Analysis Of Deaf Education

1442 Words6 Pages
Susan Scott, the author of Fierce Conversations, wrote: “While no single conversation is guaranteed to change the trajectory of a career, a business, a relationship, or a life -- any single conversation can.” In the position of leadership, we naturally aim to make the positive changes to educational system, and we have to understand that any single conversation can make an actual impact on the trajectory of educational reforms. While there are a number of desired reforms in our educational system, Deaf education has its own struggles and hardships, and there’s one inevitable issue in Deaf education: the effects of various home language environments on academic excellence. Some Deaf students use American Sign Language at home as their primary…show more content…
Susan Scott (2017) emphasized that fierce conversations are not cruel, brutal, or angry conversations but rather are powerful and intense conversations. I believe that the school’s vision and mission is a starting place where we can start the fierce conversations with the whole community about the vision of our school and how it can align with academic rigor. Actually, what matters anywhere in a school community matters everywhere in a school community, and it requires effective communication to optimize dialogues among stakeholders . Susan Scott (2017) suggested one method that promotes dialogues within the school community: Beach Ball model. She compared an organization with a beach ball with six stripes of different colors. For the school community, each strip represents a specific group of people within the community, and every group stands on a different stripe experiencing reality from that perspective. For instance, a group of parents may be on the red stripe, students find themselves on the blue stripe, and teachers stand on the yellow stripe. Indeed, they are within the school community, but they experience reality from completely different perspective. Using that model, I can improve school’s vision and mission where a shared understanding of rigor is…show more content…
Susan Scott (2017) stated that before meetings leaders should spend time in the problem-naming part to to make it short and concise. Then, I will send out the invitation to stakeholders and in the invitation I will include expectations and material for them to review before the meeting. During the meeting, I will talk through the issue that I want to address and emphasize that I am inviting them to influence me and the meeting itself. During the discussion, my job is to listen and gather inputs from all stakeholders. I also need to make sure that everyone is included in the discussion. Susan Scott (2017) explained that the only wrong answers in the Beach Ball meeting is: “I do not know.” Everyone’s perspective on the topic matters and I need to show that their ideas and inputs are welcoming and taken into consideration. After the discussion, Susan Scott (2017) suggested to hand out paper and pens and ask them to write down what they would do if they were in my shoes. For my situation, I would ask them what change in academic rigor they would like to see. Then, ask them to share what they have written down as this is a good opportunity for everyone to close the meeting with a strong message for me to listen. After the Beach Ball meeting with inputs I have gathered, I can interrogate reality to make a final decision on
Open Document