Reflection

Incident 1

I have had my second ISP visit to school 1 today to carry out the audit with the headteacher. The idea is that the school adviser comes along to make sure that it all goes smoothly as they are the people who have requested this support for the schools in the first place. Unfortunately he couldn't attend, so it was just me and the headteacher. She was particularly negative, especially in her body language. There was a circular table in her room, but she stayed on her large chair behind her desk, creating a real and an imaginary barrier between us. Not a good start!

Reflection

I have been wondering what caused this behaviour. I know the school is on an estate with high deprivation and she is very protective and nurturing of the children. Her focus is very much on their all round development as well as their education, to replace what many of them don't get at home.

I came to the conclusion that she sees the vision and aims of the programme as being at odds with her vision and aims for the school. Children's moral and spiritual development is not mutually exclusive from their academic development. If children are supported to achieve more, then they will become more confident and have a greater sense of self-worth. I believe that by supporting these children to make the most of their education will give them a better chance of escaping the cycle of deprivation they find themselves in now.

I am worried that she seems to have drawn her conclusion of the ISP without discussing her concerns with me, and she has developed a negative image of the programme. The literature all shows that for sustained improvement there has to be quality leadership and management. In this case, that has to be the headteacher, there is nobody else to take on that role as it is a small school. Although I have a leadership role within the school it is difficult to see how that could be effective for half a day per week if the programme is not being maintained for the other four and a half days by her.

I will suggest at the next meeting that we take selected elements of the programme to start with, the ones that she perceives as meeting her vision and values, and when these start showing signs of success, as I have no doubt they will, then I can implement the rest. I would rather compromise than see the programme fail.

Incident 2

Today at school 6 we worked on developing a written calculations policy. For multiplication, the majority of the staff wanted the old style multiplication. I didn't want this as I know it doesn't work with a lot of children, it's just jumping through hoops and grid method is much more effective.

I argued this fact with them in what became quite a heated debate. In a way I was quite pleased that they valued it enough to enter into a debate, but I felt that their reasons were not to do with the best interests of the children. Eventually, after much persuading, I managed to get them to accept the grid method.

After the meeting, I was talking to Mrs X the subject leader. She said that she would prepare the policy and I said "Oh no, that's ok, I'll do it", despite the fact that although it is not a huge job, I know I haven't really got the time.

Reflection

There are two issues that concern me here. The first is how vehement I was with regard to the calculation method. I believed it was in the children's best interests to use this method and I wasn't willing to concede on this point. I was almost at the point of becoming didactic.

I believe it is better to take children through an expanded method and process, even though it takes longer, as this will enable them to have understanding. I don't believe in teaching them a trick that they may or may not remember. There are so many children who lack confidence with mathematics and this will have an impact on their life chances. We have a moral duty to ensure we give them the best chance to succeed.

I felt it was appropriate to have a meeting because it gave people the chance to put across their points of view. From experience, they will be far more likely to follow this policy as it has been agreed by them all rather than if I had given a policy out with no discussion or collaboration.

This policy has the potential to make a huge impact on the children's ability to use and apply calculations. I felt that I used several elements of transformational leadership. I established clear goals with the staff, offered individual support to help with areas for development and used the meeting to allow a collaborative decision to be made. However, another part of me feels that I played the system, and that they didn't really participate in a decision making progress, they were manipulated into making the decision I wanted. Is this wrong if nobody feels aggrieved? Or is it as Gronn (2003) suggested leadership by influence?

We talked in class about preferred professional identity, about the way you can say you have certain values and yet your actions show something different. I would have said that I was a transformational leader who could communicate vision and values and develop collaborative working procedures, yet it seems I only like collaborative working procedures when I achieve what I believe is right.

The other issue that worries me is the fact that I offer to do too