Identity, race-gender intersectionality, and leadership in "context"
The importance of identity, the relevance of intersectionality in this context
The concept, identity, "operating 'under erasure' in the interval between reversal and emergence; [is] an idea which cannot be thought in the old way, but without which certain key questions cannot be thought at all" (Hall and Du Gay, 1996: 2). Hall and Du Gay (1996) further assert that identities are constructed within—not outside of—related discourse. Additionally, unity, for example, cannot be understood without fundamentally understanding concepts such as dissimilarity, uniqueness, inclusion, and exclusivity. For this reason, numerous scholars deem it essential, on behalf of all marginalized communities, to seek large-scale understanding through both historical and institutional contexts (Karp and Helgø, 2009).
Indeed, history, economics, and climate must all be noted when considering the impact of identity on those who do not reflect or represent the 'norms' associated with the dominant culture. What is clear, according to Rutherford (1990), is that identity often only becomes an issue when it is "in crisis, and when something assumed to be fixed, coherent and stable is displaced by the experience of doubt and uncertainty. From this angle, the eagerness to talk about identity is symptomatic of the postmodern predicament of contemporary politics" (p. 43). As this relates to Black women collectively, the very mention of the word "identity", because it is so non-traditional and ambiguous, tends to bring and heighten attention to other terms such as "identity crisis" and "identity politics" (Rutherford, 1990).
Though the origins of intersectionality stretch back to sociopolitical movements of the 1960s and 1970s, Crenshaw (1989) is credited as the creator of the framework known as "intersectionality". Inspired by critical race theory (CRT) and Black feminism, this seminal frame aimed to explain the multiple factors that shape and perpetuate social inequities. According to Crenshaw (1989, 2005), intersectionality contextualizes and allows for a mapping of the ways in which race intersects with gender, ethnicity, nationality, language, and other key categories connected to social existence, (in)equalities, and (in)equities. The intersectional experience is complex, interminable, and overlapping, and these interrelated elements, over the course of a lifetime, serve to shape a person's life-course. Further, Crenshaw maintains that intersectionality is much more than a concept, notion, or buzzword; rather, it should be viewed as an avenue for change, beginning with a commitment to understanding the intricacies embedded within this lived experience.
Delgado and Stefancic (2012) state that "intersectionality means the examination of race, sex, class, national origin, and sexual orientation and how their combinations play out in various settings" (p. 51). Intersectionality holds that the roots of societal oppression, i.e., racism, sexism, homophobia, bigotry, etc., do not act independently of one another. Rather, as Crichlow (2015) contends, "these forms of oppression interrelate, are tied to each or are connected to each other creating a system or faces of oppression that reflects the 'intersection' of multiple forms of discrimination" (p. 188). It is the premise of intersectionality that people live layered identities, derived from social relations, history, and the operation of structured power. Moreover, intersectionality has now become part of policy initiatives, which have begun to recognize multiple intersecting inequalities (Anthias, 2013). In other words, "people are members of more than one category or social group and can simultaneously experience advantages and disadvantages related to those different social groups" (Richardson and Loubier, 2008: 143).
Race-gender intersectionality and educational leadership in the United States
A growing number of scholars, including Eubanks et al. (2012), have called for more studies about leadership identities, the impact of identity on individual differences, and how leaders progress from one identity stage to the next. Understanding the relationship between identity and leadership can help build the knowledge on individuals' development and future behaviors as leaders (Murphy, 1999). Exploring the contextual and intersecting variables surrounding identity is fundamental to explaining how leaders construct, develop, and execute their own identities (Eubanks et al., 2012). Moreover, according to Lord and Hall (2003), this exploration is by extension, fundamental to understanding effective leadership in this unique context.
In their critical review of race and ethnicity in the leadership literature, Ospina and Foldy (2009) determined that "insights about the leadership experience of people of color from context-rich research within education, communications and Black studies remain marginal in the field" (p. 876). Lord and Hall (2003) note that for Black women in and en route to positions in educational leadership, progress begins by recognizing that "leadership, identity, and social power are dynamically intertwined in a process that unfolds as group members interact and establish a status structure" (p. 48). The work entrenched in "building bridges from the margins" (Ospina and Foldy, 2010: 292) involves the furtherance of research centered on the underlying roles that race and gender play in the development of non-archetypical leaders. Moving to increase diversity and expand representation in leadership requires a rethinking and reframing of intersectionality (Cho et al., 2017; Nash, 2008) as it is applicable within the realm of leadership. Thus, this article seeks to further conversations around the ways in which the intersecting elements, race and gender, are manifested within the context of US-based educational leadership.
In light of this, the current study examined the intersecting identities and vicarious experiences of four Black women, all purposefully selected because they hold some of the highest positions of leadership within the US educational sphere. This work was framed by the following research question:
How have the racial and gender identities of Black women informed their educational and professional experiences in and on the path to leadership?
The information gathered here provides evidence for a greater understanding of how historic events have and continue to impact Black women's educational and leadership trajectories (Orbe, 2000; Ortiz, 1982). Moreover, understanding fundamental, chronological occurrences for Black women in educational leadership allows researchers to identify the factors connected to the current gap in representation in the effort to bring it to a close. For this reason, a careful examination of key historical hindrances (e.g., race, gender) that have impacted Black women in the academic arena is required. It is against this backdrop—confronting matters of ambiguity, complexity, context, and relevance—that this work, utilizing hermeneutic phenomenology as its methodology, was designed and implemented.
The current study: A phenomenological design
Taking these considerations into account, how can educational institutions in the US mobilize to increase the number of Black women in leadership positions? Again, an understanding of the undertones relevant to all aspects of the organizational system, e.g., the continued problem of inequity in a post-President Barack Obama era, is essential (Bogotch et al., 2017; Lewandowsky et al., 2017; Wise, 2009). Esposito and Finley (2009), in "Barack Obama, racial progress, and the future of race relations in the United States", note the following:
A plethora of articles in the mainstream press describe Barack Obama's presidential election as a clear sign of racial progress. While this optimism is, in many respects, well justified, we suggest that many of these discussions, although typically well intended, point to a type of racial progress that operates within the prevailing racial status quo by conflating racial equity with color blindness, racial tolerance, and what Tim Wise has recently termed "enlightened exceptionalism". (p. 164)
The authors further argue that "framing racial progress in this manner obscures the structural character of US racism and reinforces the reality of White privilege" (Esposito and Finley, 2009: 164). This acknowledgement, also highlighted by Daguerre (2011) in "US social policy in the 21st Century: The difficulties of comprehensive social reform" and Harris and Lieberman (2013) in Beyond Discrimination: Racial Inequality in a Post-Racist Era, serves as a necessary first step toward developing large-scale, organizational-level strategies for lasting and impactful change.
Against this backdrop and considering the numerous distinct classifications of the phenomenology (Behnke et al., 2013; Moustakas, 1994; Van Manen, 1990), I embarked upon the hermeneutic phenomenological route (Heidegger, 1977, 1996). This perspective focuses on interpreting the structures of experience, and on how things are understood by people who live through these experiences and by those who study them (Byrne, 2001; Carpenter, 2007; Wojnar and Swanson, 2007). Hermeneutic phenomenology is widely accepted as an engaging process where the orientation towards the phenomenon is the matter of central concern and its reporting rhetoric demands for a unique richness (Guba and Lincoln, 1994; Kafle, 2011). Participants are generally asked to describe, in detail, their own experience of the topic being investigated (Laverty, 2003). Specific to hermeneutic phenomenology, this depth, coupled with the multiple stages of interpretation that allow patterns to emerge (Koch, 1995, 1996), are critical to the interpretive process.
Selection of participants
Phenomenologists are interested in common features of a lived experience. Although "diverse samples might provide a broader range from which to distill the essence of the phenomenon, data from only a few individuals who have experienced the phenomenon—and who can provide a detailed account of their experience" (Starks and Brown Trinidad, 2007: 1375) are deemed sufficient to uncover the core elements of a shared experience. According to Behnke et al. (2013), Moustakas (1994), Starks and Brown Trinidad (2007), Van Manen (1990) and other phenomenologists, typical sample sizes for phenomenological studies generally range from 1 to 10 people. In alignment with this, and consistent with saturation in qualitative research, four black women educational leaders were invited to participate in this study. These women hold the following titles: district-level executive (1), program director (2), and CEO of two Limited Liability Companies (LLCs) (1), and each contributor has a minimum of 15 years of experience in her respective leadership role(s).
Maintaining respondent confidentiality while presenting thorough, comprehensive accounts of the lived experience remains a challenge for qualitative researchers. For this reason, and in the interest of protecting the identity of study contributors, their full names have been replaced with pseudonyms (see Table 1).
Participants were selected because they all possess a plethora of experiences directly relevant to leadership in the educational realm. Additionally, they represent an array of locations within the US (every contributor has senior-level leadership experience in at least two of each of the following regions: Northeast, Southeast, Northwest, and Southwest US), a vast collection of knowledge, and a substantial educational leadership base spanning grades K-20 (primary through graduate school). They were all personally contacted as exclusive members of this sample, and all four readily accepted the invitation to participate in this work.
Data collection and analysis
Data were primarily collected from face-to-face interviews (Guba and Lincoln, 1982; Wolcott, 2005; Yin, 2003). Supplemental data were retrieved from artifacts and media-based sources of information (Schwandt, 2014). Three 60-minute rounds of interviews per person were deemed necessary to explore the breadth of each person's personal, educational, and professional challenges and successes throughout their journeys to their current roles as educational leaders. Each participant engaged in three sessions, resulting in a total of 12 interview hours (see Table 2).
In addition to these 12 sessions, another 100 hours was spent transcribing and collating all interviews. The goal of employing a thorough, intensive three-part interview process was to decrease the weaknesses of basing findings on any one individual occurrence, thereby strengthening the overall outcome of the study (Denzin and Lincoln, 2008).
During the first round, participants were asked to share their background and general life experiences, highlighting the elements that set their lives apart from the very beginning. Round two included documentation of contributors' successes and barriers, and the complexities specific to their leadership paths and roles. Round three served to bridge all connected, contextual factors including but not limited to: differing regional locations, varied perspectives, work-life balance, and participants' successful navigation of new terrain. In total, this series of conversations uncovered the plethora of "then-and-now" decisions that were relevant to their journeys as Black women-turned-professionals-turned-leaders.
Pertinent, in this regard, were participants' unique successes and barriers as they journeyed on their respective paths into the educational leadership sphere. Contributors were asked, during the final round of interviews, to share the lessons and tools they learned and acquired along the way. In addition, they were called upon to share their own advice, strategies, and tools for other burgeoning leaders—Black women in particular—seeking to carve their own niches towards top-tier leadership in education.