A False Reality: The Foundations of Education is Held Without Honor in the Preparation of School Leaders
1
A False Reality
The Foundations of Education is Held Without Honor
in the Preparation of School Leaders
That which is honored is practiced while that without honor is neglected
Plato, The Republic
The sad and false reality is that the foundations of education are without honor in the
preparation of school leaders.
For a century or more the preparation of teachers, and in particular school leaders, has
been under attack. The 2005 Arthur Levine study “Educating School Leaders” concluded
that the “…majority of the 600 programs to prepare school leaders were the weakest
programs found in America’s education system.” In September 2006 Levine released a
second report critical of teacher education calling it the “…Dodge City of education –
unruly and chaotici
Dr. Levine is by no means alone in his criticism. A jocular juxtaposition of book titles
from 1932 to the present tells the story. And, it is that:
There is a Crisis in Education [Silberman, 1970], and The Reason Why Johnny
Can’t Read [Flesch, 1986], and is experiencing Death at an Early Age [Kozol,
1967], is due to The Miseducation of American Teachers [Koener, 1963].
Teaching (is) a Subversive Activity [Postman and Weingartner, 1969]. As a result
the United States is A Nation at Risk, [USOE, 1983]. The challenge is Dare the
Schools Build a New Social Order [Counts, 1932], focusing on the Schools Our
Children Deserve [Kohn, 1999], and thus assuring that No Child is Left Behind,
[USA federal law, 2002]. In the extreme what might be needed is the Deschooling
of Society [Illich, 1970].
The frequently vitriolic debate has gone on between proponents of stability who have an
interest in maintaining and reaffirming things as they are, and those advocates of renewal,
transformation and change. In short, this is a classic confrontation between stability and
change. ii
The arguments on either side of the divide should be well known to those assembled
here; therefore, they will not be revisited today. Rather, what will be considered are six
points addressing theory into practice in the application of the foundations of education in
the preparation of school leaders.
A personal mantra of mine related to theory into practice is:
Theory not applied is useless while application not based on theory is reckless.
2
I wish I could take credit for those words of wisdom, but Aristotle and Confucius, among
others, offered similar counsel.
The five are:
1. Testimony in support of the allegation that the foundations of education are
without support in the preparation of school leaders.
2. A consideration of what ought to be the content, purpose, mission and goals of a
foundations program.
3. A synopsis of my personal odyssey in foundations.
4. A personal experience as a superintendent of schools in striving to develop and
implement a foundations based, constructivist approach to learning in a 20,000
student school system.
5. Communication and Conclusion
Point One
Who says the foundations of education are without honor?
The United States Department of Education
Major research organizations
Individual researchers
The president of a major university
USDE
The No Child Left Behind 2002 federal law mandates that all teachers be “qualified” by
2007. No where in the legislation does “qualified” recognize the foundations of
education.
Major Research Organization
“Educating School Leaders” [2005] is a privately funded research report associated with
Teachers College, Columbia.iii The principal author is former Columbia University
Teachers College president Dr. Arthur Levine. The report alleges that existing programs
for preparing school leaders are:
“inadequate to appalling,”
“ incoherent,”
“random grab-bag of survey classes.”
It concludes that existing programs do not address the “nitty-gritty of what it takes to be a
school leader.” The Levine study takes direct aim at foundations:
Typically, the curriculum [in schools of education] amounts to a little more than a
grab bag of survey courses – such as Historical and Philosophical Foundations of
Education, Education Psychology and Research methods – that happen to be
taught else where in the education school.
The Levine has called for the elimination of the doctor of education degree. The Ed.D.
has been termed:
3
a watered-down doctorate that diminished the field of educational administration
and provides a back door for weak education schools to gain doctoral granting
authority.
The Levine report concluded that an Ed.D. is unnecessary for any job in school
administration and creates a burdensome obstacle to people who want to enter senior
leader levels of school leadership.
In September 2006 the Levine group released a second study extremely critical of the
teacher education.
Individual Researchers
The March 2006 issue of the Phi Delta Kappan devoted a 15 article special section to
“Educating Leaders for Tomorrow’s Schools.” One contributor, Dr. Margaret Orr, Bank
Street College, featured five areas that she identified as depicting the current focus on the
preparation of school leaders. The five are:
• A reinterpretation of leadership as pivotal for improving teaching and learning
• New insights into program content, pedagogy, and filed-based learning
• Redesign of the doctorate toward mid-career professional development
• Greater use of partnerships for program design opportunities
• A renewed commitment to continuous improvement
No where in the 15 articles in the Kappan are the foundations of education recognized.
The President of Boston University.
From the beginning of his tenure in 1975 as president of Boston University, Dr. John
Silber made it known that he saw no value in the foundations of education program. In
1984 after a decade of controversy and conflict Silber succeeded in terminating the
program. According to the Nash report [1990] reviewing the plight and demise of the
foundations department at BU, Dr. Silber’s view was that teacher education programs
should include: iv
…practice teaching, some methods courses, and nothing else. If students wanted
to study what was called foundations of education, they should enroll in
departments of philosophy, history, or psychology in the College of Liberal Arts,
where such courses could be offered by conventionally trained philosophers,
historians, and psychologists.
In Support of the Foundations of Education.
The foundations of education are not without supporters. I assume those of us assembled
here today can be numbered among them. More than 150 colleges and universities list the
foundations of education among their program offerings. In contrast to the view of John
Silber, one prominent voice from the recent past will serve to make the case for
foundations. Charles Silberman in Crisis in the Classroom [1970], asserted thatv
…teachers need more than a knowledge of subject matter and a little practice
teaching experience before they enter the classroom. They need knowledge about
knowledge, about the ramifications of the subject or subjects they teach, about
4
how those subjects relate to other subjects they teach, about how those subjects
relate to other subjects and to knowledge – and life- in general ….Most important,
perhaps, they need to know that they need to know these things – they need to
understand the kinds of questions their teaching will raise and to have some sense
of where to turn for further understanding.
In what can be cited as support for the foundations of education Silberman noted: vi
While the study of history, philosophy, sociology, and psychology do not directly
enhance craftsmanship…they raise continually the sorts of questions that concern
goals, setting and meaning of education practice – the kinds of questions that
teachers need to think seriously about if they are to shape the purposes and
processes of education.
Point Two: What ought to be the content of a foundations of education program?
A foundations of education program ought to deal with what Aristotle in his Metaphysics
termed First Principles and Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica referred to as
Prima Pars, or First Questions. Those questions can be understood as focusing on the
purpose, mission and goals. In our case education in a democratic and secular society. In
the absolute those questions relate to:
• Who am I and why am I?
• Who are you and why are you?
• What is knowledge?
• What is worth knowing and why?
• How do I, do you, do we come to know?
• What is a value, what is valued and what is valuable?
For the most part questions such as these are without honor in education. It seems as if
they are considered too esoteric for the mainstream. However, behind it all they are the
philosophically based foundation questions of humanity and society. When formal
schooling is over, these questions remain. They are the eternal first questions based on
first principles.
When educators talk about their philosophy of education it should imply a consideration
of first questions and their application today in a world that is maximally effective for all.
Unfortunately in educational discourse the term philosophy has been dumbed down from
its metaphysical, epistemological and axiological origins so that now it has all but lost its
original meaning. Too often today it implies views on such matters as administration and
management, the teaching of reading, standards and testing, discipline and a host of
others pragmatic concerns. While important concerns these seldom rise to the level of
philosophical inquiry.
The University of Iowa exemplifies a clear and distinct definition as to the purpose of its
foundations of education program:
Social Foundations of Education is an interdisciplinary program designed to assist
students to better understand the influence of social, historical, and philosophical
5
forces on the formal educational enterprise. Major areas of specialization are
comparative/international education, history of education, philosophy of
education, policy studies, and sociology of education.
A foundations of education program ought to be more than what its critics call a random
potpourri of disjointed survey courses. That is indefensible. A foundations program ought
to exemplify a systems approach and in philosophical terms it should be, clear and
distinct, complete and consistent. To do less is to be at play in little games.vii
My Point of View: Defensible Partiality – Brameld.
As the result of personal experience, I tend to agree with the observation that programs
dedicated to the preparation of school leaders are weak; however, it is not because they
have been watered-down by courses in the foundations of education. Clearly the
emphasis in such programs is not the foundations of education, rather, it is
administration and management In my experience, I have found those programs to be
weak, and utilitarian. Also, I find that they miss the mark related to what ought to be the
basic preparation of school leaders. If the leaders do not keep “their eyes on the prize”
then who will? It is the leaders who have a primary responsibility to focus on the
purpose, mission and goals of education in a democratic society. While expertise in
administration and management is critical, seldom do programs in labor relations,
finance, and the like address the issues of purpose, mission and goals of the enterprise.
The foundations of education do.
Point Three: My personal odyssey in the foundations of education
After receiving both bachelor and master degrees from Boston University I applied for
admission to the doctorate program in administration. My application was denied. My
master’s advisor, Dr. B. Alice Crossley advised me to apply to the foundations of
education department. She did so on the strength of my already recognized interest in
matters related to foundations such as my then recent co-authorship of a book [United For
Separation] on church-state concerns including religion in education. I applied to the
foundations department and was accepted by its chairman Dr. Gene Phillips. Dr. Phillips
became my major advisor. That decision influenced my career in education more than
any other. I was most fortunate to be exposed to three giants in the persons of Gene
Phillips, Ted Brameld and Dick Rapacz. Professor Rapacz is here today. Thank you,
Dick.
Point Four: Here Upon I Stand
In the words of the Augustinian monk and Protestant Reformation cleric Rev. Martin
Luther: Here Upon I Stand…. What follows is an extremely brief synopsis of my
personal experience in striving to develop and implement a foundations based
constructivist approach to learning over a 15 year period in a 20,000 student school
system.
I stand in the progressivist tradition of John Dewey and served as the 13th successor of
Colonel Francis W. Parker as superintendent of schools in Quincy, MA. Dewey asserted
that progressive education began in Quincy under his colleague Colonel Parker. When I
6
assumed the superintendency in Quincy from a committed Dewey advocate – Mr. Robert
Pruitt — little remained that could be identified as Dewey based. During my 15 year
tenure as superintendent much of that changed. The system was moving in a
progressivist, Dewey based constructivist approach direction. However 25 years has
passed and for the most part all that was developed during my tenure and that of Bob
Pruitt has ended. The stability of an essentialist reality outlasted efforts at bringing about
progressivist, constructivist based change.
What is recounted here is a synopsis of steps taken toward establishing a climate for
change in a school system with a lost tradition of progressivism. The purpose here is to
briefly glance at what might be termed “best practice” approaches at bringing about
systemic change. Little or nothing remains of that effort.
My approach to leadership was and continues to be directly related to the influence of my
academic preparation in the foundations of education. To me competence in theory and
practice as a school leader is anchored in the foundations of education. Without question
expertise in administration and management are critically important, but if a person
seeking to lead others is bold enough to say to colleagues: Come follow me. In response
their first question ought to be: Where and why? It is consistent with a piece of home
spun wisdom that I recently read as an advertisement on the side of a bus in Dublin,
Ireland. To wit:
Know where you are going. Know what you are getting
The substance of the answers lay in the foundations of education.
What follows is a synopsis of several initiatives that where taken to bring about a climate
and program for change in a school system that in its promotional literature identified
with its progressivist past, but in reality practiced in a traditionalist-essentialist mode.
Assumptions about Learning
It stands to reason that an individual who feels he or she has the credentials to lead others
in the process of coming to know ought to have personal assumptions about learning. In
that how learning best takes place is not an exact science, assumption is the operative
word. Assumptions and not presumptions. An assumption posits the possibility of honest
error. A presumption is closer to the articulation of a taken for granted truth. A leader’s
assumptions, or views about learning, ought to be shared and, as appropriate, debated
among professional colleagues. Early on in my tenure as superintendent I began sharing
my foundations of education based assumptions about learning with the educational
community of Quincy. I asserted what I considered then to be “Six Basic Assumptions
About Learning.”
They are:
1. Humankind is able to come to know and is aware that he/she does know.
2. Humankind has harbored a variety of ideas relative to mind and/or matter
3. The traditional dualistic position of substantive mind and substantive matter
cannot be supported
7
4. Learning is more than a random process
5. All learning begins in doubt.
6. Learning begins when doubt occurs and takes place through the simultaneous,
mutual, interaction of the learner and the environment.
I continue to be committed to the six.
Toward a Theory of Instruction
Shortly after being appointed superintendent I accepted an invitation from the principal
level leadership to share with them my vision for the school system. I chose for my theme
“Toward a Theory of Instruction.” In so doing I shared with them my perception of where
the school system was in relationship to first questions. I asked six questions. They were:
Question One: Do we have a philosophy of education in Quincy?
My response: No
Question Two: Do we have a theory of knowledge in Quincy?
My response: No
Question Three: Do we have a theory of instruction in Quincy?
My response: No
Question Four: Are we moving toward theory of instruction in Quincy?
My response: Yes
Question Five: is what we are attempting to do new and innovative?
My response: In theory – No. In implementation – Yes
Question Six: If moving toward a theory of instruction, what are its
characteristics?
My response: An initial list of six was cited. viii
The foundations based theme struck by me that day was a reoccurring theme during my
tenure. It might be said that seemingly criticizing the school system that day as I did was
foolhardy and put my own survival as superintendent and my effectiveness as a leader at
risk. Or, was it self-serving as I was promoting myself as the savior? I subscribe to
neither position. It is said that a real leader faces the music even when he dislikes the
tune.
A Climate for Change – Quincy Project in Educational Development [Q-PED]
Among the reasons why efforts at bringing about change within an organization fail is
that little time and effort is spent at establishing a climate for change. All too often senior
leadership operates as if those who are to be affected by any change will function as
sheep being led by a shepherd and herded into compliance by the sheep dog of control.
In Quincy a major undertaking at establishing a climate for change resulted in hundreds
of the 2000 teachers in the system over a period of several years being deeply involved in
examining the organizational health and climate of the system. This was before teachers
were asked to accept any changes or move in compliance with new dictates from senior
leadership. Trust in the climate was the first prerequisite. A wide variety of activities and
events were undertaken culminating in scores of 2-3 day residential retreats for whole
school faculties or departments. The teachers association was closely involved in
8
planning the events. The Boston University Human Relations Center, Lesley College and
the Sloan School of Management at MIT were affiliated with the effective effort.
Axioms – Principle Centered Leadership
You don’t talk about what you want to do first,
you talk about what you stand for.
This observation was made by Jim Hackett the CEQ of Anadarko oil and gas company in
an article in the Financial Times, September 19, 2006.
The shoe fits for leaders in education. The influence of the foundations of education in
my professional development contributed to my recognition of the critical importance of
developing a set of personal axioms to guide my practice.
A personal set of axioms ought to guide the practice of a school leader. Axioms ought to
be clear and distinct, complete and consistent, applied in practice, and readily available
for all to see, study, dialogue on, and hopefully embrace.
Mine are seven in number and have guided my practice for decades. They are as follows:
Axioms
Here Upon I Stand
1. Among the purposes of the public school is the transmission to the young of the
ideals upon which this nation was founded;
therefore,
the school ought to be a microcosm of a democratic society.
2. Participation in the decision making process characterizes a democratic society;
therefore,
those who are to be affected by a decision ought to be involved in the process of
making, implementing and being held accountable for decisions made.
3. Learning is more than a random process;
therefore,
how human beings come to know ought to be the most basic question of inquiry
challenging educators.
4. Schools are for learners;
therefore,
the instructional program ought to be student centered and responsive.
5. Educators have an obligation to assist all learners in becoming self-fulfilling
individuals, good citizens and competent workers;
therefore,
9
consistent with individual potential and capacity, opportunities must be provided
for each person to realize these goals.
6. Knowledge is conceptually based and has structure;
therefore,
in the curriculum the concepts ought to be identified and the instructional program
so ordered as to provide for an interactive process through which each individual
in orderly and developmental fashion can inquire into, discover, construct, learn,
evaluate, and apply that which needs to be known and can be learned.
7. Educators serve the public interest and are not in private practice at public
expense;
therefore,
a management system needs to be developed and implemented that provides for
such areas as professional competence and development, curriculum and
pedagogical relevance, information systems, business acumen, fiscal
responsibility, facility maintenance and development, and institutional
transparency.
A Systemic Student Centered Design for Learning
A legitimate criticism of school systems is that they are not systems. They are not
examples of completeness and consistency. Frequently they exist as kingdoms
functioning as independent units such as pre-school, primary, middle school and high
school. Within each unit are found specialized fiefdoms. Frequently those that
practice at one level know little or nothing about the purpose, mission and goals of
other levels. There is little systemic attention given to four first questions that under
gird the whole enterprise of education. The four questions are:
1. What do we, as educators, know about how our learners come to know and
how do we systemically implement what we know?
2. Of all the things our learners can come to know what do they need to know
now and why?
3. Once having insights into responses to questions one and two how do we
organize systemically to do what we know needs to be done?
4. Once having developed a systemic organizational plan how we move to assure
that it is implemented, evaluated and, as necessary, revised?
The Student Centered Design for Learning conceptualized, developed and implemented
in Quincy was home grown. The vision of a student centered learning system was
conceptualized by a small team of senior leaders into a ten component design for
learning. The ten component concept went from development to implementation through
the efforts of more than 250 classroom teachers over a period of several years.
Development activities went on in summer workshops. Implementation of that which had
been developed was carried out during the school year.
A Ten Component Student Centered Design for Learning
10
Clear and Distinct — Complete and Consistent
1. Goals:
Within the context of a democratic society to develop and implement a design for learning
committed to the development of self-fulfilling individuals, good citizens and competent workers
in a world maximally effective for all.
2. Behavioral Projections
The eleven behavioral projections represent an attempt to identify the areas of competence that
will be needed by learners as citizens in a changing society. All programs must be assessed in light
of their contributions to these behaviors.
2.1 Fundamental processes 2.7. Individual expression
2.2 Marketable skills 2.8 Ability to cope with and/or
guide change
2.3 Understanding of individuality 2.9 Worthy use of leisure time
2.4 Aesthetic experience 2.10 Physical and mental health
2.5 Life style of inquiry 2.11 Scientific literacy
2.6 Self-motivated learning style
3. Rationale
Rationale addresses the question of — Why? Why this or that subject? Why that teacher? Why
those learning materials and resources?? Why that management system? Why that organizational
structure? Why this learning environment?
4. Comprehensive Concepts
Comprehensive concepts constitute the curriculum. They identify a structure of the discipline
approach. A comprehensive concept acts as an organizing element in curriculum development and
instructional procedures General, or big ideas, help students and teachers to organize the material
to be learned. They provide each with a way to view relationships, to order, to categorize, and to
build upon previous learning. Concepts provide a map by which students can explore a subject in
depth and breath. Concepts provide a skeletal framework with which to address issues within, as
well as across, disciplines.
5. Performance Objectives
Performance objectives based on the comprehensive concepts constitute the instructional program
and articulate learning outcomes. They facilitate a continuous progress approach. They flow
logically from each of the comprehensive concepts cited for each discipline. Performance
objectives have been identified and classified under non-repeating general objectives. Each
performance objective relates back to one or more concepts.
6. Diagnostic and Evaluative Tools and Procedures
The learning style and needs of each learner ought to be diagnosed and each student ought to be
provided with an individual education plan. Appropriate tests and assessment instruments ought to
be identified at the same time.
7. Student Learning Activities
Learning activities constitute the day-to-day proceedings and occurrences. They will vary from
teacher to teacher, and subject to subject. They ought to be individualized to reflect learner needs
and interests. Frequently they are expressed as lesson plans including: the purpose, rationale and
overview of what is to be learned, the comprehensive concept (s) and performance objectives
being addressed, and the learning, and assessment procedures.
8. Appropriate Multi-Media and Electronic Aids to Learning
9. Classroom Management
Classroom management is critically important. It goes far beyond a concern for student behavior
and discipline.
10. Learning Environment
The learning environment ought to be such that the school is a place of learning as well as a place
of joy. [Sizer]. It must be one that is personalized, friendly, accepting, supportive, humane and
challenging for learners and teachers alike.
Communication
11
Effective Communication is vital, varied and repetitive. It must be exercised over and
over again. It is not linear but circular and interactive. Until the message of the
communicator impacts in some manner on the intended receiver there has been no
communication. Effective communication does not respond to a one size fits all
approach.
In recognition of that reality my efforts toward developing an implementing a
foundations based constructivist approach to learning reached out in a myriad of
directions to diverse audiences. It honored Marshall McLuhan’s mantra the message is in
the medium.
What follows is a listing by category of many of the initiatives taken in order to address
the critically important matter of communication.
“Thoughts on Education”
Shared with faculty and staff a series of approximately 30 Creedon
authored monographs written over a 15 year period. A variety of formats
were used in presentation.
Professional development forums and activities
Student forums for information sharing and involvement in decision making
Forums for involving parents and community representatives.
Outreach to the community through the media and personal contact.
Celebrating special events in the lives of past and present faculty and staff.
Conclusion: The color of my dream ix
I am convinced of the appropriateness of the inclusion of the foundations of education in
the preparation of educators and, in particular, school leaders. My tenure as a
superintendent of schools was characterized by on-going efforts to focus on what I have
termed as “first questions” and then turning responses to those theoretical questions into
practice. My mantra in this regard has been: Theory not applied is useless and
application not based on theory is reckless. As superintendent of schools the continuing
effort by me and a small cadre of like minded colleagues was not enough to sustain the
winds of change. In the final analysis stability in the form of tradition prevailed over
change. While hundreds of Quincy educators were involved in ongoing climate for
change activities and in developing and implementing a student centered design for
learning little, if anything, remains of that effort. The reasons for that are many, but due
to constraints will not be considered here. However, the letterhead of the Quincy Public
Schools currently proclaims: Where excellence is a tradition. In a traditional sense that
might be true, but in current application there is a disconnect.
Those of us associated with the foundation based effort might console ourselves by
saying we tried our best. However, the witticism advises that to do better is than doing
one’s best. The question that needs to be asked is: What more can I do? My response to
that perception of reality cannot be to abandon the dream. The color of the dream
remains.
12
The color of my dream has neither faded nor subsided. For the past decade I have carried
my foundations based, constructivist approach message through the C. Louis Cedrone
Framingham International Education Program to nearly 20 countries around the world on
over 35 assignments. But, that is another story. For a start visit my web site:
http://www.larrycreedon.info.
The Road to Wisdom
The road to wisdom is plain and simple to express
To err, and err, and err again,
But less and less and less.
Piet Hein
Lawrence P. Creedon, Ed.D.
Framingham International Education Program
Presentation at the Annual meeting of the New England
Philosophy of Education Association
October, 2006.
lpcreedon@aol.com
http://www.larrycreedon.info
i http://www.edschool.org/pdf/Final313.pdf, “Educating School Leaders.” Dr. Levine is former president of
Columbia University’s Teachers College He is now director of the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship
Foundation.
ii Stability and change are not diametrically opposed. Dr. Noel Burchell with the Unitec School of
Management in New Zealand, points out that stability is a central prerequisite component for change.
iii http://www.edschools.org, “Educating School Leaders.”
iv Paul Nash, Te Destruction of the Program in Foundations of Education at Boston University: A Case
Study, Privately published, 1990.
v Silberman, Crisis in the Classroom
vi Silberman, pp. 491-2
vii For an example of systems applied to education see the Creedon ten component design for learning
found in this paper; for clear and distinct see “How Rationalists Construe ‘Clear and Distinct,’ Ron
Bombardi, Department of Philosophy, Middle Tennessee State University, http://www.mtsu.edu/rbombard; for
complete and consistent see mathematician and logician Kurt Godel [1906-1978] ‘Incompleteness
Theorem’
viii They can be found in the privately published Creedon monograph Toward a Theory of Instruction,
[1969]; lpcreedon@aol.com.
ix Azar Nafisi, Reading Lolita in Tehran, 2003.
Reflections on the Theory and Practice of Education 