6 Responses

1. An ethical dilemma arose when a colleague made comments during a professional learning course that left another kaiako feeling belittled and unsupported in relation to her literacy knowledge. The situation was further complicated by the fact that the kaiako affected was my sister, creating a tension between my professional role as an Assistant Principal and my personal relationship.

   While the comments may not have been intended to cause harm, they had a clear emotional impact, leading to feelings of whakamā and discomfort. In response, I experienced strong emotions and found myself becoming distant and avoidant towards the colleague involved, which contributed to a breakdown in professional relationships over time.

   The dilemma centred on balancing:
   – my responsibility to act as a fair, professional leader
   – my role as a supportive sister and colleague
   – maintaining a positive, respectful team culture
   – addressing behaviour that may have caused harm while also restoring relationships

   Applying the ethical decision-making model, the first step is recognising that this situation is not simply interpersonal conflict, but an ethical issue involving fairness, professionalism, and wellbeing.
   Different perspectives include:
   – My sister (kaiako) → felt judged, unsupported, and vulnerable in a learning space
   – The colleague → The colleague may not have intended harm and may have believed they were offering professional feedback. However, the way this was communicated, including non-verbal behaviours such as side conversations and visible reactions, had a negative impact and contributed to the kaiako feeling belittled and unsupported. This situation also highlighted the importance of understanding a person’s background and experiences. The kaiako involved had been educated through kōhanga reo, kura kaupapa Māori, and a Huarahi Māori pathway, and was now transitioning into a different teaching context with new expectations. This required support and cultural understanding, rather than judgement.
   – Myself (as AP) → navigating emotional response while needing to remain fair and professional
   – Wider staff → impacted by tension, silence, and shifts in team culture

   From an ethical leadership perspective, this situation requires acting with:
   – integrity and fairness
   – respect and accountability
   – responsibility for team culture

   From a Tū Rangatira lens:
   – relationships (whanaungatanga) must be upheld, but not at the expense of honesty
   – leadership requires mana-enhancing practices for all involved
   – decisions should reflect both individual and collective wellbeing

   Drawing on Brené Brown, this situation highlights the importance of “clear is kind”. Avoiding the situation and becoming distant did not support resolution. Her idea of “strong back, soft front” reinforces the need to lead with both courage and care, even when conversations feel uncomfortable.

   This also connects to Simon Sinek’s Golden Circle. As a leader, I need to anchor my actions in our WHY — creating a safe, respectful, and culturally grounded environment where all kaiako and ākonga feel valued. When I allowed my emotional response to guide my behaviour, I moved away from that purpose. Returning to our WHY helps guide HOW I lead (through respectful, honest conversations) and WHAT I do (addressing issues directly and fairly).
   Reflecting honestly, my response showed that I allowed my emotions and personal connection to influence my professional behaviour, which contributed to ongoing tension rather than early resolution.

   In discussing this dilemma with a colleague or mentor, I would focus on how to approach the situation in a way that is fair, transparent, and restorative. My approach would include:

   1. Gathering information
   Understanding both perspectives clearly
   Reflecting on my own emotional response and bias
   Identifying the impact on individuals and team dynamics

   2. Consulting with others
   Seeking guidance from my Principal or a trusted senior leader
   Ensuring alignment with school values and expectations

   3. Addressing the situation professionally
   Initiating a respectful, honest conversation with the colleague
   Framing the discussion around our shared WHY (a respectful and supportive team culture)
   Focusing on impact rather than blame
   Supporting restorative dialogue where both parties can be heard

   4. Ensuring transparency and fairness
   Acknowledging my dual role and being mindful of bias
   Ensuring actions are consistent, fair, and values-based
   Maintaining professionalism in all interactions

   Reflecting on this experience, it has highlighted the importance of:
   – managing emotional responses in leadership
   – addressing issues early rather than avoiding them
   – aligning actions with values and purpose

   Moving forward, I aim to lead more intentionally from our WHY, ensuring that my actions consistently reflect the kind of culture we are trying to build. This means:
   – leading with clear, respectful communication
   – separating personal feelings from professional responsibility
   – prioritising restorative, mana-enhancing relationships

   This experience has strengthened my understanding that ethical leadership is not only about making fair decisions, but about consistently aligning actions with purpose, values, and relationships. This dilemma has been an important learning experience in understanding the complexity of leadership when personal and professional worlds overlap. It has reinforced that leadership requires self-awareness, emotional regulation, and courage, particularly when navigating situations that feel personal.

   Log in to Reply

2. Step 1: Identify an ethical dilemma relevant to your role as a Deputy Principal at your kura. (Note: I worked with the Principal on this dilemma, as it was an incredibly dynamic and shifting, trauma-related, multiple-person issue.)
   An ethical dilemma emerged when several team members approached the Principal and me with concerns about their Team Leader’s mental health and the resulting daily dysfunction and dissatisfaction within their team of six staff members. These concerns appeared (to SLT) to be potentially amplified by one team member who had developed close friendships within the team and positioned herself as a confidant to others, potentially reinforcing negative perceptions about the Team Leader. This team member led the team to the DP/Principal without the TL’s knowledge to explain their concerns.

   Step 2: Applying Ethical Frameworks and Principles
   Tū Rangatira – Leading with Mana and Integrity
   The principles within Tū Rangatira emphasise leadership grounded in manaakitanga, whanaungatanga, and rangatiratanga. In this situation, these principles guided the need to:
   – Protect the mana of the Team Leader by addressing concerns respectfully and privately, especially considering (confidential) past personal trauma
   – Strengthen relationships across the team rather than allowing division to deepen
   – Act with integrity and courage to address concerns rather than avoid them
   – Ensure decisions are culturally and relationally responsive, acknowledging the collective wellbeing of the team.
   Tū Rangatira highlights that ethical leadership requires attending to both people and systems, recognising how relational breakdowns can affect collective performance and wellbeing.

   Ethical Leadership Theory
   Ethical leadership involves demonstrating fairness, transparency, accountability, and empathy. According to ethical leadership principles:
   – Leaders must listen actively to concerns without immediately accepting them as fact
   – Leaders must avoid bias, especially where group dynamics or influential personalities may distort perceptions
   – Decisions should be guided by evidence and values, not assumptions.
   This situation required modelling calm, thoughtful leadership while maintaining professional boundaries. It also required a two-pronged approach from the Principal and me, each taking on different roles for both the team and the TL.
   Ethical Decision-Making Framework
   Using the structured model from the ethical decision-making framework, the following process guided our thinking:
   1. Define the Problem
   Concerns had been raised about a Team Leader’s mental health and the functioning of the team. In the context of our own knowledge of the TL and how the team raised concerns, it was acknowledged that a very careful approach to resolving these issues would be needed. It would also (preferably) require outside assistance through EAP (offered).
   2. Gather Relevant Information
   Key information collated included:
   – Specific examples of dysfunction (rather than general perceptions)
   – Observational data from leadership walkthroughs (I attended team meetings regularly as part of the leadership PGC)
   – Feedback from multiple sources, not only one informal network
   – The Team Leader’s own perspective
   – Any indicators of student impact (assessment information)
   – Relevant HR or wellbeing policy guidance – we kept the HR officer informed of all decisions and actions.
   It was essential to differentiate between:
   – Genuine wellbeing concerns
   – Interpersonal conflict
   – Team culture issues
   – Leadership capability concerns

   3. Consider Ethical Principles
   Several ethical principles applied:
   Duty of Care: ensuring the wellbeing of the Team Leader and team members.
   Confidentiality: Protecting the personal and professional dignity of all.
   Fairness and Natural Justice: ensuring the Team Leader had the opportunity to respond to concerns in a supportive medium.
   Professional Responsibility: maintaining effective team functioning for staff and students.

   4. Consider Possible Actions
   Possible actions included:
   Option A: Address concerns directly with the Team Leader in a supportive coaching conversation (done, 2025 and 2026)
   Option B: Conduct broader team consultation to understand dynamics,
   Option C: Provide external support (e.g., EAP, coaching, mentoring)
   Option D: Initiate formal performance or wellbeing processes if required (not undertaken for this dilemma).
   The preferred approach combined supportive engagement with structured evidence gathering, and included Options A, B and C.
   5. Consider Consequences
   Positive consequences of acting carefully and ethically:
   – Improved trust across staff
   – Stronger team relationships
   – Early support for the Team Leader since wellbeing concerns were valid
   – Prevention of escalation or staff division
   Potential risks:
   – Breach of trust if confidentiality was not maintained
   – Reinforcement of team gossip if handled poorly
   – Harm to the Team Leader’s professional identity within the school as some team members talked about the situation
   – Reduced morale if staff felt unheard
   Balancing these outcomes required deliberate and transparent leadership practice. ‘why’ and ‘how’ of each meeting as the need arose, was explained to the people attending, so transparency was always there. Meetings often resulted in upset, although they mostly ended with understanding and respect for both perspectives. Working as part of a team with the Principal meant that we each had different roles, with the Principal being the facilitator of meetings and outcomes, and me providing support and follow-up coaching, personal comfort and caring for the people concerned.

   The Golden Circle – Leading from Purpose
   Simon Sinek’s Golden Circle model emphasises starting with the WHY.
   In this dilemma:
   WHY: to maintain a safe, respectful, and high-functioning learning environment where staff wellbeing and student outcomes remain central.
   HOW: through transparent communication, relational leadership, and evidence-informed decision-making.
   WHAT: implementing structured conversations, support systems, and clear expectations for professional conduct. This was particularly important in this situation.
   This framework reinforced the importance of grounding decisions in values rather than reactions. Time to reflect for me was one of the most important aspects of the success of this work. Also essential was working alongside the Principal to discuss and decide on action, which meant that the dilemma was shared, utilising both our experience, leadership practices, and knowledge.

   Step 3: Consultation and Collaborative Approach
   In discussing this dilemma with the Principal, the following approach was identified as both ethical and practical.
   Consultation with Key People – consultation included:
   – The Principal, HR Officer, and relevant senior leadership team members (at the time, we had another DP who was very helpful in discussions with the Principal and me, so we had another opinion to consider). This ensured that decisions were not made in isolation. Foremost in our minds at the time was our Duty of Care to all of the affected staff members, and the team leader in particular.
   Before acting, the following information was gathered:
   – Specific documented examples of concerns – I had conversations with individuals as needed.
   – Observation data from team meetings and interactions
   – Feedback patterns (whether concerns were widespread or clustered)
   – The Team Leader’s reflections on team function/dysfunction
   This helped avoid reliance on informal narratives or assumptions. The SLT held some strong opinions on what was going on, both acknowledging the distress of team members as well as behaviour that contributed to the worsening of the TL’s mental health and functioning.
   Ensuring Transparency and Fairness
   Transparency as maintained by:
   – Communicating processes clearly (without breaching confidentiality)
   – Providing the Team Leader with the opportunities to respond, to suggest how to move forward, and how to gain help for herself
   – Documenting conversations and decisions (done by Principal and me, depending on what kind of meeting was held, e.g. coaching/mediation etc)
   – Ensuring consistent application of school policies
   Fairness was also required in addressing the role of the influential team member whose behaviour may have contributed to team tension.

   Step 4: Proposed Leadership Approach
   Based on the ethical frameworks and professional responsibilities, the following approaches were used:
   Stage 1: Acknowledge concerns respectfully
   I/we met with staff who raised concerns: ensured the teachers felt heard while maintaining neutrality.
   Stage 2: Support the Team Leader
   I/we held several confidential, supportive conversations with the Team Leader focused on what was happening, her perspectives, considering others’ perspectives, and looking into possible action for the future. I maintained a ‘mana enhancing’. and solutions-focused approach while also acknowledging the TL’s personal pain and distress – manaakitanga and rangatiratanga.
   Stage 3: Observe and Gather Evidence – including me attending the team meetings to observe and note the dynamics of all team members. This was very enlightening and helpful to work on a solutions-focused outcome.
   Stage 4: Address Team Culture – placement of team members for the following year, honouring all perspectives.
   Stage 5: Monitor and Review – Term 1-2, 2026, DP coaching with the TL.
   This is an ongoing process, not a single decision/action taken.

   Reflection on Personal Values and Leadership
   This dilemma required reflection on my own leadership values, particularly:
   – Respect for dignity and mana (considering significant trauma being present)
   – Commitment to fairness to all, despite my own feelings of some irritation about actions taken by people in the team.
   – Courage to address difficult situations
   – Belief in relational trust as the foundation of leadership – this is foundational to my approaches to dealing with these issues.

   This dilemma highlighted the complexity of leadership when staff wellbeing, team culture, and professional responsibility clash. Ethical leadership required a slowing down of my decision-making, seeking evidence, consulting others, and prioritising relationships.
   By grounding decisions in values, frameworks, and respectful processes, it was possible to navigate competing responsibilities while maintaining trust, fairness, and professional integrity.
   Most importantly, the experience reinforced that ethical leadership is not about choosing the fastest solution, but about choosing the most principled and relationally responsible path. Sometimes that was a hug, offering tissues and a quiet space to express feelings, or just my office as an ‘escape’ for when feelings became too overwhelming, alongside a professional approach with mana for all, and ways to move forward, maintaining professional standards and overwhelmingly, care for the students in the classes of the people concerned.

   Log in to Reply

3. Step 1: The Dilemma
   I am currently supporting a Team Leader who is a high performer but is navigating a period of significant personal challenge. This has created a conflict between my value of empathy, where I want to support a colleague’s wellbeing, and my professional responsibility to ensure high standards of classroom practice and curriculum leadership.
   The decline in classroom preparation and the leader’s frustration with the new curriculum rollout are beginning to impact on their team’s culture. Several team members are vocal about their own overwhelm, and the Team Leader is struggling to provide the confidence required to lead them through these changes. The dilemma lies in how to provide enough grace for their personal situation without lowering the high expectations we hold for our learners and our school’s strategic direction.

   Step 2: Applying Ethical Frameworks
   Using Tū Rangatira, I am looking at this through two lenses:
   Manaakitanga: I have a duty to care for the person. If I ignore their personal struggle and only demand performance, I erode trust and psychological safety.
   Pono: I must be true to our school’s mission. If I allow classroom standards to slip for too long, I am not being ‘kids first’.
   Through looking at the Ethical Decision-Making Model, I have to consider the consequences of inaction. If I don’t intervene, the Team Leader may burn out, and their team’s resistance to the new curriculum may solidify into a negative sub-culture.

   Step 3: Approach and Consultation
   In approaching this, I will lean into a coaching and support mindset, which is deeply embedded in our school culture, ensuring transparency and fairness.
   1. The Whakamana Conversation (Empowering through Transparency): I will meet with the Team Leader to have a brave but kind conversation. I will use my emotional intelligence coaching skills to name what I am noticing: e.g. ‘I can see you are carrying a huge load. I value you, but I’ve noticed some specific areas where things are slipping. How can we bridge this gap together?’ This is about being honest while maintaining a high level of care.
   2. Information Gathering: I need to identify what scaffolding this leader needs right now. Is it a temporary reduction in administrative tasks? Is it strategic shadowing where I attend their next team meeting to help hold the line on curriculum changes? I need to know what they can realistically own right now and what I need to carry for them briefly.
   3. Consultation: I would consult with my Deputy Principal and Principal to ensure any flexibility I offer, such as time off or adjusted duties, is fair and consistent with school procedures. This would also allow transparency among the leadership team, ensuring we are all in the loop. I would also check in with the other Team Leaders to see if they can offer collective responsibility support, without breaking the Team Leader’s privacy.

   Step 4: Proposed Approach
   My plan is to create a temporary wellbeing and performance bridge:
   * Set a defined period of grace: Acknowledge the personal challenge and agree on a 3-4 week period where I provide extra support for their team.
   * Non-negotiables: Be very clear on the high standards that cannot slip, such as core classroom prep, because they impact the kids.
   * Collaborative Practice: I will co-lead the next curriculum session with their team. This allows the Team Leader to hear the choice and voice of their team while I ensure the strategic direction remains firm.
   * Review: Set a specific date to review the situation, ensuring the bridge is temporary and the goal is a return to their usual high standard of independent leadership.

   Log in to Reply

4. Module 2
   Task:
   Step 1: Identify an ethical dilemma relevant to your role as an Associate/Deputy Principal at your kura.
   Dilemma: Managing our three maths leads to all work towards the same result and making sure they all feel valued and heard, even though I am more inline with one teachers style more that the others.
   Scenario: I oversee the Maths Curriculum, supported by a diverse team of three Learning Leads. While each brings a high level of expertise, they possess distinct professional profiles:
   Year 5 Lead (T5): A highly capable and methodical practitioner. T5 is more reserved and thrives in focused, independent work environments, providing deep pedagogical insight.
   Year 3 Lead (T3): A confident and high-energy communicator. T3 is excellent at driving momentum and engagement, though they tend toward a concise, “just-in-time” approach to task completion.
   Year 1 Lead (T1): A dedicated overachiever. T1 is exceptionally thorough and meticulous, consistently delivering comprehensive work that often exceeds the initial brief.

   Step 2: Apply what you have learned from the resources in this module, considering different perspectives, potential consequences, and relevant ethical principles.

   Simon Sinek – The Golden Circle

   I think we are all aligned on the “Why”, which is to raise student achievement. The main issue we have is “How” we achieve the “Why.” If we follow T1’s approach of lots of documentation and readings, the staff will feel overwhelmed and switch off. For some staff T3’s approch of last minute will also put addition time pressure stress on teachers.

   Paul Green Jr. – What is ethical leadership and why it is important?

   It is important that we have Respect within the team to understand our skill sets and differences that can be brougt together as strengths. Hold each other Accountable when jobs have been assigned, but also trust that they will get done. Honesty is key when bringing the team together, though a discussion T5 voice she was just being told what to do and now contributing, T3, when assigning tasks thought she was being helpful to the team. Which leads to Community, all members need to feel part of the team.

   Tū Rangatira: Leadership Roles.

   Mana Tangata – Recognising that relationships are critical to effective practice.
   Mana A-Kura – The uniqueness of each kura.

   Building a strong respectful relationships between the Maths team and beyond it will help us reach our goal of creating a strong Maths programme for our Kura, which is unique to us and our location.

   Step 3: Discuss with your learning partner or a colleague at school how you would approach this dilemma, including how you might consult with others, what information you would need, and how you would ensure transparency and fairness in your decision-making.

   I will meet with each member for the team and discuss their vision for the team and what the hope to achieve by the end of the year? Discuss what would make them feel valued as part of the team? What do they see as a hurdle to achieving their vision?
   As a team we will make a overview for the year
   Assign tasks so all members contribute
   Utilise each members strengths
   Plan twice termly check ins and adjust plan as needed

   I will aim to make sure I listen to all members thoughts and hone in on their individual strengths that they bring to the team. I will also need to be aware of my bias towards the teacher who is more in line with my way of working and use the other styles for working to help me grow as well.

   Log in to Reply

5. Ethical Dilemma – Staffing:

   The ethical dilemma I am exploring relates to a staffing situation involving a leadership role in our school.

   Due to a change in circumstances, a staff member who had indicated she was leaving is now staying. In the meantime, another staff member had already been appointed to the role through a formal process. This has resulted in two experienced people in what was originally one position.

   The dilemma sits in balancing fairness to both individuals, maintaining the integrity of the appointment process, and making a decision that is in the best interests of students.

   What makes this a dilemma?

   There is no simple right answer. One staff member was appointed through a clear and fair process, which should be respected. The other brings experience, established relationships, and strong knowledge of our learners.

   At the same time, this is an area of the school where additional capacity would benefit students.

   This reflects the idea in “What is Ethical Leadership and Why is it Important?” that ethical dilemmas often involve competing “right” choices rather than a clear right and wrong.

   Perspectives and considerations:

   Using “A Framework for Ethical Decision-Making in Schools”, I have considered key stakeholders and possible impacts.

   The newly appointed staff member may feel unsettled or disappointed
   The returning staff member may feel uncertain about her role
   Staff will be watching for fairness and consistency
   Students are likely to benefit from increased support

   My approach:

   I have moved towards a co-leadership model for 2026, as this best supports student needs while retaining the strengths of both individuals.

   This reflects the “weighing up options and consequences” stage of the decision-making model.

   My focus now is on:

   Clarity – clearly defined roles and responsibilities
   Communication – being open about the decision and reasoning
   Relationships – supporting both individuals to work effectively together
   Fairness going forward – ensuring future opportunities are transparent

   This approach is also informed by Tū Rangatira, particularly the importance of manaakitanga and maintaining the mana of all involved, as well as Simon Sinek’s Golden Circle, being clear that the purpose of the decision is to best support students.

   Reflection:

   This situation has challenged my thinking about fairness. It is not always about treating people the same, but about making decisions that are transparent, justifiable, and centred on students.

   It also reinforced that ethical leadership is about both the decision and how it is carried out. This aligns with the final reflection stage of the ethical decision-making model.

   Ultimately, I have come back to our belief of “kids first”. With the right structure and support, this has the potential to strengthen our school rather than create division.

   Log in to Reply

6. Module 2 Reflection – Analysis of an ethical dilemma and reflection on the application of ethical principles.

   ​​The Dilemma – Balancing the duty of care for a struggling staff member (Mana Tangata) against the duty of progress for the students (Mana Mokopuna).
   Scenario – An experienced teacher at school is set in her ways. She is a well-meaning person, but is easily overwhelmed by new current teaching instruction. While she is comfortable with the way she has always done it (The What), her slow adoption of change is starting to create an achievement gap for her students compared to other classes in her year group. I need to decide how to move her forward without causing a mental health issue or a breakdown in our professional relationship.

   Analysis of Perspectives and Principles
   – Simon Sinek: The Golden Circle
   The problem is a focus on the ‘What’ (daily tasks), which feels like a threat. I need to help her find her ‘Why’ again, reminding her that explicit instruction is an equity tool ensuring learning is accessible to every child.
   – Ann Rhoades: Values-Based Culture
   Rhoades argues that high-performance cultures require living the school’s values. If we value excellence for every child, adopting proven methods is a behavioural requirement. Is it ethical to lower the bar for her because she is overwhelmed, or is that a disservice to the 27 children in her room?
   – Tū Rangatira: Leadership Roles.
   Mana Tangata (Relationships) – Protecting her mana through kindness and approachability.
   He Kaiwhakarite (Manager) – Responsibility for the efficient management of people to transform learning.
   He Kaitiaki (Guardian) – Leading from a position of aroha and manaaki to protect her well-being.

   Proposed Approach and Consultation
   Instead of a formal meeting, I would use a coaching model that would allow me to work alongside her to build collective capability where she has ownership.
   Together, we will generate options, for example:
   – Providing extra release to observe other classes.
   – I model a 15-minute Explicit Instruction segment while she observes me.
   – A peer observation swap with a trusted teacher to build a collective spirit.
   – Focusing on one small, manageable step at a time to prevent her from becoming overwhelmed.

   – Consult with the Senior Leadership Team about providing an extra release day so she feels supported as she makes this shift in her teaching.
   – Celebrate the small steps achieved.

   I will approach this through the lens of Kaitiaki. Recognising that she is overwhelmed, I will temporarily reduce the number of new initiatives she is expected to adopt to focus on the ‘why’ of improving student engagement and achievement. Drawing on Ann Rhoades, I will emphasise the value of Whanaungatanga by working alongside her to identify strengths and make adjustments that benefit learner development. This ensures she feels supported while still being held accountable to the high standards we owe our learners.

   How do we stay true to our ‘Why’ of equity for students when the ‘How’ of supporting a struggling teacher feels like it might slow down that progress?

   Log in to Reply