I observed something interesting recently regarding a question I tweeted. To provide some context, I read a blog post called the ‘Myth of Motivation‘. The post contained a quote by Fred Bucy, former president of Texas Instruments who made this point:
What is effective in motivating people at one point in their careers will not be effective in motivating them later. People’s values change, depending on what is happening in their personal lives as well as their success with their careers. Therefore, one of the most important things that a leader must do is to continue to study how to be effective. This takes discipline. It is much easier to assume that what worked yesterday will work today, and this is simply not true.
As an educational leader, I thought the point about discipline to stay the course was compelling. So I tweeted: “is discipline the most important quality for becoming an effective school leader?”
I left out “self” from discipline because I was interested to see the responses.
If you asked a professional athlete, writer or business leader about discipline, it would be evident that self-discipline was what you were referring to. It’s also a word that probably has positive associations in relation to achieving goals.
And yet, when used in the context of schooling, it more often than not implies something very different. Discipline is grounded in an industrial model where the norm was to ‘control’ students and ‘manage’ staff. It probably evokes negative feelings in many of us but it again illustrates the point I was making in the last blog post on the meaning of pedagogy and education.
Michael Fullan in his book ‘Six Secrets of Change‘ reflects on the importance of capacity building over judgmentalism. It’s the paradigmatic shift from industrial to contemporary from process to people.
Fullan writes “the route to implementing change lies in building the capacity of teachers – their knowledge and their skills. The opposite – and a big mistake – is if you convey a negative, pejorative tone. A big mistake is to focus on accountability first and capacity building second.”
Richard Elmore who visited our diocese three years ago shared his long term goal.
Unfortunately the prevailing model of schooling, which views discipline pejoratively, is still the dominant model in many schools in many parts of the world. We’re still looking at education through the lens of control and management. Take for example, the first year teaching (secondary grades) course being offered by New Teacher Centre on Coursera. The blurb says “establish and maintain behavioral expectations, implement classroom procedures and routines, and use instructional time effectively.” I was shocked that the course promotes four low effect size strategies on discipline and only one high effect strategy on student learning. Is this teaching by accountability or capacity building?
As members of professional teams, we find that our most authentic achievements grow out of a common vision, shared intentions and collaborative practices. We learn with and from each other, and we expect our colleagues to support and, where appropriate, to challenge us.
Often the highest expectations we have to deal with are the ones we place on ourselves. That’s why it is so important to cultivate a reflective (self) culture where each of us takes the necessary time to stand back and re-balance our agenda so we can focus our energies on what really matters for our students, ourselves and our school communities.
It’s time we all started speaking the language of challenge and self-discipline.
One thought on “Understanding discipline”
I’m glad to see Stuart Taylor’s response. Nice to see someone clarify what is being asked before jumping in. In a successful and accurate profiling, everything is checked for understanding first.
Greg, speaking of a challenge and self discipline, have a look at http://www.faceofthefuture.com.au and you’ll find professional development programs that have that focus