We examine U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission data (2002–2014) to assess the representation of women at different occupational levels in U.S. public school districts. As of 2014, we find women (a) approach representational parity in administrative and principal positions, (b) are underrepresented in assistant principal positions, and (c) are overrepresented among classroom teachers. We expand the analysis to include district size and find underrepresentation of women in small districts and overrepresentation in large districts across leadership positions (administrators, principals, and assistant principals). While progress has occurred, limitations persist, including: (1) a prevalence of districts with no women in leadership roles; (2) a continuing imbalance of women in leadership positions across districts; and (3) on average, large gender-based leadership inequities in smaller districts. Gender-related barriers to career entry and advancement persist. We discuss why gender gaps continue to exist in leadership positions and provide suggestions for employment policy reform.
BishuS. G.KennedyA. R. (2020). Trends and gap: A meta-review of representative bureaucracy. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 40(4), 559–588.
2.
BjorkL.GlassT.BrunnerC. (2005). Characteristics of American school superintendents. In BjorkL. G.KowalskiT. J. (Eds.),The contemporary superintend: Preparation, practice, and development (pp. 19–44). Addison-Wesley.
3.
BlountJ. M. (2013). Educational leadership through equity, diversity, and social justice and educational leadership for the privilege imperative. In TillmanL. C.ScheurichJ. J. (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational leadership for equity and diversity (pp. 7–21). Routledge.
4.
BradburyM. D.KelloughJ. E. (2008). Representative bureaucracy: Exploring the potential for active representation in local government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 697–714.
5.
BullardA. M.WrightD. S. (1993). Circumventing the glass ceiling: Women executives in American state governments. Public Administration Review, 53(3), 189–202.
6.
DometriusN. C.SigelmanL. (1997). Organizational regeneration reconsidered: Women in state and local government, 1980-90. American Journal of Political Science, 41(1), 333–338.
7.
GlassT. E.BjorkL. G.BrunnerC. C., & American Association of School Administrators. (1992). The 1992 study of the American school superintendency: America’s education leaders in a time of reform. American Association of School Administrators.
8.
GuyM. (2017). Mom work versus dad work in local government. Administration & Society, 49(1), 48–64.
9.
GrissomJ. A.KernE. C.RodriguezL. A. (2015). The “representative bureaucracy” in education: Educator workforce diversity, policy outputs, and outcomes for disadvantaged students. Educational Researcher, 44(3), 185–192. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X15580102
10.
GrissomJ. A.Nicholson-CrottyJ.Nicholson-CrottyS. (2009). Race, region, and representative bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 69(5), 911–919.
11.
GroganM. (1999). Equity/equality issues of gender, race, and class. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(4), 518–536.
12.
GroganM.BrunnerC. C. (2005). Women leading systems. The School Administrator, 62(2), 46.
13.
HuntV. H.RuckerL.KerrB. (2019). Reconsidering sex-based occupational segregation and agency missions: An analysis of U.S. state bureaucracies (1987-2015) using two different thresholds. Administration & Society, 52(3), 431–465.
14.
IngersollR.MayH.CollinsG. (2019). Recruitment, employment, retention and the minority teacher shortage. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 27, 37.
15.
IsaakA. (1985). Scope and methods of political science. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
16.
JohnsonB. J.Crum-CanoB. D. (2011). Glass walls in urban planning: An examination of policy type and gender segregation within a profession. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 31, 386–409.
17.
JohnsonJ. B.ReynoldsT. (2008). Political science research methods. CQ Press.
18.
JohnsonN. J.SvaraJ. H. (2015). Justice for all: Promoting social equity in public administration. Routledge.
19.
KerrB.KerrG. R.MillerW. (2014). Bureaucratic, leadership, and workforce representation among female administrators, principals, assistant principals, and classroom teachers in U.S. school districts, 2002-2008. Public Administration Quarterly, 38(3), 371–404.
20.
KerrB.MillerW.KerrG. R.DeshommesR. (2016). Interethnic competition for classroom teacher, assistant principal, principal, and administrator jobs in multiethnic U.S. school districts, 2002-2008. The American Review of Public Administration, 46(4), 459–477.
21.
KerrB.MillerW.ReidM. (2002). Sex-based occupational segregation in U.S. state bureaucracies, 1987-97. Public Administration Review, 62(4), 412–423.
22.
KingsleyJ. D. (1944). Representative bureaucracy: An interpretation of the British civil service. The Antioch Press.
23.
KowalskiT. J.McCordR.PetersenG.YoungI. P.EllersonN. M., (2011). The American school superintendent; 2010 decennial study. Report of the American Association of School Administrators. Rowman & Littlefield Education.
KrislovS.RosenbloomD. H. (1981). Representative bureaucracy and the American political system. Praeger.
26.
MarantoR.CarrollK.ChengA.TeodoroM. P. (2018). Boys will be superintendents: School leadership as a gendered profession: Why do men still fill most district leadership positions, and what can be done about it?Phi Delta Kappan, 100(2), 12.
27.
MarczynskiJ. C.GatesG. (2013). Women secondary principals in Texas 1998 and 2011: Movement toward equity. Journal of Educational Administration, 51(5), 705–727.
28.
MeierK. J.NigroL. G. (1976). Representative bureaucracy and policy preferences: A study in the attitudes of federal executives. Public Administration Review, 36(4), 458–469.
29.
MosherF. C. (1982). Democracy and the public service (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
30.
NachmiasD.RosenbloomD. (1973). Measuring bureaucratic representation and integration. Public Administration Review, 33(6), 590–597.
31.
NashA.GroganM. (2021). Leadership and the US Superintendency: Issues of race, preparation and impact. School Leadership & Management, 42(4), 1–20.
32.
RaffelJ. A. (2007). Why has public administration ignored public education, and does it matter?Public Administration Review, 67(1), 135–151.
33.
RehfussJ. A. (1986). A representative bureaucracy? Women and minority executives in California career service. Public Administration Review, 46(5), 454–460.
34.
ReidM.KerrB.MillerW. (2003). Glass walls and glass ceilings: Women’s representation in state and municipal bureaucracies. Praeger Publishers.
35.
RochaR. R.HawesD. P. (2009). Racial diversity, representative bureaucracy, and equity in multiracial school districts. Social Science Quarterly, 90(2), 326–344.
36.
SaltzsteinG. H. (1983). Personnel directors and female employment representation: A new addition to models of equal employment opportunity policy?Social Science Quarterly, 64(4), 734–746.
37.
School Reporting Committee (EEO-5). (n.d.). EEOC Form 168A, Elementary-Secondary Staff Information (EEO-5): Instructions for filing and record keeping requirements. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Justice.
38.
SeldenS. C. (1997). The promise of representative bureaucracy: Diversity and representativeness in a government agency. M. E. Sharpe.
39.
SkrlaL.ReyesP.ScheurichJ. J. (2000). Sexism, silence, and solutions: Women superintendents speak up and speak out. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(1), 44–75.
40.
SneedB. G. (2007). Glass walls in state bureaucracies: Examining the difference departmental function can make. Public Administration Review, 67, 880–891.
41.
ThielemannG.StewartJ. (1996). A demand-side perspective on the importance of representative bureaucracy: AIDS, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation. Public Administration Review, 56, 168–173.
42.
TillmanL. C.ScheurichJ. J. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of research on educational leadership for equity and diversity. Routledge.
43.
WhiteR. S. (2021) What’s in a first name? America’s K-12 public school district superintendent gender gap. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 22(2), 1–17.
44.
WiseL. (1990). Social equity in civil service systems. Public Administration Review, 50(5), 567–575.
45.
ZajicekA.HuntV. H.MillerW.KerrB. (2020). An intersectional approach to public school leadership: Employment patterns among principals in multiethnic U. S. school districts. Public Administration Quarterly, 44(1), 69–103.
