Sustaining Cycles of Learning: Partnering Towards Equity-Literate Leadership Capacity

• In Event: Building Equitable Leadership Capacity: An Improvement Science Toolkit

Abstract

After the Covid-19 pandemic focus on diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging, equity-centered work in schools was increasingly being positioned and implemented as an additional, non-essential initiative, leading to inconsistent district and school leadership practices. I engaged in an auto-ethnographic/self-reflective study investigating the impact of short, rapid continuous improvement cycles on building equity-literate and culturally responsive leadership capacity within an urban public school district. By utilizing improvement science as a toolkit and leadership approach to learning, I aimed to address the absence of a centralized strategy for fostering and measuring racial equity literacies across the district.
The intervention design was based on Donna Mertens’ transformative research paradigm (Mertens, 2012), which prioritizes cyclical reflection and community strength, and Gooden et al.’s (2023) application of the well-established CRSL research framework for school leaders focused on equity within the context of a school district system. Barbara J. Love's (2010) Liberatory Coonscioousness framework ensured district teams engaged in practices with awareness, analysis, action, and accountability toward social justice. Peter Senge's (2006) Five Disciplines of a Learning Organization provided a framework for continuous learning and systems thinking, crucial for embedding equity-literate practices at all district levels.
My district partnership utilized Improvement Science PDSA cycles to create conditions that best supported district leaders' capacity to consistently implement equity-literate practices and policies. The application of a culturally responsive, transformative and liberatory approach, revealed that a continuing partnership incorporating self-reflection, vision coherence, leader-led inquiry, and healing opportunities as guiding themes for strengthening leaders’ capacity to frame, facilitate and implement equity practices throughout the district. My findings underscored the effectiveness of short, rapid cycles in supporting leaders to develop and implement equity-focused practices and policies. These cycles allowed for quick iterations and adjustments, enabling leaders to respond promptly to emerging issues and to scale successful practices across the district. This iterative process not only built leadership capacity but also fostered a culture of innovation and continuous improvement.
During my research, I found that few studies focused on equity capacities for district leadership with an emphasis on incorporating healing practices. Strengthening leadership equity capacity also requires supporting the mental and physical wellbeing of education leaders. I realized the importance of incorporating practices that support the well-being of the team as we engaged in the challenging work of equity and social justice. Hooks (1994) highlighted the necessity of healing from the wounds of racism and bias in educational settings.
In conclusion, by adopting short, rapid continuous improvement cycles and embedding them within a culturally responsive framework, I could support districts to build the capacity of their leaders to implement and sustain equity practices. This approach not only addressed the immediate challenges of fostering equity literacies but also laid the foundation for long-term, transformative change.

Author

• Lyntonia Gold, New York City Department of Education