Professional identity formation of female school principals: Gender and emotionality connections

Abstract

This article presents a comparative analysis of the professional identity formation of three female principals of schools serving disadvantaged population in Spain. The focus on identity formation is complemented with parallel attention on gender and leader’s emotionality issues. The study embraces a qualitative-interpretive stance with a narrative methodological focus. The cases are framed within a broader study in which 73 male and female school principals participated in a training programme based on feedback and group coaching. Results confirm the multiple and multi-layered nature of professional identity declared in the theoretical framework. However, a diversity of patterns could be distinguished, from the managerial to the communitarian activist, with hybrid identity somewhere in the middle of such polarity. The way gendered emotions impacted the biographies of the cases was also analysed. Implications to the design and development of training programmes with a focus on leadership professional identity are suggested.

Successful school leadership for social justice in Spain

“…In Spain, the Research Network on Leadership and School Improvement (RILME) has contributed numerous investigations to the ISSPP across all its strands: Strand 1 – Leadership in successful schools; Strand 2 – Leadership in underperforming schools; Strand 3 – Identity in leadership. Many of the studies have followed the ISSPP research protocols (González-Falcón et al , 2020; Hernández-Castilla et al , 2017; Moral-Santaella et al , 2018a, 2018b, 2019; Moral-Santaella, 2020) or used the conceptual framework of the ISSPP to guide the research (Bolívar, 2019b; Cruz-González et al , 2020; Lucena et al , 2020; Ritacco and Bolívar, 2018; Sánchez-Moreno et al , 2021). These studies focus on analyzing successful leadership in public schools located in disadvantaged and marginalized contexts.…”

An interpretative phenomenological analysis: how do community college faculty experience learning, selecting, and refining their teaching methods?

“…This inquiry emerged from several interrelated concerns derived from the premise that community college faculty appear to resist adopting quality pedagogies despite extensive evidence demonstrating student success rates are improved when these methodologies are implemented (Alemu, 2014;Calkins & Yu, 2020;Chickering & Gamson, 1987;Martinez, 2019;Tinto, 1997). Such concerns include faculty training opportunities, professional identity development, individual emotional responses to change, and institutional support systems (Braxton et al, 2013;Eyler, 2018;Laiho et al, 2022;Tagg, 2012;Sánchez-Moreno et al, 2021).…”

“…Finally, the demand for excellence in teaching has encouraged colleges and universities to open centers for teaching and learning (CTLs) to provide PD more strategically for faculty and staff(Jacob et al., 2015;Sánchez-Moreno et al, 2021). CTLs across academe have varied organizational structures and processes shaped by the institutional culture; nevertheless, the primary role of CTLs is to be the catalyst of change for faculty related to the teaching-learning process(Sánchez-Moreno et al, 2021).…”

“…Finally, the demand for excellence in teaching has encouraged colleges and universities to open centers for teaching and learning (CTLs) to provide PD more strategically for faculty and staff(Jacob et al., 2015;Sánchez-Moreno et al, 2021). CTLs across academe have varied organizational structures and processes shaped by the institutional culture; nevertheless, the primary role of CTLs is to be the catalyst of change for faculty related to the teaching-learning process(Sánchez-Moreno et al, 2021). They focus on new faculty orientation(Kelley et al, 2017); offer trainings to help faculty build their teaching skills, adopt new methods, and change their conceptions of the teaching-learning process(Feixas & Euler, 2012); and host informal academic events where faculty can discuss, share, collaborate, and practice teaching methods(Ball & Forzani, 2009; Pylvas & Nokelainen, 2021).…”