Teachers are by every definition I know of Leaders of Learning, in that good teachers can lead the willing to wisdom from an inherent passion for knowledge.  They are also forced into being Managers of Classrooms, in that most K-12 institutions are filled with plenty of un-willing sheeple required to carry out the mandates of the leader and all classrooms are heaped with the administrivia required to function within schools.    Does Seth's book Tribes mention someone being both Leader and Manager.  

Godin's book can be summed up in three words (originally coined by Joseph Campbell): Follow Your Bliss.  

Godin encourages everyone to immerse themselves in the things they're passionate about and essentially "broadcast" their discoveries and opinions (in a manifesto no less)... in doing so, they inevitably attract people of like minds.  The "leader" then fosters the passion that brought the tribe together and facilitates communication between the tribe, further strengthening and affirming the idea or concept and everyone's engagement with it.  THAT'S when innovations manifest and change the way the industry/community/world perceives something.

The whole book is about changing the status quo and how being safe is the riskiest thing we can be in a world where literally EVERYTHING is changing at the speed of thought.  In this context, the "manager" analogy is counter-productive.  Managers maintain the status quo... their job is to complete the tasks assigned to them, using the authority the "factory" gives him/her.  Do what the manager says or you'll lose your job (or "fail the class" in this case).  Fear-based authority discourages curiosity, reinforces the status quo (i.e. what everyone "knows" to be true)... and the kids do NOT respond to that kind of environment (neither do I for that matter).

A teacher who is a "manager" as described above is going to get burned out quickly with expectations from above and resistance from below.

I think Godin's model encourages a leveling of the field, a more concentric classroom model with the teacher at the center inspiring, engaging, and  facilitating the curiosity of their students, rather than mandating it.  

A little background...

The inspiration for this post came from the statistic (from the recent SETDA "Class of 2020: Action Plan for Education") stating that 40-50% of new teachers leave the profession after 5 years.  I've been in situations where my expectations for a job or event were not met.  Those situations call for a choice between (A) abandoning the situation or (B) re-tooling either my expectations or how I go about achieving them.

I can only assume that many teachers are (as you described in another post) disillusioned by the circumstances they find themselves in.  If they truly ARE the teachers you describe - with the passion and commitment to facilitate learning - then maybe Godin's "tribe" model can help them retool their preconceptions and re-engage with their passions... which will only help them, their students, and the entire education cycle.

Well, I have never taught a class, but I was a social worker who worked with at risk kids in programs that worked closely with schools. Plus, coming from a family of educators as I do, I have spent a fair amount of time around that culture. And, my thoughts are that most folks who either teach or counsel kids do tend to fall in either the leader or manager category. But, many who aspire to teach (or counsel) sadly quickly learn that they must either become managers whose primary task at times is to control, pacify and mold their kids into the values of the majority. These folks believe therefore that their job is as much about bringing about compliance and controlling kids as it is anything about teaching children to love to learn. The truly energetic instructors either burn out (refuse to become managers) or else persist and may develop their leadership skills - particularly if the adminstration is trying to groom leadership skills in their staff. Because I worked with the kids who were usually the edge cases with "abnormal" thoughts or actions, I got to see how rare were the teachers who knew what to do if standard management skills didn't work on them.

But, I don't really see this as all that different than the world of business in the 21st century. Many companies value workers and managers who just do their work, meet their quotas, etc. "Trouble makers" like I have been wrongly perceived at times in different places may be useful, but are rarely considered core members of the "tribe" that survives in the org. Our countries doom will be written if the current crisis of leadership across all types of organizations is not changed by learning to celebrate leadership over compliance alone. The good news is that today's crises could become the very crucible in our organizations and politics to inspire the necessity for leaders to be trained and to emerge.

Wonderful discussion! It brought me back to a 1993 writing by one of my mentors, Chris Dede, entitled "Leadership without Followers" that particularly addresses the shift in roles required by learning in the digital age.

The Abstract states: "The concept of leadership is fraught with misconceptions. People often see leadership as a combination of meticulous management, adept political maneuvering, and responsive facilitation of others' activities. While each of these is important in advancing the field of educational technology, I believe the true nature of leadership is exemplified by four attributes: Envisioning Opportunities, Displacing Cherished Misconceptions, Inspiring Others to Act on Faith, and Discouraging Followers."

Here's a link to the entire article, I encourage you to dive into his thinking. It's as fresh today as it was a decade-and-a-half ago: www.virtual.gmu.edu/.../leadpdf.htm