Research suggests discrepancies between principals of color and White principals in their motivations and reflections on racism and how it shapes their philosophies, practice, and persistence in leading schools in historically underserved urban communities. Several scholars have discussed the pivotal role of early racial identity experiences in the beliefs and practices for Black and Latinx school leaders (Douglas, Wilson, and Nganga, 2014; Hernandez, Murakami, and Cerecer, 2014; Lomotey, 1989; Wilson, 2016). Scholars such as Gooden and O’Doherty (2015), Hines (2015), Theoharis and Haddix (2011), and Toure and Thompson-Dorsey (2018) have examined how White principals reflect on concepts of race in their work. These researchers call for further study, specifically on how White leaders’ reflection on race manifests in their beliefs and day to day practices. This serves as the impetus for this dissertation, which is framed by two research questions: 1. Why do some White principals choose to lead schools that serve historically underserved communities? What, if any, reflections on early racial experiences are common among these leaders? 2. How do the motivations and reflections on early racial experiences of White principals who chose to lead in historically underserved communities inform their leadership philosophy and play out in their practices? This study examines the role of racial literacy in the principal seat, specifically as White administrators attempt to enact leadership in low-income urban school settings that serve a majority of students of color. Using a significant body of literature as well as results from a qualitative study, it describes the journey of four White New York City charter school principals as they reflect on early racial experiences and what brought them to the principal seat. The study employs Toure and Thompson-Dorsey’s (2018) theories around the White racial frame in leadership and Khalifa’s (2018) culturally responsive school leadership (CRSL) framework to code leadership behaviors observed on site. The post-visit debrief allows insights into how the principals saw their work and the degree to which they centered racial equity in their beliefs and practice. The paper then examines the impact of recollections on racial experiences and motivations on White leader beliefs and practices via a racial autobiography and subsequent interview. It classifies leaders’ racial autobiography and interview data according to Helm’s (1995) White racial identity model. The study concludes by theorizing how its findings can be used to better understand the intersection between principals’ racial identity and practice. This study is significant because it draws close connections between Helm’s White racial identity model (1995) and Khalifa’s (2018) theories on culturally responsive school leadership. This can support future research that seeks to connect racial mindsets to practice. The results of this work can also inform more rigorous hiring practices so that districts and networks unearth race neutral mindsets in candidates. Otherwise, it is likely that we will see a continuation of the colorblind approach that has held back so many promising young students of color.

Amid concerns of increased populist right-wing movements in Europe and the US, this dissertation research uncovers a core contradiction at the heart of modern nation-states: the ethnic underpinnings of the “civic nation.” In recent years, nativist and ultra-nationalist movements opposing immigration have gained popularity in Western democracies. These movements draw on “hard” boundaries such as race or religion to exclude “others” from the “nation.” However, sociological research on the nation has consistently found that most people in Western countries publicly oppose these ideas and embrace civic conceptions of the nation. At the same time, research on immigrants' experiences in these same countries suggests that “civic” conceptions of the nation may be much more exclusionary than what survey research has shown. To reconcile this tension in the nationalism and immigration integration literature, I label the mismatch between people’s stated preferences and their actual behaviors as “colorblind ethnocentrism.” By analyzing the extent to which nations are imagined to be racially restrictive by their inhabitants, my research offers a new understanding of national identity that has consequences for the integration of non-white groups into Western societies. Using both qualitative and quantitative methods, I analyze the way that the category of “nation” is socially constructed, and in what ways this social construction overlaps with the socially constructed category of “race,” particularly in countries where “race” does not exist as a state-sanctioned classificatory system (unlike the US). Finally, I use these theoretical insights to reframe a classic debate in political economy and show that natives' normative understandings about national belonging moderate the way that non-White populations are perceived as an outside group and a threat to economic redistribution. This dissertation combines novel methodology from political science with advanced statistical analysis as well as qualitative content analysis research to investigate (1) the role of ancestry, and race in defining the imagined community, (2) the ways that race and nation are empirically related, and (3) to what extent different ideas of the “nation” mediate the relationship between increased racial diversity and decreased support for redistribution. Building on previous work, in chapter 1, I consider the “nation” as a cognitive category used to create social distinctions between those who “belong” in the nation-state and those who do not. Using a pre-registered conjoint experiment fielded in representative samples across France, Germany, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States, I challenge the long-standing assumption in the literature that the dominant conception of the “nation” in the West is based on inclusive and civic symbolic boundaries. I show that the most important characteristic across all country contexts for natives when making decisions about who is and is not a member of the nation is their ancestry: whether a given profile's parents and grandparents were all born in the country or not. I also find that people who answer in surveys that ancestry is important to be truly national in fact are espousing a racial and religious preference for White and Christian nationals. Then, I show how this colorblind ethnocentrism affects symbolic integration of non-white profiles with immigrant backgrounds. Finally, I find that racial preferences in who belongs in the nation are the most pronounced in continental Europe, where “race” is not an institutionalized categorization system (i.e. countrieswhere racial statistics and “race” is taboo). This provides some evidence in favor of my theory that countries that do not have an available discourse around race tend to use “nation” as a proxy for it. I further investigate the origins of this discrepancy in the next chapter. In chapter 2, I leverage a drastic change in curriculum in the mid-1990s in Spain that led to the sudden and (almost) complete removal of racial vocabulary from social-science textbooks to explore what happens to the construct of race once racial language has been removed. Through my analysis of 82 textbooks from 1975 to 2017, I find that a racial classification system was replaced by one based on cultural categories. Yet, far from moving away from essentialist beliefs about human nature, culture continues to reproduce the social hierarchies previously associated with phenotype. Because the books present culture as a scientifically valid classification system, the use of culture legitimizes and entrenches those same beliefs in racial differences, while creating a new double meaning for cultural categories (often “national cultures” or “nation”), i.e. its purported meaning and a short-hand for “race”. In chapter 3, I follow up on a question that emerged from my textbookstudy: to what degree do Europeans believe (or not) in biological racial differences? I find that people in Europe hold racist beliefs at similar rates to the United States. I also show that an under-studied source of variation across countries is the differences within a country between the proportion of people who believe in one racial belief but not another. In my final chapter, I investigate the consequences of this racialized “imagined community” for support for welfare in contexts of increased immigration. In this chapter, I shift the focus of attention from “immigrants” to “natives.” I argue that the well-documented reduction of native support for redistribution in the presence of immigrants is moderated by how strongly the natives imagine the “nation” as racially white. Using survey and census data from 30 European countries and 270 regions, I show that the negative association between the share of immigration and support for welfare is driven by those who imagine the nation in racial terms. Moreover, I show that ethnic nationalists’ support for welfare policies is only sensitive to non-European foreign-born immigration, not European foreign-born immigration. This suggests that racism, more than xenophobia, is the mechanism behind the withdrawal of solidarity. Finally, I conclude with a discussion of implications and directions for future research.

Despite evidence highlighting the crucial role of principals in driving school change and creating equitable learning environments, there remains a need for more robust research and operational guidance concerning principal anti-racist leadership development and practice. Recent studies have indicated Principals were not only unprepared to lead in schools with predominantly minoritized students and unable to articulate meaningful discourse around racial equity and implement policy that would respond to racial issues, but they also had not received anti-racist leadership preparation and support. (Gooden & O’Doherty, 2015; Khalifa et al., 2016; Miller, 2021; Young et al., 2010). Therefore, the purpose of this exploratory study is to partly address this issue and contribute to the existing body of research on principal anti-racist leadership development and practice. I posed the following questions to guide my research: 1. How do urban secondary school principals say they have been prepared and supported to be anti-racist leaders? 2. How, if at all, do these principals say they implemented anti-racist practices in their schools? 3. How, if at all, do these principals say it is having impact on reducing racial disparities in their schools? This study examines principal perceptions and experiences receiving preparation and support to be anti-racist leaders, and the extent to which it may be used to inform practice and pedagogy for reducing racial disparities in schools. Specifically, as six principals attempt to enact anti-racist leadership in low-income urban secondary school settings serving a majority of students of color, this study utilizes insights from Welton et al. (2018) and draws upon a significant body of literature to examine their journey, reflecting on their anti-racist leadership development, practice, and impact. This study draws on the essential nature of anti-racist leadership, which involves recognizing the significance of race within educational settings, elevating racial awareness, and actively working towards dismantling racial disparities (Aveling, 2007; Brooks & Watson, 2019; Diem & Welton, 2020; Lewis et al., 2023). It examines racial identity development and self-reflection as integral components of anti-racist leadership preparation and development, and classifies participants’ interview data according to Cross’ (1995) The Psychology of Becoming Black" (Tatum, 1997) racial identity model and Helm’s (1995) White racial identity model. The study further explores the extent to which participants engage in anti-racist leadership practices and how they say it is having impact on reducing racial disparities in schools, by referencing Welton et al.'s (2018) anti-racist leadership conceptual framework. This framework, encompassing both individual and systemic levels - attitudes, beliefs, policies, and practices - guided my investigation into informing anti-racist principal practice for reducing racial disparities in schools. The study concludes by theorizing how its findings can be used to better understand the intersection between principals’ anti-racist leadership development, practice, and impact. This study is significant because it contributes towards operationalizing Welton et al.’s (2018) anti-racist leadership conceptual framework, elucidating principal anti-racist preparation, development, and practice, and methods to accomplish it. By investigating the extent to which participants engage in anti-racist leadership practices and their impact on reducing racial disparities within schools, this research offers practical insights for advancing racial equity in predominantly Black and Brown secondary schools. Such contributions not only provide valuable guidance for current principal anti-racist leadership practices, but may also spark new thinking and approaches for further research and ongoing efforts towards systemic improvement in anti-racist educational leadership.

The purpose of my research was to co-design and test a Race Equity Assessment for Leaders (REAL) 360 tool, which is a tool that supports organizational leaders in developing self-awareness of racial equity. This tool provides a ‘360-degree’ view of each leaders’ racial equity leadership through multi-directional perspectives through a: 1) self-assessment, which I co-designed and is the survey data that I collected for my research; and 2) a rater assessment of feedback from a peer colleague, a direct report, and a supervisor, which I co-designed. However, I did not collect or report on the rater survey data as my focus was on whether or not, and how, the tool helped leaders to develop self-awareness. This tool was designed in collaboration with ProInspire, a consultancy which supports social impact leaders and organizations to advance equity. This research fills a gap in the field and literature by contributing an assessment tool and implementing it in an organizational context to gain insight into leaders' self-awareness and acquisition of feedback on racially equitable leadership in their organization. In my role, I served as a researcher and engaged in the following three research phases: 1. Phase I: Co-Development (Research and Design); 2. Phase II: Implementation (Testing and Revisions); and Phase III: Outcomes (Data Collection and Analysis). In Phase I, using an action research approach, I contributed to the iterative and collaborative process of co-designing the REAL 360. In Phase II, the tool was administered to leaders in non-profit, corporate, or higher education organizations. In Phase III, using a mixed methods approach, I collected quantitative data (pre-beliefs survey, demographics survey, and REAL 360 survey) and qualitative data (cognitive interviews with affinity focus groups and individuals and post-beliefs survey). My goal was to identify: 1) the perceived impact of the tool on race equity beliefs ; 2) areas where the tool could be impactful on race equity; and 3) how the tool may benefit from revision. The quantitative findings suggest to me that racial equity beliefs and practices differ based on participants' racial identity (1. Black, Indigenous, and People of Color, BIPOC; 2.White) and age grouping (1. under 45; 2. 45 and over). Across both groupings, participants expressed a commitment to racial equity in their personal and professional lives. Participants 45 and over with more leadership experience, emphasized listening and aligning racial equity beliefs with organizational values to cultivate an inclusive workplace culture. Those under 45 who have exposure to social justice movements more recently in their adulthood, appeared more comfortable in expressing their racial identities. BIPOC participants rated themselves higher than White participants in advocating for racial equity policies and addressing advancement opportunities, which may reflect their lived experiences with workplace discrimination. The qualitative findings reveal to me that the REAL 360 survey serves as an effective self-reflective tool. It encouraged participants to critically examine racial equity leadership practices and develop an awareness of beliefs and actions that contribute to more racially equitable outcomes in both their personal and professional lives. Also, participants revealed that learning should extend beyond the tool to include professional development. Thus, the findings from this mixed methods action research study indicate to me that race and age contribute to leaders racial equity beliefs and practices. Also, these findings suggest to me that the tool can be supported with additional learning such as coaching sessions for leaders to interpret the tool’s feedback data and develop an action plan for more racially equitable practices. For future research to broaden the use of the tool to different organizations and to navigate potential resistance, organizations can highlight how inclusive leadership contributes to business outcomes like innovation, employee engagement, and overall performance.