Leadership and school improvement stand out to be the most significant themes in 21^st-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).

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

§ 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.

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.

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 9^th and 10^th grades

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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

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 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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 4.2 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.

The findings of the study include descriptive and inferential analysis incorporating both percentage calculations and regression analysis.

The findings of the study include descriptive and inferential analysis incorporating both percentage calculations and regression analysis.

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.

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.

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.

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.