Where Are The Risk-Taking Leaders?
Mandated Change and Timeless Learning
“Is there anything else you would like to tell us?”
After 45 minutes of questions about pedagogy and school practices, my two colleagues stared silently at our interviewer, probably relieved that the external review meeting was over and we could escape back to the relative safety our classrooms. As they glanced at each other and shrugged, I felt time grind to a halt while I considered whether now was the time and place to share what had been on my mind for some time.
“Well, this might be a little controversial…” I began, before launching into a well-rehearsed diatribe about the status of our little school that has played over in my mind a few thousand times in recent years. I won’t share those details here because this post is about looking forward, not back. But suffice to say, we have work to do.

Recently, I’ve been reading “Timeless Learning: How Imagination, Observation, and Zero-Based Thinking Change Schools” by Ira Socol, Pam Moran and Chad Ratliff. An early highlight of the book that resonated with me was from the foreword, written by Yong Zhao.
Schools exist to serve the interests of children, not the other way around. Curricula exist to provide children opportunities to learn, not limit their explorations. Standards exist to guide the development of learning opportunities for children, not to judge their worthiness. Tests and assessments exist to facilitate children’s learning, not shame and label them. As a result, we are never to allow children’s learning to be dictated by curricula, standards, or tests.
Will Richardson has written a nice blog post about the book called Choosing Progressive Education for Modern Learning which I would recommend. I also highly recommend the accompanying podcast from Modern Learning featuring Pam and Ira.
Schools exist to serve the interests of children
External reviews happen every few years in South Australia. It is essentially a department audit of policies and pedagogy involving every facet of the school, including observations and interviews with staff, students and parents. The recommendations that come out of an external review aren’t suggestions, they’re directives. This matters because, as soon as tomorrow, our education department will announce the appointment of a new principal for our school.
The timing is perfect because this person, on the back of the external review, has a mandate for meaningful change which bypasses the usual train of thought for an administrator entering a new site which Mark Sonnemann describes in The Maverick Principal — Change Not Change:
Lay low, the wisdom says. Don’t try to change anything. Keep everything the same and observe and then make decisions half a year or a year in.
I’ve been lucky to have supportive leaders over the 13 years of teaching journey, but I haven’t experienced what I would call a “risk-taking” leader. So my question is, what is a risk-taking leader? (and where are they hiding?) I’ve would like nothing more than to be part of something bigger than myself or my classroom, but at this point, I’m still operating as a single cell.
A school cannot change without system change. Nothing can. If a principal says “Our school is now going to be student-centred and built around individuals” but the decision-making process does not change, then the school won’t change either. — Timeless Learning.
So how do we affect system-wide change? Can leaders drive transformational change that is accepted by staff and effectively implemented? Or is meeting staff where they are on their pedagogical journey and supporting their development the best that administrators can aim for? Is the risk-taking leader one who supports and facilitates change driven from within?
“The next generation of leaders who will change schooling must avoid just improving upon the destructive and limiting old paradigms, but rather lead a true reimagination of what educational space, educational time, and teacher-student interaction look like.” Timeless Learning
I don’t want to tinker around the edges of traditional bells and cells structures. I have a vision for my school that extends beyond the walls of just my classroom and students, but it is a vision that some will see as inconvenient. Disruptive. Every teacher should be free to preserve their authentic pedagogy, but what do we do when school becomes more about what is easy for educators than what is right for learners?
Educators must constantly consider and reflect upon the philosophical foundation from which they operate. There are times when as an administrator who fundamentally believes in teacher autonomy and organic change, in schools as community, and in your role as one of support, you may observe some egregious behaviour that negatively impacts or even harms learners. That’s when mission‐driven leaders pull moral authority from their tool belts to make sure decisions and behaviours of adults in the community are in the best interests of kids. — Timeless Learning.
The prospect of a new leader with a mandate for change is equal parts intriguing and troubling. On the one hand, a “risk-taking” progressive leader could transform our little school from middling to amazing by advocating for a student-centred model focused on doing what is good for learners. Alternatively, a more traditional principal seeking to expand the collection of quantitative data and drive compliance based frameworks would mean I’m looking for a new job. I acknowledge my bias for progressive learning, I’ve done traditional, I was good at it and worked for most kids, but I won’t go back, I can’t go back. Whatever happens, this is a staff that need to move forward together.
If educators aren’t united and constantly pushing forward — together — then two or more schools will exist: one that has teachers reimagining the classroom and the others doing decent work. Sure, one can do traditional well, but that doesn’t mean they’re doing what’s best for kids. -Chris McNutt, “We all do what’s best for children.”: The Banality of Educative Statements
“Timeless Learning” is easily the most powerful book I’ve read this year. I love that it leaves much of the heavy lifting up to the reader, there are no roadmaps or recipes for success. My biggest takeaway was that the solutions to our challenges lie within each of us, not in the pages of a book. There is so much more I would like to explore from the book, like multi-age learning, opening spaces, and zero-based design, but that will need to wait for another day…
