1-20 of 24 Results

  • Keywords: educational leadership x
Clear all

Article

In the first part of the 21st century there has been a turn to practice in the social sciences including organizational studies, critical management sociology, philosophy, and some domains of education inquiry. Despite a rich tradition of epistemological and ontological debates, educational leadership scholarship has been slow to recognize the productive nature of the practice turn. This is partly due to its historical location in North American pragmatic traditions and a concomitant privileging of more instrumentalist, positivist, and functionalist accounts of how we come to know, be, and learn to go on in the social world that constitutes educational organizations. Educational leadership scholarship has had two dominant tendencies when it comes to explaining the phenomenon of organizational change. The first relies on individualist and frequently decontextualized accounts that privilege individuals, for example, the hero leader who turns around a “failing” educational organization. The second draws on dominant societist accounts that foreground systems, for example, principals as role incumbents in schools. In so doing, the latter privileges the system above the lifeworld of educational organizations. In contrast, a practice account of leadership or leading draws our attention to the materiality and “happeningness” of leading practices as social phenomena, unfolding in the ontological specificity of particular sites at particular times, rather than as a set of espoused ideals. It foregrounds the cultural-discursive, material-economic, and social-political arrangements or practice architectures that hold in place particular educational practices, and that in turn create the kinds of enabling or constraining conditions for educational transformation to occur. By understanding the practices and arrangements that hold particular kinds of educational practices in place, we are better able to understand possibilities for educational change and transformation.

Article

There are several difficulties encountered when researching organizational culture with particular reference to educational institutions. The first attempts to articulate a softer, people-oriented strategy for improving performance arose from disaffection with rationalizing approaches to business management. The notion that successful companies had strong cohesive cultures linked with the notion of schools and colleges needing to become more business-like. This in turn led to acceptance of the culture of educational organizations as being an important factor in their effective management. Cultural models emphasize both the informal aspects of educational organizations and the dissatisfaction with traditional models. The concept of culture and its effects on educational leadership and management is a relatively underdeveloped field of study, and studies of non-Western institutions are rare, indeed. However, those studies that have been undertaken tend to be fraught with difficulties that initially stem from a series of definitional complexities that lead to flawed conceptualizations of organizational culture. Several studies have argued that common dimensions are necessary to compare and contrast cultures. These dimensions tend to be presented as polar types, although their original formulation also tended to present these dimensions as a continuum. The study of societal culture is important in understanding differences in school management practices between societies. However, the basic techniques of analysis in the models that tend to be used for this are based on concepts that are derived either from Western philosophy and sociology or from Western approaches to understanding a wide range of relationships. Such conceptualizations fail to consider any variations in the understanding of organizational culture that might be derived from an analysis of institutions in societies in other parts of the world. A more productive way to pursue a cross-cultural model of organizational culture might be to explore the metaphors attached to organizations and to recognize what those metaphors might reveal about organizational culture in different societies. Western-based models tend to reify key features of organizations and treat them as elements to be manipulated by leaders and managers within organizations. Metaphors, on the other hand, facilitate the exploration of shared interpretive schema of members of organizations, implying that culture cannot be observed directly but can only exist in the minds of members of that culture.

Article

Challenges to Mexican educational leadership and equity fundamentally have to do with class struggle and shaping the national identity to conform to one of two competing narratives: México as a country that strives to ensure its place in the first world, subordinating itself to the demands of external bodies and forgoing its own history; or México as a country that sustains and advances its historical struggle for social justice. México’s democratic teachers represent an important voice of educational leadership, as they struggle for educational equity for their students and through active resistance to reforms that rob teachers of their labor rights and intellectual autonomy, and rob students of their rights to the vast epistemological resources that their languages, history, culture, and identity represent. Facing new forms of colonialism that neoliberal education reform ushered in, the teachers fight in contested space that the Mexican curriculum is; they do so with renewed commitments to defeat education reform efforts that have more to do with the restructuring of their labor rights than the education of children in the classroom.

Article

Standards are used in a variety of professional fields to identify core elements of practice within the field as well as to describe a desired level of performance. The first set of standards for the field of educational leadership in the United States was introduced in 1996 by the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC). Since then, they have become the de facto national standards for educational leaders. The ISLLC standards have been updated three times and were recently renamed Professional Standards for School Leaders (PSEL) under the authority of the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA). Over this same period of time, multiple sets of sister standards (e.g., standards for leadership preparation) have emerged as have evaluation tools and practice resources. Soon after their release, a variety of concerns were raised about the standards and their potential impact on the practice of education leadership, particularly school level leadership. Some argued that the standards were too broad, while others argued that they were too specific. Similarly, concerns were raised about the focus of the standards and what was left out or only weakly included. These and other concerns continued to plague newer versions of the standards. Concerns notwithstanding, today, educational leadership standards are fully embedded in the lifeworld of the educational leadership profession. They have been adopted and adapted by states, districts, professional organizations, and accrediting bodies and used in a variety of ways, including: setting expectations for educational leadership preparation and practice, state certification, leadership recruitment, professional development and support, and evaluating leadership practice.

Article

Michelle D. Young and Noelle W. Arnold

Ongoing shifts in demographics, knowledge, and expectations require continuous critical reflection on the leadership of K-12 schools. The models of school leadership offered in the past, which focus on management, are no longer adequate. Today, leaders must also ensure that all the students in their care are being provided high-quality, developmentally appropriate, and challenging educational opportunities that prepare each student for college, careers, and life. In other words, leaders must engage in “Inclusive Educational Leadership.” Inclusive Educational Leadership is a reconceptualization of traditional education leadership, which is dedicated to equity, quality and inclusion. We emphasize “inclusive” because it is our contention that providing a quality education experience that is both equitable and fosters equitable outcomes requires an intentional focus on inclusion. Inclusive Educational Leadership has three key areas of emphasis: place, preparation, and practice. Place refers to social practices and policies that reflect competing meanings and uses of spaces, the role people play in a given space and articulations of locations (geographic positions), environments (conditions), and ranks (hierarchies). Preparation refers to education, training and mentoring that is provided to leaders, and practice refers to the work leaders do to cultivate dispositions that support inclusion, support inclusive and culturally responsive practice, and develop an inclusive school culture. The goal of inclusive leadership is to cultivate an inclusive, caring, and supportive school culture that promotes the academic success and well-being of each student. In other words, its goal is to offer more than expectations that lightly touch on all students; its goal is to deliver results for each student. Thus, the work of Inclusive Educational Leadership involves a restructuring of the education experience to prevent marginalization, while creating school cultures based on dignity and respect and focused on achieving equity, high-quality educational experiences, and life success for all students.

Article

Scholars have suggested that the study of school leadership has been dominated by Anglo-American and Western views. This has provoked a call for conceptual and empirical research on school leadership using a cross-cultural perspective. In their 2005 work, Dimmock and Walker provided a comprehensive Framework for the Study of Cross-Cultural School Leadership that responded to the deficit of non-Western views. They, along with others, have argued that principals play a vital role in shaping school culture and that there is a need to expand our conceptualization of culture to include organizational, local, regional, national, and global culture. Hofstede’s Model and the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) research program, initiated by Robert House in 1991, are examples of empirical models for the study of cross-cultural leadership. Ylimaki and Jacobson’s (2011) International Study of Successful School Principals (ISSPP) examined the common cross-cultural practices and policy concerns across seven global educational contexts. Their findings pointed to some common policy concerns that involve accountability, principal preparation, and the need for principals who are culturally competent. They stressed the importance of rigorous systematic research studies, reliable and valid instruments, and reconsideration of philosophies about educational administration that incorporate non-Western views and utilize a cross-cultural perspective. Some common practices cross-culturally included having high expectations, engaging in instructional and transformational leadership, shared leadership with teachers, capacity development, heroic leadership that challenged the status quo, and an emphasis on continuous learning and professional development.

Article

Leadership has received unprecedented attention in the educational leadership literature. With only a few skeptics rolling their eyes, the importance of leaders in educational reform and school improvement goes uncontested in the 21st century while the search for effective leadership—the Holy Grail of educational effectiveness and improvement—continues. That leaders, motivated by moral purpose, bring about change, uplifting “failing” schools, is the common perception. Apart from an exceptionally small number of studies, educational leadership research has generally focused on effective leadership, the implicit assumption being that leadership, by default, is positive and leaders are always well-intended, even if not always highly effective in the execution of their responsibilities. Destructive forms of leadership that would eventually harm followers or the organization have been virtually neglected. Regardless of the silence on the dark side of leadership, however, a limited number of studies, mainly from the business field and to a much lesser extent, from the public sector and schooling, suggest that negative or even destructive forms of leadership may be more widespread than is popularly perceived. Recent portrayals of contemporary educational leadership suggest that the field needs to be re-conceptualized and recalibrated in ways that acknowledge rather than ignore leaders’ frailties and the use and abuse of power by leaders with darker dispositions. In reviewing the leadership literature, a new settlement, a rapprochement, must be found between the positives and the negatives, the transformative and the destructive, as a means of recapitulating the field with more wide-eyed and real-world characteristics and achievements, where leaders and followers alike can survive and thrive while engaged in leadership praxis for everyday life and work.

Article

Howard Youngs

Distributed leadership is a diverse concept, prominent in the education field since the turn of the millennium. Practitioners, researchers, and policymakers often tout it as a preferred mode of leadership. Distributed leadership has historical roots in the leadership studies field and first came to prominence in the education field as an alternative unit of analysis for understanding leadership through a distributed perspective rather than a focus mainly on discrete leader behaviors. This perspective was surpassed but not replaced by a normative position where distributed leadership is a means for organizational development. Research studies reveal distributed leadership has many forms in practice. The associated knowledge production emerging from such studies as well as typologies and critical commentaries expose multiple positions. Distributed leadership is not only a diverse concept, but a complex one. Despite its popularity, critical perspectives related to power and issues of social justice still require further development. There are also calls to reposition distributed leadership as a hybrid of dispersed and individual leadership.

Article

Richard Lynch, Poonpilas Asavisanu, Kanog-on Rungrojngarmcharoen, and Yan Ye

Educational management is one of a trilogy of overlapping concepts, along with educational administration and educational leadership. These three concepts are related but nonetheless possess definitional differences depending on where the terms are applied. The complexity of educational management as a concept is evidenced by its inclusion of related but subsidiary though important notions such as ethics, culture, and diversity within differing educational systems. The overall purpose of educational management is to effectively and efficiently create and maintain environments within educational institutions that promote, support, and sustain effective teaching and learning, but how those key objectives are set and the means by which they are attained may differ significantly depending upon education system or level and across educational cultures. In striving to accomplish these goals, educational managers, through thoughtful practical application of management principles, enlist and organize a society’s available resources to attain the educational goals that have been set by that society’s political leaders. As such, the various educational goals set by differing societies to which educational managers at all levels of the educational system must respond are by definition changeable along with changing socioeconomic conditions within a society and the disruption occasioned by the rapid development of digital technologies used as management tools. Educational management, while guiding planned change, must be responsive to unplanned, disruptive change created by rapid changes in both social structures and cultures as well as advances in digital technologies. This is where the element of educational leadership that directs and guides the entire process of educational management and administration takes on particular importance. Leadership includes both manager and teacher professional ethics and is expressed within a variety of theories of ethical leadership in education that respond to cultural imperatives in differing societies. Educational management must be responsive to both global and local changes due to technological developments that directly impact teaching and learning through changes in curriculum in terms of pedagogical and assessment practices. It is in how educational management as a discipline evolves to effectively meet the needs of educational systems contingent upon the challenges derived from technological, social, cultural, and economic changes sweeping the globe in the first decades of the 21st century that will determine the effectiveness and efficacy of management practices going forward. Effectively and innovatively managing change is the primary challenge facing educational management locally, regionally, and globally in the decades ahead.

Article

Serkan Koşar, Didem Koşar, and Kadir Beycioğlu

Family engagement and educational leadership are among the most influential collaboration deals in schools, and family engagement is probably one of the most debated topics in educational research. Parental engagement can be considered as the active participation of parents in all aspects of their children’s social, emotional, and academic development. Parents are involved in a wide range of issues in schools or at home, such as discipline, academic future of their children, homework, success, achievement, school activities, and so on. Researchers of different contexts have recognized the importance of parental engagement and aimed to reveal whether parents have influence on their children’s schooling. Most of the parents want their children to be successful in their social, academic, and professional lives, and in order to be aware of the speed and effectiveness of their children’s education, the families generally prefer schools and teachers that provide good communication and collaboration. There are many reasons parental engagement and strengthening the family and school collaboration are important. This leads to the improvement of school programs and climate, provides family support, and increases the competencies of the parents and their leadership features. The core reason is to help the children to be successful not only at school but also in their private lives throughout their lifetimes. When collaboration between families and schools increase, the students feel more confident to use their potential to succeed, families and schools work together to conduct more effective activities, and together they have a chance to learn more about the needs, wishes, and skills of the children. The school leaders have the responsibility of creating successful collaborations. So not only the teachers but also the school principals via their leadership qualities should provide different strategies to include families in the education process and therefore improve both classroom teaching and school effectiveness.

Article

Terri N. Watson and Patrice A. McClellan

What is the relationship between educational leadership, student achievement, and what we know about Black women? For one, while educational leadership is closely associated with student achievement, school leaders were found to have little, if any, direct effect on student achievement. Black women, on the other hand, are rarely mentioned in regard to student achievement, yet their efficacy is unparalleled. Black women should be listed alongside often-cited theorists, including John Dewey, James MacGregor Burns, Nel Noddings, and the Brazilian educationalist Paulo Freire, as they have made significant contributions to the field of educational leadership. These trailblazers include Frances (Fanny) Jackson Coppin, Sarah J. Smith Tompkins Garnet, Mary Jane Patterson, and Anna Julia Cooper. As Black women and professors of educational leadership, we have an obligation to ourselves, our communities, and the next generation of school leaders to reframe and extend the narratives surrounding educational leadership, student achievement, and Black women. Most research focused on educational leadership and student achievement includes neither the perspectives nor contributions of Black women educational leaders. Extant educational leadership literatures largely chronicle the perspectives of White men and rely on theories established by other White men. Moreover, student achievement is most often attributed to teachers, roles primarily occupied by White women. These correlations negate and further marginalize Black women educational leaders, who, despite the fact they have successfully led schools and are effective instructional leaders, remain untapped resources. Black Feminist Theory provides a framework to explore the lived experiences and contributions of groundbreaking Black women educational leaders. The knowledge gleaned from these “firsts” will proffer invaluable lessons to the field of educational leadership.

Article

The nature of practices of educational leaders and their outcome in terms of productivity and teacher motivation are greatly shaped by the sociocultural norms that regulate them. The sociocultural norms proposed by Hofstede are widely considered as the benchmark for national cultural examination and comparison, which suggests that collectivist cultures are characterized by higher scores on power distance and uncertainty avoidance and lower on individualism, masculinity, long-term orientation, and indulgence. These dimensions may exert positive, negative, or mixed influence, especially on organizations such as schools that constitute intricate work structures with a variety of stakeholders influencing them from multiple directions. Educational leadership for effective change in school requires the ability to integrate traditional sociocultural norms with the global principles for effective outcomes. Work settings in collectivists cultures are characterized by hierarchy based on age, seniority, or position, and authority, conformity, and compliance are some of the prevalent elements that influence Asian school leadership practices. The issue of developing leadership practices by merging Western principles with indigenous ways that encourages more democratic participation of teachers is always been critical to effective leadership practices. In the context of work-organization, self-determination theory (SDT) has emerged as an effective motivational theory that proposes autonomy, competence, and relatedness as three universal psychological needs; satisfaction of these needs would predict optimal outcomes. Providing autonomous work environments has been widely found to be the most effective of these principles that lead to higher productivity and enhanced teacher motivation. We propose that just like their individualistic culture counterparts, it is possible for school leaders in predominantly collectivist cultures to function in a need-supporting way to provide autonomous work environment for their teachers to yield desired outcomes.

Article

Byabazaire Yusuf, Lynne M. Walters, and Abdul Halim Mohamed

Social media platforms have emerged as a powerful communication strategy for school leaders, whether within a school or in the community as a whole. The potential for the heads of school to improve leadership connectedness and efficiency lies in the proper selection and use of available social media tools. This would consolidate their position and influence in a 21st-century learning environment. Social media tools provide efficient means for school leaders to mobilize and to build consensus on important matters among their subordinates or stakeholders before arriving at a final decision. They also can use social media tools to shape a vision of academic success for students, motivate academic staff in carrying out their duties in a diligent manner, and build support for their efforts by communicating directly with parents and the community. By spearheading the use of social media strategies, school leaders can inspire teachers to embark on a pedagogical shift by putting real-world tools in the hands of students. This would allow students to consume information, as well as to create artifacts of learning to demonstrate conceptual mastery. Students would become more motivated through active engagement and achievement by focusing on improving essential skills, such as collaboration, creativity, critical thinking, problem solving, and global connectedness. Allowing for distant access, social media also enhance the management zone and extend learning beyond classrooms and schedules. Because social media resources are varied and evolving, school leaders can establish an empowered and dynamic learning community of educators in which skills, knowledge, and thinking would be shared among them through Professional Learning Communities (PLCs). Leaders also could form their own Personal Learning Networks (PLNs) to meet the diverse learning needs of their schools, acquire and share resources, access knowledge, receive feedback, connect with both educational experts and practitioners, and discuss proven strategies to address teaching, learning, and leadership concerns. Furthermore, a school leader can create specific social media channels to collectively engage teachers, heads of departments, coordinators and community leaders. This would enhance the sharing of instructional ideas and strategies, policy issues, and positive aspects of school culture that promote community pride. In this way, a school would not only provide a healthy environment for sharing ideas and collaboration, but would improve the teaching and learning process and attract the enthusiastic participation of stakeholders in school affairs. Lastly, school leaders can employ social media platforms to engage the outside community in an appropriate manner to improve their institutional image and relationships with others. Thus, a vibrant social media strategy would provide an efficient means to manage content and communicate the most accurate, timely, and relevant information, based on appropriate levels of transparency. It would also provide a means of interaction between the school leaders and community stakeholders, enabling them to keep these community stakeholders updated on either the current or most important aspects or events within the schools, hence promoting community participations in school affairs.

Article

The field of educational administration (EA) is characterized by loose scholarly boundaries that enable the permeation of new sorts of knowledge, resulting in some intellectual confusion. The purpose of this article is to probe into the kind of knowledge base in the field that every new scholar should know and read in order to become an expert in the EA field, one who contributes to its knowledge production and academic programs. What is the basic knowledge every emergent scholar in the EA field should be familiar with, regardless of his/her main discipline? In other words, I wonder what sort of knowledge a new field member whose education is in business administration, psychology of organizations, or sociology of education should acquire in order to be competent enough to teach in EA programs or supervise PhD students in this field. My rejoinder is built on the following steps. Emergent EA scholars should realize that the connections between input-process and output are weak in the instructional aspects of the school organization. Emergent scholars trained in another discipline may continue teaching and analyzing educational administration from theoretical and conceptual perspectives that are alien to the basic characteristics of the school organization. Emergent scholars should not only know how to apply models such as transformational and participative leadership to educational institutions, but also comprehend the distinctive meanings of these models in schools. Emergent scholars should be familiar with models that seem to be particular to educational organization such as moral leadership, shared leadership, leadership for social justice, and distributed leadership.

Article

China has a long history of education, and its institutionalized educational leadership and administration can be traced back more than 2,000 years. Since then, educational leadership and administration systems have evolved with the development of society, politics, economy, and culture, and an educational leadership and administration system with significant Chinese characteristics has been formed. The current educational leadership and administration system in China is stipulated by different laws and regulations of the country. The State Council and the local people’s governments at various levels are responsible to guide and administer educational work under the principles of administration by different levels and a division of responsibilities. This educational leadership and administration system in China is related not only to the history of the centralized culture but also to the administration system of the country. At the beginning of the 21st century, the world is undergoing significant development, profound change, and major adjustments, while China is currently at a key stage for reform and development. World multi-polarization, globalization of the economy, development of the knowledge economy, dramatic changes in science and technology, competition for talent worldwide, and the trend toward industrialization, informatization, urbanization, marketization, and internationalization in China pose a severe challenge to education and its administration. At the same time, some serious problems in educational leadership and administration remain to be solved. Facing these challenges and problems, the government called for reforms to promote the educational governance system and modernization of the educational governance capability to educational administration. The new educational governance system emphasizes empowerment, autonomy, shared governance, social participation in policymaking, and administration.

Article

In the context of educational leadership, the application of contingency and situational theory underlines the importance of analyzing the current situation and the variables that affect the organization’s framework so that a manager can be effective. Whichever education system we are referring to, it is virtually meaningless to study leadership styles without recognizing the significance of the school context. School is a complex organization, an open system which appears to be a very uncertain environment. In order for leadership to be effective in this uncertain environment, the leaders should adopt a holistic approach. Many leaders avoid high uncertainty by applying standard operating procedures and making traditional bureaucratic responses in every case. Contingency and situational theory could give school leaders the opportunity for a solid basis in further refining management policies and practices. Contingency theory is based on the assumption that no single leadership style is appropriate in all situations. According to this theory, leadership style is quite inflexible. Thus, organizational effectiveness depends on matching internal organizational characteristics with environmental conditions. Therefore, effective leadership depends on whether the leader’s style matches the needs of the individual case. This theory applies better to educational systems where principal selection is done through an open recruitment process. One useful tool of this theory is contingency planning or forecasting. On the other hand, situational theory dictates that leaders adapt their style to match their staff’s characteristics and requirements. In education systems where the recruitment and selection of school principals lies with central government, situational theory can be a useful tool for the principals. When principals are placed in a new school, they should choose the best course of action based upon the current circumstances. Flexibility is key in managing a team effectively. The main difference between the two theories is that in the first case we put the right person in the right job while in the second leaders adjust their style depending on school context.

Article

Raimonda Alonderiene and Margarita Pilkiene

Educational leadership, job satisfaction, and their relationship are revealed in contemporary research on the psychosocial phenomena of educational organizations. Historically, leadership and job attitudes, including job satisfaction, were studied in separate literatures, with different methodologies, and by different groups of researchers. Educational leadership is a broad stream of study, relating all the richness of leadership schools of thought within the context of education. However, the typology identified in this article helps in summarizing and analyzing educational leadership theories. Job satisfaction is a narrower construct, the focus being on the attitudinal nature of it. Teacher job satisfaction is defined as teachers’ affective reactions to their work or to their teaching role. Literature suggests that among the many antecedent factors of job satisfaction, leadership (in a variety of its lenses, such as trait, position, role, process, relationship, and lifestyle) is one of the strongest predictive factors, even more, educational leadership in general has a large positive effect on job satisfaction. Thus, exploration of the relationship between educational leadership and job satisfaction leads to a rich understanding of how teachers and other employees experience the effects of leadership and of how job satisfaction is enhanced, leading to organizational effectiveness in educational settings.

Article

Understanding, shaping, and mediating the unique contexts and communities in which schools are located offers a unique approach to educational-leadership preparation. The emerging frame of PLACE describes a place-based leading and learning framework for educational-leadership preparation that uses a combination of concept-based curricula that includes practice and problem-solving in context, bridging culture and community, arts and humanities pedagogies, creative evaluation and engagement, and leadership for context rather than for region that includes followership models. Place-based educational leadership focuses on context-based professional practice that has a direct bearing on the well-being of individuals in the school ecology and the larger ecologies in which they live and work.

Article

Jing Xiao and Paul Newton

Educational leadership as a concept refers to leadership across multiple levels and forms of educational institutions. The challenges facing school leaders in Canada center on the changing demographics of communities and school populations, shifts in Canadian society, and workload intensification related to factors such as increasing accountability regimes and changing expectations of schools. Although education in Canada is largely a matter of provincial jurisdiction, there are some similarities with respect to the challenges facing institutions across Canada. While regional differences occur, general trends in challenges can be observed throughout Canada. There are challenges related to the changing demographics and social context that include increases in immigrant and refugee populations, the growing numbers of Indigenous students and the implications of truth and reconciliation for settler and indigenous communities, the increased awareness of gender and sexual identity, and linguistic and religious diversity. There are also challenges related to the shifting policy context and public discourse with respect to the expectations of public schooling. These challenges include the necessity for schools to respond to the mental health and well-being of students and staff, the increasing pressures with respect to accountability and large-scale assessments, and the demands of parents and community members of schools and school leaders. The changing roles and responsibilities of school leaders have resulted in workload intensification and implications for leader recruitment and retention.

Article

Words have power: power to unite, to inspire, to divide, to harm. Politicians have long used persuasive language and rhetoric to mobilize constituents and to influence policy discussions. Throughout the 2016 presidential campaign, Republican Party nominee Donald Trump, capitalizing on his reputation for blunt and brash comments, created a political brand based on unedited statements and sweeping promises. He vowed to “Make America Great Again.” It stirred, galvanized, and emboldened supporters. For many, however, the candidate’s divisive discourse invoked legacies of marginalization and exclusion. Across educational settings, Trump’s language reverberated. Campaign promises left many unsure about the future of immigrants in the United States. After the election, anti-immigrant discourse continued and hate crimes spiked. The events required educational leaders to respond to support and empower immigrant students. They highlighted the need for leaders to create communities that maintain democratic ideals and ensure inclusivity and belonging for all stakeholders.