Adaptable Educational Leadership in a
Time of Crisis
By Jeffrey M. Bowen
Is leadership
during a crisis different from other kinds of leadership? And if so, what can be learned from the
difference? Recently, I posed these
questions to an elementary charter school principal for whom I have served as
an evaluator and mentor for years. Suddenly, it seems like many of her routine
executive decisions have become unnervingly irrelevant.
The current crisis of spreading coronavirus presents
a terrifying challenge to the routines of our lives. Hopefully, our responses will save lives and
livelihoods, but untimely or shortsighted steps may add to the chaos. Educators and parents are acutely aware that
continued confinement in home settings may compromise children’s learning.
The
leadership we need hinges on the type of crisis we confront. Defined as a “time of intense difficulty,
trouble, or danger” a crisis usually occurs in two phases: first, a trigger event like a catastrophe or
disaster; second, a smoldering rollout of responses during which policies and
preventive steps are developed. For
example, 9/11 instantly killed thousands of people. But today, anyone who checks in for their
plane flight experiences the lasting effects on safety and security.
An
educational example stems from a landmark report published in 1983. Titled “A Nation At Risk,” the authors
insisted our schools were trapped in a crisis of mediocrity. They urged a national mobilization of more
challenging courses and tests to preserve our economic future. Consequently, most of our students experience
a standards-based core curriculum as well as annual proficiency testing.
The
coronavirus embodies the crisis element of a viral trigger, reinforced by the
growing need for resources to avoid overloading our health-care systems.
Further up the road, policy and practical solutions must be clarified. Among other things, the aftermath of the
Covid-19 will demonstrate whether crisis leadership produces lasting educational
results.
The charter principal I mentioned earlier offers
a multi-faceted case study in crisis leadership. As the chief academic officer of a K-6
charter school, she reports directly to a board and not to district
administrators.
Confronted by
a quickly evolving crisis, the principal acted quickly to close her school
until further notice. She charged her
staff with developing take-home learning packets to cover the basics and
related practical tools. Hundreds of packets
were mailed home. Meanwhile, she set up available
online learning through Kahn Academy, and provided parents with lists of free
online sites and resources. The school’s
website is updated every day with new electronic links for parents. While the students are getting daily meals at
schools located closest to their homes, the charter school is working with Feed
More of Western New York to provide additional food and emergency food kits to
families.
All school
staff are being paid during the closure.
Laptops for all teachers are used to conduct virtual meetings and to
sustain professional development. No teachers
may enter the school, but cleaning staff sanitize the building regularly. Leadership reports from executive staff are developed
and shared with staff, the board, and the State Education Department.
Difficult as
it is to profile acts of leadership mid crisis, the facts show this principal
has adapted strategic choices to fit the circumstances. A data-driven focus on school improvement is
on hold, as state tests have been cancelled. Inequitable access to technology at home
remains a difficult issue. Still, even without
mechanisms for accountability, the principal is exploring options, taking
careful steps forward, and learning from this harrowing experience.
The goal of a
viable curriculum has been preserved, though not guaranteed, along with reasonable
ways to reinforce fundamental instruction.
Ongoing support and learning for staff are occurring; basic safety for
all has been addressed; and clearly efforts have been made to extend the
practical benefits of a caring community for parents and students. Constant upward communication with the state
and outward to parents and students are priorities.
Another
crucial dimension to leadership in crisis is attitudinal and emotional. The principal is enabling and empowering her
staff, students, and parents by providing reassurance that a welcoming school
life surely will continue. She is
capitalizing on a reservoir of trust. By
repeating the message, “We can do this together,” the principal is building
what experts call social capital. She
understands that people are frightened.
Her success will be nurtured by sustained communication and a
willingness to listen and act calmly and rationally.
Did all these
strategies materialize overnight? Certainly not, but management of resources,
consultation with colleagues, existing routes of communication, and goals of
continued learning for staff and students have come into play -- along with a plenty
of inspiration.
The role of the leader in this crisis is like
that of an orchestra conductor who suddenly finds that unusual combinations of
instruments and musicians must join together on short notice for multiple
concerts using music they have not practiced. By no means is this leadership as usual. But so
far, thanks to the conductor, the band plays on.
NOTE: The
leadership of chief academic officer Darci Novak at Niagara Charter School in
Niagara County, New York is gratefully acknowledged and described in this
article.
