"Conform and be dull" warns the poster in the office of Terry Deal, associate professor of Education. The maxim might provoke sarcastic giggles in the halls of Langdell or Baker, where conformity is a revered tradition, but at the Graduate School of Education, the poster seems to reflect the general sentiment of students, faculty, and administrators. From its low-key plans to shift its emphasis to the individual school and school leadership, to the clubby amblance of happy hours at its student cafe, the Ed School belies the image of the anxiety-ridden Harvard graduate school.

When the Ed School was founded in the 1890s, it primarily served to upgrade the quality of education at elite private schools that sent their graduates to Harvard. In the 1930s, the focus shifted to stressing improvement of suburban public schools. In the 1960s, the Ed School worked to alleviate the social and urban problems of the United States through education. At that time, budget cuts forced the school to eliminate many of the basic programs designed to teach teachers how to organize and run a classroom. The Ed School then began to concentrate on post-secondary education, research, and analysis of theoretical issues.

The school now plans to implement an ambitious "School Leadership Program," which stresses individual schools and the effect administrators, parents and teachers can have on places of learning. While the leadership courses will not be required of all students, Paul N. Ylvisaker, dean of the Ed School, last year set up a four-member committee on school leadership to develop guidelines for the Ed School's changing curriculum.

The committee has worked with the faculty to design new courses and adapt old ones to emphasize the training of administrators. It has authorized a one-year masters degree program stressing leadership skills, a series of workshops for administrators, a Principals' Resource Center to provide in-service training, and a research proposal to study the effect of government policy on individual classrooms.

"These programs are a reaction to research which has pointed out that some schools are more effective than other schools," Patricia A. Graham, chairman of the leadership committee, says, adding that administrators must learn to achieve "the right equilibrium and the right balance" between schooling and other influences such as television and the child's ethnic or racial background.

"The issue is what we have learned since the 60s: cooking up a new policy in Washington doesn't work," another member of the committee on leadership, Stephen K. Bailey, Keppel Professor of Educational Policy and Administration, says. "We have learned that there are attributes to leadership, and we're trying to find the common denominator. This is not going on much in other places, and I would hope that if we do well it would have an effect on other schools."

Most of the faculty and administrators agree that in addition to training people to be effective leaders, they hope to encourage people currently in administrative and other leadership positions to view their jobs from a new perspective. They also emphasize that the leadership program will force the Ed School to deal with the tangle of social problems that confronts urban schools today.

"People say, 'Oh good, the Education School is back in its cubbyhole, doing the traditional thing.' To the contrary," Ylvisaker explains, "I regard schooling as a statement of moral commitment for minorities and newcomers. I want to say it loud because I would be nervous if the School of Education has expanded into where it should be and it gets put in a small box again."

* * *

The best place to observe the Ed School's student atmosphere is at the school cafe's daily happy hour. Under dimmed lights, 40 to 50 students munch pretzels and drink inexpensive wine. The happy hour also provides a forum for students to discuss informally some of the questions they have about the direction of the school and their role in it. While some of the students believe the school's focus is ambiguous, others are completely satisfied with its purpose.

"I think education and education schools matter a great deal," Marya Levinson, an Ed School student who acted as a student liaison to the leadership committee, says. The Ed School, she explains, "is about how you make good schools and good policies. It's a place for practice, research and reflection. I came to Harvard to reflect on the changes in education and what I wanted to do."

Other students do not see the Ed School's role as clearly as Levinson does. "The last thing you'd see at the Ed School is a child," first-year doctoral student Ruben A. Carriedo says, criticizing the school for placing too much emphasis on theory and not enough on actual classroom practice. "There is an uncertainty that surrounds the school. Questions like 'What is the mission of the school?' and 'What are its priorities?'"

"The Ed School students feel they are on the bottom of the list, University-wide." Carriedo continues, reflecting the views of other students who complain that the University administration ignores the Ed School because its graduates earn less than the graduates of the Law, Medical, and Business schools.

Despite the faculty's obvious pride in the direction the school is taking, many express some annoyance over the attitude the rest of the University has toward the Ed School.

"I can't understand why other schools need to poke fun at a school of education even though we're part of the same community." Deal says, adding that "I feel good about what I do, and it's every bit as vital and intellectually respectable as things others do."