Expanding the Conversation

Breaking Into the All-Male Club

You will look at your colleagues at UCEA or AERA conferences differently after reading this book.

Breaking Into the All-Male Club will grab attention! It names names. It is a collection of stories about female professors of educational administration who teetered on the balance beam entering university departments in a profession designed and controlled by men. The stories were framed to focus on barriers, male norms, and struggles. Mertz acknowledges limitations (e.g., the 15 were self-selected, some “firsts” didn’t respond, most “firsts” were Caucasian). Critiques were peppered and salted with stories of supportive mentors and role models. The narratives are poignant, maddening, revealing, and even funny. We are always interested in people who “overcame the odds, why they bothered” (p. 1).

Mertz first provides a useful history of university-based programs in educational administration and explains the linkage to the history of schooling, with all its embedded assumptions about gender. Collectively, then, these stories build a set of new insights into this continuing, more inclusive history of women perceived as outsiders.

While telling their stories, these scholars exhibit their abilities to subtly frame with underlying understandings of professional cultures and the literatures and realities of the history of our field. The first entry, coauthored by Rusch and Jackson, relates Barbara Jackson’s story of being the first black woman in the field. Jackson’s dual identity as an African American and a woman leads her to conclude, “I am convinced that we must find ways for people whose life experiences have been different to come together” (p. 25).

Pounder relates stories that emphasize the hierarchical power dynamics associated with “power use and abuse,” as well incidents of overt sexual harassment (p. 81). Prestine and others’ stories of sexual politics lessons regarding commentary on assumptions like: 1) wives are there to finish papers, 2) single women will have a better chance in their careers, 3) men’s publications are celebrated but women should not brag. Bauch illustrates how women are assigned the role of “guardian of ethical values,” which sounds honorable but was really a stab in the back. Mertz recalls sexist joking, seeing professors pursuing their female students, and being told that she must “drink…and play poker with the boys in Washington” if she wanted to get grants.

More stories, more sexual politics lessons: 1) women are to “move on,” or “let it slide” when colleagues, and students say or do something offensive, 2) men are supposed to get higher pay, 3) women have special extra assignments—e.g., taking care of students’ personal lives, being “trophy wives,” and otherwise filling a range of “women’s roles” cheerfully. Just one example among many is Verstegen’s point that being a young, single woman made her a professional curiosity in the eyes of colleagues and colleagues’ wives.

Even though truths are told, this book is still overly ladylike. The 15 contributors name names but primarily when they praise supportive colleagues and mentors. When speaking of stupidities, marginalization, and unethical behaviors, the contributors politely withhold names. Is respect for hierarchy and patriarchy so ingrained? Too, while speaking of many hostilities in their work environments, none of these narratives report overt sexual harassment. Through this pre- and post-Anita Hill era, in their professional culture created by and for white males, we are to assume that nothing of the sort happened? More likely these were voices not heard.

So what’s missing? The confounding effects of race, sexuality, and gender. During the pioneering years of “firsts,” few dared to be out of the closet. Few (e.g., Barbara Jackson and Flora Ida Ortiz) were women of color. Also, how can the approach used in this book relay the missing in action? Where are the women who, on seeing this all-male club, never entered or persevered? Or those who stepped up to the plate but quit, or were dropped from the roster? Where are you, Colleen Bell? Why aren’t you in here, Catherine Marshall? Jackie Blount? And where is the most important story – that is, how has women’s scholarship infused educational administration with scholarly challenges?

Women and Educational Leadership

“There is a more accurate and detailed account of reindeer in Alaska than of women in educational leadership at the Pre-K-12 level nationwide!” (p. 103). Grogan and Shakeshaft highlight a problem that has been noted by various scholars who write about women in educational leadership. With information typically only clicks away, statistics on women in school leadership positions remain elusive. As the authors note, there are no federal or national organizations that systematically collect or report either by gender or by gender and ethnicity. Strange in a society in the throes of an obsession with numbers.

Pioneers themselves, Grogan and Shakeshaft make the case for women’s unique way of leading that is definable. They, too, make the usual disclaimers (e.g., all women don’t lead in a particular way, all women don’t lead differently from men), then identify five themes that characterize the leadership of women. These themes include a focus on relationships and a devotion to instruction flavored with a passion for social justice. Further, women strive for balance between professional and personal spheres and rely on spirituality for inspiration and hope. Their theme about power—that women “conceptualize power differently and are likely to seek to expand everyone’s power” (p. 6)”—is one worth continuing thought and study. As each theme is detailed, the authors also provide a useful overview of research to substantiate their claims.

Readers will find much to like in this book: the discussion on power, the claiming of mothering, the importance of cognitive shifts, the power of framing, and the connection to social network theory. The authors also provide questions at the end of each chapter that are useful for reflection and could be used as springboards for discussion; less useful were the vignettes that featured a dialogue between two secondary principals.

They suggest a new conceptualization of leadership that challenges the notion of centralized control and top-down leadership. This new model, a diverse collective model, is available to both women and men, and builds on both heterogeneity and difference. They tie diverse collective leadership to education as a social movement, an intriguing and timely idea. “One could argue that a social network composed of like-minded members of a particular class, race, gender, faith, or other identity marker, coalescing around an issue or issues derived from their identity, would be moved relatively easily towards collective action” (p. 49).

This book is very optimistic in its outlook. The authors assert, “Women are getting to a point where they can lead as they want to lead, without explanation. At one time women were not accepted as leaders unless they acted like men, only to learn that acting like a man was not only uncomfortable, but, for themselves, unlikely to be successful. Now women are changing the ideas about appropriate leadership models just by being themselves. And men are ‘leading like women’” (p. 97). Perhaps this assertion is the authors’ attempt to reframe the problem to result in a cognitive shift. While we agree that reframing is a powerful strategy, in this case, it seems to ignore the crisis undermining public schooling today.

So what’s missing? Grogan and Shakeshaft state that “it is not surprising that in order for many women to be comfortable with the notion of holding power, power needs to be conceptualized as something that is shared with others and that is not power over but, rather, power with” (p. 7). Let’s consider for a moment three media-celebrated female leaders in education—Wendy Kopp, founder of Teach for America, Michelle Rhee, former chancellor of District of Columbia, and Eva Moskowits, leader of the Harlem Success Academy charter school chain. Are these three women sounding the tocsin of social justice and equity and alternative leadership models? Or are they tokens, being used to mask more macro alterations? Who’s financing these entrepreneurial ventures? What is the financiers’ motivation? Eliminating teacher licensure, doing away with tenure, and funneling money away from public schools look like attempts to dismantle, not reframe, public education. These popular, politicized endeavors take our attention away from what most educators, women and men, care very deeply about—the students. We wonder. What do poor children get? The leftovers. What do public school teachers, largely a female profession, get? Disempowerment and a healthy dose of disdain.

One last note. Grogan and Shakeshaft contend that the development of charter schools in local communities is a great example of the collective concept and they urge education providers, including public, private, and charter schools, to work together. These are puzzling assertions, since charter schools (and private schools) thrive on competition. The title of Race to the Top (which encourages charter school growth), acknowledges winners and losers. It accentuates competition, in this case for funding. It uncritically accentuates assumptions of the free-market society. However, as Diane Ravitch (2010) notes, schooling is a public good that belongs in the public sector. Public school leaders, women and men, should be on guard, and women educators are especially vulnerable.

Women Leading Education Across the Continents

Sobehart’s collection of essays provides insight from research and practice about women’s experiences in K-12 education and higher education internationally. Emerging from the formation of a group of women scholars who met in 2007 in Rome, Italy, this book informs, inspires, and mobilizes. It allows us to ponder, “What is common about leadership across deserts, rainforests, to post-industrial nations, and then ask is the continued loss of women’s talent and marginalization of women’s scholarship going to go on, as it has for 30 more years?” Our review addresses each of the book’s six sections with a few highlights from each to tantalize and urge readers.

Starting with England and the US, distinguished scholars refresh the knowledge base on gender identity and politics. Intersectionality theory as discussed by Jacky Lumby shows that gender is but one part of multiple characteristics of identity. Gender and “its perceived value in supporting inclusion in leadership and shaping leadership varies significantly in differing contexts” and “that its impact cannot be understood fully without taking account of the metamorphosis of gender as it collides with, permeates and transmutes in the presence of other identities” (Lumby, 2009, p. 37). Some of these are quite familiar to those who have researched women in educational leadership, but they are essential reminders.

Part II, “Traversing Africa, from Tanzania to Uganda to South Africa,” illustrates the historical and cultural contexts for women’s emergence, and in some cases, decline as educational leaders. Thidziambi Phendla (2009) notes that the number of women leaders in higher education institutions in South Africa has actually declined. She postulates that this lack of representation may be attributable to unwillingness, either on the part of top management to appoint women or on the part of women who choose not to apply. “What appears to be the case is that women in general and Black women in particular are expected to perform, compete and lead in unfamiliar and hostile environments with little support” (p. 63).

Blackmore (2009) notes a similar decline in university numbers in Australia in Part III, “Issues in China, Hong, Kong, New Zealand, Melanesia, and Australia,” though women have made more progress in state schools. However, she notes that merely increasing the number of women in leadership roles is not an adequate measure of success. “The field needs to move its focus away from gender difference to consider differences among women such as indigenous, ‘ethnic,’ religious and linguistic difference and not to privilege gender as the analytical frame” (p. 80). This section also shows a vivid contrast of New Zealand women in major policy positions with Melanesia’s clinging to “Big Man” leadership, and where sexual violence is almost “normal,” where the state fails to protect women. This reminder of the power of culture, with promoting women into political and educational leadership quite unlikely in places where bride-prices limit women’s freedom and sense of self.

Part IV uses the trope of personal values and cultural values as the lens for examining women’s leadership in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Greece. Of particular interest is the identification of women leading in “non-formal” education and NGOs. Also noteworthy is the cross-cultural comparisons between Greece and the United States. Linda Lyman, Anastasis Athanasoula-Reppa and Angeliki Lazaridou’s (2009) comparative study of women’s leadership practices in Greece and in the United States reveals that women leaders in both countries demonstrate moral purpose, leading from strong values that include caring and democratic purpose. However, opportunities for women are still limited in both countries.

In the introduction to Part V, Grady and Bertram (2009) propose creating a “world clock” to assess the status of women in each country (p. 156) specifically addressing of women in leadership roles. Part V asks, what makes change happen? An exploration of cases in Turkey and Germany reveals both promise and disadvantage. But in Turkey, social, cultural, and economic barriers still exist for women entering the workforce. “Being assertive and diligent is not enough for women to break barriers to entry into administrative positions” (Celikten, 2009, p. 173).

Part VI concludes the compendium with an examination of Hispanic and “Mixed” Cultures of Brazil and the Caribbean and the cultural mixes in the United States. The selections show how roots, race, and ethnicity shape leadership choices. Photos and statistics, interspersed with narratives illustrate women’s insights for revisioning leadership as well as their ways of constructing careers in spite of scarce opportunities. Imagine leadership emerging from Brazil, with a heritage of women’s movements and Black women’s movements! In Rosangelo Malachia’s piece, one of her participants says, “I have been an educator for 42 years. Undeniably, I need to fight every day to be respected. How did I learn to fight? When I was a little girl, my mother taught me to say with her, ‘We are. We can.’ For years we repeated this mantra together, and I have survived” (p. 203).

The consistent message across the countries represented in this collection is limited educational leadership positions based on gender. Numbers are useful, though, in stimulating new questions, such as “how is it that Pakistan’s K-12 leaders are 50% females yet the percentage of girls in secondary schools is only 24%?” or “what are the global forces that keep a consistent pattern of many women as teachers, some as elementary and assistant principals, fewer as secondary principals, then very few as top officials like superintendents?” The opportunity to view women’s status in education cross-culturally is unique, as it connects and informs leaders across the world.

Women Leading Across the Continents, with a rich mix of autobiography and qualitative and quantitative research, not only shows how we think about gender, ethnicity, and leadership, but also offers theoretical insights and strategies for educators committed to changing and improving education. Sobehart (2009) concludes with a plea to readers to be “the passion that can transform the universe, or at least your piece of it, as flame transforms ice and turns it into energy” (p. 220).

So what’s missing? We wonder how to represent the women whose voices are not present, about how class, poverty, the sex/power dynamics, the preference for Big Man leadership, plays out in countries that are not represented.

Fortunately, Soberhart’s 2009 book has become a tradition, with the recent publication of Shaping Social Justice Leadership: Insights of Women Educators Worldwide (Lyman, Strachan, & Lazaridou, 2012). Other compendiums, such as Herstories: Leading with the Lessons of the Lives of Black Women Activists (Alston & McClellan, 2011) further expand our insights for an educational leadership that acknowledges intersectionalities.

Conclusion

The authors of these three books do fan the flame. The Mertz collection from the mothers and grandmothers who pioneered their presence in higher education demonstrates the complexities of being “First Ladies.” We would like to hear from the other female professors who were also seminal (germinal?) leaders in the early years. We would like to know what happened to those who just refused to go “with the system.”

Grogan and Shakeshaft conceptualize the notion of diverse collective leadership for the 21^st century to make a strong case for reframing education as a social movement. We would add that emphasis must be placed on the fact that schools are a public, not private, good (see Labaree, 1997; Ravitch, 2011). Can we learn from nonpublic school providers? Probably. But we cannot assume that everyone is looking out for the public good. And women educators should not let the “goodness” (be it relationship-building, instruction, passion, etc.) be a pawn.

Sobehart’s insights on women’s leadership globally intersect gender, race, ethnicity, and status to relate how our differences are complex, but that commonalities connect us. These narratives are a foundation for scholars who decide to research women, education, and leadership.

Finally, our review leaves us wondering, as Soberhart does: must every generation of scholars discover and rediscover the history of women? Pushing beyond this question, we assert that, with four decades’ accumulation of research on women’s challenges in educational leadership, we don’t need more research on women. Instead, we need a powerful political shift in our knowledge base. A next step will be to demand that women’s issues and feminist scholars’ insights be incorporated into the educational administration canon. This cognitive shift will have global and local resonance—and will hopefully provide educational administrators with models that are more useful than the competitive discourse that threatens public education today.