Arsi University

College Of Education And Behavioral Science

Department Of Educational Leadership And Management

Assignment of Leadership in Educatition

EdLM 638-Assignment-1

Name: Lemma Deme Wakene

Id Number: GsEx/0355/15

Email: lemmademe4@gmail.com

Apr, 2024
Asella ,Ethiopia
EdLM 638-Assignment-1

• Refer to relevant source and briefly describe each of the five Disciplines (Arts) of Learning
Organization in Peter Senge’s (1990) theory of learning organization in general and Learning
School in particular.
– Systems Thinking
– Personal Mastery
– Mental Models
– Building Shared Vision
– Team Learning

Answers
Introduction:Peter Senge
Born in 1947, Peter Senge graduated in engineering from Stanford and then went on to undertake a
masters on social systems modeling at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) before
completing his PhD on Management. Said to be a rather unassuming man, he is is a senior lecturer at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is also founding chair of the Society for
Organizational Learning (SoL). His current areas of special interest focus on decentralizing the role
of leadership in organizations so as to enhance the capacity of all people to work productively toward
common goals.
Peter Senge describes himself as an ‘idealistic pragmatist’. This orientation has allowed him to
explore and advocate some quite ‘utopian’ and abstract ideas (especially around systems theory and
the necessity of bringing human values to the workplace). At the same time he has been able to
mediate these so that they can be worked on and applied by people in very different forms of
organization. His areas of special interest are said to focus on decentralizing the role of leadership in
organizations so as to enhance the capacity of all people to work productively toward common goals.
One aspect of this is Senge’s involvement in the Society for Organizational Learning (SoL), a
Cambridge-based, non-profit membership organization. Peter Senge is its chair and co-founder. SoL
is part of a ‘global community of corporations, researchers, and consultants’ dedicated to discovering,
integrating, and implementing ‘theories and practices for the interdependent development of people
and their institutions’. One of the interesting aspects of the Center (and linked to the theme of
idealistic pragmatism) has been its ability to attract corporate sponsorship to fund pilot programmes
that carry within them relatively idealistic concerns.
 The dimension that distinguishes learning from more traditional organizations is the mastery of
certain basic disciplines or ‘component technologies’. The five that Peter Senge identifies are
said to be converging to innovate learning organizations.
They are:
1. Systems thinking
2. Personal mastery
3. Mental models
4. Building shared vision
5. Team learning
 Here's a brief description of the five disciplines of learning organizations as outlined by
Peter Senge (1990), in the general context and in the context of the Learning School:
1. Systems Thinking:The systems viewpoint is generally oriented toward the long-term view.
That’s why delays and feedback loops are so important. In the short term, you can often ignore them;
they’re inconsequential. They only come back to haunt you in the long term.
i). Systems Thinking, in the general context of Peter Senge's (1990) theory:
 Systems thinking is the cornerstone of Senge's learning organization theory.
 It involves understanding the interconnectedness and interdependence of various elements within
an organization, as well as the broader context in which the organization operates.
 Systems thinking encourages a holistic approach to problem-solving, where the focus is on
understanding the underlying patterns and dynamics rather than just the individual parts.
 This discipline helps individuals and organizations see the "big picture" and recognize how
different components of a system interact and influence one another.
 By adopting a systems perspective, organizations can better anticipate and respond to complex
challenges, rather than addressing them in isolation.
 Systems thinking enables organizations to identify leverage points, where small changes can lead
to significant improvements, and to develop more effective and sustainable solutions.
 It helps organizations move away from linear, cause-and-effect thinking and towards a more
circular, feedback-driven understanding of organizational dynamics.
 In the general context of Senge's learning organization theory, systems thinking is a crucial
discipline that allows organizations to navigate the complexity of modern business environments
and continuously adapt and improve their practices. It serves as the foundation for the other four
disciplines, as it provides the necessary context and understanding to effectively implement the
remaining disciplines and drive meaningful change within the organization.
 Systems Thinking, in the context of Peter Senge's (1990) Learning School:
ii). Systems Thinking, in the context of Peter Senge's (1990) Learning School:
 In the context of the Learning School, systems thinking is a fundamental discipline that
underpins the entire approach.
 The Learning School emphasizes the importance of understanding the interconnected nature of
the various elements within an educational system, such as curriculum, pedagogy, assessment,
and the broader societal context.
 Systems thinking encourages educators to move beyond a narrow, siloed view of their individual
roles and responsibilities and instead consider the broader system in which they operate.
 By adopting a systems perspective, educators can better identify the leverage points where small
changes can lead to significant improvements in the overall educational system.
 This discipline helps educators recognize the feedback loops, unintended consequences, and
dynamic complexities that shape the educational landscape.
 Systems thinking enables the Learning School to develop more holistic and sustainable solutions
to educational challenges, rather than addressing them in isolation.
 It fosters a culture of continuous learning and adaptation, where educators constantly seek to
understand the evolving needs of students and the broader community.
 In the context of the Learning School, systems thinking serves as the foundation for the other
four disciplines, as it provides the necessary context and understanding to effectively implement
the remaining disciplines and drive meaningful change in educational organizations. By
cultivating a systems perspective, the Learning School can better navigate the complex and
 interconnected nature of the educational system and work towards more effective and sustainable
outcomes.

2. Personal Mastery:People with a high level of personal mastery live in a continual learning
mode. They never ‘arrive’. Sometimes, language, such as the term ‘personal mastery’ creates a
misleading sense of definiteness, of black and white. But personal mastery is not something you
possess. It is a process. It is a lifelong discipline. People with a high level of personal mastery are
acutely aware of their ignorance, their incompetence, their growth areas. And they are deeply self-
confident. Paradoxical? Only for those who do not see the ‘journey is the reward’. (Senge 1990: 142)
i). Personal Mastery, in the general context of Peter Senge's (1990) theory:
 Personal mastery is the discipline of continually clarifying and deepening one's personal vision,
focusing one's energy, developing patience, and seeing reality objectively.
 This discipline involves an individual's commitment to lifelong learning and self-development,
as well as the ability to maintain a creative tension between their current reality and their desired
future.
 By cultivating personal mastery, individuals within the organization can develop a deeper
understanding of their own strengths, weaknesses, and aspirations, and align their actions with
their personal vision.
 Personal mastery enables individuals to approach challenges and opportunities with a growth
mindset, continuously seeking to expand their capabilities and contribute to the organization's
success.
 This discipline fosters a culture of self-reflection, personal accountability, and a willingness to
take risks and experiment, which can lead to innovative solutions and organizational
transformation.
 When individuals within an organization develop personal mastery, it can inspire and motivate
others, creating a ripple effect that strengthens the overall learning capacity of the organization.
 In the general context of Senge's learning organization theory, personal mastery is a crucial
discipline that empowers individuals to become active and engaged participants in the
organization's learning and development process. By cultivating personal mastery, individuals
can contribute to the organization's collective growth and adaptability.
ii). Personal Mastery, in the context of the Learning School as outlined by Peter
Senge (1990):
 In the Learning School, personal mastery is a crucial discipline for educators.
 It enables educators to continuously learn, grow, and adapt to the evolving needs of students and
the educational system.
 Educators with a strong sense of personal mastery are committed to their own professional
development and lifelong learning.
 They are able to maintain a creative tension between their current reality and their desired vision
for student learning and educational excellence.
 By cultivating personal mastery, educators can develop a deeper understanding of their own
strengths, weaknesses, and aspirations, and align their actions with their personal and
professional goals.
 This discipline fosters a growth mindset among educators, encouraging them to approach
challenges and opportunities with a willingness to experiment, take risks, and continuously
improve their practice.
 When educators within the Learning School develop personal mastery, it can inspire and
motivate their colleagues, creating a culture of continuous learning and improvement.
 Personal mastery also enables educators to model lifelong learning for their students,
demonstrating the value of self-reflection, self-directed learning, and a commitment to
excellence.
 In the context of the Learning School, personal mastery is a critical discipline that empowers
educators to become active and engaged participants in the ongoing process of educational
transformation. By cultivating personal mastery, educators can contribute to the collective
growth and adaptability of the educational system, ultimately benefiting the students they serve.

3.Mental Models:The discipline of mental models starts with turning the mirror inward; learning
to unearth our internal pictures of the world, to bring them to the surface and hold them rigorously to
scrutiny. It also includes the ability to carry on ‘learningful’ conversations that balance inquiry and
advocacy, where people expose their own thinking effectively and make that thinking open to the
influence of others. (Senge 1990: 9)
i). Mental Models, in the general context of Peter Senge's (1990) theory:
 Mental models are the deeply ingrained assumptions, generalizations, or even pictures and
images that influence how we understand the world and take action.
 These mental models shape the way individuals and organizations perceive and approach
challenges and opportunities.
 In the context of a learning organization, it is crucial for individuals to become aware of their
own mental models and how they influence their decision-making and problem-solving
processes.
 By surfacing and critically examining their mental models, individuals can challenge their
assumptions, consider alternative perspectives, and develop more nuanced and effective
approaches to addressing organizational issues.
 This discipline involves the ability to reflect on one's own thinking, to uncover the tacit beliefs
and biases that guide behavior, and to engage in constructive dialogue with others to share and
test different mental models.
 When individuals within an organization are able to collectively examine and refine their mental
models, it can lead to a shared understanding of the organization's challenges and opportunities,
and foster a culture of continuous learning and adaptation.
 The discipline of mental models is particularly important in complex and dynamic environments,
where outdated or narrow mental models can hinder an organization's ability to respond
effectively to changing circumstances.
 In the general context of Senge's learning organization theory, the discipline of mental models is
essential for enabling individuals and organizations to challenge their assumptions, expand their
perspectives, and develop more effective strategies for addressing complex problems.

ii). Mental Models, in the context of the Learning School as outlined by Peter
Senge (1990):
 In the Learning School, the discipline of mental models is particularly important for educators.
 Educators often hold deeply ingrained assumptions and beliefs about teaching, learning, and the
role of education in society.
 These mental models can shape the way educators approach curriculum development,
instructional practices, and student assessment.
 By surfacing and critically examining their mental models, educators in the Learning School can
challenge their own biases and preconceptions, and consider alternative perspectives on effective
teaching and learning.
 This discipline encourages educators to engage in reflective practice, where they continuously
reflect on their own thinking and decision-making processes.
 Through dialogue and collaboration with colleagues, educators can share and test their mental
models, leading to a shared understanding of the educational challenges and opportunities within
their context.
 When educators in the Learning School are able to collectively examine and refine their mental
models, it can foster a culture of continuous learning and innovation, where new ideas and
approaches are welcomed and explored.
 The discipline of mental models is especially crucial in the rapidly changing educational
landscape, where outdated or narrow mental models can hinder an institution's ability to adapt
and respond effectively to the evolving needs of students and the broader community.
 In the context of the Learning School, the discipline of mental models empowers educators to
challenge their assumptions, expand their perspectives, and develop more effective strategies for
addressing the complex challenges facing the education system.

4. Building Shared Vision:The practice of shared vision involves the skills of unearthing shared
‘pictures of the future’ that foster genuine commitment and enrolment rather than compliance. In
mastering this discipline, leaders learn the counter-productiveness of trying to dictate a vision, no
matter how heartfelt. (Senge 1990: 9)
i). Building Shared Vision, in the general context of Peter Senge's (1990) theory:
 Building a shared vision is the discipline of developing a common sense of purpose and direction
within an organization.
 This involves the ability to create a compelling and inspiring vision that resonates with all
members of the organization, fostering a sense of commitment and ownership.
 A shared vision provides a unifying focus and aligns the efforts of individuals towards a common
goal, transcending personal agendas and short-term thinking.
 When an organization has a strong shared vision, it can inspire and motivate people to take
actions that are consistent with the vision, even in the face of challenges and uncertainties.
 The process of building a shared vision is not a top-down directive, but rather a collaborative
effort that involves engaging all members of the organization in a dialogue to understand their
aspirations and align them with the organizational vision.
 This discipline requires leaders to be skilled in facilitating this process, listening to diverse
perspectives, and synthesizing a vision that resonates with the collective.
 A shared vision can also serve as a guiding principle for decision-making, helping the
organization navigate complex situations and stay true to its core purpose.

 In the general context of Senge's learning organization theory, the discipline of building a shared
vision is crucial for fostering a sense of collective ownership, commitment, and long-term
thinking within the organization, which can ultimately lead to sustained success and adaptability.
ii). Building Shared Vision, in the context of the Learning School as outlined by
Peter Senge (1990):
 In the Learning School, the discipline of building a shared vision is particularly important for
educational institutions and their stakeholders.
 A shared vision in the Learning School context involves developing a common understanding
and commitment to the purpose, values, and aspirations of the educational system.
 This shared vision can inspire and motivate educators, students, parents, and the broader
community to work collaboratively towards the common goal of educational excellence and
student success.
 By engaging all stakeholders in the process of building a shared vision, educational leaders can
foster a sense of ownership and commitment, ensuring that the vision is not just a top-down
directive, but a collective aspiration.
 A shared vision in the Learning School can serve as a guiding principle for decision-making,
curriculum development, and the implementation of educational policies and practices.
 When the Learning School has a strong shared vision, it can help the institution navigate
complex challenges, such as changing educational standards, technological advancements, and
shifting societal needs, while staying true to its core purpose and values.
 The process of building a shared vision in the Learning School requires effective communication,
collaboration, and the ability to synthesize diverse perspectives into a compelling and inspiring
vision.
 This discipline can also help to align the efforts of educators, students, and the broader
community, creating a sense of collective responsibility and a shared commitment to the success
of the educational system.
 In the context of the Learning School, the discipline of building a shared vision is crucial for
fostering a culture of collective ownership, continuous learning, and adaptability, ultimately
leading to improved educational outcomes and the holistic development of students.

5.Team Learning:The discipline of team learning starts with ‘dialogue’, the capacity of members
of a team to suspend assumptions and enter into a genuine ‘thinking together’. To the Greeks dia-
logos meant a free-flowing if meaning through a group, allowing the group to discover insights not
attainable individually…. [It] also involves learning how to recognize the patterns of interaction in
teams that undermine learning. (Senge 1990: 10)
i). Team Learning, in the general context of Peter Senge's (1990) theory:
 Team Learning is the discipline of developing the capacity of a team to engage in collective
thinking and coordinated action.
 This discipline recognizes that teams, rather than individuals, are the fundamental learning unit
in modern organizations.
 When teams learn effectively, they can achieve results that far exceed the sum of individual
efforts.
 Team Learning involves the ability to engage in genuine dialogue, where team members
suspend their assumptions and listen to one another with an open mind.
 Through this process of dialogue, teams can uncover and challenge their collective mental
models, leading to a shared understanding of the issues at hand.
 Team Learning also requires the development of coordinated action, where team members are
able to align their efforts and work together towards a common goal.
 This discipline is particularly important in complex and dynamic environments, where the ability
to adapt and respond quickly to changing circumstances is crucial for organizational success.
 When teams within a learning organization engage in effective Team Learning, it can lead to the
development of innovative solutions, the ability to anticipate and respond to emerging
challenges, and the fostering of a culture of continuous improvement.
 The discipline of Team Learning is not limited to formal teams, but can be applied to any group
of individuals who work together towards a common purpose.

 In the general context of Senge's learning organization theory, the discipline of Team Learning is
essential for leveraging the collective intelligence and capabilities of an organization, enabling it
to adapt and thrive in a rapidly changing world.

ii). Team Learning, in the context of the Learning School as outlined by Peter
Senge (1990):
 In the Learning School, the discipline of Team Learning is particularly important for fostering
collaborative and effective teaching practices.
 Educators in the Learning School often work in teams, such as grade-level or subject-area teams,
to plan curriculum, develop instructional strategies, and address student learning challenges.
 The discipline of Team Learning in the Learning School involves the ability of these educator
teams to engage in genuine dialogue, where they can openly share their perspectives, challenge
their assumptions, and develop a shared understanding of the issues at hand.
 Through this process of dialogue and collective inquiry, educator teams can uncover and address
their own mental models and biases, leading to more effective and innovative teaching practices.
 Team Learning in the Learning School also requires the development of coordinated action,
where educators can align their efforts and work together towards common goals, such as
improving student outcomes or implementing new educational initiatives.
 When educator teams in the Learning School engage in effective Team Learning, it can lead to
the development of interdisciplinary and collaborative approaches to teaching, the ability to
anticipate and respond to the diverse learning needs of students, and the fostering of a culture of
continuous professional development and improvement.
 The discipline of Team Learning is not limited to formal educator teams, but can also be applied
to collaborative efforts between teachers, administrators, and other educational stakeholders,
such as parents and community members.

 In the context of the Learning School, the discipline of Team Learning is essential for leveraging
the collective expertise and creativity of educators, enabling them to adapt and respond to the
evolving needs of students and the broader educational landscape.
References
 Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1978) Organizational learning: A theory of action
perspective, Reading, Mass: Addison Wesley.
 Argyris, C. and Schön, D. (1996) Organizational learning II: Theory, method and
practice, Reading, Mass: Addison Wesley.
 Bolman, L. G. and Deal, T. E. (1997) Reframing Organizations. Artistry, choice and
leadership 2e, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 450 pages.
 Castells, M. (2001) ‘Information technology and global capitalism’ in W. Hutton and A. Giddens
(eds.) On the Edge. Living with global capitalism, London: Vintage.
 DePree, M. (1990) Leadership is an Art, New York: Dell.
 Drucker, P. (1977) Management, London: Pan.
 Easterby-Smith, M. and Araujo, L. ‘Current debates and opportunities’ in M. Easterby-Smith, L.
Araujo and J. Burgoyne (eds.) Organizational Learning and the Learning Organization, London:
Sage.
 Edmondson, A. and Moingeon, B. (1999) ‘Learning, trust and organizational change’ in M.
Easterby-Smith, L. Araujo and J. Burgoyne (eds.) Organizational Learning and the Learning
Organization, London: Sage.
 Etzioni, A. (1995) The Spirit of Community. Rights responsibilities and the communitarian
agenda, London: Fontana Press.
 Etzioni, A. (1997) The New Golden Rule. Community and morality in a democratic society,
London: Profile Books.
 Finger, M. and Brand, S. B. (1999) ‘The concept of the “learning organization” applied to the
transformation of the public sector’ in M. Easterby-Smith, L. Araujo and J. Burgoyne
(eds.) Organizational Learning and the Learning Organization, London: Sage.
 Fromm, E. (1979) To Have or To Be? London: Abacus.
 Guttman, A. and Thompson, D. (1996) Democracy and Disagreement, Cambridge, Mass.:
Belknap Press.
 Hutton, W. (1995) The State We’re In, London: Jonathan Cape.
 Klein, N. (2001) No Logo, London: Flamingo.
 Leadbeater, C. (2000) Living on Thin Air. The new economy, London: Penguin.
 Van Maurik, J. (2001) Writers on Leadership, London: Penguin.
 O’Neill, J. (1995) ‘On schools as learning organizations. An interview with Peter
Senge’ Educational Leadership, 52(7) http://www.ascd.org/readingroom/edlead/9504/oneil.html
 Peck, M. S. (1990) The Road Less Travelled, London: Arrow.
 Schultz, J. R. (1999) ‘Peter Senge: Master of change’ Executive Update
Online, http://www.gwsae.org/ExecutiveUpdate/1999/June_July/CoverStory2.htm
 Senge, P. (1998) ‘The Practice of Innovation’, Leader to
Leader 9 http://pfdf.org/leaderbooks/l2l/summer98/senge.html
 Senge, P. et. al. (1994) The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook: Strategies and Tools for Building a
Learning Organization
 Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., Roth, G. and Smith, B. (1999) The Dance of
Change: The Challenges of Sustaining Momentum in Learning Organizations, New York:
Doubleday/Currency).
 Senge, P., Cambron-McCabe, N. Lucas, T., Smith, B., Dutton, J. and Kleiner, A. (2000) Schools
That Learn. A Fifth Discipline Fieldbook for Educators, Parents, and Everyone Who Cares
About Education, New York: Doubleday/Currency
 Stenhouse, L. (1975) An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development, London:
Heinemann.
 Sennett, R. (1998) The Corrosion of Character. The personal consequences of work in the new
capitalism, New York: Norton.
 Links
 Dialogue from Peter Senge’s perspective – brief, but helpful, overview by Martha Merrill
 fieldbook.com – ‘home to The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook Project’ – includes material on Schools
that Learn and The Dance of Change
 Peter Senge resources – GWSAE online listing includes interview with Senge by Jane R.
Schultz.
 A Primer on Systems Thinking & Organizational Learning – useful set of pages put together by
John Shibley @ The Portland Learning Organization Group
 Resources on Peter Senge’s learning organization – useful listing of resources from the
Metropolitan Community College, Omaha.
 sistemika – online Peter Senge resources
 Society for Organizational Learning – various resources relating to Senge’s project.
 Systems thinking – useful introductory article by Daniel Aronson on thinking.net.
 Acknowledgement: Photograph of Peter Senge by Larry Lawfer (used with permission of SoL)
 Bibliographic reference: Smith, M. K. (2001) ‘Peter Senge and the learning organization’, The
encyclopedia of pedagogy and informal education. [https://infed.org/mobi/peter-senge-and-the-
learning-organization/. Retrieved: insert date]
 © Mark K. Smith 2001
 Last Updated on April 4, 2013 by infed.org