Utilizing an “ethic of care” in leadership preparation

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this article is to report on a six‐year self‐study of a doctoral training program intended to promote social justice leadership via an “ethic of care” framework.Design/methodology/approachThe primary data set utilized was an open‐ended survey completed by doctoral students after finishing core course requirements. Data analysis included a thematic analysis of 110 respondents which examined variation in students' understanding and application of issues associated with equity, justice, and diversity, as well as the ethic of care. As a collaborative self‐study the data analysis involved procedures of open, independent, and collaborative coding, as well as peer debriefing.FindingsSuggests that the doctoral program has been effective at creating a caring environment and changing students' understanding of diversity and equity issues. Two programmatic weaknesses were uncovered; a lack of curricular integration and student perceptions of social justice and diversity as discrete concepts. Students reported that diversity discussions and readings were centered in one class, suggesting that this lack of integration may marginalize these issues. These weaknesses are explored using the concepts of “caring” and “colorblind” curriculums.Research limitations/implicationsReports on a self‐study of one unique program; the findings may not be generalizable to other programs. Additionally, it suggests that leadership preparation programs should attend to how the issue of colorblindness may permeate curricula, structure the classroom environment, and shape interactions with students.Originality/valueThis paper is among the first to evaluate the potential for colorblindness in the “ethic of care” as related to supporting social justice leadership in a doctoral preparation program.

Ethical leadership in education and its relation to ethical decision-making

“…, 2013). Consequently, an increasing number of researchers are attempting to understand the ethical dimensions of leadership including in education (Gerstl-Pepin et al. , 2006; Langlois et al.…”

Examining the AHRD Standards on Ethics and Integrity Using a Multiple Ethical Paradigms Approach

“…Tatum, Eberlin, Kottraba, and Bradberry (2003) emphasized two factors at the core of the ethic of care—well-being and welfare of individuals. Required endeavors to serve these needs encompass the sensitivity to others (Gilligan, 1982; Tatum et al, 2003), trust and mutual concerns (Held, 2006), mutually beneficial and developmental relationships (Enomoto, 1997), and recognition of differences and respect of diversity (Gerstl-Pepin, Killeen, & Hasazi, 2006).…”

What’s in a Name? The Confluence of Confederate Symbolism and the Disparate Experiences of African American Students in a Central Virginia High School

“…Given the diversification of America’s schools, the continued manifestations of racism in society, and potential cultural mismatch between students and educators, implementing culturally responsive education and an ethic of care and justice is imperative (Gerstl-Pepin, Killeen, & Hasazi, 2006; Johnson, 2014). Gerstl-Pepin et al and Johnson both suggest a pressing need to move past discussions of social justice to deeper thought as to how teachers teach and interact with students.…”

“…Johnson (2014) describes culturally responsive teaching as building knowledge about cultural diversity in curriculum, demonstrating respect and care toward a variety of cultures, and building learning communities. Similarly, Gerstl-Pepin et al (2006) urge educational leaders to alter school curricula to include standards that address issues of diversity, create a shared definition for social justice, and focus on practitioner reflection. In addition, leadership preparation programs “need to cultivate leaders who ‘care’ about and are able to foster equitable learning communities by addressing inequities by race, class, geography, and gender” (Gerstl-Pepin et al, 2006, p. 251).…”

“…Similarly, Gerstl-Pepin et al (2006) urge educational leaders to alter school curricula to include standards that address issues of diversity, create a shared definition for social justice, and focus on practitioner reflection. In addition, leadership preparation programs “need to cultivate leaders who ‘care’ about and are able to foster equitable learning communities by addressing inequities by race, class, geography, and gender” (Gerstl-Pepin et al, 2006, p. 251). This would comprise a commitment to respecting viewpoints, opinions, diversity, and languages; listening to and acknowledging differences; questioning personal unexamined assumptions; increasing trust and community while decreasing competition; expanding personal capacity to understand; and supporting the ideas of others.…”