Developing aspiring principals’ critical consciousness using equity-oriented pedagogies

The study is grounded in Freire’s (2002) notion of conscientização, described as “learning to perceive social, political, and economic contradictions, and to take action against the oppressive elements of reality” (p. 35), or simply “reflection and action upon the world in order to transform it” (p. 51). Styslinger et al. (2019) assert that critical consciousness is the core of social justice teaching, leading to heightened awareness of the world and power structures that shape it. Conscientização, or critical consciousness, informs our attention to the role played by preparation programs’ pedagogical practices in supporting goals of social transformation and liberation across K-12 schools.

While we recognize the process for developing critical consciousness as a “constellation of interconnected, overlapping, and mutually supportive practices” (Styslinger et al., 2019, p. 10), in the context of principal preparation, we view it as a process including (1) knowledge acquisition, (2) critical reflection, and (3) action, requiring engagement at each level. Engagement of the three practices may occur simultaneously, in a sequence, or in an iterative process which may vary by learner. Scholars recognize that this process begins with learners developing an awareness of themselves and the context within which they will lead. For example, Khalifa et al. (2016) call for school leaders to be aware of existing inequities, the experiences, and outcomes of marginalized students in addition to their own biases, values, assumptions, and identities. Following personal and contextual awareness, is the need for transformative learning structures that facilitate and support students’ “active analysis of past situations, events, and products, with the inherent goals of critique and revision for the explicit purpose of achieving an understanding that can lead to change in thought or behavior (Danielewicz, 2001, pp. 155–156). Positioning critical reflection within school leadership, Dantley (2008) highlights its role in questioning “the democracy of administrative decisions and administrative practices and asks how the administrative structures and practices have enabled the perpetuation of classism, racism, homophobia, ageism, ableism, and other markers of individual or collective identity” (p. 456). Dantley (2005) also explains that critical reflection allows learners to come to grips with their own identity, juxtaposing it against the identity and experiences of their learning community. These new understandings then foster the motivation and courage to engage in action that leads to social transformation and liberation (Brown, 2004; Freire, 2002). Engaging in transformative action and activism allows leaders to “resist, dissent, rebel, [and] subvert” oppressive and marginalizing conditions across schools (Rapp, 2002, p. 226). As the ultimate outcome of critical consciousness, Furman (2012) argues that knowledge acquisition and critical reflection without action is mere verbalism.

We define pedagogy as the totality of curricula, technologies, tools, and various ways in which principal preparation programs deliver their content to aspiring principals (Capper et al., 2006; Crow and Whiteman, 2016). Programs and faculty operationalize approaches ranging from readings and other class-based work to field-based projects and internships to develop leadership competences (Dexter et al., 2022). Equity-oriented pedagogies are the approaches and strategies serving to provide learning experiences that build critical consciousness and develop aspiring leaders’ competences for equity, diversity, inclusion, social justice, or other equity adjacent concepts.

Principal preparation programs are the primary means through which aspiring leaders develop the knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed to engage in effective leadership. This underscores why criticisms of principals’ unpreparedness are often conflated with the shortcomings of principal preparation program pedagogy (Green, 2018). In response to these criticisms, scholars have drawn from different theoretical lenses to inform the pedagogical choices of principal preparation programs (Dexter et al., 2022; Byrne-Jiménez et al., 2017). For example, Cunningham et al. (2019) used constructivism and transformational learning theories to conceptualize “powerful learning experiences” as instructional learning strategies for preparation programs to facilitate deeper understandings of educational leadership among aspiring principals. The authors encourage principal preparation programs to embrace learning characteristics including authentic problem-finding activities, immersive learning, and opportunities for reflection, “to transform the ways candidates identify and understand leadership and provide an ontological toolkit from which to draw in their leadership contexts” (p. 92).

Dexter et al. (2020) drew from situated learning theory to propose the concept (inter)active learning pedagogy to emphasize the vitality of digital cases, digital simulations, and clinical simulations in facilitating learning in context-rich scenarios. They further discussed the benefits of these pedagogical tools as “allow[ing] learners to practice applying and integrating knowledge and skills in realistic but hypothetical scenarios that require them to construct context-sensitive responses to a dilemma” (p. 174). Notwithstanding differences in the theoretical underpinnings of the various pedagogical approaches, an area of significant overlap is the emphasis on creating authentic learning experiences that mirror the work of school leaders and providing opportunities for aspiring principals to make theory to practice connections (Cosner, 2020). Best practices for adult learners emphasize that learning tasks should be highly contextualized and designed around real-world problems. Active and interactive learning tasks such as debate, case studies, and simulations, for example, allow learners to navigate reality-based leadership scenarios, constructing new knowledge while making their learning visible (Dexter et al., 2020). This affordance is ideal in the context of equity-oriented leadership as faculty are able to address aspiring principals’ biases and outdated assumptions as they appear. These types of experiences are essential for aspiring principal development for equity leadership as they activate cognitive processes that foster capacity for inspired and disruptive leadership (Drago-Severson and Blum-DeStefano, 2017).

Scholars have noted the development of critical consciousness as a core function of principal preparation programs (Capper et al., 2006; Pounder et al., 2002). As such, the field has coalesced around the link between pedagogical practices and what aspiring principals know, believe, feel about marginalized students and their experiences, and how they have acted towards them in the past or would act towards them once in service (Lac, 2024; Waite, 2021). The extant literature on the pedagogical practices used across principal preparation programs to support the development of critical consciousness for equity can be categorized into two strands: conceptual and empirical contributions.

Conceptual recommendations offer literature-based visions for how preparation programs might effectively prepare aspiring leaders to engage in equity and social justice leadership (e.g. Diem and Carpenter, 2012; Gooden and Dantley, 2012). Brown’s (2004) tripartite framework, for example, was one of the first to offer a conceptualized model for principal preparation pedagogical practices. The framework uses a weaving metaphor to illustrate the interwovenness of adult learning theory, transformative learning theory, critical social theory, and pedagogical strategies that facilitate critical consciousness. Brown offered learning tasks such as educational plunges, diversity panels, and cross-cultural interviews as practical examples of how principal preparation program faculty can attend to the different stages in the development of students’ critical consciousness.

Capper et al. (2006) also identified the need for preparation program pedagogy to develop aspiring principals’ knowledge, skills, and critical consciousness for social justice leadership, recognizing the importance of cultivating a climate for emotional safety and risk-taking. Furman (2012) added that principal preparation programs should not only develop aspiring principals’ critical consciousness, but also the capacity needed to engage with reflection and action across the personal, interpersonal, communal, systemic, and ecological dimensions of inequity. Kim and Wright (2024) pedagogical framework positions emotional safety as paramount to any effort to develop equity-driven school leaders. They note the complex interrelationships between the emotions of learners and their learning environment, highlighting the need for pedagogies that facilitate emotional scaffolding, a three-step process that includes generating discomfort, guided emotion participation, and metacognitive and meta-affect tools.

The second strand of research provides empirical account of how the pedagogical practices of leadership preparation programs have developed aspiring principals’ critical consciousness (see Lac et al., 2024; Leggett and Smith, 2022; Rasmussen and Raskin, 2023). At the knowledge acquisition level, Jones and Ringler’s (2017) study of a diversity seminar embedded in MSA students’ internship experiences provided opportunities for students to learn about the experiences of marginalized individuals through the perspectives of community members. The authors documented increased awareness of self and the experiences of marginalized students. Cultural competency has also been shown to improve through international practicums and study abroad programs (Hermond et al., 2018).

Nganga and Jamison (2023) explored the use of autobiographical narratives to support aspiring principals’ sensemaking about equity and social justice leadership. They found autobiographical narratives effective tools as students were able to makes sense of their lived experiences and the inequities related to cultural and other differences. Gooden and O’Doherty (2015) also documented how the use of racial autobiographies in a predominantly white cohort of aspiring principals facilitated racial identity development and awareness of race and racism. Leggett and Smith (2022) described the benefits of case methods as allowing faculty to create low stakes, but highly contextualized learning experiences that expose students to inequities they might not otherwise encounter. Likewise, the use of school-based action research and equity audits present opportunities for students to engage in equity-oriented leadership through the identification and elimination of inequitable practices or structures (Jacobs et al., 2013; Palmer et al., 2019; Winkleman, 2012). Internships and residencies were found to have allowed students to engage authentically with equity-oriented leadership approaches (Butcher et al., 2024; Cumby et al., 2017).

The literature on preparation programs’ pedagogy, however, has limitations, as the available studies are largely qualitative, have small sample sizes, and capture the efforts of individual principal preparation programs (Crow and Whiteman, 2016; Stone-Wright and Johnson, 2020), often from a majoritarian (i.e. white) perspective (Boske, 2010; Lac et al., 2024). Further, while the internship is regarded as the most important element of principal preparation, Butcher et al. (2024) point to the scant research that exists on how the internship is leveraged to support principal preparation programs’ equity-oriented efforts.

This study used a qualitative exploratory design (Maxwell, 2005) to examine how principal preparation program faculty perceive the role of their pedagogical practices in supporting aspiring principals’ development of critical consciousness. Qualitative research designs are particularly valuable when seeking to provide an in-depth and multi-faceted understanding of a complex issue or phenomenon (Merriam, 1998). This study is grounded in social constructivism—a view that recognizes that “reality is constructed by individuals interacting with their social world” (Merriam, 1998, p. 6), and specifically, how preparation program faculty make sense of their role in developing aspiring leaders’ critical consciousness.

The state principal preparation landscape encompasses 24 approved programs offering training that leads to the acquisition of a principal license through one or more of four options (North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, 2024). These programs are somewhat evenly distributed across the state and reflect diverse institutional characteristics including 13 being nested in public, state-funded institutions and 18 serving predominantly White students. These programs are mainly centered in urban and suburban spaces.

These programs are entrusted with the responsibility to meet the needs of students across 115 public school districts through their preparation of school leaders (Drake and Bastian, 2024). Coupled with the inequitable conditions across schools, the experiences and outcomes of the state’s increasingly diverse student population have undergirded mandates to improve principal preparation programs, and in particular, their attention to school leaders’ equity-oriented responsibilities (see Darling-Hammond et al., 2022; Jackson, 2024). These efforts are juxtaposed against a state’s contentious sociopolitical climate marked by legislative efforts to limit diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, and may create significant barriers to implementing equity-oriented practices in principal preparation programs.

The data used in this study are part of a larger study of equity-oriented principal preparation across North Carolina. Purposive sampling was employed to identify information-rich cases relevant to a phenomenon or issue of interest (Creswell, 2007; Patton, 1990). Using publicly available information on approved leadership preparation programs and their contact information, preparation program coordinators from 24 programs were invited to participate in the study by way of email. Nine program coordinators responded favorably to the study’s invitation. These individuals were also supportive in referring the study to faculty within their programs after participating, or in instances where they were unavailable, in their stead. The sample consisted of 14 program directors/coordinators, and faculty from 11 principal preparation programs, with three programs being represented by two faculty members. All participants reported having teaching responsibilities across their programs and spoke in varying details about the equity-oriented efforts and preparation pedagogies, based on their individual roles. As an example, whereas individual faculty spoke about their own pedagogical practices, program coordinators were at times more equipped to share insights into what other faculty members were doing in their courses.

While we omit demographic data on participants to prevent reidentification, we note diversity across our sample, with an even balance of racial identities, seven individuals identifying as people of color, and mostly females (n = 8). These participants were from preparation programs that were fairly representative of the state’s principal landscape: six and two from urban and suburban areas respectively, eight from PWI’s, and seven from public institutions. Recognizing the uniqueness of the different contexts within which these programs operate, we acknowledge variations in preparation programs’ missions (i.e. commitment to equity) and their agency in this regard, which ultimately influenced their pedagogical practices. Notwithstanding these differences, the state’s executive standards for educational leaders mandate preparation programs’ attention to preparing school leaders for cultural leadership, creating an imperative for preparation programs to adopt equity-oriented pedagogical practices to support their development of critical consciousness (North Carolina State Board of Education, 2006).

Data for this study were primarily collected via semi-structured interviews. The use of semi-structured interviews allows researchers the flexibility to clarify and ask follow-up questions where necessary (Creswell, 2007). All interviews were conducted and recorded via Zoom video conferencing and lasted between 45 and 90 min. Program documents were also collected (e.g. syllabi, assignment overviews, etc.) to learn more about the faculty’s pedagogical practices. Documents shared were mostly specific to courses taught by individual faculty participants and tended to include those more aligned with the larger study’s aim on equity-oriented principal preparation. In addition to allowing for triangulation through corroboration (Bowen, 2009), document analysis allowed us to render a more comprehensive portrait of preparation programs’ pedagogical practices.

All interviews were transcribed using Otter.ai transcription services. A two-cycle coding process, a combination of inductive and deductive approaches, facilitated data analysis. In vivo codes were used to make note of the equity-oriented pedagogical practices used across principal preparation programs. In vivo coding entails using the language from the original quote to accurately capture participants’ responses (Saldana, 2011). Collected documents were then analyzed for supporting evidence for participants’ interviews, in addition to allowing for the identification of other strategies not mentioned during the interviews. Each document was read to identify curricula contexts that center equity, and where identified, the planned pedagogical strategies. In addition to coding these, texts were extracted to confirm and clarify data collected during the interviews. Fifty-six unique codes were identified during this round of coding including equity-walk, critical autobiography, debate, equity capstone project, internship, cohort, and school tours.

To capture our aim of understanding how the pedagogies of participating programs facilitated students’ development of critical consciousness, the three stages in the process for developing critical consciousness (i.e. knowledge acquisition, critical reflection, and action) were used to deductively code participants’ responses. Recognizing the versatility of programs’ equity-oriented pedagogies, which prevented us from perfectly aligning their efforts to tenets from our theoretical framework, the final stage of the analysis sought to identify broad categories that uniquely reflected how their pedagogies supported aspiring principals’ development of critical consciousness. Through a comparative analysis of the inductively and deductively coded data, we were able to identify three major categories that characterize the study’s major findings—developing trust, facilitating critical awareness, and engaging in equity-oriented leadership. To test the validity of these categories, coded data were further analyzed, comparing and contrasting the text for exclusivity.

The findings identified an array of equity-oriented pedagogies used by faculty in support of their efforts to prepare aspiring principals to engage in equity-oriented leadership. Although not generalizable, the commonalities across the pedagogical practices of preparation programs suggest a widespread recognition among faculty regarding the role, benefits, and effectiveness of these practices in supporting students’ development of critical consciousness. For example, different iterations of critical reflection (e.g. racial autobiographies, cross cultural interviews, critical autobiography, etc.) provided opportunities for aspiring principals to interrogate their experiences, positionality, and biases, thereby enhancing their awareness of self and others (Brown, 2004; Khalifa et al., 2016). Likewise, Skrla et al. (2004) equity audit, featured prominently as a pedagogical strategy used by faculty, although these surfaced as different names such as equity-change project, demographic study, school improvement plan, root cause analysis, among others. As an important caveat to the findings we present, we acknowledge that space limitation hinders our ability to give representation to all participants and their equity-oriented pedagogies. Thus, we note that there were other pedagogical strategies used across the sample including debates, book studies, and others that are not represented in our findings, yet supported the three categories.

Three major findings capture how faculty perceive the role of their equity-oriented pedagogies in facilitating their students’ development of critical consciousness. Participants described a series of perceived faculty responsibilities for developing trust, facilitating critical awareness, and engaging in equity-oriented leadership. First, participants discussed the need to develop a climate of emotional safety and risk-taking through developing trust among students and faculty. Second, they described the interplay between knowledge acquisition and deep reflection as shaping students’ critical awareness of self, leadership contexts, and the experiences of marginalized individuals. Finally, participants emphasized the necessity of theory-to-practice application opportunities as they allow aspiring principals to connect their critical consciousness to equity-oriented leadership actions. They addressed this need by providing experiences where students engaged in equity-oriented leadership in situ, enhancing their situated judgment capacity and developing an action leadership identity through interactive pedagogies such as case studies, simulations, and field experiences. These responsibilities were described as occurring in sequential order, building from one to the other, emphasizing the importance of these three phases, individually and collectively, in supporting the preparation of school leaders who are prepared to transform schools.

Emerging from the data is the role played by trust and relationships in creating an emotionally safe space to support aspiring principals’ engagement with preparation programs’ equity-oriented pedagogies. This finding depicts trust as the initial phase of development, foundational to preparation programs’ efforts to develop aspiring principals’ critical consciousness. The cohort structure was identified as the major strategy for facilitating this. In support of this notion, Daniel described a bootcamp activity, offered to students during their first week of enrollment to develop trust among students and instructors.

In addition to supporting the development of relational trust, activities like this cultivated the attitudes and mindset needed to facilitate students’ later engagement with critical perspectives.

Importantly, the success of the other pedagogical strategies was also contingent on the establishment of trust among aspiring principals and their professors. Several participants attributed their effectiveness to those relationships established at the start of the program and strengthened as students transitioned throughout. As Ally shared, the cohort structure facilitated these relationships and provided “a way for our students to build community with one another and network with one another.” This was particularly beneficial given the programs online modality. Relatedly, Omar explained that having students work in groups not only supported the development of these relationships but also created a network among students with whom aspiring leaders could share ideas, experiences, and support for each other as they navigate the loneliness of the profession.

Other participants described how these relationships created safe spaces to facilitate open reflection about students’ experiences with marginalization as well as other emotionally charged topics such as implicit biases and White privilege. There was shared agreement around the role of trust when adopting pedagogical strategies that required students to experience discomfort. According to Frank,

Erica explained that established relationships allowed aspiring principals to demonstrate compassion, tolerance, and openness to different perspectives, allowing for students’ learning and growth. As Tiffany explained, “you are less likely to judge people, when you have deeper relationships with them.”

Program faculty demonstrated an awareness that trust allows aspiring principals to engage in the safe and brave spaces they cultivate. In these spaces, aspiring principals take risks and navigate the emotional tensions associated with their development of critical consciousness. To conclude, Frank explained that

Undergirding faculties’ pedagogical choices was the need to first increase students’ awareness and understanding of themselves, others, and their school contexts, including the experiences and outcomes of marginalized students. The use of racial autobiographies and identity-based activities presented opportunities for aspiring principals to interrogate their identities and stories. Frank recalled one of these opportunities:

While described as a vehicle for establishing trust, the cohort structure was also identified as a way to understand and learn from the experiences of diverse individuals through the lens of their peers. For Matt, leveraging the diversity of the cohort model allowed aspiring principals to attempt to understand the challenges and experiences that others, especially marginalized students, have had to endure. He articulates this position below:

Matt exposed aspiring principals to these transformative experiences through case studies, simulations, and assignments that bring diverse perspectives together.

Similarly, Frank shared an in-class check-in activity that required students to reflect on their engagement with a recently completed race-related assignment. The prompt asked students to reflect on what had been racially relevant to them since the experience. He shared the response of one African American female who reflected on a recent interaction at her community pool. She shared,

At the end of class when students were asked to reflect and share something they heard from a classmate that resonated with them, one White female disclosed, “I have two little boys, I have never on any day of their life had to think about whether someone is going to see them as a threat.”

Participants spoke extensively about their pedagogical efforts facilitating aspiring principals’ ability to “perceive social, political, and economic contradictions” within their leadership context. For example, the diversity seminar offered to aspiring principals during their yearlong internship was identified by Tiffany as exposing them to the experiences of community members and their children. She described it as a way for aspiring principals to understand what it feels like in “North Carolina, to be Muslim, to be gay, to be Black, to be white, to be Jewish.” Relatedly, Erica recalled the equity audit as another tool to allow aspiring principals to discern “what is happening [in their schools], by gathering the experiences and looking at the data outcomes for different students, for all students. And then recognizing where you have these disparities.”

Importantly, preparation program faculty discussed the need for students to internalize the outcomes of their findings to motivate action. Tiffany described this scenario:

A central finding within this category is the role played by critical awareness in aspiring principals’ development of critical consciousness. This suggests that efforts to develop critical awareness must facilitate the dualized process of knowledge acquisition and deep reflection.

This finding recognizes the imperative for aspiring principals to act on their critical awareness by engaging in social action and advocacy. As described by Jenny, one of the core functions of her pedagogies is to prepare aspiring principals for effective, equity-oriented leadership. Daniel discussed his programs’ efforts to develop the equity-oriented capacity of aspiring principals through learning walks of highly effective schools serving large populations of marginalized students. Matt described this process as “where the rubber meets the road in terms of putting equity into action.” He further explained the motivation behind his pedagogy is to ensure that,

Several participants reported the adoption of situated learning activities that are fraught with ethical dilemmas such as role plays, case studies, and simulations. The Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership (JCEL) was identified as a major source of these scenarios. Annie discussed the function of these activities in fostering students’ engagement with notions of equity-oriented leadership in a low-stake environment. She explained, “We bring in case studies or scenarios for students to understand more … to see this before they get out there in the field.” One example provided is the scenario of a student with an IEP making a bomb threat. Aspiring principals were tasked with describing what procedures they would take, and how those would differ for another student who doesn’t have an IEP. Holistically, these strategies presented numerous opportunities to replicate current issues impacting schools, providing opportunities for aspiring leaders to develop a frame of reference for future actions.

The internship was identified by most participants as providing the greatest opportunity for students to engage in action. Patrice discussed her program’s use of 65 core competencies, aligned to the state’s Standards for School Executives “to provide students with the opportunity to engage in a wide variety of leadership and managerial responsibilities, including those that impact equitable experiences and outcomes.” As an example, one task required aspiring principals to engage in equity-oriented instructional leadership centered around reviewing and comparing the lesson plans for three teachers to discern the following: Are these lesson plans culturally responsive? How do they address varied needs of learners through equitable instruction? In this activity, aspiring principals are then expected to lead teachers in creating culturally responsive lessons.

The faculty also reported embedding other action research projects during the internship to provide opportunities for aspiring principals to identify and remedy school inequities and to remedy them. The quote below demonstrates how Sophie discussed these efforts:

Although participants highlighted the use of strategies such as case studies, simulations, and equity audits, the internships provided the greatest opportunity for aspiring principals to engage in equity work and put theory into action. Collectively, the pre-service learning pedagogies, spanning a classroom-to-workplace continuum, facilitated the development of aspiring principals’ critical consciousness and provided the learning experiences for them to grow into equity leaders. As these pedagogies and experiences became more situated in the workplace, they became less scaffolded, allowing students greater freedom to test their new action-oriented leadership identities.

The main findings from this study were presented in three thematic categories capturing the nested and sequential nature of faculty’s perceived role of pedagogical practices which begin with developing trust, progress to facilitating critical awareness, and culminate in engaging in equity-oriented leadership. These findings align with previous recommendations for principal preparation programs to cultivate a climate of emotional safety and risk-taking to better facilitate students’ engagement with critical issues and perspectives (see Boske, 2011; Capper et al., 2006; Kim and Wright, 2024). Developing trust is a faculty responsibility that recognizes the emotional discomfort and vulnerability associated with traditional equity-oriented pedagogies such as racial autobiographies and cross-cultural interviews. Participants not only anticipated the tensions, discomfort, and emotions associated with discussions about personal experiences, identities, and marginalizing practices, but were mindful about creating safe and brave spaces to support students’ engagement. Although Leonardo and Porter (2010) argue that recommendations to create safe spaces are often motivated by efforts to cultivate “safe zones” for White learners, ignoring the realities that these spaces are rarely ever safe for people of color, faculty spoke to their efforts more broadly, cultivating spaces that encouraged students’ empathy and personal responsibility to address issues of equity. Accepting students as part of a cohort structure was identified by faculty as essential to the creation of safe spaces, since the cohort model is associated with greater trust among learners (Greenlee and Karanxha, 2010). In addition to allowing students to develop trusting relationships with their peers, we found that the cohort structure also functions as an equity pedagogy, allowing students to learn from the experiences of their diverse peers.

Critical awareness is grounded in an understanding of oneself, one’s values, beliefs, leadership context, and the exigencies of marginalization across K-12 schools and society (Gooden and Dantley, 2012; Khalifa et al., 2016). Participants’ pedagogies acknowledged the interplay between knowledge acquisition, critical reflection, and dialogue as facilitating critical awareness. For example, Frank’s cross-cultural interviews prompted students to interrogate personal identities and experiences to increase awareness of power and privilege dynamics, and to facilitate students’ understanding that their lived experience is not the “global ontological gospel” (Waite, 2021, p. 75). Of note, the findings also highlight the necessity of reflection as a precursor to aspiring principals’ interrogation of newfound awareness, which is critical if they are to critique themselves, inequitable practices, and society. It is through critical reflection that educational leaders can understand how to enact leadership practices that “rid the system, writ large, of policies and practices that lead to these shameful discriminatory results” (Gooden and Dantley, 2012, p. 241).

Engaging in transformative social action is inextricably linked to critical reflection (Brown, 2004; Furman, 2012). The findings demonstrated attention to the need to equip aspiring principals with not only the knowledge, but also the motivation, largely informed through critical reflection, to engage in social actions. Despite its limited representation across the extant literature, the equity-oriented pedagogies of faculty were also concerned with developing the skills required for aspiring principals to rebel, resist, challenge, and transform social injustices. While faculty did not explicitly articulate action-related skills targeted by their equity-oriented pedagogies, the nature of these activities, the type of skills required for students’ successful engagement, and their focus on action made their conceptualization of these experiences and theory-to-practice objectives evident. For example, engaging with pedagogical strategies such as the equity audits gave aspiring principals opportunities to develop skills in data analysis and problem solving (Skrla et al., 2004). Likewise, engagement during the internship allowed aspiring principals to engage in culturally responsive leadership and to flex their instructional leadership muscles (Khalifa et al., 2016).

Moving beyond the skills needed for action, the pedagogical practices of preparation programs also provided opportunities to engage in low and high stakes equity-oriented actions. These efforts included a range of highly contextualized learning experiences where aspiring principals developed action-oriented leadership identities in the midst of navigating equity- and social justice-informed disorienting dilemmas (Leggett and Smith, 2022). The pedagogies in the center of the classroom-to-workplace continuum, such as simulations and class-assigned, field-enacted tasks, were fundamental preparation for the internships (and eventual in-service leadership). Immersive field experiences such as the internship provided aspiring principals with opportunities to connect equity-oriented learning and theory into practice (Darling-Hammond et al., 2022; Drake et al., 2023). Interestingly, despite limited attention from scholars to the role of the internship in preparation programs’ equity-oriented efforts, participants identified it as the most immersive and effective way for aspiring principals to remedy the reckonings of their critical consciousness through equity-oriented actions.

Future research may serve to identify the primary role played by preparation programs’ curricula in shaping their pedagogies, examining the interconnectedness of programs’ equity-oriented curricula and pedagogical practices. That is, researchers can study how preparation program faculty conceptualize critical consciousness throughout their curricula. The field might also benefit from empirical research that explores how principal preparation program faculty cultivate climates of emotional safety during their equity-oriented efforts. Additionally, in recognition of arguments from scholars about the impact of the internship on aspiring principals’ preparedness, greater attention is needed on how the internship can be structured to support aspiring principals’ engagement in high-quality equity-oriented leadership and advocacy. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, future research should seek to understand how principals who experienced these equity-oriented pedagogical strategies practice equity-oriented leadership once in service in K-12 schools.

Although several scholars have documented the equity-oriented pedagogical strategies of preparation programs (see Lac et al., 2024; Leggett and Smith, 2022; Rasmussen and Raskin, 2023; Zarate and Mendoza, 2020), these have largely focused on aspiring principals’ engagement with individual pedagogies across individual preparation programs (e.g. Jacobs et al., 2013; Zarate and Mendoza, 2020). This study adds to this body of literature by exploring the various equity-oriented pedagogical practices of 14 faculty members across 11 principal preparation programs. The findings in this study respond to calls for additional research and critiques of principal preparation for equity, contributing new understandings of the pedagogical practices used to facilitate the development of critical consciousness among aspiring principals. This study echoes the need for faculty to develop trust and relationships among aspiring principals as a precursor to their efforts to facilitate their critical awareness and allows us to recognize the need to ensure faculty have the skills and training needed to cultivate spaces that are conducive to critical dialogue. As cohort diversity appears to be a major source of students’ development of critical consciousness, and while diversity is often conceptualized racially, these findings offer additional nuance to the concept of holistically diverse cohorts and repeat calls for attention to preparation programs’ admission practices and learning structures (Barnett and Caffarella, 1992; Melloy et al., 2021).

Open access for this article was made possible by the Open Access Publication Program from the Anne Spencer Daves College of Education, Health and Human Sciences at Florida State University. The results, information and opinions expressed in this work are solely those of the authors and do not reflect the views or position of our institution. All errors are our own.