Shields, Carolyn & Edwards, Mark. (2005). Dialogue Is Not Just Talk: A New Ground for Educational Leadership. Reviewed by Manuel Garay, Arizona State University

Shields, Carolyn & Edwards, Mark. (2005). Dialogue Is Not Just Talk: A New Ground for Educational Leadership. New York: Peter Lang. Pp. x + 187 $29.95 (paperback)   ISBN 0-8204-7469-X Reviewed by Manuel Garay Arizona State University March 7, 2006 In Dialogue Is Not Just Talk: A New Ground for Educational Leadership, Carolyn Shields and Mark Edwards claim that the fundamental problem faced by educational leaders is that they do not practice effective dialogue. Good dialogue is not just talk but also involves understanding, relationship and ontology, empathy and listening with our ears and “with the heart.” Shields and Edwards are convinced that dialogue could make the difference between being a good or a merely average educational leader. Good educational leaders become aware of their relationships with the people surrounding them, and practice real dialogue with students, colleagues, parents and administrators. The book is divided into two parts with three chapters each. In the first part, the authors give a precise definition to the term dialogue and explain why it is the cornerstone for school leaders to create more rewarding relationships. The second part explains how dialogue may help educational leaders through facilitation, modeling, engagement and encouragement. In the six chapters dialogue is addressed in reference to relationships, understanding, building and boundary breaker, community settings and as community builder, and its ability to rejuvenate its practitioners. Shields and Edwards conclude their work with a final and brief reflection of how dialogue offers the possibilities of new ways of living together in schools and new ways of thinking about leading and learning. In this review, I first provide a general overview of the book and a definition of good dialogue. I then discuss how dialogue has developed throughout history. Next, I address the main components of dialogue in the field of educational leadership. Dialogue through History The authors believe that understanding and developing effective dialogue is one of the most critical skills in transforming education in the U.S., and they view understanding, relationship and ontology as the three main elements of effective dialogue. To understand these elements, the authors provide practical examples to attempt to relate them to the broader theories. These theories include the findings of thinkers and philosophers such as Burbules, Gramsci, Bakhtin, Bourdieu, Sergiovanni, Sidorkin, Rutherford, Senge, and Foucault. Shields and Edwards base the thesis of their book on Burbules’s work and his concept of successful dialogue andguiding principles: participation, commitment, and reciprocity. In addition, they borrow Bourdieu’s concept of habitus to explain why and how ideas and practices persist for a long period of time. Here the authors explain how dialogue and understanding are essential in order to overcome the difficulties that learners of the community face. These difficulties find sustainability in people’s habitus. The authors refer to the concept of field, coined by Bourdieu, as a network to represent the social functions between members in a community. At this juncture Shields and Edwards find that to promote a high quality field, educational leaders must reduce the habitus to its minimum expression. Authors also refer to Sergiovanni’s concept of community setting, which recommends that educational leaders should stop thinking about schools as organizations and begin thinking about them as communities of learners creating relationships based on trust. The authors appreciate dialogue as the basis for both the creation and the re-creation of positive, powerful, and empowering educational communities focused on the development of more healthy relationships, deeper understanding, and more inclusive and democratic communities. Educational leaders must make sure that all members in the community learn to speak together with moral voices. Everyone must be free to participate in the dialogue. Alexander Gramsci uses the term hegemony to describe the way in which dominant values may combine to maintain certain practices, focusing on relationship building that should be moral and ethical. “A society without power relations can only be an abstraction” (Foucault, 2000). Edwards and Shields suggest that power cannot be placed aside, but implemented in a moral, ethical, and just manner. Ethical use of power and criteria for social justice and academic excellence will be guided by benchmarks to ensure that educational leaders’ use of power is necessary, deliberate, and, above all, moral. The book discusses and analyzes the studies and findings of these thinkers, and presents the cutting edge of effective dialogue empowered by educational leaders, including all its elements and implications. Main Components of Dialogue In the analysis of dialogue Shields and Edwards introduce three additional concepts taken from Bakhtin’s concept of outsideness, indicating the separation between the one who is trying to understand and the one who is being understood; situatedness and heteroglossia describe the multiplicity of everyday languages, and polyphony is the presence of the viewpoint of the others. If we recognize that a perspective is missing, it is important to attempt to voice it. For Bakhtin, no one person holds truth, which requires listening to a multiplicity of voices (polyphony) (p.130). These offer guidance and insight to the educational leader wanting to understand how to build a socially just community. The authors affirm that dialogue moves us beyond the fields and habitus identified by Bourdieu, beyond the hegemony of Gramsci, to the borders where new understandings may develop. It is easy to see the point of Shields and Edwards trying to point out the transcendental benefits that effective dialogue could bring to educational leaders, but in my opinion they go too far when they agree with Bakhtin, that “dialogue is the end,” without it, there is no life. Sidorkin (2002) identifies three principles related to Bakhtin’s polyphony: perpetuity, mutual addressivity, and inclusion. Sidorkin also asserts that this “does not in any way mean that the voices do not change each other. Quite the contrary, the interaction is the truest moment of their being. To be changed is the destiny of all meanings we produce.” (p. 131-132) Shields and Edwards cite Rutherford (1990) who stated that when one believes that one has attained truth and that one’s particular truth is universal, then we have become undemocratic. Recognition of a plurality of truths is only a starting point. This is what David Held has called the “principle of democratic autonomy.” Democratic autonomy implies a respect and tolerance for other people’s needs as the guarantee of your own freedom to choose. The book criticizes current reforms, and current accountability movements, such as No Child Left Behind. They are important in education, but they are contestable since they forget to address relationships. These reforms focus on professional scores and performance but do not measure warmth, caring, nor how schools make parents, teachers, and students feel welcomed (pp. 44-45). It is important to mention how Shields and Edwards look at these reforms. Focusing on individual performance and achievement as benchmarks of success promotes what they term “excess of individualism;” therefore these strategies negatively affect the construction of effective dialogue and, as a consequence, the building of communities of learners (pp. 47-48). The authors state that bridging the gap from managerial dialogue to effective dialogue presents difficulties as well. That dialogue can be difficult; it can evoke pain and discomfort. Do not assume that any of the paths that lead to deeper relationship and increased understanding are free from the potential for conflict and confusion. Developing relationships involves the risk of being misunderstood or hurt; but it also embraces hope for stronger and deeper school communities (p. 135). For dialogue to occur, participants must “suspend assumptions” (Senge, 1990).It is dialogue that allows us to move beyond the habitus and hegemony (Gramsci) of history and to discover a sense of agency that permits us to effect change. Minnich (1995) cites Benjamin Barber stating that “in the absence of community, there is no learning…language itself is social, the product as well as the premise of sociability and conversation” (p. 128). Consequently, if we don’t develop relationships properly; if we do not make the most of dialogue, we will create misunderstandings and fail to learn as best we might. One of the merits of Dialogue Is Not Just Talk: A New Ground for Educational Leadership is that it is a book written in simple and direct language and presents concepts and ideas in detail. Shields and Edwards present readers with an attractive narrative that analyses the most important positions related to dialogue and schooling. It is a shame that in their efforts to clarify concepts and their concurrence with cited scholars they go beyond explicitness and become redundant. The authors state that a teacher should not discipline students without first understanding their special needs, motivations, and goals. The problem here is that so much more than class time is necessary to achieve individual understanding, which will surely take time away from the school subject at hand. The authors note that some current educational approaches promote an “excess of individualism” which is understood as students’ performance and achievement (pp. 47-48). This suggests that there is a tone of socialism in their arguments, which contradicts their emphasis on democracy. Democracy is the right to be individual. Shields and Edwards propose a change in the system’s leadership style from managerial to dialogic (p. 63). It appears that the premise here hopes to create superhuman teachers and leaders who are in control of the system, not subjugated to it. They will no longer be overwhelmed by the continuous parade of new programs, policies, and accountability. The reader could misunderstand Shields and Edwards’s position when they say that educational policies fail to consider affectivity, and that their rigidity could prevent dialogue and understanding, to mean that these policies are unsalvageable. Dialogue Is Not Just Talk: A New Ground for Educational Leadership can help educators look at education and learning as an opportunity to understand and communicate with students and peers better in order to help them grow academically and personally in an ethical and moral environment. The book also invites the reader to see empathy as a bridge to accomplish relevant student learning. Above all, it provides a different perspective on education to those interested in adopting a more humanistic and dialogic approach to educational leadership. About the reviewer Manuel Garay is a PhD student at Arizona State University in the College of Education in the Division of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies. His research interests include educational reform policies and collaborative learning. He can be reached at Manuel.Garay@asu.edu Copyright is retained by the first or sole author, who grants right of first publication to the Education Review.