Understanding Asian American women's pathways to school leadership

Asian American Women in the Academy: Multiple Success Case Study of their Leadership Labyrinths and Practices<br /> &nbsp;

“…The distinctive characteristics of the success cases included resiliency, self-empowerment by best efforts in professional development, pride and confidence in personal identities. In terms of institutional cultures, the findings of this research confirmed the findings of the previous studies of Asher (2010), Chin (2020), Hune (2006), Kawahara (2007), Kawahara et al (2020), Liang et al (2016), Nguyen et al (2018), and Wu and Ida (2018). Generating and nurturing diversity in all aspects of institutional activities, providing encouragement and mentorship to AAW potential for leadership, and promoting equal treatment in recruiting and promoting were key catalysts for their advancement toward leadership.…”

Intersectionality and Educational Leadership: A Critical Review

“…In most studies, researchers used intersectionality to understand experience at the individual and interpersonal levels (Bass, 2009; Horsford, 2012; Jean-Marie, 2013; Liang et al, 2016; Liang & Peters-Hawkins, 2017; López, 2016; Peters, 2012; Reed, 2012; Welton et al, 2015; Witherspoon & Arnold, 2010; Witherspoon & Taylor, 2010). A micro-level analysis was evident in the research questions posed across the sample, such as: “How does African-American women leaders’ experiences with intersectionality inform ethics of care in responding to social injustices within the educational system?” (Bass, 2009, p. 621), and “What are the experiences of highly visible, early career African-American principals in a large urban school district?…”

“…Analyses of individuals primarily focused on how they perceived and responded to workplace discrimination while seeking social justice for themselves and others. Some claimed that, historically, Black women’s awareness of self and self-preservation have been intertwined with leadership for social justice in education (Horsford, 2012), and the field of educational administration has reinforced gender norms, including the image of the White, protestant, heterosexual men so that traditional conceptions of upward mobility reflect their experiences (Liang et al, 2016).…”

“…Also pointing to workplace discrimination related to institutions and identities, Welton et al (2015) described how two Asian women with international student status felt discriminated against given that they were ineligible for funding reserved for domestic students and unable to secure employment on campus. Others’ feelings and perceptions of discrimination were included in studies that reported on how Asian American women used their individual agency to navigate their employment contexts, while attempting to remain true to their cultural identities and values (Liang et al, 2016; Liang & Peters-Hawkins, 2017). In studying Asian American women principals, Liang et al (2016) suspected that participants were reluctant to violate leadership norms and risk being perceived as violating social and cultural expectations for Asian women.…”

“…Even as women began to increasingly enter into educational administrative positions during the start of the 20th century (Blount, 1998, Hansot & Tyack, 1981; Tyack & Hansot, 1982), White, Protestant, heterosexual men remained dominant in the field. Furthermore, notions of masculinity, heteronormativity, and White supremacy informed by their prominence and dominance continue to serve as the basis for theories of leadership (Liang, Sottile, & Peters, 2016). This historiography of educational leadership illustrates how inequities developed to further shape educational leadership theory, practice, and research.…”