Leadership and Change

It is certainly important for people to become innovative knowledge workers; this protects one from finding their job either computerized or outsourced. By thinking innovatively (i.e., automating tasks, discovering more efficient means to perform a job), a person can allow an organization to remain competitive while proving their own worth. This type of thinking must start in the schools, as Harkins states in this article. However, it will be a difficult and uphill battle to get the process rolling. Convincing the traditional educators becomes the challenge.

Harkins calls on leadership in the social and employment sector to help schools and colleges understand how important technology and software are to learning, future employment and even in daily life. Harkins is right when he claims *how students are taught* clashes with *how students will function in the workplace.* Organizations use software-enabled functionality to complete tasks that increase efficiency. For example, the accountant is quickly becoming a software user rather than a thinker. Unless the accountant begins a journey toward innovative thinking, s/he will soon be replaced by lower-level data input workers (who will eventually be replaced when all information is input by either thought process or some other form of far-out method we cannot possibly yet conceive of, let alone understand).

I am, however, bothered by Harkins’ argument that no one should be permitted to fail in his CTE paradigm. What does one really learn if they aren’t allowed to see the consequences of laziness or apathy? It’s a nice thought to have software deliver the answer and show how that answer was arrived at, but will all students learn from that method, or will it become a crutch, producing a bunch of future technology-dependent workers rather than independent thinkers who are excited to innovate new methods or things? I suppose it depends on the leadership of educators to model what is required to remain successful in the job market throughout life. With the speed of technology exponentially increasing and thus changing how we work and live every year, it certainly requires some sort of immediate action to properly teach our children who will be facing an uncertain future.

On the other hand, allowing students to learn through investigation and discovery can be quite stimulating. At least some students who otherwise might fail in the traditional school system would thrive in such an environment, giving them the chance to succeed. I argue it might take a combination of teacher control and teacher-student collaboration to effectively monitor which students successfully embrace the knowledge-based learning concepts. Perhaps students must earn the privilege to engage in such a learning opportunity.

While I see the vast majority of future jobs that will be considered lucrative in the United States sitting firmly in providing services, it takes a major effort to help the school systems understand what is needed to properly prepare its students for this new world. If they will need to find a niche in their chosen profession, they will need to learn how to constantly re-invent themselves. This re-invention process requires practicing leadership and embracing change – and our educators must therefore become innovative leaders, act as role models and coach students.

This article was written by Art Harkins in 2002. Have there been any significant advances toward an innovative learning paradigm within the United States educational system since it was written (other than his own successes at the University of MInnesota)? What are the barriers?

Will those students who become part of the CTE (Career and Technical Education) paradigm that Harkins promotes in this article be stunted in any way by skipping the traditional and tried methods of learning? What happens to the skills of critical thinking and writing? Can liberal arts studies and CTE knowledge-based innovative learning co-exist (or should they)?

Don’t all students also require the knowledge basics derived from traditional educational models? After all, machines break and traditional forms of education provide knowledge that is always available and understood to serve the individual and society. This is “just in case” or “should be learned” information.

**Most importantly, how do we get those who resist change to instead embrace it?** The answer to this question solves a major barrier to effective innovative leadership and, eventually, paves the way to the reality of a continuous innovative society.