Abstract
The primary aim of this study was to investigate how situational leadership impacts school improvement in secondary-level education within Islamabad. The research sought to assess the relationship between situational leadership and advancements in secondary schools. To achieve these goals, a quantitative methodology was utilized, involving the administration of questionnaires to gather data on leadership and school improvement. Islamabad Capital Territory is reported to have 250 public secondary schools by the Federal Directorate of Education, while the Private Educational Institutions Regulatory Authority Islamabad indicates 354 secondary schools. The study's target population encompassed 604 principals and 7023 teachers from secondary schools across Islamabad. School selection employed convenient sampling based on specific inclusion criteria, with purposive sampling utilized for data collection. Two schools were chosen to represent situational leadership styles, and the sample included both principals and teachers
Key Words
Educational Leadership, Teacher
Effectiveness, Organizational Change, Educational Reforms
Introduction
Leadership and school improvement stand out to be the most significant
themes in 21st-century education (Anderson, 2016). School improvement
primarily concerns facilitating purposeful change within education systems.
This study aims to determine the extent to which situational leadership
contributes to school improvement. Specifically, it investigates how
situational leadership influences school improvement at the secondary level in
Pakistani schools.
School improvement entails strategic educational
changes aimed at enhancing student achievement in increasing the school’s
capacity to adapt and manage change (Creemers, Stoll & Reezigt, 2007). Leadership on the
other hand involves steering direction and utilizing influence to achieve
collective goals (Leithwood & Riehl, 2003).
Furthermore, school improvement refers to structured
efforts to bring about educational change that enhances student achievement
through improved classroom practices (Leithwood, 2016). It involves conducive
learning conditions and addressing internal factors to effectively achieve
educational goals. Ensuring successful change in school improvement requires
continuous positive support and willingness of the involved team. This can be
achieved through thoughtful efforts to build internal capacity and address
relevant conditions (Harris, 2002).
Leadership is widely recognized as a critical factor
in school improvement literature. A large amount of studies emphasize the
pivotal role of leadership in driving school improvement efforts. Effective
leaders understand how schools and leadership function, manage teams
effectively and provide alternative leadership approaches to support school
improvement (Sergiovanni, 2005). Leadership's primary
function in deliberating school improvement entails the enhancement of the
teaching and learning process. Quality leaders focus on improving
organizational capacity, supporting teachers, and ensuring quality student
services (Hopkins, 2005).
Situational leadership is a prominent leadership
model developed by Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard in the late 1060s and
early 1970s. It posits that effective leadership is contingent upon the
readiness or maturity level of followers. The core premise of situational
leadership is that there is no one-size-fits-all leadership style. Instead,
leaders must be flexible and adjust their approach based on the situation and
the needs of the followers. This approach is highly relevant in today's dynamic
and diverse work environments, where leaders often face varying levels of
readiness among team members.
Situational leadership identifies four leadership
styles: directing, coaching, supporting, and delegating. These styles
correspond to different combinations of directive (task) behaviour and
supportive (relationship) behaviour. The choice of style depends on the
readiness level of followers which is assessed based on their ability and
willingness to perform a specific task (Blanchard, Zigarmi & Zigarmi, 1985).
Situational leadership
has gained significant attention in educational contexts due to its relevance
in understanding leadership dynamics within schools and its potential impact on
school improvement efforts. It offers valuable leadership practices
specifically in the complex and multifaceted context of school improvement. It
emphasizes the importance of leadership flexibility and adaptability. Best
leaders make sure that they focus on enhancing the capacity of the organization
as well as the teaching and learning process. They take it as their moral
obligation towards quality student services as well as supporting teachers for
engaging in delivering quality learning (Hopkins, 2005).
Literature Review
The fact that quality leadership is crucial and foundational for
enhancing the performance of the schools has been widely accepted across times,
and, inadequate leadership can lead to stagnation and impede the process of
change. This concept has been validated through decades of leadership studies
and successful school initiatives (Hallinger, 2015). Researchers have
deliberately documented the importance of leadership in driving school
improvement and have provided tangible examples (Gray et al., 1999; Southworth,
2002).
Among the numerous research-based frameworks for
school improvement efforts, Hanover and ULEAD have identified the following
systematic school improvement frameworks:
1.
WestEd Center for
School Turnaround’s 4 Domains of Rapid Improvement,
2.
Education Development
Trust's (EDT's) Six Accelerators for at-Scale Educational Improvement,
3.
The New York City (NYC)
Department of Education’s Framework for Great Schools.
These frameworks investigate essential facets of
educational systems to facilitate positive transformation and boost student
performance. Each of these frameworks explores specific conceptual dimensions,
with some incorporating additional fundamental elements and systematic
relationships (Robinson, 2008).
The critical elements that are considered common
among frameworks concerning school improvements are examined through the
following components:
§ Leadership Focus
§ Teaching and Learning
§ Staff Quality and Support
§ School Culture and Stakeholder Involvement
Given that these frameworks
comprise slightly varying elements, overlapping areas underscore the essentials
of the system for school improvement endeavours. Furthermore, it is quite vital
for leaders to tailor their approaches to meet the specific needs of individual
schools while prioritizing systemic school improvement.
Table 1.1
Framework |
Developers |
Overview |
Essential
Components |
4
Domains of Rapid Improvement
|
WestEd |
This framework offers four research-based rapid
improvement practices for systemic turnaround and improvement.
|
§ Turnaround Leadership § Talent Development § Instructional Transformation § Culture Shift |
Six
Accelerators for At-Scale Educational Improvement |
Education
Development Trust |
This framework assesses the associations of six factors
for developing and executing improvement initiatives. |
§ Vision and Leadership § Coalitions for Change § Delivery Architecture including School Collaboration § Accountability and support through empirical data § School Leadership and Teacher Effectiveness § Policy and Learning Through Evidence
|
The
Framework for Great Schools |
New
York City Department of Education |
This framework identifies six elements that work
together for school improvement. |
§ Effective School Leadership § Strong Family-Community Ties § Supportive Environment § Rigorous Instruction § Collaborative Teachers Trust |
To enhance school improvement
endeavours and elevate student achievement, it is recommended that leaders
adopt a systemic approach to address the execution of key aspects of school
improvement. These aspects pinpoint crucial elements within the education system
where successful implementation is imperative. A systemic approach suggests
that improvement efforts are interconnected, continuous and reliant on various
components of the system, rather than sporadic, temporary or fragmented
interventions. Leaders must exercise greater thoughtfulness, precision and
purposefulness when implementing improvement initiatives.
Leadership Focus
The school improvement frameworks presented here emphasize the
importance of cultivating high-quality leadership to facilitate systemic
enhancement. The EDT's framework advocates for a systemic approach, emphasizing
the necessity for leaders to possess a clear understanding of the technical
aspects of the system and how different components are interconnected.
Similarly, the WestEd’s framework identifies
‘turnaround leadership’ as the pivotal element in school improvement efforts.
This framework underscores that leaders collectively within a school are
instrumental in driving school improvement initiatives. Decisions made by any member
of the leadership team significantly influence the functioning of other team
members.
The school principal is
viewed as a central figure, enabling teachers to deliver quality instruction
and enhance student outcomes, as recognized in The New York City (NYC)
Department of Education's Framework for Great Schools.
Teaching and Learning
The majority of the frameworks prioritize learning and instruction as
fundamental elements crucial for enhancing overall student achievement within
the education system. For instance, The NYC Department of Education’s Framework
for Great Schools places significant emphasis on thought-provoking, rigorous
quality instruction that engages students and fosters critical thinking.
Conversely, the EDT’s framework takes a broader
approach by advocating for evidence-based strategies to improve instructional
and learning initiatives. It acknowledges that a systemic approach to school
improvement does not solely rely on linear cause-and-effect relationships,
emphasizing the importance of using data-driven instruction.
Additionally, the concept of 'instructional
transformation' in WestEd’s framework involves a systemic approach to enhance
quality teaching practices. This includes making instructional decisions based
on authentic data, setting high expectations, focusing on academic improvement,
and addressing various obstacles within and outside the school environment that
affect student achievement.
Staff Quality and Support
All three frameworks for school improvement emphasize the importance
of building the capacity of teachers through sustained support and
collaboration to enhance instruction and student achievement. For example, the
EDT’s framework emphasizes the need to cultivate the ‘collective capacity’ of
teachers to improve instructional quality across all stages of teacher
education, including pre-service, in-service and peer-led training.
Similarly,
The New York City's Framework for Great Schools highlights the concepts of
'collaborative teachers' who actively participate in continuous professional
development programs and demonstrate a commitment to delivering high-quality
instruction.
In WestEd’s framework,
the 'Talent Development' domain identifies four crucial aspects for rapid
school improvement, wherein teacher engage in capacity-building initiatives
throughout their professional journey. In this regard, teachers aim to enhance
their own capacity and that of their colleagues through transformational
leadership, providing ongoing support and holding themselves and others
accountable.
School Culture and Stakeholder Involvement
It has been mentioned earlier that all the frameworks recognize the
fundamental importance of the school environment in relation to school
improvement. The NYC DOE's Framework for
Great Schools emphasizes the significance of a supportive school environment in
facilitating school improvement efforts. It emphasizes the crucial role of the
school environment, and classroom in providing student with both support and
challenge while ensuring their safety. Furthermore, stakeholders within this
framework collaborate, respecting each other's perspectives to enhance student
achievement.
In contrast, the EDT’s
framework emphasizes structural elements, defining feasible structures and
outlining the roles and responsibilities of all personnel involved. This
approach aims to bring rationality and coherence to the system, ensuring that
each part is valued appropriately none is overshadowed by another.

Source 2: ©2020 Hanover Research
The concept of ‘cultural shift’ as outlined in WestEd’s framework, is
deemed essential for systemic improvement. It involves stakeholders, both
internal and external to the school, fostering a positive school climate
centred on responsibility and respect. Within this frame it is emphasized that
a turnaround culture fosters stable community cohesion, valuing the
contribution of everyone involved.
Research has indicated that leadership has a great
influence on the school improvement process. In addition to this, it has also
been that quality leadership exhibits an immensely significant yet
underestimated role in student achievement (Seashore, Anderson & Wahlstrom,
2004). At a more detailed level still,
they found that:
§
Besides classroom
instruction, leadership is the most significant factor influencing what
students learn in school. Recent research on high-performing schools has shown
that leadership fosters an environment where educators can excel in classrooms
(Zbar, Kimber & Marshall, 2009).
§
Leadership impacts to a
greater level, particularly, in low-performing schools.
Conversely, school improvement
encompasses the various methods and strategies through which reform initiatives
can be implemented. Research suggests that schools progress only when there is
a proactive and disciplined approach to implementing improvement efforts.
School Heads Must Consider
§
Forming a high-quality
team comprising both internal and external stakeholders to drive improvement
endeavours is essential. This involves implementing systemic planning for
school improvement, alongside ongoing monitoring and evaluation. Furthermore,
school leaders should establish measurable outcomes to enable the tracking and
monitoring of improvement efforts.
§
Engaging stakeholders
in both the planning and implementation phases of school improvement
initiatives is essential. This can be achieved most effectively by soliciting
feedback from stakeholders to the introduction of improvement initiatives and
by employing effective communication strategies.
Within the school improvement
frameworks outlined earlier, fundamental elements like leadership focus, staff
quality and support, teaching and learning and school culture and stakeholder
involvement have been addressed in this conceptual framework of this study.
School leaders should adopt a systems approach to address these aspects of
school improvement. It has been presupposed in the systems approach that
improvement endeavours are ongoing, interconnected, and interdependent across
various components of the system. Successful improvement initiatives can only
be attained through strategic and focused implementation managed effectively.
Correlational Research Design
Correlation research design serves as a quantitative methodology
utilized to examine the relationship between two or more variables. Its primary
objective is to ascertain whether fluctuations in one variable coincide with
changes in another variable, without implying causation. Essentially,
correlational studies analyze the extent to which variables co-vary, offering
valuable insights into patterns of association within the dataset. This methodology finds widespread application
across diverse fields, including psychology, sociology, education, and
economics (Babbie, 2016).
Correlation coefficients denote both the strength
and direction of the relationship between variables. A coefficient approaching
+1 indicates a robust positive relationship, whereas a coefficient nearing -1
indicates a strong negative relationship. A coefficient close to 0 suggests a
weak or negligible relationship between variables (Leedy & Ormrod, 2014).
Data collection in
correlational studies often involves surveys, questionnaires, observational
methods, or secondary data analysis. Researchers gather information about the
variables of interest and analyze the patterns of association. It's crucial to
note that correlational research cannot establish causality (Gravetter, &
Forzano, 2018). While it can identify
relationships between variables, it cannot determine the direction of causality
or rule out the influence of third variables (confounding variables).
Correlational studies reflect real-world situations and allow researchers to
investigate naturally occurring phenomena without experimental manipulation.
This design enables researchers to explore complex relationships between
variables, providing insights into patterns of association that may not be
apparent through experimental methods. Correlational research often involves
non-invasive data collection methods, making it ethically acceptable to study
certain topics or populations.
Population of the Study
In research, the population is primarily defined by drawing upon organizations, associations, products, or individuals to anticipate findings based on analysis. Welman et al. (2006) elucidated that the population constitutes a complementary research aspect wherein a sample is extracted for the study. In this specific investigation, the population comprised all principals (604) and teachers (7023) from both public and private secondary schools in Islamabad. Given that the study focused on secondary schools in Islamabad, the population included principals from these schools and teachers teaching solely 9th and 10th grades
Table 3.1
Schools |
No of
Schools |
Principals/Heads |
Teachers |
Public Schools |
250 |
250 |
2733 |
Private Schools |
354 |
354 |
4290 |
Total |
604 |
604 |
7023 |
Sampling Process
According
to Sekaran and Bougie (2016), a sample is
described as a selection of all elements from the population used to represent
it. When dealing with a large population, a researcher chooses a specific
number of elements through a process called sampling. This involves selecting a
proportionate number of elements to ensure that the sample, along with its
characteristics, enables the generalization of the findings to the entire
population (Levin & Robin, 2000).
Gay (1996) argued that
the sample size should be feasible within budget and time constraints. The
sampling method can be either random (probability) or nonrandom
(non-probability). In the current study, purposive sampling was utilized to
select schools. It is the researcher's responsibility to determine what
information to request and how to obtain willingness for responses (Tongco, 2007). This
study comprised two schools in Islamabad.
Sampling Technique
The method used to select participants for the study is
referred to as the sampling technique (Sauders et al., 2009). Consistent with
this a multistage sampling approach was utilized in the current study to select
the sample for investigation. Initially, schools were identified where
improvement interventions were implemented. Subsequently, leadership styles
within these schools were determined. In the next stage, two schools
representing the situational leadership style of the head were chosen and
stratified sampling was used to select a sample of teachers from the same
schools.
Table 3.2
Description |
Purpose
of Data Collection |
Sampling
Technique |
Selection of Schools |
Selecting schools based on inclusion criteria |
Convenient |
School Heads |
Identify Leadership Style |
Stratified Random |
Secondary School Teachers |
Perceptions of Teachers related to Leadership role in
school improvement |
Cluster |
Sample Size
The sample size is used to gauge the scope of the study population (Sauders et al., 2009). Accordingly, the chosen sample comprised two principals and 30 teachers from the selected schools. Teachers were selected for quantitative data collection
Table 3.3
S.No |
School |
Principals |
|
Teachers |
|
Total
Respondents |
Actual
Respondents |
Total
Respondents |
Actual Respondents |
||
1 |
School 1 |
1 |
1 |
21 |
16 |
2 |
School 2 |
1 |
1 |
18 |
15 |
Total |
2 |
2 |
39 |
31 |
Research Instrument
This section elucidated the instrument utilized
in the current study, encompassing tools for gathering quantitative data. Additionally, considerations of validity, reliability and pilot testing were incorporated into this section
The Questionnaires
A questionnaire is defined as a combination of
statements to which participants provide responses (Kumar, 2018). Deng (2010) characterized the questionnaire as a logically organized tool used for data collection from participants. Previous studies have used questionnaires as tools for collecting data from the respondents. Two questionnaires were used for collecting data from principals and teachers of the selected schools.
Table 3.4
Theme 1 |
Leadership Style Preference |
Sum of Item No |
No of Items |
Leadership |
Authoritative Style |
4,
6, 12, 14 |
04 |
Democratic Style |
1,
8, 11, 13 |
04 |
|
Facilitative Style |
2,
7, 9, 16 |
04 |
|
Situational Style |
3,
5, 10, 15 |
04 |
|
|
16 |
Table 3.5
Theme 2 |
Factors |
Items |
No of Items |
School Improvement |
Leadership Focus |
1-12 |
12 |
Staff Quality and
Support |
13-21 |
09 |
|
Learning and
Instruction |
22-35 |
14 |
|
School Culture and
Stakeholder Involvement |
36-43 |
08 |
|
Total |
43 |
A questionnaire for identifying leadership styles in the selected
schools was adopted. Through this questionnaire, leadership styles amongst
secondary schools in Islamabad were identified.
For collecting data from teachers, a five-point Likert scale was used in
which demographic information of respondents was also included.
The questionnaire for teachers was
developed based on the objectives of the present study and insights from the
previous studies. Variables and sub-variables were identified in the beginning.
Following this, the researcher developed items for the identified variables.
The researcher then sought the content validity of the developed questionnaire
from five professional experts. With suggestions and recommendations from the
experts and scrutinizing reliability, the researcher then finalized the
questionnaire.
This consisted of four sub-themes i.e. leadership focus, staff quality and support, learning and instruction, and school culture and stakeholder involvement. There were a total of 43 items in the questionnaire of which 12 items were related to leadership focus, 9 items were related to staff quality and support, 14 items were related to learning and instruction, and 8 items were related to school culture and stakeholder involvement
Instrument Validity
Validity refers to the degree to which
information pertaining to research variables is pertinent (Mugenda &
Mugenda, 2012). Deng (2010) emphasized the necessity of establishing the validity of the
questionnaire and interview schedule before conducting pilot testing, ensuring
that the instrument is measuring what it is intended to measure (Bellamy, 2012). Content validity was
employed to assess the relevance of the questionnaire. Consequently, the
questionnaires were reviewed by five experts for refinement of the statements.
Recommendations from the experts were integrated resulting in modifications to
the questionnaire.
Pilot Testing
Pilot testing assists researchers in identifying potential issues
or errors in the main investigation (Creswell, 2014). Hildebrand and Ott (2011) suggest that pilot testing helps shape the research design before
the final analysis. In line with the fundamental purpose of the current study,
the researcher conducted pilot testing to assess the reliability of the
questionnaire.
For this purpose, two schools, namely
Career Public School and Al-Beruni Model School, were selected from the
population. Two principals and 53 teachers (constituting 73% of the
respondents) were chosen for the pilot study. According to the results of the pilot
testing, teachers did not encounter any issues while responding to the
questionnaire. The data from the selected schools were analyzed using SPSS 21.0
during the pilot study phase.
Reliability of the Questionnaires
Reliability is deemed attained when the
questionnaire consistently assesses the primary research question (Meeker &
Escobar, 2014).
Cronbach’s coefficient alpha was utilized to assess the reliability of the
questionnaires, focusing on internal consistency. SPSS 21.0 was employed to
document the findings, which are present in tabular form.
Table 3.6
|
Items |
Cronbach Alpha Reliability |
Leadership Assessment Scale |
0.902 |
16 |
School Improvement Scale |
0.907 |
42 |
Data Collecting Strategies
Table 3.7
Phase |
Data Collection Technique |
Participants |
1 |
Document analysis |
Documents mentioned in school inclusion
criteria were analyzed |
2 |
Survey |
All the staff who were part of the
school improvement process and are still members of staff, in each school |
Criteria for Selection of Schools
To ensure the fairness of the present study, it was crucial to establish criteria for selecting schools based on merit. Given that the primary focus of the study is the impact of situational leadership on school improvement, schools were chosen based on their proactive engagement in two or more aspects of school improvement. The selection process involved scrutinizing school initiatives through document analysis. To facilitate this process a checklist was employed, and schools were chosen based on the evidence provided in any of the documents listed in Table 3.8.
Table 3.8
School |
Document(s) |
||||
SWOT Analysis / Baseline Survey |
List of prioritized areas |
Decisions related to prioritized areas |
Effect on school performance |
|
|
School 1 |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
School 2 |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Document Analysis
Using documents as a means to collect information without
disturbing anyone is quite beneficial and contributes to evidence collection
for research (Yin, 2009). Despite
documents not tailored specifically for research purposes, they offer valuable
insights for researchers to comprehend issues related to the problem at hand.
Reviewing documents serves as a strategic approach to assess and ultimately
select schools for study.
Survey
Surveys serve as a prevalent method for gathering
information (Neuman, 2006), aiding in
the comprehension of individuals' attitudes, opinions, behaviours or
characteristics. In this study, surveys were pilot-tested with experienced
educators to ensure clarity and efficacy.
Analysis of Data
Quantitative data, which involves numbers, was organized
and analyzed using statistical methods like Pearson coefficient with SPSS 21.0
software. This method has been following the researchers Eslamian and Khademi
(2017) for predicting the variables.
Data Analysis and Interpretation
This
section centres on the analysis and interpretation of the data gathered through
questionnaires. Descriptive and inferential statistics were utilized for
analysis of the data with t-tests used to calculate quantitative data. For this
purpose, SPSS 21.0 software was utilized.
The leadership assessment scale was administered in 101
schools where school improvement initiatives were implemented.
Table 4.1
No of Schools |
Authoritative Leadership |
Democratic Leadership |
Facilitative Leadership |
Situational Leadership |
101 |
47 |
12 |
12 |
30 |
47% |
12% |
12% |
30% |
Table 4.2
School
Improvement (SI) |
Situational
Leadership (SL) |
Entire
(SL) |
LF |
0.605** |
|
SQS |
0.731** |
|
TL |
0.635** |
|
SCSI |
0.695** |
|
Entire (SI) |
|
0.637** |
Table
4.2 represents a strong correlation. The entire value of correlation between SL
and SI (0.637**, p<0.01) clearly indicates a positive relationship between
situational leadership and school improvement at the secondary level.
Explaining
further situational leadership and all aspects of school improvement the above
table clearly demonstrates that situational leadership has a high positive
correlation with LF (Leadership Focus) (0.605, p<0.01), SQS (Staff Quality
and Support) (0.731, p<0.01), TL (Teaching and Learning) (0.635, p<0.01)
and SCSI (School Culture and Stakeholder Involvement) (0.695, p<0.01).
Based on the cited statistics, it is clear that school
improvement is strongly associated with situational leadership.
Findings, Discussion, Conclusion and Recommendations Findings
The findings of the study include descriptive and inferential analysis incorporating both percentage calculations and regression analysis.
Findings, Discussion, Conclusion and Recommendations Findings
The findings of the study include descriptive and
inferential analysis incorporating both percentage calculations and regression
analysis.
c
The research findings indicate that the authoritative
leadership style is most common among secondary schools of Islamabad, observed
in 47% of the surveyed schools. Situational leadership is also prevalent,
accounting for 30% of the schools surveyed.
Discussion
Research Question
There is a lack of specific information available in the
literature in this regard. However, there are quite a number of schools in
which heads still adhere to the traditional model of management (Daresh, 2001). The
current study attempted to find out leadership styles prevailing in the
secondary schools of Islamabad. It was found that situational leadership
existed in 30% of the surveyed schools.
Conclusion
The
conclusion drawn in this study was based on data collected through a surveyed
questionnaire. The research questions addressed in this study were (a) what
types of leadership styles are present in secondary schools of Islamabad? (b)
How does situational leadership affect school improvement at the secondary
level in Islamabad?
It was determined that authoritative leadership
predominates in the majority of secondary schools in Islamabad, while
situational leadership exists in 30% of the surveyed schools.
Furthermore, it was concluded that situational leadership
was found to have a positive relationship with school improvement and its
related aspects. This style allows leaders to adapt their approach based on the
specific needs and circumstances of the school, involving the assessment of the
situation and adjustment of leadership behaviours accordingly to maximize
effectiveness.
Recommendations
Based on the findings and conclusion, the following are
the recommendations:
1 Teachers play a crucial role in the success of students and the
school at large. No matter if this pivotal role is officially expected or
otherwise, teachers are the ones who enhance the capacity of the institute for
improvement. Teachers need to realize their central role in school improvement.
They should invest in themselves in identifying and using tactics effective for
school improvement.
2 Inculcating students’ feedback can be used to ensure a conducive
learning environment. Students should voice their concerns using different ways
and channels school improvement process.
3 Establishing partnerships with parents can help improve learning
experiences for students. This may also assist in creating a positive classroom
environment. Parents and community members should voice their feedback and show
willingness to collaborate in school improvement efforts.
Policies and frameworks have been developed by the government as a school reform initiative but the necessary support to build their capacity for change is needed. At the system level, the government should provide professional development continuously. The capacity of individual schools should be developed so that they can carry out in-house professional development activities.
References
- Anderson, J. (2016). Leadership and school improvement: Navigating the complexities of the 21st century. Routledge.
- Babbie, E. (2016). The Practice of Social Research. Cengage Learning.
- Bellamy, R. (2012). Validity in Educational Research. SAGE Publications
- Blanchard, K., Zigarmi, P., & Zigarmi, D. (1985). Situational Leadership® After 25 Years: A Retrospective. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 1(1), 21-36.
- Creemers, B. P. M., Stoll, L., & Reezigt, G. (2007). The Dutch school leader in action: A pilot study into the daily practice of school leaders in Dutch schools. Enschede: University of Twente.
- Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. SAGE Publications.
- Daresh, J. C. (2001). Beginning the principalship: A practical guide for new school leaders. Corwin Press.
- Deng, L. (2010). Data Collection Methods in Educational Research. Routledge.
- Gay, L. R. (1996). Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Applications. Prentice Hall.
- Gravetter, F. J., & Forzano, L. B. (2018). Research Methods for the Behavioral Sciences. Cengage Learning
- Hallinger, P. (2015). Assessing leadership for learning with the Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale
- Hanover Research. (2020). Higher Education Trends in 2020: A systemic approach to school improvement.
- Harris, A. (2008). Distributed leadership: according to the evidence. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 172- 188.
- Hildebrand, D. L., & Ott, L. R. (2011). Statistical Thinking for Managers. Cengage Learning
- Hopkins, D. (2005). A teacher's guide to school improvement. Open University Press.
- Kumar, R. (2018). Research Methodology: A Step-by-Step Guide for Beginners. SAGE Publications.
- Leithwood, K. (2016). Department-Head Leadership for School Improvement. University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
- Leithwood, K., & Riehl, C. (2003). What do we already know about successful school leadership? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
- Levin, J. R., & Fox, J. P. (2000). Elementary Statistics in Social Research. Pearson Education.
- Meeker, W. Q., & Escobar, L. A. (2014). Statistical Methods for Reliability Data. Wiley.
- Mugenda, O. M., & Mugenda, A. G. (2012). Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. African Centre for Technology Studies Press.
- Neuman, W. L. (2006). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Pearson Education.
- Robinson. (2008). Forging the links between distributed leadership and educational outcomes. Journal of Educational Administration. 46. 241-256.
- Seashore, K., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). The Influence of Leadership on School Improvement Processes and Student Achievement. Educational Leadership, 61(7), 6-11.
- Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach. Wiley.
- Sergiovanni, T. J. (2005). The virtues of leadership. Jossey-Bass.
- Southworth, G. (2002). Learning-centered leadership. In. Davies, B. (Ed.). The Essentials of School Leadership. London: Paul Chapman and Cowin Press.
- Tongco, M. D. C. (2007). Purposive Sampling as a Tool for Informant Selection. SAGE Publications.
- Welman, J. C., Kruger, S. J., & Mitchell, B. (2006). Research Methodology. Oxford University Press.
- Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. SAGE Publications.
- Zbar, V., Kimber, B., & Marshall, D. (2009). The Impact of Leadership on Student Learning in High-Performing Schools. Journal of Educational Leadership, 36(2), 45-58.
Cite this article
-
APA : Awan, S. A., & Nudra, S. (2023). Situational Leadership and School Improvement: A Correlational Analysis. Global Educational Studies Review, VIII(IV), 41-54. https://doi.org/10.31703/gesr.2023(VIII-IV).05
-
CHICAGO : Awan, Shahid Alam, and Saira Nudra. 2023. "Situational Leadership and School Improvement: A Correlational Analysis." Global Educational Studies Review, VIII (IV): 41-54 doi: 10.31703/gesr.2023(VIII-IV).05
-
HARVARD : AWAN, S. A. & NUDRA, S. 2023. Situational Leadership and School Improvement: A Correlational Analysis. Global Educational Studies Review, VIII, 41-54.
-
MHRA : Awan, Shahid Alam, and Saira Nudra. 2023. "Situational Leadership and School Improvement: A Correlational Analysis." Global Educational Studies Review, VIII: 41-54
-
MLA : Awan, Shahid Alam, and Saira Nudra. "Situational Leadership and School Improvement: A Correlational Analysis." Global Educational Studies Review, VIII.IV (2023): 41-54 Print.
-
OXFORD : Awan, Shahid Alam and Nudra, Saira (2023), "Situational Leadership and School Improvement: A Correlational Analysis", Global Educational Studies Review, VIII (IV), 41-54
-
TURABIAN : Awan, Shahid Alam, and Saira Nudra. "Situational Leadership and School Improvement: A Correlational Analysis." Global Educational Studies Review VIII, no. IV (2023): 41-54. https://doi.org/10.31703/gesr.2023(VIII-IV).05