University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Anti-racist adaptive leadership: an action research study on supporting principals in predominantly white schools to develop color consciousness and support future anti-racist practices

(USC Thesis Other)

Anti-racist adaptive leadership: an action research study on supporting principals in predominantly white schools to develop color consciousness and support future anti-racist practices

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Anti-Racist Adaptive Leadership: An Action Research Study on Supporting Principals in
Predominantly White Schools to Develop Color Consciousness and Support Future Anti-
Racist Practices
by
Suzanne Kathleen Wildey

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 2022

© Copyright by Suzanne Kathleen Wildey 2022
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Suzanne Kathleen Wildey certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Julie Slayton
John Pascarella
Artineh Samkian, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022

iv
Abstract
The purpose of this action research study was to examine how my role as a Director in
Educational Services could support principals in recognizing how hegemonic, colorblind
practices are reproduced in classrooms. I created a nine-session, 3-month learning opportunity to
support principals by engaging in conversations surrounding positionality, intersectionality,
unconscious bias, and color consciousness, while also focusing the conversations on the
colorblind curriculum inside and outside the classroom. Principals were selected for this study
because they play a fundamental role in constructing excellent schools and ensuring equitable
learning opportunities for all students (Radd et al., 2021), as well as because the greatest impact
on learning comes primarily from teachers and secondly from principals (Seashore Louis et al.,
2010). The research question that guided this action research study was: How do I support school
principals in my predominantly White district to develop color consciousness to support future
anti-racist practices? My findings highlighted a transformation with principals in recognizing
they were able to enact change within their sphere of influence. In addition, they were able to
walk into a classroom with a color conscious lens and see ways in which the colorblind
curriculum was reproducing a single sided, hegemonic narrative. As a leader, I grew as I was
able to let go of an initially teacher-centered environment and progress to a learner-centered
environment that allowed for a co-creation of learning to occur. In addition, my growth involved
feeling more confident, which allowed me to begin centering and naming race within
conversations.

v
Dedication
To my mom who I can only aspire to be more like. Thank you for unconditionally being there for
my family and me.

To my children, Charlie and Mackenzie, who are my world. Thank you for your patience with
me throughout this journey as I know it wasn’t always easy.

To my husband, Scott, who loved our kids and was mom and dad for them while I went to school
and studied. Thank you for reminding me how many hours I was on the computer and that taking
a break was probably a good idea. And thank you for your never-ending support. I could not have
done this without you.

To my dad who always taught me to “fight on.” Thank you for never letting me give up and
teaching me the power of perseverance. Even though you are gone, I live to make you proud.
Remember, just walk to that first speed bump and back.

vi
Acknowledgements
Dr. Artineh Samkian, if my dad were here to meet you, he would have found a way to
find out how we were somehow related with our Armenian heritages. He would then have told
you to not let me settle for good but push me to be better. Not only did you do that, but more
importantly you brought me light and positivity when I struggled in the darkness. You never
gave up on me and were always there when I needed you. You are an inspiration, and a model of
integrity, courage, and determination. How I wound up so lucky to have you as my dissertation
chair, I will never know. Thank You.
My committee members, Dr. Slayton and Dr. Pascarella. Julie, thank you for being on my
committee. Your honesty and openness were truly appreciated at all times. You never held back,
you were true to your values, and you were respectful in your delivery. Thank you for being you.
John, on the committee, you were a new voice with a different perspective. I appreciated what
you brought forth and the ways in which you improved this dissertation. Thank you.
This would not at all have been possible without my amazing participants in this study. In
the midst of a pandemic, they joined me on this journey, and I am forever grateful. In addition, I
want to acknowledge those that I work with who supported and encouraged me throughout this
process. Each time I wanted to give up, they found a way to encourage me and get me back on
track. Dr. Gotanda, Dr. Ramirez, and Dr. Licciardello- Thank You!
Finally, I want to acknowledge all the teachers and professors that I have had in my life.
Some believed in me while others did not. Regardless, I lived to make most proud while living to
prove the others wrong.

vii
Table Of Contents
Abstract ............................................................................................................................................ i
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
List Of Figures ................................................................................................................................ x
Historically Entrenched Inequity ........................................................................................ 4
Organizational Context ........................................................................................... 8
Role and Expectation ............................................................................................ 11
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 12
Anti-Racist Adaptive Leadership in Practice ........................................................ 15
Color Consciousness ............................................................................................. 29
Colorblind Curriculum in Predominantly White Schools ..................................... 35
Unconscious Bias .................................................................................................. 41
Critical Reflection ................................................................................................. 44
Summary ............................................................................................................... 49
Research Methods ............................................................................................................. 50
Participants and Settings ....................................................................................... 51
Actions .................................................................................................................. 56
Data Collection and Instruments/Protocols .......................................................... 58
Data Analysis ........................................................................................................ 62
Limitations and Delimitations ............................................................................... 65
Credibility and Trustworthiness ............................................................................ 67
Ethics..................................................................................................................... 70
Findings............................................................................................................................. 72

viii
Principal Growth 1: Recognizing Change Is Possible Within One’s Sphere
of Influence ........................................................................................................... 73
Principal Growth 2: Recognizing and Questioning the Colorblind
Curriculum ............................................................................................................ 89
Leader Growth 1: Supporting Principals From a Learner-Centered
Approach ............................................................................................................... 99
Leader Growth 2: Centering Race ...................................................................... 109
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 119
Afterword ........................................................................................................................ 120
References ................................................................................................................................... 124
Action Research Session 1 .............................................................................................. 138
Action Research Session 2 .............................................................................................. 139
Action Research Session 3 .............................................................................................. 140
Action Research Session 4 .............................................................................................. 141
Action Research Session 5 .............................................................................................. 143
Action Research Session 6 .............................................................................................. 144
Action Research Session 7 .............................................................................................. 145
Action Research Session 8 .............................................................................................. 146
Appendix B: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 147

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Action Research Timeline 57
Table 2: Principal Barriers 74
Table 3: Recognition of Colorblind Curriculum 89
Table 4: Teacher-Centered Versus Learner-Centered 100
Table 5: Centering Race 109

x
List Of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 15
Figure 2: Find Time Screen Shot for Principal Meeting Scheduling 55
Figure 3: Lesson Plan 103
1

Anti-Racist Adaptive Leadership: An Action Research Study on Supporting Principals in
Predominantly White Schools to Develop Color Consciousness and Support Future Anti-
Racist Practices
As a child, it perplexed me that people would assume my mother was the family nanny
when we were out together; often, it was in line at the grocery store. On multiple occasions, I
would hear my mom enlighten strangers, as if it was their business, that she was the mother to
these three rambunctious, brown-eyed, darker skinned children in front of her. Although I did not
inherit her beach blonde hair, her porcelain skin, or her iridescent green eyes, I was her child,
and how someone could challenge that was beyond my comprehension. Although my personality
often mirrored my mother’s German tenacious side and I prayed alongside her at night, those
traits were unseen to the judgmental eyes of those around us.
My father was the darkest man in our private gated community and the darkest man I
knew as a child. He was tall, dark, and confident, and also got stopped at every airport security
checkpoint on our travels. Growing up, I heard stories from my father and mother telling me to
treat everyone with kindness, because it was the inside that mattered. These conversations often
occurred when my dad would reminisce about stories of his childhood. He, an Armenian man,
grew up in a predominantly Black neighborhood and was not seen as Black or White. Being an
enigma to others, not Black enough or White enough, made him the victim of discrimination and
brutality by Black students. He was seen as dark and different, but not Black, and Black was
acceptable in the community in which he grew up. In high school, when things became
unbearable, my father’s doctor kept him home until he could get him transferred to a different
school. In this adverse treatment, he was not alone. My grandmother, too, was stabbed, robbed,
and left to die on more than one occasion. On one incident, it was so violent that she lost all her

2
language and never regained the ability to speak Armenian again. Not only was she robbed of
her belongings, but also a substantial piece of her culture was stripped away as well. Those were
some of the first stories I heard about Black people. Although the stories were atrocious and
enraged me, the messages delivered were about the experiences my family had encountered and
overcome. I was not taught to believe that Black people were like this, I was taught that treating
others with kindness was what mattered; seeing what was on the inside was all that truly
counted. The baffling and judgmental experiences with my mother in our predominantly White
neighborhood and the stories I heard about the violence my father and his family endured in a
predominantly Black neighborhood reinforced my belief that one’s physical difference should
not affect how one is treated. I blocked seeing color because my father was othered, which
resulted in painful occurrences, both physically and emotionally. I blocked seeing color because
I resented being questioned as my mother’s daughter simply because of our different physical
appearance.
I was enrolled in a public school for K–12 education with mostly all White students and
teachers. Often in school, teachers and parents alike would ask me, “What are you?” After asking
my parents why people asked me that, they explained my complexion was not White like others
but not Black either, and it confused people. I learned to tell those who asked that I was half
Armenian from my father’s side, because I learned to recognize that they only cared about where
my darkness came from. Predictably, what followed was the question, “Why is your last name
Johnson? Don’t all Armenian names end with an ‘ian’?” I would explain how my great
grandfather came to America; he wanted to assimilate into the White culture, so he translated his
last name of Ohanessian into Johnson. The Armenian meaning of Ohaness is John, and my
grandfather was the son of Aram Ohanessian, and thus, the name Johnson was born. I often

3
believed that Suzie Johnson was a fake name. It made me wonder if it was my Armenian or
White identity that I struggled to integrate with my sense of belonging. I thought that I had to be
one identity and did not understand that I could be an intersection of both White and Armenian.
When I married a Scottish/Irish man, I told my father that I would not keep the name Johnson
because it was not an authentic last name and was merely made up. Although I cannot be sure, I
would imagine the name Johnson contributed to privilege in my life, such as not being mocked
by peers for a last name that was not traditionally heard, as well as receiving interviews because
Suzie Johnson sounds like a simple and proper, “All American” name. It took many years before
I was able to acknowledge how hard it had to have been for my father’s side to lose this piece of
his culture in order to have a chance to belong in a country that doesn’t do well with multiplicity
in identity. How I wish my father were around now so that I could apologize for not keeping the
name Johnson, despite its story of erasure. How I wish I could thank him for making the
sacrifices he made for what he felt would allow his family to “fit in.”
Throughout my formative years of education, I often heard only one version of reality.
For example, I remember hearing extraordinary tales of how Christopher Columbus discovered
America and poor old Rosa Parks was just a little old lady who needed a seat on the front of the
bus. As a student with an individualized educational plan (IEP) and a learning processing
disorder, understanding one side of any story was a great enough challenge. I believed teachers
were encompassing knowers of everything. I was never asked to develop critical thinking or
questioning skills at home, because passing each grade was always the end goal. I was raised to
show respect to those around me, which meant not questioning those in power or authority, such
as teachers. Never would I imagine that teachers could be recounting single-sided narratives or
bold lies. Although White supremacist ideologies were displayed throughout my predominantly

4
White classrooms, from the explicit curriculum taught and the hidden messages from images on
walls to internal beliefs and unconscious biases, I did not recognize this. It would take many
years to see, understand, undo, and relearn how my home, life, and classroom experiences
perpetuated a colorblind mindset that sat atop a racist narrative.
I have come a long way since I was a girl in pigtails who believed that not seeing color
was the right and just thing to do. The fact is that color does matter and has always mattered in
our country. While uncovering what it means to be anti-racist, pain comes in discovering one’s
complicity in reproducing hegemonic ideologies. Although I am discussing the concept of seeing
color, that is only one aspect of being anti-racist. Other key milestones on my path to an anti-
racist mindset have been engaging in critical self-reflection, discovering my unconscious biases,
and immersing myself in literature and history from perspectives different from the dominant
White narrative. It is because of my own personal journey that I am drawn to work that supports
others in their progression from race neutrality/colorblindness to color consciousness, while
actively promoting anti-racist practices. As A. E. Lewis (2001) stated, colorblindness enables
one to avoid confronting the racial realities surrounding them, avoid facing their own racist
presumptions and understanding, and avoid dealing with racist events. What we need is a
rejection of colorblindness so that we may see and address the ways that racism has harmed and
continues to harm.
Historically Entrenched Inequity
In much of the same way that I accepted the dominant narratives being taught in school,
issues of equity are present in every situation, but we often do not recognize the prevalence of
systemic oppression because it is seen as normal in how things are, how we think, and how we
feel. Unjust structures and institutions are the problem—not the kids, parents, families, or

5
communities—and structural racism is at the root of these educational inequities. Inequitable
systems were created by people with ruling powers, and intentionally and unintentionally,
educators continue to perpetuate unjust systems (Aguilar, 2020).
Gillborn (2005) stated that one of Whiteness’s most powerful and dangerous aspects is
that many White people have no awareness of Whiteness as a construction, or of their role in
sustaining and playing out the inequities at the heart of Whiteness. In education, too, many well-
meaning educators are often unaware of how Whiteness affects their practice. Principals are a
core focus in education, as Seashore Louis et al. (2010) stated that the greatest impact on
learning comes first from teachers and second from principals. Because principals hire teachers
and evaluate performance and teaching, we must be committed to developing principals who
value impactful mindsets, beliefs, and instruction (Raskin et al., 2021). Many principals in
education, for example, may be inflicting more harm than they realize by virtue of their
unintentional or intentional race-neutral mindset. This colorblind racism is a racial ideology that
allows individuals the frame to interpret the root cause of race related issues as anything but
racism (Bonilla-Silva & Ashe, 2014). As stated by Khalifa et al. (2016), historically oppressive
structures have disadvantaged minoritized students, and those in education have been complicit
in reproducing this oppression. As school leaders, unless we examine how such forces have
shaped our beliefs, assumptions, and attitudes about race, we will continue to perpetuate racism
in our schools (Raskin et al., 2021).
Racism in schools can be seen in a variety of ways. Black, Latino, and Indigenous
students perform worse on almost all educational assessments that are both implemented and
valued by U.S. schools (Khalifa et al., 2016). Ladson-Billing and Tate (2016) argued that class
and gender-based explanations are not enough to account for the vast differences in school

6
experiences and performance. Additionally, the discipline gap—which is characterized by
racialized disparities in disciplinary referrals, suspensions, and exclusions—is a direct indication
that cultures in schools are hostile to minority students. Gregory and Weinstein (2008) indicated
that Blacks and Latinos are more likely than Whites to be referred to the principal’s office for
subjective offenses, which might include noncompliance or defiance. These racialized
disciplinary responses create a hostile school environment and lead to student disengagement,
because frequent suspensions contribute to academic underperformance (Davis & Jordan, 1994).
In the 2017–18 school year, the National Center of Education Statistics reported that 78%
of the nation’s 90,000 principals were White, 11% were Black, and nine percent were Hispanic
(National Center for Education Statistics, 2020). White principals lack an understanding and
awareness of the different forms of racism and how racism is perpetuated by reproducing
hegemonic practices in the classroom (Young & Laible, 2000). According to Khalifa (2018),
many school leaders have difficulty breaking out of the colonizing mold. Many do not
understand how schools were used as weapons to cleanse Indigenous people’s language,
customs, spiritual beliefs, and practices. Moreover, as a result of this lack of historical
knowledge on the foundations of public education, school leaders continue to lead in ways that
resemble the oppressive forms of colonial administrators. Most principals perpetuate the policies
they inherited, which frequently include unjust and inequitable practices. There is no denying
that race continues to fundamentally shape students’ educational opportunities and outcomes
(Ladson-Billings, 2012; A. E. Lewis & Diamond, 2015). However, without this awareness,
principals will be unable to change their leadership practices.
With White principals being the majority, this lack of understanding about how racism is
perpetuated inside and outside classrooms is problematic because it continues to preserve a

7
colorblind mindset while allowing for unconscious biases to prevail, maintaining dangerous
forms of marginalization. Leaders who are knowledgeable and proactive about anti-racism will
have a positive impact on student learning, self-esteem, academic success, and a sense of
belonging in school (Khalifa, 2018). This is not only important in schools that serve historically
marginalized students. Research shows that White-dominant schools need an approach that is
aimed at disrupting traditional curriculum and instruction for White students, one that
emphasizes the importance of teaching White students about race and racism. Whiteness requires
direct instruction for students to acknowledge their own racial identity and name how racism
works (Kailin, 2002). Real-life implications of unconscious biases can create invisible barriers to
opportunity and achievement for some students (Staats, 2016). When school principals reproduce
racial oppressions, many practices are visible, including embracing a colorblind ideology and
maintaining leadership preparation programs that minimize or exclude meaningful conversations
surrounding race, community, and culture (Khalifa et al., 2016). Principals must learn how to
recognize how their racial identity influences their leadership and understand the role racism
plays in sustaining systems of oppression. Principals must also learn that antiracism extends
beyond discussions of diversity and multiculturalism (Solomon, 2002). Predominantly White
schools reproduce hegemonic practices by providing one-sided narratives, failing to engage
students in critical thinking, and providing literature that reinforces negative stereotypes. This
one-sided narrative serves to maintain the status quo, denying White students access to the full
story. Given that these are the same White people who grow up to occupy our teaching force and
principalships, the aforementioned inequities continue to be perpetuated generation after
generation. With these inequities in place, students continue to experience marginalization,
which is reflected in student outcomes such as standardized test data, student discipline, self-

8
esteem, and suspension rates, as noted previously. Principals must be actively anti-racist, which
Kendi (2019) stated is a revolutionary choice that requires a radical reorientation of our
consciousness.
In predominantly White schools, race discussions are often avoided for fear of offending
others, and having this colorblind approach distorts the education students receive (Schofield,
2006). This cycle of avoidance, reproduction, and denial needs to come to an end, and it all
begins with the principal. Leaders play a fundamental role in constructing excellent schools and
ensuring equitable learning opportunities for all students (Radd et al., 2021). Effective leaders set
the direction for school communities to be academically ambitious and ensure that organizational
structures support their objectives while eliminating systemic inequities. As stated by DiAngelo
(2018), it is not enough for a principal to be non-racist or passively anti-racist; anti-racist leaders
must intentionally work to transform power relations in practice that are unequal.
Organizational Context
I conducted this study in order to address the way the historically entrenched inequity of
differential educational outcomes is perpetuated within my predominantly White, wealthy, high-
performing school district. The district encompasses over 11,000 students, with the most
significant majority (44%) identifying as White. The next largest racial group is the Asian
population representing 28%. After White and Asian groups, there are Hispanic or Latino (14%),
two or more races (9%), African Americans (2%), Filipinos (2%), not represented (1%), and
American Indian and Pacific Islander (0.2%).
The district is also a high-performing one, with 73% of students meeting or exceeding
math standards compared to the state average of 40%. In English language arts, 76% are
meeting, or exceeding standards compared to the state average of 51%. However, when this data

9
is disaggregated, patterns emerge where White and Asian students are the ones making greater
progress toward proficiency than the Black students. In math, 70% of White students and 87% of
Asian students are meeting grade level standards or exceeding them compared to 46% of Black
students. In English language arts, 60% of the Black population meets or exceeds standards
compared to 74% of White students and 83% of Asian students. The data is speaking clearly, but
the question is who is listening and what is being done? Along with impressive test scores for
specific populations, overall, the community is considered highly affluent, with the median
household income ranging from $130,000–$160,000 (Los Angeles Almanac, 2017). The
difference in racial outcome data is masked by overall markers of success, and a colorblind
mindset leads people to avoid conversations about how to serve the district’s Black students as
well as why anti-racist mindsets are important even for the highly performing White students.
The 17 predominantly White and wealthy schools within this high-performing district are
primarily led by principals who identify as White; however, there are also principals who
identify as Native American, Asian, or Latinx. There are no principals who identify as Black.
School principals have a responsibility and role in civil society to be responsible for challenging
the hegemonic social order and initiating new and more critical understandings of the world.
Khalifa (2018) stated that principals play a central role in the development of the entire child,
which is a crucial element of a student’s academic success. Principals must learn the reality of
racial inequality and understand their role in its reproduction (A. E. Lewis, 2001). Allowing
principals to stick to what they know and what comes easy to them is a form of cognitive
imprisonment in which they could likely be doing something wrong (Brookfield, 2017).
Within the context of my study, I aimed to initiate conversations to encourage principals
to think about how classroom and school practices might be connected to forms of White power

10
and the reproduction of White supremacist ideologies. In the past few years, there have been
limited principal professional development opportunities focusing on race and racism in my
district. Although these scarce opportunities were well-intended, as I reflect back, I cannot tell
you what we discussed or how I changed my mindset or practices as a result of attending those
professional development opportunities. When principals visit classrooms, there appears to be a
race-neutral mindset that accepts reproductions on the walls depicting only White figures, for the
authors of novels to all be White, and for lessons to be taught as the truth with just one side
presented. Principals must be supported and encouraged to, first, recognize this colorblind
curriculum, and then to challenge teachers to change their ways and view the classroom with a
color conscious lens. Outside of the classroom is also an important place where one must be
intentional about who is represented and who is not. When walking down the hallways, are there
illustrations that include non-White students? In addition, what is presented for assemblies, what
are the implicit or explicit messages being conveyed, and who is delivering the message? At all
times, principals must look beyond the four walls of the classroom to make race visible and enact
anti-racist practices that are notable school wide.
When I think back to my previous role as a principal, I can reflect on situations that I
would take back or do differently if I could. For example, I would have pushed back and
enlightened teachers regarding the problems of having children dress up as Pilgrims and Indians
for the Thanksgiving Feast; I would have interrogated activities that represented only one side;
and I would have empowered teachers to see the ways in which their literature promoted the
White man as the savior while reproducing racist stereotypes and how that contributed to long
term systemic racism. While I know that I cannot take back my actions, I can make changes
moving forward within myself and with those I support.

11
Unfortunately, I know I am not the only principal who has allowed the reproduction of
hegemonic practices to continue in education. Even for principals who may be committed to
racial equity, it is hard to undo years of breathing in the smog, as Tatum (2017) would argue. My
role in this action research process was leading principals to see color so that they would be
better positioned to enact school wide changes to achieve institutional change for racial equity.
Role and Expectation
My first day at my organization was when I was 5 years old, and I walked into my
kindergarten class attached to my mom’s leg. Although my kindergarten teacher is no longer in
the organization, I do, in fact, have former teachers still teaching and possibly with the same
curriculum that was used when I was there. After attending college and teaching elsewhere for a
brief 2 years, I returned to my hometown district, where I spent 13 years teaching and 2 years as
an elementary school principal. At the time of this study, I was a Director in Educational
Services. Finally, I am also a parent to twins in the district. By holding these various roles and
positions within the same educational context, I was able to see the inside from many different
perspectives.
During this action research dissertation, it was impossible to leave behind who I was in
all the aforementioned roles; however, the focus was placed on my role as a Director. As a
Director, I am part of the K–12 sphere and interact with all principals regarding curriculum
adoptions, English language testing and support, transitional kindergarten, gifted and talented
programs, Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP), state testing, and overall support.
Additionally, I also have the opportunity to engage with K–12 teachers concerning professional
learning opportunities, including curriculum and new adoptions, report cards, standards-based

12
assessments, and overall classroom support. Finally, at the district level, I engage with our
Human Resources division when it comes to negotiations and collective bargaining.
Outside of my formal job description as a Director, I have always extended myself to be
available to offer support on policies, guidance on teacher practices, and mentoring principals
when asked. Unfortunately, until recently, these roles had been grounded in a colorblind mindset.
Although I listened to others and reflected on their challenges, I neglected my role of reflecting
critically and centering race within these discussions. Until I started my coursework at USC, I
was unaware this needed to happen, and throughout my doctoral educational journey, I learned
the importance of how to be a better leader: one who intentionally centers anti-racist practice
through my support of other adults in my context.
With this intention in mind, I examined the following research question: How do I
support school principals in my predominantly White district to develop color consciousness to
support future anti-racist practices? By leading change with this question at the forefront, I could
better myself, principals, and current teachers, but also make a difference for future generations
of students in my district who will learn that colorblindness is not a desired end goal: rather,
being anti-racist is.
Conceptual Framework
Ignorance of how we are shaped racially is the first sign of privilege. In other words, it is
a privilege to ignore the consequences of race in America.
—Tim Wise, White Like Me
A vision without a strategy remains merely an illusion (Bolman & Deal, 2017). Maxwell
(2013) described a conceptual framework as a tentative theory of the phenomenon that one plans
to investigate as it seeks to study existing systems to understand what is going on and why. My

13
conceptual framework was constructed on the premise that school leaders can lead anti-
oppressive education only if they recognize the oppression inherent in its current iteration
(Khalifa, 2018). Within this action research framework, my long-term goal beyond this study
was promoting institutional change for racial equity. I theorized that in order for this long-term
goal to come to fruition, educational leaders needed, first, to build color consciousness, and then
to enact anti-racist practices. By implementing institutional change for racial equity, the focus is
on dismantling the culture of Whiteness that favors White people through curriculum, policies,
and pedagogy. My framework visual (see Figure 1) represented the box associated with
institutional change in a different color as I recognized that to achieve this goal, it would take
time beyond what I had available for conducting my action research dissertation. It was a long-
term desired outcome that I planned to work toward long past completion of this dissertation. As
such, the purple text in Figure 1 represented my plans for this action research, and I theorized
that by accomplishing those, we would be one step closer to the long-term goal represented by
the black text. I hoped to see and accomplish three goals by the end of this action research. First,
because I was part of this study, I wanted change to occur within me by learning more about both
the institutional system of schooling and about myself as a leader. Next, because of my actions, I
wanted to see changes in principals and their ability to recognize their own unconscious biases,
colorblind mindset, and ways in which Whiteness dominated the curriculum. The third and final
goal was the beginning stages of longer-term changes, in which principals would start the
transformation process in becoming anti-racist leaders and making plans that would disrupt the
colorblind curriculum that existed on their campus.
Khalifa (2018) stated that leadership plays a central role in the development of the whole
child. He argued that there is little evidence that traditional leadership models contribute to any

14
significant changes in the school. Although Khalifa incorrectly lumps many different leadership
approaches into what he calls “traditional leadership” some of which have been shown to be
effective, depending on one’s definition of effective, he is trying to argue that a different
approach is needed if we are to truly value students and their communities, particularly those that
have been historically marginalized. According to Khalifa (2018), traditional leaders believe that
their job is to improve students’ performance by providing instructional leadership, which is
most often measured by test scores, grades, and graduation rates. Incorporating the community is
seen as something that must be an additional outreach and is not embedded in the school’s
culture. To him, a nontraditional approach is both humanizing and culturally responsive. By
humanizing others, Khalifa (2018) stated that leaders promote environments and institutional
practices that both cultivate student identities and encourage academic identities by: (a)
establishing social and educational networks that are beneficial to minoritized students, families,
communities, and teachers; and (b) using community-based knowledge to help teachers
understand and appreciate minoritized student identities. Khalifa (2018) advocated for principals
to consider how they can leverage community epistemology and voice to improve teachers’
teaching. This nontraditional approach centers on communities and parents, which is critical in
developing a curriculum that rejects Whiteness as the norm and is culturally responsive and
humanizing. Although Khalifa’s concept of culturally responsive school leadership is primarily
relevant in communities where the population is not predominantly White, his call for
nontraditional leadership approaches that center and value non-White ways of being is relevant
in any context. Although, I was not able to bring in incorporating the community within the
length of this study, it was something that I planned to address at a later time, as it was part of
my desired outcome for long-term change for racial equity.

15
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework

My conceptual framework served as a roadmap of my preliminary understanding of my
role as a Director in my context and how I could support principals in recognizing how
hegemonic, colorblind practices are reproduced in classrooms. In doing this work, my objective
was to support principals to develop color consciousness and promote future anti-racist practices.
In the following sections, I will explain each part of the conceptual framework, using literature to
support the definitions for each of the concepts.
Anti-Racist Adaptive Leadership in Practice
In Figure 1, the conceptual framework begins with anti-racist adaptive leadership at the
top, followed by a double arrow pointing to my learners, focusing on color consciousness. The
arrows from self to learners go in both directions because the principals learned from me in the
process as I learned from them as well. Anti-racist adaptive leadership in myself comes before

16
my learners’ color consciousness because it was my role to enact anti-racist adaptive leadership
to help make color visible to the principals by uncovering unconscious bias, hegemonic
practices, and the colorblind curriculum. As a leader, I also learned from the principals about
what was truly taking place on their campus and discovered ways to support and empower them
to make racially conscious changes specifically about their curriculum. Although there are many
other facets of work in which principals engage, this study focused on the curriculum in
classrooms because of the power curriculum holds both inside and outside of the classroom. In
addition, I needed to learn where my learners were developmentally in this work so that I could
meet them where they were in order to scaffold their growth. I accomplished this goal by
interviewing both participants and asking questions that could help me determine where they
were situated according to Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano’s (2017) four ways of knowing
in adulthood typology: instrumental, socializing, self-authoring, and self-transforming. These
ways of knowing are often described as the lens through which adults interpret their world,
because they play a role in how we make sense of our experiences, feedback, and relationships.
Adults with instrumental ways of knowing have yet to fully develop the capacity to take
another’s perspective. They see things as very black or white and have a concrete right/wrong
orientation. To an educator or leader, this learner asks, “What do I do? Please tell me.” This
learner also tends to generalize worldviews and experiences and may have challenges
understanding how others feel or what they may be experiencing.
Next, there are adults with the socializing way of knowing who have grown in their
capacity to see others’ feelings and perspectives deeply. In addition, they understand there is not
a universal right way to live, lead, learn, or teach. This learner may think in terms of “What you
think of me, I think of me.” This learner is not as concerned with the “right” way of leading but

17
rather with the best way or how they should meet others’ expectations. Being concerned with
others’ opinions may make it challenging for this type of learner to address sensitive topics, such
as race and racism.
Self-authoring ways of knowing exist beyond the socializing way of knowing. With a
self-authoring way of knowing, one has grown his/her internal capacity to consider others’
expectations, assessments, and suggestions concerning their thoughts and judgments. This
knower thinks more along the lines of, “I care for all of us and have big ideas.” Self-authoring
knowers may be comfortable advocating for their students and what they believe in; however,
they have not yet grown in their capacity to critique their ideologies and belief systems.
At the highest developmental level, there are self-transforming adults who are more
centered on the idea of, “Let’s learn more about ourselves—and each other—together.” These
knowers can take a firm stand on their values and beliefs, but they also understand the
importance of looking beyond themselves. Knowers in this stage seek out others with whom they
can engage in deep dialogue about life issues. As a self-transforming knower, the most
significant challenge can be meeting others where they are and needing to be patient with the
slow pace of change.
I recognized that the principals were in different stages with respect to their ways of
knowing, and I worked with them to scaffold their growth and capacity to change by meeting
them where they were and providing appropriate supports. The arrow coming back from the
learner to self in Figure 1 partially represented this need to learn where the principals in my
study were so I could best support them. Growing from one way of knowing to the next is about
building and gathering more internal tools than building with what we have (Drago-Severson &
Blum-DeStefano, 2017). This involved helping adults stretch and expand their internal capacities

18
by combining safe-feeling scaffolds with challenges that fall outside of their comfort zone,
similar to what Lev Vygotsky (1978) described as working in the zone of proximal development
(ZPD; Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano (2017)
stated that all adults will need support and stretches in order to grow as individuals and social
justice leaders. While I felt it was important to know where my learners were so I could provide
the best supports, I did not plan or anticipate principals completely growing from one way of
knowing to the next within the time allotted for this study. It served mostly as a way for me
gauge what I needed to do in terms of my leadership behaviors to meet them where they were.
So, why did I propose an anti-racist adaptive leadership approach? Decades of good
leadership have created unjust and inequitable schools and enabled them to exist (Theoharis,
2007). The historical practice of leaders allowing inequitable practices to continue for Black
students (such as being judged by the color of their skin, disproportionate student discipline
referrals and achievement gaps, overrepresentation in special education, underrepresentation in
advanced course works, and lower graduation rates (Brooks, 2012) must remind White school
leaders not to be complicit in racist school practices and programs. White leaders are capable of
the necessary leadership around race, but it requires intellectual and emotional work (Brooks &
Arnold, 2013). Principals in predominantly White schools are challenged with making the
invisible (i.e., race) visible. If we are going to recognize schools to be institutions that are
responsible for challenging what is and initiating new, more critical, and honest understandings
of the world, then we must imagine what this looks like in White settings. Principals in
communities without Black students are tasked to imagine a different public sphere where
schools can begin to recognize their role in creating racial equality (A. E. Lewis, 2001). A.E.
Lewis (2001) stated that until one can recognize what is racial about our lived experiences, we

19
will not make progress toward undoing the effects of race in our lives. Essentially, when White
schools do not address race, nothing changes. The status quo, stereotypes, and hegemonic
practices remain intact, as does racism.
There are many different leadership approaches and styles to which one can relate and
adapt. Northouse (2019) described various leadership styles: transformational, authentic, servant,
and adaptive. After careful consideration of the work I would be performing, I resonated most
with Heifetz et al. (2009) and adaptive leadership as the right approach. The reason being, the
work of unearthing unconscious biases is challenging and not technical in nature, thus requiring
an adaptative leadership style. However, given that adaptive leadership can itself by colorblind, I
also included anti-racist to this leadership approach to emphasize my attention when acting as an
anti-racist adaptive leader. My definition of an anti-racist adaptive leader was a leader who
ensures that his/her everyday actions are taken from an anti-racist stance. Moreover, this leader
has a constant awareness of who benefits from his/her decisions and who does not and is willing
to do the hard work to make changes. In Figure 1, anti-racist adaptive leadership is represented
with “Self” because it was what I proposed to enact to support the principals’ development of
color consciousness. To be clear, I did not explicitly teach the principals the components of
adaptive leadership through this action research study given that the short-term goal was to
develop their color consciousness and begin formulating a plan to ultimately enact with teachers,
nor did I expect that they would be anti-racist leaders by the time this study was completed. A
long-term goal, beyond the scope of our time together, was for the principals to lead change as
anti-racist adaptive leaders while working with their teachers. However, since this was not
expected to be achieved during our time together, it was not included for learners in my
conceptual framework visual. I willingly made myself available to the principals after the study

20
in case they wanted further guidance on working with teachers and staff. In the sections that
follow, I will flesh out the key tenets of adaptive leadership.
Adaptive Leadership
Adaptive leadership helps others do the work they need to do to adapt to the challenges
they face. As stated above, different types of challenges may exist at a school site, such as
adaptive challenges and technical challenges. The work that I set out to accomplish, i.e., color
consciousness among principals to work towards institutional change for racial equity, would be
identified as an adaptive challenge. Adaptive challenges are central to the process of adaptive
leadership. They are characterized as problems or challenges that are not easy to identify and
cannot be solved solely by the leader’s authority or expertise. Heifetz et al. (2009) claimed that
the only way to address adaptive challenges is through changes in people’s beliefs, priorities,
habits, and loyalties. On the other hand, technical challenges are clearly defined problems, with
known solutions that can be implemented through organizational procedures. As stated
previously, my work surrounding racial equity and my adaptive leadership revolved around this
unique form of leadership that focused on the dynamic of mobilizing people to address change
(Northouse, 2019).
Northouse (2019) explained that an adaptive leader challenges others to face complex
challenges while providing them with the space they need to learn new ways of dealing with
changes in beliefs, attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors that they are likely to encounter.
Specifically, adaptive leadership is about change that enables the capacity to thrive (Heifetz et
al., 2009). To accomplish this goal, adaptive leaders are focused on helping others do work they
need to accomplish, but they do not do the work for them. This approach was appropriate for this
action research study because it prepares and encourages people to deal with changes and

21
stresses the activities that the leader enacts to support the followers’ work (Northouse, 2019).
Northouse described six leader behaviors that explain traits of adaptive leaders:
1. Getting on the balcony, which involves stepping out of conflict and finding
perspective in challenging situations. By being on the balcony, one is above looking
down to see the entire picture;
2. Identifying adaptive and technical challenges. Adaptive challenges are gaps between
espoused values and behaviors, competing commitments, elephants in the room
(problems people don’t want to address), and people avoiding work;
3. Regulating distress, which involves helping others recognize the need for change
while at the same time not being overwhelmed by it. To do this, the leader must
create a safe atmosphere; provide direction, protections, and norms; and regulate their
own distress while keeping those around them productive;
4. Maintaining disciplined attention, which requires encouraging people to focus on the
challenging task at hand;
5. Giving work back to people and not do the work for them or micromanage them; and
6. Protecting leadership voices from below and considering voices from all sides, even
the ones who are not on your side.
Out of the six behaviors, I remained focused on three in particular throughout my action
research study. First, there was an understanding phase which required me to get on the balcony.
By engaging in this process, I hoped to understand what was happening at school sites and with
principals and their schools concerning school climate, curriculum, pedagogy, and professional
learning opportunities. By standing on the balcony (Leader behavior 1), I was able to see the big
picture and how issues related to and affected one another. This work of getting on the balcony

22
to see the entire picture with an anti-racist adaptive leadership lens was painful in discovering the
multiple ways in which structures, systems, policies, and people have been complicit in racist
practices. Next, for some individuals, there is a sense of security in being told what to do and
how to do it (Northouse, 2019); this is especially true with instrumental knowers. However, my
goal was not to have principals dependent on me; it was for them to learn actions that they could
take to succeed in the enactment of anti-racist practices (Leader behavior 5). As Northouse
(2019) stated, leaders may need to say, “This is your work. How do you want to handle it?”
Finally, throughout the process, I encouraged others to keep going, and I helped regulate their
emotions when they felt frustration, distress, shame, or confusion (Leader behavior 3). This
behavior of regulating distress involved supporting principals in understanding that certain levels
of distress are both expected and unavoidable, but too much distress is counterproductive and
can be debilitating.
As an adaptive leader, Northouse (2019) stated that the leader must monitor the stress
people are experiencing and keep it within a productive range. Specific examples provided by
Northouse include: (a) providing direction so there is a sense of clarity; (b) protection in
monitoring if the change is too much or too fast; (c) orientation in helping others find their
identity within the changing system; and (d) establishing productive norms that are rules of
behaviors. By going through this process myself in moving from colorblindness to color
consciousness, I was able to anticipate potential distress that principals may encounter such as
denial, confusion, and disbelief. Knowing this, I moved slowly in the process, giving principals
time to reflect, ask questions, and think about each topic before moving onto the next step.
Wergin (2019) stated that often times we over focus on the role of cognition and downplay the
role emotions play in how we learn and change. However, paying attention to the role of

23
emotions cannot be overlooked. Wergin (2019) stated the role of emotions are part of the
learning process and can be a force for deep learning. As well, it can be a barrier when one
discovers information counter to his/her beliefs, which means one must be cautious in finding the
right balance to allow for just enough discomfort with the status quo to be able to reflect on what
is going on and try something new (Wergin, 2019). Adaptive leadership requires challenging
expectations and finding a way to disappoint people without pushing them completely over the
edge (Heifetz et al., 2009).
The work in which I engaged with the principals pushed me into a place of encouraging,
empowering, and leading them to explore new values while also providing a supportive
environment when faced with challenging situations. All of the leadership behaviors that I
strived to enact by engaging in this work were the same leadership behaviors principals would
ultimately need in order to build capacity among their teachers and staff. The reason modeling
was important was because it was my hope that the principals would eventually lead change as
an anti-racist adaptive leader. Although, I did not expect this to occur in our short time together,
as my findings will later indicate, there was some evidence of principals beginning to enact anti-
racist leadership behaviors.
We need anti-racist leaders who are developing anti-racist institutions, and anti-racist
institutions that continue to go through the process of renewing direction, structure, and
capabilities (Welton et al., 2018). Currently, we are embedded within a system of White racism
and privilege, and anti-racist leaders must be equipped to confront race and racism wherever it
exists (Brooks, 2012; Gooden & O’Doherty, 2015; Young & Laible, 2000). White administrators
need to model for their White teachers, staff, and students what it looks like to misstep, learn,
make amends, and start again with a commitment to do better next time (Stoll, 2019). School

24
leaders may claim an anti-racist stance, but they may be challenged by stakeholders who want to
maintain the status quo and uphold Whiteness (McMahon, 2007). Within my conceptual
framework, I represented institutional change for racial equity as a long-term outcome because it
was the ultimate goal, which I theorized would occur only when school site leaders develop color
consciousness and then work to dismantle the culture of Whiteness that favored White people
through curriculum, policies, and pedagogy. As Kendi (2019) stated, “To be an anti-racist is a
radical choice in the face of history, requiring a radical reorientation of our consciousness” (p.
23). My framework outlined this change in a different color, because this long-term goal within
the organization takes time that exceeded the amount allotted for this action research dissertation.
Brooks and Arnold (2009) claimed that change can be painfully slow, especially when
administrators address social justice issues in relatively conservative political environments. In
addition, achieving the change needed for racial equity in education is difficult because it calls
into question the norms, practices, and routines that may be the cause of the racial inequities
(Welton et al., 2018). Knowing this, school leaders who are concerned about educational
inequities should be thinking about how students are socialized in school settings by
interrogating educational policies and practices (Brooks & Arnold, 2013) and planning for anti-
racist leadership practices that will disrupt these practices.
Diem and Welton (2021) offered the following recommendations for educational leaders:
(a) promote youth voice in educational policy and practice. Young people are often more willing
to speak out against racial injustices than adults; (b) hire more educators of color; and (c) address
not just unconscious bias but also anti-blackness. This involves having ongoing and honest
discussions regarding the prevalence of anti-blackness in schools. Khalifa (2018) emphasized the
importance of leaders who:

25
1. Embrace inclusionary school spaces that encompass epistemologies, behaviors, and
artifacts. This counters direct exclusionary practices such as suspensions, detention,
zero-tolerance policies, use of law enforcement, and allowing students to miss class
without repercussion;
2. Are vigilant in ensuring student behaviors are not attached to identity. When leaders
punish minoritized cultural behaviors while normalizing White behaviors, they are
assaulting community-based indigenous identities;
3. Use school resources to build funds of knowledge. Leaders provide opportunities for
students and families to share their life experiences in a safe, non-exploitative way;
4. Redirect teachers into learning student identity and cultural capital. This involves
developing teachers into being more culturally responsive and having a more positive
and accurate understanding of students and communities; and
5. Mentor and model inclusiveness and identity confluence. This encompasses daily
interactions with students and parents, how students are described in staff meetings
and on documents, how students are referred to programs, and who is punished or
humanized in school.
Khalifa (2018) claimed that school leaders should place equity and cultural
responsiveness at the center of student learning, and one way to accomplish this is via
professional learning communicates (PLCs). Strategies that Khalifa shared to achieve this goal
are:
1. Connect all PLC learnings to cultural responsiveness. This includes driving questions
that have language about cultural responsiveness;

26
2. Include collective and individual responsibility in PLC discussions. This requires
teachers to accept responsibility for the treatments, successes, and failures of students.
To do this, school leaders must first address whether teachers have culturally
responsive instruction and content;
3. Include community-based people and perspectives in PLC discussions; and
4. Use data to center equity in decision making. Stoll and Louis (2007) stated that
teachers must share and critically interrogate their practice in an ongoing, reflective,
collaborative, inclusive, learning-oriented, growth-promoting way.
As a school leader who is committed to equity, one may question how or where to begin
because there are so many needs. Stoll (2019) has proclaimed that one must begin with a
fundamental understanding of equity that is non-negotiable in the following ways: (a) equity
should never be an “add-on;” it must be the foundations of everything we do; (b) there is no
“opting out” when it comes to performing equity work in education; and (c) building coalitions
with other equity minded people is essential. Stoll has also stated that educators must be prepared
to not always get it “right” when it comes to racism and White privilege.
Brooks and Arnold (2009) wondered how, without a school administration committed to
social justice and equity issues, teachers can sustain their innovative practices that may run
counter to what the literature describes as best practices. They argued that teachers cannot
succeed without systematic instructional support and authentic professional learning surrounding
race, power, and privilege issues. A socially just leader is required. One must embed professional
development in a way that makes sense of race, class, gender, sexuality, and disability
(Theoharis, 2009). In addition, Brooks et al. (2008) claimed that school leaders must act when
they identify inequity because they are able to influence equitable practices, and their proactive

27
involvement is imperative. Principals must always be conscious that they have considerable
administrative privilege; if they are not mindful of this, they will be unresponsive to and
oppressive toward community perspectives and needs (Khalifa, 2018). Leaders must ensure their
everyday actions are taken from an anti-racist stance and have a constant awareness of their
decisions, who benefits, and who does not. Everyday anti-racism considers how all individuals
combat racism in their everyday lives and lived contexts (Aquino, 2016; Pollock, 2008). Young
and Laible (2000) asserted that learning to be an anti-racist leader is a lifelong process, and
educators must recognize how their racial identity influences their leadership. Leaders who are
successful at building an institutional culture of change focus more on the big picture and are
conceptual thinkers who transform the organization through collaboration and people (Fullan,
2001). This takes time for leaders to communicate the vision effectively, build relationships and
trust, and empower others to do the work necessary for change (Fullan, 2001). Knowing this, my
role within this action research, as shown in my conceptual framework, was to first bring
awareness to principals of anti-racist leadership practices and help them plan to make lasting
systemic changes. In order to bring an awareness to principals, I started by creating a brave space
that allowed for open conversations on color consciousness and unconscious bias. In addition,
critical reflection discussion questions were brought in throughout our time together, which I will
discuss further in the methods section.
As a leader working in a predominantly White school district, a challenge that I faced
was bringing forth color consciousness and ensuring principals were aware that simply being
neutral was not enough and could even be harmful. Khalifa (2018) asserted that school leaders
who remained neutral by claiming that they did not initiate the system or have intentions that are
oppressive are both complicit in continuing unjust practices and active reproducers of such

28
practices. According to Kendi (2019), “The most threatening racist movement is not the alt
right’s unlikely drive for a White ethnostate but the regular American’s drive for a race-neutral
one.” (p. 20) Perry (2008) discussed the need for creating safe spaces in predominantly White
classrooms as White teachers are often oblivious to the painful and alienating effects that White-
dominated classrooms can have on students of color. Many of these spaces operate as race
neutral rather than race specific which creates an exclusionary environment (Perry, 2008). White
teachers need to be open in considering how classroom interactions that feel ordinary and
harmless to them can be experienced by students of color as exclusionary and ostracizing. In
predominantly White schools, student learning cannot benefit from diversity when educators do
not see race as an essential difference that has historically and in the present shaped lived
experiences. If race does not matter, the message is sent that there cannot be inequity, privilege,
or oppression based on race, and therefore Whiteness does not exist and not a problem worth
changing (Castagno, 2013). This neutral mindset is dangerous because it encourages teachers to
perpetuate the status quo. The process of acknowledging and naming racism is an integral step in
attempting to dismantle something so pervasive in education (Welton et al., 2018). White
teachers in predominantly White classrooms must stay open to students of color to learn when
their behaviors unintentionally make their students feel uncomfortable or afraid (Perry, 2008).
Education that is critical, multicultural, and focused on social justice cannot be reserved for
students of color (A.E. Lewis, 2001). Teachers have an obligation to teach students about the
reality of racial inequity and their role in its reproduction. As site leaders, school principals are
responsible for teaching teachers strategies to support safe and transformative spaces in the
classroom.

29
Color Consciousness
My anti-racist adaptive leadership is followed in the conceptual framework by color
consciousness because it was through my leadership actions described in my conceptual
framework that I sought to bring about color consciousness in the principals I supported. The
arrows go both ways because leadership and color consciousness are not related in a hierarchal
sense; rather, I was going back and forth from one to the other throughout the research study
with the goal of enacting anti-racist leadership practices. Adaptive leadership centers on
adaptations required in response to changing environments and how leaders can best support
learners during these changes (Northouse, 2019). Knowing this, I offered support surrounding
color consciousness by engaging in discussions on critical reflection, unconscious bias, and anti-
racist practices while also learning from my participants during this change. As a leader, I hoped
to change in the process as well. The changes that I wanted to have occur within myself were: (a)
always keeping race at the center of conservations and to acknowledging race plays a role in
everything; (b) actively questioning why things were being done the way they were and
considering who benefited from the actions, policy, or curriculum; (c) speaking up and
challenging policy, practices, or curriculum that benefit the status quo; and (d) ensuring a full
and representative story was taught in our curriculum (Raskin et al., 2021). With the changes in
myself as a leader, I was increasingly better positioned to move principals to a color conscious
mindset.
The process of moving principals to this mindset required a component of transformative
learning. Mezirow (2000) referred to transformative learning as a process by which we transform
our taken for granted frames of reference to make them more inclusive, open to change, and
reflective so that they may create beliefs and opinions that will prove truer to guide our actions.

30
Mezirow defined frames of reference as the result of ways in which we have interpreted
experiences, which could be either within or outside of our awareness. Often times these
references can represent learning that has been assimilated by culture or personal learning
experiences. My leadership required probing more into one’s frame of reference, by asking
critical reflection questions, which in turn led to a critical examination into one’s assumptions.
The notion behind fostering greater autonomy in thinking is a goal for adult educators and
achieving greater autonomy in thinking is a product of transformative learning. Doing so
involves acquiring more of an understanding to become aware of one’s interpretations and
beliefs, the ability to be critically reflective of assumptions, the capacity to participate in
discourse to find common meaning and validate beliefs, and an ability to act on the results of the
reflective learning process. Creating the learning conditions necessary for this transformation are
key to allowing transformative learning to occur, which is why I focused on creating a brave
space for this action research study.
Safe spaces and brave spaces sound similar but hold nuanced and important differences,
and my goal was to foster a brave space for principals. Arao and Clemens (2103) described safe
spaces as settings that are free from harm, risk, discomfort, or difficulty. Additionally, they
argued that learning about concepts connected to social justice requires risk, difficulties, and
controversies associated with safety. In other words, “safe” spaces will not allow space to discuss
and interrogate social inequities that by their very nature, cause harm to people. In contrast, a
brace space recognizes that talking about race and racism requires courage and places the
emphasis on creating conditions to encourage bravery. Within my conceptual framework, change
occurred throughout these brave space discussions on color consciousness, unconscious bias, and
anti-racist adaptive leadership. However, as a leader, I took time with my participants to clearly

31
define what a brave space meant, how we could set norms to establish a brave space during the
action research time together, and how cultivating a brave space applied within the work in
which we were engaging.
When we fail to address race, we fail to address our students’ needs (Pollock, 2004).
Although there are educators who continue to ignore race, much like I did when confronted with
my family’s experiences and subsequent teaching that race shouldn’t matter, educators reside in
a system in which race structures how schools operate along with the outcomes of schooling
(Ladson-Billings, 2005). There is a dominant influence of colorblind leadership that enables
White leaders to remain neutral regarding issues of race in their school and engage in political
blindness (Brooks & Arnold, 2013). School leaders are the ones who translate federal policies
into state policies and practices, into district policies and practices, and into local school policies
and practices for teachers, staff, and students (Briscoe, 2006). When this approach is blinded by
language such as “All children can learn” or “I don’t see race,” our leaders are engaging in
unethical and insidious forms of misleadership (Brooks, 2012). Talking about race belongs as
much or more in White school settings as it does in a racially diverse, multicultural school (A.E.
Lewis, 2001). However, Whites try very hard not to see color and therefore not hear race-related
information (Sleeter, 2001). In addition to not talking about race or seeing color, another act is
that of being colormute, which is a purposeful silencing of race-related words (Pollock, 2004).
Tatum (1997, 2007) claimed that White students were often silent because they were afraid of
their own ignorance and afraid that their limited experience with Black people may lead them to
saying something that could possibly be offensive or seen as naïve. However, students are not
the only ones who do this; adults do so as well. White people often speak in a kind of racial code
using communication patterns with each other that encourage White racial bonding. This act of

32
deleting race words and using racial code reproduces racial inequalities (Castagno, 2008), and it
is crucial to learn to navigate the act of race talk and colormuteness (Pollock, 2004).
Controversies over teaching race and racism are highly relevant today. As of March
2022, seven states had banned the teaching of critical race theory (CRT) and at least 16 states
were moving through the state legislature or are in process of implementing school policies to
forbid school policies of teaching CRT (World Population Review, 2022). Critics of CRT argue
that schools are indoctrinating students in harmful theory while accusing all White Americans of
being racist (Sawchuk, 2021). Kendi (2021) has proclaimed that Republican operatives have
buried the actual definition of CRT. Attacks are targeting CRT with made up definitions stating
that every White person is a racist. One senator stated that it teaches that certain children are
inherently bad because of the color of their skin. The backlash, weaponizing mis- and dis-
information, that has recently erupted across the nation for teaching about race and racism only
illuminate just how much we need conversations and lessons centered on race, but also how far
we have to go.
In predominantly White schools, colorblindness and colormuteness often works for and
to the advantage of White students. Silence is golden within a White framework in which the
status quo is desirable and beneficial, but silence is highly problematic within a framework of
equity in which social justice and fairness are sought (Castagno, 2008). Within acts of silencing,
students are learning to recognize rules about what can and cannot be acknowledged in public
(Polite & Saenger, 2003). However, my aim with principals was to empower them to take on the
challenging task of having conversations with teachers about race and racism, and ultimately to
dismantle Whiteness and hegemonic practices in their school contexts. By failing to explain how
racism operates within our schools, educational inequity is often left to be understood because of

33
individual deficits (Gillborn, 2005). Picower (2021) asserted that for centuries, students of color
have sat in classrooms without ever seeing their culture, history, or language and that the love of
history has only been presented to students as the White man’s visions, dreams, and
contributions. It’s no wonder we see inequitable educational outcomes.
Khalifa (2018) proclaimed that teachers are scared to be considered racist as a result of
saying the wrong thing; as a result, principals must start from a place of conscious vulnerability
when working with their staff. Principals, as well, are often starting from this same place of
vulnerability. Part of being an anti-racist adaptive leader requires modeling expected behaviors
and actions, as well as managing their distress. Teel and Obidah (2008) explained that color
conscious people understand that race matters, racism exists, and issues around race and racism
affect schooling. To teach for racial equity, it is imperative to understand the nature of race and
racism and how they can affect teaching and learning (Hollins & Guzman, 2005). Teachers need
to receive an education that will combine critical investigations of Whiteness, race, and equity
with a component that will address discomfort, guilt, and embarrassment (Castagno, 2013).
Bonilla-Silva (2018) identified four central colorblind themes expressed by White
respondents: abstract liberalism, naturalization, cultural racism, and minimization of racism. The
frame of abstract liberalism involves using ideas associated with political liberalism and
economic liberalism. Abstract liberalism ignores the fact that people of color are severely
underrepresented in good jobs and schools. In addition, this frame ignores the institutional
practices behind segregation and practices that have consequences for minoritized individuals.
The naturalization frame allows Whites to explain racial phenomena by suggesting that they are
natural occurrences. For example, living in an all-White neighborhood or having only White
friends is natural and simply the way things are rather than recognizing the long-term segregation

34
effects of national housing policy, such as redlining. Cultural racism relies on culturally based
arguments of differential outcomes. Holding these cultural views protects and defends the racial
status quo. The fourth and final frame is minimization of racism, which suggests that
discrimination is no longer a central factor affecting minorities’ life chances. For example, one
will think or say, “It is better now than in the past,” or “There are plenty of jobs out there.” This
is a highly dangerous frame because Bonilla-Silva (2018) suggested that it allows Whites to
accept facts such as racially motivated events and accuse minorities as being hypersensitive or
using race as an excuse. Whites often use these frames in combination and not in a pure form. By
being colorblind, one can only continue to reproduce dangerous hegemonic practices. In
education, where we are leading future generations, it is imperative to see color and have a color
conscious mindset. This is especially true for school site leaders who, without intentionally
pushing against these frames, might unconsciously model them for their staff.
Dyson (1997) argued that Whiteness is an identity, ideology, and institution. This
ideology serves as “a form of social amnesia” that permits White people to ignore the ways in
which we are implicated in maintaining systems of privilege and oppression (McLaren, 1998).
Fine et al. (1997) contended that Whiteness is produced through the exclusion and denial of
opportunities to people of color and institutional leadership along with race-neutral policies to
ensure White privilege continues. Colorblind perspectives in White schools are far too common
and even more so damaging. Colorblindness refers to the reluctance to discuss or acknowledge
race, the avoidance of race, and a minimizing of the role that race plays in our everyday lives
(Bonilla-Silva, 2010; Delgado & Stefancic, 2001; Frankenberg, 1993; Gotanda, 1995; Haney-
Lopez, 2007; Pollock, 2004). Many colorblind teachers strive to create a culture in their
classrooms where race is irrelevant (Castagno, 2013). All too often teachers want to reflect an

35
age-appropriate happy world to children where no one was enslaved, no one was beaten, no
families were separated, and White people never hurt anyone (Picower, 2021). This lack of color
consciousness along with false stories, which uphold White supremacy, are problematic because,
as Frankenberg (1993) noted, colorblindness preserves power structures and denies the lived
experiences of other people. Furthermore, students cannot benefit from diversity when educators
do not see race as a significant category of difference. Colorblindness protects Whiteness by
maintaining the belief that race does not matter, and if race does not matter, then there cannot be
inequity, privilege, or oppression (Castagno, 2013). Stating that one does not see color distorts
the education that students receive and denies the notion that children of different races and
cultural backgrounds may function differently in school (Schofield, 2006) and are often
consciously or unconsciously treated differently, resulting in differential outcomes. This
colorblind approach perpetuates the White image of Blacks by rendering discussions about race
irrelevant, placing the burden of need for change on Black people (Aleinikoff, 1991). I focused
on principals in my framework instead of teachers because I saw my role as working with
principals to develop their capacity in becoming more color conscious and supporting future
anti-racist practices as a result of the learning that took place from this action research study. In
order for that to happen, principals needed to have a color conscious lens when entering
classrooms and view curriculum through this lens so that they could eventually have
conversations and enact change to disrupt the colorblind classroom.
Colorblind Curriculum in Predominantly White Schools
Schools process not only people, but also knowledge as well (Apple, 2018). Before
addressing the ways in which curriculum is colorblind, I want to provide a working
understanding of the meaning of curriculum because definitions vary among practitioners.

36
Young (2014) asserted that curricula are “social facts,” which are structures that constrain not
only the activities of those involved but also those who design it. They make things possible to
learn while at the same time setting limits on what is possible to learn. Milner (2010) defined
curriculum as what students have the opportunity to learn in educational contexts. Eisner (1985)
presented the notion that schools simultaneously present three curriculums: the formal, the
hidden, and the null. The formal curriculum is that which is planned and guided by the schools
with attempts to achieve certain ends with the students. The hidden curriculum refers to the
unintended learning, which can be understood as the transmission of norms, values, and beliefs
conveyed in formal education and informal interactions. While my focus was on ensuring the
principals could identify the colorblind curricula in their schools, and I didn’t get to examine the
complexity of the hidden curriculum, it’s important to situate the meaning of this concept. The
how can also be the classroom environment materials and messages seen on walls and posters
throughout the campus. The null curriculum is that which is excluded. The curriculum that is
intentionally or unintentionally not taught conveys the message to students that these elements
are not important. Given the varying definitions of curriculum, I contend that curriculum
represents the what (formal, contextual knowledge and the null) and the how it is being taught
through the values and norms one holds.
In White-dominant contexts, curriculum is characterized in a way that overrepresents
White perspectives and instruction that privileges White ways of knowing (Borsheim-Black &
Sarigianides, 2019). Although the argument may be that the responsibility lies with the teacher to
be aware of this, I contend that school principals should have an awareness of instructional
Whiteness that is being represented (and the lack of color) in the classroom so they can properly
engage in discussions with staff as to the appropriateness of the what and the how curriculum is

37
being taught. It is all too common for White teachers to draw on familiar White narratives to
understand race, which is harmful because it misses the structural dimensions of race that are not
often associated with White ethnicity. These narratives center and normalize Whiteness while
promoting race colorblindness (Sleeter, 2001). Furthermore, what teachers select to teach often
represents their ways of thinking about race and how they have been socialized to understand
difference through their families, the media, and the broader dominant culture (Picower, 2021).
Studies that have been conducted over the span of a decade have documented that none of the
most commonly taught texts feature main characters of color or by authors of color (Borsheim-
Black & Sarigianides, 2019). This traditional curriculum, which is endorsed and institutionalized
by schools continues to position literature as White and White racial perspectives as central and
neutral (Borsheim-Black & Sarigianides, 2019). As stated by Endicott and Mukherjee (1992),
If only Shakespeare, Milton, or Dickens are taught as classics, if only Western music is
regarded as classical, if only the “discovery” version of Columbus’ voyage to the
Americas is promoted, if only one teaching/learning style is permitted, if only one accent
is considered acceptable, then an exclusionary environment is created (p. 15).
An exclusionary environment is not acceptable or in students’ best interest. Campbell and
Wirtenberg (1980) conducted a review of literature on the impact of multicultural books on
children’s attitudes and achievement. One finding they noted was that the use of readers that
portrayed Blacks in a positive way or materials about Black history not only enhanced the
attitudes Black students had about themselves but also yielded an improvement in White
students’ attitude toward Blacks, which included White students thinking all races were equal
while also making children less likely to exclude members of other racial groups.

38
Kailin (2002) stated that anti-racist education involves deliberately challenging racist
structures within our curriculum and instruction, including the literature presented in classrooms.
According to A.E. Lewis (2001), uncovering the implicit and explicit racial lessons taught and
learned in schools involves studying the curriculum and the explicit discourse and implicit logic
that shape such practices. As White people tend to categorize only explicit hate crimes or racial
slurs as racist, often times other manifestations are left unrecognized as Whiteness is masked by
seemingly caring White teachers who are actually perpetuating racism in their curriculum
(Picower, 2021). Principals must intentionally study both what teachers do and what they say
(Bonilla-Silva & Forman, 2000; B. Lewis, 1998). Doing so requires paying attention to the
multiple ways racial boundaries get produced and reproduced (A.E. Lewis, 2001).
As a principal, one must understand the differences between anti-racist/critical
multicultural education and traditional multicultural education. Multicultural education has
become a term to indicate something with diversity and equality in educational settings, but fails
to challenge Whiteness (Castagno, 2013). Castagno (2013) emphasized that there is extensive
interest in multicultural education, but it reflects an important iteration of Whiteness: namely,
that multicultural education protects teachers from being perceived as racist or uncaring and
redirects the responsibility for change elsewhere. However, because dismantling racial inequities
requires systemic change, Whiteness remains protected. An anti-racist/critical multicultural
education emphasizes the importance of investigating institutionalized racism in the classroom,
school, and society. Schools must be recognized as institutions responsible for challenging what
is; initiating a new, more critical, and honest understanding of the world; and trying to imagine
what this looks like, especially in White settings (A.E. Lewis, 2001).

39
Apple (2018) asserted that issues surrounding the knowledge taught in schools,
specifically what is considered legitimate knowledge, are of no small moment in becoming
aware of the school’s political, economic, and cultural position. Questions about the selective
tradition—such as, Whose knowledge is it? Who selected it? Why is it taught this way?—are
essential ones that must be asked but are only small parts of uncovering the link to the power and
knowledge made available (and not made available) to students. As stated by Picower (2021),
rather than using education as a vehicle to create a more equitable society, teachers whose
understanding of race are unexamined, either purposefully or unconsciously, use curriculum as a
mechanism to indoctrinate the next generation with the same racist beliefs.
Moving from colorblindness to color consciousness in curriculum is possible, and
Pollock (2008) suggested that it is helpful to understand the concept of everyday antiracism.
Pollock defined this concept as follows; “everyday antiracism requires both addressing people’s
experiences in the world as racial group members and refusing to distort people’s experiences,
thoughts, or abilities by seeing them only or falsely through a racial lens.” (p. xix) Education
leaders must learn when to call attention to race in order to address an injustice and when not to
call attention to race because doing so would perpetuate an injustice (Stoll, 2019). Stoll (2019)
argued that knowing when to do this requires a level of skill that must be constructed through
relationship-building with students of color and their families, personal and professional
development, and ample critical self-reflection.
Cheng and Soudack (1994) provided examples of changes that school leaders
implemented to address the structural barriers that have created inequity in education in the past.
Some examples were: (a) modifying the learning environment to communicate a message that all
students are valued which was reflected in photos and posters representing diverse backgrounds;

40
(b) removing materials that are biased while increasing the literature collection to reflect more
diversity; and (c) encouraging teachers to incorporate diverse perspectives into all curriculum
and highlight the contributions of various minority groups. Leaders must uncover colorblind
curricular practices to implement change because if schools continue to remain passive and do
nothing to intervene, they are perpetuating racial bias in society.
When principals put on their color conscious lens as anti-racist adaptive leaders, they
must consider the following key facets of curriculum: (a) examine issues of power and equality
and deep-seated problems related to unequal power distribution; (b) develop critical thinking
through recognizing stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination; (c) incorporate positive attitudes
and respect for differences; (d) affirm racial and cultural differences throughout the year;
(e) incorporate different viewpoint with the history, experiences, and cultural values of all;
(f) include contributions of both males and females from all racial and ethnic backgrounds; and
(g) bolster self-esteem in ethnic minority students (Cheng & Soudack, 1994).
One role I played in this action research study was to help principals discover the reality
of racial inequality in their school’s curriculum and their role in its reproduction. What I wanted
principals to begin to understand was the different forms of racism and how racism was
reproduced in classrooms through colorblind curriculum. My goal was for principals to walk into
classrooms with a color conscious lens to discover what was being taught (and not taught) and
how it was being done. Beyond this recognition, I wanted principals to make an action plan that
consisted of disrupting the status quo with an anti-racist adaptive leadership lens by engaging in
conversations with staff that may incorporate some of the strategies and facets noted previously
by Cheng and Soudack (1994).

41
Whites who grew up in a racially homogenous setting often do not know how race works
or how their lives are racialized (A.E. Lewis, 2001). The outcome that will then manifest in a
predominantly White setting is that students will become dependent upon stereotypes and other
racist assumptions (Willis, 1996), carrying those ideas on to their future lives. Education requires
a more critical multicultural curriculum and instruction that will produce students who can think
critically about their world and endeavor to serve the larger goal of changing that world. Until
we can recognize what is still racial about our lived experiences, we will not be able to make
progress toward undoing the effects of racism in our lives (A.E. Lewis, 2001).
Unconscious Bias
Unconscious biases persist and are powerful determinants of behavior because people
lack awareness of them and they can emerge despite our conscious, non-prejudiced intentions
(Devine et al., 2012). Research on unconscious bias supports the position that all individuals
have internalized racial biases and prejudices (Dovidio et al., 2002). These biases may be
resistant to change because they are unconscious and often manifest in subtle ways such as
microaggressions (Torino, 2015). Sue (2013) claimed most White people believe they are non-
racist, and the idea of developing self-awareness of one’s bias can be a threatening thought for
many Whites. Fiarman (2016) proclaimed that our biases can influence us even when they
oppose our espoused beliefs. That is because they are unconscious; we are not aware of them or
the ways in which they influence our behavior.
Building awareness around unconscious bias and recognizing its effects are the first steps
to take before addressing it in our practice. One must take concrete steps to ensure all decisions
are made with rational consideration of facts rather than under the influence of biases (Fiarman,
2016). I contend that the strategies identified subsequently are all ones that a principal could

42
implement with teachers and staff to support them in their ongoing quest to strengthen
recognition around unconscious bias and build toward color consciousness and ultimately anti-
racist practice. Fiarman (2016) offered the following strategies: (a) increase awareness: this
requires letting staff know that their biases are not deliberate and we can increase awareness by
talking about it and normalizing it; (b) name race/color: school leaders can model an honest
exchange and ask someone about their thinking by asking a question that names race such as
“Would this decision be different if the family/child were of a different race or background?” or
“Would we have the same decision if the student was White?” Tatum (2008) asserted that when
White educators name race or bias, it indicates the person may be aware of their prejudices.
Additionally, Welton et al. (2018) stated that recognizing and naming racism is an integral step
to dismantling something so prevalent to education. The other strategies Fiarman (2016)
suggested were for leaders to (c) anticipate situations in which our bias may alter our behavior
and create systems to reduce it; (d) build empathy and replace negative associations with positive
ones; and (e) hold themselves accountable by examining patterns they see in data along racial,
gender, and other potential lines of bias. By taking the time to disaggregate and examine student
data, we can see if we are more effective with some groups than others and discuss what we need
to change in our practice to make us effective with all students. Ultimately, we must actively
recognize these unwanted, deep-rooted beliefs and limit their influences on us (Fiarman, 2016).
Khalifa (2018) identified certain leadership behaviors that foster culturally responsive
curricula. Although not all of these occurred within the 12-week action research, my plan was to
support principals after the study was over by offering guidance and slowly bringing in more of
these practices to their school sites. The practices in which I engaged and that I have described
are not inclusive of all applicable practices; rather, they reflect a small piece of something much

43
larger and greater. However, knowing I only had 12 weeks, I made the most of the time with my
participants. Some anti-racist leadership actions that foster culturally responsive curricula
include: (a) connecting all professional learning communities (PLCs) to cultural responsiveness;
(b) including collective and individual responsibility in PLC discussions where teachers
collectively accept responsibility for the treatment, success, and failures of students;
(c) including community-based people and perspectives in PLC discussions; (d) using data
(equity audits) to center equity in decision making; (e) ensuring that teacher evaluations are
explicit about equity and cultural responsiveness; (f) hiring school staff from a variety of
communities; and (g) developing teacher capacity for culturally responsive curricula and
pedagogy by including cultural responsiveness in professional development, collaborative
walkthroughs, training teachers to see gaps in behavior and data, and modeling culturally
responsive behaviors. Khalifa argued that these actions positively affect student learning, self-
esteem, academic success, and sense of belonging in school. In addition, they allow teachers to
feel a sense of empowerment and efficacy, which leads to better performance.
Brookfield (2017) stated that the uncovering of assumptions about race and racism is one
of the most challenging critically reflective projects, particularly for Whites who are not yet used
to seeing themselves as racial beings. As Sue (2010) stated, many White individuals have never
thought about what it means to be White. However, critically reflective leadership seeks to
uncover assumptions about power and hegemony that inform one’s practice and should be a
consistent and regular practice. Although developing principals’ color consciousness is a short-
term goal, as outlined in my conceptual framework, I contend that being aware of race and
racism in our schools and society is just the first step. Sustained attention is necessary to reach
the long-term goal of institutional change for equity.

44
Critical Reflection
From the literature, we know that educators’ unconscious biases can impede their
teaching and leadership, even though they may profess a value for diversity and inclusiveness
(Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). As such, it has been argued that engaging in critical
self-reflection supports the personal growth of leaders and unearths their personal biases,
assumptions, and values that stem from their cultural backgrounds (Khalifa et al., 2016). Critical
reflection, then, can serve as a mechanism to arrive at color consciousness because critical
reflection is all about discovering the assumptions that frame our judgments and actions
(Brookfield, 2017). As such, critical reflection is included in Figure 1 as the connecting concept
between my adaptive leadership practice and the short-term goal of principals arriving at color
consciousness.
Principals and educators who are critically reflective and concerned about equity and
social justice issues that arise inside and outside of the classroom seek to connect their practices
to democratic ideals (Larrivee, 2008). Engaging in critical reflection takes time, patience, and
commitment. In addition, in order for critical reflection to happen, the atmosphere must be a safe
and trusting one in which people feel they will not suffer adverse consequences when disclosing
private errors and unpopular assumptions (Brookfield, 2017). Within the context of institutions,
critical self-reflection must be embedded in the horizontal and vertical structures of the school,
including observations, walk-throughs, agendas, memos, employment decisions, and policies
(Khalifa, 2018). By making critical self-reflection the first step in the process, and an ongoing
process at that, school leaders were presented with opportunities to recognize and discover how
their institutions and practices have been oppressive to minoritized students (Khalifa, 2018).

45
Reflection becomes critical when it is focused on understanding power and hegemony
(Brookfield, 2017).
What Is Critical Reflection?
Critical reflection has two distinct purposes, according to Brookfield (2017). The first one
is illuminating power, which involves questioning the assumptions held about the way power
dynamics operate in classrooms, programs, and schools. The second purpose is uncovering
hegemony, which consists of pushing back on practices and assumptions that are hegemonic by
changing some structures and altering others. Jay and Johnson (2002) developed a typology of
reflection that compares three different types of reflection: descriptive, comparative, and critical.
Descriptive reflection is the first dimension that determines the matter on which to reflect. It asks
questions such as, “What is happening?” or, “Is this working and for whom?” The next
dimension in this typology is comparative. In this type of reflection, one thinks about reflection
from several different frames or perspectives. While in this stage, one may seek to understand a
point of view that is incongruent with one’s own. This involves asking questions such as, “What
are alternative views of what is happening?” or, “What does the research contribute to an
understanding of this matter?” Last, the third dimension in the typology is critical reflection. This
type of reflection involves taking a broader historical, socio-political, and moral context of
schooling (Valli, 1990). By considering these contexts with a broader lens, people can see
themselves as agents of change who can understand what is and work to create what should be.
Questions one might ask are, “Given these various alternatives, their implications, and my own
morals and ethics, which is best for this?” or, “How does this reflective process inform and
renew my perspective?” Critical reflection is not a final destination; it involves a constant
returning to one’s own understandings (Jay & Johnson, 2002). With this in mind, critical

46
reflection is shown in my conceptual framework as touching the arrow going between the self
and the learner and the arrow leading to institutional change for racial equity. This has been done
intentionally to illuminate the idea that critical reflection is ongoing and throughout the entire
process, it is something in which both my learners and I were engaging.
Brookfield (2017) claimed, and I agree, that critical reflection is not a remedial tool but
rather a stance of permanent inquiry. One must work consistently and actively to uncover
assumptions, biases, systems of power, and systems of oppression. By engaging in critical
reflection centered on power and hegemony, one improves one’s chances of taking informed
actions that can be explained, justified, and communicated clearly to colleagues. My conceptual
framework prioritized critical reflection to show that it is not a step in a process but rather
ongoing and connected to all parts. Critical reflection is an iterative, life-long process. Rodgers
(2002) stated that educators can slow down, learn to see, and learn to be present in students’
learning by engaging in a reflective cycle. Within my leadership capacity, I wanted to engage
principals to reflect on their own positionalities to help uncover their own unconscious bias,
enabling them to “see” in more nuanced ways. When they walk into a classroom, they should
reflect on practices that are reproducing hegemonic beliefs and visions so that they can work to
uncover and dismantle them. Until school leaders can reflect on their viewpoints regarding
practices that may perpetuate inequities along with race and ethnicity, they are not ready to
engage actively in conversations with other staff members about practices that are systematically
unjust and unethical. School leaders can change others’ mindsets only to the extent to which they
can change their own mindsets first (Brooks & Arnold, 2013).

47
Modeling Critical Reflection in Schools
Critical reflection on a school site may occur in different capacities, but principals are
responsible for modeling, mentoring, advocating, and advancing these practices. Modeling
critical reflection involves principals being explicit regarding their own efforts to check their
assumptions, especially those that involve institutional power (Brookfield, 2017). This might
sound like a principal rethinking an assumption or sharing a comment or event that led them to
rethink a former belief. Principals must model for teachers that critical reflection is something
they value and practice. Brookfield (2017) asserted that a central tenet of modeling reflection is
that one must earn the right to ask colleagues to think critically about their practice because not
everyone will share the same enthusiasm regarding its importance. To skip the modeling of the
process is an error; one must be sure to place emphasis on disclosing one’s racist inclinations,
instincts, and microaggressions before asking any staff members to do so. Engaging in a
reflective practice that engages our critical consciousness probes to a deeper level and seeks to
challenge the standard meanings underlying our habitual responses (Raelin, 2001).
On a school campus, an example that a leader might consider would be to embed critical
reflection into staff meetings. Brookfield (2017) stated that by introducing a few simple meeting
protocols, leaders can make meetings more responsive, democratic, and consequential, and thus
encourage critical reflection. An example Brookfield provided was utilizing activities such as the
circle of voices. This activity ensures all voices are heard early on, limits a premature consensus
from emerging, prepares people to truly listen without speaking, and stops one person from
dominating the conversation. Raelin (2001) offered several reasons why critical reflection in
public can enhance learning. Two examples are: (a) it helps us move from unawareness to
awareness. Often times it is from support and feedback of others that we can become receptive to

48
alternative ways of reasoning and behaving. Additionally, (b) we may have errors in our
perceptions of reality because we are biased in how we obtain information. If we are interested in
improving our perception, we must become aware of these judgment errors; we can often do so
with the involvement of peers who can detect the assumptions and biases one holds. Throughout
my action research, I engaged in public reflection with principals in the study so that I could
model how they may go about doing this with their staff.
Benefits of Critical Reflection
Benefits of critical reflection include helping one take informed actions, developing a
rationale for practice, helping one to avoid self-laceration, and increasing trust (Brookfield,
2017). As I worked with principals, my own process of critical reflection played a central role in
modeling expectations, teaching how to engage in the process, and helping them understand the
need to incorporate this practice regularly. Personally, I engaged in ongoing critical reflection to
understand more about my power, positionality, and biases that I hold within my role as a
Director in Educational Services and as a longstanding White member of the community. This
reflection helped me be more alert to dominant ideology in the educational processes and
decisions. As Brookfield stated, critically reflective leadership practices require us to critique the
misuse of power we see around us as well as own our own abuses.
As important as reflecting and engaging in conversations about race is, these alone will
not produce solutions (Brookfield, 2017). As Brookfield (2017) noted, it is important to examine
race and racism to understand its complexity, in addition to gaining a deeper understanding of
how racism operates both structurally and systemically. Just as racist practices and perceptions
have been learned, it is important to know that they can be challenged, and new behaviors can be
learned, which were outlined above under anti-racist leadership practices.

49
Summary
Within this section, I presented a visual representation of and explained my conceptual
framework, drawing on the literature to support my theory of change. In other words, I explained
my process and the concepts of importance in my action research dissertation. My framework
was based on anti-racist adaptive leadership, color consciousness, and critical reflection. The
goal of this “transforming action” was to “create a new situation, one which makes possible the
pursuit of a fuller humanity.” (Freire, 2000a, p. 47) As represented in my framework, I worked
throughout this action research to understand the principals’ ways of knowing in which both my
learners and I were situated, with the lens focused on equity. This was accomplished throughout
the actions that have been discussed in this section, including critical reflection. While in this
process, understanding my learners’ ways of knowing was vital because it had implications for
how they oriented to and understood diversity and what it means to teach or lead for social
justice (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). It also helped to inform my actions, because
I needed to meet them where they were developmentally.
Conscious or unconscious, intended or unintended, racism is one of the largest barriers to
equitable schools in this country, and courageous conversations must be had (Skrla et al., 2009).
Passionate leaders are unrelenting in transforming beliefs and practices to promote learning for
all and create access for students who have been historically marginalized (Brooks & Arnold,
2013). By the end of this action research study, it was my goal to cultivate passionate leaders
who, through critical reflection and my adaptive leadership support, understood the need for
change and wanted to join me on the journey of being a change agent in their respective spheres
of influence.

50
Research Methods
The research methods section of this dissertation explains the actions I took and
illustrates the qualitative approach used within my action research study to systematically
examine those actions. The purpose of this study was for me, an Educational Director, to learn
how to best support principals in my predominantly White district to strengthen their anti-racist
leadership knowledge so that they could begin to think about changes they would ultimately
enact. Because this was an action research dissertation, I studied those actions in order to inform
further “intelligent action” (Rodgers, 2002). Specifically, I wanted principals to have a color
conscious lens when entering classrooms and view curriculum through this lens so that they
could eventually have conversations and enact change that would disrupt the colorblind
classroom.
As outlined within my conceptual framework, I focused my actions on engaging as an
anti-racist adaptive leader in order to bring forth a color conscious mindset for principals so that
they could begin to recognize the ways in which curriculum reproduces the status quo, which, as
I argued previously, reflects the White dominant narrative. Principals were selected as the focus
in this study because they are the ones who hire teachers, evaluate performance and teaching,
and are often times in charge of leading staff professional developments. Raskin et al. (2021)
stated that we must be dedicated to developing principals who value impactful mindsets, beliefs,
and instruction. Principals too often enter schools and follow old methods that are ineffective and
sometimes harmful. Seashore Louis et al. (2010) claimed that the greatest impact on learning
comes first from teachers and second from principals, and because of this, principals are
challenged to know what works best for kids. Within this methods section, I explain my process
in developing principals while also developing myself as an adaptive leader. I also detail how I

51
choose the participants (principals) for this study, where the actions occurred, and how I
collected and analyzed data on the actions. This section also includes ways I worked to increase
the credibility and trustworthiness of this study, how I ensured ethical research practice, and
what limitations and delimitations existed as a result of the study design.
Participants and Settings
My dissertation research occurred at my participants’ school sites and during online
meetings via Zoom. I engaged in purposeful sampling for this action research dissertation. I
selected purposeful sampling over other forms of sampling because this approach is based on the
assumption that the researcher wants to discover and gain insight from a specific subgroup of
people who have rich information to provide and from whom the most can be learned (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). Using this approach ensured that I was working with the right principals and
able to collect relevant information related to my action research study, as reflected in my
conceptual framework.
Participants
In this study, I engaged with school principals in the district in which I work. Given the
intense and reflective nature of this action research work and my role as a Director, I
purposefully chose two principals with whom to participate based on willingness and interest in
this action research study. Additionally, because this was my first-time supporting principals to
uncover their unconscious biases using critical reflection and to encourage them to engage in
anti-racist leadership practices in a predominantly White community, I used purposeful sampling
to select principals who were likely to want to continue this work beyond the study itself. Part of
purposeful sampling includes finding participants who will provide information-rich cases,
because one can learn a great deal about issues of importance to the purpose of inquiry (Merriam

52
& Tisdell, 2016). By purposefully selecting Elizabeth and Diane, I felt as though I would gather
rich information relative to my study. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) discussed this approach,
which they call criterion-based selection, as one in which the researcher must decide what
attributes of the sample are crucial and then find the relevant people. In addition to a willingness
to participate, I wanted participants in the study to have a connection and friendship to each other
and with me, which we did in fact have. As noted in the actions section, presented subsequently,
group meetings would be used to support principals to develop color consciousness, so having
principals who already got along made this work more logistically possible. This was also
important because I wanted them to have someone, other than me, available for support and
encouragement after the study concluded. In order to preserve the participants’ confidentiality, I
have provided limited information about their personal, social identities. I engaged with two
principals during this study, Elizabeth and Diane. Both are heterosexual, cisgender females who
have been in the school district for over 5 years.
As I presented in my conceptual framework, Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano
(2017) explained four ways of knowing in adulthood: instrumental, socializing, self-authoring,
and self-transforming. Based on the data from my first interview with Elizabeth, I would classify
her as a self-authoring knower at the time of writing this. Elizabeth revealed that she was deeply
driven by her values and standards for teaching, leading, and social justice. In addition, Elizabeth
viewed conflict as a natural part of advocacy and leadership. On the other hand, based on
information I collected at the time of this study, I considered Diane an instrumental knower.
Diane tended to orient to concrete rules and right ways of performing. Ladson-Billings (2014)
stated that this type of knower has limited and superficial notions of culturally relevant
pedagogy. However, according to Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano, from an instrumental

53
knower’s perspective, it is helpful to remember that they lead for social justice when they
highlight the right books, structures, and curriculum. The challenge was to help the educators see
beyond the confines of their practice, perspective, and meaning making.
Picower (2009) asserted that life experiences often times influenced ones understanding
of race and difference. My participants, Elizabeth and Diane, had vastly different childhood
experiences. As Elizabeth stated, “When I was a child, I kicked cans around for play and thought
that was great.” Diane, on the other hand, grew up in a wealthier White neighborhood and was
afforded luxuries that Elizabeth was not, such as access and opportunities to enrich her
educational experiences along with two parents who identified as White.
Knowing who my participants were and where they fell in the typology of knowers
helped me to better understand my role and reminded me to have grace and compassion in
recognizing that change may be a gradual process. By creating safe, brave, and collaborative
spaces for sharing and exploring our truths, one can begin to effect change in our schools,
society, and selves (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017). It was my desire to work with
these two principals to engage in ongoing and meaningful dialogue. bell hooks (1994) stated that
dialogue is one of the simplest ways we can begin as teachers, scholars, and critical
thinkers to cross boundaries, the barriers that may or may not be erected by race, gender,
class, professional standing, and a host of other differences. (p. 130)
Setting of Actions
I worked with the principals one-on-one at their school site for the interviews and walk-
through and together via Zoom for the joint meetings. Principals zoomed from their office at
their respective school sites, and I zoomed from my office. By asking principals to embark on
this journey with me, I wanted to be considerate of the time and demands I asked of them, and I

54
tried to accommodate them as much as possible. I suggested having meetings in person but was
informed that staying remote would work better for both principals. In addition, I also offered an
off-campus location as an alternative option if my participants felt more comfortable discussing
topics off their site but both principals were comfortable remaining at their school site. Each
weekend, before a new session, I would send a “Find Time” poll (Figure 2) to the principals,
which included various time options to for them to select for our weekly meeting. Within the
poll, I was able to embed our online meeting link, and once our time was confirmed, the link and
session date and time would synch to everyone’s work calendar. Because principals have very
demanding and irregular schedules, it was not possible for us to have a reoccurring time each
week and using this allowed each member to have a say in when our session would be held. I let
the principals know that if none of my suggested times worked, they could email me alternative
times that worked for them.

55
Figure 2
Find Time Screen Shot for Principal Meeting Scheduling

Because I was also part of this process, my actions for reflections and journaling occurred
both at home and in the office at the end of the workday. In addition, I utilized time throughout
the weekend to review and deepen my reflections and journaling. I wanted to document my
actions as close to the time of interactions/dialogue as possible to enable detailed descriptive
reflections. In order to conduct research in my district, our normal practices require one to get a
proposal review approved. The deputy superintendent, to whom I report directly, was the
gatekeeper (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007), and permitted me to conduct my action research study
once I had received approval from USC’s Institutional Review Board.

56
Actions
The proposed actions within my study were developed so principals could strengthen
their anti-racist leadership knowledge and begin planning for changes they could ultimately enact
(as demonstrated in my conceptual framework marked “change” under “color consciousness and
plans for anti-racist leadership practice”). The actions were also intended to help me grow as an
anti-racist adaptive leader who was working towards centering race within every conversation
and speaking up against curriculum, policies, and practices that reproduce the status quo, thus
benefiting White power structures.
Critical reflections were key components within the actions proposed for both my
participants and me. During the study, for my participants, I had critical reflection questions
based on where we were in terms of which cycle we were in and what the content was during
that cycle. For instance, if we were in the unconscious bias cycle, there would be critical
reflection questions centered on unconscious bias and leadership. For myself, I engaged in more
open-ended critical reflections than my participants and I focused my reflections on connecting
to my role as an adaptive leader; what progress I felt I made; and how my positionality,
experiences, and assumptions played roles. When I was out of the field and analyzing data, I
used these reflections to adapt the next steps I created for my participants, making any necessary
mid-course corrections to inform the next cycle of action.
Additionally, the actions timeline and information presented subsequently detail how I
prepared for the action research, and then worked with the principals over a total of six group
meetings and two, one-on-one meeting to introduce and apply the concepts of (a) unconscious
bias, unearthed through critical reflection; and (b) curriculum color consciousness through an
anti-racist leadership lens. Each of the sessions lasted for approximately 60 minutes, yielding a

57
total of approximately 10 hours of observational data. The table below also includes the time
when I paused from fieldwork to conduct in-the-field analyses, which helped inform changes to
the next cycle. However, Appendix A illustrates a more comprehensive draft plan I created prior
to starting this action research project that includes several of the discussion and reflection
questions used to guide our time together. In addition, in the more exhaustive plan, the data
sources are listed that supported me to evaluate my progress in achieving my outcomes. These
data sources were used to conduct in-the-field analysis.

Table 1
Action Research Timeline
Cycle 1 Cycle 2
One on one interview
Action researcher critical reflection
Group discussion to differentiate
colorblindness and color consciousness
Action researcher critical reflection
Group discussion to construct meaning of
curriculum, color conscious, and anti-racist
leadership.
Creating a brave space
Action researcher critical reflection
Group discussion to identify the ways in
which Whiteness dominates curriculum
Action researcher critical reflection
Group discussion on positionality and critical
reflection
Action researcher critical reflection
One on one walk through to examine
curriculum with a color conscious lens
Action researcher critical reflection
Principal critical reflection
Group discussion on unconscious bias
Action researcher critical reflection
Principal critical reflection
Group discussion to discuss enactment plan
and walk-through observations
Member check
Action researcher critical reflection
End of Cycle 1
Action researcher critical reflection
In the field analysis
End of Cycle 2
Out of the field analysis

58
Data Collection and Instruments/Protocols
This qualitative action research dissertation relied on collecting observational data about
my actions and interactions with principals, interviews with principals, and critical reflections
from both myself and the principals involved in this study. This section will explain more
explicitly how I collected the data listed in the previously presented actions table and what
instruments/protocols I used.
Documents and Artifacts
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) explained benefits of including documents to help the
researcher uncover meaning, develop understanding, and discover insights relevant to the
research problem. As an insider action researcher, data generation often comes through the active
involvement in the day-to-day processes relating to the action researcher (Coghlan, 2019).
Although documents and artifacts could include those that already exist in a setting as well as
those generated by the researcher for the purposes of the study, in this study, I focused on
documents that were generated by both participants and me. As the action researcher I produced
critical reflections, interview transcripts, and field notes from my discussions in group and one-
on-one meetings with the principals. The principals who were engaging in this action research
study with me also generated critical reflection response answers.
Brookfield (2017) explained that practicing critically reflective leadership involves
constantly inquiring into the assumptions underlying the way leadership is exercised. In addition,
Brookfield stated that critically reflective leadership seeks to uncover assumptions of power and
hegemony that inform one’s leadership practice by viewing the practice through the lens of the
followers’ eye, colleagues’ perceptions, theory, and personal experience. The followers are the
ones who report to you. The followers must feel as though they can share their perspective

59
honestly without retribution. The colleagues’ perceptions bring into account the fact that the
higher you rise in ranks, the possibility for peer support goes down. By theory, this means that
literature is filled with ideas that connect leadership to critical reflection. Finally, personal
experience is the most abundant lens for uncovering assumptions of power and hegemony.
Within this action research, the lens focused on the most was the personal experience lens.
I engaged in reflections at least once a week while I was in the field, which amounted to a
total of nine. Although my intention was to write critical reflections each week, as I looked
through them, some were more aligned with what Jay and Johnson (2002) described as
descriptive and comparative. Nonetheless, each of the reflections I generated through the course
of my action research study helped to serve as a tool for me to examine my role as an anti-racist
adaptive leader. My participants engaged with one critical reflection response question set per
cycle, which meant they each had a total of two by the end of the action research, for a total of
four across the two principals. After discussing unconscious bias, the principals were asked to
consider how their identity played a role in the results of their implicit bias test. In addition, they
were asked to consider who was disadvantaged/advantaged at their school when considering
their unconscious bias. While discussing the ways in which Whiteness dominates the literature
curriculum, principals were asked to reflect on the ways in which they have allowed partial
perspectives to be implanted through the curriculum.
Interviews
In many forms of qualitative research, some and occasionally all of the data are collected
through interviews (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As Patton (2016) explained, “The purpose of
interviewing is to allow us to enter into another person’s perspective.” I used one semi-structured
interview with each of the two principals in this action research study (see Appendix B for the

60
interview protocol). I selected this interview style because it gave me more flexibility to follow
predetermined questions and also enabled me to follow up with more open-ended clarifying
questions (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). The interviews were conducted in individual face-to-face
meetings with the participants at their respective school site. Dexter (2006) stated that an
interview is a person-to-person conversation with a purpose. The primary purpose of an
interview is to obtain a special kind of information (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). By using the
interview, I was able to get an overall understanding of my participants and a better idea of how
they saw the world and where they were situated on the ways of knowing typology (Drago-
Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017) in regard to equity in practice. In other words, the two
interviews conducted for this study did not serve to gather data about progress they made
towards color consciousness, but to inform my own anti-racist adaptive leadership behaviors in
ways that would best support them.
To be fully present with what was being said to me during the interview, I asked my
participants if they felt comfortable with me using an audio recording device. Because both were
comfortable, I used an audio recording device because this practice ensures that everything said
is preserved for analysis. In addition, I took handwritten notes during the interview to record my
reactions, signal the importance of something said, or pace the interview (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Because this was a semi-structured interview, any clarifying questions that came up
during our conversations were written down so I could remember to ask them again at a later
time.
Robinson and Leonard (2018) discussed social desirability bias, which can make
respondents hesitant to tell the truth about any behaviors or attitudes that others could perceive as
negative or unflattering. Although I was not able to control what participants said to me when

61
interviewing, I was able to standardize my instructions beforehand and share with participants
the intention of the interview, encouraging them to be honest, especially, when it made them feel
vulnerable. I assured them that their answers were confidential and were in no way for me to
judge. I did this by reminding participants that I was not coming from a place of judgment but
rather a place to learn more about how they view the world.
Observations
Observations differ from interviews because observations take place in the setting where
the phenomenon of interest naturally occurs, and observations represent a firsthand encounter
with the phenomenon of interest (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Merriam and Tisdell (2016)
explained that field notes are a written account of an observation. The field notes from this study
came from the group discussion meetings and observations that took place at the school site. Due
to the fact that the meetings were held via Zoom, I asked for permission to record the sessions so
that I could watch them again and take notes while I did so. Unlike the permission granted during
the interviews, this time one participant stated, “I do not love the idea, but if it helps you, then
fine.” Based upon this comment and not wanting any participant to feel that they were pressured
into something they were not fully comfortable with, I said that it was not going to be necessary,
and I did not record the sessions. Not having the Zoom translate or recording as a viable option, I
took comprehensive handwritten notes while we were in the remote session. After I took notes, I
went home and typed up more complete narratives as soon as I could so that all information was
fresh in my head. Bogdan and Biklen (2007) stated that the more time that lapses between
observations and field notes, the poorer your recall will be and the less likely you will be to
record the data. All write ups were done the same night as the meetings but after work hours.

62
Having thorough field notes was extremely important to me because it led to an easier time in the
data analysis process, which is the next portion discussed.
Data Analysis
According to Bogdan and Biklen (2007), data analysis is the process of systematically
searching and arranging interview transcripts, field notes, and other materials that you
accumulate to enable you to come up with your findings. Novice researchers should utilize
strategies from analysis in the field while leaving more formal analysis and interpretation until
most of the data has been collected. Each cycle of this action research involved constructing,
planning action, taking action, and evaluating (Coghlan, 2019). Coghlan (2019) emphasized the
importance of being attentive, intelligent, reasonable, and responsible to both the action as it
unfolds and the theory as it emerges.
Throughout the data analysis process, I engaged in the “evaluating” phase. I reflected on
the actions that I implemented during each session and at the conclusion of the first cycle. Those
reflections were written as analytic memos, as suggested by Bogdan and Biklen (2007). Analytic
memos are more than reports of data, they tie together different pieces of data into a recognizable
cluster often to show that the data are instances of a general concept (Miles et al., 2014).
Furthermore, I questioned whether my actions were addressing my theory of change and I looked
for evidence to demonstrate if I was successful in making progress toward my desired outcomes.
This involved rereading my critical reflections in the study or rereading field notes from group
discussions to see if principals understood the objectives I was trying to accomplish and what
evidence demonstrated this. If I was unable to find evidence that my objective was being met, I
needed to reevaluate and replan the next cycle or session.

63
Additionally, I journaled my actions, thoughts, and experiences most often in forms of
jottings. A jotting holds the researcher’s momentary and developing reflections and commentary
on issues that emerge during fieldwork and data analysis (Miles et al., 2014). By looking through
my jottings, I was beginning to see if I could compose statements that would capture my intent
regarding what I was trying to find out in my research and whether I was making progress to that
end. In particular, I thought about and reflected on my preunderstandings to check myself on my
assumptions about principals and their practice. Coghlan (2019) described preunderstandings as
both explicit and tacit knowledge. Although Coghlan (2019) examined advantages of having this
insider action knowledge, such as knowing the culture and informal structures, there are also
possible disadvantages such as internalizing and assuming more than one should.
As this was an action research study, data was analyzed immediately as it helped inform
and guide my next steps as a leader. Part of this process required me to stop and reflect on my
preunderstanding and look for evidence to ensure I was not making assumptions. This required
asking myself, “What does the data say?” If I could not find evidence, I needed to recognize that
I was possibly making an assumption and then make determinations about how I wanted to
proceed in the following session. While engaging with the data, I also looked through
observational field notes to see what I found or did not find. As Bogdan and Biklen stated (2007)
one must continuously ask, “What is it that I do not know yet?”
Throughout this action research, my conceptual framework guided my study and was
used to inform a priori codes. Once the action research was completed, data were coded using
thematic analysis. I used both a priori codes drawn from my conceptual framework as well as
emergent codes that were identified inductively. I developed and organized my codebook by
themes I discovered, which included: principal barriers, needs, emotions, and moves. For myself,

64
I organized my themes by anti-racist adaptive leader behaviors, emotions, and practices. In my
codebook, I included my definition for each, at least one example, and its typicality in my data
corpus. I used the typicality to lead me into the themes for my findings section.
As stated by Miles et al. (2014), coding is more than a filing system, and every project
needs a systematic way to store coded field data and a way to retrieve them easily for analysis.
Corbin and Strauss (2008) recommended for the researcher to think of coding as mining the data
and digging beneath the surface to discover the gold within data. However, in order to discover
the hidden treasures, one must use analytic tools to stimulate the analytic process and help one
better understand the data. Knowing the importance of using analytic tools, I adopted the
following steps in my action research dissertation: asking questions, drawing upon personal
experiences, waving the red flag, and looking at emotions that are expressed. By asking
questions, one must probe, develop provisional answers, think outside the box, and become
acquainted with data. In addition, asking questions helps when the researcher is blocked and
having trouble getting started with the analysis. Within this action research, I did share a
common culture with my participants and had similar life experiences. Because of this, Corbin
and Strauss (2008) suggested using this connection as a comparative case to stimulate thinking
about various properties and dimensions of concepts, as well as to allow other possibilities of
meaning to arise. Waving the red flag involved recognizing both my own and my participants’
biases, assumptions, and beliefs throughout the analysis. Also, it is important to remember that
hearing the words “always” and “never” should raise a red flag. Finally, Corbin and Strauss
(2008) informed about the importance of not overlooking emotions because they are part of the
context and often follow and/or are associated with action or inaction. While coding was an

65
important part of understanding the data, also significant were understanding the limitations and
delimitations I faced within this action research study.
Limitations and Delimitations
There were both limitations and delimitations within this action research dissertation that
I will address within this section. To begin with, time was a limitation because I was bound to
complete two action cycles within a 3-month period. Due to the transient nature of being in the
field, I was limited to how often I could construct, engage, plan, act, and evaluate (Coghlan,
2019). As a result of this particular limitation, I was not able to address the full spectrum of anti-
racist adaptive leadership or all the components of a curriculum color conscious lens I had set out
to. This study is only the tip of the iceberg and there is much more that needs to be uncovered,
discussed, and changed. Another limitation that I faced during the action research process was
with the time commitment I asked of my participants. At the time of the writing of this
dissertation, we were still in the midst of an unprecedented pandemic caused by a virus known as
COVID-19. COVID-19 has wreaked havoc in education since the pandemic started in March
2020. The role of a school principal drastically shifted from site leadership to COVID manager,
health clerk, COVID screener, contract tracer, and COVID protocol enforcer. Site principals are
balancing more now than ever before, and I wanted to be flexible and accommodating to their
needs while still ensuring I was making personal progress with my action research at the same
time. While the idea of using Zoom is an incredible resource and a testament to 21
st
century
tools, it served as a limitation for this study. Given that all three of us were in our own offices
during the workday, there was not one session that went uninterrupted. At any given time, our
session was interrupted by someone entering the office with a question, need, or concern. At

66
times, it was hard to feel fully present knowing an interruption could occur at any time. Despite
the limitations, we persevered the best we could.
In addition, the participants’ willingness to be honest was another potential limitation.
Given that I played a part in this self-study action research, I asked principals to discuss and
answer questions about my role in this process. Because of my position at the district level, the
fact that I am perceived to be more senior by some, and because of our friendship, my
participants may not have been abundantly honest when answering direct questions about my
leadership within this action research study.
A delimitation of my study was my decision to focus on school principals rather than
teachers, parents, or instructional coaches, which at one time were all considered. I selected
principals amongst others, because I felt that was where I could make the most change. By
working with two principals who oversee 20–40 staff members, they can, if they see fit, spread
their knowledge and enact change to all of those on campus. The research has shown that leaders
influence classroom outcomes in two ways: (a) leadership practices that directly influence
teaching and learning, and (b) activities that indirectly influence practice by creating
organizational conditions in the school that are conductive to positive change (Darling-
Hammond et al., 2009). Although the choice in principals was purposeful, it is a delimitation
because other voices are not reflected.
Another delimitation was related to the principals I selected for this action research study,
which was no easy choice. One participant, with whom I was planning to formally ask and had
engaged in conversations to prepare her for this, suddenly resigned the same week that I received
my IRB approval. Fortunately, for me, we had not yet started any sessions. The challenging part
was explaining my study to another principal who I felt would be a meaningful participant and

67
getting her to agree amidst all the stress and chaos of leading during a pandemic. I, again, had to
consider who would benefit from this process, learn from it, and hopefully continue the work
beyond the scope of this study. Although I think there are more than those whom I selected that
would have benefited to have been part of this study, it is my hope to continue this work with
more as time goes on. As a beginner to action research and being a part of this self-study, I was
also a delimiter because I was bound to this study but also learning along the
way. Distinguishing the limitations and delimitations was a critical piece as it supported my
decisions, such as selecting principals; however, to bring a greater awareness about the study
necessitates examining and naming the credibility and trustworthiness of the study, which will be
discussed next.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Biases live within each of us and acknowledging and confronting them will lead to a
research study that promotes credibility and trustworthiness. It is critical to name the biases and
monitor them concerning the conceptual framework and make explicit how they may shape the
collection and interpretation of data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Coghlan (2019) discussed the
concept that attention to experience, understanding, and judgment, which leads to action,
provides a methodology through which one can affirm what and how one wants to know. To
accomplish this goal, one must do so using a critical realist approach that will challenge one to
transcend one’s subjectivity through the quality of how they are attentive to the data, intelligent
in their understanding, reasonable in judgments, and responsible for actions (Coghlan, 2007). I,
too, brought my biases to the study and intentionally worked to name them and be aware of them
throughout the study. Coghlan (2019) mentioned the notion of preunderstanding, which refers to
the knowledge and insight that one has from experiences with being an insider researcher. As

68
mentioned previously, I have been a part of this district in different capacities for much of my
life. However, by being an insider, I cannot assume to fully know the organization because there
is much that one may have internalized or become unaware of over time. I purposefully strove to
be critically conscious in avoiding cognitive bias, i.e., interpreting incoming information to
confirm existing beliefs, expectations, and values while ignoring disconfirming signals (Bolman
& Deal, 2017). The critical conscious piece was often reflected in my critical reflections and also
this occurred during public reflection in the EDUE 725 class with Dr. Julie Slayton. Engaging in
the act of public reflection forced me to examine my beliefs that I entered the study with and
made me reevaluate the lens I was seeing through.
As a practitioner-scholar who wholeheartedly attempts to be credible and trustworthy, I
worked hard to keep myself grounded in relevant and authentic literature to inform my actions
along with engaging in data collection until it became saturated with hearing and seeing the same
thing (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Throughout this study, I deliberately attempted to discipline
my “insider” subjectivity and preunderstandings by questioning my data through asking
questions such as how am I interrogating my positionality, power dynamics, and prior
knowledge in relation to my learners and my study?
Freire (2000a) argued that dialogue is an act of love, humility, and faith in humanity.
Dialogue is more than communication; its foundation rests upon mutual trust, risk-taking to be
vulnerable, and critical thinking about the topic of discussion. Within my design choice, I
engaged in conversations with colleagues, which may have made them feel insecure, exposed,
and possibly ashamed. Even though I have a built-in relationship with the two principals chosen
as participants, discussing anti-racist practices can be difficult. Due to the delicate nature of the
study, participants may not have answered with complete truthfulness. Although I anticipated it

69
and worked to nurture the conditions to get it by creating a brave space, I cannot verify that what
was said was absolute. In addition, the voices heard in the study are essential to recognize, along
with the voices not heard. My design choice was limited to principals, and thus the voices of
teachers, staff, parents, community, and students were not represented in this study. In other
words, I will not be triangulating sources. The authenticity then rests with those in positions of
power in the educational setting because the only voices being represented are principals.
Herr and Anderson (2015) argued that due to the unique differences in action research, it
should not be judged by the same quality or validity criteria as other types of research. They
offered five validity criteria as an invitation to other action researchers to sustain a dialogue
regarding issues across the continuum of action research. The five types of validity criteria and
their goals of action research by Herr and Anderson (2015) are (a) outcome validity: the
achievement of action-oriented outcomes; (b) dialogic and process validity: the generation of
new knowledge; (c) catalytic validity: the education of both researcher and participants; (d)
democratic validity-results that are relevant to the local setting; and (e) process validity: a sound
and appropriate research methodology. Within my action research study, there was a need to be
informed by catalytic validity where both the participants and I had to be open to reorienting our
views of reality along with our roles. Herr and Anderson (2015) stated that the most powerful
action research studies are the ones in which the research recounts a spiraling change in their
own and their participants’ understandings.
Both bias and subjectivity are natural in action research as long as they are critically
examined rather than ignored, although other mechanisms may need to be in place to ensure they
do not have distorting effects on the outcomes (Herr & Anderson, 2015). Merriam and Tisdell
(2016) described triangulation as using multiple sources of data means and comparing and cross

70
checking the data collected and also claimed it to be a powerful strategy for increasing the
credibility of one’s research. I engaged in triangulation through my use of observations,
interviews, and documents.
Ethics
By approaching those that I not only knew but also called friends to solicit participation, I
felt there may have been a sense of pressure to engage with me on this action research
dissertation. I feared participants saying “yes” in order to help me versus understanding the way
this could also help them. Coghlan (2019) and Glesne (2011) discussed the role of conducting
research with a friend and the challenges it may present. For example, it may be difficult to
critique a friend or stand back and question assumptions that have been left unquestioned
previously. As a result, Coghlan (2019) stated one must work more consciously and explicitly
throughout the process in the quest for authenticity. Additionally, Glesne (2011) stated that
participants may share thoughts with me as a friend, not as a researcher, and thus not expect that
it will be recorded as data.
In addition, my role as a director in educational services could make one feel it was to
their benefit to help me, because I directly report to the deputy superintendent, who holds great
power. While I do not directly supervise the principals, being a leader at the district level could
be coercive to the principals I approached for this action research study. I was honest and
forthcoming with my potential participants to ensure that they wanted to be in the study because
no investigator has the right to use a human participant unless the individual agrees to it after
being adequately informed about the nature and purpose of the study (Locke et al., 2010). I was
extra cautious in the process by ensuring potential participants in my study had sufficient
information about the process before allowing them to agree. One thing that I did before having

71
principals agree was to share with them my Google classroom that I set up for this study. In the
Google classroom, they could get an idea about what our discussion topics were and how much
time was going to be required from them. I also assured the principals that I would preserve their
confidentiality by changing their names along with other identifying characteristics, such as their
school site, when writing the dissertation (Glesne, 2011).
According to Sefa Dei (2005), there are risks involved in pursuing anti-racist research,
and there is no end to the constantly emerging questions about ethics and the ethicality of anti-
oppression research. Based on the sensitive nature of this study, it was likely that the participants
would feel a sense of vulnerability in being part of the process. Participants may have felt
uncomfortable when examining parts of themselves that are hard to see, especially if they
thought this information could be disseminated to colleagues in the district. As a researcher, it
was my responsibility not to place participants in any oppressive or dominating situations or
distribute knowledge that could cause injury or undue harm to communities and social groups.
By remembering my role as an anti-racist adaptive leader in this self-study action research, I
engaged in practices to minimize any situation that could cause undue injury or harm. In the
quest to talk openly about racism and principals’ colorblind mindsets, which could be an
emotional and uncomfortable experience, I continuously monitored my participants to look for
signs, such as prolonged silence, tensed up body language, or looking away, indicating that I
needed to slow down, take a break, or adjust an activity.
There was a chance that ethical dilemmas would be presented when analyzing the data,
such as hearing negative racist perceptions from those with whom I work or that the multiple
methods of data collection not showing consistency (e.g., an interview may tell me one thing and
an artifact may demonstrate another). Throughout the data analysis, I remembered that what was

72
being investigated were people’s constructions of reality and how they have come to understand
specific processes (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
In addition, my ethical practice played a significant role in the dissemination of my
findings. The trustworthiness of the data was tied directly to the trustworthiness of those who
collected and analyzed the data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). However, because I was researching
where I grew up, where I worked, and where I lived, I needed to consider and be thoughtful
about how the manuscript could affect both the individuals and the community (Glesne, 2011).
This required carefully selecting what went into this final dissertation product and ensuring the
truth was represented but also ensuring that the truth did not harm either. One way I achieved
this was before publishing results, I allowed research participants to read, observe, and engage
with the findings before going to a broader public (Glesne, 2011). Knowing my participants and
because I wanted them to feel comfortable, I offered this to both principals in the study and both
engaged in this process.
Findings
My research question examined the following: How do I support school principals in my
predominantly White district to develop color consciousness to support future anti-racist
practices? Within this section, I will share what I discovered during this action research study by
focusing on two different categories. First, I will discuss my accomplishments and the ways in
which my learners, the principals, grew and what my role was throughout the process. Second, I
will discuss the ways in which I grew and what I learned about myself and my leadership
throughout this action research process.

73
Principal Growth 1: Recognizing Change Is Possible Within One’s Sphere of Influence
The principals involved in my action research study grew in recognizing that they can
make changes within their spheres of influence at their school site. As my research question was
aimed at supporting school principals in my predominantly White district to develop color
consciousness to support future anti-racist practices, I supported principals by taking this abstract
concept of anti-racist practices and presented into smaller, more manageable, and doable pieces.
When we began our time together, many barriers to enacting change were expressed as reasons
preventing change from taking place. Table 2 identifiers identifies the barriers expressed by
principals throughout our group sessions and interviews.

74
Table 2
Principal Barriers
Code Definition Occurrence
Expert Principal mentions not feeling like an expert getting in the
way of enacting anti-racist practices.
9
Power Principal mentions lack of higher-level leadership being a
barrier in enacting anti-racist practices.
7
Training Principal mentions not having training which creates a barrier
to being an anti-racist leader.
6
Curriculum
outdated
Principal mentions how the current district adopted
curriculum is outdated.
5
Curriculum
control
Principal mentions how curriculum choices are beyond their
control.
3
Time Principal mentions the need for more time with teachers to
support their anti-racist practices.
3
Parent Principal mentions that parent pushback is a barrier to
enacting anti-racist practices.
3
Conversations Principal mentions potential challenges with having fierce
conversations.
2

Of these barriers, the most common two were not feeling expert enough on issues of race
and racism and not being the one in a position of power. This section will discuss the first
perceived barrier of not feeling expert enough to enact anti-racist leadership. In an initial

75
interaction, the following was shared by Diane when asked about concerns she had regarding
speaking with her staff about race and racism:
Race and racism are big topics and should not be taken lightly. I am not the expert in this
area. As principals, we need to be guided on these topics by someone who knows more. I
would not start a conversation as I would not know where to begin.
When I initially asked Diane this question about her concerns, I hoped to gain a greater
understanding of how principals saw the world and where they were situated on the ways of
knowing typology (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano). Although with this question alone, I
could not capture where she was as a knower, her response helped me to understand her more as
it related specifically to her readiness to enact anti-racist practices. In her comment, she said “as
principals, we need to be guided on these topics by someone who knows more.” This implied
that she and other principals were not, in fact, experts in the “big topic” areas of race and racism
and needed others to guide them. When she said, “I would not start a conversation,” this
demonstrated that this barrier of not feeling expert enough limited her from even wanting to open
the door to having conversations about race and racism with her staff.
Not feeling like an expert was also repeated in a subsequent session, as illustrated below:
Diane: We need support, there needs to be professional development with a joint
message. There needs to be training from the experts, not me. I am not an expert. I don’t
know enough to train. What is going to happen then is what always does—the teacher
teaches the same way, the parent gets upset, and the cycle continues. At one time, not that
long ago, I used to think that it was good saying we don’t see color. I thought that it
meant that I was open to everyone. I know better now but I am not sure all our teachers
do.

76
Suzie: How does an expert help in ways that you may not be able to?
Diane: I think it has to do with the experience that someone has. I don’t think the
messages from me would come off the same way. I think we bring in an expert like
someone from UCLA to teach about teaching full sides of the story to children.
Suzie: I don’t think that is a bad idea, but in the meantime, keep thinking about this and
what you can do. Change doesn’t need to be big, but I think we can try to plan some ideas
together.
Diane acknowledged a negative cycle taking place when she does not provide training for
teachers. Yet, despite knowing there is a need for her leadership, she was not willing to lead any
professional development or other learning opportunities herself as she did not feel equipped to
do so. As she said, “I don’t know enough to train.” Diane also mentioned the need to “bring in an
expert.” While the idea of having professional development is not new, there are challenges
associated with this idea as well. To begin with, teacher education can often times propose
simple solutions to complex problems, as such, these solutions often fail to work (Loughran,
2014). Professional development of educators must be intentionally conceptualized, thoughtfully
implemented, and meaningfully employed otherwise one risks having one-off workshops with
consultants that provide little long-term impact (Loughran, 2014). What Diane was suggesting
was what Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999) call “knowledge-for-practice,” which depends on the
assumption that the knowledge teachers need to teach well is produced primarily by university-
based researchers and scholars in various disciplines. For teachers to improve teaching, they
need to implement the knowledge they acquired from experts outside of the classroom. In
knowledge-for-practice, teachers are often seen as knowledgeable but are often not regarded as
the ones who generate knowledge. This is different from what Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999)

77
call “knowledge-in-practice” and “knowledge-of-practice”. Knowledge-in-practice assumes
some of the most essential knowledge for teaching is practical knowledge and embedded in
practice and in teachers’ reflections on practice. This conception rejects the notion of the teacher
being a consumer of research and instead is one who constructs meaning and knowledge and acts
upon them. Knowledge-of-practice assumes that the knowledge needed by teachers to teach well
occurs when teachers treat their own classrooms and school sites as places for intentional
investigation while they treat the knowledge and theory produced by others as new material to be
further examined. With this stance, one-way teachers learn is by challenging their own
assumptions, generating problems, studying students and classrooms and constructing and
reconstructing curriculum and taking on new roles in efforts to transform classroom (Cochran-
Smith and Lytle, 1999). Although the knowledge-for-practice that Diane suggested by bringing
in an expert is a common professional development strategy, there are new collaborative
relationships being crafted that replace the expert-novice relationship. Some of these include
bringing colleagues together along with their perspectives to share on inquiries into the
complexities of teaching and learning (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999).
Moreover, in the interaction explained above, I noted frustration in Diane’s voice with
the ways in which we continue to reproduce the status quo. She said, “What is going to happen
then is what always does—the teacher teaches the same way, the parent gets upset, and the cycle
continues.” Diane seemed to be frustrated that there was no training being offered to better
support both her and her teachers. As she said, “We need support, there needs to be professional
development with a joint message. There needs to be training from the experts, not me.” She was
frustrated that we were in this iterative negative cycle with no clear end in sight, and she placed

78
the blame outside of herself, suggesting that not being expert enough created a barrier to enacting
anti-racist leadership.
In addition to not feeling like an expert, the other frequently stated barrier was that
principals felt they were not in a position of power and that change was only possible if it was
directed from the top. In Cycle 1 of this action research, while discussing unconscious biases and
the need to be intentionally aware of biases and supporting teachers to recognize them, Elizabeth
stated, “We are a unified school district, and this is a top-down K–12 thing. It must come from
the person in power.” Many public-school districts operate under a hierarchical structure. This
structure has been known to place a significant emphasis on horizontal separation into divisions
and departments, have high levels of control, low levels of employee involvement, and top-down
communication (Mindtools, 2021). Centralizing administrative duties from a top-down hierarchy
consists of school sites implementing the decisions made at the district level. Given these power
hierarchies common in school districts, principals are frequently seen as the ones who manage
and carry out decisions made by those higher in the power structure. When operating from a
hierarchical structure, site administrators often follow what has been decided at the district level
and are used to taking direction versus being the ones to lead the initiative for change. So, it
made sense that Elizabeth would bring up power as a force behind the change. While I can
understand the benefits of a unified message having worked in a district for many years, I also
know that waiting for the district to act could be dangerous as who knows how long it could take
for the district to decide it’s an important initiative and message to be sending. My response to
Elizabeth was, “Yes, a unified message would be great, but in the meantime, what can be done
within your sphere of influence to enact change now?”

79
In order to make progress, it was evident that I was going to need to find a way to help
break down the barriers and find ways principals could enact change within their spheres of
influence. Heifetz and Laurie (1997) argued that one role of adaptive leadership requires building
people’s confidence. Heifetz and Laurie (1997) also proclaimed that getting people to assume
greater responsibility is not an easy task as many employees are comfortable being told what to
do, which in the field of education is not a surprise when considering the hierarchical structure
seen in schools and districts in our country. Letting principals take the initiative and define and
solve problems to develop “knowledge-in-practice” meant that I needed to work on showing
support rather than control. In addition, this idea of showing support and empowering principals
to take control is also what I had set out to accomplish when I included the adaptive leadership
behavior of “giving the work back to the people” in my conceptual framework.
However, finding ways to give the work back while building confidence to get past the
fear of not being an expert or the one in a position of power required me to consider what type of
knower each principal was and what support may have helped. Drago-Severson and Blum-
DeStefano (2017) claimed that an effective support is to offer instrumental knowers concrete
models and strategies for supporting identity development and social justice practice. In addition,
concrete examples provide a pathway for improvement and professional growth. Thinking about
models and supports and cultivating confidence, here is one conversation that occurred that
demonstrates my efforts to support principals to overcome the barriers they communicated:
Elizabeth: I have started to look for resources to share with my teachers but there is just
so much out there that it is hard to narrow down the best ones. If I am going to give
something to my teachers, I don’t have many opportunities until they just ignore what I
send their way. What we talk about needs to be good.

80
Diane: With all that is going on right now, I don’t have time to search for what is out
there. I know this is important, but I don’t have time to look.
Suzie: There are many resources that I have that I can start sending your way. I think that
these can help you begin to see what is out there and possibly start opening the door to
having conversations with your staff. Is this something you would be comfortable with
me sharing with you?
Elizabeth and Diane: Yes!
Suzie: Is there anything specific you would want me to start with?
Diane: I would like to have more options for books or novels for our teachers to read. As
we talked about, we do not have a positive representation of Black children in our
literature.
Elizabeth: I would like to start looking at lesson plans that teach step by step certain
topics. We have Black History Month coming up, and I would like to be able to share
with teachers something they would feel comfortable taking on.
I wanted to understand more about the principal’s willingness to have conversations with staff in
this conversation. When I asked if they would be comfortable with me sharing and sending
resources, I was testing out how they would respond to my question. Almost in unison and
immediately after I asked this, both principals gave an enthusiastic “yes!” Exercising adaptive
leadership requires making oneself dispensable, and the way to achieve that is by constantly
giving the work back to others (Heifetz et al., 2009). However, before giving the work back, I
wanted to know this was something they wanted, and I wanted to ask what specifically would
interest them, which is why I asked, “Is there anything specific you want me to start with?” I

81
wanted to know what they would buy into and use and asking them was the best way for me to
find this out.
For instrumental knowers like Diane, concrete examples and resources could help
jumpstart the process of engaging in anti-racist leadership and while Elizabeth was not an
instrumental knower from my assessment of her, she could benefit from this provision of
resources, nonetheless, given her agreement with Diane about the barriers that stand in her way.
Luckily, the principals expressed an eagerness to receiving supports. Intentionally, I was not
going to select specific books or lessons, as I needed the principals to begin the work of owning
their decisions and taking the work back to their school site. Rather than giving specific material,
I curated a list of websites that offered a selection of books or lessons for them to choose from.
Through our time together in subsequent sessions, I continued to note and ask about models,
literature, and examples that would be helpful. Here is an example of resources shared based on
our discussions. These were also posted to our Google Classroom.
1. Social Justice Books (https://socialjusticebooks.org) is a website that was developed
in 2017 to identify and promote the best multicultural and social justice books. In
addition, there are articles and books for teacher. Articles include guides for selecting
anti-bias children’s books; summer reading lists that celebrate diversity, inclusivity,
and intersecting identities; and many more resources to support principals and
teachers.
2. Learning for Justice (https://www.learningforjustice.org/ ) is a website filled with free
resources such as articles, guides, lessons, films, webinars, frameworks and more to
help educators dismantle White supremacy, strengthen intersectional movements, and
advance the human rights of all people.

82
3. Teaching Hard History is a component within Learning for Justice that includes a
framework, along with student texts, teaching tools, and professional development for
anyone committed to teaching this hard history.
(https://www.learningforjustice.org/frameworks/teaching-hard-history/american-
slavery/k-5-framework).
4. The Conscious Kid (https://www.theconsciouskid.org/) is an education, research, and
policy organization that supports families and educators in taking action to disrupt
racism, inequity, and bias.
Knowing there are many models and supports available to provide, selecting these were
important as they were based on what principals asked for and what they expressed as their
needs. Additionally, the vignette above also demonstrated that principals were beginning to see
that all changes don’t necessarily need to come from the top or from experts. While they may not
have recognized it, this blockade of barriers was slowly getting broken down as they
communicated an interest in looking for “resources to share with my teachers.” While providing
these resources was an active first step, there was still a missed opportunity to go one step further
by talking about how to use these resources with their staff and to communicate clear
expectations for their teachers’ use of them in their own classrooms. However, as I have
indicated previously, the work with principals was just beginning, and I would continue to
support them past the length of this study, which would include going back and looking deeper
into how to use these resources with their teachers.
In another instance where a shift was beginning to happen with the principals, Elizabeth
expressed frustration in our session with regard to teachers building missions in 4
th
grade. She
stated, “We are letting our children build miniature Indian prisons, and it needs to stop.”

83
Elizabeth expressed irritation and fury in her voice when talking about this traditional,
hegemonic practice. When asked about conversations she had with her teachers, she stated, “I
told them to stop.” Similar to how I noted frustration from Diane in the previous example, here
also, I noted frustration in Elizabeth’s voice. However, this frustration was not rooted at anyone
in particular, but rather towards a common practice that upholds White supremacy by presenting
a Whitewashed version of American history.
Elizabeth, a self-authoring knower, was driven by her own values and standards and
viewed conflict as a natural part of advocacy. Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano (2017)
stated that for self-authoring knowers, a stretch for growth would be to create opportunities for
open and empathetic engagement with individuals whose ideologies feel diametrically opposed.
Once again, knowing my learner and my role in this process was to support principals in
disrupting traditional curriculum that overrepresents White instruction and privileges White ways
of knowing, I knew that I needed to provide the appropriate support. However, I had to
remember my goal was not to have the principals dependent on me; it was for them to learn
actions that they could take to succeed in the enactment of future anti-racist practices. Heifetz et
al. (2009) stated that adaptive leadership is about change that enables the capacity to thrive. I
needed to consider finding support that may help the principals to succeed through various
circumstances. The resource that came to mind was Brown’s (2018) concept of being ready to
give feedback. Brown (2018) recognized the challenges many face at work with staying true to
their values when giving feedback. Brown (2018) also acknowledged that one must be in the
right mental space to be able to provide this kind of feedback. In a session, I stated:
What I am going to share with you now and in the Google classroom is Brown’s checklist
for giving feedback. This may or may not be helpful for you, but I know that I personally

84
find it very valuable. I think it fits well with helping us understand when we are ready to
engage in constructive feedback and not let our emotions get the best of us. I know that
when something is close to me, it is harder for me to engage in conversations without
letting my positionality or biases get in the way. By keeping this checklist in mind, I
think it could help. There are ten elements a principal should consider on the checklist
before engaging in feedback.
Below are the following ten elements:
1. I know I am ready to give feedback when I’m ready to sit next to you rather than
across from you. Having this desk between us creates more distance and also
represents a power differential;
2. I know I am ready to give feedback when I’m willing to put the problem in front of us
rather than between us. This requires someone who will sit by the other’s side and
help them through the hurdle;
3. I know I am ready to give feedback when I am ready to list, ask questions, and accept
that I may not fully understand the issues. This requires stepping back and not rushing
by asking questions such as “Can you help me understand?”;
4. I know I am ready to give feedback when I’m ready to acknowledge what you do well
instead of just picking apart your mistakes. It is also important to recognize what one
does well rather than pointing out mistakes only;
5. I know I am ready to give feedback when I recognize your strengths and how you can
use them to address your challenges. Leaders must build upon what one does well in
order to help one grow;

85
6. I know that I am ready to give feedback when I can hold you accountable without
shaming or blaming;
7. I know I am ready to give feedback when I’m open to owning my own part. As a
principal, one may have been complicit in some ways and must acknowledge that;
8. I know I am ready to give feedback when I can genuinely thank someone for their
efforts than just criticizing them for the failings;
9. I know I am ready to give feedback when I can talk about how resolving these
challenges will lead to growth and opportunity; and
10. I know I am ready to give feedback when I can model vulnerability and openness that
I expect to see from you.
After sharing Brown’s feedback checklist and taking some time away from the situation,
Elizabeth reflected and considered how she wanted to approach creating a path of growth and
opportunity for her teachers. In a later session, Elizabeth said:
After thinking about the mission project some more, I decided I need to talk to my
teachers about it again, so I did. I was able to ask questions and understand the reasons
they taught it. I heard them explain the ways in which it connected to the 4
th
grade
standards and is a long-standing tradition. I also heard their concerns as they explained to
me that not doing this project could potentially make some parents upset. After listening
to their concerns, I was able to share the reasons that I believed we should change this
practice, which included discussing the ways it was an extremely one side White practice.
I asked the teachers to work with me on creating a new project in its place. After we
brainstormed ideas on what could work, we agreed upon creating a “legacy project.”
Students are going to compare facts from then and facts from now from the perspective

86
of Native Americans. Students will compare the two and decide what they want for the
future and what they envision for their legacy. Do they want to go back and repeat the
status quo or move forward, change, and make improvements?
In this example, Elizabeth exhibited growth in multiple ways. First, she was able to show that
she had power to make change by not waiting for a top-down directive from the district when
discussing sensitive curricular issues with the teachers at her school site. She said, “I decided I
need to talk to my teachers about it again, so I did. I was able to ask questions and understand the
reasons they taught it.” She then said, “After listening to their concerns, I was able to share the
reasons that I believed we should change this practice.” By saying “I believed we should change
this practice,” Elizabeth was situating change in her and the teachers’ sphere of influence,
something that seemed out of reach during this action research study. While I did not indicate in
my conceptual framework that principals in this study would enact anti-racist leadership
practices because I did not think it would be feasible in the amount of time allotted, in this
example, Elizabeth was demonstrating her ability to begin enacting anti-racist practices.
In addition, instead of reacting to the teachers from a place of frustration as demonstrated
by her initial comment “it needs to stop,” Elizabeth reflected and got into the right frame of
mind, as suggested by Brown (2018) in her feedback checklist. Elizabeth asked the teachers
questions about their current project, did not blame anyone, shared her concerns, and provided
meaningful feedback, which included co-creating ways to improve this project. By giving the
work back to Elizabeth through the provision of a feedback framework, I was able to position her
to engage with her teachers in a productive way. Elizabeth supported her teachers by listening to
their concerns while empowering them to be part of the change she wished to see.

87
Finally, the last piece of evidence that principals were able to make growth in
recognizing that change was possible within their sphere of influence was demonstrated with
their enactment plan. From day one, the principals in this action research study were challenged
to begin thinking about an anti-racist action plan they would like to enact with their staff. I
informed the principals, that by the end of our time together, I would like them to share a plan
with me. It could be a written plan, or they could explain it to me during one of the sessions.
During our final Zoom sessions, the principals shared their preliminary enactment plans with me.
Diane informed me that she realized over the course of our time together that the
teachers’ resistance to change often stemmed from their own apprehension. One teacher
exclaimed to her, “I don’t know how to teach these resources for Black History Month. What if I
don’t get it or what if the kids have questions that I do not know how to answer?” Diane
discussed wanting to support her teachers by building their confidence in using new material.
Diane’s plan was as follows: using the resources from the booklist that I gave Diane during this
study, she decided to select various children’s books from Black authors or with Black children
as the main characters. The literature will be focused on themes such as race and identity. Diane
will select books from The Conscious Kid Website (https://www.theconsciouskid.org/storytime).
During professional learning community (PLC) meetings, Diane and the teachers will read
various books, the teacher’s guide, and engage in discussions on how they would and could use
this book in their classroom. As Diane stated, “Too often we pick adult books to make teachers
read and discuss. Why not select books that our students are reading to help make teachers more
comfortable with reading them aloud?” By exposing teachers to new books and helping them
feel comfortable teaching them, more teachers may start bringing them into their classes. Diane’s
plan demonstrates that by modeling support to her, she was then able to take up a similar

88
approach in her plan to support her teachers, who like her, were not confident in their abilities to
discuss race and racism with their learners.
Elizabeth’s plan was connected to the use of literature as well. However, Elizabeth did
not want to bring in new material; she wanted to take a novel that teachers were currently
reading and connected to and create a novel study. Elizabeth said that she would offer this to all
teachers in the grade level, district-wide, and not only the ones at her school, so she could reach
more students. Her plan is as follows: Elizabeth will select a book that teachers love to teach and
support them in recognizing the way it is creating a one-sided White narrative. As Elizabeth
stated: “If teachers are going to continue to teach something with false representations, they need
to know how to recognize them, point them out, and teach the other side.” While they go through
the book, Elizabeth will allow for teachers to point out misrepresentations that they are able to
discover and share their strategies for addressing it and teaching another side. However,
Elizabeth will scaffold their learning by modeling and questioning and will also come prepared
to offer her recommendations and suggestions for teaching the novel. Elizabeth’s plan
demonstrates her ability to grow in seeing that she has both the power and ability within her
sphere of influence to enact change.
Like me, and as evidenced above, Elizabeth and Diane will continue this work of anti-
racist leadership well past our time together in this study as we are all committed to institutional
change for racial equity. The enactment plans shared above demonstrated a change in how the
two principals came to the work by the end of this action research project. While they initially
did not believe they could enact anti-racist leadership practices because of the many barriers in
front of them and having this abstract notion of anti-racist practices as being daunting, by

89
supporting principals to see how making changes could be manageable, they learned to see the
power they have within their spheres of influence.
Principal Growth 2: Recognizing and Questioning the Colorblind Curriculum
The work we did together during this action research project also provided the two
principals the opportunity to recognize and question the colorblind curriculum. As demonstrated
in my conceptual framework, anti-racist adaptive leadership was positioned above the other
proposed actions I wanted to enact, because it was through my role and my actions that I
believed I could support principals in making color visible by uncovering unconscious bias,
hegemonic practices, and recognizing and questioning the colorblind curriculum in principals’
respective schools. Throughout this action research, and as indicated in the table, principals grew
by recognizing and questioning the colorblind curriculum taught in their schools that reproduces
a single-sided narrative.

Table 3
Recognition of Colorblind Curriculum
Cycle Recognition of colorblind curriculum
1 2
2 6

90
During the initial meetings with principals, the curriculum was represented by the
principals as a very formalized, explicit practice seen within the confines of a classroom’s four
walls. Throughout Cycle 1, some of the ways in which the curriculum was defined by the
principals were:
1. Curriculum is what students are expected to demonstrate proficiency in by the end of
the year.
2. Curriculum is what we are expecting teachers to teach in the classroom.
3. Curriculum includes the standards and frameworks.
What I noticed about the examples above, was that they represented the formalized and uniform
teaching that occurs in schools. The definitions failed to identify that curriculum is much more
than standards and frameworks and the explicit things we teach our students. As previously
stated, my intention within this study was for principals to start recognizing that curriculum was
beyond an outdated teacher’s guide and discovering the ways in which the incidental learning,
with colorblind curriculum, in schools was reproducing the status quo. Here is an example of one
conversation I had with Diane that illustrates the colorblind curriculum not being noticed:
Diane: At our school, we have an event about to take place with students dressing up as a
culture they admire.
Suzie: Dress up as a culture they admire? I am wondering about this, and I want to talk it
through. Let’s say a child innocently dresses up in attire from another culture that they
admire, and it is taken as racially insensitive or, like we are talking about, representing a
false stereotype- because remember our kids have a White version of other cultures in
their mind.
Diane: What? No, not in elementary school.

91
Suzie: Think about this though. Imagine that I am a parent from another country and a
student dresses in a way that doesn’t accurately represent my culture. I may be wrong,
but what comes to mind is cultural appropriation where I am taking pieces of another
culture but not having that identity. It can be seen as inappropriate and hurtful. What
other versions of cultures have students been exposed to besides the White version?
Diane: What do you want me to tell the kids? Do you want me to put the kybosh on what
they wanted and planned?
Suzie: Well, what do you want to do?
Diane: I am not sure. I need to go and talk to one of my teachers now. We will talk about
this more later.
This conversation with Diane began and ended differently. In the beginning, I noted in my field
notes that Diane seemed surprised and taken aback by my comment about a child “innocently”
dressing up in a way that could be seen racially insensitive. When she responded, “No,” her tone
was more elevated than it had been when she started, and she gave a quizzical look that I
perceived to be a look of disorientation. As I asked her questions, such as, “What other cultures
have students been exposed to besides the White version?” I was not trying to put her on the spot
nor was I requiring an answer, it was just “something to think about.” At this time, we needed to
stop the action so as to learn from that action (Raelin, 2001). Had Diane stayed on longer, I
would have liked to have gotten us to a place of public reflection. The art of public reflection can
involve a process where one learns to criticize societal norms and values by surfacing one’s own
beliefs (Raelin, 2001). Along with that, public reflection, especially critical ones, can increase
learning at all levels. However, Diane left the zoom stating, “I need to talk to one of my
teachers.” Although, I do believe Diane needed to speak with a teacher, I also think it was a

92
justifiable way to exit a conversation that she may not have been feeling comfortable in, possibly
because I did not appropriately manage her emotions as an adaptive leader should or because I
asked too many questions too soon. However, because the zoom session ended early, we were
not given the opportunity to work through this discomfort together.
Heifetz et al. (2009) stated that as an adaptive leader, one must help navigate others
through a period of disturbance and this disturbance may cause conflict, panic, confusion,
disorientation, and fear of losing something dear. While conversing with Diane about the
possible event of children dressing up as a culture they admire at her school, I noticed that she
was grappling with a period of disturbance. This was evidenced in her surprised expression,
elevated tone, and abrupt departure. All of this made me realize that I would need to go slow and
regulate her distress, which is why I was cautious about framing my questions when we were
talking. I started with, “I am wondering about” versus “This is a bad idea that you need to stop.”
As Northouse (2019) stated, leaders may need to say, “This is your work. How do you want to
handle it?” My role in this was not to make decisions for principals, but to help them get to a
place to recognize colorblind practices, such as this, and empower them to disrupt practices that
reproduce the status quo and White way of knowing. As such, when Diane asked what she
should do, my response was, “Well, what do you want to do?” Diane may have been looking for
me to say that she should not do this event. I did not say that as I needed Diane to decide how
she wanted to handle and own the situation. I asked the questions and gave insight into how this
event could be perceived as cultural appropriation or culturally insensitive, but I left the final
decision-making up to her.
Adaptive work generates distress, and one cannot learn new ways of being and doing
when they feel overwhelmed (Heifetz et al., 2009). Yet removing stress altogether removes the

93
impetus for doing the adaptive work, and leaders must strike a delicate balance between feeling
the need for change and feeling overwhelmed by change. When Diane left the Zoom before our
session was over, I sensed she was feeling overwhelmed. Leaders need to manage themselves in
the environment and help others tolerate discomfort as the purpose is to make progress on a
tough challenge (Heifetz et al., 2009). As a leader, I believe I could have sat in the discomfort
with Diane longer than I did or that I could have started by asking less threatening questions
before suggesting that the idea could be insensitive and seen as cultural appropriation. However,
I did not anticipate her reaction or swift departure which did not enable the conversation to
continue.
Diane called me later that evening to let me know that she thought about what we talked
about and spoke with her teacher who was helping with this event. Diane informed the lead
teacher that they would not proceed with having students dress up as a culture they admired. She
explained to the teacher the same things we talked about earlier and explained that students
might be dressing up in inappropriate ways and reproducing negative stereotypes by having this
event. Although this practice was not initially recognized as a colorblind curriculum by Diane,
after thinking about it, she acknowledged this was not a good idea and agreed that it could
perpetuate stereotypes and be seen as a colorblind practice. As she stated:
I gave it some thought and although I don’t think any students would intentionally dress
up in a way that would offend another culture, I see how this could be perceived and I
agree this is not a good idea. I am sure there is something else we could come up with to
do with the students that would be fun.
In this response, I still felt as though there was some reluctance in the decision when Diane noted
“students would not intentionally dress up in a way that would offend another culture.” This idea

94
of good intentions is something that we need to examine as leaders. As stated by Lewis and
Diamond (2015) good intentions do not mitigate results and it is the daily interaction among
everyday practices and structural inequality that contradictions materialize between good
intentions and bad outcomes. Today, we have a system in which most operate with the best
intentions and doing the right thing, yet widespread prevalent stereotypes about groups permeate
deeply into school buildings and shape interactions (Lewis & Diamond, 2015). Current racist
curriculum is not something that should be examined by educators’ intentions, but by the way it
functions to maintain the permanence of racism both in and out of school (Picower, 2021).
Although I don’t think that Diane was at this point yet of recognizing good intentions are not
enough or that what the teachers were proposing reflected a colorblind curriculum, I do believe
that she was moving in this direction.
As our sessions continued, principals began to recognize more examples of how the
colorblind curriculum was expressed in their schools. Below is an example in which Elizabeth
recognized the teaching of one-sided curriculum:
Suzie: I think we need to work with teachers to talk about teachable moments versus
teaching material as those are not the same things.
Elizabeth: Yes, I was subbing in a classroom last week and the Wonders curriculum went
into a lesson on Mt. Rushmore. This lesson was extremely one-sided. Not anywhere in
the lesson was there mention that this “historic” landmark was built on stolen Lakota
property. It is sad that our adopted curriculum fails to mention and how we are teaching
only one White side of history. Think about all the land that was taken from Black
families and how Bruce’s Beach is in the news. These kinds of things are never talked
about.

95
Diane: This is important, and I think that we need more training. Teachers need to know
how to educate the two sides like Elizabeth did, but they also need resources to properly
do this.
Suzie: If you were not subbing in class that day do you think the Mt. Rushmore
conversation regarding the Lakota land would have come up?
Elisabeth: Probably not and this is not okay. I am going to talk to my staff about finding
other instances like this in our curriculum.
Elizabeth was able to provide an example of the ways in which our curriculum was intentionally
reproducing a single-sided narrative when she said, “not anywhere in the lesson was there
mention that this ‘historic’ landmark was built on stolen Lakota property.” Picower (2021),
identified White Out as a curricular tool of Whiteness. This tool is used to maintain racial
hierarchies by keeping Whiteness at the top and erasing things that are non-White. The main
function is to avoid accurately teaching the history of the United States’ formation by excluding
all people of color (Picower, 2021). The problem with this is: 1) It erases the history of
oppression that has been faced at the hands of White people; 2) by erasing the existence of
people of color, messages are sent about who is valuable or expendable, reinforcing racial
hierarchies; and 3) by removing accomplishments or resistance movements, teachers block
avenues for self-love or pride for students of color (Picower, 2021). However, by having an
awareness of this colorblind curriculum taking place, Elizabeth was better equipped to engage in
conversations with her staff. A change that was outlined in my conceptual framework was that
principals would strengthen their anti-racist knowledge by beginning to recognize the ways in
which curriculum is colorblind. As indicated by the example above, Elizabeth was further
developing her ability to recognize the ways in which our curriculum was (intentionally)

96
colorblind. Not only was she developing her ability to identify ways in which curriculum was
colorblind, she was also deciding to engage in conversations with her teachers as she stated,
“This is not okay. I am going to talk to my staff about finding other instances like this in our
curriculum.” Her comment about “finding other instances,” speaks to her recognition that the
colorblind curriculum is not always readily apparent, and that educators need to work hard to
“find” instances that are problematic.
Diane, too, recognized the ways in which our curriculum was intentionally reproducing a
single-sided narrative as demonstrated in the example below.
Suzie: Before our session today, I asked you to think about our walk through at your
school or think about other class visits for signs of colorblind or color conscious
curriculum and bring back an example if you found one. Does anyone want to go first?
Diane: I was in a classroom, and the students had their social study guide out, and I
looked at the section on Africa Slavery. This is what it said:
1. By 1570, 200,000 Africans had been taken to Spain
2. Slaves grew sugar cane, worked in mines, and shipped goods at ports.
What was shocking was that this was our “lesson” and what students needed to master on
slavery. I may not have noticed it before, but with all our talking about this—just the
wording alone “taken to Spain” makes it sound like a trip—what about kidnapped, stolen,
taken against their will? Nothing in this makes slavery sound bad. The entire lesson was
very one-sided, and critical information was missing. What is not being said truly says a
lot and by you making us sit and pause and talk about this all the time, we are so much
more aware than ever before.

97
Diane noticed that this lesson was missing critical information, and that the language was
softened to mask the injustices committed. As Picower (2021) asserted, this curricular tool of
Whiteness used in this lesson was “No One is to Blame.” In the No One is to Blame tool, lessons
are structured in a way that avoids assigning responsibility to White people for historical
atrocities. In particular, language is used strategically to displace blame. Diane recognized this
when she said “what about kidnapped, stolen, taken against their will…” Within these lessons,
and the examples from above, there are no victims and no perpetrators. Africans were simply
“taken to Spain.” It maintains the dominant ideology of White people as good and innocent
(Picower, 2021). These examples coupled with Diane’s statement that, “you making us sit and
pause and talk about this all the time, we are so much more aware than ever before,”
demonstrated that I was making progress toward raising the principals’ color consciousness,
because they were thinking in ways that the principals hadn’t considered before we began our
intentional focus on color consciousness about the curriculum.
What I contributed to this, and the other conversations mentioned above, was that I
worked to construct a brave space during our time together to allow for these realizations to
happen. When looking at my conceptual framework and plans to engage my learners, I theorized
that change would occur through brave space discussions. However, having brave discussions
requires cultivating that environment for learning. One way that I created that culture can be seen
in the following example:
Suzie: In my classes at USC, we read an article by Arao and Clemens (2013), which I
will share later with you in both email and in the Google Classroom. In the article, it
discusses the idea of a brave space. Before, we talk about brave spaces, I want you to
think about what it might mean and what you envision this space looking like.

98
Diane: I think about someone going out on a ledge and doing something that scares them,
but they are willing to try anyway.
Elizabeth: I tell my son to be brave when trying new things—and I think I am telling him
to take a risk—just try—it may not be perfect, but you went for it anyway.
Suzie: Thanks for sharing. The technical definition is that a brave space requires having
the courage to take risks, face danger, and know you will be heard, supported and
acknowledged. Creating a brave space is not something that is necessarily easy to
accomplish. By the end of this, if we are lucky, we will have created that space. In order
to create a brave space, it is necessary to establish meaningful norms that will guide us
through our time together.
I can suggest norms, or we can build them from scratch together. What would be your
preference?
Diane: You can suggest
Elizabeth: I agree. You can.
During this process, I introduced the concept of a “brave space” and shared our ground norms
throughout our time together. In addition, beyond this example, I took the time with principals to
revisit our brave space agreements at the start of sessions by saying, “We initially talked about
the brave space agreements, and I will share them here again to see if there are any changes to be
made.” When I asked about making changes, there was never a time that we made one. The
agreements we made were:
1. Be present: letting go of distractions around you, being in the moment and mindful of
each other and this time together.
2. Use “I” statements: remember that this is about you and your feelings.

99
3. Move up, move back: notice who is talking and who is not talking in the room. Allow
voiced to be heard from all parties.
4. Agree to disagree: constructive conflict is a good thing. We should not agree at all
times.
5. Give Grace- Have compassion for others and try to put yourself in their shoes.
Confirming with data that a brave space was created proved to be a bit challenging as there was
never a time that principals stated, “This is a great brave space.” Instead, I had to look for the
manifestations that this environment was being cultivated, and by doing that, I looked for
examples of open and vulnerable conversations. One example was when Diane stated, “we are so
much more aware than ever before.” That highlighted her growth to admit before this she was
not as cognizant regarding the colorblind curriculum and how it was reproduced in schools. By
admitting that she was not aware before was a vulnerable move on Diane’s part, one that is hard
for educators, especially educational leaders, to do in systems that don’t value or reward not
knowing or making mistakes. So, while I cannot know for sure if I cultivated a truly brave space
when working with these two principals, their vulnerability in our conversations demonstrates
that at the very least, we were moving in the right direction.
Leader Growth 1: Supporting Principals From a Learner-Centered Approach
As indicated throughout this action research dissertation, I, too, was positioned as a
learner in this process and made growth as an anti-racist adaptive leader. While analyzing my
data, I noticed a shift in my sessions, moving from a highly structured teacher-centered approach
to supporting the two principals to a more collaborative learner-centered one. Table 4 indicates
the occurrences from both cycles.

100
Table 4
Teacher-Centered Versus Learner-Centered
Cycle Teacher-centered Learner-centered
Cycle 1 12 6
Cycle 2 5 12

Teacher-centered instruction presents instruction in a highly structured environment. In it,
the teacher organizes the learning tasks, establishes the classroom objectives, presents materials
to support planned objectives, and creates the timetable and methods to achieve those learning
tasks (Hancock et al., 2002). Within this approach, the teacher’s role is often as the primary
information giver and the center of knowledge. This approach was problematic for the action
research dissertation, as I was also a learner in this process and by no means the center of
knowledge. However, when I first began working with the principals, I was very structured in
my approach. Below is an example of a teacher-centered session from an initial meeting:
Suzie: Today, we are back. You had some homework before we met. It was to watch two
videos that will help lead our conversation today. Did you happen to have the chance to
watch those before coming?
Elizabeth: Yes
Diane: Yes
Suzie: Thank You. I am not ready to get into them yet as I wanted to quickly review last
week and the things that we talked about. First, we talked about curriculum, anti-racist

101
leadership, and color consciousness. Also, we talked about the group norms in creating a
brave space. Now, I want to share the objectives that I hope you will walk away with
after our meeting today.
Later, as the session went on, I continued to lead from a teacher-centered approach as illustrated
below:
Suzie: I want to talk about the I Am From poem that you completed. When you were
writing about your identities, were any challenging to write about? Why?
Diane: Religion was for me. I think with there are many stereotypes associated with my
religion that are untrue and I don’t share that part of myself with others. Also, I was much
more religious when I was younger than I am now.
Elizabeth: Religion for me as well. My religion does not come from a book. It is a culture
and tradition. Although I consider myself religious, people don’t seem to understand
because I do not go to church and worship in the ways in which they do.
Suzie: In what ways might you operate in a position of privilege in relation to these
socially constructed categories on the axes of domination? Or Oppression?
Diane: I am oppressed as I am not a male. I also have many characteristics that place me
more on the privilege side.
Elizabeth: I don’t see me operating in privilege as I am not “rolling in the dough,” but
when I look at the axes of domination, I see that I am more in the privilege than the
oppressed.
Suzie: How do you demonstrate leadership as a principal? How do you? And to whom?
In the example above, my teacher-centered approach prevented me from establishing what I set
out to do in my conceptual framework, which was guiding principals through our discussions in

102
becoming aware of their colorblindness to develop skills in becoming an anti-racist adaptive
leader. Rodgers (2002) asserted that student learning should guide teaching and that practices
must be seen as an integrated, focused response to learning rather than as a checklist of teaching.
When Elizabeth stated that the axes of domination showed her as having more privilege,
although she did not see herself this way, I missed an opportunity to dig deeper and probe
further. Rather, I focused on the next item regarding her leadership in order to stay on my lesson
plans. The example below (Figure 3) is the lesson plan I was using and following as a checklist
rather than a guide.

103
Figure 3
Lesson Plan

A teacher-centered approach has been described as being based upon a model of having
an active teacher and a passive student versus a learner-center model where the teacher acts as a

104
facilitator (Mascolo, 2009). I prevented my learners from being the primary architects of their
learning by acting more as a gatekeeper responsible for controlling the narrative. I do not believe
necessarily that my discussion questions shown above were the limiting factors of growth, but
rather the way I used them as a checklist. As demonstrated when comparing the questions I
asked with the plan I developed before the study began, I asked the same questions in almost the
same order in a structured way. This prevented me from asking follow up questions and
following the principals’ contributions. In my reflections during Cycle 1, I noted 14 instances
where I communicated my discomfort and insecurities with this action research process, which I
believe was part of the reason my sessions were so teacher-centered. In one reflection, I stated:
The former teacher within me struggles to put my power behind and allow conversations
to evolve naturally. I feel it is just an awkward and uncomfortable situation to be in. I am
not an expert in what I am talking about. I am always learning, but in context with the
principals, I feel as though they are looking at me with the “now what” eyes and that the
expectation is that I am the one leading this ship…but where I am going? Do I even
know? As far as how I am doing towards the work I wanted to achieve, I feel as though I
stayed on the path of my questions. I did not steer off or probe much. If I was a more
experienced researcher, I feel there are places that I may have probed further. Yet, my
own fears, insecurities, and discomfort got in my way. I think staying on track and
staying within the plans is something that I am most comfortable doing so I do it.
Similar to how I noted barriers before with principals not enacting change because they did not
see themselves as the expert, I was falling into the same trap as indicated by my comment, “I am
not an expert in what I am talking about.” The combination of insecurities and not feeling expert
enough was limiting my growth as a leader as demonstrated by my statement, “Yet, my own

105
fears, insecurities, and discomfort got in my way.” These initial insecurities and the need to be in
control of the narrative led to a teacher-centered teaching style.
Opposite of teacher-centered is learner-centered, and this approach offers instruction in a
less structured environment that allows students to influence the time and character of
instruction, their approach to learning tasks, and their participation in an open exchange of ideas
(Hancock et al., 2002). One known benefit of this type of instruction is that the learner is seen as
an important resource, because they too know something and are capable of sharing. This style
of cooperative learning is essential for knowledge construction, in which both learners and
teachers contribute to the construction of knowledge through interactions (Scheurs &
Dumbraveanu, 2014). An example of a more learner-center approach that allowed for more
construction by principals is demonstrated below:
Suzie: I was thinking back on our conversation about colorblind/color conscious and
what you can do within your sphere of influence as a leader to enact change. Do we want
to talk about that more or is there something else on your mind connected to how we
have been talking about that we might want to bring up?
Diane: I think the problem is that what is appropriate keeps changing. At one time, saying
Black was bad and we needed to use the term African American, but now we use Black. I
think there is a fear to say something in case it is no longer correct.
Elizabeth: Yes, changing terminology is a shift.
Suzie: Good point, I was in a meeting with LACOE this week and they let us know that
we are no longer to use the term stakeholder and we needed to use Educational Partners
in its place
Elizabeth: What? Why?

106
Suzie: I was told that the term was rooted in colonial practices and has a violent
connotation for some tribes and tribal members. Native Americans were having trouble
connecting to the LCAP due to the numerous times the word was used and LACOE
wanted to be more inclusionary.
Elizabeth: It makes sense.
Diane: It does and is exactly what I am talking about. Teachers don’t want to be
insensitive, so they default to a colorblind curriculum.
Suzie: A colorblind curriculum is insensitive and problematic. So, as leaders, are there
changes within our spheres we can make to disrupt the colorblind curriculum?
Diane: I think by providing guidance and lessons on something they consider “safe”
would be a starting point.
Elizabeth: I would like to set up a time for my teachers to observe other teachers who are
being brave and stepping out of the colorblind curriculum. Being able to see teaching in
action may prompt more discussion and take some of the fear away.
In this example, I was enacting a more learner-centered approach and letting conversations
evolve naturally by providing more open-ended questions such as “is there anything you want to
bring up?” I was still bounding the discussion around the topic of colorblind/color conscious, but
I allowed the principals to discuss what was on their minds versus my former approach of
dictatorship questioning, which was demonstrated above. By asking if there was anything they
wanted to bring up, Diane expressed the “fear to say something in case it is no longer correct.”
She later said, “Teachers don’t want to be insensitive, so they default to a colorblind
curriculum.” Without knowing what their learners’ fears are, a leader can’t support them to
overcome their fears. In this interaction, I wanted to direct the learning in a way that was both

107
beneficial for and relevant to them and still connected to our overarching goal of becoming color
conscious so as to enact anti-racist practices, which is why I shifted the conversation back to
possibilities within their spheres by asking, “So, as leaders, are there changes within our spheres
we can make to disrupt the colorblind curriculum?” Contrary to common practices of defining
the objectives and procedures for learners, teachers may want to reduce the prescriptiveness of
their classroom behaviors to enhance learners’ motivation to learn (Hancock et al., 2002).
Once I let go of the pressure to follow lesson plans as a script and the notion that I was
the creator of knowledge, we were able to co-create knowledge and learn from each other’s
experiences. As shown in Appendix A, I still had a draft action research plan throughout our time
together, but I did not use it as a checklist, nor did I feel pressured to ask each question that I had
listed or constrained to only ask what I had written down. Below is an example of how a learner-
centered approach allowed for a principal to share her knowledge with us.
Suzie: As a principal, what ramifications do our biases present and what can we do?
Diane: The hard part about biases is they are unconscious. If we are not aware of them, it
is a problem. Understanding we have them is part of the first step toward progress.
Elizabeth: I think we need to talk about them. I talked to my staff on Monday about the
fact most traumas in my childhood came from Thanksgiving. I don’t think they mean to
have biases/stereotypes toward Native Americans, but they do.
Suzie: What did you talk about?
Elizabeth: I was often told I was not “Indian enough” and was called out by peers. It was
awful wearing these crumbled bags for a vest. One year a teacher put lipstick on my face
as “war paint.” In plays, we were always told the Indians were the “bad guys.” It was

108
awful- I hated it and I think about the way we allow “celebrations” in our schools now is
not acceptable.
Diane: I would love for you to talk to my staff.
Elizabeth: I would be happy to.
Although, a learner-centered environment was not outlined in my conceptual framework, my
research question was aimed on supporting principals in recognizing how hegemonic, colorblind
practices are reproduced in classrooms and achieving this seemed more plausible in a learner-
centered environment. The conversation above evolved from a learner-centered approach and
created a learning opportunity that may not have otherwise occurred. Mezirow (2000) suggested
that while transformative learning can occur within an individual, it is more powerful in group
dialogue, where people can try on the perspectives of others. In the learner-centered scenario
above, Elizabeth helped push us to a deeper form of knowledge by allowing us to hear about her
experiences and see her perspective. When Elizabeth shared that she spoke with her staff, I could
have gone to the next question on my plan, but instead I asked, “What did you talk about?” By
asking this question, I opened the door to hearing Elizabeth’s own experience as an indigenous
person. When I began to let go of control, embraced being a learner in this process and employed
a more learner-centered approach, I learned more about my participants and gained insight into
new perspectives. Leading adaptive change requires one to step beyond one’s default behaviors
and into unknown situations in order to learn something new, which means experiencing a period
of incompetence (Heifetz et al., 2009). After the experiences noted above with going into
unknown situations and letting go of my default controlling behaviors, I still find the idea of it
intimidating, but well worth the struggle.

109
Leader Growth 2: Centering Race
Centering race in conversations was the first change I wanted to see in myself, as outlined
in my conceptual framework. Wenton et al. (2018) claimed that acknowledging and naming
racism is an essential step when trying to dismantle something so pervasive to education. When
one overlooks or deemphasizes race, the danger of failing to deliver anti-racist change is
increased. Brown (2018) stated opting out of conversations about privilege and oppression
because they make you uncomfortable is the epitome of privilege. This was an area in which I
made growth, but also have room to grow. At the beginning of the sessions, there were multiple
occasions where I missed opportunities to center race; however, as the table below shows, in the
second action research cycle, I began showing some improvement. By having fewer missed
opportunities to center race, I improved in my ability to bring to the principals’ consciousness
how important it is in our efforts to engage in anti-racist practice and change.

Table 5
Centering Race
Cycle Centered race Missed centering race
Cycle 1 2 6
Cycle 2 4 4

110
Below is an excerpt from an initial session where I failed to center race when asking a
question about curriculum:
Suzie: Let’s talk about curriculum more. What about the curriculum that is beyond the
standards—can curriculum also be that? Think about the hidden curriculum that goes
beyond the teacher’s guide? Think about the messages on the walls. Who is on the wall?
Think about the books being read in the class? Who is in the book? How are members of
certain ethnic groups represented?
Diane: That is not what comes to mind when I think about curriculum, but I can see how
that connects to curriculum as it connects to their instruction.
Elizabeth: I think of curriculum as something that changes and evolves over time.
Suzie: Can you think of an example?
Elizabeth: My teachers decided to read the book Out of My Mind. This book addresses
diversity in that the main character has Cerebral Palsy, and we see the world through her
eyes. I think before that, reading a book with the main character having a disability would
have been a taboo thing to do.
Suzie: So it sounds like small steps are being taken forward?
In this example, by failing to center race, I failed to disrupt what I set out to do in this process, as
the first change I noted for myself in my conceptual framework was keeping race at the center of
conversations. Wenton et al. (2018) proclaimed that when one sugarcoats the narrative of race
and racism, it not only avoids addressing the issue but further upholds White supremacy. While I
asked the questions such as “Who is on the wall? Who is in the book?” I should have instead
slowed down, not asked so much at once, and explicitly asked questions that centered race. For
example, I could have asked, “When you look around, is there representation of Black students

111
and adults?” Alternatively, I could have asked these probing questions as a follow up to
Elizabeth’s statement regarding the book Out of My Mind. In addition, I should have asked for
examples of literature by Black authors and with Black main characters. I was holding back and
sugarcoating my questions by avoiding using the term Black in my questions. Instead, when
Elizabeth mentioned “this book addresses diversity in that the main character has Cerebral
Palsy,” I responded with “so it sounds like small steps are being taken forward?” In saying this, I
did not question the use of a physical disability as the example of “diversity.” As stated
previously, within the first cycle, I coded 14 times in my critical reflections about feeling
insecure or uncomfortable through this action research process, which may have been part of the
reason I held back. The times I noted feeling uncomfortable were not specific to centering race
but rather the whole process, which included the notion of me centering race, and thus a barrier
to ultimately doing what I set out to do.
When the conversation referenced above shifted to the inclusivity of students with
disabilities, I should have moved the conversation back to my research question of supporting
principals to develop color consciousness and support anti-racist practices. I failed to center race
which could have been accomplished by going back and clarifying that my intention and our
goals for growth were to focus on racial diversity and inclusion, not diversity in ability or special
needs. In a critical reflection at the end of Cycle 1, I wrote the following:
Centering race in my conversations has been at the forefront of my mind this week. When
I look at the anti-racist adaptive behaviors that I wished to have [enacted] by the end, one
of them was to put race at the center of my conversations. I have been lacking in this, and
I need to improve, yet I am not sure how to get there.

112
There are many reasons why White educators may be reluctant to confront issues of race. Topics
surrounding race and racism push White educators to examine their own assumptions and biases
about people of color and the possible role they play in maintaining the structures of racism
(Castagno, 2014; DiAngelo, 2011). By acknowledging that I was not centering race or enacting
anti-racist adaptive leadership in my mid-cycle in-the-field analysis, I was able to start thinking
more about how to improve in this area and be more intentional about bringing forth these
concepts I said I would enact. Although I was unable to determine what specifically was holding
me back, I was encouraged by Brene Brown’s (2017) words: “Integrity is choosing courage over
comfort; choosing what is right over what is fun, fast, or easy; and choosing to practice our
values rather than simply professing them.” Those words resonated with me as I knew this
process would be challenging before I even began, and I knew I was doing it because it was the
right thing to do.
As stated earlier, critical reflections were used during my data analysis to see if I was
making progress toward my desired outcomes. Although the majority of the reflections I wrote
were focused on the sessions I had with the principals in my study, there were three where I
reflected on other parts of my work. In those instances, I wrote reflections about my
understanding of my role as a director and my progress of being an anti-racist adaptive leader, in
general, outside of the scope of the study. The two examples that I will share below are both
drawn from data where I centered race outside of my study, and thus not with the two principals.
I found more compelling evidence of me centering race when working outside the scope of my
action research study, than with the principals during our action research sessions. Below is a
critical reflection I wrote after walking through a school library with a site principal who was not
in my study:

113
As I entered the library and looked through, the only thing I saw was White. White
literature, White stories, White artist illustrations, White posters, etc. Whiteness was all I
saw in this massive building that was meant to inspire curious little minds and help them
develop into critical thinkers and well-rounded children. As we took the tour, I asked
where I could find a book by a Black author or find a book with Black children as the
focus? I was surprised by the look I received when I asked this question as her eyebrows
were raised, her head was titled, and her expression was closer to a frown. I was
disappointed in what I saw but I also began to think that this school was not alone in the
way it looked. My guess is majority of our libraries look the same. How is it that I never
looked at a library this way before?
In the example above, asking where I could find a book with a Black child seemed natural and
essential. Even though the example ends with me asking “How is it that I never looked at a
library this way before?” in the moment of the tour, the awareness of Whiteness at the exclusion
of Blackness and the questions I posed to the principal didn’t seem unwarranted or out of place.
My question was authentic, and I was frustrated when I looked around and saw everything
through a color conscious lens. I was frustrated with the way the library looked and with myself
for never before looking at things through a color conscious lens. Principals have a responsibility
to lead their staff through both the process of uncovering and resolving the systemic problems
that are associated with racism within their schools (Skrla et al., 2004; Welton et al., 2015).
However, if principals are not aware of the systemic problems, how will they know to change? I
argue that they won’t, and it takes courage to inform others about these systemic problems so
that they too can develop color consciousness. While the example above may seem small or
insignificant, it is more than I would have done or noticed before I began engaging in this work.

114
The principal I spoke with in the above instance was one with whom I did not interact as
often with, nor would I consider a close friend, different from the way I consider the two
principals in my study. While I tried to determine why I was able to center race in this situation
but not with the two principals with whom I was working with more closely, I began to wonder
what influence friendship had. As I stated in my methods section, the participants I selected for
this study were not only colleagues, but also friends who I cared deeply about. It was possible
that my friendship with the two principals engaging in this study with me prevented me from
probing further or asking harder questions out of fear of jeopardizing our relationship. For
example, Diane made a comment during our time together that teachers were teaching in a way
that they always have and how they were taught. When I looked at the data, after that statement,
I realized I moved onto the next question without stopping to center race in that conversation. I
could have asked her, “Tell me more about teaching the way they always have. What does that
mean?” Also, I could have asked “How might the teachers’ race contribute to this observation?”
I also could have turned the conversation to asking about principals. “Are principals leading the
way they always have?” “How does a principal’s own race contribute to this observation?” This
idea of friendship being a barrier for me was an emergent finding and I did not collect evidence
to help me substantiate what the explanation could be for the varying ways in which I was able to
center race with some while not with others. However, what this tells me, is that I have room to
grow in centering race, irrespective of my relationships. Systemic racism operates 24-7 and 365
days a year, and should never be interrupted by one’s self-image, good intentions, or niceness
(DiAngelo, 2021). In addition, this emergent finding made me question how well I cultivated a
brave space as I was not able to be fully open and honest with the participants in my study.

115
Centering race outside of my study occurred another time while I was in a curriculum
pilot meeting. Below is an excerpt from a critical reflection:
I sat down with two teachers, and we discussed the textbook adoptions we have now and
how they are old and outdated. Right away, I felt the need to share my concerns with how
they were reinforcing stereotypes and White power. When I asked how the teacher was
addressing stereotypes and the one-sided information from our textbooks, she
acknowledged she had an awareness of this, but was uncomfortable having these
conversations because it was so new. Perplexed by this comment, I did not probe to
inquire what was new. Clearly, racism is not new, but maybe she meant talking about it?
She further stated that she felt she was “shocking their little world” and didn’t want to be
the one to do that. “But you have to” was my automatic reply followed by, “we can’t
allow teaching from books that send the wrong messages to our students and reproduce
and uphold White supremacy while doing nothing about it. You are the one in power in
your class. If you don’t speak up, who will?”
As with the library tour in the above instance, I felt the need to speak up and voice my concerns.
I did not hesitate to remind her that “You are the one in power in your class.” Or to ask, “If you
don’t speak up, who will?” This was something I wanted her to contemplate, and I didn’t shy
away from bringing it to her consciousness. In my analysis of my data and my search for
instances where I centered (or didn’t) center race, I wondered why I was able to speak so freely
with this teacher when compared to conversations I had with the principals in my study. Besides
friendship with the two principals in my study as the possible explanation, I also wonder how my
role in the district shaped my interactions with those outside my study. Given my role as a
Director, I hold a position of power over the teacher, which gave me greater confidence to

116
engage in a more color conscious conversation. Although working at the District office as a
Director may be seen by some as having positional power above principals, I personally consider
us all on an equal management level. As such, when working with the two principals in my
study, I did not see myself as having positional authority over them
1
.
The reason the two examples above were included is because they demonstrated growth
in me as an anti-racist adaptive leader. In my conceptual framework narrative, I stated that I
would keep race at the center of conversations, critically reflect on the way things were done,
and actively speak up or challenge practices that reproduce the status quo. Although my hope
was that my data would have more compelling evidence of me doing that within my study, the
lack of data highlighted that I was not yet where I hoped to be. Applying theory in practice
proves to be difficult for many educators (Wenton et al., 2019), and that was no different for me.
Below is an example with Diane and Elizabeth where I attempted to center race; however, I still
stopped short and demonstrated room for growth:
Elizabeth: Our curriculum is outdated, and teachers need to look beyond that.
Diane: Teachers are on the frontline though and not immersed in the literature the ways
in which you have been and the ways in which you have been sharing. They need
professional development and resources to understand what and how to teach. I have
been thinking about the decorations that I put up and what is on display. I now wonder
who benefits and who may be offended. This is because you keep making us think about
these things, which is great, but who is having those conversations with our teachers?

1
Although I realize I don’t have to have positional authority in order to lead from the
side, it was my discomfort in my role that shaped my actions.

117
Suzie: I think beyond just training and professional development, there are conversations
to be had with our teachers just like we are doing here. It is something you can do. We
can work on being reflective and thinking about things out loud in a non-threatening way.
Remember, small steps. Is that something that can be done?
Diane: Yes, I think we have to.
Elizabeth: 100%
Within this conversation, I failed to properly center race with principals. When Elizabeth
admitted that she “now wonder[s] who benefits and who may be offended,” I simply said, “There
are conversations to be had.” That comment was very open with no clear direction or indication
of what the conversations should look like or how to go about them. I didn’t pick up on
Elizabeth’s wondering about the “who” in her statement. I failed to say explicitly that as the
school principal, they needed to start having conversations about race and racism with their
teachers, and changes needed to happen. I could have even gone further and said, “let’s develop
a plan together on opening those doors to conversations.” In order to build leadership capacity,
there needs to be an understanding that the courage to make needed change resides in people
who have long-term perspective and a stake in the organization’s futures (Heifetz et al., 2009).
With the missed opportunities to center race, I also missed the opportunity, as an anti-racist
adaptive leader, to begin to build leadership capacity within those who have a stake in the
organization for generating long term institutional change for racial equity, which is the final
piece of my conceptual framework.
Following is another example where I demonstrated growth in centering race while still
leaving room for improvement

118
Suzie: One of the things that I am hearing is that we need to support our teachers in
recognizing stereotypes, so they are equipped to make better decisions about the books
they choose to read and bring into their class. As a principal, how might you be able to
help or what have you done?
Elizabeth: I think looking through a book together as a group and pointing out stereotypes
can help.
Diane: I have talked to my teachers about increasing diversity in their literature and they
responded that diversity can be many things such as different time periods and different
time spans.
Suzie: So, if the word diversity is leaving it open to interpretation, I think the first step is
naming what it is we mean when we say diversity. We need to name that diversity is
having literature with main characters that are Black and we need to incorporate books by
Black authors.
Diane: Yes, that would be helpful.
In the instance above Diane mentioned talking to her teachers about “increasing diversity in their
literature.” When she stated that teachers responded with “diversity can be many things such as
different time periods and different time spans” she did not say how she responded to them.
While I could have asked her to elaborate more about what she did or said next, I stopped
myself, and missed an opportunity to discover more about her leadership and beliefs on what
diverse literature meant to her. I am unsure if it was my insecurities or our friendship that
stopped me from examining the comment a little more. Rather, I made the choice to define
diversity in the way I wanted it defined to our teachers. In doing such, I was successful in

119
naming and centering race, but fell short of examining the principal’s leadership capacity so as to
know how to build it further.
There is no doubt that I made growth and also still have room to grow in my efforts to
being an anti-racist adaptive leader. Heifetz et al. (2009) stated that no one learns anything by
repressing their ignorance or incompetence. When one does not push past this limit of their
competence, they do not learn what it will take to resolve the adaptive challenges facing them.
What is suggested, and what I must improve upon, is fostering a culture of learning and to begin
by acknowledging what one does not know (Heifetz et al., 2009). Often times, when I speak up, I
like to have a solution; however, when it comes to speaking up and centering race, I do not
always know the best solution. This leads to silence and silence is carefulness in the extreme
(DiAngelo, 2021). Silence is the opposite of what an anti-racist leader should engage in. There
are times when the best strategy is to listen and there are times the best strategy is to come
forward and engage. However, by defaulting to what feels most comfortable, one is not guided
by critical thinking and is not anti-racist (DiAngelo, 2021).
Conclusion
In conclusion, my findings highlighted the ways in which the principals in the study grew
in developing color consciousness to support future anti-racist practices. In the beginning of this
process, I took time to learn about my learners and their ways of knowing (Drago-Severson &
Blum-DeStefano, 2017) as well as worked to cultivate a brave space. Once I began to learn more
about my learners and what they needed for growth, I was able to begin scaffolding their
learning to help them further develop. During our time together, principals grew in recognizing
they could enact change within their spheres of influence, and they were better able to recognize
the colorblind curriculum. These realizations helped principals develop their enactment plan for

120
the 2022-2023 school year. Additionally, my findings illustrated ways in which I grew in this
process as I was also a learner. I grew in my ability to lead from a more learner-centered
approach and was able to begin centering race more in my conversations. I also learned that there
were times where my own growth was hindered by my friendships or perceived hierarchical
relations, and I need to continue centering race irrespective of discomfort I might feel given my
role and relationships.
Afterword
In this section, it is my intent to provide information about the next steps of my practice
as an anti-racist adaptive leader. During the three months of this action research study, principals
and I covered a vast array of topics in a short period of time. Although I created a Google
Classroom and updated it regularly with numerous resources and articles that were relevant and
applicable to our sessions, the principals exhibited resistance to using it or referring to it.
Elizabeth called at one time and said, “I know you mentioned this was in the classroom, but can
you e-mail me it instead?” While I was never able to determine the reasons principals did not use
it, or refer to it, they did not seek it out as a resource. Knowing that I was taking the principal’s
time to engage in this journey together, I always wanted to simplify and meet their needs
whenever I could, so I would email them back with the same resources I had posted in the
Google Classroom when they asked.
Recognizing their unknown resistance, I began reflecting on what it was principals
needed and would use. In addition, I wanted to think of something that I could use in my future
endeavors of leading anti-racist change. My original idea was a website, and I spent a
considerable amount of time building one that I thought would be my final development to
accompany this action research dissertation. However, as I continued to construct it, I began to

121
question if it would be looked at or useful to educational practitioners, who often just want
something emailed to them. I had trouble understanding the differences between the Google
classroom I had created for the two principals and the website I was hoping to create for a wider
audience. Having this internal hesitation about what would be beneficial, what came to mind was
a handbook. Handbooks are tangible, easy to reference, easy to refer back to, and one can add to
it over time.
What I came up with was developing a handbook on Canva. The benefit of changing the
website into a handbook is that I can print it out for immediate use, and I can also use the online
version to revise and edit over time. In its present form (Appendix C), the handbook is focused
on some of my action research themes covered in my conceptual framework such as critical
reflection, brave space, unconscious bias, and color consciousness. The current version can also
be found online by going here: https://tinyurl.com/antiracistleadership2022.
I shared this handbook idea with my participants, and they helped co-create the themes
by providing insight into what they found valuable during our sessions together and what they
thought would benefit future principals. As indicated in my findings, part of my growth in this
process has been leaving the teacher-centered mindset and shifting to learner-centered, so co-
creating with principals was an essential component. Knowing that I have a desire to support
more principals in the future, I wanted a handbook to help guide me moving forward and this
handbook is a significant step forward.
Although the action research dissertation is over, my work is far from complete. What
this process made me realize is how much there is still to accomplish, and I have just begun
unlocking my potential to enact change. While the tasks at hand seem massive and daunting, I

122
stand firm behind my position in making continuous growth and steps forward each and every
day.
Throughout the past 3 years at USC, I have been deeply immersed in the literature on
subjects such as teaching practices and theories, adult learning, critical reflection, culturally
responsive school leadership and much more. Within each reading, in some way, I have grown in
my ability to lead through the lens of equity. Whether it was reading about exclusionary
practices, community-based epistemology, or radical love, there was a lesson in it for me to
grapple with, reflect upon, and use to know better and be better. As I move forward in this life-
long journey, I take with me many of the lessons I learned through this process. I will continue to
give the work back to the people, I will keep race at the center of conversations, and I will
further support principals, both those in the study and those not, in leading institutional change
for racial equity.
As Northouse (2019) stated, giving work back to the people means empowering people to
decide what to do in circumstances where they feel uncertain, expressing belief in their ability to
solve their own problems and think for themselves rather than thinking for them. Knowing now
what it takes to be an anti-racist adaptive leader and by practicing this behavior for the last three
months, encourages me to continue endeavoring down this path. While this behavior does not
always come easily for me, I have learned that teaching and empowering others to successfully
do the work feels better than doing the work for them. It also helps ensure the work continues
even when I am not there.
As an anti-racist adaptive leader, I will continue centering race by speaking up against
injustice. While there were times within this study that I failed to do this properly, there were
also times that I did center race. Knowing I am capable and knowing its importance, I will

123
actively name racism and call it out for what it is. I will not quietly sit back and tolerate a
Whitewashed curriculum with practices that reproduce the status quo while continuing to
marginalize other students. Before, ignorance allowed this silence, but I cannot undo what I
know now after years of focused study. I am no longer blinded by what is in front of me and my
color conscious lens will lead me in my future work as an educational leader and change agent.
Finally, my plan for moving forward involves further supporting the two principals who
were in this study. Both of them came up with enactment plans and I want to support them
through further development and implementation of their plans. In addition, I would like to
continue supporting other principals in developing a color conscious lens so that they, too, are
able to recognize the colorblind curriculum in their schools and begin developing plans to disrupt
it. One way I will go about this is by using resources and supports from the handbook that I
developed to start opening the door to new conversations.
The past 3 years have been an incredible experience, and I have learned more than I
could have ever imagined both about myself and about the historically entrenched inequities that
reside within education as a microcosm of our society. Moving forward, I will lead with what my
heart feels and what my brain knows. I will make a difference each step of the way as I am
committed to pursuing my goal of being an anti-racist adaptive leader in all future endeavors.

124
References
Aguilar, E. (2020). Coaching for equity: Conversations that change practice. John Wiley &
Sons.
Aleinikoff, T. A. (1991). A case for race-consciousness. Columbia Law Review, 91(5), 106 –125.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1122845
Apple, M. W. (1996). Nature of Conflict. Educating the Democratic Mind, 173.
Apple, M. W. (2018). On analyzing hegemony. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 1(1).
Aquino, K. (2016). Anti-racism ‘from below:’ Exploring repertoires of everyday anti-racism.
Ethnic and Racial Studies, 39(1), 105 –122.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2016.1096408
Arao, B., & Clemens, K. (2013). From safe spaces to brave spaces. In L. M. Landreman (Ed.),
The art of effective facilitation: Reflections from social justice educators (pp. 135 –150).
ACPA/Stylus.
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education. Allyn & Bacon.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing organizations. Jossey-Bass.
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2010). Racism without racists: Colorblind racism and racial inequality in
contemporary America. Rowman & Littlefield.
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2017). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of
racial inequality in America (5
th
ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.
Bonilla-Silva, E., & Ashe, A. (2014). 3. The end of racism? In S. Nilsen & S. E. Turner (Eds.),
The colorblind screen (pp. 57-80). New York University Press.

125
Bonilla-Silva, E., & Forman, T. A. (2000). “I am not a racist but...”: Mapping white college
students’ racial ideology in the USA. Discourse & Society, 11(1), 50–85.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926500011001003
Borsheim-Black, C., & Sarigianides, S. T. (2019). Letting go of literary whiteness: Antiracist
literature instruction for white students. Teachers College Press.
Briscoe, F. (2006). Reproduction of racialized hierarchies: Ethnic identities in the discourse of
educational leadership. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 4(1), 116–142.
http://www.jceps.com/wp-content/uploads/PDFs/04-01-4.pdf
Brookfield, S. D. (2017). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. John Wiley & Sons.
Brooks, J. S. (2012). Black school, White school: Racism and educational (mis) leadership.
Teachers College Press.
Brooks, J. S., & Arnold, N. W. (Eds.). (2013). Antiracist school leadership: Toward equity in
education for America’s students. IAP.
Brooks, J. S., Miles, M. T., & Buck, P. S. (2008). From scientific management to social justice.
And back again. Pedagogical shifts in educational leadership. In A. H. Normore (Ed.),
Leadership for social justice: Promoting equity and excellence through inquiry and
reflective practice (pp. 99 –114). IAP. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230910967527
Brown, B. (2017). Rising strong: How the ability to reset transforms the way we live, love,
parent, and lead. Random House.
Brown, B. (2018). Dare to lead: Brave work. Tough conversations. Whole hearts. Random
House.

126
Campbell, P., & Wirtenberg, J. (1980). How books influence children: What the research shows.
Interracial Books for Children Bulletin, 11(6), 3–6.
http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1711.dl/Literature.CIBCBulletinv11n06
Castagno, A. E. (2008). “I don’t want to hear that!”: Legitimating whiteness through silence in
schools. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 39(3), 314–333.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1492.2008.00024.x
Castagno, A. E. (2013). Multicultural education and the protection of whiteness. American
Journal of Education, 120(1), 101–128. https://doi.org/10.1086/673121
Castagno, A. E. (2014). Educated in whiteness: Good intentions and diversity in schools.
University of Minnesota Press.
Cheng, M., & Soudack, A. (1994). Anti-racist education: A literature review. Toronto Board of
Education, Research Department.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Chapter 8: Relationships of knowledge and practice:
Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24(1), 249 –305.
Coghlan, D. (2007). Insider action research: Opportunities and challenges. Management
Research News, 30(5), 335 –343. https://doi.org/10.1108/01409170710746337
Coghlan, D. (2019). Doing action research in your own organization (5
th
ed.). Sage.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory. Sage Publications.
Darling-Hammond, L., Meyerson, D., LaPointe, M., & Orr, M. T. (2009). Preparing principals
for a changing world: Lessons from effective school leadership programs. John Wiley &
Sons.

127
Davis, J. E., & Jordan, W. J. (1994). The effects of school context, structure, and experiences on
African American males in middle and high school. The Journal of Negro Education,
63(4), 570 –587. https://doi.org/10.2307/2967296
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2001). Critical race theory: An introduction. New York University
Press.
Devine, P. G., Forscher, P. S., Austin, A. J., & Cox, W. T. (2012). Long-term reduction in
implicit race bias: A prejudice habit-breaking intervention. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology, 48(6), 1267 –1278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.06.003
Dexter, L. A. (2006). Elite and specialized interviewing. ECPR Press.
DiAngelo, R. (2018). White fragility: Why it’s so hard for white people to talk about racism.
Beacon Press.
DiAngelo, R. (2021). Nice racism: How progressive White people perpetuate racial harm.
Beacon Press.
Diem, S., & Welton, A. D. (2020). Anti-racist educational leadership and policy: Addressing
racism in public education. Routledge.
Dovidio, J. F., Kawakami, K., & Gaertner, S. L. (2002). Implicit and explicit prejudice and
interracial interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(1), 62 –68.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.1.62
Drago-Severson, E., & Blum-DeStefano, J. (2017). The self in social justice: A developmental
lens on race, identity, and transformation. Harvard Educational Review, 87(4), 457–481.
https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-87.4.457
Dyson, M. E. (1997). Race rules: Navigating the color line. Vintage Books.

128
Eisner, E. W. (Ed.). (1985). Learning and teaching the ways of knowing. University of Chicago
Press.
Endicott, F. R., & Mukherjee, A. (1992). Employment equity for racially visible and aboriginal
peoples: An anti-racist framework and an anti-racist manual for school boards. Canadian
School Boards Association.
Fiarman, S. E. (2016). Unconscious bias: When good intentions aren’t enough. Educational
Leadership, 74(3), 10–15. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1119211
Fine, M. E., Weis, L. E., Powell, L. C., & Wong, L. (1997). Off white: Readings on race, power,
and society. Taylor & Frances/Routledge.
Frankenburg, R. (1993). White women, race matters: The social construction of whiteness.
Routledge.
Freire, P. (2000a). Pedagogy of freedom: Ethics, democracy, and civic courage. Rowman &
Littlefield Publishers.
Freire, P. (2000b). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30
th
anniv. Ed.). Continuum.
Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. Jossey-Bass.
Gillborn, D. (2005). Education policy as an act of white supremacy: Whiteness, critical race
theory and education reform. Journal of Education Policy, 20(4), 485–505.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930500132346
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4
th
ed.). Pearson.
Gooden, M. A., & O’Doherty, A. (2015). Do you see what I see? Fostering aspiring leaders’
racial awareness. Urban Education, 50(2), 225 –255.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085914534273

129
Gotanda, N. (1991). A critique of “our constitution is color-blind.” Stanford Law Review, 44(1),
1–68. https://doi.org/10.2307/1228940
Gregory, A., & Weinstein, R. S. (2008). The discipline gap and African Americans: Defiance or
cooperation in the high school classroom. Journal of School Psychology, 46(4), 455–475.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2007.09.001
Haney-Lopez, I. (2006). White by law: The legal construction of race. NYU Press.
Hancock, D. R., Bray, M., & Nason, S. A. (2002). Influencing university students’ achievement
and motivation in a technology course. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(6),
365–372.
Heifetz, R. A., & Laurie, D. L. (1997). The work of leadership. Harvard business review, 75,
124–134.
Heifetz, R. A., Heifetz, R., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009). The practice of adaptive
leadership: Tools and tactics for changing your organization and the world. Harvard
Business Press.
Herr, K., & Anderson, G. L. (2015). The action research dissertation (2
nd
ed.). Sage.
Hollins, E. R., & Guzman, M. T. (2005). Research on preparing teachers for diverse populations.
In M. Cochran-Smith & K. M. Zeichner (Eds.), Studying teacher education: The report of
the AERA Panel on Research and Teacher Education (pp. 477 –548). Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Publishers; American Educational Research Association.
Hooks, b. (1994). Confronting class in the classroom. In A. Dardner, M. P. Baltodano, & R. D.
Torres (Ed.), The critical pedagogy reader (pp. 142 –150). Routledge.

130
Jay, J. K., & Johnson, K. L. (2002). Capturing complexity: A typology of reflective practice for
teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(1), 73 –85.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s0742-051x(01)00051-8
Kailin, J. (2002). Antiracist education: From theory to practice. Rowman & Littlefield.
Kegan, R., Kegan, L. L. L. R., & Lahey, L. L. (2009). Immunity to change: How to overcome it
and unlock potential in yourself and your organization. Harvard Business Press.
Kegan, R., & Lahey, L. L. (2010). From subject to object: A constructive-developmental
approach to reflective practice. In Handbook of reflection and reflective inquiry (pp.
433–449). Springer, Boston, MA.
Kendi, I. X. (2019). How to be an antiracist. One World.
Kendi, I. X. (2021). There is no debate over critical race theory. The Atlantic.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/07/opponents-critical-race-theory-are-
arguing-themselves/619391/
Khalifa, M. A. (2018). Culturally responsive school leadership. Harvard Education Press.
Khalifa, M. A., Gooden, M. A., & Davis, J. E. (2016). Culturally responsive school leadership: A
synthesis of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 1272 –1311.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316630383
Ladson-Billings, G. (2005). Reading, writing, and race: Literacy practices of teachers in diverse
classrooms. In T. L. McCarty (Ed.), Language, literacy, and power in schooling (pp.
133–150). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2012). Through a glass darkly: The persistence of race in education
research & scholarship. Educational Researcher, 41(4), 115–120.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x12440743

131
Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: Aka the remix. Harvard
Educational Review, 84(1), 74 –84. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.1.p2rj131485484751
Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. F. (2016). Toward a critical race theory of education. In A. D.
Dixson, C. K. Rousseau Anderson, & J. K. Donnor (Eds.), Critical race theory in
education (pp. 10 –31). Routledge.
Larrivee, B. (2008). Development of a tool to assess teachers’ level of reflective practice.
Reflective Practice, 9(3), 341 –360. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623940802207451
Lawrence, S. M., & Tatum, B. D. (1998). White racial identity and anti-racist education: A
catalyst for change. Beyond heroes and holidays: A practical guide to k-12 anti-racist,
Multicultural Education and Staff Development. https://www.teachingforchange.org/wp-
content/uploads/2012/08/ec_whiteracialidentity_english.pdf
Lewis, A. E. (2001). There is no “race” in the schoolyard: Colorblind ideology in an (almost) all-
white school. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 781 –811.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312038004781
Lewis, A. E., & Diamond, J. B. (2015). Despite the best intentions: How racial inequality thrives
in good schools. Oxford University Press.
Lewis, B. (1998). The historical roots of racism. The American Scholar, 67(1), 17 –25.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/41212711
Lochmiller, C. R., & Lester, J. N. (2017). Conceptualizing practitioner-scholarship for
educational leadership research and practice. Journal of Research on Leadership
Education, 12(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1942775116668525
Locke, L. F., Silverman, S. J., & Spirduso, W. W. (2010). Reading and understanding research.
(3
rd
ed.). Sage.

132
Loughran, J. (2014). Professionally developing as a teacher educator. Journal of teacher
education, 65(4), 271 –283.
Los Angeles Almanac. (2017). Median household income by zip code, Los Angeles county.
http://www.laalmanac.com/employment/em12c.php
Mascolo, M. F. (2009). Beyond student-centered and teacher-centered pedagogy: Teaching and
learning as guided participation. Pedagogy and the human sciences, 1(1), 3 –27.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3
rd
ed.). Sage.
McLaren, P. (1998). Whiteness is… the struggle for postcolonial hybridity. In J. Kincheloe & S.
Steinberg (Eds.), White Reign: Deploying whiteness in America (pp. 63–75). St. Martin’s
Press.
McMahon, B. (2007). Educational administrators’ conceptions of whiteness, anti-racism, and
social justice. Journal of Educational Administration, 45(6), 684 –696.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230710829874
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4
th
ed.). Wiley.
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress.
Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods
sourcebook. Sage Publications.
Milner, H. R. (2010). Culture, curriculum, and identity in education. In H. R. Milner (Ed.),
Culture, curriculum, and identity in education (pp. 1 –11). Palgrave Macmillan.
Mindtools (2021). Organization Design. Understanding and Influencing Organizational
Structure. https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newPPM_95.htm

133
National Center for Education Statistics. (2020). Percentage of public school students enrolled in
gifted and talented programs, by sex, race/ethnicity, and state: Selected years, 2004
through 2013-14. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d17/tables/dt17_204.90.asp
Northouse, P. G. (2019). Introduction to leadership: Concepts and practice. Sage Publications.
Patton, L. D. (2016). Disrupting postsecondary prose: Toward a critical race theory of higher
education. Urban Education, 51(3), 315-342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085915602542
Perry, P. (2008). Creating safe spaces in predominantly White classrooms. In M. Pollock (Ed.),
Everyday antiracism: Getting real about race in school (pp. 226 –229). The New Press.
Picower, B. (2009). The unexamined whiteness of teaching: How white teachers maintain and
enact dominant racial ideologies. Race Ethnicity and Education, 12(2), 197 –215.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13613320902995475
Picower, B. (2021). Reading, writing, and racism: Disrupting whiteness in teacher education
and in the classroom. Beacon Press.
Polite, L., & Saenger, E. B. (2003). A pernicious silence: Confronting race in the elementary
classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(4), 274 –278.
https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170308500406
Pollock, M. (2004). Race wrestling: Struggling strategically with race in educational practice and
research. American Journal of Education, 111(1), 25–67. https://doi.org/10.1086/424719
Pollock, M. (Ed.). (2008). Everyday antiracism: Getting real about race in school. The New
Press.
Radd, S. I. (2021). Five practices for equity-focused school leadership. ASCD.
Raelin, J. A. (2001). Public reflection as the basis of learning. Management Learning, 32(1), 11 –
30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507601321002

134
Raskin, C., Krull, M., & Felix, A. (2021). Principal leadership for racial equity: A field guide
for developing race consciousness. Corwin Press.
Robinson, S. B., & Leonard, K. F. (2018). Designing quality survey questions. Sage
Publications.
Rodgers, C. R. (2002). Seeing student learning: Teacher change and the role of reflection.
Harvard Educational Review, 72(2), 230 –253.
https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.72.2.5631743606m15751
Sawchuk, S (2021). What is critical race theory, and why is it under attack? EdWeek.
https://www.edweek.org/leadership/what-is-critical-race-theory-and-why-is-it-under-
attack/2021/05
Scheurs, J., & Dumbraveanu, R. (2014). A shift from teacher centered to learner centered
approach. Learning, 1(2).
Schofield, J. W. (2006). The colorblind perspective in school: Causes and consequences. In J. A.
Banks & C. A. McGee Banks (Eds.), Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives
(7
th
ed., pp. 271 –295). Wiley.
Scott, S. (2004). Fierce conversations: Achieving success at work & in life, one conversation at
a time. Penguin.
Seashore Louis, K., Dretzke, B., & Wahlstrom, K. (2010). How does leadership affect student
achievement? Results from a national US survey. School Effectiveness and School
Improvement, 21(3), 315 –336. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2010.486586
Sefa Dei, G. J. (2005). Critical issues in anti-racist research methodologies: An introduction.
Counterpoints, 252, 1–27. https://www.jstor.org/stable/42978742

135
Shelton, S. A., Barnes, M. E. (2016). “Racism just isn’t an issue anymore”: Preservice teachers’
resistances to the intersections of sexuality and race. Teaching and Teacher Education,
55, 165 –174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.01.008
Skrla, L., McKenzie, K. B., & Scheurich, J. J. (Eds.). (2009). Using equity audits to create
equitable and excellent schools. Corwin Press.
Skrla, L., Scheurich, J. J., Garcia, J., Nolly, G. (2004). Equity audits: A practical leadership tool
for developing equitable and excellent schools. Educational Administration Quarterly,
40, 133 –161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X03259148
Sleeter, C. E. (2001). Preparing teachers for culturally diverse schools: Research and the
overwhelming presence of whiteness. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(2), 94 –106.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487101052002002
Solomon, R. P. (2002). School leaders and antiracism: Overcoming pedagogical and political
obstacles. Journal of School Leadership, 12(2), 174–197.
https://doi.org/10.1177/105268460201200205
Staats, C. (2016). Understanding implicit bias: What educators should know. American
Educator, 39(4), 29 –33. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1086492
Stoll, L. C. (2019). Should schools be colorblind? John Wiley & Sons.
Stoll, L. C., & Louis, K. S. (2007). Professional learning communities. McGraw-Hill Education.
Sue, D. W. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life: Race, gender, and sexual orientation.
John Wiley & Sons.
Sue, D. W. (2013). Race talk: The psychology of racial dialogues. American Psychologist, 68(8),
663–672. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033681

136
Swanson, J., & Welton, A. (2019). When good intentions only go so far: White principals
leading discussions about race. Urban Education, 54(5), 732 –759.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085918783825
Tatum, B. (2007). Defining racism: “Can we talk?” In P. S. Rothenberg (Ed.), Race, class, and
gender in the United States (pp. 123 –130). Worth Publishers.
Tatum, B. (2008). Cultivating the trust of black parents. In M. Pollock (Ed.), Everyday
antiracism (pp. 310 –313). The New Press.
Teel, K., & Obidah, J. (2008). Race in the urban classroom: Developing educators’ cross-racial
competence. Teachers College Press.
Theoharis, G. (2007). Social justice educational leaders and resistance: Toward a theory of social
justice leadership. Educational administration quarterly, 43(2), 221–258.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X06293717
Theoharis, G. (2009). The school leaders our children deserve: Seven keys to equity, social
justice, and school reform. Teachers College Press.
Torino, G. C. (2015). Examining biases and white privilege: Classroom teaching strategies that
promote cultural competence. Women & Therapy, 38(3–4), 295 –307.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02703149.2015.1059213
Valli, L. (1990). Moral approaches to reflective practice: Encouraging reflective practice in
education: An analysis of issues and programs. Teachers College Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the
Development of Children, 23(3), 34–41.
Warford, M. K. (2011). The zone of proximal teacher development. Teaching and teacher
education, 27(2), 252–258.

137
Welton, A., Diem, S. A., Holme, J. J. (2015). Color conscious, cultural blindness: Suburban
school districts and demographic change. Education and Urban Society, 47, 695–722.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124513510734
Welton, A., Owens, D., & Zamani-Gallaher, E. (2018). Anti-racist change: A conceptual
framework for educational institutions to take systemic action. Teachers College Record,
120(14), 1 –22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124513510734
Wergin, J. F. (2019). Deep learning in a disorienting world. Cambridge University Press.
Young, M. D. (2014). What is a curriculum and what can it do? Curriculum Journal, 25(1), 7 –
13. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2014.902526
Young, M. D., & Laible, J. (2000). White racism, antiracism, and school leadership preparation.
Journal of School Leadership, 10(5), 374 –415.
https://doi.org/10.1177/105268460001000501
World Population Review. (2022). States That Have Banned Critical Race Theory 2022.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/states-that-have-banned-critical-race-
theory

138
Appendix A: Preliminary Action Research Plan
Action Research Session 1
Objective Action researcher will understand how principals see the world and where they are
situated on the ways of knowing typology (Drago-Severson & Blum-DeStefano, 2017).
(

Time 45-60 minutes

Setting School Site of principal

Action Pre-Interview

Data Sources
● Interview transcripts
● Action researcher critical reflection

Protocol: (Appendix B)

139
Action Research Session 2
Objective Action researcher will discuss with principal the research question, define the end
goal of the study, and construct a meaning of curriculum, color conscious, and anti-racist
leadership. Action researcher will create group norms with principals by engaging in a
conversation about a brave space and then co-creating group norms.

Time 45-60 minutes

Setting Zoom

Action
● Action researcher and principal will discuss the research question and goal of the study
● Action researcher and principal will construct meaning of curriculum, color conscious,
and anti-racist leadership by using padlet to start the conversation of initial thoughts
and then work to a consensus on the meanings
● Action researcher will support principals in discussing what a brave space is, what that
looks like in our setting, and will co create group norms for future meetings

Data Sources
● Field Notes
● Padlet
● Action researcher critical reflection

140
Action Research Session 3
Objectives
● Principals will be able to summarize what critical reflection is, differentiate it from
reflection, and discuss its benefits.
● Principals will be able to reflect on their positionality to help uncover bias.
● Action researcher will model what critical reflection is and scaffold learning by sharing
personal examples of critical reflections- While this was intended, it did not happen due
to timing

Data Sources
● Action researcher critical reflection
● Field Notes

Time 60 minutes

Setting Zoom

Optional Activities for participants to complete before the meeting (not required)

● I am From Leadership Poem https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVryvxLTIyU
● Watch Kimberle Crenshaw Ted Talk: https://www.ted.com/speakers/kimberle_crenshaw

Actions
● Action researcher will allow principals to share their understanding of reflection by
placing ideas/thoughts on Jamboard
● Action researcher will lead an activity where principals sort reflection and critical
reflection on Jamboard and discuss differences between the two
● Action researcher will scaffold their learning with exploring the notion of different types
of reflections (Jay & Johnson, 2002)
● Action researcher will model critical reflection by sharing a previously written one
● Support principals in exploring one’s positionality and identifying how positionality is
connected to oppression and privilege. Provide Intersecting Axes of Power, Privilege,
Domination, and Oppression to assist with this action

Discussion Questions
● Describe your relationship to the socially constructed categories that organize our world.
How would you identify in terms of gender, race, class, sexual orientation, race,
ethnicity, ability, faith, etc.
● Share some of your identities from the I am From Poem. Which were challenging to write
about? Why do you think that may have been?
● In what ways might you operate in a position of privilege in relation to these socially
constructed categories? Oppression?
● How does your intersectionality factor into how you understand your positionality?
● How do you demonstrate leadership as a principal? How do you model it? To Whom?

141
Action Research Session 4
Objectives
● Principals will define what unconscious bias is.
● Principals will recognize why knowing they have bias is important.
● Principals and Action researcher will take the Implicit Association Test and analyze
results.

Time 60 minutes

Setting Zoom

Data Sources
● Principal critical reflection
● Action researcher critical reflection
● Field Notes

Actions
● Facilitate a discussion on unconscious bias
● Describe the ramifications that unconscious bias may have related specifically to being a
principal
● Watch Ted Talk- Verma Myers How to overcome our biases?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYyvbgINZkQ
● Engage in taking the Implicit Association Test
(https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html)
● Analyze the results of the Implicit Association Test
o Making Sense of IAT Results: http://kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/implicit-bias-
training/resources/iat-results.pdf
● Brown’s (2018) Engaged Feedback Checklist

Discussion Questions
● Reflect on the feelings or reactions you had to the implicit bias test.
● How may your positionality have played a role in the results of the test, if at all?
● How might knowing your results affect your future actions, if at all?

Critical Reflection Questions
● How does your identity play a role in how your responses came out in the implicit bias
test?
● When thinking about your unconscious bias, who is disadvantaged at your school when
you think this way? Who is advantaged?
● How can you interpret the results of your implicit bias test to grow as a leader?
● What is something you learned about yourself this week that surprised you?
● What conscious choice can you make to disrupt your unconscious bias?

142
Cycle 1: In-the-Field Analysis
Actions
● Am I enacting concepts as I defined them? How do I know this? What evidence can I
point to from the data thus far?
● Based on the data, how am I making progress towards my desired outcomes, it at all?
What evidence can I point to?
● What needs to change before beginning cycle two, if anything?
● Review critical reflections to begin looking for any common themes emerging.

143
Action Research Session 5
Objectives
● Principals will be able to differentiate what it means to be colorblind and color conscious.
● Principals will be able to identify strategies that reject a colorblind mindset.
● Action researcher will discuss the ways how anti-racist leadership and color consciousness
connect to each other

Time 60 minutes

Setting Zoom

Data Sources
● Action researcher critical reflection
● Field Notes

Actions
● Kegan et al.’s (2009) “The Real Reason People Won’t Change”
● Revisit Critical reflection and why it is important
● The Danger of a Single Story
o https://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_ngozi_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_
story
● Promote a discussion centered on the meaning of color consciousness and colorblindness
● Group discussion to differentiate between a colorblind statement and color conscious one
(provide examples on a jamboard and discuss)
● Produce examples of ways both colorblind curricula may show up in a classroom by
discussing the learning environment (discourse, safe vs. brave space) and color conscious
facets of curriculum by discussing Cheng and Soudack’s (1994) tenets of anti-racism
curriculum

Discussion Questions
● What are the problems with having a colorblind mindset? What is the impact this has in
education?
● What strategies can you use to reject having a colorblind mindset?
● What examples can you share of how our curriculum is colorblind?
● In predominantly White schools, how can principals make race visible?
● What is the impact of White people not knowing our racial history?

144
Action Research Session 6
Objectives
● Principals will be able to identify the ways Whiteness dominates in the literature curriculum.
● Principals will be able to deconstruct literary Whiteness in curriculum and connect it to
colorblind curriculum by examining novels used in the school district.
● Action researcher will be able to lead a productive discussion and present opportunities for
participants to reflect and share on learnings.

Time 60 minutes

Setting Zoom

Data Sources
● Action researcher critical reflection
● Principal critical reflection
● Field Notes

Actions
● As a group, discuss curriculum in predominantly White schools, its implications, and
strategies to counter the dominance of Whiteness in literature curriculum.
● Read an article from two perspectives on a common literature novel and discuss if, as a
principal, they would allow teachers to read this and why or why now.

Discussion Questions
● What have you noticed about what is present and absent in our curricula? Whose
perspectives are represented. Whose perspectives are left out?
● As a leader, we must be aware of our role in maintaining the racial status quo of White
supremacy in the ways in which we engage students in our curriculum. How might this
be accomplished?
● In White dominant contexts there is often curriculum that overrepresents White
perspectives and White ways of knowing. How might this be harmful to our students?

Critical Reflection Questions
● How could you start, continue, or deepen your learning about the White dominated
curriculum at your school site?
● What conscious choice can you make to disrupt the overrepresentation of White dominated
curriculum?
● In what ways have you allowed partial perspectives to be implanted through curriculum, if at
all?

145
Action Research Session 7
Objectives
● Principals will begin to identify what they notice on their school site related to curriculum
that are either representing a color conscious way of being or colorblind curriculum. This
may be the learning environment (the how) or the formal, hidden, curriculum, or null
curriculum (the what)
● Action researcher will be able to able to identify adaptive and technical problems while
walking the school sites with principals.

Time 60 Minutes

Setting Zoom

Data Sources
● Field Notes
● Action researcher critical reflection

Pre Action
• Walk through school site with principal

Actions
● Group discussion on ways in which the curriculum in classrooms is color conscious or
colorblind.
● Action researcher and principals to bring examples and share something they observed.

Discussion Questions
● When entering classrooms, what do you notice?
● In the curriculum, who is represented, who is not?

146
Action Research Session 8
Objective For action researcher to engage in the process of member checking with participants
to ensure accuracy of data collected and for participant to have a say before publication

Time 45 minutes

Setting Zoom

Action
● Scott’s (2004) Seven Principles of Fierce Conversations
● Action researcher will share preliminary findings with principal to allow principal to
ensure accuracy of what was captured, provide feedback, and ask for changes if he/she
does not feel comfortable about something.
● Participants will share their action plan with action researchers
● Action researcher will ask the following questions to participant:
o If I was going to engage in this study with other principals, what changes or
recommendations would you have for me based on your experience, if any?
o If I was going to engage in this study with other principals, what would you tell
me to make sure to keep doing based on your experience, if anything?
o What further supports would be helpful for you moving forward?

Data Sources
● Field Notes
● Action researcher critical reflection

147
Appendix B: Interview Protocol
Welcome and thank you for taking the time to speak with me today. I truly appreciate
you agreeing to participate in my study. When we planned this interview, I asked for you to set
aside about an hour of your time. I wanted to confirm that it still works for you. I recognize the
work it takes to run a school, and if you need to stop and reschedule because you are needed, that
is okay.
I am excited to begin, but first, I want to review what my study is about. As you know, I
am currently getting my doctorate at USC in leading instructional change. I decided to focus my
self-study action research study on understanding how, in my role as a director, I can support
principals in predominantly White districts to strengthen their anti-racist leadership practices
related to seeing curriculum with a color conscious lens. In addition to interviewing you, I am
also going to interview one other principal in the district so that I can gain further insight from
their perspectives as well.
If I ask you a question that you do not feel comfortable answering, please feel free to skip
the question. As your participation is voluntary, please also feel free to stop the interview at any
time.
As I mentioned on the phone, this interview is confidential, and it will not be shared with
anyone. The data that I gather from this study might be shared in my final report, but I will use a
pseudonym to protect your confidentiality and do my best to ensure none of the data I gather
would be identified back to you. If you would rather I did not use a pseudonym or you would
like to pick the name I use, please let me know.

148
I did bring a voice recorder with me today so I can ensure I accurately capture what you
tell me. The recording will not be shared with anyone, and I will only record if you are
comfortable with it. The data will be stored on my password-protected computer and will be
destroyed after I transcribe our interview with no identifying information. And I am happy to not
record anything that you would not like me to record. May I have your permission to record our
conversation today?
In addition to the recording, I will be taking notes as it helps me be a better listener. Also,
there might be comments you make that I want to revisit later, and this helps ensure I do not
forget to come back to those remarks. If it distracts and you would rather I did not take notes,
please let me know and I will not.
I recognize that we are colleagues and have known each other for some time. Please think
of me as a researcher during this interview and not as a colleague/Director. As I said before, I
want to understand your perspective along with other leaders in our predominantly White district
to ultimately inform how I might best support you and other principals.
Before we start, do you have any questions regarding this study or I anything I have said
today?
Interview
I would like to ask you some questions pertaining to anti-racist leadership.
1. How, if at all, have you talked with your staff about the role racism plays in
reproducing marginalization related to curriculum?
a. What concerns do you have about talking with your staff about race and
racism, if anything?

149
b. What excites you about talking with your staff about race and racism if
anything?
2. Tell me about a situation when a parent complained about the content of the
curriculum being taught, if any? How did you address it?
3. What does the term “anti-racist leadership” mean to you? (After they define: As
we will discuss in our group meetings, I define an anti-racist leader as one who
ensures their everyday actions are from an anti-racist stance and has a constant
awareness of who benefits from their decisions and who does not.)
4. How comfortable do you feel with conflict when it comes to issues of social
justice?
5. Tell me about a time when you felt uncomfortable being an anti-racist leader, if at
all.
6. What do you need most when working to be an anti-racist leader?
Now, before you leave, I am going to hand you a paper with 4 multiple choice selections.
These questions will help me understand more of you as an adult learner. For each question,
please select one choice that resonates the most with you. If none of them do, you can leave it
blank. If there is more than one that guides you, select the one that fits best for most of the time.
7. If the district asks me to implement something, I believe my role as a principal is
to?
a. Follow what has been asked because it was asked of me
b. Implement what has been asked after discussing it with others and
ensuring it is the best decision.
c. Follow what has been asked because I care what others think

150
d. Reflect on why this is being asked and ask questions before
implementation
8. As a principal, which of the following is the most important to you?
a. Staying true to my values
b. Meeting expectations and seeking approval
c. Connecting work to my own interests
d. Reflecting on others’ views and being open to and changing myself
9. As a principal, which of the following guides your decisions?
a. Does this decision keep me true to my values?
b. Will you like me for doing this?
c. How does this decision help me develop and grow?
d. Will this get me in trouble?
10. Which of these is the most true about yourself as a principal?
a. I hear your feedback, but I hold firm to my beliefs. I want to grow myself
through this feedback and through collaboration.
b. I internalize other people’s assessments of me as my own. I want them to
think highly of me.
c. I need to understand the rules to help me get through and improve.
Closing
I want to thank you for opening up today and allowing me to see things from your
perspective. Everything you shared was very helpful for my study, and I appreciate you making
the time for me. As we covered many sensitive topics today, I want you to know that I am happy
to share any material that concerns you to ensure I have accurately represented what you said. If

151
there is anything that I included that is inaccurate or worries you, I will revisit it and make
changes where needed.
Again, thank you for participating in my study.
Post Interview Reflection

152

Appendix C: Anti-Racist Leadership Handbook

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this action research study was to examine how my role as a Director in Educational Services could support principals in recognizing how hegemonic, colorblind practices are reproduced in classrooms. I created a nine-session, 3-month learning opportunity to support principals by engaging in conversations surrounding positionality, intersectionality, unconscious bias, and color consciousness, while also focusing the conversations on the colorblind curriculum inside and outside the classroom. Principals were selected for this study because they play a fundamental role in constructing excellent schools and ensuring equitable learning opportunities for all students (Radd et al., 2021), as well as because the greatest impact on learning comes primarily from teachers and secondly from principals (Seashore Louis et al., 2010). The research question that guided this action research study was: How do I support school principals in my predominantly White district to develop color consciousness to support future anti-racist practices? My findings highlighted a transformation with principals in recognizing they were able to enact change within their sphere of influence. In addition, they were able to walk into a classroom with a color-conscious lens and see ways in which the colorblind curriculum was reproducing a single-sided, hegemonic narrative. As a leader, I grew as I was able to let go of an initially teacher-centered environment and progress to a learner-centered environment that allowed for a co-creation of learning to occur. In addition, my growth involved feeling more confident, which allowed me to begin centering and naming race within conversations.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Transformative social-emotional learning: an action research study on supporting parents in a predominantly White community…

PDF

Critically reflective dialogue: an action research study on increasing the critical consciousness of ethnic studies teachers

PDF

Using culturally relevant pedagogy to deepen students' socio-political consciousness: an action research project

PDF

Changing the story: an action research study on utilizing culturally relevant pedagogical practice to enact a movement toward liberatory curriculum and instruction

PDF

Queer consciousness: one kindergarten teacher’s action research to support colleagues in creating safer schools for queer people

PDF

Instructional coaching: disrupting traditional math practices through inquiry and action research

PDF

Challenging dominant ideologies through sociopolitical discourse: an action research study on creating change as a history teacher

PDF

Cultivating critical reflection: an action research study on teaching and supporting district intern participants through critical reflection

PDF

Culturally responsive teaching in science: an action research study aimed at supporting a resident teacher in developing inquiry-based culturally responsive science lessons

PDF

Cultivating a community of practice: an action research study on cultivating a community of practice that engages in trauma-informed dialogue and critical reflection

PDF

Coaching to transform: an action research study on utilizing critical reflection to enact change towards incorporating culturally responsive teaching practices

PDF

Towards critical dialogue: an action research project building an awareness of an administrative team member’s role, identity, and deficit thinking

PDF

Engaging school leaders to conceptualize culturally relevant pedagogy

PDF

Uncovering dominant ideology: an action research project aimed to uncover dominant ideology to enact culturally relevant pedagogy in the classroom

PDF

Transformative learning: action research disrupting the status quo in literature in classrooms

PDF

Disrupting cis-heteronormativity: creating safe and affirming conditions for racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students through a critical reflection coaching group

PDF

Turning toward practice: establishing group reflective practice among upper elementary educators

PDF

Incorporation of culturally relevant pedagogy to improve my practice and address the opportunity gap

PDF

Critical pedagogy for music education: cultivating teachers’ critical consciousness through critically reflective inquiry

PDF

Role of a principal supervisor in fostering principal development to support instructional improvement and a positive school climate

Asset Metadata

Creator Wildey, Suzanne Kathleen (author)

Core Title Anti-racist adaptive leadership: an action research study on supporting principals in predominantly white schools to develop color consciousness and support future anti-racist practices

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Degree Conferral Date 2022-05

Publication Date 05/18/2022

Defense Date 04/11/2022

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

Tag anti-racist practices,color consciousness,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Samkian, Artineh (committee chair), Pascarella, John (committee member), Slayton, Julie (committee member)

Creator Email skwildey@gmail.com,wildey@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC111333314

Unique identifier UC111333314

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Wildey, Suzanne Kathleen

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20220523-usctheses-batch-943 (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