Leading in a man's world : a holistic case study of how gender bias, prejudice, and negative stereotypes impact female superintendents in Arizona.

Despite females outnumbering men in nearly every role at all levels of K–12 education, a man serves in the executive-level leadership role of the superintendent 71% of the time (Zippia, 2023e). Over the last 30 years, the gender gap in the superintendency has closed at less than 1% per year, even with decades of research indicating the effectiveness of women’s leadership skills. The continued underrepresentation of women in leadership perpetuates societal norms that females do not possess adequate skills to lead large, complex organizations. This problem of practice utilized a qualitative, single holistic case study examining the ways female superintendents respond to gender bias from perceived incongruity in their role, how they perceived their use of agentic behavior as influencing evaluations, and how they used their positionality to intentionally disrupt the status quo of male dominance in the superintendency. Four female superintendents from Arizona’s rural, urban, and suburban districts participated in semi-structured, one-on-one interviews and a focus group. The theoretical framework applied in this study was Eagly and Karau’s (2002) role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders (RCT) while weaving in two key concepts from the feminist perspective. The RCT framework lent itself to investigating decades-old issues of gendered expectations while considering the most current problems complicating the relationship between the concepts of gender norms, social roles, and bias toward female leadership. Layering in the feminist perspective allowed this research to investigate how practicing female superintendents view their stance toward social justice for women and how they see their role as status quo disrupters. Findings from this study showed that female superintendents in Arizona unintentionally reinforced the status quo, utilized skills associated with strategic femininity, and disrupted the status quo when they responded to gender bias. They leaned into their tenacity and past experiences with gender discrimination to intentionally lift other women and support aspiring superintendents. Implications and recommendations for practicing male and female superintendents, governing boards, county superintendents, and the Arizona Department of Education include suggestions to remove barriers currently facing female superintendents.