Ethical decisions in turbulent times: a rational navigation route for school leaders through the choppiest of seas

School Administrator, May, 2008 by Joan Poliner Shapiro, Steven Jay Gross, Susan H. Shapiro

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

It was a Tuesday morning, Sept. 11, 2001. Aida Rodriguez was the director of a private preschool in lower Manhattan. It was a new teacher's first day. The staff was having a welcome breakfast for her. They ordered bagels and coffee and invited the parents to join them. Though it was a beautiful day, only a few parents had shown up. Rodriguez and the staff joked that no one wanted to welcome the new teacher because they wanted to soak up the sunshine instead.

That's when it began. Two teachers ran into the room crying. They said a plane had hit the World Trade Center, about 20 blocks away. At first, Rodriguez figured it was an accident. She even felt a little annoyed these teachers were being so unprofessional. It was obviously some terrible accident, but nothing that required such emotional behavior.

Rodriguez turned on the radio and the announcer said another plane had hit the World Trade Center. By then, everyone realized this was no accident. Several parents in the room decided to go out and see. Rodriguez said they should go ahead because she knew she needed to stay in the school as she was in charge. Rodriguez tried to keep things as normal as possible.

Then the first of the parents started coming in covered in soot. One parent appeared at the door and looked like he was in shock. He walked into the classroom and silently took his child away. One of the parents suggested Rodriguez see what was going on outside. She saw the two large buildings on fire. It dawned on her they were under attack. While she watched the buildings burn, she could see things, small shapes pouring down from the top floors. Those on the street said they were people falling. At that point, Rodriguez knew it was not business as usual. She felt she had to get back into the school and protect the children.

Simple and Truthful

When Rodriguez returned, it was chaos. Parents were crying and lining up to use the phones. Children were hysterical. Rodriguez then walked into the baby room where they were all listening anxiously to the radio. There were unconfirmed reports the White House was hit, as well as the Pentagon. She suddenly thought, "Oh my God, we are all going to die." At that time, she made a decision that if she was going to die, she was going to make it as calm as she could for the children and her staff. She knew it was essential to reassure everyone it was going to be OK.

Rodriguez got back to work. She called one representative from each classroom into her office. She told them to turn off all radios, except for the one in the baby room. She promised to keep them informed as she found out information. She told them to tell the children they were safe and something bad was happening, but it was a grown-up problem. She said if the children asked questions, they should make the answers as simple and as truthful as possible.

Rodriguez also let the teachers know if they had to cry, they should leave the room and come into her office or the kitchen. Armed with new directives, the teachers went back to their rooms.

Throughout the day, decisions were made and carried out by Rodriguez and her staff. Together they managed to reach almost all the parents by phone or cell phone and let them know they should pick up their children as the school and the city were closing.

A New Approach

Education leaders make difficult ethical decisions each day. Although few deal with a situation of the magnitude Rodriguez faced, they still must navigate rationally through challenging and complex circumstances while under considerable emotional stress. One approach we think can help educational leaders make decisions is through the combined use of multiple ethical paradigms and turbulence theory.

In Ethical Leadership and Decision Making in Education: Applying Theoretical Perspectives to Complex Dilemmas, co-authors Joan Poliner Shapiro and Jacqueline A. Stefkovich develop the concept of multiple ethical paradigms. Three of these paradigms or perspectives, the ethics of justice, critique and care, were first discussed by Robert J. Starratt in his book Building an Ethical School. The fourth paradigm, the ethic of the profession, was introduced in detail by Shapiro and Stefkovich.

The ethic of justice can be used to solve or resolve an ethical dilemma by asking questions such as the following: Are there any laws, rules, procedures or contracts that would help a leader make a decision in this situation? Are there any legal impediments that might hinder a leader in making a decision?

Turning to the ethic of critique, these questions could be raised: Are the laws, rules, procedures or contracts appropriate in this case? Who made them? When were they made? Above all, should they be followed in this situation?

Moving to the ethic of care, ignoring the rules and procedures, a leader might ask: Who will be helped by my decision? Who will be hurt? How can I make certain that the long-term consequences of my determination are good? What about the unintended consequences of my decision? Who might they help and who might they hurt?