Purpose: The purpose of this article is to suggest the structure and content of an educational leadership program whose aim is to prepare principals for social justice work. Research Design: The authors have conceptualized foundational components for a comprehensive principalship program focused on social justice. They assert that educational leaders for social justice must have three goals at the forefront of their efforts: (a) They must raise the academic achievement of all the students in their school, that is, high test scores do matter; (b) they must prepare their students to live as critical citizens in society; and (c) both of these goals can only be achieved when leaders assign students to inclusive, heterogeneous classrooms that provide all students access to a rich and engaging curriculum. The components addressed for this social justice—oriented principalship preparation program include (a) how students should be selected for such a program and (b) an outline of the knowledge and content for educating social justice leaders. The importance of induction/praxis after students graduate from these programs is discussed. Conclusions: The aim of this article is to provoke a discussion in the field and spark faculty to engage in ongoing conversations and thinking about their own programs and to imagine new avenues for future research in this area. Faculty also can use these suggestions as a guide to assess their efforts and to bolster program quality, sensitive to the unique needs and schooling contexts of their particular students.

This cross-case analysis was based on three main questions that addressed three social justice-oriented education programs. The three questions were: 1) What critical elements underlie programs that prepare professionals for social justice? 2) What can we learn from these programs in support of educational-leadership programs whose aim is to prepare leaders for social justice? and, 3) What types of resistance have these programs perhaps faced in their preparation of leaders and educators for social justice? Each pair of authors analyzed the cases. Then we developed a "meta-consensus table" that combined all three cases for each of the three questions listed above. We then sorted the categories into themes within each meta-consensus table. Each theme was presented within the discussion of each of the three aforementioned questions. This was followed by a general discussion of the results. First, it was evident that program faculty played a key role in program development and implementation. Second, it is vital that social justice serves as the focus for all courses within a preparation program, rather than just select courses. Third, the variety of program structure across the three cases demonstrates the need for continued conversations about the most effective delivery method for individual programs and the students that they serve. Fourth, the importance of student recruitment to the program was an important component that sought to extend the existing social justice orientation of potential program candidates. The last section described resistances that were faced within the three cases. Forms of resistance came from students, faculty, and university administrators. We concluded the cross-case analysis by offering recommendations to overcome the resistances, and to encourage administrator preparation programs to place social justice at the core of student recruitment, program development, and program delivery.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract