This case study explores the duty of midmanagement administrators to enforce district policies with which they do not necessarily agree. The case addresses the issues of moral leadership, distribution of power, emotional responses that impact decision making, class differences, and equity. It also examines the role conflict that many married female principals bring to the job description. Issues of class and the growing inequities in the class structure of the United States are pivotal to the discussion. This case can be used in classes that consider gender and leadership, decision making, equity, moral leadership, organizational change, policy implementation, and community/school relations.
Blount, J. M. (1999). Manliness and the gendered construction of school administration in the USA. International Journal of Leadership in Education: Theory and Practice, 2(2), 55-68.
2.
Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (1987). Democracy and capitalism: Poverty, community, and the contradictions of modern social thought. New York: Basic Books.
3.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
4.
Brunner, C. C. (1999). Sacred dreams: Women and the superintendency. Albany: State University of New York Press.
5.
Burgess, G., & Burgess, H. (1999). International online training program on intractable conflict: Conflict management and constructive confrontation. A guide to theory and practice. Retrieved October 7, 2004, from http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/
6.
Curry, B. K. (2000). Women in power: Pathways to leadership in education. New York: Teachers College Press.
7.
Dalton, C. (1999). Being Black, living in the red: Race, wealth, and social policy in America. Berkeley: University of California Press.
8.
Davis, S. H., & Davis, P. B. (2003). The intuitive dimensions of administrative decision making. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, Inc.
9.
Grogan, M. (1996). Voices of women aspiring to the superintendency. Albany: State University of New York Press.
10.
Henze, R., Katz, A., Norte, E., Sathor, S. E., & Walker, E. (2002). Leading for diversity: How school leaders promote positive interethnic relations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
11.
Hoy, W., & Miskel, C. (2005). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
12.
Hoy, W. K., & Tarter, C. J. (2004). Administrators, solving the problems of practice: Decision-making concepts, cases, and consequences (2nd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.
13.
Johnson, S. (2001). Emergence: The connected lives of ants, brains, cities, and software. New York: Touchstone.
14.
Kozol, J. (1991). Savage inequalities: Children in America’s schools. New York: Crown.
15.
Larson, C. L., & Ovando, C. J. (2001). The color of bureaucracy: The politics of equity in multi-cultural school communities. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomas Learning.
16.
Maxwell, J. C. (2000). Failing forward: Turning mistakes into stepping stones for success. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
17.
Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., Roth, G., & Smith, B. (1999). The dance of change: The challenge to sustaining momentum in learning organizations. New York: Currency Doubleday.
18.
Skrla, L. (2003). Mourning silence: Women superintendents (and a researcher) rethink speaking up and speaking out. In M. D. Young & L. Skrla (Eds.), Reconsidering feminist research in educational leadership (pp. 103-128). Albany: State University of New York Press.
