Introit

Abductive Reasoning Regarding Online Competition

Abductive reasoning, i.e., imagining what might be, is something that most schools have never been good at, for years and years. We tend to operate in the camp of deductive and inductive reasoning. Abductive reasoning is anathema to us. And so, even as online learning continues to gain traction in the larger K-12 market place, we continue to espouse our traditional business model of ever-increasing tuition for a product ("education") that is delivered (no, I don't like that term, either...) in the same way.

As Vasant Dhar, a professor at NYU Stern School of Business, writes in the January 7 (2013) 'soapbox' column of the FInancial Times, "Top-branded universities may soon find themselves competing on price with lower-tier brands and potentially losing the battle. Their edge has been solid reputations and knowledge, honed over decades, which until now has been paid for. IT has changed that forever. Information is fluid and once separated from its source can be easily copied, modified and even improved. Top-branded universities have reason to worry over the long term." (11)

Substitute "top-branded independent schools" for 'universities,' and you can begin to see what I'm driving at.

I'm not about curtailing school as we know it. I'm not about tearing down buildings or retro-fitting them to be cyber-cafés. I tend to disagree with Prof Dhar about how easy it is to copy, modify, and improve information, primarily because I believe that how we learn is not in synch with how our society wants to test kids (standardized tests); in other words, testing/assessment is its own issue that is hurting real learning.

Having said that, I think that schools do have to worry if our instructional models continue to be command-and-control, wherein we do straightforward lectures and one-way delivery of content, expecting it to be regurgitated on exams (assessments). If we continue down that path, we will be in trouble.

We do need to consider the value of abductive reasoning, a type of thinking that allows us to say, "Hey, wait a minute. If online learning continues to be this disruptive, how might we alter our learning environments so that we cannot be replicated, so that we can increase our value proposition?"

Some schools are doing that, but too few. We need to embrace abductive reasoning that encourages us to use the phrase "how might we" as a means of imagining the next steps of our own evolution. In other words, imagining how we might transform our business models.

If we choose not to innovate (business models) when we are capable (i.e., now), what will we do when we are forced to innovate, but cannot (diminishing resources and enrollment)?

Safety: Time to be Heard

Heads Speak for Themselves (January 2013)

Every few years, my school conducts a market research survey to better understand what parents seek in their selection of a school for their children.  In each and every survey, “safety” appears near or at the top of the list.  This is understandable, given all that we read about violence in schools – from bullying and harassment to school shootings.

In the first two years of my tenure at my current school, I’ve paid a lot of attention to campus safety.  I’ve heightened the security presence at our main entrance; improved the fencing that surrounds our entire campus; installed security cameras to monitor most of the exterior areas on our campus; trained faculty about how the school should and would respond to an active shooter on campus; reviewed, enhanced and drilled our “lockdown” and “shelter in place” procedures; enlisted the help of a member of the Albuquerque Police Department to review safety and security issues on campus on a weekly basis; become more vigilant about locking all campus gates during the school day; and implemented an emergency alert system to notify parents about crises on campus.  I have more initiatives in the works, from increasing the size of our security staff to installing interior security cameras.

I didn’t become a Head of School because of my passion for safety and security matters, but I recognize that it’s among the most important aspects of my job.  The recent shootings in Newtown, CT have focused national attention, once again, on school safety, and, in particular, the problem of active shooters.  Unfortunately, our nation doesn’t have a good track record of taking legislative action following school shootings.

The horrific events at Sandy Hook Elementary School have captured the nation’s attention because of the large number of deaths and young age of the victims (26, excluding the shooter, including 20 small children).  Sadly, this tragedy is one of a long, steady string of school shootings.  In the last decade, excluding this most recent tragedy, there have been at least 28 shootings on school and college campuses in 15 different states, 23 of which resulted in the killing of 85 innocent victims.

This time, however, something feels different.  There is a heightened concern and energy that surround this recent tragedy.  The big question is where that will lead us.  In the past, gun violence has sometimes led the government to take action.  A recent article in The Washington Post  identified a number of examples.  These included the National Firearms Act of 1934, following the “Tommy gun” era of the gangsters of the 1920’s; the Gun Control Act of 1968, following the assassinations of JFK, Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr.; and the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, following the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan in 1981.

A lot of organizations and individuals are making suggestions about how to improve school safety.  The NRA, according to a CNN report, plans to fund a group charged with developing a plan to place armed guards in schools around the country.  Legislators in at least four states have suggested providing guns to teachers.  As someone who has spent over 25 years working in a wide range of schools – public, private, urban, rural, large and small – I cannot fathom how more guns on any school campus will make our children safer.  These suggestions alarm me, and I believe them to be misguided.

On the other hand, there are at least ten members of Congress – Republicans and Democrats – who have received high marks from the NRA and who have said, in recent days, that they are willing to take a fresh look at gun control legislation.  This suggests to me that we have a unique opportunity.

Several days ago, I was discussing the Sandy Hook incident with an acquaintance who has worked in schools for many, many years.  She asked me whether I thought that concerned parents, teachers and school leaders might not come together to address school violence in a grassroots way.  She mentioned Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), an organization that was started by a few women in 1980 and that ultimately changed the way our nation thinks about drunk driving.  About the same time, I read a blog entry by Brian Rosenberg, the President of Macalester College, in which he makes a pledge never to support a political candidate who does not support a ban on assault weapons.  Rosenberg recognizes that it’s a small step, but he notes that we “need to begin somewhere.”

As school leaders, we are charged with ensuring the safety of our communities, and we know what makes sense.  This is a time to come together and be heard.

Steve Albert is Head of School at Sandia Preparatory School (NM). He can be reached at [email protected].