For years, this whole notion of "Will over Skill" has been a controversial topic of discussion in the education sector. I remember listening in on my very first conversation around this matter- those locked into the discussion were passionately sharing their justifications behind their points of view.
One argued for the issue of will over skill, by stating that hiring teachers who have the will to learn is much more profitable in the long run than holding out to wait for a teacher who has the skill and may not be available for hire at the time of need. After all, due to the will of the teacher readily available, he or she might end up being more loyal (less likely to leave) and mold-able to the point of having the same level of skill as the skillful teacher, in years to come!
The other argued for the issue of skill over will, by refuting those statements with their own ideals. Their vantage point was predicated on the premise that a skillful teacher will not only bring their experience and knowledge to the table, but also the same (if not more) "will" of the will-only teacher. Not only that, the skill-grounded teacher would produce greater results quicker than the will-based teacher.
While I can see the validity in both arguments; and while it's quite possible that I, at one point, may have benefited from being hired because of my will more so than my skill (right out of college, and when transitioning from the classroom to an instructional leadership position), I have a hard time saying that one approach is the only way to go.
For example, every teacher who has been given leadership experience, and received their Admin certification deserves a chance to at some point be chosen as an AP. Not every interviewed AP needs to have had previous experience as such. But even in a "will over skill" situation like this, it's poignant to understand that such a candidate should be acknowledged for the volume of leadership experience (thus skill) they are bringing to the table. This same ideal could be applied to teachers leaving a certification program (having had time with a mentor teacher in a student-teacher experience); as well as a to an educator moving into some other type of leadership position. Some consideration of experience (skill) should be taken into account and thoroughly scrutinized prior to hiring. I spoke with a friend recently, and she told me about a rigorous interviewing 3-step process she endured and how mentally exhausting it was as she wondered whether or not she would be chosen despite her extensive experience and skill.
The first step was an in-depth interview with content experts, asking deep questions around her knowledge of the TEKS, her abilities to traverse the ins and outs of curriculum research. She said, as a curriculum minded person, it impressed her that the department cared so much about her background knowledge as to screen her in this way.
The second step included her sitting in front of a board of leaders of various kinds (Execs, Admin, Superintendents, etc) inquiring about leadership scenarios and support. The final step in the process was a performance task, where she was ushered into a room that held the current department plan on the wall. She was asked to critique it and provide solutions to any holes or gaps she found. As I sat and listened, I was highly impressed. This is the type of process that weed outs those with limited skill and an overabundance of will, but allows for those with an equal measure of skill and will through.
On the other side of the coin, there are certain situations & positions, (I believe) that require an equal amount of skill and will or possibly a bit more will than skill but nonetheless a considerable amount of skill. Certain leadership positions that require one to serve as a leader over others in that area, leading the charge with various tasks related directly to the knowledge and skills needed in that area; well I have a hard time seeing a person with more will than skill leading such a charge. It can be very stressful for those who serve under such a leader, to not only respect said leader but also to endure working on projects, getting critical decisions made, etc when that leader is operating predominantly off of will. When that leader has no sound knowledge or concrete experience (good and bad) to build off of, it could be detrimental to those who are directly (and indirectly) impacted by their leadership. Take for example an educator who gets chosen to serve in an Executive position leading other Administrators, but has had no administrative experience of their own (sound absurd right?) yet has had various other leadership positions and perhaps has even worked alongside other Administrators might exemplify the will to serve in this position; to learn from various professional learning situations and perhaps even befriends several administrators to learn from them (on the job). How might this new Exec provide the mentor-like encouragement, the sound advice that has worked in their favor (or even has failed them) when a new Administrator seeks out advice?
Again, I understand the notion of both view points, but I am more inclined to take skill over will than will over skill; or at least if I did have to hire someone with will over skill, I'd be looking for someone with a considerable balance of the two with the ability to pass through a rigorous screening process. I've seen a lot of nepotism and favoritism in education in the area of hiring practices. I've tried to determine which is more detrimental to a system centered around students and I've come to find them both somewhat equally deplorable and disrespectful to the skilled staff that serve under such hired leaders as well as to the students we (in education) claim to "do it" for! At the end of the day, such hiring practices are much more self-serving than others focused! With the fact that education receives the catfish of salaries, the short end of the stick from government in terms of support and funding and yet demands the most hours and effort - it saddens me how political and not-about-kids it can become when leaders are put in a position to hire. We should be more cognizant of these practices by tightening up the hiring process and doing everything we can to develop and build proper culture to retain our skilled teachers, administrator and leadership staff, to reduce the possibility of being placed in such predicaments. Let's get behind the notion of skill over will so we can show students we value their education and those in the corporate world that we take our profession seriously.
