What are my core leadership values, and how do I centre them in pursuit of inclusive leadership?
This was question posed to us by Dr. Nabeela Kajee who visited us on Monday to deliver a talk/discussion on inclusive leadership. In her talk, she brought up something that I had not really considered in depth before: inclusive leadership goes beyond having people in the room but also making sure that their presence there actually had an impact and that their voices were listened to. It’s very possibly to invite underrepresented groups into a discussion but their presence in that space is not enough to guarantee that you are practicing inclusive leadership.
I think one of my core leadership values involve integrity. To centre integrity in my leadership and be inclusive, I need to develop and practice courage. I think I’ve found it most difficult when I know when something feels or is wrong, but I’ve struggled to articulate that sentiment or feel confident enough to believe I could convince others. Dr. Kajee mentioned that one of her teachers had once told her that being in a garage does not make you a car. In the same way, simply being in a position of power does not mean that you are truly being a leader. If I want to consider myself a leader, I think building more courage will be one of the first steps, so that I am able to speak up and do things in spite of fear.
In terms of project progress, I think we’ve come a long way since last week. We were able to sit down as a team and discuss our individual priorities and goals. Once we had that discussion, I think everyone had a lot more clarity in how we could come to a project that generally fit within everyone’s expectations.
I’m still a little bit unsure if our project will be able to stick to the proposal that we first mentioned where we wanted to explore what challenges exist in using non-attainment-based evidence in shaping educational policy. Unfortunately, we have not been able to find much on the challenges in using, specifically, non-attainment-based evidence. The phrase ‘non-attainment-based evidence’ doesn’t seem to be a universal term either, so trying to search around it has been a challenge. I think we might have to consider the possibility of switching to analysing how developmental outcomes beyond attainment are conceptualised within contemporary policy discourse, which is something we’ve already been doing partly by reading different policy papers released by the UK Department of Education.
Please sign in
If you are a registered user on Laidlaw Scholars Network, please sign in
Gina, this is a lovely reflection. I particularly appreciated that you engaged critically with Nabeela's discussion of inclusive leadership rather than simply summarising it. Your observation that inclusion is not simply about representation but about ensuring people genuinely influence decisions captures an important distinction that is often overlooked.
I also thought your reflections on integrity and courage were especially insightful. Recognising that leadership is not only about holding responsibility but also about having the confidence to act on your values demonstrates a high level of self-awareness. Your honesty about finding it difficult to speak up, despite recognising when something feels wrong, makes this reflection particularly authentic. Leadership often involves developing precisely that kind of moral courage over time.
I was pleased to read that your team has made progress by openly discussing individual priorities and expectations. Taking the time to establish shared understanding is an important part of effective collaboration and will often strengthen both the working relationships and the quality of the research itself.
Your discussion of the challenges surrounding the term 'non-attainment-based evidence' also demonstrates good research judgement. Discovering that key concepts are not used consistently in the literature is not a setback — it is often part of the research process. I think your proposed shift towards examining how developmental outcomes beyond attainment are conceptualised within contemporary policy discourse is a sensible response to the evidence you are finding, and reflects an important willingness to adapt your research questions rather than forcing the literature to fit your original assumptions.