MindLab brought in the conversation in classroom during its first session. Narrative says, 'We are hoping that during this course you'll do some critical reflection through consciously interrogating your own experiences and preconceptions about leadership'. A huge ask! So possibly we will start reconstruct and reconfigure our preconception about 'leadership'. I find similarities between two - 'knowledge' and 'leadership'; both should be open to 'perestroika' and 'glasnost'. (Used two Russian words which were in 1980's and I believe, still are).
Perhaps it will be relevant if I discuss it here. Sunday morning- reading The Economist. An article seemed almost linked to this blog-post; 'Education, O-levels, a visit from Michelle Obama seems to improve test scores'. I mean this could be a fertile ground to have serious debate in MindLab classes. To cut the long story short, The First Lady visited Elizabeth Garrett Anderson School, a London state (or public) school for girls, about three-quarters of whom are eligible for free school meals. She told a star-struck assembly that she also came from humble origins, explaining how she worked her way from a poor part of Chicago to the Ivy League. She reiterated, "I am standing here....because of education. She also continued to say, "I thought being smart was cooler than anything in the world." And unlike many luminaries asked to rouse pupils, Mrs Obama kept in touch. Now let me come to the point, her message seems to have worked. In a paper published on July 1st, Simon Burgess, an economist at the University of Bristol, analysed the school's exam results in the years after Mrs Obama's visits. The 15-or 16-year-olds sitting their GCSEs did much better than girls in the previous year. The article went on, in details, the reality of correlation, cause and effect. It did consider confounding factors. But at the end, tried to say it was quite convincing that the visit had huge impact. Is that a type of leadership we want in education?