University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The racially responsive facilitator: an evaluation study

(USC Thesis Other)

The racially responsive facilitator: an evaluation study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

1

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR: AN EVALUATION STUDY

by

Mary B. Rice-Boothe

_______________________________________________________________________

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2019

Copyright 2019 Mary B. Rice-Boothe

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thank you, thank you to my advisor, Dr. Datta, for your ongoing support throughout this
process. Your knowledge, quick tips and belief that I would make it made you a truly invaluable
resource. I would also like to thank the other members of my dissertation committee. Dr.
Gutierrez, thank you for taking the time to be on my committee, providing the access to dissect
every aspect of our organization and valuing the contribution of my research to support the
organization grow and become stronger. Dr. Robles, you are a role model for female leaders of
color like me. Your relentless focus on helping students with the greatest needs is commendable
and an inspiration to all educators.
Thank you to all my colleagues for your support and participation in this project. I
appreciate the time and effort that you dedicated to help me complete this project.
I am so appreciative of all the members of cohort six. You are an awesome group and I
have enjoyed getting to know many of you. I am especially grateful to my partner, Caron, who
provided amazing feedback and support. You inspired me to fight on and tackle every obstacle
with conviction.
Most importantly, thank you to my family. Thank you, Mom, for always stepping in and
taking care of me and the kids whenever, wherever. Words cannot express how much your
support meant to me throughout this experience. To my best friend and big sister, Arva, thank
you for always believing in me. To my brothers, Chester and Rondie, thank you for always
being there. To my husband, Marki, thank you for being my cheerleader and always saying yes
to whatever big project I want to tackle. Zora and Julius, you are my pride and joy. Thank you
for picking me to be your mom. Finally, this dissertation is dedicated to my father . . . Dad, you
finally have a Doctor in the family. Love you and miss you every day!

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements 2
List of Tables 5
List of Figures 6
Abstract 8
Chapter 1: Introduction 9
Introduction of the Problem of Practice 9
Organizational Context and Mission 10
Organizational Goal 11
Related Literature 12
Importance of the Evaluation 14
Description of Stakeholder Groups 15
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals 16
Stakeholder Group for the Study 18
Purpose of the Project and Questions 18
Conceptual and Methodological Framework 19
Definitions 20
Organization of the Dissertation 21
Chapter 2: Review of Literature 22
Race in Education 22
Race in Education Leadership Programs 28
Latest Trends in Education Leadership Programs 30
Clark and Estes’ (2008) Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences 33
Framework
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences 35
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and 47
Motivation and the Organizational Context
Conclusion 50
Chapter 3: Methods 51
Participating Stakeholders 52
Data Collection and Instrumentation 55
Data Analysis 57
Credibility and Trustworthiness 59
Validity and Reliability 59
Ethics 60
Limitations and Delimitations 61

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

4
Chapter 4: Results and Findings 63
Findings 66
Research Question 1 67
Research Question 2 80
Research Question 3 93
Chapter 5: Discussion and Recommendations 100
Knowledge Recommendations 101
Motivation Recommendations 104
Organization Recommendations 107
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 110
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach 122
Future Research 122
Conclusion 123
References 124
Appendices 133
Appendix A: Group Interview Protocol 133
Appendix B: Observation Protocol 134
Appendix C: Program Evaluation Survey 136
Appendix D: Supervisor Observation Checklist 137
Appendix E: ELT Survey Results 138
Appendix F: Organizational Survey Results 155
Appendix G: Observed Session Lesson Plan 177
Appendix H: Summary of the Filmed Observation Feedback Survey 187

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

5
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals 17
Table 2. Knowledge Influence, Knowledge Types, and Knowledge Assessment 38
Table 3. Motivational Influences and Motivational Influence Assessments 41
Table 4. Organizational Influence and Organization Assessment 46
Table 5. Demographics of Participants in Focus Groups 53
Table 6. Demographics and Background Information of Participants in Focus Groups 64
Table 7. Recommendations for Practice to Address Knowledge Influences 101
Table 8. Recommendations for Practice to Address Motivation Influences 104
Table 9. Recommendations for Practice to Address Organizational Influences 107
Table 10. Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 113
Table 11. Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation 114
Table 12. Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 115
Table 13. Components of Learning for the Program 118
Table 14. Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 119

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

6
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Interaction of stakeholder knowledge and motivation within organizational 48
cultural models and settings
Figure 2. Staff members’ response rate from individual organizational survey 70
administered by Principals Lead when asked about their self-reflection
Figure 3. Response rate of staff members from individual organization survey 72
administered by Principals Lead about their feelings during conversations
about race
Figure 4. Response rate of staff members from individual organization survey 72
administered by Principals Lead about their comfort level during
conversations about race
Figure 5. Response rate of staff members from individual organization survey 75
administered by Principals Lead about the frequency in which they critique
policy and practices
Figure 6. Responses from session feedback from principal participants of filmed 78
observed training
Figure 7. Response rate of staff members from individual organization survey 83
administered by Principals Lead asking about their conceptual knowledge
of the role of race in education
Figure 8. Response rate of staff members from individual organization survey 84
administered by Principals Lead asking about their procedural knowledge
of the role of support in developing racially responsive school principals
Figure 9. Response rate of staff members from individual organization survey 86
administered by Principals Lead asking about their metacognitive
knowledge of the role of race in their upbringing
Figure 10. Response rate of staff members from individual organization survey 88
administered by Principals Lead when asked to respond to how often
they assess their own anti-racist-related goals
Figure 11. Response rate of staff members from individual organization survey 89
administered by Principals Lead when asked to respond to how often
they actively speak up and interrupt when seeing racist behaviors
Figure 12. Response rate of staff members from organizational survey administered 94
by Principals Lead disaggregated to show differences in response rate of
staff of color versus White staff

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

7
Figure 13. Staff response rate from organizational survey question administered by 95
Principals Lead disaggregated to show any differences in the responses of
White staff versus staff of color
Figure 14. Staff response rate from organizational survey administered by Principals 96
Lead disaggregated to show any differences in the responses from White
staff versus staff of color
Figure 15. Staff response rate from organizational survey administered by Principals 97
Lead disaggregated to show any differences by White staff and staff of color

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

8
ABSTRACT
As the students walking through the doors of public schools in the United States become more
diverse, the principals that lead the schools need to be able to create and maintain an
environment that is built on the experiences, perspectives and culture of all students. It is the
responsibility of education leadership programs to approach their curriculum differently in order
to produce racially responsive school principals. Since 2003, Principals Lead
1
has been running
an education leadership program to support districts across the country strengthen their
leadership pipeline. The organization recently set the goal to integrate tenets of an anti-racist
leadership program into 100% of its curriculum by 2020 in order to meet the demands of
principals. Through focus groups, observation and document analysis, the study examined the
extent to which the facilitators of Principals Lead were able to meet the organization’s goal. The
study also examined the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to
achieving this organizational goal and the interaction between organizational culture and context
and stakeholder knowledge and motivation. The findings showed that in the development of
racially responsive facilitators of Principals Lead have made strides in integrating self-reflection,
conversations about race and critiquing school policies into its curriculum but they need more
professional development, feedback and organizational support for Principals Lead to meet its
goal.

1
Pseudonym.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

9
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Introduction of the Problem of Practice
On a daily basis Black students are faced with bias from their predominately White
teachers (Gilliam, Maupin, Reyes, Accavitti, & Shic, 2016). This bias continues through to high
school (Gershenson, Holt, & Papageorge, 2016). The number of Black students attending public
schools in the United States is rapidly changing, whereas the number of leaders of color remains
stagnant or dropping (U.S. Department of Education, 2016). Education leadership programs and
their faculty are not adequately training principals to lead these demographically shifting schools
(Gooden & Dantley, 2012).
Principals need a new level of racial proficiency to support and develop their teaching
staff while connecting with students and communities different than their own (Bruner, 2008),
and the education leadership program’s role is to support them to meet that proficiency. Anti-
racist (Gooden, 2012), culturally relevant (Khalifa, Gooden, & Davis, 2016), social justice
(Furman, 2012) and transformative (Shields, 2010) are some of the terms used to describe
principals who can navigate the diverse needs and demographics in today’s public schools. For
the purposes of this study these leaders are called ‘racially responsive’ principals. Racially
responsive principals personally recognize the impact race has on their lives and the lives of their
students and families while purposefully striving to dismantle inequities seen in their schools’
systems, structures and classroom practices (Lightfoot, 2009; Theoharis, 2007).
For aspiring principals to become racially responsive principals, they need to attend
education leadership programs that do not just offer one diversity course but are anti-racist
programs. Traditional education leadership programs are part of larger university systems.
Essential components of anti-racist education leadership programs include conversations about
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

10
race and critique of school policy and larger societal issues. These programs must also value
culturally relevant pedagogy and recognize the impact of racism and bias on students.
To effectively implement an anti-racist program, the program staff has a central role in
developing racially responsive leaders. In a traditional education leadership program, they are
called professors and are responsible for developing curriculum, teaching courses and may also
visit aspiring principals at their schools. In non-traditional education leadership programs, they
are called facilitators that assume the same role and responsibilities. For the purposes of this
study, the education leadership program faculty are called racially responsive facilitators.
Racially responsive facilitators personally recognize the impact race has on their lives, the role of
race in education and in facilitation. They purposefully interweave curriculum and conversations
about race into their daily interactions with aspiring and sitting principals to support the
development of racially responsive school principals. (Carpenter & Diem, 2013; Diem,
Carpenter, & Lewis-Durham, 2018).
Organizational Context and Mission
Principals Lead
2
was created in 2003 as a program to respond to a need to find alternative
ways to develop principals for one of the country’s largest school districts. The creators
developed an alternative program to traditional education leadership programs that moved away
from theory and time in class to an experiential program that centered on a full-time internship in
a school with a seasoned principal. In 2005, the program became its own non-profit organization
and expanded beyond one school district to many. Principals Lead now partners with districts,
universities and other non-profits across the country to strengthen their leadership development
pipeline. The mission of Principals Lead is to build the capacity of educational leaders, at every

2
This is a pseudonym.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

11
level of the system, to confront inequities and create the necessary conditions for all students to
thrive.
Since becoming its own non-profit organization, Principals Lead has worked in 33 states
and two countries developing superintendents, district leaders, principals, teacher leaders and
aspiring leaders. Principals Lead currently employs almost 40 full-time staff members and over
25 part-time staff members who primarily serve as coaches. Principals Lead is divided into four
departments: administrative and operations; learning and strategy; access and equity; and client
services. Each department has its own role in upholding and implementing the organization’s
vision of a country where every school system is led by transformational leaders who prepare all
children, especially the traditionally underserved, for success.
Organizational Goal
The education leadership program run by Principals Lead always included some tenets of
an anti-racist program. In recruiting participants, there was an effort to enroll large numbers of
people of color to diversity the principal pool. In its curriculum, the program required
participants to analyze data to see which students were being disproportionately impacted by
high rates of discipline and special education referrals and reduced rates of recommendations to
honors and AP courses. The program also asked participants to think differently about how to
engage students which included critique of school policy, programs and procedures. However,
the program did not ask aspiring principals to have open conversations about race and recognize
the impact of racism and bias on students. The facilitators also did not utilize culturally
responsive pedagogy when teaching the aspiring principals. The absence of these key tenets has
required Principals Lead to do a full curriculum audit, update their facilitator competencies and
provide focused training to facilitators on how to implement these new expectations. The
organizational goal is that by June 2020, Principals Lead will help leaders address issues of
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

12
inequity in schools and districts by integrating the tenets of an anti-racist program into 100% of
its curriculum. Successfully completing this goal will help aspiring principals graduating from
Principals Lead’s education leadership program be racially responsive.
Related Literature
Facilitators who are training aspiring principals need support to close the racial
proficiency gap and to become racially responsive faciliators. Developing racially responsive
principals is critical because most students attending public schools in urban and suburban areas
in the United States are students of color, whereas the number of principals of color remains
stagnant or dropping (U.S. Department of Education, 2016). The student population of
America’s public schools has increased by 3.4 million in the past decade and a half, and 99% of
this increase has been due to the enrollment of new Latino, Black and Asian students (Logan &
Burdick-Will, 2017). The expanded diaspora of public-school students means expanded
experiences, perspectives and ways of learning and principals are not ready.
The tenets of an anti-racist education leadership programs are absent in most educational
leadership programs. In a review of education leadership preparation programs, Hawley and
James (2010) noted that the characteristics and experiences needed to adequately develop
aspiring principals for the students and communities they will support is missing. Hoff, Yoder
and Hoff (2006) state that graduates of education leadership program have limited knowledge of
diversity and when Lightfoot (2009) assessed education leadership programs, she found that
there was minimal evidence of programs exhibiting all tenets.
Education leadership programs are falling short in developing anti-racist principals. Hoff
et al. (2006) collected surveys from 58 participants and did in-depth interviews of nine
participants in an education leadership program at a state university in Maine. Their analysis
revealed that students had limited understanding of the issues of diversity and were not properly
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

13
prepared to discuss and address issues of diversity in their communities (Hoff et al., 2006). With
limited understanding and skill sets, a principal is not ready to talk to students, families and
communities about issues that are of concern from them. Furthermore, principals will not be
able to address the issues that are getting in the way of their students being successful.
Hawley and James (2010) analyzed surveys from 18 education leadership programs
affiliated with the University Council of Educational Administration. After the surveys, they
interviewed 12 deans and department heads to gather additional data. Most programs reported
that they address diversity in a single course and course content may discuss the societal impacts
of race but do not emphasize how a principal is to support a diverse student population. There
also was not any consistency across programs of which readings, films or assignments were used
in their diversity courses. Hawley and James (2010) also share that the faculty in education
leadership programs were unprepared to lead discussions on diversity in their classrooms.
Education leadership programs are providing aspiring principals minimal exposure to what it
takes to be a racially responsive principal.
Lightfoot (2009) used five key characteristics of anti-racist programs as a lens to
complete a qualitative research study of faculty and students from three different education
leadership programs in various parts of the country. The interviews and review of artifacts
revealed no program successfully exhibited the five key characteristics, which include program
vision, diversity of program personnel, curriculum, fieldwork experiences and assessment of
student progress. Lightfoot concludes that education leadership programs and faculty are falling
short in exposing aspiring principals to the content, conversations and experiences necessary for
them to be a racially responsive principal.
Hoff et al. (2006), Hawley and James (2010) and Lightfoot (2009) reviewed the courses
and content of traditional education leadership programs across the United States and all their
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

14
findings were the same. One diversity course is not enough to adequately prepare aspiring
leaders for their roles as principals. Traditional education leadership programs are leaving
principals without the knowledge to support Black students and the skill to dismantle the
inequities prevalent within our school systems. There needs to be a different approach that is
comprehensive and in alignment with the history and current landscape of education in the
United States.
Importance of the Evaluation
It is important to evaluate Principals Lead’s performance in relationship to the
performance goal of helping principals address issues of racial inequity in schools and districts
by integrating the tenets of an anti-racist program into 100% of its curriculum for a variety of
reasons. Principals Lead has made a deliberate decision to have facilitators discuss issues of race
in all its programming. The organization believes that it is the principal’s responsibility to
directly tackle issues of inequity seen in school policies and practices which often have racial
implications. The facilitators of Principals Lead must now actualize this goal and belief into
practice. The facilitators at Principals Lead are the equivalent of faculty at a traditional
education leadership program. The facilitators represent the characteristics of many principals.
They are predominately White and female. Although many believe that the issues of racial
inequity are important for principals to tackle, they are at varying degrees of skill, will and
disposition to implement this goal.
If Principals Lead cannot build the capacity of principals to confront inequities in their
districts it will be inadequately developing principals to support the increasing Black population
that are enrolled in the country’s public schools. These inadequately developed principals will
continue to push systems and structures that are built to marginalize Black students while
supporting teachers to target Black boys for suspension and special education referrals and deny
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

15
Black boys’ and girls’ recommendation to honors, gifted and/or AP courses (Gershenson et al.,
2016).
Description of Stakeholder Groups
There are many stakeholders that are involved in appropriately supporting and
developing racially responsive principals in the Principals Lead model. The key stakeholders are
the education leadership program facilitators, the principals the facilitators train and the teachers
supported by the trained principals. Each stakeholder has a unique role in changing the school
experience and outcomes for students.
Principals Lead facilitators are responsible for integrating racial equity throughout their
work with districts. The facilitators’ goal is that by May 2019, 100% of Principals Lead’s
facilitators will infuse tenets of an anti-racist program into their facilitation practice by
demonstrating proficiency in the organization’s facilitator competencies focused on racial equity.
All facilitators have experience being a school leader; however, each facilitator has varied levels
of skill and disposition to teach principals how to directly address issues of racial inequity in
their schools and districts. Principals Lead facilitators need to be appropriately trained to
develop curriculum and facilitate trainings focused on racial inequity in order to develop racially
responsive principals.
For the purposes of this study, the focus was the facilitators. The Principals Lead
facilitators have the most consistent and longest touchpoint with the principals. The approach of
facilitators has also been well documented through the development of facilitator competencies
and curriculum that has been utilized since the organization’s inception. All the facilitators have
previously held roles as superintendents or principals within a large school district. The
facilitators were chosen for this study and as the primary stakeholders because the shift in the
organization’s mission and goals requires the biggest content, mindset and disposition change.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

16
The principals are another stakeholder group. Their goal is that by May 2019, 70% of the
principals that participate in training facilitated by Principals Lead become racially responsive
principals because they will personally recognize the impact race has on their lives and the lives
of their students/families and purposefully strive to dismantle inequities seen in their school’s
systems, structures and classroom practices. If principals receive the support from facilitators to
achieve this goal, they will be more likely to create a school community that is inclusive and
works with students, families and community to create and maintain a space that will be a
positive learning environment for all students. Racially responsive principals will be reflective
and active listeners that are continually reaching out to learn more about their students. They
also are dismantling structures and policies that are hindering Black student success while
advocating for district leaders to make systemic changes.
The teachers are the final stakeholder group. The teacher goal is that by May 2019, 70%
of school teachers that are supervised by Principals Lead trained principals will report that they
have engaged in conversations about race with their principal and have learned new strategies of
dismantling racial inequities in their classrooms from their principal. If teachers receive
direction and support from a racially responsive principal, they will be more likely to recognize
their own bias when teaching, leverage culturally relevant content and create a classroom that is
a safe, positive environment to learn. Ultimately, teachers led by a racially responsive principal
will embrace the unique experiences and perspectives of their Black students, encourage them to
meet high standards and support them to achieve high levels of achievement.
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals
There are three stakeholders impacted by Principals Lead’s mission and performance
goal: Principals Lead facilitators, the principals receiving training by Principals Lead, and the
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

17
teachers being supervised by the trained principals. In Table 1, the various stakeholder goals are
outlined and the relationship between each stakeholder is seen through the cascading goals.

Table 1
Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
We build the capacity of educational leaders, at every level of the system, to confront
inequities and create the conditions necessary for all students to thrive.
Organizational Performance Goal
By June 2020, Principals Lead will help leaders address issues of racial inequity in their
schools by integrating the tenets of an anti-racist program into 100% of its curriculum.
Facilitators Goal Principals Goal Teachers Goal
By May 2019, 100% of Principals Lead’s
facilitators will infuse tenets of an anti-racist
program into their facilitation practice by
demonstrating proficiency in the organization’s
facilitator competencies focused on racial equity
which are:
• Demonstrates self-awareness and attends to
the relationship between the
participants/group and the facilitator.
• Utilizes frameworks, tools, strategies, and
processes to support participants to examine
their personal and institutional biases and
their effects.
• Fosters inclusion and utilizes strategies and
content that reflect and leverage the diversity
within the group.
• Customizes and integrates racially responsive
learning designs (agendas, activities, etc.)
based on needs and culture of each group and
intervenes or shifts mid-course when
necessary.
By May 2019, 70%
of the principals
that participate in
training facilitated
by Principals Lead
will become
racially responsive
principals because
they personally
recognize the
impact race has on
their lives and the
lives of their
students/families
and purposefully
strive to dismantle
inequities seen in
their school’s
systems, structures
and classroom
practices.
By May 2019,
70% of school
teachers that are
supervised by
Principals Lead
trained principals
will report that
they have engaged
in conversations
about race with
their principal and
have learned new
strategies of
dismantling racial
inequities in their
classrooms from
their principal.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

18
Stakeholder Group for the Study
While all stakeholders will contribute to the achievement of the overall organizational
goal of integrating the tenets of an anti-racist program into 100% of its curriculum, it was
important to evaluate where Principals Lead facilitators were currently regarding their
performance goal. Therefore, the focus stakeholders for this study were the Principals Lead
facilitators. The stakeholder goal for Principals Lead’s facilitators was determined based on the
standards used for all Principals Lead facilitators. The facilitator competencies for Principals
Lead was recently updated to explicitly include a competency that says, the facilitator stimulates
and sustains conversations regarding equity and race. For there to be change for principals, the
facilitators needed to demonstrate effectiveness in these competencies which includes designing,
developing and delivering curriculum that meets the needs of principals. Failure to accomplish
this goal will lead to ineffective principals who are perpetuating racial inequities through policy
and practice. For Principals Lead, it risks losing funding and contracts with districts if it is
ineffective in delivering training that does not result in improved equitable practices for school
districts.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to evaluate the degree to which Principals Lead
facilitators are meeting their goal of infusing tenets of an anti-racist program into their practice
by demonstrating proficiency in the organization’s facilitator competencies focused on racial
equity becoming racially responsive facilitators. In comparison to a traditional education
leadership program, every single course needs to be redesigned with a new syllabus including
course outcomes, text selections, student assignments and approach to teaching. The analysis
focused on knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to achieving this
organizational goal. While a complete evaluation project would focus on all Principals Lead
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

19
stakeholders, for practical purposes the stakeholders focused on in this analysis were Principals
Lead facilitators.
As such, the questions that guided this study were the following:
1. To what extent is Principals Lead meeting its goal of 100% of Principals Lead’s
facilitators infusing tenets of an anti-racist program into their facilitation practice by
demonstrating proficiency in the organization’s facilitator competencies focused on
racial equity?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to
achieving this organizational goal?
3. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and stakeholder
knowledge and motivation?
4. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis was adapted to the evaluation model and
implemented as the conceptual framework. This method assisted in explaining organizational
goals and clarifying the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences within the
organization. Assumed knowledge, motivation and organizational influences on Principals Lead
facilitators that impacted Principals Lead’s ability to achieve its stakeholder goal were created
through personal knowledge and related literature. The methodological framework was a mixed
method design. These influences were assessed by using surveys, group interviews, observation,
literature review and artifact analysis. Research-based solutions are recommended and evaluated
in a comprehensive manner.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

20
Definitions
The following definitions are provided to ensure clarity and consistency of the terms used
throughout the study.
Anti-racist: A proactive strategy for dismantling racist structures and for building racial
justice and equity (Horsford, Grosland, & Gunn, 2011).
Black students: A term used to incorporate African-American students as well as students
of African and Caribbean descent because most district data do not distinguish based on national
origin (Noguera, 2008).
Critical Race Theory: Radical legal movement that seeks to transform the relationship
among race, racism and power (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017).
Cultural Proficiency: The state of honoring the differences among cultures, seeing
diversity as a benefit, and interacting knowledgeably and respectfully among a variety of cultural
groups (Lindsey, Robins, & Terrell, 2003).
Facilitator: A staff member within a non-traditional education leadership program that
has the role and responsibilities of developing curriculum, teaching courses and coaching
aspiring principals in their schools.
Institutionalized Racism: The power to create an environment where the belief [racism] is
manifested in the subtle or direct subjugation of the subordinate ethnic groups through a
society’s institutions (Lindsey et al., 2003).
Race: The socially constructed meaning attached to a variety of physical attributes such
as skin color, eye color, hair texture and bone structure (Singleton, 2014).
Racial Microaggressions: The everyday slights, insults, indignities and invalidations
delivered toward people of color because of their visible racial/ethnic minority characteristics
(Sue, 2016).
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

21
Racially responsive principal: Racially responsive principals personally recognize the
impact race has on their lives and the lives of their students/families and purposefully strive to
dismantle inequities seen in their schools’ personal practices, structures and classroom practices
(Lightfoot, 2009; Theoharis, 2007).
Racially responsive facilitators: Racially responsive facilitators personally recognize the
impact race has on their lives, the role of race in education and in facilitation. They purposefully
interweave curriculum and conversations about race into their daily interactions with aspiring
and sitting principals to support the development of racially responsive school principals
(Carpenter & Diem, 2013; Diem et al., 2018).
Organization of the Dissertation
This dissertation is organized into five chapters. Chapter 1 provided an overview of the
key elements considered when evaluating the meaning and value of training principals who
graduate from anti-racist education leadership programs. It also included a framing of the
organizational context, mission, and goals, as well as the key stakeholder goals. Chapter 2
includes a review of relevant literature related to the problem of practice, including a review of
the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that affect achieving the stakeholder goal.
Chapter 3 provides the methodology of the study regarding selection of participants as well as
data collection and analysis. In Chapter 4, findings from the data collection are provided and
analyzed, including the identification of key study themes. In Chapter 5, the study concludes
with solutions along with an implementation and evaluation plan.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

22
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This literature review will examine reasons education leadership programs are not
appropriately preparing principals because they do not possess the tenets of an anti-racist
leadership program. This idea is important because the United States continues to have a racial
achievement gap that requires principals to have the skill and will to directly address the
inequities they see. The chapter will begin with the role of race in education in the United States
and how race predicts a student’s success. Also, how principals’ behaviors impact success.
Then, there will be a review of the role of education leadership program, the successes and
challenges traditional and non-traditional programs have in appropriately preparing principals for
current school demographics. Following the general research literature, the review turns to the
Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework and, specifically, knowledge,
motivation and organizational influences on education leadership program staff’s ability to
appropriately address the needs of principals.
Race in Education
The education of Black students in the United States has a history complicated by power
and privilege. Formal and informal laws denied access to a high-quality education for Black
students for centuries. Even though individual states and districts have made some progress in
creating equal access and opportunity to their Black students, overwhelmingly, Black students
are still facing the same substandard quality that they did in the early 1700s (Kendi, 2016).
Before Brown vs Board of Education
Schools for Black slaves can be dated back to the early 1700s. However, the progress of
these schools slowed when in the late 1700s when many slave states made it illegal for slaves to
learn how to read and write for fear of a revolt. After the Civil War, schools for former slaves
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

23
became more prevalent in the South although students were charged for attendance and often
faced threats by Whites for attending school (Kendi, 2016).
In March 1865, the Federal Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands,
commonly known as the Freedmen’s Bureau, was established. One of the intended outcomes of
the Bureau was to coordinate the efforts of the religious and benevolent societies and military
agencies to provide the freedmen and poor Whites with education (Spraggins, 1970). By 1870,
the number of schools operated by the Freedmen’s Bureau or benevolent societies in the South
was 2,677, educating nearly 150,000 pupils. A total of 4,000 schools had been established by the
time the Bureau was abolished (Spraggins, 1970).
In 1910, the Chicago philanthropist and Sears department store founder, Julius
Rosenwald, established a fund to help support school construction, library purchases, and teacher
training for Black students. By 1925, this fund had aided in the construction of 2,831 schools
enrolling 350,000 students in 14 states. The total eventually reached 5,000 schools concentrated
in 883 counties in 12 states. Close to 20% of all schools for Black children were Rosenwald
schools (Spraggins, 1970).
The efforts of the Freedmen’s Bureau and Julius Rosenwald to increase access to
education for Black was met with resistance. Amongst White Americans there was a general
acceptance of both “Black inferiority” and White supremacy (Powell, 2008). School districts
governed by White people allowed the education of the Black students, but some of them viewed
it as an unfair appropriation of their taxes especially in southern states, where the districts were
already financially poor. The content of the education received by Black students was also
subpar. Black students were only taught skills associated with physical labor such as agriculture
instead of skills that could have helped them earn a higher wage (Kendi, 2016).
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

24
In these substandard facilities, Black students were supported by Black principals who
understood their struggle and taught them through a culturally-competent lens. In May 1954,
there were almost 82,000 Black educators in segregated schools. Although one of every 72
teachers in non-segregated states was Black; in the South, one of every five teachers was Black
(Karpinski, 2006). Black principals were community activists who provided a learning
environment that supported the needs of Black students inside and outside of the school building.
Curriculum developed for Black schools celebrated Black contributions and culture and raised
racially responsiveness (Fairclough, 2000). Overall, the Black students received a separate and
unequal education experience prior to the decision of Brown v Board of Education in 1954.
Post-Brown vs Board of Education
After the Brown v. Board of Education decision of 1954, Black students had the right to
attend historically all-White schools, however, they were set up to fail. The decision forced the
legal parameters but did not change beliefs. Black students may have attended schools that were
integrated externally but still attended classes with only Black students (Guinier, 2004). If they
did attend integrated classes, those who were unable to assimilate into the dominant White
culture were alienated. Black students also were taught by White teachers who had low
expectations of them and their ability to be successful (Kendi, 2016).
Between 1954 and 1958, Southern states enacted 145 laws protecting segregation.
Provisions ranged from delegating arbitrary power of pupil placement to the local district to
withdrawal of state funds from any school serving Black and White students and nullification of
teacher tenure laws (Spraggins, 1970). All these laws impacted the ability for Black students to
gain ground in having access to a quality education.
Black principals and teachers left their positions in large numbers due to demotion within
White school systems or not being offered a position at all (Fairclough, 2000). Where there was
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

25
limited staff integration, mostly in border states, Black teachers were also not reemployed.
There was often no place for those educators from rural schools in the newly integrated schools.
White students were rarely transferred to Black schools primarily because of the inadequacy of
the facilities (Karpinski, 2006).
Brown vs. Board of Education was supposed to change the school experience for Black
students. The law was based on the idealism that Whites, when given the opportunity, would
actively choose racial justice and progress, even when it did not benefit them to do so.
Unfortunately, since the Brown decision what is visible is Whites failing to fulfill the promise
and responsibility of this idealism, opting instead for the powers and privileges which the White
dominant social system affords them (Allen & Liou, 2018). Black students are still having a
very different, inequitable school experience than White students.
Role of Race in Predicting Student Success
The structures and policies of school systems, built for White students, did not change
with desegregation. In the past and present, there are racial inequities in education by race in the
United States particularly in the areas of per pupil spending, discipline, honors course
enrollment, tracking and special education classification. Per pupil spending is higher in districts
that are predominantly White providing better environments, resources and support than in
districts that are predominantly Black (Ladson-Billings, 2006). Schools with a higher proportion
of Black students are more likely to use a range of punitive consequences including suspension,
expulsion, arrests, and zero tolerance (Noguera, 2008). Black K-12 students are 3.8 times as
likely to receive one or more out-of-school suspensions as White students. Also, Black students
represent 38% of students in schools that offer AP courses, but only 29% of students enrolled in
at least one AP course. Finally, 43% of Black boys are subject to receiving special education
services in isolation in comparison to 18% of White boys (U.S. Department of Education, 2016).
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

26
Werblow, Urick, and Duesbery (2013) define tracking as when student classes are
homogenized by skill or ability level such as general education, advanced and AP courses.
Tracking students by ability level disproportionately impacts Black students and results in lower
achievement levels. Werblow et al. (2013) stated that students placed in the lower level have
low perceptions of themselves and are more likely to drop out of school. Race is the leading
factor in the achievement gap because it decides how much access, opportunity and
encouragement a Black student will have in their school experience.
School Leader Behaviors Preventing Student Success
Although principals may not be the creators of structural racism in school, they are
instrumental in whether such structures are reproduced in the public schools they lead. For
principals, they can consciously or unconsciously implement structures and legal contexts that
bring about educational opportunities that appear on the surface to be fair and neutral (Delgado
& Stefancic, 2017).
Briscoe and De Oliver (2012) conducted 22 interviews with Texas principals during the
2004–2005 academic year. During the interview, principals were asked to identify the biggest
problem they were facing in their roles. The overwhelming response to the question was parents
and poverty. This blame was often connected to the pressures felt by the No Child Left Behind
Act (NCLB, 2001). Principals faced pressure of school closure if they were unable to
successfully close achievement gaps. However, putting failure of closing gaps on external
factors allowed principals to relieve the pressure on themselves as leaders.
Principals also hold a variety of biases such as colorblindness, deficit thinking, and
poverty disciplining that leads to lost opportunities for Black students (Fergus, 2016). Fergus
(2016) provides a definition for all these biases. Colorblindness is treating individuals as
individuals not considering their social and racial identities. Deficit thinking is believing low-
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

27
income and students of color are unable to achieve to standard given their circumstance. Poverty
disciplining is criticizing and wanting to change behavior of low-income and students of color to
assume middle-class and Whiteness standards and beliefs around behavior. Stereotypes about
the relationship between race and intelligence are invariably reinforced within the structure and
culture of schools (Fergus, 2016). These behaviors are evidence in the vignette of Kelly High
described by Evans (2007). Evans did a study of three suburban high schools that experienced
significant increase in their Black populations from 1990–2000. Mr. Franklin, the assistant
superintendent of the district often employed color-blindness when talking about the significant
increase in Black students. He downplayed the increase of Black students and often used the
phrase ‘kids are kids’ when discussing the impact of the changing demographics. When the
faculty engaged in student data analysis, they stated that ‘poor readers are poor readers.’
Although some community members requested diversity training, it never happened. Franklin
and the school board also refused to place any efforts into recruiting minority staff members.
Franklin stated that he didn’t want to lower standards to hire Black staff members, showing that
he believed that White candidates would automatically be stronger than Black candidates (Evans,
2007). When principals and other school leaders employ a variety of bias-based beliefs it limits
the access and opportunity of Black students.
When principals are not leading through a lens of racial responsiveness, students are
faced with bias and microaggressions in the classroom from pre-school through college. In a
study of preschool teachers, Gilliam et al. (2016) found that teachers gazed longer at Black
children, especially Black boys when expecting challenging behaviors. The researchers also
noted that implicit biases depend on teacher race. Providing family background information
resulted in lowered severity ratings when teacher and child race matched but resulted in
increased severity ratings when their race did not match (Gilliam et al., 2016).
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

28
In high school, the trend continues. Gershenson et al. (2016) analyzed a sample of 16,810
student-teacher dyads. Their analysis concluded that White teachers expected 40% of Black
students to complete no more than a high school diploma versus having the same low level of
expectation for only 3% of their White students. These low expectations lead to an increase in
discipline and special education referrals and decrease of referrals to gifted and honors courses
(Gershenson et al., 2016).
Steele (1997) used his research of college students to develop the term stereotype threat.
Stereotype threat is when an individual internalizes the negative perceptions that are associated
with their race or gender. To demonstrate stereotype threat, an empirical study of Black Stanford
University students who entered the university with the same GPA as their White peers were
asked to identify their race before taking a component of the verbal SAT exam. Steele (1997)
concludes that this requirement alone led Black students to perform worse than their White
counterparts. The school principal plays a role in identifying the behaviors of teachers and
addressing them for Black students to see increased access and impact in school.
Race in Education Leadership Programs
The history of the United States is filled with stories of principals who were motivated to
pursue a career to help students in need. In the 1700s, Quakers opened schools for free slaves.
In the 1970s, educators opened the Harvey Milk High School for lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transgender and queer students in New York City (Blount, 2013). On the either hand, there are
principals who upheld barriers to education and narrowly defined the role being White and male.
As the demographic makeup of pre-kindergarten to grade 12 schools across the nation has
increased their enrollment of Black students, most education leadership programs have remained
constant (Hawley & James, 2010; Hoff et al., 2006). Traditional education leadership programs
continue to be void of content focused on racial proficiency and faculty members who have the
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

29
awareness, knowledge, and skills to transform their approach to leadership preparation (Hawley
& James, 2010).
Traditional Approaches to Principal Development
Murphy (2002) explained that the curriculum of education leadership programs has been
homogeneous, focusing heavily on theory around finance, leadership theory and general
management of school buildings. Murphy goes on to say that there needs to be a reimagined
way of preparing principals focused on the purposes of leadership. However, Murphy’s (2002)
call for reform to education leadership programs within the university resulted in minimal
response.
As the role of the school leader changed dramatically, the education to prepare for the
role has not (Brown, 2006). Brown suggested that education leadership programs utilize theory
as a central component of their teaching approach. On the rare occasions that programs do
address cultural proficiency, they focus on the sociological and economic hardships for Black
students but not race specifically. Minimizing race in course curriculum will leave principals
without any ability to confront racism and racist educational policy (López, 2010). To teach
aspiring leaders to be racially proficient, the teaching approach needs to be focused on self-
awareness, openness to different ways of thinking, greater awareness of social inequities and
social activism (Brown, 2006).
Education Leadership Program Faculty Behaviors
The faculty of education leadership programs must be willing to be public advocates of
the type of learning principals need to be ready to support a diverse group of learners. Shoho
(2006) described three factors that impede a faculty member’s ability to be a public advocate:
knowledge, motivation and fear. There are some faculty who hold a belief that issues of race are
not present any more. Others do not realize their own biases and how it impacts their
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

30
interactions with students. To increase their knowledge, faculty need to be willing to be
transparent learners and grow with their students (Carpenter & Diem, 2013). This is difficult for
faculty who often perpetuate a colorblind mentality. There is also a lack of interest in
developing racially responsive principals (Rusch, 2004). Oftentimes faculty in education
leadership programs only teach what they know or have experienced.
Rusch (2004) analyzed survey responses from 114 faculty of educational administration
from 85% of the UCEA-affiliated education leadership programs. There were two purposes of
the study. The first was to investigate the perceptions of conversations on gender and race
among education leadership program faculty. A second purpose was to locate any progress as
well as changes in approaches to issues of gender and race in educational leadership programs.
The results of the study showed that topics focused on race were assigned to a small subset of
faculty members who were often new, female or non-White. This meant that aspiring principals
only engaged in conversations that would support their development towards racial proficiency if
they had an individual faculty member willing and able to lead the conversation and who had
been assigned to do such (Rusch, 2004). Finally, there is fear of talking about issues of race in
the classrooms. Surveyed faculty members attributed this fear to lack of knowledge or
disinterest. Often faculty who have not facilitated such discussions, fear that the conversation
may get out of control and leave a negative impression on students (Rusch, 2004).
Latest Trends in Education Leadership Programs
Researchers Davis, Gooden, and Micheaux (2015) analyzed the Interstate Leaders
Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) standards introduced in 1996 and revised in 2008. They noted
that equity was not mentioned throughout any of the standards. They also observed that the
absence of equity from the standards will continue to leave principals unprepared for the
changing landscape of public education. In October 2015, the new standards to define education
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

31
leadership were released. They are now known as the Professional Standards for Educational
Leaders (PSEL). The newest iteration has a separate ‘equity’ standard that is new in the field.
However, the new standards were not developed with equity as the central guiding lens
(Galloway & Ishimaru, 2017). Also, in 2015, the U.S. Congress passed the Every Student
Succeeds Act (ESSA). The ESSA law required states to have a plan that directly targets students
who have been historically underserved. Together, these national milestones push education
leadership programs to align their curriculum and faculty to the changing demands of the
position (Davis et al., 2015).
Use of Critical Race Theory in Curriculum
Using critical race theory (CRT) in education leadership programs is a means for
unpacking how racism impacts students and the role policy and systems play. Delgado and
Stefancic (2017) defined critical race theory as a legal movement that seeks to transform the
relationship among, race, racism, and power. CRT can be applied to other areas and has been
readily used as a lens to examine how the public-school systems in the United States is failing
Black students. Delgado and Stefancic (2017) described six unifying themes of CRT. The first
theme is that racism is a part of everyday. The second is that there are obvious reasons for
racism in our society. The third is that race is a social construction. The fourth theme is that
mainstream society participates in differential racialization. The fifth theme is that
intersectionality is key. The sixth and final theme of CRT is the importance of storytelling from
voices of color (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017).
In applying CRT to education Ladson-Billings (1998) wrote that while social justice
curriculum can discuss issues of social-economics or can focus on activism, issues of race are not
at the forefront. Gooden (2012) provided concrete strategies for using CRT to build an anti-racist
education leadership program. The first strategy would be to engage participants in developing a
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

32
working understanding of individual, institutional, and societal racism so that there is shared
understanding that racism is normal. A program would also ask participants to write a racial
autobiography. This exercise pushes participants to think about the role of race in their own
education as well as some bias-based beliefs they may hold that are negatively impacting Black
students. A final and key component of an anti-racist program is the use of data. A program
leveraging CRT would ask students to engage in an equity audit to bring any racial gaps in
achievement, suspensions, special education referrals and honors class referrals to the forefront
(Gooden, 2012).
Bustamante, Nelson, and Onwuegbuzie (2009) stated that educational leadership students
should be taught to collect school-level data to obtain a holistic view of a school’s
responsiveness to diverse groups. Leaders should not just look at test scores but see behind the
numbers and gain perspectives from the subgroups that are not performing to understand how the
school is not meeting their needs. CRT is a comprehensive structure for changing the tenets of
an education leadership program.
Developing Racially Responsive Principals
Education leadership programs need to prepare principals to be political figures who
recognize, unpack, and realign societal impacts to have lasting outcomes for the students and
communities in which they serve. Some education leadership programs have found their
graduates unprepared to engage in the multiple layers of social and cultural realities within which
students and school communities live every day. The field of educational leadership needs to
ground work in a frame that analyzes discrepancies and creates strategies to do something
proactively about them (Gooden & Dantley, 2012).
Diem et al. (2018) wrote a case study of an education leadership program in the Midwest.
Over the course of two years, they conducted interviews with 11 students, and conducted two
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

33
focus groups. They argue that education leadership programs must prepare aspiring leaders with
not just knowledge but the ability to act. Program faculty must model practices focused on the
purposeful addressing of social, political, and educational oppression. In addition, leaders must
adopt a stance of working with school stakeholders as opposed to working for those deemed to
be affected by issues of race and racism. The conclusions they made from their study was that
leadership preparation programs must provide opportunities for students to have conversations
about race as well as become politically savvy advocates to change how local educational
policies are developed and implemented (Diem et al., 2018).
Lightfoot (2009) shared five essential components of an anti-racist education leadership
program: conversations about race, critique of school policy and larger societal issues, valuing
culturally relevant pedagogy and recognition of impact of racism on students. Gooden and
Dantley (2012) further explained that these components cannot be in a separate class but must be
interwoven into the whole scope of the program. There also needs to be concrete strategies
taught to aspiring principals, so they graduate with not only theory but practice. Centering race
as the foundation of an anti-racist education leadership program while keeping the standards in
mind will lead to improved success of principals and the students they are responsible for
serving.
Clark and Estes’ (2008) Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational
Influences Framework
Clark and Estes (2008) developed a framework to identify gaps between goals and
performance within an organization. They specify how stakeholder knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences may be getting in the way of an organization reaching its full potential.
All the elements of the Clark and Estes (2008) framework were applied to Principals Lead staff
to meet their performance goal of infusing tenets of an anti-racist program into their facilitation
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

34
practice by demonstrating proficiency in the organization’s facilitator competencies focused on
racial equity. The first section will discuss influences on the stakeholder performance goal in the
element of knowledge and skills. Krathwohl (2002) describes four types of knowledge that are
important to distinguish when evaluating any knowledge gap. The four knowledge types are
factual, conceptual, procedural and metacognitive (Krathwohl, 2002). Factual knowledge is the
basic concepts and definitions needed to understand how to complete a task. Conceptual
knowledge is how all concepts work together to form an idea. Factual and conceptual
knowledge together are considered the knowledge of the what. Procedural knowledge is the
understanding of the steps or criteria for making decisions. Procedural knowledge is also known
as the knowledge of the how. Metacognition is the awareness and knowledge of self (Krathwohl,
2002).
Second, motivation influences on the attainment of the stakeholder goal will be
discussed. There are three common indicators related to motivation: active choice, persistence or
mental effort (Rueda, 2011). Active choice is deciding one over another, persistence is pushing
through despite distractions and mental effort is the exercise of developing new knowledge
(Rueda, 2011). Finally, organizational influences on achievement of the stakeholder goal will be
explored. Clark and Estes (2008) divides organizational influences into two areas: cultural
models and cultural setting. Cultural models are shared understandings of how the world works
or ought to work. Cultural settings are specific contexts where behavior is enacted. Stakeholder
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on performance were studied through the
methodology discussed in Chapter 3.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

35
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
Knowledge and Skills
Principals Lead supports principals at all levels to ensure improved school experiences
for students particularly the traditionally underserved. The organization has a goal that
Principals Lead’s facilitators will infuse tenets of an anti-racist program into their facilitation
practice by demonstrating proficiency in the organization’s facilitator competencies focused on
racial equity. For Principals Lead to meet this goal, they will need racially responsive facilitators
who have the skills and capacities to train principals to dismantle inequitable practices and
policies they see in schools. To do this, Principals Lead facilitators must have a certain set of
knowledge and skills. Clark and Estes (2008) state that excellent training and education are key
factors in increasing the competence level and outcomes of employees and the organization
overall. A review of literature focused on knowledge-related influences will show the
importance of knowledge attainment for Principals Lead facilitators to reach their goal.
Knowledge influences. Krathwohl (2002) describes four types of knowledge that are
important to distinguish when evaluating any knowledge gap. The four knowledge types are
factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive (Krathwohl, 2002). For Principals Lead to
meet their goal, there needs to be an understanding of the types of knowledge facilitators are
proficient in or may be struggling in. For the purposes of this study, there was a focus on three
of the four knowledge influences. The next section will describe each knowledge influence
supported by specific literature that explains what is needed for Principals Lead facilitators to
attain their goal.
Principals Lead facilitator competencies. Principals Lead facilitators need to
understand the competencies necessary to initiate and sustain conversations about race which is a
form of conceptual knowledge. Tatum (2009) shares the ABCs of creating inclusive
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

36
environments. They are affirming identity, building community, and cultivating leadership. She
believes that these are the primarily skill sets necessary to engage in conversations about race
and build a school and classroom community that supports diversity. Sue (2016) recognizes that
many facilitators and trainers often make mistakes when race comes up during conversations.
The response is usually to ignore the comment, sidetrack the conversation, end the conversation
or become defensive. Instead Sue gives eleven strategies that provide a roadmap for a facilitator
who wants to effectively initiate conversations about race in any setting. These skills need to be
introduced and practiced being effective. Krownapple (2016) details that the role of a culturally
competent trainer must support their participants as they move from processing their internal bias
to action. In order to effectively do this, he developed a rubric for facilitators. The rubric
highlights certain skills such as assessing cultural knowledge, valuing diversity, managing the
dynamics of difference, and adapting to diversity. Principals Lead facilitators need to engage
with principals around issues of racial inequity in their systems. To do this, a range of skills are
necessary particularly beginning and facilitating conversations about race.
Principals Lead facilitators and bias. Principals Lead facilitators need to recognize
their own bias in working with principals that are different from their own which is a form of
metacognitive knowledge. Horsford et al. (2011) asserts that the ability of educational leaders to
measure and assess their effectiveness in working with student, family, and community
populations is directly connected to their willingness to interrogate and acknowledge their own
deeply held beliefs and assumptions concerning students who represent racial, ethnic, economic,
or linguistic backgrounds or life experiences different from their own. This metacognitive effort
needs to happen before entering the profession. Bustamente et al. (2009) details further that
there is a need to focus principal preparation on examining personal biases, privilege, and beliefs
about others who are different, as well as guiding principles to develop racially responsive skills
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

37
and knowledge and the ability to assess schoolwide cultural competence. Principals Lead
facilitators must be able to unpack how their actions and interactions are impacting their ability
to meet the goal of teaching principals to lead for racial equity (Briscoe & de Oliver, 2012).
Principals Lead facilitators and pedagogy. Principals Lead facilitators need to know
how to support their aspiring and sitting principals to develop and practice anti-racist behavior
and curriculum in their districts which is a type of procedural knowledge. Horsford et al. (2011)
states that racially responsive principals recognize how important their pedagogical approach is
to their ability to successfully lead teachers and students representing diverse racial, cultural, and
ethnic backgrounds and experiences. Principals Lead facilitators must help principals identify
how behaviors such as colorblindness and deficit thinking (Fergus, 2016) are present in the
pedagogy of teachers. In education leadership programs, aspiring principals should be taught to
collect school-level data to obtain a holistic view of a school’s responsiveness to diverse groups.
Principals should not just look at test scores but see behind the numbers and speak to historically
marginalized groups of students that are not performing to understand how the school is not
meeting their needs (Bustamante et al., 2009). Having the ability to analyze data and
observations to monitor how students are being supported is procedural knowledge.
Table 2 is a synthesis of the literature. It shows how the literature shows three primary
knowledge gaps for Principals Lead facilitators to infuse racial equity into their practice. The
chart also categorizes each knowledge type and the type of assessment that could be used to
show Principals Lead facilitators acquiring the needed knowledge to be successful.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

38
Table 2
Knowledge Influence, Knowledge Types, and Knowledge Assessment
Organizational Mission
We build the capacity of educational leaders, at every level of the system, to confront inequities and
create the conditions necessary for all students to thrive.
Organizational Performance Goal
By June 2020, Principals Lead will help principals address issues of racial inequity in schools and
districts by integrating the tenets of an anti-racist program into 100% of its curriculum.
By May 2019, 100% of Principals Lead’s facilitators will infuse racial equity into their facilitation
practice by demonstrating proficiency in the organization’s facilitator competencies focused on racial
equity which are:
● Demonstrates self-awareness and attends to the relationship between the participants/group
and the facilitator.
● Utilizes frameworks, tools, strategies, and processes to support participants to examine their
personal and institutional biases and their effects.
● Fosters inclusion and utilizes strategies and content that reflect and leverage the diversity
within the group.
● Customizes and integrates racially responsive learning designs (agendas, activities, etc.)
based on needs and culture of each group and intervenes or shifts mid-course when
necessary.
Knowledge Influence
Knowledge Type (i.e.,
declarative (factual or
conceptual), procedural, or
metacognitive)
Knowledge Influence
Assessment
Principals Lead facilitators need to
understand the competencies
necessary to initiate and sustain
conversations about race.
Conceptual Focus Group Interview: What
role do you think conversations
about racial equity should play
in training for school principals?
Principals Lead facilitators need to
know how to support their
principals to develop and practice
anti-racist behavior and curriculum
in their schools.
Procedural Focus Group Interview: What
actions does a principal need to
take to lead for racial equity?
Principals Lead facilitators need to
recognize their own bias in working
with principals that are different
from them.
Metacognitive Focus Group Interview:
Describe the role of race in your
leadership journey.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

39
Motivation
The ability for Principals Lead facilitators to deliver curriculum that incorporates the
tenets of an anti-racist program depends on how motivated they are to be involved. There are
three common indicators related to motivation: active choice, persistence or mental effort
(Rueda, 2011). Active choice is deciding one topic over another, persistence is pushing through
despite distractions and mental effort is the exercise of developing new knowledge (Rueda,
2011). For Principals Lead facilitators, motivation is going to determine how much they break
from the standard way of supporting principals and put in the effort to do something differently.
For Principals Lead facilitators, personal interest and utility value are two motivation-
related factors critical to accomplishing their goal. First, Principals Lead facilitators need to
have a personal interest that talking about race and equity is integral to being successful in their
role. Schraw and Lehman (2009) explain personal interest as a key component of motivation.
Second, Principals Lead facilitators need to see the utility value of engaging in conversations
about race. Eccles (2006) describes the importance of individuals seeing how a task directly
connects to their goals. This literature review will focus on personal interest and utility value
that impact principals’ motivation to lead for racial equity.
Utility value. Eccles (2006) describes utility value as to what extent a task fits into an
individual’s goals and plans. Eccles goes on to say that people’s motivation to engage in the
demands of any situation is influenced by the extent to which the situation provides opportunities
to experience autonomy, social relatedness, and a sense of competence. In applying this type of
motivation to a school setting, Eccles explains that if utility value is absent in classrooms then
individuals will not become engaged and will attempt to disengage by whatever means are
available to them (2006).
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

40
Principals Lead facilitators and utility value. Principals do not see the necessity to
change their approach to lead their schools even when the demographics shift (Cooper, 2009).
Young and Laible (2000) further explain that White principals do not have a thorough enough
understanding of racism in its many manifestations such as individual, institutional, or societal
racism, nor do they comprehend the ways in which they are perpetuating racism in their schools,
even though most are well-meaning individuals. They are not seeing the value in changing their
behavior. Education leadership programs such as Principals Lead can plant the seeds of the
value, but many other programs are currently falling short. There are at least 505 institutions
across the United States that offer courses in school administration (Brown, 2006) and most of
these programs fail to address racism in any meaningful way (Young & Laible, 2000).
Personal interest. Schraw and Lehman (2009) explain the role of personal interest in
learning. They share that there are three ways that personal interest increases learning: increased
engagement, the acquisition of expert knowledge, and making mundane tasks more challenging.
Schraw and Lehman continue to explain that personal interest contributes to learning moving
from short-term memory to long-term mastery.
Principals Lead facilitators and personal interest. The election of President Obama
gave a false sense of race relations in the United States. This belief system led to an increased
avoidance of conversations about race and a lack of desire of people to talk about how the
maltreatment of people could be based on the color of their skin (Carpenter & Diem, 2013).
Also, as communities’ demographics are changing, educators are choosing White flight versus
engaging in conversations that could support developing school-family partnerships that are
democratic, racially responsive, and beneficial to student learning (Cooper, 2009). There needs
to be a focus on personal interest to change the current behavior. This change must happen
before principals enter their roles. Principals Lead facilitators can lay the foundation for
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

41
cultivating the personal interest principals need to actively engage in the work of leading for
racial equity. As facilitators are challenging aspiring principals to learn and grow in their critical
examination of race-related issues, they must assume a role as an active participant and model
for the students by sharing their journey toward racial awareness (Carpenter & Diem, 2013).

Table 3
Motivational Influences and Motivational Influence Assessments
Organizational Mission
We build the capacity of educational leaders, at every level of the system, to confront
inequities and create the conditions necessary for all students to thrive.
Stakeholder Goal
By May 2019, 100% of Principals Lead’s facilitators staff will infuse tenets of an anti-racist
program into their facilitation practice by demonstrating proficiency in the organization’s
facilitator competencies focused on racial equity which are:
● Demonstrates self-awareness and attends to the relationship between the
participants/group and the facilitator.
● Utilizes frameworks, tools, strategies, and processes to support participants to
examine their personal and institutional biases and their effects.
● Fosters inclusion and utilizes strategies and content that reflect and leverage the
diversity within the group.
● Customizes and integrates racially responsive learning designs (agendas, activities
etc.) based on needs and culture of each group and intervenes or shifts mid-course
when necessary.
Assumed Motivation Influences Motivational Influence Assessment
Principals Lead facilitators do not see value in
intentionally looking for how they are
perpetuating racism in an individual,
institutional and societal level.
Focus Group Question: “What impact do
you see institutional racism have on the
experiences of students of color in
school?”
Principals Lead facilitators do not have interest
in discussing the role of race in education.
Focus Group Question: “What role do
you think race plays in the past and
current experiences of all students?”

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

42
Table 3 gives each assumed motivation influence a type of motivation. The assumed
motivation influences were derived from current research on university faculty, but are also
applicable to non-profit staff members who are serving in the same capacity as university
faculty. Table 3 also shows how each influence could be assessed.
Organization
Organizational influences are another contributing factor to performance gaps in addition
to knowledge and motivation influences. This section focuses on a review of the literature of
organizational-related influences that are pertinent to achieving the stakeholder goal that by June
2020, Principals Lead will help principals address issues of racial inequity in schools and
districts by infusing racial equity focused content into 100% of curriculum. The review focuses
on the influences of clearly defined goals and objectives and the allocation of needed resources.
Clark and Estes (2008) indicated when organizational goals and policies conflict with
organizational culture, performance problems are likely to occur. Gallimore and Goldenberg
(2001) recognized these conflicts and analyze organizations using two different areas: cultural
setting and cultural models. Cultural settings are concrete and include the employees, their tasks,
how and why tasks are completed, and the social context in which their work is performed.
Cultural models are the unseen and oftentimes unwritten modes of being within an organization
(Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Each of the influences has a defined impact on facilitator’s
ability to integrate racial equity content into the curriculum.
Clear messaging. For Principals Lead facilitators to effectively adapt their approach in
working with principals, Principals Lead must provide clear messaging on the goals of the
organization. Clark and Estes (2008) stated that the goals of an organization must be concrete,
challenging and current. Clark and Estes further indicated that common pitfalls regarding goal
setting is making stretch goals that are impossible to reach and making too many high priority
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

43
goals. Principals Lead recently developed and approved a three-year strategic plan. The
strategic plan includes six goals for Principals Lead to focus in on for the next three years. These
goals have been shared with all staff members and there are quarterly updates on the progress
towards each goal during staff meetings. This process is not a regular practice of Principals
Lead. The previous cultural model was of minimal transparency from the leadership team. The
leadership team also did not expect or seek shared ownership of the organization’s goals. This
cultural model led to staff confusion and unattained organizational goals.
A culture of trust and vulnerability. Principals Lead needs to establish a culture of
trust and vulnerability within the organization to achieve the organizational goal of infusing
racial equity into its curriculum. Berger (2014) discussed the importance of communication
within an organization and the impact it may have on an organization’s culture if there is a
collaborative effort from multiple levels of leadership within an organization to communicate.
Additionally, Carpenter and Diem (2013) discussed the need for educational leadership program
faculty members to show vulnerability and willingness to be transparent learners when having
conversations about race.
Over a year ago, the leadership team of Principals Lead went through a feedback process
from staff members. Individual staff members completed an anonymous survey asking them
about the actions of the leadership team against a set of leadership behaviors. The survey results
were followed by small focus groups led by peers. The focus group results were compiled and
shared with the leadership team. Because of this process, the leadership team has undertaken a
concentrated effort to build a stronger culture of trust and vulnerability. This includes technical
changes like weekly emails sent out to the full staff talking about what happened in the past
week as well as what is upcoming. It also includes adaptive changes where leadership team
members are having difficult conversations with each other about race and what implementing
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

44
the organizational goals means for the work. There are leadership team members who still
struggle with both the necessary technical and adaptive changes and do not see how transparency
will be help them be better organizational leaders. To meet this goal, the leadership team
members will need to become more transparent about the conversations about race they are
having with each other and the challenges they are facing in understanding what it means for the
organization to meet its goal.
Opportunity for professional learning. Principals Lead needs to dedicate time for
facilitator professional learning to be able to learn and practice the behaviors associated with
facilitating equitably. Young and Laible (2000) urged education leadership program professors
to take proactive steps to periodically revisit their knowledge base and analyze how race fits in to
the larger discourse of what principals are supposed to know and can do. López (2003) further
indicated that the curriculum of leadership preparation programs in university setting stays
stagnant for multiple semesters. The standard education leadership program curriculum isolates
conversations about race to one separate course leaving the responsibility of discussing race to
only a handful of professors versus a collective responsibility (Young & Laible, 2000).
Principals Lead understands the need to provide dedicated time for staff members to
build their knowledge base. This understanding has translated into multiple opportunities for
facilitators to attend a variety of professional learning opportunities. Principals Lead has four
all-staff meetings a year. A portion of each of these meetings is dedicated to building the
knowledge base of facilitators. Additionally, Principals Lead is divided into teams. Each team
meets every four to six weeks. Each team meeting includes a critical conversation about race
usually based on a text. The amount and depth of these conversations is varying greatly based on
who leads the team. Also, although these meetings have been beneficial for some there is
recognition that there is more to be done for the organization to effectively meet its goal. For the
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

45
upcoming year, there is a plan to include racial affinity group conversations. Racial affinity
groups are when individuals meet by self-identified race. These types of groups allow for a
different level of conversation about race to occur because of shared experiences and minimized
judgments and insecurities. The collective effort and concentration on organizational learning
will hopefully result in increased staff knowledge and movement towards meeting the
organization’s goal.
Effective role models. Principals Lead needs to provide effective role models within the
organization’s leadership team who are already leading for racial equity. Schneider, Brief, and
Guzzo (1996) explained the tenets of a total organizational change model. The model stresses
the importance of focusing on the people within an organization for change to occur and be
successful. Schneider et al. also stressed the importance of leadership in leading the change.
Members of top management must embody and model the essence of the new climate, such as
communicating and sharing resources with one another. A top management team’s success in
delivering sustained improvements through system-wide change in climate and culture greatly
depends on that team’s ability to arrive at a shared vision and to be uniform in its commitment to
the change and to its goals (Schneider et al., 1996).
At Principals Lead, there has been collective responsibility amongst the members of the
leadership team to be role models for the organization’s new strategic plan by promoting
communication and positive interaction. Particularly team members who directly supervise
those who work with clients. This means that leadership team members answer questions from
facilitators as well as engage in difficult conversations.
There is also a dedicated leadership team member who has gone through extensive
training on facilitating conversations about race and leads the all-staff meetings. This leadership
team member also leads conversations amongst other leadership team members to build their
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

46
capacity to be models as well. Although, having one role model is a good start, Principals Lead
needs to continue to build the number of role models available for facilitators to look to reach
and sustain its goal.

Table 4
Organizational Influence and Organization Assessment
Organizational Mission
We build the capacity of educational leaders, at every level of the system, to confront inequities and create the
conditions necessary for all students to thrive.
Organizational Goal
By June 2020, Principals Lead will help principals address issues of racial inequity in schools and districts by
integrating the tenets of an anti-racist program into 100% of its curriculum.
By May 2019, 100% of Principals Lead’s facilitators will infuse tenets of an anti-racist program into their
facilitation practice by demonstrating proficiency in the organization’s facilitator competencies focused on
racial equity which are:
• Demonstrates self-awareness and attends to the relationship between the participants/group and the
facilitator.
• Utilizes frameworks, tools, strategies, and processes to support participants to examine their personal and
institutional biases and their effects.
• Fosters inclusion and utilizes strategies and content that reflect and leverage the diversity within the
group.
• Customizes and integrates racially responsive learning designs (agendas, activities, etc.) based on needs
and culture of each group and intervenes or shifts mid-course when necessary.
Assumed Organizational Influences Organization Influence Assessment
The organization should provide clear messaging on
the goals of the organization.
Focus Group Question: What is the impact of the
organization’s new mission and vision statements on
your work?
The organization needs to dedicate time for staff
professional learning to be able to learn and practice
the behaviors associated with facilitating equitably.
Focus Group Question: What type of training and
support do you think is necessary to effectively
facilitate conversations on racial equity?
The organization needs to establish a culture of trust
and vulnerability within the organization to achieve
the organizational goal of infusing racial equity into its
curriculum.
Focus Group Question: How do you respond to
pushback that you may have from principals who
may not believe conversations about racial equity is
an important topic?
The organization need to provide effective role models
within the organization’s leadership who already
leading for racial equity.
Focus Group Question: Who do you talk to when you
have a challenge facilitating content focused on race?

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

47
Table 4 introduces the organizational influences on the stakeholders’ progress toward
achieving the organizational goal. Each of the influences has a unique impact on Principals Lead
facilitators’ capacity to integrate race related content into the organization’s curriculum.
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation
and the Organizational Context
A conceptual framework brings together the key elements of a study to see connections
(Maxwell, 2013). Maxwell explains that there are multiple purposes of a conceptual framework
for a researcher. A conceptual framework can inform the design, help the researcher assess and
refine goals, develop realistic and relevant research questions, select appropriate methods and
identify potential validity threats to possible conclusions.
For this study, a conceptual framework connects the concepts of Clark and Estes (2008)
and critical race theory. Principals Lead facilitators’ knowledge, motivation and organizational
context was previously shared independent of each other; however, they do not remain in
isolation from each other. The conceptual framework provides the opportunity to see how each
element interacts with each other in pursuit of achieving the goal of helping principals address
issues of racial inequity in schools and districts by integrating the tenets of an anti-racist program
into 100% of its curriculum. Figure 1 illustrates this conceptual framework.
This figure outlines the relationship between the factors influencing Principals Lead
facilitators with each other and within the larger organizational context, leading to the
achievement of the stakeholder goal. Racially responsive principals need to have the ability to
lead students and communities that are different from their own (López, 2003). To do this, the
professors and instructors of education leadership programs must have a firm grasp of how to
teach such skills (López, 2003).

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

48

Figure 1. Interaction of stakeholder knowledge and motivation within organizational cultural
models and settings

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

49
The purple box at the top of the figure represents critical race theory. Critical race theory
is a legal movement that seeks to transform the relationship amongst race, racism and power
(Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). A key component of critical race theory is that racism is
pervasive, systematic, and deeply engrained. Critical race theory can be applied to other areas
and has been readily used as a lens to examine how the public-school system in the United States
is failing Black students (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). The tenets of critical race theory are the
lens through which education leadership programs were analyzed and brought the problem of
practice to the forefront. The bidirectional arrow under the critical race theory purple box
highlights the influence of the theory on the study.
The large blue circle represents Principals Lead’s cultural settings and cultural models.
An organization needs to be able to provide the training and support to effectively go through a
change. By analyzing Principals Lead through a critical race theory lens, Principals Lead has
some structures, policies and practices that are getting in the way of reaching the goal.
The orange and green circles are purposely placed within the large blue circle because
they represent the stakeholders who are the staff of Principals Lead. The orange knowledge
concentric circle overlaps with the green motivation circle to show the dependence and influence
they have on each other. The stakeholders’ knowledge and motivation must be equally
addressed to reach the organization’s goal. Stakeholders must equally increase their knowledge
of the history of race in education as well as be motivated to accept the role of race in education
in the United States. Together, these components lead to Principals Lead’s facilitators’ goal of
infusing tenets of an anti-racist program into their facilitation practice by demonstrating
proficiency in the organization’s facilitator competencies focused on racial equity. If all the
components are appropriately addressed the goal will be achieved.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

50
Conclusion
In summary, Chapter 2 provides an outline of the literature of why education leadership
programs are not adequately preparing principals because they do not possess the tenets of an
anti-racist program. The first section focused on the history of race in education in the United
States, the role of race in student success and how principals’ behaviors impact success. The
second section reviewed the past and current approach to leadership preparation programs and
opportunities for improvement. The chapter also discussed the conceptual framework of the
study and the role of critical race theory. The chapter ended with a review of the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational factors that affect the delivery of racially responsive education
leadership programs for principals. Chapter 3 will present the study’s methodological approach.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

51
CHAPTER 3
METHODS
This study examined the extent to which Principal Lead facilitators were racially
responsive themselves in order to develop and support racially responsive principals by infusing
tenets of an anti-racist program into their facilitation. The purpose of this chapter is to explain
the methodology for the research study, including the data collection and data analysis
procedures. In collecting this data, the purpose was to answer the research questions for the
study:
1. To what extent is Principals Lead meeting its goal of 100% of facilitators infusing
tenets of an anti-racist program into their facilitation practice by demonstrating
proficiency in the organization’s facilitator competencies focused on racial equity?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to
achieving this organizational goal?
3. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and stakeholder
knowledge and motivation?
4. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
The chapter explains what methods were used to collect data and criteria of the sample
facilitator population for each of those research methods. Chapter 3 also clarifies how the
instruments were administered. Information is included regarding efforts of the researcher to
ensure the validity, reliability, credibility, and trustworthiness of the research. The chapter
concludes with the ethical considerations for the facilitators who participated in the study, along
with limitations and delimitations of the research.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

52
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholders of focus were the facilitators at Principals Lead. Facilitators are
assigned to consulting contracts based on their skill sets and willingness to travel; therefore, the
number of contracts that a facilitator is assigned to varies from year to year. For this study, the
selection criteria included facilitators who were employed with Principals Lead for more than
two years, were actively facilitating sessions for Principals Lead and regularly attended
professional development opportunities held by Principals Lead. Facilitators had a variety of
perspectives of the new mission of the organization and its commitment to racial equity. These
multiple perspectives provided a more accurate view of the success of Principals Lead’s goal.
Focus Group Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. Facilitators who had been part of Principals Lead for more than two years.
Facilitators who have been with the organization for more than two years spoke to leadership
styles between the former and current presidents of Principals Lead.
Criterion 2. Facilitators currently facilitating trainings for principals. Facilitators
needed to be actively engaged in implementing the new curriculum developed by Principals
Lead and needed to speak to their experiences implementing the curriculum.
Criterion 3. Facilitators who were active participants in racial equity-focused training
provided by Principals Lead. Principals Lead used training as the primary vehicle to increase the
capacity of its facilitators. Facilitators had various levels of knowledge about implementing
racial equity-focused curriculum; therefore, it is important to see how different facilitators
leveraged the training they received to become better at their roles as facilitators.
Focus Group Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
The sampling strategy for this study was purposeful sampling. Merriam and Tisdell
(2016) explain that purposeful sampling highlights what is regularly seen. The facilitators of
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

53
Principals Lead were chosen because they represent the background of a staff member of a non-
profit education organization. Non-profit education organizations hire former educators who
have success in the field.
For the focus group, 12 facilitators were asked to be part of the study and eight
facilitators were able to participate based on their availability to attend the time of one of the
focus groups. The focus group participants were representative of the full staff of Principals
Lead regarding gender, race and duration at the organization. Krueger and Casey (2009)
recommend smaller focus groups where the participants have in-depth knowledge; therefore, the
focus groups were split into two smaller groups to capture the knowledge and experience that
Principals Lead facilitators have in integrating tenets of an anti-racist program into the
curriculum and changing their facilitation approach. The focus groups were followed by
observation. Table 5 describes the participants.

Table 5
Demographics of Participants in Focus Groups
Participant Pseudonym Race Gender
Duration of Employment at
Principals Lead
1. Donald Black M 2
2. Marcus White M 12
3. Penny White F 4
4. Sasha Latina F 13
5. Susan White/Latina F 13
6. Sandy White F 12
7. Jennifer White F 4
8. George White M 13

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

54
Observation Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. Principals Lead were the primary facilitators and the content delivered
integrated the tenets of an anti-racist program. The ability to facilitate the new curriculum was
the central component of the study and data collection. It was important to see how the new
curriculum was implemented.
Criterion 2. The training was attended by principals. The principals were key
stakeholders in this study. The success of the facilitators of Principals Lead was measured by
their ability to impact the approach and mindsets of the principals they were training.
Criterion 3. The training included facilitators practicing racial equity-focused facilitator
competencies. The facilitators needed to leverage racial equity-focused facilitator competencies
to measure their success in implementing the new curriculum.
Observation Sampling (Access) Strategy and Rationale
At the end of the focus group, facilitators were asked about upcoming trainings they were
facilitating with principals that could be observed by the data collector. Since the tenets were
being integrated across all curriculum at Principals Lead, the focus of the chosen observation
was not based on content. The facilitators must have been part of the focus group. Due to time
constraints, the observation only occurred once with two facilitators. The training was filmed by
a co-worker and viewed by the researcher afterwards.
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) outline many elements that can be gathered during
observation. For the purposes of this study, the elements collected during the observations
included the actions of the facilitators, the activities and interactions, conversation and subtle
factors. Specifically, the data collector looked for evidence of the racial equity facilitator
competencies. The observation occurred after the focus groups to see how the words of the
facilitators aligned to the actions.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

55
Data Collection and Instrumentation
Data collection methods included focus groups, observations and document analysis.
The overall goal of the Principals Lead was action-oriented and the research questions required
that evidence was gathered to show that learning was applied, which is why a variety of methods
were necessary. The focus group allowed facilitators to share their personal perspectives on the
organizational goal. The observations gave an opportunity to see facilitators demonstrate their
ability to apply the written curriculum using the facilitation competencies associated with their
goal. The document analysis provided the measurement of how much the tenets of an anti-racist
program had been woven into the curriculum.
Focus Group
Focus group protocol. A semi-structured interview protocol was utilized. Merriam and
Tisdell (2016) explain that a semi-structured interview protocol allows for flexibility while still
having a specific set of data that is collected from each participant. A semi-structured interview
is the best approach for a group interview process when participants often respond and add to the
thoughts of each other versus the prompt provided by the interviewer. The questions asked of
the group were a mix of knowledge, motivation, and organizational questions that provided a
picture of the facilitators’ grasp of the research questions, their ability to apply it and what may
be getting in the way of the application. One of the questions asked was, “What is the impact of
the organization’s new mission and vision statements on your work?” This type of question
gathered data on the facilitators’ knowledge of the organization as well as their personal response
to it. The full list of questions can be found in Appendix A.
Focus group procedures. All facilitators currently teaching content focused on the
tenets of an anti-racist program were invited to attend one of two scheduled focus groups. The
group interview was led at Principals Lead’s headquarters within a conference room by the
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

56
organization’s Associate Vice-President of Research and Evaluation. Being in person for the
focus groups was important to establish a rapport with the group while maintaining neutrality
(Patton, 2002). The focus groups took place alongside the document analysis but before the
observations. The focus groups were placed between these collection methods so that the
document analysis informed the group interview questions and the focus groups honed the focus
of the observations (Patton, 2002).
Observation
Observation protocol. The focus of the observation was to observe the Principals Lead
facilitators teach sessions with principals. This focus was connected to the conceptual
framework of the study because it provided the data necessary to know if the organization set-up
the conditions and support necessary for Principals Lead facilitators to effectively facilitate. The
protocol for observation included an entry, observation and exit. The observation protocol was
amended since the observation was filmed and then reviewed by the researcher. As
recommended by Merriam and Tisdell (2016), the researcher focused on a set list of elements
which included the physical setting, the participants, activities and interactions, conversation and
subtle factors. The observation protocol is available in Appendix B.
Observation procedures. The Principals Lead facilitators teach in pairs; therefore, two
facilitators were seen. A portion of a six-hour training was filmed and shared with the
researcher. The observation happened after the group interview so that data could be collected
around perceived preparedness to teach the sessions and for the facilitators to voice any concerns
they had about pushback from participants during the observation.
Documents and Artifacts
A variety of documents were analyzed as part of this study. Outside and separate from
this study, Principals Lead administered surveys of all staff including facilitators. Three years
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

57
ago, Principals Lead organized an Equity Leadership Team (ELT). The goal of the ELT was to
drive the organization forward in becoming a more equitable organization. The members of the
ELT represented a cross-section of staff members from all divisions and levels of the
organization. In the past three years, the team developed an organization definition of equity,
invested in staff development and updated a variety of foundational documents. After three
years, the team decided to develop a survey to measure its progress. There were two surveys
developed. One for staff to complete to measure their individual progress. The results of the
individual survey can be found in Appendix E. The other survey was an organizational survey to
measure its progress in the areas of leadership, talent management, culture and communication.
The results of these surveys are included in this study and were analyzed to better understand the
perceptions of all members of the organization. The results of the organizational survey can be
found in Appendix F.
The lesson plan for the session facilitated by two facilitators was also collected. The
lesson plan was the written documentation of the session observed. Lesson plans are internal
documents to the Principals Lead but are public for all employees. The lesson plan provided
evidence of inclusion of the tenets of an anti-racist program within the planned lesson. In
reviewing the lesson plan, the researcher utilized a series of reflective questions to ensure the
authenticity of the document such as the history of the document and what was the maker’s bias
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The researcher also analyzed the feedback surveys of the principals
collected after the filmed observation.
Data Analysis
Focus groups were administered by the organization’s Associate Vice-President of
Research and Evaluation and the audio transcripts were sent out immediately for transcription to
Rev.com by the interviewer. The transcripts were scrubbed of identifiable information and
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

58
returned to the primary researcher. The thoughts of the interviewer were also collected allowing
for a documentation of thoughts and initial conclusions throughout the process. A total of eight
facilitators participated in the two focus groups. These initial data points allowed for data
analysis on the focus group data to begin. An initial codebook was developed from the
conceptual framework. In the first phase of analysis an initial codebook was used to allow codes
to emerge through the process. A second phase of analysis was then conducted where empirical
and prior codes were aggregated into analytic/axial codes. In the third phase of data analysis
pattern codes and themes that emerged were identified in relation to the conceptual framework
and study questions.
Qualitative data collected was in the form of staff surveys. Principals Lead administered
two surveys — one focused on individual perceptions and the other focused on organizational
perceptions. After all survey data was collected using Qualtrics, the survey was closed and a
distribution report generated information about responses, without identifiable information.
Qualtrics generated a downloadable report that provided the frequencies of responses for each
question. The Associate Director of Research and Evaluation at Principals Lead developed a
report summarizing the individual and organization survey reports.
The primary documents analyzed were the lesson plan and feedback surveys from
principals after the filmed observation. The document analysis brought in the secondary
stakeholder voices of principals. The lesson plan is attached in Appendix G. The summary of
the feedback survey results from principals after the filmed observation can be found in
Appendix H. The researcher looked for affirming and disconfirming evidence of what had been
seen through the surveys, interviews and observations. Results of the document analysis were
displayed through graphs as well as narrative. Triangulation was used with document analysis,
focus groups and observations to finalize assertions.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

59
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Three strategies were utilized to increase the credibility and trustworthiness of the study.
The first strategy was deepening the rapport with the facilitators. The facilitators were already
known to the researcher; however, this interaction was different. The researcher spent time
talking to each facilitator separately and discussed the research study and their role to increase
trustworthiness. Another strategy used was a written explanation of the study for each facilitator.
They each had an opportunity to review it before the group interview. A final strategy for
credibility was to do credibility checks. As described by Maxwell (2013), these processes
required the researcher to go back to the facilitators at regular times with some initial findings
and ask them if they agreed or had further insight. The sequence of the research dictated the
checks occurring after each data gathering point. The checks happened after the document
analysis, after the group interview, and finally after the observations.
Validity and Reliability
For this study, the primary methods of data collection were document analysis, focus
groups, and observations; therefore, triangulation was used to increase the validity of the study.
Triangulation is the use of multiple source of data collection for the intention of cross-checking
data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Each source of data provided a unique perspective on the
problem of practice. Together, the data tells a comprehensive story of the facilitators at
Principals Lead and their abilities to achieve the organizational goal to integrate tenets of an anti-
racist program into their curriculum. To prove reliability, the Associate Vice-President of
Research and Evaluation worked closely with the researcher to discuss data being collected and
to see if there was consistency in the interpretation of data collected.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

60
Ethics
At Principals Lead, the researcher also has the role of Chief Access and Equity Officer.
She supervises a small team of staff members and sits on the organization’s leadership cabinet.
In respect to this research, the facilitators report to a Vice President who supervises full-time
facilitators as well as part-time facilitators. The researcher did not supervise any facilitators that
were part of this study during the time of the study. In alignment of the suggestions given by
Glesne (2011) each facilitator was given a full verbal and written overview of the purpose and
scope of the research. Each facilitator was informed that their participation in the study was
voluntary and would not impact their formal evaluation nor their standing within the
organization. Each facilitator was also informed that the data collected throughout the research
will be kept confidential.
As Chief Access and Equity Officer, the researcher sits on the governing cabinet of the
organization. Principals Lead has gone through a metamorphosis as an organization to center
itself at the nexus of leadership and equity. Principals Lead believes that a school leader cannot
be effective in his/her work unless they are talking about issues of race. The new focused
mission requires all staff members have the capacity to facilitate content on racial equity. The
researcher’s role in achieving this new mission is to facilitate all-staff meetings. Therefore, the
researcher is a key contributor in supporting the organization reach its goal. Since the researcher
is a leader within the organization and contributor to reaching the goals of the organization, she
incorporated other members internal to the organizations in gathering research. Merriam and
Tisdell (2016) provide an outline of effective observation and interviewing which is why the
researcher utilized Principals Lead’s Associate Vice-President of Research and Evaluation to
facilitate the focus groups so that the information given was not impacted by the role of the
researcher.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

61
The assumptions and biases that the researcher needed to account for is directly
connected to her role within the organization. She has worked with staff members to gain the
skills necessary to master the facilitator competencies for the past year. She has already seen
various levels of knowledge and motivation from individuals. As suggested by Rubin and Rubin
(2012) she had to make sure that the new data collected during the research was not impacted by
previously collected anecdotal data. The researcher also accounted for the biases she may have
toward White people beginning their own journey to becoming more racially responsiveness.
Limitations and Delimitations
A primary limitation of the study was the power dynamic in the study and the impact of
the honesty of respondents. The facilitators in the study were all employed at the organization
where the researcher is part of the governing body. Therefore, facilitators may have been
hesitant to be truthful when answering focus group questions. As noted by the Associate Vice-
President of Research and Evaluation, some facilitators shared that they wanted to make sure the
researcher was successful in her study so wanted to ensure they answered each question as
completely as possible.
Measuring shifts in mindset and beliefs around race is a nuanced concept that can be
analyzed from many perspectives and approaches. There were several delimitations in the study
since the study was focused on the practices and perspectives of certain facilitators within the
organization. The focus group portion of the study was limited to facilitators who have been
with the organization for more than two years thus did not provide any specific data on the
perspectives of new facilitators. Furthermore, it did not take into consideration the perspectives
of principals or other important stakeholders. As explained in the conceptual framework, the
study was focused on the facilitators’ ability to infuse tenets of an anti-racist program into their
facilitation practice by demonstrating proficiency in the organization’s facilitator competencies
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

62
focused on racial equity. Facilitator practices were substantially impacted by the knowledge,
motivational, and organizational influences displayed in the framework. As facilitators were the
key stakeholder in the study, further research is necessary to investigate an anti-racist leadership
development program from the perspective of a principal and other important stakeholders.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

63
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the degree to which facilitators at the
organization, Principals Lead, became racially responsive by integrating tenets of an anti-racist
program into the curriculum. The analysis focused on the knowledge, motivation and
organizational influences that impact facilitators’ ability to train racially responsive school
principals. While a complete performance evaluation would focus on all stakeholders, for
practical purposes, this study only focused on the facilitators that work for Principals Lead.
The questions that guided this study were:
1. To what extent is Principals Lead meeting its goal of 100% of facilitators infusing
tenets of an anti-racist program into their facilitation practice by demonstrating
proficiency in the organization’s facilitator competencies focused on racial equity?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to
achieving this organizational goal?
3. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and stakeholder
knowledge and motivation?
4. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
In Chapter 3 the process for data collection was explained which included focus groups,
literature review, document analysis and observation. Chapter 4 will detail the findings that
emerged as a result of the data analysis. The data analysis included a transcript of two focus
groups of a total of eight facilitators. The focus group was facilitated by Principals Lead’s
Associate Vice-President of Research and Evaluation, transcribed by a service and then shared
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

64
with the researcher. Table 6 provides an overview of the focus group participants as well as
additional background information about each participant.

Table 6
Demographics and Background Information of Participants in Focus Groups
Participant Pseudonym Background Information Race Gender
Duration of
Employment
at Principals
Lead
1. Donald After being a principal for over 12
years within one district, Donald left
to become a facilitator at Principals
Lead. He currently works with many
principals in various districts focused
directly on supporting them becoming
more racially responsive.
Black M 2
2. Marcus Marcus is a former principal and
district leader. All his experience is
within one district. Marcus has been a
coach and facilitator for Principals
Lead for 12 years across the country.
In engaging in conversations about
race, Marcus has experienced one
group being more open to engaging in
conversations about race versus the
other.
White M 12
3. Penny Penny is a former principal from a
small Northeast state. She works for
Principals Lead on a part-time basis.
White F 4
4. Sasha Sasha has not served as a principal
previously but has been a well-
respected coach within one district for
many years. Sasha has led
professional development for her
colleagues on the role of race in
coaching. Sasha also received formal
external certification to lead
conversations about race.
Latina F 13

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

65
Table 6, continued
Participant Pseudonym Background Information Race Gender
Duration of
Employment
at Principals
Lead
5. Susan Susan worked her way up within
Principals Lead and has taken on a
variety of roles throughout her 13
years with the organization. Susan
leads the development and facilitation
of the all-staff meetings focused on
building competency of leading
conversations about race. She
currently works solely as a facilitator.
Susan has received formal external
certification to lead conversations
about race.
White/
Latina
F 13
6. Sandy Sandy is a former principal and district
leader. All her experience is within
one district. Sandy has been a coach
and facilitator for Principals Lead for
12 years across the country. Sandy
has worked primarily with principals
in a Southwest state that have been
resistant to engaging in conversations
about race.
White F 12
7. Jennifer Jennifer came to Principals Lead as an
intern and has worked her way up to
be a facilitator. She does not have any
principal experience. Jennifer
currently works with many principals
in a Southwest state that are not open
to having conversations about race.
She also works with a district in the
Southeast that has embraced
conversations about race.
White F 4
8. George George was never a principal but has
coached many first-year principals.
George has led professional
development for his colleagues on the
role of race in coaching. He currently
works with many principals from
various districts focused directly on
supporting them becoming more
racially responsive. George has also
received formal external certification
to lead conversations about race.
White M 13

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

66
Other collected data included a filmed observation of two facilitators, Donald and
George, and review of the lesson plan that detailed the observation. Donald, a Black male, has
been working for Principals Lead for two years. George, a White male, has been working for
Principals Lead for 13 years. Together, they have been working with a group of principals from
a midsized midwestern district for a few months.
A final document analysis was a staff survey. Principals Lead in collaboration with the
organization’s Equity Leadership Team (ELT) administered two surveys to all staff members in
August 2018. The ELT is a group of 10 staff members representative of all divisions of the
organization. Of the 60 surveys sent out by email, there were 53 responses for the individual
surveys for a response rate of 88.3%. The individual assessment asked questions in the areas of
personal belief, personal interactions and identifying Whiteness. There were 42 responses for
the organization survey for a response rate of 70%. Of the returned surveys, 100% were
complete surveys. The organizational assessment asked questions in the areas of leadership,
talent development, culture, professional development, and communication. Respondents of the
survey included the stakeholder group of facilitators as well as other members of the
organization; therefore, when discussing the survey results, the term ‘staff members’ will be
used. Research-based solutions are proposed and assessed in a comprehensive manner in
Chapter 5.
Findings
This section presents the findings of the study and is organized by research question.
Within each research question, the findings are organized by theme. For the first research
question, the themes emerged from the focus groups, filmed observation and document analysis
process to provide possible answers to the research question. For research question 2, the
findings are organized using the Clark and Estes (2008) model where knowledge, motivation,
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

67
and organizational influences are explored in relation to the organizational goal. For research
question 3, the themes emerged through survey analysis and focus groups. Chapter 4 culminates
with a synthesis section, which summarizes the findings and explains the significance of the
research. Chapter 5 will address research question 4 and provide recommendations for
organizational practice.
Research Question 1
The first research question in this study asked to what extent is Principals Lead meeting
its goal of 100% of Principals Lead’s facilitators infusing tenets of an anti-racist program into
their practice by demonstrating proficiency in the organization’s competencies focused on racial
equity. The essential tenets of an anti-racist education leadership program include self-
exploration, conversations about race and critique of school policy, programs and procedures as
well as larger societal issues. Each of these tenets were explored in the focus groups and evident
in the filmed observation. The facilitator competencies explored are: demonstrates self-
awareness and attends to the relationship between the participants/group and the facilitator;
utilizes frameworks, tools, strategies, and processes to support participants to examine their
personal and institutional biases and their effects; fosters inclusion and utilizes strategies and
content that reflect and leverage the diversity within the group; and customizes and integrates
racially responsive learning designs (agendas, activities, etc.) based on needs and culture of each
group and intervenes or shifts mid-course when necessary. This section presents the extent to
which the facilitators believe that this goal has been met.
Through the analysis of the data collected three themes of an anti-racist principal
program are evident. The first theme is self-exploration. Facilitators spoke of the importance of
self-exploration in the focus group and it was affirmed in the organizational survey. The second
theme shown through focus groups, the survey and the filmed observation is conversations about
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

68
race. The final theme seen through data analysis is critique of school policy, programs and
procedures.
Theme 1: Self-Exploration
The theme of self-exploration is evident in research and in the current practice at
Principals Lead. Young and Laible (2000) state that while anti-racism ultimately targets
institutional racism, anti-racist education must be focused on the individual, for it is the
individual who ultimately complies with or challenges the existing system of racism. Therefore,
one of the essential themes of an anti-racist program is self-exploration and it aligns with the
Principals Lead facilitator competencies that states, “Demonstrates self-awareness and attends to
the relationship between the participants/group and the facilitator.” Self-exploration as a
facilitator can be seen in multiple ways including sharing personal stories and naming your own
race and the oppression or privilege associated with your race. In the focus group and in the staff
survey, facilitators were asked about self-reflection and how it is evident in their practice.
All the focus group participants spoke to the importance of naming and being aware of
their own race in their work with principals. Focus group participant, Susan, a White and Latina
woman, who has been with the organization for 13 years, shared the importance of leading with
this at the beginning of a session: “the facilitator [must] share about themselves at the beginning
of the session . . . and their race.” Focus group participant Marcus, a White male and 12-year
employee, gave a specific example of naming race particularly White privilege when talking to
principals. He shared:
I think as far as demonstrating self-awareness, to what extent does the facilitator weave
his or her personal experiences and stories into the learning. So, for example in talking
about White privilege, I shared an experience I had a couple of months ago at a traffic
stop, where as a mature White man I was let off with a warning by a White police officer.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

69
And I doubted whether the outcome would’ve been the same had I been a young man of
color.
Donald, a Black male participant, with only two years at Principals lead, gave a different
perspective of being self-reflective: “Being able to see how one’s own race both in how you are
perceived and how you present may land differently on participants.”
Young and Laible (2000) explain that an anti-racist identity requires reflecting deeply
upon one’s own racial identity, becoming a scholar of race and racism, seeking out partnerships
and connections with members of oppressed groups, and being actively anti-racist in one’s
personal and professional life. Although facilitators Donald, Susan and Marcus each have
different lived experiences based on race and varied lengths of time at Principals Leads, they
could each give examples of how the reflection of their own racial identity is part of their
facilitation. This level of vulnerability and storytelling are key competencies in order to create
the conditions for principals to share their own stories and do their own self-exploration.
Guerra and Pazey (2016) state the importance of facilitators of education leadership
programs being willing to change themselves and explore their own upbringing and biases before
asking principals to do it themselves. This self-inquiry was highlighted in the focus groups and
substantiated with the Principals Lead staff survey. The results that are reflected in Figure 2
shows that 43 staff members completely or very much agreed that they are actively reflecting on
their biases compared to 11 staff members who moderately reflect on their biases. These survey
responses could be a result of the focus of the organization and the space provided to engage in a
variety of self-exploration exercises during staff development. The facilitator comments during
the focus groups in conjunction with the staff survey results show that the tenet of self-
exploration is one that has been integrated into the curriculum at Principals Lead.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

70

Figure 2. Staff members’ response rate from individual organizational survey administered by
Principals Lead when asked about their self-reflection

Theme 2: Conversations about Race
Conversations about race is another theme of an anti-racist program. One of the
Principals Lead facilitator competencies states, “Supporting participants to engage in authentic
dialogue recognizing the vulnerability, historical distrust, risk and discomfort demanded of
conversations regarding equity and race.” The research also supports the importance of this
theme. Guerra and Pazey (2016) share the challenge yet necessity of having conversations about
race amongst facilitators of education leadership programs. They discuss that most facilitators
are willing to engage in conversations where the topic is safe. However, facilitators avoid
conversations that could uncover certain prejudices and fear of being labeled as racist.
Conversations about race also has the potential for conflict. Guerra and Pazey (2016) believe
that these initial conversations are critical before facilitators can lead conversations about race
with principals. At Principals Lead the focus groups, filmed observation, and staff survey
2
2
4
16
23
39
1
8
9
1
1
1
1
0 54
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
I am aware of and reflect on my biases, assumptions, and stereotypes and their
impact on my thoughts, judgments, decisions, actions.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

71
provide evidence that engaging in conversations about race has become an expectation and a
regular practice of the organization.
Principals Lead staff understand the challenge of having conversation about race and can
name the support they received in practicing those conversations as an organization. Over four
years ago, staff members at Principals Lead participated in a two-day training facilitated by Glen
Singleton of Pacific Education Group. The training introduced the staff to a framework where
they could begin to engage in having difficult conversations about race. The continuing impact
of the training was stated by focus group participants. Marcus stated, “Well I think for this
organization, these sessions with Glen Singleton really represented the turning point.” Jennifer,
a White female facilitator who has been with the organization for four years, gave further
explanation to the impact of the training: “Now that we’ve had this training, we can really push
those difficult conversations, and now have to do it somewhat more publicly than small groups.”
The level of comfort in engaging in conversations about race continues to be a journey
for the full staff of Principals Lead. Respondents were asked two separate questions regarding
their level of comfort engaging in conversations about race. As shown in Figure 3, 44 out of 54
staff members or 81% felt like they could identify and reflect on the feelings that come up for
them when discussing race. Respondents were also asked if they are able to be fully present and
focused on what is happening in the group during difficult dialogues about race. Figure 4 shows
for this question, 33 out of 54 staff members or 61% feel like they do this completely or very
much. No one responded ‘not at all’ to this prompt. These two survey questions together show
that staff have built on their skills of self-reflection to be attuned to them in conversations about
race.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

72

Figure 3. Response rate of staff members from individual organization survey administered by
Principals Lead about their feelings during conversations about race

Figure 4. Response rate of staff members from individual organization survey administered by
Principals Lead about their comfort level during conversations about race

7
2
9
11
24
35
1
6
7
2
2
1
1
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 54
I can identify and reflect on the feelings that come up for me (i.e. fear, shame,
stress, guilt, anger) when discussing race.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
4
3
7
11
15
26
3
15
18
1
2
3
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 54
I am able to be fully present and focused on what is happening in the group and in
myself during difficult dialogues about race.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

73
Principals Leads facilitators were able to build on their comfort level in having
conversations about race within the organization to speak directly about the importance of
having difficult conversations about race as an important skill for the principals they are
supporting. Most facilitators spoke of the importance of wanting to see principals having
conversations about race as evidence of them being racially responsive. Three facilitators were
able to explicitly emphasize this point. Penny, a facilitator that has been with the organization
for four years, said, “I would want to see them actually have the difficult conversations, whether
it be with faculty members, staff members, parents, whatever.” Susan added, “So I wouldn’t
want them to just stop on those one on one conversations, and sort of intervene on just the mind
set alone.” Finally, Jennifer noted:
I would want to see both explicitly that leader can talk about race, like their own race,
racial kind of identity, but also talk about race with others, versus like the kind of coded
language that might be used in the building.
Penny, Susan and Jennifer are all White, female facilitators who all spoke to the critical skill of
being able to engage on an interpersonal level with a variety of different stakeholders in order to
be effective in the principal role.
There also was evidence of facilitating conversations about race in the recorded
observation. Donald, a Black male and George, a White male, have been working with a group
of principals from a midsized midwestern district for a few months. The principals in the district
are over 90% White and have been trained by traditional education leadership programs that do
not use tenets of an anti-racist program. The full session was six hours but only a portion of the
session was filmed. The principals in the session were all willing participants in the session.
The group of twelve principals were seated across three tables where they were able to talk to
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

74
each other. Before the recording, the principals were divided into three groups and were asked to
define what does racial equity look like through the lens of a parent, student or teacher.
The recorded portion shows the facilitators leading a conversation about race as part of
each group sharing their thinking. The conversation focused on participants grounding their
reflections on a shared definition of racial equity which is a key attribute of the competencies.
The facilitator, Donald, based the conversation in that shared definition. After each group
presentation, he noted, “I’m wondering how this is getting us to our shared definition of equity?”
This continual questioning helped participants keep the conversation focused on equity
specifically on race especially when the conversation drifted to other topics. Finally, Donald and
George had an interchange with each other where one challenged the other’s use of the phrase,
‘authentic reflection.’ The exchange allowed the facilitators to highlight the importance of
language as a racially responsive principal and that one may unconsciously have an impact on
stakeholders by the improper use of a word or phrase. Donald and George were able to engage
principals in a conversation about race because they had engaged in such conversations
themselves as facilitators at Principals Lead. The practice gave them the competency to keep the
principals focused and on topic. The importance of and practice of leading conversations about
race was evident in the focus groups, staff survey and filmed observations affirming it as an
element of an anti-racist education preparation program that is regularly practiced at Principals
Lead.
Theme 3: Critique of School Policy, Programs and Procedures
Diem et al. (2018) explain that there are those who believe facilitators in education
leadership programs should remain apolitical and thus avoid using their platform to guide
students toward developing any sort of political agenda, yet principals today operate in an
increasingly political line of work. However, they explain that today’s school leader must be
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

75
better prepared to advocate at the school and district levels against practices and policies that
inordinately penalize students from historically marginalized populations. To do this means
facilitators must be political and critical of current political structures (Diem et al., 2018).
Principals Lead facilitators recognize the importance of critiquing policy themselves as well as
their role in developing principals that can critique school policy, program and procedures.
In the staff survey, respondents were asked about the frequency in which they critique
policies and practices. Figure 5 shows that 31 out of 54 staff members said they only do this
moderately or somewhat. This data point shows that the overall staff have not been able to
integrate this skill into their everyday practice. However, facilitators were able to speak to this
skill during the focus group.

Figure 5. Response rate of staff members from individual organization survey administered by
Principals Lead about the frequency in which they critique policy and practices

2
1
3
5
10
15
6
16
22
4
6
10
2
1
3
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 54
I consistently interrogate current organizational policies and practices that
negatively impact people of color.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

76
Many focus group participants gave specific examples of how the skill of critique looks
in a racially responsive principal which is in alignment with the essential element of an anti-
racist program that requires critique of school policy, programs and procedures as well as larger
societal issues. Focus group participant Sasha, a veteran Latina facilitator, spoke directly to the
importance of countering deficit-thinking: “So, understanding that when there’s a system they
have created the discrepancy among the students, rather than saying, it’s the student’s fault for
not knowing, understanding that it is eight, nine years of poor schooling.” Susan, a veteran
White and Latina facilitator, shared:
the idea of really looking at the systems and structures in place in their building. And not
only their building, but what might be some of the district level systems and structures
that may be impacting. So really that system thinking.
And finally, George, a White male facilitator, added, “that’s extremely useful if you move from
the realm of yes there is structural racism in America to implicating the person in that work as an
educator.” Sasha, Susan, and George name that a racially responsive principal must make the
connections between the systems and structures of the school system and what is happening
inside of the classroom in order to see real shifts happen. The focus group participants also
recognize that in order to see this happen with principals, they must build the foundation for the
principals to make the connections. One way to make these connections is through story telling.
Providing space for participants to share individual stories in order to learn from each
other is another competency that facilitators need to utilize when supporting the development of
racially responsive principals to critique policy. Throughout the recorded observed session,
many of the principals were able to share stories as they are working to become racially
responsive principals. There were two females of color in the space and the rest of the principals
were White. A female, Latina principal reflected on the challenges of being a racially responsive
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

77
principal: “As a female of color in this system, how many times do we feel like we have the
supports we need to do the work we need to do?” This reflection speaks to the role of race while
critiquing policy. As a Latina, she feels more vulnerable in her position if she wants to push on
the structural inequities that she is seeing outside of her school building.
A female, White principal was able to share that as a White parent that works for the
district, she has layers of privilege and can navigate the system because of her race and
knowledge. A White, male principal talked about a conversation he had with a parent about their
internal work at the school and had to help the parent see that the teachers are not racist but need
to raise their racial consciousness to become more effective in their positions. Finally, another
White, female principal talked about how she is being mindful of her language and is reflecting
on if she is blaming others when discussing issues of inequities. All these examples show that
the facilitators, Donald and George, created an environment where the principals did feel
comfortable giving personal stories and sharing challenges to critique policy.
In the review of the lesson plan for the observed session there were many objectives for
the full day session; however, the observed portion highlighted two objectives which were:
increase frequency and depth of conversations about racial equity and identify policies, practices
and patterns in schools that allow inequities to continue. The facilitators, Donald and George,
were able to keep the conversation focused on these objectives throughout the session. It is also
evident that the facilitators were able to implement the lesson plan as written while also allowing
space for comments that were not directly related to the activity. The lesson plan and objectives
were in alignment to what the principals needed in order to continue to build their capacity and
make meaning of newly acquired content.
When the principals were asked to provide their written feedback after attending the
session, Figure 6 shows that the principals were satisfied with the content of the training and
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

78
believe that they will be able to immediately apply what they learned. They also believed that
the session contributed to their thinking and skills around leading for equity. When responding
to the open-ended questions, the principals gave more explicit feedback on what aspects of the
session impacted them. One participant shared, “I found that each part deepened my thinking
regarding MY role in developing beliefs and structures around equity.” Another participant
wrote, “The information was valuable in helping us understand we need to develop a common
understanding of equity within our buildings and how we need that to continue to move
forward.” The principal feedback of this session show that the facilitators were able to
demonstrate that they could provide the space for principals to use common definitions, make
connections to themselves and encourage conversations.

Figure 6. Responses from session feedback from principal participants of filmed observed
training

0 2 4 6 8 10
This session developed
my skills around
leading and/or
coaching for equity.
This session developed
my thinking around
equity
I will be able to
immediately apply what
I learned from this
session.
Principal Session Feedback
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

79
Although the results of the Principals Lead’s staff survey were not strong, through the
focus groups and filmed observation there is evidence that the facilitators at Principals Lead
recognize the need for racially responsive principals to have the ability to critique policy. It is
important to note that four out of the eight facilitators that demonstrated this skill have received
additional learning. Three of the facilitators have received additional certification on leading
conversations about race. Another facilitator is the only Black male in the group and has
engaged in extensive self-study in the area. These results may be a characteristic of how much
experience and practice staff members need to have in order to effectively integrate this
component.
Research Question 1 Findings Synthesis
The first research question in this study asked to what extent is Principals Lead meeting
its goal of 100% of Principals Lead’s facilitators infusing tenets of an anti-racist program into
their practice by demonstrating proficiency in the organization’s competencies focused on racial
equity. The focus group participants were representative of the full staff of Principals Lead
regarding gender, race and duration at the organization. They were able to name how three
specific themes were exhibited in their practice as well as how they would want it to show up for
the principals they are responsible for supporting. The responses by facilitators did not vary by
gender, race and duration; however, the depth of reflection was evident. Susan, Sasha and
George were more explicit in their reflections which may be a result of the additional training
they received on leading courageous conversations about race. In the filmed observation, both
facilitators showed proficiency in integrating the tenet of having courageous conversation about
race. Finally, the staff survey provided additional evidence of the larger Principals Lead staff
perceptions of integrating tenets of an anti-racist education leadership program into its
curriculum. Although the staff survey surfaced more hesitation than the focus groups and
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

80
observations, the discrepancies were not significantly large. Together the points of data show
that Principals Lead is successfully moving towards meeting its goal of integrating tenets of an
anti-racist education leadership program into its curriculum.
Research Question 2
The second research question in this study explored the knowledge, motivation and
organizational influences related to achieving the organizational goal. The application of Clark
and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis model was instrumental in identifying important influences
related to achieving the organizational goal. There were three knowledge influences analyzed
for this study. The first influence was that Principals Lead facilitators need to understand the
competencies necessary to initiate and sustain conversations about race — which is conceptual
knowledge. The second knowledge influence was procedural and stated, Principals Lead
facilitators need to know how to support their principals to develop and practice anti-racist
behavior and curriculum in their districts. The final influence was metacognitive knowledge and
stated that Principals Lead facilitators need to recognize their own bias in working with
principals that are different from them. Based on the analysis, all the knowledge influences
demonstrated by facilitators assist in achieving the organizational goal.
There were two motivation influences analyzed in relationship to the second research
question. The first influence stated that Principals Lead facilitators do not see value in
intentionally looking for how they are perpetuating racism in an individual, institutional and
societal level. The second influence states that Principals Lead facilitators do not have interest in
discussing the role of race in education. The evidence for these influences are inconsistent and
show some challenges the organization will face in its effort to meet its goal.
All the organizational influences were evident in the data collected in the study. There
were two cultural settings influences supported by the data collected in the study. The first one
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

81
stated that Principals Lead needs to dedicate time for staff professional learning to be able to
learn and practice the behaviors associated with facilitating equitably. The second one stated
that the organization should provide clear messaging on the goals of the organization. The data
also confirmed the two cultural model settings influences. The first one stated organization
needs to establish a culture of trust and vulnerability within the organization to achieve the
organizational goal of infusing racial equity into its curriculum. The other influence was that the
organization needs to provide effective role models within the organization’s leadership who are
already leading for racial equity. This section details findings related to the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences in this study.
Knowledge Influences on Education Leadership Programs
Through the data analysis there were three themes that emerged that aligned to each
knowledge area. The first theme connected to conceptual knowledge was that Principal Lead
facilitators know the role of race in education. The second theme is Principals Lead facilitators
understand that they play a significant role in the development and support of creating racially
responsive school leaders, which connects to procedural knowledge. The final theme aligns to
metacognitive knowledge and Principals Lead facilitators recognize the role of race in their
facilitation. These themes together create a picture that of what knowledge a facilitator needs to
have in order to effectively support the organizational goal of integrating anti-racist tenets into its
curriculum.
Theme 1: Role of race in education — conceptual knowledge. Through the focus
groups and staff survey, Principals Lead facilitators show that they know the role of race in
education, which is a basis for initiating and sustaining a conversation about race. The first
question participants were asked in the focus group was, “What role do you think race plays in
the experiences of students?” This initial question was to get an understanding of the conceptual
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

82
knowledge that participants had about the role of race in education in the United States. All
participants agreed that race played a role with students as well as staff. As stated by Jennifer, a
White facilitator:
Race is a part of the fabric of everyday life. It’s a part of the identity of who people are.
It’s part of the teaching and learning dynamic in terms of how people are, how students
are seen, what they are seen as, what they are seen as being capable of, what you know,
what issues or problems or gifts they bring into the classroom.
Marcus, a White facilitator added:
So if race has a tremendous impact on people’s lives, period, life in school is not separate
and apart from what people bring with them and after they leave. So, for students, for
staff, for everyone, if race plays an important role, which it does in their everyday lives,
then the school doesn’t exist in a vacuum.
Finally, George, a White facilitator noted, “it is fundamental to where students are, what schools
they go to, what, where they live, the experiences they bring with them. So it’s very much I think
it’s fully a part of everything.” Jennifer, Marcus and George are all White facilitators, so their
conceptual knowledge is not coming from a lived experience, but they are able to articulate
exactly how race impacts students on a regular basis in and outside of the school environment.
The staff survey showed a similar level of conceptual knowledge. As detailed in Figure
7, of the 54 respondents, 41 had a complete or very much understanding of how the history of
racism in the United States impacts current experiences. No staff member responded ‘not at all’
to this question. When the responses are reviewed by race, the staff of color have a stronger
level of knowledge than White staff members. However, overall the results show a high level of
conceptual knowledge. Together, the focus group and staff survey show that across the
organization, there is a basic understanding of the role of race in education.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

83

Figure 7. Response rate of staff members from individual organization survey administered by
Principals Lead asking about their conceptual knowledge of the role of race in education

Theme 2: Understanding role of support in being an effective facilitator —
procedural knowledge. Principals Lead facilitators understand that they play a significant role
in the development and support of creating racially responsive school leaders. During the focus
group, participants were able to share strategies they utilize when being a support. Sasha, a
veteran Latina facilitator, spoke to the need to challenge some principals in their thinking: “In
facilitation it’s about challenging those types of generalizations that are based on assumptions
that people say.” Jennifer, a White female facilitator, shared the importance of understanding
where the individual person is at in their own learning: “we need to meet people at the beginning
to push them as we go through a scope of work.” Finally, Penny, a veteran White female
facilitator, shared the importance of bringing out the silent voice in the room to develop a shared
learning amongst the group:
I find that in facilitation now I am paying much more attention to the quiet voice in the
room . . . And then I work really hard to get that voice having being heard more and more
in the room as the discussion goes on and the training goes on. And I have found that
5
6
11
12
18
30
2
10
12
0 54
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
I understand how the history of racism in the U.S. and around the world impacts
current dynamics and experiences.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

84
when that voice or preferably voices, when those voices are kind of validated and given
more play in the room, then I find that we name it. Then we name it, and then we really
start talking about it.
Sasha, Jennifer, and Penny gave specific strategies of challenging, bringing out the quiet voice
and meeting a principal where they are at in their learning which are all vital aspects of support
when developing racially responsive principals.

Figure 8. Response rate of staff members from individual organization survey administered by
Principals Lead asking about their procedural knowledge of the role of support in developing
racially responsive school principals

In the staff survey, respondents were asked how supportive they are of others who may
not be as far in their understanding of race and equity without judgment. Figure 8 notes that 31
or 58% of the respondents are only moderately or somewhat able to do this well. The responses
show that this is an area of growth and the need for additional supports and strategies on making
sure facilitators have the skills to support the development of racially responsive school
principals. The focus group and survey results together show mixed results in the area of
1
2
3
5
14
19
8
12
20
5
6
11
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 53
I meet others where they are in their understanding of race and equity without
judgment.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

85
procedural knowledge. This finding may be a result of the survey being a larger group of people
that are not as directly involved with the work as others or it could be a result of the stages of
learning for each individual staff member.
Theme 3: Recognizing role of race in facilitation — metacognitive knowledge.
Principals Lead facilitators recognize how their biases impact their facilitation. During the focus
groups, Penny shared, “a facilitator’s own race and own identity get brought in, like to the mix.
Right? And we believe actually that’s an effective facilitation strategy.” Donald, the only Black
male in the focus group talked about how he is intentional about the role of race in his
facilitation:
I as a man of color, I acknowledge for myself that race plays an integral part of my
everyday life, my everyday existence, whether I would want it to or not. And because it
does for me, and I understand the role race plays in our society and everything else that
falls under it, I intentionally throw my race into the ring when it comes to how I’m
facilitating, how I’m discussing what my role in the facilitation is, what my purpose and
what my goals are from facilitation.
Sandy, a White facilitator was able to share an alternative perspective on how her race is
connected to her facilitation:
As a White woman, if I’m facilitating in a room of all, or predominantly White educators,
there are a lot of assumptions that are coming out. A lot of statements that tend to be
made. So, I feel like that’s the first place to challenge the thinking.
Although the in the moment experiences are different for each of these facilitators, they all
recognize that race is present in the room and they need to speak about it and use it while
interaction with and supporting the development of racially responsive principals.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

86
For the individual staff survey, respondents were asked if they recognize how they were
racially socialized by society and how the experiences impact them today. Figure 9 shows that
45 out of 54 or 83% of staff members completely or very much agree with the statement. This
significant majority shows that staff members know that race plays a role in all their interactions;
therefore, it would play a role in their facilitation. The focus groups responses with the staff
survey responses show that Principals Lead facilitators are consciously aware of their race and
the races of those they interact with within and outside of the organization which will support
them as the work to prepare and support racially responsive school principals.

Figure 9. Response rate of staff members from individual organization survey administered by
Principals Lead asking about their metacognitive knowledge of the role of race in their
upbringing

Motivational Influences Education Leadership Programs
Both motivation influences analyzed in relationship to the second research question
provide challenges to how the organization will integrate tenets of an anti-racist program. The
6
2
8
12
25
37
1
5
6
2
2
1
1
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 54
I recognize how I was racially socialized by society and how these experiences still
impact me today.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

87
emerging theme of inconsistent personal interest of facilitators will make it difficult for the
organization to see full change.
Theme 1: Inconsistent personal interest. Personal interest is not consistent amongst
Principals Lead facilitators. The motivational influence stated that Principals Lead facilitators do
not see value in intentionally looking for how they are perpetuating racism in an individual,
institutional and societal level. Schraw and Lehman (2009) explain the importance of personal
interest in motivation and this was apparent in the focus groups. The focus group participants
were asked, “Are there any hesitations that you have had or that you have heard from staff
members about facilitating conversations about race?” This question led participants to discuss
how the hesitations stemmed from lack of motivation. Participants were able to give specific
examples of how they have not had the motivation to push the conversation about race with the
principals they were working with. Sandy, a White female facilitator, shared,
Yes, it’s something that I think I’m being conscious, deliberate and purposeful around it,
because that’s my, particularly with my White principals. So that I would say I definitely
made it my purpose this year to engage in that conversation with all of them, and I did. I
mean actually it was a purpose delivered way of doing it, because I was asking myself
why did I have more ease with my principles of color? And so then I challenged myself
to do that part.
George, a White male facilitator, also gave examples of why his colleagues have hesitated:
the other hesitation you know with some of my coaching colleagues has been — I don’t
wanna upset the apple cart mentality, which is that I’ve been working with the principal
for a number of years, they continually buy my services, we have good conversations,
and you know you know it’s sort of like you know you bring up race and it’s like, oh, you
know you know it makes people uncomfortable, right?
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

88
The comments made by Sandy and George demonstrate that for some staff members it is easier
and less uncomfortable to have a conversation about race. Their motivation is more aligned to
keeping their contracted work versus meeting the goals of the organization.
In the individual staff survey, respondents were asked two motivation-related statements.
As illustrated in in Figure 10, 56% of staff members are motivated to annually assess their equity
competency. Combining the focus group comments with the staff survey results gives an
indication that there are still issues of motivation within staff members at Principals Lead. In
Figure 11, staff were asked how often they are motivated to speak up and interrupt when they see
microaggressions and exclusionary practices occurring in their presence. Only 33% of
respondents are motivated to speak-up completely or very much. These results along with the
focus group responses shows that not all staff members see an individual responsibility to be
reflective and active to support the organization to reach its goal.

Figure 10. Response rate of staff members from individual organization survey administered by
Principals Lead when asked to respond to how often they assess their own anti-racist-related
goals

1
6
7
7
9
17
6
7
13
1
3
4
1
1
2
0 43
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
I annually assess my current level of equity competence and discuss related goals
for my professional development with my supervisor.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

89

Figure 11. Response rate of staff members from individual organization survey administered by
Principals Lead when asked to respond to how often they actively speak up and interrupt when
seeing racist behaviors

Organizational Influences on Education Leadership Programs
Two themes emerged in alignment to the organizational influences. In the focus group
and survey, it was evident that facilitators are looking for the organization to define its purpose
beyond an updated mission and vision in order to meet its goals. The second theme is conflicting
priorities. Facilitators spoke to the need for a non-profit organization to generate revenue as a
conflict that may prevent Principals Lead meet its goal.
Theme 1: Defining purpose beyond mission and vision. Principals Lead has formally
and informally laid the groundwork for a new approach to developing and supporting racially
responsive principals, but staff need further definition to act on the mission. The second cultural
organizational influences states that the organization should provide clear messaging on the goals
of the organization. Principals Lead updated its mission and vision statement over two years ago
to align with its new focus of interweaving leadership and equity. All the focus group
participants have been part of the organization before and after the new statements. To see if the
1
1
5
11
16
7
17
24
5
4
9
1
1
2
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 52
I speak up and interrupt racist microaggressions, exclusionary behaviors, and any
comments that occur in my presence which sound inappropriate or triggering.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

90
updated statements had an impact on the daily work of the facilitators, they were asked, “What
evidence do you have that new mission and statement has impacted how the organization
operates on a regular basis?” Penny, a White female facilitator, talked about the shifts she has
noticed since joining:
I’ve been with the organization since [20]14, I concur that in my mind equity has always
been, at the forefront of the work I’ve been doing. But I think that the organization has
brought it, and I think the vision and mission speak to that, brought it to an entirely new
level.
Susan, a White and Latina facilitator, agreed with this statement and added,
So this alone for me, the mission vision alone wouldn’t — for me, was not necessarily the
catalyst. It was the catalyst in conjunction with like making shifts in the other areas,
because I think at various times we did have mission and vision statements that spoke to
equity and racial equity, whether explicit or not.
The majority of the focus group participants spoke to the interplay between Gallimore and
Goldenberg’s (2001) concepts of cultural settings and cultural models. Principals Lead put into
place the mission and vision statements as part of their cultural settings; however, it was not until
clear moves were made to integrate the updated statements into every document and
conversation that it became part of the cultural model.
However, there is evidence that staff members need more than an updated mission and
vision. In the organizational survey one staff member wrote, “I think there is still confusion
about what the focus on equity, with an emphasis on race, actually means and how that shows up
with clients.” Another added:
the Leadership Academy has not (as far as I know) publicly defined (or adopted a
definition of) an equitable organization, nor b) publicly committed itself to that vision,
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

91
with regular action steps and updates provided to the staff so we can see how we are
working toward that goal.
Finally, a third staff member added, “I believe that there is dissonance in 1) what we want to be,
2) what we currently are, 3) how we sell ourselves to clients / eventually deliver to clients.” All
these staff members spoke to the need for Principals Lead to define what is an equitable
organization and ensure that all staff members have a shared understanding of that definition
alongside the updated mission and vision statement. Until this is defined, the organization will
be challenged to meet its goal.
Theme 2: Conflicting priorities. Conflicting priorities have hindered the organization’s
ability to prioritize racial equity internally and externally. In the organizational staff survey,
many staff members spoke to finances as one conflicting priority. One respondent wrote,
“Financial priorities always get in the way of equity as a priority.” Another staff member wrote,
“The fact that the organization must raise funds in order to exist. For example, I wonder if we
have signed contracts to work in districts that have no or very little interest in confronting
matters related to race.” Finally, a staff member added to this point, “The tension between our
mission / ideals and financial constraints can present a barrier, as the organization is not currently
in a financial position to make decisions or prioritize initiatives that are completely aligned with
our mission.” All these staff members raise the issue of how an organization that has a limited
budget keep racial equity as a priority especially if it does not immediately generate revenue.
Another conflicting priority shared by staff members is knowledge sharing. The
facilitators of Principals Lead live in various cities across the country and engage in work in
many cities which means that time for in-person conversation and knowledge sharing is limited
and inconsistent. In the organizational survey, one staff member stated:
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

92
Before, it felt like there were only certain ‘knowledge-holders’ when it comes to racial
equity and I hope that the professional learning and support that will now be coming from
the ELT [Equity Leadership Team] will help spread that knowledge across ALL staff.
Another staff member wrote, “It would be great to have more opportunities for all staff members
to engage in equity work, not just those members of the equity leadership team.” A third
member wrote:
Many of us are doing equity related design, facilitation and coaching, yet we do not have
time and support for us to reflect on our learning together. This support and capacity
building is vital to growing and sustaining our practice in different contexts across the
country.
All staff members point to the importance of being able to connect with other facilitators in order
learn from each other, but that practice is not in place.
Research Question 2 Findings Synthesis
The focus group participant responses and the survey results consistently complemented
each other through the analysis. Based on the focus groups and survey results, the knowledge
acquisition is present within all facilitators, which provides the foundation necessary to
effectively integrate the tenets of an anti-racist program. However, the organization faces
challenges in the areas of motivation and organizational influences. Although the research
provided a perspective that personal interest in being a facilitator that trains and supports racially
responsive school leaders may be an issue, the data collected from Principals Lead facilitators
pointed more to conflicting priorities around finances and knowledge sharing as the primary
reasons why motivation may be mixed creating a roadblock for the organization to meet its goal.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

93
Research Question 3
The third question in the study took an in-depth look at the interaction between
organizational culture and context and stakeholder knowledge and motivation. Through the
analysis of the organizational survey and focus groups, two themes emerged. The first theme is
that Principals Lead leadership needs to play a significant role in establishing the conditions for
facilitators to reach their goal. The second theme is that Principals Lead needs to provide
concrete time and structures for reflection and learning for facilitators to reach their goal.
Theme 1: Role of Principals Lead Leadership
Principals Lead leadership needs to play a significant role in establishing the conditions
for facilitators to reach their goal. Berger (2014) highlights numerous studies of companies that
have been successful, and they all point to the ability of leadership to value communication. The
communication is also not just one-way but creates the space for collaboration and feedback
across all levels of the organization. Berger’s findings are also apparent at Principals Lead.
Figure 12 shows that 31 out of 44 staff members believe that members of cabinet regularly
discuss with staff the organization’s vision and mission. It is important to note that the scale is
not as positive when it is broken down by race. For staff of color only nine out of 17 believe this
statement to be true. This discrepancy could be based on two comments given by staff of color.
When asked to identify a barrier in achieving statements, one staff member commented,
“Hierarchical org structure and lack of feedback/communication loops.” Another commented,
“There are assumptions and biases and mental models around people’s faith or political views
and perceived misalignment with [Principals’ Lead] mission and vision.” These comments show
that a combination of structures and assumptions impact staff of color’s perception of the
leadership of Principals Lead.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

94

Figure 12. Response rate of staff members from organizational survey administered by
Principals Lead disaggregated to show differences in response rate of staff of color versus White
staff

Theme 2: Time for Reflection and Learning
Principals Lead needs to provide concrete time and structures for reflection and learning
for facilitators to reach their goal. Kegan, Lahey, Fleming, Miller, and Markus (2014) coined the
term, ‘deliberately developmental organization’ around a believe that organizations prosper
when they put in the time and effort to support every staff member’s growth within and beyond
their position. They say that in a deliberately developmental organization it is about integrating
deeper forms of personal learning into every aspect of life in the company (Kegan et al., 2014).
The staff of Principals Lead was asked a series of questions around the support they received
from the organization in their personal growth. Figure 13 shows that staff members
overwhelmingly feel supported on building their declarative knowledge around being racially
responsive. Thirty-nine staff members strongly agreed or agreed to that statement compared to
five staff members who disagreed or did not know. The survey results are complemented by one
4
4
9
5
17
22
5
4
9
2
2
4
0 44
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
Members of cabinet regularly discuss with staff the organization’s vision, mission,
equity theory of action & the compelling reasons why our focus on equity is central
to the achievement of their overall organizational strategic goals.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

95
staff member who wrote, “I believe that bringing us together collectively for an all staff meeting
regularly is contributing to a positive culture of learning and reflection.” This data shows that
Principals Lead has laid the foundation for supporting staff and using deliberately development
organizational components to get there.

Figure 13. Staff response rate from organizational survey question administered by Principals
Lead disaggregated to show any differences in the responses of White staff versus staff of color

Kegan et al. (2014) state that deliberately developmental organizations must have
principles, practices and communities. Principles are the set of beliefs that the organization
operates from. Practices are the ways the beliefs are operationalized, and communities is the
how the organizations interact with each other (Kegan et al., 2014). Focusing on the practice
component of an organization, a second question asked if the organization provides sufficient
professional development to all staff. The responses to this question was almost evenly split.
Figure 14 shows that 23 members believed that enough professional development had been
provided while 21 disagreed or strongly disagreed. When the data is reviewed by race, staff of
5
5
13
20
34
2
2
4
1
1
0 44
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
I am supported by the organization in deepening my knowledge and building skills
around the role and presence of whiteness and anti-racist tools and strategies.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

96
color disagreed at a higher percentage than White staff members. One staff member of color
explained, “I feel that we still have work to do around prioritizing depth of learning topics and
reflection over the breadth of topics we explore.” Another staff member of color added, “The
organization has to show more consideration on the allotment of time given to discuss equity
issues.” The data and written explanations together show that although there are some practices
in place at Principals Lead they have not become a part of the culture.

Figure 14. Staff response rate from organizational survey administered by Principals Lead
disaggregated to show any differences in the responses from White staff versus staff of color

Organizations that are characterized as deliberately developmental place high value in
building communities where individuals are deeply valued as individual human beings,
constantly held accountable, and engaged in real and sustained dialogue (Kegan et al., 2014).
These communities help foster individual growth through specialized, individualized
development alongside collective development. A final question asked of staff members was if
they feel all staff are sufficiently trained in interrupting racism with clients and within the
1
3
4
5
13
19
6
7
13
3
3
6
1
1
2
0 44
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
The organization provides sufficient professional development for all staff to
deepen their equity competence across the full breadth of differences.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

97
organization. As illustrated in Figure 15, the responses to this statement showed that many staff
do not feel adequately trained. Thirty-six staff members disagreed or strongly agreed with this
statement versus 10 staff members who agreed. One White staff member shared, “at least from
my perspective, I haven’t quite figured out how to connect this to my professional work. I don’t
think I am any better at confronting inequities professionally or communicating effectively about
racial equity.”

Figure 15. Staff response rate from organizational survey administered by Principals Lead
disaggregated to show any differences by White staff and staff of color

During the focus group, the facilitators were asked, “What type of training and support do
you think are necessary to effectively facilitate conversations on racial equity?” as well as, “How
does [Principals Lead] provide opportunities for you to get support and feedback on facilitating
conversations about race?” George, a White male facilitator, spoke to the importance of
community when learning. He stated,
2
2
2
6
8
9
11
20
3
3
6
2
5
8
0 44
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
All staff are sufficiently trained in interrupting racism in our client work and
internally within the organization.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

98
I think there’s a tremendous amount of learning for us to come together and to really
appreciate what it is that we’re doing together, both to understand that more completely,
but also to be able to, to create that kind of networks of support together.
The hindrance of making this happen was shared by Jennifer, a White female facilitator, when
she said, “Because we do, we schedule client things and we don’t necessarily prioritize our own
learning.”
Facilitators in the focus group did provide some suggestions on how Principals Lead
could move forward in better supporting development. Penny suggested, “When someone is
facilitating when someone can come and you know, observe maybe for an hour or whatever, I
think there needs to be more opportunities for feedback.” George added, “It would be very
helpful for the organization to invest in kind of having your manager or someone who’s really
developing you go out and see you once or have someone video you.” Principals Lead has taken
the time to provide professional development but the outcomes of the development have not
reached a level to shift cultural settings.
Synthesis
The focus groups, observations and document analysis including the staff survey
provided key insights into the knowledge, motivation, and organizational barriers influencing the
ability of facilitators to integrate tenets of an anti-racist education leadership program into their
curriculum. The data validated gaps in all three areas. The focus groups and observations
demonstrated the knowledge facilitators have in supporting racially responsive school leaders,
but facilitators still do not feel like they are sufficiently trained to do the work and need more
ongoing feedback and support in this area. Focus group data and survey results identified key
areas of improvement for all facilitators to see the value of leading conversations about race with
their principals. The largest gap was in the organizational areas. Principals Lead leadership
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

99
needs to continue to be models of learning while being deliberate about integrating learning into
the fabric of the organization.
This chapter identified the key knowledge, motivation, and organizational influencers
that impact facilitators in developing racially responsive school leaders. Chapter 5 will provide
recommendations to close the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influence gaps and an
integrated implementation and evaluation plan to assess program outcome.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

100
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In Chapter 4, the first three study questions were answered. Through qualitative and
quantitative data analysis a variety of themes emerged that shows that Principals Lead still has
work to do to reach its goal particularly in the areas of motivation and organizational challenges.
Chapter 5 will answer the fourth study question, “What are the recommendations for
organizational practice in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources?”
This chapter discusses the significance of these findings aligned to theoretical principles and
provide recommendations to address areas in need of improvement. Like Chapter 4, the
recommendations are organized into categories of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences. Recommendations are context-specific and research-based to increase the likelihood
of successful implementation. The remainder of the chapter describes how the New World
Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) can be used to implement the
recommendations and evaluate the impact. The New World Kirkpatrick Model is organized into
four levels and is utilized in reverse order: Level 4: Results, Level 3: Behavior, Level 2:
Learning and Level 1: Reaction (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Effective use of the
Kirkpatrick model will provide important information about whether the recommendations are
providing the desired results in the practice of facilitators at Principals Lead.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

101
Table 7
Recommendations for Practice to Address Knowledge Influences
Knowledge Influence Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Principals Lead facilitators
need to understand the
competencies necessary to
initiate and sustain
conversations about race.
(D)
To develop mastery, individuals
must acquire component skills,
practice integrating them, and
know when to apply what they
have learned (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Social interaction, cooperative
learning, and cognitive
apprenticeships (such as
reciprocal teaching) facilitate
construction of new knowledge
(Scott & Palincsar, 2006).
Principals Lead needs to
provide facilitation
training to all staff with a
focus on the racial equity
competencies, so they can
know, understand and
practice using the
competencies while
receiving feedback in a
cooperative learning
experience.
Principals Lead facilitators
need to know how to
support their principals to
develop and practice anti-
racist behavior and
curriculum in their
districts. (P)
Providing scaffolding (modeling,
practice with feedback) and
assisted performance in a
person’s ZPD promotes
developmentally appropriate
instruction (Scott & Palincsar,
2006).
Facilitators need to create
a community of learners
where everyone supports
everyone else’s attempts
to learn.
Principals Lead facilitators
need to recognize their
own bias in working with
principals that are different
from them. (M)
The use of metacognitive
strategies facilitates learning
(Baker, 2005).
Principals Lead need to
provide individual
coaching to facilitators, so
they recognize their own
biases in a safe, non-
evaluative relationship.

Knowledge Recommendations
Introduction
The knowledge influences in Table 7 include all assumed knowledge influences and their
probability of being validated. The knowledge influences used to achieve the facilitators’ goal
were validated based on the most frequently mentioned knowledge influences to achieving the
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

102
facilitators’ goal during group interviews, observations, document analysis and the literature
review. The conceptual framework for this study was Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis.
Table 7 displays validated influences along with recommendations for these highly probable
influences based on theoretical principles.
Declarative Knowledge Solutions, or Description of Needs or Assets
To become racially responsive, Principals Lead facilitators need to understand the
competencies necessary to initiate and sustain conversations about race which is a form of
conceptual knowledge (C). Schraw and McCrudden (2006) state that to develop mastery,
individuals must acquire component skills, practice integrating them, and know when to apply
what they have learned. It is not enough to just have a training, but it needs to be followed up.
Therefore, the recommendation for Principal Lead facilitators is to receive facilitation training
with a focus on the racial equity competencies.
Sue (2016) recognizes that many facilitators often make mistakes when race comes up
during conversations. The response is usually to ignore the comment, sidetrack the conversation,
end the conversation or become defensive. Instead Sue gives eleven strategies that provide a
roadmap for a facilitator who wants to effectively initiate conversations about race in any setting.
These skills need to be introduced and practiced to be effective. Krownapple (2016) explains
that the role of a culturally competent trainer must support their participants as they move from
processing their internal bias to action. In order to effectively do this, he developed a rubric for
facilitators. The rubric highlights certain skills such as assessing cultural knowledge, valuing
diversity, managing the dynamics of difference and adapting to diversity. As highlighted in
Table 7, Principals Lead facilitators need to receive training in the competencies, so they can
engage with principals around issues of racial inequity in their systems.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

103
Metacognitive Knowledge Solutions, or Description of Needs or Assets
To become racially responsive, Principals Lead facilitators need to recognize their own
bias in working with principals that are different from their own — which is a form of
metacognitive knowledge. Baker (2005) mentioned that the use of metacognitive strategies
facilitates learning. A strategy to support metacognitive thinking from Principals Lead
facilitators is to provide individual coaching to facilitators so that they can reflect on their
practice on a regular basis.
Bustamente et al. (2009) explains that there is a need to focus school leader preparation
on examining personal biases, privilege, and beliefs about others who are different, as well as
guiding principles to develop racially responsive skills and knowledge and the ability to assess
schoolwide cultural competence. Principals Lead facilitators must be able to unpack how their
actions and interactions are impacting their ability to meet the goal of teaching principals to lead
for racial equity (Briscoe & de Oliver, 2012).
Procedural Knowledge Solutions, or Description of Needs or Assets
To become racially responsive, Principals Lead facilitators need to know how to support
their principals to develop and practice anti-racist behavior and curriculum in their districts —
which is a type of procedural knowledge. Scott and Palincsar (2006) state that providing
scaffolding (modeling, practice with feedback) and assisted performance in a person’s zone of
proximal development promotes developmentally appropriate instruction. A strategy to support
this would be to create a community of learners where everyone supports everyone else’s
attempts to learn.
López (2010) discusses the importance of facilitators knowing themselves before
integrating the tenets of an anti-racist program into their curriculum. One way to do an internal
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

104
exploration is to have others with you on the same journey. Guerra and Pazey (2016) detail their
personal journeys and how they leveraged each other to share their stories and perspectives.
Motivation Recommendations
Table 8
Recommendations for Practice to Address Motivation Influences
Assumed Motivation
Influence Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Principals Lead facilitators
do not see value in
intentionally looking for
how they are perpetuating
racism in an individual,
institutional and societal
level. (Value)
Learning and motivation
are enhanced if the learner
values the task (Eccles,
2006).
Facilitators should share with
each other how they are
intentionally unpacking racism
at various levels and the impact
on their facilitation in order to
encourage their colleagues who
do not see the value.
Principals Lead facilitators
do not have interest in
discussing the role of race
in education. (SE)
Feedback and modeling
increase self-efficacy
(Usher & Pajares, 2006).
Focusing on mastery,
individual improvement,
learning, and progress
promotes positive
motivation (Yough &
Anderman, 2006).
Principals Lead supervisors
should observe facilitators in
practice and provide feedback on
their ability to discuss race in
education during trainings to
increase self-efficacy.
Create time and space for
facilitators to talk to each other
and support each other in their
learning. This type of peer to
peer learning promotes self-
efficacy as well as promoting
positive motivation.

Introduction
As indicated in Table 8, self-efficacy was not validated but value was validated for
achieving the facilitators’ goal. The motivation influence of value was validated through group
interviews and document analysis particularly of the staff surveys. Clark and Estes (2008)
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

105
suggest that individuals make a choice, use mental effort, and persist in undertakings that make a
difference.
Value
Principals Lead facilitators do not see value in intentionally looking for how they are
perpetuating racism in an individual, institutional and societal level. Facilitators should share
with each other how they are intentionally unpacking racism at various levels and the impact on
their facilitation in order to encourage their colleagues who do not see the value. Learning and
motivation are enhanced if the learner values the task (Eccles, 2006).
Eccles (2006) describes utility value as to what extent a task fits into an individual’s
goals and plans. Eccles further explained that people’s motivation to engage in the demands of
any situation is influenced by the extent to which the situation provides opportunities to
experience autonomy, social relatedness, and a sense of competence. In applying this type of
motivation to a school setting, if utility value is absent in classrooms then individuals will not
become engaged and will attempt to disengage by whatever means are available to them (Eccles,
2006). Principals do not see the necessity to change their approach to lead their schools even
when the demographics shift (Cooper, 2009). Young and Laible (2000) further explain that
White principals do not have a thorough enough understanding of racism in its many
manifestations such as individual, institutional, or societal racism, nor do they comprehend the
ways in which they are perpetuating White racism in their schools, even though most are well-
meaning individuals. This belief is also reflective in the beliefs of Principals Lead facilitators.
They are not seeing the value in changing their behavior. Education leadership programs such as
Principals Lead can plant the seeds of the value, but many are currently falling short. There are
at least 505 institutions across the United States that offer courses in school administration and
most of these programs fail to address racism in any meaningful way (Young & Laible, 2000).
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

106
Therefore, as stated by the research, there needs to be opportunity for facilitators to speak to one
another about their experiences in order to show the value of the work.
Interest
Principals Lead facilitators do not have interest in discussing the role of race in
education. Feedback and modeling increase self-efficacy (Usher & Pajares, 2006). Focusing on
mastery, individual improvement, learning, and progress promotes positive motivation (Yough &
Anderman, 2006). Principals Lead supervisors should observe facilitators in practice and
provide feedback on their ability to discuss race in education during trainings to increase self-
efficacy. They should also create time and space for facilitators to talk to each other and support
each other in their learning.
Schraw and Lehman (2009) explain the role of personal interest in learning. They
discussed there are three areas how personal interest increases learning: increased engagement,
the acquisition of expert knowledge, and making mundane tasks more challenging. Further, they
explain that personal interest contributes to learning moving from short-term memory to long-
term mastery (Schraw & Lehman, 2009). There needs to be a focus on personal interest to
change the current behavior. This change happens before principals enter their roles. As
facilitators are challenging aspiring principals to learn and grow in their critical examination of
race-related issues they must assume a role as an active participant and model for the students the
powerful moments of sharing their journey toward racial awareness (Carpenter & Diem, 2013).
Principals Lead racially responsive facilitators can lay the foundation for cultivating the personal
interest principals need to actively engage in the work of leading for racial equity.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

107
Organization Recommendations
Table 9
Recommendations for Practice to Address Organizational Influences
Assumed Organization
Influence Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
The organization should
provide clear messaging on
the goals of the organization.
(Cultural Setting)
Organizational effectiveness increases
when leaders identify, articulate, focus
the organization’s effort on and reinforce
the organization’s vision; they lead from
the why (Knowles, 1980).
Understanding the meaning of racial
equity, diversity and access in your
organizational context enhances the
capacity to improve organizational
climate and outcomes. (Darling-
Hammond & Bransford, 2007; Lim,
Haddad, & Daugherty, 2013).
Principals Lead should continue
to start each all-staff meeting with
an overview of the organization’s
goals and progress towards goals
while highlighting particular
racial equity initiatives.
Also during all-staff meetings,
Principals Lead should give time
and space to make sure all staff
members know the definition of
racial equity, diversity and access
and how it should play out within
the organization internally and
externally.
The organization needs to
dedicate time for staff
professional learning to be
able to learn and practice the
behaviors associated with
facilitating equitably.
(Cultural Setting)
Effective leaders regularly engage in the
process of reflection in order to ensure
their actions promote an atmosphere of
inclusion and diversity. They facilitate
problem-solving strategies that promote
objectivity, racial equity, and inclusivity.
(Bensimon, 2005)
Principals Lead should diversify
the types of professional learning
offered to staff beyond all-staff
meetings and make sure learning
is delivered in an organized,
systematic way. These smaller
group setting allow higher levels
of reflection and create stronger
avenues to invite in diverse
perspectives and experiences.
The organization needs to
establish a culture of trust
and vulnerability within the
organization to achieve the
organizational goal of
infusing racial equity into its
curriculum. (Cultural Model)
Building the capacity of an organization
is crucial in improving the institution and
its accountability systems (Hentschke &
Wohlstetter, 2004).
Organizational effectiveness increases
when leaders are trustworthy and, in turn,
trust their team. The most visible
demonstration of trust by a leader is
accountable autonomy (Colquitt, Scott, &
LePine, 2007).
The leadership of Principals Lead
needs to consistently share their
individual progress becoming
more racially conscious in small
group meetings as well as in all-
staff meetings which will show
that all staff members are learning
and will be publicly learn.
The organization need to
provide effective role models
within the organization’s
leadership who already
leading for racial equity.
(Cultural Model)
Organizational effectiveness increases
when leaders behave with integrity. The
most powerful teaching tool a leader has
is leading by example, which is occurring
all the time, whether intended or not,
conscious or not (van den Akker, Heres,
Lasthuizen, & Six, 2009).
The leadership of Principals Lead
needs to be active role models for
staff members by regularly
bringing conversations about race
and leading for racial equity into
the conversation even if it is not
on the agenda.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

108
Introduction
The organizational influences in Table 9 include all assumed organizational influences as
well as recommendations. Even when stakeholders have the knowledge and are motivated,
Clark and Estes (2008) suggest that a lack of effective organizational cultural settings and
cultural models may prevent stakeholders from achieving their performance goals. Rueda (2011)
defines cultural settings as the visible characteristics of the daily workings in an organization,
while the cultural models are often invisible and a shared mental representation of the
organizations structures, values, practices, and policies that develop over time. Table 9
illustrates that the cultural model and cultural settings were validated based on the group
interview and document analysis particularly of the staff surveys.
Cultural Settings
Principals Lead should provide clear messaging on the goals of the organization.
Organizational effectiveness increases when leaders identify, articulate, focus the organization’s
effort on and reinforce the organization’s vision; they lead from the why (Knowles, 1980). In
conjunction with organizational effectiveness, understanding the meaning of racial equity,
diversity and access in your organizational context enhances the capacity to improve
organizational climate and outcomes (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2007; Lim et al., 2013).
Based on this research, Principals Lead should continue to start each all-staff meeting with an
overview of the organization’s goals and progress towards goals while highlighting racial equity
initiatives. Also, during all-staff meetings, Principals Lead should give time and space to make
sure all staff members know the definition of racial equity, diversity and access and how it
should play out within the organization internally and externally.
Also, as stated in Table 9, the organization needs to dedicate time for staff professional
learning to be able to learn and practice the behaviors associated with facilitating equitably.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

109
Effective leaders regularly engage in the process of reflection in order to ensure their actions
promote an atmosphere of inclusion and diversity. They facilitate problem-solving strategies
that promote objectivity, racial equity, and inclusivity (Bensimon, 2005). Principals Lead should
diversify the types of professional learning offered to staff beyond all-staff meetings and make
sure learning is delivered in an organized, systematic way. These smaller group setting allow
higher levels of reflection and create stronger avenues to invite in diverse perspectives and
experiences. Clark and Estes (2008) stated that the goals of an organization must be concrete,
challenging and current. Clark and Estes further indicated that common pitfalls regarding goal
setting is making stretch goals that are impossible and making too many high priority goals.
Cultural Models
Principals Lead needs to provide effective role models within the organization’s
leadership who are already leading for racial equity. Organizational effectiveness increases
when leaders behave with integrity. The most powerful teaching tool a leader has is leading by
example, which is occurring all the time, whether intended or not, conscious or not (van den
Akker et al., 2009). The leadership of Principals Lead needs to be active role models and
coaches for staff members by regularly bringing conversations about race and leading for equity
into the conversation even if it’s not on the agenda. Also, as illustrated in Table 9, the
organization needs to establish a culture of trust and vulnerability within the organization to
achieve the organizational goal of infusing racial equity into its curriculum. Hentschke and
Wohlstetter (2004) state that building the capacity of an organization is crucial in improving the
institution and its accountability systems. Colquitt et al. (2007) add that organizational
effectiveness increases when leaders are trustworthy and, in turn, trust their team. The most
visible demonstration of trust by a leader is accountability. The leadership of Principals Lead
needs to consistently share their individual progress becoming more racially conscious in small
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

110
group meetings as well as in all-staff meetings which will show that all staff members are
learning.
Berger (2014) explained the importance of communication within an organization and the
impact it may have on an organization’s culture if there is a collaborative effort from multiple
levels of leadership within an organization to communicate. Additionally, Carpenter and Diem
(2013) stated the need for educational leadership program faculty members to show vulnerability
and willingness to be transparent learners in having conversations about race. Communication
and vulnerability together will provide the experience through cultural models necessary for
facilitators to reflect on how they are doing in integrating tenets of an anti-racist program into
their curriculum.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
This study’s implementation and evaluation plan was informed by the New World
Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The New World Kirkpatrick Model
recommends that the four levels of training and evaluation be implemented in reverse order,
starting with: Level 4 (Results), Level 3 (Behavior), Level 2 (Learning), and Level 1 (Reaction).
This model situates Level 4 to measure the results of the predetermined outcomes by using
leading indicators to ensure that critical behaviors are on track to achieve the desired results. In
Level 3, an organization can evaluate how much the individuals transfer what they learned in
training once they are back on the job. Level 3 includes critical behaviors, required drivers, and
on-the-job learning. The critical behaviors are the key behaviors that the individuals must
perform and required drivers are ways to monitor, reinforce and reward the continued use of
those behaviors (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). With Level 2 participants are evaluated on
the degree of the knowledge, skills, confidence, and commitment they learned from training
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

111
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Level 1 is the final level where the organization can evaluate
the participants’ reaction to the training in areas such as satisfaction, engagement and relevance
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Creating the implementation and evaluation framework
using this model places the organizational goal central to the plan for the recommendations for
solutions to be successful and spur change (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
The mission of Principals Lead is to build the capacity of educational leaders, at every
level of the system, to confront inequities and create the necessary conditions for all students to
thrive. The organizational goal is that by June 2020, Principals Lead will help leaders address
issues of racial inequity in schools and districts by integrating the tenets of an anti-racist program
into 100% of its curriculum. Successfully completing this goal will help close the racial
proficiency gap seen in Principals Lead’s education leadership program.
By May 2019, 100% of Principals Lead’s facilitators will infuse tenets of an anti-racist
program into their facilitation practice by demonstrating proficiency in the organization’s
facilitator competencies focused on racial equity, which are:
• Demonstrates self-awareness and attends to the relationship between the
participants/group and the facilitator.
• Utilizes frameworks, tools, strategies, and processes to support participants to
examine their personal and institutional biases and their effects.
• Fosters inclusion and utilizes strategies and content that reflect and leverage the
diversity within the group.
• Customizes and integrates racially responsive learning designs (agendas, activities,
etc.) based on needs and culture of each group and intervenes or shifts mid-course
when necessary.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

112
The stakeholder goal for Principals Lead’s facilitators was determined based on using the
standards used for all Principals Lead facilitators. The facilitator competencies for Principals
Lead were recently updated to explicitly include a competency that says, the facilitator stimulates
and sustains conversations regarding equity and race. For there to be change for principals, the
facilitators need to demonstrate effectiveness in these competencies which includes designing,
developing and delivering curriculum that meets the needs of principals. Failure to accomplish
this goal will lead to ineffective principals who are perpetuating racial inequities through policy
and practice.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
The leading indicators are used to measure accomplishments and undesirable outcomes
by tracking the critical behaviors impact on the desired outcomes (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). The proposed leading indicators external and internal outcomes, metrics, and methods are
shown in Table 10 and indicate if facilitators are achieving their desired results. It is expected
that with training, job aids, and organizational support the internal outcomes will be met. The
external outcomes should also be met as the internal outcomes are accomplished.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

113
Table 10
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
Increased facilitator
knowledge of what it means
to be an equitable school
leader.
Facilitator can provide
examples of characteristics of
an equitable school leader.
Observation of training
session taught by Principals
Lead facilitator.
Increased facilitator
knowledge of own’s race and
its impact on how they lead.
All facilitators can share their
racial autobiography.
Review of submitted racial
autobiographies.
Internal Outcomes
Increased facilitators’
understanding of facilitator
competencies.
Facilitator leverages
competencies to prepare for
90% of the sessions with
principals.
Notes of team feedback
sessions after facilitation.
Increased facilitators’
understanding of what is
means to teach using tenets of
an anti-racist program.
Facilitator integrates tenets of
an anti-racist program into
100% of the design of
training sessions with
principals.
Session design/lesson plan for
training sessions.
Increased facilitators’
awareness of the role of race
in their facilitation.
Facilitator strategically uses
portions of their racial
autobiography throughout
90% of all sessions.
Video/observation of
facilitator while conducting a
training.

Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. The stakeholders of focus are the facilitators responsible for
providing training to principals. The first critical behavior is that facilitators will reflect on their
experiences before, during and after facilitating a session with principals using the organization’s
competencies. The second critical behavior is that facilitators will feel comfortable having
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

114
conversations about race with colleagues. The third critical behavior is that facilitators will
continue to develop the organization’s content and curriculum to align with the tenets of an anti-
racist program. The specific metrics, methods, and timing for each outcome behaviors appear in
Table 11.

Table 11
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s) Method(s) Timing
Racially responsive
facilitators will reflect on
their experiences before,
during and after facilitating
a session with principals
using the organization’s
competencies.
Up to 12
times a year
Facilitators will reflect
with their teams after
each facilitation
experiences and notes
will be taken by the
team’s project manager.
After every
facilitation
engagement which
will be dependent
on each individual
facilitator’s
caseload.
Racially responsive
facilitators will feel
comfortable having
conversations about race
with colleagues.
4 times per
year
Observed conversations
about race with be
initiated by a variety of
facilitators and embraced
by all members in the
conversation.
Four times
throughout the
calendar year.
Racially responsive
facilitators will continue to
develop the organization’s
content and curriculum to
align with the tenets of an
anti-racist program.
Up to 12
times a year
The written curriculum
outcomes and activities
will show evidence of the
tenets of an anti-racist
program.
Three to four times
before each
facilitation
engagement.

Required drivers. Racially responsive facilitators require the support of their direct
supervisor, peers, and the organization to reinforce, encourage, reward, and monitor their
activities learned from trainings. Reinforcement is used to remind facilitators of what they
learned through job aids and varied training methods. Encouragement is a formal way to provide
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

115
support through coaching and critical friends groups. Rewarding, is recognizing the
demonstration of critical behaviors. Finally, monitoring ensures internal and external
accountability by monitoring performance of the facilitators. Table 12 shows the recommended
drivers to support critical behaviors of the facilitators.

Table 12
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical
Behaviors
Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
Provide regular professional development to facilitators using a
variety of learning methods.
Ongoing 3
Provide job aids in the form of written curriculum that is already
aligned to the tenets of an anti-racist program.
Ongoing 3
Encouraging
Provide access to coaching where facilitators can receive support in
their growth.
Ongoing 1, 2
Provide critical friends groups where facilitators can talk to each
other about their work in the field.
Ongoing 1, 2
Rewarding
Facilitators leveraging competencies will be highlighted in
organizational communication platforms (weekly CEO newsletter
and Yammer).
Monthly 3
Monitoring
Supervisors will observe facilitators in practice and provide
feedback aligned to the facilitator competencies.
Quarterly 1, 3
Facilitators will film themselves as a source of reflection and
feedback on their facilitation.
Twice a
year
1, 2

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

116
Organizational support. To ensure that the required drivers are implemented the
organization will provide the following support. First, continue to provide ongoing training to
facilitators while also diversifying the types of training formats. They will also provide space for
facilitators to meet as critical friends and receive coaching in their skill development.
Furthermore, facilitators will receive job aides in the form of a rubric to better understand how to
choose the appropriate curriculum and where to find the curriculum. Moreover, the organization
will provide continued resources for facilitators to develop new curriculum for their programs.
Finally, annually the organization will review the curriculum developed to ensure it is aligned to
the tenets of an anti-racist program as well as review the feedback from participants on how they
engaged and utilized the content shared by the facilitators.
Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. Upon completion of the recommended solutions the facilitators will be
able to:
1. Understand the competencies necessary to initiate and sustain conversations about
race. (D)
2. Recognize their own bias in working with principals that are different from them. (M)
3. Know how to support their principals to develop and practice anti-racist behavior and
curriculum in their districts. (P)
4. Have interest in discussing the role of race in education. (SE)
5. See value in intentionally looking for how they are perpetuating racism in an
individual, institutional and societal level. (Value)
Program. The learning goals provided in the previous section will be achieved through a
combination of training and coaching to increase the knowledge and motivation of the Principals
Lead facilitators. The training will be delivered through a variety of modes includes all-staff
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

117
meetings, team meetings, observation, job aids and personal reflection. The coaching will be
individualized and provide a safe space for reflection. The program will be ongoing to support
facilitators who are new as well as veteran facilitators who want to continue to hone their
practice. First, each facilitator will complete a self-assessment against the competencies. The
results of this self-assessment will allow them to work with the supervisor and the organizational
learning team to develop a learning plan. The learning plan will be directly connected to their
individual goals they develop each year but will not be used for formal evaluation purposes.
To support knowledge attainment, the components of the program include learning
through a variety of modes. All-staff meetings four times a year will provide an opportunity for
all facilitators to gain and practice common vocabulary. Team meetings will provide opportunity
for facilitators to develop and practice new curriculum. All-staff meetings and team meetings
will be supported by job aids that facilitators will be able to reference for their continued learning
throughout the time employed at Principals Lead. Critical friends’ groups will be an opportunity
for facilitators to talk amongst themselves about challenges in the field and support each other in
their development. There will also be opportunities for informal development through lunch
gatherings that will focus on readings, movies, podcasts and other resources.
To support motivation attainment, the program components will be focused on coaching.
Each facilitator will receive a coach that will support them in the implementation of their
learning plan. The coach will be separate from their rating officer and will be someone that has
content and coaching expertise. Coaching activities could include reflecting on personal implicit
bias, unpacking triggering events and unpacking progress towards proficiency in facilitator
competencies. Training and coaching together will provide facilitators that skills and motivation
necessary to meet their goal.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

118
Table 13
Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge: “I know it.”
Knowledge checks in team meetings through
discussions and practice.
During every team meeting which
occurs every 4-6 weeks.
Use of knowledge while developing curriculum. During design sessions that occur 3-4
times before every facilitation
session.
Procedural Skills: “I can do it right now.”
Shares personal stories of own journey to racial
consciousness during a session.
During the facilitated session.
Responding to the comments and perspectives
of principals during a session.
During the facilitated session.
Attitude: “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Retaking of organizational equity survey. At the end of the fiscal year.
Voluntary participation in smaller
organizational learning gatherings such as ‘chat
‘n chew.’
Periodically during the year.
Confidence: “I think I can do it on the job.”
Feedback from peers and supervisor during and
after the facilitated session.
After the facilitated session.
Dedicated time to discuss the facilitators
concerns about facilitation.
After the facilitated session.
Commitment: “I will do it on the job.”
1:1 discussions between facilitators after
facilitated sessions.
After the facilitated session.
Ask facilitators to write down and share how
they will implement what they have learned on
the job.
Periodically during the year.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

119
Evaluation of the components of learning. To apply what is learned to solve problems
and meet performance goals facilitators must have the knowledge and skills and motivation to
achieve their goals. Therefore, it is important to assess learning for both the conceptual and
procedural knowledge being taught. It is also important that the facilitators value training, are
committed, and confident so that they can apply what they have learned daily. As such, Table 13
lists the evaluation methods and timing for these learning components.
Level 1: Reaction
It is important to determine how racially responsive facilitators will respond to the
training and coaching received. Therefore, it is essential to confirm the quality of the training
and coaching received. Table 14 lists the reactions of the facilitators to the training and coaching
being favorable, engaging, and relevant.

Table 14
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Evaluation form Immediately after training
1:1 check-ins with facilitators Quarterly
Relevance
Evaluation form Immediately after training
During training checks for understanding During training
1:1 check-ins with facilitators Quarterly
Customer Satisfaction
Evaluation form Immediately after training
1:1 check-ins with facilitators Quarterly

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

120
Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the program implementation. Following the training the
participants will complete a survey (see Appendix C for the survey questions). The survey will
indicate relevance of the material to the role, participant satisfaction, commitment, attitude, and
confidence in applying what has been learned. During the check-ins the supervisor will fill out a
checklist aligned to the facilitator competencies (see Appendix D for the checklist).
For Level 1 and Level 2, during the 1-on-1 check-ins, the supervisor will fill out a
checklist that assesses the competency of the facilitators in the competencies which will be the
basis of feedback. During in person trainings, the instructor will conduct check-in with
facilitators about the relevance of the content to their work and addressing realistic issues
throughout the session. Level 2 will include checks for understanding of what is being presented
during the trainings.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. A year after the facilitation
support program has been in place, the organization will re-administer the organizational and
individual survey already administrated by the Equity Leadership Team (ELT). The survey will
measure the satisfaction and relevance of the training to the facilitators. It will also measure the
facilitator’s ability to provide data on perceived barriers to implementing the training provided
(Level 1), knowledge, skills, confidence, attitude, commitment and value of applying their
training (Level 2), application of the learning event to the facilitator’s ability to assess the
principal’s needs (Level 3), and the extent to which they are able to provide training aligned to
the tenets of an anti-racist program on a regular basis (Level 4).
Data Analysis and Reporting
In collaboration with the research team, the training program will be documented through
a white paper. A white paper is used in the field of non-profit organization to share learnings
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

121
and lessons for the broader field. They are usually less than 20 pages in length and provide
quick suggestions for other to use. The white paper will highlight the journey taken by
Principals Lead to transform itself and its facilitators into members that can develop and
facilitate tenets of an anti-racist principal preparation program. It will include the personal
experiences from facilitators as well as the impact on principals who experienced the new
approach to learning. Finally, the white paper will provide some suggestions and next steps for
organizations such as Principals Lead as well as traditional university-led principal preparation
programs that are looking to more accurately prepare aspiring principals for the changing needs
and demands of the public-school systems in the United States.
Summary
For the implementation and evaluation plan of this study the New World Kirkpatrick
Model is used (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Their four levels of training and evaluation are
used to ensure that facilitators have the knowledge, motivation, and organizational support to
implement the tenets of an anti-racist education leadership program. As with this model, this
training program starts with the identification of the outcomes, metrics and method to measure
the results of the targeted outcomes associated with the goal of Principals Lead. Next, the
program establishes the critical behaviors to assess if the facilitators are using what they have
learned once they are training principals. Furthermore, learning outcomes are identified and the
facilitators are evaluated on their learning and knowledge, attitude, commitment, and confidence
during the training. Finally, methods to assess how the racially responsive facilitators are
reacting to training were developed to determine their satisfaction, engagement, and the
relevance of the training. To implement change and maximize the program results it is important
to evaluate and analyze data collection during program implementation.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

122
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach
This study used a modified version of the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model as
the framework to identify the knowledge, motivation, and organizational goals of Principals
Lead facilitators to effectively integrate tenets of an anti-racist program into their curriculum.
The strength of the Clark and Estes model is that it provides a systematic approach to analyze
gaps in performance related to human causes (Clark & Estes, 2008). The model allows the
identification of both individual and organizational goals, from both short-term and long-term
perspectives. Another strength of the model is that it is applicable to real-world problems faced
in a variety of organizations versus a theoretical approach (Rueda, 2011). The Clark and Estes
model has many strengths but the model also has weaknesses. One identified weakness is the
time commitment. Organizational leaders may not be willing to dedicate the time needed to
progress through the four steps of the analysis. Additional weaknesses of the model include the
perception of leaders that the model is too complicated and too expensive to implement (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
Future Research
Emerging from this study are various potential opportunities for future researchers to
consider. One possible area is to conduct a more expansive longitudinal study. This study only
includes a small percentage of the staff members of Principals Lead during a short amount of
time. Being able to capture the data of a larger number of facilitators through the duration of a
year or longer would be able to better capture learning as well as implementation of learning.
Another area of research is to do a comparison of approaches to traditional education leadership
programs. All the research of the study was based on traditional education leadership programs
however the study was done in a non-traditional educational leadership program. A researcher
may explore how the different formats of the programs may have impacted the experiences of
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

123
the facilitators as well as the development of racially responsive school leaders. A final area of
future research may be a deeper dive into the mindset shifts of the facilitators at Principals Lead.
This study explored their actions with principals; however, the research does explain the
importance of the personal work. Focusing a study on the mindset shifts of the facilitators may
provide additional insights for the field.
Conclusion
As more Black students enroll into urban, suburban and rural public schools in the United
States, the need for racially responsive school leaders continues to rise. Education leadership
programs needs to change their approaches to better prepare new and aspiring principals. At
Principals Lead, the organization has taken on this responsibility and this study set out to
evaluate their ability to effectively have facilitators prepare racially responsive school leaders.
Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis model was used to generate and analyze knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences on teachers. Using this framework, the data revealed
that facilitators possess much of the knowledge and motivation to implement the tenets of an
anti-racist program, but lack the organizational supports required to continue to grow and learn.
Recommendations to address these organizational issues include improved and increased
training, enhanced communication, increased supports for collaboration, and evaluation of the
implementation plan to ensure success.
The implications of this study are for Principals Lead to become more intentional and
targeted in its curriculum development and support of facilitators so they can become a model
for traditional and non-traditional education leadership programs across the country. Without
Principals Lead and similar organizations leading the way, Black students will continue to face
systemic inequities that will leave too many of them far behind.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

124
REFERENCES
Allen, R. L., & Liou, D. D. (2018). Managing Whiteness: The call for educational leadership to
breach the contractual expectations of White supremacy. Urban Education.
doi:10.1177/0042085918783819
Baker, L. (2005). Developmental differences in metacognition: Implications for metacognitively
oriented reading instruction. In S. E. Israel, C. C. Block, K. L. Bauserman, & K.
Kinnucan-Welsch (Eds.), Metacognition in literacy learning (pp. 61–80). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bensimon, E. M. (2005). Closing the achievement gap in higher education: An organizational
learning perspective. New Directions for Higher Education, 2005(131), 99–111.
Berger, B. (2014). Read my lips: Leaders, supervisors, and culture are the foundations of
strategic employee communications. Research Journal of the Institute for Public
Relations, 1(1), 1–17.
Blount, J. M. (2013). Educational leadership through equity, diversity, and social justice and
educational leadership for the privilege imperative: The historical dialectic. In L. C.
Tillman & J. J. Scheurich (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational leadership for
equity and diversity (pp. 7–21). New York, NY: Routledge.
Briscoe, F. M., & De Oliver, M. (2012). Principals’ discursive constructions of low-income and
minority families identities: A marketplace racism/classism. Critical Inquiry in Language
Studies, 9(3), 247–280. doi:10.1080/15427587.2012.627028
Brown, K. M. (2006). A transformative andragogy for principal preparation programs. UCEA
Review, 45(2), 1–5.
Bruner, D. Y. (2008). Aspiring and practicing leaders addressing issues of diversity and social
justice. Race Ethnicity and Education, 11(4), 483–500. doi:10.1080/13613320802479059
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

125
Bustamante, R. M., Nelson, J. A., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2009). Assessing schoolwide cultural
competence: Implications for principalship preparation. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 45(5), 793–827.
Carpenter, B. W., & Diem, S. (2013). Talking race: Facilitating critical conversations in
educational leadership preparation programs. Journal of Principalship, 23(6), 902–931.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity:
A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 909–927.
Cooper, C. W. (2009). Performing cultural work in demographically changing schools:
Implications for expanding transformative leadership frameworks. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 45(5), 694–724.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (Eds.). (2007). Preparing teachers for a changing world:
What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Davis, B. W., Gooden, M. A., & Micheaux, D. J. (2015). Color-blind leadership: A critical race
theory analysis of the ISLLC and ELCC standards. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 51(3), 335–371.
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2017). Critical race theory: An introduction. New York: NYU
Press.
Diem, S., Carpenter, B. W., & Lewis-Durham, T. (2018). Preparing antiracist school leaders in a
school choice context. Urban Education. doi:10.1177/0042085918783812
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

126
Evans, A. E. (2007). Principals and their sensemaking about race and demographic change.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(2), 159–188. doi:10.1177/0013161X06294575
Fairclough, A. (2000). “Being in the field of education and also being a Negro . . . seems . . .
tragic”: Black teachers in the Jim Crow South. The Journal of American History, 87(1),
65–91.
Fergus, E. (2016). Solving disproportionality and achieving equity: A leader’s guide to using
data to change hearts and minds. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Furman, G. (2012). Social justice leadership as praxis: Developing capacities through
preparation programs. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(2), 191–229.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45–56.
Galloway, M. K., & Ishimaru, A. M. (2017). Equitable leadership on the ground: Converging
high-leverage practices. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 25(2).
doi:10.14507/epaa.25.2205
Gershenson, S., Holt, S. B., & Papageorge, N. W. (2016). Who believes in me? The effect of
student-teacher demographic match on teacher expectations. Economics of Education
Review, 52, 209–224.
Gilliam, W. S., Maupin, A. N., Reyes, C. R., Accavitti, M., & Shic, F. (2016). Do early
educators’ implicit biases regarding sex and race relate to behavior expectations and
recommendations of preschool expulsions and suspensions? New Haven, CT: Yale Child
Study Center.
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Boston, MA:
Pearson.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

127
Gooden, M. A. (2012). What does racism have to do with leadership? Countering the idea of
color-blind leadership: A reflection on race and the growing pressures of the urban
principalship. The Journal of Educational Foundations, 26(1/2), 67–84.
Gooden, M. A., & Dantley, M. (2012). Centering race in a framework for leadership preparation.
Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 7(2), 237–253.
doi:10.1177/1942775112455266
Guerra, P. L., & Pazey, B. L. (2016). Transforming educational leadership preparation: Starting
with ourselves. The Qualitative Report, 21(10), 1751–1784.
Guinier, L. (2004). From racial liberalism to racial literacy: ‘Brown v. Board of Education’ and
the interest-divergence dilemma. Journal of American History, 91(1), 92–118.
Hawley, W., & James, R. (2010). Diversity-responsive principalship. UCEA Review, 51, 1–5.
Hentschke, G. C., & Wohlstetter, P. (2004, Spring/Summer). Cracking the code of
accountability. USCUrban Ed, 17–19. Los Angeles: University of Southern California,
Rossier School of Education.
Hoff, D. L., Yoder, N., & Hoff, P. S. (2006). Preparing educational leaders to embrace the
“public” in schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 44(3), 239–249.
Horsford, S. D., Grosland, T., & Gunn, K. M. (2011). Pedagogy of the personal and professional:
Toward a framework for culturally relevant leadership. Journal of School Leadership,
21(4), 582–606.
Karpinski, C. F. (2006). Bearing the burden of desegregation: Black principals and Brown.
Urban Education, 41(3), 237–276.
Kegan, R., Lahey, L., Fleming, A., Miller, M., & Markus, I. (2014). The deliberately
developmental organization. Atlanta, GA: Way to Grow, Inc.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

128
Kendi, I. X. (2016). Stamped from the beginning: The definitive history of racist ideas in
America. New York, NY: Nation.
Khalifa, M. A., Gooden, M. A., & Davis, J. E. (2016). Culturally responsive school leadership: A
synthesis of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 1272–1311.
Kirkpatrick, J., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Four levels of training evaluation. Alexandria, VA:
ATD Press.
Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy
(2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: Follet.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41(4), 212–218. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Krownapple, J. (2016). Guiding teams to excellence with equity: Culturally proficient
facilitation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research
(4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1998). Just what is critical race theory and what’s it doing in a nice field
like education? International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 11(1), 7–24.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding
achievement in US schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3–12.
Lightfoot, J. D. (2009). Toward a praxis of anti-racist principalship preparation programs. In L.
C. Tillman (Ed.), African American perspectives on leadership in schools: Building a
culture of empowerment (pp. 211–236). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Lim, N., Haddad, A., & Daugherty, L. (2013). Implementation of the DOD diversity and
inclusion strategic plan: A framework for change through accountability. Santa Monica,
CA: RAND National Defense Research Institute.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

129
Lindsey, R. B., Robins, K. N., & Terrell, R. D. (2003). Cultural proficiency: A manual for school
leaders. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Logan, J. R., & Burdick-Will, J. (2017). School segregation and disparities in urban, suburban,
and rural areas. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science,
674(1), 199–216. doi:10.1177/0002716217733936
López, G. R. (2003). The (racially neutral) politics of education: A critical race theory
perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39, 68–94.
doi:10.1177/0013161X02239761
López, G. R. (2010). Mainstreaming diversity: “What’chu talkin’ about, Willis?” UCEA Review,
51(3), 6, 7.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Murphy, J. (2002). Reculturing the profession of educational leadership: New blueprints.
Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 101(1), 65–82.
NCLB. (2001). Reauthorization of the elementary and secondary education act. Public Law,
107(110), 2102.
Noguera, P. (2008). Creating schools where race does not predict achievement: The role and
significance of race in the racial achievement gap. The Journal of Negro Education,
77(2), 90–103.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

130
Powell, J. A. (2008). Structural racism: Building upon the insights of John Calmore. North
Carolina Law Review, 86, 791–816.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
Rusch, E. (2004). Gender and race in leadership preparation: A constrained discourse.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(1), 14–46.
Schneider, B., Brief, A. P., & Guzzo, R. A. (1996). Creating a climate and culture for sustainable
organizational change. Organizational Dynamics, 24(4), 7–19. doi:10.1016/S0090-
2616(96)90010-8
Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2009). Interest. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/interest
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory
Scott, S., & Palincsar, A. (2006). Sociocultural theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/sociocultural-theory
Shields, C. M. (2010). Transformative leadership: Working for equity in diverse contexts.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(4), 558–589.
Shoho, A. R. (2006). Dare professors of educational administration build a new social order:
Social justice within an American perspective. Journal of Educational Administration,
44(3). doi:10.1108/jea.2006.07444caa.001
Singleton, G. E. (2014). Courageous conversations about race: A field guide for achieving
equity in schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

131
Spraggins, T. (1970). Historical highlights in the education of Black Americans. Washington,
D.C.: National Education Association.
Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and
performance. American Psychologist, 52(6), 613–629.
Sue, D. W. (2016). Race talk and the conspiracy of silence: Understanding and facilitating
difficult dialogues on race. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Tatum, B. D. (2007). Can we talk about race?: And other conversations in an era of school
resegregation. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Theoharis, G. (2007). Social justice educational leaders and resistance: Toward a theory of social
justice leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(2), 221–258.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights. (2016). 2013–2014 Civil Rights Data
Collection: A first look [Report]. Washington, D.C.: Author. Retrieved from
https://ocrdata.ed.gov
Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2006). Inviting confidence in school: Invitations as a critical source
of the academic self-efficacy beliefs of entering middle school students. Journal of
Invitational Theory and Practice, 12, 7–16.
van den Akker, L., Heres, L., Lasthuizen, K. M., & Six, F. E. (2009). Ethical leadership and
trust: It’s all about meeting expectations. International Journal of Leadership Studies,
5(2), 102–122.
Werblow, J., Urick, A., & Duesbery, L. (2013). On the wrong track: How tracking is associated
with dropping out of high school. Equity & Excellence in Education, 46(2), 270–284.
Yough, M., & Anderman, E. (2006). Goal orientation theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/goal-orientation-theory
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

132
Young, M. D., & Laible, J. (2000). White racism, antiracism, and principalship preparation.
Journal of Principalship, 10(5), 374–415.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

133
APPENDIX A
GROUP INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Thank you for your participation in this research study on education leadership programs. Your
time and efforts are much appreciated. Your feedback is crucial to the study and will inform
current research on the approach to learning in education leadership programs.

If at any time you wish to stop participating in the study, you are free to do so. I will be
recording today’s conversation for the sole purpose of collecting an accurate record of your
responses. The data will be transcribed, and all identifiable information will be scrubbed from
the transcript to protect your anonymity. Are there any questions?

Knowledge

1. What role do you think race plays in the experiences of students?
2. How should conversations about racial equity be a part of training for principals?
3. What actions does a principal need to take to lead the agenda for racial equity?
4. Describe the role of race in your leadership journey.

Motivation

5. What evidence do you have that new mission and statement has impacted how the
organization operates on a regular basis?
6. Describe your approach to facilitating adult learning on the topic of racial equity.
7. How would you measure your progress towards meeting proficiency on the new equity
focused facilitator competencies?

Organization

8. What is the impact of the organization’s new mission and vision statements on your work?
9. What type of training and support do you think are necessary to effectively facilitate
conversations on racial equity?
10. Are there any hesitations that you have had or that you have heard from staff members about
facilitating conversations about race?
11. How does your organization provide opportunities for you to facilitate conversations about
race?
12. Do you foresee any pushback from principals who may not believe conversations about
racial equity is an important topic? What might be an example of your response?
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

134
APPENDIX B
OBSERVATION PROTOCOL
Entry
The first component of the observation will include selection of the session to observe. An
overview of the process with the staff who are facilitating the session as well as agreement on
how I will be introduced to the participants of the session.

Data Collection
Primary data collection will include:
1. Gathering Evidence Aligned to Facilitator Competencies and Critical Race Theory
Indicator
Facilitator A
S=saw
D= didn’t
see
Additional
Comments on
Facilitator A
Facilitator B
S=saw
D= didn’t see
Additional
Comments of
Facilitator B
Verbally names own race when
sharing perspective

Shares own stories related to race
Encourages different perspectives
different from their own

Gives space for personal reflection
Encourages participants who have
not spoken in large group discussion
to speak

Selected readings and video clips
represent the participants within the
group

Provides space for collective
conversations

Asks participants for their feedback
and learning throughout session

Connections between current events
and race are modeled

Connections between current events
and historical events are modeled

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

135
Definitions such as race, ethnicity
and culture are given

Incorrect definitions are clarified and
defined with examples

Encourages conversations of
participants to unpack how they see
race play a role in current society

Encourages connections between
race and other historically
marginalized groups (i.e., gender,
sexual orientation, religion)

Encourages participants of color to
share their stories

Additional Data to Collect:
1. Describe how the space is set-up
2. Describe the participants of the session.
o Total number:
o # of male. # of female:
o Self-identified races of participants:
3. List some of the questions asked of participants in relation to conversations focused on racial
equity
4. Describe any time that a participant questions the content, perspective or direction of a
facilitator and the facilitator response.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

136
APPENDIX C
PROGRAM EVALUATION SURVEY
For each of the questions below, circle the response that best characterized how you feel about
the statement.

Strongly
Agree Agree Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
I Don’t
Know
I annually assess my current level of
racial equity competence and discuss
related goals for my professional
development with my supervisor.

I am encouraged to participate in
external professional development
activities (workshops, courses,
conferences, etc.) to deepen my racial
equity competence.

I am supported by the organization in
deepening my knowledge and building
skills around the role and presence of
Whiteness and anti-racist tools and
strategies.

The organization provides sufficient
professional development for all staff to
deepen their racial equity competence
across the full breadth of differences.

All staff are sufficiently trained in
interrupting racism in our client work
and internally within the organization.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

137
APPENDIX D
SUPERVISOR OBSERVATION CHECKLIST
Context: This is a checklist that supervisors will use when observing facilitators and then
conducting 1-on-1 check-ins after the observation.

Indicator
S=saw
PS=partially saw
D=didn’t see
Additional
Comments for
Facilitator
Verbally names own race when sharing perspective
Encourages different perspectives different from their
own
Encourages sharing of personal stories

Gives space for personal reflection
Encourages participants who have not spoken in large
group discussion to speak

Selected readings and video clips represent the
participants within the group

Provides space for collective conversations
Asks participants for their feedback and learning
throughout session

Connections between current events and race are
modeled

Connections between current events and historical
events are modeled and encouraged

Definition of race is given and juxtaposed with ethnicity
and culture

Encourages conversations of participants to unpack how
they see race play a role in current society

Encourages connections between race and other
historically marginalized groups (i.e., gender, sexual
orientation, religion)

Encourages participants of color to share their stories
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

138
APPENDIX E
ELT SURVEY RESULTS
Individual Assessment: Fall 2018
In September 2018, the Equity Leadership Team asked staff to respond to two assessments in
order to help to better understand the effectiveness of our organization’s efforts to build staff
capacity in equity with a focus on race and address internal inequities in our practices, policies,
systems and structures. Fifty-three staff members responded to the individual assessment — the
following pages provide a summary of their results.
3

3
Four respondents identified more than one race.
Other 1
Hispanic or Latino 5
Asian 4
Black 14
White 35
Participant Demographics*
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

139
Condition 1
4
: Focus on personal, local and immediate

4
Please note that data labels are not shown for bars representing less than 5%.
7%
13%
15%
17%
19%
72%
48%
69%
65%
56%
17%
33%
11%
13%
15%
6%
7%
I am aware of and reflect on my biases, assumptions,
and stereotypes and their impact on my thoughts,
judgments, decisions, actions.
I am able to be fully present and focused on what is
happening in the group and in myself during diffcult
dialogues about race.
I recognize how I was racially socialized by society
and how these experiences still impact me today.
I can identify and reflect on the feelings that come up
for me (i.e. fear, shame, stress, guilt, anger) when
discussing race.
I recognize how I was racially socialized by my family
and how these experiences still impact me today.
0% 100%
To what extent do the following statements describe your behavior?
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

140

6
4
10
11
19
30
8
8
2
2
4
2
2
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 54
I recognize how I was racially socialized by my family and how these experiences
still impact me today.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
7
2
9
11
24
35
1
6
7
2
2
1
1
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 54
I can identify and reflect on the feelings that come up for me (i.e. fear, shame,
stress, guilt, anger) when discussing race.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
4
3
7
11
15
26
3
15
18
1
2
3
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 54
I am able to be fully present and focused on what is happening in the group and in
myself during difficult dialogues about race.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

141

6
2
8
12
25
37
1
5
6
2
2
1
1
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 54
I recognize how I was racially socialized by society and how these experiences still
impact me today.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
2
2
4
16
23
39
1
8
9
1
1
1
1
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 54
I am aware of and reflect on my biases, assumptions, and stereotypes and their
impact on my thoughts, judgments, decisions, actions.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

142
Condition 2: Isolate Race

6%
6%
9%
21%
30%
28%
33%
28%
57%
60%
42%
42%
42%
23%
9%
19%
15%
21%
6
%
I consistently interrogate current organizational
policies and practices that negatively impact people of
color.
I effectively bring up and discuss issues of race and
racism, and keep "race on the table" as one of the
factors to be considered.
I intentionally notice / track the full range of racial
dynamics that occur during conversations and
meetings.
I understand how the history of racism in the U.S. and
around the world impacts current dynamics and
experiences.
I recognize how institutional racism permeates societal
institutions including the legal, policing, justice,
education systems, etc.
To what extent do the following statements describe your behavior?
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
8
8
16
10
22
32
1
4
5
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 54
I recognize how institutional racism permeates societal institutions including the
legal, policing, justice, education systems, etc.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

143

5
6
11
12
18
30
2
10
12
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 54
I understand how the history of racism in the U.S. and around the world impacts
current dynamics and experiences.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
3
2
5
8
7
15
3
19
22
5
6
11
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 54
I intentionally notice / track the full range of racial dynamics that occur during
conversations and meetings.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
2
1
3
5
10
15
6
16
22
4
6
10
2
1
3
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 54
I consistently interrogate current organizational policies and practices that
negatively impact people of color.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

144

Condition 3: Normalize social construction and multiple perspectives

2
1
3
6
11
17
6
16
22
4
4
8
2
2
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 54
I effectively bring up and discuss issues of race and racism, and keep “race on the
table” as one of the factors to be considered.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
6%
7%
10%
15%
15%
19%
38%
63%
31%
47%
57%
66%
21%
28%
40%
32%
25%
13%
36%
13% 6%
I meet others where they are in their understanding of
race and equity without judgment.
I seek to learn about the experiences and perceptions
of those who are demographically different than me.
I actively seek opportunities to connect with and form
relationships with people demographically different
than me.
I connect easily with people demographically different
than me.
If I realize I have said or done something racist, I
readily acknowledge my behavior and apologize for
the impact.
If I am called out for saying something or acting racist,
I effectively listen to feedback, ask questions to
deepen my understanding, and acknowledge the
person's perspective.
0% 100%
To what extent do the following statements describe your behavior?
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

145

2
6
8
11
19
30
4
9
13
1
1
2
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 53
If I realize I have said or done something racist, I readily acknowledge my behavior
and apologize for the impact.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
5
5
10
9
26
35
3
4
7
1
1
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 53
If I am called out for saying something or acting racist, I effectively listen to
feedback, ask questions to deepen my understanding, and acknowledge the
person’s perspective.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
3
5
8
8
17
25
8
9
17
2
2
1
1
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 53
I connect easily with people demographically different than me.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

146

2
3
5
3
13
16
8
13
21
3
4
7
2
1
3
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 54
I actively seek opportunities to connect with and form relationships with people
demographically different than me.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
1
3
4
8
26
34
10
5
15
1
1
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 54
I seek to learn about the experiences and perceptions of those who are
demographically different than me.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
1
2
3
5
14
19
8
12
20
5
6
11
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 53
I meet others where they are in their understanding of race and equity without
judgment.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

147
Condition 4: Monitor agreements, conditions, and establish parameters

8%
8%
31%
28%
23%
26%
46%
40%
43%
43%
17%
21%
23%
15%
8%
8%
I speak up and interrupt racist microaggressions,
exclusionary behaviors, and any comments that occur
in my presence which sound inappropriate or
triggering.
I intentionally notice and effectively respond when
whites interrupt people of color, take over the
conversation, and/or recenter whiteness or white
issues.
I engage people in meaningful dialogue when I
experience one of their comments as inappropriate,
racist and/or triggering.
I can use triggering events as "teachable moments" for
those around when in a professional or work setting.
0% 100%
To what extent do the following statements describe your behavior?
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
2
2
4
6
8
14
8
15
23
2
6
8
1
3
4
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 53
I can use triggering events as “teachable moments” for those around when in a
professional or work setting.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

148

1
3
4
4
8
12
9
14
23
4
8
12
1
1
2
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 53
I engage people in meaningful dialogue when I experience one of their comments
as inappropriate, racist and/or triggering.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
2
2
9
6
15
3
18
21
4
7
11
1
3
4
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 53
I intentionally notice and effectively respond when Whites interrupt people of color,
take over the conversation, and/or recenter Whiteness or White issues.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
1
1
5
11
16
7
17
24
5
4
9
1
1
2
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 52
I speak up and interrupt racist microaggressions, exclusionary behaviors, and any
comments that occur in my presence which sound inappropriate or triggering.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

149
Condition 5: Use a working definition for race

19%
27%
38%
42%
21%
46%
54%
48%
37%
25%
8%
15% 8%
I can define and delineate between the terms "color,"
"culture" and "corner."
I can communicate to others why racial justice is one
of my core values and why I am committed to racial
justice work.
I know why racial justice is one of my core values and
why I am committed to racial justice work.
Racial justice is one of my core values.
0% 100%
To what extent do the following statements describe your behavior?
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
9
13
22
6
19
25
3
1
4
1
1
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 52
Racial justice is one of my core values.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

150

9
11
20
8
20
28
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 52
I know why racial justice is one of my core values and why I am committed to racial
justice work.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
8
6
14
6
18
24
4
9
13
1
1
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 52
I can communicate to others why racial justice is one of my core values and why I
am committed to racial justice work.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
5
5
10
3
8
11
5
14
19
3
5
8
2
2
4
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 52
I can define and delineate between the terms “color,” “culture” and “corner.”
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

151
Condition 6: Examine the presence and role of Whiteness

8%
12%
17%
23%
27%
56%
56%
63%
48%
46%
21%
27%
13%
27%
23%
13%
6%
I have a working definition of whiteness that I use to
analyze my experiences and interactions with others,
as well those around me.
I am aware of how my beliefs about what is "effective"
or "professional" has been influenced by my racist
socialization and white culture (i.e., leadership,
communication style, dress.)
I understand how white culture is infused into
organizational policies, practices, programs and
services.
I recognize the common daily indignities and racist
microaggressions that people of color experience.
I recognize the full breadth of unearned white
privileges that whites receive in society and in
organizations.
0% 100%
To what extent do the following statements describe your behavior?
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
10
4
14
6
18
24
2
10
12
1
1
1
1
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 52
I recognize the full breadth of unearned White privileges that Whites receive in
society and in organizations.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

152

11
1
12
6
19
25
1
13
14
1
1
1
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 52
I recognize the common daily indignities and racist microaggressions that people of
color experience.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
7
2
9
10
23
33
7
7
2
2
1
1
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 52
I understand how White culture is infused into organizational policies, practices,
programs and services.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
5
1
6
11
18
29
2
12
14
3
3
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 52
I am aware of how my beliefs about what is “effective” or “professional” has been
influenced by my racist socialization and White culture (i.e., leadership,
communication style, dress.)
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

153

Only Staff of Color:

White Staff Only:

2
2
4
12
17
29
1
10
11
2
5
7
1
1
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 52
I have a working definition of Whiteness that I use to analyze my experiences and
interactions with others, as well those around me.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
6 7 3 1
Staff of
Color
I identify the common attitudes, perceptions, behaviors and beliefs about people of
color that support the status quo.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
2 24 8 1 White Staff
I identify the common racist attitudes, perceptions, behaviors and implicit biases of
Whites that perpetuate the status quo.
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

154
The Six Conditions

5%
12%
14%
14%
20%
32%
27%
50%
41%
62%
54%
42%
43%
29%
31%
18%
21%
18%
19%
8%
11%
5%
6%
Condition 4: Monitor agreements, conditions and
establish parameters (n=211)
Condition 3: Normalize social construction and multiple
perspectives (n=318)
Condition 2: Isolate Race (n=264)
Condition 1: Focus on personal, local, immediate
(n=270)
Condition 6: Examine the presence and role of
whiteness (n=312)
Condition 5: Use a working definition for race (n=208)
Completely Very Much Moderately Somewhat Not at all
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

155
APPENDIX F
ORGANIZATIONAL SURVEY RESULTS
Organizational Assessment: Fall 2018
In September 2018, the Equity Leadership Team asked staff to respond to two assessments in
order to help to better understand the effectiveness of our organization’s efforts to build staff
capacity in equity with a focus on race and address internal inequities in our practices, policies,
systems and structures. Forty-two staff members
5
responded to the organizational assessment —
the following pages provide a summary of their results.

5
Four respondents identified more than one race.
None 1
Other 1
Hispanic or Latino 4
Asian 4
Black 11
White 28
0 30
Participant Demographics*
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

156
Leadership
6

6
Please note that data labels are not shown for bars representing less than 5%. Also note that one staff member did
not identify their race. Their response is not included in the all staff breakdowns.
5%
7%
16%
20%
45%
33%
45%
50%
20%
30%
27%
20%
16%
27%
14%
11%
9%
Members of cabinet demonstrate proficiency in the
Equity Leadership Dispositions in all aspects of their
work activities.
Members of cabinet intentionally seek out honest
feedback from colleagues and staff about their
effectiveness as a leader on issues related to
leadership and equity.
Members of cabinet regularly share their personal
passion and commitment to our organizational mission
and vision.
Members of cabinet regularly discuss with staff the
organization's vision, mission, equity theory of action &
the compelling reasons why our focus on equity is
central to the achievement of their overall
organizational strategic goals.
0% 100%
Leadership: To what extent do you agree with the following statements?
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

157

4
4
9
5
17
22
5
4
9
2
2
4
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 44
Members of cabinet regularly discuss with staff the organization’s vision, mission,
equity theory of action & the compelling reasons why our focus on equity is central
to the achievement of their overall organizational strategic goals.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
6
7
8
12
20
6
6
12
2
3
5
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 44
Members of cabinet regularly share their personal passion and commitment to our
organizational mission and vision.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
1
2
3
5
8
14
5
8
13
2
5
7
2
4
6
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 43
Members of cabinet intentionally seek out honest feedback from colleagues and
staff about their effectiveness as a leader on issues related to leadership and
equity.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

158

Talent Management

2
2
9
10
20
4
5
9
1
1
3
9
12
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 44
Members of cabinet demonstrate proficiency in the Equity Leadership Dispositions
in all aspects of their work activities.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
7%
14%
18%
18%
33%
28%
30%
14%
48%
12%
28%
32%
16%
7%
25%
68%
18%
53%
30%
All hiring, promotion, and dismissal decisions are made
transparent to all members of the organization.
Policies and processes for recruiting and hiring are
reviewed and revised annually to better achieve the
goals of diversity, equity and inclusion.
The organization shares benchmarks around
recruitment, promotion, and retention of people of color
with all staff.
Search committees are typically diverse by race and
other categories of diversity, and are committed to the
organizational goals for diversity, equity and inclusion.
The organization ensures a pipeline that seeks the
leadership of people of color.
0% 100%
Talent Management:
To what extent do you agree with the following statements?
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

159

3
3
11
12
7
5
12
3
3
5
8
13
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 43
The organization ensures a pipeline that seeks the leadership of people of color.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
2
12
14
4
1
5
1
1
8
14
23
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 43
Search committees are typically diverse by race and other categories of diversity,
and are committed to the organizational goals for diversity, equity and inclusion.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
1
7
8
9
11
21
4
3
7
2
6
8
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 44
The organization shares benchmarks around recruitment, promotion, and retention
of people of color with all staff.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

160

3
5
8
1
5
6
12
17
30
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 44
Policies and processes for recruiting and hiring are reviewed and revised annually
to better achieve the goals of diversity, equity and inclusion.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
2
4
6
4
8
13
6
8
14
4
7
11
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 44
All hiring, promotion, and dismissal decisions are made transparent to all members
of the organization.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

161
Organizational and Professional Learning

5%
9%
11%
12%
16%
18%
43%
77%
35%
40%
45%
30%
9%
33%
30%
14%
14%
19%
9%
18%
5%
5%
All staff are sufficiently trained in interrupting racism
in our client work and internally within the
organization.
The organization provides sufficient professional
development for all staff to deepen their equity
competence across the full breadth of differences.
I am supported by the organization in deepening my
knowledge and building skills around the role and
presence of whiteness and anti-racist tools and
strategies.
I am encouraged to participate in external
professional development activities (workshops,
courses, conferences, etc.) to deepen my equity
competence.
I annually assess my current level of equity
competence and discuss related goals for my
professional development with my supervisor.
0% 100%
Organizational and Professional Learning:
To what extent do you agree with the following statements?
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

162

1
6
7
7
9
17
6
7
13
1
3
4
1
1
2
Staff of
Color
White Staff
All
0 43
I annually assess my current level of equity competence and discuss related goals
for my professional development with my supervisor.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
1
4
5
6
8
15
3
11
14
4
4
8
1
1
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 43
I am encouraged to participate in external professional development activities
(workshops, courses, conferences, etc.) to deepen my equity competence.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
5
5
13
20
34
2
2
4
1
1
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 44
I am supported by the organization in deepening my knowledge and building skills
around the role and presence of whiteness and anti-racist tools and strategies.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

163

1
3
4
5
13
19
6
7
13
3
3
6
1
1
2
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 44
The organization provides sufficient professional development for all staff to
deepen their equity competence across the full breadth of differences.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
2
2
2
6
8
9
11
20
3
3
6
2
5
8
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 44
All staff are sufficiently trained in interrupting racism in our client work and
internally within the organization.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

164
Culture

5%
16%
23%
14%
30%
42%
45%
43%
25%
43%
40%
25%
27%
5%
11%
7%
57%
16%
7%
11%
5%
The organization periodically assesses the
disproportionate impact of organizational policies on
staff and / or constituents (clients, students) of color.
I am familiar with the metrics, benchmarks, and
indicators for measuring the organization's efforts
toward becoming an equitable and inclusive
workplace.
Staff and organizational leadership provide sufficient
organizational space, time, resources and structure
to discuss and respond to issues of racial equity
within and outside the organization.
My full identities (race, sexual orientation, gender
identity and expression, etc.) are recognized,
respected, and taken into consideration in the
development of organizational culture.
I feel like I can be my authentic self in this
organization.
0% 100%
Culture:
To what extent do you agree with the following statements?
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
4
6
10
4
14
19
7
5
12
1
1
1
1
2
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 44
I feel like I can be my authentic self in this organization.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

165

1
6
7
7
12
20
6
5
11
1
1
2
3
5
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 44
My full identities (race, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, etc.) are
recognized, respected, and taken into consideration in the development of
organizational culture.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
2
2
4
13
18
6
11
17
3
3
2
1
3
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 43
Staff and organizational leadership provide sufficient organizational space, time,
resources and structure to discuss and respond to issues of racial equity within and
outside the organization.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
4
9
13
6
12
19
4
1
5
2
5
7
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 44
I am familiar with the metrics, benchmarks, and indicators for measuring the
organization’s efforts toward becoming an equitable and inclusive workplace.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

166

External Facing Communications and Relationships

1
5
6
5
6
11
2
2
8
16
25
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 44
The organization periodically assesses the disproportionate impact of
organizational policies on staff and / or constituents (clients, students) of color.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
16%
23%
23%
41%
68%
27%
36%
16%
45%
36%
41%
14%
The organization has authentic and accountable
relationships with individuals and organizations of
color that provide input into the organization's
program and advocacy.
The organization raises adequate resources for its
work around equity with a focus on race.
The organization has clear criteria for external
communication and fund development that elevates
equity with a focus on race.
The organization consistently communicates to
clients, leaders, donors and allies the equity-focused
values and work that the organization does.
0% 100%
External Facing Communications and Relationships:
To what extent do you agree with the following statements?
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

167

1
6
7
12
17
30
1
1
3
3
6
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 44
The organization consistently communicates to clients, leaders, donors and allies
the equity-focused values and work that the organization does.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
1
1
8
10
18
2
5
7
6
11
18
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 44
The organization has clear criteria for external communication and fund
development that elevates equity with a focus on race.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
1
1
2
8
10
7
9
16
1
1
6
9
16
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 44
The organization raises adequate resources for its work around equity with a focus
on race.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

168

If you chose “I don’t know” for any of the questions above, please use this space to provide
your rationale.

Staff of Color
• Certain processes, structures, systems, etc., might be in place but I am not aware of them.
• Because of my position, I have no way of knowing the answers to some of the questions
since I do not sit on the cabinet and information related to those items has not been
communicated.
• I don’t know the organizations moves around equity development beyond my work with
clients and facilitation of the work we are there to present. understanding the
[PRINCIPALS LEAD] - client development of equity connection feels like an
afterthought for me that I must make up for in session.
• I haven’t been here long enough to know.
• I was not an employee while this cabinet was in place: I’m responding to be compliant.
:-)
• Anywhere I indicated “I don’t know,” I am not directly aware of any policies or practices
in place that address the issue described.
• In those area that I selected this response, I felt that, if asked the question, I would not be
able to give a cogent answer, even though I may have minimal knowledge of the issue.

White Staff
• I am not privy to the work that [PRINCIPALS LEAD] does at the policy, marketing, and
other types of outreach with outside organizations. I am not privy to internal
conversations among cabinet members, as well as minutes of cabinet meetings.
• I am not privy to or included in the organization’s decisions related to those statements
for which I chose “I don’t know.”
1
1
3
7
10
5
7
12
1
1
7
12
20
Staff of Color
White Staff
All
0 44
The organization has authentic and accountable relationships with individuals and
organizations of color that provide input into the organization’s program and
advocacy.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree I don't Know
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

169
• I am sure how the Leadership interacts outside the organization.
• I’m partially self-identifying here, but as a remote employee working on WMLA, there
are not many opportunities for me to see/hear/experience/discuss issues related to the
workings of the overall organization (e.g., organizational strategy, policies, evaluation,
etc.). I’d like to have the opportunity to do so — but am not really sure we’ve figured out
how to make that happen.
• I chose “I don’t know” whenever a) I literally did not know whether a particular policy or
practice existed or was routinely carried out (even if not publicly shared), or b) there was
a qualifier attached to the survey item that I felt I could not pass judgment on (e.g., I
don’t know how consistently the organization talks explicitly about race to funders).
• I do not know the makeup of interview teams, the criteria for hiring, or the specifics of
outreach.
• I don’t always feel privy when it comes to how we communicate our racial focus
externally.
• I feel that I do not have sufficient knowledge to agree or disagree in those situations
where I responded “I don’t know.”
• Not enough information shared with all segments of staff.
• Where I answered “I don’t know” are areas where I feel there is a lack of transparency in
the organization. I have some assumptions in these areas but truly don’t know the
organization’s actual practices.
• I haven’t seen much around the hiring process and how it is annually evaluated (given
that I’ve only experienced it from the outside).
• I have limited knowledge of the organization since I am a part-time coach and work
remotely with little contact with people within the organization beyond the scope of my
coaching work.
• I am not aware of the external resources our organization needs or uses to promote our
equity mission.
• Some decision are not made in a transparent way. There are many organization doing
important equity work but we don’t hear from them or collaborate. I think this has to do
with competition for a share of the equity training market.

No Identification
• For those questions I am not privy to the pertinent information.
What barriers do you see for [Principals Lead] to be an anti-racist and equitable
organization?

Staff of Color
• Hierarchical org structure and lack of feedback/communication loops.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

170
• Biggest barrier: Lack of investment in sufficient professional learning on the individual
and organizational level. Others: Inefficient knowledge sharing internally (how do we
learn across projects?). Muddled internal messaging (Is it racial equity, or equity w/ a
focus on race? Why is that still a question?). Expertise and tools/offerings held by small
pool of individuals — we need to build common vocabulary and codify our
approach/strategies (How many people know the 5 dispositions, CLIP, etc.).
• Financial priorities always get in the way of equity as a priority.
• The fact that the organization must raise funds in order to exist. For example, I wonder if
we have signed contracts to work in districts that have no or very little interest in
confronting matters related to race.
• I think the greatest organizational barriers right now revolve around a few areas: I think
there is still confusion about what the focus on equity, with an emphasis on race, actually
means and how that shows up with clients. In particular, would the Leadership Academy
be willing to end a client engagement because they are not attending to equity in any
form and in particular around race? I think that we need to continue to identify metrics to
recruit, promote, and retain persons of color (and those from other marginalized
identities). While we can’t change it, the vast majority of our coaching team and overall
[PRINCIPALS LEAD] team are White and female and so when we have choice points to
bring new people on-board who we then send out into the field to work with clients how
are we ensuring that there is a diverse representation. I think finally, anti-racist and
equitable organizations also have their footprint known as through organizations and
while we have the starts to this, it’s still not well-developed and for those who are
engaged in that work it’s often at the cabinet level. I think identifying means for
everyone to be able to promote this work and be supported would also help us to be more
effective.
• I believe that there is dissonance in 1) what we want to be, 2) what we currently are, 3)
how we sell ourselves to clients / eventually deliver to clients.
• I only see one person of color on the Leadership Cabinet.
• The need to explore revenue opportunities in districts/ schools that are not yet aligned
with the racial equity focus of [PRINCIPALS LEAD] can be limiting to the organization,
especially when assigning staff to provide support or to be the “face” of the organization.

White Staff
• We have not yet fully reached our goal of “complete” anti-racist and equitable practices.
As long as we continue to be reflective, and to provide opportunities for examination and
growth, we can overcome any barriers.
• The tension between our mission / ideals and financial constraints can present a barrier,
as the organization is not currently in a financial position to make decisions or prioritize
initiatives that are completely aligned with our mission.
• I see the exclusion of all voices.
• None internally but possibly from outside the organization
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

171
• While I believe that we strive to be a truly equitable organization, I think that
transparency and communication are two big barriers for us, such as who is on our board
of directors? what do those meetings board meetings entail? what happens in cabinet
meetings? Departments seem to work in silos. I am sure many of the policies and
practices listed in this assessment are in place, but it is difficult to answer whether they
are because I do not know what happens in other departments. The CSO has been
tremendous in connecting staff and opening lines of communication, but there are other
communication lines that are only privy to certain staff, and staff relationships or where
you sit within the organization dictate how much access you have to those. There is also
the physical barrier of staff being split between two different floors, operational staff
(who seem to work independently from one another) located one floor BELOW mainly
client services staff (who on the other hand, seem to work very collaboratively — with
their program teams or in their PODs).
• In order to generate the levels of trust, safety, and bravery to have the conversations and
make the plans we need to get there, we need a lot of time together. Many of our NYC-
based staff have heavy travel schedules, and many other team members are based
remotely, making time together precious and in short supply — meaning the conditions
for success only occur in pockets, rather than organization-wide.
• I guess the main barriers I see are that a) the Leadership Academy has not (as far as I
know) publicly defined (or adopted a definition of) an equitable organization, nor b)
publicly committed itself to that vision, with regular action steps and updates provided to
the staff so we can see how we are working toward that goal. I think we tend to fall into
the trap of inviting staff (e.g., via the ELT or during all-staff meetings) to make
suggestions about equitable practice and/or weigh in on certain questions . . . but our
leadership is not prepared to be guided by staff suggestion. At that point some of our all-
staff or ELT conversations begin to feel to me like academic exercises rather than a true
intra-organizational dialogue that will lead to anything concrete. To see real change, I
think we need to adopt a framework lays out what an anti-racist and equitable
organization is (staff should at least vote and/or provide input into this framework) and be
extremely public and transparent about the steps we are taking to realize this vision.
• Two things: 1) Time and resources will always be a challenge. We want to focus on
equity and build the capacity of staff but we are all stretched very thin and we need to
prioritize client work, business development, admin work, etc. 2) When we set aside the
time to discuss equity, it almost seems like a therapy session where we share personal
stories and connect them to equity competencies, but, at least from my perspective, I
haven’t quite figured out how to connect this to my professional work. I don’t think I am
any better at confronting inequities professionally or communicating effectively about
racial equity.
• Committing the necessary dollars and investment to develop a career path and succession
planning.
• Clients’ views on issue.
• Time and resources. I think we need to dedicate specific time to building staff capacity
that is held sacred and not given to clients but this isn’t a practice we have.
• None based on my experience.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

172
• We are an organization that began in an urban setting. Some clients in rural areas can be
reluctant to consider equity as a key factor for student success and may not see our
experience or mission as relevant to their needs. This can be challenging for our work,
our message and how we prioritize equity.
• Time and resources. Many of us are doing equity related design, facilitation and
coaching, yet we do not have time and support for us to reflect on our learning together.
This support and capacity building is vital to growing and sustaining our practice in
different contexts across the country and in NYC.

No Identification
• Occasional client resistance.
In thinking about your intersecting identities (race, sexual orientation, gender identity and
expression, etc.), are there aspects of the [Principals Lead] culture that are either helping
or are not fully recognized that you would like to name?

Staff of Color
• There are assumptions and biases and mental models around people’s faith or political
views and perceived misalignment with [PRINCIPALS LEAD] mission and vision.
• We do little to make our work safe for gender fluid or nonbinary individuals. We also do
little to accommodate linguistic diversity. This is reflected internally and in our work
with clients.
• This statement is in reference to what used to happen at [PRINCIPALS LEAD]. I think
the organization is now deliberately hiring Blacks. But I do not think that was the case a
few years ago. I believe those tasked with hiring recognize that sometimes it takes a bit
of extra effort to identify and hire qualified Blacks. And this is not because of a paucity
of such individuals. Instead, it’s because there were once so many White individuals on
the staff and there was no stated desire to hire Black people, that when there were
vacancies, Whites would identify people in their circles who should apply for the
vacancies. It was similar to (but not identical to) the times when unions would give
preference to hiring relatives of those already members of the union — and every
member of the union was White.
• I think that in multiple meetings I’ve sat in I’ve heard microaggressions be stated around
gender or sexual orientation. This has come from all levels, including members of
cabinet, and while it can be funny to make a joke, it also continues to perpetuate
stereotypes and gendered thinking which is counterintuitive to our organization’s
mission. I think also, in language throughout our design and materials we often use
him/her he/she in our work and it’s so easy to replace it with “they, them, theirs” which
would encompass the vast majority of gender identities and expressions. I think that as
an organization, we have yet to really dig into the work around intersections of identity in
a meaningful way and also have not done a great job of leveraging what other areas of
experience, expertise, or stories we could be using internally to make this happen as
opposed to it always being the same voices.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

173
• I believe that bringing us together collectively for an all staff meeting regularly is
contributing to a positive culture of learning and reflection. I feel that we still have work
to do around prioritizing depth of learning topics and reflection over the breadth of topics
we explore.
• I would like to see more of a balance of people of color as Coaches and on the Cabinet.

White Staff
• Age discrimination is not mentioned or addressed.
• They help with our meetings and discussion groups.
• I’m not sure if this answers your question but being a woman in a woman-led
organization is something I think I benefit from. The culture is very nurturing and
focused on professional growth and development of its staff. I’ve always felt very
supported here and I think some of that must come from the leadership styles of women.
(That’s my own bias showing though.)
• Yes, but am not comfortable naming at this point or would take away from the racial
focus which needs to be front and center.
• I don’t know.
• I think we are making progress.
• What it means to come from a working-class background in terms of vocabulary and how
to hold the complexity of the equity work but using a language accessible to everyone.

Are there any blind spots the [Principals Lead] needs to be aware of as it continues to
deepen its work around equity both internally and externally? What suggestions do you
have for the ELT / Cabinet in addressing them?

Staff of Color

• Externally — we need to complement our focus on equitable leadership with instructional
equity. We say that rigorous culturally relevant curriculum and instruction is essential for
making schools more equitable but we don’t address that sufficiently. Many leaders and
teachers don’t know what that entails or what good pedagogy even looks like, and we’re
missing a key lever by not taking on instruction more explicitly. Internally — what
structures, systems, and protocols have we put in place organization wide to advance
equity internally and to build our capacity to do this work externally? This continues to
be driven by a small group of individuals but has not taken root universally in the
organization.
• The organization has to show more consideration on the allotment of time given to
discuss equity issues.
• Are we consciously and deliberately trying to identify additional “others, qualified
others” to bring on staff. I am thinking of Muslims and Native Americans.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

174
• I think one of the greatest areas that we can do a better job of sharing is not just “what is
equity to [PRINCIPALS LEAD] and what does it look like; but also, here’s what it won’t
be.” It will help to manage expectations of people in the organization and ensure that
there is a sense of transparency. I think shifting MRB to her new role is a good fit but
also she shouldn’t and cannot be the only holder of this work and knowledge, so how are
we building the capacity of others to do this work in service of our organization first and
then the clients we support. I think that it would be helpful for us to have shared
organizational reading that we then have conversations around to help us learn together.
I would love to see in the CSO weekly some sort of equity-related reflection or resource
that people can pull from. I think finally, when it comes to staffing really attending to
and thinking about who is being placed on which project. I’ve been on a few where the
team looks very phenotypically similar and while that’s just an organizational reality,
what does it say to a client when we are talking about racial equity and don’t send a
racially diverse team? Those pieces do matter in the work. I also wonder what external
thought partnerships could we be leveraging to build our organizational capacity and
connections? I think that for the most part if feels like we are very siloed and continually
rely on the work of Singleton, which is great, but who else is out there doing great work
that we can be learning from locally or nationally? Finally, I do wonder about our role as
an organization when it comes to policy and activism in the NYC area — especially
given the new focus on the segregation of our schools. Could there also be leadership
there and how do we galvanize the entire organization around this rather than just the
ELT, POC, or cabinet?
• Yes, checking for the expertise in the room.
• Positionality within the organization has been a hindrance toward defining conditions for
effective org self-evaluation and application. I believe this issue has only been
exacerbated by the current moves made in the organization. I believe there is not enough
discussion about purpose and why driving decisions or if there is at the cabinet level; then
how this gets translated down the organizational ladder.

White Staff
• Blind spots would include the inconsistency with which White voices are heard. Further,
meetings and communication by the Cabinet and facilitators sometimes ignore a sense of
audience — that audience being composed of White people who have varied experiences
with people of color; an audience that consists of professionals who have dedicated many
years of service to children of color. While it is difficult for Whites to walk in the shoes
of people of color, the work, experience and insights of the dedicated White professionals
at the Academy are sometimes dismissed or ignored. In addition, planning for facilitation
and meetings does not include the coaches who bring a vast knowledge and experience to
what it means to support equity in schools.
• No suggestions at this time — the Academy is doing good work.
• Gender identity and expression. In places with little racial diversity, how do we address
other inequities such as those that fall along socioeconomic lines?
• I’m not sure these are blind spots, but two things come to mind:
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

175
o After a number of years here, and despite everyone’s best efforts to make space
for team builders, etc., I don’t feel like my colleagues and I know each other very
well. I think there are a number of reasons for this — people are really busy and
rarely socialize during the day, the office culture is increasingly remote and
people are not yet using technology to stay in touch very much, and a lack of
internal org communication has a tendency to silo people. I’m not suggesting that
we all need to be best friends to be an equitable organization, but I’m not sure
how we could possibly create the vibrant, multifaceted, embracing-of-differences
culture I think we want if we don’t talk to each other more. I suppose we can
accept each other’s differences on some level without knowing more. But that
acceptance is going to remain pretty superficial if don’t find time to pay more
attention to each other and learn who we really are. I don’t know where that time
is going to come from, though.
o Another potential blind spot, I think, is that we place a lot of value on the skill
sets possessed by highly educated K-12 leaders. Obviously, many of our staff fall
into this category, and they bring incredible value to our work. However, I do
think we sometimes forget that there are other critical skill sets in an organization
like ours, and then we fail to recognize or develop them. It might help to pay
more attention to the way other nonprofit organizations structure and develop
themselves, and what kinds of roles and people they need to thrive.
• I have not received training in equity other than at all coach meetings in the past 2 years.
I did not participate in the Glen Singleton trainings.
• Investment in professional development.

Is there anything else you would like to add?
Staff of Color
• I am pleased that Mary has been identified as the person who will officially lead our work
on equity. When we didn’t have a designated leader, the unstated message was that
equity was not as important as the areas of work/focus that had designated leaders.
• We have come a long way in our Work promoting equity in education. However, I think
we need more practice in confronting racism in varied settings.

White Staff
• More work needs to be done to support coaches in their daily coaching of school leaders
— work that provides coaches with relevant tools and strategies to help school leaders
develop equity plans, coordinate and interface more effectively with staff, students,
parents and the greater communities in which our schools are located. This is the real
work to achieve equity — we can attend staff meetings (which are somewhat helpful) but
our school leaders need support and the coaches are the people who provide that support.
I sometimes think that the [PRINCIPALS LEAD] cabinet and the [PRINCIPALS LEAD]
staff who prepare the work of our meetings are unaware that those who work in the field
need opportunities to develop skills to address equity issues in schools. The sims with
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

176
which we’ve worked in the past as well as some facilitation designs are unrealistic and
unrelated to what is actually happening in our schools.
• Before, it felt like there were only certain “knowledge-holders” when it comes to racial
equity and I hope that the professional learning and support that will now be coming from
the ELT will help spread that knowledge across ALL staff.
• It would be great to have more opportunities for all staff members to engage in equity
work, not just those members of the equity leadership team.
• [PRINCIPALS LEAD] needs to provide training for employees who were not included in
the Singleton trainings.
• In conversations and meetings with the team, it has been very apparent that equity is a
strong focus and needs to be modeled and affirmed during coaching conversations with
others. Equity and anti-racism have been promoted in virtually every conversation I’ve
been a part of. It is embedded into the culture of the organization.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

177
APPENDIX G
OBSERVED SESSION LESSON PLAN
Monday, October 1, 2018: 8:00am – 4:00pm
ACTIVITY
TIMING DESCRIPTION OF PLANNED ACTIVITIES
8:00am –
8:15am
(15 minutes)
Brief Welcome and Energizer
Paseo
1. Describe the last moment you experienced sheer excitement.
2. What skills and content from last time stand out in your mind/that you
have put into practice?
3. What questions remain for you in your work that you hope to get
answered today?
• Chart this question
Debrief responses and transition into framing for the day.
8:15am –
8:30am
(15 minutes)
Agenda, Norms, Purpose
Review agenda & objectives.
Revisit norms. Ask participants to describe what they mean, and if they
need any others to do their best learning? Which norm do you want to be
mindful of and work on today and how does it come up for you?
8:30am –
9:30am
(60 minutes)
Opening Reflection
Framing: We want to start the day thinking about the work you’ve done so
far, and how that work has affected the way you think about equity and
equitable practice in schools.
Ask: Given the brief time in your role this year, what does “equitable
practice mean” to you now? Take a minute for quick write.
Give participants a few minutes to share in small groups.
Elicit meaning making from group discussion then review the
working/common understanding/definition of equity from the group:
Equity means that people should receive what they need to achieve their
potential, and their race and other aspects of their identity should not
prevent access to opportunity.
Review of Iceberg slide — we need to be working down below the water
line — at patterns of behavior and at a structural level to be sure, but also
at the level of mental models and beliefs.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

178
- Think about equity lens connection (what does it mean to have an
equity lens, and how does it relate to the iceberg?).
Table Work: Divide up into three groups and ask the following questions:
- What have you seen in schools so far (from the lens of a student,
of a teacher, of a parent) as it relates to equity / inequity? Make
sure to keep your answers low-inference.
- What are the implications of that for what you’ll do in schools?
Each table is assigned one group: teachers, parents, or students.
Discuss what you’ve seen in schools from the perspective of one of those
groups.
Each table charts their own responses.
Gallery walk on the work that tables have charted. Ask participants to
leave questions and feedback with post-its on each chart.
Whole Room Conversation
- What are some of the storylines that exist in your school, or school
you support, about why students don’t achieve?
o Remind them about the importance of storytelling and
digging deeper.
- How difficult was it to identify and name elements of equity /
inequity? How did you find identifying challenges with an equity
lens?
o In particular, how this might hinder one’s ability to paint
and understand a clear picture?
- What are the implications for what you’re seeing in schools?
- What would people need to know and be able to do (skills) to
demonstrate their ability to look at your school with an equity
lens? What would they need to believe?
9:30am –
12:00pm
(2½ hours
[including 15
minute break])
Revisit Action Plan
Framing: In just a moment, we’re going to examine the action plans we
created with our teams last time we were together, looking at what we said
we wanted to do and why, and comparing our plan against what we’ve
done so far. Before that though, we want to watch a quick video that
summarizes the improvement process. This is Step 5 of the Problem-
Solving Process, which takes on a cyclical nature — we plan, execute,
reflect, adjust, etc., throughout the process.
Watch video.
Framing: As you saw in the video, we believe that it’s not only important,
but vital to reflect on mistakes and challenges as they arise. We do this not
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

179
only to improve resilience, but also to use those challenges as learning
opportunities and ways to continue to improve.
We’re going to start by reviewing and reflecting on your actions plans,
considering not only how the plan is going but also why that’s the case.
From there, you’ll break into groups and give each other feedback on
particular challenges arising from your action plans. Finally, you’ll gather
back into teams and update your action plans for the next 90 days.
Activity 1: Team-based reflection. Using a graphic organizer, describe:
- What is your theory of action? Is it manifesting?
- How is your plan holding up / shifting now that the work has
begun in schools?
- Is there alignment in all the steps in you TOA process and is it
having the right impact? If not where is the room for adjustment?
- Is there alignment with your goals, shared goals and district equity
goal? If not, what are steps to be achieved?
Facilitator Note: Keep the focus on how each of these steps is moving
closer to fulfilling the theory of action and actually addresses
equity/inequity in the school.
Make sure copy of district goals are included in the packet.
Activity 2: Tuning Protocol
Framing: Now we’re going to help each other work through challenging
action steps — the challenge might be in execution, in alignment, in effect.
To gather feedback, we’re going to use a mini tuning protocol.
Divide into four groups — you should have no more than one other person
in your group who is on the same team as you. Choose two people who
will receive feedback on one challenge they are facing. Each tuning
protocol should take 20 minutes.
- Presentation — share the context for the challenge and goals
driving the plan. What is the focus question you want your group
to address? (5 minutes)
- Clarifying questions — others have an opportunity to ask
questions to get information that may have been omitted in the
presentation that they feel would be helpful. These should be
questions of facts ONLY. (3 minutes)
- Pause to reflect on what feedback participants want to give. (2
minutes)
- Warm and cool feedback — presenter is silent and takes notes
while others give feedback, both warm and cool. (5 minutes)
- Reflection — presenter speaks to those comments/questions he or
she chooses while participants are silent. (2 minutes)
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

180
- Discuss: What have we learned about the structures needed and
challenges we face in building the habit of equity? (3 minutes)
Break
Activity 3: Time to Update your Plan
With facilitators’ help, update your plan based on your reflections and
experience to date, emerging data, and the feedback you received in your
tuning protocol.
Facilitator questions for participants to mindful of:
- How is adult behavior getting in the way of student success?
- What can we do to ensure action steps are directly addressing
challenges in the school? What are the next steps you will take
and what do you want to accomplish?
- Are we moving toward an equitable product for children?
- What are some of the markers that we are moving in the right
direction?
2-minute presentation from each group on the process they just went
through, and what is the key shift they’re going to make moving forward.
How will the steps you take address your goals?
Whole Room Debrief (keep Equity of Voice in mind):
- What structures does this team need to put in place to make “plan,
do, review, improve” a regular part of their work?
- How do we continue to work as a team to move the work forward?
- How do we bring this back effectively to our school-based core
team?
Facilitator Note: Purpose to highlight in debrief, be sure to state:
Plans are constantly evolving — things change, new data becomes
available, or obstacles get in the way. Need to constantly re-
evaluate your plan, see what worked and what didn’t, and figure
out the way forward. (Plan, Do, Review, Improve).
12:00pm –
12:30pm
(30 minutes)
Implication of Self
Framing: Now that we’ve talked about the process and the plan, now we
want to look at what our own roles are in the process:
What am I doing well? What might I be doing that’s getting in the
way of moving things forward?
Activity: Participants review the Equity competencies, their ELI results,
and the full set of Equity Coach Competencies (as applicable, see below):
- All participants: Review Equity Competencies.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

181
- Those who took the ELI: Also review their own ELI results.
- Equity Coaches: Full set of Equity Coach Competencies.
ELI Framing: The purpose of the Equity Leadership Instrument
(ELI) is to provide a baseline/diagnostic assessment of leader
behavior related to 5 Leadership Dispositions for Equity and to
measure changes in behavior over time. This tool provides a good
way of targeting areas for improvement for those working with a
focus on equity.
Individual Reflection:
- Which competency are you finding success with and why?
- Which competency you are currently struggling with in their initial
work of leading for equity in their own context?
- Does your current struggle align with the goals you have set for
yourself in this work? (goals set either officially or unofficially)
IF TIME: Share out in pairs / triads.
Facilitator Note: Things to keep in mind / call out as the group reflects:
- Goals should be aligned to the ELI (and each person’s strengths
and challenges).
- Push non-Equity coaches (esp. principals) to name specifically
what they’ll be focusing on.
- Participants should use low inference evidence to support their
perspective. Call out particulars so that dispositions have actions
and behaviors related to them.
Activity: Provide participants to refine (or set, for those who don’t have
formal goals) their goals as necessary.
Facilitator note: A pattern observed in all ELI results is that participants
are struggling to regularly engage in conversation around equity /
challenge.
Whole Group Share: Participants share out which of the competencies
they are most struggling with.
- How does this area show up in your work?
- What are the implications?
- Can you make this a part of your check-ins with each other going
forward?
Closing Framing: This collective sense will help frame the day and our
planning moving forward.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

182
12:30pm –
1:15pm
(45 minutes)
Lunch
1:15pm –
2:00pm
(45 minutes)
Farmers
Facilitator Note: Purpose
For teams to identify and understand issues that complicate team learning
and performance. During the activity, the team organizes randomly
distributed information bits to complete a “puzzle” (task).
The group determines how to involve everyone in the task and efficiently
use the skills of each member of their team. The activity is ambiguous and
timed — conditions that mirror the work they do in schools. The exercise
gives teams an opportunity to see how they manage stress and ambiguity.
After identifying these obstacles, participants also reflect on their
behaviors during the exercise and identify tools for navigating the group
dynamic.
Description/Activity Steps
Participants sit in teams of six. (You have six information bits that appear
at the end of this document; cut them by one).
1. Distribute information bits randomly to team members. Instruct
participants that everything they need to complete the task is
written in the information bits. Do not distribute the ANSWER.
2. Inform the teams to begin their task.
3. Give the teams ten minutes to work.
4. When the ten minutes are finished, circle the room and identify the
number of teams still working on solving the “puzzle.”
5. Ask the team/s if they wish to continue with the task for an
additional eight minutes.
6. If so, provide the time. (As a facilitator, observe how the teams
approach the task throughout the activity. What are the
differences in the teams’ strategies?)
7. Stop the teams regardless of their stage in the process.
8. Have teams compare the right answers for the “puzzle.”
Whole Room Debrief
FN: Ensure connection to conditions for teaming / collective efficacy from
Farmers to make sure that the two feel connected.
At first, give all participants an opportunity to reflect on teamwork,
individual work in a team, goal setting, group norms & roles, personal
style and process for getting the task accomplished by posting the
following questions for the large group to consider:
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

183
• How did you go about the work?
• What was it like working in a team?
As a facilitator, use your observation notes to highlight what is being
debriefed (e.g.):
• One person takes all the bits and tries to figure it out alone.
• Group breaks up into sub-groups.
• Everyone writes out information and there is not public record.
• People assume roles and responsibilities without any formal
process for getting there.
Framing: Farmers is an organic activity that highlights the need to think
about teaming conditions, norms, what people bring (don’t) bring to the
work and how our selves show up (don’t) show up when we are group
settings.
- How does this impact the work intended to equalize opportunities
for children? Connect to collective efficacy (may need to define
collective efficacy for some).
Transition: This exercise helped show the importance of coming together
and working as a team. This is one of a number of conditions necessary to
form and sustain an effective team. From here, we’re going to think about
your specific teams and what steps need to be taken to make sure that
you’re operating effectively.
This is a setup to explore holding environment!!!
2:00pm –
3:00pm
(1 hour)
Conditions for Teaming / Holding Environment
Framing:
• Remind participants that Chapter 4 of the Art of Coaching Teams
focuses on defining purpose, process and product as a team. We
are going to take the conversations we have just had and do an
examination of your team meetings so far and how you can
strengthen them moving forward.
• First, let’s do a temperature check of how we are doing as a team.
Activity: Team Temperature Check
• Ask each individual participant to fill out the checklist handout
based on their last meeting as a team (10 min).
• Team members should then share their individual responses with
each other while thinking about the following questions (15 min):
• What are we doing well as a team? What systems and
structures do we have in place to make this happen?
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

184
• Where do we have room for growth? What systems and
structures are we missing to make this happen?
• What role does race, gender and hierarchy play into our
team meetings? Do we have norms around and/or reflect
on these identifiers during and/or after our team meetings?
Activity: Reflecting/establishing team purpose, process & product.
Framing: Aguilar talks about the importance of having purpose, processes
and products as a team. She equally talks about what we individually
bring to a team and the role of race, gender and hierarchy in teams. So
based on our team temperature check let’s look on how we can better
establish our teams in these 3 areas:
• Review the 10 sentence stems on page 87 and based on your
temperature check conversation, choose which prompts you are
unable to answer and give yourselves time to try to answer them
now:
a. Our team exists to . . . our mission is . . .
b. Our team aspires to . . . our vision is . . .
c. Our team’s core values are . . .
d. Our team’s community agreements are . . .
e. Our team makes decisions by . . .
f. Our team’s communication agreements are . . .
g. In team meetings, we use the roles of . . .
h. Our team’s goals are (or inquiry questions) are . . .
i. Our team’s work plan is reviewed [at what frequency] . . .
j. Our team knows we are making progress on our mission
and goals and toward our vision because . . .
Whole Group Debrief
Have each team share out:
- One thing they worked on today to improve their teams.
- One thing they plan to continue to work on as they go back to their
school sites.
- Any challenges in these conversations that we want to discuss as a
larger group?
3:00pm –
3:40pm
(40 minutes)
Coaching
Framing: Given our dive into action plans, our review of competencies
and ELI results, and thinking teaming conditions, what are the
conversations we need to initiate / continue to ensure our work remains
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

185
focused on addressing inequities on behalf of students? All of today’s
learning requires a level of getting behind the eyes of others.
Mini Teach on Questioning — Getting Behind the Eyes
• Setting (and re-setting) the parameters of an effective coaching
relationship.
• Characteristics of mutual trust, vulnerability, honesty, respect,
feedback, an openness to learning, follow-through, prioritizing
time together.
• KEY POINT: In order to get behind the eyes, understand key
aspects of adult learning: using experience and reflection to make
meaning, develop the capacity to learn from discomfort to
challenge self and system — see new possibilities hooks and
anchors; create and revise stories to make and remake meaning.
• KEY POINT: A central aspect of coaching is to recognize one’s
own racial identity, experiences, triggers, mind-sets and biases.
Understand how these have affected your educational journey and
perspective.
Facilitator Note: These last two bullets are central to the framing. Also
return to the idea of using “an Equity Lens.”
Fishbowl: Working through Problems of Practice
Framing: During Greg’s visit, he learned of some challenges that exist in
the conversations necessary to move the work. He also extrapolated a
pattern from the ELI that says all of you are all struggling with having
difficult conversations. So, let’s use our remaining time to continue
practicing how we initiate, embed ourselves into having a necessary
conversation around equity. We will use the following problem of practice
to assist in our work.
POP from the recent visit:
1. Classroom management is an issue that teachers struggle with. If
we break down the elements of classroom management (e.g.,
teacher presence, content knowledge, relationships) how does our
understanding shift with an equity lens?
2. What are the best ways to challenge teacher’s deficit mind-sets?
Teachers too often say “this level of task is too difficult, they can’t
do it. I don’t want them to be frustrated, so I bump it down.”
How should we coach through this situation? What structures are
needed to shift the culture?
3. You observe a teacher that settles for (or mistakes) compliance for
engagement. Why do teachers settle for this and what are the
implications of this for your schools that are striving for culturally
relevant instruction?
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

186
Process
- Rotate the role of coach, coachee, and observer. Each round will
be five minutes (for a total of 15 minutes).
- The observer will take low inference notes of what questions they
hear and the impact it creates. The coach will use questions
developed above, or new questions as s/he seems appropriate to
get the desired impact of the coaching interaction. Let’s practice
them.
Whole Group Debrief
3:40pm –
4:00pm
(20 minutes)
Closing
Individual Reflection:
- Key Question: Where do we go between now and February? What
do I need to do?
o Remind them of the implications for the Change Project.
- How will we leverage each other and our teams to move the work?
- How am I synthesizing todays work to think about day 2 and how
will I support tomorrows team to assist in the building of their
capacity?
Whole Room Share: Those who want to can share their answer to one
question with the room.
FN – Depending on timing, this section may be limited to one question
with a sharing of the response in a commitment circle.

THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

187
APPENDIX H
SUMMARY OF THE FILMED OBSERVATION FEEDBACK SURVEY
To what extent do you agree with the following statements:

Please describe how you plan to use a strategy or tool from this session in your practice:
• The information was valuable in helping us understand we need to develop a common
understanding of equity within our buildings and how we need that to continue to move
forward.
• I will use the Tuning Tool with our various teacher leadership groups and admin
leadership groups to help us be more effective in our ability to identify the problem and
find possible solutions.
• Iceberg Tool will be very helpful in digging into problem solving with staff. Tuning
Protocol will be essential to building trust and a culture of collaboration in our admin
team.
• The last activity of today helped me with best practice in coaching. I appreciated the
small group role playing around coaching.
• Tuning and Teaming Indicator.
0 2 4 6 8 10
This session developed
my skills around
leading and/or
coaching for equity.
This session developed
my thinking around
equity
I will be able to
immediately apply what
I learned from this
session.
Principal Session Feedback
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

188
• During one of my breakouts, we discussed cognitive coaching. This strategy is valuable
and can make a real positive impact when working with teachers.
• We updated our action plan. This will allow us to return to the building ready to move
the work forward.
• As I go into work with schools being able to coach teams to center their work in equity.
• Tuning protocol — adaptive coaching opportunity to make our admin meetings
meaningful learning while building capacity.
• Continue with questioning staff about their beliefs when deficit thinking comes up and
looking for equity in voice always in our meetings.

Please describe the aspect of this session that was most beneficial to you.
• It was all beneficial to me. I enjoyed the coaching opportunities and would love to
continue to see those next time.
• Having time to role play scenarios with my team.
• All of it! Really, though, I found that each part deepened my thinking regarding MY role
in developing beliefs and structures around equity.
• I appreciated the opportunities to work closely with my principal and C3 Coordinator.
As I mentioned above, the role playing was helpful to me. Along with this was the “fish
bowl” activity.
• Time to process the concepts and team time to talk about what it will look like in the
buildings.
• Current assessment our leadership team and focusing on growth.
• Time to process and problem solve with my team.
• Reflecting on my/our agency to do the work.
• Coaching scenarios and tuning protocol.
• Working through the farmer activity.

What would have made this session better?
• I am still struggling working between two schools in the shorted amount of work time
given.
• There was one time we had 15 minutes to work I set the timer for 7 minutes and went
back to my other school and got into a few minutes of work time before we transitioned
out of work time. I understand how we ended up behind and we were catching up but
that would be helpful to keep that in mind as we are working or providing a task that I
can work with both principals at the same time on.
• It was all good!!!
• More time to dig in even deeper with you all and our team.
THE RACIALLY RESPONSIVE FACILITATOR

189
• N/A
• An additional member from the [school] team — preferably a teacher! Their input at this
point in the process would be very beneficial.
• N/A
• N/A just more time together to process our complex ideas!!
• N/A

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The impact of culturally responsive teaching on the suspension rate of African American students: an evaluation study

PDF

School integration as a reform strategy: the principal’s role, an evaluation study

PDF

Developing aspiring school leaders to address the diverse racial equity needs in school communities: an evaluation study

PDF

Reconstructing the literary canon: an innovation study

PDF

Principals’ impact on the effective enactment of instructional coaching that promotes equity: an evaluation study

PDF

Quality literacy instruction in juvenile court schools: an evaluation study

PDF

An evaluation study of the retention of company grade officers in the Western Volunteer Rifles

PDF

Evaluation of New Teacher Induction (NTI) mentor practice for developing NTI teachers capable of differentiating instruction to address cultural diversity, equity, and learner variability

PDF

Implementing standards-based grading in the era of common standards: an evaluation study

PDF

The underrepresentation of Latinas as K−12 school district superintendents: an evaluation study

PDF

Health care disparities and the influence of nurse leader cultural competency: an evaluation study

PDF

Judiciary employees engagement and motivation: the impact on employee and organizational success: an evaluation study

PDF

Implementing organizational change in a medical school

PDF

Job placement outcomes for graduates of a southwestern university school of business: an evaluation study

PDF

E-commerce marketing strategies: targeting online consumer markets

PDF

Calibrating the college preparation bridgeway for independent study program students at Amazing Independent High School District: a multisite evaluation study through the teachers' lens

PDF

Addressing the principal shortage: women teachers

PDF

Succession for success: an evaluation study of corporate strategy to improve employee satisfaction for women of color

PDF

How teachers identify and respond to bullying: an evaluation study

PDF

Lack of diversity in leadership: An organizational problem

Asset Metadata

Creator Rice-Boothe, Mary B. (author)

Core Title The racially responsive facilitator: an evaluation study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 03/11/2019

Defense Date 02/07/2019

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag culturally responsive leadership,education preparation programs,OAI-PMH Harvest,principals

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Datta, Monique (committee chair), Gutierrez, Nancy (committee member), Robles, Darline (committee member)

Creator Email mriceboothe@gmail.com,riceboot@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-131227

Unique identifier UC11675824

Identifier etd-RiceBoothe-7147.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-131227 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-RiceBoothe-7147.pdf

Dmrecord 131227

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Rice-Boothe, Mary B.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA