Educational Leadership Preparation Programs That Claim to Be Social Justice–Oriented and Ignore Sexual/Gender Identity: Lessons From the Gay Marriage Ruling

• In Event: Educational Leadership After Obergefell v. Hodges

Abstract

Objective/Purpose: Nearly all University Council for Educational Administration (UCEA) programs in the country claim to be social justice oriented, yet less than half address LGBTIQ identities (Author, 2015a). Thus, the research question that anchor this paper asks: How can the Obergefell v. Hodges,US Supreme Court ruling for gay marriage inform faculty responses about the extent to which sexual/gender identity is addressed in their social justice programs?

Theoretical Framework: To conceptually frame the question, we drew from the tenet of intersectionality within Critical Race Theory (CRT). We define the tenet and trace the lineage of the intersectionality of identities within CRT to reveal how the field continues to ignore this lineage as it relates to sexual/gender identities. We also draw from the theory of Individual/Organizational Identity Toward Social Justice (Author, 2015b). This theory articulates the relationship between individual identity development among various identities and their intersections to the social justice practices of leaders and faculty and the evolution of an organization (e.g. school or leadership preparation program) toward social justice ends. This theory takes into account social forces such as, in this case, legal decisions on individual and organizational identity development.
Methods/Data Sources: To address the research question, we drew from a secondary analysis of a data set of over 200 surveys completed by UCEA faculty in principal preparation programs that examined how various identities and their intersections were addressed in these programs (Author, 2015). We analyzed the responses of faculty about gender/sexual identity in educational leadership programs that claimed to be social justice. We compared faculty responses in social justice programs that addressed sexual/gender identity to social justice programs that do not. We relied on cross tabulation of survey data to compare and analyze quantitative survey responses. Constant comparative data analysis guided our analysis of open ended survey questions.

Results/Conclusions: In the findings, we position the arguments for and against the Supreme Court decision against faculty responses about sexual/gender identity in their social justice programs. This lack of attention to gender/sexual identities across programs claiming to be social justice focused may be partially attributed to the truncated identity development of individuals across identities and their intersections which in turn limits leadership and program policies and practices toward social justice ends. We further consider how this ruling could further inform and advance leadership preparation for social justice that is decisively queer.

Significance. This paper articulates the limits of social justice in educational leadership and empirically and conceptually forwards one argument for why this may be so. The paper concludes with practical implications for educational leadership scholars and programs to curtail the perpetuation of queer oppression in the social justice/equity discourse .

Author

• Colleen A. Capper, University of Wisconsin - Madison