Hallinger in his “Critical Reflections,” which is research on the most influential content within EAQ, 1965–2020 (55 years), fails to attend to the racism and sexism embedded within his research choices. Because he fails to critically examine or problematize his research choices, he privileges the White males and their biases who dominated EAQ, UCEA, and AERA Division A for nearly two-thirds of his time period. In response, I point out the specific research choices he made that ensure the continued privileging of those older White male scholars and suggest how he could have done his research in a more equitable way. However, Hallinger is only a small fraction of a larger racism and sexism problem. The K12 school system continues to fail miserably at equity and excellence, and since we have been training many of the school leaders, we too (including me) are complicit in Hallinger's failure.
BlountJ. M. (2013). Educational leadership through equity, diversity, and social justice and educational leadership for the privilege imperative: The historical dialectic. In Handbook of research on educational leadership for equity and diversity (pp. 7–21). Routledge.
2.
CollinsP. H. (2002). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. Routledge.
CrenshawK. W. (2017). On intersectionality: Essential writings. The New Press.
5.
CupplesJ.GrosfoguelR. (Eds.). (2018). Unsettling Eurocentrism in the Westernized university. Routledge.
6.
DelgadoR.StefancicJ. (Eds.). (1997). Critical White studies: Looking behind the mirror. Temple University Press.
7.
DillardC. B. (2000). The substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen: Examining an endarkened feminist epistemology in educational research and leadership. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 13(6), 661–681. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518390050211565
8.
DonmoyerR.ImberM.ScheurichJ. J. (Eds.). (1995). The knowledge base in educational administration: Multiple perspectives. SUNY Press.
FoucaultM. (2012). Discipline and punish. Vintage.
13.
FoucaultM. (2013). Archaeology of knowledge. Routledge.
14.
GadamerH.-G. (2013 reprint). Truth and method. Bloomsbury Academic.
15.
HardingS. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women’s lives. Cornell University Press.
16.
JacksonJ. P.WeidmanN. M. (2005). Race, racism, and science. Rutgers University Press.
17.
KuhnT. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Princeton University Press.
18.
LagemannE. C. (2000). An elusive science: The troubling history of education research. University of Chicago Press.
19.
LermaR.LinickM.Warren-GriceA.ParkerL. (2013). The politics of education: Its development and what is needed for the future for advocacy leadership in a post-racial America. In Handbook of research on educational leadership for equity and diversity (pp. 22–42). Routledge.
20.
LynchM.WoolgarS. (1988). Introduction: Sociological orientations to representational practice in science. Human Studies, 11(2/3), 99–116. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20009022
21.
McChesneyJ.BichselJ. (2020). The aging of tenure-track faculty in higher education: implications for succession and diversity. College and University Professional Association for Human Resources.
22.
MedinaJ. (2013). The epistemology of resistance: Gender and racial oppression, epistemic injustice, and the social imagination. Oxford University Press.
23.
MignoloW. D.WalshC. E. (2018). On decoloniality. Duke University Press.
24.
NelsonJ. S.MegillA.McCloskeyD. N. (1987). The rhetoric of the human sciences. University of Wisconsin Press.
25.
ParkerD. E. (1990). The conceptual practices of power: A feminist sociology of knowledge. Northeastern University Press.
26.
ParkerL.DeyhleD.VillenasS. (Eds.). (1999). Race is … race isn’t: Critical Race Theory and qualitative studies in education. Westview Press.
27.
PolkinghorneD. (1983). Methodology for the human sciences: Systems of inquiry. SUNY.
28.
RobinsonV. M.LloydC. A.RoweK. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635–674
29.
RortyR. (1982). Consequences of pragmatism. University of Minnesota Press.
30.
ScheurichJ. J. (Ed.). (2002). Anti-racist scholarship: An advocacy. SUNY Press.
31.
ScheurichJ. J.SkrlaL. (2003). Leadership for equity and excellence: Creating high-achievement classrooms, schools, and districts. Corwin Press.
32.
ScheurichJ. J.YoungM. D. (1997). Coloring epistemologies: Are our research epistemologies racially biased?Educational Researcher, 26(4), 4–16. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X026004004
33.
TillmanL. C. (2002). Culturally sensitive research approaches: An African American perspective. Educational Researcher, 31(9), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X031009003
34.
TillmanL. C.ScheurichJ. J. (2013a). Handbook of research on educational leadership for equity and diversity. Routledge.
35.
TillmanL. C.ScheurichJ. J. (2013b). Preface. Handbook of research on educational leadership for equity and diversity. Routledge.
36.
ValenciaR. R. (Ed.). (1997). The evolution of deficit thinking: Educational thought and practice. Routledge.
