I would never have said I wanted to be a superintendent. I don’t think I would have even said I want to be a teacher. Psychologist sounded ok, a lawyer I was verbal in that you
know those probably fit me better. - Ashley
Introduction
At the apex of the educational hierarchy is the superintendent. This ever- changing position is constantly under pressure to meet all stakeholders’ demands: educators, parents, community leaders, politicians, students, and other policy makers. This field has become a profession occupied mainly by men rather than women, despite the fact that women dominate the teaching professional numerically. Females currently fill only 18% of the superintendent positions in this country (Brunner & Grogan, 2007). This illustrates that women are still being seen through the traditional lens that has historically favored males (Grogan, 1996). Barriers to females obtaining the top position in education have been well documented. However, there is a gap in the research where little has been presented on these women’s experiences. Until recently, most of the literature on the superintendency has emerged from men’s experiences in the position. Thus, the perspective of talking to women is a unique contribution to educational
leadership. This study works to help fill that gap by exploring female’s experiences in the top position in education.
Gender Revealed
This study elicits the lived experiences of female superintendents in the state of Utah. Additionally, key factors influencing female superintendents in the state of Utah’s trajectories into the top position in education have been examined. Throughout this study, I have shown that historically, there has been and continues to be evidence of gender bias toward females aspiring toward and working within the top position in education. Upon initial summarization of the findings for this study, I saw that many of the discussed experiences and barriers mirrored previously conducted studies. For example, earlier studies reported female superintendents experiencing social constructions of gender during their time as superintendent.
During this study, I found the participants faced the same barrier both during their trajectory and while serving as superintendent, internally and externally. At this point, I was frustrated that my study had only mirrored previous studies. Therefore, I went back to the transcripts from the online portion, the individual interviews, and the focus group and reviewed them. At this time, I was looking solely at what the participants were saying as well as ways in which these experiences differed from their male counterparts. However, as I looked back to feminist theory, I realized that one of its primary goals is to understand the existing patriarchal structures, which continue to exclude or oppress women’s opportunities for equal access (Flax, 1979). I realized I needed to look not only at what the participants were saying, but also at what they were not saying. Even though
I had identified specific barriers participants in this study faced, and listened to the experiences they had discussed, I truly felt the experiences they shared went deeper. Additionally, I felt that there was a deeper explanation for the continuing
underrepresentation of women as superintendents than the same historically reported barriers.
As I continued to review and reflect upon the transcripts, I realized that my original analysis was focused solely upon listening to how the participants illustrated their experiences and finding similarities and differences from their male counterparts. Moreover, my efforts were focused on answering my research questions. In doing so, I realized that I failed to focus on the purpose of the study: understanding the experiences of current and retired female superintendents in the state of Utah. At this point, I revisited the data and focused on identifying an over-arching theme that could help illustrate the experiences of the participants. Relationships emerged as the ever-present, overarching theme. Throughout this phase of data analysis, I realized that each of the experiences the participants discussed had to do with the relationships they had built. As a result, I concluded that relationships significantly impacted both women and men, relative to the superintendency, just in different ways.
Further, as I continued to focus on the things that the participants were not saying, I noticed that there was a significant amount of gender discrimination, both that the participants were saying, and not saying. Thus, one of the tenets of feminist policy analysis that is essential is that I acknowledge traditional gendered expectations in order to truly enact authentic change. Even though I spent the past 19 months researching and studying the experiences of retired and acting female superintendents in Utah, my initial
analysis failed to recognize the gender discrimination that was prevalent in these
women’s experiences. I failed to recognize each of the participant’s, as well as my own, general acceptance of the world as it is structured, representing one of the primary tenets of feminist theory (Flax, 1979; Frye, 1990, Tong, 1998; Wood 2009). It is important to note that throughout this study, my own gendered perceptions have impacted the analysis and interpretation of the data.
This acceptance of the world as it is structured (Flax, 1979; Frye, 1990; Tong, 1998; Wood, 2009) resulted in a type of avoidance behavior on the participant’s part. For example, while discussing their experiences, most of the participants talked about their rise to power as a coincidence. They neglected to discuss the role they played in obtaining the position. However, it is my assertion that the female participants overlooked the fact that they were the ones who did all the work. Another individual may have encouraged them, but in order for others to encourage them, it was essential that they had previously earned respect within their district. Still, not one of the participants chose to utilize this narrative when discussing their own pathway into the superintendency. Another method of avoidance employed throughout the interviews by the participants was contradicting themselves when discussing the barrier of gender and stereotypes. For example, Jackie reported that she could not relate to gender stereotype questions. Yet later, she discussed that the gender of mentor’s for females aspiring to the superintendent position mattered, because some believe that women can do it and others do not. In addition, she discussed what she termed as “the woman’s debate.” She stated that when women have children, they often have an internal debate about going back to work, something that she discussed males do not go through. Then she discussed
watching many females come back to work 6 weeks after having a baby in tears. These statements illustrated that Jackie can in fact relate to gender stereotype questions.
Furthermore, many of the other participant’s responses mirrored Jackie’s, not connecting gender with their struggles as female superintendents.
Since some of the participants expressed that they did not face the glass ceiling during their pathway or while serving as superintendent, I asked them to discuss why they believed there continues to be a gap between male and female superintendents in the state of Utah. In other words, I wanted to inquire about their beliefs regarding why so few women had obtained access to the superintendent position in the state. Several of the participants blamed women and discussed how females are the nurtures and that the superintendent position is too high-risk. Additionally, some of them talked about motivation and not feeling confidant, ultimately questioning whether females were even attempting to secure the superintendency. For example, Shirley stated:
I think it is perceived as a male role. You are perceived as having to do some tough things. I think in general women are more nurturing then men and it doesn’t appear to be a nurturing role.
Many of the participants discussed their success in ascending to the superintendency, but simultaneously blamed female colleagues’ unwillingness to take risks, and motivation as the real problem. Only 1 of the participants acknowledged gender as a significant factor in the underrepresentation of female superintendents in the state of Utah.
Throughout the interviews some of the participants acknowledged the continuing existence of barriers for female superintendents in Utah. Ashley stated:
Its not just education, it’s women in any kind of management or above and I think we exist in a male defined, when I say defined it is defined by males. We don’t even have the vocabulary. That means the communication is then defined by the vocabulary that men have created and put value on or not, and its permeated and
embedded so deeply, women are trying to elbow their way up through something that they are not even, in the beginning weren’t even considered a part of. If you go back and read about women in the 1600’s for instance it’s like completely invisible. So that’s why its hard you know. I think, even with the women’s movement and the feminist and all that, it’s just a fight and it probably will be for a long time unless we could somehow redefine things.
Cathy emphasized, “We have a long way to go.” Annette shared:
We are still fighting. I think we have come a long way. I don’t believe there is equal pay for the same job. I think that Utah without the UEA women would still be paid 40% less than any man. I believe that to my core. I watched in this district them try to hire men higher than women for years.
While gender stereotypes continue to define the superintendent position, the continual redefinition of the position only serves to reinforce it. In the past, the superintendent position has entailed solely being an educational leader. Although the position, for various reasons, was associated with stereotypically masculine traits such as assertiveness and dominance, the culture of the organization was slowly changing. However, as was previously stated, the position itself as well as the image of the superintendent position has undergone a recent change to align more with the expectations surrounding business CEOs. The superintendent now has overall
responsibility for creating, planning, implementing, and integrating the strategic direction of their district. This includes responsibility for all components and departments of business.
With this redefinition, is it more difficult for females who are aspiring to the superintendency to obtain the position? The literature review indicated that there has been a stereotype that successful leaders should portray masculine behaviors of authority and discipline, whereas women are considered to be more emotional and collaborative. Thus, in redefining the superintendent positions to more closely align with business
CEOs, will society further define the position with socially defined masculine behaviors? Many of the participants in this study stated that they were drawn to curriculum and instruction because they wanted to help children. With the redefinition of the position, it is not only important to question if socially defined masculine behaviors will define it, but also whether women will be able to imagine themselves in it? Some of the
participants discussed that focusing solely on building schools, bonding, and leeway votes would make them miserable. It is important to note, that what each of the
participants stated attracted them to the position, with its redefinition, is something that is becoming less important in the position itself. Thus, the way in which the superintendent position is currently being redefined continues to construct barriers to female entry.
Barriers
Historically, both internal and external barriers have been present, which have prevented women from entering into the ranks of the superintendency in large numbers. Many of these barriers still exist. Based on the findings and conclusions of the research study, specific implications were constructed, with the goal of addressing the experiences and trajectory of female superintendents in the state of Utah. These implications included the following: (1) gendered stereotypes both internal and external and (2) health effects.
Gendered Stereotypes for Female Superintendents
Looking beyond the immediate answers to each of the research questions, gender stereotypes emerged as a prevailing factor impacting every facet of these women’s lives. In fact, what was quickly noted was that there was gender bias being preformed against
each participant’s in this study; however, this was not the only bias at play. Many of the participants in this study held their own gender bias. This was taken from comments made during the interviews; both in how participants viewed themselves and their experiences. A question regarding gender bias was not posed to the participants. The comments taken were embedded throughout the participants’ discussed experiences. These comments were often phrased as belief statements.
However, each of the participants not only experienced gender barriers put upon them, but also carried their own stereotypes or biases. Thus, the women in this study faced both internal and external barriers. These barriers are illustrated in Table 5. What is important to question is that with all of the internal and external barriers that are present, why has the proportion of females in the superintendency increased over the last 25 years? Even though the increases have been incremental, it seems with all of the barriers that are present the number of females in the position would stagnate or decline; however, this is not the case. Entering into the study, given the discussed barriers women face, as well as the changing gender definition of the job, I assumed that I would see a national decrease in the percent of female superintendents. Nevertheless, the percentage of females entering into the superintendent position has increased.
Internalization
Gender bias, as discursive and internalized beliefs, performed against the participants was, in some cases, illustrated and openly discussed. Conversely, as was previously stated, the gender bias performed against the participants was not the only bias at play. Each of the participants carried their own stereotypes or biases. Gender
essentially defined the women’s own personhood. Thus, their own personally held biases, in part, help explain why women are reluctant to enter school leadership positions, and do not imagine themselves in leadership roles such as the superintendency.
Throughout the individual interviews, the participants made statements that illustrated their own perceptions regarding the differences between females and males. These statements also reflected the participant’s perceptions regarding qualifications for the superintendency. During her one-on-one interview, Shirley was asked why there was a discrepancy between the number of males and females. She discussed that it had to do with mentoring and that many of the mentors are males. She further stated, “I think in general women are more nurturing then men, and it doesn’t appear to be a nurturing role.” This reflects societal stereotypes surrounding gender. Is every female more nurturing than every male? Annette was asked the same question during her one-on-one interview and she discussed that females play a major role in the discrepancy. She stated that females, “don’t ask, and we take less, and accept less.” She further illustrated, “I think that women do things to make people at ease and more comfortable, and this is still seen as a weakness, you are not tough.” Thus, Annette, when asked why the discrepancy still exists, illustrated that she thought women had strengths; however, those strengths were determined to be weak by society. When responding to the discrepancy between males and females in superintendent positions, Stacey stated, “I think it is still difficult for women to break through the cycle of men in their position. We have a long ways to go with that.” She further expressed:
I think we think differently than men. We just do. We are a whole different make- up of individual than men. I see it here and I think females are often more of a conflict than the male.
Misty discussed how, “Women on a whole operate differently than men.” Additionally, she stated:
With women it is a combination of intellect, skill, and heart and with men it seems that intellect, skill, and a little more ambition. I think their is heart is there huge and it is harder to get it but its there.
Like Annette, Stacey discussed that women have certain strengths, but that those strengths are viewed as weaknesses by society, to help explain the discrepancy between the number of male and female superintendents on the female. These statements reflect beliefs about females’ strengths and weaknesses regarding job performance and how they differ as superintendents based on gender. Many of the participants held previously conceived notions of male and female traits and blamed those traits for the discrepancy that exists. However, as this study has shown, there are many factors contributing to this discrepancy: how support is defined differently between genders, not being able to balance their personal and professional life, health issues, tenure, females not seeking out mentors, and not being able to imagine themselves early on in powerful positions.
Women imagining themselves as leaders early on. As previously stated, women do not currently imagine themselves as superintendents. This is due to multiple reasons, such as the previously discussed belief in female’s strengths and weaknesses. Additionally, there is a lack of women being archived in superintendent positions. In other words, women in leadership roles, such as the superintendency, are being erased from history. This erasure prevents females from seeing individuals who are of the same gender in the superintendent position, making it difficult for women to imagine
themselves running the show.
state of Utah, there were not even records that there were ever women in the
superintendent position when in fact there were. This was experienced numerous times throughout the data collection process. For example, while searching for females who had served in the state of Utah, I contacted each of the districts throughout the state. I specified that I was looking for names and dates of the superintendents in their district dating back to 1900. Each district happily provided me with the information needed. The interviews were then conducted and the data were returned to at a later time. Due to some confusion regarding the data, it was necessary for me to contact some of the
districts a second time. One district in particular had provided me with information, but 1 of the participants in this study, who had served in their district, was not listed.
Additionally, another district had a female listed, but it was unclear whether she served as superintendent in their district. This was due to clerks and assistant superintendents being listed on the document as well as superintendents. When I inquired about female superintendents in their district I was told unequivocally there were none. I proceeded to ask about the name in question, and the individual mentioned she knew of her, but was unsure that she was ever superintendent. Later it was found that the information given was not factual and that the individual in question had actually served for a year.
This erasure of females from the archives deeply shapes the field of education and individual trajectories. How we imagine ourselves may feel like a simplistic statement to