A.J.

Schiera
Journal Synthesis
October 11, 2014
Reflecting on my journey thus far, I notice that I really am tending to phrase my
experiences this year as a experiment, an exploration, both professionally and conceptually.
I want to understand whether and how my talents are best used, as a principal, or teacher, or
teacher educator; more importantly, I also want to explore how those boundaries between roles
can be blurred, and how the responsibilities of these roles might overlap and inform each other.
This requires the ability to think flexibly, one of Costa and Kallicks (2000) habits of mind, to be
in high supply, as I navigate what these mutually influencing roles could look like, and what
challenges I am experiencing putting them into action.
One initial consideration is how the leadership theories we have discussed help orient this
goal of creating overlapping, blended approach to my role. In Reframing Organizations, Bolman
and Deal (2013) discuss four frames that can affect how individuals see their organizations and
their roles within them: the factory frame, the family frame, the jungle frame, and the temple and
carnival frame. My efforts to serve as both a principal intern as well as a teacher are intentioned
to position myself as a member of a community, and as one who experiences what teachers
experience personally. Deep down, there is a family frame to it; we teach together, and since I
teach as well, I understand teachers individual needs. As I wrote in Journal 1, It's a way of
keeping my ear on the ground as I do my principal internship. (Perhaps secondarily, there is a
temple and carnival frame; there is something symbolic to principals returning to the classroom
to illustrate their value system.) However, much of what teachers from below and central office
from above expect of principals are seen from the other frames. Administrators must still
administrate; there is still a factory frame in which principals must delegate responsibilities to

teachers, ensure the system works well, and navigate the demands of the bureaucracy above.
There is also a jungle frame; the principal inherently holds a position of power over teachers, and
must hold them accountable. There is no escaping this reality. Bolman and Deal (2013)
characterize the skillful leader as able to successful reframe moments using the frame that fits the
organizations needs. I can see this in the 50-slide district-produced professional development
presentations sent down to principals to deliver; thinking flexibly to replace this factory frame
with a family frame seems to be critical for attending to teachers needs. And, I would aver,
principals that are closer to the classroom, and understand their teaching needs themselves, are
better positioned to lead this way.
The family metaphor explains one of the central aspects of my purpose for being both a
principal and a teacher. Apocryphally, the term principal originated from principal teacher, a
fact which reminds me that all adults are equally part of a community of learners, even if we may
each be differently positioned in those communities. This reflects a belief, echoed by Barth
(2004), that we should seek to create an environment where we are constantly learning. As I
wrote in Journal 2, after reflecting on a lesson in the course I teach, the point is to take away
that sense of vulnerability that we are all perfect teachers. We're not.But we should just get it
out in the open, just be honest with each other that we are not perfect, but that we are willing to
keep working to do better. Staying directly involved in the practice of teaching allows the
principal more common ground in their community of learners than relying on the phrase, I
remember that from when I was a teacher. It also communicates that, as Barth (2004) observes,
the principal is willing to be the head learner and to lead where he will go, rather than
communicating that continuous improvement in instruction is important for only the less-skilled,
or less-titled. Again, this requires flexible thinking. For one, an administrator cannot do all the

tasks required of teachers, or else, she would be a teacher, and have no time to be an
administrator. I am learning that I need to identify the parameters of my teaching to ensure that
it is meaningful, but does not interfere with my internship. Additionally, I need to be flexible
with knowing when my fellow teacher cap is off, and my administrator cap is on. Just as Kohm
and Nance (2007) stress that, in faculty meetings, principals identify which decisions are
principal-only decisions, versus principal decisions after teacher input or collaborative or
consensus decisions, so a principal teacher must think flexibly to know when their principal role
is foregrounded and when their teacher role is foregrounded, and make this distinction explicit.
Continuing to teach also affords a different relationship with students, one critical to a
leader, in my opinion. A principal-student relationship can be cordial, and the best principals
know to understand their students individually; but that relationship with the students in
collaborative pursuit of learning, versus in meetings and in the hallway, is a different, deeper
relationship. It also creates the opportunity for a principal to gather qualitative data on what the
experience of school is like, which Berhardt (2004) validates as data about perceptions of the
school and its work. The course I teach, I seek to understand what students experiences of their
schooling is like; I find that as I observe teachers classes in my internship role, this makes me
also observe from the perspective of the student, rather than just on teachers planning and
instruction. Thinking flexibly across these domains what is this teachers classroom like, from
the vantage point of a student, a fellow teacher, and an administrator can help craft the right
message towards improving teacher and learning in the school, as well as students feeling that
their voices are being heard.

Much of what I have learned about teacher education which is often narrowly
conceived as pre-service teacher education only aligns with the work that principals do as

instructional leaders. As I wrote in Journal 1, I am beginning to see those [roles] as

interchangeable, in a way; that the best principals would seem to be incredible teacher educators
of their staff, helping them build on their strengths in order to continuously improve their
instruction. These conceptions have been particularly useful as I imagine how I might construct
professional development. Hearing the dissonance between the principal and some teachers
discussing evidence-based strategies emphasized by the district and teachers techniques they
have found to work reminds me of the distinctions Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999) make
between different relationships of knowledge to practice. That is, I have learned that I ought to
help construct professional development sessions encourage to both consider evidence-based
strategies, share techniques they have found work in their own contexts, and take an inquiry
stance about the assumptions, values, and outcomes of their practice. Finding ways to leverage
these different conceptions can help make our professional development sessions expand beyond
their conventional formats, and produce more meaningful teacher learning than simply providing
instructions. This requires thinking flexibly about professional development as not just an
implementer of district initiatives, but as a leader and learner in a community of practice.
As I imagine how the principalship could benefit from the experience of teaching and the
approaches of teacher educators, I am reminded the alternative I am conceiving is the exploration
of an ideal, more than the enactment of a reality. It requires the school to be an edge
environment, a rich and diverse space that is inclusive of both the original core features [of
conventional schooling] and the new ones that emerge in these settings (Gordetsky, Barak, &
Harari, 2007, p. 102). And it requires the principal as an individual to inhabit this borderland,
which requires developing a tolerance for contradictions and ambiguity, but can lead to a new
consciousness (Anzalda, 2012).

As I navigate how these ideas might influence my own conception of the principalship, I
must remember that I am experimenting with these ideas in the context of a real high school.
Curriculum and pedagogy are not a blank slate, but may seem beset by standardization and
accountability; the dream of creating a community of learners is often mediated by the political
struggle of being a leader in an underresourced district with an overtaxed staff. As Evans (1996)
observes, the tasks of transition of improving a school involve a series of transformations around
motivation, commitment, competence, coherence, and consensus. As I go forward, I must
continue to think about how being a teacher and learning about teacher education can augment
and transform my work as a principal adapted to the particular context of the school and
community I work in.

References
Anzalda, G. (2012). Borderlands: La Frontera: The New Mestiza. 4th ed. San Francisco, CA:
Aunt Lute Books.
Barth, R. S. (2004). Learning by heart. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bernhardt, V. (2004). Data analysis for continuous school wide improvement. Larchmont, NY:
Eye on Education.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher
learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249-305.
Costa, A. L. & Kallick, B. (2000). Discovering and exploring habits of mind. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Evans, R. (1996). The Human side of school change: Reform, resistance, and the real-life
problems of innovation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Gordetsky, M., Barak, J., & Harari, H. (2007). A Cultural-ecological edge: A Model for a
collaborative community practice. In M. Zellermayer & E. Munthe (Eds.), Teachers
learning in communities: International perspectives (pp. 99-111). Rotterdam: Sense
Publishers.
Kohm, B., & Nance, B. (2007). Principals who learn: Asking the right questions, seeking the
best solutions. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.