqueville’s time are still being made, for the larger part. However, as time progresses, there has been the development of an additional view of the K-12 education system; an increasingly unresponsive and uninvolving bureaucratic venture (Woods, 2005). The institutions’ regard for the main stakeholders-parents, teachers, and students have experienced a deep deterioration. This has only served to widen the gap between the people whose influence and opinion is the direst in the education system. Towards the end of the 20th century, the gap between teachers and school administrations in particular became a source of concern. Facilitators, being the link between the administration and parents, ought to be well included in managerial decisions. The public school sector has been affected by this application of centralized and undemocratic control. The economist Caroline Hoxby, carried out a study in metropolitan localities that had a composition of many institutions and metropolitan localities that were a composition of a large district (Boston and Los Angeles respectively). She observed that the performance of students was notably much better in localities that had many competitive districts and in which parents had the option of relocating to another locality in search of better education. The majority of those that opted to move claimed that lack of bureaucracy, responsiveness and accountability was the shortcoming that caused their relocation. With the onset of the 21st century, the gap between stakeholders was much wider than in the late 20th century. The rise of globalization appears to have caused a decrease in flexibility of administrative control and decrease in accountability in the education sector. The administrative control in reference is not only within the institutions themselves but also within the state. While the problem may have begun simply from an internal institutional angle over time, it has now spread over to state control. The education sector in general in the current day and time is just not inclusive. Issues that have highlighted this include the funding of education in the private sector; one that the general citizenship disagrees with. The problem with an undemocratic leadership is that it bears forth-undemocratic smaller structures within an already undemocratic bigger structure (Sims, 2005). For instance, the funding of private education was one that the government came down to without involving facilitators, parents, and students. The result of this is the creation of a system where some schools get the privilege of “cherry-picking” who enrolls in them and undermines the entire concept of community. As with any sector, those at the bottom of the hierarchy in the current day, in time come to occupy the top positions. This is to say that teachers presently will be the administrators in the future. Therefore, the relations that they have and the behaviors that they adopt at the stage they are currently, determines their behavior in the future. A teacher that has no regard for the general good of the student now is not capable of developing regard for said good in later times. The resultant observation will be an administrator who looks accountability and responsiveness. Therefore, it is important that teachers take it upon themselves now to adopt good administrative strategies. The average teacher of today is the only salvation to the bureaucracy that has plagued this century. The very first step that a teacher has to take in solving this problem is understanding democracy. One has to learn to incorporate “pure democracy.” This is a democracy where all elements within an institution, organization, or state are well included in the activities of the said institution (Barry, 2009). In this way, one will not think that they are applicants of democracy while in fact they are undermining it. If democracy in the school system is to become an actual reality, the students, parents, and teachers are to make decisions as one. In many cases, the students are not involved in this process with many claiming that they do not have the intellectual capacity to understand these matters. However, teachers must always remember that these decisions are focused on the student and therefore they must be involved. If the student is not involved, then that is in no way of pure democracy. The next step is ensuring that they understand the role that they play in promoting democracy. These are the specific areas acted upon ensure that democracy. Furthermore, they must understand the role that democracy plays in the institutions’ success. Firstly, teachers must employ democracy for the main purpose of instilling it in their students. Whatever areas the students pursue in their lives, they should be democratic individuals. It has been overlooked that the education system is the one that attributes all the traits that future leaders portray. If the facilitators are not democratic, the students in due time, learn to embody this. Therefore, their teachers, through setting appropriate examples that democracy is an important aspect of success, should instill it in them. The teaching faculty and the school administration ought to incorporate the concept of shared leadership. In this regard, they learn to communicate better within themselves. In many cases upon the observation that the administration has failed to be inclusive, the teacher, resigns themselves to a similar isolation of the administration in class matters. This is usually an unconscious decision. It is of high relevance that the teacher involves the administration in matters occurring in their jurisdictional capacity even if the reverse does not occur. This makes them accountable, transparent, and responsive individuals. If all goes well the administration may learn to do the same. However, if it does not happen in this way, the teacher would have fulfilled their role in the promotion of democracy and the subsequent death of bureaucracy. The above three aspects are constantly overlooked in the k-12 education system. The system ought to be the one that engages democracy and undermines unnecessary bureaucracy, as it is the core point of education. The solutions presented above are the primary elements whose incorporation guarantees the survival of an otherwise drowning sector. They may appear somewhat basic, but their application creates results that affect a wide magnitude. The most overlooked focal point is that the concept of teaching influences the students both directly and indirectly. The teacher is the link between all the other stakeholders in the education system (Knapp, 2007). Therefore, if they are well within the principles that democracy dictates, then the k-12 education system is well on its way to decentralized control within the system. References Barry, C. (2009). Information systems development : challlenges in practice, theory and education. New York: Springer Science Business Media. Kahan, A. (2010). Alexis de Tocqueville. New York: Continuum. Knapp, J. (2007). For the commmon good: the ethics of leadership in the 21st Century. Westport: Praeger Publishers. Sims, R. (2005). Leadership : succeedingin the private, public and not-for-profit sectors. Armonk: M.E Sharpe. Woods, P. (2005). Democratic leadership in education. London: Paul Chapman. Read More