Leading Learning

Learning to lead: John West-Burnham

Introduction
The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between the development of effective leadership and the nature of the learning process. Leadership and learning are complex concepts, closely related in the way that they are both the subject of approbation and exhortation but equally diffuse and lacking any sort of systematic consensus as to what they actually mean. They are also related in the extent to which they might be regarded as aspirational states - higher order activities occupying a position of high status in a hierarchy of significance. They are the sort of concepts that Wittgenstein might have been referring to at the very end of the Tractatus when he argued "of that whereof we cannot speak, we must keep silence."

For a long time we have 'kept silence' on the nature of leadership and learning. The vacuum has been filled by a rich and sophisticated vocabulary describing management teaching - this had led to an implicit assumption that more and better management and teaching somehow equates with leadership and learning. In this short discussion there is not the space to develop elaborate comparative definitions of these key concepts so a number of propositions will have to suffice:

No school ever improved just by being well managed. Leadership is a distinctive, higher order activity, which provides the context and direction for management. Leadership and management are symbiotic, both are compromised in the absence of the other. Leadership is a composite of knowledge, skills, experience and qualities in varying ratios according to time, place and personality. Leadership cannot be taught; it has to be learnt. Learning is a unique, subjective and individual experience.

The problem is encapsulated in the highly problematic concept of charisma, it is a highly elusive quality yet is frequently cited as one of the defining characteristics of highly effective leaders. Yet nobody (I hope) would seriously propose offering a course on charisma. In order to understand the process of learning to lead there is a need to provide a range of definitions of the key concepts and pose questions as to how they might be applied.

The Process of Leading
Whether in the classroom, team or the whole school, educational leadership is usually characterised by a high volume of complex processes, most of which require decisions to be taken. The nature of schools as organisations means that they are most frequently understood through the decisions that are made (as opposed to products that are offered and selected, or symbolic roles that are discharged). Because of the social significance that is invested in education, decisions taken by educational leaders have high significance. Thus it is possible to argue that any process that claims to prepare educational leaders has to provide the means to act within the context of high complexity and high significance.

The Process of Learning
If the nature of leadership is elusive, then the nature of learning is even more so. Much of the rhetoric about learning characterises it as an essentially passive process - essentially the experience of being taught, attending a course, listening to a lecture or being present at a workshop or seminar.

A great deal of management development has, in effect, been concerned with the transmission of information with very little regard for its implementation or application. This is largely because there has only been a limited awareness of the types of learning that are available and therefore the modes of development have often been impoverished.

To allow leaders to operate effectively in contexts of high complexity and high significance a nexus has to be created between the elements of knowledge, experience, skills and qualities. Such a nexus is often described as a mental model or map - the means by which an individual makes sense of the environment and so decides to act in a particular way. Creating the nexus - the ability to integrate and reconcile the four elements is the product of higher-order learning. Such learning can best be understood in context with other types of learning as

Modes of Learning
Shallow-Deep-Profound
Replication-Understanding- Meaning
Application-Transfer- Creativity
Information-Knowledge-Wisdom
Experience-Reflection-Intuition
Extrinsic-Intrinsic-Moral
Acceptance-Interpretation-Challenge
Dependence-Independence-Interdependence

Shallow learning is the product of many so-called educational processes; it results in the ability to replicate information, responds directly to experience, is extrinsically motivated and culminates in acceptance and dependence. Deep learning, by contrast, creates personal engagement and a sense of autonomy and the capacity to act. Profound learning moves into a different level of significance altogether. Shallow learning results in the ability to apply a formulaic
response to a problem, if it is presented in the right way. Deep learning allows a range of responses to be formulated, tested and applied. Profound learning leads to the problem and solution being redefined. If leadership is about improvement, creating the future,
vision and values and enhancing the quality of personal relationships then it can only be truly developed through profound learning.

A practical example of this model can be found in the issue of managing change. (The first question to be raised is the problem of managing change - surely change involves leadership?)

Shallow learning about the process of change would result in a formulaic presentation of the various academic models, the ability to describe personal experiences of change, engagement in the process because of external imperatives and an uncritical and unquestioning acceptance of the process.

Deep learning in this context is manifested in the ability to develop a personal model of the change process which is a synthesis of a range of sources and the ability to translate that model into action.

Experience is mediated through reflection, which allows for personal interpretation and a sense of autonomy.

Profound learning however results in the creation of personal meaning, integrating principle, values and practice so that behaviour is intuitive and the response to change is creative, challenging, ethically driven and integrative.

Strategies for Learning to Lead
The creation of a personal nexus, the complex interaction of a number of variables, to formulate a mental model of reality has a parallel in what we are increasingly understanding about neurological
functioning. Our perception of the world is the result of patterning in the brain - the building of bridges between brain cells in order to create a coalition of meaning. Profound learning is the result of a similar process - the creation of rich and significant patterns which make our mental models sophisticated, deep and capable of enrichment and elaboration.

To achieve such a level of learning requires a range of strategies to be in place:The development of a range of cognitive skills: analysis, logic and the interpretation of data. Learning activities which are based on problem solving in real-life situations. Reflection on actual experience based on appropriate feedback. Challenge derived from new ideas, confronting performance, etc. Coaching to help mediate the perceived gap between actual and desired performance. A sense of moral purpose, a vocation; a search for personal authenticity.

In practical term the most powerful basis for profound learning is supported reflection - support being provided through coaching and mentoring, the use of a reflective journal, structured reading to inform review and, perhaps most importantly, peer review and feedback on actual practice.

LPSH provides both a sophisticated conceptual framework to support review, a systematic review process and support for analysis and action planning. However LPSH is an event rather than a process and although it models excellent practice it needs to be part of a personal developmental process which is axiomatic to the leadership role. Perhaps one of the most significant components of such a process is the recognition that learning is a fundamental component of the job itself - not an adjunct or a bonus but a key element in the definition of the role. It is well known that leadership development, especially for headteachers, is the first casualty of any constraint on resources - time or money. This is not to argue for more time to be spent on courses but rather for the principles outlined above to become implicit to personal working patterns, e.g.:building review into meetings and all individual and team projects; scheduling time and space for regular reflection; establishing a structured and regular pattern of
professional reading and creating opportunities to discuss and apply insights gained; regular meetings with a coach and/ or mentor as part of a sustained (and sustaining) developmental relationship;
acting as a coach/ mentor to others; creating networks (virtual and actual) to nourish support and challenge.

All that has been written so far makes at least one fundamental assumption - that there is the personal motivation and desire to develop as a leader. Without this everything else in superficial. In essence, effective schools are led by effective people, school improvement is contingent on personal improvement and organisational development requires individual development. Most importantly, a learning organisation (and what else can a school be?) has to be led by leaders who are learners.

Professor John West Burnham

The full text of this article can be viewed at www.ncsl.org.uk