Abstract
This qualitative study investigated the social justice practices of four principals − two from the United States and two from Sweden. The purpose of the study was to enhance our understanding of school leaders’ actions as they work to promote socially just practices in different national contexts. Principals were interviewed to examine their perceptions of what social justice leaders do, how they make sense of social justice, what helps and hinders the work of social justice, and how they learned to become social justice leaders. Findings from the principals’ interviews are presented as a fictional conversation to illustrate similarities and points of departure in social justice practice between the two countries. Principals emphasized the proactive nature of social justice leadership, demonstrated through decision-making, strategic planning, and daily interactions. The importance of giving voice to those who cannot speak for themselves, holding high expectations for all students, and the importance of modeling positive values was underscored. Conclusions from this study illustrate that social justice leadership in practice, despite the national context, offers more commonalities than differences.
Keywords
Schools are generally viewed as important social institutions, with education regarded as ‘a primary means of facilitating the harmonious development of a diverse society’ (Lumby and Heystek, 2011: 5). Both Sweden and the United States emphasize in their steering documents the importance of equal education for all children, no matter their background, as a means to promote social justice. Yet the definition of social justice differs among scholars, ranging from what it means in practice (Furman, 2012) to curriculum objectives that implicitly or explicitly include social objectives as teachers and school leaders today re-define the curriculum in their own contexts (Norberg, 2009).
Principals’ behaviors and decisions regarding social justice, in relation to the curriculum’s social objectives, create different prerequisites depending on school context (Gold et al., 2003). Though many factors affect students’ learning, the principal’s perception of the task and how it is performed is crucial. This article illustrates how four principals − two from Sweden and two from the US − understand and work with social justice school leadership.
The research
The research study reported here sought to enhance our understanding of school leaders’ actions as they work to promote socially just practices in different national contexts. We contacted four principals whom we consider, through personal knowledge and recognition by others, as principals engaged in social justice issues with a strong educational philosophy that commits to reducing inequality in schools. Two principals were interviewed from each country: Sylvia and Daniel from Sweden, and Alex and Andrew from the United States. Although all are considered social justice leaders, differences include school contexts, missions, and years of experience. The sizes of their schools vary between 176 (Sylvia) and 1128 (Alex) students. The minority student population varies between 11.5 per cent (Andrew) and 99 per cent (Sue). Daniel works as a principal in an upper secondary school, whereas the other three work in compulsory schools. Andrew’s school is situated in a rural town, whereas the other three schools are situated in cities. Andrew is a new principal with only 1 year of experience, whereas Alex has worked as a principal for 12 years. Although the context was different both within and across countries, all schools could be considered high-needs schools.
Interview data were collected from each principal. Interviews lasted approximately 1 hour, and were digitally recorded and verbatim transcribed. The following questions guided the research: How do social justice leaders make sense of social justice? What do social justice leaders do? What factors help and hinder the work of social justice leaders? How did social justice leaders learn to become social justice leaders?
To make their ideas and understanding visible, we have constructed a creative, yet fictional conversation, elicited from the data, in an attempt, as Gunter (2013) recommends, to use theory and theorizing as clear and creative communication to bridge the gap between research and practice. In this conversation, our four principals come together and discuss what they find crucial in their role as a socially just leader. This recreated dialogue presents research findings that address whether local and national prerequisites are visible when the principals talk about social justice, whether principals from the two countries hold the same views and values of social justice, and perceptions of their work as social justice leaders.
Making sense of social justice
The conversation begins with the principals articulating how they make sense of social justice leadership:
‘I am so glad that you have brought us together to talk about social justice,’ Sylvia started the conversation. ‘Everyone, especially principals, should talk more about these issues. I always take the opportunity to share experience about my work when I meet others who believe in a more just and democratic society. I believe that all individuals have the right to be valued as the person they are. Despite background, every student should be met with high expectations.’ All principals in the room nodded, and Daniel added, ‘Children deserve to have the opportunity to both be and become whatever they want to be.’ ‘I do hope our kids can feel that they are treated with dignity and respect and that they mean something to somebody else,’ Andrew said. Alex continued the same thread: ‘The crux and challenge of social justice is to apply that view to every student, not just the ones that fit the teachers’ idea of what a student should look like.’ ‘I would say that the views of others are crucial,’ Sylvia replied, ‘especially according to responsibility: do you see yourself as responsible, or do you put the responsibility on the people around yourself?’ Alex looked at her and said slowly, ‘That requires that students are raised to take responsibility for themselves and others and to have teachers who take that responsibility.’ Andrew filled in, ‘Yes, teachers need to see the value in each of those students, and we, as administrators, need to see the value in each of those students…to where we can lead and guide and direct a student on that path of learning to better themselves for their future. That is, I think, to work toward social justice.’ Before Andrew had the opportunity to continue, Sylvia added: ‘That requires, besides knowledgeable teachers, teachers who have self-knowledge and take time to reflect on these issues.’ ‘Oh, yes,’ Andrew said with emphasis. ‘We, as school leaders, must not only believe that all students can achieve and learn but also have a desire to make school a place where students can accomplish this, even if carrying out this vision is more difficult. I am, as an administrator, able to see the broader picture of the school. In terms of social justice, there is a delicate balance, explaining how all of these pieces work together. Changing this puzzle piece will have an effect on that puzzle piece. It may not have impact right now, but going down the road, it is going to. Making changes for one group may create an injustice for another group.’ ‘Yes, as a principal,’ Daniel filled in, ‘I have the freedom, within financial constraints, to structure the school to help those who need the most support. Injustice is an effect of poverty and the socioeconomic segregation.’
The work of social justice leaders
As dedicated leaders for social justice, the principals were asked to provide examples of actions they take and behaviors they exhibit that identify them as social justice leaders.
‘I think it is so important that you are present in the daily life at the school and that you are aware of and act in relation to your own beliefs,’ Daniel answered. ‘We need to react to students’ behavior and language no matter if it is small incidents or a major problem, so every single student can feel secure.’ ‘You are so right,’ Sylvia continued. ‘All these issues need to be lived every day rather than be a topic for a single lesson or thematic events. To be present and visible during the school day gives possibilities to act and make quick decisions when necessary.’ The principals from the United States nodded, and Alex added, ‘Modeling behavior is grounded in values. My faculty, students, and parents need to understand my values and why this is important. Modeling a culture of learning in the school allows marginalized students to see that education translates to opportunity. I want to model a culture of support to not only ensure student success but teacher success, as well.’ ‘Yes,’ said Daniel. ‘From my point of view, it is essential to have the same rules and routine for everyone − rules that build on high expectations and responsibility, to support good behavior and talk with the ones who do not live up to these expectations. You cannot expect all students to understand democracy and respect others when they have recently arrived to Sweden. Some need to be taught what is important.’ ‘It is really necessary to make students aware of their own and others’ rights and prejudices. We use a lot of films, exercises, and dilemmas to make students take a stance and become aware of social justice issues,’ said Sylvia. ‘Oh yes,’ agreed Andrew. ‘Social justice leaders provide two essential elements for their communities: voice and models. In addition to providing a voice for the students who either can’t or won’t speak for themselves, I model the behavior I want others to practice.’ Alex nodded and stated, ‘Every person has individual needs. Every person has a value, not only to themselves but to the world. You never know which student might be that one student that ends up making a difference. Taking the time to figure out those individual needs and taking the time to get to know how to fulfill those needs makes a tremendous difference. It is important that we maximize our resources. Our resources are our kids.’ ‘You are so right. This involves constantly working to meet the needs of all students, providing tools to teachers to promote their success, building on improvements, and continuously re-evaluating our own work as a social justice leader,’ Andrew said.
Factors that impede social justice work
While listening to the principals, we perceived that it was quite easy for them to promote social justice and asked whether there was anything that impeded them from being socially just leaders.
‘No, not really,’ Daniel said. ‘As a principal, you can direct the goals and clarify the track in the way you want, as long as it is in coherence with the School Act and other steering documents. And since they support social justice, there is no problem.’ Sylvia agreed, ‘The steering documents are very supportive in this issue, but the problem is that they shall be interpreted at the local school. The principal can thereby avoid highlighting the curricula’s democratic values.’ Andrew interrupted: ‘Yes, but working for social justice is time consuming! It takes time to sit down and discuss these issues with students to get to the heart of what is really going on. It takes a lot of energy because it is so individual! Each situation is individual for each student. On top of everything, you have all the other things that are supposed to be happening from an instructional leader standpoint and from a manager’s standpoint as the principal. Just being able to juggle it all − that is probably the one thing that gets in the way. Some of that also deals with the amount of energy that you have to expend on expressing those values to all of your students.’ ‘But if you get the support from the district, it gets easier,’ Alex argued. ‘The social justice issue can be difficult for some since the decisions you make don’t make everyone happy in the short term, but if the central office understands the long-term benefits, it helps a lot. And so does the parental support and having a staff that is all part of this social justice culture.’ ‘That’s right!’ Sylvia interrupted. ‘I repeatedly refer to the school’s mission and ask ‘for whom are we here?’ So as far as I’m concerned, there cannot be any differences between mine and the staffs’ values.’ ‘You make it sound so easy,’ Alex said dejectedly. ‘Teachers who don’t work toward meeting a common goal, whose vision is not aligned towards student growth for all kids, are all factors working towards social injustice. But it is easier to deal with teachers and challenge their attitudes compared to parents, who I sometimes have to save from themselves. Regardless of whether they are going to be upset with me or not, I need to do what is best for their child in order for them to grow.’ Here Daniel interrupted: ‘Yes, we have some power as principals. Some of my staff applied for other jobs when I distinctly emphasized that their behavior and attitudes were not okay. If necessary, the relations to those who don’t share my and the curricula’s values will be quite frosty.’
Becoming a social justice leader
Acknowledging that social justice leadership required courage and difficult decision-making, the four principals were asked how they became a social justice leader.
After a long silence, they all opened up, saying that there were many things that contributed to their development as a social justice leader, but childhood was significant. ‘Like most values, it is established through your parents,’ Andrew said. ‘I had a tremendous example through my father, mother, grandfather, and immediate family about how to treat people. For example, racism was inexcusable.’ ‘The same for me,’ Sylvia nodded. ‘My parents, my grandmother…they never had any patronizing comments about others. And I have also seen people suffer at close distance.’ ‘Yes, but there could be significant others besides your parents that can have great impact. Growing up in an at-risk home but hanging around with a friend who had money and a father who exposed me to other areas, other than I was exposed to when I was growing up, helped me to broaden my vocabulary and allowed me to learn new things. I can pay attention to those kids with the same background as I had and say to them that regardless of where you come from, you actually have the ability to be anything that you want.’ Daniel mentioned not childhood, but role models: ‘For me, a moral principal was my role model. She was very firm and determined when it came to social justice issues despite the staff’s different opinion. Also my experiences from other jobs and what I learned at the National Principal Training Program have influenced my leadership.’ ‘Yes, the principal training program meant a lot,’ Sylvia agreed, ‘together with other academic courses.’ ‘Yes, also for me. Formal training had an impact,’ Andrew continued, ‘but also positions at schools where I met groups of students I had not previously interacted with helped me to relate to things that were totally different than I had experienced growing up.’
Conclusion
Social justice is highlighted in national policy and curriculum in both the United States and Sweden. However, we know that implementation and what is practiced in schools differs widely, not only between the United States and Sweden, but across national contexts. This fictitious conversation, based in real data gathered from four social justice leaders, illustrates commonalities, despite context. Being a social justice leader is founded on taking an active stance for all children and working toward a democratic and just society.
The four principals’ understanding and work can be categorized into three approaches: redistribution of goods, including social as well as physical goods; a recognition or cultural approach through which marginalized groups are more strongly acknowledged and supported; and relational or participatory justice, where people are empowered to fully take part in relationships and in society (Lumby, 2013).
Examples from the above conversation point out how these principals redistribute attention, power, and high expectations to promote learning and success for all students. They recognize and give voice to marginalized students with the purpose of enhancing their opportunity to fully take part in society, cognizant of their own and others’ heritage and prejudices. This highlights that working for social justice does not mean providing the same education for all. Instead, it requires active decisions so each individual has the same chance to become what he or she wants to be and experience success in reaching those goals.
These approaches involve active work with teachers and staff to support their work in this direction. Commitment to social justice and decision-making based on individual values is not easy and is not always appreciated. The principals gave examples of resistance from faculty members who ultimately chose to leave the school. Even if it is difficult to receive negative feedback from faculty and staff, these principals never forget that their priority is the student.
Our interviews revealed that social justice issues were, according to the principals, at the forefront in their everyday interactions as well as in their strategic planning. Being visible and working to uphold their values among both students and teachers were important tasks. Their work is embedded in conscious and unconscious daily actions (Lumby, 2013). The principals demonstrated the importance of working proactively and preventatively rather than being reactive, laissez-faire leaders.
These four principals were all committed to the work of social justice, based, in part, on their earlier experiences. At the same time they acknowledged the importance of principal preparation training to strengthen the social justice perspective. As Lumby (2013) claims, the message is not comfortable if many leaders only rhetorically support a social justice approach: It does not provide reassurance that we are all doing a good job, nor offer easily adopted formulae for action. It asks that leaders engage with some difficult facts and act on them in individualized ways that demand persistent thought and effort to address seemingly intractable issues. Leaders are not powerless tools of the system. Rather, they can harness a range of resources to resist ethical bleaching and in their daily practice become thoughtful, persistently working with others to invent ways to lead for greater equality. (Lumby, 2013: 24)