Abstract
Women remain underrepresented in politics, research, history, and leadership (Perez, 2021), yet this inequity is often overlooked. Although women make up the majority of the K–12 workforce, they are underrepresented in top leadership positions, reflecting persistent gendered systems (Stainback et al., 2016). This disparity dates back to the expansion of public education as mid-nineteenth century industrialization and compulsory schooling feminized teaching as “maternal” labor, devaluing it in the process (Cassidy et al., 2021; Weiler, 1989). By the late 1800s, women outnumbered men in classrooms but were largely excluded from leadership roles, which remained male-dominated (Cassidy et al., 2021; Liang & Peters-Hawkins, 2017; Marshall et al., 2016). Today, women hold 77% of U.S. teaching positions, yet they remain underrepresented in administration (Broadhurst et al., 2021; Kruse & Krumm, 2018; NCES, 2023). Gains at the top are minimal. Women superintendents increased by less than 3% between 2010 and 2020, and post-COVID, men filled most vacancies (Mountford & Richardson, 2021). In New Jersey, women represent only 35.7% of superintendents, with parity not projected until 2042-43 (NJDOE, n.d.-a; White, 2024). As salary and authority increase, women's representation declines, reflecting structural inequities that limit their influence on policy and reform (NJDOE, n.d.-c).
New Jersey's 1.3 million students reflect growing diversity—38.5% White, 33.2% Hispanic, 10.3%, 14.6% Black, Asian, 3% multiracial, and 8.5% multilingual learners (NJDOE, n.d.-b). As demographics shift, leadership must diversify to challenge sexism and racism, advocate for equity, and advance culturally responsive education. Women are critical to this effort, as research shows they draw on their identities and experiences to foster inclusive, affirming, and high-achieving environments, while challenging structural inequities and modeling equitable leadership for current and future educators (Johnson, 2021; Liang, 2020; Marshall et al., 2016; Moorosi et al., 2018; Peters & Nash, 2021; Santamaría & Jean-Marie, 2014).
Although mentoring is recognized as critical for supporting women's advancement, the gender gap persists (Crow, 2012; Kruse & Krumm, 2018; Liang et al., 2018; Liang & Peters-Hawkins, 2017; McGee, 2010). Mentoring encompasses formal or informal, hierarchical or reciprocal, multilayered relationships in which mentors guide protégés, provide psychosocial support, and co-construct professional identity, thereby facilitating leadership development in gendered spaces (Enomoto et al., 2000; Grogan & Shakeshaft, 2010; Peters, 2010). While mentoring outcomes and structural barriers are well documented, less is known about how women narrate, co-construct, and perform leadership identity through mentoring over time. This narrative inquiry examines co-constructed mentoring narratives of women administrators in New Jersey's K–12 public schools, through a feminist lens (Harding, 1991; Leavy & Harris, 2019), to understand the identity work women undertake across spatial, temporal, and relational contexts. Findings show that mentoring actively empowered protégés to navigate invisibility and invisible work, fostered positive leadership embodiment, and built networks that expand women's influence and presence in leadership.
Literature Review
Women's leadership trajectories in K–12 education are shaped by persistent barriers, such as self-doubt, male gatekeeping, tokenism, and stereotyped assumptions, and by limited access to mentoring, networks, and role models, which are essential for advancement (Broadhurst et al., 2021; Clark & Johnson, 2017; Diehl & Dzubinski, 2016; Kruse & Krumm, 2018; Liang, 2020). Even with equal qualifications, women are often promoted later than men, reflecting enduring structural inequities in leadership pathways.
Complex Barriers to Women's Leadership
Women face systemic barriers in recruitment and hiring, as men often mentor and promote protégés who resemble themselves, while women must continually prove competence within pathways that privilege masculine leadership norms (Flores, 2018; McGee, 2010; Myung & & Horng, 2011; Sperandio, 2015). They are concentrated in elementary leadership, where nurturing traits are valued, and underrepresented in secondary roles (Kruse & Krumm, 2018; Liang & Peters-Hawkins, 2017). When appointed, women often inherit “glass cliff” positions in underperforming schools with limited support (Moorosi et al., 2018; Zajicek et al., 2020). The superintendency remains largely inaccessible, as the secondary principalship—the primary pipeline—excludes women, leaving many concentrated in district-level curriculum roles rather than fiscal or managerial leadership (Marczynski & Gates, 2013; Sharp et al., 2004; Sperandio, 2015). For many, curriculum positions thus become the chief pathway to K–12 leadership (Sharp et al., 2004; Sperandio, 2015).
Women administrators learn that joining the “boy's club” at upper administrative levels in education does not guarantee full membership (McGee, 2010). Even in leadership roles, they continue to face personal and organizational sexism (Broadhurst et al., 2021; Liang & Peters-Hawkins, 2017; McGee, 2010). Women often experience invisible labor when performing leadership identity, pursuing opportunities, or providing emotional support (Hatton, 2017). With limited access to mentors and networks, many report feeling isolated, silenced, and scrutinized (Broadhurst et al., 2021; Liang & Peters-Hawkins, 2017; McGee, 2010). Fewer professional development opportunities leave them disconnected and lacking belonging. Women must also overcome gendered assumptions about decision-making, communication, and leadership (Broadhurst et al., 2021; Liang & Peters-Hawkins, 2017) and carefully navigate perceptions of being too soft or too demanding (Liang, 2020; Liang & Peters-Hawkins, 2017). While directness in men is viewed as assertive and competent, women are often seen as “coming on too strong” (Liang, 2020, p. 9). Many feel trapped. In response, women may conform to gender norms or risk being labeled difficult or aggressive (Liang, 2020; Weiner et al., 2021).
Leadership experiences are further shaped by intersecting identities, including race, ethnicity, sexuality, and other dimensions of social location. Women of color face racialized and gendered stereotypes that restrict access to leadership and narrow the kinds of roles they are deemed “fit” to hold. Despite decades of equity initiatives, Black, Asian, and Hispanic women remain markedly underrepresented in principal and superintendent positions (Johnson, 2021; Liang, 2020; Méndez-Morse, 2004; Moorosi et al., 2018; Peters & Nash, 2021; Weiner et al., 2021). These disparities are compounded by differentiated patterns of marginalization: Black women are often appointed to under-resourced or high-conflict districts where failure is structurally produced, while Asian women report tokenization, invisibility, and confinement to culturally specific or “diversity” roles (Jang & Alexander, 2022; Liang & Peters-Hawkins, 2017). LGBTQIA + and gender-expansive leaders similarly experience exclusion and surveillance within heteronormative, Christian-normative school cultures that position their identities as misaligned with community expectations (Lugg & Koschoreck, 2003; Lugg & Roscigno, 2020). When leaders hold multiple marginalized identities, these dynamics intersect in ways that deepen isolation, limit opportunities for advancement, and intensify the emotional labor required to persist in leadership (Sim & Bierema, 2024).
Women and Mentoring in K-12 Leadership
Research on women in K-12 leadership highlights mentoring as a key strategy to advance women into administrator positions, navigate gendered barriers, and transform inequitable systems (Crow, 2012; Kruse & Krumm, 2018; Liang, 2020; Liang & Peters-Hawkins, 2017; McGee, 2010). While definitions of mentoring vary—encompassing formal or informal, hierarchical or non-hierarchical, and dyadic or group arrangements (Crow, 2012; Crow & Grogan, 2019; Liu et al., 2021; Sherman & Wrushen, 2009)—its functions consistently include teaching job responsibilities, acclimating protégés to organizational culture, providing support for career advancement, and co-constructing learning (Crow & Grogan, 2019; Liu et al., 2021).
Mentoring is a reciprocal, often intergenerational process in which protégés contribute their expertise while mentors provide guidance, model practices, advocate, and create opportunities for growth (Clutterbuck et al., 2017). Through these interactions, mentorship supports professional transitions, fosters identity work, and reshapes self-perceptions within gendered organizational contexts (Moorosi et al., 2018). Psychosocial support, manifested through affirmation, acceptance, and friendship, further strengthens leadership identity and self-efficacy, cultivating trust and mutual benefit (Higgins & Kram, 2001; Kram, 1983). Informal mentoring offers protégés a safe space to experiment, learn from mistakes, and practice leadership with guidance and protection (Liang & Peters-Hawkins, 2017). Over time, these evolving relationships provide structure for ongoing learning and reflection, ultimately transforming participants’ leadership trajectories (Crow, 2012; Crow & Grogan, 2019; Liu et al., 2021).
Mentoring Approaches
Research consistently shows that women benefit most from collaborative, non-hierarchical mentoring that supports mutual learning and growth across roles and career stages (Peters, 2010). Yet, as Gardiner et al. (2000) warned, “the practice of mentoring, steeped in the masculine tradition of reproduction of self, dominant values and attitudes, is likely to reinforce a discourse of educational administration no different from the one we have always had” (p. 187). Contemporary mentoring programs often overemphasize individual aspiration and self-reliance, reproducing gendered norms rather than fostering collective empowerment or systemic change (Harris, 2022). Likewise, Enomoto et al. (2000) demonstrated that mentoring can inadvertently reinforce “acceptable” gendered forms of leadership by steering women toward relational or care-oriented roles. These dynamics reveal how mentoring, when shaped by gendered powered relations in education, can unintentionally constrain women's leadership identities and trajectories.
In contrast, relational partnerships, including co-mentoring, create spaces where participants can contribute expertise, recognize complementary strengths, and cultivate leadership identities in supportive and psychologically safe settings (Burbage & Gregory, 2022; Crow & Grogan, 2019; Grogan & Shakeshaft, 2010). Peters (2010) further argued that women benefit from complex, multi-directional mentoring that help them navigate organizational politics and shifting institutional demands. Women value authenticity and connectedness, finding reassurance in mentors who understand their lived experiences while also helping them confront bias, enact allyship, and navigate complex organizational landscapes (Block & Tietjen-Smith, 2016; Flaxman, 2023; Grogan & Shakeshaft, 2010; Sherman & Wrushen, 2009).
Despite notable gains, women remain concentrated in mid-level supervisory roles and continue to encounter structural, interpersonal, and intersectional barriers that constrain advancement and shape their daily leadership experiences (Broadhurst et al., 2021; Liang, 2020). Within this landscape, mentoring is frequently positioned as a key strategy for navigating inequitable systems, offering guidance, affirmation, identity work, and access to networks that can extend women's influence and open pathways to leadership. Yet much of the existing scholarship focuses on outcomes, barriers, or programmatic effectiveness, treating mentoring as a discrete intervention rather than a relational and narrative process. Consequently, we know far less about how women describe, interpret, and co-construct their leadership identities through mentoring relationships over time and how these ongoing narrative negotiations shape their possibilities within gendered organizational contexts.
Feminist Theoretical Perspective
As a starting point, Acker's (1990) theory of gendered organizations asserted that organizations are not neutral. They invent and reproduce cultural images that privilege White men. This holds true for K-12 schools, where societal oppressions are mirrored, and students and adults are socialized into traditional gender norms (Weiler, 1989). Schools as gendered organizations produce segregated roles and inequalities in income, status, and opportunity (Acker, 1990; Weiler, 1989). Women administrators also navigate conflicting expectations around gender and leadership (Clark & Johnson, 2017). Historically, research has centered men and portrayed their experiences as universal (Shakeshaft, 1989), while feminist research offers space for non-dominant voices to share counter-narratives (Leavy & Harris, 2019). Guided by feminist theory, this study centers women's experiences.
Critical feminist theory, specifically feminist standpoint and postmodern approaches, guided our examination of women's mentoring narratives and leadership within gendered systems. Standpoint theory is particularly relevant because it asserts that women possess distinct knowledge rooted in their social positions and lived experiences (Harding, 1991; Leavy & Harris, 2019). Gender, like race, ethnicity, sexuality, and class, shapes how individuals navigate and make sense of the world. This perspective highlights how women engage in ongoing identity work as they negotiate organizations, while also critiquing the exclusion of women's lives as legitimate starting points for research.
However, critics note that standpoint theory can unintentionally reinforce binaries (Leavy & Harris, 2019). Postmodern feminism, in contrast, challenges the myth of a universal woman, arguing that gender is a performative social construct experienced through intersectional identities (Butler, 2007). Gender is enacted across systems and shapes how people behave and lead (Butler, 2007; Chrisler & Johnston-Robledo, 2018; Leavy & Harris, 2019; WHO, 2023). Women engage with the world through physical bodies situated in gendered spaces (Chrisler & Johnston-Robledo, 2018). As gender is enacted, it can reinforce inequality and segregation (Stainback et al., 2016), though empowered women may experience more positive embodiment (Chrisler & Johnston-Robledo, 2018).
Together, these lenses provide a holistic understanding of what it means to be a woman, recognizing womanhood as a social construction shaped by gendered systems. Feminist research interrogates these inequities (Butler, 2007; Leavy & Harris, 2019), and women's mentoring narratives offer critical insight into how leadership is experienced and negotiated within such systems.
Methods
Research Design and Questions
This study used narrative inquiry, which explores human experience through storytelling, to examine how women educational leaders make and co-construct the meaning of mentoring relationships across their professional trajectories (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000). As the “first and oldest form of inquiry,” storytelling is central to how humans make sense of experience (Hendry, 2010, p. 72). Introduced to education by Connelly and Clandinin (1990), narrative inquiry examines the social stories of schools and creates space for counter-stories, recognizing that people “lead storied lives” (p. 2). Grounded in the understanding that experience is storied, contextual, and interpreted over time (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000), this approach allowed us not only to describe mentoring relationships but also to explore how they evolve, are recalled, and shape our participants’ identity work.
This study was guided by the following research question and subquestions:
What are the co-constructed mentoring stories of women in K-12 administrator positions who experience gendered systems?
What do women administrators’ stories reveal about their experiences of leadership and gender at work? What experiences do women administrators reflect on as important to developing and sustaining effective mentoring partnerships? What do women administrators’ stories reveal about the relationship between mentoring and leadership for women?
Sampling and Participants
A combination of criterion and snowball sampling was purposefully used to identify participants (Patton, 2002). Initial recruitment occurred through professional networks, followed by referrals. Participants were selected because they were information-rich (Patton, 2002) and had mentoring experience as protégés, mentors, or both. All were women in certificated administrator positions in New Jersey K-12 public schools. To ensure depth, participants needed at least one year of administrative and mentoring experience. Seven self-identified as white and one as Latina. This underrepresentation reflects New Jersey's supervisor/coordinator demographics: 75.2% White, 12.9% Black, 9% Hispanic, and 1.9% Asian (New Jersey Department of Education, n.d.-a). Four mentoring dyads were identified. Three involved informal mentoring, and one was district-assigned. One protégé sought additional formal mentoring through NJEXCEL, a state-approved program for educators pursuing administrator certification (FEA, 2025). Table 1 provides information on participants’ credentials and roles.
Participants’ Profiles.
Note. P = protégé, M = mentor, Experience = total number of years in administration
Although invitations were open to women in varied leadership roles, all participants worked primarily in Curriculum and Instruction (C&I) at the time of the study. This pattern was not predetermined but emerged through our recruitment networks, which were anchored in professional associations and mentoring programs with strong representation of women in C&I leadership. Of the eight participants, seven were curriculum supervisors and one was an assistant superintendent. We highlight this concentration to ensure transparency and guide interpretation of the study's scope, while also noting its analytic significance.
Data Collection
Data were collected using Kim's (2016) two phases of life-story interviews (i.e., narration and conversation), which led to rich, detailed descriptions. Narrative inquiry is a relational design, and it was important to build trust and rapport with participants through assuming a narrative stance: listening with empathy, attentively observing, and allowing stories to flow naturally and without interruption (Kim, 2016). At times, unexpected data emerged when participants deeply described how they felt about their experiences, revealing nuanced emotions and meanings (Kim, 2016; Leavy & Harris, 2019).
Narration Interview Phase
During the first phase of interviews, mentoring partners were interviewed together. Dyads were prompted to tell the story of their mentoring partnership in an open-ended, unstructured format (Kim, 2016). This approach allowed participants the freedom to describe their experiences in their own terms with minimal interruptions. As narrative researchers, we practiced active listening, encouraging participants and listening for “sequence, coherence, continuity, meaningfulness, and transformation” (Kim, 2016, p. 168). Four dyads were interviewed during this stage, and interviews lasted from 35 to 120 min. Stories were transcribed using software and reviewed for accuracy. Semi-structured interview questions were refined in preparation for the conversation phase of narrative interviews (Kim, 2016).
Conversation Interview Phase
In the second phase, participants were interviewed individually using a semi-structured protocol informed by our research questions and narrative interview design (Kim, 2016). Narrative inquiry attends to the temporal, social, and contextual nature of experience, examining how past encounters shape present understanding and future possibilities (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000). Our protocol invited participants to recount mentoring experiences across time, including those shared in dyads and those experienced individually, as well as formative moments, pivotal transitions, and evolving leadership aspirations. We also considered sociality and place, recognizing that experience is shaped by relationships, institutional contexts, geographic locations, and cultural dynamics (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000). During interviews, we noted how workspaces such as offices, meeting rooms, and district buildings afforded or constrained mentoring relationships and leadership participation. Interviews lasted 60 to 120 min and were recorded and transcribed.
Data Analysis
During two cycles of interviews, data collection and analysis were concurrent and ongoing (Kim, 2016). As narrative researchers, we were attentive to both the content of the stories and how they were told (Fraser & MacDougall, 2017). As participants shared, we listened for elements of story—plot, theme, character, and setting—understanding that stories may lack clear boundaries, with no real beginning or end (Kim, 2016). Women administrators described their perceptions of relationships, actions, and events. Stories were co-constructed by researchers and participants and woven together through telling, listening, and retelling.
Data Analysis Framework
The narrative mode of analysis configured data to create a cohesive story with narrative meaning (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000; Kim, 2016; Polkinghorne, 1995). Transcripts were initially analyzed using standard narrative elements: character (educational actors), setting, and events (conflicts and resolutions). While these elements are not unique to women administrators, their manifestation in participants’ stories revealed patterns specific to women's leadership experiences. Themes emerged around how women administrators navigate, create, share, and expand leadership space. Drawing on Clandinin and Connelly's (2000) emphasis on temporality, sociality, and place, we restoryed women's told stories: filling gaps, sequencing, and integrating events into plots using thematic threads. Narrative smoothing helped decide which stories to include (Kim, 2016). Interpretation of faith and suspicion were used together: trusting participants’ authentic meaning while decoding hidden messages. Together, we used these techniques to retell women's stories with fidelity.
Trustworthiness
To ensure trustworthiness consistent with narrative inquiry's relational and interpretive commitments, we engaged in ongoing reflexive memoing to examine how our positionalities shaped data collection and analysis and invited member resonance by sharing narrative summaries with participants for clarification and affirmation (Clandinin et al., 2010). While we had no previous relationships with the participants, we were familiar with their professional contexts. Such proximity can deepen narratives, as shared professional experiences often foster reflexivity and trust (Clandinin, 2013). At the same time, we acknowledged the potential for bias and mitigated it through an analytic attention to how our knowledge shaped what stories were told, how they were told, and how we interpreted them (Riessman, 2008). Taken together, these practices supported interpretations grounded in participants’ meanings rather than researcher assumptions.
Positionality
Feminist research emphasizes transparency, particularly regarding researcher positionality (Leavy & Harris, 2019). The first author, a white, cisgender woman, has nearly 30 years of experience in K–12 public education, including roles as teacher, assistant principal, supervisor, C&I administrator, assistant superintendent, mentor, and protégé. She has both challenged and upheld gendered structures. The second author, a white woman and tenured professor, contributed expertise in feminist theory and qualitative inquiry, guiding the study's conceptualization and development. Together, they engaged in a praxis of relational accountability and critical reflection, ensuring the integrity and trustworthiness of the research process.
Findings
Findings highlight the unique mentoring needs of women in mid-level, less visible roles as curriculum supervisors and show that participants formed informal, bi-directional mentoring partnerships on their own initiative. Partnerships were essential in creating safe spaces where women shed gendered performances and embraced authenticity. Within this space, women connected personally and professionally, creating innovative programs, developing leadership skills, and challenging each other to grow.
Dyad Profiles
The following profiles present brief narratives of the women and their mentoring relationships to contextualize findings.
Anna and Rebecca
Anna always wanted to be a teacher and began her career at a private school during budget cuts. She later moved to a public school, where she taught for 13 years before earning her supervisor certification and becoming an administrator. Rebecca studied biology and considered a research career but pursued teaching through an alternate route. After 13 years in the classroom, she became a curriculum supervisor. Anna and Rebecca have worked together for three years. Rebecca first informally mentored Anna as she joined the district, then formally mentored her for principal certification.
Laura and Megan
Laura majored in political science and initially worked as a paralegal, before switching to teaching through an alternate route after feeling unfulfilled. While teaching, she completed a 14-month fast-track leadership master's program, then became an instructional coach and later a supervisor. Megan initially planned a career in publishing but shifted to teaching after visiting a high school and being inspired by a teacher. She worked as a teacher and supervisor before becoming a director and then assistant superintendent. Laura and Megan have worked together for a year, with Megan serving as both her supervisor and district-assigned mentor.
Maya and Tina
Maya felt uncertain in her doctoral program, but encouraged by her mother, entered teaching through an alternate route. She began in middle school, transitioned to high school, and became a department coordinator. A female supervisor encouraged her to pursue supervisor certification. Tina started as a grant writer before working with “at-risk” youth in a wilderness reform program. Wanting a deeper impact, she pursued biology certification through an alternate route, taught for ten years, and became a department chair, assistant principal, and supervisor. When Maya joined the district, Tina informally mentored her during the transition.
Isabella and Claire
Isabella began as a paraprofessional in a special education school and taught while earning her ESL certification. Encouraged by a female supervisor, she pursued supervisor certification and became an administrator at 26 with six years of teaching experience. Claire started as an elementary teacher while in graduate school, earning her master's and principal certification. She became a principal shortly after having a child, and becoming concerned about future opportunities. When Isabella joined the district, Claire was a principal. They quickly formed a close friendship, and Claire became Isabella's informal mentor, guiding her through varied school contexts before Claire became a supervisor.
Navigating Gendered Space
As participants served in district curricular roles, they were outsiders in school buildings and needed to effectively interact in other administrators’ spaces. Both mentors and protégés described the challenges of navigating multiple buildings with different cultures and principal expectations. All participants reported that relationships became challenging with principals, who were more often men, when there were competing priorities, specifically as principals had perceived higher status and more important responsibilities. As mentors had experience in these settings, they helped protégés to successfully work across settings and manage relationships. Mentors offered space for protégés to authentically share their gendered experiences. As women administrators who encountered similar barriers, mentors understood and empathized with protégés, which was affirming and reassuring. For protégés, this was the first opportunity to openly discuss their gendered leadership experiences and feel heard. Tina and Maya's story explored these realities in more depth.
Tina and Maya's Story
Maya started in a new district midway through the school year, which is where she met Tina, who has since served as her informal mentor. Like Laura, Maya needed guidance in navigating the personalities of principals across multiple buildings. The high school and middle school administrators were all men, and at times, Maya was not sure how to best approach them, especially as some principals did not seem open to collaboration or compromise. Maya described the concern she felt in approaching one particularly inflexible principal about a curricular initiative. This same principal had described Tina “as subtle as a baseball bat to the face.” Maya explained that Tina provided advice based on her experience: She made sure I knew…to temper my femaleness, or my strength when interacting with him. And that did not feel unusual to me… male administrators who do not like the feeling of a very strong woman. I've had to be more purposely demure or purposely pulled back, less opinionated, less gregarious or ambitious.
Maya's story illustrated that mentors may reinforce cultural norms by coaching protégés to perform within the cultural expectations of the system rather than confront the underlying problem of gender. However, Tina recognized the principal would be resistant if Maya appeared too assertive. She strategically coached Maya to temper her approach and stay focused on the goal. In this situation, Tina and Maya determined that securing building-based support for the curricular initiative took priority over challenging the gendered power structure.
Maya, however, saw “the influence of gender everywhere.” Specifically, Maya felt that her position was not understood or valued by her male principal colleagues. As she explained, “He and his assistant principal believe, and have not been quiet about the fact that supervisors are like on a lower rung… and so their version of collaboration is they let you know something, but it's not a collaborative decision.” While Maya believed that gender dynamics hindered her ability to collaborate effectively, Tina challenged this perspective and suggested the dynamics were due to personality, not gender.
Ultimately, Maya appreciated having a mentor who was open to her perspective and willing to challenge her thinking. In fact, she described Tina as a critical friend and “perfect thought partner…willing to play it out with me, willing to say, like, “Counterpoint. What about this?’” Maya's reflection underscored the importance of having a mentor who was willing to listen even if they did not agree: Working with [Tina]…made me like myself in a way that I didn't before. It made me value myself and what I have to offer in a way I didn't before, and also it presented me with this person who understands this gendered view that I have
Despite their different perspectives, Maya did not feel dismissed or invisible when talking through the challenges she associated with gender. Instead, Tina consistently provided space for Maya to explore her experiences, which ultimately transformed the way that Maya felt about herself.
Overall, as the women in this study were in curriculum and instruction roles, most shared common priorities. Specifically, they were focused on programs, instructional resources, classroom instruction, teacher observation, and professional development. While they described some principals as interested in these areas, they described most as prioritizing operations, building needs, and management. Competing priorities created friction and required careful navigation. As Maya explained, “[Tina] helps me a lot to navigate, how to talk to him, without setting him off.” Another mentor, Claire, had similar advice for her protégé, “Play the game…know when to stay quiet and just get the job done… and know when it's important to speak up about an issue that's going to impact us in what we do but also impact our students.” Claire and Tina's approach mirrored that of many mentors, who strategically supported protégés in advancing important initiatives without disrupting the status quo. Several mentors even suggested workarounds such as letting colleagues take credit for an idea. Although this approach reinforced existing cultural norms, it allowed women to move initiatives forward by negotiating around the structural barriers embedded in salaries, organizational charts, and cabinets that upheld gender segregation.
There was one exception to this approach. Megan, as an assistant superintendent of curriculum and instruction, had more formal authority and was able to directly intervene and advocate for her protégé Laura, a supervisor, when necessary: When [I] get into arguments, it's mostly about division of labor and who has the final say at the building level. He'll be like, “Well, it's their building.” And I [say], “It's my curriculum program.” It should fall to the supervisors.
In this case, Megan's direct approach challenged the gendered status quo, reflecting her higher position in the hierarchy and ability to confront issues openly, unlike other mentors who had to navigate around them.
Taken together, Megan's directness and the more strategic, status-quo–preserving approach of Tina highlight the varied ways mentors negotiate gendered constraints, helping protégés navigate difficult relationships, often with men. This was true for all mentoring relationships. Isabella described the support that Claire provided when a budgeting oversight in one school was blamed on Isabella. As a former building principal, Claire used her established relationship and understanding of personality to effectively communicate Isabella's perspective and deescalate the situation. Additionally, Rebecca used her depth of experience to help Anna balance professional boundaries and compassionate leadership when a teacher questioned an observation rating. Overall, having a mentor act as an ally in navigating challenging relationships or uncomfortable situations was important for all protégés.
Creating Space
In addition to helping protégés navigate space, mentors created space for protégés to vent, problem-solve, and ask questions without feeling guarded or judged. Protégés were drawn to mentors who were immediately welcoming and reassuring. Protégés valued gestures such as receiving a phone call or a lunch invitation or touring a facility. When women were together in their mentoring partnerships, they were authentic and shed their carefully curated performances. Laura and Megan's story highlights how mentors can create this space for protégés in more depth.
Laura and Megan's Story
Laura and Megan had been working together for one year. In her role as Laura's immediate supervisor and district-assigned mentor, Megan provided space for Laura to ask questions, learn from mistakes, and try on different leadership styles. Laura described a shift in thinking that Megan taught her. “I’m so worried that I'm going to drop the ball somewhere, or that I'm going to mess something up, or not do something…and she goes, ‘We’ve all dropped the ball before…so we pick it up.’” With almost twenty years as an administrator and mentor, Megan believed that people learn through experience, which includes making mistakes. It is her job to guide and support her protégés to gain confidence to make their own decisions. “You need to let them explore. You need to let them kind of fail forward, if you will be there to support it.” This freedom to learn from mistakes has been reassuring to Laura and has promoted professional growth for both women.
Megan explained that working with protégés, particularly women, has made her “more reflective in [her] own practices…coaching them through tough situations.” Megan recognized that coaching helped her to become more reflective, which informed her relationship-centered leadership style, “If you're going to mentor somebody, a woman, you need to mentor the woman as well as the role.” Megan was open with her protégés about leadership challenges associated with gender, recognizing that sharing her experiences “makes them feel like they’re not alone. It's not personal to them, but it's a more broad generalization about our gender.” Laura appreciated this approach and recalled a specific situation when Megan demonstrated support: I remember one day …it was, like, two o'clock in the afternoon, and I was trying to get my daughter in to see a doctor…and I got a phone call… saying that there was a cancellation for 2:30 that day. And I'm like, I couldn't not take it. So I called Megan and…she's like, just go. Don't worry.
Laura's story underscored that Megan saw her as a complex, whole woman and empathized with her need to balance her roles as mother and administrator. In fact, all mentors recognized the importance of authentically connecting with protégés. On Maya's first day in the district, Tina invited her to lunch so they could talk in a relaxed setting. Claire and Isabella bonded outside of their professional roles when they discovered that they were both doing construction on their homes. As Isabella remembered, “I felt comfortable enough to have that conversation, where I'm not sitting in the room being like, ‘What can I talk about? What are my boundaries?’” Finally, Rebecca discussed the importance of being able to “laugh at [themselves] and make jokes that actually puts everyone else at ease and makes better relationships” rather than “emulate what we think that leaders should look like.” Through strong mentoring relationships, these women were able to be more vulnerable and less guarded.
Sharing Space
Because the mentors and protégés in this study held similar curricular roles, they were frequently assigned to the same office—a shared space they found mutually beneficial. Mentor and protégés worked together to create innovative programs and services, even though an initiative was outside one partner's area of expertise. This type of collaboration promoted mutual growth. Claire and Isabella's story adds an additional component by highlighting how shared space helped them to balance curricular responsibilities and the often-invisible work of supervisors.
Claire and Isabella's Story
Claire transitioned from principal to supervisor, hoping for more flexibility and a better work-life balance. Although some colleagues questioned this “step down,” Claire believed it gave her a better perspective and the opportunity to work more closely with Isabella as her informal mentor. In the following exchange, they described how they balanced their workload and provided mutual support in the space they created: Isabella: And I feel like with the curriculum, like we're doing the bulk of the thinking. We're doing the bulk of the planning ahead of time…we plan PD days, like five months in advance. Like we're literally supporting and uplifting and doing a lot in our office. Claire: Something as simple as like, I mean, I'll use this silly example, but we were revising our progress report. So we come with this idea about revising our progress report to our male assistant superintendent, who's wonderful, but it becomes like, “Oh, you guys got this, okay?” Because there's faith that we'll get it done. Something as simple as sending the Google calendar invite becomes a task for us. Because if we wait, it might not happen Isabella: So I feel like we do a good job at… balancing the tasks, but also balancing, you know, kind of like the stress of the job. There's a lot that needs to happen. And there's only two of us…so it's tough. …So I kind of feel like we have to rely on each other to get things done.
Claire and Isabella's exchange, illustrated the multiple responsibilities they managed together- advocating for change, planning curricular initiatives and professional development, providing daily support for their staff and each other, and communicating plans. By sharing and prioritizing their efforts, they were able to better balance initiatives.
Sharing physical space was also important as participants sometimes felt alienated as the only women in a particular space. Maya discussed her hesitation presenting to a room full of men, and Laura reflected on her tendency to apologize before asking questions, preemptively saying sorry for any perceived inconvenience. Most participants talked about being advised to remain quiet in public environments. Megan recounted her early days as a teacher, trying to avoid attention by slipping in and out of the teachers’ lounge filled by male colleagues. Ultimately, while participants recognized that phone calls and texts provided some support, they found that informal interactions in a shared office or casually chatting in someone's office doorway, were invaluable for day-to-day support and connection.
Expanding Space
Finally, these women worked together to expand and fill space in additional ways. For example, both mentors and protégés challenged their partners to grow professionally beyond their day-to-day roles. Despite working in similar positions, these women were able to create transferable leadership experiences for each other. Rebecca and Anna's story highlights an additional way that women expanded their space.
Rebecca and Anna's Story
Rebecca served as Anna's informal mentor for three years, and both women aspire beyond their current positions, which may not be possible in their current district. As Rebecca explained, “It's not that they would be anti-women. But I do think…they have a little bit of a boys’ club. They moved up together and now they're, you know, moving up and up.” Like other participants in this study, Rebecca felt disadvantaged because the network of men in her district seemingly excluded women. This, she felt, was likely unintentional but rather a by-product of long friendships born of common experiences and interests. Reflecting on these experiences, Anna added, “It's a good idea to get your principal cert because you never know…if you want to climb the ladder or just to give you that job security.” Through sharing their aspirations and perceived barriers, both women felt validated and together they strategized their next steps, which included building a network that expanded their leadership space.
Rebecca credited Anna with bringing together “strong, amazing professional women” by creating a districtwide women-centered professional learning community (PLC) that supported women leaders in their district. Anna explained, “I wanted to form a formalized group where we can come together… share time and space and just trade different strategies and stories and encourage each other.” Anna's reflection demonstrated how women can expand spaces beyond mentoring partnerships to build networks. Reflecting on the PLC as a place where women administrators can “talk out new ideas and try to lift each other up,” Anna recognized the value of learning from multiple women role models with different perspectives. Additionally, PLC topics and book discussions evolved into conference presentations.
Ultimately, in all mentoring relationships, both mentor and protégé inspired their partner to pursue opportunities outside their comfort zones: interviewing for new positions, pursuing additional degrees or certifications, presenting at conferences, establishing professional learning communities, and/or advocating for innovative programs. Anna and Rebecca maintained a connection with a former woman superintendent who continued to coach, advice, and encourage them. Maya encouraged Tina to co-present at a conference, emphasizing that despite Tina possessing “all the certificates and degrees, [she] put her in the position of having to speak to a crowd.” Isabella and Claire served on multiple committees so that teachers would see that they were involved and committed. In all these ways, women expanded spaces into networks.
Discussion
Women often enter leadership spaces as outsiders, performing identity work to navigate and enact leadership within gendered organizational systems (Acker, 1990). This work fosters awareness of systemic inequities and their own positionality—insights often invisible to male colleagues—and underscores the importance of mentoring that supports both professional growth and the experience of being a woman leader. Extending prior research on principals and superintendents (Enomoto et al., 2000; Kruse & Krumm, 2018; Liang et al., 2018; Marczynski & Gates, 2013; McGee, 2010; Reyes, 2003; Sharp et al., 2004; Sherman & Wrushen, 2009), this study highlights the mentoring needs of mid-level women leaders and shows how effective mentors help protégés navigate invisibility, embody leadership, and strengthen women's presence in K–12 education.
Navigating Invisibility
The first research sub-question explored women's experiences of leadership and gender, revealing that mentoring was essential in helping protégés navigate invisibility, particularly in curricular roles where they were often outsiders in principals’ spaces. Women's work becomes invisible when devalued, marginalized, or physically unseen (Hatton, 2017), and curriculum work was not always prioritized by building-based colleagues. Mentors recognized its importance, encouraging protégés to assert their expertise strategically and claim visible leadership across the district, extending traditional mentoring roles of teaching, coaching, modeling, and support (Crow & Grogan, 2019; Liu et al., 2021).
Participants predominantly worked in suburban districts where principals and cabinet members were predominantly men, while women held feminized curriculum roles (Sharp et al., 2004; Sperandio, 2015). As outsiders in school buildings, protégés navigated spaces shaped by gendered norms, often fearing that assertiveness might be perceived as challenging (Liang, 2020; Weiner et al., 2021). Mentors validated the emotional labor of identity work (Hatton, 2017), helping protégés resist invisibility through strategic planning and relationship-building.
Mentors’ approaches varied by role. Informal mentors in similar positions guided protégés within existing structures, coaching careful communication and leveraging culturally recognized forms of leadership to advocate for teachers, students, and programs, often reinforcing gendered norms (Enomoto et al., 2000). Formal mentors in higher-level roles granted protégés authority to prioritize initiatives, providing institutional power to challenge and reshape structures. Protégés also carried largely invisible, feminized labor, including care work supporting teachers and curricular initiatives (Hatton, 2017). Mentoring relationships acknowledged and shared these responsibilities, whether through collaborative planning or pairing protégés with other supervisors for equitable support.
Overall, mentoring made women's curriculum work visible, fostered authentic, strong-tie connections, and enabled more effective, equity-minded programming (Higgins & Kram, 2001; Kram, 1983). Partners who shared decision-making mitigated stress and energized innovation, while mentors’ guidance and emotional support highlighted that making leadership visible extends beyond formal tasks to relational and strategic labor.
Sharing Embodiment
The second research sub-question explored the experiences women administrators identified as central to developing and sustaining effective mentoring partnerships. Contrary to research suggesting women leaders experience isolation and limited connection (Broadhurst et al., 2021; Liang & Peters-Hawkins, 2017; McGee, 2010), participants reported ongoing support and connection through mentoring. Mentors consistently provided psychosocial support, including affirmation, acceptance, and friendship (Higgins & Kram, 2001; Kram, 1983). Being district-based curriculum specialists, rather than building-attached, facilitated collaboration, as partners often held similar positions, shared offices, goals, and staff.
Protégés valued mentors who created shared spaces where they could connect, vent, problem-solve, and ask questions without feeling guarded or judged (Block & Tietjen-Smith, 2016; Burbage & Gregory, 2022; Flaxman, 2023; Sherman & Wrushen, 2009), which was particularly challenging for women navigating both leadership and gender roles simultaneously (Clark & Johnson, 2017). While women needed mentors who understood challenges specific to women (Sherman & Wrushen, 2009), the stories revealed that effective mentoring was more than guiding the protégé. Mentors supported identity work, creating a foundation for protégés to reshape their self-perceptions within gendered organizational contexts (Moorosi, 2013). Women leveraged mentoring relationships to collaboratively embody leadership, beginning in mentoring spaces and expanding as trust deepened.
Because interactions are mediated through the body, women embodied leadership differently in private mentoring spaces than in public ones, with their sense of self and leadership identity shaped by embodiment (Chrisler & Johnston-Robledo, 2018). In these spaces, mentors and protégés shed performative roles to discuss children, families, interests, challenges, professional journeys, and worldviews. This environment fostered personal and professional connection, innovation, and mutual growth. Research suggests that women who feel mentally and physically free are more likely to develop positive embodiment, a condition supported by effective mentoring partnerships (Chrisler & Johnston-Robledo, 2018). Within these spaces, mentors and protégés shared experiences of gendered leadership and curriculum work, valued relationships and care labor, and openly discussed barriers while feeling heard and validated (Burbage & Gregory, 2022; Sherman & Wrushen, 2009).
When working in school buildings, partnerships strategically determined whether to challenge or work within the status quo. Mentors intervened, advocated, defended, or approached a colleague on behalf of their protégé (Burbage & Gregory, 2022). In such situations, having both women explicitly support a goal or solution strengthened the likelihood of the desired outcome. The mentor's institutional knowledge, relationships, and track record could be leveraged to engender support. While mentors provided direct support when needed, they also reinforced the importance of protégés undertaking difficult or uncomfortable conversations essential to embodying leadership. In effect, mentors created spaces where protégés could practice leadership, then supported them to embody it in school buildings dominated by masculine norms and practices. In contrast to mentoring that overemphasizes self-reliance (Harris, 2022), partnerships presented a unified front, sharing a public embodiment of leadership and collective empowerment.
Expanding Presence
The third research sub-question sought to describe what women's stories revealed about the relationship between mentoring and leadership for women. Mentoring was important to all participants, yet the protégés, as curriculum supervisors, were not assigned formal mentors through state certification procedures. Therefore, most sought and developed informal mentoring partnerships offering support, protection, and inspiration (Burbage & Gregory, 2022; Crow & Grogan, 2019; Grogan & Shakeshaft, 2010; Peters, 2010). Although it is common for women to find unconventional mentors (Méndez-Morse, 2004; Peters, 2010; Sherman & Wrushen, 2009), this study underscores mentoring's importance beyond being unintentional. Moreover, as noted, it was formal mentorship that enabled women to deconstruct some of the gendered barriers to their leadership.
Finally, participants consistently aspired to roles beyond their current positions. Although informal mentors could not sponsor advancement while in similar roles as their protégés, findings show that mentoring relationships were used to build professional networks. Additionally, collaborative, non-hierarchical partnerships fostered mutual learning and growth regardless of role distinctions or career stage differences (Peters, 2010). Both mentor and protégé encouraged one another to pursue opportunities beyond their comfort zones—interviewing for new positions, pursuing additional credentials, presenting at conferences, forming professional learning communities, and/or advocating for innovative programs. Notably, one partnership created a women's network after realizing that male colleagues had long formed networks and advanced together, often excluding women. Through this network, women were inspired to join committees, attend workshops, and present at conferences—broadening both their network and leadership presence.
Ultimately, effective mentors provided space for protégés to feel visible and become confident in their leadership identities. They also encouraged protégés to embody leadership in outside spaces, expanding women's leadership presence. Through this process, protégés formed new professional relationships, aspired to higher positions, sought new leadership experiences, and built wider networks. Mentoring fostered connections beyond mentoring, and women were strengthened by coming together. Overall, findings underscore that mentoring is an expansive structure that can provide on-ramps and pathways for individual women and a way forward for women collectively. Ideally, as women's leadership representation increases, gender stereotyping, segregation, and devaluing will decrease (Stainback et al., 2016). Women will have more influence on policy and practice (Stainback et al., 2016) and increase access to role models and mentors.
Implications for Research and Practice
Women's knowledge and experiences have been systematically marginalized in leadership scholarship, creating dangerous gaps in understanding how women actually navigate gendered organizations (Harding, 1991). Traditional mentoring research exacerbates this problem by fragmenting mentoring relationships into isolated mentor or protégé perspectives, producing incomplete findings that misrepresent how these partnerships function (Liu et al., 2021; Reyes, 2003). This study directly challenges these patterns by examining both sides of the mentoring dyad simultaneously, revealing how mentors and protégés engage in reciprocal identity work, collectively claim and defend leadership space, and collaboratively develop navigational strategies within gendered organizations. By centering women's collective contributions, this research shows mentoring as a powerful yet underrecognized way to contest gendered leadership barriers, while cautioning against approaches that reinforce traditional gendered leadership expectations.
The finding that women's embodiment of leadership and the co-construction of space occur through mentoring relationships warrants further investigation. Future research should explore how mentor-protégé partnerships collaboratively create and sustain leadership spaces for women in organizations where such spaces are often limited, contested, or denied. It is also important to identify the specific relational practices that enable this co-construction. Additionally, research should investigate how mentoring relationships function as rehearsal spaces where women experiment with leadership presence before enacting it in high-stakes contexts, and what specific mentor practices help protégés maintain authentic leadership styles when facing gendered expectations or resistance.
Given that our participants were predominantly white women, mentoring programs and policies must account for how intersecting systems of oppression and privilege shape leadership experiences. Women with multiple minoritized identities face unique barriers, including tokenism, cultural taxation, stereotype threat, racial battle fatigue, and limited access to mentors who share their experiences (Gardiner et al., 2000; Sim & Bierema, 2024). Future research should move beyond traditional dyadic mentoring, which may privilege white, Western relational norms, to explore alternative models that respond to intersectional leadership needs and support the full diversity of women leaders.
Key implications for practice and policy include pairing aspiring women leaders with mentors who provide both guidance and career sponsorship, embedding mentoring requirements into certification policies, and revising hiring criteria to value pedagogical expertise alongside administrative experience. Women benefit most from mentors who combine psychosocial support with advocacy, leveraging networks to create opportunities, influence high-stakes decisions, and expand space for women's leadership. Because women often advance through curriculum and instructional roles (Sharp et al., 2004; Sperandio, 2015), formal mentorship for supervisory positions is essential to confronting systemic inequities rather than placing the burden on women to adapt. Hiring and promotion practices should explicitly recognize leadership potential demonstrated through instructional and curricular excellence, ensuring that contributions to teaching, program development, and student outcomes are valued alongside traditional administrative experience.
The gendered system itself is at fault. We cannot rely on individuals to drive change; the structures that perpetuate inequity must be transformed. School districts and educational organizations must actively restructure systems that privilege masculine-coded leadership pathways while disproportionately assigning women invisible work. This includes examining assignment patterns at the organizational level. By periodically reviewing assignment patterns, such as analyzing who has access to opportunities such as leading initiatives, chairing committees, or representing the school, and who routinely handles administrative coordination, scheduling, and support tasks, leaders can identify systemic inequities in how work is distributed and make adjustments to create more equitable pathways to leadership. These structural changes shift responsibility from women learning to navigate inequitable systems to organizational accountability for advancing women's leadership.
Conclusion
In sharing stories, women administrators emphasized that finding a mentor or colleague with whom they connect is crucial. They highlighted the value of relationships with individuals genuinely invested in their growth and success. These partnerships helped women focus on their missions, including developing curricula, programs, and services to support student learning, as well as providing teacher support and professional development. In their interviews, participants shared stories of women mentors who encouraged updating resumes, practicing interview skills, pursuing certifications, and presenting at conferences, and they expressed appreciation for critical friends who challenged them to grow. Effective mentors modeled confidence and resilience, encouraged questions, offered advice, fostered autonomy, and prioritized relationships. Ultimately, mentoring stories reinforced that women administrators do not conform to a single leadership model. Instead, partnerships were transformative for women who felt seen and valued in their mentoring spaces. However, the work is far from over–gendered organizations will only change when women's spaces are visible to men and accessible to all women.
Footnotes
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.