Speech Delivered by Dr. Elizabeth Davis-Russell
at the
MCA-New Jersey Second Annual Leaders and Legends Gala Event
June 14, 2008
Educational Leadership for the 21st Century
As we all here know, Liberia has been through several years of civil war, and almost all the infrastructure of the country was damaged or destroyed. Education at all levels bore a disproportionate amount of the destruction. The physical damage to universities was horrific: laboratories stripped, equipment stolen, buildings burned. Yet the visible physical damage is only one part of the story of the catastrophic consequences of civil war. The greater damage to higher education has been the loss of human capital. Many of the best qualified faculty have been killed or left the country.
One of the challenges facing Liberia, given its many problems, is where to begin. But equally important, there needs to be a realistic balance between responding to immediate needs and developing thoughtful long term plans. Both will be critical as we move ahead. As I address you this evening I would like to invite you to join me in reflecting upon the challenges confronting Liberia, especially some particular challenges confronting Liberia’s higher education system, and the kind of leadership I think is needed to move higher education institutions through the 21st century.
Some of the challenges that confront us in higher education are Access, Equity and Affordability, Quality and Accountability. Before we can address any of these challenges, Liberia higher education must develop a vision for itself. It must develop answers to the following questions. What is the purpose of higher education in Liberia? What is the balance between workforce development and general education? What is the role of higher education in creating a stronger civic society and democratic government? What is higher education’s responsibility for teacher preparation? Is it simply to have a unit that prepares teachers, or does the entire university have responsibility for teacher preparation? What are the respective roles of public education, church-related education, and proprietary education? What is the relationship of research and teaching? How can higher education be focused on the need of the country?
Assuming we gain some consensus on these crucial questions, we must then address the issues of access, equity and affordability, and accountability. Let us first examine Access. As we take a close look at institutions of higher education in Liberia it becomes apparent that the existing institutions, especially the public institutions cannot accommodate the numbers of students who want to go to college. The government wants to build three new public institutions outside of Monrovia, in the southeast, in the north, and the northeast. Are there adequate resources to fund 3 new universities? In particular, can we find adequate faculty resources when the current universities are so woefully understaffed? In addition, access is not only providing new institutions, as important as that is. Access means creating mechanisms so that poor but capable students can afford to attend college. This means some combination of loans, grants and scholarships. Because K-12 preparation is so critical, alignment of the curriculum between the primary, secondary, and tertiary levels is critical. Preparing greater numbers of college-ready students will be essential to ensure greater access to higher education. In addition to strengthening and aligning the K-12 system with higher education, access plans need to address a special population of under-prepared students. Because so many young people have not had adequate preparation due to the disruption of the war, special stop-gap measures may need to be implemented to provide remedial education, perhaps in the form of a 13th preparatory year.
Developing a comprehensive plan for higher education will require considering, perhaps much later, access for both working and unemployed adults, to help transition workers from old to new industries.
The issues of equity and affordability loom before higher education if we are to construct a democratic society. Education cannot remain the province of only those who can financially afford a college education. It is imperative that two things happen. Our pricing of higher education must be reasonable, and higher education in Liberia must provide avenues and resources for those talented students who are not financially able to pay for a college education. Having spent 35 years in higher education institutions I am painfully aware that the 21st century college or university require great resources. I am also painfully aware of the current state of Liberia’s ability to fully fund its higher education system. Yet our students must be prepared to take the places in the world and to be competitive. This means that we will have to work to develop resources to supplement what the government can provide.
I have mentioned the 21st century college or university. In order to make that a reality for Liberia the needs for more and better-trained faculty are perhaps one of the most pressing needs of Liberia higher education. In its report to the Ministry of Education the AASCU team noted that more degreed teachers are needed and that more professional development is needed. More pathways are required so that less-degreed faculty can advance, and incentives must be established that encourage advancement. In terms of curriculum, there is a critical need for revision of degrees, programs and courses to reflect contemporary knowledge and pedagogical design. As we look at the infrastructure, existing and new institutions need computers, laboratory equipment, textbooks and curriculum materials, and library materials. For Tubman College of Technology which ceased operation some 14 years ago we cannot create what existed 15 plus years ago. Tubman College must leapfrog into the 21st century and build a university for today and the future.
Another indicator of quality is governance. Currently Liberia higher education does not have an accreditation process that assures quality. Some poor quality institutions are operating in the country, offering a very inadequate education, not preparing their graduates to be successful. We must change that for our students deserve the best education and educational services possible.
As we construct higher education for the 21st century we must demonstrate our accountability. We must engage one another in discussions that are open, civil, and respectful. We must be truthful and open in what we present to our publics, so that our constituents know what we do, how we do it, and what the results are. Our prospective students should know the real institutions to which they are applying. Our policies and practices should be clearly articulated, not obscure codes that have to be deciphered. They should be to facilitate students’ experiences and success, not intended to obstruct or even to entrap students.
In our internal decision making processes we should invite participation. We must work collaboratively to achieve mutual involvement and support. We need to base our decisions on facts wherever possible. Therefore our institutions must possess the infrastructure to provide us with consistently reliable sources of needed data.
And for everyone involved in higher education this means engaging in new thinking. But how can new thinking be encouraged? What kind of leadership will it take to move higher education institutions to this new thinking?
I propose that servant leadership is one kind of leadership that helps us move our institutions to this new thinking in the 21st century. We must have leaders who begin “with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. The difference manifests itself in the care taken by the servant leader – first to make sure that other people’s highest priority needs are being served. The best test is: Do those served grow as persons; do they, while being served become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servant leaders?” (Greenleaf, 1970)
Reflecting upon Greenleaf’s concept of the servant leader and thinking about higher education institutions in Liberia, one first thought is our students, faculty and staff, and then our external public. As leaders, we must place our students’ highest priority needs at the forefront of how we structure their educational experiences, rather than doing what is convenient for us. We must structure their experiences to ensure that they grow as persons. As a result of our leadership and the manner in which we structure their experiences, our students should become healthier, wiser, free from the shackles of ignorance, poverty and disease. Given their experiences with us they should themselves aspire to become servant leaders.
How do we recognize servant leaders? There are ten characteristics of the Servant-Leader (Larry C. Spears, 1998) which make them recognizable. The characteristics include
 1. Listening
2. Empathy
3. Healing
4. Awareness
5. Persuasion
6. Conceptualization
7. Foresight
8. Stewardship
9. Commitment to the growth of people
10. Building Community
The first characteristic of listening can be taught to our leaders. Spears points out that as a servant-leader, the focus is on listening intently to others, trying to identify what the will of the group is and trying to clarify that will. I am a psychologist by education and training, and as such we talk about the importance of listening to what is not being said. So does the servant-leader. As Spears indicates, s/he “also keenly listens to her/his own voice and engages in reflection”.
As we look at the second characteristic, empathy, we know that Carl Rogers made a tremendous impact on my field and also generally when he emphasized this concept and that of unconditional positive regard. The servant-leader is one committed to understanding and accepting others even when he or she does not accept their behaviors or performance. The distinction between the behaviors/performance and the individual as someone with intrinsic worth is critical to being a servant-leader.
This third characteristic of healing refers to the “potential one has for healing one’s self and one’s relationship to others”; the desire to make whole. Greenleaf in “The Servant as Leader” states “There is something subtle communicated to one who is being served and led if, implicit in the compact between servant-leader and led, is the understanding that the search for wholeness is something they share.” This is so crucial to Liberia’s ability to move ahead as a unified country. We must work assiduously to make the country and ourselves whole. We must not continue to let ethnicity, education and class divide us as a nation and erode the core of who we are as humans.
As leaders we must possess general and self-awareness. This means that we must be sharply attuned to self, others and the environment. Oftentimes this means that one is jarred by that awareness, but that should be a catalyst to bring about positive changes in self, others and the environment.
As we think about the servant leader as one for the 21st century, the ability to use persuasion is vital. The emphasis here is on the ability to convince others rather than to rely on positional authority to coerce compliance. This separates the servant leader from others who use power to dominate others.
As a leader one must think beyond the day-to-day occurrences, “putting out fires”, and dream big dreams. This ability for Conceptualization enables the servant leader to be a visionary.
Foresight, another characteristic of the servant leader enables him/her “understand the lessons from the past, the realities of the present, and the likely consequences of a decision for the future.”
As leaders demonstrating stewardship, we hold our institutions in trust for the greater good of society. From my perspective, it is a trust that is inviolate. Our young people’s future is too important for us to betray that trust. Therefore we must be good stewards.
Spears tells us that servant leaders “believe that people have an intrinsic value beyond their tangible contributions as workers.” Therefore servant leaders are “deeply committed to the growth of each and everyone in his or her institution.” This means that if we are servant leaders we have a “tremendous responsibility to do everything within our power to nurture the personal, professional, and spiritual growth of” our students and the employees of the institution.
As we look at the developed world we can observe that given the rise of urbanization, technology, and all of the other factors that tend to isolate people, and I would include civil strife among these, these contribute to the tendency to focus only on ourselves. The servant leader strives to build a sense of community within the institution, fostering caring communities that replace the bureaucracies and silos with which we are confronted in higher education. Let us commit ourselves to becoming servant leaders dedicated to serving and building institutions that exhibit caring, excellence, and communities.
Thank you.
References
Attributed to Robert K. Greenleaf. His first essay was published in 1970 and is entitled “The Servant as Leader”.
AASCU Team Report on Trip to Liberia, April 2007,
AASCU Team Report on Trip to Liberia, April, 2008
|
