Capacity Building, of Organizations

Organizational and Managerial Capacity

Schools will need to be reorganized to support indepth learning for both students and teachers, necessitating a corresponding accountability of school leadership. In fact, classroom learning and effects of change on teachers, programs, instruction, and student outcomes are part of a larger emphasis on transformational leadership and school restructuring. For quality instruction to occur with teachers' continuous updating of their knowledge and skills, an infrastructure must exist. Administration that promotes teacher development, proficiency, and reflection can better support goals for student achievement.

Managerial-oriented principals who protect the status quo instead of inspiring change may be hazardous. School systems steeped in technical standards of responsibility could end up sacrificing ministerial for managerial competency, straining a community's human values. By resetting this organizational compass to address “ministering” rather than “managing” one's culture, leadership teams can develop heterogeneous communities that value racial tolerance and monitor potentially volatile situations, as well as integrate diversity awareness into terrorism preparedness. Developing the capacity for diversity will require that the new era of globalization and its political, cultural, and economic forces be incorporated into schooling.

Transformational theories and practices are built outward from core commitments rather than inward from a management text. Schools and universities are cautioned to monitor top-down, policy-driven standards. While some see the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) and National Council of Accreditation for Teacher Education/Educational Leadership Constituent Council (NCATE/ELCC) standards as legitimate guides for the field, others critique them as “managementspeak.” Any rational–technical apparatus harnesses the field by presenting “cookie-cutter” solutions to complex issues, in effect reducing variances in graduate programs that are contextually necessary.

Systemic Mentoring Capacity

The development of a systemic mentoring capacity for school leadership requires modeling in real-world settings. The goal is to shift mentoring from isolated innovations to systemic improvement efforts. Leaders prepared for change will be able to mobilize teams that address many teachers' needs. School cultures will need to move away from hierarchical transmission of knowledge toward shared inquiries through teacher networks and councils. The capacity of leadership to understand the value of lifelong learning can lead not only to improving teacher performances but also to expanding feelings of empowerment.

Collaborative Leadership Capacity

Changing outdated views, norms, and practices is an imperative direction for school and administration. A collaborative leadership style has replaced a traditional, elitist one; some call this “relational leadership,” claiming that it should integrate both feminist and masculine approaches.

Democratic Leadership Capacity

Democratic ideas of leadership call for school administrators to commit to new practices of diversity that uphold social justice, concern for oppression, and a healthy skepticism toward leadership and authority. Democratic leaders also formulate just decisions, ask moral questions, and solicit diverse stakeholder viewpoints.

In the educational literature, democratic administrative leadership can be characterized as having three strands: (a) democratic pedagogy: School leadership approaches the renewal or improvement of schools, teachers, and students as participatory and community oriented; (b) pedagogical leadership: An organization's resources are expanded through community-building efforts; the value of human capital supersedes that of economic prosperity; and (c) democratic accountability: Leaders negotiate the seemingly contradictory forces of democracy and accountability.

...