Theoretical Framework/Objectives 

School leaders play a critical role in securing a better environment within challenging school settings (Martinez, Rivera & Marquez, 2018). Although there are differences in coping with the challenges in different cultures, in traditional societies school principals' demographic characteristics, such as their gender (Long & King, 2015) can be the cause for additional challenges. The male hegemony in educational administration (Blackmore, 1999) consequently challenges the work of female school principals in ‘masculine societies’ (Oplatka&Arar, 2016).

To address such marginal and diverse situations, Social Justice Leadership (SJL) is considered as remedial (Angelle & Torrance, 2019; Arar, Örücü & Waite &, 2020; Bogotch & Shields, 2014). Most frequently, female principals in traditional societies find themselves in double marginality (Arar, Örücü & Küçükçayır, 2018), where they have to fight to cultivate socially just practices not only for their school community but also for themselves in a male-dominant profession (Blackmore, 2016).

Given the role of schools as the sanctuary for compassion and care (North, 2008), educational leaders are expected to develop critical awareness to different types of oppression, exclusion and marginalization (Diem & Boske, 2012). Striving for social justice in education is a mission, involving commitment and awareness. It necessitates opposition to any manifestations of social discrimination and reconstruction of an educational reality in terms of heightened awareness to injustice that would enable deconstruction of socio-cultural constructs and the provision of constructive and empowering educational opportunities (Berkovich, 2014).  Women school principals tend to embed in their leadership styles the pedagogy of social justice. For example, in  the USA, Grogan and Shakeshaft (2011) identified four types of activity that female school principals employed in their roles: (1) shaping of an educational vision, (2) providing support (3) constructing a foundation for participation and (4) bridging gaps between students in their schools.  They noted that female principals were able to empower others through the use of participatory management more than male colleagues do. Educational contexts are  described as “arenas where inequities and injustices can be produced and reproduced, for instance, by privileging some social identities while marginalizing others” (Roland, p.3). As individuals tend to locate their identities through race, gender, religion and social class (Cumings, Welton & Lee, 2016), the definition of gender in different societies have an impact on social, religious, economic, political or other institutions (Blackmore, 2016; Fitzgerald, 2010) such as education. Thus, it is important to analyse such intersecting oppression as double marginality, especially in developing and transitional societies (Martinez et al., 2018; Lumby & Azaola, 2014; Oplatka &Arar, 2016). Intersectionality is an analytical tool to study, understand and respond to how gender intersects with other identities (Fuller, 2015) and how these intersections contribute to the unique experiences of oppression and privilege (Case, 2016; Crenshaw, 1991). Therefore, in understanding the female school leaders’ experience in traditional societies (Arar, 2018), intersectionality is amenable to raise awareness in explaining social oppressions and deconstructing power relations in ensuring social justice (Case, 2016). Clearly, it relates to the dual marginality of being women in a male-dominated world and leading schools for social justice in traditional societies.

 Therefore, this study compares the meaning of social (in)justice as perceived by three female principals in three Middle Eastern countries (Palestine, Turkey, Lebanon) in relation to intersectionality of challenges by posing the following research questions: (1) What are their challenges? (2) Do they have common personal characteristics and educational values towards social justice? (2) How do they lead to ensure social justice in their schools? (3) Do they employ different or similar strategies and practices to ensure social justice leadership?

Qualitative multiple case study (Thomas, 2011) was utilized in this research and three female school principals from three different national settings participated in this study (with fictive names) as Rawan (Palestinian principal), Nihan (Turkish principal), Paula (Lebanese principal). Participants were identified based on the critical cases they pose in terms of female principalship. The participants, case schools and country contexts will be presented during the session. Shortly, Rawan is a school principal of an elementary school in East Jerusalem; Nihan is a principal of a large Girls vocational school in a socio-economically disadvantaged suburb with a conservative population in a metropolitan Turkish town, and Paula is a nun and principal in a rural area in the Beqaa valley of eastern Lebanon. In-depth semi-structured narrative interviews were conducted with each principal (Creswell, 2007). All participants were individually interviewed for about two hours (in person or virtually). Interviews were conducted in the principal’s language of preference (Arabic with the Palestinian principal, French with the Lebanese principal, and Turkish with the Turkish principal). All interviews were translated to English language verbatim. The study was explained and anonymity was ensured. Participation was consensual; interviewees were able to terminate the interview at will. They were asked to describe their perspectives concerning national, gender, or social status discrimination, indicating the sources of their perceptions of social justice and the actions they conduct to promote the practice of social justice and equity in their schools. Following transcription of the interviews, the texts were analysed following four stages suggested by Marshall and Rossman (2012) including ‘organizing the data’, ‘generating categories, themes and patterns’, ‘testing any emergent hypothesis’ and ‘searching for alternative explanations’, to identify central themes in the data, searching for recurrent perceptions, trajectories, experiences and attitudes. The analysis identifies central themes, identify repetitive experiences, feelings and attitudes. Comparative analysis guided the coding of the data (Strauss & Corbin, 1998), including comparison between coded elements in the identified categories and sub-categories. Structured analysis and peer review were employed for validity and reliability. It is hoped that by providing details of the systematic data collection the credibility and authenticity of the data is enhanced.

The findings yielded the following themes as (1) development of awareness to injustice; (2) sensitivity to injustice; (3) establishing school policies and actions to promote social justice. The principals reported different sociocultural, national and personal trajectories shaping their perceptions of SJ, and described their daily work to promote SJ . Yet, they were commonly motivated by their belief systems and moral compass, promoting equality and justice and empowering others to succeed. Their strong desire to succeed and leadership skills enabled them to challenge the inegalitarian rules and norms. They brought their natural strengths and experience to advance social goals far beyond requirements of their official job descriptions. To summarize; they clearly explain that their perception of social justice developed out of their value systems and their perspectives on the role of education (Lindsey & Lindsey, 2011). Their descriptions of the contexts where they developed their perception of social justice clearly show that these perceptions grew out of their personal circumstances and their experiences in their local and national environments. These perceptions, in turn shaped the policies they instituted in their schools their educational and social initiatives. Their perceptions of social justice, diversity, intercultural and narrative encounters, accessibility, fairness, all influence their school policy design and the way in which they promote social justice values and processes (DeMatthews, 2018). The significance of personal accounts and testimonies revealed that there are multiple examples of intersecting oppressions (Crenshaw, 1991) with respect to gender and we witness fragmentation of female identities in the three cases as these women leaders are entrapped between various social dynamics and barriers. This study does not attempt to make generalizations; however, the findings could be compared and utilized for similar phenomena in other localities; while a comparison to the international/European contexts will be drawn during the presentation.

Angelle, P. S., & Torrance, D. (Eds.). (2019). Cultures of social justice leadership. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. Arar, K., Ӧrücü, D., & Waite, D. (2020) Understanding leadership for refugee education: introduction to the special issue, International Journal of Leadership in Education, 23(1), 1-6. Blackmore, J. (2016). Educational Leadership and Nancy Fraser. London: Routledge. Blackmore J (1999) Troubling women: Feminism, leadership and educational change. Buckingham: Open Books. Bogotch, I., & Shields, C.M. (2014). Introduction: Do promises for social justice trump paradigms of educational leadership and social (in)justice. In: Bogotch, I., & Shields, C.M. (eds.). International handbook of educational leadership and social (in)justice (pp.1-12). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. ISBN: 978-94-007-6554-2 (Print) 978-94-007-6555-9 (Online). DeMatthews, D. E. (2018). Community engaged leadership for social justice: A critical approach in urban schools. NY: Routledge. Diem, S. & Boske, C. (2012). Introduction: Advancing leadership for social justice in a global world. In: C. Boske & S. Diem (Eds.), Global leadership for social justice: Taking it from the field to practice (pp.113-128). London: Emerald Publishing. Fuller, K. (2015). Learning gendered leadership: A discursive struggle. In: E. Reilly, & Q. Bauer (Eds.), Women leading education across the continents: Overcoming the barriers (pp. 181-186). Rowman and Littlefield. Grogan, M. & Shakeshaft, C. (2011). Women and educational leadership. California: Jossey Bass. Lindsey, R., & Lindsey, D. (2011). Social justice: Focusing on assets to overcome barriers. In: A. Blankstein & P. Houston (eds.), Leadership for social justice and democracy in our schools (pp. 25- 44). Thousand Oaks, Cal.: Corwin Press. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. (2012). Designing qualitative research (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, Cal.: Sage Publications. Martinez, M., Rivera, M., & Marquez, J. (2018). Learning From the Experiences and Development of Latina School Leaders, Educational Administration Quarterly, 1 –27. Thomas, G. (2011). How to do your case study. London, UK: Sage Publication. Intent of Publication: This study will be published in Bloomsbury Handbook in Gender Educational Leadership and Management in 2021.