Gary Ivory

Distribution of Influence, Communication, and Relational Mentoring in the US Superintendency.

We report on how fifty superintendents (chief executive officers of public school systems, each invited by a researcher to participate) from seven states in the US talked in eight focus groups of their perspectives on their influence as leaders, their efforts to communicate with stakeholders, and how they learn from these stakeholders. We maintain that our participants’ revelations suggest that three definitions must be expanded to fit their work. First, influence or authority must be seen not merely as vested in the superintendent; rather, these superintendents described their leadership in terms of working with and through others. Second, organizational communication for these superintendents is more than the district’s leader communicating his or her perceptions and wishes to others; it is more relational, in which a variety of actors communicate their perspectives to one another. Third, this type of inter‐professional leadership leads logically to relational mentoring, where learning does not pass merely from expert to novice; rather, superintendents described their roles in terms of various parties learning from and teaching one another. We discuss implications of these insights for practice, research, and preparation.

Hidden Expert Knowledge: The Knowledge That Counts for the Small School-District Superintendent

Using Bereiter and Scardamalias (1993) hidden expert knowledge, we explored what knowledge counts from the perspectives of working small school-district superintendents and the ways in which they gain that knowledge. This qualitative study used focus groups as its primary data collection method. Participants were 37 superintendents of districts with fewer than 1,000 students representing the Midwest, southwest and west, and southeast. We learned that what counts for our superintendents appears to be in constant and fluid negotiation because of the small-district context supporting themes of competing visions, you are the center of the wheel and balancing/negotiating/weighing decisions. We also learned that preparation programs may not help in all the ways necessary to prepare these superintendents for their jobs.

The self and leader expertise

If you are a superintendent of a small district, or if you aspire to be one, then you are setting out to be a quandary negotiator. It would do you no good to seek to be a quandary avoider; our examples in this book show that quandaries are inherent in the superintendency Nor do we see superintendents as quandary solvers, for many quandaries never go away, or they go away only temporarily—rising again in new forms or with new parties concerned. But we do believe you can learn to negotiate quandaries: to make good decisions rather than ones that exacerbate quandaries, to make conditions as good as they can be for the greatest number of people, to face difficulties rather than letting them fester or passing them off to others, and to foster solutions that will be of long-term—rather than merely short-term—benefit and that will “support the higher level goals of [your] organization” (Bereiter and Scardamalia, 1993, p. 57). Part of being a great leader is quandary negotiation.

How Good Does the Information Have to Be to Justify a Press Conference

This case involves a dilemma that school district evaluators frequently face. A superintendent directs an evaluator to participate in a press conference and present data validating the superintendent’s program to improve high school course-passing rates. The evaluator presents his analysis to the superintendent, who directs him to remove some data with the result that the report will reflect more positively on the program. The evaluator believes it is improper evaluation procedure to remove the data. The teachers, meanwhile, have registered their opposition to the superintendent’s program, since it negatively impacts their working conditions.

Leadership Development and the Study of Expertise

As this book has shown, navigating quandaries is no easy task. In fact, its authors have prompted you to weigh platforms, theories, and leadership skillsets when attempting to do so. You have explored how quandaries require more than a “by-the-book” response and an exercise of current knowledge—they require you to learn beyond your current leadership knowledge. Quandaries hold the promise of developing leaders. If quandaries have this potential, how do you unlock it? In this chapter, we call attention to three levels of leadership expertise. We also maintain that there are four psychological processes that can support your pursuit of leader expertise: identity, self-efficacy, self-regulation, and goal orientation.

Promoting the Success of Every Student with Integrity, with Fairness, and in an Ethical Manner: What If the Way Is Not Clear?

We are pleased with the opportunity to write about ISLLC Standard 5, which serves as the main title to this chapter. Nearly every word of this standard resonates with us. We are excited to envision a system of schooling in which all students can succeed. Furthermore, as the three of us together have decades of experience as educators, we have certainly come to recognize the satisfaction of working with leaders of integrity, rather than those who are at best self-serving and at worst duplicitous. Fairness is a virtue we value highly. Doing things in an ethical manner is similarly appealing. So, we looked forward to writing a chapter that would help readers pursue these ideals.

The Quandaries Solved by Case-Based Teaching

In 1995, Donmoyer, Imber, and Scheurich produced a book of readings with the intriguing title The Knowledge Base in Educational Administration. The books chapters highlighted the possibility that we who prepare graduate students to administer schools may be unable to define precisely what it is that we know or what we should pass on to our students. This is a threatening prospect. If we cannot say what we know, then we cannot tell why students should come to us. If we cannot justify students coming to us, then they might just as well go elsewhere. If students go elsewhere, then our self-esteem (not to mention our livelihood) suffers. This is our preeminent quandary.