- Which leadership response is likely to be most effective in resolving immediate issues? Why?
When an incident occurs, a structural bureaucratic thought frame may be used. This frame focuses on roles and structure (Bolman & Deal, 2008). Structural leaders focus on implementation according to Bolman & Deal (2008, p. 360). This would be useful as Joey needs to know the expectations of the school in terms of behaviour and the behavioural consequences. The teacher needs to clearly know the steps of action towards dealing with the behaviour. Most schools have a behavioural policy that has been reviewed by teachers and students have been made aware of it. This provides transparency and increases the illusion of ‘fairness’ when discipline issues occur. The judgement of the teacher is removed and a protocol is followed that has been approved by the board.
I think a human resources frame in conjunction with the bureaucratic approach would help support Joey better. The teacher Mr. Harris seemed to escalate the situation as he engaged with Joey more, instead of lowering the emotions so that the milk could be dealt with.
- Which leadership response is likely to be most effective in resolving longer term issues? Why?
A Human Resources approach to the situation would be a good choice of action as it supports both the staff, students and families. I appreciate that this is a team approach between the home and school of problem-solving and action-planning forward. This is an educational approach to the situation for the student and family. Human resources frame focuses on a sense of openness and caring where active listening and participation in the discussion is encouraged for a cohesive, supportive approach (Bolman & Deal, 2008, p. 360).
I also like that the principal would do some reflecting with the assistant principal and teacher to see what they learnt from the situation and how they could manage the situation differently if necessary. It is also a time for the principal to be reflective of the whole process as a school and see if there are key adjustments that can be made to support moving forward productively.
- From your viewpoint, what utility (if any) is there in analysing educational leadership from the strategic and from the tactical level? Why?
Analysing educational leadership from a strategic and tactical level is helpful as a way to understand the different perspectives and where the situation may be lacking in capacity. With an understanding of the two levels, it helps bring concrete understanding to the leader as they begin to unpack a situation. In some situations, long term and immediate might require different approaches and a well-rounded understanding of all the frames will help the leader adapt to the situation at hand.
- Is it realistic to expect that school leaders are or should be able to respond effectively to both immediate and longer term issues equally effectively? Why? If not, how might more effective responses be implemented. In your explanation – be sure to link your responses to leadership perspectives presented thus far in this subject?
I believe that as a school leader it is important to be able to make the right decisions in the immediate present for the situation as it will greatly impact as a ripple effect long term issues. When a short-term issue has been mishandled, it can often lead to more complicated and escalated states later in the long-term issues. By developing a greater understanding of Bolman & Deal’s frames (2008), educational leaders can better read the situation from different perspectives and identify what the best course of action should be.
ReferencesBolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2008). Reframing Leadership. In Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice and Leadership (4th ed., pp. 341-372). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.