Educational Research

People are worrying about their jobs and the next paycheck. Companies are closing stores and budgets cuts are happening everywhere. Banks are reeling, yet there is a bright side to this economic turmoil, especially for educators.

» Read More

Recently, while working at a university, the rules changed for taking mid-term and final exams. Prior to this change each section of the exam was timed. Of course, everyone understands the importance of timed exams on producing assessments which are considered valid in the eyes of other institutes. The change was brought about due to the complaints of students that there was not enough time to complete the exam.

The original tests were designed to give the student, what is considered, the proper time to respond, provided that the student has a working knowledge of the information. To present an example; the old multiple choice section provided 1.1 minutes per question. Under the new system, there is no real time limit for the multiple choice section.

We are focusing on validity not reliability. Reliability has to do with the consistency of scoring between markers where as validity is focused on the consistency results when used in different groups of student (yet the same level), different schools, different school years, etc.

Mid-term and final exams are high stakes assessments. They determine whether a student proceeds to the next level or the next year in the university. High stakes assessments must be proven valid, especially if the university wants to be considered as a legitimate institute of education.

In order for an assessment to be considered valid there must be generalizability. In other words, “the degree to which evidence of validity based on test-criterion relations can be generalized to a new situation without further study of validity in that new situation.” AERA et al (1999 p. 15). You can not get the same results in different areas because each person will dedicate a different amount of time to the task.

AERA et al (1999) report states that ‘time period’ or allotted time per item or section is an important aspect in measurement consistency. Without consistent measurements how can we properly evaluate the curriculum? Without consistent measurements how can we properly evaluate teacher efficiency? We use the ‘timed’ aspect to our exams otherwise our results will be skewed.

This skewing of results has occurred. In the latest exams, we had students who scored extremely high on the reading section, but very low on the vocabulary section and others who scored extremely high on writing, but failed the vocabulary and reading. Each student chose the area which they wanted to dedicate their time.

These skewed results make it impossible to evaluate the learning process and the educational program as a whole. It makes it impossible to find problem areas in the program or to make adjustments to the program. Exam validity is a cornerstone to our education system, no matter what the students may think.

As to the student’s complaints of not enough time to produce good work, that complaint is but a myth. Kroll (1990) found that the timing really did not make a difference. Polio et al. (1998) came up with the same results. TESL did a study in 2006 and found basically the same results. They noted the only thing which will make a difference in the writing section is the use of technology, computers. Otherwise, giving the student more time to work on a task basically only helped in the spelling component.

Therefore, changing our allotted time scheme and allowing students to determine how much time they spend on each task will not permit us to have truly valid tests. We can not change to match the whims of the students. The student must learn to function under the dictates of the world around them. Yes, we should listen to their complaints and assess whether their points are valid, but to bow to the whims of the students is not acceptable.

These types of complaints are but one of the consequences of the assessment. There are consequences to every assessment; both good and bad consequence. That is part of assessment development. The consequence of students complaining about time restraint is to be expected and as AERA et al (1999) says these consequences do not invalidate the assessment.

If we are to assess the learning of our students, if we are to assess the programs we use to teach the students, all exams must be valid. The must produce accurate data to ensure the success of the students and the institution. If you are coming under fire about exams and are thinking about changing the exams, think twice. You may not be helping the students or the institution, you may be leading it into disaster.


References:

American Educational Research Association (AERA), American Psychological Association (APA), & National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME). (1999) Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC. Author.

Kroll, B. (1990). What does time buy? ESL student performance on home versus class compositions. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights from the classroom (pp. 140-154). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Polio, C., Fleck, C., & Leder, N. (1998). "If I only had more time: ESL learners' changes in linguistic accuracy on essay revisions." Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(1), 43-68.

With a world in a downward economic spiral and governments attempting to bailout the old lumbering giants it is time for true leadership to step forward. Obama has exhibited some of the characteristics of a leader. He has the charisma, the vision and the ability to inspire, now will come to the test of the other, more important characteristics of leadership.

The business industry needs to take a lesson from Obama. The industry lacks great leaders. There are money makers, businessmen, concerned only with the bottom line, but leaders, there are few. The have chased the all mighty dollar without regard to whom they hurt; all to benefit a select few. Obama on the other hand appears to want to help all equally. He seems to want to get rid of the bad apples and cause the US to blossom once again. Will he be able to do it?

This will be his test of true leadership. He has to unite a country that for half a century has been running every which way, with everyone doing as he or she pleased. Basically the US has been a dysfunctional country.

JFK saw the handwriting on the wall. He saw a country that was splintering. He knew the country was about to start running amok and he tried to change the attitudes of the people. Unfortunately he did not last long enough to make a change. Now, Obama is stepping up with what sounds like a call to unite the people, a call to set aside the differences and become one people again.

Will he do it or will he give in to the status quo? The money elite do not want things to change. They are the only ones who do not get hurt in these economic turmoil times. There money is secure and when they do get hurt the government comes in and replenishes their wealth and the cost of the little guy. Will Obama change this?

There is a need to make these high and mighty money lords accountable; accountable not only for the money they move, but for the people they destroy. There is a need to bring the splintered society together again as one united body. There is a need to rebuild respect for the country in the eyes of the world. There is a need for a tough leader who will stand up the corruption and abuses. There are some great challenges ahead. Is Obama up to the challenge?

The coming months will tell us if Obama is a true leader or just another show boy. By June we know which way he will go. By this time next year we will know the whole truth about our new president. Let us pray that he is a true leader.

downloadable PDF paper can be found at We Develop Leaders - Educational Leadership Development


Considering the difficulty in learning a second language we need to provide our students with all the aid possible to ensure their success. In order to have a chance at being successful in their university studies, the students must attain at least intermediate level English. According to the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California and other language experts, it will take the normal Arabic speaking person 65 weeks to go from beginner to intermediate level English. However, our students have only 48 weeks to perform the same task. Therefore we must do everything possible to assist and expedite the learning process. One such way is the Learning Pathway coupled with Formative Assessment.


A statement about the Pathway and why the Pathway is important
The Learning Pathway is both a teaching tool and a learning tool. It is designed for both the teacher and the student, though its greatest benefit is to the student. It brings the student into the learning process and makes the student responsible for their progress and overall learning.

In the Learning Pathway we provide clearly stated goals or objectives for the students. We take the normal process of stating only goals a little further by adding the condition under which the student will be evaluated and the degree to which the students must perform, along with the prior knowledge needed to reach the goal and then we share all of this with the students in a concrete form.

When we do not provide all of this information it produces a lack of understanding on the part of the student, a gap in their understanding. The lack of a full understanding of what is required of the student produces much anxiety and fear, not to mention that it decreases the engagement by the students (Al-Essa & Al-Malik 1999).

As instructors we often ‘tell’ the students at the beginning of the semester what they have to learn. Many of the books we use will have a page or pages which state what the student will be able to do after they complete the book. So the student knows where he/she will hopefully end up, but that is not enough to engage the student in the learning process.

Unfortunately, these goals are usually stated in general terms and when stated by the instructor usually verbally and once. The student does not know how to get to the objective, which forces the student to be dependent on the teacher instead of taking responsibility for their own learning. Instead, we need to really share all aspects of these goals and bring the student into the learning process. This is inline with what Barr & Tagg, (1995) said in their article “Changes”, about bringing the students into the learning process instead of just teaching.


How to use the information with students
One way I have found for sharing the goals, standards and prior knowledge needed is by posting them on the wall of my classroom, so that the students had the information in front of them constantly. We would refer to the poster almost daily and through reflection, the students would determine how well they were achieving the goals. If I did not have an assigned classroom, I would print these items and distribute them to the students as a handout at the beginning of the semester.

I would not assume that the students would guard this handout; instead I would refer back to it often, asking the students to take out the handout and ‘examine where we were at’ or ‘Tell me the next goal to be achieved’. I would ask them to do some self-evaluation, “Did you learn everything you were supposed to? Can you apply everything you learned?” This constant reinforcement will cause the students to develop the habit of guarding the handout and referring to it constantly.

It is important to note here that the ‘conditions / degree and prior knowledge’ should not to be an individual interpretation. This must be a collaborative effort by all instructors in a given course to ensure consistency of grades and accuracy of prior knowledge. The more explicit the Pathway, the better the students will succeed (Barootchi & Keshavarz, 2002; Davies et al., 2004; Hermann & Lewis, 2004).All instructors should bring their own version of conditions, degree and prior knowledge to a group meeting and come to an agreement as to the exact conditions and degree, along with the correct prior knowledge needed to achieve the goal.

At the end of the semester the teachers would again consider how well the Pathway functioned; were goals met, were the conditions actually used, were the degrees met, was stated prior knowledge actually necessary, etc. From this point, the teachers would make changes in the Pathway if needed.

The Pathway below is however an individual interpretation, since none of my colleagues have had experience in developing a Learning Pathway. It is for this reason that this paper has been written in the hopes that more will come to use this learning / teaching tool.


TABLE 1 – The Pathway for Level C students at Sur College
READING GOAL READING CONDITION & DEGREE PRIOR KNOWLEDGE NEEDED TO OBTAIN THE GOAL

1 THE STUDENT WILL RECOGNISE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PUNCTUATION MARKS IN TEXT A = WHILE READING - ALOUD OR SILENTLY – THE STUDENT ALWAYS RECOGNISES AND USES PUNCTUATION CORRECTLY
B = WHILE READING THE STUDENT RECOGNISES AND USES PUNCTUATION CORRECTLY 85% OF THE TIME C = THE STUDENT RECOGNISES AND USES PUNCTUATION CORRECTLY 75% OF THE TIME
I = THE STUDENT RECOGNISES AND USES PUNCTUATION CORRECTLY LESS THAN 75% OF THE TIME THE STUDENT NEEDS TO MEMORIZE THE DIFFERENT PUNCUATION AND HOW THEY ARE USED
2 THE STUDENT WILL IDENTIFY PARTS OF SPEECH AND THEIR FUNCTION IN A TEXT A = WHILE READING - ALOUD OR SILENTLY - THE STUDENT CONSISTANTLY IDENTIFIES PARTS OF SPEECH AND THEIR FUNCTION IN A TEXT 95% OF THE TIME
B = THE STUDENT CONSISTANTLY IDENTIFIES PARTS OF SPEECH AND THEIR FUNCTION IN A TEXT 85% OF THE TIME
C = THE STUDENT CONSISTANTLY IDENTIFIES PARTS OF SPEECH AND THEIR FUNCTION IN A TEXT 75% OF THE TIME
I = THE STUDENT IDENTIFIES PARTS OF SPEECH AND THEIR FUNCTION IN A TEXT LESS THAN 75% OF THE TIME THE STUDENT MUST HAVE COMPLETED STEP 1 AND MUST HAVE MEMORIZED GRAMMARTICAL VOCABULARY AND THEIR RELATED FUNCTION, WHAT A NOUN IS, AN ADJUECTIVE, A VERB, AN ADVERB, A PREPOSITION, ARTICLE, ETC.

MUST NAVE MEMORIZED WHICH WORDS ARE NOUNS, WHICH ARE VERBS. ETC
3 THE STUDENT WILL USE A DICTIONARY TO FIND MEANING OF WORDS A = WHEN THE STUDENT ENCOUNTERS AN KNOWN WORD HE/SHE KNOWS HOW TO USE A DICTIONARY TO FIND MEANING OF WORDS AND CONSISTANTLY USES THE DICTIONARY CORRECTLY 95% OF THE TIME
B = WHEN THE STUDENT ENCOUNTERS AN KNOWN WORD HE/SHE KNOWS HOW TO USE A DICTIONARY TO FIND MEANING OF WORDS AND CONSISTANTLY USES THE DICTIONARY CORRECTLY 85% OF THE TIME
C = WHEN THE STUDENT ENCOUNTERS AN KNOWN WORD HE/SHE REMEMBERS GENERALLY HOW TO USE A DICTIONARY TO FIND MEANING OF WORDS AND USES THE DICTIONARY CORRECTLY 75% OF THE TIME
I = WHEN THE STUDENT ENCOUNTERS AN KNOWN WORD HE/SHE DOES NOT REMEMBER HOW TO USE A DICTIONARY TO FIND MEANING OF WORDS AND/OR RARELY USES THE DISCTIONARY THE STUDENT MUST HAVE MEMORIZED THE ORDER OF THE ENGLISH ALPHABET,

MUST HAVE MEMORIZED THE ORGANIZATION OF THE DICTIONARY,

MUST MEMORIZED AND BE ABLE TO RECOGNIZE THE PARTS OF SPEECH AND THEIR USAGE
4 THE STUDENT WILL IDENTIFY PRONOUNS AND THEIR REFERENCE (NOUN / PRONOUN AND SUBJECT / VERB AGREEMENT) A = WHILE READING - ALOUD OR SILENTLY - THE STUDENT CONSISTANTLY IDENTIFIES PRONOUNS AND THEIR REFERENCE (NOUN / PRONOUN AND USES SUBJECT / VERB AGREEMENT CORRECTLT) 95% OF THE TIME
B = THE STUDENT CONSISTANTLY IDENTIFIES PRONOUNS AND THEIR REFERENCE (NOUN / PRONOUN AND USES SUBJECT / VERB AGREEMENT CORRECTLT) 85% OF THE TIME
C = 80% OF THE TIME THE STUDENT IDENTIFIES PRONOUNS AND THEIR REFERENCE (NOUN / PRONOUN) AND USES SUBJECT / VERB AGREEMENT CORRECTLT 75% OF THE TIME
I = THE STUDENT IDENTIFIES PRONOUNS AND THEIR REFERENCE (NOUN / PRONOUN AND USES SUBJECT / VERB AGREEMENT CORRECTLT) LESS THAN 75% OF THE TIME THE STUDENT MUST HAVE COMPLETED STEP TWO AND MUST HAVE MEMORIZED NOUNS AND PRONOUNS AND BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY THEM WHEN READ
5 THE STUDENT WILL RECOGNISE TARGET GRAMMATICAL STRUCTURE A = WHILE READING - ALOUD OR SILENTLY - THE STUDENT CAN CORRECTLY RECOGNISE TARGET GRAMMATICAL STRUCTURE OF A TEXT 95% OF THE TIME
B = THE STUDENT CAN CORRECTLY RECOGNISE TARGET GRAMMATICAL STRUCTURE OF A TEXT 85% OF THE TIME
C = THE STUDENT CAN CORRECTLY RECOGNISE TARGET GRAMMATICAL STRUCTURE OF A TEXT 75% OF THE TIME
I = THE STUDENT CAN CORRECTLY RECOGNISE TARGET GRAMMATICAL STRUCTURE OF A TEXT LESS THAN 75% OF THE TIME THE STUDENT MUST HAVE COMPLETED STEPS 2, 4 AND

DEPENDING ON THE LEVEL, MUST APPLY THIS KNOWLEDGE TO WRITE SIMPLE, COMPOUND AND COMPLEX SENTENCES IN PRESENT, PAST AND FUTURE.

DEPENING ON THE LEVEL APPLY THIS KNOWLEDGE TO WRITE SIMPLE, COMPOUND AND COMPLEX QUESTIONS IN PRESENT, PAST AND FUTURE.

DEPENDING ON HTHE LEVEL APPLY THIS KNOWLEDGE TO WRITE CONDITIONAL SENTENTCES
6 THE STUDENT WILL GUESS THE MEANING OF WORDS FROM CONTEXT A = WHILE READING - ALOUD OR SILENTLY - IF THE STUDENT ENCOUNTERS AN UNKNOWN WORD, THE STUDENT IS ABLE TO CORRECTLY GUESS THE MEANING OF WORDS FROM CONTEXT 95% OF THE TIME, WHEN NEEDED
B = THE STUDENT IS ABLE TO CORRECTLY GUESS THE MEANING OF WORDS FROM CONTEXT 85% OF THE TIME, WHEN NEEDED
C = THE STUDENT IS ABLE TO CORRECTLY GUESS THE MEANING OF WORDS FROM CONTEXT 75% OF THE TIME, WHEN NEEDED I = THE STUDENT IS ABLE TO CORRECTLY GUESS THE MEANING OF WORDS FROM CONTEXT LESS THAN 75% OF THE TIME, WHEN NEEDED THE STUDENT NEEDS A SUFFICIENT MEMORIZED AND USABLE VOCABULARY (STEP 1) TO RECOGNISE THE MAJORITY OF THE WORDS IN THE SENTENCE OR PARAGRAPH,

NEEDS THE ABILITY TO RECONISE AND USE CORRECTLY THE VAIOUS TYPES OF SENTENCES AND QUESTIONS - STEPS 2,4,5


As you noted in Table 1, the course has assigned goals, which are normally discussed with the students, all we did is add the Condition and Degree, along with prior knowledge necessary to achieve the stated goals. This is the Pathway.

We helped the student understand, on a higher level and with less chance of misconception, everything which is necessary to arrive at the stated goal. The student now has a map which shows him/her what they need to learn first, second, third, etc. They know that they must master certain skills before they attempt other skills. They know how they will be evaluated and what is considered ‘good’.

We have now given the student everything to succeed. They have a qualified instructor, they know where they are going and how to get there, they know what is required to get there and they know the level of excellence they must reach. They know that there is better chance of performing well and they know that they need the course to do well in the university. When a person knows that they will do well and they know that they need something the level of engagement rises (Atkinson 1964; Eccles 1983; Wigfield & Eccles 1992, 2000).

It also serves as a troubleshooting map. If the students have problems with one goal they can look at the pathway, which shows the skills they need to be proficient at prior to learning another skill. They can use that information to test their abilities and fix the problem or seek out help (fill the gap). We have brought the student into the learning process and made him/her responsible for their learning. We have helped form learners who “take charge of their own learning” (Barootchi & Keshavarz, 2002, p.286), and take responsibility for learning (Davies et al., 2004; Hayward et al., 2004; Kirkwood, 2000; McDonald and Boud, 2003).


Example of the usefulness of the Pathway
For example, a student trying to identify grammatical structure (step 5) in a reading assignment has trouble doing so. Normally what would happen? The student would not participate in the class or wait for the for someone else to ask how to identify the structure correctly or hope the teacher will explain again how to find the correct structure or if you are lucky the student will come to your office and ask you for help, but often not. End result the student usually does poorly on that particular section on the exam.

However, by using the Pathway, we bring the student into the learning process. We are referring to the Pathway constantly. We would be asking the students questions like, “According your handout, what do you need to identify the target structure?”, “What part of the Pathway helped you identify the structure?”. Now, the student can look at the Pathway and sees that he or she needs to have a firm foundation in the skills listed in steps 2 and 4 (reflective). The student knows where to search to find his or her weakness and hopefully how to correct that weakness.

Giving a person a destination without giving them a route or map is of little help. They may find the destination after much trial and error, but that may take semesters or years. We need to produce competent students now; therefore we need to map out the complete route.

Imagine again the same student from the example above, he or she only has the goals stated at the beginning of the semester. There is no Learning Pathway. He or she can not identify the grammatical structure of the reading assignment. He or she does not know how or where to start in order to fix the problem, what will happen to the student. Will frustration begin to set in? Could the student become discouraged, doubting their ability to handle the material?

Giving students a clear Pathway to Learning improves their understanding and motivation. It allows them be become active participants in their education. This understanding enables students to reflect on their performance and then self-define and monitor a plan toward mastery (Fontana & Fernandez 1994; Frederickson & White 1997).

However, though we have stated the Pathway we are still assuming that the student is capable of functioning at his/her assigned level. Once you reach the Year 1 or Year 2 students this may or may not be true. The students may or may not have learned all the prior Foundation English skills necessary. Should we just assume they have? The teacher must know what they understand and to what level they understands.

To avoid assuming we can incorporate some preliminary assessments to test the student’s readiness to move forward in the course. As educators we are here to ensure successes not reinforce failures.


Example of ensuring prior learning

The students probably understand, to some extent, the prior information or they would not be in this course. However, we need to assess not just if they understood, but to what extent they understood and can use what was presented to them. Therefore, we assess the students on their prior knowledge and abilities with questions designed to provide the teacher with information on which ability is weak and to what extent. Each question is short and focused on one (1) outcome to avoid partial completion and allow the instructor to determine if the objective has been met.


To what extent does the student understand?


Though he has passed the prior course, he may not thoroughly understand or be able to use what he should have learned


We, as teachers need to know the level of our students in order to help them achieve their goals


To What Extent does the Student Understand
The teacher will analyze the results to determine what, if any, skills need to be re-taught and how. From that information the teacher designs the lesson plans and begins re-teaching. At every step of the way the teacher is re-evaluating the students to ensure that every student understands and can use the material to the stated degree of competency. We can only call what we are doing “Formative Assessment” if we draw the student into the learning process and our along with their efforts enhance the student’s learning. That is our goal. Let’s look at an example…

Assuming that our course begins with identifying grammatical structure and proceeds forward, we can test the first three steps in one simple quiz, though the quiz will have multiple parts. We design a quiz with vocabulary which the students should know and will have to use, at least at the beginning of the present course. The words are ordered according to levels. We also add some words which most, if not all, will not know. The reason for the words which none will know is to make sure that the student has to use their dictionary, one of the skills we are assessing.

In one part of the quiz, we ask the students to write a definition, in their own words, of the vocabulary (testing basic vocabulary knowledge according to level). In another part we ask them to tell us which part or parts of speech the word represents (testing their ability with parts of speech). We also tell the students that if they do not know the word they should take out their dictionary and look up the word, but should try to answer all the vocabulary without their dictionary (testing dictionary skills).

By observing the number of students who use dictionaries along with when and ‘how’ they use their dictionary we can evaluate their ability to use a dictionary correctly. If we notice that there are difficulties (alphabetically order not known, does not understand the abbreviation for parts of speech, etc), we note what type of difficulty the students have and the number of students who suffer from that difficulty.


Statement about Formative Assessment and how to use it
In Formative Assessment we look for specific skills or knowledge which the student lacks (gaps) and then focus our teaching (using various methods) to correct that problem (fill the gap). We are looking at engaging the students in every step of the learning process. We want to promote self-examination, reflection, critical thinking and a history of success on the summative evaluation.

In Formative Assessment we are looking for data not grades and we use the data immediately to dictate what we need to teach or re-teach and to garner ideas on how to teach the material so that the student can understand and use it properly. Therefore, once the quiz, stated above, is done we can address any dictionary problems before class ends. We can review the steps for using a dictionary, use visuals, peer teaching, small groups working together to look up words any number of methods to ensure that our students have learned and can apply the skill. After class we correct the answers to the vocabulary and note the problems, if any.

If no errors are found, we can design quizzes, if we have not already done so, to assess the next set of steps; pronouns, sentence construction, etc. However, if there are problems we note the exact difficulty and analyze the best possible method or methods to re-teach the material.

As stated above Formative Assessment is designed to evaluate specific skills and give the instructor usable information on what the student knows or does not know what the student can do or not do. Formative Assessment is not for grades, but for information.

Having said that we look at the quiz and at the different skills we were assessing. Do the students have a problem identifying many of the vocabulary word? Which level words were difficult? Are there any words which a large portion of the students found troublesome? Do many students have a problem identifying the part(s) of speech which relate to the word? Once we have identified the gaps in the students’ understanding and/or abilities, we are ready to design classes to fill those gaps.

Let us assume that many of the students had a problem identifying the part(s) of speech related to the vocabulary. The next class would begin with a review of identifying parts of speech to help them become proficient at that skill. Since they know from the Pathway Chart, that they need that skill, they will be more inclined to be engaged in the review.

The instructor has designed his/her lesson and begins to instruct the students on identifying the parts of speech of various vocabularies. All the while the instructor is verifying that the students understand and can use the skill which is being taught. Verification comes through a multitude of channels; body language, direct questioning, group work, peer teaching and reflection to name a few. Until the students are successful at the present skill, the next skill is not taught.

Formative Assessment means evaluate the students frequently on specific points or skills which they are learning or have just learned. When utilizing a quiz format, design evaluations which will clearly identify specific skills or knowledge. The evaluation are not just paper and pencil quizzes, they are the multitude of forms for verifying a students understanding and ability to perform and should be done during the instruction and after to ensure quality of learning and retention. At every stage of the assessment, note the skills which are low and address that problem or problems immediately or in the next class.

This is where Formative and Summative differ. If the instructor waits until the Mid-Term or the Final Exam and looks at the test he/she may not be able to tell which skill was lacking to perform well and there is no time to go back and fix the gaps in the students’ learning. Plus the instructor normally does not have access to the test to sit down and tear apart the tests to discover which skills are lacking and where along the learning process the student stumbled. For this reason Formative Assessment is frequent assessment; daily, after each new skill or information is taught, at the end of the lesson to ensure that the student can combine the different skills to produce a higher order of knowledge or a higher degree of competence.

In a relatively short time we have ensured that the students are at the correct level and that all prior knowledge and skills are functioning properly. Though we spent some time evaluating them, that investment in time will pay huge dividends during the course when you can move quicker through the new material without having to repeat information which should have been learned in prior levels.

As you noted we incorporated Formative Assessment in the evaluation process, in fact the evaluation process is Formative Assessment. Formative Assessment is evaluating people to note the exact skill which they lack (gap) and help them to learn that skill and become competent at that skill (filling the gap).

Most teachers give homework and quizzes, but usually only place a grade on the assignment. We are missing a wealth of information which could change a failing student into a passing student. Every homework is an opportunity to evaluate our students and learn their weak points and design the next class to repeat information if needed. Every quiz is an evaluation which can be used to assess the strengths and weakness of the student and for redesigning our lessons. Often, we miss valuable opportunities to improve our students.

It is time to turn all of our homework assignments into true learning assignments. Design the homework to assess a particular skill(s). Be very clear about the skill(s) you are evaluating. As soon as you receive the work evaluate it for errors. Note the errors and prepare the information for your next class.

This in itself will change your students. All of the students know that the college requires the teachers to assign 2 hours of homework per week. They have heard that it is used for practice to make them better. However, many of the students look at this homework as duty while others look at it as a burden and some will not do it. The homework has no meaning to them.

If the instructor is assigning meaningful homework and clearly stating the reasoning for each assignment, the students’ perception will start to change. As the students see that the homework was used for a valid reason, in their opinion, they will become engaged in the process. Now the homework is not only for practice, it is to find problem areas in their learning and correct those areas. Now it has meaning.

The same is true for all the quizzes that we present to the students. Each question must be specifically designed to assess a certain skill which has been taught. It must also be designed to assess a certain level of understanding (memorization, application, etc.). You may design a quiz which will test the skill, but at every level of understanding. Again, as soon as the quiz is complete, evaluate the quiz and note the problem areas and design your next class based on the data you received.

We will continue this same process throughout the entire course. At each step of the Learning Pathway we will perform evaluations, not for a grade (though at times it is used to assign a mark or grade), but to evaluate the student’s ability to apply what they have learned. If there are any gaps in the student’s learning we fill that gap before proceeding to the next step.


Advantages of using Formative Assessment

Now I know that some may say that this process is too time consuming, however I wish to prove that in the long run it will prove faster and more efficient. Some will say that the teacher will not be able to cover all the material by the Mid-Term and Final Exams. Assuming that it is true that they can not cover all the material, which from experience I have found that it is not true, but assuming that it is true. The information which the student’s did learn, they learned completely 100%. If we only covered 80% of the assigned material prior to the exam, the students will be 100% competent at 80% of the material and their score will be at least 80%.

Teachers in other classes, who do not use Formative Assessment, may cover all the assigned material, but the students do not know 100% and can not apply 100%. Therefore, students in other classes which covered all the assigned material in the stated time will understand or be competent in anywhere from 50% to 90% of each skill. Hence, what will their score be? The other students will have scores from 50% to 90% with a class average of 70%, whereas the group taught under Formative Assessment will have a class average of 80%. Which is better? Which will produce truly competent students?

There is another advantage, which will increase the speed of learning. Many of you have studied student motivation. You know from your studies that what a student believes about his/her abilities affects their engagement and effort to study (Bandura (1993, 1997); Schunk (1990, 1991); Wolters & Pintrich, 1998; Zimmerman, 1990; Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons, 1990). Through Formative Assessment we increase the student’s belief that he/she can perform the tasks, that he/she can learn the material and most importantly that he/she can get good grades in the material. This change in the student’s belief system will cause the student to put more effort into learning the material which will ultimately increase the speed of the classes.

What really slows down a class? You know the frustration when students do not seem to be able to comprehend the material you are teaching. This slowness in the learning process is caused by lack of thorough understanding of prior concepts or inability to see where the material is connected to something else they know or both. The Learning Pathway provides the students with a visual map showing how one piece of knowledge is connected to another and how it is important to learn the whole picture and Formative Assessment ensures that all the students thoroughly understand all concept before moving on to the next concept. Therefore the time you lost trying to get the students to understand would not be lost by the teacher using Formative Assessment. In the course of one semester how many times have you had to slow down? The teacher using Formative Assessment would not experience those slow downs, would not experience the students fear of answering, would not experience the disengagement by students because of poor results and a multitude of other setbacks. Therefore, the teacher using Formative Assessment would not be behind the rest of the course, in fact, once in place, the Formative Assessment teacher would cover the same amount of material in one semester.

Formative Assessment provides additional benefits for the teachers and the institution. Utilizing Formative Assessment, and the data it provides, allows teachers to monitor the effectiveness of their instruction and make changes to their strategies and/or methods if necessary. Additionally, it provides both the teacher and the institute ways to improve curriculum design, goal assignment and educational standards.


Conclusion

The Learning Pathway is a valuable tool for the student, the teacher and the institute. It provides a learning tool for the student, which will aid not only their understanding but their confidence as well. It is also an excellent teaching tool, which will give instructors the opportunity to think deeper about the subject(s) they are teaching. When combined with Formative Assessment the end product will be happier, more content students who develop a history of success, teachers who are happier with the progress of their students and an institute happier with its true success rate.

In the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s Formative Assessment was consider a theory. The 90’s saw it come to application stage and over the last 10 years it has become common place to implement this learning process in the schools. In my years of experience using these two tools, I have found that the tools improved the students, the teachers and the institutes in which they were implemented. My hope is that Sur College will attempt to use these tools on a wide scale basis to validate their usefulness to the school.



References:

Al-Essa, A., Al-Malik, A. (1999). The Effects of Individualized Motives of Failure in the Learning Process. KSA : Riyadh College of Technology

Atkinson JW. 1964. An Introduction to Motivation. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand

Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28, 117- 148.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.

Barootchi, N. & Keshavarz, M. H. (2002). Assessment of achievement through portfolios and teacher-made tests. Educational Research, 44 (3), 279-288.

Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From Teaching to Learning: A New Paradigm for Undergraduate Education. Change, November/December, 13-25.

Davies, P., Durbin, C., Clarke, J. & Dale, J. (2004). Developing students’ conceptions of quality in geography. The Curriculum Journal, 15 (1), 19-34.

Eccles JS. 1983. Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In Achievement and Achievement Motives, ed. JT Spence, pp. 75– 176. San Francisco: Freeman

Fontana, D., and Fernandez, M. (1994). Improvements in mathematics performance as a consequence of self-assessment in Portuguese primary school pupils. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 64 (3): 407-417.

Frederickson, J. R., and White, B. J. (1997). Reflective assessment of students’ research within an inquiry-based middle school science curriculum. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

Hayward, L., Priestley, M. & Young, M. (2004). Ruffling the calm of the ocean floor: Merging practice, policy and research in assessment in Scotland. Oxford Review of Education, 30 (3), 397-415.

Hermann, R. & Lewis, B. (2004). A formative assessment of geologic time for high school Earth Science students. Journal of Geoscience Education, 52(3), 231-235.

Kirkwood, M. (2000). Infusing higher-order thinking and learning to learn into content instruction: A case study of secondary computing studies in Scotland. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32 (4), 509-535.

McDonald, B. & Boud, D. (2003). The impact of self-assessment on achievement: The effects of self-assessment training on performance in external examinations. Assessment in Education, 10 (2), 209-220.

Schunk, D. (1990). Goal setting and self-efficacy during self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 25, 71- 86.

Schunk, D. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 207 - 231.

Stiggins, R. J. (2001). Classroom Assessment for Learning. Phi Delta Kappan.

Wigfield A, Eccles JS. 1992. The development of achievement task values: a theoretical analysis. Dev. Rev. 2:265–310

Wigfield A, Eccles JS. 2000. Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 25:68–81

Wiske, M. S. (Ed.). (1998). Teaching for understanding: Linking research with practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Wolters, C. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (1998). Contextual differences in student motivation and self-regulated learning in mathematics, English, and social studies classrooms. Instructional Science, 26, 27 - 47.

Zimmerman, B. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist, 25, 3 - 17.

Zimmerman, B., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 51 - 59.

The world in which we live is changing rapidly. Agriculture, as a way of life, is fading. Industry and technology are the number one employers and education is a must. We have more people entering schools than ever before in the history of mankind (Institution for Educational Leadership 2000). There is a teacher shortage, but more importantly, there is a shortage of leaders for the educational institutes (e.g., Jordan, 1994; Moore, 1999; Adams, 1999; ERS, 2000; O’Connell, 2001; Lord M. 2000).

Ten years ago, leaders (principals or directors) were not even on the list of ‘needs’ for urban schools. By 2005 leaders were number 7 on the needs list. Why are we seeing this shortage? The reason is simple, it takes a special type of person to lead a school to success and keep it there. It takes an extraordinary person to lead a school into success, keep it there and have it stay that way after he/she leaves (Effective School 2001). That, my friends, is exactly what we are running short of, extraordinary people; leaders.

You may say that the shortage of principals or directors is not that severe, but an estimated 40% of our current educational leaders will be retiring within the next 5 to 7 years. In 2005 school leaders were number 7 on the needs list for school. When 40% of our existing principal and directors leave, what will be left? What will that do to the market?

Remember, I am not talking about the paper shuffling manager type, which will not work in this new educational world. Just sending people through the university does not produce a leader. We live in time that demands true leaders and true leadership.

The advances in technology, the increase in knowledge and spread of information has created a new educational world. The students need to learn more than ever before and there is no more hours to add in the day to teach them. This demands changes in our educational system creating a new educational world.

The new educational world demands higher academic standards, the new educational world demands that everyone entering school leaves school competent. The new educational world is ever changing and full of challenges. The leader must know education in side and out. He or she must be charismatic to win over the team. The leader must have a vision for the future and a plan to get there. The new educational world demands great leadership.

These changes can not be made without a leader. These challenges can not be met without true leadership (Albritten 2004). The leader (principal or director) holds a very important position in the school (Drake 1992). If we are to educate and make students competent for the challenges of this rapidly changing world, we need special men and women guiding those efforts (Gimbel 2003).

We know what we need, so why do we have a shortage? Are there not enough men and women entering the universities to supply the needs? If the current leadership were to stay on board for another 10 or 20 years, yes we might have enough. However, as stated 40% are getting ready to retire and others are leaving the profession due to the immense stress involved. That will produce a huge shortage. There are two main reasons for the shortage; low pay (e.g., Whitaker, 1998; Moore, 1999; Fennell, 1999; Adams, 1999; ERS, 2000; Lankford, O’Connell, & Wyckoff, 2003) and lack of training.

The pay has to be equivalent to the amount of work involved. Remember the work involved is not just shuffling paper and sitting in meetings. The principal is responsible for the school, the teachers, the staff, the students and preparing those students to meet the challenges of the future. That is a lot of work and a lot of stress.

The stress involved in running a school is tremendous. Students must achieve the grades on standardized tests. The government is ever increasing the challenge to raise the academic standards. Every year there is something new to learn. And most importantly, for our futures, every student needs to be completely competent in all skills and knowledge. For that to happen, you need a leader, a guiding force.

The principal is the guiding force (Gene Bottoms and Kathy O'Neill 2001). Often, he or she is the reason that students are able to achieve the high standards (Bossert, Dwyer, Rowan, & Lee, 1982; Hallinger & Murphy, 1986; Andrews & Sober, 1987; Zigarelli, 1996). The interaction with teachers and even students, professional development of teachers, a vision for the future needs, analyzing data, planning ways to get there, reviewing the progress and making changes when needed, allocating recourses, managing curriculum, monitoring lesson plans and the general guidance can take a low performing school and transform it to a high performing school (Deborah King 2002). These are the abilities which the principal needs to bring to the job.

These abilities do not come with your Bachelor’s degree, not even with your Master’s. These abilities come through time, with guidance, experience, mentoring and coaching. This is where the training comes in.

Universities are attempting to prepare potential candidates for school leadership positions (National Policy Board for Educational Administration 2002), but more reading and case studies can not compete with experience and mentoring. Our leaders need more than book knowledge (Parkay and Rhodes 1992) or sitting around talking about how they would handle a situation and that is the key word; situation.

I have been training people for 25 years in education and in businesses. Yes, we use case studies, but only to measure the person’s abilities and disposition. Case studies are a great tool for weeding out the one who won’t make it. After the weeding out process, we get to work training.

We need to have potential educational leaders in the field training (Bottoms, Gene; O’Niel, Kathy; Fry, Betty; Hill, David 2003), before all our experienced leaders have retired. They need help to understand how to handle different situations. Talking about a situation and living through it are entirely different. The potential leader needs to be working hand in hand with a pro, a great leader until he or she is able to run the show on their own.

Even after the leader is place in a position by himself or herself, the mentor continues to meet with them and advise and mold them (also read “Principal Mentoring – An Update by Robert J. Malone. Research Roundup; V18, N2 WIN 2001 – 2002). The mentor helps the potential leader become a leader (Guiney 2001). When he or she is going through a tough time the mentor lends a helping hand. When the troubles come, the mentor gives ideas or verifies the ideas of the potential leader. The potential leader is molded into a true leader.

As you can see, we are at a perilous point in time. If we do not act soon, we will have a shortage of educational leaders and the ones who are in place will lack the experience and guidance to confront all the challenges which face them.

Take a look around. Can this world afford to make more errors? Can we afford to produce one or two generations of people who are not fully prepared to function in this world? We must get more people into the training mode and then pay them what they are worth. After all, how much is a good future worth to you?

Unique Leaders Educational Leadership Development works with schools around the world. We partner with schools to help them train teachers and develop future educational leaders.

Contact Unique Leaders for more information www.we-develop-leaders.com



References:

Adams, J. P. (1999). Good principals, good schools. Thrust for Educational Leadership 29(1), 8–11.
Andrews, R. L., & Soder, R. (1987). Principal leadership and student achievement. Educational Leadership 4, 9–11.
Bossert, S. T., Dwyer, D. C., Rowan, B., & Lee, G. V. (1982). The instructional management role of the principal. Educational Administration Quarterly 18(3), 34–64.
Bottoms, Gene, and Kathy O'Neill. Preparing a New Breed of School Principals: It's
Time for Action. Atlanta: Southern Regional Education Board, 2001. 32 pages.
Bottoms, Gene; O’Niel, Kathy; Fry, Betty; Hill, David. Good Principals are the Key to Successful School: Six Strategies To Prepare More Good Principals. Atlanta: Southern Regional Education Board, 2003. 33 pages.
Drake, N. M. (1992). The association between principal influence on teachers and
student achievement (Doctoral dissertation, Washington State University, 1992).
UMIProQuest AAT 9321022
Education Research Service (ERS). (2000). The principal, keystone of a high-achieving school: Attracting and keeping the leaders we need. Arlington, VA: The National Association of Elementary School Principals and the National Association of Secondary School Principals.
Effective Schools Products, Ltd., (2001). Effective schools primer. Retrieved Dec. 10,
2005, from Revolutionary and Evolutionary: The Effective Schools Movement
Web site: http://www.effectiveschools.com.
Fennell, H. A. (1999). Planting seed for change: Fostering leadership. Planning and Changing 30(3/4), 175–197.
Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: Jossey Bass
Gimbel, P. (2003). Solutions for promoting principal-teacher trust. Lanham, MD: The
Scarecrow Press, Inc.
Guiney, E. 2001. Coaching isn’t just for athletes: the role of teacher leaders. Phi Delta Kappa, 82,10, 740-743
Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. (1986). Instructional leadership in effective schools. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
Institution for Educational Leadership (2000). Leadership for student learning: Reinventing the principalship. Washington DC: Author.
Jordan, D. (1994). The supply and demand trends of public school principals and administrators in Southwestern Louisiana: 1993–1997. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
King, Deborah. "The Changing Shape of Leadership." Educational Leadership 59, 8
(May 2002): 61-63.
Lankford, H., O’Connell, R., & Wyckoff, J. (2003). Identifying the next generation of school leaders. Unpublished manuscript.
Lord, M. Hello? Anyone there? School districts scramble to fill principals’ chair.
U.S. News & World Report, 129 (6), 43
Moore, D. (1999). Where have all the principals gone? Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
National Policy Board for Educational Administration. Standards for Advanced
Programs in Educational Leadership. Arlington, Virginia: Author, 2002. 48 pages.
O’Connell, R. (2001). The New York State principalship: Profile of an evolving profession. Albany, NY: The School Administrators Association of New York State.
Parkay, Forrest W., and John Rhodes. "Stress and the Beginning Principal." In Becoming a Principal: The Challenges of Beginning Leadership, edited by Forrest Parkay and Gene Hall. 103-22. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1992.
Sergiovanni, T. (1992). Moral leadership: getting to the heart of school improvement.
1st ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Whitaker, K. S. (1998). The changing landscape of the principalship: View from the inside. Planning and Changing 29(3), 130–150.
Zigarelli, M. (1996). An empirical test of conclusions from effective schools research. Journal of Educational Research 90(2), 103–110.

©2005 Unique Leaders

KEY WORDS : educational leaders, leadership, shortage of principals, develop of leaders, leadership development, school improvement, school crisis, school research, educational research, academic standards, instructional leadership, high achieving schools, potential leaders, mentoring, coaching

Everyone would consider people like Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan and George Washington to be good leaders. Even in business, people like Fred Maytag, Henry Ford and Lee Iacocca are considered good leaders. What do these people have in common? Are there any commonalities which will make for a successful leader?

For 30 years I have been in business. I have been a manager (all levels), administrator, and owner of my own companies. I always wanted to be a good leader, so for most of my business career I have studied different leaders, I have notice 10 points which all of them had. They did not have these to same degree, but all the leaders, both world and business leaders, had these. I will tell you the points and then explain how I use each one, along with the results.

I divide the 10 points into 2 groups; attitude and skills. Amazingly each group has 5 points. Under attitude we have:
1) Worked towards the greater good
2) Suffered with their soldiers or people
3) Fought wars, only when necessary
4) Had strong personalities
5) They were willing to take risks

Under the skills we have:
1) Great communication skills
2) Great planning skills
3) Great delegating skills
4) Great at being Proactive
5) Good at negotiations

These are the Essential 10, as I call them. Every leader who was missing one or more of these had extreme difficulties or just plain failure. As an example we will look at Fred Maytag and his son E.H. Maytag.

Fred understood people. He wanted to help people. In bad times he suffered with his employees. On the other hand, E.H. was only concerned about the business and money. Yes, you would say he was a great businessman, but was he a leader? He led the company, but he did not lead people.

Because E.H. Maytag lacked that concern for the people and did not suffer with the troops, it cost him labor problems. In fact in July of 1938, he had to sign a deal and allow the union into the company. All because he cut employee’s salaries by 10% and had continued to anger his employees. Good business move, but a poor leadership move.

In contrast, the union would have never gotten in if his father Fred Maytag was in power. Fred inspired his people. They were loyal to him, because he was loyal to them. When there were good times, everyone enjoyed them and when there were bad times, everyone suffered. How much greater could the Maytag Company have been if E.H. Maytag was a leaders of the people like his father?

As you see, if you are missing one of the Essential 10, you will not be an effective leader of people. You may do well as a businessman, but as a leader of the people you will fail. As to how successful each leader was that depended on how well the Essential 10 were developed.

As an example, Alexander the Great did not develop his communication skills. He had them, but he was weak in that area and did not develop it. His over sight almost cost him everything. Three times his men revolted, because of misunderstandings. These could have been avoided and he would have accomplished more, but the fact remains that he did not develop this skill.

How well each of the Essential 10 is developed will serve as a gauge to your success. Henry Ford stands as a good example of this principle.

Henry Ford saw the BIG picture and he wanted to help the average person, he gave his employees more to help them, he only went up against the competition after his son persuaded him to do so, he definitely had a strong personality, he would not be pushed by anyone, he took many risks, some of which did not work, but he tried, he made sure people understood him and tried to make sure that he understood what they said, he planned out things years in advance, he knew he could not do everything him self so he gave some things to others to complete, but he made sure they were capable and then held them accountable, he was always looking for what could go wrong and trying to prevent it or at least be prepared for it. Yes, he exercised all of the Essential 10 and developed them and as you know Henry Ford was a great success.

Now let us look at the Essential 10. So that there is little confusion about how I am using each of these phrases, I will explain them.

GREATER GOOD
Everyone one of the world leaders mentioned started out to improve things for their people or the country, even Hitler wanted to improve Germany at first. They had a vision of what the people could be or what their country could be and they united the people to accomplish that vision. Their initial aim was not to conquer the world, but to help their people. Even in business the leader must have a vision and he has to look out for the people. You are only as good as the people who work for you!

If the person’s eyes are focused only on the bottom line, he will fail (as a leader). He will make some happy and the others will be unhappy. This leads to revolts, strikes and more problems than he can counter. He must think of all the people; the shareholders, management, the workers and even the consumer. He must see the BIG picture and how to include everyone into that picture. Then he must institute policies which will be fair to all.

This is a difficult, but not an impossible job. The leader will know how to show each group that his ways are the best for everyone. As the Japanese are fond of saying, a win – win scenario.

Even Genghis Khan had a vision of how his people should be. He united the people into one group and stopped the bickering between tribes. He made laws that were fair to everyone. He wanted peace and security for his people.

Henry Ford wanted to provide a car that everyone could afford. He didn’t want just the rich to enjoy this luxury; he wanted everyone to enjoy it.

Lee Iacocca wanted to save the jobs of thousands of people. He wanted to save the honor of the US. He wanted to help the people of America.

Only when we lose sight of the greater good do we start doing what is wrong. When Napoleon wanted more than just the greater good of the French, he met his Waterloo.

SUFFERING WITH THE TROOPS
This is another weak point for today’s leaders. Not many are willing to take a cut in pay. Not many are willing to move to a lower rent area. Not many are willing to suffer with the troops.

Suffering with the troops means if the company is doing poorly, you take less money, shorter paid vacations, less perks, etc. Today’s leaders are not willing to sacrifice anything of their own for the good of all. They will cut the number of workers the company has, but they will not cut their own pay or benefits. They will cut the retirement benefits, but they will not cut their own benefits. That is why you see labor disputes and poor performance in companies. Why would you be loyal to a person who might stab you in the back at the first sign of financial loss?

Imagine if the CEO cut his own pay by 20% and then asked the employees to take a 10% pay cut to help get the company back on track. What do you think the outcome would be? Yes, some would not want to take the cut, but the majority would see the example of the leader and follow him. Remember the old saying, “Lead by example.”

Suffering with the troops does a lot to galvanize the group. Every time it has happened, the troops came together as a stronger unit and fought harder than they had before. The Americans had almost lost the revolutionary war, then at Valley Forge; George Washington suffered along side his men. Afterwards, they were not going to let him down.

On Christmas Eve Washington and his troops crossed the Delaware River and defeated the Germans camped there. Later Washington asked one of his officers, “Why did they follow me into battle even though we have been defeated in the past?” The answer was simple and straight forward, “They love you sir and would follow you to their death bed.”

Suffering with the troops pulled everyone together. They became one unit, one family, one man. No one was different. No one was better than. Everyone was in it together. Suffering with the troops is powerful!

Lee Iacocca did the same. He said “I will only take $1 a year until the company is making a profit. This galvanized all the employees to help turn the company around. As you know, it worked. Chrysler, which was on the verge of bankruptcy, turned around and became a profitable company which is still making a profit.

Not suffering with the troops has led to many revolutions. When the people see that they are suffering and no one at the top is losing anything, instead they are gaining, the people become discontent. This is a de-motivating factor which will lead to people abandoning the company and even fighting against it. Remember the French revolution and what happened to the rich who let the people suffer!

FIGHT ONLY WHEN NECESSARY
Many in business and in government need to learn this lesson. Too many today try to conquer new territories by force. Before the company decides to conquer by force they should consider peace with companies in the new territory, a partnership or joint venture.

All the best leaders have offered peace and a union with them. If the other party refused the offer of peace, then they fought, but if they accepted the peace, then they worked together.

Could this work in business? Of course it could work, as long as greed or power is not the motivating force in the company. The outcome would be more prosperity for all.

Alexander offered peace to every town. If they accepted, they were considered as one with Alexander’s people. They had all the same rights as the rest of his people. This made them loyal to him. It also created one of the largest armies the world had seen.

As far as how well you fight when you have to, that is strategy which is a different training session.

STRONG PERSONALITY
Charisma, you must be a person the people will listen to and want to listen to. You have to be good with the people. There are many brilliant men and women in the world but they can not accomplish their goals because they lack the charisma to get people to work with them. And even when they are somewhat charismatic they still lack another essential part.

Another part of strong personality is conviction. You must have the conviction that you are right and stand up for it. You must have conviction that the vision you have for the company is the best way to go and stand up for it. You can not vacillate.

There are many people who are ‘likable’ but they lack the conviction and so people do not follow them. Then you have people who have conviction but no charisma and they are just obnoxious. They irritate you and they sound pushy.

Charisma and conviction combined give you a strong personality. The leader must have a strong personality to get the people to follow him into battle and possible death. Today, in business, there is not much of the physical death, but there is still a kind of death that is possible, career death. The leader has to be able to take you into the battle, into unknown territories and lead you out the other side in victory.

Every time that a leader has lacked the charisma to make people listen and the conviction to make them believe in him, he has lost his power to lead. You see it throughout history; a person rises to power only to fall shortly thereafter, but when you have a person who is charismatic and full of conviction, even if he is thrown in jail the people still follow him. Look at Nelson Mandela.

Usually it has been a combination of the attitudes and skills which cause the fall, but if he could have kept the strong personality he may have had the opportunity to stay in power longer and perhaps change.

TAKING RISKS
The last of our major attitudes is risk. Let’s face it; most people do not like change. They will do anything to keep from changing, but the leader sees change as necessary at times. The leader will take the risk so that all may benefit. He sees that the path they are on is a dead end, but if they go to a new area they may live.

There is always the possibility of failure, but the leader does not see failure as failure, he sees it as a learning lesson. He also has looked closely at the situation and he knows that there is a ‘good’ chance that they will win. It is a calculated risk.

I guess you might say that risk taking has to do with courage; the courage to go ahead when everyone else wants to go back, but not a blind reckless courage. The leader has a calculated courage.

Skills

I am sure that enough has been said about the skills list. I do not need to explain them. I do not believe that I use them any differently than any other training consultant.

Conclusion

You have seen that The Essential 10 are the key points which separate the leaders from businessman or manager. There is another very important factor, responsibility. The person must be willing to take responsibility for his actions and for the other people as well.

Responsibility is usually the big divider. I have trained many and when it came down to taking full responsibility, 30% would stop there. They wanted to be leaders, but they did not want to take responsibility for everyone and everything. As I explain, your decisions will affect the lives of hundreds, thousands or possibly millions of people, are you ready to take that responsibility?

You can train them, but you can not force them to take the responsibility for everyone. This will be your hardest decision. As the company owner or stakeholders, you must decide whether the person will be responsible or not. I can teach him the skills. I can help him develop the attitudes and fine tune the skills, but I can not make you decision for you as to whether he is the right person to lead the company, that is your duty.

Dr. Weaver has worked leaders in small, medium and large companies around the world. His unique formula for developing true leaders has won him acclaim where ever he has gone. To learn more contact Unique Leaders