{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02058319039451115, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005145797598627788, 'mean_word_length': 5.9880239520958085, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
PK–12 District Leadership for Equity: An Exploration of Director Role Configurations and Vulnerabilities

Purpose: This study sought to understand PK–12 district-level equity directors’ efforts to improve experiences of students of color and outcomes in US districts. Research Methods: We interviewed 13 practicing equity directors and analyzed artifacts such as meeting minutes, equity policies, equity mission statements, job descriptions, and organizational charts. Findings: Directors experienced structural and psychological vulnerabilities depending on how their districts structured the role with positional power, resources, and authority to carry out their leadership work. Equity directors’ roles were often ambiguous and at times misaligned to the expected leadership tasks. Institutionalized racial and gender oppression compounded the vulnerabilities of the role. Implications: To realize the full potential of this new district leadership position, districts must attend not only to what they expect equity directors to accomplish but also to the configurations of the role as it intersects with labor-related racial and gender oppression in districts.