"An Opportunity for Growth and Learning": Leadership Approaches in a Contentious Political Climate

• In Event: Leadership for Democracy: How Are Principals Responding in Troubled Times?

Abstract

Phil White’s Connecticut high school enrolls students from a wide array of backgrounds who hold very distinct political beliefs. Like most high school principals leading schools since the 2016 presidential election, White has found that these differences are frequently associated with contentious and occasionally hostile student interactions. Yet, whereas most principals leading schools in the age of Trump have viewed diversity as a challenge to be avoided or managed, White has taken a different tack. “When conflicts come up,” he explains, “we try to use them as an opportunity for growth and learning.”

This paper draws on a unique data set to examine how principal background characteristics as well as school and community demographics are related to whether and how principals engage challenges associated with political, social, and racial diversity in a contentious political climate. Specifically, analyzing data from a nationally representative survey of 505 high school principals, I use multiple regression to assess what factors are associated with principals communicating with their student bodies about the values of tolerance and respect toward different sub-groups of students—eg. racial minority groups, immigrant youth, LGBTQ youth, and students who hold unpopular political views. Preliminary findings suggest the principals of color, principals with strong personal commitment to civics, and principals in cities and suburbs are most likely to highlight the principles of tolerance.) In addition, I examine transcripts of 40 follow-up interviews to illuminate the distinction between principals who merely seek to manage the conflicts associated with diversity and the principals (like Phil White) who view diversity as a resource for deepening learning and democracy. The latter group of principals embrace democracy as an organizing principle that shapes school culture and practice.

The findings from this paper will be of interest to scholars studying democratic leadership and leadership for democracy (Fusarelli, Kowalski, & Peterson, 2011; Lopez-Delgado, 2014;Woods & Woods, 2012; Johnson, 2006). My focus on school leadership in the context of growing political contention represents a promising extension of existing scholarship. Certainly polarization in the broader body politic is not entirely new, nor are its implication for public education (Bishop, 2008; Hess and McAvoy, 2014). Yet, it is clear that the election of Donald Trump has heightened partisanship, increased incivility, and unleashed new levels of social and racial hostility that have seeped into public schools (Pew, 2017; Crandall, Miller, & White, 2018; Rogers et al. 2019). It thus is imperative that we understand how school leaders are responding to these new dynamics.

Authors

• John S. Rogers, University of California - Los Angeles

• Joseph E. Kahne, University of California - Riverside

• Alexander Kwako, University of California - Los Angeles