Color-Blind Leadership

Purpose: Working from the driving research question— is the explicit consideration of race present in the ISLLC and ELCC standards?—this article explores the implications of a school leadership landscape reliant on a collection of color-blind leadership standards to guide the preparation and practice of school leaders. In doing so, we analyze the language of the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) and the Educational Leaders Constituent Council (ELCC) standards and their accompanying reports using a critical race theory framework. Research Methods: In our analysis of the ISLLC and ELCC standards, we performed a multistep review of these standards’ leadership domains and their components. Our hybrid methodology employs empirical and theoretical elements of content and textual analysis. Drawing on the tenets of critical race theory, we provide an analysis of the extent to which the standards’ language address, or fail to address, issues of race, racism, and culture. Findings: The words race, ethnicity, and color do not appear in either the primary or substandards of the ISLLC and ELCC standards. Despite this fact, the bibliography for the ELCC standards includes works that boldly discuss issues of race and racism in education. Additionally, three key findings emerged from the textual analysis: (1) a conflation of culture, climate, and school culture; (2) a sidestepping of race and race language; and (3) an underdeveloped conceptualization of social justice. Implications for Research and Practice: We present our case citing the importance of a color-conscious educational leadership paradigm supported by inclusive leadership standards. We conclude with proposals for the improvement of leadership policy and preparation program standards.