Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
An examination into leadership strategies that stop perpetuating the equity gap of historically marginalized students in high schools
(USC Thesis Other)
An examination into leadership strategies that stop perpetuating the equity gap of historically marginalized students in high schools
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
An Examination Into Leadership Strategies That Stop Perpetuating the Equity Gap of
Historically Marginalized Students in High Schools
Skyler Manhan Garrahy
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
May 2023
© Copyright by Skyler Manhan Garrahy 2023
All Rights Reserved
The Committee for Skyler Manhan Garrahy certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Christina Kishimoto
Richard Lawrence
Gregory Franklin, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023
iv
Abstract
The equity gap continues in the current educational systems for historically marginalized
students. This research examined leadership strategies that work to stop the gatekeeping policies
that continue to exist in the educational system that perpetuate the equity gap of our historically
marginalized youth in the high school setting. Policies and procedures are still in place that
reflect systemic barriers for historically marginalized youth, policies that determine not only the
students’ path in the high school setting but also the outcome of their postsecondary journey.
This was an examination specifically into leadership strategies of high school principals who
work to eliminate or change the policies and procedures that perpetuate the equity gap of
historically marginalized students in high schools.
v
Dedication
To my family, I could not have achieved this without your continued love and support. I
appreciate all you continue to do for me and also for providing me with the inspiration to
continue this journey.
vi
Acknowledgements
Thank you to all of the amazing professional educators that I have had the opportunity to work
with and for. I will always appreciate your continued support and feedback. It is because of your
honest evaluation and continued motivation that I have been able to grow as a professional.
Thank you to all of my students. You have taught me as much as I have taught you.
vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ........................................................................................................................................ v
Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................... x
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ xi
List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................... xii
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................. 2
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 3
Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................ 6
Significance of the Study ..................................................................................................... 8
Limitation and Delimitations ............................................................................................. 10
Definitions of Terms .......................................................................................................... 11
Organization of the Study .................................................................................................. 12
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ......................................................................................... 14
The Equity Gap .................................................................................................................. 15
Course Prerequisites .......................................................................................................... 17
Grading Practices ............................................................................................................... 21
Culturally Relevant Curriculum ........................................................................................ 24
Adaptive Leadership Theory ............................................................................................. 26
Role of the Principal Leading Change ............................................................................... 29
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 32
Chapter Three: Methodology ......................................................................................................... 34
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................. 34
viii
Purpose of the Study .......................................................................................................... 37
Research Questions ............................................................................................................ 38
Selection of the Population ................................................................................................ 39
Design Summary ............................................................................................................... 40
Instrumentation .................................................................................................................. 41
Data Collection .................................................................................................................. 42
Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 43
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 43
Chapter Four: Results .................................................................................................................... 46
Research Questions ............................................................................................................ 47
Selection of the Population ................................................................................................ 47
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 48
Findings Related to Research Questions ........................................................................... 50
Results Research Question 1 ............................................................................................. 52
Results Research Question 2 ............................................................................................. 56
Results Research Question 3 ............................................................................................. 59
Results Research Question 4 ............................................................................................. 64
Additional Findings ........................................................................................................... 66
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 67
Chapter Five: Discussion ............................................................................................................... 69
Purpose of the Study .......................................................................................................... 69
Research Questions ............................................................................................................ 70
Summary of the Study ....................................................................................................... 70
Establishing the Baseline ................................................................................................... 74
Use of Adaptive Leadership Theory to Create Effective Change ..................................... 75
ix
What Is Missing to Make Change: Maslow’s Needs ........................................................ 78
Implications for Practice .................................................................................................... 81
Recommendations for Further Research ........................................................................... 84
Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................................... 86
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 86
References ..................................................................................................................................... 88
Appendix A: Informed Consent/Information Sheet ...................................................................... 92
Appendix B: Screening Survey ..................................................................................................... 94
Research Questions ............................................................................................................ 94
Research Framework ......................................................................................................... 94
Target Population .............................................................................................................. 94
Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 94
Appendix C: Qualitative Interview ................................................................................................ 97
Interview Questions ........................................................................................................... 98
x
List of Tables
Table 1: Frequency Distribution of Demographics (N = 12) From Screening Survey .................. 49
Table 2: Years of Service in the Education Field (N = 12) ............................................................ 50
Table B1: Survey Questions .......................................................................................................... 96
xi
List of Figures
Figure 1: Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs ........................................................................................ 31
Figure 2: Strategies of Change: Responses Coded From Open-Ended Interview
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 53
Figure 3: Successful Strategies Assisting in Change: Responses Coded From Open-Ended
Interview Participants ........................................................................................................ 57
Figure 4: Roadblocks to Successful Change: Responses Coded From Open-Ended
Interview Participants ........................................................................................................ 61
Figure 5: District Supports Needed to Create Change: Coded Responses From Open-
Ended Interview Participants ............................................................................................. 65
Figure 6: John Kotter’s 8-Step Model for Change ........................................................................ 76
Figure 7: Maslow’s Hierarchy of School Needs ............................................................................ 80
xii
List of Abbreviations
BIPOC Black Indigenous people of color
IEP Individualized Education Plan
MLL Multilanguage learner
PYD Positive youth development
SEL Social emotional learning
SPED Special education
TOSA Teacher on special assignment
1
Chapter One: Overview of the Study
In the United States of America, students are given the right to have a free and equitable
public education. All students should be given the same opportunities as their fellow students no
matter their location, their gender identity, their race, their culture, or their socioeconomic status.
Educational programs must ensure that there is equity in the education provided to all students to
decrease the equity gap. It is the responsibility of school leaders to not only ensure this equity
exists but to also make change to educational institutions by recognizing the policies such as
course selection, grading policies, and the use of culturally relevant curriculum that do not
respect the diverse strengths of students and their ability to be successful in high school and
beyond.
Creating an equitable learning environment that decreases the equity gap of the
traditionally marginalized should be the goal of all in education, but specifically it is the role of
the school leader. Unfortunately, policies and practices that continue to perpetuate the equity gap
and continue to create disparity in the success of students throughout high school, including
course selection, grading practices, and the lack of culturally relevant curriculum, can be seen
“where 87 percent of white students graduate high school on-time compared to 76 percent of
Hispanic and 73 percent of African American students—and continues into and through
postsecondary education” (Higher Learning Advocates, 2019, para. 1). Educators must examine
the leadership strategies that have positively led to change in these gatekeeping policies and
procedures, the support systems in place for our site leadership and the roadblocks leaders have
been challenged by. This research was an examination specifically into leadership strategies that
high school principals have used to help eliminate or change the policies and procedures that
perpetuate the equity gap of historically marginalized students in high schools and how the role
2
of the principal is vital to these changes. This study gives background information into policies
and procedures that have been found to be inequitable for traditionally marginalized students,
such as grading policies, course selection, and the nonuse of culturally relevant materials, but the
research was specifically on leadership strategies to make changes to these policies and
procedures.
Background of the Problem
The Supreme Court ordered an end to the state-mandated racial segregation of public
schools in 1954. Yet it has been more than 50 years since this court order, and “most black
children attend public schools that are both racially isolated and inferior. Demographic patterns,
White flight, and the inability of the courts to effect the necessary degree of social reform render
further progress in implementing Brown almost impossible” (Bell, 1980, p. 518). The
educational community within the United States continues to have disparity among the world
and in education between how it should be and what reality really is. This is especially true for
traditionally marginalized youth who continue to face deep systemic barriers in education that
impede their success in the high school setting and postsecondary and employment advancing
opportunities. The questions then begin to ask are why are practices that are known to be
detrimental to student success continuing, or are they even recognized as a gate keeping policy?
Looking at the success of traditionally marginalized students, is there a connection
between success and leadership strategies that high school principals use to eliminate the policies
that perpetuate the equity gap of historically marginalized students in high schools? Specifically,
this research analyzed leadership strategies that examine course selection/placement, grading
policies, and the use/nonuse of culturally relevant curriculum that can positively or negatively
impact the success of the historically marginalized student in high school, in postsecondary
3
education, and in the workforce. This research study focused on the successful leadership
strategies used by high school administrators who recognize the need to create more equitable
practices in the educational systems and the roadblocks that administrators run into that continue
the inequities perpetuated by the systemic barriers in educational policy and their effect on the
historically marginalized students.
Statement of the Problem
The educational equity gaps “represent impact of conscious & unconscious inequitable
policies/practices that create barriers and disparities in how systems treat and support different
people” (Rector, 2021, p. 1). It is this equity gap that can continue to grow and decrease the
mobility of traditionally marginalized students through a lack of access by continuing the
practice of course prerequisites, by a grading gap through the use of traditional grading practices,
and by worthiness gap because of a lack of culturally relevant curriculum for the diverse student
population. It is through these historically practiced policies and procedures that the educational
system perpetuates these systemic barriers that continue to marginalize many students.
If perpetuating the equity gap is not a goal of the educational institution, then leaders in
education must look at what strategies our educational leaders are able to enact at each school
site to make effective change. This research study is an examination into leadership strategies
that address the equity gap of historically marginalized students in high schools. This research
study also attempted to determine the roadblocks that school leadership runs into when
implementing changes to policies and procedures that would decrease the equity gap and
increase the success of traditionally marginalized students.
The practice of having course prerequisites has been shown to have a negative impact and
a direct correlation between the course selection and success for historically marginalized
4
students in regard to graduation requirements, A–G college preparation, and career advancement.
When high school principals in the educational institution reflect upon current and past practices
to identify policies that limit the successful outcome of traditionally marginalized students, they
decrease their overall potential for success. De Brey et al. (2019) stated,
The percentage of students who were 9th-graders in fall 2009 earning any Advanced
Placement/International Baccalaureate (AP/IB) credits by 2013 was higher for Asian
students (72 percent) than for White students (40 percent). The percentages for Asian and
White students were higher than the percentages for students of any other racial/ethnic
group. (p. v)
Course selection policies can be seen as a road map not focused on student achievement for
college or advanced career postsecondary education:
The percentage of students who were 9th-graders in fall 2009 earning their highest math
course credit in calculus by 2013 was higher for Asian students (45 percent) than students
of every other racial/ethnic group. The percentage earning their highest math course
credit in calculus was also higher for White students (18 percent) than students of Two or
more races (11 percent), Hispanic students (10 percent), and Black students (6 percent).
(de Brey et al., 2019, p. v)
The concept of using prerequisites and testing to determine placement is not all negative.
In fact, placing any student in a class for which they do not have the skill sets necessary to be
successful is also detrimental to the student. However, there must be an understanding of the
implications for traditionally marginalized youth when it comes to implicit bias for course
selection or placement by teachers or counselors, the biases of standardized tests, and the social
systemic barriers that teach traditionally marginalized students that they are created with the
5
negative self-worth to be able to be successful in the more advanced classes. This attack on
confidence through the use of tests and ideologies is a long-time practice through the use of
testing for measuring and sorting individuals; the goal of producing a perfect human being has
been at the heart of curriculum projects throughout the history of the United States (Winfield,
2007).
Grading policies and practices that have been traditionally followed also can be
considered a systemic barrier that perpetuates the equity gap of traditionally marginalized
students. Traditional grading practices many times do not consider the actual learning of the
students but rather the ability of the students to complete work. Traditional grading can be
looked at as grading for completion rather than grading for learning. This style of grading can be
a driver of course failures and therefore a factor that perpetuates the equity gap because “up to
40% of traditional student grades include non-academic criteria that do not reflect student
learning gains—including participation and on-time homework submission. As a result,
traditional grading may inadvertently penalize underprivileged students who struggle to meet
non-academic expectations” (Sullivan, 2021, para. 1). High school principals must have the
ability to recognize not only the challenges students face in regard to traditional grading but also
the long-term effects on student achievement. The ability of the high school principal to lead the
school’s educators to make effective changes to grading policies and practices can be not only
difficult, because they are deeply woven into our historical educational policies, but also nearly
impossible without a school-wide culture of understanding and district support.
Educational leaders who want to make sure that all students have an equitable education,
as the whole system works to decrease the equity gap of traditionally marginalized students,
must also analyze the curriculum that they teach. Historically speaking, the curriculum that has
6
been used in our schools has been of a singular, White colonial point of view (Hollins, 1995). If
educational leaders want to continue to engage traditionally marginalized students, it is
imperative that the curriculum evolve. To decrease the equity gap, we must make sure that
educators not only examine the curriculum they teach students but also make sure that it is
culturally relevant in a manner that not only supports teachers in teaching students of diverse
backgrounds and cultures but also effectively contributes to the meaningful learning of
historically marginalized students to support their academic success.
Change is difficult in most situations. Any change in education is no different in this
regard, and it is a slow and gradual process. Add in emotions to change and practices, such as
changing policies that are representative of the systemic barriers of traditionally marginalized
students, and change can be perceived as impossible. This study examined the positive strategies
that embody the concept of change through the adaptive leadership theory used by high school
principals as well as the roadblocks they face. It is through an adaptive leadership model,
specifically the work of Kotter (2022) and Heifetz et al. (2009), that change can be accomplished
within an organization with transformational success.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the leadership strategies that high school
principals can use to eliminate or make change to the policies and practices that perpetuate the
equity gap and the systemic barriers that decrease the opportunity for the success of the
traditionally marginalized student. Specifically, this research analyzed leadership strategies that
examine course selection/placement, grading policies, and the use/nonuse of culturally relevant
curriculum that can positively or negatively impact the success of the historically marginalized
student. According to Riele (2006),
7
Secondary education across the western world expanded in order to aid social and
economic development after the Second World War. Moreover, education was also
meant to act as a vehicle for social mobility, according to the meritocratic ideal expressed
in policy at that time. (p. 129)
Many years have passed since World War II, and unfortunately the educational system still has
not created a system that promotes all students. Instead, education has continued practices that
maintain inequities for historically marginalized students. This intent of this study was to
examine the connection between leadership strategies that high school principals can use to
eliminate or make changes to the policies and practices that perpetuate the equity gap that
decreases the opportunity for the success of traditionally marginalized students. The following
questions were used to determine how school leaders can make effective change that will stop
the continuum of unethical and inequitable policies and practices that affect not only the classes
students take and their overall academic success but also their personal belief about their own
history, relevance, outcome, and potential for success.
1. What leadership strategies have high school principals used to change these
gatekeeping practices including course selection and prerequisites, grading policies,
and the use of culturally relevant curriculum?
2. How successful have principals been in changing these gatekeeping practices?
3. What roadblocks have principals hit when changing these practices?
4. What district office supports have principals received when working to eliminate
these gatekeeping practices?
8
Significance of the Study
The equity gap continues in the current educational systems for historically marginalized
students. This research examined leadership strategies that work to stop the gatekeeping policies
and practices that continue to exist in the educational system and perpetuate the equity gap of
historically marginalized youth in the high school setting. Policies and practices are still in place
that reflect systemic barriers for historically marginalized youth, policies and practices that
determine not only the students’ path in the high school setting but also the outcome of their
postsecondary journey. This was an examination specifically into leadership strategies that high
school principals have used to eliminate the policies that perpetuate the equity gap of historically
marginalized students in high schools.
Educational leaders must recognize that change is hard for people. Changing policies that
have been institutional standards are not only hard to recognize but also hard to change. The
educational system, specifically high school principals, must examine all of the policies and
procedures that are in place to ensure all students are offered and feel comfortable participating
in course work that allows for success, the grading policies used, and the curriculum that is
taught. Students who have been historically marginalized and excluded from certain courses in
the high school setting have been abandoned by the educational institution. Students who have
been judged by their work completion versus their knowledge or learning have been unfairly
limited by the educational system. Students who have not been taught using culturally relevant
curriculum have been forced to disregard their own culture, history, and point of view and lose a
sense of belonging in the educational system. It is the duty of high school principals to analyze
and determine which policies and procedures are in place to ensure that high school sites do not
continue the past practices that perpetuate the equity gap of historically marginalized students.
9
This study has a significant impact on the students, staff, and leaders of high schools and
demonstrates the need of support for leaders from the district office and other educational
stakeholders to increase the successful outcome of all students. The policies and procedures
concerning course prerequisites, grading policies, and culturally relevant curriculum has been
proven to have a direct result on the success of historically marginalized students. If high school
principals do not recognize and work to make effective change to these policies and practices
there will be a continued academically negative effect on the students in high school including
their dropout rate, behavior, and disciplinary actions and their safety and high school completion.
Unfortunately, these policies and practices do not stop there and continue to have an effect on the
student after high school. These gatekeeping policies and practices, including course selection
and prerequisites, grading policies, and the lack of culturally relevant curriculum, translate into a
decreased opportunity at postsecondary education and the potential for higher waged
employment. Students who have not been given the same opportunity as those whom the
educational system has traditionally believed to be better students are also more apt to enter into
patterns that help continue the school-to-prison pipeline, which was demonstrated by data from
2015 for students in Grades 9-12 who were reported to be involved in on-campus altercations in
the previous 12 months. The breakdown of students involved was 6% of White students, 9% of
Hispanic or students of two or more races, and 13% of Black and American Indian/Alaska
Native students (de Brey et al., 2019). This study will help change the leadership strategies that
can remove or modify gatekeeping policies and thereby change the students’ outcome.
Educators can no longer continue to do things the way they have always been done.
There must be support systems in place that help educators learn how to create an environment
that is inclusive, equitable, and safe for all students to participate in courses, grading policies,
10
and with culturally relative curriculum that will ultimately change their lives. High school
principals will be able to reflect on their individual and collective actions after this study has
examined the strategies that can be taken to decrease the systemic barriers that negatively affect
the opportunity for the success of the traditionally marginalized student. This study also looked
at the connection between the successful leadership strategies and roadblocks to success high
school principals have experienced that can eliminate such policies and practices that perpetuate
the equity gap.
In education there must be accurate data, that is understood, to be able to shift the
systems. This study will provide our policy makers and school leadership another opportunity to
reflect on how high school principals recognize and then use strategies that create change to
support traditionally marginalized students in regard to course selection, grading policies, and
culturally relevant curriculum and the difficulties with creating this change. Educational policy
does not change easily. This study will help create momentum, encourage equitable change, and
determine strategies for school leaders that ultimately will assist high school principals to
recognize, reflect, and determine strategies that will help traditionally marginalized youth by
decreasing the equity gap.
Limitation and Delimitations
Limitations of the study were my own positionality as a White, female researcher and
educator. Included in my positionality is my own socioeconomic status that can cloud my own
bias. The study may also be limited by the data sourced on students that accurately reflect
student outcome while addressing the effects of the coronavirus pandemic.
11
Delimitations of the study were high school settings within the Southern California
region and high school principals who recognize the equity gap and policies and practices that
support positive change for the traditionally marginalized students.
Definitions of Terms
Cultural pluralism is the theory that advocates a society in which multiple cultures
coexist and maintain distinct identities, but share social, economic, and political status. This
theory became more popular “during the colonial period when English-speaking settlers felt the
need to maintain, protect, and promote their cultural dominance in the face of increasing
numbers of immigrants from southern and eastern Europe” (Hollins, 1995, p. 34).
English language learner (ELL) refers to a student who is either unable to communicate
fluently in English or a student who may come from a home or background where English is not
considered to be the primary language. An ELL student, now called a multilanguage learner
(MLL) student, will typically need specialized English language modified instruction and/or be
forced to take a designated course in their school day.
Individualized Education Plan (IEP) is a designated special education plan that is
developed to ensure that a child with an identified disability who is attending an educational
institution receives specialized instruction and related services as designated by the IEP team
based on the needs of the student.
Marginalized means to be relegated to an unimportant or powerless position within a
society or group (Merriam-Webster, n.d.)
Multilanguage learner (MLL; previously ELL used) is the current designation of the ELL
student. New designation or label used to demonstrate the multilanguage aspect of the student.
12
Socioeconomic challenged: Title 1 is a designation for a school receiving federal aid
because 40% or more of the student population is considered low income.
Standards-based grading is a grading system that focuses on allowing teachers the
opportunity to track students’ progress, based on achievement and learning, versus grading for
completion of assignments. This grading practice focuses on student mastery and learning.
Organization of the Study
The educational system, specifically high school principals, must examine all of the
policies and procedures that are in place to ensure all students are offered and feel comfortable
participating in course work that allows for success, the grading policies used, and the
curriculum that is taught. Data from past and current practices with the outcome they have on
students provided a road map for this study. The purpose of this study was to examine the
leadership strategies that high school principals can use to eliminate or make change to the
policies and practices that perpetuate the equity gap and the systemic barriers that decrease the
opportunity for the success of the traditionally marginalized student. This is not a study of
grading practices, course selection, or the use of culturally relevant curriculum but rather a study
on the strategies of the high school principal to make changes to these policies and procedures to
increase the success of the traditionally marginalized student. The information from this study
will allow for a more equitable education system and for policy makers, administrators, and
educators to reflect on their own practices that may or may not perpetuate this equity gap.
Chapter 1 of this research study detailed the background of the problem and the statement
of the problem. From the background of the problem, I identified the purpose of this study, the
significance of the study, and the organization of the study. In Chapter 1, I also identified the
limitations and delimitations of the study and defined key terms.
13
Continuing with Chapter 2 is the review of literature to provide the background for the
study, including the details regarding the equity gap. Chapter 2’s literature review also provides
background evidence regarding the impacts of course selection and prerequisites, traditional
grading policies, and the nonuse of culturally relative curriculum that have negative effects on
the traditionally marginalized students’ success. Chapter 2 also describes the adaptive leadership
theory as it relates to this study and the role of the principal leading change for student success.
Chapter 3 restates the problem and the purpose of the study. It follows with the selection
of the population for the study. Chapter 3 summarizes the design of the study and the
instrumentation and finishes with the data collection and data analysis.
Chapter 4 makes connections of the data collected and follows with Chapter 5 as a
summary of findings and final conclusions.
14
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Education policies and procedures seem to be constantly changing. Every year there seem
to be new thoughts on how to create the best possible educational system that will provide the
best support and future for youth. However, are the policies and changes really supporting all
youth, or are educational leaders going to allow the traditionally marginalized youth to spiral
down the same path that they have always been on, thereby continuing to marginalize them?
How are educational leaders supporting school leaders to not only recognize but also create
change to the policies and practices that continue to expand the equity gap? Looking at the
traditionally marginalized, what connections are there between leadership strategies that high
school principals use to eliminate the policies that perpetuate the equity gap of historically
marginalized students in high schools, what support do they receive, and what roadblocks have
they encountered? Specifically, this research analyzed leadership strategies that examine course
selection/placement, grading policies, and the use/nonuse of culturally relevant curriculum that
can positively or negatively impact the success of the historically marginalized student.
Educational institutions must look at the relationship between systemic barriers that
remain in the educational system including course prerequisites, grading policies, and the lack of
culturally relevant curriculum and the success of continued marginalized youth, specifically why
changes are not being made to these policies and procedures. This research study focused on the
leadership strategies used by high school administrators to create more equitable practices in the
educational system and the roadblocks that administrators run into that continue the inequities
perpetuated by the systemic barriers in educational policy and practices and their effect on the
historically marginalized students.
15
The Equity Gap
Equity within the educational institution is not only a loose term, but it is also a term that
can be manipulated to fit a political landscape as it shifts based on the current viewpoints. An
aspect of equity within education is what is known as the equity gap. Although the concept of an
equity gap is still considered to be controversial, it is an area that must not only be defined but
also understood in regard to not only the success of the student but also the society as a whole.
The equity gap has affected the traditionally marginalized students in educational institutions and
within society more than students of the dominant culture. The concept of the gap is when two or
more groups are faced with the same task or opportunity and the results of the groups are
significantly different or widened (de Brey et al., 2019).
Traditionally marginalized students are those students and societal groups that are
considered to be on the edge or left to the outside of the traditional or dominant culture
(Merriam-Webster, n.d.). It is imperative to look at the educational attainment of traditionally
marginalized students and how it affects overall student success, including the equity gaps that
begin in the K–12 educational setting. According to Higher Learning Advocates (2019, para. 1),
the equity gap can be seen by 87% of White students graduating high school on track compared
to 76% of Hispanic students and 73% of Black students. This gap continues in postsecondary
educational settings.
The equity gap between students leads to an overall decrease in student academic success
as a result of the compounding effects of an achievement gap because of standardized aspects of
our educational institutions, an opportunity gap based on the inequities of students based on race,
socioeconomic status, achievement, or cultural differences from the dominant culture, and last
16
the access gap because of the systemic barriers to traditionally marginalized students based on
policies and procedures that are perpetuated in educational institutions (Rector, 2021).
As educational leaders, it is imperative to continue to examine the design of the
educational system to determine whether educational stakeholders are changing the policies and
procedures that perpetuate the equity gap; instead, educators must work to create more equitable
social mobility. However, the traditionally marginalized students, based on race, gender, and
sexuality have not had the same positive success from the educational systems. Instead, those
students who would be considered traditionally marginalized and needing more assistance have
instead been negatively renamed as deprived, disadvantaged, poor, alienated, and at risk, creating
a negative stereotype of the student rather than provoking an in-depth reflection of traditional
educational practices (Riele, 2006, p 129).
The negative impact of stereotyping of traditionally marginalized students continues to
impact not only their overall academic success but also their success in society. This continued
practice also perpetuates the practices and policies that gatekeep traditionally marginalized
students rather than look at practices and policies that can improve and effectively change the
educational institutions to better serve all students (Ladson-Billings, 1995).
If educational leaders are to begin looking at the causes of the equity gap, then all
educators must begin to look at all policies and practices and determine whether educational
institutions are providing the best educational learning environment for all students. The
students’ educational environment must promote academic success and excellence while
recognizing the students’ interactions they have at home, culturally, linguistically, and socially
(Ladson-Billings, 1995). This is not a common practice of many educational institutions, but it
must become a norm of practices to decrease gatekeeping policies and increase the success of
17
traditionally marginalized students. Changing and challenging these policies and procedures is
challenging work for educators as they determine what are good teaching practices and
beneficial policies and procedures that are working to successfully create positive learning
environments and outcomes for traditionally marginalized youth (Ladson-Billings, 1995).
Among these policies that have been researched and should be adjusted to decrease the equity
gap of traditionally marginalized students are the use of course prerequisites, grading policies,
and the use of culturally relevant curriculum. Educators must begin to reflect on leadership
strategies to create real change to those policies and procedures that only work to grow the equity
gap and negatively stereotype groups of students as less than capable of academic success (Riele,
2006).
Course Prerequisites
The path of students has a direct impact on their high school experience, their success in
graduating, and in their endeavors after high school. The different types of courses that are
offered at the high school are not all created equal. It is important to understand that with each
course selection, the path the student takes are being determined (Spellman et al., 2021). The
policies and procedures that are in place that dictate a student’s high school direction must be
investigated to ascertain whether they are indeed the gatekeeper to the success of the historically
marginalized students. Research has shown that high school courses are tailored to the outcome
that is desired by the student. However, if the student or the student’s guardian not aware of the
implications of course selection or there are policies in place that have historically been a
detriment to the success of the historically marginalized student, their high school and
postsecondary fate may already be determined. Courses can be labeled as remedial, honors,
18
Advanced Placement, dual enrollment, A–G, CTE, vocational, or academic support. Courses
come with many names and just as many critical outcomes for the student.
The United States has a long history of exclusionary practices based on race, sex, and
stereotyping that has created a power system that leaves many with more advantages and
opportunities than others. This deliberate desire to create an inequitable power struggle has also
been structured within the educational institutions that have been developed in the United States,
leaving the traditionally marginalized student without the same opportunities for academic
success (Stone, 2001). Within education, the practice of having course prerequisites or course
selection processes that act as gatekeepers to traditionally marginalized students negatively
impact not only the academic success in the high school setting but also the overall confidence of
the student leading to less postsecondary completion and lower expectations in employment
(Spellman et al., 2021). The ability to see success as a possibility has been shown in research
regarding critical consciousness and the long-term success of the student both in school and with
the correlation between critical consciousness and career development with successful
occupational attainment as an adult (Rapa et al., 2018). The research conducted by Rapa et al.
(2018) determined that when youth have the ability to experience interventions that are both
engaging and challenging to the student, traditionally marginalized youth develop skill sets that
encourage them to advance occupationally, increase their desire to recognize social injustices,
and challenge the social constructs that perpetuate social injustice.
It is imperative that leadership not only recognize and have a better understanding of the
use of course prerequisites and overall scheduling of students who are traditionally marginalized
but also implement strategies that will be used by the counseling profession to make changes to
the past practices that limit our students. It has been found that the traditionally marginalized
19
student has not been advocated for and must overcome significant cultural and systemic barriers
in the policies and procedures in the educational system and the counseling profession; school
leadership must understand the importance of making students who are traditionally
marginalized feel wanted, supported, and worthy of not only graduating but also being successful
beyond graduation (Spellman et al., 2021). Trends in course placement show that leadership
must make sure that counseling is appropriately representing all students who are capable of
success in all levels of courses. Unfortunately, the data do not show an equal representation
when 18% of White students, 11% of two or more race students, 10% of Hispanics, and only 6%
of Black students earned math credit in calculus or higher in 2013 (de Brey et al., 2019). The
data do show that the high school completion rate for traditionally marginalized students is
steadily increasing, still a lower percentage than for White students; however, the percentage of
ninth-grade students who completed any Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate
credits by 2013 was 72% Asian students and 40% White students with no other racial group
reaching that percentage.
This trend of the traditionally marginalized student population not being represented in
higher level or more prestigious courses continues to affect the way they see themselves and
their abilities for success. Research has indicated that academic and professional development
programs that included the traditionally marginalized student as a means to promote their
awareness and belief that they could be successful in a science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) or similar prestigious career found that they contributed to the students
believing that they not only belonged but could also be successful (McAlexander et al., 2022).
According to Thiem and Dasgupta (2022),
20
In addition to helping historically marginalized students gain access to professional
networks and employment, experiential learning opportunities may have further benefits.
These opportunities may grow students’ social capital by familiarizing them with
workplace norms, etiquette, and unspoken expectations. Moreover, we suspect that these
applied experiences may have psychological benefits for students, such as a strengthened
professional identity, greater self-efficacy, and increased sense of belonging in a future
profession. (p. 240)
This allows for a positive self-image to be created that the marginalized students lack from
traditional educational settings. Leadership has to recognize the positive benefits of traditionally
marginalized youth and their ability to gain not only content knowledge but also the self-
confidence and positive visualization of their ability to belong in higher level courses (Vera et
al., 2022). Although the McAlexander et al. (2022) study found that the focused work and the
ability to participate in internships contributed to the positive self-worth of the student, it is also
necessary to look at the negative outcomes of not placing the traditionally marginalized students
in higher level courses. According to Thiem and Dasgupta (2022), not allowing the traditionally
marginalized student to participate in high level courses,
feeds into the negative stereotypes and low academic expectations that circulate on
university campuses and are, to lesser or greater extent, harbored by some faculty and
fellow students. These compounding barriers set the stage for a downward spiral whereby
low-income first-generation students are at risk of withdrawing from higher education.
This withdrawal reduces representation of such students on campus, further compounding
the message that students from these groups do not belong in college. (p. 214)
21
These are the same feelings that are seen in traditionally marginalized students throughout the
high school course selection process.
Grading Practices
Traditional grading practices many times are a grading system that encourages and
supports students for their work completion versus their work comprehension. Unfortunately, not
all students, especially those who are traditionally marginalized, may benefit from this style of
grading system. It has been determined that students who are traditionally marginalized face
additional challenges when trying to succeed using this type of grading policy. Traditionally
based grading policies that perpetuate and allow for stereotyping that remains in the educational
system that identifies positively stereotyped groups in academics as White and Asian while
negatively stereotyped groups as Black, Hispanic, and Native American will continue if leaders
do not examine and interrupt our policies and procedures. To make effective positive change to
this negative stereotyping, educational leaders and administrators need to lead our instructors to
reward students for growth mindset versus fixed mindset (Thiem & Dasgupta, 2022).
Traditional grading policies are not policies that many leaders in education want to
challenge to change or even take the time to investigate their true effect on students because that
would be considered a battle against one of education’s longest traditions (Guskey & Brookhart,
2019). Within the high school setting, grading practices can be discussed and many times will
end with commentary that explains this is the way it has always been done, which unfortunately
leaves traditionally marginalized youth to suffer the negative impacts of traditional grading
practices. Guskey and Brookhart (2019) stated,
School leaders who do acknowledge that there is a need for grading reform are working
against hidden traditions and histories that are deeply rooted in systemic barriers and it is
22
up to school leaders to recognize and make change for more equitable, fair and accurate
grading policies. (p. 163)
Leadership must take on this challenge to make effective changes in the educational institution
that promotes the success of all students and decreases the negative effects and the lack of
unification in theory about grading. According to Guskey and Brookhart,
The issue of fairness becomes particularly problematic when students are subjected to
arbitrary grading and the district has few or no grading policies in place. Without explicit
policy provisions and subsequent protections, school districts and leaders are at risk of
court challenges by students and their families. (p. 160)
Grading policies that support a growth mindset, grading for learning, and grading for
comprehension rather than completion allow students who typically may have lower grades in
the traditional grading systems to have a more successful academic performance and a better
self-worth and self-identity. Yet the traditional grading practices continue to be the standard
grading policy in high school academic settings. This begs the question of what are the
traditional grading procedures really grading? Guskey and Brookhart (2019) indicated that
teachers claimed to be grading activities that would be considered high-order thinking, but the
research indicated more grading of and measurement of basic knowledge based in memory and
information retrieval (p.67). Traditional grading practices are doing many students a disservice
when it comes to their overall academic success because grading for work completion and ability
to maintain the large amount of required coursework, which does not demonstrate mastery of
skill or concept, can be inequitable especially for those students who may have additional
responsibilities beyond the academic day (Sullivan, 2021).
23
Taking into consideration that the traditional grading policy is historically traditional in
the educational institution and therefore built on practices that perpetuate gatekeeping policies,
that it is grading heavily on recall versus higher level thinking, and that it is individually teacher
dependent, it is no wonder that it continues to have a negative impact on traditionally
marginalized students. There is also an impact on the success of the traditionally marginalized
student, and all students for a matter of fact, when educational leaders examine the fact that the
traditional grading system is teacher dependent. The idea that grading policies that are teacher
dependent means that every teacher has their own category of weights, policies for late work,
retakes, and rewards. If a student already has difficulty in the academic setting and then also has
difficulty understanding the worth of their knowledge, this can have lasting negative effects for
the student (Feldman, 2018). Students are then left to try to remember and determine the
intricacies of each teacher’s grading policies. This confusion can lead to a negative outcome for
students leading to teachers grading based on behavior, students who demonstrate engagement in
learning, instead of academic comprehension. This concept can be detrimental to the traditionally
marginalized student because of cultural norms or misunderstandings (Guskey & Brookhart,
2019).
Grading practices in the traditional sense can create situations in which students who are
traditionally marginalized are misinterpreted as behaviors that are disrespectful or inappropriate
because of the cultural background of the teacher. Unfortunately, combining the cultural
ignorance of the teachers with the traditional grading practices can have a negative impact on the
traditionally marginalized students’ academic success or self-worth (Feldman, 2018). Feldman
(2018) found that the traditional grading policies that include the practice of adding citizenship
24
grades and participation grades negatively impact Black students who are regularly graded as
poorer classroom citizens by White teachers.
Leaders also must examine their own biases and know that they have the power to
continue these policies and procedures that perpetuate the inequities that negatively affect
traditionally marginalized students. Coupling implicit bias with subjective grading can be one
explanation to why the achievement gap among traditionally marginalized students continues to
grow. This academic equity gap can be related back to the subjective grading practices with the
behaviors of students, which may be culturally acceptable at the home setting but perceived
negatively at the school setting, and therefore increase the susceptibility of students’ academic
success (Feldman, 2018).
Leaders may not want to challenge the traditional grading system policies and procedures
that have continued to perpetuate the equity gap of traditionally marginalized students both in
school and beyond. The challenge is not a small task, but the research has determined that it
continues to have negative impacts on the success of students both in school, in the way they see
themselves, and in their ability to achieve employment opportunities to improve their overall
quality of life.
Culturally Relevant Curriculum
The educational system has a long history of using curriculum that does not represent the
diversity of people or history. In the United States, the curriculum and teaching strategies many
times do not acknowledge the traditionally marginalized students in careers that are
stereotypically considered highly intellectual, such as STEM-related fields, or as a representation
of the cultural representations of students. For traditionally marginalized students not only to be
successful in high school but also to have the confidence and positive self-value to be successful
25
in postsecondary education or career aspirations, there must be a culturally relevant curriculum
used in the classroom setting with culturally diverse and pedagogically sound teaching practices.
It is the responsibility of site administrators not only to make sure that all students, including
traditionally marginalized students, identify with the curriculum being taught but also that the
educational staff are proficient in the pedagogy that goes along with the use of culturally relevant
curriculum.
Many marginalized youth grow up feeling disconnected in the United States from social
institutions and society as a whole and therefore feel disempowered and less than; therefore,
there must be interventions in place that help create a positive youth development that helps to
define them as active and positive members of society (Eichas et al., 2017). Research conducted
by Riele (2006) found that students who are often stereotyped as troubled youth illustrate the
lack of connection to the traditional practices of educational institutions continuing to create an
educational environment that does support their individual needs for academic success. Ferrer-
Wreder et al. (2002) researched and found that the impact of positive identity development on
urban minority youth who are considered to be vulnerable to the negative development impacts
of being traditionally marginalized can increase the students’ overall success in overcoming
equity gaps. The goal of the study was to gain additional knowledge learn additional knowledge
on how to deal with the marginalized youth to create opportunities for youth to transform
themselves “through the through the development of a critical understanding of their life context,
a sense of control and responsibility over their lives, and an increasingly proactive participation
in defining for themselves who they are and what they believe in” (p. 180). The study found that
the opportunity to provide traditionally marginalized youth participatory and transformative
26
methods that created the ability for them to proactively participate in their lives and find an
identity was a benefit to their overall success.
The use of culturally relevant curriculum allows traditionally marginalized students the
ability to identify positive positionality within their communities that is also found within their
educational institutions. According to del Carmen Salazar (2013),
Some would argue that scholars continue to privilege the experience of the “oppressor”
and negate or exclude the agency of the “oppressed” by strictly focusing on the
educator’s role in a humanizing pedagogy. Future research should therefore focus on the
active role of students in co-creating a humanizing pedagogy in the classroom and
beyond. (p. 142)
Traditionally marginalized students continue to be negatively affected by educational
institutions. If leaders do not understand that students of color will resist teachers who do not
understand or identify their bicultural and multicultural worlds, then educators are doomed to
continue to perpetuate the equity gap and continue the educational goal for students of color to
be cultural replacement or assimilation into the mainstream dominate culture (del Carmen
Salazar, 2013). It is imperative that the policies and procedures are examined for all of their
potential negative impacts so that the traditionally marginalized students who are facing systemic
barriers and who are attempting to succeed in an institution that has culturally dominant
curriculum and pedagogy have the opportunity to be successful in education and beyond
(Spellman et al., 2021).
Adaptive Leadership Theory
The literature review detailed that there are still policies and procedures that are in place
and currently being not only used but also considered to be the standard in education including
27
course prerequisite, grading policy, and the need for a culturally relevant curriculum. The
literature review also details that these policies and practices continue to be gatekeeping actions
that impede the success of historically marginalized youth. Based on this information, the need to
make effective change and the fact that school leaders are aware that these policies and
procedures continue to harm students, it is imperative that the leadership of the schools create an
adaptive environment on campus that allows for others to have the opportunity to reflect and to
grow. Adaptive leadership strategies include being social and being open to solutions that allow
not only for people to work together to find a solution to a problem but also for the problem to be
identified and solutions to be implemented that are adaptive (Jefferies, 2017).
Creating real change to historically sensitive policies and procedures will not be an easy
task. As stated previously, the concept of that is the way it has always been done is a much easier
approach. However, adaptive leadership is the ability to help people mobilize and then move
through tough challenges or changes and not just survive but thrive as a whole regardless of how
challenging the change may be or how deep it may be ingrained into thinking and practices
(Heifetz et al., 2009). As leadership of the school, it is very important to also reflect on the
change that is needed for the institution and also reflect on oneself. Adaptive leaders must
analyze their own biases, own needs, and then how they as leaders affect the possible change
they have deemed as necessary for the organization. Employing the adaptive leadership theory
is not about meeting or exceeding your authorizers’ expectations; it is about challenging
some of those expectations, finding a way to disappoint people without pushing them
completely over the edge. And it requires managing the resistance you will inevitably
trigger. (Heifetz et al., 2009, p. 26)
28
Challenging the status quo while implementing adaptive leadership strategies can be found in the
work by Kotter and Cohen (2002) regarding creating an environment of adaptive leadership for
change using an eight-step procedure. Adaptive leaders can create effective change by battling
the status quo, including practices that are known gatekeeping policies and procedures including
grading policy, course prerequisites, and the lack of culturally representative curriculum, by
using the eight steps provided by Kotter and Cohen (2002), in The Heart of Change: Real-Life
Stories of How People Change Their Organizations, which include
• increasing urgency: helping those to have an understanding to the why and the need
to make change;
• building the guiding team: picking the right people for the change effort by building
trust;
• getting the vision right: creating the vision to create bold change through bold
strategies;
• communicating for buy-in: using clear communication to decrease distrust and build
buy-in;
• empowering action: taking away unnecessary barriers to action;
• creating short-term wins: building momentum and create visible success;
• not letting up: creating change head on, especially at the bigger emotional barriers;
and
• making changes stick: rooting behavior in structure (p. 6).
The adaptive leader has the ability to make change. Kotter’s steps mentioned are one example of
a step-by-step process to create change and demonstrate that the policies and procedures that
continue to perpetuate the equity gap of traditionally marginalized students are not set in stone,
29
but they have been in use in educational institutions and society historically. When leaders see
the need for change, they can want to act quickly. Although there is the need for urgency, the
adaptive leader understands that there is a need to recognize the problem, stop and examine the
problem, and then fully understand the change that may be needed to disrupt such policies. Take
time to look from the balcony and the dance floor. Go back and forth between the two and really
make sure that to take the time to fully understand not only the problem but also all of the pieces
that need to be changed or understood before making change (Heifetz et al., 2009).
Role of the Principal Leading Change
Fireflies’ chances of mating go up from 3% to 82% if they light up together instead of
randomly. The role of the principal is to make sure to help others become better together. It is the
role of the principal to increase opportunities, coordinate for progress, and provide opportunities
for group growth. Achor (2018) stated, “The more you help people find their light, the brighter,
you both will shine” (p. 18). The role of the school leadership is not easy. The hardest work for
principals is to continue their own growth, such as in making adaptive changes that challenge
traditional points of view or longstanding practices (Raskin et al., 2021). The work is hard, but
the results if the work is not completed are far worse for all students and society as a whole.
It is the role and responsibility of the principal to disrupt the cultural inequity that
continues to exist in educational institutions. Rector (2021) stated,
Cultural Inequity: Schools are institutions created based on dominant culture beliefs,
values, and experiences. They have changed little as more diverse students have come to
attend. The norms, customs, social expectations, and pathways to success may not be
known or understood. Often there can be cultural conflict and forced assimilation into the
dominant culture ways as the only avenue to success. Many students must learn to “code
30
switch” to try to maintain their own cultural identity and still function within the school
setting. (p. 2)
Principals cannot work alone to make change, and leaders must be able to support all of
those around them by creating an environment of support and also of understanding that a
change is required even for those who may not feel a change is needed or wanted (Achor, 2018).
It is important for leaders not to involve their own emotions into the change effort and recognize
how their own emotions and moods may affect those around them as they are working as a team
to create change in the organization. For leadership, this may be a difficult task. It is challenging
not only not to lead with emotion but also not to have their own emotions triggered during this
change effort, especially considering the fact that with creating change for equity, the policies
and procedures that perpetuate the equity gap are tied directly to deep emotions. To create
change, principals must support those they lead, but it is also important that principals are
supported. Principals must be supported by their district personnel, but they also must support
their own personal needs. The job of a principal is to “move people, both literally and
figuratively, from a familiar place to a place less familiar, you operate on their emotions, on their
stomachs and hearts in addition to their heads” (Heifetz et al., 2009, p. 232). Leading effective
change in areas that require emotional ties to such strong barriers can create burnout often caused
from leading from the heart (Heifetz et al, 2009). Adaptive leaders must protect themselves as
they work to protect others through change. While creating change, not only must the needs of
the principal be maintained, but the others’ needs must also be maintained and satisfied for them
to follow the change efforts. These needs, which can be identified by Maslow’s hierarchy of
needs, proposed in 1943 by Abraham Maslow in “A Theory of Human Motivation,” are
illustrated by the following triangle in Figure 1 (Boogren, 2018).
31
Figure 1
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
Note. From Take Time for You: Self-Care Action plans for Educators (Using Maslow’s
Hierarchy of Needs and positive Psychology) (p. 18), by T. H. Boogren, 2018, Solution Tree.
Copyright 2018 by Solution Tree.
The practices and procedures that the principal must own are those about building
organizational culture including hiring practices, evaluation, effective instruction, and
courageous conversations. Principals have the ability to hire teachers and to determine the path
the school culture and practices will take. Therefore, it is imperative that principals evaluate
teacher performance and create a known mindset, belief, or value to build upon when hiring
(Raskin et al., 2021). To create this environment and culture on campus, it is important for
32
principals to engage in the four agreements in conversations, which are to stay engaged, speak
truth, experience the discomfort, and last to expect and accept non-closure. The role of the
principal must include these defining characteristics to be able to effectively make change,
especially regarding the policies and procedures that perpetuate the equity gap of traditionally
marginalized youth. Principals must be willing to engage in critical self-awareness that examines
internal assumptions and challenges the inequities that negatively affect the traditionally
marginalized student (McLaughlin, 2020).
Principals can improve the success of all students and decrease the equity gap that has
plagued many youths since the beginning of the education system. To improve the success of all
students, principals need to focus on equity-focused learning strategies and on culturally
responsive leadership policies and procedures (McLaughlin, 2020). Principals must have the
courageous conversations to achieve change in policies and procedures that are a challenge and
as a gatekeeper for traditionally marginalized youth. This includes engaging with those who do
not want to talk or with uncomfortable conversations (Raskin et al., 2021). It is important for
principals to understand what it is that they have inherited in a school, what methods are still in
practice that may be harmful for the students, and what strategies they intend to use to make
effective change for the traditionally marginalized students, the staff, and the whole school.
Conclusion
The equity gap continues in the current educational systems for historically marginalized
students. This research examined leadership strategies that work to stop the gatekeeping policies
that continue to exist in the educational system that perpetuate the equity gap of historically
marginalized youth in the high school setting. Policies including course selection and
prerequisites, grading policies, and the nonuse of culturally relevant curriculum are still in place
33
and reflect systemic barriers for historically marginalized youth; they determine not only the
student’s path in the high school setting but also the outcome of their postsecondary journey.
This was an examination specifically into leadership strategies that high school principals can
use to eliminate the policies that perpetuate the equity gap of historically marginalized students
in high schools.
34
Chapter Three: Methodology
The equity gap continues in the current educational systems for historically marginalized
students. This research examined leadership strategies that work to stop the gatekeeping policies
that continue to exist to perpetuate the equity gap of historically marginalized youth in the high
school setting. Policies are still in place that reflect systemic barriers for historically
marginalized youth, policies that determine not only the students’ path in the high school setting
but also the outcome of their postsecondary journey. This was an examination specifically into
leadership strategies of high school principals who work to eliminate the policies that perpetuate
the equity gap of historically marginalized students in high schools.
Statement of the Problem
The educational equity gaps “represent the impact of conscious & unconscious
inequitable policies/practices that create barriers and disparities in how systems treat and support
different people” (Rector, 2021, p .1). It is this equity gap that can continue to grow and decrease
the mobility of traditionally marginalized students through a lack of access by continuing the
practice of course prerequisites, by a grading gap through the use of traditional grading practices,
and by a worthiness gap because of a lack of culturally relevant curriculum for the diverse
student population. It is through these historically practiced policies and procedures that the
educational system perpetuates these systemic barriers that continue to marginalize many
students.
If perpetuating the equity gap is not a goal of the educational institution, then educational
leaders must look at what strategies educational leaders are able to enact at each school site to
make effective change. This research study was an examination into leadership strategies that
address the equity gap of historically marginalized students in high schools. This research study
35
also attempted to determine the roadblocks that school leadership runs into when implementing
change to policies that will decrease the equity gap and increase the success of traditionally
marginalized students.
The practice of having course prerequisites has been shown to have a negative impact and
a direct correlation between the course selection and success for historically marginalized
students in regard to graduation requirements, A–G college preparation, and career advancement.
When high school principals in the educational institution reflect upon current and past practices
to identify policies, like the requirement of course prerequisites that continue to perpetuate the
equity gap in historically marginalized students, there must be an honest assessment of the
negative outcome on the student. De Brey et al. (2019) stated that the percentage of White and
Asian students earning credit in advanced course work was higher than the percentage of
students of any other racial or ethnic group.
Course selection policies can be seen as a road map that is not focusing on student achievement
for college or advanced career postsecondary education:
The percentage of students who were 9th-graders in fall 2009 earning their highest math
course credit in calculus by 2013 was higher for Asian students (45 percent) than students
of every other racial/ethnic group. The percentage earning their highest math course
credit in calculus was also higher for White students (18 percent) than students of Two or
more races (11 percent), Hispanic students (10 percent), and Black students (6 percent).
(de Brey et al., 2019, p. v)
The concept of using prerequisites and testing to determine placement is not all negative.
In fact, placing any student in a class where they do not have the skill sets necessary to be
successful is also detrimental to the student. However, there must be an understanding of the
36
implications for traditionally marginalized youth when it comes to implicit bias for course
selection or placement by teachers or counselors, the biases of standardized tests, and the social
systemic barriers that teach traditionally marginalized that they are created with the negative
self-worth to be able to be successful in the more advanced classes. This attack on confidence
through the use of tests and ideologies is a longtime practice through the use of testing for
measuring and sorting individuals; the goal of producing a perfect human being has been at the
heart of curriculum projects throughout the history of the United States (Winfield, 2007).
Grading policies and practices that have been traditionally followed also can be found to
be considered a systemic barrier that perpetuates the equity gap of traditionally marginalized
students. Traditional grading practices many times do not consider the actual learning of the
students but rather the ability of the students to complete work. Traditional grading can be
looked at as grading for completion rather than grading for learning. This style of grading can be
a driver of course failures and therefore a factor that perpetuates the equity gap because “up to
40% of traditional student grades include non-academic criteria that do not reflect student
learning gains—including participation and on-time homework submission. As a result,
traditional grading may inadvertently penalize underprivileged students who struggle to meet
non-academic expectations” (Sullivan, 2021, para. 1). High school principals must have the
ability to recognize not only the challenges students face in regard to traditional grading but also
the long-term effects on student achievement. The ability of the high school principal to lead the
school’s educators to make effective changes to grading policies can be not only difficult,
because they are deeply woven into our historical educational policies, but also nearly impossible
without a school-wide culture of understanding and district support.
37
Educational leaders who want to make sure that all students have an equitable education
as they work as a whole system to decrease the equity gap of traditionally marginalized students
must also analyze the curriculum that they teach. Historically speaking, the curriculum that has
been used in our schools has been of a singular, White colonial point of view (Hollins, 1995). If
educational leaders want to continue to engage traditionally marginalized students, it is
imperative that the curriculum evolves. To decrease the equity gap, educators must make sure
that they not only examine the curriculum they teach students but also make sure that it is
culturally relevant in a manner that not only supports teachers in teaching students of diverse
backgrounds and cultures but also effectively contributes to the meaningful learning of
historically marginalized students to support their academic success.
Change is difficult in most situations. Any change in education is no different in this
regard, and it is a slow and gradual process. Add in emotions to change and practices, such as
changing policies that are representative of the systemic barriers of traditionally marginalized
students, and change can be perceived as impossible. This study examined the positive strategies
that embody the concept of change through the adaptive leadership theory used by high school
principals and the roadblocks they face. It is through an adaptive leadership model that change
can be accomplished within an organization with transformational success, specifically by
examining the work of John Kotter.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the leadership strategies that high school
principals can use to eliminate or make change to the policies and practices that perpetuate the
equity gap and the systemic barriers that decrease the opportunity for the success of the
traditionally marginalized student. Specifically, this research analyzed leadership strategies that
38
examine course selection/placement, grading policies, and the use/nonuse of culturally relevant
curriculum that can positively or negatively impact the success of the historically marginalized
student. According to Riele (2006),
Secondary education across the western world expanded in order to aid social and
economic development after the Second World War. Moreover, education was also
meant to act as a vehicle for social mobility, according to the meritocratic ideal expressed
in policy at that time. (p. 129)
Many years have passed since World War II, and unfortunately the educational system still has
not created a system that promotes all students. Instead, education has continued practices that
maintain inequities for historically marginalized students. The purpose of this research study was
to examine the leadership strategies that high school principals can use to eliminate policies that
perpetuate the equity gap that decreases the opportunity for the success of the traditionally
marginalized student. The following questions were used to determine how school leaders can
make effective changes that will stop the continuum of unethical and inequitable practices that
affect not only the classes students take and their overall academic success but also their personal
belief about their own history, relevance, outcome, and potential for success.
Research Questions
1. What leadership strategies have high school principals used to change these
gatekeeping practices including course selection and prerequisites, grading policies,
and the use of culturally relevant curriculum?
2. How successful have principals been in changing these gatekeeping practices?
3. What roadblocks have principals hit when changing these practices?
39
4. What district office supports have principals received when working to eliminate
these gatekeeping practices?
Selection of the Population
To conduct the research, I examined leadership strategies that work to stop the
gatekeeping policies and practices that continue to exist in the educational system that perpetuate
the equity gap of historically marginalized youth in the high school setting. Policies and practices
including course selection and prerequisites, grading policies, and the nonuse of culturally
relevant curriculum are still in place that reflect systemic barriers for historically marginalized
youth that determine not only the students’ path in the high school setting but also the outcome
of their postsecondary journey. This was an examination specifically into leadership strategies of
high school principals who first recognize the need for change and then work to eliminate the
policies that perpetuate the equity gap of historically marginalized students in high schools.
For this research, I involved high school principals. To select the high school principals
who were used for this research, I first determined which schools to use. The schools that I used
for my research were high schools within the Southern California area. The schools that I
focused on were public high school settings. Using high school principals who recognize the
need for a change allowed for the interviews’ results to illustrate the practices that not only are
common but also have permeated the educational system. The findings from these high school
principals detail the leadership strategies that are successful, the roadblocks that are faced, and
the role of the principal throughout these changes to policies and procedures that continue to
perpetuate the equity gap among historically marginalized youth. The schools and the individuals
who participated in this research study are identifiable by name or location. The research only
40
reports on the findings among the participants. The research followed the ethical guidelines to
ensure the safety, trust, and integrity of the participants and their location.
Design Summary
To gain research for this study it was important to conduct a qualitative survey to screen
for potential high school principal participants. Allowing participants to first respond in a survey
detailing practices that they may or may not see as gatekeeping policies and their work to combat
these policies determined whether they met the criteria for the qualitative interview. The
interview examined the high school principals’ strategies for change and roadblocks that they
may have encountered. From the screening survey results, I invited to an interview participants
who had participated in strategies to change the gatekeeping policies and procedures on course
selection and prerequisites, grading policies, and culturally relevant curriculum and those who
may have been challenged to create change. The interview setting allowed the participants to
have the ability to elaborate on their answers regarding the research questions. I used the survey
to screen for potential interview candidates. This not only allowed me to obtain answers that
would illustrate the data as they relate to the research question but also have more information to
help create connections from the participants related to the leadership roles and strategies to
make effective change to gatekeeping policies. The framework for this research was constructed
using the research questions and purpose from Chapter 1 and the literature review that can be
found in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 of this research study identifies the manner the data were
collected, and Chapters 4 and 5 analyze and detail the findings of the research study.
Methodology
To complete this research, the methodology included both a screening survey and an
interview to allow for the collection of qualitative data. The survey and interviews allowed for
41
data to be retrieved from high school principals. These data allowed for detailed information that
was used to identify connections between leadership strategies and change to the possible
gatekeeping policies and procedures that continue to perpetuate the equity gap for historically
marginalized youth.
Qualitative Method
Using a two-step approach, I first determined possible interviewees and then conducted
individual interviews. The data that were collected were then used to determine commonalities
and possible connections from the interview questions. Applying the data that were retrieved
from the survey allowed me to identify those who were the interview participants. The literature
review from Chapter 2 allowed for further analysis of the gatekeeping policies being examined in
the research questions, which included
1. What leadership strategies have high school principals used to change these
gatekeeping practices including course selection and prerequisites, grading policies,
and the use of culturally relevant curriculum?
2. How successful have principals been in changing these gatekeeping practices?
3. What roadblocks have principals hit when changing these practices?
4. What district office supports have principals received when working to eliminate
these gatekeeping practices?
Instrumentation
Survey for Interview Screening Instrument
After emailing potential participants and delivering the informed consent and information
sheet for the research study (see Appendix A), the screening survey instrument was used to
determine potential interview participants. The survey (see Appendix B) was divided into Part 1,
42
the participants’ demographics; Part 2, the participants’ knowledge of policy and the equity gap;
and last Part 3, their experiences. The data were obtained from a mixture of high school
principals in Southern California who are in the public-school setting.
Qualitative Instrument
The qualitative instrument allowed for the research participants to have a more intimate
dialogue regarding the possible policies and procedures including course prerequisite, grading
policies, and culturally relevant curriculum and the leadership strategies that stop perpetuating
the equity gap of historically marginalized students in high schools. The interview included 13
open-ended questions (see Appendix C). The questions could be singularly addressed and had
the option for more probing questions to gain more insight from the participants. The interviews
were conducted via telephone, face-to-face in person, and video conferencing. The participants
for the interviews were a mixture of high school principals.
Data Collection
The information that was gained from this interview and survey is confidential as
directed by the ethics regarding the research study that can be read in the study information. To
make sure that the participants were not known and their answers were not linked to them, I used
a pseudonym for their names, and I tried my best to report in a manner that did not identify them.
I used participants’ direct quotes, but I did not release any of their information to other teachers,
staff, or district employees. Once the study was completed, I provided a copy for participants if
they desired. For this research study, following the ethical aspect discussed in the study
information sheet and as directed by USC, all data were stored in a protected computer with
destruction of data after a 3-year period.
43
Research data for the screening survey were collected by using a Google form.
Participants had the option to add in their email if they wished to be contacted for follow-up
information. Research data that were collected for the qualitative interview were based on
participants who elected to be interviewed from the predetermined category of participants who
are high school principals. From these interviews, information was stored confidentially, and
pseudonyms were used. Participants had the opportunity to review their responses at the
conclusion of the research study and review the study itself. If at any time the participant wished
to not participate, their information was pulled. The research interview took approximately 45
min to complete and allowed time for follow-up questions. Notes were taken during the
interviews and tape recording as allowed by each participant.
Data Analysis
Conducting a qualitative interview allowed for data to be compiled and analyzed. The
research data from the interview questions were used to define and determine themes and
common answers and to determine data that were then analyzed to promote possible change in
regard to the research questions.
Once all data were collected found, the information was transcribed and compiled. Using
the research accumulated, the data were analyzed to look for consistencies, trends that related to
the Chapter 2 literature review, and potential new findings that related to the research questions.
Summary
The research examined the leadership strategies that stop perpetuating the equity gap of
historically marginalized students in high schools in regard to course placement, grading
policies, and culturally relevant curriculum. Although in education it is common to hear that
education is for all, it is important to carefully examine practices to determine whether this really
44
is true. According to Gullo et al. (2018), the desire to be equitable can be affected by biases, and
though these biases might be unintentional and one might not be aware of them, they will still
have an impact on decision-making processes.
Educators must reflect on their own implicit bias and how their implicit bias can interfere
with the placement of students and allow for policies and procedures to continue even though
they have been found to be inequitable and have a negative effect on traditionally marginalized
students. It has been found that students who are of low socioeconomic status experience some
of the most detrimental outcomes including low test scores and increased disciplinary actions,
which can alter their course placement and change the perception of students’ ability by
decreasing their opportunity for learning and thereby increasing the equity gap (Gullo et al.,
2018).
As schools strive to create systems of change that support all students’ ability to succeed
by providing equitable opportunity to education, it would be a disservice not to look at the
leadership strategies, the support, and the roadblocks high school principals face when trying to
make change to policies that continue to perpetuate the equity gap in schools. This research
examined the adaptive leadership strategies that have been used or tried to make effective
positive change for traditionally marginalized students.
When looking at increasing the success of a student, it is imperative that educators
examine the policies and practices that can deter a student from achieving. This would include
the practices that are not culturally responsive in both the pedagogy and in the culture of the
classroom and school. The inability to look at the course selection and prerequisites that students
are confronted with, traditional grading policies, and the inability to create a culturally
responsive overall culture inhibits a student from experiencing the behaviors, learning
45
opportunities, and environment that promote student success, especially for the traditionally
marginalized students (Stembridge, 2019). This decrease in success provides the unfortunate
foundation to decrease the appropriate classroom placement and thereby perpetuates the equity
gap. High school principals must examine the strategies they put in place, the support they are
given, and the roadblocks they face so they may make effective change that increases the success
of traditionally marginalized students and stops the systemic barriers that are gatekeepers to
closing the equity gap.
46
Chapter Four: Results
The purpose of this study was to examine the leadership strategies that high school
principals can use to eliminate or make change to the policies and practices that perpetuate the
equity gap and the systemic barriers that decrease the opportunity for the success of the
traditionally marginalized student. Specifically, this research analyzed leadership strategies that
examine course selection/placement, grading policies, and the use or nonuse of culturally
relevant curriculum that can positively or negatively impact the success of the historically
marginalized student. According to Riele (2006),
Secondary education across the western world expanded in order to aid social and
economic development after the Second World War. Moreover, education was also
meant to act as a vehicle for social mobility, according to the meritocratic ideal expressed
in policy at that time. (p. 129)
Many years have passed since World War II, and unfortunately the educational system still has
not created a system that promotes all students’ achievement. Instead, education has continued
practices that maintain inequities for historically marginalized students. The purpose of this
research study was to examine the leadership strategies that high school principals can use to
eliminate policies that perpetuate the equity gap that decreases the opportunity for the success of
the traditionally marginalized student. The following questions were used to determine how
school leaders can make effective changes that will stop the continuum of unethical and
inequitable practices that affect not only the classes students take and their overall academic
success but also their personal belief about their own history, relevance, outcome, and potential
for success.
47
Research Questions
1. What leadership strategies have high school principals used to change these
gatekeeping practices including course selection and prerequisites, grading policies,
and the use of culturally relevant curriculum?
2. How successful have principals been in changing these gatekeeping practices?
3. What roadblocks have principals hit when changing these practices?
4. What district office supports have principals received when working to eliminate
these gatekeeping practices?
Selection of the Population
To conduct the research, I examined leadership strategies that work to stop the
gatekeeping policies and practices that continue to exist in the educational system that perpetuate
the equity gap of historically marginalized youth in the high school setting. Policies and practices
including course selection and prerequisites, grading policies, and the nonuse of culturally
relevant curriculum are still in place that reflect systemic barriers for historically marginalized
youth and that determine not only the students’ path in the high school setting but also the
outcome of their postsecondary journey. This was an examination specifically into leadership
strategies of high school principals who first recognize the need for change and then work to
eliminate the policies that perpetuate the equity gap of historically marginalized students in high
schools.
For this research, I involved high school principals. To select the high school principals
who were used for this research, I first determined which schools to use. The schools that I used
for my research were high schools within the Southern California area. The schools that I
focused on were public high schools. Using high school principals who recognize the need for a
48
change allowed for the interviews’ results to illustrate the practices that not only are common but
also have permeated the educational system. The findings from these high school principals
detail the leadership strategies that are successful, the roadblocks that are faced, and the role of
the principal throughout these changes to policies and procedures that continue to perpetuate the
equity gap among historically marginalized youth. The schools as well as the individuals who
participated in this research study are not identifiable by name or location. The research only
reports on the findings among the participants. The research followed the ethical guidelines to
ensure the safety, trust, and integrity of the participants and their location.
Participants
This qualitative study used a screening survey to collect data by using a Google form.
Participation was voluntary, and participants had the option to add in their email if they wished
to be contacted for follow-up interview. The data were collected in the months of September and
October, an extremely busy time for high school administrators. Using the voluntary screening
surveys, the interviews were scheduled and conducted via zoom conferencing. From these
interviews, information was stored confidentially, and pseudonyms were used. Participants had
the opportunity to review their responses at the conclusion of the research study as well as
review the study itself. If at any time the participant wished to not participate, their information
was pulled. The research interview took approximately 45 min to complete and allowed time for
follow-up questions. Notes were taken during the interviews, and audio recording was also
conducted as allowed by each participant.
The opportunity to participate in this research study was sent to sixty-nine high school
principals in Southern California. Twelve participants completed the Google screening survey.
Of those who participated, two declined—one declined because of a feeling of lack of experience
49
as an administrator of a high school, and the other did not give any rationale for not participating
in the interview. Even though only 10 participants agreed to participate in the research interview,
the results of the interviews proved to be very enlightening in regard to the research questions.
Of the 12 participants, three participants identified as female, and the other nine identified as
male; the ethnicity of the participants was predominantly White at 83.3%, Hispanic or Latino at
16.7%, Asian at 8.3% and Filipino at 16.7% as indicated in Table 1.
The range of educational years of service ranged from 18 years to 40 years whereas the
years of service as a high school administrator ranged from 3 to 28 years of service. The mean
years of service in education, for those who completed the Google screening survey, was 25.7.
The mean years of service as a high school administrator was 12.25 as represented by Table 2.
All participants stated that they had used strategies to create change to the equity gaps related to
course selection and grading practices, and six participants out of the 12 stated that they had also
used strategies to create change to the equity gap related to the use of culturally relevant
curriculum.
Table 1
Frequency Distribution of Demographics (N = 12) From Screening Survey
Variable N %
Gender
Female 3 25.0%
Male 9 75.0%
Ethnicity
Black 0 0.0%
Filipino 2 16.7%
Hispanic or Latino/a 2 16.7%
Asian 1 8.3%
White 9 83.3%
50
Table 2
Years of Service in the Education Field (N = 12)
Variable M
Years in education 25.67
Years in administration 12.25
Average years 18.96
Findings Related to Research Questions
The qualitative research was gained from the open-ended interview questions that were
asked of the voluntary participants of the Google screening survey that are represented in
Appendix B. From the interviews that were conducted, all responses were analyzed and coded
based on the four research questions that determine the leadership strategies that have been
implemented to stop perpetuating the gatekeeping strategies of historically marginalized youth.
From these data, four areas of interest were identified, with subcategories that relate to the four
research questions that are the cornerstone of the research. The four trends were strategies
needed to create change, support to create change, successful strategies to create change by
leadership, and roadblocks to creating change. Not only were these four trends seen throughout
all of the interview responses, but they can also be seen to be intertwined with each other to
determine not only support needed and strategies of change but also successful strategies and
roadblocks to change.
Participants were asked 13 questions, as well as a closing question. They were then given
the following as a closing comment: “I want to again thank you for sharing your insight with me
today and taking the time to be a part of this study.” The 13 questions are as follows, with the
51
initial three questions setting the stage, and Questions 4–13 serving as the heart of the
interview—focusing on the practices they are trying to change.
1. First, tell me about your background in education.
2. How long have you worked in the field?
3. What roles or positions have you held?
4. If someone were to ask you if equity gaps exist in your school, what would you say to
them?
5. What educational policies do you believe perpetuate the equity gap with historically
marginalized youth in the high school setting? Describe how you would change the
educational policies that you spoke of?
6. Describe which educational partners support you as you are navigating change to
educational policy? If possible can you provide an example?
7. As a principal you recognize that gatekeeping practices are harmful. What leadership
strategies have you employed to address these practices?
8. Describe successful leadership strategies you employed to lead your change initiative.
Are there any strategies if you were implementing again you would do differently?
9. What external roadblocks have you encountered while trying to make change?
10. What do you feel are the biggest obstacles that keep principals from successfully
changing their practices?
11. What strategies have you effectively used with your teachers to make change?
12. Provide an example of a challenge when initiating change at your school site.
13. How are you supported by your district when leading educational policy change?
52
Participants were then asked, “Is there anything else you would like to share regarding policy on
course selection/prerequisites, grading policies, culturally relevant curriculum and your ability,
strategies, or roadblocks you have encountered?” The question gave the participants the
opportunity to add further details they might like to share after completing the previous
questions.
Results Research Question 1
Research Question 1
What leadership strategies have high school principals used to change these gatekeeping
practices including course selection and prerequisites, grading policies, and the use of culturally
relevant curriculum?
Research Question 1 Finding
To make successful change to gatekeeping practices including course selection and
prerequisites, grading policies, and the use of culturally relevant materials, high school principals
need a culture and environment on the campus that supports changes, need to feel understood by
district administration, and need effective communication and additional support for district
administration that helps to allow change strategies.
Administrators who were able to successfully create effective change only did so if the
culture of their campus and the environment of their campus allowed it to happen. The leadership
strategies used by administrators who were successful were attributed to the culture and the
environment that the administrators were able to use as a positive foundation for change efforts.
These data were documented by the results found in Figure 2 (35.8% of 852 coded responses)
that detailed the need for a culture and environment on campus that supports the administrators’
leadership strategies to create change. The most successful change effort was the ability of the
53
principals to lead the campus to develop an environment and culture of change. From the
findings it was also found that principals were not able to develop and put into practice
successful strategies if the principals were feeling burnout because of lack of capacity, negative
environment and culture, unrealistic expectations, too much implementation, feeling
overwhelmed by trying to be the manager, micromanagement from district leadership, difficult
relationships, lack of resources, decrease in time, and a lack of trust.
Figure 2
Strategies of Change: Responses Coded From Open-Ended Interview Participants
54
From Research Question 1 there were 51 documented responses in regard to the
principals needing to feel as though they were understood by district leadership. The principals’
need to be understood along with the knowledge of the need for change by district leadership
was described by “being intentional about what we’re doing, and why we’re doing it, and how
we’re going to do it” as well as “taking some intentional steps” with an understanding,
we defined for ourselves what we wanted to do, and then realized in lots of spaces that
wasn’t happening, and so in that way it made things a little easier. I don’t want it to be
easier, but it made for people to be on board for particular changes.
With an understanding of the needed strategies also came an understanding for a need for a
vision (28 responses). Responses included how a vision can be a guiding force for change as
described from “people know that that’s what we’re going. They know that they’ll be supported”
and “creating a clear vision … and through that vision, trying to get as many people to, like,
want to go in that direction as well … between where we are and where we want to go.” The
understanding and vision of where the leadership strategies to make change were coming from
lead also to the mindset of making change (36 responses).
Continuing with the topic of needed support, the data also indicated that the need for
effective communication was a strategy that must be implemented when creating change.
Principals believed the use of effective communication would increase understanding of the
potential policies and procedures that lead to the perpetuation of equity gaps among historically
marginalized youth including increasing parental awareness (seven responses) to foster a better
understanding of what gatekeeping policies are (48 responses) including grading policies (11
responses) and the concept of equity gaps (17 responses). One response regarding increasing
55
communication to engage more educational partners to create effective change was the
following:
How do you engage your educational partners, because educational partners are a good
way to surface a broader perspective of what's working and what’s not working, and that
that parent voice, so that community voice is very important, because it’s one that your
board is not going to go against.
Another respondent stated,
By increasing our you know, parent awareness of and like the rationale as to why we
have these high end career pathways, and why it’s better to be in an engineering pathway
as a go through construction pathway I worked with them in a way that was bringing a lot
of awareness to some of the educational opportunities that there's that their children had
available to them.
Principals also indicated that the need for additional supports was a main contributor to
the overall success or failure to create effective change. The need for additional support that
trended through the data described support needed to help with implementation direction and
understanding (60 responses), time (42 responses), trust (42 responses), resources (53 responses),
and support (56 responses). Principals’ need for additional support was documented through the
interviews by discussions about potential supports having a positive or negative effect on change
including quotes that described “what’s reinforced from the district is really managing status
quo” or the recognition that principals were left “pushing back on the actual change and on the
rate of change” because the slow pace of change could also be a detriment for change
implementation by principals. Other data from the interviews described the need for time to
make change: “It takes so much time and energy” for the principal to “manage the school and
56
then by implementing something new” that principals become “double overwhelmed.” This led
to the principals describing the burnout caused by lack of capacity, negative environment and
culture, unrealistic expectations, too much implementation, trying to be the manager,
micromanagement from district leadership, difficult relationships, lack of resources, decrease in
time, and a lack of trust.
Results Research Question 2
Research Question 2
How successful have principals been in changing these gatekeeping practices?
Research Question 2 Finding
To be successful in creating change to gatekeeping practices including course selection
and prerequisites, grading policies, and the use of culturally relevant materials, high school
principals must have the ability to collaborate, to build and have relationships with their
colleagues, and to have confidence in their decision-making abilities, and they must have the
support of their district administration. When creating change, successful principals must have
the ability to collaborate (48.6% of 74 coded responses) and have relationships (24.3% of 74
coded responses) with their colleagues thereby increasing their confidence to make change as
detailed in Figure 3. When the data from the interviews were analyzed, it was found that
successful strategies that assisted principals in successful change were not isolated from supports
needed, which were discovered from the findings from Research Question 1. Instead, the
findings continued to be an extension of these needs and only when principals feel safe and
confident with collaborative relationships with their colleagues are they able to broach the
challenge of creating change.
57
Figure 3
Successful Strategies Assisting in Change: Responses Coded From Open-Ended Interview
Participants
From the data I determined that to create change in gatekeeping policies, a successful
principal needs to have the supports that were discussed in the evidence provided from Research
Question 1. The successful principal must also have confidence (eight responses), collaboration
(36 responses), colleagues (12 responses), and relationships (19 responses) that assist with a
successful execution of change as seen in Figure 4. When analyzing the data from the interviews
I found that these successful strategies that assisted principals in successful change were not
58
isolated from supports needed found from Research Question 1 but rather were an extension of
these needs. Responses from principals interviewed included “How do we connect those folks to
their passions?” Another principal stated,
How do we give them real creative power in order to do the things that they’re supposed
to do, and then give them the resources to build those things and to do those things for
their community. And to me that’s the barrier right to really building organizations and
schools that are responsive to kids… and to their communities.
Another response was “I was encouraged to try new things. I was not dissuaded from doing
things like, for the fear of failing in that space” allowing principals to have the support and trust
to build confidence to attempt to make change. With support principals found that there was a
need for confidence to make changes:
I think one is confidence. There's one, I would say, like, you know, like I truly believe, in
a lot of the coaching work we do. The idea of the imposter phenomenon is real, and so
the feeling of like uh time, you know one's not worthy, or one just lacks a little bit of that
confidence. Um, I think, is one big factor.
Confidence and trust to make change from practices that have continued to marginalize
youth also require relationships with colleagues that allows for collaboration; one principal
stated,
With relationships that I have with them knowing I could pick up a phone call and talk to
just about anybody at the district office and um oftentimes they’ll drop what they’re
doing to support. Right? That’s helpful, or to just be a thought partner. Um! There are
some structures in place that we have uh in order to collaborate with um principals across
the district in meaningful ways we do monthly principal meetings, and they’re always off
59
campus. Collaboration, colleagues, confidence, relationships and support are so important
for me just to continue building relationships.
Another principal stated,
I think um success always comes down to relationships. Right? So, I've been fortunate to
build a personal relationship with every one of my teachers over the years and in that
time have gained their trust and gained credibility right like following through on my
word, and taking care of the things that they need taking care of. So, a lot of it honestly is
social capital. It’s that I’ve been able to gain the trust of the people that I have their back
and my value system is kids, and even if we make mistakes along the way, they’re done
with the best intentions. So, relationships are number one and gaining that credibility.
Another principal described their experience:
To have trust in fellow principals that you could um discuss things with, and then be able
to be in the safe environment and talk about things and share great ideas. And if you are
going South by some that the trust level, so that your fellow principals weren’t afraid to
call you on your well, I don’t know if I could say, Call you on your shit. Collaboration
with colleagues without fear creating support and trust. And then I think horizontally to
have trust in fellow principles [allowing for successful strategies to take place when
making effective change,] the collaboration with peers is, um, I think, the most beneficial
structure in place.
Results Research Question 3
Research Question 3
What roadblocks have principals hit when changing these practices?
60
Research Question 3 Finding
To make successful change to gatekeeping practices including course selection and
prerequisites, grading policies, and the use of culturally relevant materials, high school principals
must feel supported and not lead with fear. Principals are unable to make change and support
systems of change when they are micromanaged or working in a culture of fear. When principals
are not supported by their district leadership by either district leadership not understanding the
need for change and the challenges of making change or when principals are fearful when
leading, the change of policies and procedures are not successful at the school site. Major
roadblocks for administrators trying to create change are maintaining the status quo (22.1% of
210 coded responses), micromanagement of the principals (18.9% of 210 coded responses), and
the continuation of student placement procedures (19.5% of 210 coded responses) as seen in
Figure 4.
Building on Research Questions 1 and 2 led to the roadblocks faced by principals when
making change. The trends and four areas of interest documented by the data are not only
intertwined but also can vary between positive or negative impacts on successful change. When
looking at roadblocks to decreasing the successful change outcome, I found the most common to
be fear (nine responses), status quo (42 responses), union (five responses), continuity of
leadership (five responses), burnout (12 responses), teacher directed change or top-down
leadership style (17 responses), student placement (37 responses), stereotyping (13 responses),
bias (14 responses), and micromanaging (36 responses) as seen in Figure 4.
61
Figure 4
Roadblocks to Successful Change: Responses Coded From Open-Ended Interview Participants
The ability to create change brings in the concept of what happens when it does not work.
Participants discussed the concept of fear with such comments as “Anytime anybody talks about
change, fear comes into play” and wondering whether “fear of trying new things has been met
with punishment.” Principals are left trying to create change to what they know is inequitable but
are afraid of their potential personal outcomes.
Making changes to the status quo was a topic of much discussion during the interviews.
The research questions asked about making change in policies and procedures that perpetuate the
62
equity gap among marginalized youth, and although change was discussed, status quo (42
responses) was a consistent trend of policies left in place “because we’ve always done them,”
and principals asked, “Are these the best policies that support each child?” Principals discussed
that the status quo needed to be examined to determine “how things had been done in the past,
and that includes practices not just student practices, but also adult practices.” Professional
development also was brought up as a status quo procedure as well as how they assign teachers
to teach specific courses. Principals discussed fighting against the status quo, specifically in the
high school where they had a one-size-fits-all approach, which is a “really artificial set of
guides.” One principal said that building systems of change was as difficult as making the
change. As the principal left, so did the change, and the status quo returned: “They stayed with it
because it was my program. They couldn’t wait for me to leave,” allowing for the return of
inequities.
Making change also was found to have roadblocks in the area of unions: “In situations
where relationships with unions aren’t positive, union contracts can be a hindrance.” Along with
unions, other roadblocks included teacher discretion and mindset as “the biggest obstacles that
keep principles from successfully changing their practices. Systems across the school
environment and across the district organization systems and mindsets.” Continuing with the
idea of roadblocks, continuity of leadership created another roadblock that could be a direct
outcome resulting from burnout. The constant challenge of creating change led to principal
burnout when trying to fight against those who wanted to keep the status quo: “Those people
took so much time, and they probably took like so many years off my life” and “there aren’t
many out there that want to do the job work or will stick with the job for very long.” The
principal burnout and turnover make things even more difficult for principals, which in turn is
63
really tough on schools. Principals in the secondary setting “at best, are 3 to 4 years on average,
of sitting space.”
Successful changes to gatekeeping policies have also been documented by the data as
being at odds with student placement whether because of past practice, bias, or stereotyping.
This can be documented by the following comment by one principal:
Every kid has the ability to learn. But sometimes the adults look at kids and think that
because somebody is on free and reduced lunch or hasn’t had the opportunities that some
of the middle-class kids have that they’re not going to be able to achieve.
Principals also noted that the systems that the educational institutions create may not be the
systems that are needed to provide students with the right intervention, but rather they are a
systemic problem continued by adult needs versus student needs. They continued, “We condemn
kids too with false barriers” and “false limitations” by continuing to use course prerequisite and
tracking of testing to determine the outcome of students.
An additional roadblock that was determined from the research questions was
micromanaging (36 responses) and implementation when new implementation and
micromanaging becomes the focus of the school or district instead of the actual needs of the
school. One principal noted that it was “the same people who did the whatever the acronym was
the year before, and the year before that.” The data also suggested the micromanaging of time
and decision making of principals was a roadblock to creating change when districts are at odds
with the changes the principals want to make, especially if the district is not moving at the same
pace as the individual school: “I think that they are uncomfortable with how quickly we are
moving because we are ahead of them in so many things, and they didn’t want us to be ahead.”
Principals felt that they wanted to lead and be supported by the district and not hindered by
64
implementation and micromanaging that occurs from the top-down organization: “The district is
setting policy and sometimes providing support for the policy” leaving the principal and site to
wonder “why these are the hoops we are being asked to jump through, whereas they don’t seem
as urgent as the student” and “feel like that’s an impediment to progress.” It is an impediment to
creating change when the micromanaging is not a support that is beneficial to the principal but
instead a shift toward not leveraging the resources at hand to best address the site’s specific
needs.
Results Research Question 4
Research Question 4
What district office supports have principals received when working to eliminate these
gatekeeping practices?
Research Question 4 Findings
For a principal to make successful change to gatekeeping practices including course
selection and prerequisites, grading policies, and the use of culturally relevant materials, high
school principals and district leaders must be able to provide the supports principals need. For a
principal to have success in creating change, districts must have clear communication, provide
resources necessary to implement change, and support the site-specific needs. Principals need
overall support, clear communication (24.6% of 336 coded responses), and support with the
implementation (17.9% of 336 coded responses) process when creating change to policies and
procedures as seen in Figure 5.
65
Figure 5
District Supports Needed to Create Change: Coded Responses From Open-Ended Interview
Participants
Research Question 4 built upon the previous three questions in regard to creating and
support for change. As stated previously, many of the items overlap and are interconnected to
support the effective change outcome. From the data obtained from the interview process, the
main items trending from this question are support (56 responses) and all of the subsets of
support, including communication (83 responses), implementation (60 responses), time (42
responses), trust (42 responses), and resources (53 responses), Principals feel that the district will
“try to support us” but also have wondered what “it would be like to be in a district where it’s not
66
just on my shoulders to come up with change” but collaborating to make change. Support was
also needed keeping clarity among the educational stakeholders: “getting the Board to commit to
some goals and it to a direction, and then like moving in that direction.” The principal continued,
“I was encouraged to try new things,” and other principals felt the support by “not [being]
dissuaded from doing things like, for the fear of failing in that space.” Principals also felt that
they needed the money and resources to create change.”
Additional Findings
Throughout the interview process, additional findings were also noted in regard to trends
that did not directly fit within a particular research question. These trends, although not directly
related to one question, are important to the overall investigation into leadership strategies that
are able to stop the perpetuation of equity gaps among the historically marginalized youth. There
were three references to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs in regard to change, including
[Looking at] the needs of all human beings. Right? So, when we look at like Maslow’s
triangle for a pyramid for students that leads right over the top of adults as well. Right, so
in which ways do you make teachers feel like they belong? And what ways do you use
their creativity, and which reason you help them reach the pinnacle right where they are,
where they’re looking to, to succeed and to move and to progress right and to me that’s
what we owe them. And so, when we put in systems like that, when we really talk to
them about what it is they need and what they want to do, and how their work may
pertain or help the whole system move towards the vision that we put out there.
There were also trends in socioeconomic (seven responses), political (10 responses), manager
(nine responses), balance (two responses), and pedagogy (24 responses). These responses
discussed different aspects of successful change in leadership, not limited to one research
67
question but rather how they affect all four research questions, describing how the principals’
responsibilities are so many that they are stretched “thin across all areas” with no additional
support. Because the principal is the end all for schools’ responsibilities, “and even though you
have some APs, it’s still not the same right, because the buck still stops with you.” The principal
is the sole owner of the responsibility of the school, and although the assistant principal was
discussed, the reality was that “there’s nobody else that shares your responsibilities in that
space.” The principles discussed the management of hundreds of people, instructional leadership,
human resources, professional development, budget, evaluations, disciplinary action, and also
being the face of the school as areas that weigh heavy on the principal, and also included “being
a content expert across eight or nine at areas and expert in those spaces as well on top of trying to
be innovative and exciting all the time.” Principals sited the many areas of exhaustion and stress
that they faced daily on the job as a major impediment to change and principal overall burnout:
“by the time you figure it out a lot of times, you’re out or the system’s already worn out on you.”
This leads to the additional finding of meeting the needs of the human aspect of the principal as a
major contributor to impact change to the gatekeeping policies of the policies and procedures in
the educational system either successfully or negatively.
Summary
Data findings regarding the four research questions proposed in the open-ended interview
questions delivered to the 10 participants detailed data that not only could stand alone as a
possible positive or negative influence on leadership strategies that stop perpetuating the equity
gap of historically marginalized youth but also proved to be intertwined. The insight and details
gained from the data collected will help to determine why some leaders are successful and why
68
some leaders are derailed by roadblocks when making effective changes to the policies and
procedures that continue to perpetuate the equity gap of traditionally marginalized students.
69
Chapter Five: Discussion
Principals have the opportunity to make change to school sites. High school principals
have the challenge to make sure that the school site is providing the best opportunity of success
for all students. Therefore, if high school principals knowingly continue to support the status quo
or fail to challenge educational policies and practices that perpetuate the equity gap and systemic
barriers of the traditionally marginalized student, are they providing the best possible opportunity
for success?
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the leadership strategies that high school
principals can use to eliminate or make change to the policies and practices that perpetuate the
equity gap and the systemic barriers that decrease the opportunity for the success of the
traditionally marginalized student. Specifically, this research analyzed leadership strategies that
examine course selection/placement, grading policies, and the use/nonuse of culturally relevant
curriculum that can positively or negatively impact the success of the historically marginalized
student. According to Riele (2006),
Secondary education across the western world expanded in order to aid social and
economic development after the Second World War. Moreover, education was also
meant to act as a vehicle for social mobility, according to the meritocratic ideal expressed
in policy at that time. (p. 129)
Many years have passed since World War II, and unfortunately the educational system still has
not created a system that promotes all students. Instead, education has continued practices that
maintain inequities for historically marginalized students. The purpose of this research study was
to examine the leadership strategies that high school principals can use to eliminate policies that
70
perpetuate the equity gap that decreases the opportunity for the success of the traditionally
marginalized student. The following questions were used to determine how school leaders can
make effective changes that will stop the continuum of unethical and inequitable practices that
affect not only the classes students take and their overall academic success but also their personal
belief about their own history, relevance, outcome, and potential for success.
Research Questions
1. What leadership strategies have high school principals used to change these
gatekeeping practices including course selection and prerequisites, grading policies,
and the use of culturally relevant curriculum?
2. How successful have principals been in changing these gatekeeping practices?
3. What roadblocks have principals hit when changing these practices?
4. What district office supports have principals received when working to eliminate
these gatekeeping practices?
Summary of the Study
To conduct the research, I examined leadership strategies that work to stop the
gatekeeping policies and practices that continue to exist in the educational system that perpetuate
the equity gap of historically marginalized youth in the high school setting. Policies and practices
including course selection and prerequisites, grading policies, and the nonuse of culturally
relevant curriculum are still in place and reflect systemic barriers for historically marginalized
youth, which determine not only the students’ path in the high school setting but also the
outcome of their postsecondary journey. This was an examination specifically into leadership
strategies of high school principals who first recognize the need for change and then work to
71
eliminate the policies that perpetuate the equity gap of historically marginalized students in high
schools.
For this research, I involved high school principals. To select the high school principals
who were used for this research, I first determined which schools to use. The schools that I used
for my research were high schools within the Southern California area. The schools that I
focused on were public high schools. Using high school principals who recognized the need for a
change allowed the interviews’ results to illustrate the practices that not only are common but
also have permeated the educational system. The findings from these high school principals
detailed the leadership strategies that are successful, the roadblocks that are faced, and the role of
the principal throughout these changes to policies and procedures that continue to perpetuate the
equity gap among historically marginalized youth. The schools as well as the individuals who
participated in this research study are not identifiable by name or location. The research only
reports on the findings among the participants. The research followed the ethical guidelines to
ensure the safety, trust, and integrity of the participants and their location.
This qualitative study used a screening survey to collect data by using a Google form.
Participation was voluntary and participants had the option to add their email if they wished to be
contacted for the follow-up interview. The data were collected in the months of September and
October, an extremely busy time for high school administrators. Using the voluntary screening
surveys, I scheduled the interviews and conducted them via zoom conferencing. From these
interviews, information was stored confidentially, and pseudonyms were used. Participants had
the opportunity to review their responses at the conclusion of the research study as well as
review the study itself. If at any time the participant wished to not participate, their information
was pulled. The research interview took approximately 45 min to complete and allowed time for
72
follow-up questions. Notes were taken during the interviews and audio recording was also
conducted, as allowed by each participant.
The opportunity to participate in this research study was sent to 69 high school principals
in Southern California. Twelve participants completed the Google screening survey; one
declined because of a feeling of lack of experience as an administrator of a high school, and the
other did not give any rationale for not participating in the interview. Even though only 10
participants agreed to participate in the research interview, the results of the interviews proved to
be very enlightening in regard to the research questions.
From the screening survey results, I invited 10 participants to an interview (N = 10), all of
whom had participated in strategies to change the gatekeeping policies and procedures on course
selection and prerequisite, grading policies, and culturally relevant curriculum; I also invited
those who may have been challenged to create change. The interview setting allowed the
participants to have the ability to elaborate on their answers regarding the research questions.
This not only allowed me to obtain answers that would illustrate the data as they relate to the
research question but also have more information to help create connections from the
participants related to the leadership roles and strategies to make effective change to gatekeeping
policies. The framework for this research was constructed using the research questions and
purpose from Chapter 1 and the literature review that can be found in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 of
this research study identified the manner the data were collected, and Chapters 4 and 5 analyze
and detail the findings of the research study.
Using a two-step approach, I first determined possible interviewees and then conducted
individual interviews. The data that were collected were then used to determine commonalities
and possible connections from the interview questions. Applying the data that were retrieved
73
from the survey allowed me to identify those who were the interview participants. The literature
review from Chapter 2 allowed for further analysis of the gatekeeping policies being examined in
the research questions, which included the following:
1. What leadership strategies have high school principals used to change these
gatekeeping practices including course selection and prerequisites, grading policies,
and the use of culturally relevant curriculum?
2. How successful have principals been in changing these gatekeeping practices?
3. What roadblocks have principals hit when changing these practices?
4. What district office supports have principals received when working to eliminate
these gatekeeping practices?
The qualitative instrument allowed for the research participants to have a more intimate
dialogue regarding the possible policies and procedures including course prerequisite, grading
policies, and culturally relevant curriculum and the leadership strategies that stop perpetuating
the equity gap of historically marginalized students in high schools. The interview included 13
open-ended questions (see Appendix C). The questions could be singularly addressed and had
the option for more probing questions to gain more insight from the participants. The interviews
were conducted via telephone, face-to-face in person, and video conferencing. The participants
for the interviews were a mixture of high school principals (N = 10).
Conducting a qualitative interview allowed for data to be compiled and analyzed. The
research data from the interview questions were used to define and determine theme and
common answers and to determine data that were then analyzed to promote possible change in
regard to the research questions. Once all data were collected, the information was transcribed
and compiled. Using the research accumulated, the data were analyzed to look for consistencies,
74
trends that related to the Chapter 2 literature review, and potential new findings that related to
the research questions.
Establishing the Baseline
The theoretical framework for this research study was adaptive leadership specifically
using the work of The Practice of Adaptive Leadership by Heifetz et al. (2009) and the eight
steps to change through adaptive leadership by Kotter (2022). The purpose of this study was to
examine the leadership strategies that high school principals can use to eliminate or make change
to the policies and procedures that perpetuate the equity gap and systemic barriers that decrease
the opportunity for the success of the traditionally marginalized student. Specifically, this
research analyzed leadership strategies that examine course selection/placement, grading
policies, and the use/nonuse of culturally relevant curriculum that can positively or negatively
impact the success of the historically marginalized student.
From the data collected by the screening survey as well as the data collected through the
interview process, it was determined that all leaders agreed that equity gaps are not only present
in our educational institutions, but they also continue to be perpetuated because of the policies
and procedures that remain in place within educational institutions. Throughout this research
study, three policies and procedures that were of primary focus were grading policies, course
prerequisites, and the lack of culturally relevant curriculum. This research study used previous
research, as detailed in Chapter 2, to point out that these policies and procedures are known by
educational leaders to have negative impacts on the success of traditionally marginalized youth
in the education system and beyond. This point was further proven by the data collected from the
participants of this research study, and all participants agreed that the practices and policies listed
negatively affect the marginalized student and continue to perpetuate the equity gap in schools.
75
The findings from the educational leaders who were interviewed for this research study
have been examined not to prove the existence of the perpetuation of equity gaps of traditionally
marginalized students by policies and procedures that include course prerequisites, grading
policies, and the lack of culturally relevant curriculum. Instead, the findings from those
educational leaders who participated in this research were to determine the why behind the
perpetuation of policies and procedures that are known to be gatekeeping and negatively
impacting students when the goal is for adaptive leadership strategies to create effective change.
Use of Adaptive Leadership Theory to Create Effective Change
Kotter’s (2022) eight-step process model for leading change using the four change
principles found in Figure 6 were found in areas where principals were able to make effective
change to policies and procedures that continue to perpetuate the equity gap in traditionally
marginalized students, creating gatekeeping strategies. The principals who were interviewed
discussed knowing the why and sharing the why behind creating change within their
organizations, which correlated to Kotter’s Step 1 of creating a sense of urgency. Knowing the
why behind the need for change allows others to understand the need to move and the need to
make change.
For Step 2, creating the coalition of stakeholders to join in the effort to make change, the
data that were collected demonstrated that successful principals were able to build a coalition of
advocates to help create the change that was needed while creating urgency illustrating the why
behind change. This allowed for others to join the principals as they worked to create change
within their organization. Principals discussed the need to get others on board, recognizing the
need for the many but not all to be bought in to move forward. This style of creating the coalition
76
of stakeholders to create change allowed for the movement to spread and capture those who may
have been on the fringe.
Figure 6
John Kotter’s 8-Step Model for Change
Note. From 8 Steps to Accelerate Change in Your Organization (p. 33), by Kotter, n.d.
(https://www.kotterinc.com/methodology/8-steps/).
77
Kotter (2022) described Step 3 as creating the strategic vision and the understanding of
the initiatives that are put in place. According to the interviews, successful principals were able
to relay information to their coalition for change with a clear understanding of the why and the
need for change, but they were very precise in stating the initiatives that were used to make
change. For example, one principal broke it down to two items to guide all others: “relationships
and pedagogy.” These two driving forces were clear to create the why but also allowed for a
vision with clear and easily grasped initiatives to lead the change effort.
Steps 4 and 5 allow for others to join and not be constrained by the red tape of the
educational institution. These two steps were critical in the data that were retrieved from the
principals who were successful in creating change by creating the united front and then
supporting those who were working to create change by removing the barriers in their path. The
support that the principals were able to give their change effort stakeholders was key to their
successful implementation of creating change.
Recognizing the success by those involved through Step 6, creating the short-term wins,
demonstrated the knowledge of successful principals in understanding how change takes not only
time, but also an extreme will and effort to sustain. The strategies that were enlisted by the
principals I interviewed demonstrated how they were able to communicate that these wins were
breaking down the larger inequities of educational institutions piece by piece; even though the
task may have been daunting and difficult, it still was possible, which leads to Step 7, keeping
the movement moving.
Last, Step 8 is instituting change. The strategies of the principals from whom I collected
data discussed how instituting the change was a must but that it also must be created as a
structure that is adopted and maintained without the one who leads the charge. Adaptive
78
leadership and creating change, as described by the principals interviewed, only occurred when
these steps were followed, but they also continued after the leaders who initiated the change were
no longer present. This means that the successful strategies that were created through Kotter’s
(2022) eight steps using the adaptive leadership theory only continued if the leaders were able to
get systemic structures in place that became part of the institution and not just another initiative.
What Is Missing to Make Change: Maslow’s Needs
The purpose of this study was to examine the leadership strategies that high school
principals can use to eliminate or make change to the policies and practices that perpetuate the
equity gap and the systemic barriers that decrease the opportunity for the success of the
traditionally marginalized student. Specifically, this research analyzed leadership strategies that
examine course selection/placement, grading policies, and the use/nonuse of culturally relevant
curriculum that can positively or negatively impact the success of the historically marginalized
student through the use of adaptive leadership theory and specifically, the Kotter (2022) eight-
step model for creating change. As the interview data suggest, there were strategies that were
implemented by principals that created effective change to the policies and procedures that
continue to perpetuate the equity gap of traditionally marginalized students. However, there were
also roadblocks that these principals faced that slowed or completely halted their ability to make
changes or eliminate known policies and procedures that continue the known equity gaps that
continue to plague marginalized students.
From the data collected, the findings illustrate that principals know that there are policies
and procedures that continue to perpetuate the equity gap, for example grading policies, course
prerequisites, and the lack of culturally relevant materials. From the research conducted, it is also
recognized that Kotter’s (2022) eight-step model to create change and adaptive leadership is a
79
successful process to create change to an organization and educational institution. Taking into
consideration that principals are not only aware of inequities but also policies and procedures
that perpetuate this concern and also aware of techniques that may be used to successfully create
change to these including Kotter and the adaptive leadership theory techniques, the question
becomes what roadblocks are in place that are hindering change from taking place?
To create change, principals must support those they lead, but it is also important that
principals are supported. Principals must be supported by their district personnel, but they also
must support their own personal needs. The job of a principal is to “move people, both literally
and figuratively, from a familiar place to a place less familiar, you operate on their emotions, on
their stomachs and hearts in addition to their heads” (Heifetz et al., 2009, p. 232). Leading
effective change in areas that require emotional ties to such strong barriers can create burnout,
often caused from leading from the heart (Heifetz et al., 2009). Adaptive leaders must protect
themselves as they work to protect others through change. While creating change, not only must
the needs of the principal be maintained, but the others’ needs must also be maintained and
satisfied for them to follow the change efforts. Boogren (2018) found that these needs can be
identified by Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, proposed in 1943 by Abraham Maslow in “A Theory
of Human Motivation.” From the findings of the data provided from interviewing the principals
involved in this research study, I found that it is the lack of providing the basic needs that creates
roadblocks for principals.
The concept of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs as it relates to the educational system can be
found in Figure 7 (Guditus, 2013). It is this same hierarchy of needs that must be present for
principals and administrative leadership if changes to long-standing educational institutional
practices are going to be made. The principals discussed the need for time to create relationships
80
among tier stakeholders to create change, but the relationships among the principals and the
district staff or the executive leadership above them must also be groomed to create the safety
needed for principals to create change.
Figure 7
Maslow’s Hierarchy of School Needs
Note. From “Maslow’s Hierarchy of School Needs,” by S. Guditus, 2013
(https://web.archive.org/web/20221027121803/http://sguditus.blogspot.com/2013/02/maslows-
hierarchy-of-school-needs-steve.html).
81
The psychological needs of principals are the foundation level of needs, also the greatest
need, that allow principals to feel safe in their ability to fight against systemic barriers found in
the policies and procedures that continue to perpetuate the equity gaps among marginalized
students. It is this trust that allows principals to operate out of the desire to create effective
change without the fear of retribution or micromanaging. Trust must be understood so that
principals will be able to make changes to factors that include the status quo, unions, bias, and
change itself. It is through Maslow’s hierarchy of needs that roadblocks of change will be
eliminated. If principals are allowed to feel safe, have the self-confidence to make change, and
feel supported to not only fight the status quo but also have the trust and safety to make change
that may or may not work on the first try, the policies and procedures that are currently known to
negatively impact the equity of students will not be perpetuated for another generation.
Implications for Practice
Research Question 1 Finding
Leadership strategies used by administrators that were successful to create change relied
heavily on the environment and culture (35.8% of 852 coded responses) that were supported in
the organization as well as the mindset of those in the organization (30.9% of 852 coded
responses); results are found in Figure 2. Principals found that these successful strategies were
not able to be used because of the principals describing the burnout caused by lack of capacity,
negative environment/culture, unrealistic expectations, too much implementation, trying to be
the manager, micromanagement from district leadership, difficult relationships, lack of
resources, decrease in time, and a lack of trust.
82
Research Question 2 Finding
To be successful in creating change principals must have the ability to collaborate (48.6%
of 74 coded responses) and have relationships (24.3% of 74 coded responses) with their
colleagues thereby increasing their confidence to make change as detailed in Figure 3. When
analyzing the data from the interviews it was found that successful strategies that assisted
principals in successful change, were not isolated from supports needed found from the findings
from Research Question 1. Instead, the findings continued to be an extension of these needs and
only when principals feel safe, confident with collaborative relationships with their colleagues
are they able to broach the challenge of creating change.
Research Question 3 Finding
Principals are unable to make change and support systems of change when they are
micromanaged or working in a culture of fear. Major roadblocks for administrators trying to
create change are maintaining the status quo (22.1% of 210 coded responses), micromanagement
of the principals (18.9% of 210 coded responses), and the continuation of student placement
procedures (19.5% of 210 coded responses), as seen in Figure 4.
Research Question 4 Findings
If a district wants to support principals in creating change, it must have clear
communication, provide resources necessary to implement change and support the site specific
needs. Principals need overall support, clear communication (24.6% of 336 coded responses),
and support with the implementation process (17.9% of 336 coded responses) when creating
change to policies and procedures, as seen in Figure 5.
83
Additional Finding
Principals need to have their own needs met to be able to create change and sustain the
fight to stop the perpetuation of gatekeeping policies and procedures as seen in Maslow’s
hierarchy of needs. The educational equity gaps “represent impact of conscious & unconscious
inequitable policies/practices that create barriers and disparities in how systems treat and support
different people” (Rector, 2021, p. 1). It is this equity gap that can continue to grow and decrease
the mobility of traditionally marginalized students through a lack of access by continuing the
practice of course prerequisites, by a grading gap through the use of traditional grading practices,
and by worthiness gap because of a lack of culturally relevant curriculum for the diverse student
population. It is through these historically practiced policies and procedures that the educational
system perpetuates these systemic barriers that continue to marginalize many students.
If perpetuating the equity gap is not a goal of the educational institution, then leaders in
education must look at what strategies educational leaders are able to enact at each school site to
make effective change. This research study examined leadership strategies that address the
equity gap of historically marginalized students in high schools. This research study also
determined the roadblocks that school leaders run into when implementing changes to policies
and procedures that could decrease the equity gap and increase the success of traditionally
marginalized students.
The findings of this research study are that there is a threefold approach that is needed for
change or elimination of policies and procedures that continue to perpetuate the equity gap of
marginalized students. First, educational leadership cannot stop by only identifying all policies
and procedures that continue to perpetuate the equity gap. Instead, this must be openly and
honestly identified and discussed among all key educational stakeholders to determine the
84
negatives of the status quo, allowing educational leaders to create systems of change using
adaptive leadership theory. Second, educational leadership must have a knowledge base of
adaptive leadership and Kotter’s (2022) change model to create systemic change within the
educational institutions. It is through the adaptive leadership theory that change systems will be
able to not only be implemented but also sustained within the organization for the long term
regardless of leadership change or new initiative implementation. Third, and per the research, the
most impactful effective strategy to create change is the necessity for the educational leadership
to have their needs met as illustrated through the Maslow hierarchy. The research findings
indicate that even though leadership may acknowledge inequities and know policies and
procedures that perpetuate these inequities and leadership may be educated in the theory of
adaptive leadership and Kotter’s change model, change will not take place without meeting the
basic needs of the leaderships’ psychological, safety, and trust as described by Maslow. Only
when leaders have these foundational needs are they able to move through the roadblocks of
years of systemic barriers, unions, and status quo that result in the policies and procedures that
continue to perpetuate the inequities of marginalized youth. To create change educational
leadership must first be aware enough to support the leadership to begin the change effort and
continue this support and understanding throughout the change effort.
Recommendations for Further Research
Although there were only 10 principals willing to take part in this research study, the
years of educational experience were extensive. These years within the educational system
represented not only educational leaders who spanned experience over the past 40 years but also
new educational leaders who have experiences that differ from those with more historical
85
reference. For further research, a larger pool of participants could lead to more data that support
the findings in this research study and could lead to more precise findings trending.
This research study was limited to principals in the Southern California region. For
further research, participants in other locations may render more data that could determine
whether regional localities have a determining factor to successful strategies or roadblocks to
creating change within the policies and procedures that perpetuate the equity gap of the
marginalized student. Using different regions may also uncover data that may change the
response of the participants regarding the concept of equity gaps and the policies and procedures
that may lead to what is considered to be policy or procedures that perpetuate the equity gap.
Another recommendation for further research would be to gather a more diverse
participant pool, which would include more diversity within the participants themselves as well
as the type of school they lead. In this research study, the participants were primarily White and
male, and all were educational leaders in the public setting. A more diverse participant pool as
well as the inclusion of private administrators may lead to more research for creating change. If a
more diverse pool for interviews were used for future research, questions could also be created
that would allow the principals to reflect on their own positionality and the effect it has on their
practices or beliefs. Another point of interest would be to direct questions to the principals to
describe their practices as the practices relates to their school site and day-to-day work they are
involved in and also how this relates to the educational system as a whole and the possible
change efforts that could be made.
Last, a further point of research would be on the educational system itself, looking further
into whether the educational institution wants to create change for all students or whether the
educational institution would rather remain a bureaucratic institution run by test scores and
86
placement run by political agendas of politicians who lack the research knowledge and
educational practices of our professional educators. Continuing with this concept would be to
look at the educational system compared to how private corporate companies are managed while
wondering whether the business of education is what continues to contribute to the use of known
policies and procedures that perpetuate the equity gap in marginalized students.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations of the study were my own positionality as a White, female researcher and
educator. Included in my positionality is my own socioeconomic status that can cloud my own
bias. An additional limitation that could contribute to bias could be attributed to my own
employment history that includes employment outside of the educational field. The study may
also be limited by the data sourced by principals that accurately reflect change outcome while
addressing the lasting effects of the coronavirus pandemic.
Delimitations of the study were high school settings within the Southern California
region and high school principals who recognize the equity gap and policies and practices that
support positive change for the traditionally marginalized students.
Summary
Creating change to decrease the inequities that are perpetuated in educational institutions
cannot be isolated to one person, one educational leader, or one educational institution. It is
imperative that educators not only recognize openly that there are policies and procedures in
place that continue to perpetuate the equity gap of marginalized students but also that even
though leaders in the educational institution know there are systemic barriers, the educational
community continues to allow structures that are common practice within school settings.
87
Educational leaders need to be supported to call out the systemic barriers that roadblock
the change that is needed within educational institutions. The support that is needed for
educational leadership must be built on trust, relationships, and confidence that is found in
freedom to fail and leads to change and progress. Principals need support that does not create
fear or unhealthy competition that leads to burnout and cutthroat behavior instead of
collaboration and collegiate growth.
Only when educational institutions look at the needs of the whole student with the desire
to allow all students the tools necessary to be successful will educational leaders be able to make
effective change throughout. Until then, it will be up to the educational leaders in the classroom,
on the school sites, within the districts and beyond to support the individual change efforts that
are being made. These change efforts will need to gain a support system, both in the physical and
mental sense, as the educational leadership and educational community grow to remember the
why and continue to grow a change army with the momentum to overcome the status quo and the
systemic barriers that continue to perpetuate the equity gap of marginalized students.
88
References
Achor, S. (2018). Big potential: How transforming the pursuit of success raises our achievement,
happiness, and well-being. Currency.
Bell, D. A., Jr. (1980). Brown v. Board of Education and the interest-convergence dilemma.
Harvard Law Review, 93(3), 518–533. https://doi.org/10.2307/1340546
Boogren, T. H. (2018). Take time for you: Self-care action plans for educators (using Maslow’s
hierarchy of needs and positive psychology). Solution Tree.
de Brey, C., Musu, L., McFarland, J., Wilkinson-Flicker, S., Diliberti, M., Zhang, A.,
Branstetter, C., & Wang, X. (2019). Status and trends in the education of racial and
ethnic groups 2018 (NCES 2019-38). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for
Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2019/2019038.pdf
del Carmen Salazar, M. (2013). A humanizing pedagogy. Review of Research in Education,
37(1), 121–148. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732x12464032
Eichas, K., Montgomery, M. J., Meca, A., & Kurtines, W. M. (2017). Empowering marginalized
youth: A self-transformative intervention for promoting positive youth development.
Child Development, 88(4), 1115–1124. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12866
Feldman, J. (2018). Grading for equity: What it is, why it matters, and how it can transform
schools and classrooms. Corwin.
Ferrer-Wreder, L., Lorente, C., Kurtines, W., Briones, E., Bussell, J., Berman, S., & Arrufat, O.
(2002). Promoting identity development in marginalized youth. Journal of Adolescent
Research, 17(2), 168–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558402172004
89
Guditus, S. (2013, February 25). Maslow’s hierarch of school needs.
https://web.archive.org/web/20221027121803/http://sguditus.blogspot.com/2013/02/masl
ows-hierarchy-of-school-needs-steve.html
Gullo, G., Capatosto, K., & Staats, C. (2018). Implicit bias in schools: A practitioner’s guide.
Routledge.
Guskey, T. R., & Brookhart, S. M. (2019). What we know about grading: What works, what
doesn’t, and what’s next. ASCD.
Heifetz, R. A., Linsky, M., & Grashow, A. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership: Tools
and tactics for changing your organization and the world. Harvard Business Review
Press.
Higher Learning Advocates. (2019, May). 101: Equity gaps in higher education.
https://higherlearningadvocates.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Final-Equity-101.pdf
Hollins, E. R. (1995). Revealing the deep meaning of culture in school learning: Framing a new
paradigm for teacher preparation. Action in Teacher Education, 17(1), 70–79.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.1995.10463232
Jefferies, S. S. (2017). Adaptive leadership in a socially revolving world: A symbolic
interactionist lens of adaptive leadership theory. Performance Improvement, 56(9), 46–
50. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.21741
Kotter. (n.d.). 8 steps to accelerate change in your organization.
https://www.kotterinc.com/methodology/8-steps/
Kotter, J. (2022). The 8 steps for leading change. https://www.kotterinc.com/8-steps-e-book-
download
90
Kotter, J. P., & Cohen, D. S. (2002). The heart of change : Real-life stories of how people
change their organizations. Harvard Business School Press.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant
pedagogy. Theory Into Practice, 34(3), 159–165.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849509543675
McAlexander, S. L., McCance, K., Blanchard, M. R., & Venditti, R. A. (2022). Investigating the
experiences, beliefs, and career intentions of historically underrepresented science and
engineering undergraduates engaged in an academic and internship program.
Sustainability, 14(3), 1486. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031486
McLaughlin, D. V. (2020). Personalized principal leadership practices: Eight strategies for
leading equitable, high achieving schools. Emerald Publishing Limited.
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Marginalize. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved August 5,
2022, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marginalize
Rapa, L. J., Diemer, M. A., & Bañales, J. (2018). Critical action as a pathway to social mobility
among marginalized youth. Developmental Psychology, 54(1), 127–137.
https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000414
Raskin, C., Krull, M., & Felix, A. J. (2021). Principal leadership for racial equity: A field guide
for developing race consciousness. Corwin Press.
Rector, E. (2021). Equity_gaps_forms_handout [PDF].
https://www.cosa.k12.or.us/sites/default/files/images/equity_gaps_forms_handout.pdf
Riele, K. (2006). Youth ‘at risk’: Further marginalizing the marginalized? Journal of Education
Policy, 21(2), 129–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930500499968
91
Spellman, K., Dillenbeck, J., Edwards, N. N., & Bohecker, L. (2021). Supporting marginalized
students in counselor education and supervision programs. Journal of Counselor
Leadership and Advocacy, 9(1), 32–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/2326716x.2021.2007429
Stembridge, A. (2019). Culturally responsive education in the classroom: An equity framework
for pedagogy. Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429441080
Stone, D. (2001). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making (Revised ed.). W. W.
Norton & Company.
Sullivan, M. (2021, November 15). Why equitable grading policies matter. EAB.
https://eab.com/insights/expert-insight/district-leadership/why-equitable-grading-
policies-matter/
Thiem, K. C., & Dasgupta, N. (2022). From pre-college to career: Barriers facing historically
marginalized students and evidence‐based solutions. Social Issues and Policy Review,
16(1), 212–251. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12085
Vera, E., Heineke, A., Schultes, A., & Daskalova, P. (2022). Social and emotional needs of
emergent bilingual high school students: Perspectives of teachers, school counselors, and
school social workers. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 32(4),
416–453. https://doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2021.2018657
Winfield, A. (2007). Eugenics and education in America: Institutionalized racism and the
implications of history, ideology, and memory (complicated conversation). Peter Lang.
92
Appendix A: Informed Consent/Information Sheet
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089
INFORMATION/FACTS SHEET FOR EXEMPT NON-MEDICAL
RESEARCH
An examination into leadership strategies that stop perpetuating the equity gap of
historically marginalized students in high schools.
You are invited to participate in a research study. Research studies include only people who
voluntarily choose to take part. This document explains information about this study. You should
ask questions about anything that is unclear to you.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to examine the leadership strategies of high school principals that
can eliminate policies that perpetuate the equity gap. Specifically, this research will analyze
leadership strategies that examine course selection/placement, grading policies, and the
use/nonuse of culturally relevant curriculum that can positively or negatively impact the success
of the historically marginalized student. “Secondary education across the western world
expanded in order to aid social and economic development after the Second World War.
Moreover, education was also meant to act as a vehicle for social mobility, according to the
meritocratic ideal expressed in policy at that time” (Riele, 2006, p. 129). Many years have passed
since the second World War and unfortunately the educational system still has not created a
system that promotes all students. Instead, education has continued policies and practices that
maintain inequities for our historically marginalized students. This research study is to examine
the connection between leadership strategies of high school principals that can eliminate or make
changes to policies that perpetuate the equity gap that decrease the opportunity for the success of
the traditionally marginalized student. The following questions will be used to determine how
school leaders can make effective change that will stop the continuum of unethical and
inequitable practices that affect not only the classes students take, their overall academic success,
but their personal belief on their own history, relevance, outcome, and potential for success.
Research Questions:
1.What leadership strategies have high school principals used to change these gatekeeping
practices including course selection and prerequisites, grading policies, and the use of culturally
relevant curriculum?
2. How successful have principals been in changing these gatekeeping practices?
93
3. What roadblocks have principals hit when changing these practices?
4. What district office supports have principals received when working to eliminate these
gatekeeping practices?
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to participate in a 45-minute semi-
structured one-on-one interview, and a 30-minute one-on-one follow-up interview (if necessary).
All interviews will be audio-taped. You do not have to answer any questions you do not want to
during the interviews. If you do not want to be taped during the interview, handwritten notes will
be taken. You will also be asked to respond to researcher-constructed documents in the form of
short journal prompts at three randomly selected dates during the course of this study. These
prompts will be sent to your work email at the end of workday on the randomly selected dates.
You do not have to answer any questions that you do not want to answer when you receive the
journal prompts, and your responses will be anonymous and confidential.
ALTERNATIVES TO PARTICIPATION
Your alternative is to not participate. Your relationship with your employer will not be affected
whether you participate or not in this study.
CONFIDENTIALITY
Skyler Garrahy will be the Principal Investigator of this study. Any identifiable information
obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential. Your interview responses will be
coded with a false name (pseudonym) and maintained separately. You will have the right to review
and edit the audio recordings or transcripts of the one-on-one interviews. All audiotapes related to
this study will be destroyed once they have been transcribed. The transcripts will be stored on a
password protected computer, which only the Principal Investigator can access.
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects
Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research studies
to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the study, please contact the following individuals:
Principal Investigator
Skyler Garrahy
Faculty Advisor
Dr. Gregory Franklin
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los
Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu
94
Appendix B: Screening Survey
The following are questions that help to determine the leadership strategies that stop
perpetuating the equity gap of traditionally marginalized students.
Research Questions
1. What leadership strategies have high school principals used to change these
gatekeeping practices?
2. How successful have principals been in changing these gatekeeping practices?
3. What roadblocks have principals hit when changing these practices?
4. What district office supports have principals received when working to eliminate these
gatekeeping practices?
Research Framework
An examination into leadership strategies that stop perpetuating the equity gap of
historically marginalized students in high schools was the framework for this study.
Target Population
The target population is school leadership, specifically public high school principals in
Southern California.
Introduction
This is a research project being conducted by Skyler M. Garrahy while at USC’s Rossier
Graduate School of Education. I am inviting you to participate in this research project because
you are a site leader who directly participates or sees the inequities because of policies that may
affect the success of the traditionally marginalized student in regard to course selection and
prerequisites, grading policies, and culturally relative curriculum. This research study is
voluntary, and you may choose not to participate. You may withdraw at any time if you decide to
95
participate in this research survey. If you decide not to participate in this study or if you
withdraw from participating at any time, you will not be penalized.
The procedure for this survey involves filling out an online survey that will take
approximately 10 minutes. The survey questions will screen you to determine your knowledge
regarding practices that have a direct impact on the equity gap among historically marginalized
students and the leadership strategies that may change these practices. This survey will also
include questions about your identity demographics to better understand how your sense of
positionality relates to student outcome. The results of the survey will allow me to identify those
who will be the interview participants.
I will do my best to keep your information confidential. All data will be stored in a
password-protected electronic format. To help protect your confidentiality, the surveys will not
contain information that will personally identify you unless you choose to be interviewed. The
results of this study will be used for scholarly purposes only and will only be seen by the
researcher.
The questions for the survey are presented in Table B1.
96
Table B1
Survey Questions
Question # Question Response
– Please indicate by selecting YES that you have read,
understand, and agree to participate in the research
study.
1. Yes
2. No
1. Gender you identify as. 1. Male
2. Female
3. Other
2. Please specify your ethnicity. 1. White
2. Black
3. Hispanic/Latino/a
4. Asian
5. Other
3. Total years of service in K–12 education (any position)? Short answer
4. Total years of service as an administrator in a high
school educational institution?
Short answer
5. Confirming I am or have been a high school principal. 1. yes
2. no
6. Have you used strategies to create change to the equity
gap as it relates to course selection and/or
prerequisites?
1. yes
2. no
7. Have you used strategies to create change to the equity
gap as it relates to grading practices?
1. yes
2. no
8. Have you used strategies to create change to the equity
gap as it relates to the use of culturally relative
curriculum?
1. yes
2. no
9. Are you willing to participate in a 45-minute interview
regarding your successful strategies, roadblocks, and
support in regard to the policies mentioned above?
1. yes
2. no
10. If you stated “Yes” to the question above, please enter
your email below.
Email response
97
Appendix C: Qualitative Interview
Hello and I want to thank you for agreeing to participate in my research study. I value
your time and I am grateful for the time that you have set aside to answer my questions. This
interview should take no more than 45 minutes. Does this time still work so that I can make sure
that we have enough time to complete the questions and record your answers?
Please remember that I am a student at USC and this study is an examination into
leadership strategies that stop perpetuating the equity gap of historically marginalized students in
high schools. The overview which was provided to you in the Study Information Sheet, and I
would like to take the time now to answer any questions you might have about participating in
this interview. In particular I am looking at the policies that remain in place, the knowledge of
these policies, the strategies used by site administration to change these policies, the roadblocks
they have faced and last the support that is or is not provided regarding these policies.
Please know that I am asking you these questions as a researcher. I am looking for your
perspective on this equity concept, and at no time will your answers be used in an evaluative
manner.
The information that is gained from this interview is confidential as directed by the ethics
regarding the research study that can be read in the Study Information. To make sure that you are
not known and your answers are not linked to you I will use a pseudonym for your name I will
try my best to report in a manner that will not identify you. Please know that I do plan to use
your direct quotes, but I will not release any of your information to other teachers, staff, or
district employees. Once the paper is completed, I can provide you a copy if you desire.
98
For this research study interview, following the ethical aspect discussed in the Study
Information Sheet, all data will be stored in a protected computer with destruction of data after a
three-year period.
Before we begin do you have any questions regarding the study or anything that we have
just gone over? I do want to ask your permission to record this conversation only for my personal
listening as I want to make sure that I accurately record your responses. Do I have your
permission to record this interview?
Interview Questions
The interview questions were presented to the participants as follows.
Setting the Stage
The researcher began the interview by saying, “I’d like to start by asking you some
background questions about you.”
1. First, tell me about your background in education.
2. How long have you worked in the field?
3. What roles or positions have you held?
Heart of the Interview: Your Practices: What Particular Practices Are You Trying to
Change?
4. If someone were to ask you if equity gaps exist in your school, what would you say to
them?
5. What educational policies do you believe perpetuate the equity gap with historically
marginalized youth in the high school setting? Describe how you would change the
educational policies that you spoke of?
99
6. Describe which educational partners support you as you are navigating change to
educational policy? If possible, can you provide an example?
7. As a principal you recognize that gatekeeping practices are harmful. What leadership
strategies have you employed to address these practices?
8. Describe successful leadership strategies you employed to lead your change initiative.
Are there any strategies, if you were implementing again, you would do differently?
9. What external roadblocks have you encountered while trying to make change?
10. What do you feel are the biggest obstacles that keep principals from successfully
changing their practices?
11. What strategies have you effectively used with your teachers to make change?
12. Provide an example of a challenge when initiating change at your school site.
13. How are you supported by your district when leading educational policy change?
Closing Question and Comments
I concluded the interview with the question, “Is there anything else you would like to
share regarding policy on course selection/prerequisites, grading policies, culturally relevant
curriculum and your ability, strategies, or roadblocks you have encountered?” and the closing
comment, “I want to again thank you for sharing your insight with me today and taking the time
to be a part of this research study.”
Post Interview Summary and Reflection
After the interview, the researcher summarized the results of the interviews and reflected
on the responses.
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
The equity gap continues in the current educational systems for historically marginalized students. This research examined leadership strategies that work to stop the gatekeeping policies that continue to exist in the educational system that perpetuate the equity gap of our historically marginalized youth in the high school setting. Policies and procedures are still in place that reflect systemic barriers for historically marginalized youth, policies that determine not only the students’ path in the high school setting but also the outcome of their postsecondary journey. This was an examination specifically into leadership strategies of high school principals who work to eliminate or change the policies and procedures that perpetuate the equity gap of historically marginalized students in high schools.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Implementing an equity-based multi-tiered system of support in a large urban school district: the grows and glows
PDF
The attributes of effective equity-focused high school principals
PDF
The attributes of effective equity-focused high school principals
PDF
The importance of the implementation process to achieve equity in the classroom through culturally relevant pedagogy
PDF
Why can’t I see myself in my school? Hiring and retaining ethnically diverse leadership in public schools
PDF
Building leadership capacity from the top: how superintendents empower principals to lead schools
PDF
The attributes of effective equity-focused elementary school principals
PDF
Leading the new generation: principal leadership practices that promote retention of millennial teachers
PDF
Building leadership capacity from the top: how superintendents empower principals to lead schools
PDF
Examining elementary school teachers’ beliefs and pedagogy with students from low socioeconomic status and historically marginalized communities
PDF
The attributes of effective equity-focused elementary principals
PDF
Leading conditions to support reclassification of long-term multilingual learners
PDF
Novice Black Indigenous People of Color (BIPOC) school administrators' professional development and adult learning
PDF
Equitable hiring practices: “Why can’t I see myself in my school?”: Hiring and retaining ethically diverse leadership in public schools
PDF
The role of historically underserved students’ perceptions of their high school counselor in overcoming the equity gap in college admissions: an evaluative study
PDF
Prescription for change: gender barriers impact on healthcare leadership equity
PDF
The dynamics of instructional leadership & organizational structure in high performing urban schools
PDF
Why I can't see myself in school? Hiring and retaining ethnically diverse leadership in public schools
PDF
A phenomenological study of the impact of English language learner support services on students’ identity development
PDF
Culturally responsive principal leadership and its influence on teachers in urban settings.
Asset Metadata
Creator
Garrahy, Skyler Manhan
(author)
Core Title
An examination into leadership strategies that stop perpetuating the equity gap of historically marginalized students in high schools
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Educational Leadership (On Line)
Degree Conferral Date
2023-05
Publication Date
03/29/2023
Defense Date
03/06/2023
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
Change,culture,equity,leadership,OAI-PMH Harvest
Format
theses
(aat)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Franklin, Gregory (
committee chair
), Kishimoto, Christina (
committee member
), Lawrence, Richard (
committee member
)
Creator Email
garrahy@usc.edu,skylergarrahy@gmail.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC112850377
Unique identifier
UC112850377
Identifier
etd-GarrahySky-11532.pdf (filename)
Legacy Identifier
etd-GarrahySky-11532
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
theses (aat)
Rights
Garrahy, Skyler Manhan
Internet Media Type
application/pdf
Type
texts
Source
20230330-usctheses-batch-1013
(batch),
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 author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.
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
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
equity