Stop Recycling the Same Solutions: Rethinking Leadership in Public Education

Everyone acknowledges that American public education faces an acute crisis. Experts have recognized for many decades that fundamental problems exist because of achievement gaps alongside teacher burnout, student disengagement, outdated curriculum, and behavioral challenges. Every time we conduct leadership searches we use the same tired methods, while asking familiar questions, expecting different results.

During candidate interviews we consistently ask about PBIS philosophy, as well as professional development strategies for improving teaching, and classroom technology implementation plans. The same predictable answers surface during the interview process. Our current practice of selecting leaders who commit to implement untested versions of failed methods leads to our surprise at the lack of progress. After selecting the same types of leaders asking the same types of questions, why do we continue to be surprised by the lack of progress?

Let’s talk about it.

PBIS Doesn’t Work the Way It’s Supposed To

The Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) system originally functioned to build positive student behavior while preventing school discipline problems. The practical application of PBIS transforms into a superficial award system which includes stickers and candy rewards that do not resolve student needs or environmental conditions (Gage et al., 2018). The implementation of PBIS fails to improve discipline problems especially among students with disabilities according to Vincent et al. (2016).

Professional Development Isn’t Professional or Developmental

Teachers are burned out. Teachers need specific educational experiences that move beyond the standard workshop format with its pre-designed curriculum and slide presentation. The majority of traditional professional development fails to meet essential requirements for being job-embedded and sustained and directly connected to classroom practice (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017).

The overwhelming majority of teachers currently meet and frequently surpass their required professional development time requirements. According to the National Center for Education Statistics [NCES] (2020) research shows that 90% of teachers do PD annually while 47% get more than 30 hours yearly which produces minimal instructional impact during these standard sessions. Teachers spend most of their time in unproductive mass sessions that fail to enhance their classroom practice.

Teachers express frustration regarding insufficient time to implement the essential educational methods that lead to better results including peer teamwork instructional design and mentoring. Research indicates that student achievement benefits from active learning and feedback combined with follow-up support yet these essential elements are present in fewer than 10% of teacher professional development programs (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017).

The main issue is that teachers receive plenty of professional development but they need substantial and transformative education rather than excessive routine sessions. Teachers want professional development that delivers mentorship together with autonomy rather than empty compliance-based training that disregards their daily classroom responsibilities.

Teacher Retention Is Still Plummeting

The national teacher attrition rate stands at a critical level because more than 44% of new teachers decide to leave their profession within five years (Ingersoll et al., 2018). Teachers exit their positions primarily because of insufficient workplace support along with strict accountability measures, toxic workplace environments, their absence of decision-making influence, and low salaries (Garcia & Weiss, 2020). Emotional exhaustion and institutional neglect overcome the positive impact of appreciation weeks on teachers.

Technology Is Not a Magic Wand

The pandemic drove schools to adopt digital learning but research demonstrates that higher screen usage does not directly lead to better academic results. Excessive use of educational technology tools produces negative effects on student learning and their motivation toward schoolwork according to research by Zheng et al. (2016). Technology serves as an educational resource yet it cannot replace essential elements of personal connections between students and teachers along with meaningful learning experiences and skilled instruction. The belief that technology functions as a magic solution to educational challenges remains nothing more than an illusion.

So Why Do We Keep Asking the Wrong Questions?

Because it’s comfortable. Modifying existing systems proves simpler than it does to create disruptions. Some fear what they don’t yet understand. But comfort doesn’t lead to change. A genuine educational transformation requires finding leaders who want to redesign the current system rather than those who want to sustain it.

We should be asking different questions:

• What specific plan do you have to serve the genuine educational needs of students outside academic requirements?

• What approach will you take to create an educational environment which helps students develop as people rather than focusing solely on grades?

• What methods will you use to eliminate outdated assumptions while implementing systems that serve the present, promote fairness and create meaningful purpose?

Every decision at the school must include teacher voices, student voices and community input. Not just the illusion of these contributions.

The current educational leadership system requires transformation from fixers to innovators who will establish fresh systems that function effectively and respect human values.

The questions we ask today will always yield identical responses which produce identical outcomes.

References

Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/effective-teacher-professional-development-report 

The study conducted by Gage et al. (2018) evaluated School-wide positive behavior interventions and supports implementation fidelity and student risk for severe problem behavior. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 62(3), 162–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2017.1402362 

Garcia, E., & Weiss, E. (2020). COVID-19 and teacher attrition: Why teachers are leaving and what can be done. Economic Policy Institute. https://www.epi.org/publication/teacher-turnover/ 

Ingersoll, R., Merrill, E., & Stuckey, D. (2018). Seven trends: The transformation of the teaching force – Updated October 2018. Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2020). Professional development for teachers: Results from the 2017–18 National Teacher and Principal Survey. U.S. Department of Education. https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2020145 

Vincent, C. G., Sprague, J. R., & Tobin, T. J. (2016). The study found disciplinary referrals for culturally and linguistically diverse students with and without disabilities when school-wide positive behavior support was implemented. Exceptionality, 24(4), 221–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2015.1064424 

Zheng, B., Warschauer, M., Lin, C. H., & Chang, C. (2016). A meta-analysis and research synthesis of learning in one-to-one laptop environments is presented in this review. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 1052–1084. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316628645