Explaining the gender gap in school principalship: A tale of two sides

Abstract

This study sheds light on the underrepresentation of women as school principals by analysing which model (organisational or individual) is most identified with the gender differences in the quality of management found in favour of women principals. To do so, this study presents a model for the appointment of school heads in a two-sided market: demand and supply. On the demand side (organisational model), the presence of double standards, with respect to the promotion of women, would imply that higher bars are set for the evaluation of women. Alternatively, on the supply side (individual model), a potential lower self-efficacy perception among women could lead them to self-exclude from managerial positions. In both cases, the findings reveal only highly-skilled females as principals and a gender gap in principal positions. By using the World Management Survey (WMS), data indicate that female principals are associated with higher management quality, which confirms the presence of barriers to female promotion. Exploration of the market side responsible for these barriers found that only the demand side is significant, which signals the double-standard argument. This supports the argument that changes in the principal selection process should be implemented for the maximisation of the available pool of talent.

Pathways to the school principalship: An international scoping review

“…Notwithstanding disagreements on what the principalship entails, because school principals matter for schools’ processes and outcomes, understanding the push and pull factors for entry and professional socialisation practices become relevant research issues to inform policy, recruitment, preparation, and supports for practice (Crow, 1992; Stevenson, 2006). The current review updates and extends previous studies that have examined pathways concerning personal characteristics, pre-service preparation, and policy infrastructure in specific countries (DeAngelis and O'Connor, 2012; Lee and Mao, 2020; Martínez et al, 2021; Murphy, 2020) as well as earlier studies in international contexts (Huber and Hiltmann, 2010; Lumby et al, 2008; Oplatka, 2004; Pont et al, 2008).…”

“…These studies started appearing in the 1970s in North America and England and over the last 20 years, the topic has been increasingly addressed in a wide range of countries. Pathways shed insights into women's interest in, and understandings of, the post as well as the institutional, organisational, and cultural barriers that constrain their access (Adkison, 1981; Chan et al, 2016; Coleman, 2012; Cubillo and Brown, 2003; Davis et al, 2017; DeAngelis and O’Connor, 2012; Fuller et al, 2016; Goldring et al, 2021; Grissom et al, 2021; Martínez et al, 2021; Mcintosh, 1974; Sperandio, 2010; Yeakey et al, 1986). As compared to gender, fewer studies have addressed the underrepresentation of ethnic minorities and these have largely been located in the Global North (Bush et al, 2006; Miller and Callender, 2018); with some exceptions, as for example the work of Bush and Moloi (2008) in South Africa and Miller (2014) in Jamaica.…”

The Well-Being of Secondary School Principals One Year into the COVID-19 Pandemic

“…Our results suggest that principals reported experiencing more stress when they perceived that Wilson, 2017;Martínez, Molina-López, and Mateos de Cabo, 2021;Dunatchik et al, 2021), could have played a role. 9…”

Distributed Leadership: A Scoping Review Mapping Current Empirical Research

“…Female leadership is a topic that requires significant attention as female teachers comprise 68% of all teachers, however, they comprise just 45% of principal positions, as of the last available data in 2013 [61], later referenced by Martínez, et al [62]. This has been investigated in conjunction with distributed leadership twice over the past ten years (5.1%) according to the literature in this review.…”