Bases legales

Superintendent 2 ascended into the superintendency following a successful career in various educational leadership roles. When the researcher invited the superintendent to

participate in the study, the superintendent replied to the researcher that she found the study to be “fascinating research” but that she had not had “many challenges…[or] barriers” to the

superintendency. Regardless, the superintendent proposed to the researcher the question, “…am I still a good interviewee?” This email introduction established the narrative strategies employed by the superintendent throughout the interview. In recounting her experiences in leadership, the superintendent leverages a narrative strategy elucidating how humble ambition and encounters with unnamed sexism marked her movement into a school district’s top role and allow her to make meaning of her leadership.

Those Are Shoes I’ve Not Been Able to Fill…Yet.

The superintendent’s narration of her ascension into leadership, her feelings of

inadequacy coupled with optimism, and her quiet, unrealized pride each contextualized how a narrative strategy of humble ambition marked her leadership. She stated that very early in her career she desired to be an educational leader. She said she “knew in [her] first year of teaching” that she wanted to be a principal and that leadership was ingrained in her family dynamics at a young age as her parents were business owners who taught her the “values” of hard-work needed for leadership. While the superintendent established her ambition for leadership early in the

93

interview, her explanation of her steps through educational leadership juxtaposed her early ambition. This was evident in her description of the male gatekeepers in her work life:

I was encouraged by a male principal whom I taught under to go back and get my administrative degree,

and I did under his advisement,

knowing that I wanted to leave the classroom at some point anyway.

But I only taught school for [a few] years and then I became an assistant principal with aspirations of being a principal.

I was only an assistant principal for….maybe [specific number of] years. And then became principal and quickly moved to the central office. I was not in a principalship except for a year and a half.

And then my superintendent, who was male, came to me and said, “We’re having an opening as a [specific central office role.] Would you be interested in applying?”

I told him initially that I would not, that I loved being principal and I had not been at my school long enough to leave…

and he reminded me that we don’t always get to choose when opportunity knocks. (Laughter.)

So I did apply for it and I got that job,

and so I have spent the majority of my career at the central office level.

Then I was encouraged by another male superintendent whom I worked for to get my doctorate degree.

And I worked with him in [specific number of] different counties.

When he left one county and went to a neighboring one he asked me to come along and gave me a position in the second county,

and it was there that I began my doctorate studies under his advisement. And he retired and luckily…

within [a short time] of graduating from [name] University with my doctorate, I landed here… as superintendent.

After she had initially established her ambition for leadership in just her first year as teacher, she then describes how three male gatekeepers in her career moved her into the leadership positions. This contrast between her initial ambition for leadership and her movement into leadership through the encouragement of three men illustrates how her narration exemplifies appropriately feminine leadership movement. She portrays herself to be ambitious yet humbly so, being encouraged by male leaders along the way. This was echoed later in the interview when the researcher asked the superintendent to talk about her mentors:

94

I have always been a people person and I’ve never been afraid of people in leadership.

I hope I’ve never crossed my boundaries because I’ve always known that in my career I’ve had a principal or boss to report to.

But I’ve always been able to develop good relationships with all of them. So I think maybe just my openness, just demonstrating a high work ethic made those male leaders see that I had a knack for leadership…

and luckily they weren’t afraid to encourage me.

In her description of her mentors, all of whom were male leaders, she articulates that her success is attributed to not being fearful of men. She likewise explains that staying in the “boundaries” and establishing relationships with them has allowed them to see her leadership. Her diction in this narration illustrates a sense of compliant ambition: her willingness to not be afraid, her ability to navigate female-male relationships, and her willingness to stay-in-her-lane have allowed her male mentors to see her abilities.

The superintendent’s narrative strategy of describing her feelings of inadequacy coupled with optimism likewise highlighted her humble ambition to and through the superintendency. When the researcher asked the superintendent about the most difficult challenge of being a female superintendent, she explained the difficulty of navigating politics:

I don’t know if this has anything…. let me say two things.

One: I think this school system was ready for a female superintendent;

Secondly, I think the most challenging part of my role now is learning the politics. The former superintendent was a master with the political piece,

so I feel inadequate a lot of the time….

I know him as he was superintendent here and that was a great strength of his. He could maneuver the politics of the commissioners and just the whole that whole political piece.

I don’t feel as comfortable doing that.

Those are shoes I’ve not been able to fill…yet…

because I feel like this school system welcomed me as a female superintendent and welcomed the idea of a female superintendent.

I don’t think that anyone has held that against me. I think it’s really been a refreshing change.

95

When comparing her male predecessor’s political acumen to her nascent political skills, the superintendent describes feeling “inadequate.” Such a feeling is produced only when there is an established expectation to which one feels she cannot attain. Her use of the word “inadequate” again highlights her narrations of humility throughout the interview; however, it is important to note her description of filling her predecessor’s “shoes.” In her humility, she describes this political maneuvering skill as “shoes [she’s] not been able to fill” but in her ambition she pauses and states “…yet.” In this strategy, she affirms a male-stereotyped expectation of political savviness that she does not possess yet humbly confirms that it is a skill she will acquire.

The superintendent’s narration of her quiet, unrealized pride also elucidates how humble ambition has marked her leadership as a female superintendent. This was evident in the

superintendent’s description of attending a superintendents’ meeting:

I was stunned at the first state superintendents meeting I went to…. it was apparent to me and I didn’t even think that going into there… it was full of men!! This room is full of men!!

There are like 10 women in the room. Then, I sat there and thought,

“Wow! I am a woman in a man’s world!” (Laughs.)

I started to get a little loud and proud. I still am…

even when I read your question this morning about “a woman in a powerful position”…

I thought: “Yes I am!”

And do men stop and think that?

I don’t think so…it’s like they think it’s a right.

When the superintendent is describing her literal walk into the superintendents’ meeting, she acknowledges that she “didn’t even think that” going into the meeting, acknowledging just how “stunned” she was that the room was overwhelmingly full of men superintendents. Upon her realization that this was the makeup of the superintendents, she becomes humbly prideful, describing herself as “a little loud and proud.” In preparing for the interview with the researcher,

96

she seemed to affirm herself in saying, “Yes I am [a powerful woman]!” Her description illustrates a sense of pride for her exceptional success in achieving the superintendency only once she physically encounters a room that shows how unique it is to be both female and superintendent, almost as if her success throughout her career to that point was unrealized. It is this quiet, unrealized pride that additionally describes the humble ambition she narrates in her description of her female superintendency. As evidenced through her movement into the superintendency, her feelings of inadequacy coupled with optimism, and her quiet, unrealized pride, superintendent 2 leverages a narrative strategy of humble ambition to make meaning of her leadership.

We Had Good Enough Relationships That They Would Often Pick On Me.

In addition to humble ambition, superintendent 2’s narration around unnamed sexism has formed her leadership meaning-making process. After receiving the initial email from the

superintendent that she did not feel she had experienced barriers to the superintendency as a female, the researcher approached the interview concerned that the superintendent may not articulate any experiences of discrimination or unfair treatment. Surprisingly, the superintendent described incidents that the researcher perceived as unfair treatment based on the

superintendent’s gender. While the researcher will not name these stories as sexism because the superintendent does not, the researcher interprets this narration strategy as the superintendent’s experiences with unnamed sexism. The researcher analyzes such a narration strategy as another example of the superintendent’s need to conform to appropriate societal roles for female

ambition in a realm dominated by male leadership and, in turn, allows her to make meaning of her leadership experiences.

97

This narration strategy was employed by the superintendent early in the interview. When asked about her awareness of being a female leader, she described a difficult work experience in a “good-ole-boy system”:

Yes, I have worked for…this is my [specific number] school district.

And in one district in particular I was very aware that I was a woman who… had to earn the trust and respect of my male counterparts.

It was…

as if I may say so without being derogatory… a good-ole-boy system.

And I honestly….

I was in that district for [specific number of] years,

and I really still question whether or not some of those gentlemen really felt that they had to listen to me,

even though I was in a supervisory role.

Because it was just tradition in that school system for the men to be at the helm. I felt that for about [specific number of] years in my career.

Her description of “tradition” in the system where men are part of a “good-ole-boy system” which she was not part of caused her to have to “earn the trust and respect” of her colleagues, even ones she supervised. The superintendent describes a clear delineation between male- expected behavior and female-expected behavior in the district. She continued to describe this work dynamic and how she worked to deal with it:

I really made a valiant effort to be personable with them and to learn more about what made them tick.

I tried to figure out why they thought that they didn’t need my guidance. Again, it was a struggle.

Those [specific number of] years were the most challenging of my career. It’s not that way here; however, there are more women in leadership here than there are men…

but still going back to those strategies.

I still would never walk away from the table feeling that I wanted to be that good- ole person…

That was just not my network.

So even though I tried to communicate with them on a level with them that I thought they would be more receptive to my leadership style,

I never truly was able to give into that because it’s just not who I am. I’m very goal-oriented and driven to a certain outcome…

98

we had good enough relationships that they would often pick on me about… “Well, [she’s] not gonna let us forget that!” and

“Don’t worry, we’ll get a reminder email!” Those kinds of things.

There is contradiction in her description of her relationships with the men. First, she articulates there were clearly defined behaviors of what was unfairly acceptable for men versus women in the district. She also describes this work environment as the “most difficult” of her entire career. Yet, when she narrates how she dealt with such inequitable expectations, she describes how her established relationships were “good enough” that the men would “pick on her.” They would tease her for her positive attributes of leadership, such as being organized and helpful. This narration shows that while the superintendent is cognizant of differentiated treatment between male and female workers, she reframes their disparaging comments about her strong work ethic as a consequence of good relationships instead of discrimination. Because women have been expected to accept such environments in which their hard work is stereotyped negatively, superintendent 2 attempts to make meaning of this difficult experience by reframing the sexism positively.

Unnamed sexism was evident also in the superintendent’s description of her difficulty navigating the politics of the superintendency. She told a story about a recent experience with a male politician:

[Participant]: This is the part of the superintendency that intimidates me…. I’ll be quite honest.

I sat at this table on Monday and met with the [a high-ranking politician figure] and [another political figure] was present for the meeting too.

I felt like at the end of the meeting we were all on the same page. And then when I get to the [specific type of] meeting that very night…

the tides turned and what we had talked about flipped on its head and nothing I thought was going to happen in that meeting did.

And so I am a very real person… and just …

99

Don’t make me believe one thing and then something else happened and leave me guessing why.

So I feel like that’s the way of politicians.

They tell you what they think you want to hear but then at the end of the day it doesn’t work out that way.

I don’t like to guess why something didn’t happen the way it was going to. [Researcher]: Were they both men?

[Participant]: Yes.

And the [group of politicians] are all … it’s a [group of certain number],

all [number] are men.

It makes me wonder if they take me seriously….

The superintendent describes experiencing great difficulty navigating the politics of the

superintendency role. Specifically, she is aggravated by the male politician telling her he will do something and then acting in a completely opposite way that evening at the political meeting. Her description of the male group of politicians’ perception of her is critical in understanding the narrative strategy she employs. When the researcher asked the superintendent if she had

experienced sexism, she stated directly, “I have not.” In her storytelling of the group of male politicians, she questions if they take her seriously, insinuating that the reason they perhaps do not take her seriously is because she is a female leader. It is this narration by the superintendent in which she describes events in which differential treatment and perceptions are articulated as gender-based, yet she does not label or acknowledge them as sexism. This unnamed treatment is a narrative strategy she employs to navigate the superintedency and describe her leadership as a female superintendent. By employing a narrative strategy illustrating her humble ambition and encounters with unnamed sexism, superintendent 2 makes meaning of her leadership experiences as a woman in a gendered role.

100