Further & Deeper Benefits of the Leadership Team Model to Leaders Virtually every Lead Teacher and Lead Scientist involved in SYEFEST commented on the tremendous value of their leadership team not only in the success of their work with teachers, but also as a stimulus for professional growth on their own part. Indeed, for many, the collegial aspect of working in a team was one of most positive aspects of their participation. These outcomes were somewhat surprising, with both scientists and teachers reporting significant improvements in their own teaching and in their professional capacity as leaders of education innovation. Benefits to Scientists' Teaching and Involvement in Education Reform Frank Kuserk, the Lead Ecologist from the Bethlehem, PA SYEFEST, conducted a survey of Lead Ecologists to gauge how their participation had influenced their teaching. A brief summary of the results is shown in ESA Talk, 1995 and the Survey Results. One Lead Ecologist commented, "I have definitely de-emphasized lecture and tried to incorporate constructivist methods into both my undergraduate and graduate courses. This has been a challenge and a risk (in teaching evaluations) but I am starting to really see benefits now. I'll never go back to 'sage on the stage' now." Benefits to Teachers' Teaching and Professional Development Lead Teachers report that by working closely with a practicing scientist to run SYE Institutes, they: changed their teaching felt more knowledgeable about inquiry teaching ended up spending more time teaching outside than they had before had enhanced self respect were more confident and enthusiastic about teaching science were much more involved in other education reform activities in their schools and districts had a more positive view of the scientific community developed new contacts within the scientific community beyond their Lead Ecologist partner. Alternatives to the Leadership Team model Not everyone who wants to run a SYE Institute will be able to find a partner for a Leadership Team as was done in SYEFEST. Since this is beyond the direct experience upon which this Handbook is based, we can only reflect on what we think some of the challenges might be. Perhaps most importantly, having to lead alone a professional development program for teachers in inquiry-based ecology will stretch any one person's breadth of expertise. In response, the leader might choose to rely more heavily on outside resource people, or upon a narrower set of curriculum materials or instructional programs. This will require careful consideration of the tenets of effective modeling and professional practice as discussed in the Background and elsewhere in the Handbook. Some key challenges are likely to be: bringing cutting edge science knowledge and inquiry if a committed ecologist with compatible personality and philosophy cannot be found bringing classroom reality and cutting edge educational expertise if a committed teacher is not involved in leading the institute having too many outside instructors and thereby losing the continuity of philosophy and purpose provided by the leader relying on a set curriculum and program, and thereby limiting the kinds of inquiries and instruction that participating teachers do. Limits to Modeling Professional Practice We don't pretend that modeling of professional practice is a panacea for leaders. Here are some reflections on what we've found most challenging or limiting to the value of modeling in our work with teachers. We are very interested in your thoughts, too, and hope you will share them in the forum on Modeling of Professional Practice. The most persistent limit to modeling is simply how difficult it really is to do. As discussed in the Background section, it is easy to over-load an agenda and try to talk through activities and topics rather than paying attention to how the diverse set of learners - the teachers - are actually assimilating what is being "covered." All of us make mistakes in our teaching, including leaders of professional development workshops. Recognizing, rectifying and coping with these errors is one of the most difficult challenges for modeling.