PROGRAMA AMPLIADO DE INMUNIZACIONES Objetivo del PA

By examining student leaders in separate, single-gendered educational contexts, the opportunity to consider gender perceptions and leadership is presented, albeit in a limited way, in this study. To contextualize the findings, some understanding of current research into gender and education as well as gender and leadership is warranted. Perceptions of gender-based attributed have been explored in both educational and organizational contexts. Understandings of or dispositions towards existing social constructs (including school culture) reflect how gender groups behave and respond in homogeneous and heterogeneous situations.

In educational contexts, the preponderance of recent research has examined student performance in single-gendered learning environments in order to understand how these learning environments may differ from co-educational schools. In a summary of a meta-analysis of research into single-sex education, Hayes, Pahlke & Bigler (2011) challenge the assertion that improved performance among its students is attributable to gender isolation: “Instead, it appears that the performance of single-sex schools is

sometimes inflated by selection biases on the part of both students and schools.” (p. 702). Similarly, the quality of the peer group was regarded as another characteristic

contributing to the success of students (p. 702). In single-gendered environments, gender alone was not deemed to be meaningful at all in terms of understanding improved

performance. However, the research did indicate a favourable disposition towards a school culture that was related to academic success, particularly for girls:

Girls whose attitudes and achievement were a close fit to the mission of this particular single-sex school (focus on math, science, and leadership) felt the most strongly connected to the school. This finding is consistent with research

indicating that a sense of belongingness is a significant predictor of academic success (Bigler & Signorella, 2011, p. 666).

It is noteworthy that a focus on leadership development is included within the researched school’s mission and that academic achievement may be only part of the rationale for selecting a single-gendered environment.

Research understandings related to academic performance admittedly do not entirely explain the influence such institutions may have on overall student growth. In addition to selection and peer quality characteristics, connection with the institution is an

important consideration regarding the benefits of a single-gendered environment. This affective component may relate more closely to a student’s intrinsic motivation than to interventions organized by the school. The research examined here recognizes the “focus on leadership” that such environments place on their ‘curriculum’ (defined here in the broadest sense as any school-sanctioned learning activity). While current research recognizes the need for further exploration, perceptions of leadership characteristics are more likely to be recognizable within these environments.

In organizational contexts, the relationship between gender and a predisposition towards a transactional versus a transformative/transformational approach to leadership is also of interest for this study, as the latter approach is more closely aligned with artistic processes. The underlying assumption is that male leaders are associated with a more transactional approach to leadership whereas female leaders tend towards the

transformative end of the spectrum. Despite these presumptions, the adoption of a

leadership style does not appear to be gender specific: “Lastly, evaluation both by leaders and subordinates shows that male and female leaders adopt a typical behavior of the transformational and transactional leadership styles with similar frequency” (Cuadrado, Navas, Ferrer, Molero, & Morales, 2012, p. 3102). The adoption of more traditional forms of leadership by women leaders is related to the type of organization in which they work, or lead. A leader satisfies the expectations of the organization first, allowing their own personal style to influence their practice. In other words, women leaders will naturally tend towards more transformative approaches where the context enables it (p. 3106). Other contextual aspects have a role to play in determining perception of a leader’s effectiveness, both for the leaders and their subordinates. In a study of age,

gender and educational background and understandings of leadership ability, Barbuto Jr., Fritz, Matkin, and Marx (2007) assert that “gender alone did not affect transactional and transformational leadership [tendencies]” (p. 81), and that the other areas of investigation, age and educational background could also shape perceptions of both leaders and

subordinates.

The apparent absence of gender difference in leadership style may reflect how understandings of leadership have been shaped by women’s more transformational approach. Shakeshaft (2010) describes the tendency towards ‘collective leadership’ models in educational leadership in which “the concept of distributed leadership considers the importance of collaboration and interdependence among organizational members” (p. 45). She argues that these approaches are no longer described in gender- specific terms (i.e., the way women lead); they have shifted the discourse about best practice for leadership as a whole: “Now women are changing the ideas about appropriate leadership models just by being themselves. And men are ‘leading like women’. Current ideas of leadership are incorporating woman-initiated approaches” (p. 95). In truly transformational organizations, leadership practice transcends gender.

Gender does appear, however, to relate to group decision-making approaches. Hannagan & Larimer (2010) suggest that “Human preferences are sensitive to the gender composition of groups, and the strategies used to make decisions differ by group gender composition” (p. 63). In their study, groups with more women tended to take more inclusive approaches, seeking a positive outcome for all, whereas male-dominated groups operated more frequently with a win/lose mentality to problem-solving. Hannagan & Larimer conclude that “increasing gender equity within decision-making bodies is likely

to result in more democratic decision-making processes and produce outcomes closer to universal median preferences“ (p. 63). Coincident with their findings, within this study, democratic approaches and their connection to artistic processes of empowerment and collaboration were considered in the participant responses section of Chapter 4.