Educational Leadership & Diversity: A Comparative Style Analysis

This essay provides a comparative analysis of different leadership styles in an educational context, focusing on Clark and Laughton's authoritarian approaches versus Perez-Dickson's participative style. It examines how these styles impact diverse school settings, highlighting the differences between Laughton and Clark's methods, particularly in their disciplinary actions. The essay emphasizes the effectiveness of Perez-Dickson's collaborative and committed leadership in fostering a supportive and inclusive environment for students, suggesting that a participative approach is more suitable for diverse educational settings. It concludes by underscoring the importance of motivating students and facilitating understanding among them through effective leadership strategies. Desklib provides access to this essay, along with a suite of AI-powered study tools designed to enhance learning and academic success.

Running head: EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND DIVERSITY
EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND DIVERSITY
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author note

2EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND DIVERSITY
Clark and Laughton’s leadership:
According to the case study, both Clark and Laughton follow the authoritarian leadership
style. The authoritarian style of leadership means when the leader dictates the procedure and the
policies, decides the goals that the organization needs to achieve and helps in the direction and
control all the activities which involves no meaningful participation by the subordinates of the
organization (Lyman & Villani, 2004). The authoritarian leadership style leader has the full
control over the team. Clark and Laughton both have full control over their respective workplace.
Clark leadership approach is more like “tough love”. Clark has a good relationship with his
students as he is frank with their student and has helped many students to solve their problem.
This can be seen by his interaction with their student and how he looks forward to help their
students (Bowen & Murshid, 2016). Clark has the total control in the organization which is
evident by the way he gives order to his subordinate. Laughton has a compelling vision of the
organization and the thing that he is doing.
Perez-Dickson leadership style:
Carmen Perez-Dickson is a caring, energetic and passionate leader. She is strong and determined
in her beliefs. She thinks that the children need to be treated with respect. Carmen Perez-Dickson
is committed and collaborative in her leadership style (Miao et al. 2013). Carmen lives her word
she does what says for example she operated a food bank in her school, which gives the
opportunity to the student’s parents to come and take food that they need but cannot afford.
Carmen has been very helpful and has motivated the students through his skills. Carmen has
some great leadership skills that helped the students to achieve remarkable results. She has also

3EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND DIVERSITY
organised motivational meeting for the students and their parents. Carmen has followed the
participative leadership style. She cooperated with everyone and she motivates everyone to
execute their objective or target successfully.
Are their leadership styles different?
The leadership style of Laughton, Clark is different to that of Perez-Dickson. Laughton
and Clark follow the authoritarian leadership style. In which the leader gives direction and orders
to achieve the team target. Clark has helped the student by becoming cooperative with the
student and has also helped them to achieve the target by motivating (Hogg & Adelman, 2013).
The leadership style of Perez-Dickson is different as she follows the participative
leadership style. Perez-Dickson is collaborative and committed in her leadership style. She is
determined and does what she says.
The leadership style of Perez-Dickson is perfect and appropriate for a diverse school
setting. The participative leadership style will help the student to learn many things from the
leaders and will be more effective for the diverse school setting. Diverse school setting will
require the leader to work with the student for their development. Giving orders will not be
effective to implement a diverse school setting. The leader needs to motivate them and show
them the ways how t hey can achieve their objective. With the help of the participative
leadership style the students will be more effective in understanding each other.
Difference between Laughton and Clark leadership style:
The only difference that can be seen is that Clark is harsh with his actions which can be
seen by his past activities. He threw out about 300 students from the school for being absent or

4EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND DIVERSITY
tardy. He calls his students leeches and parasites that disrupts the school. Whereas Laughton is
calm with his actions and does not take harsh decisions without proper notice.

5EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND DIVERSITY
References:
Lyman, L. L., & Villani, C. J. (2004). Best leadership practices for high-poverty schools. R&L
Education.
Bowen, E. A., & Murshid, N. S. (2016). Trauma-informed social policy: A conceptual
framework for policy analysis and advocacy. American journal of public health, 106(2),
223-229.
Miao, Q., Newman, A., Schwarz, G., & Xu, L. (2013). Participative Leadership and the
Organizational Commitment of Civil Servants in C hina: The Mediating Effects of Trust
in Supervisor. British Journal of Management, 24, S76-S92.
Hogg, M. A., & Adelman, J. (2013). Uncertainty–identity theory: Extreme groups, radical
behavior, and authoritarian leadership. Journal of Social Issues, 69(3), 436-454.