Leadership Philosophy: Leader as Facilitator
Leadership, at its core, is about balance, respect, and ‘facilitating’ processes that are informed and influenced by people, systems, and policy. When I teach leadership theory and when I apply leadership as a process in my own life, I see it being primarily focused on, quite literally, the easing of processes. The Spanish verb facilitar means ‘to ease.’ This is how I see the primary role of a leader. That is to facilitate or to ease every aspect of a process, which includes people power and human resources, systems and structures that streamline (or at times stymie) productivity and progress, and policy and procedures that inform the boundaries of what is possible. As a facilitator leader (or an ‘easer’), I see myself as being responsible for innovation, creativity, participative engagement, and above all respect and humility.
How I accomplish this is through a servant leadership approach. In 1970, Robert Greenleaf coined the term servant leader, but anyone who has studied leadership recognizes this concept’s roots in myriad leaders spanning millennia. That being said, perhaps the most inspiring aspect of Greenleaf’s work is his supposition that, “the servant leader is servant first… it begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead” (p. 1). Simply stated, a servant leader focuses on the growth and well-being of people and the communities to which they belong (Greenleaf, 1970). This particular conceptualization of leadership illuminates the importance of humility and the value of others (in some cases other peer-leaders or followers). It is at this point where my leadership approach and an inherent commitment to diversity and inclusion align, both of which are informed heavily by my own personal and professional development and experience.
Infused into my understanding and application of the servant leader model is the work of Juana Bordas (2007) and her conceptualization of multicultural leadership. This particular model, when combined with servant leadership informs and strengthens both. Bordas defines multicultural leadership as, “an inclusive approach and philosophy that incorporates the influences, practices, and values of diverse cultures in a respectful and productive manner… [which] resonates with many cultures and encourages diverse people to actively engage, contribute, and tap their potential” (p. 8). In this, I believe that the best leader is the one who respects, accounts for, fosters, and facilitates the many perspectives that inform the best option for moving forward. That being said, there are times when all the information in the world will not make the decision easier, or more likely right, and in those circumstances the leader has to step-out and make the decision. If a participatory approach had been adopted throughout the approach, the likelihood of making the best decision is increased. This is the approach I try to navigate as a leader daily.
As noted in my teaching philosophy statement (see CV), a critical mission of institutions of higher education is to educate and inform the next generation of citizenry to not only be the critical conscious of society, but to have the skills and courage to act on that conscious. If our graduates are meant to be the critical conscious of our society, but also the ‘easers,’ ‘facilitators,’ or leaders, it is imperative they understand, have witnessed, and have applied leadership that can inform and inspire.
References
Bordas, J. (2007). Salsa, soul, and spirit: Leadership for a multicultural age (new approaches to leadership from Latino, Black, and American Indian communities. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Greenleaf R. (1970). Servant as leader. Atlanta, GA: Greenleaf Center.
How I accomplish this is through a servant leadership approach. In 1970, Robert Greenleaf coined the term servant leader, but anyone who has studied leadership recognizes this concept’s roots in myriad leaders spanning millennia. That being said, perhaps the most inspiring aspect of Greenleaf’s work is his supposition that, “the servant leader is servant first… it begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead” (p. 1). Simply stated, a servant leader focuses on the growth and well-being of people and the communities to which they belong (Greenleaf, 1970). This particular conceptualization of leadership illuminates the importance of humility and the value of others (in some cases other peer-leaders or followers). It is at this point where my leadership approach and an inherent commitment to diversity and inclusion align, both of which are informed heavily by my own personal and professional development and experience.
Infused into my understanding and application of the servant leader model is the work of Juana Bordas (2007) and her conceptualization of multicultural leadership. This particular model, when combined with servant leadership informs and strengthens both. Bordas defines multicultural leadership as, “an inclusive approach and philosophy that incorporates the influences, practices, and values of diverse cultures in a respectful and productive manner… [which] resonates with many cultures and encourages diverse people to actively engage, contribute, and tap their potential” (p. 8). In this, I believe that the best leader is the one who respects, accounts for, fosters, and facilitates the many perspectives that inform the best option for moving forward. That being said, there are times when all the information in the world will not make the decision easier, or more likely right, and in those circumstances the leader has to step-out and make the decision. If a participatory approach had been adopted throughout the approach, the likelihood of making the best decision is increased. This is the approach I try to navigate as a leader daily.
As noted in my teaching philosophy statement (see CV), a critical mission of institutions of higher education is to educate and inform the next generation of citizenry to not only be the critical conscious of society, but to have the skills and courage to act on that conscious. If our graduates are meant to be the critical conscious of our society, but also the ‘easers,’ ‘facilitators,’ or leaders, it is imperative they understand, have witnessed, and have applied leadership that can inform and inspire.
References
Bordas, J. (2007). Salsa, soul, and spirit: Leadership for a multicultural age (new approaches to leadership from Latino, Black, and American Indian communities. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Greenleaf R. (1970). Servant as leader. Atlanta, GA: Greenleaf Center.
Teaching Philosophy:
A critical mission of institutions of higher education is to educate and inform the next generation of citizenry to not only be the critical conscious of society, but to have the skills and courage to act on that conscious. My teaching philosophy has been guided by Deweyian experiential education philosophy, which is centered on educative experiences as catalysts for learning (Dewey, 1938). Central to experiential education philosophy is the acquisition of knowledge through the principles of continuity and interaction, educative experiences, and critical reflection (e.g., this is the source for experiential education’s theoretical and philosophical underpinnings – Giles & Eyler, 1994).
This philosophy can foster the type of educative environment that can prepare participants for a career and a life of learning. Understanding the various paradigms of inquiry guiding our worldviews runs deeper than simply obtaining course objectives or memorizing course material, it provides lifelong learners (and future citizens) with the capacity to (a) think critically, (b) formulate rational decisions, (c) apply and connect acquired knowledge to educative projects, and (d) communicate said decisions with others.
Teaching, training, and facilitating learning environments allow me to fulfill what I believe to be fundamental responsibilities of any educator or administrator. This emphasis on human development can manifest in classroom settings with students or in one-on-one sessions with faculty, staff, and community partners. Those responsibilities are based on providing learners an educative and challenging environment where curiosity is awakened, intrinsic motivation and active/collaborative learning are evident, and the greater connection comes from critical analysis, synthesis, and reflection. Whether the student is preparing for higher education, life, or a specific career, these skills are necessary. This philosophy aligns well with the mindset and skillset of an entrepreneur. I have devised several general objectives to achieve these aims.
I believe lifelong learners and leaders should be able to:
References
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan
Giles, D. E. Jr. & Eyler, J. (1994), The theoretical roots of service-learning in John Dewey: Toward a theory of service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning 1(1). p. 77-85.
This philosophy can foster the type of educative environment that can prepare participants for a career and a life of learning. Understanding the various paradigms of inquiry guiding our worldviews runs deeper than simply obtaining course objectives or memorizing course material, it provides lifelong learners (and future citizens) with the capacity to (a) think critically, (b) formulate rational decisions, (c) apply and connect acquired knowledge to educative projects, and (d) communicate said decisions with others.
Teaching, training, and facilitating learning environments allow me to fulfill what I believe to be fundamental responsibilities of any educator or administrator. This emphasis on human development can manifest in classroom settings with students or in one-on-one sessions with faculty, staff, and community partners. Those responsibilities are based on providing learners an educative and challenging environment where curiosity is awakened, intrinsic motivation and active/collaborative learning are evident, and the greater connection comes from critical analysis, synthesis, and reflection. Whether the student is preparing for higher education, life, or a specific career, these skills are necessary. This philosophy aligns well with the mindset and skillset of an entrepreneur. I have devised several general objectives to achieve these aims.
I believe lifelong learners and leaders should be able to:
- Critically process and apply information learned in respective disciplines and beyond.
- Find information, evaluate/synthesize that information, know how to make informed decisions from that information, and be able to do something about it or apply it.
- Actively engage in learning environments in and out of the classroom (as individuals, in diverse groups, expecting timely feedback, high expectations, and faculty interaction).
- See themselves as change makers who have a responsibility to themselves and their community.
- Recognize that their worldview and perspective is but one of many, and in this experience a shift in perception from dualistic to relativistic in thought.
References
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan
Giles, D. E. Jr. & Eyler, J. (1994), The theoretical roots of service-learning in John Dewey: Toward a theory of service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning 1(1). p. 77-85.
Philosophy of Student Success
Introduction
My philosophy of student success and engagement in higher education is informed by my personal education experience as a first-generation student, Deweyian educational philosophy, Learning Reconsidered, the power of student engagement in AAC&U’s High-Impact Practices, and ultimately a holistic student-centered approach. Symbolically, this philosophy is framed best by the Spanish verb Hacer and the 10%:90% Rule. My philosophy and these articulation symbols will be described in the following statement.
A critical mission of institutions of higher education is to educate and inform the next generation of citizenry to not only be the critical conscious of society, but to have the skills and courage to act on that conscious. My philosophy has been guided by Deweyian experiential education philosophy, which is centered on educative experiences as catalysts for learning (Dewey, 1938). Central to experiential education philosophy is the acquisition of knowledge through the principles of continuity and interaction, educative experiences, and critical reflection (e.g., this is the source for experiential education’s theoretical and philosophical underpinnings – Giles & Eyler, 1994). Moreover, the concepts and approaches offered in Learning Reconsidered (2004; 2006) and AAC&U’s High-Impact Practices (2008) for student engagement offer an applicable guide and road map for how to bridge academic and student affairs, capitalize on institutional resources (e.g., funding, students, faculty, the wider-community, etc.), and scale and sustain engagement across institutions.
My Philosophical Beliefs on Education Informed by Hacer & the 10%:90% Rule
To me, student success entails and requires more from universities than just focusing on the retention of students. Our students’ success demands more from us in higher education than ensuring that a student persists on a 4 or 6-year graduation timeline.
Having a philosophy and operationalizing it are two sides of the same coin.
Regarding higher education institutions, there is a social contract captured most aptly and succinctly by the Spanish verb hacer – which translates to mean to do or to make. This has always served as a symbol to me for how the relationship or social contract between students and institutions of higher learning must be framed. We know from decades of engagement and retention research that involvement and retention are one in the same. Therefore, as institutions it is imperative that we make and design initiatives that will support our students and in turn we expect and motivate our students to do or engage in those initiatives that we know will support their success and learning. This social contract requires institutions to establish offices, programs, policies, and systems that enable students to thrive, while also inspiring students to apply themselves. In turn, students must do. Students must engage and commit to their learning and development. When all parties included in this social contract commit, the student experience becomes richer, the institution is strengthened, and success for all stakeholders is positively impacted.
On a weekly basis, a university student will spend roughly 10% of their time in a class environment and 90% outside of a formal curricular-focused environment (10%:90% Rule). As institutions, we cannot expect 100% of a student’s learning to come from 10% of their time. As the highest priority, students’ curricular learning must be complemented by the co-curricular opportunities a university designs. When these curricula are aware of one another the 90% becomes the space for the co-curricular to align with and support the curricular work happening in the colleges, departments, programs, and courses across campus. This decision, to align as much of the co-curricular with the students’ curricular environment can create synergies that can engage and retain students in remarkable ways. For example, consider Undergraduate Research initiatives, Common Book programs, Global Education opportunities, and Service-Learning/Community Engagement experiences are exemplar vehicles that can connect the academic and student affairs divisions in ways that can engage and retain students.
For me, the only thing better than watching someone grow, is helping them grow. It is our calling, every single day, to wake up thinking about how each one of us can help our students grow. As Thoreau said, “though I do not believe that a plant will spring up from where no seed has been, I have great faith in a seed. Convince me that you have a seed there, and I am prepared to expect wonders.” Our students should work to convince us there is a seed there and we, as faculty, staff, and administrators, should work to foster the conditions that will help them grow.
References
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.
Giles, D. E. Jr. & Eyler, J. (1994), The theoretical roots of service-learning in John Dewey: Toward a theory of service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning 1(1). p. 77-85.
Keeling, R. P. (2004). Learning reconsidered: A campus-wide focus on the student experience. Washington, D.C.: ACPA/NASPA.
Keeling, R. P. (2006). Learning reconsidered 2: A practical guide to implementing a campus-wide focus on the student experience. Washington, D.C.: ACPA/NASPA.
Kuh, G. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Washington, D.C.: Association of American Colleges and Universities.
My philosophy of student success and engagement in higher education is informed by my personal education experience as a first-generation student, Deweyian educational philosophy, Learning Reconsidered, the power of student engagement in AAC&U’s High-Impact Practices, and ultimately a holistic student-centered approach. Symbolically, this philosophy is framed best by the Spanish verb Hacer and the 10%:90% Rule. My philosophy and these articulation symbols will be described in the following statement.
A critical mission of institutions of higher education is to educate and inform the next generation of citizenry to not only be the critical conscious of society, but to have the skills and courage to act on that conscious. My philosophy has been guided by Deweyian experiential education philosophy, which is centered on educative experiences as catalysts for learning (Dewey, 1938). Central to experiential education philosophy is the acquisition of knowledge through the principles of continuity and interaction, educative experiences, and critical reflection (e.g., this is the source for experiential education’s theoretical and philosophical underpinnings – Giles & Eyler, 1994). Moreover, the concepts and approaches offered in Learning Reconsidered (2004; 2006) and AAC&U’s High-Impact Practices (2008) for student engagement offer an applicable guide and road map for how to bridge academic and student affairs, capitalize on institutional resources (e.g., funding, students, faculty, the wider-community, etc.), and scale and sustain engagement across institutions.
My Philosophical Beliefs on Education Informed by Hacer & the 10%:90% Rule
To me, student success entails and requires more from universities than just focusing on the retention of students. Our students’ success demands more from us in higher education than ensuring that a student persists on a 4 or 6-year graduation timeline.
- I believe that our students and communities demand and deserve more of their higher education institutions – both public and private.
- I believe that students should persist in an environment where they not only want to stay (be retained), but where they want to thrive and awaken the curiosity within themselves. A place that pushes and supports students to step outside their comfort zones in affective, cognitive, and behavioral ways as it is in these conditions that students begin to shape and reshape the way they view the world, how they engage with it, and to seek to change it.
- I believe that as institutions of higher education we must create the conditions that matter – we must create the conditions that allow us to meet our students where they are. To do this we cultivate environments whereby students from all backgrounds, all interests, all orientations, and all creeds can find the place they aspired to be. Our universities must be places that will breathe life into their passions, hopes, dreams, and future.
- I believe that universities are places where hopes and dreams do come true and that universities are places where futures begin to manifest and where passions have a place to be unleashed. And in this, I believe that even dreams need a plan.
Having a philosophy and operationalizing it are two sides of the same coin.
Regarding higher education institutions, there is a social contract captured most aptly and succinctly by the Spanish verb hacer – which translates to mean to do or to make. This has always served as a symbol to me for how the relationship or social contract between students and institutions of higher learning must be framed. We know from decades of engagement and retention research that involvement and retention are one in the same. Therefore, as institutions it is imperative that we make and design initiatives that will support our students and in turn we expect and motivate our students to do or engage in those initiatives that we know will support their success and learning. This social contract requires institutions to establish offices, programs, policies, and systems that enable students to thrive, while also inspiring students to apply themselves. In turn, students must do. Students must engage and commit to their learning and development. When all parties included in this social contract commit, the student experience becomes richer, the institution is strengthened, and success for all stakeholders is positively impacted.
On a weekly basis, a university student will spend roughly 10% of their time in a class environment and 90% outside of a formal curricular-focused environment (10%:90% Rule). As institutions, we cannot expect 100% of a student’s learning to come from 10% of their time. As the highest priority, students’ curricular learning must be complemented by the co-curricular opportunities a university designs. When these curricula are aware of one another the 90% becomes the space for the co-curricular to align with and support the curricular work happening in the colleges, departments, programs, and courses across campus. This decision, to align as much of the co-curricular with the students’ curricular environment can create synergies that can engage and retain students in remarkable ways. For example, consider Undergraduate Research initiatives, Common Book programs, Global Education opportunities, and Service-Learning/Community Engagement experiences are exemplar vehicles that can connect the academic and student affairs divisions in ways that can engage and retain students.
For me, the only thing better than watching someone grow, is helping them grow. It is our calling, every single day, to wake up thinking about how each one of us can help our students grow. As Thoreau said, “though I do not believe that a plant will spring up from where no seed has been, I have great faith in a seed. Convince me that you have a seed there, and I am prepared to expect wonders.” Our students should work to convince us there is a seed there and we, as faculty, staff, and administrators, should work to foster the conditions that will help them grow.
References
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.
Giles, D. E. Jr. & Eyler, J. (1994), The theoretical roots of service-learning in John Dewey: Toward a theory of service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning 1(1). p. 77-85.
Keeling, R. P. (2004). Learning reconsidered: A campus-wide focus on the student experience. Washington, D.C.: ACPA/NASPA.
Keeling, R. P. (2006). Learning reconsidered 2: A practical guide to implementing a campus-wide focus on the student experience. Washington, D.C.: ACPA/NASPA.
Kuh, G. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Washington, D.C.: Association of American Colleges and Universities.