12:00-1:45: Workshop Registration Open

2:00-2:30: General Session Begins: Comments by Gail Imig

LINC

• 13 grants made to FSPE institutions and leadership teams to participate in national workshops that utilize innovative leadership models
• Carry the discussions back to institutions to inform a broader set of partners to work on term leadership development for institutional change
• Create leadership development programs to address issues of institutional change and sustainability
• Create new models of leadership for continuous change in higher education

Anticipated Outcomes:

It is anticipated that new models of leadership development will allow greater emphasis on the following:

• Leadership models that focus on faculty and their external partners working in collaboration for the good of the institution and stakeholder groups;
• The development of a critical mass of faculty and partners with shared leadership skills built on shared visions and values’
• Catalyzing successful long-term sustainable models that are responsive to those institutional changes
• A sustainable model of leadership development that allows universities to continue to build a supply of sophisticated, well-trained leaders for the future.

2:30-2:40: Overview of Workshop Segments (Day 1, Day 2, Day 3)

The structure of the workshop, as developed at the Design Conference (February 2-4, 1998), will be discussed and reviewed.

• A series of six continuous conferences would be easier if the same people came to all workshops. The movement would continue to build.
• Instead, with learning community at each project, the rotating membership at each national conference creates its own form of chaos.
• Ideally, conversation #3 was informed by what #2 participants learned, thought about what was said, said they would do (3rd day planning at Workshop #2)
• The real work is working together in home teams - communicating with other projects - what are we doing, how are we doing it.
• The on-going process encourages explorations of trying it out, sharing the learning, concentrating on what we have learned., and going forward.

Workshop design:

• Day 1: Reconvene, collect as a home team - answer questions, share what was done, and create insights with other projects
• Day 2: New insights, new techniques, visit, time to reflect on new leadership models
• Day 3: Home teams - what is our plan for action between now and Workshop #4.

Workshops are only springboards - not the event. The events are those things that go on at home.

New ideals, concepts, theories, explorations come on Day #2.

• Our hope: we will model collective leadership.
• Workshop designed by a collective group at Design Conference.
• Workshop should be rich in interaction - not many talking heads - informed by case studies - examples of application - intentional change - community building - leadership as a primary thrust.
• Workshops are Phase I - the exploration and experimentation and the dialogue about it.
• After the workshops - what do you do now? What will be the Phase II proposal?

Chaos theory of change - nothing is for sure.

Facilitators - container of time - intention - work topics. How to use the time is up to you. We will provide the container of time.

Agenda:

Focus is collective leadership in higher education

Reflect –

• What did you hear?
• What did you think?
• How can we take it back to our institution?

Learning happens from discomfort.

Example: chairs - not structured but a jumble – the conference crew was ready to fix the chairs back into structure.

Chaotic, self-forming, amusing, artistic, and time for reflection

Taking the Pulse: Sit and share individually and then as a group

Define and revise agenda for the next day as a collective

Review of today’s agenda - as project teams and as mixed groups

Projects bring object, learning partner, interact, case studies (stories), mixed groups - sharing what is happening and learning, taking the pulse, artistic presentation and discussion, ending with day 2 design

2:40-3:00: Project Team Discussions

3:00-3:15: Project Team Introductions

Project Teams will introduce themselves by presenting an object that symbolizes their leadership initiative (1 minute each team).

Minnesota/North and South Dakotas: Visions for Change

Iowa: Shared Leadership for Institutional Change

• REEL SLIC project - Really Exceptional Educational Learnings (about) Shared Leadership for Institutional Change
• Rod and reel and fish
• 5 learning teams about leadership
• ISU reaching out to CC, business, industry, government, and community
• Reel - and hook is fiber-optics
• Cashing about for leaders
  

Texas: Texas Collective Leadership for Change in Higher Education

• Wizard of Oz - Dorothy’s shoes
• Storm of change - like storm in Wizard of Oz
• 9 different projects - one goal of institutional change
• Dorothy and her friends had same goal, but different objectives
• Dorothy - had power - red shoes - not ready to hear it
  

Nebraska: Leadership Initiative

• Installation: textile art that describes groups - Dan, Al, David
• Naturally made paper - cotton and flax - bound together by silk
• Represents diversity
• Links - collective leadership and collaboration on campus
• Performance art - to Kansas
  

Penn LINC: Cheyney University and Penn State

• Learning about past to inform present to create the future
• Visited historical buildings on campus - multiple uses and change
• Ex. pavilion theater - ag arena then 1940’s - drill military soldiers
• Frescos in administration - 1940’s - what would be in frescos today that would represent higher education
• Quality improvement and continuous learning
  

California - CF3 - drum - Vision Quest - beats the drum and goes out to all

• hot air - twisted balloons - hard work to blow up and make anything you want
• Fingers - outwardly oriented organization
• The tie that binds - needle and thread - ties us all together
  

South Carolina Leadership Congress

• 18 institutions - Clemson and South Carolina State and 16 tech institutions
• Stone with bird - eagle
• From conference - stone in pocket for 7 years - remind us, collective leadership - must be a good listener - stone reminds us of that
• Eagle on stone - flying high with strong vision

Washington/Idaho: Partnership 2020

• Zygote: symbol of group - stage
• Growing - pre-embryonic
• Glass of water - half full!! optimistic that much will happen

Ohio

MAC - Mad-Atlantic Consortium

• Participatory art: paper, dirt (soil),
• 10 different seeds (one for each institution in partnership)
• Add fertilizer, light,
• Growing together, experimenting, together, receiving energy from outside - all on the same page

SOFSEC - Represent 5 states in a global society

• Interconnected
• Leadership - in a state of flux - always moving - flexible - changing
• Floats in air
• Important to reach out - beyond the walls of the 5 states - to the world

Oregon: Leadership and Education in Partnership

• Toddler art - trying to understand building and then deconstructing the university - SAND castles - building
• Building sand castle - the crumbling ivory tower
• Bowl of sand with pictures of toddlers
• Toys - connected in different groups

Mixed groups: identification

Mix around center table to find learning partner

3:15-3:30: Formation of learning partners

Each individual will work with a learning partner (someone outside of your project), offering each of you the opportunity to ‘check in’ with another individual to discuss your expectations of Workshop #3 and what your role is in your project.

3:30-4:00: Two Case Studies from the Leadership Initiative

Stories of what we’re doing and what we’re learning

• Mid-Atlantic Consortium, Kristen Grace

Story - when we met we said what we needed to do was where we already were with leadership development activities and beyond - (something we hadn’t envisioned in proposal) we needed to have a better sense of who we are, what we are doing, and why we are doing that. Leadership for WHAT? Institutional change? WHY - could not move farther until we had a basis for leadership for WHAT. Not fully settled way - but the technique we decided to do to get at what we were doing was Concept Mapping.

• Concept Maps visually depict critical relationships among the ideas generated by a group. "Concept mapping is a structured conceptualization technique which provides a pictorial representation of a group’s thinking around a topic." (Kolb, 1998). This discussion of concept mapping follows the methodology developed by William Trochim (1989). Other processes also exist to map conceptual frameworks. The advantage of Trochim’s approach is that it is particularly suited for group use and provides a basis for subsequent evaluation. "The content of the map is entirely determined by the group. The [group] brainstorms the initial ideas, provides information about how these ideas are related, interprets the results of the analyses, and decides how the map is to be utilized" (Kolb, 1998). Concept mapping is a democratic process that encourages communication about issues that matter to the group and provides them with a useful tool for planning and evaluation.

 

 

• South Carolina Leadership Congress (SCLC), John Kelly

Patrick O’Neal - Extraordinary Conversations –a process for checking assumptions in conversation.

FSPE plus LINC members went through a series of exercises to learn more about ourselves and each other

Day long exercise:

LINC - 1/2 day - vision and guiding principles

After exploration session together

Intent –

• How do we get people to stand behind their gifts and talents?
• How do we get people to offer their gifts and talents to a group?
• Some people inhibit path, what is our life dream?
• Why are we here?
• What is driving force that brought us here?

Exercise: - Wilma Mankiller (native American chief) created a necklace with a two headed wolf. The two-headed wolf represents the inner conversations we experience: -who are we listen to? In our own head, we have a conversation which is two-sided.

Which head do I want to feed? The positive (realizing your life dream) -- or -- the negative (the can’t do’s.)

The exercise is generally in trios or groups of three people. If time the people would rotate roles.

• 1st person - set the goal or dream (be the dreamer)
• 2nd person - represents the negative voice
• 3rd person – represents the positive voice

The first person shares the dream - give some details about it - tell a story - passion - genuine - relate the positive issues and also the negative issues that you have identified that are restraining – narrate. The other two people are listening!

Then negative and positive begin talking and re-iterating and enlarging the themes the dreamer brought forth. The dreamer listens - cannot speak! Then the dreamer shares or summarizes what the negative voice and positive voice. And how, if any, their versions haveswayed the dreamer or the dreamer tells how their conversations made her feel.

Then rotate (if time allows)

Suggested time frame:

• 2 minutes - dreamer
• 2 minutes - positive
• 2 minutes - negative
• 4 minutes for shared reflection

Total: 10 minutes, then rotate - 10 minutes, then rotate - 10 minutes – Total of 30 minutes.

After the exercise - what changed? Did your goal change? If rotate, then everyone has an opportunity to share dream and hear opposing viewpoints.

Outcomes:

• Sharing dreams - get to know 2 other persons’ dreams
• Opportunity to hear yourself state negative and positive
• Help each person to identify assumptions - both positive and negative
• South Carolina - diversity - diversity brought richness to understanding different people and where they are coming from.
• John Kelly - dream - collective leadership - legacy piece in career
• felt like strangling negative person - used to confronting it
• Goal - of being a high level administrator - optimistic
• Negative voice - very dynamic - powerful - angry about relinquishing dream - exposed vulnerability

Regret - not doing this exercise today - coming together as a collective group - not knowing, but would get to know 2 other people better.

4:00-4:15: Break

4:15-5:00: Mixed Discussion Groups

5:00-5:15: LINC Workshops as National Dialogues on Leadership

5:15-5:30: Taking the Pulse

Participants fill out comment cards that inform the next day's design

• What came clear today?
• What needs further discussion?
• What would make tomorrow better for you as a learner?

Responses:

Agenda items (things that facilitators can control)

• More free tune - Opportunity to be "resort" like
• Take your time - Watch the time - Adhere to Agenda - Stay loose
• Instructions for activities: One time only - don’t repeat!
• More small group discussion
• More home team time

Content areas - can be covered at Maricopa or can be addressed in afternoon:

• Who says we need to change?
• Need for goal - end state - What is this thing supposed to look like?
• What is "collective leadership?"
• What has worked - Get specific on how to do it!

Issues to be addressed in afternoon:

• How to get "the top" (the higher levels of administration) involved and committed?
• How do participants in the process get selected?
• Where does Kellogg fit? What does Kellogg define? What does the institution define?

5:30: Adjourn for the afternoon

6:00: Social

6:30: Dinner

7:15: Presentation of Le Movement

Le Movement is a 21st Century Morality Play about the community college movement written by Maricopa Community College District Chancellor, Paul Elsner. The performance will be coordinated and staged through the Readers Theatre of Mesa Community College’s learning in retirement community, New Frontiers for Learning in Retirement

8:15: Discussion and Dessert

A big thank you to Bill Harriott and Jeff Raz for helping set a context for the play and for creating a dialogue after the presentation of the play. The actors are volunteers and are members of a Third-Age group that is peer-led, self-directed, and focuses on learning.

8:45: Facilitator Planning for Day 2

Participants are invited to work with the facilitators, reviewing the ‘pulse’ cards and refining the next day’s agenda.

--> Link to Workshop 3, Day 2

About Kellogg LINC Workshop Series  Discussion Groups  Resources

Copyright 1998 WorkSpan