Miyoshi Juergensen

EDL 610: Legal Foundations

December 5, 2017

Step 4: Ethical Platform

As an instructional leader, my personal code of ethics is undergirded by my mission,

vision, values, and goals as a social-justice oriented educator. Having explored the ethical codes

for educators in Alabama, Georgia, Alaska, and the National Association of Secondary School

Principals (NASSP), I have a clearer understanding of the kinds of ethical behaviors that will

help to achieve those goals. As such, this platform critically analyzes the aforementioned ethical

codes, explains their significance to my leadership, discusses a situation wherein I had to make

an ethical decision, and, finally, outlines my personal code of ethics.

Critical analysis of ethical codes

The ethical codes for Alabama, Georgia, Alaska, and the NASSP reflect each entity’s

desired behaviors for its educators. All of them define professional conduct and misconduct,

which serves as a guide for generally accepted ethical standards for professional educators. In

addition, all are intended to assist educators with protecting the overall well-being of students,

families, and employees. While many of the codes focus largely on legal compliance, also

included in each are standards that reinforce the interconnection between morality, ethics, and

education. For example, trustworthiness and honesty are often considered as much moral values

as ethical ones within and beyond educational settings. Importantly, however, each code of ethics

should be interpreted through the particular lenses of location and culture in order to more

precisely understand what behaviors are expected and which are punishable. In this way, the

explanations of what ethical conduct is and is not underscore cultural and societal expectations of

ethical behavior as well.

 To this point, the ethical codes for Alaska and the ethical recommendations for the

NASSP are consistent with the overall ideas in the code of ethics for Alabama and Georgia.

Importantly, however, they differ in distinct ways. First, Alaska’s codes are organized

thematically as they relate to students, the public, and the profession; and, Alabama’s codes are

organized by standard. In this way, Alaska’s approach centers the beneficiary of ethical conduct

instead of the conduct itself. Additionally, Alaska’s codes begin with obligations to students (as

does NASSP’s) while Alabama’s does not directly address conduct toward students until the

fourth standard. While neither of these documents explicitly indicates a hierarchy of importance,

this difference resonates when considering Alabama’s codes alongside Alaska’s and NASSP’s.

Second, Alaska’s codes reflect an explicit approach to social justice oriented education as

compared to Alabama’s as evidenced by its more inclusive language toward marginal identities

and experiences. For instance, Alabama’s lists “engaging in harassing behavior on the basis of

race, gender, national origin, religion, or disability” (Alabama Department of Education, 2005,

p.3) as an example of unethical conduct. Alaska’s codes, however, extends this idea by also

protecting students from discrimination and/or prohibiting “discriminatory advantage… on the

grounds of race, color, creed, sex, national origin, marital status, political or religious beliefs,

physical or mental condition, family, social, or cultural background, or sexual orientation”

(Alaska Department of Education and Early Development, 2010, p.1). Further extending this

idea of protection, Alaska’s codes also specify that educators “may not engage in a course of

conduct that would encourage a reasonable student to develop prejudice on these grounds” (p. 1).

As a queer woman of color who educates out of a social justice framework, these differences

struck me as personally and ethically significant in terms of exactly who is protected under each
state’s codes and how educators are expected to provide this level of protection for their students

and colleagues.

Significance of ethical codes to my views on school leadership

Several of the ethical standards discussed here hold personal significance for my views

on ethical leadership. The first speaks to teacher/student relationships and general conduct with

students. As an educator, students are priority. And, how educators establish and maintain their

relationships with all students is essential to their ability to positively impact students’ lives in

academic, social, and emotional ways. The second standard of significance is related to

trustworthiness and honesty. As both a moral and ethical value, trustworthiness requires a school

leader to be honest, reliable, courageous, and transparent (Northouse, 2018). These

characteristics are important to ethical leadership because they reflect leaders’ core values and

inform their ability to make ethical decisions. The third standard of significance is professional

conduct as it closely aligns with my personal views on “the dignity and integrity of the teaching

profession” (Georgia Department of Education, 2015, p. 4). As a profession, good teaching is

often defined by how and to what degree teachers engage in collaborative, respectful,

intellectual, and supportive practices “in order to promote student learning” (Alabama

Department of Education, 2005, p.1). The same is true for ethical leadership.

In particular, many of Alaska’s ethical codes speak directly to my views on ethical school

leadership. One of the broader constructs reiterated throughout Alaska’s codes is the expectation

that educators not use their personal views to “distort, suppress, or deny access” (Alaska

Department of Education and Early Development, 2010, p.1) to students’ educational rights,

colleagues’ participation in professional organizations, or colleague’s “political or citizenship

rights and responsibilities” (p. 2). This is important to ethical school leadership because it leaves
room for educators’ personal beliefs but also limits the influence of personal views to protect and

benefit the entire school community. Another area of significance is Alaska’s codes for collegial

conduct. By outlining behaviors that are just and honest, Alaska’s codes highlight the

relationship between fairness, inclusiveness, and collegiality. These are components I view as

essential to ethical school leadership because of their potential to impact school culture and

climate in significant, positive ways. Lastly, Alaska’s codes that discuss using institutional

privilege and/or district resources for personal gain reflect my existing views on ethical school

leadership. As a public school educator whose position and purpose exists for the public good, it

is particularly important to be an ethical steward of the public’s monies and interests.

Overall, my view on ethical leadership in practice requires each of these standards to

work individually and collectively for the academic and moral development of students. They

have the potential to nurture and support students’ development and should be utilized for this

purpose to be in accordance with ethical leadership. Alternatively, an educator who abuses the

teacher/student relationship, community trust, or the ideals associated with the profession is not

only likely committing a criminal act, but also doing academic and/or personal harm to students.

As such, these standards carry with them the kinds of behaviors, goals, and values associated

with my position on ethical leadership.

Ethical decision-making in a school setting

As an instructional technology coach for the district, my position requires me to work

with colleagues at both the district and school levels to support purposeful and effective

technology integration in educational settings. Recently, the leadership team at one of the high

schools I support expressed interest in using G Suite for Education to develop a digital data space

to store, share, and track student performance data and goals. As a result, the leadership team,
which consists of an assistant principal, the literacy coach, and two teacher leaders, invited me to

join their meetings as they developed their goals, expectations, and implementation plan for the

digital data space. Alabama’s code of ethics for educators regarding confidentiality of student

records states that it is unethical to “share confidential information concerning student academic

records… unless required by law” (Alabama Department of Education, 2005, p. 4). Before

moving forward, then, we needed to address a significant dilemma: Would sharing and storing

student data in Google applications violate ethical standards for maintaining and safeguarding

the confidentiality of student academic performance?

To answer this question, I turned to my supervisors at the district level, the Director of

Technology and the Coordinator of Instructional Technology for the district. In our meeting, I

explained the purpose and goals of the digital data space and its potential for positively

impacting both student academic performance and teacher engagement in the assessment

process. Two major issues were raised in the discussions I had with the district’s technology

leaders. The first was the essential issue of security. Specifically, the school’s leadership team

wanted to store and share performance data on 1) students’ academic status in individual classes

and 2) the major standardized assessment mandated by the district. In both situations,

transferring this data to Google Drive applications required teachers to pull the information from

their native secure environments to a platform designed for sharing and collaboration. As such,

the primary concern was the potential for people outside of Tuscaloosa City Schools (TCS) to

have access to this information. For example, this could happen by teachers using personal

Google accounts to build their digital data spaces instead of their TCS accounts.

The second issue was teachers’ and students’ proficiency with Google Suite for

Education. By working closely with the school’s leadership team to train them on Google Forms,
Sheets, Docs, and Drive in the beginning stages of the project, I had been made aware that

majority of teachers and students were not proficient users of G Suite. The issue here is that

having a robust digital data space requires users to know how to create, share, and access

information within Google applications in ways that maintain security and support the goals of

the digital data space.

To address both issues, the leadership team decided to introduce the idea of a digital data

space in afterschool department meetings instead of faculty meetings. This approach allowed us

to work with smaller groups of teachers to emphasize the use of TCS accounts for the project to

maintain security. Considering that the district supports its own secure instance of G Suite for

Education, we decided that the digital data space would not violate student confidentiality if

student data was stored and shared exclusively using Tuscaloosa City Schools’ Google accounts.

In addition, we used these meetings to address the second issue of proficiency by including

training on Google applications. Since the leadership team decided that implementation need

also include professional development for teachers on how to use G Suite for Education in safe

and secure ways, I provided focused training on the specific Google applications teachers and

students would use for the project.

Although we are only in the beginning stages of implementation, I learned several

significant lessons that have influenced my own developing personal code of ethics as a leader.

The first was the importance of protecting student data. I believe that ethical leadership means

protecting all members of the school community. By protecting student data, we protect students

and their teachers from undue exposure and embarrassment. In the same vein, I also learned the

importance of protecting my colleagues. Having lived in Atlanta, Georgia during the height of

the testing scandal (2009-2011), I took very seriously the potential for severe consequences if
district leadership was unaware of their goal to store and share student performance data in a

digital space. As an instructional leader, I sought to protect them out of ethical and professional

obligations to them as colleagues - an emerging salient theme in my developing code of ethics.

Finally, I was reminded of the value of teacher feedback. In our small department

meetings, teachers critically discussed the digital data space initiative and provided suggestions

for how to streamline the process moving forward. Although the leadership team included two

teacher leaders, their feedback had minimal impact compared to their peers. In hindsight, we

should have invited more teachers to contribute to the development of the plan instead of seeking

input only at the implementation stage. Ironically, I have discussed the importance of

collaboration throughout my ethical platform; however, I missed an opportunity to practice this

value by limiting teacher contributions to two teacher leaders. As I continue to develop my

personal code of ethics as a leader, I will need to consider other areas of inconsistency in order to

be a truly effective and ethical leader.

Personal code of leadership ethics

The following is a list of statements that outline my personal code of ethics as an

instructional leader. Although each statement is addressed separately, the universal theme is

protecting the school community and providing all members with opportunities for personal and

academic growth. Each statement includes an explanation, personal significance, and an

imagining of how I would practice that statement as an ethical school leader.

As an educational leader, I will center students in the teaching, learning, and

decision-making processes. As discussed earlier in this platform, students are my priority. To

center students means to shift the focus and many of the learning responsibilities from the adults

in the building to the students. In addition, a student-centered approach to leadership means that
students’ voices, identities, and lived experiences are at the center of the daily operations of the

school. As a result, students’ identities become essential components of the curriculum,

discipline practices, and decision-making. As an educator who taught in nontraditional

educational settings for students at risk as well as traditional settings, I have witnessed the

difference a student-centered approach can have on students’ personal and academic

development in both environments. That said, using a student-centered framework also provides

a touchstone for how I will go about protecting students against academic, social, and/or physical

misconduct.

Operationally, I will center students in the teaching and learning processes of school by

ensuring quality and rigorous instructional practices are used with all students. I will use data-

driven decision-making strategies to work collaboratively with students and teachers to improve

students’ academic performance. I will also infuse culturally relevant practices in my leadership

style to model these practices for teachers and create a climate and culture of acceptance. In

terms of broader decision-making, I will ask myself and others a set of essential questions: How

is this decision impacting students? Is it ethical? Which students are benefitting from this

decision and which are not?

As an educational leader, I will support my colleagues’ professional and personal

growth as well as my own. From professional conferences to peer learning communities, these

experiences provide opportunities to think collaboratively, critically, and reflectively about how

to improve students’ schooling experiences and educators’ practices. As a school leader,

supporting the professional and personal growth of my colleagues means investing in their

development as practitioners and leaders. Indeed, professional learning opportunities create a

bridge to leadership and are an important component of a comprehensive system designed to

support student learning. They also provide opportunities for colleagues to practice mutual

respect for one another in terms of identity and lived experiences. Ethically, I believe it my

responsibility to engage in collaborative and critical discussions about my leadership practices as

well.

Therefore, I will redesign the schedule to embed time for professional development

workshops, peer-to-peer observations, and peer learning communities, of which I will be a

participant. I will work closely with teachers to identify shared areas to target for improvement

and focus professional development topics on these areas. Through the peer learning community

model, I will encourage collaboration and critical reflection between and among content areas.

Given the benefit of professional conferences, I will also encourage colleagues to attend as well

as present at local and national conferences; I will do the same and collaborate with teachers to

co-present.

As an educational leader, I will thoughtfully and carefully build relationships with

all members of the school community. Throughout the ethical codes studied for this course,

trustworthiness, honesty, fairness, respect, and regard prove to be universal expectations of

ethical educators in general and ethical leaders in particular. I see these characteristics as

essential to my ability to build and maintain relationships with students, their families,

community members, and colleagues. I also see my effort to build relationships as a way to

model and encourage the entire school community to relationship-build with one another.

Therefore, I will be visible and accessible in the school and the community. In the same

vein, I will simply commit to learning students’ and colleagues’ names as well as cultural

referents important to them. In an effort to communicate trustworthiness, sound judgment, and

regard, I will exercise patient and compassionate decision-making practices by seeking to

include community members’ voices and experiences in decisions. Out of respect for all

members of the school community, I will hold high expectations for participation, growth,

collaboration, and mutual respect. One of my favorite quotes by Kiese Laymon (2013) explains

that “love requires forgiveness, truth, high expectations, and patience” (p. 10). I posit the same is

true for good teaching as well as ethical leadership if such relationships are to be built and

maintained.

References

Alabama State Department of Education. (2005). Alabama educator code of ethics. Retrieved

from http://www.alsde.edu/sec/ee/Documents/Alabama_Educator_Code_of_Ethics.pdf

Alaska Department of Education. (2010). Code of ethics of the education profession. Retrieved

from https://education.alaska.gov/ptpc/pdf/coe.pdf

Georgia Department of Education. (2015). The code of ethics for educators. Retrieved from

https://www.gapsc.com/Rules/Current/Ethics/505-6-.01.pdf

Laymon, K. (2013). How to slowly kill yourself and others in America. Bloomsbury Publishing.

National Association of Secondary School Principals. (2013). Ethics for school leaders.

Retrieved from https://www.nassp.org/who-we-are/board-of-directors/position-

statements/ethics-for-school-leaders?SSO=true

Northouse, P. (2018). Introduction to leadership: Concepts and practice (4th ed.). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.