UBC Graduate Research

Meanings of attire in education and leadership Yee, Favian 2009-04

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata


42591-Yee_Favian_EADM_590_Meanings_2009.pdf [ 22.18MB ]
JSON: 42591-1.0340071.json
JSON-LD: 42591-1.0340071-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 42591-1.0340071-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 42591-1.0340071-rdf.json
Turtle: 42591-1.0340071-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 42591-1.0340071-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 42591-1.0340071-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

MEANINGS OF ATTIRE IN EDUCATION AND LEADERSHIP by FAVIAN YEE B.Sc, The University of British Columbia, 1995 B.Ed, The University of British Columbia, 1996 A GRADUATING PAPER SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF . MASTER OF EDUCATION m THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Educational Administration and Leadership) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA April, 2009 © Favian Yee, 2009 Altire in Education Leadershi p 2 Meanings of Attire in Education and Leadership Introduction It was Wednesday, August 14, 1996; I had just completed the Teacher Education Program at UBe and was enjoying my time off. The sky was clear and blue. The morning temperature was a pleasant 20°C and perfect for a run around the Stanley Park Seawall. By the time I had finished my run, the temperature had soared to a searing 27°e, and the air was getting thick. It would have been a great day to go to the beach. When I returned from my run, I called South Delta Secondary School to see if there was anyone tending the telephones; I had been trying for several days. The office staff had been on summer break, so connecting with anyone at the school proved to be quite difficult. Finally, one of the secretaries answers. I ask if I could come by to see the school and drop off my resume for the GeologylEarth Science posting. ] did not want to lose my window of opportunity so I quickly jumped into my little car and took a pleasant drive from Downtown Vancouver to Tsawwassen. With my resume in hand , ] walked in to the school and ended up meeting the vice-principal who just happened to be there. I started to ' arrange an interview time for Friday when the principal leisurely walks in. We exchanged the usual pleasantries when suddenly he says, "Why don ' t we do the interview right now?" I reacted with a gasp and responded with a somewhat hesitant "but. .. " There] was standing in my running shorts and a smelly T-shirt about to go into the first formal interview of my new career. Embarrassed, ] tried to excuse myself out of this impromptu conference. " .. .I didn't come prepared. Look, ]'111 not even dressed for an interview. Are you sure we can't do this on Friday? " Attire in Education Leadership 3 My soon to be new administration too was leisurely dressed. The principal looked as if he was on his way out to a tennis match, and the vice-principal , like a member of a private golf club. With a warm chuckle, the principal calmly said, "Don't worry about it, neither are we." While en route to South Delta Secondary, I did not concern myself with what I was wearing because ] was just going to see the secretary, but ircertainly mattered when I discovered the administration was present. Ten years later and almost to the day, I was to entering into an interview for the current position I serve with the Delta School District. This time, ] was coming prepared, or at least I believed I was. I wore a slim-cut charcoal grey suit, a freshly pressed white shirt with French cuffs,a monochromatic and diagonal striped knitted silk tie, and a pair of highly polished black leather loafers. The first people who greeted me were the secretaries, a pair of whom] had previously worked with. This was the first time they had seen me so formal, so I received several cat-calls and teasing but it was all in good fun. While I was waiting for my interview, another coordinator dashed into the office, sat beside me and said with a big grin , "You ' re dressed far too nicely for thi s office. You know, you're going to make us all look bad." I still wear suits to the office but have since relaxed somewhat by not wearing a tie. This fashion style still gives me a strong sense of professionalism, but without the stuffiness. Only on days when] am seeing sales representatives, di strict executives, or going to School Board meetings do ] sport a necktie. As part of my morning routine in preparing to present myself for the day, I do consciously pay attention to where] am going, who] am seeing, and what impression] wish to leave the people who] will encounter throughout the day. This usually A ttire in Educa ti on Leadershi p 4 determines whether a tie should compliment my suit. Perhaps it should be a sport jacket instead of a suit. Do I wear a turtleneck sweater or do ] wear a freshl y pressed dress shirt ? Will that dress shirt have button cuffs or French cuffs? Somewhere in my self-monitoring mind, there is an algorithm that processes all thi s informati on - self-monitoring is the process through which peopl e regul ate their own behaviour in order to "look good" so that they will be perceived by others in a favourable manner. Thi s situational information is probably heavily influenced by the medi a in our culture -movies; magazines, newspapers, and televi sion. Regardl ess of its ori gin , thi s is part of my daily routine in impression management. Self-presentation, self-monitoring, and impression management are three closely related concepts that explain why humans present themselves in certain ways (Zagaski , 2001). The process involves individuals giving present ati ons in order to leave impressions with observers. They would self-monitor the effect of their performances and adjust them accordingly. Thinking back to that very first day at South Delt a Secondary School, I certainly did not present myself very well. ] had a vi sion of how] should look for this first career interview. This vision is not Llnlike that recommended by some employment agencies. According to a career coach al Monsler.com, an onjine job finding agency, classroom teachers in an interview shoul d dress in clothing that communicates responsibility, trustworthiness, dependabilil y and honesty; they should al so look as though they can handle a cri sis (VOgl, 2008). \Vhile dressed in short s and a T-shirt from a momingjog I certainly did not communi ca le that. Although 1 performed a quick self-monitoring, it was too late. What were my int erviewers thinking of me? Given Attire ill Eci u(,;l tioll Le:1cit'rsilip " the non-verbal cues, I perhaps appeared irresponsible, sloppy, and careless. \\l ith t hi ~ notion, I was not at all confident for my interview. Why did I feel that shorts and a T-shirt translate into irresponsible, careless, and sloppy? Perhaps it is because I have a preconception of what a male teacher 's look shoul d be' -especially one teaching senior academic courses. Thi s preconception woul d be' one-developed through my own experiences in high school and especiall y through the medi a. To me a male classroom teacher should be dressed at minimum in a coll ared shin with a pair of tai lored pants - no denim, and a pair of well maintained leather shoes . From popular Hollywood media, I have ment all y imprinted images of teachers such as Mr. John Keating of Dead Poets Society (Haft, Witt, Thomas, &Weir, ]989), Mr. Jaime-Escalante of Stand and Deli ver (M usca & Manendez, ]988), or images of male teachers that are simply found in newspapers and magazine. such as in Clark (2006) . Perh ap~ if had been applying for a physical education positi on , ] would have been more comfon able wearing the shorts and T-shirt. Then , ] would be leaving an impression th at ] was in good physical shape and modeled good health - the kind of image ] woul d wan t to ponra~' a~ a physical education teacher. Presentation includes the way individual s dress , how they carry the mselves , the tone of their voices, and even the choice of words they use. When personal informati on is unavailable, some people develop evalu ati ons of others from limited inform ati on in non-verbal cues (O'Hair, Rubenstei n & Steward , 200J ). As Zagaski (2001 ) ci t e ~ Crut sin.Qer & Seitz, over 85% of these impressions are based solely on visible cues s\lch ;\.. the clo thin g worn, body type, ethnicity, or hair style. The impressions left can be- intent ion;ll or unintentional. In most circumstances they can be m;lnaged through self- monit orin g. 1t Attire in Ed uca tion Leadership 6 was the non-verbal cues that I was afraid I was projecting during that first career interview dressed in that leisurely attire. For my coordinator interview, my intention was to give the impression of professionalism, competence, and confidence J felt suited for that position. In addition to attire, thi s impression management also included the way J can·ied myself, making certain I would look directly at my interviewer while speaking, or even choosing the right words for my responses. Much of my self-monitoring revolved around what I believed the interviewers wanted to hear. If J felt there were any trouble spots, I would have to quickly analyse them, find the possible causes , and rectify them before the interview concluded. In reality, individuals rarel y know exactly what the interviewer is looking for, so all of the assumptions they had may be wrong. In their study about getting ahead in the workplace, Kilduff & Day (1994) cite a very predictive 18 item true-false version of the "self-monitoring" scale derived through 20 years of extensive research by Snyder, Gangestad & Snyder, and Snyder & Copeland . (Appendix A). These studies are based on behavioural and attitudinal differences of hi gh and low self-monitors. Using the same self-monitoring scale in their stud y on beliefs and attitudes regarding workplace attire, Peluchetle, Karl , & Rust (2006) explain that high self-monitors strategically select attire for their appearance according to the image they wish to project; they are highly concerned with what people think of them ; they are seen as particularly concerned with their outer appearances; they typicall y have a higher sen se of fashion and have relatively extensive wardrobes. Kilduff & Day (1994) found that high self-monitors obtained more internal promotions than those who are low self-monitors. A strong factor to this phenomenon would be that "clothing itself is one of the most essential ingredients to impression formation, and that judging others based on Attire in Ed ucation L eadershi p 7 clothing is done both consciously and unconsciously" (Zagaski, 200], p.4). The Kilduff & Day (1994) and Peluchette et a1. (2006) studies did use participants who were gradua te students from masters of business administration programs. It was stated that many of their participants were placed in upward career tracks that would lead to manageri al positions. While these studies lead us to believe that clothing influences career paths and the power of attire in impression management, they are specific to corporate type organisations. Accordingly, these findings may have little weight in education al organisations. There are however those impressions based on appearance that one cannot control or ones that are heavily influenced by preconceptions. I recall a number of years ago , ] saw an image in Colors, a magazine published by the Benetton Fashion Group. The image was of a Black man wearing a brown bomber jacket and a pair of jeans running around a street corner. Following him was a uniformed London bobby - he was \Vhit e. In the context that was given, the viewer would presume that the Black man was a suspect being chased by a police officer. This was the intent of the photograph. ]n actuality, the Black man was a plain clothed officer who was leading the chase of a suspect who was outside the frame of the photograph. ] must confess that ] thought the plain clothed officer was the fleeing suspect. Another example is of a very good fri end of mine who faces this type profiling daily. She competed for Canada and won a bronze medal in basketball at the 2004 Parallel Olympic Games in Athens and is a very capable person who leads a very independent life. When people first see her, regardless of her attire, they see the wheelchair. Often the strangers she encounters do not see beyond thi s tool of necessity and have a presumption that there is a segment of society Ih al is Allire in Ed uca li ol1 LC;ldt'rsili p helpless, burdensome, useless, or in need of sympath y. These are two exampl es of where even the highest of self-monitors would have little control in impression manage ment. Although grossly exaggerated, The Devil Wears Prada , is a Holl ywood drama about Andrea Sachs, a young naive woman fresh out of journali sm school who lands a job as an assistant to the editor in one of New York 's bi ggest fashion magazines. And rea finds that in order to succeed in the shallow and hostile environment , she mu st change her small-town wholesome image. It is an uphill battle from the start as Andrea faces summary judgement and conviction in her first five minutes of stepping int o her fu ture employer's office (Finerman & Franker, 2006). Depending on the contex t, the image an individual projects can be helpful to a profession or it could be a hindrance. For And rea Sachs, she is almost written-off had she not expressed her sentiment s about the superficial nature of the fashion industry. While Devil Wears Prada is not about educati on, it does liberall y demonstra te that the attire individuals choose to wear and how they wear it can communi cate strong and powerful messages about themselves. In some instances, how indivi du als projec t themselves can have as much impact on their careers as to how they ac tu all y perform their roles (Towner, 2005). Referring back to my first interview wearing shorl s and a T-shirt, I sincerely believed that my attire would have a bearing on my being hired. ] analogize my clothing to body armour which is worn to protect me as ] go int o ba ttl e. 111 wearing what I considered unprofessional attire, I felt my armour of confidence as a teacher-candidate stripped, leaving a very large chink . Had] not comment ed on the sudden and awkward timing of the interview, thi s may very well have affect ed l11 y performance. Similarly, I do believe that my professional appearance did pLly ;-1 role in ! IIIn in Ed tlCl li on LC;ldership 9 my interview for coordinator. For tl,:I: ,l'C O Ii'~ (';·tJ"l' er inlervi l"\\ '. 1 fel l Ih al my armour was appropriate and it gave me aSSlln1l1 Ce I( CIIT: 0111 my in lerview wilh confidence. ] have had student-teachers who are onl y rom or fiVf :11." :lr:' oldl."r Ih :ln Ihe mosl seni or students they teach. Early on in their practi c i. 1 n:>C) I1 I."~1 Ih ilt they wear clo thing several levels up that distinguishes them from their sl11dl."n t:' . ]1 11t'lp~ ampli fy il hie r:lrchy . With overly casual attire, ] felt the marginal age P:1P miph l le ild to re ~peci :1I1 d discipl ine issues which may affect their teachin g effec ti vene s~ f l1 nher cl own in their pr:'1(' t ica or through their careers. Granted, thi s is not a hard ~el mle in :1I1y reg:lrd. ]1 owe vt'r-, in these particular circumstances, dressin g up would provide :1 :Iounp teacher cCl nclid:lle with the leverage to focus more on the lesson. Indeed, the appropri ate Cl tli n" for the .iob ill han d can impaci effec ti veness. The impression projected in an educa tion: l1 k :Kln ' ~ ClpiKity i:, espe i:1Jly import ant. ]n a profession which often has indi vid l1: tl, ri :llin~ wi th C01Je:lgl1f'S. stll den ts, and cl community as a whole, the way ed llcati n:ll Jei"tCle r<: llli1l1ilg f Ih eir image may have significant influences to how effecl iw tllf :' ilH' rfpa rdk:,~ of the ir iK tllal performance. This paper will examine the significmc - of me~:-: in the context of le,lrie rshi p, and student perceptions of teacher leaders wi lh respeci Ic- Ilwir ;ltli re- in ;In e-ri ll cl li on;ll work environment. With film and med icI he inp :-;t lCh ;1Il infJ ll enli: il1nrce in om Cl1llllre, a selection of media images and foo t i l ~ 1." Ih ill e x el1l pl i fie ~ illl contextllalizes some of my arguments wiJJ be included. Attire in Education Leadership 10 Dress and Leadership Roles One of the first books on the effects of attire and leadership was Dress For Success, written by John Molloy in 1975. This often cited work is a how-to book written to help leaders use dress as a tool to assist them in climbing the ladder of success (Gilpin, 2008). Research to date suggests that clothing styles worn by teachers have a decided influence on student learning, but no single attire can be shown to be better than another (Prenni & Lord, 1992). In my initial search, I focused on attire in an education leadership context because there has been a movement towards casual dress in the classroom (Million, 2004) and was curious to know if there would be any marked influence on student perceptions. A debate has ensued as to whether teachers should wear more formal attire to school. If educators want to be paid and treated as professionals, they should look like professionals (Waters, 2006; Malloy as cited in Roach , 1997). The question that follows is what does a professional look like? There are various definitions and opinions to this and we must be mindful that it is situational. In general, professional attire in the educational context is above the casual level of what students wear (Roach, 1997). More formal attire in the classroom portrays an image that educators are proud of their profession (Waters, 2006). Elrod (2006) argues that form follows function in defining professional attire. She says that in choosing attire, a teacher 's primary thoughts must be based on versatility and not as fashion statements. For example, if teachers are painting with students, they would not be wearing suits, but instead something that can be soiled without any concern - perhaps jeans and sweatshirts. Although, there have been a number of academic articles around workplace leadership and attire, very few that could be found in the specific context of education leadership. A ltire in Educati on Leadership 11 Rafaili, Dutton, Harquail, and Mackie-Lewis (l 997) conducted a study of everyday decisions about dress at the work of admini strative employees in a university business school that employed 137 support staff and] 38 faculty members. This study 's focus is on clothing as a symbol that individuals actively use to facilitate their pelformance of organisational roles. The study is based on symbols as concrete indicators of abstract values that are part of cognitive frameworks or templates, known as schemata. Citing Fiske & Taylor and Taylor & Crocker, the authors explain that schemata are "sets of cognitions about people, roles or events th at govern social behaviour" (p. ] 0). They assert that "individuals use dress as a symbol to engage and execute their role schemata in organisations" (p. 10). Some individu als who are high self-monitors and place high value on clothing find that dressing appropriately for work makes them feel more competent and also empowers them to perform more effectively on a variety of tasks (Peluchette et aI, 2006). In another example from The Devil Wears Prada, Andrea Sachs finds that in order to adapt, she needs to discard her faili ng small town wholesome persona. For her to function in the large corporate New York City fashion world, she needs to dress the role to engage and be taken seriously with the other employees (Finerman & Franker, 2006). This example is not in the sphere of education, but there may be some similarities. Linking back to my own experience, ] have adjusted my dail y work attire to fit a role. Even though there are no objections to teachers (and coordinators in Delta are still considered teachers) wearing de nim , ] personally would not be comfortable wearing it. I even recall a req ues t by our support staff to have a weekly casual attire day and our supervisor strongly suggested against thi s request. Because ] deal with more of the business aspect s of the public school system, my dress is more Attire in Education Leadership 12 formal than what I had worn while teaching in the classroom. ] have witnessed that school administrators tend to dress several levels above students and above most other teachers. Of the principals and vice-principals I have come across in my school district, nearly all are dressed in this fashion. On rare and usually special occasions, they dress in casual attire. It may be that at most times, this slightly more formal attire helps fulfill their schemata as administrators. It does notably amplify the hierarchy within the schools. The Rafaili et al. study identified a stratified random sample of 20 women from the population of full-time employees in the organisation. The participants included 9 clerical positions and 11 professional administrators who all came from a wide range of departments. 90% of the participants were White which reflected the racial composition of the entire staff. Data collection was conducted by semi-structured interviews and unstructured observations of the participants. The interviews included structured set of questions such as explaining and describing their work clothing, what clothing they felt comfortable and uncomfortable in, what their attire communicated of them, and how their experiences in at work influenced their choices. As participants answered the questions, the researchers probed for elaboration and clarification; this was the semi-structured portion. The unstructured or open observations looked at describing the dress and appearance of the participants, co-workers, and workstations; the dress context of the participants at various events (luncheons, presentations, workshops); and the physical attributes of each school within the faculty. Rafaili et al. analysed the data in three distinct but interrelated phases. ]n Phase] , they searched for themes and found approximately 40 themes. These themes ranged from Allire in Educa ti on Leadership I:; intuitive assertions (form of dress influenced by weather) to un anticipated ones (identification of dress in different p,uts of the org ani sati on). Phase 2 involved developing a conceptual framework th at would integrate these themes coherentl y. There were three guiding questions in developing their assessment of the alternative conceptual frameworks: ]) Does the framework capture' a large number of themes? 2) ]s the framework a cohesive and concise summary of the themes? 3) Does the framework offer new conceptual insights about organi sa tion al dress or admini strative employees? They concluded that for thi s participant group, organisation al dress is an effortful engagement of a symbol that is guided by dress attribut e's th at are part of several organi sati onal schemata. Although it is unclear to me how they came to thi s conclu sion. In Phase 3, they systematically coded their data int o themes according to the themes ret ained in Phase 2. Rafaili et a1. found three emergent themes: I . Dress was an import il nt elemen t in the sc hemata that organi sed the parti cipant s' ideas about performing va ri OliS orgn ni Silt ional ro les . There were four categorica l schema types in de t e rl1linin ~ thi s: a. organisa ti onal memhersh ip - which inc luded on ly profess ional or business- like all ire b. organ isa ti onal hierarc hal le ve l - top leve l with more profess ional component s and lowest level s w ith less profess ional component s c. funct ional areil - the exec ut i ve wore t he most conservil t i ve whi Ie areas such as document process ing wore the least conservati ve d. role event s - spec ial eve nt ~ had the mos t conserva ti ve dress while routine work has the least co n ~c rva ti ve 2. Dress ing in accordance to th ese sche m:l t:l was a means for enhancing compt~ t en l ro le execution. 3. Dress ing in accord ance w ith th t'sC sc hemata in vo lved a. urpri sing amou nt of work. (p. ] 7) For me, these themes are not difficult to re];.lle' to. As] Jd lect on my career, growing from student teacher, to teacher, to dep.1rlI11e'nt he'ad, Clno now to coordinator, ] have' bee n Allire in Educat ion Leadersh ip 14 known tojncrease the formality - some may call it the professionalism - of Ill y attire. I have found that the attire does allow me to execute my particular role. As a classroom teacher, I often wore pressed trousers and a button down long sleeved collared shirt , but never a tie. Yet, as a department head, I recall taking it up a level by wearing a sport jacket when I went to department head or district meetings. As a di strict coordinator, I am very likely to wear a suit, and on regular occasions, a ti e. Throughout my teaching career, there has been effort put into what I wear to work each morning, and the clothing always helped me feel good and competent in what I do. While thi s may be t.rue for some, it does not apply to all individuals. For others regardless of the profession , a pair of jeans may be what they operate best in. Furthermore, as menti oned previously, the participants were all women. I am curious to know if males in general would have the same emergent themes. Rafaili et al. report that dress is fitting to the role in which empl oyees are assigned. Dress is the symbol or sign of their position in the company. Participants explicitly noted that they felt better when dressed for their role. In her review of schol arl y and popular literature, Gilpin (2008) noted how import alll dressing the part is fo r women in corporate America. She cites findings by Rubenstein in that clothing symbols are task-oriented or instrumental; they have one primary meanin g; and they are commonl y recognized as symbols by its wearer. While the study by Peluchette et al. (2006) reports similar findings, they did find that individuals also believed th at manipul ating attire could influence other's views of them, thus achieving greater power and influence, and obtaining work-related outcomes, such as advancement or compensa ti on increases. This agrees with the original meaning of "dress for success" as roined by Malloy in ] 975. Attire in Eci ucati on Ll' :lcif'rship 15 The original data collection and sample included 23 participants, 3 of whom are male. In the end, data collected from the male participants were omitted. Thi ~ distribution matched the 94% proportion of women in this business school's administrati ve support staff With the number of men being so small, Rafaili et al. decided to focu s onl y on the women, thus dropping the data collected from the males. They claim the homogeneity of the sample constrains the generalisability of their findings ; this is because most administrative support staffs are female. Moreover, women in administrative positions are a marginal group in many organisations and this was to be the primary foc Ll s of their study in furthering theoretical knowledge in this field. A strong theme did emerge where participants in administrative positions expressed concerns about tensions between their gender role and their organisational role. According to Rafaili et aI., his findi ngs agree with other scholars studying women in organisations such as Kanter, and Sheppard. They found that women in male-dominated organisations have a greater need for legitimacy, credibility, acceptance, and self-confidence that dress can convey. ]n thi s organisation, women at management levels required skirts and jackets, or suit. . Rafaili et al. found that dress was one approach female administrators used to navigate through the organisation because they are a marginal group. Gilpin (2008) cites Molloy in sayin g that in many professional workplaces, women must communicate both maleness and femaleness, but not too much of either; they may do this in their speech, interpersonal interaction, and dress. Cubi]]o & Brown (2003) agree in quoting Blackmore, ;lnd educational feminist who in ] 999, authored Troubling Women: Feminism, Le(lr/ership and Education Change: Att ire in Educat ion Leadership 16 "" . women in management mask their gender and sex uali ty throu:; h how they drt'ss, walk and talk in order to minimise their presence I and] manage the dist urbance of c1illerence t hey represent. Women leaders made frequent reference to being cCl reful aho ut dress ... of being different but not too different." In other words, women in administrative rol es need to understate their feminin e attributes .and emulate male attributes to be successful at work , yet men do not need to emulate women. As a male, I have given littl e att ention abou t the effort somE' women exercise to gain credibility into male-structured workplace rol es wi th respect to their dress. Hollywood has recognized this effort and exemplifi es it in a film adaptati on of Ian Fleming 's Casino Royale (Wilson , Broccoli & Campbell , 2006). When .J ames Bond first meets Vesper Lynd aboard the train to Montenegro: hE' comments on the impression she projects. In their dialogue: VL: What else can you surmise Mr. Bond ? JB : About you Ms. Lynd ? Your beaut y·s a prohlem. You worry YO ll wo n' t be taken seriously. VL: ... which one can say about any woman with hCl lf:l br<lin. JB: True, but this one over-compensa tes by wearing slight ly masc uline clothing. he ing more aggressive than her female co lleag ues which gives her a so mew hat prickl y demeanour. And ironically enough makes her less likely to be Clccep ted and promoted by her male superiors who mistake her insecuriti es for arrogance. In the public school system of Briti sh Columbi a, 69% of it s members are women (BCTF, 2004). Of its 60 school district s, onl y 30% of the sllperint endent s of school ~ are women (Province of British Columbia, 2008). At di stri ct lE' vels, onl y 42% of admini strative roles are held by women (BCTF, 2004). Female admini strators arE' indeed a margi nalized group. With such significant under-rep resent ati on of wo men in senior ed uclIional leadership roles, it would not be surpri sing if fem alE' tf' ,Kher Jeadf' r:-: feel compelled to Atlire in Education Leadership 17 dress slightly masculine to be taken more seriously. Another coordinator was once advised by a former female administrator that she had to wear a suit to be taken seriously. The closest this coordinator has come to this suggestion is a denim suit. While the reasons for choice of attire can be very personal and based on individual preferences, dressing for the role of administrator can also be both a point of empowerment and censure for the working woman (Gilpin , 2008). For a female administrator, the suit can be a symbol of achievement, confidence and professionalism ; however it may also be a symbol of discrimination and limitations women still face in the education system. Unfortunately, this study does not report much in terms of how racial or ethnic minorities navigate through business organisations . It would be interesting to see if ethnic minorities need to consider masking their ethnicity to be successful in their organisational roles - regardless of gender. With female administrators already having to partially suppress their femininity (or heightening their masculinity), notwithstanding, it moves to say that women of racial minorities would in addition need to partially suppress their ethnicity. Influence of Dress in Student Perceptions of Educational Instructors At the high school I formally taught at, the attire of the teaching staff varied from cargo shorts, golf wind breakers and running shoes to collared button down shirts, pressed trousers, and oxford shoes in men; and sweat pants, T-shirts, and Birkenstock sandals to suits and heeled shoes for women. There was no official dress code for teachers. With such latitude in the formality of teacher attire, ] am curious to know if this latitude influenced student perceptions of teachers in any way. Attire in Educati on L eadership 18 J reviewed two studies that examined the influence of instructor attire on student perceptions and behaviour. Chowdhary (1988) studied attire as a biasing factor in students' ratings of the instructor. A study by Roach (1997) studied how the formality of attire would affect student learning , behaviour, and instructor rating. Chowdhary 's study looked at how wearing Indian attire, and Western attire would influence student perceptions of instruction. Chowdhary hypothesized that since Indian dress may not be familiar to students in a Western setting, the first impressions made about an observed person may not be accurate and therefore misinterpreted. She questioned if there was a relationship between instructor ' s attire and 1) the overall rating of the teacher 2) rating methods of evaluation and testing of students in the course 3) rating of course organisation 4) ratin g of interest and enthusiasm in the course 5) rating of instructor's manner or presentation 6) rating of instructor 's attitude toward students. The participants in Chowdhary 's study were post-secondary students from predominantly white, middle-class, suburban families in the Southern Midwestern United States. All students were female majoring in retail , business, marketing, or home economics. They were taught western dress making in two separate sections. Class A had ] 5 students and Class B had 16 student s. Both groups of students constructed a Western style skirt in the first half (Phase J) of the semester and a blouse in the second half (Phase lJ ). Both sections were taught by the same instructor (from Jndia) on Tuesdays and Thursdays, in the same room, using the same text s, tests , assignments , syll abus, class organisation and manner of present ati on. The only difference was the instructors dress Attire in Education Leadership 19 and the times of both sections. Class A was taught from ] OAM - 12PM and Class B was taught from IPM - 3 PM. In Phase I, the instructor wore Western attire in Class A and Indian attire in Class B. The Western attire was either a dress or skirted suit. The Indian attire was either a saree (six foot long piece of fabric draped over a slip and a tight fitted waist length blouse), or a combination of salwar (drawstring trousers) , kameez (tunic), and dupatla (scarf). A bindi or a red dot was also worn on the forehead with both types of Indian dress. After eight weeks, in Phase II, the instructor wore Western attire for both sections. She wanted to assess the strength of perceptions formed during Phase I. Evaluations of course/teacher effectiveness were administered during a class after students modeled their own dresses made during Phase I, and after students modeled their own skirts made in Phase II. In both phases, the evaluation surveys are the standard form s that have been used for the past five years in the Education and Allied Professions Divisions at the university. The evaluations surveyed: ]) the overall rating of the teacher 2) rating of methods of evaluation and testing of students in the course 3) rating of course organisation 4) rating of interest and enthusiasm in the course 5) rating of instructor's manner or presentation 6) rating of instructor' s attitude toward students. The questions regarding "rating methods of evaluation and testing of students in the course" was omitted for Phase I because the students had not been evaluated at the time the surveys were taken after week eight. The range for each item was 0 to 4 (0 being poor and 4 being excellent). In both phases when the evaluations were administered, the same instructi ons Attire in Educati on Leadership 20 for completion were given and the instructor was absent when students were completing them. For Phase I, Chowdhary found that the averages for the five variables were consistently lower for Class B where the instructor wore Indian dress. She implies that in Class B, since the instructor did not wear a skirt while teaching skirt construction , the students may have judged the instructor as unfamiliar with the ski]] needed to construct a western skirt. Chowdhary does not indicate what the instructor was specifica]]y wearing on the day of the Phase I evaluation. If in Class B, the instructor was wearing a salwar, kameez, and dupatta combination, then students may judge the instructor as she implies, but if the in structor wore a saree which does resemble a dress, then another implication mi ght be in order. Nevertheless, her findings are consistent with other literature on first impressions, and that stereotyping may be at play. The use of stereotyping helps people understand and gives meaning to their interactions with other people (O'Hair & Steward, 200]; Spindler, ] 999; Galin & Benoliel, 1990). Thi s point relates so much to an experience 1 had while instructing golf to youth during the summer of ] 999. A man approached me and asked if he could help assist in the instruction of golf. I was apprehensive. At our first meeting, thi s gentleman had yellow stained teeth (from smoking a pipe), long pony-tailed grey and white hair, a chest length scruffy grey beard , a tired looking golf shirt , and stains on his cotton trousers. His grooming was something left to be desired. I would metaphorica]]y ca]] him the Grizzly Adams of the golf course. I was unclear of hi s motives. This man clearly looked as though he did not belong here. A professional golfer has a very distinct stereotypical look Attire in Ecil lca li on L eaci ershi p 21 - clean cut, three-buttoned collared T-shirt, and pressed trousers; thi s is typical ani re in any golf course's pro-shop. Nevertheless, he picked up and swung a golf club. ] witnessed one of the most beautiful and smoothest swings. I was new to the golf course, so after some probing, I found out that he was actually the club treasurer. To my surpri se, not only did he have this beautiful swing, but hi s instruction was also brilliant. He continued to work with me for the duration of the summer - Grizzly Adams grooming and alL It was one of the most memorable experiences 1 had ever had in golf. ] learned much on the golf course that summer. This example supports the counter argument in that individuals can also be professional, competent and confident in their own skin without the aid or impression given off by attire. Initial impressions are formed by treating others as objects, judging them on the basis of outward appearances (O 'Hair & Steward , 2001 ). This was one instance where I was seduced by stereotyping and it lead to a gross misjudgement on my part. The analysis of the data for Phase Il was to assess the strength of the perceptions during Phase I. Chowdhary wanted to see if the impressions formed during the first phase of the experiment would change as the instructor's clothing changed or wi ll the "primacy effect" prevaiL She describes the primacy effect as the cognitive process in which an individual retrieves evaluations of an observed person from first impressions. Although the instructor was dressed in western attire, Chowdhary did find significant differences between Class A and B in organisation, inTereST and enThusiasm , alli lur/e {()words students, and evaluation and testing . She attributes these significant differences between Class A and B to the primacy effect. Chowdhary found non-significant differences in the overall course evaluation and in manner of presenTaTion. She attribut es tIlt' non Attire in Educati on Leadership 22 significant differences to the perceiver making evaluations based on an opinion formed during the last meeting with the person being judged - the "recency effect". This recency effect can have serious implicati ons in teacher and instructor evaluations, especially for those who do not have tenure. Dickey & Pearson (2005) found that post-secondary instructors who are aware of the recency effect and are not tenured might try to manipulate student evaluations through influencing gestures such as dropping lowest grades, being friendlier or just joking more often. These instructors wanted to imprint positive experi ences just prior to being evaluated . While it is somewhal different in British Columbia 's public school system, certain positions are nOI governed by union seniority protocol. Whil e we are stj)) considered to be teachers, di stri ct coordinator positions in Delta are reviewed annually. Thus, ] have made effort s to influence unofficial evaluations with our admini strators and execulives. From Febru ary 10 April, the district undergoes budgel planning where all areas of operations are scrutinized. In hopes of having my annual contract renewed, ] have employed the recency effect by tactfully reminding di strict staff the work that coordinators do. ] feel no apprehension in telling them that many events and programs the di strict enjoys would otherwise not exist if coordinalors were released. When] was reaching in Ihe classroom, this was not a consideration because of seniority prolocol. Further to the evalu ali ons Ihemselves, Dickey & Pearson, (2005) found Ihal a significant number of students feli Ihat the evaluations have little importance or bearing on instructors' positions. Thi s leaves me questioning wh al proporti on of the evaluati ons filled by the students in Chowdhary's study were complel ed with indifference. The Attire in Education Leadership 23 implications of this indifference could have skewed the results of her study. Perhaps a significant number of students in Class A felt this was an important evaluation and put more effort and time into its completion while the more students in Class B were indifferent. On a five point scale, (0 - 4), those indifferent students may have just filled an entire column of 2s resulting in mean values that were closer to 2 - and lower - in Class B. Chowdhary also compared rating changes in each section from Phase I to Phase II. For Class A, the mean rating improved in four of the five categories with the exception of manner of presentation which decreased slightly. However, she considers the difference to be statistically significant only for the interested and enthusiasm, item. For Class B which Indian dress had been worn, the mean ratings improved for all five categories. The instructor also noted a behavioural change where the students approached her more frequently and asked more questions when in western attire. She cites Buckley whose research suggested that similarity in dress can predict perceived attractiveness of others. In other words, by having similar cultural dress to the students, the instructor was more approachable. This does contradict findings by Morris, Gorham, Cohen, & Huffman (1996) and Gorham, Cohen, & Morris (1997) where there was no relationship between instructor attire and immediacy. Chowdhary concludes that dress does have an impact on students' evaluations of their instructors. There are some limiting factors that she has pointed out. One, Students in Class B may not be as "fresh" and energetic in the afternoon as those in Class A, and as a result, their attitudes and perceptions may be biased. ] would like to see further At tire in Educat ion Leadershi p 24 research in this area by reversing the secti ons where Indian attire is worn during Class A in the morning and Western attire in Class B during the afternoon. Second, she states that this study is limjted to female post-secondary student s enrolled in retail , business, marketing, or home economics majors, I would also like to see further study with only male students, and classes with mixed gender populations. Perhaps two boys' physical education classes taught by the same teacher - one in athleti c attire, the other in pressed slacks and a dress shirt. Furthermore, thi s study was conducted in a region of the United States where the majority of the popul ati on are White. It would be interesting to see if the results would be similar if the study were conducted in a metropolitan area like Metro-Vancouver. Of its 2.1 million residents, over 875 , 000 are of visible minorit y group with Chinese and South Asians residents making up a large proporti on (S tatisti cs Canada, 2006). Aside from instructor evaluations, I would like to see what the student achievement levels were like based on teacher anire. I am curious to know if the average course marks from Class A were superior to those in Class B. Al so, were the grade point averages of the students in Class A superi or to those in Cl ass B to begin with ? The reason is that research has shown teachers whose student s do well on achievement measures receive higher instructional ratings than teachers whose student s do poorly (Cohen, 1981). Therefore, if attire affec ts teacher ratings, and ratings are correlated to student achievement, then one could surmi se that Class B ' s achievement mi ght have been lower than Class A 's. The instructor's Indi an attire might affec t the perception of competency in the instructor thus affecting student confidence and moti va ti on in the course and in their own abilities. A ttire in Educati on Leadership 25 The effects of attire on student achievement were also studied by Roach (1997). He examined the effects of graduate teaching assistant (TA ) attire on student learning, misbehaviours, and ratings of instructi on. Roach begins by expl aining that teaching assistants are not as their title suggest. ]nstead they are frequentl y thru st into the role of college instructor with little or no training in instructi onal strategies . ]n most cases, it is a sink or swim atmosphere. Those departments that do offer training often overlook nonverbal communication in the cl assroom such as instructor attire, immediacy, or environment. Roach expresses that clothing can indicate socio-economic status, the type of profession or career track a wearer has. It can also be an indicati on of attitudes, beliefs and values. He says that whether accurate or not, judgement s of a person based on clothing serve as a source of information, a basis in fo rming opinion and relationship, and a foundation for how others communicate with that person. Roach refers to "professional" attire and expl ains that it is generall y dress appropriate for a particular career position, role and/or functi on. For example, professional attire would certainly di ffer between a Ji feg uard , a teacher, or a surgeon. Roach goes on to explain that "form ality" of dress is a slightl y different construct. For example, formal business attire at the office would be different to fo rmal social attire at a wedding. For the purposes of hi s study, Roach considered professional dress to be instructor attire that is above casual attire levels of student s. In regards to student learning, Roach believes that instructor attire may influence student mood, motivation to learn , and percepti ons th at classroom ac ti vities are important A ttire in Educa tion L eadership 26 to learning. If a teacher dresses professionall y suggesting th at the classroom, it s activities, assignments, and interactions are important , then stu dent s may respond by adopting more professional attitudes towards them , thu s improvi ng her learning (W aters, 2006). With respect to student misbehaviour, Roach is of the opinion that TAs who exhibit casual or sloppy dress are perceived to have a less professional or serious attitude toward teaching, resulting in student mi sbehaviour. Another thought Roach offers about student misbehaviour is the teacher-student distance. Because TAs are closer in age to their students than many faculty are, they may have to work harder to establi sh an appropriate teacher-student distance. They may also have to work harder to project themselves as competent in teaching and their subject mailer. ]f unsuccessful , this may foster student misbehaviour. Professional allire may help TA s in establi shing that teacher-student distance and respect that fac ulty are more readil y afforded, thus decreasing student misbehaviour. Roach cites a study by Buerkel-R othfuss & Fink where they found two behaviours that emerge as critical 10 slUdent s ' percepti ons of quality of teaching by TA s: the degree of professionalism di spl ayed and the abilit y to exert appropri ate levels authority in the classroom. Roach cites another stu dy by \Vestm yer & Flaherty where it was found that formally-dressed instructors are perceived as more credible than casuall y-dressed instructors. It may be that T As who are dressed more formally come across as more competent, or instead dress may have no impac t on instructor ratings whatsoever. Roach 's study explored the fo llowi ng questi ons: Attire in Ed ucation Leadershi p 27 RQl To what extent are stude nt perceptions of teaching assistant dress related to student affecti ve learning? RQ2 To what ex tent are student perceptions of teac hing ass istant dress related to student cogniti ve learning? RQ3 To what ex tent are student perceptions of teaching assistant dress related to student self- reported li ke lihood of misbehav iours? RQ4 To what extent are student perceptions of teaching ass istant dress related to student ratings of instruction? RQ5 Does a significant difference ex ist between teaching assistants and fac ulty on the relationships of instructor dress and student affecti ve learning, student cogniti ve learning, student likelihood fo r misbehaviors, and student ratings of instruction? RQ6 What the relationship between student clothing ori entation and student ratings of instructor attire? There were 355 participants in Roach 's study from a large South-Western university -177 males, 175 females, and 3 who did not indicate gender. Of these, 56 were freshman, 112 sophomores, 79 juniors, 104 seniors, 1 marked other, and 3 who did not indicate classification . The average age of the subjects was 21. The ethnic compositi on is 81 % White, 10% Hispanic , 3% Black, 3% "non-resident alien", 2% Asian, and less than] % American Indian. Student perceptions of instructor dress were measured by a 7 item professional dress survey: informal - formal, wrinkled - pressed, inappropri ate - appropriate, dirty -clean, professional - non-professional, neat - sloppy, and fashionable - non-fashionable. Students were asked to rate these aspects of instructor dress on a bi-polar scale from] -7. Affective learning was measured using a scale developed by Gorham. Students were asked to rate the following items using 7 point semantic di fferenti al scales: attitudes toward course content, attitudes toward behaviours recommended in thi s class, attitudes Attire in Ed ucat ion Leadershi p 28 toward the instructor of this class, likelihood of engagi ng in behaviours recommended in thi s class, likelihood of enrolling in another course of this type, and likelihood of taking another course with the teacher of thi s course. Based on a study by Morri s et al. (1996), where it was found that instructors' ratings in their ex troversion, sociability and interest of presentations were not significantl y related to the formality of thei r att ire, ] suspect that Roach will find little or no significant correlation between affective learning and instructor attire. Roach notes that his cogniti ve learning measurement scale was adapted from Richmond, McCroskey, Kearney, and Plax. Students were asked to rate the fo ]]owi ng items on a 9 point scale where 0 = nothing and 9 = more than any other class you have had: "How much are you learning in class?," "How much do you think you could be learning in this class if you had an ideal instructor?", "How much knowledge/understanding are you gaining in thi s class? ," and ''If this class were being taught by the best possible instructor, how much do you think you could be learning?" These appear to relate to the competency of the instructor. Morri s et al. (1996) found that perceptions of instructor competency were direc tl y related to the formality of instructor attire. Thus, I would believe that cognitive learning would be ranked higher when an instructor is dressed in more form al attire. Student misbehaviours were measured using a fourteen item survey which asked to indicate the likelihood/frequency they engage in mi sbehaviour items which included: cheating, asking counterproductive questi ons, challenging the teacher's authority, diverting classroom talk from the lesson, leaving class earl y, walki ng in late to class, non-class relevant talking during class, inattention to the teacher, lack of attendance, turning A llir!:' in Educati on L eadershi p 29 in assignments late, failure to turn in assignments, sleeping in class, reading the newspaper in class, and doing other homework in class. These item ' were rated on a scale form 0 = Never to 4 = Very Often . ] do find some of these items interesting; depending on the context, an act that is percei ved as mi sbehavio ur in this stud y could be viewed as democratic voice or a challenge to authority. What could be genericalJ y termed as misbehaviour could be a protest for something a student has strong convicti ons over -such as handing in an assignment late to make a point because the time allowed for completion is unreasonable or unatt ainable. Students rated instruction using a four item scale: ] = Poor, 2, = Weak, 3 = Good, and 4 = Excellent. They responded to the folJowing statements: "The overall quality of this course"; "I would tell other students that thi s course was . .. "; 'The overall . effectiveness of this instructor"; and "] would tell other student s that the instructor was . . . " Roach also used a seventeen item survey developed by Rosenfeld & Plax to determine student clothing orientations. Thi s survey probed the participants' attitudes towards clothing. Four clothing dimensions were derived from the survey: clothing consciousness (degree of concern for own clothing), exhibiti onism (desire to wear revealing clothes), practicality (practi cality versus aes theti c value) , and designer (desire to be involved clothing as a vocation ). Each dimensional score seeks to quantify the students ' clothing dispositions on a continuum from Jow to hi gh. Roach believes there might be a possibility that student ratings of instructor attire may be infl uenced by the student 's own clothing preferences or ori entati ons because evalu ati ons of others are can be based on an individual' s personality and preferences (p 133). Contrary to what Roach Attire in Ed ucati on Leadership 30 and Chowdhary believe, studies by Morri s et a1. (1996); and Gorham et a1. (1997) found no significant relationship was found where the more teacher and student are similar, the greater immediacy exists between them. Roach's findings showed that attire does affect student learnin g. He found that attire had a significant positive correlation with student affective learning as well as cognitive learning. These findings can have important implicati ons. If thi s does carry over into the high school setting, the achievement and learning of our students may be affected based on what the teacher wears. Often student perform ance (and implicitl y teacher performance) is measured by controversial standardized exams .. According to Roach 's findings, these results may stati sticall y improve by merely improving a teacher's professional image. With a constant push to improve student achievement as measured by standardized exams, it is not surprising that 75 % of a dmini strators favour of mandated faculty dress codes (Prenni & Lord, 1992). Thi s study, based out of Pennsylvania, concluded that "school administration strongl y di sfavour casual dress and favour conservative attire for teachers" (p 580). Although the formality of attire may have some . effect on student learning as Roach concludes, issues such as class size, the availability of learning resources, or the socio-economic status of the community may playa larger role as a determinant of student learning. Accordingly, practices such as innovation, providing effective feedback, and setting challenging goals would have far greater impact on improving student achievement (Hattie, 1999) than would in structor attire. Roach also found a significant negati ve correlati on between TA dress and the likelihood of what he considers misbehaviours. As teacher dress increased in professionalism, student mi sbehaviours - active or passive - decreased. Thi s finding Allire in Ed ucati on Leadership 3 1 would be supported by superintendents and principals who believe that casuaJ dress contributes to discipline problems whereas conservative professional dress has a positive influence on the classroom environment (Prenni & Lord , 1992; Million , 2004), but other supporting studies of this phenomenon have been difficult to find. Although] have felt that dressing above the student levels to be important, it is not a firm conviction. As mentioned previously, ] do ask student-teachers to dress above their students because the narrow age gap may lead to respect and di scipline issues. Many of them are challenged with the focus of teaching the lesson, so fewer di srupting factors WOllld be to their advantage. Though as the age gap widens and teachers appear distinctively older, ] have witnessed that these classroom management issues tend to dimini sh. ]J1 fact , there are . seasoned teachers in our district who sport very casual attire, yet have excellent classroom management with student behaviours. In support of thi s, Roach did find that faculty dress had no significant correlation to student misbehaviour. Roach also found that there was a significant positive correlation between student perceptions of T A dress and student ratings of instruction. As professionali sm of instructor attire increased , so did the ratings of instruction. This concurs with a study by Morris et a1. (1996) where it was found that perceptions of instructor competence was highest when they were dressed in the formal professional attire (dark business suites, white shirts, dark ties and dress shoes for males, and tan or black skirted business suites, sheer hose, and heeled pumps for females), with casual professional (tan slacks, dark sport shirts with button down collars, and leather shoes for males, and skirt s and sweater and dress pumps for females) ranking a close second , and casual attire (faded worn blue Allire in Educal ion Leadership 32 jeans, light coloured T-shirts, plaid fl annel shirts worn open over T-shirts, and running shoes) had the lowest ratings. Although Roach believed there would be a signifi cant correlati on, he did not find any marked difference in student perceptions of instructor sociability and immediacy to attire. His findings do concur with those by Morri s et aJ. (1996) and the Gorham et aJ. (1997). Regardless how formal instructor attire was, students in general found that instructors were approachable. For his final research question , Roach found that faculty dress rated higher over T As attire in the areas of affective learning, cognitive learning, and ratings of instruction. Though the correlations were larger, stati sticall y, Roach considered that none were significant. With a U.S. national average age of 49.7 years for faculty members (U.S. Department of Education, 2006) , perhaps the mere older appearance of faculty commands more respect and gives the perception of competency over the younger T As. Furthermore, the experience behind faculty may also lead to better ratings in affecti ve and cognitive learning, better behaviour, and ratings of instructi on. Due to lack of experience, beginning teachers may have trouble looking beyond the scope and sequence in a given course outline while experienced facu lty can make better sense of individual topics or can draw on past encounters with student s (Reynolds. 1992). Allire in Ed uca lion Leadership 33 Implications of Attire in Education and Leadership Attire can be a very personal thing. With organisations moving toward less formal or non-existent dress codes, employees are afforded greater di scretion about their workplace attire (Rafaili, ] 997, Million , 2004). This relaxation can have the effect of having individuals invest more time and effort into what they choose to wear to work. There can be so much put forward about a person through non-verbal cues such as clothing, but what is said is dependent on the experiences of the observer. Many of those evaluations are influenced by individuals ' own experiences and in part the images they · see everyday around us. Through these experiences and stereotypes that may be portrayed in daily media, a code may be formed into reading non-verbal cues. This code helps decipher the voids in personal information given in non-verbal cues such as workplace attire. (O'Hair, Rubenstein & Steward, 200]) Attempts were made to find patterns and themes in workplace attire as it pertains to leadership and the perceptions student s have of teachers who dress in their various attires. Studies found in the context of workplace attire mainl y relate t()'those in the business or corporate world. Furthermore, studies on student perceptions of instructor attire were in the university context with students who were enrolled in business type courses. In the studies that were reviewed , t.here were frequent references to older sources suggesting that there may be an academic gap in thi s area of research . Nevertheless, there were certain themes that emerged in the review of thi s literature. RafaiJj et aJ. (1997) looked at attire and it s meaning for women in the workplace. They found that clothing served a purpose for the female participant s of their study. Clothing helped to faciJjtate their roles and function within the organisation known as Allin? in Ed uca ti o n Leadershi p 34 schemata. In some organisations, dress had influenti al meanings for the participant s where it empowered them to pelform more effectively in a vari ety of tasks (Peluchette et aI., 2006). Because this study involved only female participant s in a bu siness or corporate type setting, it would be interesting to see if the result s would be simil ar in a different workplace environment. Also, would males in general have the same sentiments about workplace attire either in a corporate setting or some other type of work environment? Rafaili et a1. also report that attire .can be a sign of position in an organisation. Workplace attire can enhance hierarchy which can have it s own issues and benefits. Gilpin (2008) notes how imp0l1ant it can be for some women to dress the part in the corporate business world - especially if they are in senior management. In a traditionally White male dominated world , in order to succeed , some women feel they mu st sacrifice some of their femininity in attire (Gilpin, 2008) , Cubillo & Brown , 2003). 1 add that some may even mask their ethnicity. This leaves me questi oning whether women in the pubbc education arena, where nearly 70% of its members are female , need to surrender to the hegemony where over 60% of thi s arena 's top leaders are White males (Province of British Columbia, 2008). Workplace attire can have possible influences with the staff in an educati onal organisation. In addition, instructor attire can also have effects with student s and their perceptions of the instructor. In reviewing studies by Chowdhary (1988) and Roach (1997), it was revealed that instructor anire can indeed affect student percepti ons of their instructor. Chowdhary found that culturally different ]ndi an attire can influence student perceptions of instructor organisation , interest, present ati on, attitude and overall teaching. A ttire in Ed uca tion Leadership 35 She claims that stereotyping influenced the participants' evaluations of thei r instructor. Chowdhary also found that the first impressions left with the test participant s while in culturally different attire had residual effects in instructor evalu ations after the instructor moved to culturally similar attire. Limits to her study include control and test groups at differing times of the day (AM/PM) and that all participants were female bu siness, marketing or home economics students. As Dickey & Pearson (2005) found , a significant number of students do not value instructor evaluations. Thi s implication of thi s is that if students among the test group were indifferent, the results of Chowdhary's study may have been skewed in favour of the control group. She also reported an increase in instructor immediacy and approachability when the she moved from culturall y different attire to culturally similar attire. Thi s does contradict findings by Morris et a1. (1996) and Gorham et a1. (1997) where they found no relationship between instructor attire and immediacy. The implication of the Chowdhary stud y suggests that dress does have impacts on students ' evaluations of their instructors. The participants of her stud y reside in a predominantly White community. ]t would be interesting to see if her study would be replicated in a culturally di verse community such as Metro-Vancouver where nearly 42% of its population is visible minoriti es (S tati sti cs Canada, 2006). furthermore , if thi s were applied to a public school setting where the socio-economic and academic backgrounds of the students are more widespread, would the findings be simi lar? ]f so, then what could be said about what teachers should wear to teach their student s? Allire in Education Leadership 36 The study by Roach (1997) examined the effects of the formality of TA attire on student learning, misbehaviours and ratings of instruction. He found that the formality of TA attire does affect all of these variables . Student learning increased as the formality of T A attire increased. In support of this, a finding from a study conducted in Pennsylvania found that the majority of superintendents and principals favour teacher dress codes (Prenni & Lord, 1992).Because this is a post-secondary setting, this may have very different implications in the public school system where issues such as student diversity, limited learning resources and funding may playa more significant role. Research has suggested that other practices such as innovation, effective feedback and goal setting have far greater influence in improving student learning (Hattie, 1999). Roach also found that as the formality of T A dress decreased, misbehaviours among the students increased . With T As having such a narrow age gap with their students, teacher-student distance may not be well established and misbehaviours can arise. The concern here is that what Roach considers as misbehaviour can be relative and, may be interpreted differently by different people. As an example according to Roach ' s definitions, a protest to unreasonable instructor expectation s could be interpreted as misbehaviour instead of seeing it as an effective use of student voice and democracy. If dress does indeed lead to improved cl assroom management , implications of how young teachers dress for the classroom may influence their teaching in a public school setting. As the formality of TA attire increased, so did student ratings of instruction. Morris et a1. (1996) also found that perceptions of instructor competence ranked highest among students when dressed in formal professional attire. Attire in Ed uca ti on Leadershi p 37 The one underlying point here is the consistency among the T As used in thi s study. With a spectrum of academic backgrounds, personaliti es and emoti onal intelligences, these factors may play' a far more signi ficant role in these student evaluations of TA instructors than Roach would lead us to beli eve. Roach did find that faculty or experi enced instructors rated favourabl y in all areas, though he considered them stati sticall y insigni ficant. Thi s is most likely attributed to a visible age gap between student find faculty, as well as ex peri ence. With the average age of 49.7 among university faculty members (U.S . Department of Education, 2006), the distinct age difference may command more respect from students. ]n additi on, experienced instructors or facult y may have a deeper understanding and wider scope of the subject material, whereas, TAs may onl y have a superfi cial understanding of it (Reynolds, 1992). With attire being such a personal expression with many meanings and interpretations, no hard set rules can be establi shed in regards to what is considered appropriate or inappropriate for workplace dress . Clothing ' S i,nfluence can be fa r reaching or it can be limiting. Regardless , as we navigate through our organi sati ons in search of tailored meanings, perhaps we wj]] find comfort in words by M ark Twain in that "The finest clothing made is a person's skin , but, of course, society demands something more than this." A llire in Ed ucati on Leadership 38 APPENDIX A - SELF·MONITORING SCALE SELF-MONlTORlNG SCALE Developed by Mark Snyder (1974) DIRECTIONS: The statements below concern your personal reacti ons to a number of different situations. No two statements are exactly alike, so consider each statement carefully before answering. IF a statement is TRUE or MOSTLY TRUE as applied to you, circle the "T" next to the question . If a statement is FALSE or NOT USUALLY TRUE as applied to you, circle the "F" next to the question . (T) (F) I . I find it hard to imitate the behaviour of other people. (T) (F) 2. My behaviour is usually an expression of my true inner feelings , attitudes, and beliefs. (T) (F) 3. At parties and social gatherings, I do not attempt to do or say things that others will like. (T) (F) 4 . I can only argue for ideas which] already believe. (T) (F) 5. I can make impromptu speeches even on topics about which] have almost no information. (T) (F) 6. I guess I put on a show to impress or entertain people. (T) (F) 7. When I am uncertain how to act in a social situ ation, ] look to the behaviour of others for cues. (T) (F) 8. J would probably make a good actor. (T) (F) 9. ] rarely seek the advice of my friends to choose movies, books, or mu sic. (T) (F) 10. I sometimes appear to others to be experi encin g deeper emoti ons than I actually am. (T) (F) II. ] laugh more when] watch a comedy with others than when alone. (T) (F) 12. In groups of people, I am rarely the center of att enti on. (T) (F) 13. In different situations and with different people, ] often act like very different persons. (T) (F) 14. I am not particularl y good at mak in g other people li ke me . All irc in Ed uca ti on Leadershi p 39 (T ) (F) 15. Even if I am not enjoyin g myself, I often pretend to be having a good time. (T ) (F) 16. I'm not always the person] appear to be. (T) (F) 17. I would not change my opini ons (or the way I do thi ngs) in order to please someone else or win their favour. (T ) (F) 18. I have considered being an entertainer. (T ) (F) 19. In order to get along and be liked, ] tend 10 be what people expect me to be rather than anything else. (T ) (F) 20. I have never been good at games like charades or improvisati onal acting. (T ) (F) 21. I have trouble changing my behaviour to suit di fferent people and different situations. (T ) (F) 22. At a party, I let others keep the jokes and stori es going. (T) (F) 23. I feel a bit awkward in company and do not show up guite as well as I should . (T ) (F) 24. I can look anyone in the eye and tell a li e with a straight face (if for a ri ght end). (T ) (F) 25. I may deceive people by being fri endl y when I reaJJ y disli ke them. A ttire in Ed uca ti on Leadershi p 40 References British Columbia Teachers' Federation . (2004). Teacher and Administrator Fact SheeT. Retrieved February 2, 2009 from : http://bctf.ca/uploadedfiles/pu blications/research reports/2004tdO J .pdf Chowdhary, U. (1988). lnstructor' s attire as a bi asing factor in students' ratings of an instructor. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 6 (2) pp] 7 - 22. Clark, L. (2006). Discipline fears as female teachers outnumber male peers by ] 2 to 1. Mail Online. Retrieved on February 22, 2009 from: http://www.dailvm ail .co.uk/news/arti cle-4J 5547 /DiscipJi ne-fears-fema Je-teachers-oUlnumber-maJe-peers-12-] .htm1 Cohen, P. (1981). Student ratings of Instruction and student achievement: A meta-analysis of multi section validit y slUdies. American Educational Research Association. 51 (3) pp 28] - 309. Cubillo, L. , & Brown, M. (2003). Women into educati onal leadership and managemen t: international differences? Journal o.fEducat ion Administration. 41 (3) pp. 278 _. 29] Dickey, D. & Pearson, C. (2005). Recency effect in coll ege slUdent course evaluations. Practical A .f.I"eJJ111('17/ Re.rearr/J & E 7Jabla/iol1, 10 (6) pp 1-10. Elrod, E. (2006). Should teachers wear business attire to school? No. NEA Today. February p. 45. Finerman , W. (Producer) & Franker, D. (Director) (June 30,2006) Th e Devil Wears Prada. USA: Fox 2000. Galin , A. & Benoliel , B. (1990). Does the way you dress affect your performance rating? Personnel. 67 (8) pp 49 - 53. Gilpin , S.S. (2008). Disadvant aged women dress for success : A slUdy of empowerment and censure, American Communication Journal , 10 (2). Gorham, l , Cohen , S.H. , & Morri s, T.L. (1997). Fashion in the classroom ll : lnstructor immediacy and attire. Communica tion Reseorch Reports l 4(J) pp ] 1 - 23 . Haft, S., Witt , PJ ., Thomas, T. (Producers), & Weir, P. (Director). (June 9, ] 989). Dead Poets Society . USA: Touchstone Picture ' . Attire in Education Leadership 41 Hattie, J. (August 2, 1999) Influences on STudenT Learning. Lecture presented at the University of Aukland, Aukland, New Zealand. Kilduff, M. , & Day, D. (1994). Do chameleons get ahead? The effects of self-monitoring on managerial careers. Academy of Management Journal. 37 (4) pp 1047 - 1060. Million, J. (2004). Dress Codes for Teachers? The Education Digest. January pp 59-61. Morris, T., Gorham, J., Cohen, S. , & Huffman, D. (1996). Fashion in the classroom: Effects of attire on student perceptions of instructors in college classes. Communication Education , 45 (April) pp135 - 148. Musca, T. (Producer), & Menendez, R. (Director). (March 11, 1988). Stand and Deliver. USA: American Playhouse. Q' Hair, D., Rubenstein, H., & Steward, R. (2001). A Speakers Guidebook: TeXT and References. Boston: Bedfors/St. Martin's Peluchette, K., Karl, K., & Rust, K. (2006). Dressing to impress: beliefs and attitudes regarding workplace attire. Journal of Business Psychology. 21 (1) pp 45 - 63. Prenni, T., Lord, T. (1992). Comparing secondary school teacher and administration reaction to a required dress code. EducaTion 1] 2(4) pp 579 - 583 Province of British Columbia (2008). SuperinTendenTs Basic Information . Retrieved on February 1,2009 from: hltp:llwww.bced.20v.bc.ca/appslimcllimclWeb/SP.do Rafaili, A., Dutton, J., Harquail, C, & Mackie-Lewis, S. (1997). Navigating by attire: The use of dress by female administrative employees, Academy of Management Journal. 40 (1) pp 9 - 45. Reynolds, A. (1992). What is competent beginning teaching? A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research 62( 1) pp 1 - 35. Roach, K.D. (1997). Effects of graduate teaching assistant attire on student learning, misbehaviours, and ratings of instruction. Communication Quaterly. 45 (3) pp 125-141. Spindler, A. (1999). What you clothes make of you. New York Times. November ]4, 1999. Retrieved September ]4, 2008 from: http://guery.nytimes.com/2st/fulJpa2e.html ?res=9805E7DD] 33AF93 7 A257 52C] A96F958260&sec=&spon=& pagewan i ed=al J Attire in Educa ti on Leadership 42 Statistics Canada (2006). Canada · s ethnocultural mosaic , 2006 Census: Canada's major census metropolitan areas. Retri eved March ]4,2006 from: ht 1)) :llw"',1\'" 1 2 .SI at can .ra/en 2]ish/census06/anal ysis/ethnicori Qj n/vancouver.cfm Towner, N. (2005). How to project the ri ght image. Community Care. 03075508: June 30, 2005: ]ssue ]579 United States Department of Educati on (2006). 2004 National Study of Postsecondary Institution Data Analysis. NCES 2007175. Washington , DC. Vogt, P. (2008). Dressi ng For The ]nterview By Industry. Retrieved on Sept] 4,2008 from http: //career-advice.monster.com/interview-preparationlDressing-for-the-]nterview-by-Indus/home.aspx Waters, R. (2006). Should teachers wear business attire to school ? Yes. NEA Today. February p. 45 . Wil son, M.G. (Producer), Broccoli , B. & Campbell , M. (Director). (2006) Casino Royale. USA, Sony Pictures & Metro Golden Mayer. Zagaski, E. (200]). Women' s fa shi on: Characteri stics perceived about a female based on her choice of clothing. Unpubli shed senior thesis paper. Western Connecticut State Uni versity. Retri eved on September] 7,2008 from 


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items