Will a Female Ever Be Elected President of the United States? You Betcha!

Compare these quotes from the 2008 Presidential Election

Quote #1
“There is a quality of playing the embattled, beleaguered victim that I find unappealing and depressing.”

Quote #2
"When it comes to the real work of crafting policy, she's often not there," .... "I don't know if she's disinterested in details or not comfortable with them, but the bottom line is: She is not truly a hands-on governor."

Both quotes are negatively describing two of the major candidates from the 2008 election. Quote #1 immediately followed a section of text where Hillary Clinton mentioned going on the attack after her Iowa Caucus loss to then Senator Barack Obama. If it was her husband or any other man that went on the attack, would they have been described as a victim? Quote #2 described then Governor Sarah Palin's visionary leadership style; a style that is shared by many male Presidents such as Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy and Ronald Reagan. Were they described as "not comfortable with details" or nor "not hands-on?"

Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin both came very close to be elected in 2008, but were the odds stacked against them prior to their runs for national office? Women have been elected as leaders in many countries around the globe, including Margaret Thatcher (United Kingdom), Corazon Aquino (Philippians), Indira Gandhi (India) Yulia Tymoshenko (Ukraine), Golda Meir (Israel) and Angela Merkel (Germany). An article from Barbara Palmer attempts to tackle the question of if a female president ever happen in the United States. The main idea in the article was that American exceptionalism and our desire for a leader with a military background. This argument doesn't explain the whole story, because all of the previously mentioned female leaders rose to power in countries with a strong military. Palmer shows the results of a poll that shows that 40% of Americans do not think the country is ready for a female president. That leaves only 60% to pull from for a winning coalition in a national election, a major initial hole for a female presidential candidate to climb from for victory.

However, over 90% of Americans said they would vote for a female for president. The odds are likely that a female president one day will be selected as president; six females are currently serving as state governors and two recent female governors are currently serving as members of President Obama's cabinet. Hillary Clinton is currently Secretary of State, the third female in recent history to serve in the highest cabinet post. Sarah Palin and Congresswoman Michelle Bachman are both considered potential candidates for the Republican nomination in the next presidential election. The key is that for women to be elected, they have to display strong leadership qualities. Traditionally, these qualities have been associated with strong male gender roles. Once Americans choose to look past traditional gender roles and a strong female candidate emerges, it will not be a question of will a female president be elected, it's a matter of when.

Not of Words but of Deeds

I was in probably my third or fourth year of teaching agriculture at South Granville when one one of my students asked me the following string of questions "Why do you spend so much time with us potting plants? You are the teacher aren't you? Shouldn't you just be telling us what to do?" At the time, I just kind of shrugged it off at the time with a response of "It has to be done," but upon further reflection, it was my belief in doing the right thing which as a leadership concept is referred to as authenticity.

According to Weber (2010), authenticity is "the consistency between what you value and how you act" (p. 166). He proceeds to offer an example of a leader who advocates for gender equality but only appoints men in senior leadership positions as being very inauthentic. If that leader is aware, they can suffer from many personal problems such as disappointment or regret. In my example in the first paragraph, I have the personal belief that all people should put in effort when the job needs to be done. It is only authentic if we do what we say when we are in leadership roles.

As a agricultural teacher educator in training, I truly understand sharing the importance of the concept of authenticity with all of my teachers, whether they are in their first year or thirtieth year in the classroom. As agricultural teachers, we are expected to share with our students the FFA Creed. At the beginning of the creed, E.M Tiffany writes "I believe in the future of agriculture, with a faith born not of words but of deeds." In my situation with my former student, I was showing them with my deeds how to operate a business, not telling them with my words. My actions were counter intuitive to their previous belief of their role of a classroom teacher. To be authentic as a leader, you can't be afraid to get your hands dirty.

It's Time to Ask a New Question

Early in my teaching career; I noticed that my students had different talents that each of them brought to the educational setting. No individual student was exactly the same in their talents, but they were all evaluated the same way, a multiple choice test on arcane material that may or may not be applicable to a real world setting. Surprisingly, some of my colleagues failed to recognize these talents and would automatically write off students when they did not meet a certain testing or assignment criteria. After recently being re-exposed to the theory in a graduate leadership course, it caused me to wonder, how many educators do not receive exposure to Howard Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences?

Gardner's theory covers eight potential intelligences that people may potentially have; spatial, linguistic, logical-mathematical, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal and naturalistic. The model allows for individuals to have varying rates of each intelligence type, because it is difficult to quantify human intelligence in the model. Traditional IQ tests only measure the ability for people to analyze linguistic or mathematical problems, they do not provide for the full range of human intelligence. The key difference between the traditional and Gardner's theory would come from Gardner’s definition of intelligence as the ability to solve a problem or create a product that is valued within one or more cultures. This definition does not lend itself well to traditional testing, therefore exposing the major faultline between Multiple Intelligence Theory and traditional education.

Numbers and scores in education do have their right place, they help us to gain a snapshot of the classroom and learning situation. Numbers fail to tell us the entire story, it is improbable to place a numerical value on someone's unique talents and abilities. When we have to look at individuals and not the artificial numbers that are attached to them, we are then required to provide that person dignity. It is a novel concept to empower individuals by working with their individual intelligences to generate knowledge. With the “glowing” results coming from public school districts across the nation, it is time we try a different approach. The question that we have been asking is "Are you intelligent?" The question that we should be asking is "How are you intelligent?"

Ugly American Syndrome

My wife and I went on our first cruise together celebrating our first wedding anniversary, our first port of call was Ocho Rios, Jamaica. Besides Canada and the United Kingdom, Jamaica was my first experience with a foreign country. It was impossible to not notice the beggars present at the cruise terminal and the shops at the port that were selling overpriced "Jamaican" merchandise catering to the tastes of mostly American tourists. Caribbean cruises stand out to me for their ports of call that cater to the "Ugly American," people that compare everything at the port of call to American standards.

When examining "Ugly American Syndrome" one cannot help but think of Social Identity Theory as an explanation for how we characterize a group of people. As much as Americans like to claim that we are multicultural with different backgrounds; when we are abroad we are generally viewed as "Yanks" or worse, the "Great Satan." Americans are characterized this way for a reason; this list of what not to wear or how to act in Europe might give some insight into some of the truths of the perceptions of Americans around the globe. The list helps to verify one of the key points of Social Identity Theory, the in-group "Americans" are catering to the needs of the in group while excluding the needs of the out-group "the visiting culture." From Bratislava to Aruba to Roatan, it's been very easy for me to find "Authentic American Cuisine" such as McDonald's, Subway, or Kentucky Fried Chicken.

Cruises have been a fun, economical way for our family to visit destinations that would be unaffordable if we had to fly to each destination. A representative from Carnival Cruise Lines even mentioned to us on our last voyage that 97% of all Caribbean Cruise passengers were American. It is natural for a company that makes money off of Americans to try to cater to American tastes and desires. However, if you really want to enjoy a destination, avoid the "little America" sections of the town and begin to try to absorb the local surroundings and culture and adapt to the areas that you are visiting. Get off the tour bus, visit a local shop or grocery store, hire a local driver or if you are truly adventurous, take the public transportation in a country where you do not even begin to understand the language. Social identity theory explains why we are predisposed to gravitate to what is comfortable with-in our group. To grow as individuals, we should seek to leave our comfort group of nationality and enter another group, that group that includes appreciative world travelers. Two great resources that have helped us in traveling the world have been Rick Steves (European Travel) and Cruise Critic (Ship Ports of Call). Not only will you appreciate the destination, you're identity will take on some of the place visited and hopefully help cure some symptoms of "Ugly American Syndrome" back at home.

You Cannot Prevent Crazy

I was in oblivious bliss last Saturday Afternoon; my NC State Wolfpack had beaten Wake Forest, Virginia Tech began looking like a team that might make it to the Big Dance and it was funny to watch the Seahawks win a game that they were not supposed to win. But then my Grandmother called and asked me if I had heard about the news in Arizona. As she was telling me about a congressman being shot; I went online to try to find out some specifics about the case. From the initial reports that I happened to find online; you cannot prevent crazy.

The issue has actually hit much closer to home for me than I thought; the 9-year old girl that was murdered happened to be the daughter of my uncle's supervisor in the Los Angeles Dodgers organization. My thoughts and prayers are with all of the victims in this tragedy. As a father and a husband, I can't imagine the anguish that they are feeling at this time; all because of one simple fact; you cannot prevent crazy.

There is one thing that I'm thankful for in this whole tragedy; President Obama sent the FBI in to conduct the investigation. The sheriff is behaving as an absolute buffoon; what part of not commenting about an ongoing investigation does he not understand? Many pundits in the media have been worse; trying to portray people that have no link whatsoever to the shooter as accomplices. As has been proven by previous tragedies at Virginia Tech, Columbine or September 11; and by the comments of people that would best be served by remaining silent; you just cannot prevent crazy.

My Four Life Streams

Bruce Avolio has developed a unique metaphor relating to leadership development that involves the development of the life stream. The life stream represents events that you accumulate to from birth to the present that shape how you choose to influence others and yourself. According to his proposed theory, leaders change over time based upon the events that have happened in their lives. The theory is abstract in nature, but easy for most people not versed in leadership theory to grasp as long as they understand how a river flows.

Who says that our life has to be defined by one stream? To build on Avolio's metaphor, my leadership journey could be defined by four separate river valleys; the Yadkin, the Dan, the Neuse and the New. All four of these rivers flow through North Carolina and I have lived in each of the valleys at one time in my life. All of these river valleys have distinctly affected my life stream.

The Yadkin River represents my heritage and my roots. The Edwards family settled on the Little Yadkin River in the 18th century. They began a long heritage of farming passed down for 200 years. I became a part of the first generation to not live on a farm; funny because I later became an agriculture teacher. The Dan River represents my coming of age. Many nights I camped on the banks of this river not realizing how much the skills that I learned in scouting still apply today. The Neuse River represents my first loves; I was married not to far from the banks of the Neuse River and my son was born there several years later. The creek that ran behind my high school agriculture department and that ran through NC State's campus both fed the same river. The New River represents the future. The river is world famous for its rapids, fast-paced and sometimes full of waterfalls like graduate school. The New River eventually flows into the Mississippi River Delta, so it represents not only change but the opportunity for great growth.

Think about your own life. Not everyone is affected by living around four different bodies of water, but each of us has a life stream. Remember the water flow that has made us who we are and how we are will change us into who we want to be.

Oak Table Team Leadership

Sitting around an oak table, Walter Newman stated the following need for a new organization for young farm boys:

"In my opinion the farm boys of Virginia who are enrolled in vocational agriculture are equal to any other group of boys in the State. But somehow the boys themselves seem to have a feeling of inferiority. Especially is this true when the farm boy goes to the city and has to compete with his city cousin. This condition should not exist. I believe that a strong organization of our boys in agriculture would help them to overcome this handicap. Let's form an organization that will give them a greater opportunity for self-expression and for the development of leadership. In this way they will develop confidence in their own ability and pride in the fact that they are farm boys."

Newman met with Edmund Magill, Henry Groseclose and Harry Sanders around that oak table and created the parameters of the Future Farmers of Virginia (FFV); the organization that turned into today's National FFA Organization. The men used team-based leadership to create the new organization. Henry Groseclose, considered the "Father of the FFA," created the constitution, ceremonies, rituals, and degrees of membership. Walter Newman advocated for the new organization and helped create new statewide organizations throughout the nation. Edmund Magill trained a generation of agriculture teachers as a professor at Virginia Tech. Harry Sanders served as a district agriculture teacher supervisor and established an agricultural education department in Puerto Rico before returning to Virginia Tech. The FFV served as the framework for the foundation of the Future Farmers of America in 1928.

Each member of the team recognized the need to create an organization for farm boys. The team members pursued different paths while expanding the FFA. The foundation of the FFA was a solution to a problem developed through a team approach. When faced with a challenge, teams need to analyze problems then pursue solutions based upon the strengths of the individual members. True team leadership can create solutions that can positively affect millions of people.