We are really conscious that our work shows exactly what we – the collective ‘we’ as a profession – risk losing as a result of the restrictive images of what a leader looks and acts like.

We hear from participants about the myriad ways the explicit and implicit expectations of ‘looking like a leader’ have presented blockers towards who feels like they can aspire to leadership, who is given opportunities to lead, and who is supported to take up those opportunities.

This, we think, is an incredibly important aspect of our project. When we started, Pat and I knew we had shared experiences of pressures associated with ‘looking’ like a principal and we suspected that this was a wider phenomenon. Our fieldwork has borne this out. We have heard from hundreds upon hundreds of women who have shared their experiences. Every now and then – rarely, but it has happened a couple of times over the last couple of years – someone has told me they don’t ‘get’ this project. Why wardrobes? Why women in particular? Why focus on this? This post is an example of a deeply complex and abiding problem with school leadership that is highlighted by discussions around expectations of appearance, wardrobe, identity, and opportunity. Wardrobes give us a way into exploring some really wicked problems associated with school leadership.

In our recent book chapter, we wrote about some of the ways we can come to understand the experiences of women leaders by using wardrobe as a starting point. You can read our publication here. We know that our own experiences as white Australian women leaders are naturally going to differ significantly from the experiences of women who are of a different cultural background to us, and who experience different barriers than we did or continue to do. We wrote about the importance of having an intersectional lens and understanding of participants’ experiences. (Read more about Professor Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw and the development of the theory of intersectionality here.)

A colleague from the US, Dr Terri N. Watson, has written a forthcoming article in the Journal of Educational Administration and History where she talks about ‘performative wokeness’ and how we tend to use terms or phrases that make us feel like we’re calling out racist practices without actually naming those practices. Dr Watson’s work focuses on Black girls, education, and Black women leaders and you can access more information about her research here.

As I was reading Dr Watson’s article, it made me reflect on whether I was clear enough about what I was trying to get at in the original draft of this blog post. And I wasn’t. I was trying to discuss the fact that we know that there are systemic issues that still present blockers for us having a diverse principalship, but I didn’t name the issues. Racism, sexism, and ableism persist and they mean that the principalship remains largely homogenous, in Australia at least.

I wanted to share an article that highlights the need to have more open conversations about race and racism in educational leadership. It was written by Dr Edith Rusch and Associate Professor Sonya Horsford, and it’s openly accessible in the link below.

Rusch, E. A., & Horsford, S. D. (2009). Changing hearts and minds: The quest for open talk about race in educational leadership. International Journal of Educational Management.

I am writing this from Melbourne, Australia, where according to the latest TALIS data, Australia’s school leaders are largely white, and women continue to remain underrepresented in school leadership given the feminisation of the teaching profession.

If we continue to work with the idea that a leader has to look and behave a certain way, we are going to continue to perpetuate leadership that is largely white, middle-class, and denies opportunities to people who do not fit that mould. Pat, along with Jill Blackmore and Karin Barty has researched about this in the past– the ways selection panels continue to reproduce themselves (see Pat’s blog post about it here).

Those of us who are in positions of power – those who hire people, who promote people, who mentor people, who are part of the ‘tapping on the shoulder’ that still makes up so many of our school leadership hiring practices – have a responsibility to understand and acknowledge our own complicity in these systems and practices, and work to ensure we are not perpetuating the same cycles.

I wanted to share two articles: “When Feminism Is White Supremacy in Heels” written by Rachel Elizabeth Cargle as a starting point to think about “the type of behavior that rests under the guise of feminism only as long as it is comfortable, only as long it is personally rewarding, only as long as it keeps “on brand.” But if the history of this movement taught us anything, it is that intersectionality in feminism is vital.” 

And finally, I wanted to share this op-ed written by Dr Terri Watson, who pushes us further in “The Problem with Kindness” to think about how ‘kindness’ has been wrapped up in ‘glitzy’ easy to digest packages for educators.

We need to recognise and acknowledge the ways we benefit from current structures, and dismantle those structures. I finish with Flavia Dzodan’s famous essay “My feminism will be intersectional, or it will be bullshit”.

(Image: PopSugar)

 

 

We have decided to move to monthly blog posts where we examine some of the issues and findings related to our project in more depth. Our research project is ongoing and we are currently working on some new publications – stay tuned for more! 

A lot goes into the careful construction of what a person might project to the outside world. For the women in our study, we’ve spoken about how their morning routines give them a sense of constructing the ‘leader’ persona, and how they don the clothing and appearance of a ‘professional leader’ as part of getting ready. This can get them into the mindset of being ready for the day, of tackling the challenges associated with leading schools, and of the sorts of complex interactions they’re going to have throughout the day.

We’ve been really interested in what this all means for women who are working from home at the moment. We’ve explored the wardrobe choices women are making, as well as some of the critiques that felt inevitable as soon as all of this started. Something that keeps coming up is the challenge of the video conferencing background. While some of the twitter accounts, such as this one that rates the credibility of experts based on how many books are behind them on screen, are funny, there’s also a lot of really serious critique about what it means to essentially open a window into your home life, for people who are usually able to set boundaries and define what is a private or public part of their lives.

Many of us are working from hastily set-up spaces which means the hidden parts of our home are on display in the background – bedrooms or kitchens: the spaces where many people might have thought of as the places they once decompressed from work. They’re now right there, undeniably in screen and blurring the boundaries of work and home even more.

As a result, we’ve seen a surge in clever video conferencing backgrounds and discussions about how to find the perfect one (by the way, I have the final answer on this: I present to you, my Ramones brick wall background in the form of the hotline bling meme – this took more effort than you’d think).

I had a discussion with some school leaders about this last week and the general consensus was that it adds a layer of unexpected worry to the interactions leaders are having with people. There were a couple of people who hadn’t even thought of it, but others who had planned and constructed backgrounds with precision to convey a certain image – or to keep the separation between home and work. We’re interested to hear what your experiences are – how have you approached this? Is it something you’ve even thought about? Get in touch with us on twitter! We’d love to hear from you.

 

We know – and have written about – how wardrobes help people get into working mode for a certain role. We know that the morning routine of getting dressed and getting ready for work can sometimes serve as a routine of getting into the mindset and headspace for the day ahead, or putting on the character of the ‘leader’, which is different for everyone.

So what does it mean when that morning routine is gone?

We’ve been hearing from a lot of women at the moment and having conversations with teachers and academics who are doing a lot more of their work online. When much of the world is working from home, with only a small portion of a person as visible to surveillance and the public gaze as they usually are (if at all).

When you’re teaching at home, the routine goes out the window for many people, in part because ALL of the routines are out the window. There have been fascinating decisions and conversations about the effects of this on their work mindset, the way they’re interacting with people online, and the way they’re working with their colleagues and students.

We’ve heard from women like Beck who has, in the past, shared snaps of her work heels, who is now updating us on her home wardrobe (keep it coming, Beck!)

At-school Beck:

RemoteLearning Beck:

Pat and I have both commented about this too. Pat’s comment about zoom-eyeliner clearly struck a chord with people:

We wrote recently about the way the blazer sits on many women leaders’ chairs as a quick wardrobe item to throw on and feel more prepared / professional. I realised I had done a similar thing with a ‘zoom cardigan’:

Twitter has been giving us some hilarious commentary around these issues – as well as some important insights into people’s perceptions of the importance of appearance. Some schools have been advising students to wear their uniforms for video conferences, and there’s an enormous amount of discussion from teachers about what’s appropriate to wear while teaching synchronous video sessions. There’s heated debate on both sides and we are taking it all in, thinking of what it means for this project.

I’ll leave you to think on these issues with this tweet, one of my favourites:

 

We’d love to hear your thoughts! Tweet us at @chalkhands and @ThomsonPat

When you’re researching wardrobes, you start to really notice the number of news articles and conversations about clothing, appearance, identity, and careers.

You also start to notice what people wear. This is partly because people now often comment to me about their clothing / outfits (and I love the conversations that come after that) but I find that I’m also more observant just in the day to day of things. I was in Sydney earlier this week and walking from the city to the university and, for whatever reason, I was paying attention to people’s shoes.

There were so many people in sky-high heels who appeared to be uncomfortable, or who were walking slowly in the steady flow of foot traffic. Of course, there were others who were striding down the footpath like Naomi Campbell stomping down the runway – just so you know I’m not skewing the anec-data here! It did make me think about our survey data, though, and the split comments from women about their shoes and what they represented.

When participants spoke about the times they wore heels, for example, it was often to look more professional (we’ve written about this in the past). Leaders reported wearing heels when they were ‘on show’ – meeting with governors, speaking on assemblies, or for ‘high stakes’ occasions, in one participant’s words. Participants described expectations to wear heels, and some people noted that even when they like wearing them they do find them to be uncomfortable.  There were comments about wearing them to be taller (an issue I’ve never had to think about at 5’9”, admittedly) to offset power dynamics.

Some of the participants questioned the need to wear heels. Their explicit resistance was about comfort (“as I have got older, I have begun to wear flat boots”), about the expectations placed on women (“would you ask a male leader about his footwear?”) and about practicality.

The issue of practicality of wardrobe choices was not limited to shoes, though it did come up a lot with shoes. Wardrobe choices were determined by the day’s tasks (playground duty, teaching classes – “Again full time teaching a young class where I am up and down from the floor and on my feet most of the day demands comfortable non restrictive clothes and no heels”), the weather (heat, rain, snow – our diversity of participants are well represented in their climates!), and safety concerns (“I have to be involved in the positive handling of students. Unconsciously I have stopped wearing any jewellery other than my watch and wedding rings so I don’t scratch them or my selves.”).

Of interest was the participant who described her wardrobe as changing when taking on a leadership role, becoming “less practical, more ‘professional’” in nature. One standout response was the Deputy Head / Deputy Principal in a primary school who described her job & her subsequent wardrobe choices in terms that were familiar to both of us: “Practical for the environment I work in.  Able to work on the floor, clean up stuff, plunger toilets, move quickly in an emergency. Brightly coloured for the kids.”.

The practicality of shoes are a recurring theme – women in our study have expressed an expectation (sometimes explicit through dress codes) to wear heels. When considering practicality of shoes, issues of distance walked throughout classroom visits during the day, stairs, being ‘on the go’ (“I am never a high heels person and prefer flat shoes or boots so I can run if needed!”), and wanting to be able to move freely (“I hate wearing heels but can’t break the habit – being taller also makes me feel more in control but I often take my heels off to teach. I want to look adult and be taken seriously but I also want to be able to prance around teaching Shakespeare.”).

We’ve written about shoes in our blog before. Pat has reflected on her heels that were both a ‘don’t f**k with me’ armour, and a little bit of an uncomfortable match. Our guest blogger, Lacey Austin, wrote about balancing on the tightrope of expectations for image and what it means to look like a teacher. This is clearly a rich area of thinking – partly because of the images and discourses/connotations associated with heels, but also because they are quite literally debilitating. You can’t easily run, jump, dodge or weave, and we know that heels cause permanent and painful damage to our feet. (More here – ‘This is what wearing heels all day does to your body’.) When women are still required to wear heels as part of either explicit expectations (dress codes), or implicit expectations, we need to better understand their effects.

I write all of this as an academic who, many days, manages to get away with wearing jeans and sneakers to work. But – like all of the data – on days when I have to teach, or when I have important meetings, the dresses and ‘nice’ shoes come out. I always get comments (maybe because of this project, maybe because of the mismatch in image) and I inevitably refer to it as having to look ‘like a grown up’ that day. Then I kick myself – ‘what am I saying!?’. I’m still thinking through how those ‘off the cuff’ responses influence our thinking and our rules about wardrobe. And, check out my cool and comfortable shoes today while I do that thinking.

 

We’d love to hear your thoughts, either on our survey if you haven’t yet taken it, or on twitter – Amanda – @chalkhands and Pat @ThomsonPat