Towards Culturally Competent Educational Leaders: An Examination of the Development of Educational Leaders’ Cultural Intelligence in Educational Leadership Preparation Programs

Background: The burgeoning cultural and linguistic diversity in the United States has altered the educational landscape of kindergarten through Grade 12 (K–12) public schools. This demographic shift created an urgent need for culturally competent educational leaders who can successfully navigate the multifaceted complexities of cultural interactions with diverse students and communities. There has been a growing need for culturally competent educational leaders capable of effectively leading in cross-cultural contexts. While it is evident that educational preparation programs are responsible for preparing leaders capable of meeting the needs of culturally and linguistically diverse students, there is less certainty about what that process might entail or how best to evaluate leaders’ preparation. Purpose: Drawing on the theoretical framework of cultural intelligence (CQ), this study’s first purpose was to evaluate the effect of educational leadership preparation programs upon educational leaders’ CQ. The second purpose was to test for moderating effects of antecedent cross-cultural experiences on participants’ CQ. Conceptualized as an aggregate cultural competence model of capabilities, CQ is a malleable cultural competence framework of intercultural effectiveness that can be enhanced with training and cross-cultural experiences. Methods: Using a quantitative, causal-comparative design, the dependent variable was assessed using the Cultural Intelligence Scale (CQS). The study sample comprised 546 graduate students seeking an educational leadership degree, certification, or combination of degree and certification from 54 U.S. universities holding an institutional membership with the University Council for Educational Administration. The sample consisted of 207 participants at the starting phase of their programs and 339 participants at the completion phase. Findings: The independent samples t test revealed no statistically significant difference between program starters’ and program completers’ aggregate CQ, cognitive CQ, and metacognitive CQ. Program completers had significantly lower levels of motivational CQ and behavioral CQ than program starters. The multiple linear regression models used to test for the moderating effects of cross-cultural experiences upon educational leaders’ preparation programs indicated no significant moderation effect of cross-cultural experiences on participants’ aggregate and four factors of CQ. Additional analyses indicated significantly positive effects of cross-cultural experiences on program participants’ aggregate CQ. Conclusion: Study findings suggest that preparation programs did not have a positive effect on the CQ of program participants. The findings also suggest that preparation programs had negative effects on participants’ motivational CQ and behavioral CQ and on participants’ intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy in achieving cultural competence. The findings extend the need for preparation programs to cultivate leaders’ abilities to lead effectively in culturally and linguistically diverse environments beyond the practice of increasing critical consciousness and challenging leaders’ epistemological assumptions. The study findings support the existing education leadership literature in highlighting the urgent need to include a measurable and robust intercultural competence framework and a curriculum that includes self-assessment, self-effective practices, goal setting, case-based approach learning, and meaningful field experiences in culturally and linguistically diverse environments. Finally, the results validate the reliability and generalizability of the CQS and extend the nomological network of the CQ framework in the context of U.S. K–12 educational leadership.