The Moral Imperative of School Leadership

Citation

Cook, P. and Gallagher, W. (2005), "The Moral Imperative of School Leadership", Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 229-232. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230510586614

Fullan's latest book, The Moral Imperative of School Leadership (Corwin Press, California, 2003) will appeal to principals and system administrators alike.

Reflecting on his current work with districts in North America, Fullan argues that to achieve ‘large scale, sustainable reform and improvement’ (p. xiv) to schools there is a need to look at the principalship (which he sees as the critical agent for reform) from a system level.

The concise 80‐page work, typical of Fullan's recent publications, sets the context for his argument in the first chapter, with an examination of the changing context for public educators and schools, and, particularly with a strong defence of the importance of the public education system.

In short, a high quality public education system is essential, not only for parents who send their children to these schools but also for the public good as a whole. (p. 4)

It is in this section of the book that Fullan introduces his most significant theme, however, by providing a strong challenge to principals who hold the view that by improving their schools individually, the public system will be nurtured and developed. Fullan argues that

Improving the overall system will not happen just by endorsing the vision of a strong public education system; principals in particular must be cognizant that changing their schools and the system is a simultaneous proposition.

The first chapter concludes with an endorsement of Jim Collins' (2001) “Level 5 Leadership” – those characteristics which Collins argues turn a good company into a great one. Collins' characteristics include getting the right people; maintaining faith in the context of recognising reality; and the “hedgehog concept” – deciding what you are passionate about, what you can be best at, in the context of what makes financial sense – all this is in the frame of disciplined thought and carefully selected technology.

The second chapter briefly analyses barriers to effective principalship, examining data from a study of 137 principals and vice principals in the Toronto Board of Education in the 1980s. Most interesting and most relevant to readers in 2004 is a barrier which Fullan calls “loss of one's moral compass” where he elaborates briefly the notion of the principal who, in a context of overload and role ambiguity, loses contact with her fundamental motives for engaging with the principalship. There is no doubt that many of our colleagues here in Australia suffer from this malaise – too much to do; too many roles to perform; and not enough time to engage their sense of moral purpose and consider appropriately what is right for students. Linked to this, and only mentioned briefly in the book, is the barrier of principals not taking charge of their own learning – leaving the critical issue of their learning and development to someone else.

The other barrier which principals here in Australia would identify with post‐2000 is what Fullan calls an “absence of system change strategy”. This barrier involves the sheer volume of system initiatives; distracting or inconsequential policies and structural change unconnected to student learning; poor policy implementation and clear policy gaps – such as in the areas of teacher induction and on‐going learning.

The purpose of this chapter is to elicit thought from readers about what needs to be done, and to form a basis for Fullan's thesis that moral purpose is a powerful enough lever to bind schools and systems together in their search to establish new cultures in and across schools.

Fullan's third chapter examines moral purpose at the school level. Fullan defines moral purpose at the beginning of this section, setting the scene for his further arguments.

Moral purpose of the highest order is having a system where all students learn, the gap between high and low performance becomes greatly reduced, and what people learn enables them to be successful citizens and workers in a morally‐based society. (p. 30)

Fullan introduces the levels of moral imperative here – individual, school, district and societal – and concentrates on the second, or school, level, asking what the moral imperative of principals is within their schools and communities. In this section, Fullan draws heavily on Bryk and Schneider's (2002) study, Trust in Schools, and work done in the Baltimore City Public System which concentrated on improving reading in 18 inner‐city elementary schools (Dicembre, 2002, p. 34 from Fullan p. 35). Most significant here in terms of schoolwide moral purpose are words from Dr Goldman at Holiday Elementary School in Chicago.

I feel a moral responsibility to a child who is innocent and vulnerable in this society, to try – at least in my little neck of the woods – to give them a good taste of America…

That's what I look for in my teachers – crusaders… They're people who have a passion for what they're doing… (Bryk and Schneider (2002) in Fullan p. 36)

Fullan makes a number of points about the principalship in this chapter – in particular that we need a large number of capable principals and that there is a declining pool of takers. According to Fullan, even the best principals are essentially only making a difference in literacy and numeracy in elementary schools, and there is a need for a recognition of the depth of change in the principal's role that is required. This can be accomplished, he says, through quality principals and leaders developing leadership in others, thus consolidating school leadership beyond the individual.

The conclusion of this chapter is significant. Principals, according to Fullan, require “courage and capacity to build new cultures based on trusting relationships, and a culture of disciplined inquiry and action”. He argues that quality school leadership is much more than improving test scores.

Most readers will be of the view that the fourth chapter “Making a Difference Beyond the School” is the essence of this book. Fullan argues that the overall environment must improve if schools are to undergo continuous improvement, and that this improvement cannot be achieved only from the top. It is, according to Fullan, about principals and leaders at the same level giving and receiving help (p. 47) thus building capacity across all schools. Moral imperative, in terms of public education, will therefore be a collective endeavour. In Fullan's words

If these developments play themselves out regionally…it is far more likely leaders will be cognizant of their responsibility and contribution to closing the performance gap beyond their own narrow bailwick. The result will be an improvement in the system – the district or the region… In the same way that the school cannot develop if individual teachers do not identify with and participate in schoolwide actions, the district cannot be effective if school leaders do not identify with and participate in districtwide developments. (p. 47‐48)

Fullan concedes that principals with moral purpose ought not wait for the system to make its advance, but should make every effort to get it right at their schools. He concedes that even though an increasing number of areas are claiming success – certainly at the elementary school level –

(the) majority of school districts do not have the conception, the capacity or continuity to be anything more than an episodic aggravation for school improvement… (p. 50)

The key data examined in terms of how to achieve district‐wide improvement focussed on district‐wide meetings of principals where principals worked together in a relational way, using a data‐driven agenda in an atmosphere of instruction and learning. A key indicator is explained using the example of a school which was put “on watch” because of low achievement scores. Instead of principals responding with the thought, “there but for the grace of God go us”, other principals contacted the principal of the school and asked how they could help.

The role of the district was to improve facilities, materials and administrative support, continually emphasizing the moral mission of the district, supporting the school where teachers did not want to perform, celebrating success, and being visible in schools listening to what the staff had to say.

Fullan also emphasises strong school leadership – indicating that the new model of school leadership is not to be “a highly effective implementer of ‘informed external prescription’” (Barber, 2002, p. 3 in Fullan p. 55). In Fullan's words, “the moral imperative cannot be sustained on the backs of principals… who are driven by external forces … ” (p. 56).

He also admits the blockers including how difficult it is for schools to learn from each other; how associated culture and propensity to do so are often absent; and how resources and related capacity are regularly missing (p. 57). In the school districts cited, while many schools opened their doors to visitors from other schools, most were not clear about what they had to do to lead others, and lacked the time, resources or capacity to make a difference.

Fullan's major premise, though, bears examination, and presents a challenge for all district leaders and system administrators:

Individual school principals must be almost as concerned about the success of other schools in their district as they are about their own. This is the only way that large numbers of schools and communities will be able to operate with moral purpose, literally, because system action continually reinforces this direction through capacity‐building and accountable monitoring, all focussed on moral purpose.

On the other hand, according to Fullan, “school leadership is the single most important contributor to school performance.. (and) we want to see a schooling system growing from the bottom up, rather than the top down, partnerships fuelled by vocation and interest and commitment as well as contracts and funds, not central diktat” (Miliband, 2002, p. 5 in Fullan p. 58)

The final section on school leadership and society is only briefly mentioned by Fullan, where he alludes to the work of Heifetz and Linsky (2002) indicating that principals will not get their interaction at the highest level right if they cannot first get right their interactions at the lower levels.

The final chapter of The Moral Imperative of School Leadership is called “how to get there” and readers will take what they will from a range of strategies which Fullan mentions including developing trust, putting your ideas on the line and combating fear of failure. More significant to gain from this chapter though, are two ideas – the concept of leading quietly (not all of us can be charismatic leaders…) and remembering always that the “why” is more important than the “how to”. Fullan is critical of the “how to” culture which dominates the deeper issues of intention, purpose and responsibility.

The central messages of the final chapter, and of the book essentially, are listed towards the end of this section, and include a need to re‐conceptualise the role of school leadership and to invest in leaders developing leaders.

The Moral Imperative of School Leadership is an important read for school leaders and system administrators, not so much because it provides a prescription for the future of public education, but more because it elevates the moral imperative of public schooling, and enshrines the view that effective school leadership must be driven from a deep moral purpose.