It certainly wouldn't look like SLA, and not just because I work in elementary or middle schools. Chris Lehmann is the founding principal of SLA and as such he, I'm sure he picked a staff that has a similar educational philosophy. Taking over an existing school also means taking over the existing staff. How would a person radically change the philosophy of a school without being able to radically change the staff?
And thus we come to the problem facing major school districts around the country, even the Secretary of Education himself; How does one fix education without starting over? Evidently most big cities have quit trying, at least it seems that way because their solution is to close failing schools and reopen them as private schools, charter schools, or small schools whatever flavor of "educational reform" is your favorite.
There are of course no shortage of books detailing how to motivate people. We can influence friends and win converts, but in the end is it really a reform? I've blogged in the past that the current state of public education in America is actually much better than we think it is, even in our worst schools.
I think our schools are more of a reflection of ourselves. That the "fix" has less to do with pedagogy and more to do with people. Yes, problem based learning is a great way to teach. Yes, 1 to 1 technology should be the norm. Yes, teachers matter as well as leaders. But all that isn't the cure, it isn't the "fix". Or maybe it is, but all that won't happen until, well I guess people really start to care.