"Telling our own story": Women and leadership in the early childhood setting by Wise, Valaida Littlejohn, Ed.D. The George Washington University. 2011: 177 pages; 3449187

―Telling Our Own Story‖:

Women and Leadership in the Early Childhood Setting

By Valaida Littlejohn Wise

B.A. 1978, Syracuse University

M.A.T. 1998, Trinity College

A Dissertation submitted to

The Faculty of

The Graduate School of Education and Human Development

of The George Washington University

in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of Doctor of Education

May 15, 2011

Dissertation directed by

Travis S. Wright

Assistant Professor of Educational Research

UMI Number: 3449187

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript

and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

UMI 3449187

Copyright 2011 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against

unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway

P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346

ii

The Graduate School of Education and Human Development of The George Washington

University certifies that Valaida L. Wise has passed the Final Examination for the degree

of Doctor of Education as of March 10th

, 2011. This is the final and approved form of the

dissertation.

―Telling Our Own Story‖:

Women and Leadership in the Early Childhood Setting

Valaida L. Wise

Dissertation Research Committee

Travis S. Wright, Assistant Professor of Educational Research,

Dissertation Director

Linda K. Lemasters, Associate Professor of Education Administration,

Committee Member

Jay C. Chunn, Director, National Center for Health Behavioral Change,

Committee Member

iii

Dedication

To my father, Roy Littlejohn

1936 - December 10, 2010

To almost the very end you used every bit of energy you had to listen to yet another

iteration of my thoughts on women and leadership. I could tell you enjoyed it though. I

wish you could have been there to witness the culmination of this journey, Daddy. I truly

miss you.

To my mother, Marilyn A. Littlejohn

Thank you for your suggestions, remarkable insights, and the many nights we stayed up

late talking philosophy and theory. I finally have my ―smashed hat.‖ Here‘s to you,

Mom!

To my husband, Mike Wise

You are my anchor and my life raft. Whenever it seems as if I‘ve lost my way or I‘m a bit

off balance you are always there to keep me upright, never letting me drift too far off

course, offering your love and a rescue supply of Gummy Bears. I love you powerfully

and eternally.

To my children, Michael, Talyn and Jordan

Your eagerness to hear about my progress and your words of encouragement and pithy

suggestions have been a true source of joy and refreshment. I am so proud of all of you!

Now go on to make your own paths in the sands of life and know that no matter what, I

will always be so very proud of you all.

To Robin and Charles,

It takes a village to complete a dissertation! Thanks for the late-night, last-minute help.

iv

Acknowledgements

There are women who make things better…simply by showing up.

There are women of wit and wisdom who through strength and courage make it through.

There are women who change the world every day…Women like you‖

-Ashley Rice

To the 12 courageous women who took part in this study: You gave me so much more

than I thought possible. Your passion and dedication to the work inspires me. Your

knowledge of your craft leaves me in awe. Thank you for sharing your incredible

insights.

Thank you to my committee, Dr. Travis Wright, Dr. Jay Chunn, and Dr. Linda

Lemasters.

To the chair of my committee, Dr. Travis Wright: There are those whose light seems to

shine just a bit brighter than others. I have learned so much from you and continue to be

amazed at what you bring to everything you are involved in. You continued to believe in

me and support me through the death of my father, electrical blackouts, record winter

storms, and writers block; you never gave up. Your words of encouragement, incredible

insight and … were fresh water to a thirsty woman. I cherish our work together and am

grateful to be able to call you not only my mentor but my friend.

To Dr. Linda Lemasters: Your insights and attention to detail made me a better writer and

a more thorough researcher. Thank you for your guidance and support.

To Dr. Jay Chunn: Like the griot of Africa villages, you acted as a mentor and guide by

reminding me of my story and the greater story of my family. Thank you for your

v

encouragement, words of wisdom, and intellectual guidance. You always pushed me to

be better.

To my readers: Dr. Freund and Dr. Howard. While the process was a bit painful the

results were well worth it. Thank you for holding my work up to the research magnifying

glass. I am a better writer because of it.

To Dr. Debra Bright: Thank you for your guidance. You understood what it meant to

walk this road and I am so grateful that you mentored me along the way. It has been a

wonderful experience, and your ability to make the way just that much easier is much

appreciated.

To the members of my cohort: Getting a doctorate with a cohort is a remarkable

experience because although attaining a doctorate is ultimately an individual pursuit, with

a cohort you are never truly alone. I want to thank all of the members of cohort six for

the love, support and just plain fun. John, although we lost touch before the end, thank

you for being there in the beginning. Mona, your gentle words, balanced view of life,

and delicious food made the journey just that much more enjoyable. Mike, you set the

pace that kept us all moving forward. To my special friend Henry, there are not enough

words—you have been an incredible friend and colleague from the beginning. We have

shared a special bond; from the long nights at Howard University Library to the pep talks

and dinners in Baltimore—you have walked with me on a very special journey and at the

end I am more grateful than at the beginning.

To my editor, Mary Lou Sommardahl: A fast editor is a real find but finding a fast editor

who is also gifted is a miracle. You are my miracle Mary Lou. Thanks for everything!

To Pebbles: Thanks for keeping my feet warm. It was just you and me at 3 a.m.

vi

Abstract of Dissertation

―Telling our story‖: Women and Leadership in the Early Childhood Setting

The purpose of this study was to gain a deeper understanding of how women,

identified as successful early childhood leaders understand what it means to be a leader.

This study focused on how 12 women made meaning of leadership rather than how they

led in their early childhood settings. Using a ―basic, interpretive‖ qualitative research

design with a constructivist-informed, feminist theoretical framework, in-depth

interviews with a purposeful sample of 12 women leaders were used in an effort to give

voice to the meaning these women made of their positions (Merriam, 2009). The sample

was made up of women who held the position of head of school, director, principal, or

administrator in an early childhood setting. The intent was to provide broader

commentary on what a feminine-centric approach to school leadership might offer the

educational community.

The findings from this study suggest that the leadership experience for women in

early childhood is a gendered experience that is person centered, values driven, and

context specific. These leaders were passionate and dedicated to their work. Participant

responses indicate that although early childhood leaders value relationships and work

hard to build community, they also experience loneliness, isolation, and emotional strain.

The findings of this study also suggest that women leaders in early childhood feel that

their work is undervalued because the field of early childhood in general is undervalued.

They attribute this undervaluing to a lack of understanding by the general public about

early childhood and an undercurrent of sexism that still exists in modern society.

vii

Table of Contents

Dedication .......................................................................................................................... iii

Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ iv

Abstract of Dissertation ..................................................................................................... vi

Table of Contents .............................................................................................................. vii

List of Tables .................................................................................................................... xii

Chapter One: Introduction .................................................................................................. 1

A Recollection ................................................................................................................ 1

Statement of the Problem: A Critical Absence ............................................................... 4

Another Recollection ...................................................................................................... 8

The Missing Voice: Women in Preschool Leadership ................................................. 10

A Unique Opportunity .................................................................................................. 11

Filling the Void: Purpose and Research Question ........................................................ 12

Research Questions ....................................................................................................... 13

Locating Self: Subjectivity Statement .......................................................................... 13

Chapter Two: Literature Review ...................................................................................... 16

Leadership and Early Childhood Settings .................................................................... 16

Early childhood leadership summary. ....................................................................... 28

Conceptual Context ....................................................................................................... 29

Gender matters .......................................................................................................... 29

The Research on Women as Educational Leaders ........................................................ 33

The importance of place: The role of context in leadership development. ............... 38

Summary ....................................................................................................................... 39

viii

Chapter Three: Methodology ............................................................................................ 41

Introduction ................................................................................................................... 41

Locating the Question: The Research Perspective ....................................................... 42

Population ..................................................................................................................... 43

Sampling Strategy ......................................................................................................... 44

Sample Description ....................................................................................................... 45

Instrumentation ............................................................................................................. 52

Data Collection ............................................................................................................. 53

Data Analysis ................................................................................................................ 57

Trustworthiness and Ethical Considerations ................................................................. 60

Summary ....................................................................................................................... 61

Chapter Four: Findings ..................................................................................................... 62

Introduction ................................................................................................................... 62

Pathways ................................................................................................................... 62

The experience .......................................................................................................... 63

Values ....................................................................................................................... 63

Context ...................................................................................................................... 64

Contradictions ........................................................................................................... 65

Pathways ....................................................................................................................... 66

Unanticipated leadership ........................................................................................... 66

―Why do we get into this field? What, to be rich?‖ ................................................. 71

Summary of pathways ............................................................................................... 72

The Experience ............................................................................................................. 73

ix

―Bringing something different to the table‖ .............................................................. 73

―We‘ve been minimized‖ .......................................................................................... 76

Summary of the experience ...................................................................................... 77

Values ........................................................................................................................... 78

―Touching people‘s souls‖ ........................................................................................ 78

―In touch with your own beauty and demons‖ .......................................................... 82

―Inspiring them to dance with me‖. .......................................................................... 83

Context .......................................................................................................................... 86

―Critical years‖. ......................................................................................................... 86

―Just a preschool‖. .................................................................................................... 88

Summary of context .................................................................................................. 89

Contradictions ............................................................................................................... 90

―You can‘t do that with women‖. ............................................................................. 90

―Every day I feel lonely‖. ......................................................................................... 91

―The more I‘m in it the harder it is‖.......................................................................... 92

Summary of contradictions ....................................................................................... 97

Summary of Chapter Four ............................................................................................ 97

Chapter Five: Discussion of Findings and Recommendations ......................................... 98

Introduction ................................................................................................................... 98

Discussion of the Findings ............................................................................................ 98

Pathways ..................................................................................................................... 100

Unanticipated leadership ......................................................................................... 100

―Why do we get into this field? What, to be rich?‖ ............................................... 102

x

Summary of pathways ............................................................................................. 102

The Experience ........................................................................................................... 103

―Bringing something different to the table‖. ........................................................... 103

―We‘ve been minimized‖ ........................................................................................ 105

Summary of the experience .................................................................................... 106

Values ......................................................................................................................... 106

―Touching people‘s souls‖. ..................................................................................... 106

―In touch with your own beauty and demons‖ ........................................................ 108

―Inspiring everybody to dance with me‖ ................................................................ 109

Context ........................................................................................................................ 110

―Critical years‖. ....................................................................................................... 110

―Just a preschool‖ ................................................................................................... 111

Summary of context ................................................................................................ 112

Contradictions ............................................................................................................. 112

―You can‘t do that with women‖ ............................................................................ 112

―Everyday I feel lonely‖ ......................................................................................... 113

―The more I‘m in it the harder it is‖........................................................................ 114

Summary of Findings .................................................................................................. 115

Pathways ................................................................................................................. 117

The Experience ....................................................................................................... 118

Values ..................................................................................................................... 118

Context .................................................................................................................... 118

Contradictions ......................................................................................................... 119

xi

Implications for Practice ............................................................................................. 119

Recommendations for Research ................................................................................. 122

Reflections on the Conversation ..................................................................................... 123

Epilogue .......................................................................................................................... 127

References ....................................................................................................................... 128

Appendix A: Interview Questions .................................................................................. 145

Appendix B: Letters to Participants ................................................................................ 160

Appendix C: Informed Consent Form ............................................................................ 162

xii

List of Tables

Table 1. Shakeshaft’s Developmental Research Stages .................................................... 37

WOMEN AND LEADERSHIP IN EARLY CHILDHOOD

1

Chapter One: Introduction

A Recollection

The intercom on my office phone buzzed angrily. I pressed the red ―call waiting‖

button and waited patiently for the split-second delay necessary to connect me. I heard

my receptionist Brenda say, in her usual cheery voice, ―Ms. Wise, it‘s Ms. Harris.‖ For a

moment the stubborn puzzle pieces of recognition remained elusive before slowly

clicking into place. With that recognition came an almost tangible excitement. This was

THE Carol Harris, president of an exclusive organization for heads of independent

schools. I had been waiting—it seemed my whole career—for this call. This was the

kind of organization that helped careers, the kind of organization in which credibility and

membership were synonymous. This call could mean more than just another unused

membership card in my wallet. It would mean that I had finally arrived as a head of

school. Membership would mean recognition that could lead to more lucrative

employment opportunities in the future. Membership would also increase the visibility

and prestige of the school I currently led. Several of my friends—also heads of school—

often mused about the conferences and workshops they attended because of their

membership, as if they were almost vacations to be enjoyed at one‘s leisure. The

conferences were held in exotic places with the kind of speakers that were, for lack of

better phrasing, administrative celebrities. Some organizations bring with them a certain

cachet that is unique. This was one of them.

I answered the call with confidence resulting from my years of hard work and

dedication. ―Hello Carol, how are you?‖ I said. Her voice was timid on the other end,

―Hi Val, I‘m doing fine, but…‖ And there it was, that little conjunction that more often


2

than not is a precursor to unsavory news—―…well, I‘m a bit embarrassed.‖ She

continued, ―Um, let me just say first that your application was lovely and very well

written and you know that if it was up to me, well…you know…. Um, I guess I just

didn‘t realize that….‖ The phone went silent for a moment. ―Well, I didn‘t know that

you were now the administrator of a preschool. I mean we have these membership rules

and well, …I wouldn‘t have encouraged you to apply if I had known. Well, maybe you

could add some grades later on and try again. You know you‘re such a great

administrator it should be easy. But, really you could be doing so much more than

heading a preschool; anyway you should really think about moving up….‖ I had heard

this before, in different settings and different ways but always the same sentiment. It was

as if my current position wasn‘t prestigious enough or the work wasn‘t challenging

enough. This sentiment always seemed to be lurking somewhere in the background of

many conversations about leading in a preschool instead of ―real school.‖

Many would have bristled at this veiled affront to the importance and relevance of

my position as a leader in early childhood education. For me, however, this incident

served only to reinforce my desire to more concretely and unquestionably legitimize my

profession. My passion did not waver, even in the fierce winds of doubt among those in

my field. My feelings were not hurt. This claim of legitimacy, in fact, has served to fuel

the fire that has sustained me throughout my career. What I do is challenging. It is hard

work, requiring the kind of skill and knowledge that can be acquired only after years of

success. This rejection was not about me personally but more about the position I held.

It was a rejection of the importance of leadership in the early childhood setting.

Leadership in education in general has been well studied, demonstrating the real effect it


3

has in a variety of areas (Kelley, Thornton, & Daugherty, 2005; Leithwood & Jantzi,

2000; Waters, Marzano, & McNulty, 2005; Witziers, Bosker, & Kruger, 2003). Research

in the area of early childhood leadership, however, is sparse, and theories regarding it are

rare to nonexistent. This devaluing of leadership in early childhood settings may be the

reason the research in this area is so limited.

I continue to wonder, ―when will the greater educational community recognize

that leadership in an early childhood organization is as important as leadership in any

other educational setting?‖

These kinds of experiences have caused me to believe that continued research in

the area of leadership and the early childhood setting is imperative if leadership in early

childhood is ever to be considered and acknowledged as professional and as important as

leadership in other educational contexts. This belief has led me to wonder how women

leaders make meaning of leadership in an early childhood setting. It is this question that I

explore in this study. The purpose of this study was to better understand the perspectives

of women as leaders in early childhood environments. Recognizing the central role

women typically play in leading early childhood organizations, I sought to understand the

implications of the preschool setting as a historically woman-dominated environment for

leadership practices.

It is important at this juncture, to underscore the fact that the field of early

childhood is a large and very diverse landscape which encompasses; private, public, for

profit, not for profit and religious organizations. Since this is the case, this research

project focuses on only one aspect of this landscape- private, not for profit early

childhood programs that are not part of a larger corporation.


4

Statement of the Problem: A Critical Absence

Many studies have noted the strong and positive effect of leadership in the

educational setting on student achievement, school culture, and other aspects of the

educational environment (Kelley et al., 2005; Leithwood & Jantzi, 2000; Waters et al.,

2005; Witziers et al., 2003). The research points unequivocally toward leadership as an

important factor in the achievement of quality in most educational institutions.

Leadership has been cited as second only to classroom instruction in its contribution to

achievement (Leithwood, Louis, Anderson, & Wahlstrom, 2004). Studies on leadership

have been conducted in a variety of educational contexts: from higher education and high

school to middle schools and elementary schools (Leithwood et al., 2004). In the area of

leadership in the preschool context, however, the research is virtually nonexistent

(Geoghegan, Petriwskyj, Bower, & Geoghegan, 2003; Muijs, Aubrey, Harris, & Briggs,

2004; Rodd, 1998).

This is a critical absence because researchers have highlighted the importance of

organizational context in shaping leadership style (Avolio & Bass, 1988; Bass, 1985;

Bryman, 1992; Pawar & Eastman, 1997; Pettigrew, 1987). Billot (2005) suggested that

―it is not possible to theorize school leadership without fully contextualizing it‖ (p. 28).

Several researchers have highlighted the fact that more research needs to be conducted on

the effects of context on leadership (Avolio & Bass, 1988; Bryman, 1992). Examining

leadership in the preschool environment adds to the body of research on leadership and

organizational context.

The need for research in the area of leadership in early childhood education is

made even more salient when one takes into account that the need for quality childcare


5

programs in early childhood is expanding. In 1994, a little more than 60% of children

under the age of 6 had mothers in the workforce (Weill & Jablonski, 1997, p. 138).

Reports from the 2000 U.S. census, however, stated that 59% of mothers with infants

were in the labor force. These statistics highlight the fact that women are leaving

children at younger ages as they seek work outside the home. Therefore, it is vitally

important that research be conducted that will directly impact the quality of care for

young children.

Several studies have demonstrated a positive relationship between the director‘s

training and experience and quality in the preschool environment (Bloom, 1989, 1991;

Bloom, Sheerer, & Britz, 1991; Bredekamp & Willer, 1996; Cost, Quality, and Child

Outcomes Study Team, 1995). These studies focused more on managerial aspects and

less on the leadership of institutions as it is currently defined. Rodd (2006) asserted that

although management and leadership are both needed for the development of quality in

the early childhood setting, there is a significant difference between the two. Rodd

defined management as being concerned with the daily operations of the program,

sustaining and maintaining status quo. Leadership, on the other hand, as defined by

Rodd, is concerned with improvement of the organization through vision and philosophy;

it is ―forward thinking.‖ It may be said then that management focuses on maintenance

and leadership on development. Although a few researchers such as Rodd and Bloom

have focused on early childhood leadership in their work, as a whole, the field of

preschool education has been slow to recognize the importance of leadership (Culkin,

2000; Moyles, 2006; Rodd, 1998).


6

The idea that leadership is not a major concern in the preschool arena is seen in

the lack of educators who have both training in early childhood education and leadership

skills (Bricker, 2000). Rodd (1998) acknowledged this fact, suggesting that this may be

because the term leadership in early childhood education remains vague and incomplete.

Highlighting this definitional absence, Kagan and Bowman (1997) stated, ―Despite this

attention to leadership the field does not have a commonly accepted definition of

leadership, nor has it engaged in a systematic collaborative discussion of the properties of

leadership‖ (p. xi).

Researchers have postulated several theories as to why this is the case. When

addressing this issue, Muijs et al. (2004) highlighted two reasons for this absence. First,

early childhood leaders tend to view themselves ―first and foremost as educators‖ (p.

158). Second, Muijs et al. asserted that leaders in early childhood have a ―narrow view

of their role‖— tending to focus on the ―interactions with children‖ rather than the

managerial role (p. 158). Kagan (as cited in Culkin, 2000) argued that the lack of focus

on leadership in the field of early childhood education is due to a form of isolation that is

unique to early childhood education. She also stated that the field has tended to focus on

the child–teacher dynamic because it is ―simply easier than focusing on the entire

system‖ (p. ix).

Rodd (1998), on the other hand, cited a ―historical division between research and

academic staff and early childhood professionals‖ as a reason for the discrepancy (p.

142). According to Rodd, this division has led early childhood professionals to become

―consumers rather than producers of research‖ (p. 142). This situation perpetuates the

view that early childhood administrators are a lower status group that tends to be more


7

focused on practice than theory and are, therefore, not as interested in theories of

leadership (Almy, 1988).

Rodd (2006) offered another reason for the discrepancy, namely that leadership in

early childhood education tends to focus on its effect on program quality rather than the

―recognition of the concept of individual leadership potential,‖ which could ultimately

―advance the professionalization of the early childhood field and achieve still much-

needed advances in community credibility and status‖ (p. 10). This study is significant

because it values the experience of the leaders themselves instead of the ways in which

leadership relates to child outcomes.

Although the field of early childhood education itself has been slow to recognize

the importance of leadership, so has the greater society. The fact that society also has not

fully embraced the importance of leadership in early childhood education can be seen in

the significantly lower pay preschool leaders receive when compared to their elementary

and secondary school peers. Salary can be viewed as a reflection of the value society

places on an occupation (Hodge, 1996). It is interesting to note, then, that in May 2008,

preschool and childcare program administrators earned median annual wages of $39,940.

The middle 50% earned between $31,290 and $54,680. The lowest 10% earned less than

$25,910, and the highest 10% earned more than $77,150. During that same period

elementary and secondary school administrators earned median annual wages of $83,880.

The middle 50% earned between $68,360 and $102,830. The lowest 10% earned less

than $55,580, and the highest 10% earned more than $124,250 (United States Department

of Labor, n.d.-b). Equally as troubling is the fact that nearly a quarter of all teachers and


8

administrators in the early childhood field have incomes that fall almost 200% below the

poverty line (Herzenberg, Price, & Bradley, 2005).

Educational qualifications are another measure of the importance society places

on leadership in the early childhood setting. The minimum qualification for a public

school principal or assistant principal is a master‘s degree in education or educational

leadership. Preschool leaders, on the other hand, typically have no such requirement

(United States Department of Labor, n.d.-a). Although there has been a movement in

many states to require credentials for preschool leaders, most require only some higher

education credits but not a full undergraduate degree (United States Department of Labor,

n.d.-a). In fact, since 1983 the educational level of administrators in the field has fallen

consistently, with fewer and fewer administrators possessing at least a 4-year college

degree (Herzenberg et al., 2005). This phenomenon has resulted in a field of leaders that

have lower educational preparation and lower salaries than leaders in other types of

educational organization.. In a society in which salary and education are the credentials

for credibility, it is little wonder that preschool leaders are not as respected (Rodd, 1998)

or taken as seriously as their peers in the field of education.

Another Recollection

I distinctly remember the invitation. It was beautiful, on handcrafted paper with

pink and lavender flowers painted in soft watercolors. It was the kind of invitation that

one might want to keep in a scrapbook or frame. The invitation was from the head of a

prominent all-girls school in the Washington, DC area. It was to a very special event—a

luncheon for women who were heads of independent schools in the Washington, DC

area. Women new to independent schools and women who had been in leadership


9

positions for many years would gather together to celebrate and commiserate. We were

all successful leaders of independent, private schools, both large and small. Our schools

were financially viable, accredited by national organizations, and considered to be some

of the best in the Washington, DC area. But what is most remarkable to me is the fact

that we were all women in a field dominated by men.

On a lovely spring afternoon, we sat in white chairs on a deck overlooking a well-

manicured garden in a residential area of Washington, DC. To onlookers, we would have

seemed more like a woman‘s book club, gathering to discuss our weekly readings. The

conversation began with small talk, catching up on the year‘s events, our families, our

favorite pastimes, our favorite books. Inevitably though, our conversation settled on a

topic we all had in common; this is when we effectively shattered the illusion. We came

together as a group of women to discuss more than pleasantries. We came to discuss

leadership.

As a doctoral student in a program focusing on educational leadership, I found

this conversation to be intriguing. I listened as my colleagues discussed their

achievements, their proudest moments, their regrets. We talked about the long hours and

the fight to keep a balance between the family at home and the family at school. The

conversation was refreshing because this was a group of my peers. We all truly

understood what it was like to lead in an educational setting. But, I slowly began to

realize there were differences in perspective and point of view. My experiences did not

exactly mirror the experiences of many in the group. I took a quick mental survey,

scanning the group of women gathered around me. I realized that only one other person

was a leader in an organization that focused on early childhood. Was this the reason for


10

the difference in experiences or was it my own perception? This led me to wonder about

my own leadership style. Unlike many of my colleagues, my school environment

focused on young children, and I was a woman leader in a community of women. I

wondered whether the early childhood environment, as a domain typically consisting of

women leading women, supported a different kind of leadership and what, if anything, it

could reveal about women and leadership.

The Missing Voice: Women in Preschool Leadership

Historically, women have dominated the field of teaching. Although this is the

case, available statistics suggest that women continue to lag behind their male

counterparts in administrator positions in most educational settings (National Center for

Education Statistics, 2007). Preschool education, however, is considered to be one of the

few educational arenas in which women are dominant in both leadership positions and

follower positions (Rodd, 2006; Whitebook & Phillips, 1999). This fact could have

major implications for theory development on leadership in preschool settings and the

phenomenon of woman-led leadership models.

Researchers have noted that much of leadership theory to date has been informed

by a masculine and privileged perspective (Blackmore, 1999; Fitzgerald, 2002;

Shakeshaft, 1987; Theobald, 1996). Shakeshaft highlighted this fact when she asked the

following questions: What if the study of school administration took into account the

female world? What would theory and practice look like? She stated further, ―It is clear

from examination of the research and theory in educational administration that the female

world of administration has not been incorporated into the body of work in the field‖ (p.

198).


11

Researchers (Bell & Chase, 1993; Denmark, 1993; Shakeshaft, 1989) have cited

the underrepresentation of women in top leadership positions as the reason for their

underrepresentation in the literature on leadership. This is certainly not the case in the

field of preschool education. As previously stated, women dominate leadership positions

in preschool (Muijs et al., 2004; Rodd, 2006). Studying leadership in the early childhood

setting can provide an important context in which to explore the unique ways that women

lead, contributing to the broader leadership literature. Likewise, given the centrality of

leadership in determining school quality (Witziers et al., 2003), it is important for the

early childhood education community to develop a deeper and more explicit

understanding of leadership in the early learning environment.

As the world becomes more complex and societal pressures increase, other

educational arenas have worked to examine and embrace the art and science of

leadership, recognizing its positive impact on quality. Because quality in the preschool

setting is vitally important if its benefits are to be realized, it is imperative that the field of

preschool education continue to evolve in its understanding and application of leadership

theory.

A Unique Opportunity

Feminist researchers in educational leadership have been interested in exploring

how ―traditional theories and understandings have been normalized, while women‘s

experiences, understandings, and values have been ignored‖ (Bell & Chase, 1993, p.

141). Yet, the voices of leaders in early childhood organizations are still generally

absent. Feminist scholarship has remained virtually silent in this area, although early


12

childhood settings provide a unique context in which to explore a woman-dominated

leadership culture.

This research focusing on gender in context through an examination of leadership

in the early childhood setting has provided an opportunity to address the theoretical gap

that has heretofore ignored the experience and understanding of women in leadership

positions in early childhood education. The information generated from this study may

also contribute to the development of leaders who can be effective in the implementation

and maintenance of high-quality preschool environments. This study has provided an

opportunity both to explore the demands of leadership and to conceptualize and imagine

the contributions of a woman-centered model.

Filling the Void: Purpose and Research Question

There is a dearth of research on women and leadership in early childhood; the few

studies that do exist focused on managerial aspects of leadership or leadership as it

related to quality (Rodd, 1998). The purpose of this study is to gain a deeper

understanding of how women, identified as successful early learning school leaders,

understand what it means to be a leader. This study focused on how 12 women made

meaning of leadership rather than how they led in their early childhood settings. Using a

―basic, interpretive‖ qualitative research design, I conducted in-depth interviews with a

purposeful sample of 12 women leaders in an effort to give voice to the meaning these

women made of their positions (Merriam, 2009). The sample was made up of women

who each held the position of head of school, director, principal, or administrator in an

early childhood setting. Through this exploration, I hoped to provide broader

commentary on what a feminine-centric approach to school leadership might offer the


13

educational community. The following research questions and analytical questions

guided this study.

Research Questions

The primary research question is stated as follows: How do 12 women in

positions of leadership in early childhood education make meaning of leadership? My

analysis was guided by the following analytic questions:

1. How does the early childhood setting influence one‘s understanding of the

leadership experience?

2. How does being a woman shape one‘s understanding of leadership?

This study explored how women directors, heads of school, and administrators

made meaning of leadership in early childhood settings. By conducting this study I

hoped to make a significant contribution to the literature on leadership in early childhood

and the general literature on women and leadership. Knowledge of how women leaders

make meaning of leadership in early childhood will assist in creating a definition of

leadership in the field of early childhood education. This research also will assist in

closing the gap between practice and research.

Locating Self: Subjectivity Statement

In conducting this study, I recognized that my own background and perspective

necessarily influenced my interpretation. Because I am a practicing leader in an early

childhood environment I bring a unique focus to this work. Having been a Montessori

preschool teacher for more than 15 years, I have a real interest in developing quality

preschool environments for all children, recognizing their importance for overall child

development and success in later life. Being a Montessorian, in and of itself, places me


14

on the ―radical fringe‖ of child development and frames my thinking of what young

children should know and be able to do. And, as an African American female school

leader for more than 10 years, I am well acquainted with the stereotypes and biases that

are a byproduct of our societal assumptions of gender and race and that infiltrate our

communities.

I am one of the few women of color leading an independent school in the

Washington, DC area. I am highly sought after to participate on professional boards and

organizations, being asked to speak at events, lead workshops, and generally add to the

knowledge base surrounding my profession. Although this is the case, when seeking

employment opportunities, I still must ask, ―Is this community ready for a Black woman

leader?‖ One might think that in the 21st century, with a man of color as President of the

United States, this question would be unnecessary, but the world of leadership in

independent schools is still the domain of the White male. A consultant must still pause

and think about whether the community she is seeking to enter is, first, ready for a

woman and, second, ready for a woman of color.

I began my career in education as a preschool teacher almost 20 years ago. After

spending many years in the classroom and reviewing a great deal of research, I am now

convinced more than ever that the foundation for education is laid during the preschool

years, those years from 2.5 to 6 years of age. Many research studies point to the positive

effects a quality preschool education can have on a child‘s social, psychological, and

intellectual development (Ramey et al., 1992; Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000). I also

understand that a preschool program must be of the highest quality for it to have the


15

desired effect. And, as a leader, I realize how much my style of leadership and attitude

affect the school culture.

I believe that collaboration and the development of community are essential for

the creation of a positive school culture and that development of the individual is vital to

the organization as a whole. I also believe that people do not simply make up the

organization—they are the organization. This means that when decisions are made, the

needs of the people within the organization are always first. I encourage collaboration

and community. I find that my perspective tends to be very different from that of the

males I know who are leaders in their schools. In view of the fact that I am interested in

conducting gendered research, I believe it is important to clarify my beliefs surrounding

this topic. Although I do not believe that men are essentially masculine or that women

are essentially feminine, I do believe that men and women are different and behave

differently.

As the female head of a small school with an early childhood focus, I am

intimately involved in the day-to-day administrative functioning of the school. But more

importantly, I see myself and am considered by others as the leader of the institution. I

am the one in the organization who is vested with the obligation and duty to maintain the

vision and mission of the organization.

Given my experiences as a leader, my perspective undoubtedly shaped my

understanding and interpretation of the participants‘ responses in this study. My

experiences helped me hear things others might not have heard and, conversely, might

have influenced what I was able to hear. I was vigilant, however, to be true to the

participants‘ voices.


16

Chapter Two: Literature Review

In this literature review, I demonstrate gaps in the literature that support the need

for a qualitative study and to explain the reason for my research focus on women in

leadership in an early childhood setting. This literature review consists of three sections.

The first section reviews the research relating to leadership in the early childhood setting.

Given that the early childhood setting is an important context for this study, next I review

the literature on the influence of organizational context in leadership development and

style. The third section highlights research on women and leadership. Although there is a

great deal of literature on leadership and women in educational leadership, little research

had been conducted on leadership in the early childhood setting. Therefore, it was

necessary to draw from a wider range of research.

Leadership and Early Childhood Settings

Research in the field of leadership in early childhood settings can be said to be in

its infancy, with much of the research dating back only to the 1990s. The research in this

area was also extremely limited and dominated by only a few researchers, much of it

conducted as dissertations (Muijs et al., 2004). Muijs et al., in a review of the literature

on leadership in early childhood, cited the fact that much of the research of leadership in

early childhood is ―anecdotal and in some cases does not transcend the ‗tips for teachers‘

style‖ (p. 158). Paula Jorde-Bloom, who conducted some of the earliest studies on

leadership in early childhood, is one of the most prolific researchers in the field. One of

Jorde-Bloom‘s (1992) earliest studies focused on childcare managers, finding that they

had a very limited view of their role. The managers reported that the most enjoyable

aspect of their job was interacting with the children and their families whereas the least


17

enjoyable part was the management aspect. Jorde-Bloom reported that the managers

were uncomfortable in the management positions and focused more on their roles as

educators. Other researchers also reported similar findings (Rodd, 1996).

The fact that some childcare administrators reported to researchers that they did

not enjoy management called into question whether the work of administrators in early

childhood could really be considered leadership. Culkin (1994) set out to answer this

question by documenting in her dissertation the ―actual work‖ (p. 180) of an early

childhood administrator. She then analyzed the data in an effort to determine if the

position qualified as a ―leadership job‖ (p. 180). Culkin reported that the administrator‘s

job was complex, requiring a variety of skills and competencies. Her research revealed

seven themes that she believed qualified the position as worthy of being called a

leadership position. Those themes were complexity, relationship building,

communication, planning, community building, creating a learning environment, and

management of resources. As one of the first studies to investigate the administrator‘s

role as a leadership role, Culkin‘s research added to the body of knowledge surrounding

the work life of the childcare administrator, helping to begin the process of defining

leadership in the early childhood setting.

There were several limitations in Culkin‘s (1994) work. Culkin's sample was not

necessarily focused on those in leadership positions. She included anyone who worked

closely with childcare administrators. Culkin also used a variety of early childhood

settings, including public schools with childcare centers. Although Culkin asserted that

public schools principals are often site-based managers, it can be argued that they are not

as likely to be very involved in the day-to-day management of the childcare center. The


18

study also did not focus on the role of gender in early childhood leadership, falling short

of really allowing women early childhood leaders the opportunity to tell their stories.

Hawley (1990), in a mixed-method dissertation, explored the concept of power

and how it is perceived and experienced by early childhood administrators. Hawley

interviewed 10 female administrators from privately funded childcare centers, ranging

from 28 to 51 in age and representing a variety of racial groups. Although Hawley did

not find a common definition of power, the researcher made several important

observations. Hawley found that the administrators were able to make difficult decisions

and that communication and problem solving were the predominant means of power

expression. This was a testament to the fact that administrators in early childhood were

leaders of complex organizations. One most interesting finding in Hawley‘s study was

that power as it was used by these early childhood administrators was different from how

it is usually defined. The experience of the administrators in the study again highlighted

the fact that, although their roles were indeed leadership roles, a new more flexible

definition must be developed for leadership. This definition would need to include some

nontraditional elements such as self-trust, confidence, vulnerability, nurturance,

connection, collaboration, interdependence, and relationship. Hawley argued that the

definition of power in leadership must be expanded to allow for a type of power that is

not punitive or restrictive but supportive and nurturing.

Hawley‘s (1990) findings are important in that they helped to continue the

leadership discourse in the early childhood community, but the study did not go far

enough in the development of leadership theory. The focus in this particular study was

more on the expression of power as a tool of leadership than leadership as a construct.


19

The study did not allow for the unique experience of women in leadership in early

childhood settings.

Once it had been established that childcare administrators were indeed leaders, the

next phase of research began to document the multiplicity of roles, skills, and tasks

exhibited by these leaders (Muijs et al., 2004). It was at this stage that the bulk of

research in early childhood leadership was set. In this vein, Rodd (1997) conducted a

research study to investigate leadership roles with 79 early childhood managers and

childcare establishment owners in the United Kingdom. The respondents were asked to

list the most common management and leadership roles and to rate the percentage of time

required for each. The resulting list was composed mostly of management tasks such as

managing the budgeting,

Pipa (1997) continued the work on roles and skill documentation in a dissertation

that studied the directors of high-quality state-funded childcare centers in the San

Francisco Bay area. She was interested in identifying and describing leadership skills

and behaviors of the directors. She was also interested in determining whether the skills

and behaviors of early childhood education (ECE) leaders were similar to those found in

the effective leadership literature. Pipa interviewed 10 childcare center directors and

collected surveys from 41 teachers about the directors in their centers. Pipa found that

directors in the early childhood centers utilized several leadership and management skills

to perform their jobs. Pipa cited four areas as the most prevalent: staff development,

instructional leadership, internal organization politics, and external organizational

politics. She distinguished between knowledge, skills, and behaviors, finding that

directors used their leadership knowledge to share information and to assist teachers in


20

their development. Pipa also found that directors of state-funded early childhood centers

used their leadership skills to develop the skills of others, evaluate and assess student

achievement, and support teacher development. Although knowledge, skills, and

behaviors are certainly important aspects of leadership, the focus in Pipa‘s study did not

allow for the depth of investigation that focusing on the leadership experience could

provide. A limitation of the study is that it utilized the effective schools theoretical

framework, which presupposes that methods effective in the schools setting will be

equally as effective in the early childhood setting. Finally, this particular study focused

on administrators in San Francisco, California, and therefore has limited generalizability.

Seplocha (1998) conducted a multisite case study for her dissertation. She was

interested in determining what leadership qualities were common among directors of six

high-quality childcare centers in different regions of the United States. Using Bolman

and Deal‘s (as cited in Seplocha, 1998) leadership framework, Seplocha investigated how

well the behavior of the administrator fit the frames. Seplocha found that the ECE

leaders were skilled in all four of Bolman and Deal‘s frames, and she noted 12 new

concepts. She found that leaders in high-quality childcare centers (a) had knowledge of

early childhood development, (b) were experienced in leveraging resources, (c) took

ownership of the program, (d) had competent assistance, (e) could focus on the big

picture, (f) could focus on staff development, (g) participated in professional

communities, (h) had vision, (i) were collaborative, (j) possessed an ethic of care, (k)

appreciated staff, and (l) were sensitive to parents. Although the research added to the

body of knowledge by furthering the definition of effective leadership skills, the fact that

Seplocha started out with Bolman and Deal‘s frames could be interpreted as the


21

researcher‘s overstructuring the analysis. This study also described the behaviors but fell

short of allowing the directors to relate their lived experience.

For her dissertation, Larkin (1999) conducted a qualitative case study with 16

preschool directors in the Boston area. The primary purpose of the study was to gain an

understanding of the unique skills necessary to be a successful leader in an early

childhood environment. The second focus of the study was to determine why the

directors transitioned to leadership positions. Larkin found that the directors defined

their roles along administrative lines. The directors in the study highlighted budgets,

communication, and setting the tone as the most important aspects of their position. The

participants also commented that their style of leadership was collaborative, emphasizing

shared decision making. Although the study shed some light on the leadership skills

utilized by early childhood administrators, the study did not investigate the phenomenon

of leadership as experienced by the leaders. It also did not specifically utilize a feminist

perspective in the analysis of the women‘s perceptions of leadership.

The aforementioned studies can be considered foundational for the field of

leadership in early childhood. These studies appropriately focused first on the

establishment of the title of leadership for what chief administrators do in early childhood

settings; they then documented the tasks, skills, and roles associated with leadership,

noting that it was complex and context specific. Although the bulk of research in the area

of leadership in early childhood has focused on the documentation of roles and skills, a

few researchers have turned toward the task of defining effective leadership in the field.

For another dissertation, Jones (1998) conducted a qualitative study in an attempt

to uncover themes or patterns that provided some insight into various perspectives on


22

leadership: specifically, how community leaders and practitioners define leadership and

how leadership is practiced at these various levels. Jones began with the assumption that

educators in early childhood had neither thought a great deal about leadership nor had an

opportunity for ―open and public dialogue‖ regarding the subject of leadership in early

childhood (p. 141). In an effort to create this opportunity, Jones utilized focus groups to

uncover the meaning that early childhood educators make of their experience with and as

leaders in their profession. Participants in the focus groups included 59 women and 2

men. They were early childhood directors and members of various statewide

professional associations in the State of California.

Jones (1998) found that participants perceived leaders as valuing relationships,

developing social connections, and motivating and inspiring followers. Although this

finding was consistent with the literature on leadership in general, Jones‘s research

certainly added to the body of literature regarding leadership. Allowing individuals

directly involved in the field to talk about their perceptions of leadership is important in

beginning to build a description of what successful leadership looks like in the field of

early childhood. Although there was much to be gained from investigating this question,

Jones‘s work did not focus specifically on how women in the field make meaning of their

leadership experience. Because focus groups cannot guarantee confidentiality, the

women in Jones‘s study may not have felt free to reveal their true beliefs.

In a qualitative study, Sciaraffa (2004) developed a life history narrative of six

early childhood administrators to focus on their career paths, personal characteristics, and

administrative style. The researcher utilized general systems theory as the theoretical

framework. The study found that there was no single pathway to becoming an


23

administrator; this finding was consistent with the findings of other researchers. The

study also determined that the administrators all shared a concern for children and

families, having high expectations for the staff they viewed as a team.

Although the information found through the Sciaraffa (2004) study added to the

general body of knowledge focusing on female leadership in early childhood settings, the

study had some limitations. The researcher stated that administrators chosen were

reported as being strong, but there was no definition of the term strong. Also, half of the

administrators interviewed were retired and could not be observed in their settings; such

observations could have added important aspects to the data. The researcher used general

systems theory as the theoretical framework; therefore, it could be argued that the unique

experiences of the women that might ―offer us unique perspectives and insights into the

world around us‖ were missing (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2007).

Horwitz (2003) also was interested in adding to the research about effective

leadership in early childhood education. Horwitz conducted a study that focused on what

constitutes effective leadership in quality early childhood programs. Horowitz used in-

depth, semistructured interviews of four retired leaders in early childhood education to

gain insight into their commitment to their work and their perspectives of being ―women

in a field of women.‖ She found that there was a variety of determinants that shaped the

lives of these leaders. Horwitz‘s focus on the meaning of effective leadership is

important, but there were limitations to the study. Because the leaders were retired, their

views may not be generalizable to those who are still active in the field. The researcher

did not view leadership through the feminist lens of analysis and, therefore, may have

neglected to truly hear the perspective of the leaders.


24

June‘s (2007) dissertation employed a phenomenological qualitative study that

documented teachers‘ descriptions and perceptions of leadership traits and styles of

administrators from six sites using surveys, questionnaires, and interviews. June was

interested in how preschool teachers related leadership qualities and traits to program

quality from their perspective. The study was conducted in six state-funded preschools in

Michigan. Using a semistructured questionnaire and in-depth interviews, a profile was

created of each director. June used the Multi-Rater Leadership Form developed by Jorde-

Bloom. The Multi-Rater Leadership Form asked the participant to rate the director on 25

traits using a Likert response scale.

The researcher developed three profiles from the instruments—a profile of the

director, a task profile, and a program quality profile—and looked for commonalities

among the profiles. June found a relationship between a specific type of leadership

profile and a high-quality program. The high-profile directors were most associated with

high-quality preschools. Those leaders with high quality were reported as displaying a

mixture of task and integrated behaviors; having good communication skills, knowledge,

and concern for others; and creating a team culture.

Henderson-Kelly and Pamphilon (2000) took the field a few steps farther by

investigating whether women in early childhood settings had begun to develop a context-

specific type of leadership model. They asserted that women are developing their own

perspectives, models, and language on leadership. They further proposed what they saw

as an emerging paradigm distinctive to the early childhood sector. Building on the 1986

work of Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, & Tarule, the aim of Henderson-Kelly and

Pamphilon was to ―build theory regarding the leadership practices of women in children's


25

services and to begin developing a model that gave relevant structure to further

professional development in the area‖ (p. 2). Although the authors were not explicit, the

guiding questions seemed to be (a) Is there a feminist leadership model for directors of

early childhood centers? and (b) Can the work of Belenky et al. be used as a springboard

for the development of a leadership model in early childhood? The authors were rather

vague regarding the data collection method and the sampling procedure. The sample was

made up of those individuals in an early childhood leadership program that ―agreed to

take part‖ in the project (Henderson-Kelly & Pamphilon, 2000, p. 2). Three directors

agreed to participate in the study: one from private day care, one from occasional care,

and one from family day care. The researchers reported using interviews, questionnaires,

reflection, and member checks as data collection methods. It is interesting to note that

they neglected to use observation as a method of triangulation. This study expanded on

the findings of Belenky et al. by including ―leadership wisdom‖ in the framework.

Henderson-Kelly and Pamphilon argued that women must continue to explore this

emerging paradigm of leadership. They added four ―wisdoms‖ to the ―women‘s ways of

knowing‖ described by Belenky et al. to begin the development of a framework for

understanding women‘s leadership practices in early childhood education. The study‘s

findings highlight the fact that generic leadership theories may not be useful in

understanding leadership in early childhood education. The sample was extremely small

and did not contribute sufficiently in developing a grounded theory of female leadership

in early childhood education.

In a mixed-methods study conducted in Australia, Jorde-Bloom (2000) utilized in-

depth interviews and surveys to collect 257 early childhood education directors‘


26

responses to questions about role definition, job satisfaction, stress, and growth. Jorde-

Bloom analyzed the data using linguistic metaphorical analysis to determine patterns in

responses. She found that 22% of the directors used metaphors relating to family, 22%

used metaphors about caring and nurturing, and 16% used metaphors that highlighted

connections. Although the findings addressed important aspects of leadership in early

childhood settings, the study did not provide an opportunity to explore how the leaders

themselves understood leadership, specifically, as well as their own leadership practices.

Also, because the study did not focus on the perspective of women leaders, their unique

voice was missing.

Hujala (2004), as part of an international project on leadership in early childhood,

investigated leadership and its societal connections in a Finnish context. Using surveys

and focus groups, the study examined leadership as a function of the perception of those

involved in childcare. Because Hujala was interested in the connection between

leadership and society, she used Nivala‘s (as cited in Hujala, 2004) contextual leadership

model as the theoretical framework. Based in large part on the ecological framework

developed by Bronfenbrenner (as cited in Hujala, 2004), the contextual leadership model

―considers leadership as a cultural system…and consists of the children, parents,

childcare unit, local and state authorities, and, finally, the whole society and its culture‖

(Hujala, 2004, p. 54). Leadership in this study was interpreted as not only the

―leaders‘…ideas concerning leadership but also the views of all those involved with

childcare‖ (p. 55). The focus group method of data collection was utilized, with the

inclusion of 11 questions developed by an Australian international leadership project

team. The questions were modified to be culturally relevant in Finland and to include


27

questions about the respondent‘s definition of leadership, the roles and responsibilities of

leadership, and the quality of childcare as it related to leadership. Each participant also

received a survey by mail that asked for her personal opinions about leadership.

Hujala (2004) found that the context of leadership defines the culture and the

language used to describe it. It is interesting to note, however, that Hujala found no clear

connection between the tasks and duties connected to leadership as perceived by the

participants. Hujala speculated ―whether the unclear and disunited leadership reflects an

unclear and disunited mission of childcare among leaders at different levels‖ (p. 69).

This thought is important and corroborates others‘ assertions that there is no clear

definition of leadership in the field of early childhood education (Kagan & Bowman,

1997).

Hujala‘s (2004) findings are important as the field of early childhood education

continues to examine the idea of leadership. The study highlighted the need for a clear

definition of leadership and the importance of considering context when conducting

research in the field. Hujala‘s study, however, did not provide an analysis of how the

leaders themselves perceived leadership or how the early childhood context impacted

leadership. The study also was created to gain an understanding of Finnish child care

center leadership and, therefore, may not be generalizable to other populations.


28

Early childhood leadership summary.

There is very little research focusing on early childhood leadership and most of

the current research has focused on the role or skills of early childhood leadership.

Researchers have also called into question the quality of the few studies that have been

conducted (Muijs et al., 2004; Rodd, 1998). Nevertheless, research established the notion

that early childhood administrators are worthy of the leadership title and hold a

multiplicity of roles that tend to be ―context specific‖ (Curry, 2000; Muijs et al.).

Researchers in the field of leadership in early childhood have made a general call

for an expanded definition of leadership from what is currently espoused in the leadership

research (Kagan & Bowman, 1997; Rodd, 1998). According to Rodd (2001), those in

leadership positions in early childhood seem to recognize leadership at a ―personal level‖

but seem to be unable to translate that into ―aspirations for more general or professional

leadership, which could advance the professionalism of the early childhood field and

achieve much needed advances in community credibility and status‖ (p. 1). There is a

need for a common understanding of effective leadership in the field of early childhood

to move it toward professionalization and to assist in training others.

Given the limited research in this area, I sought to add to the general discussion of

leadership in the early childhood setting by investigating how women leaders in early

childhood make meaning of their leadership experiences. I built on the previous work by

going beyond the documentation of skills and tasks and delving into the meaning these

leaders make of their experiences. As I did so, I attempted to keep in mind that the early

childhood setting is a specific context that may impact the kind of leadership experience

these directors and administrators have.


29

Conceptual Context

I drew from several related bodies of literature in developing a conceptual context

for this study. Primarily, I viewed this study as one focusing on women as leaders and

the influence of context on leadership and leadership style, and. Given the limited

amount of previous research seeking to integrate these three areas, I drew from disparate

research sources to conceptualize this study. Following, I present previous research that

informed my thinking as I undertook my research. My purpose was not to provide an

exhaustive review of this literature but to explicate the readings and theories that have

been most fundamental in shaping my interpretations in this study.

Gender matters. Leadership in early childhood is unique in that it is a field

dominated by women in leadership positions; this phenomenon may have implications

for the development of leadership theory in the early childhood context (Muijs et al.,

2004; Rodd, 1996). In this work, I drew on the assumption that a woman, left to her own

preferred way of being, may be inclined toward a style of leadership that is different from

typically masculine-focused perspectives. As I considered the experiences of women in

this study, I worked to be open to elements of care, collaboration, and nurturing. I also

looked for evidence of how participants may not conform to this conceptualization.

Additional works on women as leaders have focused on relationships and caring

(Brunner, 1996; Gilligan, 1993). Beck (1992) found the idea of caring to be so vital to

women‘s leadership style that it needed to be placed at the top of the hierarchy of values.

Beck argued that all other values were ―informed and guided by caring‖ (p. 29).

Educational environments led by women tend to be characterized by the development and

maintenance of caring relationships (Cohen, 1989).


30

Another research focus has been in the area of power in leadership. Brunner

(1998) asserted that, unlike men, who tend to use power as a method of control, women

use power for collaboration and organization. The research in this area also highlighted

the idea that women tend to share power by collaborating, including others, and building

consensus (Cohen, 1989). In line with this finding, Loden (1985) found that women

often use a team concept, as a form of collaboration within the organizational structure.

In this study, I worked to remain open to the foregoing findings of researchers

regarding the nature of women and leadership. This perspective helped me better

understand the perspective of these women. This study offered a particular advantage in

studying women-centered approaches to leadership, given that the early childhood setting

as a context seemed to impose a different sense of reality for women in leadership

positions.

The research cited in this literature review alludes to the idea that women tend to

have a leadership style different from that of men. Northouse (2007), in his overview of

research on leadership, stated that women are simply different from men and thus they

lead differently. I began with this assumption in this work, focusing specifically on how

women lead in a situation in which women predominate. In discussing women and their

leadership styles, Gilligan‘s (1982) work on women‘s psychological and moral

development has had tremendous influence. In her work on women‘s psychological and

social development, Gilligan argued that women often experience the world in a way that

is fundamentally different from the way men do. Gilligan characterized men‘s

perspective on the world as being organized around justice—making decisions based on

moral principles that are independent of relationships and social contexts. In contrast,


31

women‘s moral development, Gilligan pointed out, centers on the idea of nurturing,

interdependence, and connection, which she called an ―ethic of care.‖ This difference in

moral development, Gilligan argued, manifests itself in the different ways women lead;

therefore, women lead and administer differently from men. Gilligan stated,

As we have listened for centuries to the voices of men and the theories of

development that their experience informs, so we have come more recently to

notice not only the silence of women but the difficulty in hearing what they say

when they speak. Yet in the different voice of women lies the truth of an ethic of

care, the tie between relationship and responsibility, and the origins of aggression

in the failure of connection. The failure to see the different reality of women‘s

lives and to hear the differences in their voices stems in part from the assumption

that there is a single mode of social experience and interpretation. (p. 173)

Gilligan‘s (1982) work influenced numerous studies, including that of Helgesen

(1990). Helgesen conducted a case study of successful women leaders in various

industries. Through observations and in-depth interviews, Helgesen developed a theory

of leadership she believed was unique to women. She called this leadership style a ―web

of inclusion.‖ In her book, Web of Inclusion, Helgesen described her findings with

regard to a woman‘s way of organizing her workplace. She used the spider‘s web as a

metaphor to illustrate a kind of organic leadership style (Kouzes & Posner, 1993). A

literal spider‘s web is spun in such a way that each thread is connected to the others;

Helgesen asserted that a woman‘s leadership style is connective, like a spider‘s web,

tying the various aspects of the organization together. A spider‘s web has no hierarchy

but is connected and integrated; also, according to Helgesen, is women‘s leadership.

Helgesen stated further that in the web of inclusion, the leader is not at the top as one

would be in a more hierarchical or pyramid-shaped system; in the web, the woman is at

the center of the organization, supporting a ―web of concern.‖ This style of leadership


32

has flexibility and adaptability as its foundation. Helgesen‘s findings highlight the idea

that women, when allowed the opportunity, may have a leadership style that is unique to

them. This idea may have implications for the meaning women in early childhood make

of leadership.

Other researchers concurred with Helgesen‘s view, arguing that women‘s style of

leadership tends to be more nurturing, collaborative, and inclusive (Adler, 2005; Chin,

2004; Eagly & Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001; Greenberg & Sweeney, 2005; Rosener, 1990).

Collectively, these women-focused researchers suggested that women tend to experience

and execute leadership differently than do men. It is important to consider this possibility

because it may help to develop a deeper understanding of leadership in general and add to

the findings of previous research. I have chosen to use these less than contemporary

sources because I believe they are useful in helping me to understand the leadership

experience of women in the early childhood setting.

It is important to note that there have been critics of this notion. According to

Young, (2003), several authors have viewed the research in this area as essentializing

gender. These researchers questioned ―whether one can adequately understand the

experiences of or tell the stories of other women‖ (Young, 2003). It is the representation

of all women as having common qualities that researchers find problematic, falling prey

to misrepresenting women as a whole (Blackwell; Caulfield; as cited in Young, 2003).

Researchers have argued that women differ on a variety of levels, including age, ability,

social class, family background, educational attainment, sexual orientation, religion, and

so forth, and that these characteristics are equally as important as gender and therefore

contribute to the development of different women (Blackwell; Caulfield; Linden; Moss;


33

Rollins; Romero; as cited in Young, 2003). Harding (1991) suggested that researchers

interested in this area fall into three categories. One group of researchers views all of

these characteristics as contributing to the formation of women. Others view race, class,

and any other characteristics as secondary to gender. A final group views some

characteristics such as race and class as more important than gender. I believe that my

leadership style is informed predominantly by my gender.

The Research on Women as Educational Leaders

The focus on women specifically in educational leadership has a relatively short

history. The purpose of this early research, however, was not to study women as leaders:

It was to prove that women could be good leaders (Shakeshaft, 2006). Early research

focused on comparing women‘s behavior with that of men.

It was Shakeshaft‘s landmark work in 1987 that led researchers to focus on the

particular experience of women and educational leadership. Shakeshaft, along with

others, revealed that leadership research from a male perspective dominated the research

on leadership of the time (Blackmore, 1999; Fitzgerald, 2002; Shakeshaft, 1987). As

more and more women took on the leadership mantle, researchers began to focus on

women administrators in their own right.

Commenting on research conducted on women in educational administration,

Shakeshaft (1989) outlined six developmental research stages (Table 1). The first stage

of research on women in educational leadership focused on gaining statistics about

women in leadership positions in education. The research took the form of surveys

documenting topics such as how many women were actually in educational

administration, how long they stayed in those positions, and how long it took them to get


34

to those positions (Blount, 1998; Shakeshaft, 1999). During this stage the research noted

that in 1910 only 9.0% of school superintendents in the United States were women, but

that percentage dropped to 1.3% by 1971. By 1992, the percentage had increased to

6.6%, and in 2000 the percentage was 13.2% (Glass, 1992; Glass, Bjork, & Brunner,

2000). This knowledge, coupled with the fact that women make up more than 65% of

teachers in the United States, underscores the disparity (Shakeshaft, 1999). The

conclusion from this stage of research was that, although women represented a larger

percentage in the field of teaching, they were significantly less represented in educational

administration (Shakeshaft, 1999). Although the research during this stage narrowly

defined administration as either the superintendency, elementary principalship, or high

school principalship, completely ignoring administration in early childhood, it

nonetheless added to the literature on women in educational administration.

Shakeshaft (1989) suggested that stage two in research on women and educational

administration focused on the history of women in school administration. A great deal of

research focused on specific women such as Ella Flagg Young (1845-1918), who served

as the nation‘s first female superintendent; Mary Parker Follett (1868-1924), political and

business philosopher during the 1920s and 1930s; and Jane Addams (1860-1935),

founder of the famous Hull House in Chicago (Bjork, 2000). Studies of prominent

women in leadership positions are important because they add to the conversation about

leadership and women in leadership in particular. Again, it must be pointed out that the

same kind of focus has not been placed on women in leadership positions in early

childhood.


35

Shakeshaft‘s third stage of research on women in leadership positions in

educational administration investigated the reasons that women have had limited access

to these administrative positions. Shakeshaft (1989), in her seminal work, outlined

discriminatory feelings, stereotyping, and gender bias as some of the factors that

prohibited women from achieving parity in the field of educational administration. These

studies were highly relevant for positions such as the superintendency and the high

school principalship, but leadership in the field of early childhood has always been the

purview of women. Neglecting an emphasis on early childhood leadership has resulted in

a less than clear picture of women and leadership.

Centering research on women and their unique voices constituted stage four in

Shakeshaft‘s analysis of the research. The focus at this stage was on women‘s

perceptions and experience. A good example of this kind of research is the work done by

Bjork (2000). Bjork examined women‘s traits of leadership and found that women

exhibit traits that are unique to them. Although Bjork did not include early childhood

leadership in the study, it is relevant that women may have a unique style of leadership.

Another frequently cited research study that fit well into this fourth stage was the work

done by Regan and Brooks (1995). These researchers interviewed 35 women educational

administrators in an attempt to understand how they experienced leadership. Their

research led to the development of what they called ―relationship leadership.‖ This

leadership style is noted by five attributes: collaboration, caring, courage, intuition, and

vision; Regan and Brooks followed in the footsteps of other researchers, such as Gilligan

and Helgesen, who had been interested in a woman‘s way of leading.


36

According to Shakeshaft (1989), stage five placed emphasis on challenging the

dominant androcentric theories of leadership and developing leadership theory that

emphasized women‘s ways of leading. There was some overlap in stages four and five;

much of the research fit into both stages. Shakeshaft‘s final stage was stage six. This

stage of research has implications for the entire field of leadership study in that it affects

both women and men, adding to the discourse on leadership and ultimately changing it.

According to Shakeshaft (1989), research about women in educational

administration was concentrated in the first three stages in which documentation of

numbers and identification of barriers were the focal points. Exploration into the

experiences of female directors of preschools contributes to the line of inquiry in

educational leadership. Given that I was interested in recording the voices of women in

leadership positions in early childhood settings, my research project was set in what

Shakeshaft called stage four.


37

Table 1. Shakeshaft’s Developmental Research Stages

Stage Question Approach Outcome

1. Absence of

women

documented.

How many women

are administrators

and what are their

positions?

Surveys Documentation of the

numbers of women

by administrative

position.

2. Search for

current and

previous female

administrators.

What are the

characteristics and

history of women

school

administrators?

Surveys of women

administrators.

Historical research

on great women.

Demographic and

attitudinal

descriptions of

women

administrators.

Stories of female

administrators.

3. Women as

disadvantaged or

subordinate.

Why are there so

few women

administrators?

Surveys of attitudes

towards women and

women‘s

experiences.

Identification of

barriers to

advancement in

administration.

4. Women studied

in their own

voices.

How do women

describe their lives

and experiences?

Surveys,

interviews, and

observational

studies of women in

educational

administration.

A world view from a

female perspective.

5. Women as

challenges to

theory.

How must theory

change to include

women‘s

experience?

Analysis of theories

and methods

appropriate for

women.

Reality that theories

don‘t work for

women.

6. Transformation

of theory.

What are new

theories of human

behavior in

organizations?

A range of

approaches.

Reconceptualization

of theory to include

men‘s and women‘s

experience.

Shakeshaft, C. (1989). The gender gap in research in educational administration. Educational Administration Quarterly, 15(4), p. 327.


38

The importance of place: The role of context in leadership development.

Seddon (1993) stated that context is a highly ambiguous notion. According to

Porter and McLaughlin (2006), no ―coherent, integrated picture of the leadership-context

interaction‖ existed (p. 559). There was some agreement, however, as to what comprises

context. Porter and McLaughlin cited culture or climate, goals or purpose, people,

composition or processes, state or condition, and structure or time as important

components. Gronn and Ribbins (1996) defined context as the sum of situational,

cultural, and historical circumstances. They stated further that context is the ―vehicle

through which the agency of particular leaders may be empirically understood‖ (p. 454).

I used Gronn and Ribbins‘s (1996) definition of context as a lens of analysis in

this study. The focus of my research was women in leadership in the context of the early

childhood educational setting. During the collection of data and the subsequent analysis,

I worked to remain particularly open to the themes of organizational context that emerged

from these women‘s experiences.

Researchers have indicated that leadership and organizational context are closely

related (Avolio & Bass, 1988; Bass, 1985; Bryman, 1992; Pawar & Eastman, 1997;

Pettigrew, 1987; Porter & McLaughlin, 2006). Selznick (1957) was succinct in this

matter, stating that ―theory of leadership is dependent on the theory of organization‖ (p.

23). Perrow (1970) agreed, adding that ―leadership style is a dependent variable which

depends on something else. The setting or task is the independent variable‖ (p. 6).

Although several theorists have agreed on the importance of the relationship between

context and leadership, to date, few research studies have actually focused on this

connection (Goldring, Huff, May, & Camburn, 2008). Porter and McLaughlin stated that


39

―the impact of context on leadership is an underresearched area‖ (p. 573). In fact,

theorists have called for more research to be conducted in this area (Avolio & Bass, 1988;

Bryman, 1992; Porter & McLaughlin, 2006).

A vast majority of the research conducted in the area of leadership and context

has been conducted through surveys and questionnaires. Gronn and Ribbins made the

case that the method of research used by many to investigate the relationship between

leadership and context may be the reason it is so ―badly undertheorized‖ (p. 454). Gronn

and Ribbins argued further that quantitative, positivist methods of inquiry into the study

of leadership pay insufficient attention to the effect that organizational context has on

leadership. They stated, ―The constructivist approach to context highlights the lived

experience of situationally embedded real-world actors. Context, in this perspective

means an entity, like a container bounded in the particulars of time and space within

which organization members negotiate meaningful action‖ (p. 455).

Summary

This literature review highlights the importance of leadership in early childhood

educational settings (Bloom, 1989, 1991; Bredekamp & Willer, 1996; Muijs et al., 2004).

Leadership in ECE settings has been shown to affect program quality, work culture, and

job satisfaction (Muijs et al., 2004). The literature review demonstrates a need for an

expanded theory on leadership as it relates to early childhood settings. It also

demonstrates that leadership in early childhood settings has been an underresearched area

of study. Among the few research studies focusing on this area, none explored how

women currently holding leadership positions in early childhood settings make meaning


40

of leadership. This omission resulted in the absence of a theory to explain the nature of

leadership in the early childhood setting as experienced by women.

This literature review also indicated that women tend to experience and relate

leadership differently from men and that leadership is context specific. This finding has

implications for a unique leadership experience for women in the context of the early

childhood setting. My research helps to develop a more comprehensive understanding of

leadership in early childhood (Kagan & Bowman, 1997). It also helps to narrow the

divide between academia and ECE professionals, ultimately further professionalizing the

field (Rodd, 1998). The previously mentioned themes are not adequately supported in

the literature; thus, the results of this study may begin to facilitate the development of

leadership training programs that more adequately support the work in early childhood

settings. This research adds to the body of knowledge focused on the relationship

between context and leadership. Finally, this research serves to broaden the discussion

about women and leadership in general.

The following chapter outlines the methodology that was used for this research

study. The research employed a basic qualitative design using a constructivist-informed,

feminist theoretical framework to understand how women make meaning of leadership in

early childhood settings. The chapter presents a rationale for the chosen research

methodology as well as a discussion of basic qualitative research. Also included is

description of the population, sampling strategy, and procedures for data collection and

analysis.


41

Chapter Three: Methodology

Introduction

Merriam (1998) asserted that the research process must begin with the

researcher‘s examining her ―own orientation to basic tenets about the nature of reality,

the purpose of doing research, and the type of knowledge to be produced‖ (p. 5).

Research in the field of education can generally be divided into two basic paradigms—

quantitative and qualitative. A quantitative research paradigm emphasizes a ―value-free

environment‖ (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000). Quantitative researchers view reality as

―objective, out there, independent of the researcher‖ (Creswell, 1994, p. 4). A qualitative

research paradigm, on the other hand, views reality as ―constructed by the individual‖

(Creswell, 1994, p. 4). Qualitative research also addresses the process as well as the

product of the research (Creswell, 1994; Merriam, 2009).

I was interested in understanding how people ―make sense of their world and the

experiences they have in the world‖ (Merriam, 1998, p. 6). More specifically, I was

interested in how women leaders in early childhood settings make sense or meaning of

their experiences

This study employed a qualitative approach to understand how participants‘ make

meaning of an experience (Merriam, 1998) and to provide thick rich descriptions of

complex issues (Reynolds, 2002). Qualitative research seeks to understand how ―the

meaning of the process or experience constitutes the knowledge to be gained from the

inductive, hypothesis- or theory-generating mode of inquiry‖ (Merriam, 1998, p. 4).

Merriam described the characteristics of this type of research as including descriptions,


42

interpretations, and understanding. Qualitative research also involves identifying patterns

in the form of categories.

Locating the Question: The Research Perspective

Because I was particularly interested in the experience of women, this dissertation

used feminist-standpoint epistemology as a conceptual framework. Feminist standpoint-

epistemology is a ―unique philosophy of knowledge building that challenges us to see

and understand the world through the eyes and experiences of oppressed women‖

(Brooks, 2007, p. 55). Brooks asserted that it is also unique in that it is both an

epistemology and a methodology.

Feminist-standpoint epistemology emerged during the 1970s, with its roots in the

philosophies of Carl Marx and Georg Hegel (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2007). Both Marx

and Hegel believed that knowledge is constructed through the lived experiences of the

individual. Feminist-standpoint epistemology, therefore, indicates that understanding

women‘s experiences from a ―committed feminist exploration produces more complete

and less distorted knowledge than that produced by men‖ (Maynard, 2000, p. 95). It

places women‘s concrete experiences at the center of the research process (Hesse-Biber

& Leavy, 2007, p. 77). Feminine-standpoint research also challenges researchers to use

the feminine lens to look critically at society as a whole (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2007).

Collins (1990) argued that, if we are to make knowledge claims about women and their

experiences, it is their ―concrete experiences‖ (p. 209) that must be used. Feminist-

standpoint theory allowed me to place women at the center of the research process,

acknowledging and valuing their unique experiences.


43

Feminist-standpoint epistemology embraces women‘s everyday lives as the

starting point to build new knowledge. This process is designed not only to understand

women‘s lives but also to ―reveal and challenge dominant institutional understandings of

women, men and social relationships between them‖ (Harding, 2007, p. 26).

I believe feminist-standpoint theory as expressed by Harding (2007) is an

appropriate conceptual framework to use in understanding how women leaders in early

childhood settings make meaning of leadership. It is important to note that while there

are many feminist epistemologies I draw from this particular one because its emanates

from the lives of the participants and therefore runs less risk of exploiting or

misrepresenting the participants. As a lens of analysis in this study, it increased my

understanding of how women, generally, as well as women in early childhood leadership

positions, specifically, create knowledge. It allowed me to give voice to the women‘s

perspective, ultimately ―identifying the ways in which women create meaning and

experience life from their particular position in the social hierarchy‖ (Riger, 1992, p.

774). Building theory from the experience of women leaders in early childhood is

important if we are to mend the ―historical trend of women‘s misrepresentation and

exclusion from the dominant knowledge canons‖ (Brooks, 2007, p. 56).

Population

The field of early childhood in the United States consists of such a wide and

variable array of early childhood programs that it has been referred to as a ―patchwork

quilt of public and private programs‖ (Burnett & Yarosz 2007 pg. 2). Therefore it was

necessary to limit the population. Because, I was interested in understanding how

women leaders in early childhood experienced leadership I felt it was important to only


44

include those types of settings that would have the least amount of masculine influence.

Therefore, I chose to focus my research on a specific population of women leaders in

early learning environments. I limited my population to the following criteria; schools

that served children in the stage of early childhood ages three to eight, schools having

501c3 status, with a woman as the highest paid employee holding the title of director,

executive director head of school, president, executive director or director and schools

that were accredited by an outside agency such as NAEYC, etc. I also limited the

population to include only those organizations that were not affiliated with a government

agency such as Head Start or larger for-profit organizations, postulating that these may

have a more androcentric or imposed top-down leadership model which may influence

the leadership experience for the women involved. These limits helped to particularize

my findings and helped to further develop the experience of leadership for women in

early childhood settings.

Sampling Strategy

According to Polkinghorne (1989), in qualitative research, participants are

―chosen who are able to function as informants by providing rich descriptions of the

experience being investigated‖ (p. 47). Therefore, the participants fulfilled two

requirements. First, each participant had to have had the experience of leadership, and

second, she also had to have the ability to give a full description of that experience

(Polkinghorne, 1989). I used a type of purposeful sampling called criterion-oriented

sampling. Criterion-oriented sampling is a technique that deliberately selects individuals

because they are most likely to have had the kind of experiences that will provide thick,

rich descriptions (Creswell, 1998). The criteria for the sample included the following: (a)


45

women considered the leaders of their respective institutions, for example, heads of

school, directors, or executive directors; (b) women whose respective early childhood

settings had been accredited by NAEYC or some other outside accrediting institution; (c)

women who were members of professional educational organizations; (d) women whose

organizations were not associated with a larger for profit corporation or governmental

organization such as Head Start or Preschool For All (e) women who had at least three

years in a leadership position. .

Because I am a school leader in an early childhood setting, participants were

initially identified through my knowledge and experience in the field. I also made an

announcement asking for volunteers at a meeting of the Maryland Association of the

Education of the Young Child. I contacted four individuals in the field that I knew

personally and asked them to suggest potential participants. After each interview, I also

employed the snowballing technique and asked if the participant could suggest anyone

who met the criteria and would be interested in participating in my study (Marshall &

Rossman, 1999). Snowballing involves asking a few selected participants to refer

individuals who would be good participants for the study (Merriam, 2009). A letter

explaining the study was also created to solicit participation. The letter described the

study and its interview guide. I provided a detailed explanation to the potential

participants and informed them of their confidentiality rights.

Sample Description

I interviewed 12 participants, a number that is considered to be within the

adequate range for research studies (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009). The involvement of 12

participants was sufficient to provide the kind of saturation described by Kvale and


46

Brinkman. According to Kvale and Brinkman, saturation is the point at which ―adding

more respondents will yield less and less new knowledge‖ (p. 113). A larger number of

participants might have yielded a more varied response, but might have precluded the

type of in-depth understanding that is consistent with qualitative research (Rossman &

Rallis, 2003). Furthermore, a total of 12 interview participants was consistent with the

sample size of other studies in the field. Each participant held the highest administrative

level position in the early childhood organization. Each participant had at least 3 years of

experience as a director or head of school and held at least a bachelors degree. This

criterion ensured that all participants had enough experience in the field to draw thick,

rich descriptions. Several of the participants had received a masters degree and one held a

doctorate. All of the participants were leaders in programs that were, independent of a

government organization and held nonprofit status. Following this section are profiles of

the participants. The purpose of the following section is to provide context for the women

leaders who participated in this research study.

Participant Descriptions

Naomi spoke with love and devotion about her small school and leaned forward,

using her hands to emphasize her point. Her interest in education began in high school

where she volunteered to work with children with special needs. Naomi held a

bachelor‘s degree and a master‘s degree in early childhood education and had been in

education for more than 20 years. She is a much sought after presenter for workshops on

early childhood issues in both national and local organizations. Naomi serves as the

director of a small nonprofit religious preschool located in a suburb of a large urban area


47

on the east coast. There are approximately 50 children in her school. She has been the

director of her school for 3 years. Naomi is newly remarried with children.

Ann is the second oldest of six children and believed that her birth order qualified

her as an unofficial preschool teacher. Although Ann has a master‘s degree, it was not in

education. She is proud of the fact that she has volunteered alongside very talented

teachers who helped her learn about early childhood in a practical way. So, although she

has never received a salary as a teacher nor taken courses in education, she believed that

her experiences gave her the perspectives she needed to lead effectively. Ann is the

executive director and founder of an early childhood non-profit early childhood facility

with more than 300 children. She has been the executive director for 10 years.

During her college years Emily settled on English as a major but did not find a

job when she graduated from college. With no real plans for the future, Emily moved to

Alaska with a friend and began working at a local newspaper. She did a little substituting

in the area high schools but after leaving school several times in tears, she stopped

substituting. After getting married, Emily moved to the east coast and began waitressing.

Not totally satisfied with her situation, she took a teaching position in an infant–toddler

facility. Although she had no real training with that age group, she enjoyed it; she has

been in education ever since. At the time of this study, she was serving as the director of

an innovative childcare center that served 38 infants and toddlers. She has received a

master‘s degree in K-6 education and is a doctoral candidate in educational

administration. Emily has been the director of her facility for 6 years.

The oldest of three, Julia was raised in the midwest but moved to southern

Mississippi during the late 1960s. She attributed this move, during the height of the civil


48

rights era, as laying a foundation for her abhorrence of social injustice and her desire for

equity and justice. During her senior year in high school Julia had worked in a

developmental kindergarten and enjoyed the experience a great deal. Julia went on to

college and received a master‘s degree in science. She held a variety of positions,

including working in Alaska as an environmental scientist on an oil pipeline, but felt the

need to return to early childhood. After moving back to the east coast, Julia taught

science to preschoolers for several years. At the time of this study, she was serving as the

director of a small preschool program in a large east coast urban area. The school has

100 students. She has been the director for 5 years. Julia is in her early 50s, divorced

with two children.

Liz was raised in the midwest and had worked in early childhood since the age of

16, when she worked in a Head Start facility. After undergraduate school, Liz had

traveled to England where she received a British teaching degree. She began her

teaching career working with 80 young children in a poor coal mining community of

England. There were only two other teachers in the school. The school provided for all

of the children‘s needs during the day, including food and some health care. The teachers

were with the children the entire day, beginning with the serving of breakfast. Liz

reported that it was this experience that helped her develop her appreciation for nurturing

the development of the whole child and shaped her philosophy about education. Liz has

a master‘s degree in education and is serving as the director of a small highly regarded

preschool in an urban center that serves typically developing children as well as children

with special needs. Liz is in her early 60s. She is married with two children.


49

Patricia was originally from Latin America. Patricia had always wanted to be a

teacher; as a child, she played school with her younger cousins. She had big dreams of

coming to the United States where her intention was to look for work and go to college.

Once she arrived in the states it was difficult to find suitable employment. Patricia

worked in a restaurant and picked up odd babysitting jobs on the side. Resolving to stay

in the U.S., Patricia was finally offered a position in a daycare center. She worked long

hours and put herself through undergraduate school, receiving her bachelor‘s degree. At

the time of this study, she was working on a master‘s degree in early childhood

education. She is the director of a childcare center that focused on the Latin American

community; she has been the director for 3 years. She is married and expecting her first

child.

Marian grew up in a small town in New York. Marian‘s mother wanted her to be

a teacher, but according to Marian, that suggestion resulted in her resistance to becoming

a teacher. Marian went to undergraduate school and majored in sociology and

government. In her senior year she decided there was nothing she really loved more than

children and teaching. As a result, Marian wrote her senior thesis on moral education.

Marian went on to receive a master‘s in early childhood education and intended to begin

her career teaching in the public system in Harlem, New York. She got married instead.

In her own words, ―never satisfied with just staying home with her child‖, she started a

playgroup in her neighborhood. When her daughter was ready to attend preschool,

Marian went back to work at the school her daughter attended. She taught in a variety of

small independent schools in various positions, finally taking on an administrative


50

position. Marian is the director of an early childhood facility serving 100 children. She

has been the director for 9 years. She is married, in here early 50‘s with one child.

Marie grew up in the midwest and was always interested in education. She

recalled that at age 9 she became involved with childcare because her mother was a

kindergarten teacher. After graduating from college, Marian worked at a Head Start

preschool on a Cherokee reservation near her home. She taught a variety of levels in an

elementary school until she became principal of a large elementary school of over 2000

children. One day, however, she was called to a district meeting at the superintendent‘s

office and told that consultants had been hired to teach the children how to take the

required standardized tests. Feeling that this was not good for children, Maria resigned

on that day and moved into private education. She is serving as the head of a prestigious

early childhood facility with 400 children in a large urban area. In her early 60s, Marian

has recently remarried; she has two children.

By her own account, Clara came to her leadership position in early childhood

indirectly. She received her undergraduate degree in political science from a college in

Vermont where she grew up. She received a master‘s degree in higher education

administration and began work as a resident advisor of a freshman dorm at a large urban

university on the east coast. Clara continued to work in various administrative positions

until she had children, choosing to stay home to raise them. Clara began volunteering at

her children‘s preschool almost 40 hours per week as a substitute teacher and board chair

until she was offered the leadership position at her current school. Clara attributed the

fact that she was asked to take the position to her knowledge of administration and her


51

strong leadership style. She has been at her current school for 14 years. Her school

served 50 children. Clara was married, in her mid sixties with two children.

Emma described herself as an incredibly timid child, the product of a nominally

religious Jewish family growing up in a small midwestern town in the 1960s. Emma had

experienced incredible racism as a young person growing up, which she believed scarred

her deeply. Although quite introverted, Emma was interested in theatre and had

participated in all of the plays and choral groups in high school. She went to college and

received bachelor‘s and master‘s degrees in theatre. Emma began to have a real interest

in Judaism and after receiving her degrees, she spent 6 months in Israel. She returned to

the United States to marry a rabbi she had met earlier. Emma did not return to work after

she married, but as she said in her own words, ―So what do you do when you‘re married

to a rabbi and you want to have a job that doesn‘t conflict with the responsibilities…. So

I began to teach in religious school on Sunday morning.‖ This began her work in the

field of education. Although never receiving a formal degree in early childhood, Emma

has taken many early childhood courses over the years. Emma is married, in her late

fifites with children and has been the director of her school for 3 years.

The youngest of three, Jennifer grew up in New York State. She reported that she

had always wanted to work with young children and attributed this desire to her own fond

memories of her preschool years and her father. Jennifer‘s father was a practicing

obstetrical gynecologist. He told her on many occasions that the reason he chose

obstetrics was because he loved children and wanted to help them and the best way to do

that would be to help them come into the world. Jennifer had volunteered as a candy

striper in her father‘s hospital and could remember hearing a newborn baby‘s first cry.


52

The nurses told her that it was her father who had delivered that baby. Jennifer reported

that it was a magical moment for her. She inherited that same love of children. After

graduating from high school, Jennifer attended a nearby college, graduating with a degree

in early childhood and art therapy. She worked at various places until finding a position

as an assistant in a preschool class. She worked her way up from assistant teacher to lead

teacher and then was asked to serve as director of the school. Jennifer is in her early

forties, married with one child.

BJ was the only participant who had earned a doctorate degree. Originally from a

small southern town, BJ moved to a larger urban area in the north to pursue a career in

social work. Upon arrival, she quickly realized that attending college would take more

money than she had at the time. This situation motivated her to seek full-time

employment. She started her career as a playground monitor in a poor inner-city area and

worked her way up to a variety of administrative positions while attending college. She

attributed her development to the many mentors she had along the way. She had always

been interested in working with special populations. BJ is the director of a preschool

with a homeless population. She is in her late sixties, divorced with one child.

Instrumentation

Many researchers have identified interviewing as a preferred method of data

collection for qualitative research because it can provide insight into the world of the

interviewee (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2007; Maynard, 2000). Seidman (2006) stated that

―at the root of in-depth interviewing is an interest in understanding the lived experience

of other people and the meaning they make of that experience‖ (p. 9). While there is no

single methodology that can be considered feminist, interviewing is a highly preferred


53

method (Devault, 2004). Hesse-Biber and Leavy asserted that interviewing is a method

that can allow for the expression of women‘s voices that may otherwise be hidden. I

conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews to explore how women leaders made

meaning of leadership in early childhood settings. Feminist standpoint theory has

―distinctive ways of extending the methods of this qualitative tradition‖ by placing

women at the center of inquiry (Devault, 2004 (p.227).

An 11-question semi-structured interview protocol was developed for this study

(Appendix A). These questions were piloted with a woman serving as the head of an

independent school; she is a member of an educational organization of which I am also a

member. The purpose of this pilot was to determine the efficacy of the questions and to

test the interview process itself. As a result of this effort several questions were adjusted

and one question was removed completely.

Data Collection

After approval of this study was received from the Institutional Review Board

(IRB), I contacted potential participants by formal letter and e-mail. The letter and e-mail

reviewed the purpose of the study and requested the recipient‘s participation. I also

requested an interview appointment at that time. When a participant agreed to take part

in the study, I sent an e-mail confirming the appointment and thanking the participant for

her participation. I sent the interview guide, as well as the information sheet, by e-mail to

the participants. The participants were informed that their continuation with the

interview was considered implied consent.

Seidman (2006) recommended a three-part interview series, with each separate

interview having its own specific focus: life history, the details of experience, and


54

reflection of meaning, respectively. The first section of the interview focused on the

participant‘s life history ―in light of the topic up to the present time‖ (p. 17). The purpose

of this portion of the interview was to place the participant‘s life history in context.

Allowing the participant to reconstruct her history in this way helped develop a narrative

for self-definition (Gergen, 2001). The second section of the interview concentrated on

the ―concrete examples of the participant‘s present lived experience in the topic area of

the study‖ (Seidman, p. 18). This part of the interview was used to try to reconstruct the

kind of details that would make up the foundation of the respondent‘s experience. In the

third section of the interview, the participant was asked to reflect on the meaning of her

experience. In this regard, Seidman was referring not to whether the experience was

rewarding but more to ―the intellectual and emotional connections between the

participant‘s work and life‖ (p. 18). It is important to note that although it was not until

the third interview that the participant was asked to reflect on the meaning of her

experience, each of the first two interview sections laid the foundation for the final

interview. According to Seidman (2006), ―the third interview can be productive only if

the foundation for it has been established in the first two‖ (p. 19).

Seidman acknowledged that researchers using his method may find reason to

modify the structure. His own research team found this necessary as well (Seidman, 2006

p.22). Seidman allows for these kinds of modifications but cautions that the alternatives

must maintain the basic structure that would allow the ―participants to reconstruct and

reflect upon their experience with the context (p.21). I used a modification of Seidman‘s

structure by conducting one interview that incorporated all of the phases of the protocol

in one setting on one day. This was due to the large amount of time required from the


55

participants who had extremely limited time due to their positions as leaders, mothers and

wives. As Seidman postulates, it is not known what impact this kind of modification had

on the interview process since there has been relatively little research on it. But,

modifying this process allowed me to continue the ―flow‖ during the interview process

allowing the conversation to unfold naturally. However, since one of the purposes of the

three days of interviewing was to allow the participant time to reflect on the topic, this

may have been compromised. The use of in-depth semi-structured interviewing allowed

me the opportunity to investigate the leadership experience of women in the early

childhood setting, with the purpose of beginning ―to build some theoretical ideas

concerning this topic‖ (p. 119). I conducted one semi-structured interview in three

separate parts with each of the 12 women. The interviews were conducted one person at

a time and at a location chosen by the participant. Each interview lasted between 90 and

180 minutes.

A set of 11 questions was developed prior to the interview and used as the

interview guide. The guide assisted in providing direction for the interview while

allowing for variability. I followed up the guide‘s open-ended questions with a series of

probing questions that were intended to encourage further explanation about the

experience. Depending on the responses of the participant, I added or removed questions.

I conducted a follow-up telephone or face-to-face interview to clarify or test an

interpretation with all of the participants.

The first section of the interview covered the life history of the participant and

allowed then to chronicle their path to leadership. Once this set of questions was

completed I informed the participant that we would be moving in to the second section of


56

the interview which would explore the lived experience asking them to share specific

instances of the construct. I repeated this process after it seemed as if there was no new

information and told the participant that we would be moving into third section of the

interview which asked the participant to reflect on the meaning of the construct.

I met with all but one of the participants over lunch finding that this environment

allowed the participants to feel less rushed and facilitated a rapport. One of the

participants was interviewed over the phone because a mutually agreeable time to meet

face to face was unavailable.

Devault (2004) suggests that women interviewing women ―bring to their

interaction a tradition of ―women talk‖ (p.229). She goes on to argue that women can

help each other ―develop ideas and together can more easily understand each other‖

(p.235). This seemed to be especially true for me because I am a woman leader in an

early childhood setting interviewing women leaders. Therefore during the interview

process I allowed my common experience with the participants to assist me in

―establishing ‗rapport‘ and move the interviews ahead‖ (p.237).

Many times during the interview process I experienced what Hesse-Biber &

Keckenby (2004) described as ―flow‖. Hesse-Biber & Leckenby describe flow as

―moments of optimal experience when our sense of self-efficacy is heightened and our

social bonds are strong‖ (p.217). I experienced these times in my interviews as a

connection to the participant and a point where I was really listening not only to the

participant but also to the flow of my emotions.

I digitally recorded all of the interviews; this process allowed for greater accuracy

and ensured that everything was preserved for later analysis (Merriam, 1998; Patton,


57

1990; Seidman, 2006). Recording the interviews also assisted in accountability

(Seidman, 2006). It gave me the space and time to review the interview and to write

reflective notes while planning for the next interview. All data collected from the

participants were kept in a secure and locked location. Field notes were taken during the

interview and served as a supplement to the tapes. Field notes allowed me to record the

participant‘s tone of voice and gestures that were not possible to capture on the digital

recorder.

After each interview, I sent the data to a professional transcriber, who produced a

verbatim transcription of the interview. Both Seidman (2006) and Kvale (2009)

highlighted the fact that written instructions should be given to the transcriptionist.

Therefore, I made sure that I wrote specific instructions regarding how the data were to

be transcribed; for instance, I asked the transcriber to include the pauses, emphasis in

intonation, and laughter. I also had each participant choose a pseudonym to protect her

confidentiality and identity. Once the transcriptions were received, I compared the

document to the tapes of the actual interview for accuracy and as a part of the data

analysis process.

Data Analysis

One of the most common forms of qualitative data analysis used in interview

research is thematic analysis (Roulston, 2010). While thematic analysis can be done in a

variety of manners, I chose to use the process of data reduction through the application of

codes. From the codes, I developed categories of data ―through sorting and classification

of the codes‖ (Rolston, p.150). Once the categories had been established the data was


58

reorganized into themes that represented an interpretation or assertion. The

interpretations were then supported by interview quotations.

During the process of analysis, I used ―invivo codes‖, or the participant‘s actual

phrases or words, in order to represent and ―create space for respondents to provide

accounts rooted in the realities of their lives‖ (Devault, 2003, (p.230)

Thematic analysis in qualitative research generates a great deal of data that must

be well managed. As a result a good management tool is a necessity. Merriam (2009)

stated that using a computer-based program helps to remove some of the tedious nature of

the process, thereby resulting ―in creatively observing the possible links and connections

among the different aspects of the data‖ (p. 195). I used Atlas Ti 6.0 software as my data

management tool. Atlas Ti was invaluable, making the coding and retrieval aspects of

the research less tedious and providing ―new avenues for analysis‖ (Merriam, 2009, p.

195).

I followed the six steps of analysis outlined by Tesch (as cited in Creswell, 1994).

First, in an effort to gain a sense of the whole, I read through all of the transcripts

carefully while listening to the digitally recorded tapes. I then listened to the tapes a

second time while engaging in reflexive journaling. This activity involved writing my

impressions, problems with the interview, concepts that began to emerge, or any obvious

links. I then chose one interview and analyzed it according to what Creswell described as

thinking about ―its underlying meaning‖ (p. 155). During this phase, I recorded my

thoughts as memos in the Atlas Ti 6.0 program (Creswell, 1994, p. 155). Memo writing

allowed me to document the ―development of interpretation decisions throughout the

process‖ Rouslton, 2010, p.155). I then began to compare the unfolding data with other


59

data from interviews. This constant comparative method involved a more inductive

process. (Charmaz, 2009).

Once I had completed a comparative analysis task for several of the interviews, I

made a list of all of the topics, organizing them into ―major topics, unique topics, and

leftover topics‖ (p. 155), clustering them into themes with representative passages. As I

analyzed the data and continued to identify themes, I kept track of codes and code memos

using Atlas Ti. During this step of the process, I looked for both theoretical codes (those

that I expected to see in the data) and open-emergent codes (those that emerged from the

data unexpectedly). Using this list, I revisited the interviews and coded the quotations

according to the topics. I found the most descriptive invivo wording and created

categories with that wording. The entire process was facilitated using Atlas Ti.

Using Atlas Ti, I was able to create networks and nodes to discover ways to

reduce the number of codes by collapsing them into constructs. After eliminating

marginal and irrelevant codes, I made a ―final decision on the abbreviation for each

category and alphabetized these codes‖ (p. 155). I then assembled the data for each

category, making sure the categories were not only exhaustive but also relative to the

purpose of the research and mutually exclusive (Merriam, 2009). I used the Atlas Ti

software to assist me in creating a cross-case matrix that allowed for comparison across

participants. Member checks was used to ensure accuracy of the representation. During

the final stage of the process, I incorporated quotations and data from the first steps to

create a detailed description of the leadership experience of the women interviewed.


60

Trustworthiness and Ethical Considerations

It was important to determine how the research reflected trustworthiness and

ethical considerations in this qualitative study. I employed member checks as a method

of ensuring trustworthiness. Maxwell (2005) stated that member checks are

the single most important way of ruling out the possibility of misinterpreting the

meaning of what participants say and do and the perspective they have on what is

going on, as well as being an important way of identifying your own biases and

misunderstanding of what you observed. (p. 111)

Also, in an effort to enhance the transferability of the data, I endeavored to create

―thick, rich descriptions‖ (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). As Lincoln and Guba stated, it is

important to create a ―thick description of the sending context so that someone in a

potential receiving context may assess the similarity between them and…the study‖ (p.

125). Thick, rich description refers to ―a description of the setting and participants of the

study, as well as a detailed description of the finding with adequate evidence presented in

the form of quotes from participant interviews‖ (Merriam, 2009, p. 227).

I allowed all of the participants to review my preliminary findings and asked if

my interpretations reflected their experience. I used the information from these member

checks to inform my analysis. According to Merriam (2009), ―participants should be able

to recognize their experience‖ in the researcher‘s interpretation (p. 217). I ensured that

approval from the IRB was secured before the data collection process began. To guard

the confidentiality of the participants, all identifying information was removed before the

digital recordings were transcribed. All of the participants were informed of their

individual rights as participants in a research study: the right not to answer any questions,

the right to have the recorder turned off, the right to stop the interview at any time, the

right to unconditionally withdraw from the study with or without explanation, and the


61

right to obtain access to the transcription and analysis of the interview data prior to

publication. Participants‘ anonymity was protected during every phase of the project by

creating pseudonyms and protecting the data in a locked metal cabinet. All participants

were given the opportunity to view the final report before publication and to respond to

anything they perceived as being unfair or making them feel uncomfortable. Lincoln and

Guba (1985) stated that this process can add credibility to the study.

Summary

This chapter has served to provide an overview of the methodology for this study.

The overview included (a) discussion of the difference between quantitative and

qualitative research, (b) discussion of basic qualitative research and a rationale for its use,

(c) research questions, (d) description of the population, (e) sampling strategy, (f)

instrumentation, (g) procedures for data collection and analysis, (h) role of the researcher,

and (i) trustworthiness and ethical considerations.

I conducted a basic qualitative design study, which allowed me to explore how

women leaders made meaning of their lives and their experiences in early childhood

settings (Merriam, 2009). The following chapter presents the findings of this study.


62

Chapter Four: Findings

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to gain a deeper understanding of how 12 women

leaders in early childhood environments experienced leadership. The stories derived

from the women in this study prompted me to organize my findings into five themes:

pathways, the experience, values, context, and contradictions. In this chapter I present

the findings of the study by expanding on each of these categories. First I define the five

major categories and then expand on those definitions with excerpts from the women‘s

textual narratives in an effort to give life to the categories.

Pathways. All but one of the women in this research study reported that they did

not aspire to leadership in early childhood; a few reported that they were even reluctant to

take on leadership roles. Although this was the case, they nonetheless responded

positively to the opportunity. Leadership became a calling rather than an aspiration for

them. More often than not, these women were chosen by others to wear the mantle of

leadership. Before becoming leaders, many had been classroom teachers with no

previous leadership experience or training. They typically developed their leadership

skills ―on the job,‖ through trial and error. Without a clear pathway to leadership, these

women tended to come to their new positions feeling unprepared and unsupported.

Although these women might have come into their positions reluctantly or might

not have actively sought leadership positions, they had very intentional reasons for

choosing to accept the call. Their reasons seemed to fall into two general categories:

either to make a difference or to share their expertise with others. The first category had

an underlying theme of wanting to make things right in the world—social justice. The


63

women who wanted to share their expertise, on the other hand, thought their career move

would allow them the flexibility to make a difference in the field while staying close to

teaching, which had been and continued to be their first love.

The experience. All of the participants expressed the belief that being a woman

impacted how they led, how they felt about leadership, how they were viewed by others

as leaders, and, to some extent, the value others placed on their organizations. They

reported that their gender and understanding of womanhood had an impact on the culture

of the organization, how it felt and worked. Some of those interviewed expressed the

idea that there is a particular skill set that women possess, making them, in some ways,

better at their job then many men. They believed that, as women, they brought something

unique to the work that was not only well suited to early childhood but also a necessary

element for the specific environment in which they led.

Although the foregoing was true, these women also reported feeling that their

positions were undervalued because of the preponderance of women in the field. They

expressed both frustration and resentment at the undercurrent of sexism that they viewed

as one of the causes of this devaluing. This devaluing was reflected in the wages they

received, in the educational requirements they had to meet, and even in the amount of

research being conducted.

Values. Conversations with these women highlighted the fact that leadership for

them was person centered. They experienced leadership as relationships they nurtured

and developed with everyone in their organizations. Communication was a central

component in developing these relationships. Communication for the women in this

sample meant a great deal more than weekly newsletters and e-mails. These leaders


64

focused on the kind of communication that helped connect individuals emotionally,

socially, and sometimes physically. They greeted, hugged, counseled, nurtured, and

sometimes even cried with and for the people in their communities. They also worked to

inspire others with their ideas and conversations. They were not afraid to give of

themselves emotionally and believed it was important and even natural for them to ―lead

from the heart.‖ They valued being emotionally available and considered this aspect of

their leadership to be particularly well suited to the early childhood environment. These

women acted as mothers, grandmothers, confidantes, mentors, and friends, constantly

looking for ways to take care of ―their people.‖

The value they placed on relationships and the person centeredness of their

leadership style affected the way decisions were made in the organization as well.

Decisions tended to be made after a great deal of conversation involving others in the

organization. They desired this diversity of viewpoints, recognizing the creativity and

power that comes from looking at a problem from a variety of vantage points. This

horizontalization of decision making requires humility and introspection on the part of a

leader. Humility and introspection were values espoused by all of the women in this

sample.

Context. It was evident from the interviews that the context in which these

women practiced their leadership was important and affected how they worked. All of

the leaders echoed the sentiment that leadership in early childhood is impacted by the

context in which it is experienced. From the length of the work day to the relationship

with parents, the women in this study perceived that the early childhood setting helped to

define how they led and where they maintained their focus.


65

These women uniformly felt the weighty responsibility of working with young

children, recognizing that the experiences the children had in their facilities would

become the foundation for the rest of their lives. These leaders also viewed the early

childhood setting as a unique opportunity to guide parents as they developed into their

new role. Due to the newness of the parenting experience for these families, the early

childhood education environment also represented a natural opportunity to develop close

personal relationships with parents to support them in their new role.

The women leaders in this research study were genuinely proud of the work they

did and were honored to lead their institutions. They asserted, however, that their work

was made more difficult because the field of early childhood was undervalued and

underappreciated, thereby resulting in a lack of respect for their work and the position

they held. They cited wage differentials, public policy, and parental attitudes as evidence

of this fact.

Contradictions. Although the foregoing is true, it is interesting to note that some

of the very elements these women found to be important and even vital to the early

childhood environment and to their leadership styles were also some of the most difficult

for them to manage. These seeming contradictions caused at the very least consternation

and, in some cases, feelings of isolation and pain as well.

The early childhood environment provides an opportunity for women to lead

women. In contrast with some theoretical and empirical work that suggests that women

may be more relational, many of the women in this study found working with such a

large percentage of women to be challenging. Some participants in this study even


66

referred to working with women as ―hard work.‖ They frequently cited the issues of

physiology and emotionality as major reasons for this challenge.

Developing and building relationships was considered by all of the women in this

study to be one of the most important aspects of their work. They believed they were

particularly well suited for this part of the work and, therefore, spent a great deal of time

and effort in this endeavor. But, maintaining the relationships and being so emotionally

available was also described as exhausting. Several of the women, in fact, cited this issue

as one of the reasons they might not be able to stay in the field.

There was a perception among the women in this study that to be effective as

leaders they needed to maintain a boundary between themselves and those they

supervised. These same women, who had worked hard to connect meaningfully with

others and valued leading from the heart, found they needed to distance themselves from

those with whom they had built these connections. This separation frequently caused

feelings of loneliness and sometimes feelings of isolation.

In the sections that follow, I expand on the previous categories with textual

narratives excerpted from the women‘s interviews.

Pathways

Unanticipated leadership. A major finding of this study is that although many

fields in education have well-defined and direct paths to leadership, the path to leadership

for these participants tended to be much less direct. In fact, most of the women in this

study reported that leadership was neither something they actively pursued nor, for some

of them, something they even considered. For example, Patricia was looking for any job,


67

not necessarily a job in early childhood leadership. She applied because she met the

qualifications, not because it was a career path she had chosen. She explained,

I was looking for another job; I wasn‘t looking, you know, to be a leader or

anything and I was, I remember, looking and looking and looking and I got, I

looked at one, went to like three or four different interviews. One doing those

advocacy programs...and the other one was some other policy job and then the

other one was—that‘s where I am now—at the center directing a preschool

program. I remember looking at the posted and thinking and they are never going

to hire me, you know. I am not ready for this; I mean I read the qualification and

I said, ―Well, I am qualified but am I really qualified, am I really ready for this,

am I, like this is actually…I mean this is a director‘s job. Am I really like ready

for this and are they?‖

Marie summed it up this way when she explained, ―I had no plan at all…and at

every job I ever got there was more of a shoulder tapping…an ‗Are you interested?‘…or

‗Would you like to?‘‖ Not necessarily choosing this path for themselves, these women,

as Marie had been, tended to have been encouraged or chosen by others to step into a

leadership position. BJ, for example, was in a position she disliked and wondered how to

make a change. The change came from a phone call. She explained,

When I would go out to social things people would ask, ―BJ, what are you

doing?‖ I‘d say, ―I can‘t stand it.‖ H. called me and asked if I‘d be interested.

So, he told them, ―I think I‘ve got the perfect person. She can come out.‖ And so

I was interviewed, and I tell you that was the best decision I had made.

Clara‘s experience in becoming a leader also resonated with many of the women

in this study because she also was not looking for a career in leadership; in fact, she was

not looking for a job at all. She was chosen by others to take on the mantle, as were so

many of the women in this sample. She stated,

So…had my two children and I was out of the workforce for, I guess, 7 years.

During that time, my husband would say I was certainly not out of the workforce

because I was volunteering at my children‘s preschool and 40 hours a week or

more so, you know. I chaired the auction, I was the president of the board of

directors, and I substituted, so I did kind of a little bit of everything and when my


68

second child was in kindergarten and I still was not working, the director of the

center that I am at now called me and said, would I come to work and she asked

me if I would come to work as the assistant director of the school of the center

that she was at and I knew her because she had been the director of the center that

my children went to. And so I said, well, I wasn‘t really looking for a job but my

husband said, ―What harm can it do? You can only find out you don‘t want to do

it and say thank you, but sorry.‖ So that was in 1995; so it was 15 years ago and

she left. The director who called me basically left shortly there afterwards; she

had kind of, she knew she was moving on, that she was going to retire. She just

hadn‘t announced it yet, and she was trying to position a person she wanted to

replace her.

Emily related a similar experience; she stated, ―So I was at St. P.‘s until 5 years

ago, and S., who was still the director—she was at the school for 38 years. She called me

up and said, ‗I‘m retiring at the end of this year. I‘d pick you.‘‖ Jennifer corroborated

this type of experience with a similar scenario when she said, ―I was happy as the lead

teacher; I hadn‘t thought about being the director but S. came to me and asked me and I

thought, why not?‖

Many of the leaders in this study were classroom teachers before they were

leaders. This fact, on the surface, is admirable, as in effect there is no glass ceiling in

early childhood. But, the field of early childhood typically has no well-developed

program to adequately prepare these ―teacher-leaders‖; so, they tend to take on the mantle

of leadership feeling unprepared. Clara explained it this way when she said,

I am in a profession that is predominantly female, and I don‘t have to struggle

against the glass ceiling certainly. It‘s all women.... I think so many leaders in

the field, in the early childhood field, were teachers who moved up into leadership

positions and have kind of gotten there not quite knowing that they are leaders….

I am thinking of a few people, who[m] I just had this discussion with, that they

are in a position of leadership; they are not quite confident.


69

Because so many of the leaders in early childhood came into their positions with

little or no preparation, they had to be resourceful, creatively taking advantage of what

was available to train themselves. Naomi explained,

It‘s interesting because mostly, for early childhood, almost all of us come up from

within and that‘s just how we become leaders, just what we do. And you learn on

the job and that‘s really tough, and you may have some mentors if you are lucky

who‘ll give you some examples and you may have someone outside that can

support you and you can process what‘s going on.

Marian felt that she might not be as well prepared as she would like and stated

that those who employed her

took the risk. I think it was a risk—maybe it wasn‘t a risk—I think they could tell

that this was something I can do, except for the budgets, which I was very honest

about, something I had never done even at home, but I said, ―You know, I am

certain, sure I can learn.‖

For Marian, learning on the job without support was a fact of life as it was for most of the

women in this sample.

Another reason for reluctance to take on leadership positions for the women in

this sample was the perceived purpose of the position. Jennifer‘s experience was

representative of many in this sample. She reported,

I never looked at myself as being in charge…. One of the directors said to me,

―You know what, Jennifer, I‘m going to be going and I‘d like you to take my

place.‖ And I said, ―You know I‘m not really comfortable with telling people

what to do…. I don‘t know about that.‖

Jennifer‘s definition of leadership as being ―in charge‖ was uncomfortable to her;

therefore, she was reluctant to take on the role. Patricia felt uncomfortable as well; she

related, ―It‘s hard to lead and to not feel like you are sort of like telling others what to do,

and having power over them.‖ Emily defined it this way:


70

Before you get into early childhood, I think when you think of leadership, you

think of, like, a remote boss…. I‘ve really come to realize that a leader isn‘t

being a boss at all; you can be a leader and not be the boss. In fact, most of the

leaders are not bosses.

Not wanting to ―be the boss‖ is a theme in several of the narratives in this study.

This may be interpreted by others as a fear of power, but in the situation of early

childhood, it more likely represents a desire to share power. For example, Jennifer

sought input from others regarding her decision to take on the position of leader. It was

important to her that others have an opportunity to voice their thoughts. She also was

seeking to build relationships through conversations. She told her story in this way:

And most of the people that I worked with were going to stay on, so what I did

was get the staff together, and I said, ―Listen, this is the situation: So-and-so is

leaving, they‘re asking me to do it. Would you all mind having me step in that

position, by going from a peer to somebody that would have to evaluate you

eventually?‖

Jennifer, Patricia, Emily and others were uncomfortable with the idea of being ―in

charge‖; they defined leadership, at least initially, as being over someone else. But

Patricia was also uncomfortable for another reason. She struggled with what could be

termed an ―identity crisis.‖ Patricia viewed herself as a teacher who only happened to be

a leader. She related,

I wasn‘t looking, you know, to be a leader or anything…so it gets really difficult

for me because I am—I see myself not as an administrator so much—I see myself

as a teacher. I see myself as somebody who enjoys being with children, who

understands where the teachers are coming from, who knows how difficult it is

and how amazing it is—the job that they do every single day.

A teacher‘s being promoted to a leadership position within her own organization

can prove to be a decidedly stressful undertaking. Naomi expressed it this way: ―When

you move from a peer to a leadership position, there is [sic] instantly very strong feelings,


71

and they are very for you or very against you.‖ Naomi‘s feelings were not too dissimilar

from Patricia‘s, who stated that she felt she was a teacher first. As did Patricia, Naomi

also seemed to experience an identity crisis. Teaching was important to her; it was what

she knew she was good at. She related,

Honestly, I love being a teacher, I knew that I was an amazing teacher and I knew

that I was one of those teachers that—yeah, I think there is [sic] some people that

really have the gift—I really know I had that gift. I loved it, and people loved

having me, and I loved the children.

Naomi had to move from insider status to outsider status in her organization. In

other words, as a teacher, she was one of them, but as she moved from the classroom to

the office she was ―of them but not one of them.‖ Naomi anticipated the emotional stress

this move would cause. She related, ―I knew it would be difficult because I knew that

again I will be a peer entering their classrooms, and when I was working for the previous

director there were issues and…. So I had mixed feelings.‖

“Why do we get into this field? What, to be rich?” Patricia asked rhetorically,

―Why do we get into this field? What, to be rich?‖ She was jokingly alluding to the fact

that the reason women choose to go into the field of leadership in early childhood is

certainly not to become wealthy. On the contrary, leadership in early childhood tends to

be a low-paying administrative position. The reason these leaders cited for going into the

field was much more altruistic. During my analysis, when the women in this study spoke

about their reasons for entering the field of early childhood leadership, their answers fell

into two categories: either to make a difference or to share their experience or expertise

with others. For BJ, it was to make a difference with a special population. She stated,

The conflict level of working with minorities is my passion. I‘ve done that for

close to 40 years. I bless and thank everybody else and all that. They can do


72

what they want to, but these are my people. This is the first time, though; I‘ve

worked with a concentrated population of homeless.

Julia expressed her need to make a difference this way:

What I realized is that for me to really truly enjoy my work and feel satisfied with

what I‘m doing, there has to be a real service component. I am not content to just

be an educator of children. I need to know that I am serving children or families

or a constituency that needs more than typical, well-furnished W. family.

Some of the women in this sample indicated that the reason they chose a position

in leadership was to share with others the skills and knowledge acquired over the years.

Marian stated, ―I could get involved with teacher training, which I also love. [The]

faculty…would just love to learn all of this from me.‖ Marie‘s statement was similar, but

she also noted that the process of giving can become reciprocal. She believed that she

would receive something in return. She related, ―I think sharing what I know and then, at

the same time, learning from the teachers who are living it every day—it‘s quite joyful.‖

Naomi chose leadership because she felt she could balance the things she loved. She

explained it as follows:

I could do a little of both, I could be in classrooms, I could help, I could…mentor

and I could still do the thing I love. …So I had mixed feelings but I loved

working with teachers, and I love communicating and seeing that window opened

for teachers in the same way I loved seeing it opened for the children.

This ability to get back what they gave was a fundamental premise that connected

all of the leaders in this sample. They believed they were stronger as an organization of

collaboration and sharing than they ever would have been alone. They, therefore, sought

opportunities to interact with others in an effort to share what they had learned.

Summary of pathways. Many of these women were a bit reluctant to accept

their positions initially—some lacking confidence in their own abilities, others lacking


73

confidence in what the title ―leader‖ implied. A few of these women were concerned

with how they would be perceived by their peers when they took on the new position.

Once they became leaders, however, they worked in concert with their values, moving

forward with passion and dedication, rooted in altruistic values. They worked creatively,

using whatever means they could find to prepare themselves for the opportunities ahead.

The Experience

“Bringing something different to the table”. All of the 12 leaders in this study

believed that being a woman had implications for how they led others and how they

experienced leadership in the early childhood environment. Emma expressed it this way:

I do think that women bring something different to the table…. Women—not all

of us, but most of us—have that nurturing side that makes us well suited for the

work. I think that in this scary world that we live in, I actually think it‘s

important for women to be leaders in early childhood because we have scared

parents that come to us. I think that women more than men have a way of tuning

into another person‘s emotions.

Marie was a bit more direct about what women bring to leadership in early childhood.

She stated, ―I frankly think that if you look at the various kinds of intelligences that there

are, I think women just have some advantages.‖ Naomi explained it this way,

Well, I think…I‘m more in touch with my emotional life. I think I‘m able to talk

about feelings and things that perhaps—and I don‘t want to be a stereotype of

men either—but I think I‘m able to go into realms that perhaps you know a man

might not be comfortable or as comfortable talking about.

Liz believed that women have specific needs that must be acknowledged at the

work place and, therefore require a leadership style that is conducive to those needs. She

asserted,

Women have different needs on the work line. Women working together end up

having relationships, and sometimes those are your best friends. They‘re going to

find out that you didn‘t sleep, or that you had a fight with your son, or that


74

whatever you did over the weekend was a family obligation that you didn‘t really

enjoy. Working with women is—you have to be more careful, because I think

their moods count…. Knowing that and understanding that helps me be more

compassionate and supportive, and I think they need that to be effective. I think

it‘s a rare woman who doesn‘t have socioemotional needs that they bring to a

job—whether they work in a law firm, or a school, or a department store.

The ability to be comfortable with feelings and emotions was cited by several

leaders as differentiating them from their male counterparts in other organizations and as

a necessary part of the early childhood environment. Clara explained it this way:

I approach my supervision of other women and leadership, if that‘s what you want

to call it, in a more emotive way than a man would and…not always my emotion,

but taking into account their emotions and the fact that what becomes number one

for me is to listen, listen first, listen second, listen third is the way my husband

always puts it, but he doesn‘t do that. He doesn‘t listen to me first, second, or

third; all he wants to do is tell me what to do.

This idea of being emotionally available for others was highlighted in Emma‘s

narrative when she said, ―The compassion we have for our families to tell them the stuff

we have to tell them. I‘m a crier, so I sometimes cry along with my parents when we‘re

talking about special needs. That‘s probably not very leadership-like, but it‘s who I am.‖

Liz expressed these same sentiments, but, she alluded to the idea that some leadership

models may not be in line with the desire to be emotionally available. She stated,

I don‘t feel like putting up a boundary between myself and somebody. I mean,

my traffic person came in the other day, and she sat down and asked how my

father was. I told her exactly how it was. She‘s compassionate; she‘s very

Christian. She was so supportive. She‘s praying for my dad. That means so

much to me. Why would I not share that with her? She‘s a valuable person to

me, and just because her job is more of a menial one in my organization, I still

value who she is, and I‘m going to let her in. Other people say you got to set a

boundary. You should never get personal. I‘m a person, too. And that‘s where I

can give and get back.

Several of the leaders in this study perceived that the impact of being a woman in

a position of leadership was also evident in practical areas. As an example, Clara stated,


75

You know our meetings are longer, you know. We have these staff meetings, we

have an hour of staff meetings and we could probably cover a very—I am very

organized, I have agenda 1, 2, 3, 4—we could probably cover it in 20 minutes

tops, but they go an hour because I start every meeting with what would anyone

like to share that‘s very pressing right at the moment that just needs to come out

right now and let‘s talk about it…. But it just is a different beast than it would be

if I was a man or had all men in my organization.

Marie expressed a similar opinion when she said,

I think that stylistically—and this is a huge generalization—but I think that

research and business even shows that the women may take a longer time to make

a decision; they may hear more perspectives, that there‘s an acknowledgement, a

larger acknowledgement of different opinions.

Liz offered another practical example of how being a woman affected her work.

She explained:

I also think women can multitask better than men. I really do. I can have six

balls juggling in the air and know that that person at the door needs me and do it;

instead of listening to the way my husband‘s law firm operates, where it‘s one

thing at a time…. You can do lots of things, and you have to. You‘re cut out for

it. I think men can learn it, but women do it by nature. There‘s probably lots that

refutes that, but that‘s my feeling.

Emily expressed it this way:

Right and not too stereotype. But it is what it is, you know, if somebody comes

up to me, crying on my leg, my first instinct just to pick them up and hug them,

whereas my husband—and he is a really nice guy—his first instinct might to be

like, go toughen up, you are all right, you know.

Some of the leaders reported that having a male in the position of leader in an

early childhood environment might change the nature and atmosphere. Emily further

stated,

I think if a man were to come in and do my job, there would be more, like,

instruction and direction. …So I think a man might be more disposed to say

―suck it up,‖ you know, like who cares if you won‘t. So my husband is a manager

of a restaurant. And if somebody is having a tough day, he is, like, well, tough;

get over it and do what you are going to do or if somebody doesn't catch on


76

during the first week, he is all about Darwinism—he didn't get it, you are out, you

know.

All of the women in this sample believed they were leading in a field that lacked

status and value in the eyes of the outside world. As a result, they experienced their

leadership role as being devalued as well. One of the reasons they felt this was the case

was because the field is predominantly women. Patricia expressed it this way: ―I think

it‘s even more difficult because you have to establish yourself as a leader or, you know,

as having this leadership position in a field…that they don‘t feel that that‘s important.‖

“We’ve been minimized”. Naomi argued that the field lacks status because of

sexism. She related, ―I am in a profession that is predominantly female…it‘s all women,

but we‘ve been kind of minimized because we are all women.‖ Patricia also pointed to

the part that sexism continues to play in society. She reported, ―We really have to realize

and be honest and to say, well, there are still differences—maybe not in the law, but in

people‘s minds, and that‘s the most difficult thing to change…how we see women and

how we see others.‖

Offering a further explanation regarding this issue, Naomi said, ―Anybody could

be a mom and become…you are a teacher—you could just fall into that role…if our

schools were filled with men, teaching would be a whole different world.‖ Agreeing with

Naomi on this point, Clara argued,

I still think the power brokers are men. I mean, for the most part—and I still

think we are trying to prove ourselves that we are not second class citizens—that

we are smart and can get things done. I mean we do it every day so much.

BJ provided a more historical viewpoint when she reported,

Simply because people viewed it years ago as babysitting, as just taking care of

children. Just like when you‘re in a marriage and you stay home, and all you‘re


77

doing all day is taking care of the children. But there‘s a whole lot to go with

taking care of children. I think over the years, we‘ve evolved into a more

professional arena. But with that evolvement comes funding. So as long as you

are—with that comes a different face that you see. You see a male. You see all

those other people who are making the money.

Clara offered a slightly different perspective as she asserted, ―

Well, I think women in the field came into the field because they were part time,

they were supported by their husbands or parents maybe, and that it‘s always been

looked at as something temporary, something secondary, not as the work of head

of household wage earners.

Clara exposed another more recent development, expressing the following sentiment:

Everybody from the national association down has been way too quiet about the

issues of worthy wage. That whole agenda has gone off the table. It is not on

anybody‘s radar right now…. Yet, there‘s still a part where, you know, we are

still not out there advocating for worthy wages, you know. The directors of our

national associations are men.

Summary of the experience. Leadership in early childhood education is a

gendered experience. These leaders believed they brought something unique to the early

childhood environment as women. They cited a leadership style that tends to be

comfortable with emotions and feelings as an example of the particular aptitude they

brought to the work. They also pointed to more practical areas of uniqueness, such as the

collaborative way decisions are made or how meetings are run. Nevertheless, these

women also perceived that their positions were not as valued as they would have been in

other fields. They cited gender as a major contributing factor, arguing that an

undercurrent of sexism is still pervasive in the broader society. This perspective has

resulted in a general devaluing of early childhood as a whole.


78

Values

“Touching people’s souls”. All of the leaders in this study believed in the

importance of developing relationships and connecting with others emotionally. They

were person centered in their leadership style and felt compelled to connect on a variety

of levels with their community. They comforted, encouraged, collaborated, and

celebrated with others while communicating a common vision that inspired their

institutions to become better. It was evident that they set the pace and tone. The leaders

in this sample believed it was their unique ability to be emotionally available and

supportive to others on a variety of levels that defined the culture, thus building a strong

and vibrant school community. Naomi expressed it this way:

I think I feel empowered to be professional and talk about the budget and also to

hold someone and cry or hold them while they cry. That‘s a good thing

because…I think maybe or not—again I don‘t know because I‘m not that

person—but maybe a neurophysicist does a lot of heartfelt things; I don‘t know,

but in early childhood, a big part of what we do is, is touching people‘s souls and

comforting and counseling. Well, come on, we are the mommy, we are the

doctor, we are the therapist, we are everything.

Each of the 12 leaders relayed the efforts made to develop a sense of community

in their centers or schools. They viewed themselves as vital to that process and

essentially as the barometer for the culture of the community. Liz explained,

I think when you infuse that feeling in a school, it does become a ―pass-it-on.‖ A

smile goes a mile, and it will pay you back. That‘s the tone I set when I greet

people every morning. I tell children I‘m happy to see them. I tell parents I‘m

happy to see them. I say that to my staff, too, when I see them. That‘s the

altitude of your attitude. It‘s up there, and that‘s a choice. You have a choice.

What your attitude is is a selection process every day.

The importance of developing and nurturing the relationships that build

community was a recurring theme with all of the participants. Naomi related,


79

What‘s the best way to take people along on a journey…first, one has to build

relationships, just like teachers in the classroom, each piece mirrors each other.

You have to develop those relationships with care and trust, where the people are

willing to talk to you, open up to you, think about things in a deeper way, see

themselves as part of the community that cares.

All 12 participants spoke about the simple task of greeting parents, families, and

staff as an important and tangible way to build a strong community. Everyone talked

about starting their day by greeting the entire staff and all of the children in the center.

The greeting by these leaders was much more than a simple acknowledgment for the day.

It was the leader‘s method of helping to create the connections that allowed for the

development of community. Clara explained it this way,

I make sure that I greet every one of my staff members. I, like, try to encourage

them to come through the kitchen every morning because it‘s important for them,

not only to look at the white board and just say hello but it makes them feel they

are more in touch with each other I think…. It just shows how much I value

them. I want to know if they are going to greet me back with a smile or a frown,

so it gives me an indication of how they‘re feeling.

Marian said, ―I like to be here when teachers walk in so we have conversations about

their lives or what‘s going on in the classroom. Sometimes I feel I am a talker, I am so

invested in these kids and know them so well.‖

For this sample of leaders, connecting emotionally and physically with students

and faculty was vital to the development of community. Naomi pointed out,

Not only do we need to acknowledge each other, but we need to physically

embrace each other and greet each other and welcome each other and ask and

make eye contact. I think that feeling of hospitality and welcome says everything

about the community…and I think women—we have been official greeters

probably from Sarah and Abraham. We went out from the tent and said, ―Come

on in; we‘ve got the pita bread and the water.‖ It took me 12 hours to get that

water but I‘m going to give it to you. That‘s who we are. We, you know, we are

the emotional connectors; that‘s what we do.


80

Liz further defined the results of this kind of personal connection or community

building that seems to define the early childhood environment by saying,

I think then it translates down—it‘s the old Southwest Airline thing. Take care of

your people, and they‘ll take care of their people. A lot of my leadership has to

do with personally connecting with those people—my staff and my parents;

knowing things about them; knowing what they value; talking about it. ―How is

your daughter doing? Did you ever find that good restaurant? Oh, I have a book

for you. Oh, sure, I can find you that recipe.‖ All of those things—I like

personally connecting. I genuinely care about them, but I also like showing them

that I care about them. I think that goes a long way to their feeling they‘re valued.

We don‘t just take care for our kids. We take care of the people who are taking

care of kids. You get something back for that—that I think is genuine.

Patricia was passionate about the need to develop the relationships that build a

strong supportive community but admitted the difficulty of doing so. Explaining this she

related,

So, I feel like it‘s an everyday, it‘s a constant job, but it‘s a constant struggle, too,

because you have to, you inspire them with your actions and really building their

relationships, really respecting them…really like creating a community that‘s

reflective, that wants to learn, that wants to have the energy and the curiosity for

life.

Clara, in commenting on this idea of developing relationships and building

community, spoke about the atmosphere that should be a part of the center. She said,

It should feel like an extension of your home. It should be welcoming, it should

be clean, should be neat, should smell good; someone should greet you at the

door. You should feel like you can come in and flop down to my couch if you

need to, you should be able to go and breast feed if you need to, you should be

able to stay in your child‘s room, hang out for 10 minutes or all 10 hours if you

really wanted to although that doesn‘t happen very often. I know I feel like that‘s

our mission.

This development of community was also seen in the way leadership was

exercised. All of the leaders spoke of their leadership style as involving others.


81

Leadership was a collaborative effort. They actively sought the diversity of ideas that

comes with involving others. Ann stated,

So, I am not one of those leaders that is in control of everything and has to do

everything myself and decide everything…we‘re a community of leaders. So, I

experience it as a really collaborative and creative endeavor…. I love that; it‘s

challenging.

Reflecting on this idea of building community through collaboration, Marie highlighted

the importance of engaging in the healthy debate of ideas as a central method of

collaboration. She expressed it this way:

For me, leadership is such a process of talking; my learning style is really to talk

out loud and to talk out loud with someone else. I love to talk with somebody

about an idea I have, and then they say, you know, ―Oh yeah, then we can do

this,‖ and then I might, and then we could have, you know, and if I am just

making these decisions in a vacuum, I am not very good at all…. Leadership for

me is a constant conversation and, quite frankly, I have a lot of fun with that.

Although all of the participants talked about some form of collaboration or

inclusiveness in decision making in their facilities, two of the participants offered their

own definition of inclusivity. Emma believed in collaboration but she cited the need for

balance. She stated,

I think that I like to lead by consensus building. I think I‘m a little dictatorial, but

I hide it. It‘s my way, as long as you think it‘s your way. But I do believe that

you have to have a cooperative thought about the school with the teachers who

teach day in and day out that has to become their vision as well. You have to

build that vision together in order to really be a good school. But I‘m still their

supervisor, so I have to make all the final decisions.

Julia also had a slightly different view of collaboration. She admitted her ability

to be inclusive but felt that sometimes it could become overwhelming. She stated,

I went to a conference a year after I‘d been a new head, so I was already in the

driver‘s seat to know what I wished I‘d known. So I knew where to pay attention.

One of the psychological tests that they gave was the X test. It looks at measures

of how inclusive you are in your style and how much you like to be included, and


82

how much you like to be in charge, and how much you are willing to take on in

terms of direction. I‘m incredibly inclusive, but I just as soon you run me off the

ramp because I really like my time alone.

One final part of developing relationships and building community relates to

mentoring. Several of the participants highlighted the need to develop future leaders for

the field. Marie expressed it this way:

I would say for me within the last 5, 6 years the other part of leadership has been

knowing that I am seeing an end for me…. It‘s so like Sylvia Levine talks about

in adult stages of development, I am just hitting it. Erickson does this too and I

am just hitting that need to mentor other people, and so I am doing a lot of that

and I think that‘s another form of leadership that I never spent a lot of time on

before, but there are amazing people out there…. I have about five people I am

working with now that are all women, and the majority are women of color who I

just think really need to be this next generation of leaders so that‘s the other part

of leadership right now.

Although Marie was heartened by the individuals she mentored, other participants

in this study worried that the next generation might not want to follow the pathway to

leadership. Julia articulated this fear when she said,

Truthfully, I‘m a little worried about the upcoming generation of young people in

the workforce. Leadership is incredibly time consuming, and it‘s incredibly hard

work. I know that people have been saying, for years, that the younger generation

is just not doing what they need to do. But I hope that people who have the

potential to be good leaders continue to make themselves available to step into

those shoes.

“In touch with your own beauty and demons”. All of the participants believed

the leader was important for setting the tone of the community‘s culture and, therefore,

had to be mindful of the significance of their position, the impact they had on their

organization, and their own limits and strengths. Naomi stated it this way:

It is as like a ray, kind of shooting out and going back, which is, you know, where

am I, who am I, how do I act in this role, and then how the way I act affects

everyone else. So you have to be mindful, you have to be checking back in.


83

Naomi was alluding to the idea that for leaders to be effective, they need to know

themselves. Clara underscored the importance of the leader‘s possessing self-knowledge

when she said, ―To be a leader, one needs to know one‘s self, needs to have examined

one‘s own values, morals, culture, have a sense of that.‖

It is evident from the participants‘ narratives that fully knowing oneself includes

gaining an understanding of one‘s own strengths and weaknesses. Naomi articulated it

this way: ―You can only be as good a leader as you are a person and in touch with your

own beauty and demons; you know wherever you are, you bring yourself there.‖ Julia

demonstrated the weighty responsibility that is connected to this idea of self knowledge

by stating,

Understanding that the culture of the thing that you create really descends directly

from your beliefs in the person that you are, and how reflective and aware of how

you carry yourself and how you interact with others and how your expectations

for outcomes from conversations, and being with and living with the people in

your organism—really creates the thing that you are leading. I find it a very

organic and sensitive thing to be part of, and I find it a little frightening because I

am incredibly hard on myself and see all my flaws magnified a million times.

Julia‘s feelings were echoed in Maria‘s statement about leadership: ―I think I

approach it every day with more humility than I did when I first began because I really

understand the significance of it now and I don‘t think I did initially.‖

“Inspiring them to dance with me”. The need for the leader to understand and

articulate the vision and philosophy of the school is another important value. It is the

leader‘s role not only to be the voice of the organization but also to inspire others to take

up the mantle and participate fully in it. Patricia articulated this well by saying,

A leader is somebody that kind of inspires others to do things that they never

thought they were able to do and that has the vision and the perseverance to keep

doing that everyday even when it seems like there is nobody following.


84

Patricia offered a metaphor for this concept of leadership as inspiring others. She related,

She showed us a video of this lone nut,…this one guy that started dancing and

dancing and dancing; he was the only one dancing for a long time and then he got

one more person to join him in this crazy dance and then when this one person,

this one other person came, then this other person came and then everybody was

dancing. So sometimes I just feel like that‘s what leadership is about…. It‘s just

like inspiring them to, you know, dance with me. If I get one teacher to join me,

then, you know, well, and then, now, if I get another teacher to join in and then if

I get another teacher to join in and then we can create a culture within our

center…we know what the bigger picture is.

. Several of the participants in this study expressed the idea that for leadership to

accomplish its stated goal, it must not only have a vision, but that vision must resonate

with the stated philosophy of the organization. Leadership must also offer a way to

achieve the vision. This idea was clear in Julia‘s statement; she said,

In an organization like mine, you have to have an understanding of the

philosophy, but you also have to have a vision of one way to get there. There are

lots of ways to get there, and every leader could bring a different method to it, but

having that vision—it has to have momentum, and it has to be forward.

BJ expressed the idea in this way:

You‘ve got to know the business you‘re in. When you don‘t know the business

you‘re in—whether it‘s early childhood or criminal justice—then you‘ve got a

problem. You‘ve got to know the business. And that‘s when people make

mistakes. They don‘t take the time to learn and deal with their business.

The ability to develop the vision into a compelling call to arms helps to bond the

organization around a common purpose. Ann expressed this notion:

I think because of our mission….they have to buy into the idea that this is a good

community part of what we are doing, something beyond just the regular…school

thing. And while we are an independent school, we are also altruistic in our way

by the amount of scholarship we are giving to the kids, the opportunities we are

trying to provide for all kids in the region. And that our outreach really feeds our

inside practice, that those relationships with charters and Head Start programs and

other nonprofits are really feeding our teachers‘ sort of engagement and helping

them be better teachers and administrators.


85

The development and dissemination of the vision is a process that requires

focused work and direction by the leader. This idea was best illustrated by Emily when

she said,

So I think it did take a long time to sort of have people say, okay well this is the

way it‘s going to be, this is the way we talk to children, this is the way we treat

them, this is the way we deal with parents, this is the way we work together. And

now that everybody is sort of on the same page, I feel like there are a lot fewer

fires to put out. My first year I mean, we had people, I mean I had to actually fire

people, and it takes a long time and a lot of documentation and people rarely get

fired at the program. But when you jerk a kid by his arm, you‘re out, I‘m sorry,

we don‘t do that. And so now everybody is like, I trust them, which is nice. You

know I don‘t feel like I have to check up on them and make sure that they are

doing the right thing. I mean they are totally professional, so if I could just clone

this group and keep them every year.

Having an organization commit to a vision and move forward in its

implementation can be seen as a reward in itself and can give the leader a great deal of

satisfaction. Liz expressed this belief when she said,

I like affecting people with my thoughts and ideas. I like their feeling the

contagion that I feel about young children and the significance of the learning

process. I like firing them up about books and ideas and creative thoughts and

interesting curriculum; and I like feeding them and watching them get sustenance

from my…food that I send them.

The idea that the vision is solely the product of the leader was negated by Ann,

who said that a leader had to be

somebody who can articulate a vision and bring others along but they have to be

adaptable to other‘s views of that vision. So, not to be sort of unilateral in your

thinking, but to include other people‘s view, but to be able to force things forward

to benefit whoever you are trying to serve.

These leaders in early childhood were person centered and values driven. Their

values were rooted in a deep-seated commitment to collaboration and building and

developing relationships. The leaders believed that they must be self-aware and realistic


86

in their own capabilities to be effective in their positions. They articulated the vision for

the institution and inspired others to take part in that vision.

Context

“Critical years”. No matter what population they served or how long they had

been in their positions, every leader spoke about the fact that their leadership was

impacted by the important and weighty responsibility of working with young children.

Marie explained it this way:

These years are the most critical years in children‘s lives…so we can‘t afford to

mess around with bad teachers…. We are laying the foundation for the rest of

their lives, so, you know, that is how I always slept at night, you know, moving

towards the best that is out there for kids, and we will never arrive.

Marian stated, ―To me being an early childhood leader is a huge responsibility…. I think

it comes with future responsibility.‖

The leaders in this sample agreed that early childhood education offers a unique

environment in which to lead. Young children and parents of young children have

specific needs that are unique to the early childhood environment and require a special

skill set.. The leaders in this sample also argued that because early childhood is an

extremely important stage of development, making sure that their support system is

functioning correctly also falls within their purview. Julie stated,

When you‘re dealing with people who are filled with wonder and enthusiasm for

all things, and whose parents want nothing more than to hear about their child‘s

wonderfulness, or even sometimes their not-wonderfulness. They want to do the

right thing. Farther up in the food chain, parents aren‘t so open, and kids are

filled with attitude. There‘s a lot of remediation you have to do both with the

children and the parents, and there‘s a lot of crap you have to teach and test for,

and stuff that just doesn‘t interest me.


87

Marie summed it up when she said, ―One word misspoken, one gesture overlooked

matters. I mean, everything we do matters.‖

In commenting on how the effects of the early childhood environment trickle

down, impacting other areas, Marie stated,

My number one priority was to make it an absolutely wonderful place for kids

followed closely on the heels by an absolutely wonderful place for the adults, so

that if I am telling people how they respect the nature of childhood, I‘ve got to be

respecting the nature of their learning styles.

Clara also commented on this perspective. She stated,

I think a lot of leaders in other organizations think in terms of who[m] they

supervise and how well they do that, and I don‘t necessarily think of that. I think

my leadership really has an impact on the families, the parents, and the children,

and sometimes the extended families, depending on how big it is.

Another reason for the importance of this work that leaders cited was the close

working relationship that develops with the parents. Several of the leaders expressed the

idea that the work of leadership in early childhood involves the parents more closely than

at any other stage of the child‘s development. Clara offered an answer as to why this is

the case when she said,

They don‘t have their moms down the street or…they choose to have children, but

they really haven‘t figured out what that‘s going to entail. They don‘t have

anybody there to teach them and I feel like that‘s part of our mission.

As did Clara, many of the leaders in this study viewed themselves as the support systems

for parents and sometimes their extended families. Clara offered another explanation as

to why leaders were so involved with parents. She stated,

They have so much access to us and that‘s what I want. That‘s what I was just

going on and on about that I want them to have that access…. I think that‘s

because of the nature of our kind of business and because we are dealing with

young children and their families that any other kinds of leadership would not

really work in terms of—oh, I don‘t think it would work very well.


88

Julia offered insight into this situation as well by stating,

The early childhood field gives you a unique opportunity to also be a leader to

parents in ways that I think people who work with older children don‘t have. And

really you‘re meeting parents at their tenderest and most vulnerable time, where

they really appreciate and need guidance and assurance and support as they

develop their parenting skills.

Liz suggested that the leader in early childhood assists the parents through their

own stages of development, offering them a safe place to find the support they need to

become competent in their jobs as parents. She said,

But it‘s also where you help them let go. I believe they should be very involved

at this level, and then you let them tether out. Let the lead out little by little. But

right now, you want them by your side. You want to be the bookends for

children, and do the home school thing very tightly. Make sure that the messages

are consistent, that the classroom mission also becomes the home mission.

“Just a preschool”. Although the leaders in this study highlighted the

importance of the early childhood years, they also believed their job was made more

difficult because society as a whole undervalues the field and, as a result, the leadership

position. Clara stated, ―I think the other thing that has made being a leader in the field, if

that‘s in fact what‘s going on, is because of the fact that we are kind of, we are not

established, we are not valued yet.‖ Regarding this situation, Patricia stated, ―I think it‘s

even more difficult because you have to establish yourself as…having this leadership

position in a field that nobody or that a lot of people don‘t know much about or that they

don‘t feel that that‘s important.‖

Liz viewed the situation regarding the perceived value of early childhood this

way:

I think that sometimes there is not the appreciation that you are inspiring a love of

learning, and trying to open as many doors as possible. At the same time, trying


89

to figure out what a child‘s affinities are—they do start to exhibit a good bit of

that personality, intuition, proclivities toward math, science, music, and art.

All but two of the participants spoke of the wage differential as a cause for the

devaluing of early childhood education. Julia asserted, ―We don‘t get paid. People‘s

perspectives are based on how much the salary is.‖

Several leaders expounded on the typical response from outsiders when they

answered the question, ―What do you do?‖ Patricia related her experience as follows:

When we go out…I remember people asking, ―So, what do you do?‖ And

they‘re, like—I‘m a preschool teacher— ―Oh, that's cute.‖ And then there is a

lawyer or somebody, you know, working at the Capitol Hill doing policy work,

and even people at the hill doing policy work, and vocational policy, they look at

us slightly, oh, you know: ―What could you know, you know, what could you

know?‖ Yeah, we know everything; we actually know what is going on in our

classrooms.

Emily responded in this way,

Well it‘s funny because you always get the what-do-you-do question, and I can

give two answers: I can say, ―Oh, I direct the young children's program at X,‖ and

they are really interested in what I do, or if I say, ―I‘m a director of a preschool,‖

they are like oh, you know, so …why is one really exciting and one is just kind of

like, ah that‘s cute, you know?

It is evident from the variety of responses that despite the educational degrees they hold

or the reams of research proving the importance of the field in which they work, leaders

in early childhood experience a devaluing of their profession.

Summary of context. These women leaders believe that context matters. They

believe that the need of the early childhood environment necessitates a different kind of

leadership style. Their leadership, however, is impacted by the fact that the field of early

childhood is undervalued and perceived as lacking professional status. This devaluing is


90

felt by the leaders themselves, affecting how they lead and how they feel about their

leadership.

Contradictions

“You can’t do that with women”. It is interesting to note that although the

leaders in this study tended to believe that the organizations they led were compassionate

and emotionally supportive places because of the preponderance of women, some

expressed the view that this very dynamic could make it challenging. Clara expressed it

this way:

It is so difficult sometimes. I think that I mean sometimes it‘s just basically

physiological…when you get a group of women together and you‘re there 10

hours a day with one another, all those sorts of physiological things can affect you

in terms of your moods.

About this issue, Liz said, ―And women can get in this catty vicious cycle that does not

become them. I‘ll talk to my lawyer husband sometimes about issues, and he‘ll say, ‗Just

tell them to get over it.‘ You can‘t do that with women.‖ Naomi argued, ―When you are

interacting with 14 women, it‘s a whole different button-pushing experience.‖ Marie

summed up her feelings this way: ―I think sometimes if it is all women, one of my

biggest goals when it was all women, was to try to break down some of the intensity, you

know.‖

Although Julia admitted there could be challenges in a single-gendered

environment, she believed the benefits far outweighed the challenges. She stated,

Being in this world and working with women that I love and adore and respect

has really allowed me to have the kind of social life with women that really

pleases me…. It‘s a community, and it‘s people who are interested in building

relationships. Of course, it‘s also a whole bunch of women working together and

not telling each other the important stuff when things need to get solved and

done…. But it‘s great.


91

“Every day I feel lonely”. In general, the participants in this study described

their early childhood environments as warm, nurturing, and emotionally supportive

communities. These women expressed the notion that they needed and wanted to be

emotionally connected to others. They worked hard to be welcoming to members of the

community and strived to know members personally. Therefore, it was interesting to me

to discover that nine of the twelve leaders expressed experiencing some sort of loneliness

associated with their position. The experience of loneliness for these leaders fell into two

categories: lack of supportive networks and the necessity of boundaries.

The perceived need for boundaries in the leader–follower relationship caused a

feeling of isolation and loneliness for some of the leaders. Expressing this same notion

about the need for respecting boundaries, Naomi stated, ―I mean it‘s hard

sometimes…you have to really be careful about boundaries…. One thing I‘ve learned is

I‘m not their friend, I‘m not their buddy, I don‘t socialize with them, I don‘t go out with

them.‖ Patricia expressed the same sentiment when she said, ―How to support them, but

not cross over that line…. I have to be your boss and having them understand that that‘s

what I am there for.‖ Emma expressed it this way, ―When you‘re a teacher, the other

teachers become your friends. But as a director, you have to keep boundaries from your

teachers even if you have a warm relationship with them.‖ Citing an example of the pain

and feelings of isolation that can occur due to these boundaries, Emma further stated,

It can be lonely when I see a teacher who went to some store and bought every

other teacher these light-up Hanukkah necklaces. It never occurred to her to get

one for me. I don‘t get upset about it, but it goes back to that loneliness thing.

Jennifer‘s experience was a classic example of this feeling as well. She stated,


92

I miss that connection with the kids and they look at me as the principal, so you‘re

a good guy–bad guy kind of thing, or ―You don‘t want to be in Ms. Jennifer‘s

office,‖ and I miss that. I miss being the warm and fuzzy person. And that‘s

when I start to feel a little lonely. And even during gift time, like holidays, it‘s a

big thing, parents will ask me, ―What can I get the teachers and blah-blah-blah,‖

and, you know, you tell them and you help with all the ideas, but then they never

say thanks to what you do. It‘s like nobody seems to remember, ―Hey, I put this

all together.‖ I miss them; I talk to them all the time. So sometimes it can get to

you a little bit.

The lack of a professional network was cited by some of the leaders as a cause for

loneliness. Clara expressed it this way:

Every day I feel lonely. It‘s when I have to struggle through on a question of, you

know, when I‘m trying to make a decision when there is some morality with it or

when I have to be logical or when there is emotion is involved, especially with

personnel issues, and I don‘t have anyone to talk to. There is a lack of network of

other people who do what I do to talk to and brainstorm and get ideas and share

things. It feels a little lonely because I can‘t talk to my staff to talk about it and I

turn to my husband and he is very much a man and he is trying to give me

solutions, but I just need to talk it out. His patience is limited and he will go right

for the solution and not the ―talk.‖

Liz expressed some anxiety that the feeling of isolation might cause her to leave

the profession. She stated, ―Sometimes I think, ‗Wow. Can I keep this up?‘ It‘s lonely.

I think that when you‘re the only person in the school who‘s the head, it‘s really lonely.‖

Marian expressed a similar sentiment as she recalled an incident when she first

was hired as the director of her school. She stated,

The one thing she did say to me after I got it or even before maybe, she said, you

are going to be alone at the top because it‘s a small school and you need to think

about that. It was after I took the job, because she said, ―Okay I am really sorry;

maybe I made a mistake here because I realized, you know, I figured you would

love it, but yet who are you going to talk to?‖ It was interesting, and that is a little

bit of a problem.

“The more I’m in it the harder it is”. Marian‘s statement regarding the hard

work of leadership in early childhood—―The more I‘m in it the harder it is‖—was echoed


93

by every leader in this study. Every participant described an occupation that involved

long hours, emotionally and psychologically draining work, and—for smaller

institutions—physical labor. No matter the size of the school, working with the youngest

students requires one to wear a variety of hats. Two of the leaders remarked that they

might not be able to stay in the field due to the strain.

Several of the leaders commented on the fact that the job of leadership in early

childhood requires a variety of skill sets not typical of leadership in other institutions.

Emma stated,

I have unstopped toilets, mopped floors when kids have thrown up; and in my

present school we don‘t have custodians until the afternoon. So if there‘s

anything that goes wrong with the building, I‘m the one that‘s walking around

with a screwdriver, gloves, and a mop. Also, if a teacher gets sick or we‘re short-

staffed, I go into the classroom and work with the teacher. It doesn‘t happen as

much as it did in my early years, but it still does happen.

Patricia related the same perspective when she stated,

It involves so much, you know, from administrative stuff, staffing, and people

calling out sick—like you are having to find subs and, you know, day-to-day

things and operations and safety and making sure that, you know, you do all your

reports for all the funders and all the people and that you go to all the meetings

and that all of the everyday management stuff, you know, hiring, firing, meeting

with teachers. It‘s like I could go on and on and on.

Occasionally the work of the leader involves a role extremely out of the ordinary.

Clara demonstrated this point by relaying the following humorous anecdote:

I told somebody yesterday that snake wrangler is part of job description officially

because I had to. I got, heard this shriek and went running only to find this 6-foot

black rat snake curled up on top of the hamster‘s cage in one of the rooms, and

Lord knows how long it had been there, but they were just shrieking. It was like

Christmas dinner and, you know, my husband is like, ―So what did you do?‖ I

said, ―Well, I got a pillow case and a grabber thing and we got it in a pillow case.‖

He was like, ―You are kidding me.‖ What are you going to do—I mean, you

know?


94

Four of the leaders described the work as a constant, never-ending cycle

frequently involving early mornings, late hours, or both. Some related that once they left

their facilities they continued their work at home. Two of the leaders found that worrying

about the decisions they had made or problems they had to solve kept them up at night.

Marie explained,

I find in the last 2 years I have so many night things. Honestly, that‘s a killer and

that‘s why I ultimately will retire, because I can do all the day stuff. If I can be

home by 6, I am home; I am good because I work at least 2 hours every night,

sometimes more, and then when you have night stuff, then you are back at school

again. You know, the whole thing starts all over again so that‘s the hard part.

Liz concurred with Marie but connected the difficulty of the work to the magnitude of the

reward. She stated,

What you get hooked on is that the most challenging work is the most rewarding.

The stuff that‘s the hardest to do gives you the most rewards. You reap the

greatest benefits from working like a son of a gun. But I sometimes think, ―Oh,

wow. Does this ever quit? Do I ever just let up? And when I finally retire, will I

be gratified?‖ I‘ll probably be busy with something, but it‘s damn hard work.

The inability to leave the work at the office was cited by several leaders as being a

particularly difficult part of the job. Marian explained it this way: ―It‘s exhausting

because you don‘t ever let it go.‖ Liz also had difficulty letting the issues go but

explained the kind of supports she needed to help her cope with the strain. She related,

Somebody—it‘s important to please—isn‘t happy for some reason. That‘ll stick

in my craw until a little time goes by, and then I‘ll have to rationalize it. Then I‘ll

have to say, ―Well, I guess there‘s more to life.‖ Well, right now I don‘t really

have any more life for my school. That‘s why I so desperately want to be closer

to my husband, because he offers me that balance. He‘ll be able to say, ―Get over

it. This is just your job; and while you live and breathe it, it‘s okay. You‘ve got

other things going on around you that need you and support you and are there.‖ I

don‘t know how I could do this at any other time in my life—raising children,

whatever. Now that I‘m almost 60, and I‘ve done all that—the imbalance is that I

work more than I play. I work very hard. But I also find that—I see that finite,


95

and I‘m going to go out with a bang. My life is going to be intense no matter how

long or short it is. Why wouldn‘t you just give it 100 percent?

Emma highlighted the emotional toll the work can have. She related,

But sometimes I experience leadership as being the one who gets dumped on.

Parents who have concerns like to come and dump. Teachers that are having a

bad day come and dump. Just yesterday, an assistant teacher comes down and

starts yelling at me because the room that she was doing an after-school program

in was 65 degrees, which I don‘t even think is that cold. And she is probably

leaving on Thursday to see her grandchild in Florida, and she doesn‘t want to get

sick. I said, ―Well, I hardly think you‘re going to get sick, but press the override

button on the thermostat and it will come up.‖

Time was considered a precious commodity for the leaders in this sample. Julia

expressed it this way: ―Leadership is incredibly time consuming, and it‘s incredibly hard

work.‖ Emily explained one of the reasons it was so time consuming for her. She stated,

―So, there is really never any time during the day when you are alone without children or

parents.‖ Marian, however, was initially surprised at how all consuming the work could

become. She related, ―It had the kid piece and it had the parent piece; little did I know

that it would totally take over my life. I should have realized that, but I didn‘t until you

are here because there are a lot of pieces to that puzzle.‖

Liz argued that the work of leadership required her to be almost superhuman. She

related,

Do you know how healthy we have to be? We can‘t really get sick, and we don‘t.

And we shouldn‘t really live too far from where we are, because we have to jump

there and jump home. You don‘t want car accidents because we‘re so sleepy at

the wheel. They don‘t really ever cover that when they‘re talking about things—

the health of the head. But isn‘t it important? But it is very interesting to me,

because I sign these slips that allow for this leave time. I think—well first of all, I

grew up where, you know, in a family of four, my mom raised us singlehandedly,

and you‘re not sick. ―I have to go to work, and you do, too.‖ You didn‘t get sick,

and you didn‘t have babysitters and nannies. You may have a cold, but get up and

go to school. I think we all had perfect attendance—all four of us. In my four

years of work—my husband, too—I can‘t even count being home sick.


96

Because leadership in early childhood requires so much time, emotional energy,

and psychological energy, many leaders spoke about the importance of ―alone time.‖

Naomi articulated it this way,

I think every director I‘ve ever talked to says, you know you need, ―non-

interruption time‖ where nobody is calling, where nobody is stopping, and

nobody needs your help to find the green paint, and that‘s why some of the things

just can‘t get done during the workday.

Although the ability to be comfortable with sharing feelings and emotions was

cited as an important aspect of leadership by the participants, it can be emotionally

draining. Emma acknowledged how exhausting this aspect can be by citing the following

example:

The first director I worked for—she totally burned out. She just got tired of

mommying everybody—the children, the staff, the parents. She burnt out. If it

isn‘t something that‘s sort of innately you, it can burn you out. I do know that it‘s

draining sometimes to be a leader in early childhood.

The close association and interaction of the leader with the parents is not only

welcomed but valued. Nevertheless, some of the leaders perceived that this access came

at great cost. Clara articulated this perception:

I feel like we are also evaluated every day by our clients, you know, the people

we serve…. Does the child come home happy, does the child come home clean?

And so there‘s a measure of evaluation every day. I am trying to think if there‘s

other organizations certainly when, I don‘t know, if I, for example, being the

leader of the organization or childcare directors, there‘s nobody really looking at

what we do each and every time we meet to evaluate what we are doing, so that‘s

interesting.

Maria acknowledged the cost this way:

If you are an early childhood person, you do a lot of hand holding with parents.

What I find is that parents are so happy during the pregnancy, and all they want is

a normal healthy baby and then once the baby is born, that‘s never good enough


97

again, and so we are often the first people to tell them you have a great child but

he or she isn‘t perfect and so to help them through that trauma often falls to me.

Summary of contradictions. Leaders in early childhood experience a series of

contradictions. These women leaders enjoyed the single-gendered environment but it was

not without challenge. These leaders found leading women to be difficult. Although

they valued collaboration and relationship building, they nonetheless experienced a sense

of loneliness in their positions. They valued being emotionally available but found it

emotionally draining. And, although the focus of these organizations was young

children, the work was hard with little opportunity for time alone to reflect and plan.

These contradictions seemed to be context specific.

Summary of Chapter Four

This chapter has presented the findings related to how 12 women in early

childhood settings experienced leadership. It has provided textual narratives to support

the five major themes that emerged: (a) pathways, (b) the experience, (c) values, (d)

context, and (e) contradictions. The following chapter presents discussion, analysis, and

interpretations of the findings as well as recommendations for future research.


98

Chapter Five: Discussion of Findings and Recommendations

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to gain a deeper understanding of how women in

leadership positions in early childhood experience leadership. Using a ―basic,

interpretive‖ qualitative research design, my aim was to document how these 12 women

made meaning of leadership (Merriam, 2009). This chapter provides discussion and

analysis of the findings of this study. It also offers recommendations for practice and

future research. The primary research question for this study was ―How do women in

leadership positions in early childhood make meaning of leadership?‖ Five major themes

emerged from the data: (a) pathways, (b) the experience, (c) values, (d) context, and (e)

contradictions.

Discussion of the Findings

The findings from this study suggest that these women in leadership positions in

early childhood tended find their way into their positions indirectly, with many having

been encouraged by others to take on the mantle. These women rarely reached out for

these positions or planned to become leaders. In fact, many were almost uncomfortable

with the title. Once in their positions, however, they led with humility and passion,

viewing the position as a calling rather than an aspiration. Instead of aspiring to ―climb

the corporate ladder,‖ these women came to serve. They came to their positions wanting

to make a difference—either to foster social justice or just to have a chance to give back

to the field they loved. What they found upon arrival, however, was a field that was

undervalued and misunderstood; therefore, by association, their positions of leadership

were similarly undervalued and misunderstood.


99

These women recognized the importance of their work, but they faced the lack of

support emotionally, financially, and professionally that comes with being undervalued.

They saw themselves as being in organizations requiring a context-specific leadership

style because of the focus on early childhood; they believed that, because they were

women, they possessed many of the values and skill sets necessary to be successful in

their roles.

The women in this study valued people and relationships and actively nurtured a

variety of constituencies; children, parents, faculty, staff, and those who would become

leaders themselves. They tended to make their decisions through collaboration with

others, wanting to hear and respecting a diversity of ideas and viewpoints.

These women viewed being in an environment that tends to be predominantly one

gender as both a ―blessing and a curse.‖ The ability to have a softer kind of leadership

was highly valued, but they also contended that having one gender was a challenge.

The women in this sample believed they needed to be emotionally available and

in touch with the feelings and emotions of others in their institutions. They gave of

themselves daily, worrying about the work they had done and decisions they had made

long after the workday was done. Although being emotionally available was important to

them, it was also costly, both physically and emotionally. Many were exhausted by the

work, and some of them even were considering leaving the profession because of this

factor.

The experiences of these women suggest that there is an aspect of loneliness to

the position of leadership in early childhood settings, which appears to arise from a

conflict between the need to be an administrator, which, some might argue, requires


100

distance, and the need to develop relationships more typically associated with teaching.

This feeling may be stronger in the early childhood environment where developing close

relationships with others is so much a part of the day-to-day functioning of the

organization as a whole.

The findings suggest that these leaders were the caretakers of the philosophy,

mission, and vision of their institutions. They helped to articulate the vision and motivate

others to move the organization forward. They worked constantly to inspire others to feel

like professionals in a field where outside forces constantly deem them not worthy of

professional status. They believed they needed to be self-aware and in touch with their

own strengths and weaknesses if they were to lead their organizations effectively.

The following section provides more in-depth analysis of the major themes and

subthemes derived from the data.

Pathways

Unanticipated leadership. Leadership in early childhood was, for the women in

this sample, unanticipated. They became leaders at the behest of others or by

happenstance, but none of the women in this sample planned to be an early childhood

leader. A vast majority in this sample did not aspire to be leaders in any context, with

many feeling reluctant to be ―in charge‖ at all.

This discomfort with leadership is a theme that is consistent with the literature.

Geoghegan et al. (2003) noted that women leaders in early childhood tended to report a

level of discomfort with leadership. Rodd (1996) and Bloom (1992) produced similar

findings.


101

Feminist researchers, such as Blackmore (1989) and Fennel (2002), noted that

women in educational leadership in general might be uncomfortable with the more

masculine definition of power in leadership. Blackmore suggested that the more

masculine definition of power tends to emphasize ―control, individualism and hierarchy‖

(p. 123). As noted throughout the following discussion, women in leadership in early

childhood tend to value relationships, collaboration, and the acceptance of diverse

viewpoints and ideas. Women in this sample were much more likely to prefer

horizontalization of leadership rather than a hierarchy. They might, therefore perceive

this more masculine definition as a mismatch to their own leadership styles. Although

these women might have been reluctant to take on the title of leader, once in the position

of leader, they wanted to make a difference.

Many of the leaders in this study started as teachers and came to leadership from

the classroom. The perceived change in relationships that occurred after becoming

leaders was difficult for many of them. They expressed a feeling of consternation

derived from the tension they perceived between the ―teaching self‖ and the

―administrative self.‖ In discussing this contradiction, Grogan (2003) stated,

The discourse of administration is sometimes in direct contrast to that of teaching.

Teaching encourages relationship building, administration recommends keeping

distance. Therefore, teachers who become administrators often have to adopt a

different subject position from the one they held previously. (p. 19)

Although Grogan was referring more to the superintendency in public education, this

type of tension may be even more apparent in an organization such as the early childhood

setting where administration and teaching are so closely intertwined.


102

“Why do we get into this field? What, to be rich?” The findings in this study

highlight the fact that, once women in leadership in early childhood education accept the

position, they frequently cite, as significant motivators, a desire to promote social justice

or to become an agent of change to the status quo. The desire to ―make a difference‖ or

effect social change is consistent with the literature on women in educational leadership.

Blackmore (2002) defined social justice as being about ―human rights and obligations

towards humanity.‖ Strachan (2002), on the other hand, defined it more as a passion for

doing work that makes a difference. Regardless of the definition, the desire to effect

change in a way to meaningfully impact their organizations and society at large was a

strong motivator for the women in this study.

The idea of social justice‘s being motivational in women‘s acceptance of

leadership has been cited in the research literature (Strachan, 2002). The women in this

research study were passionate about working to bring the desired positive change to the

status quo for their students and parents and even the field of early education overall. It

is also evident from the narratives that these women intended not to do this alone but in

collaboration with others.

Although some of the women in this study cited social justice issues as

motivators, others were interested in sharing their expertise with those coming into the

field. The opportunity to assist or mentor others in the field not only provides significant

opportunities for growth and development for the mentee but also provides reciprocal

growth for the mentor (Browne-Ferrigno & Muth, 2004).

Summary of pathways. The findings of this study in the area of women‘s

pathways to leadership reflect the literature on women in educational leadership in


103

several ways. Women in early childhood education tend to be uncomfortable with the

more masculine model of leadership of power over others, preferring a much more

feminized interpretation of power with others (Blackmore, 1989). Their organizational

structures tend to be more horizontal than hierarchical. As leaders in early childhood are

typically promoted from within, they tend to be teachers that feel the strain of the new

role (Grogan, 2003). Moreover, women leaders in early childhood tend to be motivated

by issues of social justice and want to give back (Strachan, 1999). The findings from this

study differ from findings in the previous literature in one specific way, however:

Women in early childhood typically do not seek the role of leadership; they are chosen by

others.

The Experience

“Bringing something different to the table”. The women in this study believed

that being a woman impacted how they led their organization, how they perceived

leadership and how they and their leadership were perceived. They also believed they

brought to the work a unique skill set that was especially suited to the early childhood

setting. Putnam and Kolb (2003) asserted that a practice is considered gendered when the

characteristics of the practice are more closely associated with one gender than the other.

Gendered practice also refers to the situation of one gender‘s being devalued or hidden in

the process. In the case of early childhood education, women are closely associated with

the practice of the field—mothering, nurturing, and so forth—and the field is devalued

because of that association. The idea that women experience leadership differently from

men is in keeping with previous research (Chin, 2007; Gilligan, 1982; Helgesen, 1990;

Northouse, 2007).


104

Rodd (2006) pointed out, however, that the majority of research on women in

leadership continues to be conducted in primary or secondary educational levels where

followers are typically a mixed group of men and women. She asserted that the field of

early childhood is a field where women not only dominate as leaders but also are the

followers. She asserted that if this fact were viewed as an opportunity by researchers,

they could provide a better idea of what leadership for women looks like and reveal that it

need not always fit a traditional male model of leadership.

Henderson-Kelly and Pamphilon (2000) are two of the few researchers who have

attempted to investigate early childhood leadership. And, although the sample from

which they generated their theory was very small (only three participants), it is

nonetheless interesting. They argued that women in early childhood are in the process of

developing their own model of leadership, which they called the ―wisdom framework.‖

Borrowing from the 1986 women‘s ways of knowing model of Belenky et al., the

researchers cited four wisdoms as being connected to leadership in early childhood: (a)

people wisdom, which highlights interpersonal skills and communication skills; (b)

emotional wisdom, which emphasizes being attuned to the emotional needs of self and

others; (c) role wisdom, which highlights being able to navigate multiple roles at a time;

and (d) resource wisdom, which refers to being creative with problem solving. The

findings from my study are in keeping with the Henderson-Kelly and Pamphilon study in

many ways.

The women in this study demonstrated emotional wisdom as they developed the

relationships that are part of building community. They also spoke about the importance

of self-knowledge, which is a part of emotional wisdom. The women leaders cited their


105

ability to successfully navigate or juggle multiple roles as something that they did well

because they were women. They were creative and resourceful in working with parents

and teachers, which is a part of resource wisdom.

Although there are certainly similarities between my findings and Henderson-

Kelly and Pamphilon‘s (2000) findings, there are differences. The women in this study

not only demonstrated interpersonal skills and knowledge of roles and resources, but they

also demonstrated curiosity, a true sense of inquiry, and a passion for the work. They

actively sought a diversity of opinions and viewpoints and demonstrated an ability to

weave those diverse opinions into new ideas. These important attributes were not cited in

the research by Henderson-Kelly and Pamphilon.

“We’ve been minimized”. The women in this study asserted that their

organizations and positions had been devalued or minimized. They cited the low pay and

lack of status in the field as examples of devaluing or minimization. They cited the

gendering of the field as a reason for the devaluing. This finding is in keeping with the

literature. Skills such as mothering, nurturing, and caring, those typically associated with

women, are less valued, resulting in jobs associated with those skills being paid less

(Acker, 1989; England, 1992; Gibelman, 2003; Guy & Newman, 2004; Hogue & Hord,

2007). In conducting research on gender roles, Fletcher (1998, 1999) found that

regardless of whether the behaviors were in line with the goals of the organization, such

as the goals in early childhood, the behaviors associated with the feminine gender were

generally devalued. She described a kind of silencing or ―disappearing of behaviors‖ that

were associated with women.


106

Summary of the experience. It seems that some women in early childhood

experience leadership differently than men do. The ability to develop relationships and

connections with others was a fundamental aspect of the leadership style of the women in

this study. It was a value that they returned to time and again, emphasizing the

importance to them personally, and to them as women in early childhood. They also

exhibited the framework that Henderson-Kelly and Pamphilon (2000) called the four

wisdoms; however, they were unlike the subjects of the Henderson-Kelly and Pamphilon

work in that the women in this study also demonstrated a sense of inquiry and interest in

hearing diverse ideas.

The women in this study experienced their organizations as gendered and, as a result,

devalued. They attributed this devaluing to the preponderance of women in the field.

Values

“Touching people’s souls”. One of the most salient findings in this study

indicated the importance for these early childhood leaders‘ of developing meaningful

relationships, connecting emotionally, and collaborating with others. Every leader in this

study spoke about the need to connect with others. In addition, each of the women in

these leadership positions viewed herself as being in touch with the emotional life of the

school, feeling that this was almost the hallmark of the institution. Naomi‘s statement

articulated this well and, ultimately, became the title for this theme, because it seemed to

echo what every other leader stated. From the time they entered their facilities in the

morning, each leader had a ritual of greeting, welcoming, or connecting with others. The

greetings were not meant as ritualistic formalities but were described by the leaders as

opportunities to bond and build community. These leaders actively sought out


107

opportunities to connect both emotionally and sometimes physically, offering a hug or

shoulder to cry on.

It was evident from the narratives that each leader saw herself as being at the

center of an organization whose purpose was to develop and nurture people. Her role,

therefore, was to develop relationships, involve others in her decision making, and be in

touch with the emotional life of those in her organization. This theme is consistent with

the research findings of others on the types of organizations women in leadership tend to

create. Helgesen (1995) described this organization type as a ―web of inclusion.‖

Helgesen further stated that the leaders in these organizations were noted for

―emphasizing both accessibility and equality, and that they labored constantly to include

people in their decision-making‖ (p. 10). Helgesen described these leaders as accessible,

communicative, and collaborative, with an ability to listen. These adjectives certainly

represent how the leaders in this study described themselves in their organizations.

Several of the women cited the need to communicate well and listen well as vital to their

leadership styles.

Helgesen (1995) described the web of inclusion as a process or way of thinking

about tasks, how people interact with each other, and how decisions are made. Helgesen

further explained that everyone in this type of organization has access to information and

is, therefore, better able to feel empowered as part of the organization.

Many of the leaders in this study expressed the need to engage their respective

faculties and staffs in the conversations that would help to deepen and strengthen the

connections that had developed. Despite this desire, finding the necessary resources


108

sometimes stood in the way. They wished, nonetheless, to bind their organizations

together around a common theme.

Leadership style, as expressed by the participants in this study, seemed also to be

rooted in what Gilligan (1993) called an ethic of care. Gilligan stated that women tend to

―define themselves in the context of human relationship but also judge themselves in

terms of their ability to care‖ (p. 17).

Noddings (2003), in her examination of the idea of an ―ethic of care,‖ postulated

that women tend to ―approach moral problems by placing themselves as nearly as

possible in concrete situations and assuming personal responsibility for the choices to be

made‖ (p. 8). Noddings asserted that women ultimately define themselves from the

position of the one caring. This was certainly the case with the participants in this study.

“In touch with your own beauty and demons”. Another important finding for

this study was the importance for these women of of being self-aware as a leader.

Because early childhood leadership is at the center of the organization, the leader has a

direct effect on the culture. Several women in this sample expressed the idea that the

leader‘s attitude and personality affected the general functioning of the organization. As

this was the case, they considered it important for the leader to know herself well to make

it all work. This finding is in keeping with previous research. Maxwell (1991) asserted

that leaders are successful because of ―who they are on the inside‖ (p. 1). Maxwell was

articulating the idea that without knowledge of what is ―inside,‖ a leader will be less than

successful. Bloom (2002) argued that a self-aware leader is better equipped to positively

manage her interactions with others. Rodd (2006) concurred and suggested that effective


109

leaders in early childhood must not only know themselves but also work to ―not suffer

from unreasonable insecurity about their abilities‖ (p. 33).

Brown and Manning (2000) agreed with the foregoing, citing knowledge of self

as an important aspect of leadership. They defined leaders‘ self-knowledge as the ability

to ―be cognizant of their own abilities and limitations, strengths and weaknesses‖ (p. 91).

Further, they suggested that leaders also need to be balanced, recognizing their roles in

their organizations as they relate to other constituencies such as community leaders and

outside services.

“Inspiring everybody to dance with me”. The women in this study cited the

ability to articulate the vision and mission of the organization and to be the ―champion‖

for that vision as important. This finding is in keeping with previous research.

Bolman and Deal (2003), in their discussion of symbolic leadership, touched on

the importance of the leader‘s ability to communicate a vision for the organization. They

suggested that the leader will either ―create a vision and then persuade others to accept it‖

or ―articulate a vision that is already there‖ (p. 362). Although this viewpoint seems to

correspond to the views of the women in this study, it does so only superficially. The

women in this study neither created the vision alone nor did they articulate what was

already there. Instead they inspired others to, as Patricia so eloquently said, ―do things

that they never thought they were able to do.‖ For these women in leadership in early

childhood, the vision was created in concert with others. This phenomenon required a

kind of horizontalization of leadership that seems a significant aspect of the early

childhood leadership style. The desire and ability to create with others is a powerful

component that is the foundation of leadership in early childhood.


110

Context

“Critical years”. According to the findings of this study, context mattered and

had an impact on how the women in the study experienced leadership. This finding is in

line with previous research. Perrow (1970) stated that ―leadership style is a dependent

variable which depends on something else. The setting or task is the independent

variable‖ (p. 6). Rodd (2006), in reflecting on leadership in early childhood, also agreed,

arguing that ―leadership is a contextual phenomenon, that is, it means different things to

different people in different contexts‖ (p. 10). The women in this study noted how the

context of the early childhood setting impacted virtually every aspect of their practice due

to the highly connective nature of the organization. The ability to have a deep impact on

the lives of the children they served was also a factor cited in this study as being sobering

but motivating.

Grogan (1997) asserted that the ―process by which one becomes a leader and the

means by which one exercises leadership are very gendered activities‖ (p. 83). She

further argued that individuals‘ leadership can be shaped by the institutions they are in

and can experience a kind of mismatch. She cited women‘s aspiring to the

superintendency in public education as an example of this kind of mismatch, where the

―traditionally approved female behaviors are the aggressive, competitive styles‖ (p. 83),

which may be at variance with the culture of the institution. The early childhood leaders

in this study, however, did not experience this kind of mismatch. In fact, many of them

felt supported by their institutions.

It is interesting to note that several of the leaders alluded to the idea that the early

childhood context supports a different kind of leadership. Given the emphasis on


111

nurturing and connecting, one leader defined leadership in early childhood as a softer

kind of leadership. This idea of a ―softer kind of leadership‖ seemed to be an expression

of an ethic of care as espoused by Nodding (2003).

“Just a preschool”. Although reams of research support the fact that quality

early childhood education has a significant positive impact on a variety of areas in a

child‘s development, the field of early childhood remains undervalued financially and

socially. Loane (1997) described the field of early childhood as the ―pink ghetto‖

because of the low pay, low status, and traditional female stereotypes that tend to plague

it. This situation can act as a stressor for leaders in early childhood education. The

leaders in this study cited the lower status of the field as a significant issue.

Fromberg (2003) connected the devaluing of early childhood education to the

societal view of motherhood as ―taken-for-granted, unpaid labor‖ (p. 178). She explained

that it is difficult for the average person to value a profession that, at its best, looks like

play. Fromberg asserted that low educational expectations and lack of advocacy

regarding professionalization in the field had contributed to the low-status issue. She

argued that the field ―reflects an outgrowth of ‗commonsense‘ approaches that more

nearly comprise an occupation rather than a profession‖ (p. 178). It follows then that

until the field recognizes itself as a profession and acts accordingly, society as a whole

will not place sufficient value on it. Naomi articulated it this way:

Our culture is always paying lip service but…is it to children in education? Let‘s

be honest: We don‘t get the dollars, you don‘t get the awards and in part, it‘s our

own fault and responsibility because we don‘t educate ourselves enough, we don‘t

educate our staff enough, we don‘t articulate what it is that we do, and if we, if we

tell parents that we do paint, you know, and we do glue, why shouldn‘t they think

that‘s what we do?


112

It is interesting to note that anyone aspiring to become a school principal or

superintendent must hold an advanced degree or be eligible for certification (Grogan,

1996). In fact, according to Grogan, academic preparation is fundamental to the position

of superintendent, and one need only look through job announcements for school

principals to see that academic preparation is important for that position as well. There

is, however, neither any such training ground nor a designated mentor program for early

childhood leaders. Advanced degrees in educational leadership typically focus on

elementary, high school, or higher education. There are no designated degrees that relate

specifically to leadership in early childhood.

Summary of context. It is evident from the foregoing that the early childhood

context shaped and or reflects the leadership styles of these participants.The context

affects the kind of leadership that is best suited for the environment and the status

attributed to the leader and organization in general society. The field of early childhood

seems to support a kind of leadership that is softer and more nurturing.

Contradictions

“You can’t do that with women”. Early childhood environments are unique in

that they are typically single-gendered environments. The findings from this study

indicate that although the preponderance of women creates a warm and nurturing

environment, the single-gender situation is not without challenges. Leaders in this study

found that leading women was more difficult than it would have been in a multi-gendered

environment. Several of the leaders indicated that with women predominant, there was a

tendency toward a more emotionally charged environment. They frequently cited this

issue as one of the challenges.


113

Perhaps one reason these women in early childhood found leading women to be

more difficult was because of the close relationships that had developed within the

organizations. The leaders might have had higher expectations with regard to those

relationships.

“Everyday I feel lonely”. According to the findings of this study, women

leaders in early childhood education struggle with feelings of loneliness. Given the

highly collaborative nature of their leadership style and the emphasis on relationships that

typify the early childhood community, this feeling seems to be totally incongruent with

conventional wisdom. Results from this study highlight two primary factors that produce

feelings of loneliness for early childhood leaders: a lack of support networks and the

perceived need for boundaries between administration and staff.

Loneliness has been defined in the research as a negative experience resulting

from an inadequate or absent social network (Peplau & Perlman, 1982; Weiss, 1973).

Weiss delineated two kinds of loneliness: social and emotional. Weiss suggested that

social loneliness involves an absence of an acceptable social network whereas emotional

loneliness involves an absence of an attachment figure. Rokach and Brock‘s (1997)

seminal work on loneliness highlighted the fact that women experience loneliness

differently than men do. Women, according to Rokach and Brock, tend to experience the

pain of loneliness more intensely.

For these women in early childhood leadership, the focus of their positions is on

developing and nurturing relationships with others. Accordingly, it is reasonable to

assume that they would feel a real emotional strain if they had to distance themselves

from the relationships they so carefully developed.


114

Most of the leaders in this study learned how to be leaders ―on the job.‖ Rodd

(2006) confirmed that this is the case in much of the field. Such a situation can

potentially leave new leaders without the valuable social support system they need.

Ebbeck and Waniganayake (2003) suggested that mentoring and coaching opportunities

would assist and support the development of these leaders. Leaders who have been in

their positions for some time would most likely relish the ability to speak with others

about their particular situations. Such opportunities might lessen some of the fatigue

noted by leaders in this study.

These women in early childhood leadership also may feel loneliness because,

instead of respecting the need to implement a more horizontal leadership style, they feel

pressured at times to create a leadership style that seems more professional to the outside

world, thus compromising themselves. The more hierarchical leadership style causes

tension in the culture because it is not a preferred leadership style for these women. Doty

(2001), in a study of middle school principals, found that although women described their

style of leadership has highly valuing characteristics associated with women and

leadership, they asserted that they had to compromise those values at times to appear less

feminine.

“The more I’m in it the harder it is”. The results of this study indicate that

although these women leaders in early childhood education find their work fulfilling, it

can be hard work both physically and emotionally. Rodd (2006) acknowledged that

positions of leadership that require working directly with people can be highly stressful.

This is especially true in early childhood education as young children and their families

demand and deserve a great deal of time and care. Emily stated, ―So, there is really never


115

any time during the day when you are alone without children or parents. So, getting that

prep time, getting just those 5 minutes of peace and quiet….‖ Demonstrating the

emotionality of the position, Marian stated,

I mean, we could just hang a shingle right now. I mean, that‘s really a lot of my

days, is just that. I mean, when I think of the parents that have been in my office

crying through divorces and this and health issues and, you know, faculty, too….

Rodd (2006) explained that it is important to recognize that women leaders in the

field of early childhood, because they interact with a variety of constituencies, will be

more susceptible to emotional fatigue. Miller (1986) suggested that women have been

socialized to ―concentrate on the emotions and reactions of others‖ while their own

emotions go unexpressed. Miller argued that this situation makes it imperative that

women take time to know themselves.

This study revealed that leadership in early childhood is a mass of contradictions.

Because the field is predominantly women, it may support a more emotionally connected

and nurturing environment. Nevertheless, these leaders reported that this preponderance

of women made it difficult to lead. The leader in the early childhood setting values being

emotionally available and building and nurturing relationships, but these leaders

frequently experienced loneliness and emotional fatigue.

Summary of Findings

This research project began as have, I am sure, countless other doctoral

dissertations, with a search of the literature in an effort to define or deduce a gap in the

literature. The research in the area of women and leadership in the early childhood

setting was scant; therefore, it was obvious to me that there were many questions that

remained unanswered. Initially, it seemed almost serendipitous that the gap appeared in


116

(a) the field in which I work and (b) the position I hold. Several of the findings in this

study were expected and in keeping with previous research. But some of the findings

contradict the research; they were not part of my personal experience and, therefore, were

surprising to me. I am an insider, in that I am a woman leader in an early childhood

setting. But, as a feminist researcher, striving to listen closely to the voices of the

participants, I feel like both an insider and an outsider.

I realize now, however, after many months of reading, interviewing, and writing,

that this research question was one born of my subconscious. It was a deep-seated

question born of a feminist need to bring light to what I continue to believe is a gross

injustice against women. It has, therefore, become a very personal mission to reveal the

remarkable stories of the dedicated and courageous women whose work often goes

unnoticed, underappreciated, and undervalued. I believe it is an injustice that the

individuals who ultimately have responsibility for 32% of all children in the United

States under the age of 5 lack the training and support necessary to do their jobs in the

best way possible (Capizzano & Adams, 2000). It is also an injustice that they are made

to feel that their field, which has so much responsibility, lacks the status it deserves.

The research question posed by this study was: How do 12 women in leadership

positions in the early childhood setting make meaning of leadership? After analyzing the

data in this research study, I suggest that these women make meaning of leadership in

five ways: (a) through their path to leadership, (b) the experience of leading as a woman

in early childhood , (c) the values these women find central to their leadership, (d) the

context of the early childhood setting and its effect on practice, and (e) the contradictions

these women deal with as leaders.


117

Pathways. For these women, there was no clear or set pathway to leadership in

the early childhood setting, no corporate ladder, no career plan. During their college

careers, the women in this study did not make plans to go into these leadership positions

in early childhood. Women in early childhood typically did not aspire to leadership and

attain their positions at the encouragement of others, with many being chosen by their

predecessors, straight from the classroom. This initial reluctance did not mean, however,

they were afraid to be leaders. More often than not, they resisted the idea of leadership

because of the perception that leadership meant power over someone else. They rejected

this definition of leadership and replaced it with a more horizontal or collaborative

leadership style. Once in the position, however, the women served with passion,

dedication, and humility in a way that was authentic to them—a reflection of what they

believed to be true about the nature of leadership.

Because many of these leaders in early childhood came directly from the

classroom, the move from teacher to administer caused some feelings of consternation.

This phenomenon may be due to the perception that the relationships they so carefully

developed as teachers cannot be maintained if they become leaders. What is remarkable

about this finding, however, is the fact that although these women leaders felt unprepared

and unsupported, they nonetheless remained dedicated and committed to their work

becoming remarkable leaders in award winning organizations. They developed

innovative and creative ways to train themselves to do the best job possible. This finding

reveals that these women did not take the positions because of a personal aim such as

money or status, because, in truth, in comparison to their elementary and high school

counterparts, they received neither of these. They agreed to these positions because they


118

recognized a social need or desired to make a difference. This more altruistic reason for

leadership may explain the dedication and humility that so many of these leaders

displayed.

The Experience. The women participating in this study believed they brought

something unique to their positions because they were women. They also experienced

the apparent sexism that continues to be prevalent in today‘s society as a result of the

devaluing of the characteristics and traits associated with the nurturing and caring that

characterize this field. They believe that they are paid less than they are worth, and they

feel that they lack the social connections and networks that would make leading easier for

them. These women leaders in early childhood feel that they lack the benefit of the social

prestige that is usually afforded leadership.

Values. The women in this study are guided by the belief that being emotionally

available and leading from the heart is important. They are at the center of the

organization, acting as a hub, but refraining from the suggestion that they are on top.

They lead from the middle and work diligently to include others in decisions, making it a

point to be inclusive.

Context. It is evident from the findings in this study that context matters to these

women. This belief is reflected in the way these women think about leadership and how

they lead. The early childhood context necessitates a softer kind of leadership that

respects the emotional needs of the community. Their leadership is also impacted by the

fact that the field in general is undervalued and lacking in status. The question dreaded

by the participants in this study is ―So, what do you do?‖ They offered a variety of


119

creative ways to answer this question, but the reality is that the question is challenging

because it highlights the low status of the field.

Contradictions. The women in this study lead amidst contradictions. They

appreciate and to an extent, celebrate the single-gendered environment but find leading

women hard. They value being emotionally available but find it physically exhausting.

They love the ability to interact with parents but find that exhausting as well. Although

these leaders love the work, they also find it hard to do.

As I reflect on the findings from this study, I realize that the story these women

tell is my story in many ways, but it also is not my story. While everyone participating in

this study did not have the exact same experience, their experiences did overlap. It is this

overlap that I tried to chronicle. It is my hope that this study will provide the impetus for

others to continue to document the experience of the women in leadership positions in

early childhood education.

Implications for Practice

The findings in this study suggest a variety of implications for practice.

Nevertheless, they can be divided into two general categories: individual implications and

field implications. Interestingly, however, these categories are not mutually exclusive.

One category can and, if implemented, will influence or impact the other.

Probably, the most important implication for practice suggested by this study is

the need for professionalization of the field of early childhood. Fromberg (2003) and

Rodd (2006) argued that professionalization is imperative if the field is to move forward

and be given the respect it so rightly deserves. I agree with this sentiment. Without this

important step, it will be difficult to implement any substantive changes in the field,


120

either economically or socially. Therefore, the following implications relate to this

situation.

In commenting on the acquisition of professional status, Howe (1980) suggested

that the occupations of doctors and social workers be considered. Both fields earned

legitimacy and professionalization through education. This distinction has implications

for early childhood. Both of the aforementioned professions have requirements for

licensure, education, and apprenticeships. They each also have a predetermined pathway

to leadership. For doctors, internships and residencies are the norm and for the field of

social work, apprenticeships are also a standard practice.

The field of early childhood has no designated pathway to leadership. It has been

the practice that superior early childhood teachers are chosen and then moved from the

classroom into the administrative office. Unlike the public school system, where one

becomes a teacher, then a department chair, and then an assistant principal, there is no

such ―training ground‖ for administration in early childhood education. Although this

process has given women in early childhood an opportunity for leadership without having

to encounter the ―glass ceiling,‖ the situation is not without challenges.

Because the foregoing is the case, the first recommendation for practice is to

create a predetermined career track for leadership in early childhood education. This

would entail leadership opportunities for teachers prior to assuming the position of

director or head of school. Such opportunities could be made available by creating

designations such as curriculum director or experiential learning director, similar to such

positions in public education. There could also be an administrator-in-training track.

These positions would allow teachers to develop and become comfortable with the rigors


121

of leadership. Many high schools across the United States have child care centers that

expose students to early childhood education. A mandatory aspect of these programs

should be a leadership tract that allows students to intern under early childhood directors

and administrators.

Another important recommendation for practice is to place early childhood

teachers on the same pay scale as public school teachers. This action would compel the

field of early childhood to require the same educational qualifications as public school

teachers. This requirement is an important step toward professionalization. Currently,

educational requirements for early childhood teachers vary by state, ranging from

requiring a high school diploma to requiring a bachelor‘s degree in the field.

Standardization of qualifications across the country is also important if the field is to

become recognized as professional. Also, the field of early childhood has one of the

lowest pay scales for leaders and teachers. Placing teachers and leaders in early

childhood on a public school scale would encourage more educators to enter the field and

those in the field to stay. It also might encourage more males to enter the field.

Specific education is also recommended for the individual. With a standardized

requirement for education that is rigorous, the field will have well-prepared teachers and,

thus, well-prepared leaders. The development of a leadership training program that

incorporates a master‘s degree would be one clear step toward preparation of qualified

leadership. Early childhood leaders should be actively encouraged to work toward

postgraduate degrees. Current doctoral programs in educational administration focus

only on K-12 leadership or the superintendency. Expanding programs to actively include

the special needs of early childhood also would go far in professionalizing the field and


122

would create a capacity for the kind of research necessary for the field to improve and

grow and that has heretofore been underutilized in the field (Rodd, 2006).

Finally, new leaders need to be provided mentors to assist in their training and

development. This mentoring program could pair new leaders with more seasoned

leaders in an effort to assist both in developing a broader social network. Professional

networks of early childhood leaders and those who are interested in leadership need to be

created. Leaders need to connect with each other as well as leaders in other educational

arenas. Such connections will help leaders to see themselves as part of the larger

educational conversation and move them out of their perceived isolation (Rodd, 1998).

Recommendations for Research

This study‘s findings elicited several questions that may warrant further research.

The following recommendations relate to research in the fields of early childhood,

leadership and women, and leadership and women in early childhood.

With the field of nursing becoming more and more heterogeneous, early

childhood education is quickly becoming one of the last fields to be truly single

gendered. This fact has implications for research on single-gendered environments.

Further investigation must be completed to interpret the experience of women working

with and supervising other women. Women in this study reported that it was difficult to

work with women. Why is that the case?

It is important to investigate the impact of not feeling valued on leadership. All of

the women in this sample reported that the fact that the field of early childhood was

undervalued had an impact on them. What is that impact and how can it be measured?


123

The sample in this study included a specific type of center or school with varying-

sized student populations. It would be interesting to investigate the impact of student

population size on leadership. It would also be interesting to investigate paths to

leadership in institutions of varying sizes. Although several of the schools served very

diverse populations, that was not the norm. It would be interesting to conduct research

using a sample of wider socioeconomic diversity as well as ethnic diversity.

Several of the leaders in this study discussed the emotional drain they felt

working in the field. Research on the implications of this fact and ways to ameliorate this

drain would be important to the field. One of the most salient findings in this study was

the feeling of loneliness women in early childhood leadership felt due to the perceived

need to create boundaries between themselves and staff. It would be interesting to

further investigate the extent to which loneliness is a product of leadership style or

organizational structure.

Much research has noted that women tend to prefer horizontal organizations. It

would be interesting to research the amount of horizontalization that occurs in early

childhood settings. It would also be interesting to note whether or not feelings of

loneliness persist in highly horizontal organizations.

Reflections on the Conversation

At the outset of this study I purposefully and methodically went about the process

of creating what I thought would be the perfect sample. I wanted to include individuals

who were recognized in the field, who held advanced degrees, and who led accredited

institutions. I set out to find those leaders who did not fit the definition of a typical early

childhood leader as noted in the previous literature. I wanted to elicit from this small


124

sample of women their descriptions of the experiences that would validate and archive

women‘s experience with leadership in high-quality early childhood settings. I had a

plan in mind that had come fully to light only recently; I sought women who were like

me. As has been said many times by Cole & Knowles (2001), ―we research who we are‖

(p. 89). In seeking answers from these women leaders, I sought answers for myself. I am

well educated, leading in an early childhood environment that is accredited and well

recognized in the community. In this research, I sought words for what I do—the kind of

words that did not seem to be present in the current literature on leadership, the kind of

words that would not only define leadership in early childhood but also demonstrate its

uniqueness and perhaps even its appropriateness for other settings. I wanted to mine the

nuggets of truth these women possessed and offer them to the compilation of literature

centering on leadership; I wanted also, in some way, to offer the essence of who I am and

what I do, as well.

I must admit that I have a privileged position in this work; I am an insider. I

know the language of early childhood and the triumphs and challenges of this unique

setting. In many respects I am living the life of my study‘s participants. Because of this,

they spoke to me as someone who understands, not as a researcher but more as a

confidante, a friend. This interaction was certainly not the typical researcher–participant

relationship. We engaged in ―woman talk‖ that was framed by the interview questions

and the topic of leadership. Devault (2006) argued that women who are positioned

differently learn to ―speak and hear quite different versions of ‗woman talk‘‖ (p. 231).

But, we were in similar positions; our woman talk was the same. The interview became a

conversation between equals: a coconstruction of reality and truth. These women


125

revealed feelings and perceptions to me that they may not have revealed to others. We

could ―talk shop‖ and laugh at ―insider jokes.‖ Unlike other interview settings in which

participants prefer distance, we had rapport. I was willing to invest my personal identity

in the relationship and was happy to do it.

My privileged positioning in the research allowed me to engage in conversations

to which others may not have been privy. Women who may have hidden their true

feelings from others because they wanted to protect or shield their insecurities were more

willing to share who they were and what they felt with me. As a result, the findings of

this study reveal a unique perspective. The most important finding, that women in early

childhood bring something distinctive and wonderful to leadership, became readily

apparent. These women are masters at creating community and developing relationships

that support and encourage, but they may find it more difficult to accept the feelings of

inadequacy, loneliness, and minimization that this study also uncovered.

The early childhood leaders in this study were smart, articulate, and passionate

women who exhibited strength, humility, and personal fortitude. They had visions for

their schools and were positive about the possibilities. They presented themselves as

confident and self-assured women, thereby begging the question, ―Why didn‘t they

anticipate leadership?‖ The answer is not an easy one, and this study falls short in

determining the reason. It may be that some simply had not thought about leadership

because they were perfectly happy in their classroom environments. It may also be that

they exhibited the qualities of leadership that became so obvious to others that they were

virtually pulled from their classroom setting. Could it have been a false sense of

humility, however, that caused so many of them to say that they did not seek leadership


126

or that leadership was forced upon them? The women in the age group that this sample

generally represents may have been socialized to perceive it as ―unwomanly‖ to ask for

what they want. It may also be that because leadership is often defined in more

masculine terms these women were not interested in what it implied. This feeling was

apparent when, in commenting on leadership, Clara said, ―Leadership or whatever you

want to call it….‖ But, no matter how they came to their positions, once the women in

this study became leaders, they made a difference. They were successful.

The early childhood context was a powerful force that shaped these women in

ways that were consistent with who they wanted to be in their positions—collaborative

and inclusive. The environment of early childhood necessitates the ability to be nurturing

and caring, which came so easily for these women. Several of the women in this study,

however, in their desire to develop themselves further or to be accepted as leaders in the

general population, may have begun to take on the mantle of more traditional or

masculine forms of leadership. This possibility may explain some of the discord that

occurred when Emma or Naomi talked about not being able to become friends with the

staff. Is there a way to keep the friendship and still lead? How does that look, and does it

work? Is it inevitable that leaders cannot maintain friendships with their employees? Are

women leaders in early childhood being successful in bridging that divide? Is there a

way to maintain leadership styles that are considered more traditional while keeping the

collaborative and inclusive nature of the early childhood setting?

Although it is much easier to have findings that are neat and tidy with answers to

all of the questions succinctly provided, the findings in this study are messy and

challenging, ultimately raising more questions than answers. But, this is how theory is


127

built. Research on early childhood leadership is in its infancy and will require a

commitment from the wider research community to grow and develop; however, this is

the challenge. The field of leadership in early childhood must conduct its own research.

It must graduate its own researchers and it must push to document and define what it

does, or the unique voices of those doing the work may become lost in efforts to become

like everyone else.

Epilogue

If e-mail inboxes were tangible objects, on that day, mine would have been

literally bursting at the seams. I had been remiss. I had been so busy working on my

research, interviewing women leaders and learning more about myself in the process, that

I had been a bit neglectful of reading e-mails. In my haste to reduce my unread e-mails

to a more manageable number, I almost missed the one that, months ago, would have

been placed in a folder labeled ―Urgent.‖ As my eyes glanced over the subject lines, I

recognized a very familiar address. It was from an organization to which I had applied

but been rejected because my school was considered early childhood or preschool. A

wave of indignation and—in retrospect—what might have been contempt came over me.

It started ―An invitation to join….‖ As my mouse glided over the subject line, my fingers

poised to click, my eyebrows rose with anticipation (and perhaps something else). I read,

Dear Val,

I am pleased to report that the X Association has now amended its bylaws in order

to welcome schools that are early childhood organizations. Would you like to

reconsider membership at this time?

There it was. And then I laughed.


128

References

Acker, J. (1989). Doing comparable worth: Gender, class, and pay equity. Philadelphia,

PA: Temple University Press.

Adler, N. (2005). Leadership journey: The courage to enrich the world. In L. Coughlin,

E. Wingard, & K. Holliahn (Eds.), Enlightened power: How women are

transforming the path to leadership (pp. 3-10). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Almy, M. (1988). The early childhood educator revisited. In B. Spodek, O. Saracho, & D.

Peters (Eds.), Professionalism and the early childhood practitioner (p. 57). New

York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (1988). Transformational leadership, charisma and beyond.

In J. G. Hunt, B. R. Baglia, H. P. Dachler, & C. A. Schriesheim (Eds.), Emerging

leadership vistas (pp. 29-49). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectation. New York, NY:

Free Press.

Beck, L. G. (1992). Meeting the challenge of the future: The place of a caring ethic in

educational administration. American Journal of Education, 100, 45

Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. McV., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women's

ways of knowing: The development of self, voice and mind. New York, NY: Basic

Books.

Bell, C., & Chase, S. (1993). The underrepresentation of women in school leadership. In

C. Marshall (Ed.), The new politics of race & gender: The 1992 yearbook of the

politics of education association (pp.141-154). Bristol, PA. Falmer Press.

Bernard, J. (1981). The female world. New York: Free Press


129

Billot, J. (2005). Leadership in context: Observations from two island communities.

Management in Education, 19, 28-31.

Bjork, L. G. (2000). Introduction: Women in the superintendency – Advances in research

and theory. Educational Administrative Quarterly, 36(1), 5-17.

Blackmore, J. (1989). Educational leadership: A feminist critique and reconstruction. In

J. Smyth (Ed.), Critical perspectives on educational leadership (pp.93-130).

London, UK: Falmer Press.

Blackmore, J. (1999). Troubling women: Feminism, leadership and educational change.

Philadelphia, PA, Open University Press.

Blackmore, J. (2002). Troubling women: The upsides and downsides of leadership and

the new managerialism. In C. Reynolds (Ed.), Women and school leadership:

International perspectives (pp.49-69). Albany, NY: State University of New York

Press.

Bloom, P. J. (1989). The Illinois director's study: A report to the Illinois Department of

Children and Family Services. Evanston, IL: Early Childhood Professional

Development Project, National College of Education.

Bloom, P. J. (1991). Child care centers as organizations: A social systems perspective.

Child and Youth Care Forum, 20(5), 313-333.

Bloom, P. J. (2002). Images from the field: How directors view their organizations, their

roles and their jobs. In M. L. Culkin (Ed.), Managing quality in young children's

programs: The leader's role (pp.59-77). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Bloom, P. J., Sheerer, M., & Britz, J. (1991). Blueprint for action: Achieving center

based change through staff development. Lake Forest, IL: New Horizons.


130

Blount, J. M. (1998). Destined to rule the schools: Women and the superintendency,

1873-1995. Albany, NY: State University of New York.

Bolman, L.G. & Deal,T.E. (2003). Reframing Organizations: Artistry, choice and

leadership. (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bourantes, D. & Papalexandris, N. (1990). Sex differences in leadership: Leadership

styles and subordinate satisfaction. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 5(5) 7-10.

Bredekamp, S., & Willer, B. (Eds.). (1996). NAEYC accreditation: A decade of learning

and the years ahead. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of

Young Children.

Bricker, D. (2000). Interdisciplinary early intervention/Early childhood special

education leadership program. Eugene, OR: Oregon University.

Brooks, A. (2007). Feminist standpoint epistemology: Building knowledge and

empowerment through women's lived experience. In S. Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy

(Eds.), Feminist research practice: A primer (pp. 53-82). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.

Brown, N. W., & Manning J. P. (2000). Core knowledge for directors. In M.L. Culkin

(Ed.), Managing quality in young children's programs: The leader's role (pp.78-

96). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Browne-Ferrigno, T., & Muth, R. (2004). Leadership mentoring and situated learning:

Catalysts for principalship readiness & lifelong mentoring. Mentoring &

Tutoring, 14(3), 275-295.

Brunner, C. (1998). Can power support an "ethic of care"? Journal for a Just and Caring

Education, 4(2), 142-175.


131

Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations. Newbury Park, CA:

Sage.

Barnett, S.W., & Yarosz, D.J. (2007). Who goes to preschool and why does it matter?

Preschool policy brief Revised,November 2007, Issue 15 NIEER.

Capizzano, J., & Adams, G. (2000). Childcare arrangements for children under five:

Variation across states (No. B-7). Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through

qualitative analysis. London, England: Sage.

Chin, J. L. (2004). Feminist leadership: Feminist visions and diverse voices. Psychology

of Women Quarterly, 28, 1-8.

Cohen, S. S. (1989). Tender power: A revolutionary approach to work and intimacy.

Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Cole, A.L. & Knowles, J.G. (2001). Lives in context: The art of life history research.

Lanham, MD: Altamira Press.

Collins, P. H. (1990). Black feminist thought. New York, NY: Routledge.

Cost, Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team. (1995). Cost, quality and child outcomes

in childcare centers study: Public report. Denver, CO: University of Colorado at

Denver, Economics Department.

Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five

traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage


132

Culkin, M. L. (1994). The administrator/leader in early care and education settings: A

qualitative study with implications for theory and practice (Unpublished doctoral

dissertation). The Union Institute, Cincinnati, OH.

Culkin, M. L. (Ed.). (2000). Managing quality in young children's programs: The

leader's role. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Curry, B. K. (2000). Women in power: Pathways to leadership in education. New York,

NY: Columbia University, Teachers College.

Denmark, F. L. (1993). Women, leadership and empowerment. Psychology of Women

Quarterly, 17, 343-356.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.).


Devault, M.L. (2004). Talking and listening from women's standpoint: Feminist

stratregiers for interviewing and analysis. In S. N. Hesse-Biber & M. L. Yaiser

(Eds.) Feminist perspectives on social research. (p.227-250). N.Y.:Oxford

University Press.

Doty, K. L. (2001). Women in public middle school administration in Georgia: A feminist

analysis of the perceptions of women in power (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved

from Dissertation Abstracts International, 62, 3250.

Eagly, A. H., & Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C. (2001). The leadership styles of women and

men. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 781-797.

Ebbeck, M., & Waniganayake, M. (2003). Early childhood professionals: Leading today

and tomorrow. Sydney, Australia: MacLennan & Petty.


133

England, P. (1992). Comparable worth: Theories and evidence. New York, NY:

deGruyter.

Fennell, H. (2002). Letting go while holding on: Women principals' lived experiences

with power. Journal of Educational Administration, 40(2), 95-117.

Fitzgerald, T. (2002). Changing the deafening silence of indigenous women's voices in

educational leadership. Journal of Educational Administration, 41, 9-23.

Fletcher, J. K.(1998). Relational practice: A feminist reconstruction of work. Journal of

Management Inquiry, 7, 163-188.

Fletcher, J. K. (1999). Disappearing acts: Gender, power and relational practice at work.

Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Fromberg, D.P. (2003). The professional and social status of the early childhood educator

. In J. Isenberg & M. Jalongo (Eds.), Major trends and issues in early childhood

education: Challenges, controversies and insights. (p. 177-192). N.Y.: Teachers

College Press

Geoghegan, N., Petriwskyj, A., Bower, L. & Geoghegan, D. (2003). Eliciting dimensions

of educational leadership in early childhood education. Australian Research in

Early Childhood Education, 15(2 ) 38-42.

Gergen, K. J. (2001). Forward. In S. Wortham, Narratives in action: A strategy for

research and analysis (pp. ix). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Gibelman, M. (2003). So how far have we come? Pestilent and persistent gender gap in

pay. Social Work, 48. 22-32.

Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.


134

Gilligan, C. (1993). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Glass, T. E. (1992). The 1992 study of the superintendency. Arlington, VA: American

Association of School Administrators.

Glass, T. E., Bjork, L., & Brunner, C. C. (2000). The study of the American school

superintendency 2000: A look at the superintendent of education in the new

millennium. Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.

Goldring, E., Huff, J., May, H., & Camburn, E. (2008). School context and individual

characteristics: What influences principal practice? Journal of Educational

Administration, 46(3), 332-352.

Greenberg, H. M., & Sweeney, P. J. (2005). Leadership: Qualities that distinguish

women. Financial Executive, 21(6), 32-36.

Grogan, M. (1996). Voices of women aspiring to the superintendency. Albany, NY: State

University of New York Press.

Gronn, P., & Ribbons, P. (1996). Leaders in context: Postpositivist approaches to

understanding educational leadership. Educational Administrative Quarterly,

32(3), 452-473.

Guy, M. E., & Newman, M. A. (2004). Women's jobs, men's jobs: Sex segregation and

emotional labor. Public Administration Review, 64, 289-298.

Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women’s lives.

Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Harding, S. (2007). Feminist standpoints. In S. Harding (Ed.), Handbook of feminist

research: Theory and praxis (pp. 45-69). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.


135

Hawley, S. J. (1990). Female early childhood administrators: their understanding and

sense of power in the workplace (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Fielding

Institute, Santa Barbara, CA.

Helgesen, S. (1990). The female advantage: Women's ways of leadership. New York,

NY: Doubleday.

Helgesen, S. (1995). The web of inclusion: Architecture for building great organizations.

Washington, DC: Beard Books.

Henderson-Kelly, L., & Pamphilon, B. (2000). Women's models of leadership in the

child care sector. Australian Journal of Early Childhood. Retrieved from

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-65773912.html

Herzenberg, S., Price, M., & Bradley, D. (2005). Losing ground in early childhood

education. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.

Hesse-Biber, S.N., & Leavy, P. (2007). Feminist research practice: A primer. Thousand

Oaks, CA. Sage.

Hesse-Biber, S. N. & Leckenby, D. (2004). How feminists practice social research. In S.

N. Hesse-Biber & M.L. Yaiser (Eds.) Feminist perspectives on Social Research.

New York, NY: Oxford Press.

Hodge, R. W. (1996). The measurement of occupational status. In J. Scott (Ed.), Class:

Critical concepts (pp. 27-40). New York, NY: Routledge.

Hogue, M., & Hord, R. G. (2007). A multilevel, complexity theory approach to

understanding gender bias in leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 370-390.

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-65773912.html


136

Horwitz, C. M. (2003). The director's role in developing and sustaining nurturing

professional learning communities: Elder leaders in early childhood

(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Hartford, Hartford, CT.

Howe, E. (1980). Public professions and the private model of professional

professionalism. Social Work, 25(3), 179-191.

Hujala, E. (2004). Dimensions of leadership in the childcare context. Scandinavian

Journal of Educational Research, 48(1), 53-71.

Jones, M. E. (1998). An examination of leadership perspectives in early childhood

education: Childcare center directors and statewide leaders (Unpublished

doctoral dissertation). California State University, Fresno, CA.

Jorde-Bloom, P. (1992). The effect of leadership training on childcare program quality.

Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7, 579-594.

Jorde-Bloom, P. (1998, November). Images from the field: How directors view their

organizations, their role, and their jobs. Preconference presentation, National

Association for the Education of Young Children Annual conference, Toronto,

Canada.

June, B. J. (2007). Early childhood program director leadership characteristics and

program qualities (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Western Michigan

University. Kalamazoo, MI.

Kagan, S., & Bowman, B. (1997). Leadership in early care and education: Issues and

challenges. In S. Kagan & B. Bowman (Eds.), Leadership in early care and

education (pp. 3-8). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of

Young Children.


137

Kelley, R. C., Thornton, B., & Daugherty, R. (2005). Relationship between measures of

leadership and school climate. Pharmaceutical News Index, 126(1).

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1993). Credibility: How leaders gain and lose it, why

people demand it. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research

interviewing (2nd

ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage.

Larkin, E. (1999). The transition from direct caregiver to administrator in early childhood

education. Child & Youth Care Forum, 28(1), 21-32.

Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2000). Principal and teacher leadership effects: A

replication. School Leadership and Management, 20(4), 415-434.

Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership

influences student learning. New York, NY: Wallace Foundation.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hill, CA: Sage.

Loane, S. (1997). Who cares? Guilt, hope and the child care debate. Sydney, Austraila:

Mandarin.

Loden, M. (1985). Feminine leadership or how to succeed in business without being one

of the boys. New York, NY: Time Books.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (1999). Designing qualitative research (3rd

ed.).


Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (2nd

ed.).


Maynard, M. (2000). Methods, practice and epistemology: The debate about feminism

and research. In J. Glazer-Raymo, B. K. Townsend, & B. Ropers-Huilman (Eds.)


138

Women in higher education: A feminist perspective (2nd ed., pp. 89-100). Boston,

MA: Pearson Custom.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San

Francisco, CA. Jossey-Bass.

Moyles, J. (2006). Effective leadership and management in the early years. Maidenhead,

England: Open University Press.

Muijs, D., Aubrey, A., Harris, A., & Briggs, M. (2004). How do they manage? :A review

on leadership in early childhood. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 2(2), 157-

169.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2009, June). Characteristics of Public, Private,

and Bureau of Indian Education Elementary and Secondary School Principals in

the United States: Results from the 2007-2008 Schools and Staffing Survey.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009323/tables/sass0708_2009323_p12n_03.asp

Noddings, N. (2003). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. (2nd

ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press.

Northouse, P. (2007). Leadership: Theory and practice (4th

ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury

Park, CA: Sage.


139

Pawar, B., & Eastman, K. (1997). The nature and implications of contextual influences

on transformational leadership: A conceptual examination. The Academy of

Management Review, 22(1), 80-109.

Peplau, L., & Perlman, D. (1982). Perspectives on loneliness. In L. Peplau & D. Perlman

(Eds.), Loneliness: A sourcebook of current theory, research and therapy (pp.1-

18). New York, NY: John Wiley.

Perrow, C. (1970). Organizational analysis. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth

Pettigrew, A. M. (1987). Context and action in the transformation of the firm. Journal of

Management Studies, 24, 649-670.

Petty, M. M., & Bruning, N. S. (1980). A comparison of the relationship between

subordinates' perceptions of supervisory behavior and measures of subordinates'

job satisfaction for male and female leaders. Academy of Management Journal,

23(4) 717-725.

Pipa, R. L. (1997). The leadership knowledge, skills and behaviors of directors of quality

state funded, childcare centers in San Francisco Bay area (Unpublished doctoral

dissertation). University of La Verne, La Verne, CA.

Polkinghorne, D. E. (1989). Phenomenological research methods. In R. S. Valle & S.

Halling (Eds.), Existential-phenomenological perspectives in psychology:

Exploring the breadth of human experience (pp.100-110). New York, NY:

Plenum Press.

Porter, L. W., & McLaughlin, G. B. (2006). Leadership and the organizational content:

Like the weather? The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6) 559-576.


140

Putnam, L. L. & Kolb, D. M. (2003). Rethinking negotiation: Feminist views of

communication and exchange. In R. J. Ely , E. G. Foldy, & M. SCully (Eds.),

Reader in gender, work and organizations (pp.135-150). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Ragins, B. R. (1991). Gender effects in subordinate evaluations of leaders: Real or

artifact? Journal of Organizational Behavior. 12(3), 259-268.

Ramey, C. T., Bryant, D. M., Sparling, J. J., Wasik, B. H., Fendt, K. H., & Lavange, L.

M. (1992). A comparison of two early intervention strategies to prevent retarded

development. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 5, 12-25.

Regan, H. B., & Brooks, G. H. (1995). Out of women's experience: Creating relational

leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Reynolds, C. (2002). Women and school leadership: International perspectives. Albany,

NY: State University of New York.

Riger, S. (1994). Challenges of success: Stages of growth in feminist organizations.

Feminist Studies, 20, 275-300.

Rodd, J. (1996). Towards a typology of leadership for the early childhood professional of

the 21st century. Early Child Development and Care, 120, 119-126.

Rodd, J. (1997). Learning to develop as leaders: Perceptions of early childhood

professionals about leadership roles and responsibilities. Early Years, 18(1) 24-

34.

Rodd, J. (1998). Leadership in early childhood: The pathway to professionalism (2nd

ed.).

New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Rodd, J. (2001). Building leadership expertise of future early childhood professionals.

Journal of Early Childhood Education, 22, 9-12.


141

Rodd, J. (2006). Leadership in early childhood (3rd

ed.) New York, NY: McGraw-Hill

Education.

Rokach, A., & Brock, H. (1997). Loneliness and the effects of life changes. Journal of

Psychology, 131, 284-296.

Rosener, J. B. (1990). Ways women lead. Harvard Business Review, 68(6).

Rossman, G.B. & Rallis S.F. ((2003). Learning in the field: An introduction to qualitative

research (2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Roulston, K. (2010). Reflective Interviewing: A guide to theory and practice. Thousand

Oaks, CA.:Sage.

Sciaraffa, M. (2004). Profiles of early childhood education administrators: Looking for

patterns of leadership (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Louisiana State

University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, Baton Rouge, LA.

Seddon, T. (1993). Context and beyond: Reframing the theory and practice of education.

London, UK: The Falmer Press.

Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in

education and the social sciences (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Columbia University

Teachers College.

Selznick,P. (1957). Leadership in administration, Evanston, Il: Peterson-Row.

Seplocha, H. (1998). The good preschool: Profiles of leadership (Unpublished doctoral

dissertation). Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ.

Shakeshaft, C. (1987). Women in educational administration. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Shakeshaft, C. (1989). The gender gap in research in educational administration.

Educational Administration Quarterly, 25(4), 324-337.


142

Shakeshaft, C. (1999). The struggle to create a more gender-inclusive profession. In J. L.

Murphy & K. Seashore (Eds.), Handbook on research on educational

administration (2nd

ed., pp. 99-118). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Shakeshaft, C. (2006). Gender and educational management. In C. Shelton, B. Francis, &

L. Smulyan (Eds.), The Sage handbook of gender and education. Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage. Retrieved from http://www.sage-

ereference.com/hdbk_genderedu/Article_n36.html

Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (Eds.). (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The

science of early childhood development. Washington DC: National Academy

Press.

Strachan, J. (2002). Feminist educational leadership: Not for the fainthearted. In C.

Reynolds (Ed.), Women and school leadership (111-126). Albany:State

University of New York Press.

Strachan, J. (2002). Feminist educational leadership: Not for the fainthearted. In C.

Reynolds (Ed.). Women and school leadership: International Perspective (pp.

111-125). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Theobald, M. (1996). Knowing women: Origins of women's education in nineteenth

century Australia. Melbourne, Australia: Cambridge University Press.

United States Department of Labor. (n.d.-a). Career guide to industries, 2010-11 edition:

Child day care services. Washington, DC: Bureau of Labor Statistics. Retrieved

August 9, 2010 from http://www.bls.gov/oco/cg/cgs032.htm

http://www.bls.gov/oco/cg/cgs032.htm


143

United States Department of Labor. (n.d.-b). Occupational outlook handbook, 2010-11

edition: Education administrators. Washington, DC: Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Retrieved July 16, 2010, from http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos007.htm

Valentine, P. (1995). Women's working worlds: A case study of a female organization. In

D. Dunlap & P. Schmuck (Eds.), Women leading in education (pp. 340-357). New

York, NY: SUNY Press.

Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2005). Balanced leadership: What 30 years

of research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. Aurora,

CO: Mid-Continent Regional Education Laboratory.

Watson, C. (1998). When a woman is the boss: Dilemmas in taking charge. Group and

Organization Studies, 13(2), 163-181.

Weill, J. D., & Jablonski, D. M. (Eds.). (1997). The state of America's children, Yearbook

1997. Washington DC: Children's Defense Fund.

Weiss, R. S. (1973). Loneliness: The experience of emotional and social isolation.

Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Whitebook, M., & Phillips, D. (1999, January). Childcare employment: Implications for

women’s self-sufficiency and for child development. Working Paper Series. New

York, NY: Foundation for Child Development.

Witziers, B., Bosker, R. J., & Kruger, M. L. (2003). Educational leadership and student

achievement: The elusive search for an association. Educational Administration

Quarterly, 39(3), 398-425.

Young, M. D. (2003). Considering (irreconcilable?) contradictions in cross-group

feminist research. In M. Young & L. Skrla (Eds.), Reconsidering: Feminist

http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos007.htm


144

research in educational leadership (pp. 35-79). Albany, NY: State University of

New York Press.

Yuki, G. (1999, Summer). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational

and charismatic leadership theories. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2) 285-305.


145

Appendix A: Interview Questions

Interview 1 Questions: Focused Life History

1. Please tell me about your life up until you became an early childhood

leader.

2. Please tell me about your current position.

a. How long have you been in this position?

b. How did you come to have this position?

3. Tell me about the path you took to get to this position.

Interview 2 Questions: Details of the Experience

1. Please reconstruct a typical day for you as a leader from the time you

wake up until you fall asleep.

Interview 3 Questions: Reflection on Meaning

1. Tell me how you experience leadership.

2. How do you understand leadership in your life?

3. Please tell me your definition of leadership.

4. How has being in an early childhood setting affected your

understanding of leadership?

5. What does it mean to be a woman in a leadership role in an early

childhood environment?

6. What does it mean to be a woman leading women?


146

7. Are there any other questions that you believe I should have asked to

better understand your experience as a woman leader?

Research question: How do 12 women in positions of leadership in early childhood

education make meaning of leadership?


147

Participant Demographic Data

Name Age Ethnicity Position

Years at

school Highest Level of education

Marital status Children?

School size Intentional

Ann 50 White Executive director

10 years MA divorced Yes 250 Y

Emily 30 White Director 6 years MA doctoral

candidate married No 60 N

Julia 50 White Director 5 years MA divorced Yes 100 N

Liz 50 White Head of school 3 years MA married Yes 120 N

Naomi 50 White Director 12

years MA married Yes 60 N

Patricia 30 Latina Director 3 years MA candidate married Pregnant 60 N

Marian 50 White Head of school 9 years MA married Yes 100 N

Marie 60 Biracial Head of school

19 years MA/ABD married Yes 435 N

Clara 60 White Director 14

years MA married Yes 65 N

Emma 55 White Director 3 years MA Married Yes 60 N

Jennifer 38 White Director 8 years BA married Yes 60 N

BJ 62 African

American PhD divorced Yes 90 N


148

Participant Narratives Organized by Theme

Name Pathways The Experience Values Context Contradictions Ann …well, my oldest

daughter had

some

developmental

delays and so she

didn‘t get into

school when I

applied her to

independent

schools… she

went to different

schools …they

passed on her so I

really thought

like, okay, well

I‘ll do my own

school.

I think that the

collaborative stuff

I‘m comfortable

with that because I

am woman. We are

not as

comfortable… I

am not comfortable

saying, I have

decided this

therefore we are all

going to it. I am

sure I could that. I

am in a position to

do it, but I would

rather have a

meeting.

Somebody who can

articulate a vision

and bring others, be

adaptable to others‘

views of that

vision. So, not to

be sort of unilateral

in your

thinking…to

include other

people‘s view, but

to be able to force

things forward to

benefit whoever

you are trying to

serve.

And that‘s the

most exciting

time to work

with children

that can

benefit the

most. Their

environment,

the effect of

the

environment

is the largest I

think of it any

time and

because we

get them so

young we‘re

really able to

intervene in

that early

intervention

kind of model.

So, I think

that the

leadership in a

way it‘s

because

anything you

do with

enough

consistency

you‘re going

to get results.

But nobody can

really tell you,

no one is

standing there

to help you

evaluate your

effectiveness as

a leader or

really giving

you feedback

and in that way

it‘s lonely

because my

administrators

don‘t come in

and say, you

are really, you

know, awful

and that, why

do you, you

know.


149


Name Pathways The Experience Values Context Contradictions Emily And then an ad

popped up for a

child

development

center that was

right down the

street from me

and I said, well,

I didn‘t like high

schoolers or

middle

schoolers,

maybe I will go

see what this is

all about and

they pretty much

hired me right

on the spot. I

knew nothing

about little kids,

yeah.

And I think what it

is, it's there is a lot

of care that goes

into it, so there is

the bodily fluids,

there is the… and

the hugging and the

tears and all of that

and I think that

women are just

more intuitively

equipped to deal

with that.

So I think it's just

being sort of like

keeping the pulse

of what people are

feeling throughout

the day, and even if

you just notice somebody is

dragging like you look

like you are having a

rough day, do you need

a hand or, you know,

whatever

So I think it

is the

proximity,

it's the

amount of

time that

everybody

spends there,

it is the fact

that you are

not going to

school there,

you are living

your life

there.

But sometimes

when I want to

complain about

something I can‘t

go to the teachers

and I have no

real colleagues I

can talk to well, I

could talk to my

husband but he

doesn‘t

understand. I

can‘t talk to the

teachers without

putting on you

know, my

director‘s face.


150


Name Pathways The Experience Values Context Contradictions Julia So I was at St.

P‘s until five

years ago, and S,

who was still the

director—she

was at St. C‘s for

38 years. She

called me up and

said, ―I‘m

retiring at the

end of this year.

I‘d pick you.‖

I think it‘s part of

being a woman—the

connectivity, the

thing that makes you

feel, activates all

those serotonin

pathways. Being

with people, and

knowing that you‘re

helpful. So I think

it‘s part of the

biology of who I am,

and I want it to be a

part of everybody‘s

biology, because I

think that will create

a better world if we

all feel that way.

What is it that I can

offer that people in

my realm that will

make them want to

work in service of

what I believe in?

Understanding that

the culture of the

thing that you create

really descends

directly from your

beliefs in the person

that you are.

The early

childhood field

gives you a

unique

opportunity to

also be a leader

to parents in

ways that I

think people

who work with

older children

don‘t have.

And really

you‘re meeting

parent at their

tenderest and

most

vulnerable

time, where

they really

appreciate and

need guidance

and assurance

and support as

they develop

their parenting

skills. So it‘s

very holistic.‖

It‘s great. I love

women. But

it‘s unbalanced,

which I think is

a shame; but I

think that‘s a

product of the

wage scale and

the fact that

any man who‘s

interested in

being in early

childhood is

automatically

assumed to be a

pederast, which

is just grossly

unfair.


151


Name Pathways The Experience Values Context Contradictions Liz And when I

moved to this

area, there were

no jobs in early

childhood unless

I wanted to work

for nothing. I

was supporting

my husband in

law school, so I

couldn‘t work

for $4,000 at

independent

schools in

Annapolis….

When I decided

to make my head

search, I looked

at a number of

opportunities,

and I looked at

lower school

headships. This

came along, and

as soon as it

did—Labor Day

weekend before I

took that job that

November, I

said, ―Perfect,

because this is

sort of bringing

me back to what

my true love is.

I also think women

can multitask better

than men. I really do.

I can have six balls

juggling in the air,

and know that that

person at the door

needs me and do it;

instead of listening to

the way my

husband‘s law firm

operates, where it‘s

one thing at a time.

It‘s good that I can

do that, because I

know that at 3:20

somebody needs me,

and I‘m not going to

let it go. Or I know

that I have to get

back to this person or

that person, and it‘s

critical.

A lot of my

leadership has to do

with personally

connecting with

those people—my

staff and my parents;

knowing things about

them; knowing what

they value; talking

about it. ―How is

your daughter doing?

Did you ever find

that good restaurant?

Oh, I have a book for

you. Oh, sure, I can

find you that recipe.‖

All of those things, I

like personally

connecting.

It‘s the

gravity and

seriousness

about it—that

it‘s that

important. I

guess the

thing is that

tender time,

too, where

you don‘t

want to make

mistakes with

children.

Leadership

has its

rewards, but

it‘s a lot of

work.

Sometimes I

think, ―Wow.

Can I keep

this up?‖ It‘s

lonely. I think

that when

you‘re the

only person in

the school

who‘s the

head, it‘s

really lonely.


152


Name Pathways The Experience Values Context Contradictions Naomi two directors

came up to me

who knew me

and said, ―I have

a job at my

school, I have a

job at my

school.‖ I was

―Well, I consider

leaving the

county part time,

but got to match

with what I‘m

being paid in

county,‖ and

they said okay.

It's, just no accident

that teachers were

undervalued because

it's woman, you know

that and the field is

undervalued because

we think of it as a

women's field.

I think you know

first one has to build

relationships just

like teachers in the

classroom, each

piece mirrors each

other. You have to

develop those

relationships with

care and trust, where

the people are

willing to talk to

you, open up to you,

think about things in

a deeper way, see

themselves as part of

the community that

cares, and then you

have to look at your

own ways of

communicating.

Well it's…just

sort of

honestly where

our culture is

always paying

lip service

but… we don‘t

get the dollars,

you don‘t get

the awards and

in part, it‘s our

own fault and

responsibility

because we

don‘t educate

ourselves

enough, we

don‘t educate

our staff

enough, we

don‘t articulate

what it is that

we do, and if

we, if we tell

parents that we

do paint you

know, and we

do glue why

shouldn‘t they

think that‘s

what we do?

But one thing

I've learned is

I'm not their

friend, I'm not

their buddy, I

don't socialize

with them, I

don't go out

with them. I

think it's, gets

very fuzzy

and then it

gets hard to

keep it clean,

that doesn't

mean I am not

caring and

loving and

wanting to

know how

their lives are

and they can

call me in

person, boy if

they needed

me at 3:00

a.m. of

course, I

would do

what I need to

do to help

them, but

being a

supervisor

and a boss is

different from

that.


153


Name Pathways The Experience Values Context Contradictions Patricia I looked at one,

went to like

three or four

different

interviews one

doing those

fairly program

one for DC and

the other one

was some other

policy job and

then the other

one was that‘s

where I am not

at the center

directing a

preschool

program, I

remember

looking at the

posted and

thinking and

they are never

going to hire me,

you know, I am

not ready for

this.

But I think a lot of

men who are putting

the policies into place

also view us as ―Oh

well that's, that's nice,

that‘s cute.‖ You

know it's cute that you

are there with the

kids, somebody has to

take care of the kids

every day.

A leader is

somebody that

kind of inspires

others to do things

that they never

thought they were

able to do and that

has the vision and

the perseverance to

keep doing that

everyday even

when it seems like

there is nobody

following.

I think it‘s

even more

difficult

because you

have to

establish

yourself as a

leader or, you

know, as

having this

leadership

position in a

field that

nobody or that

a lot of people

don‘t know

much about or

that they don‘t

feel that that‘s

important.

It involves so

much, you

know, from

administrative

stuff, staffing

and people

calling out

sick like you

are having to

find subs and,

you know,

day to day

things and

operations

and safety and

making sure

that, you

know, you do

all your

reports for all

the funders

and all the

people and

that you go to

all the

meetings and

that all of the

everyday

management

stuff, you

know, hiring,

firing,

meeting with

teachers, it‘s

like I could go

on and on and

on.


154


Name Pathways The Experience Values Context Contradictions Marian I had no

administrative

experience

…they took the

risk. I think it

was a risk may

be it wasn‘t a

risk I think they

could tell that

this was

something I

can do except

for the budgets

which I was

very honest

about.

I mean when I think

of the parents that

have been in my

office crying through

divorces and this and

health issues and you

know faculty too so

and a male could do a

very good job at that,

don‘t get me wrong

but the kid piece with

a female leader I think

makes a difference. I

don‘t like saying that.

I like to be here

when teachers

walk in so we have

conversations

about their lives or

what‘s going on in

the classroom.

Sometimes I feel I

am a talker, I am

so invested in

these kids and

know them so well

that I think

sometimes

teachers probably

just skip my office

in the morning

rather than because

they are afraid

they are going to

get into some

conversation about

a child in their

class.

I think being

in an early

childhood

setting has

proven to me

how

important

leadership is

because these

are the most

important

years.

I think it‘s

hard, but I

think women

are tough. I

think they

complain.

They want

everything to

be fixed,

sometimes not

going the

extra mile to

try

themselves.

They are so

general

because it‘s

not

everything.


155


Name Pathways The Experience Values Context Contradictions Marie I had no plan at

all…every job I

ever got from

there was more

of a shoulder

tapping, are

you interested,

would you like

to.

I frankly think that if

you look at the

various kinds of

intelligences that there

are, I think women

just have some

advantages. I am not

sure if I believe that

that‘s genetically

controlled may be you

will talk about that in

some of the research

you do because we

know for example that

part of women‘s brain

that has to do with

language is much

greater.

My sense is that

early childhood

people unlike high

school teachers are

very gentle souls

and to have a harsh

disciplinary

authoritarian person

kind of really kills

their souls and I

think to lift them up

with the respect they

are due and the

homage that we

need to pay to these

wonderfully talented

people.

I think there

is a real

blending of

art and

science in

working with

young

children and

if you do it

well and if

you get the

pedagogy

down, you

really are

changing

their lives for

the rest of

their lives

and the

significance

of that is so

powerful. I

try not to do

that too much

with the

teachers

because I

don‘t want to

be early

dramatic and

scare them

but I don‘t

think they

even have

any idea of

the power,

the will.

The one thing

she did say to

me after I got

it or even

before may

be, she said,

you are going

to be alone at

the top

because it‘s a

small school

and you need

to think about

that. It was

after I took

the job

because she

said okay I

am really

sorry may be I

made a

mistake here

because I

realized you

know I

figured you

would love it

but yet who

are you going

to talk to, it

was

interesting

and that is a

little bit of a

problem.


156


Name Pathways The Experience Values Context Contradictions Clara I was

volunteering at

my children‘s

pre-school and

40 hours a week

or more so you

know, I chaired

the auction, I

was the president

of the board of

directors and I

substituted so I

did kind of a

little bit of

everything and

when my second

child was in

kindergarten and

I still was not

working, the

director of the

center that I am

at now called me

and said, would I

come to work

and she asked

me if I would

come to work as

the assistant

director of the

school.

I mean I think often

times I approach my

supervision of other

women and leadership

if that‘s what you

want to call it, in a

more emotive way

than a man would and

I just not always my

emotion but taking

into account their

emotion and the fact

that what becomes

number one for me is

to listen, listen first,

listen second, listen

third is way my

husband always puts it

but he doesn‘t do that.

He doesn‘t listen to

me first, second or

third, all he wants to

do is tell me what to

do you know.

That you have a

vision of where you

want to go, that you

involve the other

people who are your

teachers and parents

and board of

directors in that

discussion of what is

our vision, where do

we want to go, what

kind of place we

want to be and that it

fits, it feels right and

then you live it and

that‘s where you

know if you have

forgotten about the

children then God

help you but you

know it really is

about for them.

I still think that

if you can‘t

say at a

cocktail party

that you are a

lawyer or a

doctor or you

know a fund

manager that

people turn

off, they don‘t

keep listening

and I think so

many of the

leaders in the

field of early

childhood

were teachers

who moved up

into leadership

positions and

have kind of

gotten there

not quite

knowing that

they are

leaders.

It is so

difficult

sometimes. I

think that I

mean

sometimes it‘s

just basically

physiological

that you know

when you get

a group of

women

together and

you there 10

hours a day

with one

another, all

those sorts of

physiological

thing can

affect you in

terms of your

moods and all

of that so.


157


Name Pathways The Experience Values Context Contradictions Emma So what do you

do when you‘re

married to a

rabbi and you

want to have a

job that doesn‘t

conflict with the

responsibilities

of all the things

you keep. So I

began to teach in

religious school

on Sunday

morning. I

started teaching

kindergarten and

first grade. I did

that for a

while…. We

had two children

in day school,

and even though

day school

wasn‘t what it is

today - you

know. So part of

it was

financial.... I

really hemmed

and hawed about

whether it was

right for me to

apply. But after

much soul-

searching, I

applied thinking

they‘re not going

to want me.

Then they hired

me.

I do think that women

bring something

different to the

table…. But I do think

that women—not all

of us, but most of us—

have that nurturing

side that makes us

well suited for the

work. I think that in

this scary world that

we live in, I actually

think it‘s important for

women to be leaders

in early childhood

because we have

scared parents that

come to us. I think

that women more than

men have a way of

tuning into another

person‘s emotions.

I think that

leadership is a

combination of

being able to

articulate what you

believe in, what you

want your staff to

do. So there has to

be vision. A leader

has to have vision.

But beyond vision,

they have to be able

to understand how to

make that vision

work

But I don‘t

think my field

is taken care

of…. That‘s

frustrating.

We‘re

children‘s first

experience in a

long line of

school. It‘s so

critical these

first couple of

years - their

growth and

really their

academic

success. We

are their first

learning

experience;

and if it‘s a

bad experience

with us, it

doesn‘t seem

to matter.

There‘s just

this feeling—

―Oh, they‘re

just playing.‖

I think also

that there is a

certain

amount of

loneliness in

the position of

early

childhood

leader. When

you‘re a

teacher, the

other teachers

become your

friends. But as

a director, you

have to keep

boundaries

from your

teachers even

if you have a

warm

relationship

with them


158


Name Pathways The Experience Values Context Contradictions BJ They mentored

me in such a way

that I was always

given the

opportunity to

not only go to

school, but also

the opportunity

to take courses -

supervision

courses. I would

imagine that they

saw something

in me that I did

not see.

I think we will need

to continue to show

leadership abilities

to open and mentor

young other females

that are interested in

it. So they can see

some hope, and they

can see some

progress in this type

of work that we‘re

doing—as opposed

to being a lawyer.

I think a leader has

to do what she says

she‘s going to do,

or what he says

he‘s going to do,

when she says

she‘s going to do,

and how. And

you‘ve got to have

a reputation that

can stand through

the community that

you‘re working

with that you are

fair; you strive for

excellence;

Early

childhood,

especially

when you

begin to work

in child

development

centers, have

not always

been looked

upon as a

profession…

early

childhood,

especially

when you

begin to work

in child

development

centers, have

not always

been looked

upon as a

profession.

It‘s a

challenge. But

again, I think

it‘s up to the

leader to be

able to

influence that

environment

you work in.

By that I

mean, people

say women

tend to gossip.

If you set the

environment

where you do

not listen to

gossip.


159

Name Pathways The Experience Values Context Contradictions

Jennifer And one of the

directors said to

me, ―You know

what, I‘m going

to be going and

I really would

like you to take

my place.‖

And most of the

people that I

worked with, were

going to stay on,

so what I did was,

get the staff

together and I

said, ―Listen, this

is the situation, so-

and-so is leaving,

they‘re asking me

to do it, would you

all mind having

me step in that

position, by going

from a peer to

somebody that

would have to

evaluate you

eventually?‖

I always try to

give them a nice

day and say,

―You know

what?‖ and I can

tell usually by

my staff, not

everybody,

something

happens,

everybody has an

outside life, so

something is

negative and I‘ll

say, ―You know

what? You don‘t

seem that happy

today, and

remember the

most important

thing to do is to

meet and greet

and be happy.‖

Yeah, it‘s the

softer side. I

am not a

hardcore

person,

there‘s this

definitely

clear

boundaries,

and I just like

the softer

side, and I

think it‘s the

softer side of

leadership.

The time that I

would actually

feel this is

when I say, ―I

miss the

classroom,‖

when you hear

the kids really

wanting a

teacher, and

―Oh I want Ms.

Janet, and I

want a little

hug,‖ that‘s

when I start to

feel lonely in

my position,


160

Appendix B: Letters to Participants

Dear Early Childhood Leader,

The purpose of this letter is to ask for your participation in a research study on leadership

in early childhood settings. I am a doctoral candidate at George Washington University

interested in the experience of women in leadership positions in early childhood settings.

This research will give women in leadership positions in early childhood an opportunity

to share their experiences and perceptions of leadership.

I am contacting you because you are a leader in a quality early childhood education

setting, and your experiences, perceptions, and other comments relative to your

experience will greatly enhance this research project.

As a participant in this study, you will be committing to approximately 1-2 hours of time

for a face-to-face interview on your leadership experience.

I will also contact you after the initial interview for a follow-up interview, if necessary.

All information obtained will be maintained in accordance with the guidelines of

institutional research for human subjects. The interview will be treated confidentially

and maintained and used in such a way as to protect your identity.

If you are interested in participating in this study, please indicate your interest by

responding to this e-mail within the next 2 weeks. Your response can be sent to me at the

following address: [email protected]. If you prefer, you may also contact me by phone

at 202.997.4347. If you have questions, you may also contact my dissertation committee

chairperson, Dr. Travis Wright, at 202.994.1980 or [email protected].

Thank you in advance for your consideration

Sincerely,

Valaida L. Wise

Doctoral Candidate

Educational Leadership and Policy Studies

Graduate School of Education and Human Development

The George Washington University, Washington, DC

mailto:[email protected]



161

Confirmation Letter

Dear Participant:

Thank you for agreeing to participant in my dissertation research on women in leadership

in early childhood education. The purpose of this study is to understand the experience

of women like you, who hold leadership positions in quality early childhood programs.

Your participation is valuable to my research to the greater community of early

childhood.

This letter serves to confirm our interview appointment scheduled for __________.

The first interview will last approximately 2 hours. I have enclosed a copy of the

interview protocol along with two copies of the informed consent form. Please review,

complete, and sign both copies of this document. Once you have signed the document,

please keep one copy of the form for your records and return the other copy to me on the

interview day.

If you have any questions or concerns that you would like to discuss with me before the

interview, please feel free to contact me at 202.997.4347 or [email protected]. You may

also contact my dissertation chairperson, Dr. Travis Wright. He may be reached by

calling 202.994.1980 or e-mailing him at [email protected].?

Thank you again for agreeing to participate in this study. Your participation will add to

the body of knowledge about women and leadership. I look forward to meeting you

soon.

Sincerely,

Valaida Wise

Doctoral Candidate

Educational Leadership and Policy Studies

Graduate School of Education and Human development

The George Washington University, Washington DC

Enclosures




162

Appendix C: Informed Consent Form

Title: Women and Leadership in the Early Childhood Setting: A Feminist Perspective GW IRB Reference Number: Principal Investigator: Travis S. Wright, Ed.D. Telephone Number(202)994-1980 Sub-Investigator: Valaida Littlejohn Wise Telephone Number (202)997-4347

1) Introduction You are invited to participate in a research study under the direction of Dr.

Travis S. Wright of the Department of Educational Leadership, The George

Washington University (GWU). Taking part in this research is entirely

voluntary. You may choose not to take part, or you may choose to withdraw

from the study at any time. In either case, you will not lose any benefits to

which you are otherwise entitled.

2) Why is this study being done? You are being asked to take part in this study because you are a woman who

is considered a leader in an early childhood setting. Your personal

experience, perceptions, and other comments relative to you leadership

experience will greatly enhance this research project.

The purpose of this study is to explore how women leaders in early

childhood settings make meaning of leadership.

Although the researcher will travel to various areas to conduct interviews,

the analysis of the data collected will be conducted at the following location:

The George Washington University

3) What is involved in this study? If you choose to take part in this study, this is what will take place:

I will contact you to set up an interview date and time.

I will send you a confirmation letter to confirm the date and time

agreed upon.

I will send you a copy of the interview protocol in advance of the

interview.

You will participate in an interview that will last approximately 1-2

hours on the designated day. During the interview you will be asked

a series of questions relative to your experiences as a woman leader

in an early childhood setting.

The interview will be taped; I will also take handwritten notes.


163

The interviews will be sent to a transcription service to be

transcribed.

A final analysis of the data will be conducted, and the results and

findings will be formally written into a dissertation.

Upon your request, I will send you a copy of the results and findings

after the analysis has been conducted and the conclusions have been

written into the dissertation.

4) What are the risks of participating in this study? There are no physical risks associated with this study. There is, however,

the possible risk of loss of confidentiality. Every effort will be made to keep

your information confidential; however, this cannot be guaranteed. Also

you may find that some of the questions asked as part of this study may raise

sensitive issues for you, thereby resulting in mild emotional discomfort.

You may refuse to answer any of the questions asked and you may take a

break at any time during the study. In addition, you may withdraw from this

study at any time, either during or after the interview, without negative

consequences.

5) Are there any benefits to taking part in this study? Taking part in this research will not help you directly; however, you may

benefit from

the opportunity to reflect on your experiences as a leader in an early

childhood setting and

the opportunity to benefit other early childhood leaders.

The benefit to science and humankind might include the opportunity to add

to the professionalization of the field of leadership in early childhood.

6) What are my options? Participation in this study is voluntary. You do not have to participate in

this study if you do not want to. Should you decide to participate and later

change your mind, you can do so at any time.

7) Will I receive payment for being in this study? You will not be paid for taking part in this study.

8) Can I be taken off this study? The investigator can decide to withdraw you from the study at any time.

You could be taken off the study for reasons related solely to you (for

example, not following study-related directions from the investigator) or

because the entire study is stopped.


164

9) How will my privacy be protected? If the results of this research study are published in journals or at higher

education settings, the people who participated in this study will not be

named or identified. GWU will not release any information about your

research involvement without your written permission, unless required by

law.

10) Problems or Questions The Office of Human Research of George Washington University, at

202.994.2715, can provide further information about your rights as a

research participant. If you think you have been harmed in this study, you

can report this to the principal investigator of this study. Further

information regarding this study may be obtained by contacting Dr. Travis

Wright (principal investigator and dissertation committee chairperson) at

202.994.1980 or Valaida Littlejohn Wise (subinvestigator and student

researcher) at 202.997.4347.

*Please keep a copy of this document in case you would like to read it again.

Consent is implied if you continue with the interview.

Documents

"Telling our own story": Women and leadership in the early childhood setting by Wise, Valaida Littlejohn, Ed.D. The George Washington University. 2011: 177 pages; 3449187