Teaching organizational leadership through film.

Abstract

Future leaders must learn to assess their organizations to determine areas of stability, areas of need, or, perhaps, where to make change. Educators must find creative ways to help students understand organizational theories and applications of those theories to the practices of leading; using films, as a pedagogical tool, is one such way. In this essay, I will discuss groundings in organizational and adult theory, film as pedagogy, film choices and rationale, and specifications, expectations and evaluation for film assignments in organizational leadership.

Introduction

There are many challenges posed by the modern world important to leader educators. First, we are reminded of the emerging body of knowledge and discourse on leadership, behaviors, characteristics, and approaches for varying situations. Challenges exist in communicating ideas generated by leadership scholars. A third challenge is to help students understand theory, apply that theory to practice and appreciate the link between practice and its theoretical underpinnings. Finally, with postmodern theories challenging traditional methods used to develop leaders, we are compelled to find new ways to help students understand leadership theory and practice. Among suggested postmodern pedagogical methods, we can use case studies, problem-based learning, and change projects or community-based projects of development. Using film in a critically reflective manner can be one way to improve the education of future leaders.

Purpose

To help our graduate students understand the link between organizational theories and practices, one method I employ is the observation and analysis of film. In this essay, I will connect theoretical frameworks, rationale for using film, and the process of using film as a pedagogical tool to link theory and practice. I will note how one can use film, for example The Paper, to explicate organizational theory that is to be learned and/or practiced (in which the film is embedded). Additionally, pedagogical perspectives, specifics of the assignment, scoring criteria, and evaluative information will also be noted. It is hoped that by sharing such pedagogical knowledge linking organizational leadership theory and practice that we will help grow leaders who will make needed 21st century organizational changes.

Organizational Theory

There are a variety of theoretical frameworks (and texts) one can use to ground the study of organizations and organizational change. Since the students I teach will be school leaders, we use a straightforward text that combines several theoretical perspectives within a context of practice, Bolman and Deal's Reframing Organizations (2003). The students develop an understanding of organizations from four frames, key theorists from those frames, assumptions of and significant issues imbedded within each frame, and how to use the various frames to effect organizational change. Thus, we study organizations from a structural perspective, a human resource frame, from political and symbolic/cultural theories, and finally, the authors discuss emerging theories of change.

Pedagogical and Adult Learning Theories

Moving from the traditional lecture method of teaching traditional leadership theory to postmodern pedagogies advancing postmodern leadership theories provides opportunities and challenges for those who prepare leaders to lead 21st century organizations. From the critical school of thought in the field of education, Freire (1974, 1998a, 1998b) suggests changing the traditional student-teacher relationship, moving from a teacher-controlled setting to a dialogic setting with interaction between teacher and student (reflection and action), critical thinking, problem-posing rather than problem solving, and teaching for "learning to learn." As organizations have become more diversified, educators have had to rethink pedagogical practices to grow future leaders who can lead in diverse, team settings, prompting pedagogical groundings from experiential and critical schools (Apple, 1996; Cherryholmes, 1988; Dewey, 1916; hooks, 1994; Kellner, 1989, 2003; McLaren, 1998; Rorty, 1996; and Shor, 1980, 1992).

Adult learners, according to Knowles (1978), demonstrate several characteristics. Possessing a wide experience base, there is a desire to self-direct their learning, a time perspective for learning oriented to the present, and a problem-centered focus on learning. Knowles indicates that the most definitive of these characteristics is the experience the adult learner brings to the classroom. Primarily interested in material they can use for real problems, and responding to intrinsic rather than extrinsic motivations, however, adults need to see results for their efforts; that is, unless the new information or insight is something that can be used, it seems not worthwhile. Analyzing films is one way to immediately practice applying leadership theories learned in class, and to ascertain student understanding of those theories.

Film as Pedagogy

Postmodernists English (1995, 2003) and Kellner (1989, 2003) note that the use of film is a viable pedagogical classroom tool within a critical perspective. Film can enrich the study of both the leader as actor (Barbour, 2004) and in chaotic or complex contexts (Barbour, 2005). Instructors can provide a forum to explore worldviews with respect to power relationships, an abstraction turned into a reality, for instance, within the shared context of film. In addition, issues of observation, perceptions, biases, judgments, and values, both manifest and latent, important for a leader, can also be explored. For purposes of this essay, we will focus on choosing a film for organizational analysis, and how to design an analytical exercise in which the instructor is able to assess understanding of theory and its application to leadership practice in organizational contexts.

Most of the students I teach plan to become school leaders; their backgrounds and experiences in leadership positions vary, however. Many have had careers in other fields; some have led organizations or subgroups in organizations. I try to use film in the leader classroom to bring organizational theories to life, and attempt to create situations in which class members will have common frames of reference, similar to case studies. Compared to cases, films seem a bit more "real" to students, active rather than passive, although that realness does exist within a cinematic world. The film actors are active in a context that would appear to be similar to all classmates. Chosen films are focused on decisions leaders make, contexts or situations in which leaders lead, and about those being led, or the followers. The films used in class assignments are first-run feature films that can be rented or purchased from local video-rental stores or from the Internet, and are viewed either alone or with others. Sometimes the films are shown in class; at other times the students view the films on their own. Finally, analyzing films has an added bonus of introducing our Masters Degree candidates to qualitative data collecting: how to collect observational data, how to decide what constitutes data, creating themes, and so on.

For this essay, I have chosen to describe pedagogical use of the film The Paper. Within a common frame of observational reference, students assess and analyze the newspaper organization depicted in the film The Paper using both traditional organizational theories and emergent qualitative, political and critical theories. The movie, directed by Ron Howard, is about a newspaper organization and how a local news story makes it to print. Although I chose one film for this exercise, I have discovered several organizational-type films that one can use, either chosen for the whole class (as The Paper), or as choice opportunities picked by the students. Among the films I have used or students have chosen are Remember the Titans, Drum Line, Ladder 49, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Shawshank Redemption, and Crimson Tide.

The films we use are chosen for several reasons. Students have seen many of the films; thus they are familiar with the contexts and the nature of the films. The films are complex and many-layered, thus providing a good deal of qualitative data for analysis. Students can choose to go in several directions with their analyses, thus creating meaning and understanding of organizations from individual perspectives. They can gather easily discernible, manifest evidence to prove their contentions, and, for those so inclined, can gather symbolic and more latent meaning from the films. The films have leaders, some obvious, some not so obvious, who can be analyzed from a variety of theoretical perspectives discussed in class. The students are able to analyze the relationship of leaders and followers within the organizational context. Finally, the films are in contexts different from the backgrounds of our students, for example, a newspaper, fire station, mental hospital, prison, navy submarine, or university band, so the students are removed from their familiar environments and forced to look anew at organizational contexts and the people therein. Within the class discussion, post-viewing and post-analysis, the students are thrust back into an educational context when they are asked to make critical connections between organizational leadership and change as theories, the organizational and cultural environments within their films and the transfer knowledge for a leader who has to deal with schools undergoing change.

Assignment Specifications for the Film Analysis

This assignment is designed to ascertain what students have gleaned from readings in organizational theory, activities and class discussions, and to discover if they can apply theory to practice. The film varies from a professor-directed choice, such as The Paper, and a studentchosen film from a list generated by the class or the professor. The process of choice varies depending on backgrounds, abilities and needs of the students. They are encouraged to watch the movie as often as needed, either solo or with other classmates, friends and/or family members. Students are to submit an analysis of the organization depicted in the movie based on the theories and practices of organizational leadership read and discussed in class; analyses are sometimes submitted solo or with a partner or two. Over the years, I have discovered the fertile, thoughtful reflections that result from viewing the films together, discussing elements of theory observed in the film, and then writing a group paper. Students have commented that the film analysis was one of the more difficult, yet richly layered papers they had ever written due to the creative reflection of extra writers.

There are three purposes to the film analysis exercise. One focus of this work is for the students to demonstrate that they understand various theoretical concepts of organizational leadership. Second, students are to demonstrate that they can utilize theoretical concepts to analyze and assess an organization. The newspaper organization in The Paper, like all organizations, will be stronger or more functional in some areas, more needy of reframing or change in other areas. The students are to analyze what they see. As an aid to analysis, they are to create their own table or matrix or chart in which they include the key features assessed and key observations from structural, human resource, political and cultural/symbolic perspectives. Finally, the students are to demonstrate that they can synthesize a body of data into a cogent discussion, using Bloom's (1956) highest taxonomic levels of analysis, synthesis and evaluation. Guiding questions include: What, as an outsider, do you see as you observe this organization? What is occurring relative to leadership theories discussed in class? What are some areas you might consider in need of change or organizational "reframing?" Students are to support their contentions with evidence from the film. In their final paragraphs, they are to summarize their contentions as if they had to present them to the owner of the newspaper. When discussing the final analyses together in class, we add a component to the discussion: What lessons are learned that can be applied to organizational leadership and change in schools?

Criteria for Evaluation

The students are evaluated on several criteria. They are to submit a four to five page analysis (about 1200-1500 words) of the organization depicted in the movie. Students are assessed on their ability to apply theories learned in class to the analysis and evaluation of an organization, and to synthesize their data (evidence from the film) into a cogent discussion supporting their contentions about the organization in question. A scoring guide in the form of a matrix is given to the students, containing "50 Points" the possible number of points to be earned for the assignment.

The scoring guide includes the following categories on its vertical axis: 1. Paper submitted on time, neatly typed and with appended cover sheet, appropriate font size, margins, and pagination, and author(s) use appropriate grammar, wording, spelling, phrasing, sentence structure, and so on. 2. Information is organized, flows with relevance; there is an introduction with thesis statement and a conclusion. 3. Demonstrates ability to analyze and discuss basic characteristics of organizations and the organization depicted in the film. 4. Demonstrates understanding of and ability to choose appropriate "frames" and elements in analysis. 5. Provides appropriate examples from the organization to prove contentions made in analysis. 6. Able to synthesize information and knowledge into a cogent discussion. 7. Uses APA appropriately for cites and references. 8. The matrix/table created for analysis is appropriately designed and includes information gleaned from the film; contents included in final paper. (Each criterion above is allocated five points, while criterion 3 and 5 carry more weight and are worth ten points.)

On the horizontal axis of the scoring guide, columns are labeled by points earned. Thus, to earn "Five Points," the author(s) will have submitted an essay that is thoughtful, well written, interesting to read, focused on the guiding questions posed in the directions and on which the evaluation was based, and had few to no errors. To earn "Four to Three Points," the author(s) will have submitted an essay that is well written, interesting to read, discussed key elements on which the evaluation was based, and may have contained some errors or inappropriate contentions or evidence. To earn "Two Points to One Point," the author(s) will have submitted an analysis that was not easily read, did not discuss key elements on which the evaluation was based, and may have contained several errors.

Film Analysis to Class Discussion

In the class discussions that ensue post-film analysis, students are involved as active listeners, opinionated, and willing to participate in small group and large class discussions. Perhaps the film organization they have observed for a few weeks gives them the confidence to speak as knowing participant-observers, rather than simply distant observers. We have learned over time that not all students see the same contexts or situations the same as fellow classmates. We discuss the reality of what was observed, possible reasons for seeing different realities, and on occasion have replayed key scenes to conduct "reality checks." We talk about prejudices and biases of our observations and interpretation of evidence, and resultant application to leader decisions, and discuss constructivist interpretations as to more or less appropriate or accurate. In class discussions, we talk about issues of communication such as watching and listening to learn about hidden meanings and subtext. Finally, we relate findings, evidence, interpretations, and suggestions for change to their philosophies of organizational leadership. For example, are their suggestions for change compatible with their philosophies or would they have trouble instituting the suggested changes? Could they walk their organizational talk, so to speak.

Conclusion

As we transfer knowledge from the film to leading their organizations, we shift the conversation so our future leaders reflect upon their own commonalties and differences, helping them respect their differences from others, while becoming critical of those who would suppress differences or present some differences, for example, racial, gender, or class, negatively, stereotypically, or pejoratively. While we try as scholars and practitioners to come to some common understandings and conclusions about organizational leadership within diverse and changing contexts, we also try to pose the questions that may not have answers, pose questions that should be asked about leadership, and bring out aspects of organizational change that we know exist in schools.

References

Apple, M. (1996). Cultural politics and education. NY: Teachers College Press.

Barbour, J.D. (2005). Oz, Jurassic Park, The Matrix: Using contextual settings in film to understand chaos theory and organizational leadership. In D.C. Thompson and F.E. Crampton, (Eds.), Proceedings of the University Council for Educational Administration, Kansas City, Missouri, November 2004. Kansas City, MO: University Council for Educational Administration. http://coe.ksu.edu/ucea/04ucea03.pdf

Barbour, J.D. (2004). Developing leaders who understand the link between theory and practice: Grounding leadership practice with theoretical knowledge through film. In Improving Leadership Around the World: Challenges, Ideas, Innovations. Proceedings from the International Leadership Association Conference, Washington, D.C., November 2004. College Park, MD: International Leadership Association.

Bloom, B.S. (Ed.) (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals: Handbook I, cognitive domain. New York: Longmans, Green.

Bolman, L.G.& Deal T. E. (2003). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice and leadership, 3rd Edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cherryholmes, C.H. (1988). Power and criticism: Poststructural investigations in education. NY: Teachers College Press.

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. NY: Macmillan.

English, F. (1995). "Using Film to Attain a Cultural and Contextual Understanding of Moral Leadership." Paper Presented at the American Education Research Association Annual Conference, April, San Francisco, CA.

English, F. (2003). The postmodern challenge to the theory and practice of educational administration. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas.

Freire, P. (1974). Pedagogy of the oppressed. NY: Seabury.

Freire, P. (1998a). Pedagogy of freedom: Ethics, democracy, and civic courage. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

Freire, P. (1998b). Teachers as cultural workers. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge.

Kellner, D. (1989). Reading Images Critically: Toward a Postmodern Pedagogy. Journal of Education, 170(3), 31-52.

Kellner, D. (2003). "Toward a Critical Theory of Education." Democracy & Nature, Vol. 9, No. 1.

Knowles, M. (1978). The adult learner: A neglected species. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing.

McLaren, P.(1998). Life in schools: An introduction to critical pedagogy in the foundations of education. 3rd Ed. NY: Longman.

Rorty, R. (1996). Solidarity or objectivity? In L. Cahoone (Ed.), From modernism to postmodernism: An anthology (pp. 573-588). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

Shor, I. (1980). Critical teaching and everyday life. Boston: South End Press.

Shor, I. (1992). Empowering education: Critical teaching for social change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

JoAnn Danelo Barbour, Texas Woman's University 

Barbour, Ph.D., is Professor of Educational Administration and Leadership