Download Dr. Tekakwitha Pernambucco-Wise MS. HUNTER: I wanted to say a

Dr. Tekakwitha Pernambucco-Wise
“ATTAINMENT AND RETENTION OF THE HEAD OF SCHOOL POSITION FOR WOMEN”
MS. HUNTER: I wanted to say a few words of introduction for Tekakwitha Pernambuco-Wise, who is our last speaker of
the session. I'm Cathy Hunter; I'm from San Francisco Friends School. And I'm delighted to introduce Tekakwitha
Pernambuco-Wise, who is our last speaker of this session. Tekakwitha is the Head of the middle school at St. Andrew's
Episcopal School, which is in beautiful Saratoga, California. She's just been selected -- is this public news?
DR. PERNAMBUCO-WISE: Yes.
MS. HUNTER: She's just been selected as Head of School at Sea Crest School, which is in beautiful Half Moon Bay.
She seems to find her way to beautiful places. Congratulations.
Tekakwitha is a native of British Guyana, has over two decades in education and counseling fields. She was at St.
Andrew's for six years and before that she was at San Domenico School for Girls, which is also in California. She
completed her undergraduate work at Brown University and some graduate work at the University of Toronto in Canada
and finished her doctorate in educational leadership at St. Mary's College.
She's active with Soroptimist, an organization for girls and women. And as she probed what she would do for her
dissertation, she was looking first at public school superintendents and sort of comparing and contrasting them with
independent school or private school leaders and found her niche taking a look at women who are running independent
schools. An ambitious person, she started with 30, was it?
DR. PERNAMBUCO-WISE: 12.
MS. HUNTER: And then narrowed down to work with 12 leaders. So we're very interested to hear the results of her
research of her doctoral dissertation, which was completed at St. Mary's College also in California. Welcome.
DR. PERNAMBUCO-WISE: Thank you. Thank you for your gracious welcome.
I'll start by telling you a little bit about my name. So Kateri Tekakwitha, some of you may know, was just canonized as a
Catholic saint. She was a Mohawk Indian who lived in the 1600s. Kateri means Catherine. So my sister is Kateri; I got
"Tekakwitha."
And Tekakwitha really means -- she was blinded by small pox and her village was decimated. Her parents died, and she
went to live with her uncle. And he gave her the name Tekakwitha because of the movement of her hands when she
moved. And so the literal translation of Tekakwitha, much to my husband's delight, is "one who gropes in the dark." The
queen's version is "one who organizes or one who gathers." And so I feel I also organize and I gather. You know, when I
started my doctorate studies, I knew I wanted to do something about women; I knew I wanted to do something about
leaders. And so I was looking at the female leaders in the world, basically. But as you go through your studies you've got
to limit it. You've got to narrow it down or you'll never finish, and I did want to finish within the four years. But as I was
thinking about it, in this society, in the U.S., we talk a lot about it being a male hegemonic society, or we talk a lot about it
being male dominated. But let me tell you a little bit about the male-dominated society in which I grew up.
So I grew up in an Upasana Indian household. And in my culture, and this is in South America, the women really have no
voice. They walk behind the men. They have no say in when they marry. Some marry as early as 14 years old. They
have no say in how many children they have or they're allowed to have. They just have no voice. However, I grew up in
a home that had a maverick father, and he did not want that for his daughters. He has four daughters and one son. And the
mantra that I grew up with was: You can do anything that a boy can do. And that was powerful for me.
My father, though, had a very male perspective. So it's no wonder that I grew up really revering really traditional male
characteristics. And I grew up being the best that I could be. I grew up very competitive, being very competitive. It's no
wonder that I competed in a sport, judo; I became a black belt, I became an Olympian. And it's no wonder that every
person I came across, every situation I came across, the perspective was: You grab them by the shoulders; you slam them
into the mat and strangle them. That was my perspective because that was successful for me.
It wasn't until I really started my formal education, particularly my doctorate studies, that I realized that my mother, who
was probably – not probably, who I believe is the most gentle and graceful person I know, but she also has the strength.
And so my study:
So here's the problem that's presented to us here in our schools, our NAIS schools. I narrowed my study to just NAIS
schools. The majority of our teachers are women. The majority of our administrators are women. 72 percent of the
persons who are on the traditional path to headship – and "traditional" meaning that you start as a teacher, then probably a
department chair, a dean, a division head, assistant, associate head, head, that sort of trajectory. 72 percent of the persons
on that path are women. And then something happens when it comes to headship. Almost 70 percent of men are Heads
and 31 percent of women are Heads of Schools in our system here. So something is occurring at the top-most level.
Now, there's a lot of literature on public school superintendents and on female experiences of the public school
superintendents. But in the past ten years I was only able to find two studies that talked anything at all about private,
independent schools. And they were ten years old. And so there's a dearth of information in the literature about our
private, independent schools. I juxtaposed the superintendent position, especially if it's the superintendent of a small
district, with the Head of School position mainly because of the duties that pertain to both positions.
So NAIS predicts that by 2020, because a lot of the Baby Boomers are retiring, there will be not enough Heads, or not
enough persons who want to be Heads of School. So the problem for me was if the majority of teachers are women,
majority of administrators are women, majority of people in trajectory for headship are women, how can we get more
women to be Heads and to fill this gap that NAIS is projecting?
So I was an aspiring Head of School when I started this study. And I attended the E.E. Ford/NAIS Aspiring Heads
fellowship program in 2008. And I sat in on a talk given by Kate Windsor, and she talked about even though she had
ticked off all of the boxes that the traditional Head -- and the traditional Head is seen as a European American male in this
country. Even though she had done all of her preparation, she was still categorized as a non-traditional candidate.
So my interest was peaked again.
I think it's important that we have a diversity of voices out in the field, that our pupils see diverse role models. And if
they're only seeing men, or European American males, as the model of leadership, I think that says something for our
society and the messages that we are sending to our pupils. I think it's a social justice issue. I think it talks a lot about the
perceptions of our leadership. I already talked about the NAIS prediction.
What was important for me was to do a study that was practical for us in the field so that the information would be
informative not just for aspiring Heads -- so part of it was selfish, you know, I was an aspiring Head -- but also for people
who hire Heads, for people who mentor aspiring Heads. So it was important for me to do a study on that.
I called it Trailblazers. I called the study Looking at the Female Headship Role not to discount men. It was really
because as a woman, as an aspiring Head, and in seeing the troubling statistics, I thought, something has to be done to
look at this. It's really not to discount the experience of men.
So here's the research question. It is: What factors are related to attaining the Head of School position for women in
private, independent NAIS-member K-12 schools and for sustaining them in headship? So how do they attain it and how
are they sustained in it? It has to be very specific. For those of you who have done research questions, you have to be
very specific, which is why it's got all of those parameters in it. I also have three sub-questions. So again, looking at the
beliefs, the practices that sustain these women. And also what had happened with the superintendent's position in public
schools was that position was created specifically to keep men in education. So a little bit about history here: In the
1700s, education was the domain of men here in this country. Most, if not all, of the teachers were male. And then as
society began to change, as men left the education profession, went into industry, as immigrant children came in, there
were not enough men to be teachers, and that's when women entered the teaching force in droves.
But curiously, what occurred was when women entered education, the position became downgraded. It became
feminized, and so it was seen as less-than. So in order to keep men interested in it, the superintendency position was
created as the top-most position. So what I wanted to see, was this the same for private, independent schools. Was the
position constructed in such a way that it disadvantaged women?
So here's a little bit about the participants. I had 19 heads. Well, I'm a bit of an overachiever, and I should have only
interviewed 12 persons, but I ended up interviewing 30 persons. I did regret it because there was just a lot of data, and so
I had to slog through a lot of data. But on the other hand, I didn't regret it because I felt that it was important to hear the
voices of a diverse number of people. I received a fellowship from the Soroptimists, and so I was able to take my study
not just from California, where I was living, but nationally. And you can see the states there.
It was important for me to also not just talk to female Heads of Schools, but also triangulate the data with search
companies. And so I spoke with 12 search consultants from eight different search firms, four of whom were men. So I
felt that that made the data what is called rich, thick data. And again, I was able to do it from a wide variety of places
across the country.
I did a grounded theory study. I have a whole chapter dedicated to grounded theory. I won't bore you with that. Even
though it's exciting for me, I won't bore you with the theory. But really what it means is that I was not looking to prove or
disprove a theory. Because I was studying women, of course it's a gender-based study. But I did not want to look at it
from a feminist perspective. Really what I wanted, because of my world view, I wanted it to be objective.
And so it was important for me to do a study that formed a theory rather than proved or disproved an extant theory.
And I've got a lot of statistics in the study, but I pulled out just a couple to share with you, which I thought might interest
you. The majority of women were appointed between the ages of 41 and 50. 57 being the oldest, 26 being the youngest.
This is their first appointment. The data showed that it took women an average five years longer than their male
counterparts to attain their first headship. I did not look at people of color, but I did gather the statistic. Most of them, of
the subjects, were European American, but that was because I did something that was called snowball sampling. I didn't
specifically look for any specific ethnicity. And snowball sampling means, for example, somebody would give me the
name of a person, I would interview them, and then I would ask them, "Is there anybody else you think might be
interested in this study?" and so they would give me the name of someone else. So that's the kind of sampling that I did.
The demographics of the schools, as you can see there. I did a range of boarding, day, day-boarding, boarding day. These
are all NAIS-specific definitions. I did co-ed, elementary, high school. So I really tried to capture data from all these
various sources. As you can see, the majority were day schools, the majority were co-ed, and the majority were
elementary secondary schools.
And now let's get to the meat of the matter: So how did I gather this data? There are two kinds of ways a researcher can
gather data. You can do a quantitative study, where you're just sending out surveys and then analyzing numbers, or you
can do a qualitative study where you're looking at the meaning behind the numbers. What do I mean by that? Say two
persons make $50,000 a year. That's quantitative. Those are numbers. But it doesn't tell you what it means to make
$50,000 a year; whether one feels poor, whether one feels successful. So I wanted to look at the meaning, not just the
numbers. And so one day when I was interviewing this one person, she said, "You know what? For me the path to
headship was not about cracking the glass ceiling." She said, "For me it was negotiating a labyrinth." And so that
metaphor became my core category. And Grecian myth aside, I took "labyrinth" to mean a maze.
And so the metaphor I used was navigating a labyrinth, with the treasure being the headship. So here's what NAIS says.
If ten men enter the maze, seven of them will attain the treasure. If ten women enter the maze, only three of them will
attain the treasure. So that was what the metaphor was about.
So what I did was expanded the metaphor and I looked at what I called doors. These were the barriers. And I called them
iron-girded doors. These were the barriers to these women attaining the treasure. One of the barriers was unspoken bias.
Another one was risky candidate. Another one was lifestyle versus job. And then another one was being lonely. So these
were the iron-girded categories or doors that stopped these women from attaining headship.
They also found that there were six keys, I called them master keys, that they were able to use on these doors. And these
master keys were their foundation; skills; support; opportunity; voice; and changing times, changing position. So the keys
used either in unison or on their own helped them to get through these iron-girded doors.
Of course, in a research study I'm not going to use a labyrinth of women running through. So this is basically what my
core categories came out to, showing you there that the core category that came up was navigating the labyrinth, the
doors, and the keys.
Let me talk a little more about the theory that was then formed. Here's what was said, "Women, unlike men, who aspire
to private, independent school headship must prove beyond a doubt that they are highly competent in all aspects of
headship. Furthermore, to ascend to the position, they must have the following perfectly aligned: preparation,
opportunity, advocacy, and support." So here's what this means. If we look at cards, women had to have four aces. This
is according to the data. Women had to have four aces. Men didn't even have to have four cards. That's what the data
was showing.
So here's an example. Finances come up a lot when one is interviewing. Are you astute, are you adept at finances? And
if a man had not really experienced spreadsheets and budgets and things like that, he was more easily forgiven -- this is
what the data shows -- he was more easily forgiven than a woman. The woman had to show that she was adept in every
single aspect, that she had ticked off every single box, or she was discounted. So she was starting off at a disadvantage.
So one of the female Heads of School said, "We're sort of like a racial minority," she says. "You've got to be better and
cleverer, and you're still something of an anomaly." And she expressed what a lot of the female Heads of School were
feeling.
Now, I'm not saying that every female Head of School goes through this, or every male Head of School is given some
concessions, but generally speaking, that's what the data shows. I did have two negative cases where two women had
attained headship in their mid 20s. So they hadn't gone through what a lot of the other women had gone through, but one
of them in her second headship had experienced what the other -- when she was pursuing her second headship, she then
experienced what the other Heads had experienced.
So let's go a little bit into more depth. So the main category of unspoken bias, and these are the five sub categories that
came out of it. And basically for this one it was unseen or invisible. It had a lot to do with societal stereotypes of women.
So it's nothing that we could do. There's something called ascription, meaning it's something we're born with and we can't
do anything about it. I am a woman. You know, I'm of a certain race or ethnicity or color. We're born with it. And so
there's certain unspoken biases that are concealed.
Here's an example. Women were assumed to be relational. So the female Heads of School who were not relational and
were more authoritative were vilified for that. Whereas a male, if he were super authoritative, it was just, "Oh, that's how
men are." And if he were relational, he was even seen as wonderful. One of the women said he was given a lot of street
credit for it. So women had to learn to do both. They couldn't be one or the other. And this was because of these
unspoken biases.
The screening by search committees. If search companies or the majority of the persons in the company were traditional
in their thinking, so say -- not say. The data shows that many search companies, many Boards of Trustees; the majority of
their members are European American male, up to 86 percent in some cases. So they think a certain way, they're going to
screen a certain way. It doesn't mean that they're bad people. A lot of it is subconscious, right. It's something that's
called affinity attraction, meaning that I'm attracted, or one is attracted to persons who have similar values. So a lot of it is
subconscious. So one of the findings is that if you find yourself, you search companies or persons on Boards of Trustees,
in a homogenous board, please start thinking in a diverse way. And I'm not thinking just gender or racial. Religious,
socioeconomic. All sorts of diversities. So that's one of the findings that were important.
Women were also seen as risky candidates. I mentioned Kate Windsor's experience earlier, or my experience when I
attended her talk. This was also concealed. A lot of what the women said was that there's a difference between feeling
part of the group, and they termed it "insider-hood," or feeling like outsiders. So, for example, they might attend a
meeting that only Heads of School were to attend. And so one woman said she attended this meeting and someone turned
to her and said, "What position do you hold at your school? Why are you here?" And she said, "This is a meeting only
for Heads of School." None of the men were asked that question, but she was. So it was hard for some of them to feel part
of the club, so to speak.
Another poignant story that resonated with me was that a prestigious school hired its first woman. After hundreds of
years, it hired its first female Head of School. And when the board chair stood up to the community to introduce her he
said, "We did an extensive national search, and to our surprise, we found that the best candidate was a woman." And
that's how he presented her. He didn't say the best person or the best educated or the best person with budgets, he said,
"The best person we found happened to be a woman." So these are the kinds of, as I said, unspoken biases or risky
candidates.
Another door, another barrier, was the lifestyle versus job. Now, the headship position, as I'm sure I will be sure to find
out pretty soon, is a hyper-demanding job, that's whether you're a male or female Head. One of the findings was that
some women self select out of the position. They may not see it as a barrier. For them, at this time in their lives, it's not
something that they want to do. They don't want to relocate, or for their spouses or their children. For whatever reason,
they're actively self-selecting.
However, some women inadvertently self-select out of the position in two ways: One is they don't prepare themselves
enough; and the other, by the career choices that they make. So most Heads of Schools, as I said, are the traditional paths.
So if some women are not placing themselves in leadership positions, or are not being placed, not asking their Heads of
Schools to place them in leadership positions, they're pretty much self selecting out and they're not realizing it because
they're not getting the experience that they need to attain the position.
Being lonely was another one of the doors that the women felt more acutely than men. The search companies felt that -or the data from the search companies showed that men tended to, in general -- generally, men tended to seek the position
for power or prestige because it was the top-most position in the school. Many men were more aggressive about seeking
headships than were women. Many men, their second or third headships they went on to more prestigious schools.
Women tended to be more loyal to their schools. They also tended to be hired for schools that were struggling because
men would not look at those schools, would not even take a look at applying for those schools.
So this particular door, it gives the perception that for females to be successful, maybe support groups, whether they're
single gender or co-ed, so they don't necessarily need to be support groups just for women, they can be both. That was
important.
So those were the barriers. Let me get to the keys to opening the doors to these barriers. One of the fascinating keys that
I found is foundation. Only the women -- now, remember, I had eight female search consultants and four male search
consultants. But none of the male search consultants mentioned foundation as one of the characteristics that later helped
them or others in leadership. For the women, though, every single one of them felt it was important, that their upbringing
was important and the influence of their upbringing was important. A lot of them felt that they needed to put themselves
forward, they needed to be assertive. One of the search companies said, "You need to put yourself in position so that
when people think of leadership, they think of you." So it was important to do that.
Skills, I don't have to spend a lot of time on this line. I think most of you, if you're all Heads in this room, you know the
kinds of skills one needs to attain in order to become a Head of School. But the main ones were -- the one that came up a
lot was being able to be financially astute. So aspiring Heads, it's very important that they get that experience. And
what's one way to get that experience? So for example, I asked my Head of School if I could be on the finance
subcommittee of our board. And he asked, and the answer was no. But not to be daunted, I then joined a board of a high
school in our area and I asked them if I could be on their finance committee. So I was able to get my experience that way.
So it's important to look for ways to fill the gaps. You know, whether it's development, it's important to do that.
This one I want to spend a little time on because it talks about mentors and advocates. The data showed that the women
distinguished between being a mentor and advocate. And they felt that mentors were people, your Head of School, your
current supervisor could be a mentor just by default. They thought that advocates were people who really pushed them.
A lot of them talked about being pushed onto the path; that they really had no idea, they really didn't want to do this; some
of them were really pushed onto the path. Some of them were nudged. But advocates were people who did that, who
looked out for them.
I know certainly for me, my advocates submitted my name many times to various search companies. The current position
that I will hold, or the position I will hold next year, I had not heard about it. But my advocate, and I'll say her name,
Doreen Oleson, she submitted my name to a search company and they contacted me, and that started the ball rolling with
that particular school. But there were others who also did that for me, in addition to my also searching on my own. But
that was very important. Many of the women, especially the veteran ones, the ones who had been Heads for 20, 30 years,
felt that it was their duty to mentor and to advocate for the next generation. Some of them said, "They have worked too
hard to just walk off into the sunset." Some of them even got irritated with women who said, you know, "I have a
husband and I have children and it's so hard." They said, "We don't talk enough about the joys of our position. And yes,
female physicians and female engineers and female lawyers also find it hard, and sometimes it's painful. But so why can't
we too?" Some of them got irritated with women who wanted to self-select out in that manner.
It was important for the Heads of School to feel supported both professionally and at home. Some of the younger Heads
stated that they noticed that some of their veteran colleagues, their marital relationships had suffered because the position
is so hyper demanding and perhaps they did not get the support, or the perception was that they don't get the support from
their families. And so it was important for our Heads to feel that support.
This one speaks for itself, being in the right place at the right time, paving your own path. A lot of the women talked about
the old boys' network: It does not work for women, and so women need to create a new girls' club. And so how do you
do that? You have to do it carefully because women don't have the critical mass. And so female Heads themselves are a
minority. So how do you do it and how do you balance it? But a lot of them talked about that.
This was an interesting category for me, because as often happens I think with any kind of journey, any kind of labyrinth,
if we go back to the Grecian metaphor, when you're going through the journey you also are self empowered, you also
become self enlightened. And a lot of the women talked about that. But in addition to being able to express their voices
at the highest policy-making levels, they felt more enlightened. It was almost spiritual. A lot of them talked about how
much they loved, loved, loved -- I mean, some of them went on and on about how much they loved their jobs. And again,
showing the joy for their jobs and not just the hard part. It was very important for them to show aspiring Heads that.
Now, the women, they didn't know about my literature research on superintendents and the feminization of the teaching
profession. What they did know, though, was they did not want accommodations to be able to seek the headship. They
just wanted to be on the same playing field; they wanted to be measured by the same weights as men. So many of them
are very adamant about that. And, you know, when they were interviewed and they were asked about childcare, because
very often the women were asked about childcare. One woman was even asked, she said, about her marriage. And the
way she was asked, it was said, "Are you happily married?" with emphasis on happily.
They were interested. And I didn't do a study in men, but I don't know if men would be asked that kind of question. But
they felt that they were asked these sorts of questions about childcare and, "When you go home, who's going to take care
of the children?" and that sort of thing. And they would answer, "That really has nothing to do with the job. That is my
and my family's business." So they were very, very adamant about that. And then the last key was changing times and
changing positions. As society changes, the methodologies of doing education, as you see now -- we're seeing in our field
as experts, as consultants. We're expected to be consulted by our parents and our constituents. But what's happening as
society is changing is the labyrinth itself is changing. And many of the veteran Heads expressed that when they became
Heads 20 or 30 years ago, it's very, very different from the kinds of duties that Heads are expected to do now. And so
quite a few of them suggested perhaps having a university model similar to the provost/president model or having coHeads.
Now, here's a caution. Public schools did that. So when the public schools hired superintendents who did not come from
the traditional path, some of them perhaps might have hired a general, someone with a military background, what they did
to compensate for that was to have a CAO, or a Chief Academic Officer, who tended to be a woman. So the position still
became skewed.
So if we go to this co-headship, if that's something that we would like to explore, and I believe there are one or two
schools that are doing that, it really needs to be an equal relationship.
And so I'm just going to wrap it up a bit here by talking about next steps. So as I mentioned, my study really was about
female Heads of School. I think it's important to compare the male headship experience. I got a little bit of that from the
search consultants, from their perspective. However, I think it's important to find out what's happening with men.
One of the characteristics that came out was that younger males are now -- similar to some females who are self selecting
out, younger males who have young families at home are not pursuing headships for the same reasons that women have
given in the past, that they have young children at home, et cetera.
I think it's important to examine the leadership styles of different Heads of Schools, not just women. You know, books
abound on different kinds of leaders and leadership styles, but I'm interested to know what about in our NAIS or private,
independent school community? One of the articles I read when I was doing my study, and many of you might have also
already read it, was Al Adams' article about the different metaphors that are being used for Heads, whether it's fiscal
shepherd or CEO or mayor or culture creator. All of these different terms are being given to Heads now. And so I think it
would be interesting to see how leadership styles affect headship and how they have changed over the years.
I'd like to take a look at the so-called non-traditional Heads. Remember that traditional Heads are defined as European
American male. And so what about the ones who are not traditional? The women, the persons of color, ones who do not
come up the normal trajectory? You know, some Heads have been lawyers before and that sort of thing. So what about
their experience?
I think it's important to examine the support systems for sustainment, especially since it came out in the findings that that
was important, the support system at home. I also think we should examine the foundation more. And I think because
none of the men mentioned it at all. And because of my own experience I thought that since so many of the women
mentioned that their upbringing was important. And there are theories out there that talk about how important the
woman's upbringing is, whether she becomes a connected knower or not, is important. So I think it's important to
examine the foundation also.
I wanted to just share with you some relevant reading that helped me when I was doing this study. Of course, the last one
there, The Heads' Handbook, which is almost fresh off the press, I just finished reading it. I liked this book because it
really speaks to aspiring Heads. It also speaks to current Heads, and it speaks to those who are going through post
headship. And I think it's important to have all of these perspectives to help one as one is preparing for headship.
Of course, none of this could be done alone.
Whilst I did the study on my own, I do want to thank the Soroptimists for helping me to be able to take the study to a
national forum. Of course, my Head of School and my faculty and staff at St. Andrew's Episcopal School. Mr. McKay,
he was not on my dissertation committee, but he graciously read my dissertation and gave feedback. And I was also able
to use professional development funds to complete my degree. I mentioned Dr. Oleson. She was on my dissertation
committee, and so she gave valuable feedback. My dissertation chair, Kathleen Taylor. And of course I could not have
done this study at all without the cooperation and the time -- you know, these interviews took about two hours, and then I
sent transcripts to them, the subjects, and then I sent chapter four to them. And so it took a lot of their time. And I could
not have done this study without them giving up their time to me.
And so I've just really given you a synopsis of a 300-page document in a few minutes. And I'm happy to answer any
questions that you've got at this time.
MS. FONESCA: I'm Maureen Fonseca, a fellow Guyanese, so nice to see you. Congratulations on this great work. I was
interested in the age factor. And I was talking to a friend, I don't know if he's here, Jay Russell, that I think it's for men
easy to consider going on for headships well into their 60s, whereas I wonder if there's a period where women are
considered too old. I don't know if you've looked at that or if that's something that holds women back, especially if they're
getting into their first headship later.
DR. PERNAMBUCO-WISE: Well, oldest person who got into her first headship, she attained it at the age of 57, after
trying for 12 years. So she had a very tough time making inroads into the field.
What the search companies said is that women, more so than men, were excluded or disadvantaged, given flimsy reasons
sometimes. Sometimes they were too old; sometimes the reason was they were too young; sometimes they were too
pretty. I mean, these were all reasons that women were given for not being Heads. So it would be one of the factors, but
as the person who's attained her first headship at age 57 could attest, don't stop trying.
Some women did stop, though. And I don't know how one could find out -- perhaps a study could be done on that, those
who pursued the headship and then decided not to and what their reasons were. But for all the women that I studied, they
pursued it doggedly.
MR. LAUDER: Good morning. Bo Lauder. This is a really fascinating topic. I really enjoyed your presentation. I have
a colleague who's now 57, and she's been pursuing a headship since she was 40. And she is every bit as capable and
competent as I, and we started our careers together. And so I think that says a lot. I'm shocked to hear that some of those
words were used to a candidate's face, "too pretty" or whatever. I'm curious if your study revealed any women Heads who
came up through the ranks of their own school; in other words, who became internal candidates. I have a feeling that that
probably is one gateway that has been maybe a little more successful for women than some of the others.
DR. PERNAMBUCO-WISE: Yes, a couple of them had; however, they asked that their schools do a national search.
They didn't want to be the default Head. Again, it was very important to them that they merited the position and they
were just not seen as a default. What the search companies are saying, though, is that, as I mentioned the statistics at the
beginning of the program, the majority of educators being women, one gateway really is to groom the upcoming leaders
and to really have a succession plan in place. There was one school that had done a succession plan successfully. It's
tricky, though. Sometimes it's a bit difficult for an internal candidate to progress because they may have, let's say for
argument's sake, come from division head duties and now they're a to be a Head. The two jobs are very different, and so
very often those candidates had a tougher time than a fresh Head to the school. But I do think it's important to have
specific strategic succession planning.
MS. GALBRAITH: Carol Lane, you were a search consultant. I know at least one search consultant who tells schools
absolutely not for internals. You know, he won't let them -MS. LANE: Carol Lane. Many of you know that I was a Head of School and a Head search consultant for 12 years and
then headed this organization. And before I say anything, the more things change, the more they remain the same. So
much of this is so familiar to what we were experiencing in the '70s and the '80s and the '90s. To address the question of
internal candidates, I placed internal candidates and many from outside the community. But my point with search
committees always was that you must go through a legitimate search, that you have to legitimize the inside candidates.
And again, this question of a default candidate, you start out with three strikes against you. And I myself was an internal
candidate, by the way, in my school, but they did go through a search.
MS. KAUFFMAN: Hi. I'm Nanci Kauffman from Castilleja School. I was an inside candidate, and I just want to push
back on that. I told the board I wouldn't be part of a horse race, and so they needed to decide if they wanted me or not.
And they hired a consultant to evaluate me and assess me and then make their decision. So I just thought I'd pass that
along to you. I think it was a real moment of leadership, actually, when I told them that. But what I really wanted to ask
you about was the hand of four aces, because I actually think that we also have to look at the fact that that continues to be
the expectation. So there is a long time pressure on the female Head to continue to hold that hand and that, you know, the
mistakes that you may make along the way, you probably need even more support and advocacy and mentoring to deal
with those. And then I just want to say one last thing. I'm obviously really passionate about this subject. The speaker
before who told us that we should be looking at the outside culture and environment to address our own issues, this is a
national and global issue. Sheryl Sandberg is about to come out with her book Lean In. And there's so much discussion
around what women need to do to put themselves forward as leaders and also how we need to break down some of the
biases that you talked about. So I hope that as we're looking at this as a group we don't ignore what's happening outside of
the educational community.
MS. BENEDICT: Randie Benedict. As you did the study, what fortified you as you think about this transition that you're
about to make in your own career?
DR. PERNAMBUCO-WISE: Whilst I was doing this study, I was doing a lot. I was commuting round trip three hours to
my school; I was finishing the doctorate; I was, you know, doing the dissertation. And I wanted to be a Head
immediately. Fresh off the press, got my degree. And so I did enter four searches. I was a finalist in three and a semi
finalist in one. That was prior to this. And I don't know if I lost out, but the person who always got the position when I
was a finalist was a European male sitting Head. And so I was becoming very frustrated that I would never obtain a
headship. And I remember my mom saying to me, "The right school is out there for you, just be patient." So this time
around I really went back and I read my study. And I used my mentors and I used my advocates. And every search I
entered, and again, I entered four, I would phone one particular person and really just ask her opinion. Because of
anonymity I'm not allowed to say their names. Another one of them gave me like a six-page preparation document that I
was able to use. And had I not used those things, I don't think I would have been as prepared.
So of course I haven't done the headship position, but this time I have to say when I went into the searches this year, I just
felt differently. I'm happy at St. Andrew's, but I want a headship. So I knew that I could happily stay at St. Andrew's if it
didn't occur this time. But I must have walked taller; I must have presented myself differently.
When I was asked questions about the budget I was able to say, "Well, no. I've done this, this, and this but I haven't done
that," but not make it negative, and say, you know, "I've gone off and I'm the chair of this." And then I would bring in my
study. I brought my study, not with me, but the results and the findings. And so when they would ask me questions, I
would say, "This is not me speaking, this is my study. This is the data." But you need to be more diverse and that sort of
thing. And again, I was a finalist in three and I withdrew from one after accepting the one I accepted.
But what sustained me were my advocates and my mentors and knowing that I could bother them, because I think
sometimes women feel that we don't want to bother people too much. But my advocates and mentors really said, "No, I'm
here for you." And that, more than anything else, sustained me.
MS. SPEERS: Tekakwitha, thank you so much.
DR. PERNAMBUCO-WISE: My pleasure.
MS. SPEERS: I certainly enjoyed our two hours together in Simsbury. And you have spoken a lot of the thoughts and
words that many of us, I think men and women, recognize in our profession and sometimes don't have the courage to
speak. So thank you for putting data and words and heart and soul into it. It will help all of our schools be better. Thank
you so much.
DR. PERNAMBUCO-WISE: It's my pleasure.
MS. SPEERS: You have also brought the sun out.
Thank each of you for your commitment to our profession and to getting here and participating till the end, for slogging
through some rain puddles. And Bruce and I, we will work out the weather kinks in Orlando. So we'll see you next year.
And do keep `networking. All right. Thanks so much.
*
*
*
*
*