I have developed my understanding of different leadership styles, even into the final assessment, throughout this course. The easiest styles for me to understand were distributed leadership (Biviano, 2020, March 16) and transformational leadership (Bales, 2020, March 16) as I have experienced leaders who favoured these styles and some of the benefits of each. I have learned, however, that a school is run on varying styles and cannot be run effectively utilising just one leadership style.
TLs are in the perfect position to lead from the middle (Digital Promise, 2016) as distributive leaders in a transformational environment and it is vital that they lead to maintain relevance in future-facing schools (Biviano, 2020, March 16). Adapting a collaborative approach to teaching and learning as a result of ELT504 (Bales, 2020, April 17), I have begun to develop my distributed leadership skills through offering to help collaborate on ongoing and new programs. In the future, I will begin to carefully implement a servant leadership style to support teachers, without allowing my role or intentions to be taken advantage of (Biviano, 2020, May 23).
Throughout this course, I have been introduced to the SWOT and GAP analysis (Mindtools, 1996-2007), which was recommended for use in the group response to Case Study 4 (Group 8, 2020, May 8). As a result, I have already distributed SWOT analysis’ to staff members at my school to determine their understanding of the library’s role and gather suggestions for improvement and opportunities. This has been invaluable in developing a strategic plan, alongside my principal for the library.
Throughout the case studies, teamwork evolved organically to problem solve and submit work on time. Group 8 was made up of positive, collaborative workers who fell into an easy rhythm after the first group study (Biviano, 2020, May 23). Initial challenges included a hesitance to take over, which delayed a start on Case Study 3, and uncertainty on how to begin. I suggested splitting into pairs and addressing one main topic per pair and other group members took on distributive roles in determining the pairs (Harris, 2010), while an instructional role was utilised in assigning topics (University of Washington, 2015) with the understanding that in the following case study topics would be allocated through expertise (Biviano, 2020, April 17). Assigning topics for this study was necessary to get work started. I would utilise this style of leadership, initially, to support staff in engaging with new information and transition into distributed leadership when looking to develop programs once the core information has been understood.
As part of a collaborative reflection in the discussion boards, it was determined that we need to establish a timetable for future case studies to support timely learning. I found this very useful in Case Study 4 but, it was not utilised in Case Study 5 due to time constraints. This was difficult for me to adapt to and, as such, I missed conversations and feedback and the final product lacked the collaborative construction of previous case studies (Biviano, 2020, May 23).
References
Bales, J. (2020, March 14-25). Module 2: Week 2: Primary [Online discussion comment]. Interact 2 ETL504. https://interact2.csu.edu.au
Bales, J. (April 15-May 23). Module 4: Week 6: Primary [Online discussion comment]. Interact 2 ETL504. https://interact2.csu.edu.au
Digital Promise (2016). The new librarian: Leaders in the digital age. SCIS Connections. https://www.scisdata.com/connections/issue-96/the-new-librarian-leaders-in-the-digital-age/
Group 8. (May 15, 2020). COVID Case Study 5- Group 8. [Online discussion thread]. Interact 2 ETL504. https://interact2.csu.edu.au
Harris, A. (2014, September 29). Distributed leadership. Teacher Magazine, ACER. https://www.teachermagazine.com.au/articles/distributed-leadership
University of Washington. (2015). 4 dimensions of instructional leadership. Center for Educational Leadership. http://info.k-12leadership.org/4-dimensions-of-instructional-leadership