Rethinking the Politics of Fit and Educational Leadership

Abstract

This theoretical analysis employs a poststructuralist lens to reveal the constructs behind the word fit, an oft used descriptor integral to the discourse of school hiring practices, personnel decisions, and politics. Although the term is a part of the everyday culture of school politics, it is rarely considered with any depth. Using the metaphor of a mechanical watch, the authors explain how two theories and a sociopolitical concept (identity theory, social constructionism, and hegemony) conflate the role and responsibilities of leadership with the frameworks of one’s identity. Thus, fit is used to perpetuate hegemony and the social construction of what a school leader is. The authors cite empirical examples of how some leaders negotiate their fit and how some leaders are able to transcend the boundaries of tolerance to recreate the definition of “the best fit for the job.” Finally, they outline the implications of the politics behind the word fit, along considerations for those who prepare school leaders, those who are serving as schools leaders, and those policy makers who govern school leaders.

Devolving authority: the impact of giving public schools power to hire staff

“…Trial schools had the flexibility to ‘think differently’ about how to cater for student needs by creating promotional roles around teachers’ ‘natural gifts’ or ‘personality’ (S3T, W7T), reflecting how principals more readily privilege the likeability of a teacher over other elements such as educational background, experience or knowledge when making staffing decisions (McEwan ; Tooms, Lugg and Bogotch ).…”

“…The fact that decisions about candidate selection are ‘always subjective’ and often made within the first few minutes of interviewing (R14T, IB19) highlighted how principals can make idiosyncratic judgements based on a range of biased and misleading perceptions, and improperly make decisions before all candidate data has been collected and evaluated (Delli and Vera ; Mason and Schroeder ). Additionally, the fact that some panels make decisions based on their ‘gut feeling’ or by the enthusiasm demonstrated by a candidate (S10C, W5T), which can be misleading (Miles and Sadler‐Smith ; Peterson ), reflects how principals often neglect to consider more objective elements including experience or qualifications (McEwan ; Tooms, Lugg, and Bogotch ). Moreover, the failure of the process to accommodate the unique challenges faced by remote schools such as workload pressures or fear of ‘word getting out’ about staffing decisions (R14T, R17C) illuminates the spatial complexities of staffing within particular geographies.…”

Looking Backwards to Reach Forward: A Strategic Architecture for Professional Development in Music Education

“…Advocacy for professional development as an integral part of teacher evaluation and accountability measures will be insufficient, however, if these efforts are presented as an add-on to the current system, or if they are configured to function within the same highefficiency, high-stakes, mono-directional track that characterizes educational policy today (Tooms, Lugg, and Bogotch 2010). For change to occur, teachers must become architects of their own professional development and advocates for new forms of accountability and assessment (Lieberman and Miller 2004).…”

Developing leadership identity through critical reflection: voice, knowledge and advocacy

“…Educational leaders are not interchangeable parts in a machine, but individuals associated with their social characteristics. Women teachers of colour contend with re-framing their lack of 'fit' as school leaders because of personal, social and organizational identities that diverge from conventional, mainstream school administrators (Tooms, Lugg, & Bogotch, 2010). Yosso (2006) describes the power of uncovering 'counterstories' to portray the relationship between institutional racism and the minority experience, with particular attention to American Chicanas and Latinos.…”