Page 1 of 12

Practicum in Educational Management and Leadership

Leadership Interview Group Assignment

Submitted By:
Haytham El Ghali

Beirut
May 18th 2016
Page 2 of 12

A Focused Literature Review on Educational Leadership

Introduction

The purpose of this section is to provide a review of research-based evidence about

leadership functions and effects, as well as research findings about key educational leadership

challenges. The authors believe that efforts towards adequately comprehending educational

leadership should build upon the foundation of well-documented and well-accepted knowledge.

This literature review was not aimed at exhausting all what is already known about leadership;

much more could be written. Yet it helps in forming a robust theoretical background before

tackling the practical responses of actual practitioners of educational leadership.

Educational Leadership at a Glance

Educational leadership is defined as “the work of mobilizing and influencing others to

articulate and achieve the school’s shared intentions and goals” (Firestone and Riehl, 2005, p.

12). Although leadership work can be essentially accomplished by persons occupying various

roles within the educational system, this paper will focus on the leadership of school principals

and heads of college departments (i.e. formal leadership). The reason behind this selection lies in

practical reasons (i.e. time constraints, social networks of authors, and their job positions...).

Moreover, conclusions drawn on formal leadership are more firm due to the extensive research

already conducted on it (e.g., Tucker and Codding, 2002). The functions of leadership vary

depending on the context, the individual leader, and the nature of the goals being pursued. In that

sense, successful school leadership refers to leadership practices that have a direct or indirect

positive impact on student learning (Firestone and Riehl, 2005).

Contributions of School Leadership to Student Learning

According to several qualitative studies, school leadership can make important

contributions when student learning is significantly above or below normal expectations (Levine,

and Lezotte, 1990; Mortimore, 1993). Cotton in 1995 elaborated that effective leadership

encompasses the frequent monitoring of school activities, decreasing distractions, providing

dynamic support for teachers, and continuous expenditure of time and energy for overall school

improvement. Furthermore, other functions and characteristics of school leaders also contribute

to the enhancement of student learning. These factors include adequate monitoring of student

progress, professional parent involvement, efficient student grouping, competent curriculum

coordination, and equitable school policies (Sammons et al., 1995). In addition, certain case

studies ended up concluding that leadership is important for the improvement of teaching while

not initially looking for leadership effects (e.g., Hamilton and Richardson, 1995).

On the other hand many quantitative studies examined the relationship between school

organizational conditions and student achievement (i.e. the single most important criteria for

assessment of education). Hallinger, Bickman, and Davis (1996), for instance, studied the effect

of school mission and goals. Back in 1989, Nias, Southworth, and Campbell examined the

impact of staff relations and the overall school culture. Other important school leadership

decisions include the assignment of qualified teachers to classes, the academic nature of the

curriculum and the school size (Ingersoll, 1999). Similarly, the issues of active participation in

the school decision making process and the management of relationships with parents and the

wider community were respectively discussed by Smylie and associates (1996) and Epstein

(2001). Those school circumstances do implicitly indicate the performance of school leadership

because leaders usually have considerable impact on them.

Principal and Teacher Leadership

Principals and teachers, due to the vital responsibilities and functions they hold, are the

main manifestations of leadership in schools. In particular, teachers usually assume formal

leadership roles of diverse forms such as being a department head, a lead teacher, or even a

cross-departmental coordinator. Researchers therefore have classified the prevalent school

leadership approaches into six generic categories: managerial, instructional, transformational,

participative, moral, and contingent forms of leadership (Firestone and Riehl, 2005). Meanwhile,

Grossman and associates (2001) maintained that teacher leadership can be also noticed in inter-

teacher supportive roles during school change efforts or in professional learning communities

(i.e. informal leadership positions). Teachers working as department heads, and because of their

lack of necessary knowledge and skill, were not very effective as facilitators of change (Hannay

and Denby, 1994).

Hart (1995) asserted that both principal leadership and teacher leadership entail the

exercise of influence on the values, beliefs, and actions of others. However, administrators and

teachers exercise leadership in different ways and towards different ends within the diverse

aspects of the school’s functioning (Taylor and Bogotch, 1994). Additionally, the resources

available at hand for teachers and administrators are different and thus their leadership

approaches are certainly affected. Administrators (i.e. principals, school masters, supervisors…)

in traditional schools are occupying formal leadership roles and consequently have greater access

to positional power in their attempts to influence classroom and school practices. Teachers on the

on other hand, and because of their technical expertise about teaching and learning have greater

access to referent power (Firestone and Riehl, 2005). Spillane and associates (2003) have found

that, in the viewpoint of teachers, other teachers are considered real leaders if they employed

human, cultural, and social capital in their work with others. Similarly, teachers tended to believe
Page 5 of 12

that administrators were real leaders if they demonstrated supportive interactional styles (i.e.

primarily on the basis of cultural capital). Interestingly enough, teachers considered principals to

be leaders on the basis of human capital when they displayed instructional expertise with a

particular subject matter domain.

A Different Perspective: Distributed Leadership

In their book entitled “Designing Effective Organizations”, Banner and Gagné (1995)

examined the trending initiatives concerning organizational restructuring. Their inquiry

examined critical conceptions of distributed leadership as flatter, team-based, and more organic

structures began to replace hierarchical structures in many business sectors. Gronn (2000)

suggests that a “learning-focused leadership” requires an interrelated set of roles and functions

across the school or system. This newly proposed leadership architecture is especially

demonstrated in the context of complex policy initiatives. Although research activity in the area

of distributed leadership is still relatively at an early stage of development, empirical evidence

concerning the nature, effects and the contexts in which this orientation to leadership is most

productive is on the rise. For instance, Spillane et al. (2001) observed that the configuration of

distributed leadership shifted as problems and issues shifted. They reported that depending on the

curriculum area concerned the leadership exerted by school principals would vary and could be

eventually ceded to highly involved teachers or to outside consultants or curriculum facilitators.

A Core Set of Valuable Leadership Practices

Day et al. (2000) elaborated on the idea that some leadership practices are valuable in

almost all contexts is supported by evidence from many different kinds of schools. Most

successful leaders would consider such practices as a necessary but not sufficient part of their
Page 6 of 12

overall role. In general, three broad categories of leadership strategies that contribute to success

are defined concerning: purposes/directions, developing people, and organizational structures

(Leithwood, 1994).

Setting Directions

Effective leaders help their groups in developing shared understandings about the

organization and its goals (i.e. framing a sense of purpose or vision). This critical aspect

of leadership work is enacted through several means. Educational leaders are expected to

identify new opportunities for their schools and consequently articulate an inspiring

vision of the future. Increased commitment from organizational members and consistent

drive towards professional growth are important outcomes of such value-driven visions

(Firestone and Riehl, 2005). Additionally, leaders help set direction in their schools by

encouraging staff to develop shared goals (i.e. by a democratic process) that are

compelling and challenging yet achievable (Ford, 1992). Similarly, leaders can provide

direction through actions that clearly demonstrate their feasible expectations for quality

and high performance from staff (Podsakoff et al., 1990).

Developing People

The educational leader’s knowledge of the “technical core” of teaching and

learning is often termed as “instructional leadership”. Likewise, a leader’s capacity to

connect emotionally with others towards deploying their own emotional resources at

work is called “emotional intelligence”. When both attributes are mobilized, the leader’s

effectiveness is significantly fostered (Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee, 2002). Practically

speaking, educational leaders can practice transformational leadership by offering

intellectual stimulation for their staff. By continuously generating questions and ideas

that prompt change in people, leaders challenge their staff to examine assumptions about

their work and rethink (e.g. through in-depth conversations about teaching and schooling)

how it can be performed (Leithwood, 1994).

On an individualized level, educational leaders are encouraged to support staff by

showing respect and concern about their personal feelings and needs. By paying personal

attention to employees, leaders increase their levels of enthusiasm and optimism while

reducing frustration and transmitting a sense of organizational mission. Thereby, and in

an indirect sense, leaders are increasing staff performance (McColl-Kennedy and

Anderson, 2002). Furthermore, principals set model behavior to be followed. Their

actions and sayings are consistent with the organization’s values and goals. This

modeling process provides a clear guide for staff growth. I also enhanced their beliefs

about their own capacities and their sense of self-efficacy (Firestone and Riehl, 2005).

Redesigning the Organization

There are three specific sets of educational leadership practices which are

typically associated with developing schools as effective organizations. In such

institutions leaders support and sustain the performance of teachers, for example, by

strengthening the overall school culture. The practices of leaders in this regard aim at

developing shared norms, values, beliefs, and attitudes while promoting mutual caring

and trust among staff (Skalbeck, 1991).

An effective educational leadership also strives to modify organizational

structures through changes in staff and task assignments, the scheduling and design of
Page 8 of 12

time and space, enhancing routine operating procedures, and the adequate deployment of

technology and other material resources. These changes help in establishing positive

conditions for teaching and learning by fostering individual staff performance and the

accomplishment of organizational goals (Louis at al., 1995).

In the same way, leaders can boost school performance by providing opportunities

for staff to participate in decision making about issues that affect them and for which

their knowledge is crucial. This practice is referred to as “building collaborative

processes”. Staff will be motivated and more productive when they can shape the

organizational context to meet the needs pertaining to the accomplishment of school

goals (Firestone and Riehl, 2005).

The Indicator of Successful Leadership: Teaching and Learning

Educational leaders aiming to achieve impressive outcomes at their schools maintain a

clear and consistent focus on improving the core task of teaching while strictly refusing excuses

for failure. As facilitators for the work of teachers, they help them in actively enhancing their

strategies in dealing with all their students. Those leaders carefully attend to both classroom and

school-level issues. They emphasize the necessity of all staff having ambitious learning goals for

all students. Moreover, they take careful decisions concerning the diverse school policies such

sa: student promotion, size and composition of classes, staff recruitment and retention (Firestone

and Riehl, 2005).

Bibliography

Banner, D. K., & Gagné, T. E. (1995). Designing Effective Organizations: Traditional and

Transformational Views. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Brown, M., Rutherford, D., & Boyle, B. (2000). Leadership for School Improvement: The Role

of the Head of Department in UK Secondary Schools. School Effectiveness and School ,

11 (2), 237–258.

Cotton, K. (1995). Effective Schooling Practices: A Research Synthesis. Portland, OR:

Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.

Day, C., Harris, A., Hafield, M., Tolley, H., & Beresford, J. (2000). Leading Schools in Times of

Change. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

Epstein, J. L. (2001). School, Family, and Community Partnerships: Preparing Educators and

Improving Schools. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Firestone, W. A., & Riehl, C. (Eds.). (2005). A New Agenda for Research in Educational

Leadership. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

Ford, M. (1992). Motivating Humans: Goals, Emotions, and Personal Agency Beliefs. Newbury

Park, CA: Sage.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal Leadership: Realizing the Power of

Emotional Intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Gronn, P. (2000). Distributed Properties: A New Architecture for Leadership. Educational

Management and Administration , 28 (3), 317–338.

Grossman, P., Wineburg, S., & Woolworth, S. (2001). Toward a Theory of Teacher Community.

Teachers College Record , 103 (6), 942–1012.

Hallinger, P., Bickman, L., & Davis, K. (1996). School Context, Principal Leadership, and

Student Reading Achievement. Elementary School Journal , 95 (5), 527–549.

Hamilton, M. L., & Richardson, V. (1995). Effects of the Culture in Two Schools on the Process

and Outcomes of Staff Development. Elementary School Journal , 95 (4), 367–385.

Hannay, L. M., & Denby, M. (1994). Secondary School Change: The Role of Department Heads.

American Educational Research Association (pp. 1-29). New Orleans, LA: Institute of

Education Sciences (IES).

Ingersoll, R. (1999). The Problem of Under Qualified Teachers in American Secondary Schools.

Educational Researcher , 28 (2), 26–37.

Leithwood, K. (1994). Leadership for School Restructuring. Educational Administration

Quarterly , 30 (4), 498–518.

Levine, D. U., & Lezotte, L. W. (1990). Unusually Effective Schools: a Review and Analysis of

Research and Practice. Madison, WI: National Center for Effective Schools Research and

Development.

Louis, K. S., & Kruse, S. D. (1995). Professionalism and Community: Perspectives on

Reforming Urban Schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

McColl-Kennedy, J. R., & Anderson, R. D. (2002). Impact of Leadership Style and Emotions on

Subordinate Performance. Leadership Quarterly , 13, 545–559.

Mortimore, P. (1993). School Effectiveness and the Management of Effective Learning and

Teaching. School Effectiveness and School Improvement , 4 (4), 290–310.

Nias, J., Southworth, G., & Campbell, P. (1989). Staff Relationships in the Primary School.

London: Cassell.
Page 12 of 12

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational

Leaders’ Behaviors and Their Effects on Followers’ Trust in Leader, Satisfaction, and

Organizational Citizenship Behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly , 1 (2), 107–142.

Sammons, P., Hillman, J., & Mortimore, P. (1995). Key Characteristics of Effective Schools: A

Review of School Effectiveness Research. London: Office for Standards in Education.

Skalbeck, K. L. (1991). Profile of a Transformational Leader: A Sacred Mission. Ann Arbor,

MI : UMI Dissertation Services.

Smylie, M. A., Lazarus, V., & Brownlee-Conyers, J. (1996). Instructional Outcomes of School-

based Participative Decision Making. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , 18

(3), 181–198.

Spillane, J. P., Hallett, T., & Diamond, J. B. (2003). Forms of Capital and the Construction of

Leadership: Instructional Leadership in Urban Elementary Schools. Sociology of

Education , 76 (1), 1–17.

Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2001). Investigating School Leadership

Practice: A Distributed Perspective. Educational Researcher , 30 (3), 23–28.

Taylor, D. L., & Bogotch, I. E. (1994). School Level Effects of Teachers’ Participation in

Decision Making. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , 16 (3), 302–319.

Tucker, M. S., & Codding, J. B. (Eds.). (2002). The Principal Challenge: Leading and Managing

Schools in an Era of Accountability. San Francisco: Wiley.