Search results

Educators have had good reason to be concerned with social justice in a context where diversity has become more pronounced in both our schools and communities, with widening divisions between the advantaged and the disadvantaged. Internationally, increasing emphasis has been placed on utilizing the role of school leadership to address issues of social justice and equality, within a scenario where comparative studies of the performance of educational systems dominate the policy imagination globally, thus leading to increased pressure on school systems. This chapter presents a problematization of the social justice concept within education as presented in the literature, while setting out to critique this concept as an educational goal, as well as the role educational leadership is expected to play in the promotion of equity and social justice discourses through the lens of Actor-Network Theory (ANT). This theoretical chapter has implications for theory, policy, and practice.

This qualitative study aimed to explore school principals' perceptions of social justice in a centralized school setting in Kuwait, as well as the challenges they face when promoting equity and equality for students' learning in schools.

Data were collected through in-depth interviews with 18 public school principals from Kuwait's six educational districts.

The results revealed that principals' experiences and unique perspectives shape their definitions of social justice within their schools. Some school principals see social justice as ensuring fairness and equal opportunities for every student regardless of their backgrounds. Others focus on creating an inclusive and supportive environment. The results also showed that limited resources, institutional barriers, limited autonomy, lack of training, and some ministerial laws are among the challenges that school principals face in promoting equity and equality.

The findings are informative to policymakers and other educational stakeholders. Practical suggestions are provided to improve school principals' social justice leadership practices.

This study adds to the empirical knowledge of school principals' role in promoting equity and equality for student learning in a centralized school setting and attempts to reduce the social justice leadership gap in schools.

This introduction aims to set the context for the subsequent chapters that problematize various aspects of social justice, equity, and inclusion through particular lenses, and/or methodologies. This is done by presenting the ‘problem’ of social justice and equity in education, while simultaneously making links with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The term ‘social justice’ is appearing in numerous public texts and discourses within the education field, thus becoming a key concept in current education policy and practice. Moreover, the concept of social justice is crucial to theorizing about education and schooling, consequently being considered by politicians, policymakers, and practitioners in their thinking about the nature of education and the purpose of schools. Regrettably, education practitioners, researchers, and policymakers often utilize this umbrella term (social justice) while leaving out salient details about its social, cultural, economic, and political bearing. Notwithstanding the unanimous agreement on the desirability of social justice as an educational goal, this is complemented by a parallel contestation over its actual meaning and application in relation to schooling, that is, in relation to the formulation of policy and how it is to be included in practice. This chapter seeks to unravel the conceptual confusion around the terms social justice, equity, and inclusion in relation to schooling and education, through an exploration of the existing literature in the field.

The purpose of this study is to identify key school leadership practices that center social justice and are evidenced across multiple school and district contexts.

A qualitative, multidistrict research design is used within this study. Sampled across seven US school districts, 24 school leaders were interviewed about their justice-centered school leadership practices within and outside of their school buildings.

Participants engaged in five key domains of justice-centered practice, which included 13 practice areas and 28 sub-practices. These domains include (1) creating an inclusive and caring environment, (2) promoting equitable opportunity to learn, (3) strengthening staff capacity for justice, (4) positioning families as partners in education and (5) building and extending community capacity and resources.

This study incorporates empirical data across diverse contexts and investigates actions relevant to diverse students and multiple justice-centered leadership approaches. By doing so, this study unearths a spectrum of justice-centered school leadership practices, presenting these in one of the few empirically grounded frameworks available in the literature. This framework provides an accessible, comprehensive and actionable starting place for practitioners hoping to lead in socially just ways and for preparation programs who will support these leaders.

Organizational initiatives to address diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) have multiplied with many different courses and training programs in the last three decades. Despite these efforts, some recent studies have pointed out that disadvantages among minoritized social groups continue to persist, and thus far, organizations have failed to address them. University graduate leadership programs are, at least theoretically, able to respond in a way that better prepares future formal and informal organizational leaders with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed to be inclusive individuals in the 21st century committed to social change and social justice. This study aimed to understand how some graduate programs were currently teaching DEIB issues; more specifically, to understand if universities implementing DEIB programs were using a critical lens in their program design and to assess if these programs were indeed intended to be transformative. The review of 40 graduate programs in the United States indicated that the majority of them view diversity training and the work of DEIB leadership as “managing diversity” to keep the status quo and for economic profit contributing to the commoditization and tokenism of people; there was no mention of power in terms of asymmetries but rather a legitimizing of the accumulation of power with the leader at the top; and, finally, except for five programs, there was little attention given to DEIB as a transformative project committed to social justice.

Using Hong Kong as the context of study, this paper examines the role of education policy, particularly professional standards for teachers (PST) and principals (PSP), in enabling leadership for action on contemporary challenges and crises such as climate change.

This paper utilises critical policy analysis (CPA) and an associated analytical framework to examine key policy texts that are designed with the intent to frame the professional roles, practice and learning of educators and leaders in Hong Kong. The data analysis process involved rounds of descriptive coding, which was then collated into broader themes for discussion.

Policy texts emphasised the scope for educators to exercise leadership and decision-making that supports innovation, improvement and collaboration in the pursuit of a broad social mission for education, emphasising the skills students do and will need to respond to dynamic contemporary challenges. However, how this relates to broader policy goals, and limited articulation of the means through which this is possible, questions remain about the extent to which teachers and leaders are able to exercise leadership for action on climate change.

This study has important implications for how those in policymaking, research and practice spaces understand the framing of the role of teachers and school leaders in policy and the influence of this on their capacity to lead action on contemporary challenges and crises, such as climate change.

The purpose of this study was to explore the current transformative leadership values and beliefs of Cooperative Extension leaders. Specific research objectives included, (1) characterize Extension leaders’ beliefs regarding transformative leadership, and (2) determine differences in transformative leadership beliefs based on selected characteristics.

This exploratory study applied transformative leadership theory to examine the values and beliefs regarding equity, justice, and leading change held by leaders in the Cooperative Extension System. A sample of 138 administrators across the U.S. completed the Transformative Leadership Scale (TLS), which presents 32 contrasting statements representing dimensions of transformative leadership.

Results found the mean TLS score was 70.61 out of 100, indicating nascent awareness of equity concerns but substantial room for growth in fully embracing transformative leadership principles like social activism and egalitarian distribution of power. The score distribution skewed slightly left, with 16% possessing a highly transformative belief system, 71% demonstrating moderate awareness of equity issues, and 13% focused more on organizational efficiency over justice. Differences emerged based on diversity leadership roles and years of experience.

The findings establish an important baseline for aligning leadership development with Extension's mandate to champion inclusion and confront systemic barriers as social change agents. This research kicks off a vital dialogue regarding transformative leadership's implications for guiding community-engaged institutions like Extension pursuing democratic engagement.

This represents the first study to apply transformative leadership to a national assessment of values and beliefs among Extension education leadership.

The importance of socially just leadership has been increasingly acknowledged in recent years as integral for tackling issues of disadvantage and inequality across education and schooling systems. However, there are still remaining questions about what these leadership practices look like in the everyday work of school leaders. This chapter draws on a research project to embed Indigenous perspectives in schools as an example of socially just leadership. The links between Indigenous communities and schools are a key focus area for improving educational outcomes for Indigenous students. This project sought to bring Indigenous community members into classrooms in six schools in New South Wales, Australia. Community members were recruited to work with teachers as co-constructors of learning activities that explicitly value and work with Indigenous perspectives. This chapter outlines the positive outcomes from this project as well as challenges faced by schools, teachers, principals, and community members as part of this culturally responsive work. The practices of community members, teachers, and principals are theorized using the notion of culturally responsive leadership. The chapter argues for an approach to leadership that is grounded in culturally responsive understandings to improve the educational outcomes and opportunities for Indigenous students and the cultural understanding and awareness of non-Indigenous students, to better promote reconciliation. This chapter provides a concrete example of powerful leadership practices that are working towards equity and social justice for their schools and communities. While the cases are specifically from the Australian context, they are relevant for a variety of schooling contexts and leadership practices.

In this chapter, the author argues that in order to meet the United Nations’ sustainable development goal 4 which calls for education to “ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all by 2030,” transformative leadership may be key. Transformative leadership goes well beyond traditional technical and rational approaches to leadership; it includes but extends theories such as social justice leadership and transformational leadership and involves two general principles and eight interconnected tenets. These include knowing oneself, one’s community and organization; deconstructing frameworks that perpetuate inequity and reconstructing them in more equitable ways; addressing the inequitable distribution of power; emphasizing individual and collective good; focusing on democracy emancipation, equity, and justice as well as interconnectedness and global awareness; and offering both critique and promise. Transformative leadership theory is a critical, holistic, and normative approach that focuses on values, and on beliefs and mindsets as well as knowledge and action. It is characterized by its activist agenda and its overriding commitment to social justice, equity, and democratic society. Thus, it is an approach to leadership that is anti-racist, anti-homophobic, anti-xenophobic, etc.; it calls for rejection of deficit thinking and for inclusive and equitable practices that require moral courage. It is such a holistic and critical theory that would help to promote the United Nations’ education goal by the target of 2030.