In this article, I put forth a framework for thinking about how contexts matter. This framework highlights organizational, occupational, personal, and social contexts that influence leadership, which I illustrated with three cases of superintendents working on issues of systemic, equity-focused improvements. Data are drawn from a seven-year study of a superintendent's network, including nine interviews with each participant. These illustrations demonstrate that different interactions between the personal, occupational, social, and organizational contexts may result in reframing, crystallizing, or negotiating what it means to lead for equity. For superintendents to engage in equity-minded reform, research and policy need to expand to consider leaders’ personal experiences as well as dominant discourses of equity.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlsburyT. L., & WhitakerK. S. (2006). Superintendent perspectives and practice of accountability, democratic voice and social justice. Journal of Educational Administration, 45(2), 154–174.
2.
AlstonJ. A. (2005). Tempered radicals and servant leaders: Black females persevering in the superintendency. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(4), 675–688.
3.
AndersonG. (2002). Can we effectively build credential programs for educational administrators on principles of social justice? A case study. Retrieved 4 June, 2006 from www.leadershipforsocialjustice.org
4.
AndersonL., & StillmanJ. (2013). Student teaching's contribution to preservice teacher development: A review of research focused on the preparation of teachers for urban and high-needs contexts. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 3–69.
5.
ArtilesA. J. (2011). Toward an interdisciplinary understanding of educational equity and difference: The case of the racialization of Ability. Educational Researcher, 40(9), 431–445.
BrunnerC. C. (2000). Unsettled moments in settled discourse: Women superintendents’ experiences of inequality. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(1), 76–116.
10.
ChildressS. M., DoyleD. P., & ThomasD. A. (2009). Leading for equity: The pursuit of excellence in Montgomery County Public Schools.Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
11.
CityE. A., ElmoreR. F., FiarmanS. E., & TeitelL. (2009). Instructional rounds in education: A network approach to improving teaching and learning.Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
12.
CreswellJ. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd edition). Los Angeles: Sage.
13.
CrowsonR. L. (1987). The local school district superintendency: A puzzling administrative role. Educational Administration Quarterly, 23(3), 49–69.
14.
CubanL. (1976). Urban school chiefs under fire.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
15.
Darling-HammondL. (2007). Race, inequality and educational accountability: The irony of “No Child Left Behind.”Race, Ethnicity, and Education, 10(3), 245–260.
16.
EdwardsR., & MillerK. (2007). Putting the context into learning. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 15(3), 263–274.
17.
EscobarR. H. (2009). How Latinos ascend to the superintendency (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (AAT 3355332).
18.
EvansA. E. (2007). School leaders and their sensemaking about race and demographic change. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(2), 159–188.
19.
FishmanC. A. (2010). Making way for equity: Elementary principals’ interpretations of equity (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (AAT 3407545).
20.
FusarelliL. D. (2004). The potential impact of the No Child Left Behind Act on equity and diversity in American education. Educational Policy, 18(1), 71–94.
21.
GlassT. E., & FranceschiniL. A. (2007). The state of the American school superintendency: A mid-decade study.Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
22.
GubaE. G., & LincolnY. S. (1982). Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic inquiry. Educational Communication and Technology, 30(4), 233–252.
23.
Hibbert-SmithL. (2006). Minority female urban superintendents: A historical perspective. Journal of Philosophy and History of Education, 56(1), 54–62.
24.
HorsfordS. D. (2010). Mixed feelings about mixed schools: Superintendents on the complex legacy of school desegregation. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(3), 287–321.
25.
HorsfordS., GroslandT., & GunnK. M. (2011). Pedagogy of the personal and professional: Toward a framework for culturally relevant leadership. Journal of School Leadership, 21(4), 582–606.
26.
JacksonB. L. (1996). Balancing act: The political of the urban school superintendent.Washington, DC: Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies.
27.
JenkinsC. (2007). Considering the community: How one rural superintendent perceives community values and their effect on decision-making. Rural Educator, 28(3), 28–32.
28.
JohnsonS. M. (1996). Leading to change: The challenge of the new superintendency.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
29.
KatzS. (2010). Women superintendents: Standing for social justice. Education Leadership Review, 11(1), 1–8.
30.
KhalifaM. A., JenningsM. E., BriscoeF., OleszweskiA. M., & AbdiN. (2014). Racism? Administrative and community perspectives in data-driven decision making: Systemic perspectives versus technical-rational perspectives. Urban Education, 49(2), 147–182.
31.
KowalskiT. J. (1995). Keepers of the flame: Contemporary urban superintendents.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
32.
KowalskiT. J. (2005). Evolution of the school district superintendent position. In BjörkL. G., & KowalskiT. J. (Eds.), The contemporary superintendent: Preparation, practice, and development (pp. 1–18). Thousand Oakes, CA: Corwin Press.
33.
Ladson-BillingsG. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding achievement in U.S. schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3–12.
34.
LincolnY. S., & GubaE. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
35.
LuggC. A., & ToomsA. K. (2010). A shadow of ourselves: Identity, erasure, and the politics of queer leadership. School Leadership and Management30(1), 77–91.
36.
MarshallC., & WardM. (2004). “Yes, but …”: Education leaders discuss social justice. Journal of School Leadership, 14(1), 530–563.
37.
MatthewsE. N. (1995). Women in educational administration: Views of equity. In DunlapD. M., & SchmuckP. A. (Eds.), Women leading in education (pp. 247–273). Albany: State University of New York Press.
38.
Murtadha-WattsK. (2000). Cleaning up and maintenance in the wake of an urban school administration tempest. Urban Education, 35(5), 603–615.
39.
Nestor-BakerN. S., & HoyW. K. (2001). Tacit knowledge of school superintendents: Its nature, meaning, and content. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(1), 86–129.
40.
OrnsteinA. C. (1991). Problems facing school superintendents and school board presidents of large school districts. Urban Review, 23(3), 207–215.
41.
ParkerL., & VillalpandoO. (2007). A ra(cialized) perspective on education leadership: Critical race theory in educational administration. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(5), 519–524.
42.
PattersonJ. A., KoenigsA., MohnG., & RasmussenC. (2006). Working against ourselves: Decision making in a small rural school district. Journal of Educational Administration, 44(2), 142–158.
43.
PayneR. K. (2003). A framework for understanding poverty (3rd edition). Highlands, TX: Aha Process.
44.
PeterkinR. S., Jewell-ShermanD., KellyL., & BoozerL. (2011). Every child, every classroom, every day: School leaders who are making equity a reality.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
45.
PetersonG. J. (2002). Singing the same tune: Principals’ and school board members’ perceptions of the superintendent's role as instructional leader. Journal of Educational Administration, 40(2), 158–171.
46.
RorrerA. K. (2006). Eroding inequity: Straddling the margin of tolerance. Educational Policy, 20(1), 225–248.
47.
RuschE. A., & HorsfordS. (2009). Changing hearts and minds: The quest for open talk about race in educational leadership. International Journal of Educational Management, 23(4), 302–313.
48.
ScottH. J. (1990). Views of Black school superintendents on Black consciousness and professionalism. Journal of Negro Education, 59(2), 165–172.
49.
ShermanW. H. (2008). No Child Left Behind: A legislative catalyst for superintendent action to eliminate test-score gaps?Educational Policy, 22(5), 675–704.
50.
SizemoreB. (1986). The limits of the Black superintendency: A review of the literature. Journal of Educational Equity and Leadership, 6(3), 180–208.
51.
SkrlaL. (2000). Mourning silence: Women superintendents (and a researcher) rethink speaking up and speaking out. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 13(6), 611–628.
52.
SkrlaL., ReyesP., & ScheurichJ. J. (2000). Sexism, silence, and solutions: Women superintendents speak up and speak out. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(1), 44–75.
53.
SleeterC. E. (2000). Epistemological diversity in research on preservice teacher preparation for historically underserved children. Review of Research in Education, 25(1), 209–250.
54.
TallericoM. (2000). Accessing the superintendency: The unwritten rules.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
55.
TheoharisG. (2004). At no small cost: Social justice leaders and their response to resistance (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (AAT 3143016).
56.
TheoharisG. (2007). Social justice educational leaders and resistance: Toward a theory of social justice leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(2), 221–258.
57.
TyackD., & HansotE. (1982). Managers of virtue: Public school leadership in America.New York, NY: Basic Books.
58.
WolfE. L. (1988). The school superintendent in the reform era: Perceptions of practitioners, principals, and pundits. Peabody Journal of Education, 65(4), 9–30.
