- Published: December 18, 2021
- Updated: December 18, 2021
- University / College: Northwestern University
- Language: English
- Downloads: 31
Introduction
Don’t let anyone tell you there weren’t notable and effective women throughout history. They were always there, but because historians failed to note women’s accomplishments in HIStory, the women of each generation have to reinvent themselves. Spread the word of women’s accomplishments. It is time to UNDELETE our past .
Irene Stuber
Women have always played influential leadership roles in society in general and education specifically, but cultural notions have frequently limited women’s roles to behind-the-scenes contributions. The result is that the female voice and wisdom have not been fully appreciated by subsequent generations. Writing about another unrecognized woman school leader, Hauser (2006) states,
The importance of using a feminist lens to understand Caroline Pratt (American educator, 1867–1954, who made significant contributions to progressive and early childhood education) lies in the argument that without women’s history and a feminist consciousness, the achievements of women in public and professional life can easily be erased. (p. 10)
This project emanated from a call for papers on women school leaders. We met one another through Women Leading Education (WLE) and in person when Angelikki was in the American Midwest during her Fulbright Scholar experience at Illinois State Univerisity. Dr. Linda Lyman mentored both of us at different points in our careers. As will be evident later on in this chapter, mentoring is a recurring theme in women’s leadership.
The stories of two women – one Greek, the other American – who lived in the 19th century will be told as a way to more fully understand their influence on education. Aikaterini Laskaridou and Lydia Moss Bradley were selected because the legacies left behind continue to have a powerful influence on education even today, over a century after their deaths. With this chapter, we sought to provide deeper understandings of Aikaterini Laskaridou and Lydia Moss Bradley’s lives and accomplishments, and relate the understandings gained from their stories to current understandings of how women educators influence contemporary societies. The relevance of this endeavor is summed up by Elias Xyrotiris (1961), who recently wrote about Laskaridou; “ Since Laskaridou’s death, there [has been] no one to take the baton and to continue her work with the same enthusiasm and dedication” (p. 13). The hope is that this essay will contribute to a better appreciation of the considerable legacies left by the subjects of our investigation.
In the words of Ella Baker, American civil rights leader and activist, “ In order to see where we are going, we not only must remember where we have been, but we must understand where we have been” ( Preskill, 2005 ). Taking Ella Baker’s words to heart then, to remember and understand the lives of Aikaterini Laskaridou and Lydia Moss Bradley requires more than a summary of the details of their lives, but also a deeper understanding of ways they dealt with societal expectations for women to create their legacies that endure today.
The chapter is organized into the Introduction, Methods section, an Authors’ reflection that reveals not only our reasoning as we constructed the means by which to study these two women, but also our reactions to the process, the stories of Aikaterini and Lydia, a Comparative Analysis employing Lambert and Gardner’s Framework for the Development of Women Leaders , Summary, and final Authors’ Reflection.
Materials and Methods
This chapter employed historical research, which is the systematic collection and evaluation of data to describe, explain, and understand past actions or events. The purpose of historical research is to provide insights into particular events so that others can benefit from past experiences ( Fraenkel and Wallen, 2003 ). The research questions we sought to answer involved how do the lives of two women who lived over a century ago on two continents continue to exert leadership in education today and how do their life stories, which have been relatively unacknowledged in leadership literature provide models for women leaders today” ( Lambert and Gardner, 2009 ). Limitations of the research method include a paucity of pertinent information on the life story of Lydia Moss Bradley. While there is more data related to the life of Aikaterini Laskaridou, even documents on her life story are separated by over a century. All documents are secondary ( Fraenkel and Wallen, 2003 ).
We used feminist research lens to tell and analyze the life stories of the two women who lived for the most part in the 19th century. Taking into considerations the limitations of historical research cited above, we sought to study these “ women from the perspective of their own experiences to develop versions of reality that more accurately reflect their own experience” ( Young, 2012 , p. 37). “ The possibilities of leadership values, perspectives, goals, and behaviors from women’s experience” ( Marshall, 2003 , p. 215) of Aikaterini Laskaridou and Lydia Moss Bradley are at the center of this research. We sought to understand to the extent possible the cultures in which they lived recognizing limitations in our understandings of differences in culture related to time, location, and lived experiences. Another limitation emerged given the considerable diversities in the women’s backgrounds. While both women came from relatively privileged backgrounds, Aikaterini was highly educated while Lydia had no formal education, which was not that uncommon in her time in the United States. This difference is reflected in greater availability of written documents on Aikaterini and given not only Lydia’s lack of formal education, but also her private nature.
Leadership
Leadership is a concept that is heavily defined by cultural traditions and roles most often defined by military or business models. Women school leaders in the 21st century, in spite of movement toward greater acceptance, continue to struggle against prevailing cultural priorities to constrict talents and energies toward hearth and home ( Lambert and Gardner, 2009 ). Acquiring and succeeding into leadership roles requires women of our day to negotiate cultural “ command and control” leadership notions.
Leadership mental models continue to include bigger than life myths regarding strong, take charge leaders who solve problems that stymie the rest of us. Neither Aikaterini nor Lydia fit a traditionally strong heroic leader mold. We contend, however, that Aikaterini and Lydia embody Howard Gardner’s (2011) definition of leaders because 100 years after their deaths each continues to be a “ person who, by word and/or personal example, markedly influence the behaviors, thoughts, and/or feelings of a significant number of their fellow human beings” (p. 5–6). Through their lives and legacies, Aikaterini Laskaridou and Lydia Moss Bradley demonstrated leadership as they “ articulated a vision, set standards for performance, and created a focus and direction” ( Bolman and Deal, 2017 , p. 338). The life story of each fits the Level 5 leaders identified by Collins (2005) as leaders who “ build an enduring greatness through a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will” (p. 12).
Aikaterini Laskaridou was distinct from current day visions of heroic leadership, described as highly educated, multitalented, enthusiastic, visionary, dedicated, and tireless. Lydia Moss Bradley exercised powerful leadership from her stately home in Peoria, Illinois even as she tended to her chickens and other domestic details of living, while also serving on a local bank board and engaging in her many business pursuits.
In telling the stories of these two women leaders, our purpose is not to distinguish male from female leadership, but to extract benefit from their stories wisdom that is not well known. We seek to demonstrate that visions of leadership that are held by societies in general and educators in particular are incomplete when voices of powerful, influential women are not well known. Thus, we seek to broaden the conceptions of leadership needed to contribute in some way toward resolution of contemporary societal challenges due.
To reveal the significance of the contributions of Aikaterini Laskaridou and Lydia Moss Bradley requires not only knowledge of the details of their lives, but also understanding of the cultures in which they lived and how they dealt with those conditions. Both lived during similar time periods (Aikaterini 1842–1916, Lydia 1816–1908). One lived in Greece, the birthplace of democracy and the other in a new democracy that was growing into an influential democracy. Aikaterini was highly educated, Lydia learned to read and compute in a neighbor’s kitchen. Both used their substantial wealth to benefit their communities.
The final methods decision used in this study relates to analysis of the data collected. Lambert and Gardner’s (2009) Framework of Women’s Leadership Development (p. 31) grounded the collected information on the lives of these two women school leaders. The literal recounting of their lives revealed few similarities beyond the obvious that they were both female, relatively well-to-do, and their stories were recorded to some extent. Analyses based upon Lambert and Gardner’s themes of commitment to values, evolving self, courage, imagination, community and mentoring (p. 31) revealed astonishing similarities. Lambert and Gardner’s themes of commitment will be explained in greater detail in the analysis section of the chapter.
Author Reflections
While each of us have written extensively about women school leaders, neither of us identify as “ experts” in feminist ideology. However, the stories of Aikaterini Laskaridou and Lydia Moss Bradley resonated deeply with us. Their stories touched our souls to an extent that surprised us. We identify with their life struggles and are inspired by their lives. At the same time, we recognize some obvious limitations in our telling of the stories of these women because they are separated from us by over a century and they lived two continents, as do we. We acknowledge the “ different conditions of life define what constitutes being a woman” ( Young, 2012 , p. 35) and take full responsibility to create credible contexts of the culture of the times in which these women lived.
Through the feminist lens we sought to contribute in small ways to work against all forms of oppression such as racism and classism, by appealing to liberated conceptions of leadership released from sexist notions of leadership ( hooks, 2000 ). We sought to record the competence of two women school leaders recognizing that “ It is not just any female leaders that need to be heard. It is someone who has been able to subvert the organization to create equality” ( Shakeshaft, 2015 , p. xviii).
We hold ourselves accountable and responsible by stating clearly the influences that we self-identify as researchers in order to demonstrate self-awareness of our social positionality, values, perspectives, and self-critique ( Young, 2012 ). We acknowledge how, as female educators ourselves, we are shaped by the strong influence of the thoughts and ideas of western civilization, one of us from Greece, the other from the United States. Despite our cultural differences, each of us has been deeply affected by the mainstream ideology of our times that have dictated, in open and subtle ways, the boundaries of our lives and dreams.
Each of us has been fortunate to co-author books with Dr. Linda Lyman. Angeliki co-authored with Linda in Shaping social justice leadership: Insights of women educators worldwide (2012). Jenny worked with Linda early in her (Jenny’s) scholarly career to co-author with Linda and Dr. Dianne Ashby Leaders Who Dare (2005), the stories of Illinois women school leaders who came of age professionally in a time when few women were school leaders.
We extend deep gratitude to Linda for another reason. Linda was a Fulbright Scholar in Greece (2005). While in Greece, she collaborated with Angeliki and carried out a cross-cultural research on women leaders as democratic change agents. This research project signified the beginning of a long-lasting collaboration, friendship, and mentorship since Linda was an established scholar in her field and Angeliki a young scholar and academic. Influenced by Linda Lyman, each of us pursued and were awarded Fulbright Scholar grants. Jenny was awarded a Fulbright Scholar grant to Ukraine during spring 2012 and again to Latvia in 2018. Angeliki came to central Illinois in fall of 2013 on a Fulbright Scholar grant.
Our experiences as Fulbright scholars were life-changing and when we considered the personal impact for each of us, we realized that our values and identification as a Greek and American scholar were tested and deepened. Our conceptions of educational leaders were broadened through relationships with Ukrainian, Latvian, and American women whose life experiences differ greatly from our own. Each of us returned home with a deepened recognition that similarities between global women school leaders are much stronger than cultural differences.
Leaders’ narratives are a way of understanding experience and must be understood in terms of both individual and social contexts ( Clandinin and Connelly, 2000 ). The cultural contexts that Aikaterini Laskaridou and Lydia Moss Bradley lived in held rigid roles for women and, in different ways, both Laskaridou and Moss Bradley contributed outside the prescriptions of their culture. Understanding the constraints experienced is not as important as understanding, more than a century after they lived, to the extent possible, how each self- identified, aspirations they held for work, and the impacts of contributions each made.
In telling the stories of these two women leaders, our purpose is not to distinguish male from female leadership, but to extract benefit from their stories wisdom that is not well known. We seek to demonstrate that visions of leadership that are held by societies in general and educators in particular are incomplete when voices of powerful, influential women are not well known. Thus we seek to broaden the conceptions of leadership needed to resolve contemporary societal challenges due to globalization.
To reveal the significance of the contributions of Aikaterini Laskaridou and Lydia Moss Bradley requires not only knowledge of the details of their lives, but also understanding of the cultures in which they lived and how they dealt with those conditions. Both lived during similar time periods (Aikaterini 1842–1916, Lydia 1816–1908). One lived in Greece, the birthplace of democracy and the other in the United States, a new democracy that was growing into global influence. Aikaterini was highly educated, Lydia learned to read and compute in a neighbor’s kitchen. Both used their substantial wealth to benefit their communities. Descriptions of their lives and contributions follow.
The Greek Educational System and Aikaterini Laskaridou’s Contributions
Greece in the 19th century is marked by its independence from the Ottoman Empire after more than 400 years of occupation. The end of Greece’s Independence War in 1830 marked the beginning of a new era for Greece as a kingdom ruled by the German king Otto. That time also marked the beginning of the country’s economic, political, societal and educational restructuring. The first schools in Greece were private and were founded by the American missionaries King, Robinson, and Hill in 1831 to educate the boys of wealthy families. Later a school for girls began operating at the Hill’s residence in Athens. By 1840, the first public elementary schools opened in Athens for boys and girls, separately.
Attempts to institute preschool education in Greece began around the same time, mainly through the efforts of a few individuals and foreign missionaries following similar attempts that took place all around Europe. The international environment proved to be very important in the formation of pre-school education in Greece. Developments in European countries were a constant point of reference for Greek politicians and educators. As a result of this influence, the educational institutions that provided pre-school education in Greece, were infiltrated by the European ideas at the time. Their establishment and operation, the organization and content of teaching, the training of their executives, are all influenced by the French and German schools. Yet, progress in this domain was slow and fraught with difficulties. In large part this was due to the political and ethnic instabilities associated with frequent wars as well as cultural norms ( Doliopoulou, 2000 ).
During this time, Greek pedagogic thought shifted away from the ideas of Rousseau toward those of Pestalozzi, aided particularly by advocates like Froebel ( Ziogou et al., n. d.). However, despite the efforts of some highly motivated individuals, there was no State recognition of the need for preschool education until 1895 when a law that recognized nursery education for three to six-year-olds was enacted [Kitsaras, as cited in Doliopoulou (2006)]. In the years leading up to this turning point, a number of individuals had painstakingly laid a solid foundation for formal preschool education in Greece. Among them, Aikaterini Laskaridou stands out as a leading figure in the struggle to have women recognized as qualified individuals who could contribute to the improvement of the ethical and social life of Greek children and, ultimately, the advancement of women’s role in society.
Aikaterini Xristomanou-Laskaridou was born in Vienna on September 28, 1842 to an affluent family that originated in Macedonia-Greece. Her father was a businessman who was born in Serres (Macedonia) but raised in Vienna. He and his wife Maria had six children, with Aikaterini second in line. Aikaterini spent her childhood in Vienna, where great teachers educated her in two languages: French and German. Her father’s influence was instrumental in developing her love of nature. In 1856, when she was 13, her family returned to Greece and established themselves in Athens. According to Aikaterini, her father was such a patriot that, as soon as they disembarked at the port of Piraeus, he asked his children to get on their knees and kiss the soil of Greece.
Four years after the family’s relocation to Greece, in 1859, Aikaterini married the wealthy businessman Laskari Laskaridi and subsequently had three daughters. As a mother Aikaterini was deeply devoted to her children, but at the same time she continued her education, studying classical literature and pedagogy, history, physics, philosophy, psychology, geography, mythology, art, and religion. Due to her frequent travels abroad, Aikaterini was able to keep informed about the latest developments in pedagogy, in which she had an exceptional interest. Aikaterini envisioned a revitalization of the Greek educational system, and the elevation of the status of women in Greek society through education – a purpose she set her mind to accomplish using her vast knowledge acquired in her studies and her experience abroad.
Aikaterini began her professional work as a teacher at an all-girl school in Athens. There she taught for two years before she became a principal. When the owner of the school retired in 1875, Aikaterini took over, renamed the school, and gave it an all-new identity, which was focused entirely on promoting the education of young Greek women. A year later, after she had studied the Froebelian system in Dresden, Germany, she began her systematic efforts to infuse the Froebelian system into the Greek educational context, starting at her own school. Subsequently Aikaterini promoted the new system in more schools including preschools, primary, and secondary schools. At the same time, she personally trained the first 36 teachers who subsequently spread the knowledge like “ good missionaries” to yet other schools. Before we proceed, we present a brief account of the Froebelian approach to kindergarten education.
Froebel’s Approach to Education
Froebel was greatly influenced by the work of German Romantic philosophers Rousseau and Fichte, as well as ancient Greek thinkers, and had been exposed to Taoist and Buddhist teachings. Froebel was the first to recognize that significant brain development occurs between birth and age 3. His method combined an awareness of human physiology and the recognition that humans are, in essence, creative beings. Because he recognized that education begins in infancy, Froebel saw mothers as the ideal first teachers of humanity. Women, he believed, were best-suited to nurture children and become teachers in his schools. As such, the Froebel Kindergarten offered the first significant careers for women outside the home. At that time, women were not expected (or often allowed) to work professionally. The Kindergarten attracted ambitious, intelligent women, who received advanced education and developed businesses of their own. Fröbel’s great insight was to recognize the importance of the activity of the child in learning. He introduced the concept of “ free work” into pedagogy and established the educational worth of toys. Froebel’s method inspired and informed the work of Maria Montessori, Rudolf Steiner and others, who adopted his ideas and adapted his materials according to their own work. Prior to Friedrich Froebel very young children were not educated.
Aikaterini’s Contribution
At the policy level Aikaterini injected Froebelian principles into preschool education in Greece and contributed to the establishment of a College of Education wherein nursery teachers were officially trained for the first time in post war Greece (Greece’s independence war from the Turkish occupation). She was personally involved in the training of those teachers and in the dissemination of the Froebelian method by lecturing, publishing articles, books, and magazines, and by sending graduates of the College of Education to teach in all areas of Greece as well as places abroad where Greek civilization still thrived, like Cyprus, Egypt, and Odessa in Romania.
At a pragmatic level, she worked relentlessly to found and operate nursery schools in Athens and staff in the surrounding areas schools with graduates of the College of Education. In order to improve women’s lives, she also contributed to the Union of Greek Women, in which she presided for a number of years. During that time she assisted women refugees from the 30-day Greco-Turkish war of 1897. At the same time, she established shelters for poor women in Athens and Pireaus, placing them in jobs that ensured their sustenance while providing safety and education for their young children in shelters that used Froebel’s methods ( Dimitriadi, 2012 ).
Aikaterini’s success in embedding the Froebelian approach in Greek education was not only due to her passion and persistent efforts, but also to various other activities in which she engaged. The first was to promote Froebel’s system of education among Greeks. She accomplished that by translating and publishing Froebel’s work, by giving lectures, and by contacting research on the applicability of Froebel’s ideas in the Greek educational system. In addition to those, Aikaterini published many children’s books, various educational books, and a great number of scientific articles (e. g., on Froebelian nurseries, 1880; How to entertain kids, 1883; The Froebelian system in Greece, 1885). Those activities succeeded in awakening interest in preschool education and allowed for more nursery schools to operate in various areas around the country. Aikaterini became so well known to the Greek world, that Greek schools inside and outside the country (i. e., Egypt, Turkey, and Romania) sent her requests to train kindergarten teachers in the Froebelian system.
Although Aikaterini’s love and passion was for children and their education, she was equally passionate about the vision of women’s education. She never stopped talking about the need to reform the education of women. She believed strongly that women’s education should be based on scientific grounds and that it should be carried out in universities like men. To understand her efforts to support women’s education we need to bring into perspective the status of women in Greece during Aikaterini’s time.
In the 19th century Greek women were subjected to the power of the man – a father or a husband. As agricultural work, in rural Greece, required cooperation and the distribution of tasks among family members, women were considered almost equals to men. The increasing urbanization of the population at the end of the 19th century brought about radical changes in family life. The established balance between its members was shaken and the position of women was further degraded. The house was considered “ women’s kingdom” at the same time that the public life was a man’s domain. Upper class women were not deemed appropriate to leave the house unaccompanied by a male relative, whereas lower class women were allowed to go out to work ( Dimitriadi, 2012 ). Marriage was considered a means of social ascension, as the dowry that accompanied the bride was an opportunity for the groom to accumulate capital, but at the same time it turned marriage into an economic transaction and commercialized human relations. Married women were completely dependent on their spouses, financially and legally.
Aikaterini fought for women to become equals to men because, as she argued, “ this is how women become complete” ( Dimitriadi, 2012 , p. 219). Her work was recognized by the Greek state on various occasions during her lifetime, and she was awarded many medals. On one such occasion Queen Sofia visited her at her home to give her the Silver Cross of Christ. Forty years after her death, at the Conference of the Global Organization for Preschool Education in 1956, Aikaterini was recognized as a leading figure of preschool education worldwide, and that year was named the Year of Aikaterini Laskaridou.
Aikaterini Laskaridou taught to all those who were fortunate enough to meet her that one should strive to fulfill a purpose one heartedly believes in. Aikaterini died in 1916, but her legacy continues to capture people’s hearts because it was founded in her unequivocal love for people – especially children, and her visionary ideas for the advancement of women’s education.
Lydia Moss Bradley (1816–1908)
This eloquent description of Mrs. Bradley sums up her life and legacy.
If you turned an estate worth half a million dollars into a fortune of over two million dollars, you would be prosperous. If you were the director of the board of a national bank for 25 years, you would be a leader. If you donated a city park and endowed a private college, and if you gave money and land to many community projects, you would be a great philanthropist. If you accomplished all of this as a woman, you would be astonishing, and if you achieved all of this as a woman between the years of 1816 and 1908, you would be Lydia Moss Bradley (Illinois Early Women).
Lydia Moss was born in Vevay, Indiana on July 30, 1816, the youngest of six surviving children of Zealy Moss and Jenny Glassock. Zealy was 61 years of age and Jenny was 50 when their last child was born. Her father, whose influence would remain with her all her life, was an industrious entrepreneur who possessed an extraordinary ability to accomplish what he set out to do. Zealy’s compassion for the dispossessed was evident in his deeply held opposition to slavery. Zealy was generous to all six of his children, giving each of them a parcel of land in the Vevay area. In spite of the family’s relative prosperity, everyone worked on the farm, a habit that Lydia continued throughout her life. Eventually all of the Moss children with the exception of one, resettled in Peoria, Illinois ( Upton, 1994 ).
Similar to other pioneer girls of her time, Lydia Moss received no formal education. She learned to read, write, and work with numbers in the kitchen of an Indiana neighbor, Mrs. Campbell ( Upton, 1994 ). Lydia married Tobias Bradley on May 11, 1837. They resettled in Peoria, Illinois a few years after their marriage. But while still in Vivay, they suffered their first tragedy when their first child, Rebecca passed away at age five. Lydia gave birth to six children, none of whom survived childhood. The last surviving child, Laura, died in 1864. The Daily Transcript (Peoria newspaper of the day) on Saturday, February 7, 1864 recorded:
The funeral of Miss Laura Bradley, daughter of Tobias S. Bradley, was largely attended yesterday afternoon, the pupils of the High School being present in a body. The deceased was but 15 years of age, a member of the High School, and a young lady of much promise. The remains were interred at Springdale Cemetery (Upton, p. 25).
Note, that consistent with the custom of the time, Lydia’s name was not included in the obituary.
Three years after the death of their only surviving child, Laura, Lydia suffered another tragedy when Tobias was killed in a freak carriage accident ( Upton, 1994 ; Lyons, 2003 ). He died without a will, leaving Lydia to put their significant financial affairs in order (Upton). She would live forty years after Tobias died. Prior to his death, only close friends and relatives in terms of women’s roles of her time likely would have remembered her. Many women in her situation might have retreated to her large stately home to live out their lives in relative comfort and obscurity.
But Lydia’s story does not end with Tobias’s death. Indeed, the legacy presented on these pages, began after his death. Prior to his untimely death, she and Tobias had talked about an orphanage as a memorial for their children. Lydia decided against the orphanage because she saw an “ orphanage as a ‘ stand pat’ institution – a way-station for homeless children where they were fed and clothed until such time as they were old enough to be sent out into society” ( Upton, 1994 , p. 33). Lydia dreamed of a memorial to her children that would benefit not only students, but also the local community.
As she researched possibilities for the memorial that eventually became Bradley University, Mrs. Bradley demonstrated her values described here by Upton; “ Where others saw a problem and either yielded to its insolubility or sought solutions based on the past, Lydia sought solutions in new and untried ways when her intuition and good sense indicated a chance for success” (p. 33).
When she didn’t have knowledge in a particular area, Lydia sought out those who did know. Hammond, her business manager of many years, said of Lydia Moss Bradley, “ What she knew, she knew, and would not be cheated out of it by sophistry or persuasion. What she did not know, she never pretended to know, and was willing to have settled by those who did know” (Wycoff, The First Decade 126 as cited in Illinois Early Women, 2008). She worked carefully with William Rainey Harper, president of the University of Chicago who encouraged her to create the Institute while she was still alive rather than bequeath it upon her death. The Institute was framed to some degree to be similar to the University of Chicago, but Mrs. Bradley was clear that Bradley Polytechnic Institute would maintain its independence in order to fulfill her original purpose, which always included service to the greater Peoria community.
Zealy Moss passed on to his youngest child a rich legacy of industry, passion for social justice and generosity that Lydia Moss Bradley fully embraced through her life. Her unique business acumen and life habits provided her with the wealth and wisdom to create Bradley University. Her passion for social justice, certainly not a term that would have been used during her time, created the vision for an institution of higher learning available to many who might not otherwise have benefited from an education. Finally, Lydia’s generosity always benefited the recipient and the community. Each quality informs the other to create a unique, meaningful, and enduring legacy.
There is no record that Mrs. Bradley ever expressed how she dealt with the ways in which her self-image might contrast with dominant cultural models for women of her time. Chase (1995) distinguishes between “ narratives of the achievements of accomplished women and talk about subjection to gender and racial inequities” (p. 11). We have no way to determine how Lydia Moss Bradley felt about existing inequities of her time for women. What we do know is that during a period when women were given scant power through legal or social means, Mrs. Bradley’s life enriched others not only those who lived in her time but also in generations to come. The intention here is not so much to impress the reader with Mrs. Bradley’s accomplishments, as to provide new understandings into her leadership.
In a time when women could not vote (in the United States), Lydia Moss Bradley’s power had to be acquired and utilized carefully. She was a strong, independent woman in a time when women were expected to be tractable. If she had acquired so much wealth and influence for her own glorification she might have been viewed differently, but she established the respect of those close to her through her character and her generosity (Early Illinois Women, 2008).
Over 100 years after her death, the wisdom and spirit of Lydia Moss Bradley continue. Through her life she embodied the values handed down by her parents. She worked hard and when life dealt enormous difficulties through the deaths of her entire immediate family, Lydia prevailed to create wealth that she used to benefit others. The voice of Lydia Moss Bradley, which is available to us solely through the writings of others and her accomplishments, remains as powerful today as it was over a hundred years ago.
Comparative Analysis of Lives and Legacies
After researching the life stories of Aikaterini Laskaridou and Lydia Moss Bradley, we adapted the framework employed by Linda Lambert and Mary Gardner in Women’s Ways of Leading (2009). We chose Lambert and Gardner’s framework because we regarded their work as the most appropriate means to compare and analyze the lives and work of these two women. Prior to the comparative analysis, we were most aware of the remarkable accomplishments of our subjects. We also identified similarities between their work and the tenants of WLE. When the call for papers to the 2019 WLE convention was posted, we immediately recognized strong congruence to our project and the conference theme – Ways of seeing women’s leadership in education: stories, images, metaphors, methods and theories. Upon receiving the call for papers, we quickly reconnected and set out to respond to the call for papers to the 2019 WLE Conference in Nottingham, England.
The framework is summarized this way. “ We propose that women who leadcommit to values, are conscious of their evolving selves, invoke passion and courage, arouse the imagination, create community, and mentor the next generation ” ( Lambert and Gardner, 2009 p. 5). The life stories of Aikaterini Laskaridou and Lydia Moss Bradley are not only fascinating, but also important to inform current discourse about the roles and contributions of women to contemporary global education.
Lambert and Gardner’s (2009) first theme is values. Values guide our behavior by telling us what to do and what not to do. Begley (1999) defines values as “ those conceptions of the desirable, which motivate individuals and collective groups to act in particular ways to achieve particular ends” (p. 237). Leaders whose actions align with clearly articulated values both to themselves and others, create confidence and inspire trust ( Kouzes and Posner, 2012 ; Combs et al., 2015 ). Leaders who are able to integrate universal values such as equity, care, social justice into their inner and outer lives are much more likely to achieve a strong sense of purpose ( Lambert and Gardner, 2009 ).
The similarities in Aikaterini and Lydia’s values are more striking than the differences. Both women greatly respected learning, one as an academic, the other as a businesswoman. Each was an expert in their field who sought additional information to accomplish their goals – Aikaterini studied with Froebel to learn about integrating kindergarten into Greek education and Lydia consulted extensively with William Rainey Harper from the University of Chicago in the creation of Bradley University. Each woman possessed the habits of mind of tenacity and persistence in spite of the strict roles society placed upon women during their lives. In different ways, each valued nature and the natural order of life greatly. Finally, each woman in different ways used her considerable wealth toward the common good of their communities.
This passion also explains, in part, Aikaterini’s love for Classical Greece. For Aikaterini, Froebel’s work was a modern version of Plato’s main ideas, and she therefore saw it as a way to rekindle the Greek spirit of ancient times. Indeed, Aikaterini firmly believed that the adoption of this system of education would help to bring about a “ renaissance of the underdeveloped and lagging Greek education system” ( Dimitriadi, 2012 ).
Lydia’s values related to beliefs about principles upon which the United States was founded – that all men are created equal – are reflected in her openly expressed stance on slavery and later in the creation of Bradley University as a co-educational organization. Neither position was mainstream at the time Lydia used them as a basis for her actions. Others may have agreed with her, but few expressed or acted upon their beliefs as she did.
Consciousness of evolving self is the second theme in Lambert and Gardner’s (2009) framework. The highly developed woman leader in this category bases her identity on continuous self-reflection on the needs of others and brings informal authority to accomplish change. Lambert and Gardner posit that “ Consciousness springs from the meanings derived from lives led and values attended to” (p. 56).
Because we were not able to interview either woman, we can only speculate on how they found their voice to express their deepest values. According to Dimitriadi (2012) Aikaterini was intensely self-aware and applied herself assiduously to her roles as a wife and a mother of three, as well as her need to keep on progressing as a person and a leader. This awareness produced knowledge of both [her] strengths and limitations, enabling [her] to add value to other women’s lives through [her] compassion, work and roles in the world (Dimitriadi, p. 119). Aikaterini was fully conscious of her own limits. At the end of her life, she acknowledged that her desire to spread the Froebelian system of education across Greece did not fully materialize as she had envisioned. From her deathbed she echoed her fears about the future state of her schools and preschool education in Greece: “ I am not worried about orphans or kindergartens. I am convinced that they will one day spread throughout Greece. But I’m worried about my teachings and the schools. What will happen? It has hardly been secured financially. Its high purpose has not yet been fully understood. How to educate women, women capable of contributing to the rebirth of our Greece? How will kindergartens be educated ethically without kindergarten teachers?” ( Kiriazopoulou-Valinaki, 1957 , p. 360).
Lydia’s accomplishments in the 40 years after her husband died are in distinct contrast to her earlier life. While we have very few direct quotes to shed light on her thoughts, her actions and the results of her actions during the last half of her life appear to reveal a woman who shed all societal expectations to achieve what she set out to do.
Lydia’s private world was as she wanted it. How strangers reacted, whispered, envied meant little to her. Her goals in life were of paramount importance and they were achieved to the betterment of life for the people in the Central Illinois are, in particular, and to the nation at large in a general sense” ( Upton, 1994 , p. 79).
The third theme from Lambert and Gardner (2009) involves inspiring passion and courage to live their lives through universal values. Inspiration and the act of leadership requires the ability to see situations differently from commonly held perceptions. Once again, we realized that these two women were more alike than different in the passionate ways they worked to accomplish their goals.
The Froebelian system of education was Aikaterini’s religion, the dream of all her happiness, the ideal of all her desires. … Nothing discouraged her. Nothing could reduce her enthusiasm. Like an apostle, above all her happiness as a person, a wife, a mother, was the joy of realizing her reforming work ( Parren, 1916 ). Aikaterini displayed courage as she confronted conflict or difficulty, pain, danger, or uncertainty ( Lambert and Gardner, 2009 ). Her passion transcended the moment, bypassing problems and personal or other struggles, while her strongly held values provided a clear path to the realization of her dreams.
Lydia promoted and defended universal values, many which were not accepted in her time, such as her position against slavery and in the inclusion of women in the creation of Bradley University. Her quiet steadfast passion has sustained creative action in the university since its inception. We don’t know how she felt about her opinions, if she saw herself as courageous or not.
Aikaterini and Lydia’s creations are direct results of their abilities to invoke passion and courage in others. Their abilities to think differently from those around them, seek out additional knowledge prior to the creation of their dreams, and pay close attention to details to implementation details characterize each of them as they embarked upon their projects. Neither would have accomplished as much as they did had they not engaged others in their radical at the time ideas.
Aikaterini was a woman of exceptional courage and passion. Colleagues at her teaching college described her as having “ a fire in her heart” ( Parren, 1916 ). Her dedication and devotion to disseminating the Froebelian system of education in Greece was legendary. The German historian Charles Krombaher, who visited her school in Athens, was impressed by “ the sharp and incredibly educated headmistress of the school who tries with her words and deeds to transmit this [Froebelian] system of education in Greece” ( Dimitriadi, 2012 ). Whatever is known in Greece about Froebel is based on Aikaterini’s writings. Her enthusiasm for Froebel’s method was contagious and spread like fire in the hearts of the young women who were aspiring to become teachers. Aikaterini instilled in them a love of education and she managed to assuage their fears. Inspired by her courage, for the first time in Greece’s education history, young female teachers were willing to take risks and undertake teaching positions in the most remote and dangerous parts of the country.
Lydia’s quiet steadfast passion has sustained creative action in the university since its inception. Clearly Lydia changed the culture and dynamics of the Peoria community in the creation of Bradley University. She did so through her daily life aligned to her values, a strong work ethic, steadfast attention to details, a willingness to innovate (after thorough research of a problem and possible solutions), and impressive generosity.
The fifth theme is arousing the imagination. Lambert and Gardner (2009) note that imagination is evidenced in ideas, creation, agendas, and results (p. 104). Sir Ken Robinson (2011) defines imagination as “ the power to see beyond the present moment and our immediate environment” (p. 17). Both Aikaterini and Lydia defied societal female roles in male-dominated societies to dream and create.
In addition to being extremely knowledgeable, Aikaterini was a creative spirit, a visionary woman for whom “ imagination is the fire that ignites the slow fuse of the possible” ( Lambert and Gardner, 2009 , p. 98). Aikaterini conceived an educational system that would contribute to the overall improvement of education in Greece, a system that would embrace the child from pre-school to the end of their high school years. Aikaterini set her mind and heart to make that dream a reality ( Kiriazopoulou-Valinaki, 1957 ).
Lydia sought a way to memorialize her six children and husband and decided against a home for orphans ( Upton, 1994 ). True to her values, she sought an institution that would touch the lives of more individuals. She did her homework (another characteristic of successful entrepreneurs) and was not swayed by the opinions of naysayers.
The fifth theme is building community as not only an act of imbuing the members of a society with a common purpose, it is also “ meaning making and knowledge development” as well as creating a “ locale for growing values, identity, courage, and imagination” ( Lambert and Gardner, 2009 , p. 127). It is the transformation of a society. The women of our stories didn’t accomplish their dreams alone. They brought along like-minded people in whom they cultivated their ideas and succeeded in transforming them into actions.
Building community was second nature for Aikaterini. A school principal who knew her well wrote that, “ She was seeking new ways to act, and to offer to Greek youth. She constantly wanted to give. It was in her nature. Even in childhood she had felt a compelling need to give to others” ( Parren, 1916 ). That Aikaterini strived all her life to give to others is indisputable: schools to teach young children, a school to train teachers, and a new community that united and enabled 830 refugee women. Aikaterini’s community work contributed to the transformation of a stifled Greek culture into a more modern system.
Lydia’s commitment to community is evidenced in many ways. The establishment of Bradley University Board of Directors is a particularly relevant example of ways that her vision looked far into the future. She insisted that half of that body must come from local community. That charter continues today, maintaining Bradley’s connection to the local community.
Much of Lydia’s generosity was designed to the betterment of the Peoria community. Examples include Laura Bradley Park, which still exists today, Peoria’s Home for Aged Women, and support in the creation of what is now St. Francis Hospital. Many of Lydia Moss Bradley’s contributions to others will never be known because she was a private person and would have kept to herself gifts and donations.
The local newspaper Peoria in February 1908 after her death paid tribute to her skill:
To her genius and economy is due the remainder of the endowment, which has become public property. Her prosperity has been both a consequence and one of the causes of Peoria’s splendid growth. Wherever she invested, she encouraged improvement, mutually beneficial to the community and to herself ( Upton, 1994 , p. 39).
The final theme is mentoring. Lambert and Gardner (2009) contend that mentoring requires a continuing relationship, guidance, support, and encouragement. In Greek mythology, Mentor was the advisor and guardian assigned by Odysseus to his son Telemachus. His role was to activate the full potential of Telemachus and to help him mature to wisdom.
Aikaterini, a passionate follower of the classical ideals, exemplified that role wholeheartedly and tirelessly with her young protégées. For her, mentoring was an undeniable imperative. There are collections of her letters to her graduates wherein it is apparent that she was in constant communication with them, especially at the beginning of their careers. In keeping with the role of mentor, Aikaterini always closed her letters to mentees with “ Your spiritual mother, Aikaterini” ( Dimitriadi, 2012 ).
Bradley University is a mentoring project on a huge scale if one considers that past, present and future students, faculty and staff reside in an institution that perpetuates Lydia’s values. As noted earlier, knowledge of many of her mentoring efforts have not survived over a century so that we can recognize them today. Unlike Aikaterini, Lydia was not a scholar who would have written down her ideas. Lydia was a doer and while the influence of those she mentored likely continues today, we don’t have those stories.
One of the few direct quotes from Lydia available today illustrates her commitment to community and mentoring. As she attended to every organizational detail in the creation of Bradley University, Lydia established that Bradley Polytechnic Institute would have the largest endowment of any Illinois university (at the time) with the exception of the University of Chicago ( Upton, 1994 ). The board of trustees were selected on the basis of recognized scholars and Peoria influential leaders (all male). But Lydia, typical of her lifelong practice of following what she considered the best course of action, appointed her nephew who was a local farmer. When he asked her reasons for appointing him to sit on the board with such a distinguished group, she replied, “ I have been watching you with your procedure…. closer than you have known……(I chose you) because I have a great deal of farm property and I believe that you, with your experiences, would be a valuable man on my board” (Upton, p. 55). Her language is succinct and reveals her actions to be based upon considerable thought.
Conclusion
As we analyzed the life story of each of these women against the themes identified by Lambert and Gardner (2009), we realized that the similarities between them were unexpectedly strong. Over and over we said, “ They are more alike than different!” The differences came from cultural, educational, and life circumstances. That two women living on two continents, who chose to use their strong intellects, laser like focus, impressive work ethics, and we must also acknowledge, considerable wealth to the betterment of their communities (whether local or national) is a testimony to what can be achieved.
The differences between Aikaterini and Lydia are in the details. Aikaterini was born into a wealthy family. She was afforded every educational opportunity available at the time. She used her education and financial resources to study the Froeblian method that she instituted in Greece. Lydia was born into a family that was certainly financially comfortable, but could not have been considered wealthy. The fact that her parents saw the necessity to send her to a neighbor to learn to read and write is a testament to the value they saw in education at a time when education for girls was not considered important in the United States. Lydia’s formal education would go no further than that what she learned from her neighbor. Lydia was an exceptional businessperson who quadrupled her husband’s considerable estate of $500, 000 at the time of his death to over $2, 000, 000 at her death. Lydia turned to education then in the formation of Bradley University to use her wealth to memorialize her deceased children and husband as well as to benefit the Peoria community.
So it is that in analyzing their differences, we returned to another similarity. Both Aikaterini and Lydia regarded education as the vehicle to express their values, their consciousness of evolving self, invoke passion and courage, arouse imagination, create community and mentor future generations into the present and onto futures beyond. We agree with Lambert and Gardner “ that there is no evidence that these qualities are the sole possession of the select few…each woman possesses the capacity to learn and to lead; the inner gems of values, capacity for self-understanding; courage and imagination, a deep yearning for community and the desire to mentor others” (2009, p. 15).
Authors’ Final Reflections
We have been powerfully affected by the life stories of Aikaterini and Lydia. Not only did the analysis of these women reveal much deeper understandings of how they exercised leadership in education, in engaging in the analysis ourselves, we came to new awakenings of our own leadership journeys. In a very real sense, our own values and the ways we have engaged with them in our leadership as educators. Analyzing their life stories opened up for us ways our values have provided meaning to our lives. We came to deeper understandings of our evolving selves through the stories of Aikaterini and Lydia. We were humbled by the courage, passion, and imagination their life stories reveal, bolstering, we hope, our own sense of who we can become. Having ourselves come together through two powerfully influential communities, WLE and Fulbright, the stories of Aikaterini and Lydia urge us to venture forth for into new frontiers. Finally, we share the powerful mentoring of our dear friend Dr. Linda Lyman and understand fully our need and responsibility to mentor others.
But the message goes much further than what we as two researchers gained from the analysis of two women school leaders who lived so many years ago. Their legacy to each of us is to consciously understand their stories to more fully understand our own. We invite each of you to start out as we did, looking for the not-so-well-known stories of women school leaders from the past in your community, however you describe community. We encourage you then to go deeper than simply recounting their story to better understand who they were, how they lived their values, and positively affected others. Use the framework we used from Lambert and Gardner or another.
Our hope is that each reader will come to know more fully seldom told stories of women school leaders in order to inform your own leadership. It is indeed “ time to UNDELETE our past”( Stuber, n. d.).
Data Availability Statement
The datasets generated for this study are available on request to the corresponding author.
Author Contributions
Both authors listed have made a substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
Begley, P. (1999). “ Values and educational leadership: An agenda for the future,” in Values and Educational Leadership , ed. A. Begley, (Albany, NY: SUNY Press), 315–324.
Bolman, L. G., and Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing Organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Chase, S. E. (1995). Ambiguous Empowerment: The Work Narratives of Women School Superintendents. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.
Clandinin, D., and Connelly, F. (2000). Narrative Inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Collins, J. C. (2005). Good to Great and the Social Sectors: A Monograph to Accompany Good to Great. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
Combs, J., Harris, S., and Edmonson, S. (2015). Four essential practices for building trust. Educ. Leadersh. 2, 18–22.
Dimitriadi, E. (2012). The contribution of Aikaterini Laskaridou in the development of pre school education in Greece. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Ioannina, Greece.
Doliopoulou, E. (2000). Contemporary Educational Programs for Pre Schoolers. Athens: Tipothito.
Doliopoulou, E. (2006). Contemporary Perspectives in Pre-School Education [in Greek]. Athens: Dardanos Publications.
Fraenkel, J. R., and Wallen, N. E. (2003). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education , 5th Edn. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Gardner, H. (2011). Leading minds: An anatomy of leadership. BasicBooks. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
Hauser, M. (2006). Learning from Children: The Life and Legacy of Caroline Pratt , Vol. 38. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.
hooks, B. (2000). Feminist Theory from the Margin to the Center . Cambridge, MA: South End Press.
Kiriazopoulou-Valinaki, T. (1957). A figure of Greek Education. A celebration and a speech. Sch. Life 7-8, 360–365.
Kouzes, J., and Posner, B. (2012). The Leadership Challenge. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Lambert, L., and Gardner, M. (2009). Women’s Ways of Leading. Indianapolis: Dog Ear Publishing.
Lyons, C. (2003). Women of Peoria: 1620 to 1920. Northampton: Wilde Press.
Marshall, C. (2003). “ The emperor and research on women in school leadership: A response to Julie Laible’s loving epistemology,” in Reconsidering Feminist Research in Educational Leadership , eds M. Young, and L. Skrla, (Albany, NY: SUNY Press), 211–220.
Parren, K. (1916). Aikaterini Laskaridou. Journal of Ladies 1082, 3–5.
Preskill, S. (2005). Fundi: Enduring Leadership Legacy of Civil Rights Activist Ella Baker. Available online at: http://www. advancingwomen. com/awl/social_justice1/Preskill. html (accessed August 25, 2020).
Robinson, K. (2011). Out of our Minds. Learning to be Creative. United Kingdom: Capstone Publishing Ltd.
Shakeshaft, C. (2015). “ I’m not going to take this sitting down: the use and misuse of feminist standpoint theory in women’s educational leadership research,” in Women Leading Education Across the Continents: Overcoming the Barriers (pp. xv-xvii), eds E. C. Reilly, and Q. J. Bauer, (New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield Education).
Stuber, I. (n. d.). Women’s history: The Liz Library Downloaded July 21, 2020. Available online at: http://www. thelizlibrary. org/undelete/about-irene-stuber. html
Upton, A. (1994). Forgotten Angel: The story of Lydia Moss Bradley. Toronto: Allen A. Upton.
Xyrotiris, I. (1961). The History of Contemporary Kindergarten (in Greek). Athens: Pechlivanides publications.
Young, M. (2012). “ Considering (irreconcilable?) contradictions in cross-group feminist research,” in Reconsidering feminist research in educational leadership , eds M. Young, and L. Skrla, (Albany, NY: SUNY Press), 35–79.
Ziogou, S., Foukas, V., and Chatzibei, P. (n. d.). Childhood and Pedagogical Theory in Greece (19th-First Decades of the 20th Century): From “ The Small Adult” to the “ Child’s Psychology. Available online at: https://www. inter-disciplinary. net/wp-content/…/06/Foukas-paper. pdf
