Building Culture and Climate

One of the best things I have learned in the course is that of differentiating School Culture and Climate. I once thought they are the same. However, one can see the clear connection between the two.

If you have a good school culture, then the climate is positive and relaxed. Now, the two last words point not to nonchalance and non-commitment. Contrariwise, people feel positive and relaxed because the culture is positive and relaxed. Further, the culture has made them better staff, principal, faculty. It has made them a better, effective part of the whole, thus making them fulfilled as an individual. This has connection with the motivation of individuals according to Maslow (Need-Hierarchy), Hull (Drive-Reduction), and Herzberg (Motivation-Hygiene).

The problem then is how to get there. We are flooded with literature of how an effective school should be – key words such as collegiality, collaboration, cooperation, belief in the educability of all children, teacher-empowerment. I trust that if we list them all down, this will become a thesis for Effective Schools Movement. However, no one told us how to get there. The mathematician in me, prompts me to focus on the process and not on the final output. In fact, one song puts it, “Life’s a journey, not a destination” (Crazy, Aerosmith). We should not say, for example, that De La Salle or Ateneo de Manila has reached the height of effectiveness. As long as we are still here in this world, there is still something to improve on. Hence, we must focus rather on how a school culture can be achieved.

For me, it starts on the leader. The teachers build the school culture and climate, but only as reaction to the administration and leadership of their leaders. Are the teachers always complaining? That points to a mediocre culture. But who is to blame? Napoleon once said – and we always say this in the Legion of Mary – there are no bad soldiers, only bad officers. If one or two teachers are not doing well, we may blame those two teachers. But if the culture is such that everyone is complaining, then something is wrong with the leader.

My leadership style is not a demanding one. I am perhaps to be classified as the Humanitarian, only, I put the burden on my shoulders. I used to think it is because I was born under the Pisces sign, and the year of the Pig. Anyway, I am criticized for doing everything by myself. That is, if no one will do it, then I will. Partly, it is because I am able to. Or, as my classmate Ma-ann said – because we had almost the same scores in “delegating” (Blanchard, through Dr. Muñoz) – it shows that we do not trust people that much. I just feel that if I depend on anyone, and s/he does not deliver, then I am left with nothing. Nevertheless, this is trait leadership, as the report of Andy and Ram said.

Building a school culture then rests on the leaders’ attitudes, beliefs, relationships, and competence/ skills. A leader that is not positive will not evoke genuine support, only compliance. Even a principal who has finished all the doctorate in the world cannot move teachers to be leaders themselves, if that principal has the wrong set of beliefs. If the leader’s relationships are not good, then it reflects on what is happening in his school. There is blaming syndrome, no inputs coming from the teachers. As in the case of one Bethany School, everybody sits at the back row. No one feels responsible for anything. They are afraid to be criticized, to be laughed at. In short, they are afraid to make a mistake because failure has always been not an option.

A competent leader is a given. S/he must be proficient as a leader; else, no one will follow him/her. Now, being competent in leadership does not imply success in building a good school culture. Right attitude and sets of belief must also be present. A leader is one who exerts influence. Power (or resort to position) has always been one of the last options. Violence is the ultimate option.