At GLP, we believe that staying abreast of new ideas, trends, and information is essential to visionary leadership. This newsletter seeks to help leaders cut through the noise and find resources that are worth reading. Visit our website to explore earlier editions!
Preface
We are just a few weeks away from the election and we find ourselves, as a nation, awash in anger, fear, worry, and a sense of deep injustice. School leaders and trustees are swimming in questions, physically exhausted, and in some cases, dealing with existential threats to the viability of their schools. The pressing nature of topics such as the pandemic and Black Lives Matter can sometimes demand immediate action — and, in turn, sometimes lead heads and trustees to lose sight of the bigger picture.

In this moment, it’s key that schools make sure that they ground their conversations and actions in their mission and values. This is not something that’s easy to do, even in times of stability. But schools cannot simply throw their purposes and core beliefs out the window in moments of crisis — especially because doing so will only make things worse. Maintaining a focus on mission is essential for forming policies and practices that work, and keeping your school’s values in mind is crucial for communicating effectively with your community.

Today’s Blueprint offers a range of perspectives and guidance to help you make sense of how many of these issues have interlocking roots. We hope you’ll find this edition provocative and helpful, and as always, we hope you’ll share your thoughts and feedback.
Why Diversity and Dialogue Matter
As reported in The Chronicle of Higher Education, a massive survey of 20,000 undergraduates at 55 colleges found that “about six out of 10 students said they had censored themselves on [political] issues out of fear of how others would react.” While there was some variation among groups — “strong Republicans” reported the highest rates of keeping views to themselves (75%), while “strong Democrats” came in at 52% — regardless of where students landed on the political spectrum, the majority felt a need to self-censor. The article also noted that “Black students were most likely to report a time when they kept views to themselves.”

What are the implications of this survey? First, we might think about what this means in terms of community-building. Most schools strive to build communities that are diverse across a variety of identities, but if students feel reluctant to share their thoughts, we have to conclude that schools aren’t living up to their goals. When students feel like they have to self-censor in front of their peers or teachers, it implies that they’re not feeling truly safe and welcome, and that they’re therefore not bringing their whole selves to their learning community. 

Beyond the community implications, we need to also think about the learning implications. One of the key reasons for building diverse schools is that everyone — students and adults alike — benefit from having diverse perspectives on campus. The open exchange of ideas helps people check their assumptions, examine other theories, and build empathy for other people. As Stephanie writes in her most recent blog post:

We must try to make sense of where we are with students — not by reducing and narrowing our questions to one answer or one perspective — but instead by widening them to embrace multiple viewpoints, leading us toward a deeper understanding; one that often lies at the intersections. That means allowing diverse perspectives to enter the classroom, with respect and tolerance, and with an open pursuit of inquiry and evidence. That means the educators do the work alongside the student, developing the skills and capacities through modeling, practice, and feedback.

We believe these pedagogical practices link up with much larger ideas about the purpose of school. As Stephanie discusses in the blog post, schools help students become independent learners and thinkers — and that is first, and foremost, our essential task. Learning is a holistic endeavor that transcends content and subject matter, and never has our work been more important. And, as Brittany Talissa King recently wrote in Tablet, even as we commit to broad social justice goals, there is room for disagreement about sub-goals and strategies, and we should welcome that diversity of thought: “Diverse opinions about dismantling systemic oppression aren’t inconvenient stumbling blocks. They can be essential stepping stones.”

For adults, learning is critical to great decision-making, and boards and leaders are now grappling with many of the same questions and controversies. In light of the many structured conversations about racial justice issues that we have recently facilitated for boards and leaders, this article from The Atlantic struck us as particularly thought-provoking. The piece analyzes a widely-discussed recording of a New York City district education council meeting from this summer, and it offers an interesting case study into how ideological rigidity, a lack of empathy, and a failure to engage in open, civil, and inquiry-based free discourse can upend an education system. It poses an important warning for board members and school administrators who may find themselves involved with meetings that devolve in parallel ways.

While this piece is difficult to read, the article also contains many positive messages reminding us to focus on what our students need in order to grow. The best learning environment for our children fosters their curiosity about different ideas, teaches them how to engage empathetically with diverse viewpoints, and supports them in their intellectual risk-taking as they seek to make sense of the world. “We need to permit ourselves to be comfortable in the imperfection of this work,” remarked a district superintendent at the end of this contentious meeting. “We cannot wait to talk until everybody knows the right words and has assessed the least terrifying public stances to take… We have to call each other into conversations, not push each other out.”
When Crisis Reveals What Must Change
During this moment of immense transformation for education, schools and colleges are faced with existential crises — but also the opportunity to rethink how schools work on a fundamental level. In this month’s Washington Monthly, Kevin Carey, who directs the education policy program at the think tank New America, discusses one intriguing example of what seizing this moment might look like — what he describes as “a New Deal for America’s sinking colleges.” In Carey’s view, the survival of the nation’s higher education system revolves around a dramatic rethinking of government funding and tuition pricing as well as the creation of a vast interconnected network of institutions. “The moment has come to finally give all students, not just the elite few, a great, affordable college education, without life-shattering financial stress and anxiety,” writes Carey. “And it’s time for colleges to work together, rather than standing and dying alone.”

While Carey is advocating for these paradigm shifts from the perspective of a policy analyst, this is the kind of thinking that schools who want to survive (and even thrive) in the current crisis must engage in. What would it look like, for example, if schools agreed to operate not as islands unto themselves but within a network of shared resources? It's easy for school leaders and boards to stay wrapped up in the day-to-day logistics of running a school but tabling more transformative conversations for a “later” that never arrives is a risky move.

For inspiration, we recommend looking at this recent article from Harvard Business Review that outlines five essential principles for adaptive leadership — the kind of leadership that is necessary from heads and trustees in order to navigate this moment. According to the authors, adaptive leaders 1) ensure evidence-based learning and adaptation; 2) stress-test underlying theories, assumptions, and beliefs; 3) streamline deliberative decision making; 4) strengthen transparency, inclusion, and accountability; and 5) mobilize collective action. As you read that quick list (the article explains these principles in more detail), ask yourself: Does your leadership team follow these principles? How about your board? Can you point to specific examples, or is this wishful thinking?

Adaptive leadership can — by design — lead to some major changes at schools. When schools ask hard questions and transform their practices, there is an emotional toll to faculty and staff. Crises lay people and organizations bare, and we have been in conversation with leaders who have made some tough, values-based decisions to part with people who, in crisis, can no longer serve the mission, or reveal no capacity for growth. As Jamil Zaki, psychology professor at Stanford, writes in this piece for Harvard Business Review: “The simple question, ‘How are you?’ has turned into an emotional minefield.” And sometimes, the right course for school leaders is to dodge the mine.

But on a more constructive and hopeful note, Zaki offers guidance for leaders so they can support people as they navigate the powerful emotions that might arise from difficult or painful experiences. Zaki describes why leaders should affirm values and emphasize community in order to cultivate resilience and growth, even in times of extreme stress. “Values-based leadership and attention to community are always smart, but now they are mandatory,” Zaki writes. “In times of trauma, these strategies can help organizations not merely survive, but build what we wish had been there all along.”

And on what must change: Recent crises reveal that we have a long road towards successfully approaching the essential and difficult work of diversity, equity and inclusion. As the most important human work, and as work that never ends, it requires time, intention, and sustained effort. Beyond taking a stance, or implementing a few trainings, organizations must look deeper into the problem and tackle how to help people come to a shared understanding of why change matters and how it’s achieved. As Robert Livingston writes in Harvard Business Review: “The real challenge for organizations is not figuring out ‘What can we do?’ but rather “Are we willing to do it?’”

Livingston offers a helpful framework for making progress, which he calls PRESS: Organizations must move through the stages of problem awareness, root-cause analysis, empathy, strategies for addressing the problem, and sacrifice. He defines “sacrifice” as the organization’s “willingness to invest the time, energy, and resources necessary for strategy implementation,” and it’s clear that this isn’t something that comes easily. What would it look like for schools to embody this idea of “sacrifice” in order to meet crucial equity goals?
Subscribe to the Blueprint
Thanks for reading! Please feel free to forward the Blueprint to any friends or colleagues who may find it of interest! And if you're not already on our mailing list and you'd like to receive future editions of the Blueprint, click the button below to subscribe!