SOL 2 (2016) – making decisions

SOL 2 (2016) – making decisions

Today started the first day of ShortCourse –  a weeklong “summer camp for BC Principals and Vice Principals. We got to meet our table-team (the soccer fanatics for our table).

We started out with a discussion introducing ourselves and thinking about: why are we here (both in the role of pvp and here at shortcourse)   One of our key goals is thinking about our thinking – and to help with this we were led through a session around Ethical Decision Making – because so many of our decisions for ourselves, for our schools, for our districts are very complex and have answers that may change depending on the day…..

Liz Bell & Adam Baumann gave us a great reminder of ethical decision making and different levels of values:

Level one: pre-conventional morality: punishment/reward (what’s in it for me?)

Level two: conventional morality: perception/authority (what will others think?)

Level three: social contract/authority (what will I think)

None of these are based on age, but acknowledges that people are at all levels depending on what the issue is….(ie speeding….)

Group Question: What is the evidence at your school pointing to? And stages have nothing (okay – a little) with age.

Some key reminder around Ethical Fitness:

  1. Sustain moral responsibilities and principles
  2. Mentally engaged in decision making
  3. Caring enough to want “right” to prevail

Group Question:  Name the values you have (yourself as well as the learning community)

Morals have to do with right and wrong behaviour

Ethics pertain to the study of standards between and wrong behaviour

Ethical decision making:

Obedience to the unenforceable – because it’s the right thing to do

Obedience to the enforceable – because it’s the law

Testing for right-vs-wrong

  • the legal test
  • The professional standards test
  • The gut feeling test
  • The front-page test
  • The role model test

Right vs right dilemma paradigms

Truth vs loyalty

individual vs community

short term vs long term

justice vs mercy

Resolution Principles:

Ends-Based: utilitarianism (the greatest good for the greatest number)

Rules-Based: Categorical Imperative (I ought never to act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law – Kant)

Care-Based: Golden Rule (do to others as you would have them do to you)

Highlight of using  process/model: it sometimes slows things down so that you are making a mindful decision.


It is not about everyone liking your decision.

It is about people trusting that you have a process.

It is being able to articulate what your decision is and how you got to it.

It is about your values that consistently underlie your decision.

It is about listening to others, collaborating and revisiting if necessary.

About technolandy

Principaling on the Pacific in Powell River BC Pushing 'technologization' in education: blending technology and curriculum seamlessly. Advocate for better understanding of Anxiety in Education (and use of self-regulation) Utilizing ePortfolios & Descriptive Feedback to personalize learning!
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to SOL 2 (2016) – making decisions

  1. Pingback: Day 86 (of 189) to call a snowday…or not… | technolandy: site of Ian Landy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s