The Responsibility of the School Administration - Essay Example

From observing the current administrator, an aspiring administrator realizes necessary changes and possesses great energy and enthusiasm to implementthose changes. Sometimes, however, the level of inexperience and optimism gives a false sense of confidence that changes can be easily implemented. On the other hand, the experienced administrator realizes the pain and glory of being the chief official at any educational site. The seemingly impossible and ever-increasing expectations coupled with intense pressures take extreme tolls on those in leading positions. As a result, reluctance of potential administrators (Rayfield), and the turnover rate of administrators continue to rise (Senge et. al 88). Nevertheless, the slim chance to beam in and at success motivates site administrators to persevere through battles and wars waged on them by stakeholders to whom they offer their public service. Due to inexperience, aspiring administrators lack the skill to realistically anticipate and effectively cope with the pressing responsibilities often experienced in lead administration. Aspiring administrators should seek the help of others to cope as some of their ideal expectations are adjusted by realistic occurrences. According to Dr. Lorraine Monroe, leadership is the key determinant of a great school (12). Candidates for the leading position take great notice of the publicity that comes along with the leading position but slightly recognize the magnitude of responsibility. As the chief official of a designated school site, the administrator bears the responsibility of all that happens within the building. According to elementary principal Kimsherion Reid, "No matter what goes on in the building, it reflects on you" (Delisio). Thus, the site administrator has the challenge of making sure all aspects of the school exist peacefully and productively. Lorraine Monroe states: "The real leader is the servant of the people she leads" (126). Administrative candidates may not realize that an administrator does not occupy the throne of a dictator. Rather, he or she must learn from and oftentimes accommodate stakeholders, others who take part in the educational process. Stakeholders include parents, students, teachers, custodians, as well as other members of the community. A content group of stakeholders lessens administrators' worries. Thus, administrators and aspiring administrators alike must learn to find a comfortable medium that will appease most who are involved in issues that arise. One frequent issue school administrators encounter is adequately and effectively handling student discipline. In Loco Parentis grants educators the right to stand in place of parents while children are in the school's jurisdiction. As they temporarily stand in place of the parent, educators are liable for students' safety and "have the authority to direct the pupil and to punish for infractions, much as a parent would" (Reutter 763). Specifically designed to protect the best interest of all students, In Loco Parentis grants educators authority to exercise control. However, some inexperienced administrators are surprised to find that the granted authority is often challenged resulting in the necessity for additional accommodations. Differences in values and opinions often sabotage efforts to accommodate everyone in a satisfactorily manner. For example, administrators and parents may agree to work for the students' best interest. What happens, however, when the administrator and parent disagree on the consequence assigned for the child's misbehavior What is the solution when the parent contends that his or her child's behavior is not misbehavior at all In such a situation, how can the administrator appropriately serve and appease the student and parent while fulfilling his or her duty as one who maintains order in the school Administrators are expected to be diplomatic chief officials. With the responsibility of diffusing problems prior to their getting out of hand, administrators must balance and compromise without totally surrendering. They are often straddled between doing what is right and making everyone happy. Needless to say, the two hardly coexist when a judicious decision disregards the personal opinions of others. Thus, administrators must not expect to please everyone involved. Doing what is right oftentimes angers the wrong people. There is little harm in angering others if it is for the right purpose. Effectively handling a situation complicated by the potentially destructive emotion. If administrators are able to control their anger, they will have a better chance of effectively dealing with others. Sorenson states: The school principal who is able to control his or her own anger, as well as the anger-related responses of others, and who can anticipate and proactively inhibit potential sources of anger and conflict, can expect more positive, anger-free resolutions to most negative situations. Challenging others does not always involve angering others. Retired principal, Paul Young, reflects on achieving success by sometimes becoming a nemesis of superiors and subordinates: "To accomplish our goals, I often had to challenge the status quo. I had to challenge self-centered individuals in the central office whose interest were far removed from what was best for kids. I challenged staff members who lost sight of our goals too." Though others were unsettled with him, Young remained keen on students' best interest as the focus. Working in the best interest of students sometimes proves challenging. Administrators and teachers alike realize that a safe and comfortable environment is one most conducive to learning. What happens when students threaten the learning environment with disruption One may think disciplinary measures should be immediately assigned and enforced. After all, it is in the best interest of the school's safety and learning environment-two elements that should be protected. Aspiring administrators may be shocked to learn that the school's learning environment and overall safety are sometimes compromised. According to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004 (IDEA), some students possess disabilities which hamper them from always conforming to ideal behavior. Students who are found to have nonconformist behavior that threatens the order of the learning environment must be accommodated and cannot be penalized if their behavior is directly linked to their disabilities. School staff is not allowed to assign the same consequence that a student without disabilities may receive; rather, they must meet students' needs through accommodations. Some accommodations take an extended amount of time. The passing of time grants disruptive students additional time to jeopardize the learning environment and overall safety of the school. When assigning discipline for students with disabilities, administrators must keep the law in mind. Avoiding ramifications from the federal government means administrators adhere to protocols when assigning discipline for students with disabilities. Upon finding discipline that has not been judiciously assigned, the federal government will challenge, overturn, and/or penalize administrators who ill-assign discipline to students with disabilities. Some administrators find that abiding by the law sometimes leave their teachers without support. An administrator may not immediately remove a disruptive student from the school because of the student's disability. Rather, the administrator has no choice but to allow that student to attend class, and the teacher and other students must continue encountering the incessant disruption until proper procedure has been followed. Sometimes the protection of students with disabilities comes at an imposing cost to other students and teachers by thwarting an administrator's ability to protect the order of the school. Much like students with disabilities, students without disabilities have plans implemented to protect their best interests. Aspiring administrators may expect to protect the best interests of rule-abiding students at all costs and contend that disruptive students relinquish their rights when they decide to challenge rules with their disruptions. No matter how disruptive or non-disruptive students may be, their rights remain equal and intact. As a result of Goss v. Lopez, every student is entitled to due process. If a student is accused of an act that warrants a short-term suspension, that student and his or her parents must be notified and given the opportunity to respond to the accusation (Reutter 769). Students with devious and malicious intents are entitled the same rights as those who value education and would do little to interfere with it. While due process was initially designed to protect students' best interest, it sometimes sabotages school officials' efforts to maintain an orderly educational environment. In some cases, students utilize due process with direct intentions to escape consequences or seek legal reprimand for school officials (Arum). Regardless, administrators who neglect to follow procedural due process inevitably lose to the court of law (Reutter 769). Administrators in serious or fervent pursuit of their jobs must do so cautiously. They must recognize that enforcing a justifiable consequence for some students may result in not only verbal confrontations with parents but also lawsuits. More frequently, students vocalize the fact that their parents can and will sue (Arum). Such a reality warrants school officials and districts to retain professional insurance. Since Goss v. Lopez, membership to the National School Boards Association's Council of School Attorneys has grown from 250 to over 3,000 members (Arum). Unfortunately, administrators must seek insurance as protection for even the noblest of their missions. Though society depends on the staff at educational institutions to prepare young people to become productive citizens, it does little to aid educational institutions in the process. As more laws, parents, and students challenge administrative decisions yet continue to assign more responsibilities, it has become increasingly difficult for administrators and teachers to protect the learning environment and enforce assigned discipline (Arum). Aspiring administrators must optimistically yet cautiously pursue their future roles. Under no circumstances should administrators surrender when their missions are threatened. Monroe states that leaders should remain steadfast in their missions, even if it means breaking rules (173). A worthwhile goal is worth the many wages of battles or even wars. If an administrator decides to continue pursuing his or her mission, he or she may have to do so without the support of many within the school. An aspiring administrator may ask where he or she will find the strength to continue. What happens when the opposing force depletes his or her initial vim and vigor Before their verve has been used or even exhausted, aspiring administrators should have a support system in place. An experienced mentor acting as a voice of reason can many times guide new administrators through difficult circumstances. In addition, the mentor can share strategies he or she has learned through experience that may alleviate stress, and save time and energy. Depending on someone who has the capacity to offer genuine empathy and worthy advice helps novice administrators cope with the magnitude of responsibilities and avoid permanent exhaustion for the profession (Delisio). Education is raising children. No one person can bear it all alone-not even the chief administrator of a school. Aspiring and experienced administrators must be prepared to seek and accept the help of the many individuals involved in the education process. At times the help will prove beneficial. Other times, however, offered help will be imposing and potentially damaging. It is then that administrators must possess the strength to remain steadfast in their initial goals, which may require that they stand alone or with the support of very few. Through the expected and unexpected occurrences of administrations everyone must share in the burdens, lessons, and celebrations of educating the future of America. Works Cited Arum, Richard. "Sparing Rods, Spoiling Children: The Impossibility of School Discipline." National Review. 11 October 2004 . Delisio, Ellen R. "Mentoring New Administrators to Success." Education World. 02 April 2007 . Goss ET AL v. Lopez ET AL. 22 January 1975. Supreme Court of the United States. 06 April 2007. . Monroe, Lorraine. Nothing's Impossible: Leadership Lessons from Inside and Outside the Classroom. New York; PublicAffairs, 1997. Rayfield, Robin. "An Analysis of Administrator Attitudes Toward Tasks in School Administration." 02 April 2007 . Reutter, Edmund E. The Law of Public Education. New York; The Foundation Press, Inc., 1994. Senge, Peter, et. al. Schools that Learn. New York; Doubleday, 2000. Sorenson, Richard. "Diffusing Everyone's Anger in Our Schools." Education Digest. January 2007: 31-33 The Individual with Disabilities Education Act of 2004. "Building the Legacy: IDEA 2004." U.S. Department of Education. 06 April 2007 . Young, Paul G. "The Principal as Troublemaker." Education World. 02 April 2007 . Read More