Ceilings Made of Glass and Leaving En Masse? Examining Superintendent Gender Gaps and Turnover Over Time Across the United States

Abstract

Given that a national superintendent dataset has never existed, claims about superintendent turnover and gender gaps have traditionally been based on conjecture or data from a single year and small sample of superintendents. Utilizing a new dataset of all K–12 public school district superintendents in the United States across four school years, this study explores how the superintendent gender gap and turnover have changed over time and across states and district types. Analyses reveal that superintendent turnover has increased, particularly among men, and the superintendent gender gap has marginally narrowed. Although men are increasingly turning over, women are seldom filling those positions—a necessity if the superintendent gender gap is to narrow. State and district analyses are presented, as well as discussion of the implications of the findings and the power of a longitudinal superintendent dataset.

Precarious positions: glass ceilings, glass escalators, and glass cliffs in the superintendency

“…Advancing to leadership in education has been a prime example of this phenomenon. Women make up approximately 80 % of all teachers, but they make up only 50 % of all principals and just a quarter of all superintendents (Finnan and McCord, 2017;Robinson et al, 2017;Tienken, 2021;White, 2021White, , 2023. The glass escalator phenomenon suggests men are encouraged to pursue higher positions in these fields regardless of personal interest and motivation.…”

“…The "glass cliff " phenomenon has been observed in many fields (Ryan and Haslam, 2005;Cook and Glass, 2013;Ryan et al, 2016;White, 2023); in these situations, women are hired into ostensibly prestigious, but precarious, leadership positions. The concept was first introduced by Ryan and Haslam (2005) to describe the possible relationship between the appointment of women board members in business leadership positions and firm performance; while narratives between performance and women holding these prestigious positions sometimes appeared to paint women leaders in a negative light, Ryan and Haslam (2005) found no measurable differences in performance after a man or woman was added to the board given pre-hiring trends.…”

“…As in business, historically we see a lack of women in leadership roles in education, particularly at the district level. While approximately 80% of teachers in United States public schools are women (National Center for Education Statistics, 2022), about half of principals in the United States are women, and only around a quarter of superintendents are women (Finnan and McCord, 2017;Robinson et al, 2017;Tienken, 2021;White, 2021White, , 2023. The superintendency, the highest position in district leadership, was originally conceived of as a managerial position and considered "men's work" for decades, with women holding only 1% of all superintendencies even into the early 1980s (Robinson et al, 2017).…”

“…In fields that are overrepresented by women, such as education, leadership inequities are particularly glaring because the most qualified for advancement are likely those with experience in the field (Schein, 2001;Mahitivanichcha and Rorrer, 2006). The efficiency argument suggests that disparities between men and women in the position indicate possible bias in hiring, with selection into leadership being at least partially based on gender rather than solely upon applicant qualifications for the position (Tallerico, 2000;White, 2023). Thus, instead of hiring the best candidate for the leadership position, bias in hiring leads to an inefficiency, as the organization potentially hires a less qualified candidate.…”

“…When women do take on leadership positions, evidence suggests women tend to be more likely to work in districts serving students with more diverse needs (e.g., students with disabilities, English learners, students qualifying for free or reduced-price lunch; White, 2023). These student and district demographic characteristics are also typically associated with lower academic achievement as measured by traditional metrics (e.g., standardized assessments, graduation rates), reflecting inequitable access to resources, and these districts may be considered more challenging, and therefore more precarious (McGhee and Nelson, 2005).…”