No Child Left Behind Act Replaced with the “Every Student Succeeds Act”

The“Every Student Succeed Act "has replaced NCLB act for K-12 education in the United States. Congress voted to lessen the role that the federal government will play in education, while allowing for more decisions to occur in the districts and states. The over testing accountability culture that punished states if students did not score proficient in math and reading will be eliminated and replaced with the “Every Student Succeeds” measure. States will now fix their own problems by creating their own tests and creating their own evaluation for teachers.  States will determine for themselves how achievement gaps will be closed. Arne Duncan says that the top-down, one size fits all system of NCLB will be replaced with a system of laws that are more flexible for finding the best solutions locally. The secretary of education Arne Duncan stepped down as secretary of education and has an interim who is nominated to replace Duncan. The acting secretary of education  is John B. King; an African American and said to be a pro charter schools advocate, as he founded his own charter school, just outside of Boston in 1999 (Camera, 2015).

Some things remain the same in the new system for K-12 education, including the federal schedule of testing (testing grade 3-8 and once in high school in math and reading); and the annual reporting of achievement scores with a demographic break down. New safeguards include the monitoring from states for the underserved students. The new educational law is a direct response to President Obama’s executive authority and call for change in education. The bipartisan vote and legislation of congress is represented in the “Every Student Succeed Act” (Camera, 2015).  

Obviously, selection of local leadership for local developments and strategies need to be done with the most care and discretion. According to Rivera, 2015, the act provides for the states discretion for developing their own strategies for the lowest performing schools of Pennsylvania. In Pennsylvania, Governor Wolf secured an increased budget of 350 million dollars to strengthen education in the state. Now, we all share the goal for securing quality education for Pennsylvania (Reigelman, 2015).

                                                                       

                                                             References

Reigelman, N. (2015). Pennsylvania Pressroom, State department of education responds to congressional passage of Every Student Succeeds Act. http://www.media.pa.gov/Pages/Education-Details.aspx?newsid=199

Humility for Educational Leadership

                                         

                                                   

In today’s leadership economy, shared leadership is necessary since no individual person is correct all the time (Kocolowski, 2010, p.67). The management catastrophe for many leadership experiences however, is when a leader finds a need to control every aspect of an organization to the point that they are micro-managing. Shared leadership differs as the approach allows for decisions that are interactive and for many to be influenced by one another. Shared leadership has replaced the former practices of hierarchical leadership (Avolio, Walumbwa, and Weber 2009). A Definition of shared leadership set by Conger & Peace (2003): “A dynamic, interactive influence among individuals in groups for which the objective is to lead one another to the achievement of group or organizational goals or both” (p. 1). I have recognized how the initial intentions of an organization for shared leadership may begin honest and good, but as commonly known, “power corrupts”.  The ugly face of pride and desire to rule over people often reveals itself through individuals who cannot handle the idea of being empowered. Therefore, I wish to suggest that a great need exist in educational leadership today. Matters of integrity, ethics, ability to motivate are all important but I believe that one of the most important character traits in shared leadership is the ability to lead with humility.

An old biblical passage exhorts saying that if one will be great, one must first humble one’s-self.  Contrary to what the media highlights, the greatest leaders are not the rambunctious, arrogant, and self-centered models set before the American people. If one evaluates the presidential race in the United States, shameful representations of leadership are present as they seek to uncover the faults and failures of one another. If these were granted the authority to lead the great United States, many would quickly bring the nation to ruin. If leaders will enhance their practices, examining one’s demonstration of humility is necessary and the journey of developing one’s character must be set as primary. The problem is that the same problems and personality types exist in educational leadership that are in the political arena. Educators speak of the achievement gaps that exist among children but as we consider educational leaders, I believe that a “humility gap;” exist. Too often, people who crave power strive for such leadership positions, but are usually the worst to serve. In a recent study where 137 teachers from a K-12 setting took a survey about the effectiveness of their principal, the ANOVA revealed that humility and confidence interacted in relation to leadership effectiveness, that is to say that the humbler the leader the greater confidence the teachers had in their principal (Oyer, 2011).

Studies show that the best leaders are humble leaders. A leader’s humility cannot be a counterfeit but rather must be genuine as the counterfeit will not hear other’s opinion or the other side of the story. He knows he is right and despite the information presented from others, will not alter his decision because “he is the boss”. Therefore, for effective educational leadership, a humble leader will be necessary as the humble leader will learn from criticism, and admit when he makes mistakes. This humble leader will be viewed as trustworthy, an encourager and one who empowers growth in those he leads. The humble leader should serve as a role model for followers if he will promote inclusion as, humble leaders do not isolate individuals but help people to feel included (Prime & Salib, 2014). 

Too often in educational leadership, politics is the path through which leaders control their environment. They maintain the status quo through unethical leadership practices.Therefore, let us learn to select leaders for our organizations by examining the issues that really matter.  Resumes are good for purposes of credentials in terms of experience but one must explore deeper to examine character traits. Higher order questioning is necessary as I believe that character is more important than any contribution a leader may have as the leader will reproduce after his own kind and those who are hired may be those to perpetuate the same.

References

Conger, J. A., & Peace, C. L. (2003). A landscape of opportunities: Future research in shared leadership. In C. L. Peace & J. A. Conger (Eds), Shared Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (285-303).

Kocolowski, M. D. (2010). Shared leadership: Is it time for change. Emerging Leadership Journeys. School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship. 3(1), 22-32.

Oyer, B. L. (2011). The relationship between principals’ confidence, humility and effectiveness: A study of teacher perceptions. http://gateway.proquest.com.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&res_dat=xri:pqdiss&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:3451591