Page 1 of 25

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal – Vol. 8, No. 12

Publication Date: December 25, 2021

DOI:10.14738/assrj.812.11421. McDowell, W., & Martin, B. N. (2021). Retaining Teachers: Intentional Invitational Action and Social Justice Leadership as Driving

Forces. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 8(12). 187-211.

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Retaining Teachers: Intentional Invitational Action and Social

Justice Leadership as Driving Forces

William McDowell

PBIS Coach, Olathe Public Schools, Olathe, Kansas, United States

Barbara N. Martin

School of Professional and Educational Leadership

University of Central Missouri, United States

ABSTRACT

Social justice challenges and teacher retention challenges create crises in urban

school districts across the United States. Moreover, despite literature linking

principal leadership with school ethos known is little as to how the use of an

invitational leadership style with a social justice orientation has a connection to the

retention of teachers in urban settings. This study used a qualitative case study

survey design conducted at two urban school district settings, one in the Western

United States and the other in the Midwest. The analysis found a connection

between the principal using an invitational leadership style, and the presence of a

strong social orientation that helped to retain teachers. These findings present

implications for scholars and practitioners.

Keywords: Invitational Leadership; Social Justice; Retention of Teachers.

INTRODUCTION

In 2015, two reports emerged regarding the supply and demand of educators entering and

staying in the teaching profession noting dismal outcomes for these answers of teacher

retention [1]. While their research added to a heavily researched topic searching for these

answers of teacher shortage, recruitment and retention [2], these studies offered a one-stop,

cumulative, extensive resource. Podolsky et al., [3] argued attrition was most significant in high

poverty schools due to lower salaries and impoverished working conditions. Additionally,

Sutcher et al. (p. 51) [4] argued, “A comprehensive research review of attrition in high-poverty

schools finds that the most significant workplace conditions associated with teacher attrition

are teachers’ perceptions of their principal, collegial, and school culture.” Buckingham and

Goodall [5] echo this, when they found that teachers would come for the mission of a school,

but stay for the team with whom they worked. They went on to note when teams share vision

and values, they engage and accomplish at higher rates.

Unfortunately, the rate of principal turnover in high-poverty, high-minority, and high-need

urban high schools is also significant [6]. In fact, by 2020 the demand for k-12 principals has

increased by six percent nationwide due to population increases [7] and principal attrition.

This inquiry examined the connection of a leader’s commitment at a high-poverty, high

minority urban school to following the tenets of invitational leadership. Furthermore, this

Page 2 of 25

188

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 8, Issue 12, December-2021

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

examination attempted to reveal how that connection leads to a commitment from teachers,

parents, outside stakeholders, and the principal to continue to engage in the development of

students beyond the two-year tenure of many high needs schools [8]. There have been inquiries

regarding the benefits of invitational leadership within high needs urban high schools [8], and

examinations of what principals can do to attract and retain excellent educators in high needs

urban schools [3]. Little has been studied on the connection between the retention of teachers

in high poverty settings due to the tenets of invitational leadership, integrating the actions of a

social justice leader being present through the principal’s leadership. Specifically, the purpose

of this paper is to discuss the connection between adherence of the school leader to the

principles of invitational leadership theory, while integrating social justice in high poverty

urban high schools and that demonstration of leadership behaviors to the connection to

retention of teachers. Research questions that guided this investigation are: What tenets of

invitational leadership and social justice orientation are evident within the leadership style of

the principal? And, how do the tenets of the invitational leadership style with a social justice

orientation of the principal impact the retention of teachers within a high poverty school

setting?

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS

Intending to realize fully and provide the framework needed to understand the significance of

this study, presented are two separate frameworks: social justice leadership [9] and

invitational leadership [10]. Martin and Miller [8] recognized the connection between the two

when one of the emerging themes in their work included, “Addressing Social Justice Inequities

through the Six P’s.” The six P’s is a reference to the six P’s of invitational education [10].

Following their line of inquiry, this research will have a greater focus on the connection of

sustained engagement through invitational leadership practices employed by the school

principal. This focus on two high poverty, high minority, high needs urban high schools also

invited the exploration into the principal’s engagement in socially just leadership practices.

Presented below are the two frameworks.

Social Justice Leadership

In much of the high poverty, high minority, urban high schools, the proportion of White females

teaching Black, Latino, and Native American students has increased while Black and Latino

students were primarily attending schools with only Black and Latino students has risen [11].

Therefore, teachers in these schools need leaders grounded in social justice, as defined by

Theoharis [7]. The latter, “make issues of race, class, gender, disability, sexual orientation, and

other historically and currently marginalizing conditions in the United States central to their

advocacy, leadership, practice, and vision” (p. 223). Accordingly, the social justice theory will

be an overarching theory further explored. Theorharis’s [12] definition of social justice

leadership “...is to mean that these principals advocate, lead, and keep at the center of their

practice and vision issues of race, class, gender, disability, sexual orientation, and other

historically and currently marginalized conditions in the United States” (p. 5)[12].

The conditions in highly segregated, high poverty schools led to teachers leaving the profession

early or at least not staying multiple years [3]. With so much focus on this turnover of teachers,

few had noticed that the principal turnover rate surpassing the teacher turnover rate [13].

Consequently, the turnover with a principal exacerbated the rate at which teachers left, creating

a level of adult professional unrest that unsurprisingly coincided with student test scores falling

Page 3 of 25

189

McDowell, W., & Martin, B. N. (2021). Retaining Teachers: Intentional Invitational Action and Social Justice Leadership as Driving Forces. Advances

in Social Sciences Research Journal, 8(12). 187-211.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.812.11421

in a school [13]. Compile this with high poverty schools [3] it becomes vital that the school finds

a leader who is willing to build a team where teachers will come for the mission while staying

for the team [5].

Compared to other leadership theories, the social justice theory in educational leadership

literature was comparatively new [14]. Bogatch [14] sought the creation of a comprehensive

view of different perspectives, such as what social justice leadership should entail. He argued

that the ongoing struggle for social justice in education has gone on for decades. He saw that in

educational leadership, “an individually-minded principal is often called a maverick; an

individually-minded teacher leader is called a trouble-maker. Neither are included under the

banner of loyalty to the system” (p.6) [14]. He challenged educational leaders to create social

and political space for social justice advocacy by arguing four parameters in the name of

educational leadership. These parameters are:

1. There can be no fixed or predictable meanings of social justice before actually engaging

in social and academic discourses;

2. The center or unity of any educational reform is so dynamic that it cannot hold together

for long;

3. The result of our work (just and unjust) are always fragile and fleeting; and, therefore,

4. All social justice/educational reform efforts must be deliberately and continuously

reinvented and critiqued – repeatedly. (p. 10) [14]

For Bogotch [14], one could not be challenged to be a real educational leader without

advocating for social justice. “And at every step, articulate how our actions connect to social

justice inside and outside of schools” (p.10).

Subsequently, Theoharis [11] conveyed the following leadership traits were evident in

principals following the ethos of social justice leadership:

1. Arrogant humility: Leaders hold a headstrong belief that they are the right person to

lead the team toward the vision of social justice for the students and families they serve

while paradoxically being filled with self-doubt. They are humble enough to know after

self-reflection when they need to admit when they are wrong. They wonder if they

indeed are the right person for the role of principal.

2. Passionate visionary leadership: These social justice principals stand as

transformational leaders who are driven by such deep care, commitment, and

enthusiasm toward championing a strong vision. These components are realized by such

a passion that there is a tightly interwoven connection between the principal position

and the person doing that job.

3. Tenacious commitment to justice: The leader maintains a fierce and sustaining

commitment to equity and justice not only for their staff but also for themselves. (p. 17)

These sentiments were further echoed when argued during a 2011 ruling by Supreme Court

Justice Sonia Sotomayor when she stated, “Inequality in education is the most pressing issue in

diversity in the United States” contributes to, “...make educational equity and diversity

mainstream issues for practitioners, scholars, and policymakers to consider” (p. 247). Social

justice leadership is an inclusive leadership that engages relationships not only in dialogical,

collaborative, reciprocal, and horizontal ways; they also promote equity and justice through

caring fluid relationships among various leaders [15].

Page 4 of 25

190

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 8, Issue 12, December-2021

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Any principal in a high-poverty, high-minority, high-needs, and urban high school is taking on

a role where persistent inequalities concerning distinguished groups, including among others

race, sexual orientation, ethnicity, social class, and language of origin continue to exist [16]. Yet,

the promising literature on social justice leadership lacked in specific skill sets employed by

these leaders [17]. Therefore, within this inquiry, it was contented the social justice leader

would be recognized as a maverick, while also needing many troublemakers as denoted by

Bogatch [14]. Therefore, he or she must have taken an invitational posture to gain the vision,

buy-in, and clear structure needed to retain teachers within the high-poverty, high-minority,

high needs urban high school [18].

Invitational Leadership

Considering the desire for accessible actions, invitational leadership [10] became the primary

theory used for this study. Invitational leadership affords a school leader an immediate

structure to work through an inviting stance after which the actions taken affect the people,

place, policies, programs, processes, and politics of the school building lead to an inviting

environment [8]. If the schools are going to find success, teachers in high need, high poverty

communities, must stay for at least five years.

The solutions offered to retain teachers in high needs schools include culture, structures for

leadership opportunities, collegial support, and the chance to shape and influence within the

school [20]. This, coupled with working conditions cited by Podolsky et al. [3], included school

leadership, professional collaboration, and shared decision-making, accountability systems,

and resources for teaching and learning [3]. Addressing all these variables was the framework

of invitational leadership [10].

Being an invitational leader encompasses all aspects of one’s life as the leader calls forth all

around them to pursue a life of purpose when they “invite their colleagues, family, friends, loved

ones, and community to do the same” [10]. A school’s climate contributes to psychological well- being, student achievement, positive youth development, and how stakeholders perceive the

school [2]. An inviting educational environment will carry themes of passionate partnership,

motivational inspiration, and organic nous of affinity [21]. The high school principal can have

the most significant effect of any individual on the school to create such an environment [20].

The principal can influence a productive school climate by following the tenets of invitational

education theory. [10]

Novak and Purkey [18] referenced, “...being an invitational educational leader is like being on

a tennis court with another” (p. 70). The leader controls what can be controlled then delivers

the idea or concept to the other. The goal is to make solid contact, then in a dialogical fashion,

allow the other to receive it. The leader bases this in an inviting stance [18]. Novak and Purkey

[18] defined the principles of invitational leadership to be:

Care - Possessing full receptivity to the other through de-centering oneself and listening

for interests and meaning expressed by the other.

Respect - Give the other person time to own their part of the relationship.

Trust – Recognize the interdependence of people. Possessing confidence and

predictability of others’ abilities and integrity.

Optimism - Understanding that human potential is untapped, and there is a better chance

of good things happening if there are a positive mindset and belief of others.