Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Culturally responsive leadership in American K-12 education: a gap analysis of a large urban district
(USC Thesis Other)
Culturally responsive leadership in American K-12 education: a gap analysis of a large urban district
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE LEADERSHIP IN AMERICAN K-12 EDUCATION: A GAP
ANALYSIS OF A LARGE URBAN DISTRICT
by
Mikal Tahir Renfrow Anderson
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
August 2020
Copyright 2020 Mikal Tahir Renfrow Anderson
ii
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to my grandparents, the late Lucious Renfrow and Dr.
Gladys Spann Renfrow. Grandpop Renfrow, thank you for always supporting me and believing
in my capabilities. As a child, you would call me “professor” because you recognized my
intellect and knew before I did that I would get to this point in life, even if you were not here to
physically witness it. You never missed a sports game, recital, or school event and you were
always there to support me even when I did not realize you were present. Thank you for the
lessons and values that you instilled in me which I will carry with me always.
To my grandmother, Dr. Gladys Spann Renfrow, thank you for all of your sacrifices and
for ensuring that I valued education as a foundational pillar in my life. You demanded nothing
but excellence from me and would always challenge me to think thoughtfully, critically, and
ethically while maintaining a sense of integrity. You laid the foundation which enabled me to be
where I am today. Never would I have imagined that 40 years later, I would be building upon
your doctoral research during your tenure at the University of Pennsylvania on institutional
equity issues. I feel blessed and honored to have followed in your footsteps, and extremely lucky
to have been afforded the opportunity to conduct my research at the same organization, the
School District of Philadelphia. Your intellect was unparalleled, and I am grateful to have had
you as a guiding force in my life.
Although you both are not here in body, I know that your spirits continue to surround me,
and I will carry you with me always.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First, I would like to acknowledge God for the opportunity to pursue my doctoral studies
and for sustaining me through this process. I also would like to convey my deepest gratitude and
appreciation to my Dissertation Chair, Dr. Cathy Krop. You genuinely believed in me and in my
capabilities, and you guided me with patience through the dissertation process. Additionally, I
would like to recognize my Dissertation Committee Members, Dr. Shaun Harper and Dr. Renée
Smith-Maddox for your mentorship and unwavering support. Furthermore, I would like to
acknowledge Dr. William R. Hite, Jr., Superintendent, and Evelyn Sample-Oates, Executive
Director of Government Affairs, Advocacy, and External Engagement at the School District of
Philadelphia for facilitating and participating in my dissertation study.
To my mother Beverly Renfrow, thank you for your guidance, mentorship, sacrifices, and
encouragement over the years. You are responsible for guiding me down the pathway of
education, and because of you, I have been able to touch the lives of youth around the world. To
my father and step-mother Robert and Monique Anderson, I appreciate your commitment to my
well-being and personal development. In particular, Dad I want to thank-you for instilling in me
the values and attributes of selflessness and servant leadership. Being able to put others before
myself aided me in becoming who I am today. I also would like to acknowledge my
grandmother, Betty Anderson. Grandmom, thank-you for supporting me during the times I
needed you most and for always encouraging me to reach my fullest potential. To my uncle, L.
Craig Renfrow, thank-you for being one of my biggest supporters, my mentor, and my friend. I
would not be where I am today without you, and for that I am grateful. To my aunt, Dawn
Anderson-Simpson, I appreciate you motivating me to always do my best. Lastly, I would like
to thank my siblings, aunts, uncles, godparents, cousins, mentors, friends, and fraternity brothers
of Kappa Alpha Psi for being an ecosystem of support during my doctoral studies.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... ii
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ iii
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. vi
List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. viii
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... ix
Chapter One: Introduction ...............................................................................................................1
Background of the Problem .........................................................................................................2
Importance of Addressing the Problem .......................................................................................6
Organizational Context and Mission ...........................................................................................7
Organizational Performance Status .............................................................................................7
Organizational Performance Goal, Current Performance, and Stakeholder Group for the
Study ............................................................................................................................................8
Purpose of the Project and Questions ........................................................................................10
Conceptual and Methodological Framework .............................................................................11
Definitions .................................................................................................................................11
Organization of the Project ........................................................................................................12
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .........................................................................................14
The Historical Role of Race in American Education ................................................................14
Critical Race Theory as a Lens Into Educational Inequity ....................................................17
Description of Culturally Responsive Leadership .....................................................................25
Culturally Responsive Leadership in Organizations .............................................................26
Culturally Responsive Leadership in K-12 Settings ..............................................................28
Leadership Styles Aligned to Culturally Responsive Leadership .............................................33
Servant Leadership ................................................................................................................33
Adaptive Leadership ..............................................................................................................34
Transformational Leadership .................................................................................................34
Evidence of the Positive Effects of Culturally Responsive Leadership on Student Outcomes
and Related Best Practices .........................................................................................................35
Student Outcomes ..................................................................................................................35
Best Practices in Building Culturally Responsive Leadership ..............................................36
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences ........................................41
Knowledge and Skills ............................................................................................................42
Motivation ..............................................................................................................................45
Organizational Influences ......................................................................................................48
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................52
Chapter Three: Methodology .........................................................................................................54
Participating Stakeholders .........................................................................................................55
Survey and Interview Sampling Strategy and Rationale .......................................................55
Data Collection and Instrumentation .........................................................................................56
Interviews ..............................................................................................................................57
Documents and Artifacts .......................................................................................................57
Data Analysis .............................................................................................................................57
Credibility and Trustworthiness .................................................................................................58
Validity and Reliability ..............................................................................................................59
Ethics .........................................................................................................................................59
Limitations and Delimitations ...................................................................................................61
v
Chapter Four: Results and Findings ...............................................................................................63
Interview Participants ................................................................................................................64
Results and Findings for Knowledge and Skills Influences ......................................................65
Conceptual Knowledge ..........................................................................................................67
Procedural Knowledge ...........................................................................................................74
Metacognitive Knowledge .....................................................................................................79
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Knowledge and Skills Influences .............................83
Results and Findings for Motivation Influences ........................................................................85
Utility and Attainment Value .................................................................................................86
Self-Efficacy ..........................................................................................................................90
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Motivation Influences ...............................................92
Results and Findings for Organizational Influences ..................................................................94
Cultural Models .....................................................................................................................95
Cultural Settings ....................................................................................................................99
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Organizational Influences .......................................103
Conclusion ...............................................................................................................................104
Recommendations to Build Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Assets of
Culturally Responsive Leadership ...........................................................................................108
Recommendation 1: Build Foundational Knowledge of Culturally Responsive
Leadership ............................................................................................................................109
Recommendation 2: Develop a Professional Development Plan for Culturally
Responsive Leadership ........................................................................................................111
Recommendation 3: Provide Executive Coaching to Support the Implementation of
Culturally Responsive Leadership Initiatives ......................................................................113
Recommendation 4: Establish a Central Office Equity Department at the School
District of Philadelphia ........................................................................................................114
Implementation Plan and Proposed Action Steps ....................................................................115
References ....................................................................................................................................129
Appendix A: National Education Association Governance And Leadership Competencies ......141
Appendix B: National Policy Board for Educational Administration Professional Standards
for Educational Leaders ...............................................................................................................142
Appendix C: The School District of Philadelphia Leadership Pathways Framework .................143
Appendix D: The School District of Philadelphia 2019-2020 Organizational Chart ..................155
Appendix E: Interview Protocol ..................................................................................................156
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Assumed Knowledge Influences ......................................................................................44
Table 2 Assumed Motivation Influences .......................................................................................47
Table 3 Assumed Organizational Influences .................................................................................52
Table 4 Demographic Information of Senior Leader Interview Participants (N=11) ....................64
Table 5 Assumed Knowledge Influences as Assets of Culturally Responsive Leadership ...........66
Table 6 Validated Assumed and Newly Identified Conceptual Knowledge Influences of
Culturally Responsive Leadership .................................................................................................68
Table 7 Characteristics of Culturally Responsive Leadership within a School District
Environment ...................................................................................................................................72
Table 8 Validated Assumed and Newly Identified Procedural Knowledge Influences of
Culturally Responsive Leadership .................................................................................................75
Table 9 Validated Assumed Metacognitive Knowledge Influences of Culturally Responsive
Leadership ......................................................................................................................................80
Table 10 Metacognitive Knowledge Responses of Executive Leaders on Culturally Responsive
Leadership ......................................................................................................................................81
Table 11 Validated Assumed Conceptual, Procedural, and Metacognitive Knowledge Influences
of Culturally Responsive Leadership .............................................................................................83
Table 12 Assumed Motivation Influences as Assets of Culturally Responsive Leadership..........86
Table 13 Validated Assumed Utility and Attainment Motivation Influences of Culturally
Responsive Leadership ..................................................................................................................87
Table 14 Validated Assumed Self-Efficacy Motivation Influence of Culturally Responsive
Leadership ......................................................................................................................................90
Table 15 Validated Assumed Utility Value, Attainment Value, and Self-Efficacy Motivation
Influences of Culturally Responsive Leadership ...........................................................................92
Table 16 Assumed Organizational Influences as Assets of Culturally Responsive Leadership ....95
Table 17 Validated Assumed Cultural Model Organizational Influences of Culturally
Responsive Leadership ..................................................................................................................96
Table 18 Validated Assumed Cultural Setting Organizational Influences of Culturally
Responsive Leadership ................................................................................................................100
vii
Table 19 Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences of Culturally Responsive
Leadership at the School District of Philadelphia ........................................................................106
Table 20 Foundational Knowledge to Build Culturally Responsive Leadership ........................117
Table 21 Professional Development Plan for Culturally Responsive Leadership .......................118
Table 22 Executive Coaching to Implement Culturally Responsive Leadership Initiatives .......120
Table 23 Establish an Equity Office at the School District of Philadelphia ................................121
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Relationship between culturally responsive leadership and college and career
readiness (Linda Darling-Hammond, Wilhoit, & Pittenger, 2014), as explored in this research. ...9
ix
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this research study was to explore, by means of a gap analysis, the extent
to which culturally responsive leadership influences school climate and student outcomes in K-
12 American education systems. Utilizing the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model
through a critical race theory lens, interview and document analysis data were examined to
identify the knowledge, motivation, organizational assets and continuing needs that should be
addressed in order to improve performance within the area of school climate. Eleven senior
leaders from the School District of Philadelphia participated in this study. Findings concluded
that performance is impeded by the lack of foundational knowledge, professional development,
and formal infrastructure needed to build and implement culturally responsive leadership. This
study concludes with proposed recommendations to improve performance, and a plan for
implementation and evaluation of suggested solutions.
Key Words: Culturally responsive leadership, School climate, Student outcomes, Leadership
development, Equity, K-12 education
1
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
The achievement gap embodies the multigenerational implications of social, economic,
and political constructs on student success, and disproportionately affects Black and Latino
students in America (Noguera, 2008). For decades, socio-economic status, institutional
inequalities, social capital, and pedagogical practices have been explored to better understand
why White students achieve higher testing scores than Blacks (Darby & Rury, 2018; Johnson-
Ahorlu, 2012). In addition, teacher preparation, parental involvement, resource allocation, and
school climate have been investigated to comprehend the correlation between these variables and
the variance in performance for both Black and Latino students compared to their White peers
(Smith, 2005).
Decades of reforms have been made; however, the achievement gap persists. The most
recent data from the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) show that the average
8
th
grade math scores in 2017 were 33 points lower for Black students and 24 points lower for
Latino students than their White counterparts (NAEP, 2018). Additionally, 8
th
grade results from
the same year display that Black and Latino students performed 24 and 20 points lower in
reading than their White peers (NAEP, 2018). While strong emphasis has been placed on
teacher practice and, in particular, culturally responsive pedagogy, and how it can mitigate these
gaps in performance (Ladson-Billings, 1995), the practices of school and district leadership have
been less explored. Culturally responsive leadership builds upon the practices of culturally
responsive pedagogy to include the leadership philosophies, practices, and policies that create
inclusive school environments for students and families from diverse backgrounds (Johnson,
2014). This dissertation will explore how culturally responsive leadership can be leveraged in
order to improve school climate – with culturally responsive leadership serving as a foundational
pillar in American K-12 institutions leading to positive outcomes for students in the areas of
2
truancy, school discipline, social and emotional well-being, and the narrowing of the racial
achievement gap for both Black and Latino learners.
Background of the Problem
Research shows that students of color, the largest stakeholder group in the American K-
12 public education system, experience school differently than their White peers (Smith, 2005).
This phenomenon manifests itself through the achievement gap, a term often utilized to explain
the lower academic performance of students of color, more specifically, Black and Latino
students to their White counterparts. The achievement gap is one of the most difficult challenges
that schools currently face, however, it takes root from the historical constructs of institutional
racism (Smith, 2005). The prior status, experiences, and social configurations of segregation
have adversely impacted the academic achievement of African Americans (Fordham & Ogbu,
1986). Similarly, the Latino population has faced challenges stemming from immigration; and
they encountered language barriers which precluded them from accessing opportunities in the
American educational system (Téllez, 2004). The current K-12 ecosystem prioritizes test-score
accountability and the reduction of the black-white achievement gap, and this narrow focus often
ignores the cultural contexts in which achievement disparities arise, thereby limiting culturally
responsive institutional interventions (Ford, Harris, Tyson, & Trotman, 2001; Gaddis & Lauren,
2014).
Social, psychological, cultural, and institutional barriers adversely impact the academic
performance of students of color (Moore, 2005). This includes feelings of not belonging coupled
with instructional and institutional practices that exclude the culture and experiences of minority
students (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Furthermore, social interactions in and out of the classroom,
student engagement, cultural inclusivity, and institutional policies not only affect scholars in
general education settings, but also high-performing learners who are classified as academically
3
gifted. From a structural and institutional standpoint, extenuating organizational factors,
curriculum design, equity indicators, formal assessments, the lack of faculty supports for
instruction, and constrained financial resources all challenge the performance of racially diverse
students (Gthompson, 2010). Furthermore, from a socio-cultural standpoint, students of color
come from racial minority populations in America – and the historical struggles of these groups
against post-colonial oppression have created a need for communalism and a cooperative,
interdependent style of living amongst them (Moore, 2005). Within the classroom setting, this
communalism manifests itself through movement, expressive individualism, and social time for
students of color. However, this concept of communalism strongly contrasts with traditional
western styles of teaching and learning. The misalignment of cultural understanding coupled
with the lack of cultural orientation to meet minority students’ needs through instruction have
significant implications on their academic performance (Moore, 2005).
However, culturally responsive institutions that are social justice oriented understand the
cultural backgrounds of students and build relationships with the community that can address
these barriers (Dantley & Green, 2015; Green, 2017). Black and Latino students thrive when
leaders integrate cultural responsiveness into their interactions, decision making and practice;
and prioritize equitable access and fully preparing students for a diverse global society (Minkos
et al., 2017). This includes access to rigorous courses, mentoring and counseling, increased
stakeholder engagement in school related reforms, and the existence of leaders who address the
politicized relationship between race and student achievement (Noguera, 2008). By doing so,
these leaders ensure that exceptional school environments exist with college-going cultures that
are responsive to the needs of minority students (Harper & Griffin, 2011; Khalifa, Gooden, &
Davis, 2016). Therefore, culturally responsive leadership ought to be considered as an effective
and necessary tool to create learning environments where all students can excel.
4
Within the context of a school system, leadership is a vital component in the equation for
student achievement. The structure and norms of an institution are driven by its leadership, and
for diverse learners to excel, culturally competent leaders who have mastered strategic and
motivational skills related to antiracism and inclusion in schools must be present (Beswick,
1990). Culturally competent leaders are leaders who are aware of their own identity and possess
the attitudes and skills to work effectively with diverse populations (Larson & Bradshaw, 2017).
More importantly, these leaders leverage their mastery of cultural competence to demonstrate
their capacity to understand and consider the diverse cultural experiences and backgrounds of
individuals different from themselves (Gay, 2018). The role of educational administrators has
changed with the increasing heterogeneity in American schools; and now it is necessary for them
to prioritize new meanings about diversity, promote inclusive school cultures and instructional
practices, and build relationships between schools and communities (Minkos et al., 2017; Riehl,
2000). More specifically, they must possess individual skills across the knowledge,
metacognition, motivation, and behavior domains that facilitate organizational change and
equitable outcomes for all stakeholder groups (van Driel et al., 2013). For educational leaders,
this means advancing beyond the attainment of knowledge related to cultural norms, practices,
and self-awareness strategies toward intrinsic motivation and behaviors that perpetuate and
reinforce educational equity (van Driel et al., 2013).
Although culturally responsive leaders have been associated with improved outcomes for
Black and Latino students (Khalifa et al., 2016), how to develop leaders with these skills and
competencies needs further exploration. Given the population shifts in the United States, and
that racial and ethnic minority groups are projected to comprise 53.3% of students in American
public education in the 2019-2020 academic year, school systems and organizations alike need to
reimagine ways to best serve and support diverse stakeholders (Gay, 2018; National Center for
5
Education Statistics, 2019). Strategies include building the capacity of leadership to be
culturally responsive, as well as the deconstruction of barriers that mitigate culturally responsive
leadership and diverse leadership pipelines. As it relates to the capacity building of cultural
responsiveness in leadership, the adaptive framework of diversity, equity, and inclusion is often
utilized to cultivate the skills necessary for educational equity. However, for leaders to be
successful, they must first possess the mindset and motivation to view diversity as an opportunity
for positive change rather than a threat (Stevens, Plaut, & Sanchez-Burks, 2008). Additionally,
they ought to be trained to master the skills of all-inclusive multiculturalism (AIM) through
which communication, language, organizational structure and policies, interdependency, and
symbolic interactions are emphasized as mechanisms for enterprise and process improvement
(Stevens et al., 2008). Leaders who possess these skills foster inclusive environments that
address the specific needs of all stakeholder groups (Khalifa et al., 2016), and within the field of
education, culturally responsive leadership could address the unique challenges of all learners
including Black and Latino students impacted by the achievement gap.
Pertaining to the development of culturally responsive leadership, mastery of inclusion
practices have proven to yield strong results in the areas of organizational development and
impact (Wuffli, 2016). These leaders possess the skills to motivate others around their values
and ethics, involve diverse people in developmental processes, build relationships across sectors
and cultures, and are change-oriented (Wuffli, 2016). Furthermore, with regard to cultural
responsiveness, they mitigate the misalignment between climate and leadership thereby reducing
organizational performance problems in the areas of productivity, innovation, knowledge, and
behavior (Døjbak Haakonsson, Burton, Obel, & Lauridsen, 2008). Leaders with these attributes
create positive impact in school systems beyond instructional management on climate, where
they facilitate orderly atmospheres for student learning, clear rules for behavior, and address
6
disruptive student behaviors (Huang, Hochbein, & Simons, 2018). As a result, they establish
positive school climates which enable leadership to shift its focus on instructional management
to improve Black and Latino student achievement, while also improving student participation
and attendance, school discipline, and the social and emotional well-being of students in school
and society (Cohen, 2006; Huang et al., 2018). Therefore, culturally responsive leadership ought
to be explored further as an intervention to improve organizational climate and reduce the racial
achievement gap.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
Culturally responsive leadership, and its implications on school climate, is important to
study within the context of the racial achievement gap paradigm. From its inception, public
education has been viewed as the great equalizer and the pathway to economic mobility and
social capital (Darby & Rury, 2018). Given such, academicians, social scientists, and
educational practitioners have made numerous attempts over the last 60 years following Brown v.
Board of Education (1954) to implement interventions that would eliminate the achievement
gap. These strategies include school desegregation, alternative disciplinary policies and
practices, evidence-based and culturally responsive teaching practices, setting high expectations,
increased parental involvement, and elevating student voice (Noguera & Wing, 2006). Despite
these efforts, the racial achievement gap has been difficult to close (Noguera, 2017). This makes
research and the exploration of methods to improve school climate and student outcomes all the
more paramount. Increasingly, attention has been focused on school and district leadership as a
remedy to this problem. As a result, the continued study of culturally responsive leadership
practices within this context is important as a means to support educational experts in identifying
and developing the leadership skills and practices necessary to drastically improve school
climate and the performance outcomes of Black and Latino K-12 students.
7
Organizational Context and Mission
The School District of Philadelphia is the eighth largest public-school district in the
United States. Founded in 1818, the mission of the organization is “to deliver on the civil right
of every child in Philadelphia to an excellent public school education and ensure all children
graduate from high school ready to succeed, fully engaged as a citizen of our world” (“Our
Mission,” 2018). Located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, the School District of Philadelphia
provides instruction to approximately 200,000 students in grades K-12, 55.3% of whom are
Black and Latino, and directly runs 339 schools making it one of the largest publicly governed
academic institutions in the United States. The district currently has over 18,000 employees
including support staff, teachers, administrators, and central office personnel. In addition, there
are seven chief level leadership team members which include the Superintendent, Chief of
Academic Support, Chief of Student Support, Chief of Schools, Chief of Evaluation, Research
and Accountability, Chief of Charter Schools and Innovation, and Chief of Communications and
External Relations as well as 13 assistant superintendents who focus on the execution of
culturally responsive leadership practices as a means to narrow the achievement gap for Black
and Latino students.
Organizational Performance Status
Recent academic performance data show that the School District of Philadelphia has
achieved consistent academic growth in English Language Arts (ELA) and math over the last six
years (“SY2017-2018 District Score Card,” 2019). Despite the 14.68% improvement in math
and 10.12% growth in ELA from the 2012 academic year to present, the School District of
Philadelphia continues to fall beneath the average performance of schools within the state
(“SY2017-2018 District Score Card,” 2019). In 2018, results from the Pennsylvania System of
School Assessment (PSSA) display that the state averages of students performing at levels of
8
proficient or advanced were 61.4% for ELA and 42.1% for math (“PSSA Results,” 2019).
However, in the district, 64% of students in ELA and 80% of students in math placed in the basic
and below basic categories as it relates to academic performance and mastery of content during
the same year (“SY2017-2018 District Score Card,” 2019). With regard to the larger problem of
how school systems can improve the academic performance of Black and Latino students and
reduce the achievement gap, the School District of Philadelphia has proven to be an ideal
organization to investigate. Although the district’s student performance data remains below state
averages, it shows positive trends in academic growth for all students and has leadership who
formally prioritize through organizational goals cultural responsiveness, school climate, and their
impact on student outcomes.
Organizational Performance Goal, Current Performance, and Stakeholder Group for the
Study
Under its current leadership, the School District of Philadelphia has three anchor goals
related to college and career readiness, English language arts (ELA), and strong instructional
staff. However, the primary goal of the organization is to ensure that 100% of students will
graduate ready for college and career (“SY2017-2018 District Score Card,” 2019). This
objective was set by the current leadership at the district in the Action Plan 3.0 released by the
superintendent. To track this goal, the School District of Philadelphia internally monitors: (a)
climate, (b) student achievement and progress on PSSA assessments, and (c) college and career
indicators in the areas of advanced placement and international baccalaureate exams, college
entrance exams, graduation rates, and college matriculation rates.
This study focuses on school climate and the importance of culturally responsive
leadership in establishing a school climate to reach the district goal that 100% of students will
graduate, ready for college and career. More specifically, the impact of culturally responsive
9
leadership on climate was explored, given that a strong climate leads to positive outcomes for
students in the areas of attendance, achievement, discipline, and social and emotional well-being
– all of which reinforce college and career readiness (Darling-Hammond, Wilhoit, & Pittenger,
2014). Figure 1 below illustrates the relationship between culturally responsive leadership and
college and career readiness, the primary goal of the School District of Philadelphia.
Figure 1. Relationship between culturally responsive leadership and college and career readiness
(Linda Darling-Hammond, Wilhoit, & Pittenger, 2014), as explored in this research.
Although many stakeholder groups contribute to the achievement of the organizational
performance goal, including senior district leadership responsible for instructional outcomes,
principals, and students, given this study’s focus on culturally responsive executive leadership,
the stakeholder group examined was a subgroup of senior district leadership. Senior district
leadership included the Superintendent, Chief of Academic Support, Chief of Schools, and Chief
of Charter Schools and Innovation, all of whom are central office staff involved in the
instructional process, as well as the Deputy Chief of School Operations, Executive Director of
10
Government Affairs, Advocacy, and External Engagement, and five assistant superintendents
responsible for networks of schools.
Senior district leadership is responsible for setting policies and performance measures,
cultivating school leadership, and institutionalizing best-practices throughout the entire system
that accelerate learning outcomes. For this study, it was important to understand the assets and
barriers faced by the School District of Philadelphia as it attempted to implement policies and
procedures to improve school climate. More specifically, how the district implemented policies
and procedures to develop culturally responsive leadership to improve school climate and student
outcomes was explored. As a result, the stakeholders of focus for this study were identified
district leaders who set policy for the School District of Philadelphia, and those who managed
principals at the building level responsible for student success.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to conduct a gap analysis to examine the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences on the School District of Philadelphia’s performance
goal of culturally responsive leadership providing a climate where 100% of students will
graduate, ready for college and career. More specifically, aspects of culturally responsive
leadership and the development of a thriving school climate as a subcomponent of this goal were
examined given their connection to student outcomes as well as college and career readiness.
Although a complete gap analysis would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes, the
stakeholder group focused on in this study was senior district leadership. The analysis began by
generating a list of possible or assumed interfering influences that were later examined
systematically to focus on actual or validated causes.
Given such, the questions that guided this study are the following:
11
1. What are the attributes of culturally responsive leadership in district leadership that create
a climate for student success?
2. What is the interaction between stakeholder knowledge, motivation, and organizational
culture and context related to the School District of Philadelphia’s goal of culturally
responsive leadership providing a climate where 100% of students will graduate, ready
for college and career?
3. What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational context
for culturally responsive leaders?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis, a systematic, analytical method that helps to clarify
organizational goals and identify the gap between the actual and preferred performance levels
within an organization, was utilized as the conceptual framework for this dissertation. The
methodological framework is a qualitative case study with descriptive statistics. Assumed
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on performance were generated based
upon personal knowledge and related literature. These influences were assessed through the use
of document analysis, interviews, literature review, and content analysis. Additionally, research-
based solutions were recommended and evaluated in a comprehensive manner.
Definitions
Academically Challenged: A general term used for individuals who struggle with their
performance in academic and school settings.
Achievement Gap: Social scientists define achievement gaps as stable and statistically
significant differences in the average performance of students at the same grade level but from
distinct demographic or economic groups on standardized tests (Darby & Rury, 2018).
12
Climate: Within the context of an educational setting, climate reflects the norms, goals,
values, interpersonal relationships, teaching and learning practices, and organizational structures
of an academic institution (Schein & Schein, 2017).
Culturally Competent: Possessing the cultural competence to (a) understand one’s own
cultural conditioning that affects personal beliefs, values, and attitudes; (b) comprehend the
worldviews of culturally different individuals and groups; and (c) use culturally appropriate
interventions and communication skills across universal settings (Sue, 2001).
Culturally Responsive: The ability to understand and consider the different cultural
backgrounds of the people you teach or offer services to, and create conditions to affirm cultural
identity through thoughts, insights, and learning about a product or process (Smith-Maddox,
1998).
Opportunity Gap: The ways in which race, ethnicity, socio-economic status, English
proficiency, community wealth, familial situations, or other factors contribute to or perpetuate
the unequal or inequitable distribution of resources and opportunities for specific groups of
students (Johnson-Ahorlu, 2012).
Organization of the Project
Five chapters are used to organize this study. This chapter provides the reader with the
key concepts and terminology commonly found in discussions about the achievement gap, and
the role of culturally competent and responsive leadership in establishing a school climate to
close this phenomenon. The organization’s mission, goals, and stakeholders as well as the initial
concepts of gap analysis were introduced. Chapter Two provides a review of current literature
pertaining to the scope of the study. There, the historical context of the achievement gap, causes
and who it affects, and promising practices related to culturally competent and responsive
leadership are addressed. The chapter then turns to the assumed knowledge, motivation, and
13
organizational influences on establishing a climate of culturally responsive leadership to ensure
all students thrive. Chapter Three details the methodology for understanding those assumed
influences on organizational goal attainment when it comes to the choice of participants, data
collection, and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and results are assessed and analyzed.
Chapter Five provides recommendations for practice based upon data and literature as well as
recommendations for an implementation and evaluation plan.
14
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The Historical Role of Race in American Education
Race is a social construct that societies manipulate when convenient to maintain systems
of power and inequity (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). As it relates to the United States, the nation
was initially founded on the principle of restricting citizenship for free white persons while
denying basic human rights to people of color; and this ideology has led to racial and economic
inequalities that have negatively impacted educational opportunities and achievement for
minority groups (Noguera, 2017). Within America, race has been socially and biologically
defined as a primary determining factor in institutional arrangements, particularly with respect to
the dominant power structure’s formulation of what is considered appropriate in terms of
education policies, programs, and practices (Jones-Wilson, 1990). As a nation built upon
inequality and discrimination, this resulted in inequitable and segregationist educational practices
and institutional policies that reinforced White privilege while marginalizing ethnically and
racially diverse groups.
Initially, education was established in America during the times of separatism from
England and colonialism, as a means to continue religion and build literacy (Marshall, 1962).
Schooling from the late fifteenth to mid-eighteenth centuries during the Colonial Era was
primarily for boys, rooted in religious and local values, reading, writing, and arithmetic (Fox &
Buchanan, 2017). The primary focus was to prepare White individuals to be decent Christian
citizens. However, as the American colonies evolved so did schooling to reflect their symbiotic
relationship with society. Discriminatory educational practices prevented Black slaves from
receiving an education in the southern states, and reinforced segregationist policies that led to
low-quality schooling in the north for freed Blacks (Jones-Wilson, 1990). During this time
period, Native Americans and African slaves comprised one-third of the population yet they
15
were restricted access to an education, and while the Northwest Ordinance Acts of 1785 and
1787 linked government funding to schools, they excluded connecting resources to institutions
attended by freed African Americans (Fox & Buchanan, 2017).
As time progressed beyond the Colonial Era, educational opportunities and outcomes
improved for some but not all. During the early to mid-nineteenth century, the Common School
Movement arose, spearheaded by Massachusetts state senator Horace Mann who was nationally
known for mobilizing the public to support liberal taxation for public education (Marshall,
1962). In addition to Mann advocating for universal public education, state-coordinated
education systems from elementary school to college, and local control of institutions, Catherine
Beecher pushed for and helped to achieve greater female participation in the educational process,
both as teachers and learners (Fox & Buchanan, 2017). Although the Common School
Movement coincided with significant historical moments in American history, such as the
Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 and Civil War of 1865 which denoted the end of slavery for
Blacks, conflicting ideological struggles existed with White southern aristocrats opposing
universal education for Blacks and White industrialists of the north supporting the notion to
accommodate the growing industrial economy (Jones-Wilson, 1990). As a result, Blacks during
this epoch were not afforded equitable access to quality education as a whole, and in many
circumstances, were denied an education altogether.
Throughout U.S. history, Whites have been the primary beneficiaries of civil rights
legislation and reform policies that aimed to improve equitable outcomes for minority groups
(Ladson-Billings, 1998). Looking more specifically at recent history, from the Progressive Era
in the late nineteenth century to present day, there has been a massive influx of cultural and
racial diversity in America due to immigration (Fox & Buchanan, 2017). However, legislative
reforms such as Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) which institutionalized “separate but equal” and
16
Brown v. Board of Education (1954) which overturned discriminatory segregationist policies in
education did not address the inequitable funding practices and distribution of resources that
disadvantage Blacks and other racial minority populations (Jones-Wilson, 1990). Although
intended to improve access and opportunity, administrative reforms during the early to mid-
twentieth century in American public education perpetuated systems of inequality by tracking
minority students into less rigorous academic pathways such as vocational education, and
restricted human and financial capital from reaching diverse communities (Fox & Buchanan,
2017). Furthermore, they did not address the implications of poverty, wealth distribution, and
economic inequality on educational performance for racial minority groups – a dilemma that
persisted from the past to present day (Noguera, 2017).
As it relates to the K-12 public education system, global competitiveness, cultural
responsiveness, equitable distribution of resources, and clearly defined international academic
standards have shaped current practices in America today (Fox & Buchanan, 2017; McGinn,
1997). Nonetheless, these priorities driven by economic integration and international
interdependence have not clearly addressed the historical and present implications of normalized
racism or comprehensively critiqued the role of White dominance in shaping the social, political,
and economic processes that impact American education (Gillborn & Ladson-Billings, 2010;
McGinn, 1997). Although public education supports the economic vitality and competitiveness
of a nation within the international marketplace, the needs of racial and ethnic minorities in the
U.S. ought to be prioritized to achieve this aim (Lipman, 2004). In practice, this means
disrupting the inequitable and discriminatory practices replicated throughout history that have
disadvantaged people of color in America through the refinement of culturally responsive
institutional and leadership practices. This will aid in mitigating minority students’ perceptions
17
of racial discrimination in the educational process, thereby increasing their perceived economic
value of education, motivation, and academic performance (Mroczkowski & Sánchez, 2015).
Critical Race Theory as a Lens Into Educational Inequity
Critical race theory (CRT), a social constructivist view of race and races as products of
social thought and interactions, is a multi-disciplinary approach that combines social activism
with a critique of the fundamental role played by White racism in shaping contemporary
societies (Gillborn & Ladson-Billings, 2010). More specifically, it challenges how race, white
supremacy, applied meritocracy, and racist ideologies have shaped and undermined policy
efforts intended to improve outcomes for African American and other minority groups (Harper,
Patton, & Wooden, 2009). CRT originated in the 1970s and 1980s from the work of legal
scholars such as Derrick Bell and Kemberlé Crenshaw as a new and oppositional form of anti-
oppressive theory that explores the relationship between race, racism, and power (Delgado &
Stefancic, 2017; Gillborn & Ladson-Billings, 2010). As a natural response to pervasive
emotions and ideologies held by people of color on racism, discrimination, and oppression, CRT
arose as a lens through which systemic inequity could be assessed and critiqued, laying the
groundwork for present-day diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.
CRT is driven by the purpose to understand, oppose, and change race inequality, with a
specific focus on the structural forms of white supremacy that privilege the interests of White
people juxtaposed to the institutionalized subordination of people of color (Gillborn & Ladson-
Billings, 2010). However, within the context of the United States, the task of altering four-
hundred years of systemic oppression will prove to be a major feat. The reason being, racism is
difficult to cure because it is often unacknowledged, and equality measures only remedy the
most overt forms of discrimination (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). As a result, the subtle and
pervasive forms of racial inequality and oppression continue to remain engrained within the
18
social, political, and economic systems of America today. The eradication of current racial
paradigms that reinforce subordination and inferiority will require transformational change;
however, these things are unlikely to be realized due to policies and legal structures that only
allow for incrementalism (Harper et al., 2009; Ladson-Billings, 1998). Therefore, policies ought
to be evaluated through a CRT lens to ensure that they have attainable goals and achieve their
intended impact of advancing minority groups rather than cause them to regress (Harper et al.,
2009).
Applying CRT to the field of education is useful in understanding educational inequity in
its infancy and critiquing meritocracy in the United States relative to race and racism (Ladson-
Billings, 1998). As a theoretical framework, it supports the understanding of how race is a
significant factor in the persistence of the achievement gap between White and racially diverse
students. Furthermore, within the context of schooling it explores how race and citizenship
interact, given that educational systems prepare citizens in the United States (Ladson-Billings,
1998). As a result, there are four tenants of CRT, which include racism as being normal, interest
convergence, intersectionality and anti-essentialism, and storytelling that ought to be explored to
better understand institutionalized discrimination and oppression, and help inform culturally
responsive leadership strategies that will support the disruption of the racial achievement gap in
K-12 American education.
Racism is normal. Racism is ordinary and normal in society and is the common
everyday experience of people of color in America (Delgado & Stefancic, 2012). Moreover,
race itself is a social construct lacking connection to scientific realities that societies manipulate
when convenient to protect privilege and reinforce inferiority, thereby leading to inequities
(Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). This is evident throughout history, particularly in America. The
United States was built upon the institutionalized slavery of Blacks and further developed
19
through the use of servitude, specifically from racial and ethnic minority groups. As a result, the
notion of subordination to White dominant culture is common in American society and has
transcended into various systems including education.
As it relates to education, racial issues have always existed and continue to impact
progressive and regressive policies intended to create equity and access for people of color in the
United States (Harper et al., 2009). They existed during the times of slavery when Blacks where
not afforded access to universal public education, they existed during the segregationist laws of
the Jim Crow Era, and they exist today through color-blind practices and anti-affirmative action
policies, notions pertaining to meritocracy for historically marginalized racial groups, and
inequitable resource distribution. Therefore, the normalization of racism in society, its
transferability to schooling, and the cultural responsiveness of leadership in addressing these
challenges ought to be explored when attempting to improve the performance of Black and
Latino students impacted by the racial achievement gap.
Interest convergence. The material gain of white elites and physical gain of white
privilege for working-class Caucasians generated by racism disincentivizes these population
segments in America to eradicate that which advances their interests (Delgado & Stefancic,
2012). As a result, the attainment of racial equity will only be accommodated when that interest
converges with the interests of Whites involved in policy-making decisions who recognize the
goals of people of color as their own (Bell, 2004). However, the interests of dominant society
can be viewed two-fold. Interest convergence is not just when Whites stand to gain particular
benefits when aligned to the agenda of people of color, but rather, it also includes how their
interests can be protected and not threatened (Harper et al., 2009). Furthermore, it can result in
effective racial remedies, however, these remedies may be retracted by policymakers who fear
remedial strategies will threaten the superior status of middle and upper-class Whites (Bell,
20
2004). Building upon this ideology of interest convergence, culturally responsive leadership in
educational systems ought to question what societal incentives exist, if any at all, beyond
national economic sustainability to close the racial achievement gap, given that the attainment of
this goal may compromise the superiority of Whites in America. By doing so, educational
leaders will be able to better strategize how to operationalize culturally responsive practices that
converge with the interests of dominant society while contributing to the progress of racial
minority groups.
Intersectionality and anti-essentialism. No person has a singular unitary identify and
all people have potentially conflicting, overlapping identities, loyalties, and allegiances (Delgado
& Stefancic, 2012). This results in intersectionality moving across time, disciplines, issues,
geographic and national boundaries (Carbado, Crenshaw, Mays, & Tomlinson, 2013). As human
beings, we are all unique with our own individual experiences which makes it difficult to
generalize solutions for specific minority groups. Nonetheless, intersectionality forces those in
decision-making positions to recognize two phenomena – that instances of marginalization may
operate within institutional discourse that legitimize existing power relations, as seen in
feminism and antiracism; and conversely that discourses of resistance may produce and
legitimize marginalization as evidenced in the gender dynamics of White women who maintain
their privilege over Black men within patriarchal institutional settings (Carbado et al., 2013).
Within the context of education, intersectionality is dually serving. It explains and
confirms the complexities of existing power dynamics for people of color with multiple identities
in American K-12 education. For example, being a Black girl in school presents dynamics of
gender and racial inequality that her Black male counterparts may only have to address along the
lines of race. Additionally, intersectionality may reinforce marginalization across non-dominant
populations because it introduces aspects of identity such as gender, class, and socioeconomic
21
status that stratify the experiences of racial minority groups. As a result, it is imperative that
educational leaders build their capacity in culturally responsive leadership to better understand
and address the complex performance problems associated with intersectionality and multiple
identities for racial minority groups.
Storytelling. CRT highlights the presumed assumption that minority people in America
must have the competence to speak up about issues or race due to their personal experiences with
oppression (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). More specifically the thought is that Black, Latino,
American Indian, and Asian individuals ought to be able to clearly communicate to their White
counterparts matters of race and racism that they are unlikely to know (Delgado & Stefancic,
2012). Simply because one experiences racism, that does not make them a race expert or
representative of their race equipped with the skills to effectively engage decision-makers on
issues pertaining to institutional discrimination and oppression. Additionally, this disconnection
between presumed assumptions and actual competence further exacerbate racial challenges both
within society and school settings.
Effective storytelling is a skill, and like all skills, it can be cultivated. Pertaining to
school environments, assessment driven institutional settings provide too few opportunities for
students to express their voice on critical issues or provide original responses to key issues
(Quaglia & Fox, 2016). This results in students not finding creative solutions to perplexing
problems, including their own academic challenges, because they are disengaged in the
educational process and lack voice (Quaglia & Fox, 2016). However, culturally responsive
leaders cognizant of the storytelling assumptions highlighted by CRT have a unique opportunity
to change both school and societal landscapes. They can create space in the educational process
to build the capacity of students to effectively engage with decision-makers and policymakers on
issues pertaining to race, racism, and inequality. By doing so, they will disrupt the problem
22
space that currently exists between dominant culture and minority populations related to
storytelling, and prepare learners to be active citizens who can effectively navigate the
intersection of race and citizenship (Ladson-Billings, 1998).
Applying Critical Race Theory to Current Educational Practice
Critical race theory today remains true to its original precepts of race being a social
construct and racism being deeply ingrained into the fabric of American society. However,
present-day CRT scholars build upon this foundational framework pushing academicians,
practitioners, and policymakers to rethink ways of conceptualizing equality and civil rights
within the modern context of racial indifference (Delgado & Stefancic, 2012). Historically, CRT
focused solely on race; however, the introduction of intersectionality has called for the
examination of age, gender identity, class, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, and
disability status for racial minority groups. These variables coupled with the current dynamics of
colorblindness, meritocracy, race, class, poverty, and globalization present significant challenges
within the current socio-political climate in America, specifically for Black and Latino students
(Delgado & Stefancic, 2012). As a result, educational leaders today must now possess the skills
and cultural competence to address a myriad of socio-political issues through their educational
practice that will lead to improved outcomes for racially diverse students.
Colorblindness, meritocracy, and multiculturalism. Liberals in America equate
colorblindness with equal opportunity and meritocracy, rather than equal results (Delgado &
Stefancic, 2012). This ideology in itself is problematic because it does not acknowledge the
four-hundred years of discriminatory and oppressive historical events that limited access,
opportunities, and disadvantaged minority populations intergenerationally in the United States.
The adoption of colorblindness refuses to acknowledge racial realities, and places emphasis on
merit measured by dominant culture assessments that appear to be equitable, fair, and just, while
23
reinforcing inequity due to socioeconomic inequalities (Gillborn & Ladson-Billings, 2010).
Additionally, it turns the focus on creating comfortability and positive experiences for dominant
culture when talking about race related matters, while diminishing the voice, experiences, and
realities of people of color (Apfelbaum, Grunberg, Halevy, & Kang, 2017). This is evident not
only in schooling when examining the access that minority students have to well-funded
institutions, high-quality teachers, and resources outside the classroom; but also through the
under-compensation of minority groups compared to their White counterparts and increasing
wage gap in America (Gillborn & Ladson-Billings; Mandel & Semyonov, 2016). Highlighting
these dynamics expose the flaws in the colorblind and meritocracy frameworks, and show how
they potentially reinforce the problems of institutionalized discrimination they set out to solve.
One possible solution to the challenges presented by colorblindness and meritocracy is
multiculturalism. Unlike colorblindness, multiculturalism encourages the recognition of racial
and ethnic differences, and positions them as assets that lead to improved productivity
(Apfelbaum et al., 2017). Within the context of organizational settings, all-inclusive
multiculturalism (AIM) allows for diversity in thought, perspectives, experiences, and leadership
which supports problem solving and change management processes (Stevens et al., 2008).
Applying AIM to education, leaders who possess the cultural competence to understand the
implications of colorblindness and meritocracy will be better equipped to identify and address
organizational and societal influences that hinder the performance of Black and Latino students.
Race, class, and poverty. Economic inequality affects all racial groups, however, the
rate to which is does so varies (Noguera, 2017). Race, class, and poverty intersect in complex
ways causing the financial security and professional status of people of color to be less secure
than their White counterparts in America (Delgado & Stefancic, 2012). These variables have
limited access to resources and opportunities for people of color, and perpetuated inequitable
24
wealth accumulation and distribution. This stems from centuries of racial discrimination,
oppression, slavery, and segregation that disadvantaged people of color while reinforcing
existing power structures and the privilege of White Americans. Within the context of culturally
responsive leadership, leaders who comprehend and take into account the historical and societal
implications of race, class, and poverty will be better positioned to confront extrinsic factors
outside of school environments that impact Black and Latino students. Furthermore, they will be
better positioned to address the physical, social, psychological, and emotional needs of minority
students caused by poverty that are often neglected by policymakers who decide resource
allocation and levels of support (Noguera, 2017).
Globalization. Colonialism in the United States suppressed the development of local
leaders and migrant populations, thereby keeping them poor, fearful, and disorganized (Delgado
& Stefancic, 2012). As a result, the impact of colonialism has implications on modern-day
American society. The current need to be financially competitive coupled with gentrification
and the migration of global talent have created educational ecosystems where the needs of people
of color are deprioritized to accommodate the international marketplace (Lipman, 2004).
Reconciling the competing priorities of capitalism driven by global interconnectedness and
educational equity present unique challenges for current educational leaders charged with the
success of marginalized students. Not only do they have to address problems within the context
of their socio-political environments, but they must also develop strategies for student success
that take into account the global influences which impact the students and families they serve
(Lipman, 2004).
As it relates to American K-12 education, globalization has fostered economic integration
and interdependence allowing for international standards to influence domestic educational
policy (McGinn, 1997). However, these standards do not take into account the identity, culture,
25
and experiences of students of color in the United States. The pressures of accountability from
global interdependence have diminished the prioritization of how identity and culture are
observed and manifested in American public education (Lipman, 2004). Testing scores and
proficiency have taken precedence over the holistic development of youth. Although identity
and culture are factors outside of the traditional scope of instructional pedagogy, they have
significant relevance to the academic achievement of students of color (Ladson-Billings, 1995).
Therefore, leaders who are culturally responsive will be best positioned to address the persistent
challenges that globalization raises with respect to the achievement gap for Black and Latino
students in the United States.
Description of Culturally Responsive Leadership
Culturally responsive leadership embodies characteristics and traits that are applicable
both within and outside of school environments. In school settings, culturally responsive
leadership incorporates the philosophies, practices, and policies that create inclusive school
environments for students and families from ethnically and racially diverse backgrounds;
whereas outside of schools these leaders advocate for cultural recognition, revitalization, and
community development (Johnson, 2014). They master the ability to reconcile competing
priorities of accountability, practice, and organizational culture to create professional
environments where collective expectations, commitments, and values prioritize the success of
all people (Elmore, 2005).
Culturally responsive leaders are also change agents. They create the vision, strategy,
and culture of shared values necessary to support change while simultaneously empowering,
motivating, and inspiring all those involved and impacted by an organization (Gill, 2002). These
leaders constantly build their knowledge of other cultures they engage with, are sensitive and
mindful to needs of people from multiple identities, are intrinsically motivated to learn about
26
other cultures, and demonstrate the behavioral skills required to learn new ways of doing things
(Schein & Schein, 2017). Furthermore, culturally responsive leaders leverage their own cultural
competence to communicate clearly and effectively with stakeholders while navigating them
through change, and they establish a culture that supports sequential, incremental, and radical
transformation which benefits all (Gill, 2002).
Culturally Responsive Leadership in Organizations
Culturally responsive leaders in organizations master specific skills and embody
attributes that enable them to lead and achieve results for diverse populations. These individuals
maintain high expectations for all people and have a strong commitment to the community
(Johnson, 2014). They believe that all persons from various racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic
backgrounds possess the ability to excel. Additionally, these leaders celebrate differences and
encourage tapping into the diversity of those they lead to encourage creativity, innovation, and
problem solving (Thomas & Ely, 1996). They see diversity as an asset to support organizational
development and deepen institutional impact. Furthermore, culturally responsive leaders set and
reinforce organizational culture by exemplifying behavioral integrity, where their values
expressed by words align with those expressed by their actions (Simons, 1999). They lead by
example and their activities reflect their ideologies and organizational aspirations.
Culturally responsive leaders also possess the ability to create a culture of assessment
driven by facts and analysis reflective of the input and needs of all people (Lakos & Phipps,
2004). They prioritize the well-being of diverse populations and rely on data-informed decision-
making to promote equitable and inclusive professional environments. Within organizations,
culturally responsive leadership is transformative and these leaders demonstrate the capacity to
(a) move followers beyond self-interests for the good of the organization; (b) possess charisma;
(c) encourage intellectual stimulation where the beliefs, values, and expectations of leadership
27
and staff are constantly monitored and assessed; and (d) provide inspirational motivation where
they move all stakeholders toward mutually desired goals (Ergeneli, Gohar, & Temirbekova,
2007). Not only are they able to motivate diverse racial and ethnic groups to achieve common
objectives, but they exhibit the ability to leverage these transformational competencies for
organizational impact and change across multiple identity groups (Ergeneli et al., 2007).
Culturally responsive leaders possess the acumen and cultural competence to improve
outcomes and enact change for racially and ethnically diverse populations. Through their
practice, they display the values, knowledge, and skills necessary to manage diversity across
organizations at the staff level with peer interactions, managerial level with the execution of
policies and procedures, and at the leadership level with strategic goals (Hays-Thomas, Bowen,
& Boudreaux, 2012). These leaders ensure inclusion at all levels of an enterprise to motivate and
engage all stakeholders and heighten performance. Transcending beyond baseline leadership and
management competencies, culturally responsive leaders master and leverage the four-step
process of culture setting in organizations for enterprise advancement which includes (a)
analysis, (b) cultural intelligence, (c) external adaptation and internal integration, and (d)
assessment (Schein & Schein, 2017). They analyze current practices, rely on racially and
ethnically diverse perspectives in decision-making, goal setting, and evaluation processes,
integrate external organizational culture influences into internal practices, and consistently assess
cultural practices within their institutions to ensure that they increase productivity and
performance (Schein & Schein, 2017). More specifically, they utilize a culturally responsive
lens to evaluate the knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences that impact
institutional culture and performance (Clark & Estes, 2008; Schein & Schein, 2017).
Building upon cultural settings and performance capabilities, culturally responsive
leaders also possess deep understanding of macro-culture and the environments in which they
28
operate. They utilize macro-culture analysis which includes artifactual and historical data,
occupational and organizational information, and institutional values to inform their decision-
making and practices related to diversity and inclusion (Nkomo, 1995). Furthermore, they
leverage macro-culture analysis, their knowledge of historic and institutional oppression, the
motivations and values of diverse stakeholders, and organizational influences to inform and lead
practices that promote equity and inclusion (Johnson, 2014). By doing so, they manage diversity
at all levels of their organizations and establish practices that improve outcomes for minority
groups.
Culturally Responsive Leadership in K-12 Settings
Culturally responsive leadership in K-12 school settings overlaps with leadership for
social justice approaches where the focus is on improving the educational experiences of all
students, particularly those who have been traditionally marginalized (Johnson, 2014). These
leaders ensure that the entire school environment, not just teaching practices, adaptively respond
to the needs of minoritized students through the centering of inclusion, equity, culturally
responsive educational leaders create inclusive school climates through (a) critical self-reflection
on their own leadership behaviors, (b) the development of culturally responsive teachers, (c) the
promotion of culturally responsive school environments, and (d) active engagement with parents,
students, and indigenous contexts (Khalifa et al., 2016). More specifically, through their
orientation with social justice, they openly engage in critical conversations about race and equity
keeping these variables present in their decision-making, practice, and leadership.
Additionally, culturally responsive leaders possess unique attributes as social justice and
equity-oriented agents of change. They engage in (a) ongoing learning which includes critical
self-reflection and the examination of personal identity, beliefs, and leadership philosophies; (b)
deconstruct inequitable practices while reconstructing processes that benefit diverse students; (c)
29
exercise agency and work on behalf of the marginalized to create change; and (d) develop
relationships to sustain equity initiatives (Lopez, 2016). Through their instructional and
leadership practices, they address issues of diversity, race, and culture that adversely impact
marginalized students (Khalifa & Alston, 2015). This is evident through the use and facilitation
of culturally responsive pedagogy in classroom instruction and culturally responsive leadership
practices which establish institutional climates that work toward eradicating bias and deficit
thinking associated with minority students (Khalifa & Alston, 2015; Ladson-Billings, 1998).
Of great importance is the deconstruction of barriers that mitigate culturally responsive
leadership. While it is essential to develop the capacity of leaders to be culturally responsive, the
proper organizational practices and infrastructure for effective process improvement and change
management must exist (Hunsaker & Hunsaker, 1979). Here individual and institutional
motivation as well as organizational factors need to be explored further to ensure that the proper
psychological, procedural, structural, and policy elements exist within a given enterprise
(Stevens et al., 2008). Within the context of an educational system, assessing the practices that
both hinder and support diversity in leadership and leadership development for racially diverse
educators will help inform how to overcome barriers that thwart the culturally responsive
leadership necessary to improve school climate.
In K-12 American schools, there are numerous challenges that culturally responsive
leaders face which impede their efforts to reduce the racial achievement gap for Black and
Latino students. Top-down accountability reforms have failed to transform schools primarily
serving students of color, and the political and socioeconomic out-of-school forces impacting
these learners further complicate school improvement efforts (Green, Gooden, Horsford, &
Vasquez Heilig, 2014). In addition to the lack of policy agendas orientated to meet the needs of
minority students, leadership standards reinforce colorblind ideologies which minimize the
30
importance of race in education (Green & Gooden, 2014; Davis, Gooden, & Micheaux, 2015).
General standards for instructional leadership lack clear and consistent definitions for school
climate and culture, omit elements of cultural competence, and fail to recognize the disparate
realities of diverse individuals (Davis et al., 2015). As a result, there are no standardized
accountability protocols to measure cultural responsiveness in leadership or uniform
accountability measures to ensure that educational leaders work toward concrete equity goals.
Therefore, culturally responsive leaders must possess the self-determination to assess, develop,
and refine their own practice.
Specific institutional and community-oriented qualities govern the performance of
culturally responsive leadership. These leaders incorporate social justice agendas within school
settings, establish leadership development programs to develop the cultural competence of staff,
and hold their organizations accountable to meet the needs of the community (Dantley & Green,
2015). More importantly, they cultivate the cultural responsiveness of all members of their
organization focusing them on prioritizing the needs of the students, families, and communities
they serve. Additionally, they approach school improvement efforts through two mechanisms –
teaching and learning, and cultural research which explores cultural models and settings
(Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Culturally responsive leaders emphasize best practices in
teaching and learning and support these efforts with cultural analysis that explores cultural
models, the embodiment of shared thinking within cultural groups, and cultural settings that
bring stakeholders together to accomplish specific aims (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). They
approach the instructional process through an adaptive lens and underline culture as a key factor
in the academic experience for racially and ethnically diverse students.
Schools are anchor institutions and convening spaces in neighborhoods, and ought to be
leveraged to engage the community. Understanding that they cannot work in silos, culturally
31
responsive leaders intentionally work alongside community stakeholders to achieve school-
community improvement efforts (Green, 2017). Additionally, they comprehend the positive
relationship between parental involvement and student achievement, and actively engage parents
encouraging their participation in the school community (Renfrow, 1981). Culturally responsive
school leaders use an integrated four-phase approach for improvement efforts inclusive of the
community (Green, 2017). This framework includes (a) disrupting deficit views of communities,
(b) initial community inquiry, (c) establishing community leadership teams, and (d) equity, asset-
based data collection (Green, 2017). Disrupting deficit views of communities of color includes
capacity building efforts that highlight diversity as an asset. Here, educators transform their
mindsets and rely on the cultural assets of diverse community stakeholders to improve academic
outcomes. Building upon these shifts in attitudes, culturally responsive leaders use inquiry and
asset mapping strategies to identify commonalities and strengths within the community and
leverage these attributes to establish partnerships (Green, 2017). This process culminates with
the development of a community leadership team, comprised of diverse academic and
community leaders, whose perspectives provide context to data collection procedures in school-
community change efforts (Green, 2017). Through the bilateral relationship building process
with the community, culturally responsive leaders establish inclusive school climates that
mitigate environmental factors negatively impacting students and families (Renfrow, 1981).
Furthermore, they assume roles as agents for community development through which they
harness their influence to implement positive change in the environments surrounding their
academic institutions (Renfrow, 1981).
Culturally responsive leadership focuses on distinctive actions to improve school climate
and student outcomes. With regard to school climate, these leaders explicitly call out and take
into account race and directly confront institutionalized racism and the negative experiences of
32
students of color (Harper, 2012). Alike their counterpart in higher education, culturally
responsive leaders in K-12 settings incorporate eight actions into their leadership practices to
reduce racism, which include (a) recognizing their implicit biases and remediating their racial
illiteracy, (b) holding high expectations for students from all racial and ethnic backgrounds, (c)
discarding expectations relating to students of color being teachers on race or representatives for
their diaspora of people, (d) reducing assumptions that all students from the same racial group
are similar, (e) raising their awareness of stereotype threats that occur among students of color,
(f) integrating diverse cultures and peoples into curricula, (g) addressing racial tensions when the
arise, and (h) recognizing that they share responsibility with their professional colleagues for
racial inequities (Harper & Davis, 2016). Through self-reflection on their own practice, these
leaders have unlearned the traditional behaviors and notions of schooling that are not inclusive of
diverse students and model the ethos of culturally responsive education (Marshall & Khalifa,
2018). Additionally, they build relationships and trust among instructional staff and strengthen
cultural responsiveness in their organizations through professional development with cultural and
community liaisons (Marshall & Khalifa, 2018). By doing so, they establish and sustain
exceptional K-12 college-going cultures and school climates which adequately prepare and
provide access to higher education for low-income, working-class, and minority students (Harper
& Griffin, 2011).
Nonetheless, absences of school district policies centered around cultural responsiveness
make it difficult to ensure that culturally responsive practices exist in schools (Marshall &
Khalifa, 2018). Furthermore, the lack of these policies have negative implications on school
climate and performance outcomes for students of color. Instructional leaders believe that their
ability to be culturally responsive is better facilitated when school district administration
explicitly support these behaviors, and organizational policies and procedures align with
33
institutional equity goals (Marshall & Khalifa, 2018). As a result, senior district leadership
ought to establish discrete policies that acknowledge race, center around equity, and require
participation from all people, not just individuals of color (Harper, 2012; Marshall & Khalifa,
2018). Addressing these institutional policy concerns will support the establishment of culturally
responsive learning environments and positive school climates thereby increasing the likelihood
of improved outcomes for students of color.
Leadership Styles Aligned to Culturally Responsive Leadership
Northouse (2018) outlines three leadership styles, servant leadership, adaptive leadership,
and transformational leadership whose characteristics align with culturally responsive leadership.
Knowledge of the attributes of these three leadership styles could support educational leaders
with implementing culturally responsive leadership practices in academic institutions to improve
school climate and student outcomes. While it is helpful to draw upon elements of servant,
adaptive, and transformational leadership to support capacity building efforts related to culturally
responsive leadership, leaders must be able to differentiate the attributes of these leadership
styles to ensure that culturally responsive leadership is implemented effectively and with fidelity.
Servant Leadership
Servant leadership emphasizes that leaders be attentive to the concerns of their followers,
empathize with them, and nurture them (Northouse, 2018). More specifically, these leaders are
ethical and put their followers first, empower them, and help them develop their full potential
(Northouse, 2018). Within the context of K-12 schools, servant leaders focus directly on the
needs of learners and how to support the development of all students. These leaders also lead in
ways that serve the greater good of the organization, community, and society (Northouse, 2018).
These attributes of a servant leader directly align with the culturally responsive leadership traits
of promoting culturally responsive environments and engaging with the community (Khalifa et
34
al., 2016). Although similar in nature, the characteristics of servant leaders should not be
conflated with those of culturally responsive leaders.
Adaptive Leadership
Adaptive leadership focuses on followers and is orientated toward problem-solving and
reconciling conflicting values through activities that mobilize, motivate, organize, orient, and
focus the attention of others (Northouse, 2018). However, the process is not conducted by the
leader, but rather, the leader assists followers with addressing problems relevant to prevalent
issues (Northouse, 2018). This type of leadership requires leaders to address technical problems
in the workplace that are clearly defined and adaptive challenges which are not easily identified
(Northouse, 2018). As it relates to K-12 education, this leadership style aligns with the culturally
responsive leadership attribute of developing culturally responsive educators (Khalifa et al.,
2016). Drawing upon adaptive leadership traits while implementing culturally responsive
leadership could empower leaders to build the capacity of their staff to address issues related to
culture, school climate, and student performance. More importantly, they would be equipped to
adapt to the cultural challenges that diverse students face within school environments.
Transformational Leadership
Transformational leadership is the process that changes people through deeper
exploration of emotions, values, ethics, and long-term goals (Northouse, 2018). This process
takes place through assessments of followers’ motivations, satisfying their needs, and treating
them as full human beings (Northouse, 2018). These leaders are charismatic, and exhibit
qualities of being strong role models, competence, articulation of goals, communication of high
expectations, confidence, and the ability to arouse motives through which they are able to
produce effects on followers that lead them toward trust, unquestioning acceptance, obedience,
affection, goal orientation and confidence (Northouse, 2018). Transformational leadership aligns
35
with the culturally responsive leadership attribute of developing culturally responsive leaders
(Khalifa et al., 2016). Education systems require leaders who can build the capacity of educators
to cultivate relationships with students and motivate learners toward their academic goals. As a
result, the attributes of transformational leadership support the foundational principles of
culturally responsive leadership.
Evidence of the Positive Effects of Culturally Responsive Leadership on Student Outcomes
and Related Best Practices
Student Outcomes
While limited research to date has been done on the effects of culturally responsive
leadership on student outcomes, research does suggest that a school culture and climate that
supports shifts in academic programming, instructional delivery, the development of students’
aspirations and goal commitments, strengthens cultural competence and expectations among
educators, and encourages college attendance yield positive results for Black and Latino students
(Harper & Associates, 2014). In these school environments, racial minorities have access to
rigorous and advanced courses, mentoring and counseling services, and the normalization of
their underperformance is unaccepted (Noguera, 2008). These institutions utilize evidence-based
culturally responsive teaching practices and asset-based pedagogies to improve student
achievement for Black and Latino students (Ladson-Billings, 1995; López, 2016).
One of the few recent studies that has looked to quantify the effects of culturally
responsive teaching practices and pedagogies on student achievement involved Latino English
language learners from 14 school districts in the southeast United States. Conducted across 22
schools and 74 teacher classrooms, this study identified the positive relationship between
culturally responsive instructional practices and academic outcomes for low-income Latino
students (Portes, González Canché, Boada, & Whatley, 2018). The results displayed that
36
culturally responsive pedagogical practices yield positive academic results for students in
multiple subjects, with positive effect sizes of .27 in English language arts, .27 in reading, .27 in
science, .42 in social studies, and .26 in math respectively (Portes et al., 2018).
Culturally responsive leadership practices also produce beneficial outcomes related to
school discipline. Inequitable school disciplinary policies adversely impact racial minority
groups, more specifically Black and Latino students (Okilwa & Robert, 2017). However,
culturally responsive leadership has proven to improve disciplinary concerns related to school
climate through the recognition of problems such as disproportionality in corrective action taken
on Black and Latino students, the development and implementation of institutional policy
solutions such as restorative justice and positive behavioral intervention and support (PBIS), and
participation in broader political discourse on public policy reform spearheaded by state and
federal government bodies (Okilwa & Robert, 2017). Consistent with disciplinary interventions,
these leaders acknowledge the relationship between race and student achievement, and increase
stakeholder engagement in school-related reforms to create incremental change through strategic
leadership and funding (Noguera, 2008). By doing so, they are able to utilize human capital and
financial resources to employ culturally responsive strategies that best support Black and Latino
student success.
Best Practices in Building Culturally Responsive Leadership
Culturally responsive leadership, like any other leadership practice, is iterative and
requires training and development to build capacity in this area. Drawing upon organizational
development and psychology bodies of literature and research in the education and business
fields, four domains emerge as promising practices to build culturally responsive leadership.
More broadly, these categories include professional development, talent acquisition and
retention, operationalizing culturally responsive and equitable practices, and evaluation.
37
Professional development. Cultural competence and antiracism go hand-in-hand in
effective leadership development (Welton, Owens, & Zamani-Gallaher, 2018). Developing
culturally responsive leadership requires building upon the traditional pedagogical tools of
instructional practice (Marshall & Khalifa, 2018). More specifically, professional development
in this area should be led by cultural and community experts who possess deep knowledge in
culture and intercultural competence (Collier, 2015; Marshall & Khalifa, 2018; Smith-Maddox,
1998). Training in these areas will further support and reinforce cultural responsiveness in
educational leaders, and their capacity to lead reform efforts that improve academic outcomes for
racial minority students.
In order to understand and establish positive school climates, leaders must first build their
knowledge of culture and how schools interact with it. Culture is everyday practices, how
people understand ideas, and how they ascribe meaning to daily life (Smith-Maddox, 1998).
Within society, culture is a form of capital, and this cultural capital consists of societal
preferences and consumption patterns that reflect the cultural background, knowledge,
disposition, and skills passed from one generation to the next (Smith-Maddox, 1998). However,
schools as microcosms of society often reproduce social inequality because they knowingly or
unknowingly devalue the cultural capital of racial and ethnic minorities (Lareau, 1987).
Understanding this phenomenon and how culture creates variance in academic performance
across racial and ethnic lines is extremely important within leadership development. Therefore,
capacity building for leadership should prioritize teaching cultural competence to ensure that
cultural responsiveness can be achieved within academic institutions. This can be accomplished
through professional development that integrates field studies with traditional training, and
immerses participants into diverse communities to better understand their individual,
associational, institutional, and indigenous assets (Smith-Maddox, & Solórzano, 2002).
38
In addition to culture, professional development in the area of intercultural competence
also supports the capacity building of culturally responsive leadership (Collier, 2015). More
specifically, it facilitates deeper understanding about the misperceptions of culture and
intercultural interactions, and supports leaders with establishing institutional climates where all
individuals thrive. Intercultural professional development programs should highlight (a) culture
is not a mental program developed from socialization associated with nationality, (b) culture is
not static or homogenous, (c) culture is not predictive of social and psychological tendencies nor
is it predictive of individualism and collectivism patterns, and (d) culture is not a thing but rather
an action manifested through representations, identifications, and relationships (Collier, 2015).
Understanding what culture is, what it is not, and how it interacts with systems will further
support academic leadership in establishing climates, school cultures, and institutional policies
that facilitate the success of racially and ethnically diverse students.
Sourcing and retaining diverse talent. Building culturally responsive leadership
requires integrating diverse talent into leadership positions to ensure that various racial and
ethnic identity groups are represented in decision-making and organizational strategy. This
involves standardizing institutional leadership qualities, utilizing recruitment strategies that align
the job analysis and selection processes, and mitigating bias to grow diverse leadership pipelines
(Craig, 2015; Jabbar, 2018). Talent acquisition practices for leadership within school systems
should not only be driven by skill-gap shortages, but also, deficits in institutional diversity
(Craig, 2015). Combining both priorities will ensure that leadership within academic settings
reflect the diversity and perspectives of the students and communities served.
Of equal importance are retention efforts to retain culturally responsive leadership in
school systems. Employee engagement, performance incentives, job mobility, and
organizational culture deeply influence the retention of diverse talent (Craig, 2015). Employees
39
want to feel valued and have opportunities for professional advancement. Therefore, it is
important to create cultural environments within organizations that encourage, support, and
provide space for racial, ethnic, and cultural diversity to exist (Hunter, 2015). This can be
achieved through a five-step organizational culture model that (a) creates a welcoming, diverse,
and inclusive work environment with ethnically diverse talent who express potential for upward
mobility, (b) sustains leadership’s commitment to diversity and inclusion efforts, (c) considers
non-traditional talent sources and creates effective training and development processes to reduce
employee attrition, (d) provides incentives for diverse hires to source and recruit ethnically
diverse talent, and (e) appreciates talent through a nurturing, supporting, high-performing,
challenging, thoughtful, considerate, and fun environment (Hunter, 2015).
Operationalizing diversity, equity, and inclusion and culturally responsive practices.
Operationalizing diversity, equity, and inclusion as well as culturally responsive practices
requires leadership to possess conceptual knowledge about race and culture; procedural
knowledge on how to execute equity-oriented initiatives, and the intrinsic motivation to promote
equity and change. To achieve racial equity, a systematic outlook and plan must exist that
ensures racially diverse perspectives are embedded into institutional culture, structures, and
policies (Welton et al., 2018). Within the context of schooling, this reform agenda should
identify (a) how equity issues became central, (b) what knowledge related to ethnic and cultural
diversity should be taught in schools (c) how cultural knowledge can be genuinely
acknowledged, and (d) how to draw on specific cultural norms that align with national standards
(Smith-Maddox, 1998). Furthermore, equity-driven initiatives ought to be informed by
scholarship that identifies how and why racism in education is still a problem, and should outline
systematic actions toward rectifying the problem and making racial equity a reality (Welton et
al., 2018).
40
Executing culturally responsive practices and diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives
requires specific leadership qualities and the implementation of evidence-based actions
associated with organizational change. These leaders ought to reflect the traits of cultural
adaptability, cultural perspective, and interpersonal skills (Butts, Trejo, Parks, & McDonald,
2012). In practice, they should be able to modify their behaviors based upon social conditions,
understand how culture influences perceptions of themselves and others, and build meaningful
relationships with others from diverse backgrounds. Furthermore, to operationalize equity-
oriented initiatives, these leaders must demonstrate the capacity to (a) set a clear and compelling
vision, (b) move that vision to the group level within their organization, (c) ensure the adaptation
of change at the individual employee level, (d) sustain the momentum of change implementation,
and (d) institutionalize change through policies and procedures (Whelan-Berry & Somerville,
2010). Culturally responsive leaders who can master these competencies will be well prepared
to lead culturally responsive change efforts that promote diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Assessment tools and frameworks for evaluation. As with any capacity building
effort, assessment tools and frameworks ought to be utilized to measure the growth and
effectiveness of culturally responsive leadership within institutional settings. Specifically within
K-12 school contexts, these instruments should assess the cultural responsiveness of district
policies, institutional racism, leaderships’ acknowledgement of culture and race, and school-
community change (Marshall & Khalifa, 2018; Harper & Davis, 2016; Davis et al., 2015; Green,
2017). Attached in Appendix A are the competencies developed by the National Education
Association (NEA) that assess cultural competence in governance and leadership for educational
administration. Additionally, in Appendix B are the evidence-based professional standards
generated by K-12 and higher education experts from the National Policy Board for Educational
Administration which highlight the competencies that culturally responsive leaders should
41
adhere to in their practice. These competencies and standards reflect the ideal attributes that
culturally responsive leadership should possess in K-12 American schooling.
Understanding the importance of culturally responsive leadership and its role in
supporting positive student outcomes is important as it relates to the performance of Black and
Latino students. However, to successfully implement culturally responsive leadership in K-12
school settings requires a deep understanding of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences within specific educational contexts and environments, as will be discussed in the
following section.
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
Clark and Estes (2008) identify three critical factors that must be examined during the
gap analysis process, which include knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on
performance. Within this theoretical framework, knowledge is how (and when, what, why,
where, and who) to achieve performance goals; motivation is the internal process of choosing,
persisting, and investing mental effort toward a specific task; and organizational influences are
the processes, procedures, and missing resources that hinder or promote goal attainment (Clark
& Estes, 2008). Relative to culturally responsive leadership, leaders must possess the knowledge
and skills to effectively engage and support individuals of cultural variance, the motivation to
view diversity as an opportunity for positive change, and the capacity to identify and address
barriers and opportunities that impact organizational climate (Stevens et al., 2008). This section
discusses and explores the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of
culturally responsive leadership in the School District of Philadelphia, and their possible impact
on school climate.
42
Knowledge and Skills
Within the field of education, the knowledge of key stakeholders is vital to
comprehending organizational context and to the attainment of goals (Rueda, 2011). It
establishes the foundation to understand how information, or the lack thereof, influences
performance. Building upon the framework of Bloom’s Taxonomy, Krathwohl (2002) provides
a cognitive approach through which knowledge is categorized into four types: factual,
conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. As it relates to the School District of Philadelphia,
this section highlights how these knowledge types may impact culturally responsive leadership
and, therefore, school climate in a K-12 setting.
Conceptual Knowledge: Knowledge of the foundational components and beliefs of
culturally responsive leadership. Conceptual knowledge incorporates the comprehension of
categories, classifications, principles, generalizations, theories, models, and structures relative to
a particular area (Rueda, 2011). As it relates to culturally responsive leadership, conceptual
knowledge is the foundational component of stakeholders in school environments. Therefore,
understanding the intersectionality of leadership, culture, and climate is essential to building and
maintaining culturally responsive leadership in K-12 schools.
Historically, leadership within K-12 education attempted to address school climate and
the racial achievement gap by integrating culture into education and not education into culture
(Ladson-Billings, 1995). Rather than focus on embedding school practices into the culture of
students, learners were forced to engage with culturally insensitive practices that had minimal
integration of their own identity and practices. This type of phenomenon can have disastrous
effects on performance, given that social exclusion diminishes the performance of individuals in
cognitive performance tasks (Baumeister, Twenge, & Nuss, 2002).
43
Additionally, conceptual understanding related to professional development and diversity
interventions will support culturally responsive leaders in meeting climate driven organizational
performance goals. Diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives often include elements of
professional development. However, within the context of school systems, these projects often
are not grounded in research and framed as intergroup relation interventions that (a) establish a
causal effect of the program, (b) use unobtrusive outcome measurement that goes beyond self-
reporting, and (c) conduct the research in relevant populations and settings (Paluck, 2006). In
light of the aforementioned research, conceptual knowledge of the governance and leadership
competencies set forth by the National Education Association (Appendix A) and National Policy
Board for Educational Administration’s Professional Standards for Educational Leaders
(Appendix B) could yield positive results on culturally responsive leadership practices pertaining
to school climate.
Procedural Knowledge: Knowledge of how to leverage culturally responsive
leadership in order to improve school climate. Procedural knowledge involves knowing how
to execute a particular task (Rueda, 2011). Pertaining to this study, understanding how to
leverage culturally responsive leadership to improve school climate will empower leaders to
build upon their conceptual knowledge and take action. Deriving from sociocultural theory, the
procedures that culturally responsive leadership can utilize to build positive school climate
include (a) establishing images of self-identity for students through educators; (b) providing role
models similar in self-identity to students, (c) creating an image of a society we aspire students
to form, (d) establishing positive home-school connections, and (e) engaging students in their
own culture during the learning process (Cummins, Chow, & Schechter, 2006). In addition to
executing diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, these procedural knowledge assets are
essential to improving school climate.
44
Metacognitive Knowledge: Knowledge of how to assess one’s own strengths and
weaknesses as a culturally responsive leader. Metacognitive knowledge is self-awareness in
the cognitive process (Rueda, 2011). Moreover, it is the key aspect of strategic behavior in
problem solving and allows one to consider conditional and contextual aspects of any given
paradigm (Rueda, 2011). Within the context of this study, the ability of culturally responsive
leaders to assess their own strengths and weaknesses is key to process improvement and
organizational change. More specifically, how they self-assess their work motivation, general
job-related skills, self-management, approach to change, social approach, and leadership
qualities, particularly related to their culturally responsive practices, is critical to school and
climate improvement (Huber & Hiltmann, 2011).
Below, Table 1 displays the assumed conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive
influences related to this study on culturally responsive leadership and its association with school
climate.
Table 1
Assumed Knowledge Influences
Assumed Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type
Senior district leaders need knowledge of the foundational
components and beliefs of culturally responsive leadership
within the context of school environments.
Conceptual
Senior district leaders need knowledge of how to leverage
culturally responsive leadership in order to improve school
climate.
Procedural
Senior district leaders need knowledge of how to assess
one’s own strengths and weaknesses as a culturally
responsive leader.
Metacognitive
45
Motivation
In addition to knowledge, motivation is a key influence on performance. Motivation,
otherwise classified as the desire to seek success or avoid failure, can be examined through
choice of behavior, level of activity and involvement, or persistence and management of effort
(Dembo & Seli, 2016). Understanding that many performance problems can be attributed to
motivation makes it important to assess the amotivation, extrinsic, and intrinsic motivational
factors of stakeholders within an organization. How people perform correlates to how situations
occur to them and their experiences (Taylor, 2015). Therefore, as it relates to this study, the
extrinsic, attainment, and self-efficacy motivational influences of district leadership will be
instrumental factors in addressing school climate through culturally responsive leadership.
Utility value: Extrinsic value placed in implementing culturally responsive
leadership to improve school climate. Utility value is the external motivational factor
associated with how an individual weighs a task. Pertaining to this study, utility value is
assessed extrinsically and by attainment, through which usefulness and importance are explored.
In alignment with expectancy value theory, utility value or the worth of task can increase
motivation when it is viewed as being useful (Pintrich, 2003). Additionally, activating personal
interest through opportunities for choice and control also can lead to increased motivation
(Eccles, 2006).
As it relates to the stakeholder group of this study, district leadership, the utility value of
culturally responsive leadership can be increased in two ways. First, clear articulation as to why
culturally responsive leadership is important in attaining the goal of improving school climate
will support district leaders with the prioritization of this goal and finding motivation (Pintrich,
2003). However, for this to be realized, district leaders also ought to be afforded autonomy,
through which self-determination will reinforce motivation (Taylor, 2015). The opportunity for
46
this stakeholder group to make decisions relative to their particular environments should not only
reinforce their motivation, but also afford them the opportunity to positively influence outcomes
for matters which they are directly responsible.
The second factor which can increase stakeholder utility value is modeling, through
which district leadership should be provided with similar and credible models of success
(Pajares, 2006). Not only is it possible for this to have a positive impact on district leadership’s
motivation, but it provides exemplars to learn from and draw upon while attempting to achieve
performance goals.
Utility value: Attainment value district leaders place on culturally responsive
leadership being a core responsibility they have in their own practice. Attainment value is
the importance placed on acquiring a skill to enhance performance and reach a specific goal
(Pintrich, 2003). Pertaining to this study, attainment value is how district leaders perceive
culturally responsive leadership as a core responsibility in their own practice to improve school
climate and outcomes for students. More specifically, attainment value explores how motivated
these leaders are to learn and acquire skills related to culturally responsive leadership to enhance
their performance (Eccles, 2006). In order to increase the motivation of district leaders to be
culturally responsive, relevant professional learning materials and activities should be designed,
connecting their interests to real-world tasks and problems of practice (Pintrich, 2003). By doing
so, these leaders will value culturally responsive leadership as a framework to improve school
climate and outcomes for Black and Latino students in K-12 education.
Self-efficacy: Positive expectations for success in executing culturally responsive
leadership. Self-efficacy is the personal evaluation that individuals have about their abilities to
successfully complete a specific task (Bandura, 1982). In alignment to social cognitive theory,
modeled behaviors are more likely to be adopted if the model is credible, shares characteristics
47
with the observer, and the behavior itself has functional value (Denler et al., 2009).
Additionally, under self-efficacy theory, the motivational influence of self-efficacy is enhanced
when there are positive expectancies for success (Pajares, 2006). Collectively, both theoretical
frameworks suggest that self-efficacy can strengthen motivation when there is a shared identity,
high expectations, and optimism about future results.
Pertaining to the School District of Philadelphia, the following self-efficacy strategies
ought to be explored to increase motivation, and further cultivate culturally responsive
leadership. Purposeful professional development training and evaluation systems linking
progress to rewards both have positive relationships with motivation (Pintrich, 2003).
Additionally, goal directed practice and targeted feedback also strengthen performance and
reinforce motivation (Pajares, 2006). Research shows that these items together may lead to
greater self-efficacy and reflection in practice. Therefore, the implementation of these strategies
may further cultivate culturally responsive leadership within the School District of Philadelphia
and lead to improved school climate and student outcomes.
Below, Table 2 displays the assumed utility value and self-efficacy motivational
influences related to this study on culturally responsive leadership and its association with school
climate.
Table 2
Assumed Motivation Influences
Motivation Construct Assumed Motivation Influence
Task Value (Utility) Extrinsic – Senior district leaders need to see
the value in implementing culturally
responsive leadership to improve school
climate.
Task Value (Attainment) Attainment – Senior district leaders need to
feel that culturally responsive leadership is a
core responsibility they have in their own
practice.
48
Table 2, continued
Motivation Construct Assumed Motivation Influence
Self-Efficacy Self-Efficacy – Senior district leaders need to
believe that they are capable of implementing
culturally responsive leadership, and through
that, improve school climate.
Organizational Influences
Organizational influences include how a setting is structured, the policies and practices
that define it, and how people interact with each other within a given environment (Rueda,
2011). In highly functioning situations, these elements are considered assets, however, when not
functioning well, they are considered barriers (Dembo & Seli, 2016). Organizational influences
can be classified into two categories – models and settings (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001).
Cultural models represent the values, beliefs, and attitudes that are invisible and automated,
whereas cultural settings are visible and concrete manifestations of cultural models within
activity environments (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001).
This study will examine both cultural models and settings as they impact district leaders’
capacity to implement culturally responsive leadership practices within the context of the School
District of Philadelphia. These assumed organizational influences will explore the invisible
factors that impact culturally responsive leadership at the school district, such as culture and the
core mission, as well as the concretized manifestations of cultural settings in the form of
organizational structure, goals, and professional development.
Organizational culture: The District needs value for culturally responsive
leadership as part of the organizational culture. Organizational culture represents the values,
beliefs, and practices of an institution, and it can be disaggregated into three areas – culture in
the environment, culture in groups, and culture in individuals (Clark & Estes, 2008). These
categories speak to the internal workings of culture within an organization through
49
environmental, identity, and social constructs, and highlight how various modalities of culture
impact performance. Culture within an institution is often invisible and difficult to define
(Rueda, 2011). However, every organization also encounters external socio-political factors that
impact institutional values. Within the context of a school system, this becomes further
compounded when taking into account organizational influences such as prejudice, social capital,
socio-economic status, and politics – all of which have significant implications on the values and
norms of an academic institution.
Pertaining to the School District of Philadelphia, the organizational influences that could
impose serious challenges on the culture of the system and leaders’ capacity to implement
culturally responsive leadership practices are both internal and external in nature. These include
how the district values culturally responsive leadership and embeds it as part of its mission, as
well as the formalized goals, structures, professional development, funding, and autonomy
associated with the implementation of this leadership framework. As it relates to the goal of
improving school climate so that 100% students will graduate, ready for college and career, how
culturally responsive leadership is utilized was explored. However, the value that schools place
on culturally responsive leadership may be heavily influenced by how the School District of
Philadelphia weighs this topic. If the district does not prioritize cultural responsiveness in its
leadership, then schools will have difficulty with internalizing this concept into their norms,
beliefs, and values.
Organizational mission: The District needs to embed culturally responsive
leadership into its core mission. The mission of an organization is the method by which it
moves toward achieving its goals. Within an institution, mission fulfillment influences
motivation, self-efficacy, social identity, and emotional exhaustion (Suh, Houston, Barney, &
Kwon, 2011). Additionally, it promotes self-regulation and drives behaviors toward goal
50
orientation (Denler et al., 2009). These motivational factors have a reciprocal relationship with
organizational influence, by which, motivation supports organizational practices and vice-versa.
However, how an institution executes its practices toward mission attainment is not solely driven
by internal factors. The mission of an organization is also influenced by external matters,
outside of its control, which help to shape internal cultural norms.
Within the context of this study, it would be a disservice to embed culturally responsive
leadership in the mission of schools without exploring this practice at the central office of the
School District of Philadelphia with senior leadership. Given the positive and negative
relationships that external organizational influences have on internal policies and practices, how
the school district views and engages with this practice is key. Not only will it provide the utility
value of culturally responsive leadership at the district level, but it will give insight into how the
practices of schools are shaped by district influences while executing their mission.
Organizational structure and goals: The District needs to create formalized
structures and goals to support and build culturally responsive leadership. Organizational
structure refers to the way in which an institution configurates itself to improve performance and
reach its goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). Within the context of education, these short-term,
intermediate, and long-term goals can be broken down by each unit of analysis (which includes
the U.S. Department of Education, State Departments of Education, school districts, schools,
teams, and individuals) into discrete and scaffolded performance goals (Rueda, 2011).
Therefore, individual, team, school-wide, and district-wide goals should always be in alignment
with respective state-wide and federal educational targets.
With regard to building and sustaining culturally responsive leadership at the School
District of Philadelphia, the assumed cultural setting influences of the district formalizing
structures and goals in this area becomes paramount. How the district prioritizes and
51
institutionalizes practices to build leadership capacity in this area will have serious implications
at the school level. Prior research at the School District of Philadelphia identified school quality
across four domains, which include reading scores, math scores, attendance, and student
behavior; however, due to limitations in the study, the impact of leadership on performance
measures was not explored (Gottfried, 2012). In order to approach leadership development in a
systematic way, organizational influences and their impact on institutional practices ought to be
taken into account. Therefore, how the School District of Philadelphia sets goals and structures
at departmental level to build culturally responsive leadership will influence and guide the
practices, norms, culture, and performance measures at the school level.
Professional development: The District needs to have professional development,
funding, and autonomy to leaders in order to build culturally responsive leadership. Clark
and Estes (2008) define professional development as data-driven performance improvement
programs that aim to standardize behavior and productivity through training. Professional
development is the financial investment that enterprises make with its human capital to improve
functionality and organizational impact. As it relates to schooling, there are three primary
factors that contribute to performance problems – fragmentation in approaches, the misalignment
of approaches and goals, and the failure to match solutions to problems (Rueda, 2011). Although
various causal factors may exist pertaining to the aforementioned issues, well designed
professional development delivered to the appropriate stakeholders may mitigate problems of
performance.
High-quality professional development requires resources, more specifically, time,
funding, and the autonomy for leaders to contextualize it to their respective settings. Pertaining
to the School District of Philadelphia, there are political, societal, and governmental factors at
the state department of education level that generate organizational influences that impact the
52
cultivation of culturally responsive leadership. They include diversity issues, political agendas,
perceptions of school reform, privatization and school choice, and governmental priorities – all
of which impact the level of funding and autonomy administered to the district for leadership
development purposes.
Below, Table 3 displays the assumed cultural model and cultural setting organizational
influences related to this study on culturally responsive leadership and its association with school
climate.
Table 3
Assumed Organizational Influences
Organizational Influence Category Assumed Organizational Influences
Cultural Model Influence 1 The School District of Philadelphia needs to
value culturally responsive leadership as part
of its organizational culture.
Cultural Model Influence 2 The School District of Philadelphia needs to
embed culturally responsive leadership into
the core mission of the organization.
Cultural Setting Influence 1 The School District of Philadelphia needs to
create formalized organizational structures and
goals at the central office level to support and
build culturally responsive leadership.
Cultural Setting Influence 2 The School District of Philadelphia needs to
provide professional development, funding,
and autonomy to leaders in order to build
culturally responsive leadership.
Conclusion
The historical roles that race, inequality, institutionalized oppression, and poverty played
in America had a detrimental impact on the education sector, culminating in the current
educational inequities that Black and Latino students face today in K-12 education (Jones-
Wilson, 1990; Noguera, 2017). As a whole, these students not only experience school differently
53
than their White peers but they also are underperforming academically due to decades and
centuries of segregation, lack of resources, and lack of access to opportunities (Jones-Wilson,
1990; Smith, 2005). Nonetheless, for America to truly become the egalitarian, just, and
equitable society that it aspires to be, greater focus ought to be paid on developing youth, in
particular, those belonging to groups who have been historically marginalized and
disenfranchised.
Over the past three decades, multicultural-based interventions such as culturally
responsive teaching have been implemented which recognize variance in culture and take into
account the cultural assets and learning differences of diverse students (Ladson-Billings, 1995;
Ladson-Billings, 1998). However, these efforts alone will not truly solve the problem without
the support of culturally responsive leaders who ensure that the entire school environment, not
just teaching practices, is responsive to the needs of minority students through the centering of
inclusion, equity, advocacy, and social justice (Khalifa et al., 2016). Therefore, it is imperative
that greater attention be paid to culturally responsive leadership development as a pillar of
education reform, not only to improve school environment and climate, but also the learning
outcomes of Black and Latino students in American K-12 education.
54
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this study was to explore, by means of a gap analysis, the role of
culturally responsive leadership in improving school climate. From an organizational standpoint,
inclusive leaders who are culturally competent and possess the skills to meet the needs of all
stakeholders create the proper environment for institutions to meet their goals (Stevens et al.,
2008). As it relates to K-12 systems, when a positive relationship is established by means of
school climate between the learner and the school, student outcomes improve (Barile et al.,
2012). Within this context, the role of teachers has been well documented. However, that of
district leadership has been less explored.
In light of such, the questions that guided this study are the following:
1. What are the attributes of culturally responsive leadership in district leadership that create
a climate for student success?
2. What is the interaction between stakeholder knowledge, motivation, and organizational
culture and context related to the School District of Philadelphia’s goal of culturally
responsive leadership providing a climate where 100% of students will graduate, ready
for college and career?
3. What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational context
for culturally responsive leaders?
In this chapter, the conceptual framework and methods for data collection and analysis
are provided for this descriptive qualitative study. This includes the participating stakeholder
group, sampling strategies, data collection and analysis, validity and reliability, ethics,
limitations and delimitations.
55
Participating Stakeholders
The primary stakeholder group for this dissertation was senior district leadership which
included the Superintendent, Chief of Academic Support, Chief of Schools, Chief of Charter
Schools and Innovation, Deputy Chief of School Operations, Executive Director of Government
Affairs, Advocacy, and External Engagement, and five assistant superintendents. This group
participated in semi-structured individual interviews, both in-person at the School District of
Philadelphia and virtually. Given the nature of this study, which investigated through the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences (KMO) conceptual framework the role of
culturally responsive leadership at the district level on school climate, and ultimately, student
outcomes, all participants were required to be in a senior leadership role where they manage
others within their respective functions.
Survey and Interview Sampling Strategy and Rationale
Given the research questions and conceptual framework for this study, a stratified
approach was taken to sample participants in a non-random and purposeful manner. The criteria
utilized, based upon set characteristics, to select participants for the interview process are stated
below. Interviews were conducted with participants previously identified as district leadership to
further investigate the topic of inquiry.
Criterion 1. Participants must be in a senior leadership role at the district where they are
responsible for managing teams of individuals.
Criterion 2. Participants must have the authority to make executive level decisions
pertaining to school climate and student learners.
For this study, there was a goal of getting all chief level district leadership related to
instruction and at least 50% of assistant superintendents responsible for learning networks to
participate in the interview process. The eleven individuals interviewed included the
56
Superintendent, Chief of Academic Support, Chief of Schools, Chief of Charter Schools and
Innovation, Deputy Chief of School Operations, Executive Director of Government Affairs,
Advocacy, and External Engagement, and five of the 13 assistant superintendents. Only a
subgroup of the assistant superintendents were interviewed due to their availability. However, it
was important to capture their perspectives because these leaders manage networks of principals
who lead instructional practices and regulate climate in schools. All of the leaders who
participated in this study were purposefully selected for interviews. A stratified recruitment
strategy was utilized to (a) achieve representativeness of all leadership, (b) capture heterogeneity
and maximum variation amongst participants, (c) test initial theories, (d) establish explicit
comparisons between participants, and (e) build relationships with participants who would best
enable the research questions to be answered (Maxwell, 2013). Each member of the senior
district leadership sample group was interviewed for approximately 30-minutes to one-hour.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
The necessary permission to perform research activities was obtained from the University
of Southern California Institutional Review Board. The methods used in this study to collect
data and validate the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to
culturally responsive district leadership included semi-structured, in-person and virtual
interviews. Using a 15-question interview protocol (Appendix E), interviews were conducted
during the months of February and March 2020 to assess the influence of culturally responsive
leadership on improving school climate and student outcomes. Each participant from this non-
random sample group was purposely selected to ensure that multiple perspectives were gathered
through various data points and triangulated to ensure that the research questions were answered
(Maxwell, 2013).
57
Interviews
Six senior level central office staff and five assistant superintendents were purposefully
selected for in-person and virtual interviews from the School District of Philadelphia. These
interviews were conducted in English during the months of February and March of 2020. The
in-depth interviews with these participants were semi-structured, and open-ended questions were
used to allow for flexibility during the interview process, deeper investigation into initial
assumptions, and for new ideas to arise (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Each interview began with a
standard interview protocol, including permission to audio record, to support the transcription
and coding processes. All interview information was stored in a password protected laptop, and
a copy was also secured in a password encrypted file on an external hard drive.
The interview instrument for this study can be found in Appendix E.
Documents and Artifacts
Document analysis consisted of the most recent school climate data retrieved from the
office of the Chief of Evaluation, Research, and Accountability at the School District of
Philadelphia. In addition, the National Education Association Governance and Leadership
Competencies (Appendix A), National Policy Board for Educational Administration Professional
Standards for Educational Leaders (Appendix B), the School District of Philadelphia Leadership
Pathways Framework (Appendix C), and School District of Philadelphia 2019-2020
Organizational Chart (Appendix D) were assessed and triangulated with interview data to further
support codified themes.
Data Analysis
Data collection and analysis were conducted by means of the Clark and Estes (2008) gap
analysis framework. This qualitative case study focused on the knowledge, motivation, and
58
organizational assets and deficits related to culturally responsive leadership that influence school
climate within the School District of Philadelphia.
For interviews, data analysis began during data collection. Analytic memos were written
after each interview. All thoughts, concerns, and initial conclusions were documented about the
data in relation to the conceptual framework and research questions. After leaving the field,
interviews were transcribed and coded. In the first phase of analysis, open coding was used to
look for empirical codes and apply a priori codes from the conceptual framework. Subsequently,
the second phase of analysis was conducted to assess where empirical and a priori codes could be
aggregated into analytic/axial codes. During the third phase of data analysis, pattern codes and
themes that emerged were identified in relation to the conceptual framework and study questions.
Immediately following, documents and artifacts were analyzed for evidence consistent with the
concepts in the conceptual framework.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Creswell (2014) emphasizes eight validity strategies for qualitative researchers to
consider as it relates to strengthening the credibility and trustworthiness of research: (a)
triangulate, converge several sources of data to identify and build coherent justification for
themes; (b) member checking, conduct follow-up interviews with participants to discuss the
accuracy of major findings; (c) thick description, provide detailed descriptions of the setting to
facilitate shared experiences; (d) bias, present characteristics and experiences of the researcher
that may influence interpretations of the findings; (e) discrepant information, introduce
contradictory evidence and perspectives about the identified themes; (f) prolonged time, develop
an in-depth understanding of the study through more interaction with participants; (g) peer
debriefing, locate a colleague to review and ask questions about the study; and (h) external
59
auditor, select an independent investigator unfamiliar with the researcher or project to provide an
objective of the project.
Out of the strategies mentioned, triangulation, member checking, bias, and peer
debriefing were used during the data collection and analysis phases to establish credibility.
Triangulation involved the synthesis and cross-checking of data from surveys, interviews, and
documents to inductively generate themes (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Due to the background of
the investigator, including his previous and current experience as an educational practitioner and
consultant on issues pertaining to organizational culture and climate, member checking was
performed and a peer was identified to review the research and ensure clarity of interpretation
and purpose throughout the study.
Validity and Reliability
Validity is the trustworthiness, authenticity, and quality of research (Maxwell, 2013).
Pertaining to this study, internal validity was authenticated through the triangulation of
interviews, documents, and peer review so that external validity could be established, thereby
making this research applicable in other contexts (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The triangulation
process was used to validate assumptions related to district leadership’s knowledge, motivation,
and organizational assets and performance levels. Furthermore, the information collected from
interviews and documents was cross-checked against findings from topic-related literature.
Additionally, member checking was executed during the interview process and findings were
shared with participants to ensure the accuracy of interpretation (Creswell, 2018).
Ethics
The purpose of this project was to conduct a gap analysis to examine the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences that build culturally responsive district leadership to
create school climates where 100% of students graduate, ready for college and career. As the
60
primary instrument in this study, the role of the investigator was to conduct a gap analysis related
to culturally responsive leadership at the district level given its association with leadership in
academic institutions and school climate. To achieve this aim, certain ethical protocols were
followed by which all participants were respected and empowered to make their own choices,
shown beneficence and no harm, and afforded justice. Prior to conducting the study, participants
were provided with informed consent forms and information was shared pertaining to the nature
of this research project, their voluntary participation, confidentiality, and their right to withdraw
from the study. Additionally, the aforementioned consent documentation was collected, prior to
the study, to reinforce with participants that their involvement was purely voluntary (Glesne,
2011). To ensure the safety of all subjects, the research methods and instruments of this study
were submitted to the University of Southern California Institutional Review Board for approval
prior to the commencement of data collection.
This dissertation study took place in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania at the School District of
Philadelphia and the investigator has no personal or professional affiliation with the
organization. At the time of the study, it was clearly articulated to participants that the nature of
this research was not evaluative, nor would it adversely impact their employment or standing
within the school district. Additionally, the role of the investigator was conveyed, through which
participants were made aware of the data collection, analysis, and reporting processes. Here, the
practical goals of this study, which focus on the administrative and policy improvement
objectives of organization were emphasized (Maxwell, 2013). More specifically, how this
research will help to generate theories and results that will support the School District of
Philadelphia with process improvement related to school climate through culturally responsive
leadership was addressed.
61
The investigator recognized that as an African American male educational practitioner,
he may hold potential biases as it relates to the topic of inquiry, culturally responsive leadership.
Personal experiences and goals motivate researchers to explore certain topics of inquiry, and they
can also influence the researcher during the data collection process (Maxwell, 2013). Given
such, the investigator intentionally decided to work with a school system that he had no
connection to, not only for the purposes of mitigating bias, but also to ensure the greatest level of
objectivity.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations are the influences on a study that the researcher cannot control (Creswell,
2014). Pertaining to this study, there was no absolute way to measure causality, more
specifically, the direct impact of culturally responsive leadership on specific student outcomes
given the unique environment of each school. Therefore, the results and findings may not fully
represent the participants’ characteristics reflective of their environments.
Conversely, delimitations are influences that the researcher can control through the
careful design of a study (Creswell, 2014). Due to the lack of convenience, capacity, and access,
the researcher did not have the ability to observe culturally responsive leadership practices at the
school district level or in various schools to better understand the context of school climate at the
School District of Philadelphia; therefore, observations in this study were omitted. Additionally,
the researcher opted to focus solely on culturally responsive leadership in this study thereby
deprioritizing the impact of other variables on school climate, such as teaching and learning in
the classroom, physical surroundings and the institutional environment, interpersonal
relationships and the respect for diversity within the community, and physical safety. Not
including these factors in this study may limit the findings and recommendations of this research.
62
Lastly, as it relates to the survey and interview items, the terminology and comprehensiveness of
questions may be limiting factors as well as the presence of the investigator.
63
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The purpose of this chapter is to report the results and findings related to culturally
responsive leadership in improving school climate. Specifically, qualitative data were collected
through interviews and document analysis to better understand the knowledge and skills of
senior leadership at the School District of Philadelphia, their motivational factors, and the
existing organizational influences of culturally responsive leadership that impact school climate.
Data were analyzed to understand executive leaderships’ current assets and continuing needs in
these areas. For those areas of continuing need, evidence-based recommendations for practice
are provided in Chapter Five.
The research questions that guided this study are:
1. What are the attributes of culturally responsive leadership in district leadership that create
a climate for student success?
2. What is the interaction between stakeholder knowledge, motivation, and organizational
culture and context related to the School District of Philadelphia’s goal of culturally
responsive leadership providing a climate where 100% of students will graduate, ready
for college and career?
3. What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational context
for culturally responsive leaders?
This chapter addresses the first two research questions that guided this study and is
organized by three sections which demonstrate the results and findings for knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organizational influences on culturally responsive school district leadership.
These findings include (a) the conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge and skills
influences necessary to build culturally responsive leadership; (b) the utility, attainment, and
self-efficacy motivation influences needed to implement culturally responsive leadership; and (c)
64
the cultural model and setting organizational influences required to operationalize culturally
responsive leadership across functional areas within a school district.
Interview Participants
For this research project, 13 interviewees from the School District of Philadelphia were
invited to participate in the study, and data were collected from 11 (N=11) participants. These
stakeholders were identified as senior leaders and included the superintendent, chief and deputy
chief officers, assistant superintendents, and one executive director. Semi-structured interviews
ranged in time from 30-minutes to one hour, and were conducted on-site in the Office of the
Superintendent and virtually. Below, Table 4 displays the demographic information of interview
participants. To maintain confidentiality, pseudonyms have been assigned to each interviewee,
and they will be referenced in the analysis and discussion of subsequent subsections in this
chapter.
Table 4
Demographic Information of Senior Leader Interview Participants (N=11)
Leadership Level
Pseudonym Tenure in Years
Senior Leader
Participant 1
5-10 years
Chief Officer Participant 2 5-10 years
Senior Leader Participant 3 over 20 years
Chief Officer Participant 4 5-10 years
Senior Leader Participant 5 5-10 years
Senior Leader Participant 6 over 20 years
Senior Leader Participant 7 less than 5 years
Senior Leader Participant 8 over 20 years
Chief Officer Participant 9 5-10 years
Senior Leader Participant 10 5-10 years
Chief Officer Participant 11 11-20 years
65
Results and Findings for Knowledge and Skills Influences
Senior district leaders’ knowledge of culturally responsive leadership is critical as they
aspire to improve school climate and student outcomes. More importantly, they need to
understand the practical uses and applications of culturally responsive leadership within a school
district setting. Krathwohl (2002) organizes knowledge into four domains which include factual,
conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. This section details the findings of assumed
knowledge assets of senior leaders at the School District of Philadelphia related to the usage of
culturally responsive leadership as a means to improve school climate. Assumed conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive knowledge influences on culturally responsive leadership, as
identified in Chapter 2, were assessed and validated as foundational assets or continuing needs
through interviews and document analysis as referenced in Table 5 below. Knowledge
influences in this study were identified as foundational assets if the majority of leaders
interviewed demonstrated some understanding of culturally responsive leadership. In addition,
four newly identified influences were generated based on the interviews and noted below. A
newly identified influence is an asset useful in building and implementing culturally responsive
leadership that was not previously identified through the literature in Chapter 2.
66
Table 5
Assumed Knowledge Influences as Assets of Culturally Responsive Leadership
Assumed Knowledge Influences
Category Foundational
Assets
Continuing
Needs
Senior district leaders need knowledge of the
foundational components and beliefs of culturally
responsive leadership within the context of school
environments.
Conceptual
✓
Senior district leaders need knowledge of how
systemic oppression and institutional racism impact
leadership. (Newly Identified)
Conceptual
✓
Senior district leaders need knowledge of what
culturally responsive leadership is within a school
district. (Newly Identified)
Conceptual
✓
Senior district leaders need knowledge of how to
leverage culturally responsive leadership in order to
improve school climate.
Procedural
✓
Senior district leaders need knowledge of how to
utilize culturally responsive leadership to close the
achievement gap for Black and Latino students.
(Newly Identified)
Procedural
✓
Senior district leaders need knowledge of how to use
culturally responsive leadership to strengthen
community-based relationships for school districts.
(Newly Identified)
Procedural
✓
Senior district leaders need knowledge of how to
assess one’s own strengths and weaknesses as a
culturally responsive leader.
Metacognitive
✓
Culturally responsive leadership can be observed at both the practitioner and institutional
levels. As educational practitioners, culturally responsive leaders create inclusive school
climates through (a) critical self-reflection on their own leadership behaviors; (b) the
development of culturally responsive teachers; (c) the promotion of culturally responsive school
environments; and (d) active engagement with parents, students, and indigenous contexts
(Khalifa et al., 2016). At the institutional level, culturally responsive school systems center
67
inclusion, equity, advocacy, and social justice in their practice, and they intentionally work
alongside community stakeholders to achieve school-community improvement efforts (Green,
2017; Khalifa et al., 2016). According to the results in Table 5, the majority of conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive knowledge assumptions were validated as foundational
knowledge assets. Although the majority of knowledge influences were recognized as
foundational knowledge assets, the leaders interviewed did not demonstrate full understanding or
mastery of culturally responsive leadership. Only one assumption was identified as a continuing
knowledge need, however, the district could still improve in many of the aforementioned areas.
In subsequent sections of this chapter, data will be disaggregated to display the percentages of
validated assumptions for each knowledge, motivation, and organizational influence in alignment
to the instrumentation used for assessment.
Conceptual Knowledge
Conceptual knowledge is the understanding of underlying categories, principles,
structures, and theories of an area or field (Krathwohl, 2002). According to Table 6, two of the
conceptual knowledge influences for this study were validated as knowledge assets in association
with four interview questions and documents used for analysis. Highlighted in the table below,
0% validity for senior leaders need of knowledge of the foundational components and beliefs of
culturally responsive leadership means that no district leader interviewed demonstrated a
baseline knowledge of the foundational components of the leadership practice. By contrast,
100% validity for senior district leaders need knowledge of how systemic oppression and
institutional racism impact leadership means that all leaders stated at least some base knowledge
of how discrimination and inequity impact leadership. These data in Table 6 show percentages
of validated assumed conceptual knowledge influences and the theoretical understanding of
68
culturally responsive leadership from chief officers and senior leaders at the School District of
Philadelphia.
Table 6
Validated Assumed and Newly Identified Conceptual Knowledge Influences of Culturally
Responsive Leadership
Assumed Knowledge Influences
and Newly Identified
Knowledge Needs
Category Instruments Aligned Questions Validity
N (%)
Senior district leaders need
knowledge of the foundational
components and beliefs of
culturally responsive leadership
within the context of school
environments.
Conceptual
Interviews
Document
Analysis
How would you define
your personal leadership
style?
What do you see as key
leadership attributes of a
culturally responsive
leader?
0
(0%)
Senior district leaders need
knowledge of how systemic
oppression and institutional
racism impact leadership.
(Newly Identified)
Conceptual Interviews How have systemic
oppression and
institutional racism
impacted your
leadership style, if at all?
11
(100%)
Senior district leaders need
knowledge of what culturally
responsive leadership is within a
school district.
(Newly Identified)
Conceptual Interviews
Document
Analysis
What does culturally
responsive leadership
mean within the context
of a school district
environment?
9
(82%)
Knowledge of the foundational components and beliefs of culturally responsive
leadership within school environments. Two interview questions and document analysis
addressed the assumed conceptual knowledge influence of senior district leaders needing
understanding of the foundational components and beliefs of culturally responsive leadership in
schools. The two interview questions, “How would you define your personal leadership style?”
69
and “What do you see as key leadership attributes of a culturally responsive leader?” were
juxtaposed with the National Education Association Governance and Leadership Competencies
(Appendix A) and the National Policy Board for Educational Administrations Professional
Standards for Educational Leaders (Appendix B) pertaining to culturally responsive leadership.
The questions provided insight into senior leaders’ understanding of culturally responsive
leadership and its relationship to their personal leadership practices. Data analysis from these
two questions concluded that none of respondents could identify all of the elements of culturally
responsive leadership, which include (a) critical self-reflection on their own leadership
behaviors, (b) the development of culturally responsive teachers, (c) the promotion of culturally
responsive school environments, and (d) active engagement with parents, students, and
indigenous contexts (Khalifa et al., 2016). Furthermore, these leaders were unable to connect
culturally responsive leadership to their personal leadership practices. The clearest description
came from one chief officer who stated, “You have to be able to understand not only your own
culture and your own beliefs, but also be open to those of others” (Participant 2). This directly
ties into one of the tenants of culturally responsive leadership, which is self-reflection, however,
none of the respondents were able to cite all of the traits of the leadership practice.
Although none of the interviewees were able to identify all four attributes of a culturally
responsive leader, 91% of executive leaders were capable of articulating at least one culturally
responsive leadership quality. Attributes of collaboration, trust, effective communication, and
being data-driven were mentioned; however, these qualities do not coincide with the conceptual
framework of culturally responsive leadership. Being a servant leader also surfaced, with 55%
of senior leaders describing servant leadership as an attribute of culturally responsive leadership.
One senior leader shared, “I think you have to be a servant leader and you have to understand
that it is so not about you” (Participant 1). Servant leaders prioritize the highest needs of others
70
being served (Northouse, 2018). Although aspects of servant leadership may coincide with
culturally responsive leadership, they are not one in the same. Being service oriented is critically
important in the field of education because the needs of students and families ought to be met to
ensure successful outcomes. However, being a servant leader committed to the needs of others
does not make one culturally responsive and adept to navigate the complex challenges of diverse
populations.
While the majority of senior leaders were able to identify at least one attribute of
culturally responsive leadership, there still appears to be unclarity around this particular
leadership style and its relationship with existing leadership practices. One senior leader noted,
“Today was the very first time I’ve ever heard the concept culturally responsive leadership”
(Participant 7). Additionally, one chief officer mentioned, “I can’t think of a district or a system
that has fully embraced culturally responsive leadership or teaching” (Participant 9). There
appears to be a desire from executive leaders at the School District of Philadelphia to use
culturally responsive leadership practices as a means to improve educational equity and student
outcomes in their system. Despite this aim, conceptual knowledge gaps exist related to the
theoretical framework of culturally responsive leadership which could make the attainment of
this goal difficult.
Knowledge of how systemic oppression and institutional racism impact leadership.
With regard to the interview question of, “How have systemic oppression and institutional
racism impacted your leadership style, if at all?” 100% of the participants shared that these
factors have influenced their leadership styles. For some, their personal interactions with
discrimination motivated them to make a positive impact in education. One chief officer noted,
“Go to college…I got in but didn’t even know how to write a paper because I came from a
system that didn’t believe that I would be where I am today…so that makes up who I am and
71
informs how I lead” (Participant 2). Another chief officer stated, “You can’t hide the
microaggressions that play out in everything from folks who think I’m a secretary when I walk
into a building…both from people who look like me and people who don’t…I think it’s very
important as a person of color that you don’t give anyone any reason to discredit why and how
you enter a space” (Participant 9). Leaders at the district acknowledged that systemic oppression
and institutional racism have impacted them in negative ways which help inform their leadership
practices. As a result, they recognize how cultural responsiveness is critical to the success of all
students.
Building upon this sentiment, there also were leaders who shared that their experience
with discriminatory behaviors, either personally or through the observation of others, encouraged
them to be disruptive and advocate for educational equity. One chief officer mentioned, “I think
that it’s important for individuals to understand the consequences from systemic oppression and
racism as it constantly influences our work and biases our approaches (Participant 4). This
highlights the significance of oppression and racism not only on leadership approaches, but also
organizational practices. Additionally, one senior leader mentioned, “People are not really
paying close attention to what’s happening with many of our students of color; even in your
high-performing schools, there’s a subset of students who just don’t do well and historically have
never done well” (Participant 3). Another senior leader added, “I think that this notion of
institutional racism definitely impacted my style in terms of understanding the root cause of that,
and how as a leader I was going to address it” (Participant 8). These leaders make direct
connections between race, racism, and underperformance, and recognize the importance of
utilizing cultural responsiveness to improve student outcomes.
Knowledge of what culturally responsive leadership is within a school district
environment. The final question used to assess the conceptual knowledge of senior leaders
72
investigated the meaning of culturally responsive leadership within a school district environment.
Participants were asked, “What does culturally responsive leadership mean within the context of
a school district environment?” and their responses were analyzed along with the National
Education Association Governance and Leadership Competencies (Appendix A) and the
National Policy Board for Educational Administrations Professional Standards for Educational
Leaders (Appendix B) to reach validity. Below in Table 7 are data which illustrate the
characteristics of culturally responsive leadership within a school district environment identified
by executive leaders at the School District of Philadelphia.
Table 7
Characteristics of Culturally Responsive Leadership within a School District Environment
Identifying Characteristic
Category Instruments Percentage of Respondents
N (%)
Recognizing difference
Conceptual
Interviews
4 (36%)
Hiring practices Conceptual Interviews 4 (36%)
Managing bias Conceptual Interviews
5 (45%)
Willingness to call out inequity
Conceptual Interviews 3 (27%)
Within the context of a school district environment, 91% of leaders identified at least one
attribute of culturally responsive leadership, with 36% of interviewees referencing the
importance of recognizing difference, 36% mentioning the significance of hiring practices, and
45% stressing the importance of managing bias. While it is not an attribute of culturally
responsive leadership, it is important to note that 27% of participants identified being willing to
73
call out inequity as essential for system leaders within a school district. These data demonstrate
that baseline conceptual knowledge exists with executive leaders at the district pertaining to
culturally responsive leadership in school settings, however, they are not aligned in their
understanding. As a result, leaders were able to define culturally responsive leadership in their
personal practice, however, they lacked the ability to do so from a district leadership perspective.
Building upon the lack of consensus from executive leaders in defining culturally
responsive leadership, there also appears to be unclarity around how the leadership practice is
operationalized. Some leaders referenced elements of a system-level approach, while others
described culturally responsive leadership as individual attributes of educational practitioners.
From an organizational standpoint, leaders stated that for culturally responsive leadership to exist
in a school district, formal structures need to put in place. One senior leader shared, “I suggested
that we have our own leadership office that works to make sure it hits all levels of cross-
functional teams” (Participant 10). Additionally, one chief officer stated, “We don’t have a chief
of equity or a chief of inclusion, we don’t have someone whose full-time job is to focus on that
which doesn’t make any sense because if this isn’t someone’s job to point out inequity every
single day, across operations, this is where you fall short across teaching and learning”
(Participant 9). These leaders highlighted the importance of having formal structures in place to
promote culturally responsive leadership in their school district to improve climate, student
outcomes, and educational equity. They stressed the importance of intentionality, consistency,
and systems as mechanisms to permeate culturally responsive leadership across functional areas
in their school district to improve student success.
Conversely, there were leaders who emphasized that culturally responsive leadership
manifests itself within a school system at the individual level. One senior leader noted, “I think
it is how well we know our clientele, our students, our communities, and their experiences, their
74
needs, and their wants” (Participant 7). One chief officer also mentioned, “I think it is knowing
the similarities and differences that exist amongst various cultures, and keeping them in mind
when you are developing policies and procedures for districts (Participant 2). These participants
identified attributes of culturally responsive leaders and noted the importance of leveraging
culturally responsive leadership to establish policies, procedures, and practices that achieve
educational equity within school systems. Unlike some of their counterparts, these leaders
acknowledged that some form of conceptual knowledge related to culturally responsive
leadership must exist prior to developing procedural knowledge that leads to actions.
Furthermore, they recognized the relationship between conceptual and procedural knowledge,
and comprehended that conceptual knowledge is a building block for procedural knowledge
when aiming to operationalize equity initiatives that improve student outcomes.
Almost all leaders interviewed at the School District of Philadelphia were able to identify
at least one attribute of culturally responsive leadership, either as an individual practitioner or
through the lens of a system. However, the inconsistency demonstrated in defining the
leadership practice presents an opportunity for leaders at the district to build their conceptual
knowledge around culturally responsive leadership. More specifically, building their capacity to
clearly define this leadership practice at the individual and institutional levels, and what it means
within the district, ought to support leaders in achieving their goals related to school climate,
student success, and educational equity.
Procedural Knowledge
Procedural knowledge is the comprehension of skills and procedures involved with a
particular task, which include the techniques, methods, and steps necessary for successful
implementation (Krathwohl, 2002). Table 8 below highlights the validity of the assumed
procedural knowledge influences for this study. Three interview questions were used to analyze
75
the procedural knowledge of chief officers and senior leaders at the School District of
Philadelphia pertaining to culturally responsive leadership. The data listed in Table 8 show
percentages of the validated assumed procedural knowledge influences of culturally responsive
leadership from executive leaders interviewed who demonstrated at least some level of
understanding at the district.
Table 8
Validated Assumed and Newly Identified Procedural Knowledge Influences of Culturally
Responsive Leadership
Assumed Knowledge Influences
and Newly Identified
Knowledge Needs
Category Instruments Aligned Questions Validity
N (%)
Senior district leaders need
knowledge of how to leverage
culturally responsive leadership
in order to improve school
climate.
Procedural
Interviews
What steps do you think
should be taken to
leverage culturally
responsive leadership as
a means to improve
school climate?
8 (73%)
Senior district leaders need
knowledge of how to utilize
culturally responsive leadership
to close the achievement gap for
Black and Latino students.
(Newly Identified)
Procedural Interviews What would or could a
culturally responsive
leader do to support
school reform efforts
that target closing the
achievement gap for
Black and Latino
students at a large K-12
school district?
7 (64%)
Senior district leaders need
knowledge of how to use
culturally responsive leadership
to strengthen community-based
relationships for school districts.
(Newly Identified)
Procedural Interviews
What role could
culturally responsive
leadership play in
strengthening
community-based
relationships for school
districts?
6 (55%)
76
District leadership knowledge of how to leverage culturally responsive leadership to
improve school climate. Each of the three questions asked assessed procedural knowledge on
how to implement culturally responsive leadership to improve school climate. Building upon the
notion that positive school climate is necessary to improve student outcomes, the subsequent
questions captured leaders’ understanding on how to leverage culturally responsive leadership to
improve school-community relationships and close the achievement gap. School climate
includes interpersonal relationships and teaching and learning practices (Schein & Schein, 2017),
and for this reason, school-community relationships and cultural practices related to instruction
were assessed.
The first question, “What steps do you think need to be taken to leverage culturally
responsive leadership as a means to improve school climate?” was asked of executive leaders
and 73% of participants were able to identify at least one element of culturally responsive
leadership that would build school climate. Two themes emerged from this response with 64%
of participants mentioning that professional development was needed to build culturally
responsive leadership and 45% of interviewees raising the need for leaders to get comfortable
talking about race, racism, class, and privilege. One chief officer shared, “I think we have to
become honest about making sure that folks are trained in culturally responsive leadership…I
don’t know that the average person in the system could even define it and you can’t build a
culture around something that you actually can’t define” (Participant 9). To add, another chief
officer noted, “We have to set the expectation…we are going on almost a year and we still
haven’t defined equity and we use the word like we’re all clear about what it is” (Participant 11).
These responses portray that leaders recognize the need for professional development in the
district to build capacity in leveraging culturally responsive leadership to improve school
climate. However, it appears that there is a gap in conceptual knowledge on the subject matter
77
and an unwillingness to explicitly discuss issues pertaining to race and class which may be
thwarting efforts to achieve the district-wide goal of improving school climate. This is
evidenced in responses from participants and by those who referenced that conversations
pertaining to equity have not led to concrete action items or results.
Knowledge of how to utilize culturally responsive leadership to close achievement
gaps. The second question fundamentally addressed academic performance and educational
equity issues for Black and Latino students. Leaders were asked, “What would or could a
culturally responsive leader do to support school reform efforts that target closing the
achievement gap for Black and Latino students at a large K-12 school district?” The response
data show that 64% of leaders identified an aspect of culturally responsive leadership that could
be used to close the achievement gap. Again, professional development was raised, and 27% of
participants mentioned that additional training would lead to positive results. One chief officer
shared, “It’s our responsibility to really develop folks, and again, speak the truth, call it as it is,
and provide them with the resources that they need to develop in being culturally responsive
leaders at the same level and with the same sense of urgency that we do in developing them as
instructional leaders” (Participant 2). This leader highlighted the significance of culturally
responsive leadership being equally as important as instructional leadership in closing the
achievement gap. The results also concluded that 45% of leaders recognized self-reflection and
examining bias as critical steps in leveraging culturally responsive leadership to improve student
outcomes for Black and Latino students. One senior leader noted, “If we say this is important,
then how is every aspect of every department building it into their plans for supporting schools”
(Participant 3). This participant acknowledged the magnitude of self-reflection and also the
significance of subsequent actions from that reflection that lead to concrete results. As it relates
to culturally responsive leadership, having leaders who are introspective matters; however, it is
78
also essential to have leaders who continuously improve and take action. Therefore, it is
essential that leaders not only self-reflect on their own practice, but also implement initiatives
that develop culturally responsive leaders, create culturally responsive environments, and engage
students, parents, and the community to improve school climate and close the achievement gap.
Knowledge of how to strengthen community-based relationships. The final question
posed to leaders to assess procedural knowledge asked, “What role could culturally responsive
leadership play in strengthening community-based relationships for school districts?” Although
validity was achieved with 55% of participants being able to identify actions of a culturally
responsive leader that build community relations, responses varied greatly. The data show that
45% of respondents highlighted the need to build authentic relationships with community
stakeholders. Within the context of culturally responsive leadership, authentic relationships
derive from authentic leadership by which leaders create reciprocal relationships with their
followers and are seen as being genuine (Northouse, 2018). One senior leader mentioned, “If we
were to pay more attention to what the community is saying and what stakeholders in that
community are saying, then I think we will be better partners” (Participant 3). However, it is
important to note that community stakeholders do not only include parents and community
leaders, but also politicians who influence and shape local educational policy. Building upon
this sentiment, one senior leader shared, “You got to play ball with the politicians and got to talk
to them” (Participant 5). Being a culturally responsive leader also involves engaging with the
political community and building meaningful relationships with political allies who can support
school agendas. This requires developing the skills to engage with diverse populations and
communities that exist coexists within the educational landscape. As a result, 36% of senior
leaders raised the need to build cultural understanding as a means to strengthen school-
community relationships. One chief officer stated, “I think it’s inviting the community in and
79
being knowledgeable of the community…North Philly is so different from West Philly and there
may be some best practices that work in both, but there are also best practices that are very
different in different areas within the city” (Participant 2). Understanding the nuances that exist
across communities, and that needs vary based upon geographical regions and populations is
critical to successful relationship building.
Although the majority of executive leaders at the School District of Philadelphia were
able to identify procedural knowledge concepts of culturally responsive leadership to improve
school climate, their responses were not aligned. Three out of the four attributes of culturally
responsive leadership were referenced which included self-reflection, developing educators, and
engaging with the community, however, promoting a culturally responsive environment was not
mentioned. Leaders raised comments about leveraging professional development, authentic
relationships, deeper cultural understanding, self-reflection, and conversations centered on race,
class, and privilege to build culturally responsive leadership and improve school climate.
However, inconsistencies emerged when leaders were asked to define culturally responsive
leadership, and responses lacked cohesion when questioned how to operationalize the framework
to improve school climate. Therefore, an opportunity exists for leaders to build and align their
conceptual and procedural knowledge of culturally responsive leadership to improve outcomes
and achieve equity goals across the district.
Metacognitive Knowledge
Metacognition is the ability to reflect upon and adjust necessary skills and knowledge,
which includes general strategies, assessing demands, and planning one’s approach while
monitoring progress (Krathwohl, 2002). According to Table 9, the metacognitive knowledge
influence for this study was validated in association with one interview question and documents
80
used for analysis. These data show the percentage of senior leaders who demonstrated
metacognitive knowledge related to culturally responsive leadership.
Table 9
Validated Assumed Metacognitive Knowledge Influences of Culturally Responsive Leadership
Assumed Knowledge Influences
Category Instruments Aligned Questions Validity
N (%)
Senior district leaders need
knowledge of how to assess
one’s own strengths and
weaknesses as a culturally
responsive leader.
Metacognitive
Interviews
Document
Analysis
Tell me about a time, if
any, that you reflected
upon your own strengths
and weaknesses as a
culturally responsive
leader.
7 (64%)
District leadership knowledge of how to assess one’s own strengths and weaknesses
as a culturally responsive leader. The question asked about the assumed metacognitive
knowledge influence examined the ability of senior district leaders to self-assess and modify
their leadership practices in alignment with culturally responsive leadership. Leaders were
asked, “Tell me about a time, if any, that you reflected upon your own strengths and weaknesses
as a culturally responsive leader.” The responses provided along with document analysis
suggested that approximately 64% of respondents demonstrated the specified metacognitive
knowledge. Interview data collected were juxtaposed with the National Education Association
Governance and Leadership Competencies (Appendix A) and the National Policy Board for
Educational Administrations Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (Appendix B)
pertaining to culturally responsive leadership.
Participants were asked to respond to one prompt to assess their metacognitive
knowledge of culturally responsive leadership. Responses concluded that 64% of executive
leaders reflect upon at least one element of culturally responsive leadership in their own practice.
81
However, the information collected from participants varied greatly with 27% of interviewees
mentioning that they reflect upon their hiring practices and professional development when self-
evaluating, and 27% raising that they think about parental engagement when assessing their
strengths and growth areas as a culturally responsive leader. Additionally, 27% of executive
leaders shared that they directly reflect upon their own biases and personal behaviors. Table 10
below details the variance in responses from executive leaders related to the metacognitive
knowledge characteristics of culturally responsive leadership.
Table 10
Metacognitive Knowledge Responses of Executive Leaders on Culturally Responsive Leadership
Identifying Characteristic
Category Instruments Percentage of Respondents
N (%)
Reflection on hiring practices
and professional development
Metacognitive
Interviews
3 (27%)
Reflection on parental
engagement
Metacognitive Interviews 3 (27%)
Reflection on personal bias and
behaviors
Metacognitive Interviews
3 (27%)
The metacognitive knowledge characteristics identified by executive leaders were
supported by statements during the interview process. One chief officer noted, “I reflect on it
when we write policies that then create unintended consequences for certain youth and I think
about it when we try to solve for one issue, but that issue actually could create more barriers for
groups that may not be represented in the group that we’re trying to solve the problem for”
(Participant 4). Additionally, one senior leader stated, “I think that my area of growth is how do
I help other people be disturbed” (Participant 8). These leaders raised a critical point related to
the cultivation of metacognitive knowledge for culturally responsive leadership. They recognize
82
the importance of self-assessment, and how personal bias and behaviors shape policies, practices,
and procedures that impact the outcomes of students.
In alignment with previously mentioned self-assessment strategies, 18% of senior leaders
noted the significance of calling out inequity within school contexts. These participants
referenced the importance of leveraging culturally responsive leadership practices to establish
inclusive environments that promote student belonging and educational equity. One chief officer
noted, “I call out directly who the schools are run by, who the school serves, what environment
and climate is at that school because schools that are run by people of color are often the first up
for closure” (Participant 9). Within the context of metacognition, this response portrays
characteristics that ought to be scaled across the executive leadership team at the school district.
This leader displayed the aptitude to self-reflect upon their own leadership attributes, align their
leadership attributes with culturally responsive leadership, and use personal reflections to inform
their leadership practices.
Building upon the metacognitive knowledge data collected from executive leaders related
to culturally responsive leadership, one opportunity for growth emerged. The National
Education Association Governance and Leadership Competencies states that culturally
responsive leaders, “identify their own leadership strengths and growth opportunities and work
diligently to improve them” (NEA, 2019). The data showed that 64% leaders at the School
District of Philadelphia reflect upon their leadership practices in a manner that aligns with the
theoretical framework of culturally responsive leadership; however, none of these leaders
mentioned having a focus on improving their practice in this area. As a culturally responsive
leader, being able to reflect upon one’s own skills and knowledge is important, however, it is
equally important to assess one’s own strategies and leadership approaches while progress
monitoring toward concrete goals.
83
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Knowledge and Skills Influences
The results and findings from interviews, and the document analysis from the National
Education Association Governance and Leadership Competencies (Appendix A) and the
National Policy Board for Educational Administrations Professional Standards for Educational
Leaders (Appendix B), show that two of the three initially assumed knowledge influences on
performance were validated as foundational assets to advance culturally competent district
leadership. Knowledge pertaining to senior district leaders needing knowledge of the
foundational components and beliefs of culturally responsive leadership was identified as a
continuous need for improvement. In addition, four new conceptual and procedural knowledge
influences emerged during the data collection process as foundational assets. Each of the
conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge influences pertaining to culturally
responsive leadership, and their level of validity, are illustrated in Table 11 below.
Table 11
Validated Assumed Conceptual, Procedural, and Metacognitive Knowledge Influences of
Culturally Responsive Leadership
Assumed Knowledge Influences
Category Instruments Aligned Questions Validity
N (%)
Senior district leaders need
knowledge of how systemic
oppression and institutional
racism impact leadership.
(Newly Identified)
Conceptual
Interviews
How have systemic
oppression and
institutional racism
impacted your
leadership style, if at all?
11
(100%)
Senior district leaders need
knowledge of what culturally
responsive leadership is within a
school district.
(Newly Identified)
Conceptual Interviews
Document
Analysis
What does culturally
responsive leadership
mean within the context
of a school district
environment?
9
(82%)
84
Table 11, continued
Assumed Knowledge Influences
Category Instruments Aligned Questions Validity
N (%)
Senior district leaders need
knowledge of how to leverage
culturally responsive leadership
in order to improve school
climate.
Procedural Interviews
What steps do you think
should be taken to
leverage culturally
responsive leadership as
a means to improve
school climate?
8
(73%)
Senior district leaders need
knowledge of how to utilize
culturally responsive leadership
to close the achievement gap for
Black and Latino students.
(Newly Identified)
Procedural Interviews What would or could a
culturally responsive
leader do to support
school reform efforts
that target closing the
achievement gap for
Black and Latino
students at a large K-12
school district?
7
(64%)
Senior district leaders need
knowledge of how to use
culturally responsive leadership
to strengthen community-based
relationships for school districts.
(Newly Identified)
Procedural Interviews
What role could
culturally responsive
leadership play in
strengthening
community-based
relationships for school
districts?
6
(55%)
Senior district leaders need
knowledge of how to assess
one’s own strengths and
weaknesses as a culturally
responsive leader.
Metacognitive Interviews
Document
Analysis
Tell me about a time, if
any, that you reflected
upon your own strengths
and weaknesses as a
culturally responsive
leader.
7
(64%)
Triangulation of interview findings and document analysis disclosed knowledge and
skills strengths and areas of growth for executive leaders at the School District of Philadelphia
related to culturally responsive leadership. Although definitions were not aligned,
overwhelmingly participants displayed conceptual understanding of what culturally responsive
leadership is within a school district. Nearly all interviewees were able to identify at least one
85
element of the conceptual framework and highlight its importance in their personal practice;
however, none of the executive leaders were capable of identifying all of the characteristics of
culturally responsive leadership. Furthermore, leaders demonstrated less mastery of culturally
responsive leadership in the procedural and metacognitive knowledge domains. More
specifically, they were unable to consistently articulate how to operationalize culturally
responsive leadership to improve school climate, student outcomes, and educational equity in
their district. In addition, there was a lack of clear understanding on how to self-assess personal
leadership practices as a culturally responsive leader, and build upon self-reflection to improve
student outcomes.
The ability to define culturally responsive leadership as executive leaders in the district is
an identified gap and area for continuous improvement. In addition, leaders need to master how
to operationalize culturally responsive leadership in their daily practices, and understand how to
leverage it to build institutional equity while strengthening school climate. Building capacity in
these areas could support the district in improving school climate, a targeted improvement area
identified by the organization, aligned to its anchor goal of 100% of students graduating, ready
for college and career.
Results and Findings for Motivation Influences
Motivational influences are important to observe when leveraging culturally responsive
leadership to improve school climate and student outcomes. Within this study, how leaders
value culturally responsive leadership as a useful tool to improve school climate and reach
performance goals within a school district setting was assessed (Pintrich, 2003). Additionally,
the motivational influence of self-efficacy which enhances positive expectations for success was
examined (Pajares, 2006). This section details the findings of the assumed motivational
influences of senior leaders as foundational assets at the School District of Philadelphia related to
86
the use of culturally responsive leadership as a means to improve school climate. Assumed
utility value, attainment value, and self-efficacy motivation influences were assessed through
interviews as referenced in Table 12 below.
Table 12
Assumed Motivation Influences as Assets of Culturally Responsive Leadership
Assumed Motivation Influences
Category Foundational
Assets
Continuing
Needs
Senior district leaders need to see the value in
implementing culturally responsive leadership to
improve school climate.
Utility Value
✓
Senior district leaders need to feel that culturally
responsive leadership is a core responsibility they
have in their own practice.
Attainment
Value
✓
Senior district leaders need to believe that they are
capable of implementing culturally responsive
leadership, and through that, improve school climate.
Self-Efficacy
✓
According to the results in Table 12, each of the utility value, attainment value, and self-
efficacy motivation assumptions were validated as foundational assets of the district. In
subsequent sections of this chapter, data will be disaggregated to display the percentages of
validation in alignment to the instrumentation used for assessment.
Utility and Attainment Value
Pintrich (2003) disaggregates the task value of motivation into four categories, which
includes intrinsic value that measures interest, extrinsic value which calculates utility, attainment
value which gauges importance, and cost value which assesses benefit. Table 13 below
highlights the validity of the utility and attainment motivation assumptions for this study. One
interview question was used to analyze the utility and attainment motivation influences of
executive leaders at the School District of Philadelphia pertaining to culturally responsive
87
leadership. The data listed in Table 13 show the percentage of leaders who demonstrated
motivation in each of the documented areas below.
Table 13
Validated Assumed Utility and Attainment Motivation Influences of Culturally Responsive
Leadership
Assumed Motivation Influences
Category Instruments Aligned Questions Validity
N (%)
Senior district leaders need to
see the value in implementing
culturally responsive leadership
to improve school climate.
Utility Value
Interviews
What do you see as the
value of culturally
responsive leadership, if
any?
6 (55%)
Senior district leaders need to
feel that culturally responsive
leadership is a core
responsibility they have in their
own practice.
Attainment
Value
Interviews What do you see as the
value of culturally
responsive leadership, if
any?
7 (64%)
Extrinsic value placed in implementing culturally responsive leadership to improve
school climate. One question was asked to assess the extent to which district leaders see the
value of implementing culturally responsive leadership to improving school climate. In
particular, “What do you see as the value of culturally responsive leadership, if any?” was asked,
and the responses given provided insight into how executive leaders value the implementation of
culturally responsive leadership as it relates to their personal leadership practices and the
attainment of school climate goals. Data analysis from the question concluded that 55% of
respondents found culturally responsive leadership useful as a means to achieve their goals and
connected it to their personal leadership practices. The clearest description came from one chief
officer who stated, “The value is to understand your context, understand commonalities and
differences, and be able to respect them and still do what we need to do for the future of our
88
society as educators, and if we don’t, we are going to continuously have segregation and
oppression of those that are considered minority groups” (Participant 11). In addition, one senior
leader shared, “I don’t think we can support our children or any child without culturally
responsive leadership” (Participant 6). These responses clearly align with the tenants of
culturally responsive leadership and highlight the utility value that senior district leaders from
the School District of Philadelphia place on culturally responsive leadership.
Although the majority of executive leaders recognized the utility value of culturally
responsive leadership and found it useful for reaching future goals, the responses provided
highlighted only two themes. Leaders interviewed at the district raised that culturally responsive
leadership is useful for meeting the needs of children, which includes providing culturally
relevant curricula, diversity in staff, addressing children’s interests, and culturally responsive
pedagogical practices. Furthermore, these leaders highlighted that culturally responsive
leadership is useful when establishing equitable learning opportunities focused on positive
student outcomes. However, there lacked consistency and depth in the range of responses, which
reinforces the need to build executive leaders’ conceptual knowledge of culturally responsive
leadership as an opportunity for growth. More specifically, these leaders displayed inconsistent
language when explaining the usefulness of the leadership practice, and they could not clearly
articulate each of the attributes of a culturally responsive leader. Addressing these limitations
ought to support executive leaders with the implementation of culturally responsive leadership
practices to improve school climate and student outcomes.
Attainment value district leaders place on culturally responsive leadership being a
core responsibility they have in their own practice. The same question used to assess the
utility value of chief officers and senior leaders at the School District of Philadelphia evaluated
their attainment value. According to the results, 64% of the leaders interviewed identified
89
culturally responsive leadership as a core responsibility in their own practice that supports the
attainment of their professional goals. More specifically, these leaders mentioned that culturally
responsive leadership was influential in helping them learn about various cultures, celebrate
diversity and tolerate differences, build positive relationships with students and staff, and
dismantle systemic oppression. One chief officer mentioned, “The schoolhouse is supposed to
be where you are supposed to learn about others and learn tolerance and learn how to exist in
society…in this thing we call America or democracy, cultural responsiveness is core to the
foundational construction of democracy” (Participant 9). Building upon this statement, 36% of
leaders interviewed at the district found culturally responsive leadership not only important for
the attainment of positive student outcomes, but also to produce better life outcomes for students
of color in American society. Therefore, it is critical to acknowledge that the assumption of
culturally responsive leadership being a core responsibility of senior district leaders was not only
validated, but it also connects to the life outcomes of students outside of the school environment.
As noted with the findings associated with utility value, the majority of executive leaders
interviewed at the School District of Philadelphia recognized the attainment value of culturally
responsive leadership as an important factor in their professional practice to achieve their goals.
However, the responses provided by these leaders uncovered a gap between knowledge and
motivation, more specifically, between procedural knowledge and attainment value. Although
participants were able to clearly explain the importance of culturally responsive leadership in
connection to their professional practices, they were unable to describe the implementation
procedures necessary to attain their goals. This underscores the interconnected relationship
between procedural knowledge and attainment value, and that understanding how to execute
culturally responsive leadership practices should have a direct impact on how it is valued by
leaders. Therefore, an opportunity exists for executive leaders at the district to build their
90
procedural knowledge of culturally responsive leadership to heighten student outcomes, achieve
their professional goals, and strengthen motivation and attainment value that will lead to concrete
results.
Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy is the personal evaluation that individuals have about their abilities to
successfully complete a specific task, and as a motivational influence, it is enhanced when there
are positive expectancies for success (Bandura, 1982; Pajares, 2006). Table 14 below highlights
the validity of the self-efficacy motivation assumption for this study. One interview question
was used to analyze the self-efficacy motivation influence of executive district leaders at the
School District of Philadelphia pertaining to culturally responsive leadership. The data listed in
Table 14 displays the percentage of senior leaders who expressed self-efficacy in their ability to
implement culturally responsive leadership and, through that, improve school climate.
Table 14
Validated Assumed Self-Efficacy Motivation Influence of Culturally Responsive Leadership
Assumed Motivation Influences
Category Instruments Aligned Questions Validity
N (%)
Senior district leaders need to
believe that they are capable of
implementing culturally
responsive leadership, and
through that, improve school
climate.
Self-Efficacy
Interviews
As a district leader, what
enables or constrains
you from taking these
steps to leverage
culturally responsive
leadership to improve
school climate?
7 (64%)
Positive expectations for success in executing culturally responsive leadership. One
question was asked to assess the assumed self-efficacy motivation influence of chief officers and
senior leaders needing to believe they are capable of implementing culturally responsive
91
leadership to improve school climate. More specifically, “As a district leader, what enables or
constrains you from taking these steps to leverage culturally responsive leadership to improve
school climate?” was asked, and the responses provided gave insight into the positive
expectancies of executive leaders pertaining to the implementation of culturally responsive
leadership. The data collected from this question concluded that 64% of respondents believed
they were capable of implementing culturally responsive leadership to improve school climate.
One senior leader noted, “I think I'm very fortunate to be the leader of a network where I have an
enormous amount of freedom and leverage to do what I think is best to support the team that I'm
overseeing” (Participant, 1). Building upon this statement, 36% of leaders interviewed shared
that they have the autonomy to implement culturally responsive leadership, and 36% mentioned
that there is willingness amongst the executive leadership team to have conversations pertaining
to culture, race, and equity. As a result, the majority of leaders at the School District of
Philadelphia believe that they can leverage culturally responsive leadership to improve school
climate across the school system.
Conversely, 36% of the population interviewed shared that they believe limitations exist
that would prevent them from implementing culturally responsive leadership across the district to
improve school climate. More specifically, 27% of leaders noted concerns pertaining to time
constraints and two participants highlighted issues related to personal safety as mitigating
factors. With regard to the implementation barriers of culturally responsive leadership, it is
important to note that one senior leader mentioned, “This needs to be disrupted but at the same
time I have a family too, and if I go piss off a part of Philadelphia that has usually been left
alone, am I still going to have a job next week” (Participant 7). For some participants, there
were concerns around job security which impacts their willingness to fully engage with and
address issues pertaining to equity. Additionally, leaders felt that they do not have adequate time
92
to execute culturally responsive leadership, which is further complicated by the social and
political dynamics that influence their leadership practices. These safety, time, and socio-
political factors present a unique challenge and opportunity for the district to address
organizational influences that may be adversely impacting the motivation of senior leaders to
implement culturally responsive leadership practices. Should the district decide to confront these
challenges, leaders would be better positioned to advance equity goals related to school climate
and student outcomes.
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Motivation Influences
The results and findings from interviews show that all three of the assumed motivation
influences were validated as foundational assets of executive leaders at School District of
Philadelphia related to culturally responsive leadership. During the data collection process, no
additional motivational influences were identified. However, each of the originally assumed
utility value, attainment value, and self-efficacy motivation influences pertaining to culturally
responsive leadership were shown to exist for the majority of respondents and are illustrated in
Table 15 below.
Table 15
Validated Assumed Utility Value, Attainment Value, and Self-Efficacy Motivation Influences of
Culturally Responsive Leadership
Assumed Knowledge Influences
Category Instruments Aligned Questions Validity
N (%)
Senior district leaders need to
see the value in implementing
culturally responsive leadership
to improve school climate.
Utility Value
Interviews
What do you see as the
value of culturally
responsive leadership, if
any?
6 (55%)
93
Table 15, continued
Assumed Knowledge Influences
Category Instruments Aligned Questions Validity
N (%)
Senior district leaders need to
feel that culturally responsive
leadership is a core
responsibility they have in their
own practice.
Attainment
Value
Interviews What do you see as the
value of culturally
responsive leadership, if
any?
7 (64%)
Senior district leaders need to
believe that they are capable of
implementing culturally
responsive leadership, and
through that, improve school
climate.
Self-Efficacy Interviews
As a district leader, what
enables or constrains
you from taking these
steps to leverage
culturally responsive
leadership to improve
school climate?
7 (64%)
Findings from interview data were synthesized and assessed to identify motivation
strengths and areas of growth for chief officers and senior leaders at the School District of
Philadelphia related to culturally responsive leadership. Although their explanations were not
fully aligned, participants conveyed that they find culturally responsive leadership useful and
important, and when implemented, they have positive expectations. Additionally, the majority
senior leaders shared that culturally responsive leadership was not only vital to their practice,
improving school climate, and heightening student success, but it also supports students with
building the cultural competence necessary for positive outcomes outside of the school
environment. These leaders raised the sentiment of preparing students to be culturally aware and
tolerant of diverse people so that they are equipped to fully engage in the democratic processes
of society.
Conversely, lack of time and personal safety were two issues highlighted by executive
leaders related to their motivation to implement culturally responsive leadership. These
challenges present opportunities for growth and improvement in practice. Although the majority
94
of leaders recognize the value of culturally responsive leadership, given their competing
priorities, they often feel they do not have the adequate time necessary for effective
implementation. In addition, two leaders mentioned not feeling safe with implementing
culturally responsive leadership practices and not wanting to jeopardize their employment
because of making people in positions of power uncomfortable. Addressing these systemic
challenges could provide opportunities to increase the motivation of senior leaders at the School
District of Philadelphia related to culturally responsive leadership. Furthermore, allocating time
and creating safe environments to address equity issues could support the district in improving
school climate, a targeted improvement area identified by the organization aligned to its anchor
goal of 100% of students graduating, ready for college and career.
Results and Findings for Organizational Influences
Understanding of organizational influences is critical for senior district leaders who
aspire to leverage culturally responsive leadership to improve school climate and student
outcomes. Organizational influences include how a setting is structured, the policies and
practices that define it, and how people interact with each other within a given environment
(Rueda, 2011). Organizational influences can be classified into two categories – models and
settings (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Cultural models represent the values, beliefs, and
attitudes that are invisible and automated, whereas cultural settings are visible and concrete
manifestations of cultural models within activity environments (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001).
This section details the findings of assumed organizational influences as foundational assets or
continuing organizational needs at the School District of Philadelphia pertaining to the usage of
culturally responsive leadership as a means to improve school climate. Assumed cultural model
and cultural setting organizational influences were assessed through interviews and document
analysis as referenced in Table 16 below.
95
Table 16
Assumed Organizational Influences as Assets of Culturally Responsive Leadership
Assumed Organizational Influences
Category Foundational
Assets
Continuing
Needs
The School District of Philadelphia needs to value
culturally responsive leadership as part of its
organizational culture.
Cultural
Model
✓
The School District of Philadelphia needs to embed
culturally responsive leadership into the core mission
of the organization.
Cultural
Model
✓
The School District of Philadelphia needs to create
formalized organizational structures and goals at the
central office level to support and build culturally
responsive leadership.
Cultural
Setting
✓
The School District of Philadelphia needs to provide
professional development, funding, and autonomy to
the School District of Philadelphia in order to build
culturally responsive leadership.
Cultural
Setting
✓
Cultural Models
Two assumed cultural model organizational influences related to culturally responsive
leadership at the School District of Philadelphia were explored in this study. More specifically,
how the district values culturally responsive leadership as part of its culture and how it embeds
the leadership practice into its mission were investigated to assess the values, beliefs, and
attitudes within the organization. Table 17 below highlights the validity of the cultural model
organizational assumptions of this study. Two interview questions and document analysis were
used to analyze the cultural model influences at the School District of Philadelphia pertaining to
culturally responsive leadership. The data listed in Table 17 suggest two areas of continuing
needs to embed organizational models to support culturally responsive leadership at the district.
96
Table 17
Validated Assumed Cultural Model Organizational Influences of Culturally Responsive
Leadership
Assumed Organizational
Influences
Category Instruments Aligned Questions Validity
N (%)
The School District of
Philadelphia needs to value
culturally responsive leadership
as part of its organizational
culture.
Cultural
Model
Interviews
Document
Analysis
To what extent does the
School District of
Philadelphia value
culturally responsive
leadership as part of its
organizational culture?
0 (0%)
The School District of
Philadelphia needs to embed
culturally responsive leadership
into the core mission of the
organization.
Cultural
Model
Interviews
Document
Analysis
How does the School
District of Philadelphia
embed culturally
responsive leadership
into its core mission, if
at all?
2 (18%)
The district needs to value culturally responsive leadership as part of its
organizational culture. One question was investigated to assess how the district values
culturally responsive leadership practices as part of its organizational culture. Chief officers and
senior leaders were asked, “To what extent does the School District of Philadelphia value
culturally responsive leadership as part of its organizational culture?” to gain insight into the
values, beliefs, and attitudes at the district related to culturally responsive leadership practices.
Numerous leaders responded with “I don’t know” or “We are trying” to the proposed question.
The data collected from this inquiry concluded that none of respondents believed that culturally
responsive leadership is valued as part of the organizational culture at the district. One chief
officer noted, “I think that we all know it’s important and in a district this size, there needs to be
a department that focuses solely on this and we need to have a team that is constantly thinking
97
about and ensuring that everything we are doing is aligned to what our beliefs are” (Participant
2). Additionally, a senior leader mentioned, “I think it is highly valued but if it’s executed, that’s
a whole different story” (Participant 8). Building upon these statements, it is important to note
that leaders as individuals recognize the significance of culturally responsive leadership. More
specifically, 45% of executive leaders referenced seeing value in culturally responsive leadership
as it relates to teaching and learning, and 27% shared it was important for recruiting diverse
talent. However, there appears to be a gap between the individual recognition and value of
leaders when juxtaposed to how the organization as a system values the leadership practice. This
uncovers the disparity between the motivational influences of executive leaders at the district
who value culturally responsive leadership and the lack of organizational value placed on
leveraging the leadership practice to improve school climate and student outcomes.
In this study, the cultural model organizational influence of the district needing to value
culturally responsive leadership as part of its culture was not validated as a current asset.
Interview data was juxtaposed with the School District of Philadelphia Leadership Pathways
Framework referenced in Appendix C to assess the validity of the aforementioned assumed
organizational influence. Although there are formal structures in place and a Leadership
Pathways Framework rubric to measure the cultural responsiveness of leaders in the district, no
formal structures exist to measure culturally responsive leadership at the organizational culture
level. Furthermore, none of the executive leaders interviewed were able to explicitly state that
the School District of Philadelphia values culturally responsive leadership. As a result, the
individual value placed on culturally responsive leadership practices by leaders did not align
with the absence of value within the organizational culture at the School District of Philadelphia.
This presents an opportunity for the district to build an organizational culture that embeds and
98
operationalizes culturally responsive leadership practices into its values, beliefs, and attitudes to
improve school climate and student outcomes, particularly for Black and Latino learners.
The district needs to embed culturally responsive leadership into the core mission of
the organization. The mission of the district is “to deliver on the civil right of every child in
Philadelphia to an excellent public school education and ensure all children graduate from high
school ready to succeed, fully engaged as a citizen of our world” (“Our Mission,” 2018).
Although the mission of the organization focuses on civil rights, quality education, citizenship,
and post-secondary success, it does not explicitly recognize the significance of culture or cultural
responsiveness. One question was asked to assess how the School District of Philadelphia
embeds culturally responsive leadership into its core mission. Chief officers and senior leaders
were asked, “How does the School District of Philadelphia embed culturally responsive
leadership into its core mission, if at all?” According to the results from responses, 82% of
participants shared that the School District of Philadelphia does not embed culturally responsive
leadership into its core mission. One chief officer mentioned, “I don’t think we call it out and
there isn’t a button that says this is our equity agenda and these are the tenants that we push for”
(Participant 9). In addition to not calling out cultural responsiveness from leadership standpoint,
the majority of leaders were unsure as to whether or not the district operationalizes cultural
responsiveness in its practices. The 18% of senior leaders who believed culturally responsive
leadership was embedded into the mission of the district referenced it being done so through
curriculum development only, not the processes of teaching and learning.
Similar to the assumed cultural model organizational influence of the district needing to
value culturally responsive leadership as part of its culture, the assumption of the School District
of Philadelphia embedding the practice into its core mission was a continuing need. Data
collected in this study revealed that the majority of executive leaders interviewed do not believe
99
culturally responsive leadership is embedded into the organizational culture of the school system.
This could be attributed to leaders’ lack of conceptual and procedural knowledge of culturally
responsive leadership, which would impact how the district operationalizes the practice into its
core mission. As a result, an opportunity exists to build the knowledge of senior leaders on
culturally responsive leadership which ought to improve how the practice is embedded into the
mission of the district, and how it is operationalized through the mission to advance school
climate and student outcomes.
Cultural Settings
In addition to the cultural model organizational influences of this study, two assumed
cultural setting organizational influences pertaining to culturally responsive leadership at the
School District of Philadelphia were explored. In particular, how the district creates formal
structures and goals, and offers development and resources to build culturally responsive
leadership were investigated. Table 18 below highlights the validity of the cultural setting
organizational assumptions of this study. Two interview questions and document analysis were
used to analyze the cultural setting influences at the School District of Philadelphia pertaining to
culturally responsive leadership. The data listed in Table 18 show that 73% of leaders
interviewed believed that the district incentives structures and goals to build culturally
responsive leadership and 55% of leaders felt that the district provides resources and autonomy
to encourage the leadership practice, which suggests these two cultural setting organizational
influences are assets of the district to build on.
100
Table 18
Validated Assumed Cultural Setting Organizational Influences of Culturally Responsive
Leadership
Assumed Organizational
Influences
Category Instruments Aligned Questions Validity
N (%)
The School District of
Philadelphia needs to create
formalized organizational
structures and goals at the
central office level to support
and build culturally responsive
leadership.
Cultural
Setting
Interviews
Document
Analysis
Does the School District
of Philadelphia
incentivize structures
and goals to support and
build culturally
responsive leadership?
If so, what are some
specific examples of
this? Are there areas in
which the district could
do this better?
8 (73%)
The School District of
Philadelphia needs to provide
professional development,
funding, and autonomy to
leaders in order to build
culturally responsive leadership.
Cultural
Setting
Interviews
Document
Analysis
How does the School
District of Philadelphia
provide resources,
funding, professional
development, and
autonomy to build
culturally responsive
leadership? What else,
if anything, do you think
could be done to
strengthen this?
6 (55%)
The district needs to create formalized structures and goals at the central office level
to support and build culturally responsive leadership. Executive leaders were provided with
one question to explore how the district establishes formal structures and goals to build culturally
responsive leadership. More specifically, chief officers and senior leaders were asked, “Does the
School District of Philadelphia incentivize formal organizational structures and goals to support
and build culturally responsive leadership?” to gain insight into the activities and practices of the
101
district related to culturally responsive leadership. The data concluded that 73% of respondents
believe that the district incentivizes and establishes formal organizational structures and goals
related to culturally responsive leadership, however, there was lack of alignment in responses.
Leaders acknowledged that the district has invested in professional development around mindset
and bias, curriculum development, and defining equity, however, the activities used to promote
culturally responsive leadership were inconsistent. One senior leader shared, “I think it depends
on what department you work in” (Participant 10). This response highlights that the district may
not be aligned across departments with promoting culturally responsive leadership and
addressing equity issues. One chief officer also mentioned, “I think it’s interesting that we are
culturally responsive when society forces us to make a line in the sand, but we are not drawing
those lines and making society norm to us” (Participant 9). In addition to concerns around
alignment across departments, this leader raised that the district addresses matters of culture in a
reactive manner, not proactively. This reveals the disparity between cultural models and cultural
settings at the organization. The School District of Philadelphia lacks the informal automated
values, attitudes, and beliefs necessary to actively promote culturally responsive leadership. As a
result, the formal structures and initiatives used to implement the leadership practice are not
aligned.
In this study, the cultural setting organizational influence of the district needing to create
formal structures and goals to build culturally responsive leadership is, at some level, a current
asset. Executive leaders at the district recognize the need to have structures and goals to build
culturally response leadership. Interview data was juxtaposed with the School District of
Philadelphia 2019-2020 Organizational Chart referenced in Appendix D to assess the validity of
the aforementioned assumed organizational influence. Although district leaders recognize this
need and have some structures in place such as cycles professional development and an
102
evaluation rubric that measures cultural responsiveness, no formal team or department exists to
monitor, align, and implement culturally responsive leadership or equity initiatives. This
presents an opportunity for the district to build formal structures that will promote culturally
responsive leadership practices.
The district needs to provide professional development, funding, and autonomy to
leaders in order to build culturally responsive leadership. One question was utilized to
assess the activities and practices of the School District of Philadelphia in building culturally
responsive leadership. Executive leaders were asked, “How does the School District of
Philadelphia provide resources, funding, professional development, and autonomy to schools to
build culturally responsive leadership?” The data collected from this question revealed that 55%
of participants believe that the district allocates resources, professional development, and
autonomy with provisions to leaders to build culturally responsive leadership.
Although the majority of leaders interviewed mentioned that the district engages in
practices to build culturally responsive leadership, it is important to note that there were
numerous responses which reflect uncertainty on the district’s position. With regard to funding
and resources, one senior leader shared, “I don’t know if people would know who to reach out to
or if we really have a mechanism in place” (Participant 6). This indicates that for some, there is
lack of clarity around what funding exists to build culturally responsive leadership and how to
access these resources. Building upon this statement, another senior leader mentioned, “I don’t
know of anyone trying to do the equity work at the school level or anything like that”
(Participant 7). Not only was there unclarity around how leaders can access resources to build
culturally responsive leadership, but there also appeared to be uncertainty as to how culturally
responsive leadership practices at the central office level connect to practices within schools. In
addition, another senior leader shared, “With the exception of professional development that we
103
have, which is not enough and not regular enough, we don’t do much around that” (Participant
5). Although the assumption of the district needing to allocate resources and autonomy to build
culturally responsive leadership was validated as an asset as a majority of the district leaders felt
these resources and autonomy were granted, the responses provided highlight the ambiguity of
executive leaders on how to effectively operationalize the leadership practice to improve results.
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Organizational Influences
The results and findings from interviews, and the document analysis from the School
District of Philadelphia Leadership Pathways Framework (Appendix C) and the School District
of Philadelphia 2019-2020 Organizational Chart (Appendix D) revealed that the two cultural
model organizational influences of this study were areas of continuing need and the two assumed
cultural setting influences were validated by the majority of respondents as current assets of the
district. During the data collection process, no new organizational influences emerged.
Triangulation of interview findings and document analysis uncovered organizational
strengths and areas of growth for senior leaders at the School District of Philadelphia pertaining
to culturally responsive leadership. Although the cultural setting organizational influences of this
study were seen as current assets by the majority of district leaders interviewed, the two cultural
model influences were not. This could be attributed to the inconsistency in responses from
senior leaders on how the district operationalizes culturally responsive leadership. The majority
of participants explained that there are activities, professional development, and resources at the
district to build culturally responsive leadership; however, how these initiatives and resources are
executed into daily practice varies based upon the autonomous actions of leaders across
functional areas and departments. As a result, this inconsistency in implementation could give
the perception to school level employees and the community that culturally responsive leadership
does not exist at all at the central office level, and it is not prioritized.
104
In addition, the inability to clearly define culturally responsive leadership practices at the
organizational level may also be attributed to the lack of conceptual and procedural knowledge
of executive leaders, and deficiencies in how the district values culturally responsive leadership
cultural models. Not only do leaders need to master how to operationalize culturally responsive
leadership in their daily practices and understand how to leverage it to build institutional equity
that strengthens school climate, but the district needs to value this practice as a critical
component of its institutional mission and organizational culture. This study revealed the
significant connection between conceptual and procedural knowledge, and organizational
influences. Cultivating the knowledge of senior leaders in culturally responsive leadership is
foundational to the effective implementation of the leadership practice district-wide. Therefore,
it is essential to build capacity in the knowledge domain, and subsequently at the organizational
level, to support the School District of Philadelphia in improving school climate, a targeted
improvement area identified by the organization, aligned to its anchor goal of 100% of students
graduating, ready for college and career.
Conclusion
The findings presented in this chapter suggest that the knowledge and skills, motivation,
and organizational influences were generally seen as assets by the majority of participants. The
literature review in Chapter 2 established the foundation for the research of this study pertaining
to culturally responsive leadership and its implications on school climate and student outcomes.
Executive leaders have the responsibility of cultivating, refining, and modifying their knowledge
and skills, motivation, and organizational influences related to culturally responsive leadership in
the pursuit of closing the achievement gap and improving school climate for Black and Latino K-
12 students. The examination of interview responses and document analysis from this study
revealed the essential knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences necessary
105
to build institutional equity and improve school climate for Black and Latino student
populations. These findings uncovered that chief officers and senior leaders need a strong
foundation in conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge of culturally responsive
leadership to build the leadership practice across the district. Building upon these knowledge
requirements, leaders must value culturally responsive leadership in the utility, attainment, and
self-efficacy motivation domains in order to operationalize the leadership practice district-wide.
The data revealed that deficiencies in knowledge and motivation influences have implications on
how culturally responsive leadership is implemented at the organizational level. This was
reflected in the lack of both cultural model influences of this study associated with how the
district embeds culturally responsive leadership into its mission and culture. As a result,
improvement in cultural model influences, more specifically how the organization values
culturally responsive leadership in its mission and culture, could dramatically improve how
equity initiatives related to school climate and student success are operationalized and achieved
at the School District of Philadelphia.
Chapter 5 examines ways in which to improve upon and scale the identified practices,
and provides evidence-based recommendations for knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational influences of this study. Additionally, this chapter provides implementation plans
and an evaluation framework to further address the research questions raised in Chapter 1. In
closing, Chapter 5 concludes with opportunities for future research.
106
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS, IMPLEMENTATION, AND EVALUATION
This study examined knowledge, motivation, and organization influences related to
culturally responsive leadership, and how they support the School District of Philadelphia in
improving school climate, a targeted improvement area aligned to the district’s anchor goal of
100% of students graduating, ready for college and career. Interview data from executive leaders
at the district and document analysis were used to better understand current assets and continuing
needs using the Clark and Estes’ gap analysis (2008) framework. Below in Table 19 are the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational areas that were examined related to culturally
responsive leadership and the level of validity of each for leaders interviewed at the School
District of Philadelphia. This suggests the percentage of district leaders for which each assumed
influence was a current foundational asset, with those areas of higher validity being particular
strengths among district leaders and those areas with lower levels of validity being particular
areas of continuing need. The recommended solutions presented below cut across these areas to
focus on building additional strength in all areas, but focus, in particular, on those areas of
greatest need to build culturally responsive district leadership.
Table 19
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences of Culturally Responsive Leadership at
the School District of Philadelphia
Knowledge, Motivation, and
Organizational Assets
Knowledge Motivation Organizational Validity
N (%)
Senior district leaders need
knowledge of the foundational
components and beliefs of culturally
responsive leadership within the
context of school environments.
✓
0 (0%)
Senior district leaders understand
how systemic oppression and
institutional racism impact
leadership.
✓
11 (100%)
107
Table 19, continued
Knowledge, Motivation, and
Organizational Assets
Knowledge Motivation Organizational Validity
N (%)
Senior district leaders understand
what culturally responsive
leadership is within a school
district.
✓
9 (82%)
Senior district leaders understand
how to leverage culturally
responsive leadership in order to
improve school climate.
✓
8 (73%)
Senior district leaders understand
how to utilize culturally responsive
leadership to close the achievement
gap for Black and Latino students.
✓
7 (64%)
Senior district leaders understand
how to use culturally responsive
leadership to strengthen
community-based relationships for
school districts.
✓
6 (55%)
Senior district leaders understand
how to assess one’s own strengths
and weaknesses as a culturally
responsive leader.
✓
7 (64%)
Senior district leaders need value
implementing culturally responsive
leadership to improve school
climate.
✓
6 (55%)
Senior district leaders believe that
culturally responsive leadership is a
core responsibility they have in their
own practice.
✓
7 (64%)
Senior district leaders believe that
they are capable of implementing
culturally responsive leadership, and
through that, improve school
climate.
✓
7 (64%)
The School District of Philadelphia
needs to value culturally responsive
leadership as part of its
organizational culture.
✓
0 (0%)
108
Table 19, continued
Knowledge, Motivation, and
Organizational Assets
Knowledge Motivation Organizational Validity
N (%)
The School District of Philadelphia
needs to embed culturally
responsive leadership into the core
mission of the organization.
✓
2 (18%)
The School District of Philadelphia
creates formalized organizational
structures and goals at the central
office level to support and build
culturally responsive leadership.
✓
8 (73%)
The School District of Philadelphia
provides professional development,
funding, and autonomy to the
School District of Philadelphia in
order to build culturally responsive
leadership.
✓
6 (55%)
This chapter is divided into four sections. The first section presents key validated
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on culturally responsive leadership and
proposed solutions related to those findings to improve school climate and institutional equity.
The second section provides a plan for implementation of said solutions which includes a
proposed timeline and resources. The third section outlines the evaluation plan of proposed
solutions to assess the progress and effectiveness of implemented initiatives. The fourth and
final section of this chapter concludes this study with a discussion of considerations for future
research pertaining to culturally responsive leadership.
Recommendations to Build Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Assets of
Culturally Responsive Leadership
The data collected from interviews and document analysis validated six knowledge
influences, three motivation influences, and two organizational influences as particular strengths
pertaining to culturally responsive leadership at the School District of Philadelphia. These
109
influences are identified as assets at the district to build upon and strengthen culturally
responsive leadership for the attainment of institutional goals whereas other influences were
identified as needing more foundational work. The knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences, together, were synthesized to generate four key recommendations to continue to build
culturally responsive leadership to improve school climate and student outcomes.
Recommendation 1: Build Foundational Knowledge of Culturally Responsive Leadership
All leaders interviewed at the district, regardless of race, gender, tenure, or functional
role held deep understanding of how systemic oppression and institutional racism impact their
leadership style. More specifically, these leaders shared that their personal interactions with
injustice and inequity, either as a person of color or one or privilege, has informed their practices
as educational leaders and heightened the relevance of culturally responsive leadership in their
current positions. Each of the leaders highlighted that they ascribe to create more equitable
opportunities for all children due to their personal and observed interactions with systemic
oppression, institutional racism, and societal inequities. Although understanding of such
inequities by executive leaders was an asset of the district, the unique personal experiences of
these leaders did not translate into an aligned understanding of culturally responsive leadership
practices. As a result, there are three proposed steps which the executive leadership team and the
School District of Philadelphia could take to build their foundational knowledge of culturally
responsive leadership to improve school climate and student outcomes.
At a fundamental level, executive leadership at the district should consider building their
understanding of what culturally responsive leadership is and how it exists within school district
settings. Most leaders interviewed could name attributes of culturally responsive leadership,
however, none of the participants of this study could describe all of the characteristics of the
leadership practice at the individual and institutional levels. Culturally responsive leaders create
110
inclusive school climates through (a) critical self-reflection on their own leadership behaviors,
(b) the development of culturally responsive teachers, (c) the promotion of culturally responsive
school environments, and (d) active engagement with parents, students, and indigenous contexts
(Khalifa et al., 2016). At the institutional level, culturally responsive school systems center
inclusion, equity, advocacy, and social justice in their practice, and they intentionally work
alongside community stakeholders to achieve school-community improvement efforts (Green,
2017; Khalifa et al., 2016). Building an aligned understanding of the leadership practice across
the senior leadership team will support the district with improving school climate, student
outcomes, and institutional equity.
In order to build comprehension at the executive leadership level, the School District of
Philadelphia should consider offering professional development opportunities specifically on
culturally responsive leadership. Cultural competence and antiracism go hand-in-hand in
effective leadership development (Welton et al., 2018). This training program ought to explore
the conceptual knowledge components of the leadership practice to build and align baseline
understanding at the practitioner and institutional levels amongst leaders, and also include
professional development focusing on procedural knowledge so that leaders understand how to
implement culturally responsive practices. Developing culturally responsive leadership requires
building upon the traditional pedagogical tools of instructional practice (Marshall & Khalifa,
2018). Professional development in this area should be led by cultural and community experts
who possess deep knowledge in culture and intercultural competence (Collier, 2015; Marshall &
Khalifa, 2018; Smith-Maddox, 1998). In addition, the training program needs to facilitate deeper
understanding about the misperceptions of culture and intercultural interactions, and support
leaders with establishing institutional climates where all individuals thrive. Intercultural
professional development programs should highlight (a) culture is not a mental program
111
developed from socialization associated with nationality; (b) culture is not static or homogenous,
(c) culture is not predictive of social and psychological tendencies nor is it predictive of
individualism and collectivism patterns, and (d) culture is not a thing but rather an action
manifested through representations, identifications, and relationships (Collier, 2015).
Professional development that facilitates mastery of conceptual and procedural knowledge could
be leveraged to inform curriculum design and pedagogical practices, improve climate and culture
in schools, build school-community relationships, and close the achievement gap for Black and
Latino students.
Recommendation 2: Develop a Professional Development Plan for Culturally Responsive
Leadership
The ultimate goal of culturally responsive leadership within a school district context is to
improve student outcomes, particularly for those who are marginalized and underperforming.
For this to occur, the implementation of culturally responsive leadership should not just remain
with executive leadership at the district, but rather, it should be cultivated across functional areas
in the school system and amongst leaders in learning networks who have proximity to learners
(Khalifa et al., 2016). The professional development plan for cultivating culturally responsive
leadership should build upon traditional instructional practices to include elements of cultural
competence and awareness (Marshall & Khalifa, 2018). Furthermore, the professional
development plan should be informed by instructional leaders, diversity practitioners, and
community experts who possess deep knowledge in data-driven instruction, culture, and
intercultural competence (Collier, 2015; Marshall & Khalifa, 2018; Smith-Maddox, 1998).
In school settings, culturally responsive leaders incorporate philosophies, practices, and
policies that create inclusive school environments for students and families from ethnically and
racially diverse backgrounds; whereas outside of schools these leaders advocate for cultural
112
recognition, revitalization, and community development (Johnson, 2014). These leaders create
the vision, strategy, and culture of shared values necessary to support change while
simultaneously empowering, motivating, and inspiring all those involved and impacted by an
organization (Gill, 2002). Additionally, culturally responsive leaders constantly build their
knowledge of other cultures they engage with, are sensitive and mindful to needs of people from
multiple identities, are intrinsically motivated to learn about other cultures, and demonstrate the
behavioral skills required to learn new ways of doing things (Schein & Schein, 2017). Lastly,
these leaders are capable of incorporating eight actions into their leadership practices to reduce
racism, which include (a) recognizing their implicit biases and remediating their racial illiteracy,
(b) holding high expectations for students from all racial and ethnic backgrounds, (c) discarding
expectations relating to students of color being teachers on race or representatives for their
diaspora of people, (d) reducing assumptions that all students from the same racial group are
similar, (e) raising their awareness of stereotype threats that occur among students of color; (f)
integrating diverse cultures and peoples into curricula, (g) addressing racial tensions when the
arise, and (h) recognizing that they share responsibility with their professional colleagues for
racial inequities (Harper & Davis, 2016).
The professional development implementation plan at the School District of Philadelphia
should include a clear strategy to cultivate the aforementioned attributes and build understanding
of culturally responsive leadership at the executive level across functional areas. Furthermore, it
should connect executive leadership development initiatives at the central office to capacity
building efforts for instructional leaders in schools. Conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive
knowledge factors ought to be considered in training programs to build understanding on the
leadership practice, how it is implemented and operationalized, and how to self-assess personal
practices and progress. Mastery of these concepts by executive leaders will empower them to
113
better support school leaders focused on improving school climate and learning environments,
student outcomes, and institutional equity (Khalifa et al., 2016). Furthermore, it will support the
leadership team at the district with transitioning beyond current conversations pertaining to racial
and educational equity to implementation strategies that will yield concrete results in school
climate and student performance.
Recommendation 3: Provide Executive Coaching to Support the Implementation of
Culturally Responsive Leadership Initiatives
Building upon the previous recommendation of a professional development plan, it is
recommended that executive leaders at the School District of Philadelphia also be provided with
executive coaching to build their capacity in culturally responsive leadership. Despite lacking
foundational knowledge of the leadership practice, the leaders interviewed value culturally
responsive leadership and believe that it is useful for the attainment of their professional goals.
However, as members of the senior leadership team, these leaders need to be prepared to
incorporate social justice agendas within school settings, establish leadership development
programs to develop the cultural competence of school leaders and staff, and hold their
departments accountable to meet the needs of the community (Dantley & Green, 2015). As
culturally responsive leaders, they must cultivate the cultural responsiveness of all members of
their organization focusing them on prioritizing the needs of the students, families, and
communities they serve. Furthermore, district leaders must be prepared to use an integrated
four-phase approach for improvement efforts inclusive of the community (Green, 2017). This
framework includes (a) disrupting deficit views of communities, (b) initial community inquiry,
(c) establishing community leadership teams, and (d) equity, asset-based data collection (Green,
2017).
114
Top-down accountability reforms have failed to transform schools primarily serving
students of color due to the lack of internal assessment of executive leadership, and the political
and socioeconomic out-of-school forces impacting learners and school improvement efforts
(Green & Gooden, 2014). Prior decades of policy agendas not orientated toward meeting the
needs of minority students have reinforced colorblind ideologies which minimized the
importance of race in education (Davis et al., 2015; Green & Gooden, 2014). Furthermore,
general standards for instructional leadership continue to lack clear and consistent definitions for
school climate and culture, omit elements of cultural competence, and fail to recognize the
disparate realities of diverse individuals (Davis et al., 2015). As a result, executive coaching is a
recommended as an essential requirement to provide individualized support to leaders. Offering
this personal assistance will help advance professional development efforts that will build
culturally responsive leadership at the district, and executive leaders’ capability to offset
systemic challenges caused by race, class, and lack of cultural relativeness.
Recommendation 4: Establish a Central Office Equity Department at the School District of
Philadelphia
Executive leaders interviewed recognized that formal structures and resources exist at the
district to build culturally responsive leadership. This is evidenced in the School District of
Philadelphia Leadership Pathways Framework (Appendix C), a rubric used to assess the cultural
responsiveness of leaders, and through current professional development opportunities.
Although these organizational assets were identified as strengths, there was a lack of clarity
pertaining to how the district leverages culturally responsive leadership to build institutional
equity and execute its mission. As a result, it is recommended that the School District of
Philadelphia establish a fully staffed equity department at the central office. This newly created
department would be responsible for (a) ensuring that culturally responsive pedagogical and
115
leadership practices connect to the mission of the district, (b) managing resources to build
culturally responsive leadership and institutional equity, and (c) measuring and evaluating
current practices and change management initiatives across functional areas focused on
improving organizational culture and climate, student experiences, inclusion and belonging,
equity agendas, and culturally responsive instructional and leadership practices.
Operationalizing diversity, equity, and inclusion as well as culturally responsive practices
requires leadership to possess conceptual knowledge about race and culture; procedural
knowledge on how to execute equity-oriented initiatives, and the intrinsic motivation to promote
equity and change. To achieve racial equity, a systematic outlook and plan must exist that
ensures racially diverse perspectives are embedded into institutional culture, structures, and
policies (Welton et al., 2018). Therefore, the newly created equity office ought to have diverse
representation of race, ethnicity, gender identity, age, ability, and professional experience in its
staff and leadership to ensure that a comprehensive approach is taken to address institutional
equity issues (Craig, 2015; Hunter, 2015). The reform agenda of this department should identify
(a) how equity issues became central, (b) what knowledge related to ethnic and cultural diversity
should be taught in schools, (c) how cultural knowledge can be genuinely acknowledged, and (d)
how to draw on specific cultural norms that align with national standards (Smith-Maddox, 1998).
Furthermore, the equity-driven initiatives of this office ought to be informed by scholarship that
identifies how and why racism in education is still a problem, and should outline systematic
actions toward rectifying the problem and making racial equity a reality (Welton et al., 2018).
Implementation Plan and Proposed Action Steps
This section introduces action steps, timelines, and the relevant staff associated with
implementing the recommendations of this study. The first recommendation of building
foundational knowledge of culturally responsive leadership will support and inform all future
116
goal-related activities. The second recommendation is focused on developing a professional
development plan to build the capacity of executive leaders at the district in culturally responsive
leadership practices across functional areas. The third recommendation emphasizes the need for
executive coaching to provide technical assistance and ensure execution of the leadership
practice with fidelity. The fourth and final recommendation elevates the need for a central office
department committed to institutional equity, responsible for assessing and evaluating culturally
responsive leadership across the district.
In this section, each of the four recommendations will be presented in detail and the
primary components or themes of each recommendation will be described. Subsequently,
specific action steps will be outlined, responsible staff suggested, and timeframes for
implementation established. Should additional resources or support be required, they will be
identified and discussed.
Table 20 below outlines the actions steps, proposed timeline and required staff necessary
to build foundational knowledge of culturally responsive leadership amongst the senior
leadership team at the district. Beginning in August 2020, the first step is to build common
understanding amongst executive leaders on the individual and institutional traits of culturally
responsive leadership within school district settings. The second action step requires the senior
leadership team at the district to align their individual understanding of the culturally responsive
leadership and define what the leadership practice means in-practice as a district across each
functional area. This will ensure that a coherent understanding of the leadership practice exists
amongst the senior leadership team. The third and final action step involves the senior
leadership team creating a district-wide equity agenda to leverage culturally responsive
leadership to improve school climate, student outcomes, and institutional equity.
117
Table 20
Foundational Knowledge to Build Culturally Responsive Leadership
Recommendation 1: Build Foundational Knowledge of Culturally Responsive Leadership
Proposed Action Steps
Responsible
Staff
Timeline
Build understanding amongst executive leaders on the
individual and institutional traits of culturally responsive
leadership in school district settings.
Senior
Leadership
Team
External
Consultants
August –
October, 2020
Define what culturally responsive leadership means
organization-wide and across functional areas at the School
District of Philadelphia.
Senior
Leadership
Team
External
Consultants
October –
November, 2020
Develop a district-wide equity agenda that leverages culturally
responsive leadership as a tool to improve school climate,
student outcomes, and institutional equity.
Senior
Leadership
Team
External
Consultants
November –
December, 2020
Building upon the first recommendation, Table 21 below outlines the second
recommendation of this study and the implementation measures required to develop a district-
wide professional development plan for culturally responsive leadership. Beginning in January
2021, the first action step is to generate the scope and sequence of content for a professional
development plan to train district and school leaders on culturally responsive leadership. In
collaboration with consultants, relevant district leaders are to create content and a training
program that will build institutional knowledge around culturally responsive leadership and how
to successfully implement the practice. The second action step of this recommendation entails
creating an implementation plan for culturally responsive leadership professional development
focused on district and school leaders. This implementation plan should include a timeline and
118
delivery dates for relevant stakeholder groups in alignment to the scope and sequence of the
training program.
Table 21
Professional Development Plan for Culturally Responsive Leadership
Recommendation 2: Develop a Professional Development Plan for Culturally Responsive Leadership
Proposed Action Steps
Responsible
Staff
Timeline
Generate a professional development plan inclusive of a scope
a sequence for training focused on culturally responsive
leadership for district and school leaders.
Chief of
Academic
Support
Chief of Student
Support Services
Chief of Schools
Chief of
Communications
and External
Relations
Assistant
Superintendents
External
Consultants
January –
March, 2021
Create an implementation plan for culturally responsive
leadership development training for district leaders across
functional areas and school leaders.
Chief of
Academic
Support
Chief of Student
Support Services
Chief of Schools
Chief of
Communications
and External
Relations
Assistant
Superintendents
March –
June, 2021
119
Below, Table 22 details the action steps required to execute the third recommendation of
this study. Two actions steps are necessary to effectively provide executive coaching to support
the implementation of culturally responsive leadership initiatives. The first action item is
strategic in nature and requires chief level officers at the district to align the institutional equity
goals of the district with the professional development goals of executive leaders. More
specifically, the chief officers need to embed culturally responsive leadership practices into the
professional development and performance goals of senior leaders to ensure that they adequately
support instructional leaders and district staff with improving school climate and student
outcomes. The second action step of providing ongoing executive coaching to the senior
leadership team related to culturally responsive leadership will be executed by external
consultants. These experts should possess deep understanding in K-12 education, culturally
responsive instructional and leadership practices, diversity, equity, and inclusion, organizational
development, and organizational change management to support leaders with implementation
strategies that center equity in district-wide practices that lead to process improvement, improved
school climate, and positive student outcomes.
120
Table 22
Executive Coaching to Implement Culturally Responsive Leadership Initiatives
Recommendation 3: Provide Executive Coaching to Support the Implementation of Culturally
Responsive Leadership Initiatives
Proposed Action Steps
Responsible
Staff
Timeline
Align equity goals of the district with the professional
development and performance goals of executive leaders.
Superintendent
Chief of
Academic
Support
Chief of Student
Support Services
Chief of Schools
Chief of
Communications
and External
Relations
December, 2020
Provide ongoing executive coaching and support to build
competency in culturally responsive leadership amongst
central office leaders.
External
Consultants
January –
June, 2021
Table 23 below outlines the three action steps, timeline, and relevant staff necessary to
execute the final recommendation of this study. The first action step required to establish an
equity department at the School District of Philadelphia is the creation of a task force comprised
of members from the senior leadership team and external consultants charged with conducting
research and landscape analyses to develop the policies, procedures, roles and responsibilities,
and a financial budget for this newly formed division. This will also require a deep analysis of
the current outputs of the district to assess how culturally responsive leadership practices can
further advance performance goals and institutional equity. Building upon the first action item,
the second action step includes establishing evaluation systems and structures aligned to the
organizational mission to progress monitor and assess culturally responsive practices and
121
institutional equity goals. Identifying key criteria to improve within equity initiatives is
important, however, it is equally important that these initiatives be monitored and assessed to
ensure the advancement of climate, culture, and student outcomes across the district. The third
action step requires chief officers to allocate adequate financial and human capital resources to
guarantee that a fully staffed equity division is realized. The chief of the equity office along with
their supporting team should be tasked with monitoring and evaluating institutional equity and
equity-centered change management processes across all functional areas of the district to affirm
that each division of the school system is operating in a capacity that advances the productivity
and outcomes of all students.
Table 23
Establish an Equity Office at the School District of Philadelphia
Recommendation 4: Establish a Central Office Equity Department at the School District of
Philadelphia
Proposed Action Steps Responsible Staff Timeline
Create a task force comprised of senior leaders
and consultants charged with conducting research
and landscape analyses and developing policies,
procedures, roles and responsibilities to establish
an equity office at the district.
Select Members of the
Senior Leadership Team
External Consultants
November –
December, 2020
Establish evaluation systems and structures
aligned to the mission of the district to progress
monitor and assess culturally responsive practices
and institutional equity goals.
Superintendent
Chief of Academic Support
Chief of Student Support
Services
Chief of Schools
Chief of Communications
and External Relations
January –
March, 2021
Generate a budget and allocate financial and
human capital resources to staff an Equity Office
at the School District of Philadelphia inclusive of
a Chief Equity Officer.
Superintendent
Chief Financial Officer
Chief Talent Officer
Chief of Staff
March –
April, 2021
122
Evaluation Plan
In order to assess progress made within each proposed solution, the four-level evaluation
model developed by Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2006) is recommended. This model outlines
the evaluation of solution-related interventions across four dimensions. Although the assessment
process may not be necessary or practical at each level, proposed solutions should be examined
along the continuum of each level and determinations for evaluation established where
appropriate. Level one measures the reaction of the participants in a program (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2006). Level two measures the learning of participants (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2006). Level three focuses on behavior and how the participants apply what they learned in their
professional roles (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006). Level four measures targeted outcomes
and impact that result from learning (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006). Assessing the proposed
recommendations of this study utilizing this framework will enable executive leaders at the
School District of Philadelphia to measure the impact of culturally responsive leadership on
school climate and student outcomes.
Level 1: Reaction
Level one measures the reaction of the participants in a program which includes the
satisfaction and engagement of participants (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006). At the School
District of Philadelphia, the reactions and experiences of leaders engaging in professional
development and executive coaching initiatives can be evaluated through surveys, attendance
rates, and levels of discussion during sessions. Survey data collected at the end of each training
and coaching session will provide insight into how participants are engaging with content, and
will offer data to inform future training so that relevant needs are addressed. Furthermore,
monitoring attendance rates and levels of discussion during training will help regulate participant
123
engagement and assess their motivation to participate in culturally responsive leadership
development initiatives.
Level 2: Learning
Level two measures the learning of the participants and focuses on assessing changes in
knowledge, skills, and attitudes (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006). For the implementation plan
to be effective, leaders at the district need knowledge of culturally responsive leadership
practices. Furthermore, the professional development training sessions and executive coaching
delivered should result in leaders being more knowledgeable and confident in implementing
culturally responsive leadership practices to improve school climate, student outcomes, and
institutional equity.
In order to measure the acquired knowledge, confidence levels, and commitment to
change of the district and school-based leaders, surveys will need to be administered to all
participants before and after training and coaching programs. In addition, interviews can be
conducted to investigate how the professional development and coaching provided assisted
leaders with gaining knowledge of culturally responsive leadership. Finally, surveys from
trainings and interview data will be reconciled to assess changes in the knowledge, skills, and
attitudes of senior leaders.
Level 3: Behavior
Level three focuses on the application of new learning and the capability of individuals to
transfer new knowledge to implementation strategies and work-related initiatives (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2006). At this level, it is important to observe how professional development
learning and coaching related to culturally responsive leadership connects to organizational
practices that impact school climate and student outcomes. The critical behaviors to measure
include (a) how leaders have defined culturally responsive leadership both as a district and across
124
functional areas, (b) how leaders have embedded culturally responsive leadership into
instructional practices and the organizational mission, and (c) how culturally responsive
leadership was leveraged to establish equity agendas and build an equity office at the district.
Assessment at the district level on the aforementioned indicators requires bi-annual
surveys and interviews from a sample group of leaders to capture behavioral changes. These
surveys will align to professional development and executive coaching interventions to measure
the knowledge transfer from training programs. Furthermore, they will document and assess
implementation strategies deriving from culturally responsive leadership training focused on
process improvement, student achievement and outcomes, and strengthening school climate.
Triangulation between survey and interview data will provide insight into changes of behavior,
the transfer of knowledge, and the capacity of leaders to execute change management initiatives
driven by culturally responsive leadership.
Level 4: Results
Level four measures targeted outcomes, impact of learning, and implemented solutions
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006). At this level, it is important to evaluate results and impact
holistically with a long-term vision toward sustainable change (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2006). As a result, the implementation plan of this study should result in a transformation of the
leadership practices at the district to improve school climate, student outcomes, and institutional
equity.
The results from the four recommendations of this study focus on improving school
climate and student outcomes by leveraging culturally responsive leadership practices. To
successfully measure impact, by which knowledge is acquired, transferred, implemented into
practice by district leaders, the School District of Philadelphia needs to (a) establish measurable
goals for leveraging culturally responsive leadership to improve instructional practice in schools,
125
(b) create a database to measure and monitor cultural responsiveness and equity in the district
across the academic, attendance, school discipline, and student well-being domains, (c) refine
leadership evaluation rubrics to assess culturally responsive leadership in the school district, (d)
progress monitor the impact of culturally responsive leadership on achieving the mission of the
district, (e) create clear goals to build interpersonal relations and leverage culturally responsive
leadership to improve school-community partnerships, (f) progress monitor the impact of
culturally responsive leadership on building school-community partnerships, and (g) establish
clear policies and goals for the newly formed equity office to progress monitor equity goals,
outputs, and resource allocations across departments in the domains of organizational and school
climate, discipline, truancy, instructional quality, leadership development, human resources,
finance, operations, external relations, and policy. This evaluation should be conducted on a
quarterly basis to progress monitor changes in performance and outcomes, and measure
stakeholders’ reactions, learning, behavior, and results from the implementation of culturally
responsive leadership practices to improve school climate, student outcomes, and institutional
equity.
Considerations for Future Research
Additional research related to the influence of culturally responsive leadership on school
climate and student outcomes would benefit future studies and district-wide practices. Limited
published research exists pertaining to the impact of culturally responsive leadership on
organizational effectiveness and student outcomes in K-12 education. In addition, there is
insufficient literature to explain the impact of culturally responsive leadership in virtual learning,
and how changes at the district level resulting from the implementation of the leadership practice
directly impact school practices. Understanding the extent to which these factors inform school
126
climate, instructional delivery, student performance, and institutional equity would better inform
school districts with their goal-setting and strategic planning processes.
Future studies may further benefit from a parallel analysis of factors affecting the success
or limitations of similar school districts in attaining school climate and student performance
goals. Through these efforts, the assessment protocols utilized in this study would be formalized
as part of an evaluation of two or more institutions. Drawing upon existing literature and best
practices within the field, this study provides a framework for examining the attributes of
culturally responsive leadership and their influence on institutional performance in the areas of
school climate and student outcomes. Understanding the successes and challenges of the School
District of Philadelphia will provide valuable insights on how to leverage culturally responsive
leadership to improve school climate and disrupt educational inequity, particularly for Black and
Latino students.
Conclusion
Utilizing the gap analysis framework, this study sought to better understand the
knowledge, motivation, and organization influences on culturally responsive leadership and how
they are impacting the ability of the School District of Philadelphia in achieving its goal related
to school climate and institutional equity. Through interview responses from executive
leadership and data analysis collected, four categories of need were identified and addressed.
Evidence-based solutions were proposed and an implementation plan for the proposed solutions
was presented alongside an evaluation plan to measure stakeholder progress in the interventions
aligned to each solution.
The need for future research in the area of culturally responsive leadership is vast.
American society is in a state of crisis, and the educational community needs culturally
responsive leaders who challenge the constructs of race, white supremacy, applied meritocracy,
127
and racist ideologies which shape and undermine policy efforts intended to improve outcomes
for African American and other minority groups (Harper et al., 2009). Institutional racism,
systemic oppression, race, class, and socio-economic status have historic implications on the
current state of American society and the educational system. As a result, the sector deeply
needs leaders who understand and connect culture to education, and practitioners who internalize
culture as a form of capital consisting of societal preferences and consumption patterns that often
omit people of color while reflecting the cultural background, knowledge, disposition, and
intergenerational skills of dominant society (Smith-Maddox, 1998). The current state of
American education requires leaders who promote educational equity and can identify (a) how
equity issues became central, (b) knowledge related to the ethnic and cultural diversity that
should be taught in schools, (c) cultural knowledge that needs to be acknowledged, and (d) how
to connect specific cultural norms to national standards (Smith-Maddox, 1998). Leaders with
these attributes will not only advance outcomes for Black and Latino students, but will improve
learning environments for all scholars.
With regard to the improvement of school climate, the current American education
system requires leaders who explicitly call out and take into account race and directly confront
institutionalized racism and the negative experiences of students of color (Harper, 2012).
Furthermore, these leaders must be able to establish inclusive school climates that mitigate
environmental factors negatively impacting students and families, and understand the positive
relationship between parental involvement and cultivating community-based relationships
(Renfrow, 1981). During these times of heightened racial tension and crisis, the task of
developing and deploying culturally responsive leaders is not an option but rather a requirement.
These leaders are not only critical to the advancement of Black, Latino, and marginalized
128
students, but also to the progression of the academic profession, the evolution of educational
equity, and the expansion of the American knowledge economy.
129
REFERENCES
Apfelbaum, E. P., Grunberg, R., Halevy, N., & Kang, S. (2017). From ignorance to intolerance:
Perceived intentionality of racial discrimination shapes preferences for colorblindness
versus multiculturalism. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 69, 86-101.
doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2016.08.002
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2),
122-147. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122
Barile, J., Donohue, D., Anthony, E., Baker, A., Weaver, S., & Henrich, C. (2012). Teacher–
Student relationship climate and school outcomes: Implications for educational policy
initiatives. Journal of Youth and Adolescence; A Multidisciplinary Research Publication,
41(3), 256-267. doi:10.1007/s10964-011-9652-8
Baumeister, R. F., Twenge, J. M., & Nuss, C. K. (2002). Effects of social exclusion on cognitive
processes: Anticipated aloneness reduces intelligent thought. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 83(4), 817. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.4.817
Bell, D. A. (2004). Silent covenants brown v. board of education and the unfulfilled hopes for
racial reform. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Beswick, R. (1990). Racism in Am e rica’ s schools. ERIC digest series, number EA 49.
Butts, C. C., Trejo, B., Parks, K. M., & McDonald, D. P. (2012). The integration of diversity and
Cross‐Cultural work: Competencies and commonalities. Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, 5(3), 361-364. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2012.01461.x
Carbado, D. W., Crenshaw, K. W., Mays, V. M., & Tomlinson, B. (2013). Intersectionality. Du
Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race, 10(2), 303-312.
doi:10.1017/S1742058X13000349
130
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Cohen, J. (2006). Social, emotional, ethical, and academic education: Creating a climate for
learning, participation in democracy, and well-being. Harvard Educational Review;
Harvard Educational Review, 76(2), 201-237. doi:10.17763/haer.76.2.j44854x1524644vn
Collier, M. J. (2015). Intercultural communication competence: Continuing challenges and
critical directions. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 48, 9-11.
doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2015.03.003
Craig, M. (2015). Cost effectiveness of retaining top internal talent in contrast to recruiting top
talent. Competition Forum, 13(2), 203-209.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Cummins, J., Chow, P., & Schechter, S. R. (2006). Community as curriculum. Language Arts,
83(4), 297-307.
Dantley, M. E., & Green, T. L. (2015). Problematizing notions of leadership for social justice:
Reclaiming social justice through a discourse of accountability and a radical, prophetic, and
historical imagination. Journal of School Leadership, 25(5), 820.
doi:10.1177/105268461502500502
Darby, D., & Rury, J. L. (2018). The color of mind: Why the origins of the achievement gap
matter for justice. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wilhoit, G., & Pittenger, L. (2014). Accountability for college and career
readiness: Developing a new paradigm. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22
doi:10.14507/epaa.v22n86.2014
131
Davis, B. W., Gooden, M. A., & Micheaux, D. J. (2015). Color-blind leadership: A critical race
theory analysis of the ISLLC and ELCC standards. Educational Administration Quarterly,
51(3), 335-371. doi:10.1177/0013161X15587092
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2012). Critical race theory: An introduction (2nd ed.). New York:
New York University Press.
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2017). Critical race theory: An introduction. New York: New York
University Press.
Dembo, M. H., & Seli, H. (2016). Motivation and learning strategies for college success: A
focus on self-regulated learning. New York, NY: Routledge.
Denler, H., Wolters, C., & Benzon, M. (2006). Social cognitive theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/social-cognitive-theory/.
Døjbak Haakonsson, D., Burton, R. M., Obel, B., & Lauridsen, J. (2008). How failure to align
organizational climate and leadership style affects performance. Management Decision,
46(3), 406-432. doi:10.1108/00251740810863861
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/.
Elmore, R. F. (2005). Accountable leadership. The Educational Forum, 69(2), 134-142.
doi:10.1080/00131720508984677
National Center for Education Statistics. (n.d.). Enrollment. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372#PK12_enrollment
Ergeneli, A., Gohar, R., & Temirbekova, Z. (2007). Transformational leadership: Its relationship
to culture value dimensions. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31(6), 703-
724. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2007.07.003
132
Ford, D. Y., Harris, J. J. III, Tyson, C. A., & Trotman, M. F. (2001). Beyond deficit thinking:
Providing access for gifted African American students. Roeper Review, 24(2), 52-58.
Ford, D. Y., Harris, J. J., Tyson, C. A., & Trotman, M. F. (2002). Beyond deficit thinking:
Providing access for gifted African American students. Roeper Review, 24(2), 52.
doi:10.1080/02783190209554129
Fordham, S., & Ogbu, J. U. (1986). Black students' school success: Coping with the “burden of
‘acting white.’” The Urban Review, 18(3), 176-206.
Fox, R. A., & Buchanan, N. K. (2017). The Wiley handbook of school choice. Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley.
Gaddis, S. M., & Lauen, D. L. (2014). School accountability and the black–white test score gap.
Social Science Research, 44, 15-31. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2013.10.008
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist, 36(1),
45-56.
Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
Gill, R. (2002). Change management--or change leadership? Journal of Change Management,
3(4), 307-318. doi:10.1080/714023845
Gillborn, D., & Ladson-Billings, G. (2010). Critical race theory Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/B978-
0-08-044894-7.01530-X
Glesne, C. (2011). But is it ethical? considering what is right. Becoming Qualitative
Researchers: An Introduction, (4), 162-183.
Gottfried, M. A. (2012). Understanding the institutional-level factors of urban school quality.
Teachers College Record, 114(12)
133
Green, T. L. (2017). Community-based equity audits: A practical approach for educational
leaders to support equitable community-school improvements. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 53(1), 3-39. doi:10.1177/0013161X16672513
Green, T. L., Gooden, M. A., Horsford, S. D., & Vasquez Heilig, J. (2014). Transforming out-of-
school challenges into opportunities: Community schools reform in the urban Midwest.
Urban Education, 49(8), 930-954. doi:10.1177/0042085914557643
Gthompson, E. (2010). Addressing institutional structural barriers to student achievement. Race,
Gender & Class, 17(1), 51-57.
Harper, S. R. (2012). Race without racism: How higher education researchers minimize racist
institutional norms. The Review of Higher Education, 36(1), 9-29.
Harper, S. R. and Associates. (2014). Succeeding in the city: A report from the New York City
Black and Latino Male High School Achievement Study. Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania, Center for the Study of Race and Equity in Education.
Harper, S. R., & Davis, C. H. F. (2016). Eight actions to reduce racism in college classrooms:
When professors are part of the problem. Academe, 102(6).
Harper, S. R., & Griffin, K. A. (2011). Opportunity beyond affirmative action: How low-income
and working-class black male achievers access highly selective, high-cost colleges and
universities. Harvard Journal of African American Public Policy, 17
Harper, S. R., Patton, L. D., & Wooden, O. S. (2009). Access and equity for African American
students in higher education: A critical race historical analysis of policy efforts. The Journal
of Higher Education, 80(4), 389-414. doi:10.1080/00221546.2009.11779022
Hays-Thomas, R., Bowen, A., & Boudreaux, M. (2012). Skills for diversity and inclusion in
organizations: A review and preliminary investigation. The Psychologist-Manager Journal,
15(2), 128-141. doi:10.1080/10887156.2012.676861
134
Huang, T., Hochbein, C., & Simons, J. (2018). The relationship among school contexts, principal
time use, school climate, and student achievement. Educational Management
Administration and Leadership, 48(2), 305–323. doi:10.1177/1741143218802595
Huber, S. G., & Hiltmann, M. (2011). Competence profile school management (CPSM)--an
inventory for the self-assessment of school leadership. Educational Assessment, Evaluation
and Accountability, 23(1), 65-88. doi:10.1007/s11092-010-9111-1
Hunsaker, J. S., & Hunsaker, P. L. (1979). Overcoming barriers: Personal and organizational
development in schools. Educational Horizons, 57(3), 126.
Hunter, K. (2015). Blueprint: Recruiting and hiring ethnically diverse talent. Public Relations
Tactics, 22(11), 12.
Jabbar, H. (2018). Recruiting “talent”: School choice and teacher hiring in New Orleans.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 54(1), 115-151. doi:10.1177/0013161X17721607
Johnson, L. (2014). Culturally responsive leadership for community empowerment.
Multicultural Education Review, 6(2), 145-170. doi:10.1080/2005615X.2014.11102915
Johnson-Ahorlu, R. (2012). The academic opportunity gap: How racism and stereotypes disrupt
the education of African American undergraduates. Race Ethnicity and Education, 15(5),
633-652. doi:10.1080/13613324.2011.645566
Jones-Wilson, F. (1990). Race, realities, and American education: Two sides of the coin. Journal
of Negro Education, 59(2), 119. doi:10.2307/2295635
Khalifa, M. A., & Alston, J. A. (2015). Handbook of urban educational leadership. Lanham,
MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
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.
doi:10.3102/0034654316630383
135
Kirkpatrick, D., & Kirkpatrick, J. (2006). Evaluating training programs: The four levels (3
rd
ed.).
San Francisco, CA: Brett Koehler.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212-18. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that's just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant
pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34(3), 159-65. doi:10.1080/00405849509543675
Ladson-Billings, G. (1998). Just what is critical race theory and what's it doing in a nice field
like education? International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 11(1), 7-24.
doi:10.1080/095183998236863
Lakos, A., & Phipps, S. E. (2004). Creating a culture of assessment: A catalyst for organizational
change. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 4(3), 345. doi:10.1353/pla.2004.0052
Lareau, A. (1987). Social class differences in family-school relationships: The importance of
cultural capital. Sociology of Education, 60(2), 73. doi:10.2307/2112583
Larson, K. E., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2017). Cultural competence and social desirability among
practitioners: A systematic review of the literature. Children and Youth Services Review, 76,
100-111. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.02.034
Lipman, P. (2004). High stakes education electronic resource]: Inequality, globalization, and
urban school reform. London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.
Lopez, A. E. (2016). Culturally responsive and socially just leadership in diverse contexts from
theory to action (1st ed.). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/978-1-137-
53339-5
López, F. (2016). Culturally responsive pedagogies in Arizona and Latino students' achievement.
Teachers College Record, 118(5), 1.
136
Mandel, H., & Semyonov, M. (2016). Going back in time? gender differences in trends and
sources of the racial pay gap, 1970 to 2010. American Sociological Review, 81(5), 1039-
1068. doi:10.1177/0003122416662958
Marshall, R. A. (1962). The story of our schools: A short history of public education in the
United States. Washington, DC: Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges.
Marshall, S. L., & Khalifa, M. A. (2018). Humanizing school communities. Journal of
Educational Administration, 56(5), 533-545. doi:10.1108/JEA-01-2018-0018
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
McGinn, N. (1997). The impact of globalization on national education systems. Prospects, 27(1),
41-54. doi:10.1007/BF02755354
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Minkos, M. L., Sassu, K. A., Gregory, J. L., Patwa, S. S., Theodore, L. A., & Femc‐Bagwell, M.
(2017). Culturally responsive practice and the role of school administrators. Psychology in
the Schools, 54(10), 1260-1266. doi:10.1002/pits.22072
Moore, J. L., III. (2005). Underachievement among gifted students of color: Implications for
educators. Theory into Practice, 44(2), 167-177.
Mroczkowski, A. L., & Sánchez, B. (2015). The role of racial discrimination in the economic
value of education among urban, low‐income Latina/o youth: Ethnic identity and gender as
moderators. American Journal of Community Psychology, 56(1-2), 1-11.
doi:10.1007/s10464-015-9728-9
137
National Education Association (n.d.). Leadership competency guide. Retrieved from
http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/25935_Leadership%20Dev%20Comp%20Guide%202-
Aug%2014-2019-Vert_final-V2-web.pdf
Nkomo, S. M. (1995). Identities and the complexity of diversity. In S. E. Jackson (Ed.), Diversity
in work teams: Research paradigms for a changing workplace (pp. 247-253). Washington,
DC: American Psychological Association.
Noguera, P., & Wing, J. Y. (2006). Unfinished business: Closing the racial achievement gap in
our schools (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Noguera, P. A. (2004). Social capital and the education of immigrant students: Categories and
generalizations. Sociology of Education, 77(2), 180-183. doi:10.1177/003804070407700206
Noguera, P. A. (2008). Creating schools where race does not predict achievement: The role and
significance of race in the racial achievement gap. Journal of Negro Education, 77(2), 90-
103.
Noguera, P. A. (2017). Introduction to “Racial inequality and education: Patterns and prospects
for the future”. The Educational Forum, 81(2), 129-135.
doi:10.1080/00131725.2017.1280753
Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Okilwa, N., & Robert, C. (2017). School discipline disparity: Converging efforts for better
student outcomes. The Urban Review; Issues and Ideas in Public Education, 49(2), 239-
262. doi:10.1007/s11256-017-0399-8
Our Mission. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.philasd.org/about
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/.
138
Paluck, E. L. (2006). Diversity training and intergroup contact: A call to action research. Journal
of Social Issues, 62(3), 577-595. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2006.00474.x
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-86.
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Portes, P. R., González Canché, M., Boada, D., & Whatley, M. E. (2018). Early evaluation
findings from the instructional conversation study: Culturally responsive teaching outcomes
for diverse learners in elementary school. American Educational Research Journal, 55(3),
488-531. doi:10.3102/0002831217741089
Professional Standards for Educational Leaders. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://npbea.org/wp-
content/uploads/2017/06/Professional-Standards-for-Educational-Leaders_2015.pdf
PSSA Results. (n.d.). Retrieved May 17, 2019, from https://www.education.pa.gov/Data-and-
Statistics/PSSA/Pages/default.aspx
Quaglia, R., & Fox, K. (2016). A lesson in listening. RSA Journal, 162(5565), 46-48.
Renfrow, G. (1981). A descriptive study of parental involvement using the Pennsylvania
comprehensive reading/communication arts plan (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
University of Pennsylvania.
Riehl, C. J. (2000). The principal's role in creating inclusive schools for diverse students: A
review of normative, empirical, and critical literature on the practice of educational
administration. Review of Educational Research, 70(1), 55-81.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Schein, E. H., & Schein, P. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership. Hoboken: Wiley.
139
Simons, T. L. (1999). Behavioral integrity as a critical ingredient for transformational leadership.
Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(2), 89-104.
doi:10.1108/09534819910263640
Smith, C. A. (2005). School factors that contribute to the underachievement of students of color
and what culturally competent school leaders can do. Educational Leadership and
Administration: Teaching and Program Development, 17, 21-32.
Smith-Maddox, R. (1998). Defining culture as a dimension of academic achievement:
Implications for culturally responsive curriculum, instruction, and assessment. The Journal
of Negro Education, 67(3), 302-317. doi:10.2307/2668198
Smith-Maddox, R., & Solórzano, D. G. (2002). Using critical race theory, Paulo Freire’s
problem-posing method, and case study research to confront race and racism in education.
Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 66-84. doi:10.1177/107780040200800105
Stevens, F. G., Plaut, V. C., & Sanchez-Burks, J. (2008). Unlocking the benefits of diversity:
All-inclusive multiculturalism and positive organizational change. The Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science, 44(1), 116-133. doi:10.1177/0021886308314460
Sue, D. W. (2001). Multidimensional facets of cultural competence. The Counseling
Psychologist, 29(6), 790-821. doi:10.1177/0011000001296002
Suh, T., Houston, M. B., Barney, S. M., & Kwon, I. G. (2011). The impact of mission fulfillment
on the internal audience: Psychological job outcomes in a services setting. Journal of
Service Research, 14(1), 76-92. doi:10.1177/1094670510387915
SY2017-2018 District Scorecard. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://cdn.philasd.org/offices/
performance/Open_Data/School_Performance/District_Scorecard/DPR_SY1718_District_S
corecard_20190115.pdf
140
Taylor, B. M. (2015). The integrated dynamics of motivation and performance in the workplace.
Performance Improvement, 54(5), 28-37. doi:10.1002/pfi.21481
Téllez, K. (2004). Preparing teachers for Latino children and youth: Policies and practice. The
High School Journal, 88(2), 43-54.
Thomas, D., & Ely, R. (1996). Making differences matter: A new paradigm for managing
diversity. Harvard Business Review, 74(5), 79-91.
van Driel, M., Gabrenya, W. K., Chiu, C., Lonner, W. J., Matsumoto, D., & Ward, C. (2013).
Organizational cross-cultural competence: Approaches to measurement. Journal of Cross-
Cultural Psychology, 44(6), 874-899. doi:10.1177/0022022112466944
Welton, A. D., Owens, D. R., & Zamani-Gallaher, E. (2018). Anti-racist change: A conceptual
framework for educational institutions to take systemic action. Teachers College Record,
120(14), .
Whelan-Berry, K., & Somerville, K. A. (2010). Linking change drivers and the organizational
change process: A review and synthesis. Journal of Change Management, 10(2), 175-193.
doi:10.1080/14697011003795651
Wuffli, P. A. (2016). Inclusive leadership A framework for the global era (1st ed.). Cham:
Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-23561-5
141
APPENDIX A
National Education Association Governance And Leadership Competencies
Competency Theme Level 1:
Foundational
Level 2:
Mobilizing and
Power Building
Level 3:
Agenda Driving
Effectively executes
governance and
leadership
responsibilities
Understands the roles
and responsibilities of
various leadership
positions as well as the
specific duties and legal
obligations of
governance
Creates trusting
relationships and builds
consensus among
leaders on governance
activities and strategic
objectives
Executes, monitors, and
adjusts plans, policies,
and strategies to
accomplish the short
and long-term
objectives of the
Association
Establishes and
maintains
collaborative and
effective relationships
Establishes purposeful
relationships to foster
collaboration
Builds and maintains
productive internal and
external relationships
Leverages internal and
external relationships to
form authentic
partnerships and
utilizes those
partnerships to
accomplish strategic
objectives
Advances the
organization by
internalizing its
vision, mission, and
core values
Uses the purpose,
culture, and history of
the organization, as
well as education and
union trends to
influence the direction
of work
Empowers others and
promotes a culture that
appeals to the different
motivations of
members while
recognizing the
contributions of all
Implements strategies
that utilize the vision,
mission, and core
values to drive work
and culture
Sets strategic
objectives to guide
long-term goals and
priorities
Understands the
implications of the
organization’s strategy
and priorities as it
relates to their own
actions and tactics
Educations others on
Association strategies
and tactics to advance
organizational long-
term goals and
priorities
Creates value for
members by creating
and communicating
clear and compelling
objectives to achieve
long-term goals and
priorities
Ongoing commitment
to personal and
organizational
culturally relevant
leadership
development (cultural
intelligence, cultural
competency, cross-
cultural networking)
Identifies own
leadership strengths
and growth
opportunities and
works diligently to
improve them
Identifies and builds a
diverse group of leaders
to take on greater roles
and responsibilities in
the Association
Develops succession
strategies that ensure a
successful transition in
leadership to sustain the
Association’s vision
over time
142
APPENDIX B
National Policy Board for Educational Administration Professional Standards for Educational
Leaders
Equity and Cultural Responsiveness
Effective educational leaders strive for equity of educational opportunity and culturally
responsive practices to promote each student’s academic success and well-being.
Effective leaders:
a) Ensure that each student is treated fairly, respectfully, and with an understanding of each
student’s culture and context.
b) Recognize, respect, and employ each student’s strengths, diversity, and culture as assets
for teaching and learning.
c) Ensure that each student has equitable access to effective teachers, learning opportunities,
academic and social support, and other resources necessary for success.
d) Develop student policies and address student misconduct in a positive, fair, and unbiased
manner.
e) Confront and alter institutional biases of student marginalization, deficit-based schooling,
and low expectations associated with race, class, culture and language, gender and sexual
orientation, and disability or special status.
f) Promote the preparation of students to live productively in and contribute to the diverse
cultural contexts of a global society.
g) Act with cultural competence and responsiveness in their interactions, decision making,
and practice.
h) Address matters of equity and cultural responsiveness in all aspects of leadership.
143
APPENDIX C
The School District of Philadelphia Leadership Pathways Framework
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP (IL)
Uses deep master of curriculum, instruction, and assessment to ensure all students engage in
learning that demonstrates high academic achievement and growth
Aligned Indicators Across Leadership Roles
Assistant
Superintendent
Principal Assistant
Principal
Teacher Leader Central Office
Leaders
(IL-AS1) DEVELOPS
PRINCIPALS’
INSTRUCTIONAL
LEADERSHIP:
Develops principals’
capacity for
instructional
leadership; uses
instructional expertise,
coupled with
quantitative and
qualitative data, to
make decisions and
provide actionable
feedback to improve
leader and teacher
effectiveness, student
learning, and overall
outcomes
(IL – P1)
DEMONSTRATES
INSTRUCTIONAL
LEADERSHIP:
Demonstrates expertise
in curriculum,
instructional methods,
and assessments used
to achieve consistently
strong academic
outcomes for all
students
(IL – AP1) BUILDS
INSTRUCTIONAL
EXPERTISE: Builds
expertise in curriculum,
instructional methods,
and assessments used
to achieve consistently
strong academic
outcomes for all
students
(IL – TL1) SERVES
AS CONTENT-
SPECIFIC
INSTRUCTIONAL
RESOURCE: Serves
as the curricular,
instructional, and
assessment expert in
specific content areas
and provides teachers
with robust content-
specific support
designed to improve
teacher practice and
achieve consistently
strong academic
outcomes for all
students
(IL – CL1)
DEMONSTRATES
INSTRUCTIONAL
KNOWLEDGE:
Demonstrates
knowledge in
curriculum,
instructional methods,
and assessments used to
achieve consistently
strong academic
outcomes for all
students
(IL-AS2)
OBSERVES,
ASSESSES AND
COACHES: Conducts
regular school-wide
observations and data
analyses to assess and
coach principals on
implementation of their
instructional goals in
the comprehensive
school plan
(IL – P2)
OBSERVES,
ASSESSES AND
COACHES: Regularly
conducts formal and
informal classroom
observations of a cross-
section of teachers and
instructional leaders to
assess the quality of
instructional practices
across the school and
provides targeted
feedback that develops
teachers and
instructional leaders to
improve school-wide
outcomes
(IL – AP2)
OBSERVES,
ASSESSES AND
COACHES: Regularly
conducts formal and
informal classroom
observations of a cross-
section of teachers to
assess the quality of
instructional practices
across the school and
provides targeted
feedback to teachers to
improve school-wide
outcomes
(IL – TL2)
CONDUCTS
CLASSROOM
VISITS AND
COACHES: Uses
release time to support
teachers in improving
their practice through
frequent classroom
visits, targeted
feedback, and other
coaching and co-
planning support
(IL – CL2)
DEVELOPS
OTHERS’ SKILLS
AND
PROFESSIONAL
CAPACITY:
Develops staff, school
leaders, and/or teachers
through observation,
feedback, coaching,
professional
development, and
collaboration to have a
shared belief and
ownership in the
academic success of
every child; develops
the capacity of staff to
implement instructional
vision, assessment
practices, data analysis,
and action planning
(IL-AS3)
ESTABLISHES
CULTURE OF HIGH
EXPECTATIONS
AND DATA DRIVEN
INSTRUCTION:
Establishes a culture of
high expectations and
data-driven instruction
by using relevant data
and external resources
to make network-wide
decisions regarding
curriculum, instruction,
assessment, and
professional
development that leads
(IL – P3)
ESTABLISHES
CULTURE OF HIGH
EXPECTATIONS
AND DATA DRIVEN
INSTRUCTION:
Establishes a culture of
high expectations and
data-driven instruction
by using relevant data
and external resources
to make school-wide
decisions regarding
curriculum, instruction,
assessment, and
professional
development that leads
(IL – AP3)
MAINTAINS
CULTURE OF HIGH
EXPECTATIONS
AND DATA DRIVEN
INSTRUCTION:
Maintains a culture of
high expectations and
data-driven instruction
by using relevant data
to determine school-
wide data trends and
inform discussions
regarding curriculum,
instruction, assessment,
and professional
development
(IL – TL3)
SUPPORTS
CULTURE OF HIGH
EXPECTATIONS
AND DATA DRIVEN
INSTRUCTION:
Supports a culture of
high expectations and
data-informed
instruction by using
relevant data to identify
and prioritize
opportunities to
improve curriculum,
instruction, assessment,
and professional
development
(IL – CL 3)
MAINTAINS
CULTURE OF HIGH
EXPECTATIONS
AND DATA DRIVEN
SUPPORT: Maintains
a culture of high
expectations by using
relevant data to
determine district-wide
needs, and to inform
discussions regarding,
instruction, assessment,
and professional
development
144
to increased student
outcomes
to increased student
outcomes
Other Role Specific Indicators
(IL-AS4) MODELS
EFFECTIVE DATA
USAGE: Models and
supports the effective
use of data to make
decisions, identify
areas that need
improvement, and
providing ongoing
feedback on
comprehensive school
plan
(IL-AS5)
IMPLEMENTS
ASSESSMENT
SYSTEMS:
Implements processes
to monitor and assess
the effective
application of the
district-wide
curriculum, instruction,
and assessments at each
school
(IL – P4) CREATES
PLANNING
STRUCTURES:
Creates planning
structures and time for
all teachers and
instructional leaders to
collaborate on school-
wide, high-impact
instructional strategies;
ensures leaders and
teachers use individual
and team planning time
to create standards-
based unit plans, daily
lesson plans, and
assessments aligned to
the PA Core Standards
(IL – AP4)
SUPPORTS
IMPLEMENTATION
OF PLANNING
STRUCTURES:
Supports the building
of a shared
understanding of high-
impact instructional
practices, aligned to the
PA Core Standards
through the
implementation of
rigorous and relevant
curriculum and daily,
unit, and long-term
plans in all content
areas
(IL – TL4)
SUPPORTS
IMPLEMENTATION
OF PLANNING
STRUCTURES:
Supports teachers with
understanding high-
impact instructional
practices, aligned to the
PA Core Standards
through the
implementation of
rigorous and relevant
curriculum and daily,
unit, and long-term
plans in specific
content areas
(IL – CL4) USES
DATA
EFFECTIVELY: Uses
district and school-wide
data to inform
instructional decisions
regarding coaching,
development, and
training
(IL – CL5)
MONITORS
RELEVANT
TRENDS: Stays
current on pedagogical
and political shifts in
the sector that may
impact the District’s
Action Plan
145
PERSONAL LEADERSHIP (PL)
Demonstrates the growth mindset, self-awareness, adaptability, and resourcefulness to inspire
and achieve vision and goals
Aligned Indicators Across Leadership Roles
Assistant
Superintendent
Principal Assistant
Principal
teacher leader Central Office
Leaders
(PL-AS1) APPLIES
GROWTH MINDSET:
Applies a growth
mindset to personal
growth and development
by actively seeking
feedback; takes
responsibility for
behavior, mistakes, and
results; and changes
behavior/actions to
become a more effective
leader
(PL – P1) APPLIES
GROWTH
MINDSET: Applies a
growth mindset to
personal growth and
development by:
actively seeking
feedback; taking
responsibility for
behavior, mistakes, and
results; and changing
behavior/actions to
become a more
effective leader
(PL – AP1) APPLIES
GROWTH
MINDSET: Applies a
growth mindset to
personal growth and
development by
actively seeking
feedback; takes
responsibility for
behavior, mistakes, and
results and changes
behavior/actions to
become a more
effective leader
(PL – TL1) APPLIES
GROWTH
MINDSET: Applies a
growth mindset to
personal growth and
development by
actively seeking
feedback; takes
responsibility for
behavior, mistakes, and
results and changes
behavior/actions to
become a more
effective leader
(PL – CL1) APPLIES
GROWTH
MINDSET: Applies a
growth mindset to
personal growth and
development by
actively seeking
feedback; takes
responsibility for
behavior, mistakes, and
results and changes
behavior/actions to
become a more
effective leader
(PL-AS2)
CONSIDERS
DIVERSE
PERSPECTIVES:
Seeks to understand the
needs and motivations
of leaders, teachers,
students, families, and
the community, and
applies that knowledge
when making decisions
and adjusting long term
plans
(PL – P2)
CONSIDERS
DIVERSE
PERSPECTIVES:
Seeks to understand the
needs and motivations
of leaders, teachers,
students, and families
and applies that
knowledge when
making decisions and
adjusting long term
plans
(PL – AP2)
CONSIDERS
DIVERSE
PERSPECTIVES:
Seeks to understand the
needs and motivations
of leaders, teachers,
students, and families;
considers a diverse set
of perspectives when
making decisions
(PL – TL2)
CONSIDERS
DIVERSE
PERSPECTIVES:
Seeks to understand the
needs and motivations
of leaders, teachers,
students, and families;
considers a diverse set
of perspectives when
making decisions
(PL – CL2)
CONSIDERS
DIVERSE
PERSPECTIVES:
Considers input and
data from a diverse set
of perspectives when
making decisions
(PL-AS3)
DEMONSTRATES
INTEGRITY:
Demonstrates integrity
by modeling and
teaching high
expectations for self and
others to achieve
network-wide vision,
goals, and values
(PL – P3)
DEMONSTRATES
INTEGRITY:
Demonstrates integrity
by modeling and
teaching high
expectations for self
and others to achieve
school-wide vision,
goals, and values
(PL – AP3)
DEMONSTRATES
INTEGRITY:
Demonstrates integrity
by modeling and
teaching high
expectations for self
and others to achieve
school-wide vision,
goals, and values
(PL – TL3)
DEMONSTRATES
INTEGRITY:
Demonstrates integrity
by modeling and
teaching high
expectations for self
and others to achieve
school-wide vision,
goals, and values
(PL – CL3)
DEMONSTRATES
INTEGRITY:
Demonstrates integrity
by modeling and
teaching high
expectations for self
and others to achieve
district-wide vision,
goals, and values
(PL-AS4) MODELS
AND ENCOURAGES
INITIATIVE AND
INNOVATION:
Values, encourages, and
uses creative and
innovative ideas to
support the
comprehensive school
plan; creates space to
allow school staff to go
above and beyond
typical expectations to
achieve exceptional
results
(PL – P4) TAKES
INITIATIVE: Takes
initiative, going above
and beyond typical
expectations, and
making necessary
innovations to achieve
the comprehensive
school plan
(PL – AP4) TAKES
INITIATIVE: Takes
initiative, going above
and beyond typical
expectations and
making necessary
innovations to achieve
the comprehensive
school plan
(PL – TL4) TAKES
INITIATIVE: Takes
initiative, going above
and beyond typical
expectations and
making necessary
innovations to achieve
the comprehensive
school plan
(PL – CL4) TAKES
INITIATIVE AND
MODELS
INNOVATION: Takes
initiative, going above
and beyond typical
expectations and
making necessary
sacrifices to achieve
exceptional results;
Values, encourages,
and uses creative and
innovative ideas to
achieve the Anchor
Goals
(PL-AS5) ADAPTS
AND COACHES
PERSONAL
LEADERSHIP
STYLE: Adapts
personal leadership style
to motivate, influence,
and persuade others;
seeks out teachable
moments to coach others
to do the same.
(PL – P5) ADAPTS
AND COACHES
PERSONAL
LEADERSHIP:
Adapts personal
leadership style to
motivate, influence,
and persuade others;
seeks out teachable
moments to coach
others to do the same
(PL – AP5) ADAPTS
PERSONAL
LEADERSHIP:
Understands and
articulates the impact
of their own strengths
and weaknesses; adapts
personal leadership
style to motivate,
influence, and persuade
others
(PL – TL5) ADAPTS
PERSONAL
LEADERSHIP:
Understands and
articulates the impact
of their own strengths
and weaknesses; adapts
personal leadership
style to motivate,
influence, and persuade
others
(PL – CL5) ADAPTS
PERSONAL
LEADERSHIP:
Understands their own
strengths and
weaknesses; takes
responsibility for
behavior, adapts
personal leadership
style to motivate,
influence, and persuade
others
146
OTHER ROLE SPECIFIC INDICATORS
(PL-AS6) EXHIBITS
PROFESSIONALISM:
Models, teaches, and
coaches self-awareness,
integrity, reflective
practice, transparency,
and ethical behavior.
(PL-AS7) ENGAGES
IN PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
FOR SELF: Engages in
professional
development activities
to improve their own
leadership practice;
learns from successes
and failures; integrates
feedback by adapting
behavior/actions to be
an effective leader; and
teaches others to do the
same
(PL – CL6)
DEMONSTRATES
FLEXIBILITY:
Demonstrates
flexibility and tenacity
when plans or
situations change
unexpectedly;
effectively solves
problems and adjusts
plans to achieve goals;
follows through on
commitments and
promises with an
appropriate sense of
urgency
(PL – CL7)
ENGAGES IN
PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
FOR SELF: Engages
in professional
development activities
to improve their own
leadership practice;
learns from successes
and failures; integrates
feedback by adapting
behavior/actions to be
an effective leader; and
teaches others to do the
same
147
TALENT MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT (TMD)
Recruits, selects, develops, and retains a highly effective team, fostering a culture of performance
management and continuous learning that values and prioritizes staff and student learning
Aligned Indicators Across Leadership Roles
Assistant
Superintendent
Principal Assistant
Principal
Teacher Leader Central Office
Leaders
(TMD-AS1)
IDENTIFIES AND
CULITVATES
HIGH-QUALITY
TALENT: Identifies
and cultivates potential
high-quality principal
talent; drives the
process to hire new
principals within their
network
(TMD – P1) STAFFS
EFFECTIVELY AND
PRIORITIZES
RETENTION: Staffs
school with the high-
quality leaders,
teachers, and staff
needed to achieve the
comprehensive school
plan; Creates and
maintains school
conditions to retain
high quality talent
(TMD – AP1)
SUPPORTS
STAFFING AND
RETENTION:
Contributes to the
retention of talented
and valued school staff
by listening to their
needs and working with
the principal to develop
a plan to meet those
needs
(TMD – TL1)
SUPPORTS
TEACHER
RETENTION:
Contributes to the
retention of talented
teachers by serving as a
mentor, motivator,
coach, and subject
content facilitator
(TMD – CL1)
IDENTIFIES AND
STAFFS HIGH-
QUALITY TALENT:
Identifies and cultivates
potential high-quality
talent; drives or provide
input into the process to
hire new staff within
the central office or in
schools
(TMD – AS2)
COACHES AND
TRAINS
PRINCIPALS:
Coaches and trains
principals to reach their
goals by monitoring
progress, conducting
formative assessments,
providing feedback,
and adjusting elements
of the professional
development plan to
ensure principals meet
their comprehensive
school plan
(TMD – AS3)
DIFFERENTIATES
SUPPORT:
Differentiates the
support given to each
principal by balancing
the development needs
of the principal and the
instructional needs of
the school
(TMD – P2) LEADS
TEACHER AND
STAFF
DEVELOPMENT:
Identifies teacher,
leader, and staff
member strengths for
maximum impact and
collaborates with
internal and external
experts to address each
person’s key areas of
growth with
differentiated coaching,
feedback, professional
development, and
support
(TMD – AP2)
SUPPORTS
TEACHER
DEVELOPMENT:
Identifies each
teacher’s instructional
strengths for maximum
impact and collaborates
with principal to
address each staff
member’s key areas of
growth with
differentiated coaching,
feedback, professional
development, and
support
(TMD – TL2)
SUPPORTS
TEACHER
DEVELOPMENT:
Develops non-
evaluative
individualized coaching
plans for teachers and
supports them in setting
and meeting student
learning and teacher
practice goals; responds
to the diverse learning
needs of teachers and
identifies, promotes,
and facilitates varied
and differentiated
professional
development and
support
(TMD – CL2) SETS
HIGH
EXPECTATIONS
AND PROVIDES
FEECTIVE
FEEDBACK: Sets
high expectations by
providing targeted
feedback that links
directly to the District’s
Action Plan
(TMD – AS4)
MAINTAINS
ACCOUNTABILITY:
Holds principals
accountable for
achieving the
comprehensive school
plan while actively
training and coaching
them on their highest
leverage areas of
growth
(TMD – P3)
MAINTAINS
ACCOUNTABILITY:
Holds staff and
teachers accountable
for achieving the
comprehensive school
plan while actively
training and coaching
them on their highest
leverage areas of
growth
(TMD – AP3)
MAINTAINS
ACCOUNTABILITY:
Holds staff and
teachers accountable
for achieving the
comprehensive school
plan while actively
training and coaching
them on their highest
leverage areas of
growth
(TMD – TL3)
SUPPORTS
ACCOUNTABILITY:
Provides constructive
feedback on strategies
to strengthen teacher
practice and address
student needs aligned
to the comprehensive
school plan
(TMD – CL3)
MAINTAINS
ACCOUNTABILITY:
Holds staff accountable
for achieving the
office/team goals while
actively training and
coaching them on their
highest leverage areas
of growth
148
Other Role Specific Indicators
(TMD – AS5)
ADJUSTS
MANAGEMENT
STYLE: Shifts from
being a coach to a
supervisor as necessary
to enhance the learning
of the principal;
employs innovative
thinking and strategic
planning to create
change in response to
school-specific needs
(TMD – AS6) LEADS
AND MODELS
EFFECTIVE
LEARNING
COMMUNITY:
Establishes and models
the creation of a safe
and effective network
learning community
centered on a growth
mindset, that supports
peer feedback and
mitigates boundaries
created by experience,
knowledge, and status,
while promoting
innovative thinking
(TMD – AS7)
SUPPORTS
MANAGEMENT
STRUCTURES:
Helps principals create
distributed leadership
systems, and a talent
development plan to
meet current and
anticipated school
needs
(TMD – P4)
DEVELOPS DATA-
INFORMED
DECISION-
MAKERS: Develops
leaders, teachers, and
staff to analyze, reflect,
and synthesize data and
relevant information
when making decisions
(TMD – P5)
ENABLES
GROWTH
MINDSET: Creates
the conditions for a
school-wide staff
culture that embraces a
growth mindset and
feedback by developing
the capacity of the
instructional leadership
team to grow teachers
through observation,
feedback, coaching,
professional
development, and/or
collaboration
(TMD – P6) LEADS
EFFECTIVE
LEADERSHIP
TEAM: Identifies,
develops, and retains a
highly effective
leadership team that
has the knowledge,
skills, and mindsets to
keep the school driving
toward its goals even in
the principal’s absence
(TMS – AP4)
SUPPORTS DATA-
INFORMED
DECISION
MAKING: Assists
teachers, and staff to
analyze, reflect, and
synthesize relevant data
and information when
making decisions
(TMD – AP5)
MAINTAINS
GROWTH
MINDSET: Supports
the conditions for a
school-wide staff
culture that embraces a
growth mindset and
feedback by developing
the capacity of the
teachers to grow
through observation,
feedback, coaching,
professional
development, and/or
collaboration
(TMD – TL4)
ENCOURAGES
DATA-INFORMED
DECISION
MAKING: Creates a
climate of trust and
critical reflection for
teachers to analyze,
reflect, and synthesize
relevant student data
from their own and
other classrooms to
improve teaching and
student learning
(TMD – TL5)
MAINTAINS
GROWTH
MINDSET: Supports
the conditions for a
school-wide staff
culture that embraces a
growth mindset and
feedback by developing
the capacity of the
teachers to grow
through observation,
feedback, coaching,
professional
development, and/or
collaboration
(TMD – CL4)
SUPPORTS DATA-
INFORMED
DECISION-
MAKING: Assists
staff to analyze, reflect,
and synthesize relevant
information when
making decisions
(TMD – CL5)
MAINTAINS
GROWTH
MINDSET: Supports
the conditions for a
staff culture that
embraces a growth
mindset and feedback
by developing the
capacity of staff to
grow through
observation, feedback,
coaching, professional
development, and
collaboration
149
COMMUNITY AND CULTURE (CC)
Understands and builds relationships with students, families, and all stakeholders in their school
community and establishes an environment that promotes diversity, equity, and inclusivity
ALIGNED INDICATORS ACROSS LEADERSHIP ROLES
ASSISTANT
SUPERINTENDENT
PRINCIPAL
ASSISTANT
PRINCIPAL
TEACHER
LEADER
CENTRAL
OFFICE
LEADERS
(CC – AS1) SETS
RIGOROUS,
EQUITABLE
EXPECTATIONS:
Defines, articulates, and
implements rigorous and
equitable academic and
behavioral expectations,
aligned to college and
career readiness, for all
students
(CC – P1) SETS
RIGOROUS,
EQUITABLE
EXPECTATIONS:
Defines, articulates,
and implements
rigorous and equitable
academic and
behavioral
expectations, aligned to
college and career
readiness, for all
students
(CC – AP1)
SUPPORTS
RIGOROUS,
EQUITABLE
EXPECTATIONS:
Supports the
implementation of
rigorous and equitable
academic and
behavioral
expectations, aligned
to college and career
readiness, for all
students
(CC – TL1)
SUPPORTS
RIGOROUS,
EQUITABLE
EXPECTATIONS:
Supports the
implementation of
rigorous and equitable
academic and
behavioral
expectations and
promotes instructional
strategies that address
issues of diversity and
equity in the classroom
(CC – CL1) SETS
RIGOROUS,
EQUITABLE
EXPECTATIONS:
Defines, articulates, and
implements rigorous
academic and
behavioral
expectations, aligned to
college and career
readiness, for all
students
(CC – AS2)
ESTABLISHES AND
BUILDS POSITIVE
RELATIONSHIPS: Builds
relationships with all
stakeholders based on
common goals, trust, and
mutual responsibilities
(CC – P2) BUILDS
POSITIVE
EXTERNAL
RELATIONSHIPS:
Establishes and
maintains mutually
beneficial relationships
and partnerships based
upon trust, respect, and
achievement of the
comprehensive school
plan; proactively builds
authentic relationships
with families and
community members
by prioritizing time for
meaningful
engagement at the
school, in students’
homes, and in the
community
(CC – P3)
FACILITATES
INTERNAL
RELATIONSHIPS:
Works with the
leadership team to
implement school-wide
structures that facilitate
positive relationship-
building between staff
members and students
(CC – AP2) BUILDS
POSITIVE
EXTERNAL
RELATIONSHIPS:
Maintains mutually
beneficial
relationships and
partnerships based
upon trust, respect,
and achievement of
the comprehensive
school plan;
proactively builds
authentic
relationships with
families and
community members
by prioritizing time
for meaningful
engagement at the
school, in students’
homes, and in the
community
(CC – AP3)
FACILITATES
INTERNAL
RELATIONSHIPS:
Supports the principal
and leadership team
to implement school-
wide structures that
facilitate positive
relationship-building
between staff
members and students
(CC – TL2)
FACILITATES
INTERNAL
RELATIONSHIPS:
Supports teachers to
implement class
structures that facilitate
trust and positive
relationship-building
between teachers and
students
(CC – CL2) BUILDS
POSITIVE
RELATIONSHIPS:
Consistently
demonstrates respect
and appreciation for
others by valuing their
time and contributions;
Is available and
responsive to staff and
all stakeholder needs,
and the needs of the
District
(CC – AS3)
COMMUNICATES
EFFECTIVELY: Conveys
decisions to relevant
stakeholders and takes
follow-up actions to support
the decision; effectively
communicates rationale and
process for making
decisions to parents,
leaders, teachers, and
students
(CC – P4)
COMMUNICATES
EFFECTIVELY:
Communicates in a
compelling and
adaptive manner that
builds trust and
investment of all
stakeholders, promotes
collaboration efforts,
and welcomes different
opinions and ideas
(CC – AP4)
COMMUNICATES
EFFECTIVELY:
Communicates in a
compelling and
adaptive manner to
build the trust and
buy-in of all
stakeholders while
reinforcing an
environment in which
people from diverse
backgrounds and
(CC – TL3)
COMMUNICATES
EFFECTIVELY:
Communicates in a
compelling and
adaptive manner to
build the trust and buy-
in of teachers and
students while
reinforcing an
environment in which
teachers and students
from diverse
(CC – CL3)
COMMUNICATES
EFFECTIVELY:
Conveys decisions to
relevant stakeholders
and takes follow-up
actions to support the
decisions; effectively
explains rationale and
process for making
decisions to leaders and
teachers
150
even if it leads to
conflict
perspectives can
succeed
backgrounds and
perspectives can
succeed
(CC – AS4) PROVIDES
DIRECTION ON
CULTURAL
PROFICIENCY: Creates,
sustains, and monitors
environments in which
people from diverse
backgrounds and
perspectives can succeed at
meeting their goals; ensures
all schools have access to
the full range of integrated
services to meet the diverse
cultural and learning needs
of each student
(CC – P5)
DEMONSTRATES
CULTURAL
PROFICIENCY:
Creates and sustains an
environment in which
students, families, and
staff from diverse
backgrounds and
perspectives can thrive;
identifies and mitigates
inequities within the
school and implements
systems that value and
respect the diversity
and culture of all
students, families, and
staff members
(CC – AP5)
DEMONSTRATES
CULTURAL
PROFICIENCY:
Sustains an
environment in which
students, families, and
staff from diverse
backgrounds and
perspectives can
thrive; identifies and
mitigates inequities
within the school and
implements systems
that value and respect
the diversity and
culture of all students,
families, and staff
members
(CC – TL4)
DEMONSTRATES
CULTURAL
PROFICIENCY:
Sustains an
environment in which
students, families, and
teachers from diverse
backgrounds and
perspectives can
thrive; identifies and
mitigates inequities
within the school and
implements systems
that value and respect
the diversity and
culture of all students,
families, and staff
members
(CC – CL4)
DEMONSTRATES
CULTURAL
PROFICIENCY:
Implements team or
program initiatives to
identify and mitigate
inequities within the
school or District, and
to value and respect the
diversity and culture of
all students, families,
and staff members
OTHER ROLE SPECIFIC INDICATORS
(CC – AS5) PREPARES
PRINCIPALS TO
SUPPORT SOCIAL AND
EMOTIONAL WELL-
BEING: Advises principals
on system development to
cultivate an environment
that supports the social and
emotional well-being of all
school staff and promotes a
positive relationship with
families and the community
(CC – AS6) ADAPTS
AND RESPONDS TO
RELEVANT TRENDS:
Identifies and responds to
societal and educational
trends that affect the District
and school communities
(CC – TL5) BUILDS
COMMUNICATION
CAPACITY: Models
and teaches effective
communication and
collaboration skills
with teachers, students,
and families, focused
on attainable, equitable
outcomes for students
of all backgrounds and
circumstances
(CC – CL5)
ENSURES ACCESS
AND SUCCESS:
Establishes and sustains
a positive and inclusive
environment in which
people from diverse
backgrounds and
perspectives can
meaningfully engage
with one another and
execute their work
(CC – CL6) ADAPTS
AND RESPONDS TO
RELEVANT
TRENDS: Identifies
and responds to societal
and educational trends
that affect the District
and school
communities
151
VISION AND GOALS (VIS)
Articulates and implements a short- and long-term vision and strategy to ensure student success
ALIGNED INDICATORS ACROSS LEADERSHIP ROLES
ASSISTANT
SUPERINTENDENT
PRINCIPAL ASSISTANT
PRINCIPAL
TEACHER
LEADER
CENTRAL
OFFICE
LEADERS
(VIS – AS 1)
COMMUNICATES
DISTRICT’S ACTION
PLAN: Communicates
the District’s vision,
goals, and strategies
outlined in the District’s
Action Plan, with all
internal and external
stakeholders
(VIS – P1)
COLLABORATES
WITH AND
INVESTS
STAKEHOLDERS
IN DISTRICT’S
AND SCHOOL’S
VISION: Works with
and invests leaders,
teachers, students,
families, and key
external stakeholders
in the District’s and
school’s shared
instructional vision,
mission, values, and
Anchor Goals
(VIS – AP1)
SUPPORTS
ARTICULATION OF
DISTRICT’S AND
SCHOOL’S VISION:
Works with and invests
leaders, teachers,
students, families and
key external
stakeholders in the
District’s and school’s
shared instructional
vision, mission, values,
and Anchor Goals
(VIS – TL1)
SUPPORTS
ARTICULATION OF
SCHOOL’S VISION:
Works with school
leadership to invest
teachers, students, and
families in the school’s
instructional vision,
mission, and values
(VIS – CL1)
INVESTS OTHERS
IN VISION: Inspires
and gains the
commitment of others
towards the vision,
mission, values, and
the Anchor Goals,
including equity for all
students; shares
ownership and
responsibility for the
program or team’s
vision and goals with
leaders and teachers
(VIS – AS2)
MONITORS AND
ENSURES FIDELITY
OF SCHOOL PLAN:
Monitors principals’
comprehensive school
plans, to ensure they are
developed and
implemented with fidelity
and are clear, realistic,
measurable, achievable,
and aligned to the
District’s Action Plan;
facilitates the adjustment
of each school’s goals as
needed
(VIS – P2)
DEVELOPS AND
IMPLEMENTS
SCHOOL
COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN: Leads the
implementation,
monitoring, and
evaluation of school-
wide short- and long-
term strategic goals
that are clear, realistic,
measurable,
achievable, and aligned
with the District’s
Action Plan; makes
decisions throughout
the year that empower
staff to share
responsibility for the
school’s outcomes
(VIS – AP2)
UPPORTS
COMPREHENSIVE
SCHOOL PLAN
DEVELOPMENT
AND
IMPLEMENTATION:
Leads the development
of key parts of the
comprehensive school
plan and supports its
implementation,
monitoring, and
adjustment, with staff
input and the principal’s
guidance
(VIS – TL2)
SUPPORTS
COMPREHENSIVE
SCHOOL PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION:
Leads department-
and/or content-specific
meetings to analyze
classroom and school-
based data, facilitate
problem-solving, and
maintain a unified
vision for teacher
practice aligned to the
comprehensive school
plan
(VIS – CL2) SETS
AND ALIGNS
GOALS TO PLANS:
Establishes annual
team goals that are
clear, realistic,
measurable, and
achievable; aligns
short- and long-term
programmatic and
coaching goals to the
school’s
comprehensive school
plan or District’s
Action Plan; makes or
influences necessary
adjustments to the
comprehensive school
plan
(VIS – AS3)
DEMONSTRATES
HIGH
EXPECTATIONS:
Demonstrates high
expectations in all
settings by establishing
goals that are responsive
to school-wide data and
challenge leaders,
teachers, students, and
self to excel
(VIS – P3)
DEMONSTRATES
HIGH
EXPECTATIONS:
Demonstrates high
expectations in all
settings by establishing
goals that are
responsive to school-
wide data and
challenge leaders,
teachers, students, and
self to excel
(VIS – AP3)
DEMONSTRATES
HIGH
EXPECTATIONS:
Works with principal,
teachers, and other staff
to align individual
performance and
development goals to
the comprehensive
school plan;
demonstrates high
expectations in all
settings by setting goals
that are responsive to
school-wide data and
challenge teachers,
students, and self to
excel
(VIS – TL3)
DEMONSTRATES
HIGH
EXPECTATIONS:
Demonstrates and
models high
expectations in all
settings by setting goals
that are responsive to
classroom data and that
challenge teachers,
students, and self to
excel
(VIS – CL3)
DEMONSTRATES
HIGH
EXPECTATIONS:
Demonstrates high
expectations in all
settings by
establishing goals that
are responsive to
school and district-
wide data and
challenge self and all
staff to excel
152
(VIS – AS4) MODELS
INNOVATION: Models
the best practices needed
to create an environment
that encourages others to
take initiative by
designing innovative
plans for school and
network-wide initiatives
that improve student
outcomes and achieves
each schools’
comprehensive school
plan
(VIS – P4)
INNOVATES:
Creates an
environment that
encourages others to
take initiative by
designing innovative
plans for classroom
and school-wide
initiatives that improve
student outcomes and
achieve the
comprehensive school
plan
(VIS – AP4)
SUPPORTS
INNOVATION:
Supports an
environment that
encourages others to
take initiative by
designing innovative
plans for classroom and
school-wide initiatives
that improve student
outcomes and achieve
the comprehensive
school plan
(VIS – TL 4)
SUPPORTS
INNOVATION:
Creates an environment
that encourages and
assists teachers to
design innovative plans
for classroom initiatives
that improve student
outcomes and achieve
the comprehensive
school plan
(VIS – CL4)
SUPPORTS
INNOVATION:
Creates an
environment that
encourages others to
take initiative by
designing innovative
plans for school and
district-wide initiatives
that improve student
outcomes and make
progress on the
District’s Action Plan
OTHER ROLE SPECIFIC INDICATORS
(VIS – AS5)
ESTABLISHES
VISION OF
INSTRUCTIONAL
LEADERSHIP:
Collaborates with
principals to articulate
and refine a shared vision
and understanding of
effective principal
instructional leadership
and how the evaluation
system supports the
vision, mission, and goals
of the school
(VIS – AS6) ALIGNS
DECISIONS TO
GOALS: Makes
decisions throughout the
year that align with the
established
comprehensive school
plan for each principal
and school
(VIS – P5) ALIGNS
STAFF GOALS TO
COMPREHENSIVE
SCHOOL PLAN:
Aligns individual
performance and
development goals for
leaders, teachers, and
students to the
comprehensive school
plan; creates and uses
systems to hold
everyone accountable
to achieving these
goals
(VIS – AP5)
COMMUNICATES
ALIGNED
PRIORITIES TO
STAKEHOLDERS:
Articulates the
alignment between the
comprehensive school
plan and the District’s
vision, mission, and
values to internal and
external stakeholders
(VIS – CL5)
COMMUNICATES
ALIGNED
PRIORITIES TO
STAKEHOLDERS:
Articulates the
alignment between the
office/team goals and
the District’s vision,
mission, and values to
internal and external
stakeholders
(VIS – CL6)
MONITORS
RELEVANT
TRENDS: Keeps
current on innovations
in programming,
especially for planning
and decision-making
153
ORGANIZATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT (OM)
Manages the key resources and systems needed to ensure the effective management of school
systems and operations
ALIGNED INDICATORS ACROSS LEADERSHIP ROLES
ASSISTANT
SUPERINTENDENT
PRINCIPAL ASSISTANT
PRINCIPAL
TEACHER
LEADER
CENTRAL
OFFICE
LEADERS
(OM – AS1) ADVISES
ON RESOURCES,
SYSTEMS AND
STRUCTURES:
Advises principals to
allocate school resources
in alignment with the
comprehensive school
plan; coaches and
supports principals in
creating systems and
structures for critical
school operations
(OM – P1) DESIGNS
EFFECTIVE
SYSTEMS: Designs
systems and manages
staff to maintain and
support highly
functioning school-
based operations such
that staff members
anticipate and eliminate
potential barriers to
teaching and learning
(OM – AP1)
MANAGES
SYSTEMS FOR
CONTINUOUS
IMPROVEMENT:
Manages and
recommends ways to
improve the
effectiveness of
established school-
based operational
routines and procedures
to eliminate any
potential barriers to
teaching and learning
(OM – TL1)
SUPPORT SYSTEMS
MANAGEMENT:
Coordinates school-
based operational
routines and procedures
as needed; acts as
representative for
principal or other
school leaders for
various school
functions as necessary
(OM – CL1)
ESTABLISHES
SYSTEMS AND
PROCEDURES:
Creates clear systems,
processes, and
procedures to manage a
team or program; uses
communication
systems that
proactively gather input
and feedback from key
stakeholders on
initiatives and projects
(OM – AS2)
DEMONSTRATES
FLEXIBILITY:
Demonstrates flexibility
when plans or situations
change unexpectedly;
suggests adjustments to
plans to achieve school
and district goals by
maximizing resources and
ensuring effective
management of school
systems and operations
(OM – P2)
DEMONSTRATES
FLEXIBILITY:
Demonstrates
flexibility when plans
or situations change
unexpectedly;
effectively adjusts
plans to achieve school
goals by maximizing
resources and ensuring
effective management
of school systems and
operations
(OM – AP2)
DEMONSTRATES
FLEXIBILITY:
Demonstrates
flexibility when plans
or situations change
unexpectedly; suggests
adjustments to plans to
achieve school goals by
maximizing resources
and ensuring effective
management of school
systems and operations
(OM – TL2)
DEMONSTRATES
FLEXIBILITY:
Demonstrates
flexibility when plans
or situations change
unexpectedly; advises
on strategies to
maximize resources
and ensure effective
management of
classroom systems and
operations
(OM – CL2)
DEMONSTRATES
FLEXIBILITY:
Demonstrates
flexibility when plans
or situations change
unexpectedly; suggests
adjustments to plans to
achieve district-wide
goals by maximizing
resources and ensuring
effective management
of school and central
office systems and
operations
(OM – AS3)
PRIORITIZES
CENTRAL OFFICE
REQUESTS: Prioritizes
central office requests to
ensure each school’s
involvement is
meaningful and
contributes to the
development of the
principal as an
instructional and
operational leader
(OM – AS4)
ADVOCATES FOR
SCHOOLS AND
PRINCIPALS:
Represents and advocates
for schools and
principals; connects
principals to central
office resources and
personnel that support
their comprehensive
school plan
(OM – P3)
PRIORITIZES
EFFECTIVELY:
Focuses on the critical
operational details
essential to keeping the
school running such as
risk management and
compliance systems
(OM – P4)
MANAGES
RESOURCES:
Prioritizes resources
(e.g., finances,
equipment, time, and
people) to support the
school’s vision; utilizes
current and untapped
resources and
appropriately delegates
day-to-day operations
to designated staff
members to ensure
continued focus on
instruction
(OM – AP3)
SUPPORTS
EFFECTIVE
PRIORITIZATION:
Strengthens the
principal’s focus on the
critical operational
details essential to
keeping the school
running, such as risk
management and
compliance systems
(OM – AP4)
MANAGES
RESOURCES: Aligns
resources to support the
school’s vision;
effectively utilizes
current and untapped
resources and aligns
them towards achieving
the comprehensive
school plan
(OM – TL3)
SUPPORTS
EFFECTIVE
PRIORITIZATION:
Strengthens teacher
focus on the critical
details essential to
keeping their
classrooms running;
advocates for sufficient
time, preparation, and
support for teachers to
work individually and
in teams to improve
practice.
(OM – CL3)
PRIORITIZES
SUSTAINABILITY:
Establishes systems
with the long-term
sustainability of the
District in mind
(OM – CL4)
MANAGES
RESOURCES:
Manages time and
resources effectively,
prioritizing efforts
according to the
District’s Action Plan
and Anchor Goals;
promotes collaboration
at all levels of the
District to align and
coordinate efforts
(OM – AS5)
COMMUNICATES
EFFECTIVELY: Uses
clear and streamlined
communication systems
(OM – P5)
COMMUNICATES
EFFECTIVELY:
Uses clear and
organized
(OM – AP5)
COMMUNICATES
EFFECTIVELY:
Uses clear and
organized
(OM – TL4)
COMMUNICATES
EFFECTIVELY:
Uses clear and
organized
(OM – CL5)
COMMUNICATES
EFFECTIVELY:
Uses clear and
streamlined
154
to regularly communicate
with central office staff,
with leaders, teachers,
students, and families and
other school-based staff
communication
systems to regularly
communicate with
leaders, teachers,
students, and families
communication
systems to regularly
communicate with
leaders, teachers,
students, and families
communication
systems to regularly
communicate with
leaders, teachers,
students, and families
communication
systems to regularly
communicate with
central office and
school-based staff
OTHER ROLE SPECIFIC INDICATORS
(OM – AS6)
UNDERSTANDS
REGULATIONS:
Understands current
local, state, and national
laws, regulations, and
compliance submissions
(OM – P6)
ESTABLISHES
CLEAR FEEDBACK
LOOPS: Establishes a
system for gathering
ongoing feedback from
the leadership team,
other staff members,
and students about the
implementation of
operational systems;
makes and
communicates
necessary adjustments
throughout the school
year
(OM – CL6)
ENSURES
OPERATIONAL
SUCCESS: Designs
plans to achieve short-
and long-term goals;
ensures that the
logistics and details are
thoroughly considered
during implementation
(OM – CL7)
UNDERSTANDS
REGULATIONS:
Understands current
local, state, and
national laws,
regulations, and
compliance
submissions
155
APPENDIX D
The School District of Philadelphia 2019-2020 Organizational Chart
156
APPENDIX E
Interview Protocol
1. How would you define your personal leadership attributes?
2. How have systemic oppression and institutional racism impacted your leadership style, if
at all?
3. There are all kinds of lenses by which to view leadership, including transformational
leadership, servant leadership, and adaptive leadership. What do you see as key
leadership attributes of a culturally responsive leader?
4. What does culturally responsive leadership mean within the context of a school district
environment?
5. What do you see as the value of culturally responsive leadership, if any?
6. What steps do you think need to be taken to leverage culturally responsive leadership as a
means to improve school climate?
7. As a district leader, what enables or constrains you from taking these steps to leverage
culturally responsive leadership to improve school climate?
8. Tell me about a time, if any, that you reflected upon your own strengths and weaknesses
as a culturally responsive leader.
9. What do you think are your strengths and weaknesses?
10. Most districts face a student achievement gap for black and Latino students. Thinking
about culturally responsive leadership, what would or could a culturally responsive leader
do to support school reform efforts that target closing the achievement gap for Black and
Latino students at a large K-12 school district?
157
11. What role could culturally responsive leadership play in strengthening community-based
relationships for school districts? Does it now succeed in that role? Why or why not?
12. To what extent does the School District of Philadelphia value culturally responsive
leadership as part of its organizational culture?
13. How does the School District of Philadelphia imbed culturally responsive leadership into
its core mission, if at all?
14. Does the School District of Philadelphia incentivize formal organizational structures and
goals to support and build culturally responsive leadership? If so, what are some specific
examples of this? Are there areas in which the District could do this better?
15. How does the School District of Philadelphia provide resources, funding, professional
development and autonomy to schools to build culturally responsive leadership? What
else, if anything, do you think could be done to strengthen this?
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
The purpose of this research study was to explore, by means of a gap analysis, the extent to which culturally responsive leadership influences school climate and student outcomes in K-12 American education systems. Utilizing the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model through a critical race theory lens, interview and document analysis data were examined to identify the knowledge, motivation, organizational assets and continuing needs that should be addressed in order to improve performance within the area of school climate. Eleven senior leaders from the School District of Philadelphia participated in this study. Findings concluded that performance is impeded by the lack of foundational knowledge, professional development, and formal infrastructure needed to build and implement culturally responsive leadership. This study concludes with proposed recommendations to improve performance, and a plan for implementation and evaluation of suggested solutions.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Examining regular high school teachers’ roles in enhancing students academic performance: a gap analysis
PDF
The impact of elementary school leadership on student achievement: a gap analysis
PDF
Efficacy of non-formal education programs in educational outcomes of marginalized Filipino children: an evaluation study
PDF
Critical thinking, global mindedness, and curriculum in a Saudi Arabian secondary school
PDF
A gap analysis on improving teacher retention in kindergarten: a case of a private kindergarten in Hong Kong
PDF
The principal, the achievement gap and Children's Literacy Initiative: a promising practice
PDF
Equitable schooling for African American students: an evaluation study
PDF
Learner-centered teaching in Uganda: an analysis of continuing educational needs
PDF
Closing the “college aspirations - enrollment gap” in America’s urban public high schools: an innovation study
PDF
Equity and access: the under-identification of African American students in gifted programs
PDF
The impact of culturally responsive teaching on the suspension rate of African American students: an evaluation study
PDF
Improving educational attainment at a bridge program in Saudi Arabia: a gap analysis
PDF
Welcoming and retaining expatriate teachers in an international school
PDF
Systemic multilayered assessment of global awareness in undergraduate students: an innovation study
PDF
Faculty retention at private colleges in China
PDF
Calibrating the college preparation bridgeway for independent study program students at Amazing Independent High School District: a multisite evaluation study through the teachers' lens
PDF
Increasing international student enrollment at public research universities: a gap analysis
PDF
Creativity and innovation in undergraduate education: an innovation study
PDF
An evaluation study of effectiveness of continuous professional development in Ethiopia
PDF
Expanding bilingualism and biliteracy through a student-centered culturally relevant pedagogy in secondary schools: An innovation gap analysis
Asset Metadata
Creator
Anderson, Mikal Tahir Renfrow
(author)
Core Title
Culturally responsive leadership in American K-12 education: a gap analysis of a large urban district
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Global Executive
Publication Date
08/01/2020
Defense Date
07/09/2020
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
culturally responsive leadership,equity,K-12 education,leadership development,OAI-PMH Harvest,school climate,student outcomes
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Krop, Cathy (
committee chair
), Harper, Shaun (
committee member
), Smith-Maddox, Renée (
committee member
)
Creator Email
mikal.t.anderson@gmail.com,mikaland@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-355480
Unique identifier
UC11665964
Identifier
etd-AndersonMi-8845.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-355480 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-AndersonMi-8845.pdf
Dmrecord
355480
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Anderson, Mikal Tahir Renfrow
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
culturally responsive leadership
equity
K-12 education
leadership development
school climate
student outcomes