The Building Blocks of Educational Administration: A Dialogic Review of the First Three Chapters of the Handbook

Abstract

ThefirstauthorwasaskedtowriteareviewofthefirstthreechaptersoftheHandbook. Rather than approach this task in the conventional way, he decided to involve several others in his department. He asked three of his doctoral students-Gerardo R. López, James W. Koschoreck, and Kanya Mahitivanichcha-and one of his colleagues-James J. Scheurich-to work with him. The five of us then began to discuss how we might do this together.What we decided to do is a kind of structured dialogue. In this dialogue, there are three "blocks." For "Block 1: Introductory Comments," each of us independently read and responded to the first three chapters of the Handbook. This means that none of us knew what the others were writing for Block 1. For "Block 2: Response," each of us continued our response to the first three chapters but also responded to what everyone else had said in Block 1. For "Block 3: Final Comments," each of us, once again, continued to respond to the Handbook's first three chapters as well as respond to what others had said 477

The (Racially Neutral) Politics of Education: A Critical Race Theory Perspective

“…As a whole, issues of racial avoidance are not at all uncommon. For example, in educational administration, very few individuals have had a critical dialogue about the role of racism in society-and more specifically, racism in our beliefs, ideas, practices, and knowledge bases (Donmoyer et al, 1995;Scribner et al, 1999). Within the politics of education, discussions of racism have also been largely avoided.…”

“…As Young and Laible (2000) attested, "If changes are not made, educational administration programs will continue to produce primarily white, middle class administrators with little understanding of or interest in the institutionalized system of white privilege, oppression, and racism" (p. 388). In short, a critical reevaluation of the knowledge base in educational leadership must be made to address this toxic trend (see also Capper, 1993;Donmoyer et al, 1995;Ortiz & Ortiz, 1995;Sanford, 1995;Scribner, López, Koschoreck, Mahitivanichcha, & Scheurich, 1999).…”

The Study of Educational Leadership and Management

“…This has created a crisis of credibility. While scholars debate the knowledge base and methods of investigation, they should be most centrally concerned with the meaning of these differences for contributing to our understanding of educational practice (Gunter, 1999;Leithwood and Duke, 1999;Scribner et al, 1999). Theory remains a significant influence on practice even when it is disavowed (Bush, 1999).…”