Effective School Leadership And School Improvement Essay.

Effective school leadership and school improvement.Use only the literature given.

Organizational Culture and Leadership

There has been tremendous growth in the field of school leadership and school improvement over the recent years (Bush & Glover, 2014). For instance, leadership has changed from instructional leadership to education management in 21^st century. Leadership is concerned with influence that results in achievement of certain goals. Thus, school leadership involves management of school activities ranging from setting goals to evaluating teachers. Leadership can be classified into many categories such as instructional and managerial leadership (Bush & Glover, 2014). Regarding instructional leadership, students are affected greatly with behavior of their teachers. The following are some of the reasons why instructional leadership has been criticized; it enhances teaching instead of learning as well as focusing on the roles played by the principal, thus ignoring contributions made by other leaders. On the other hand, there will be a smooth running of day-to-day school operations only if tasks have been carried out accordingly. This is based on managerial leadership (Bush & Glover, 2014).

Besides, basing on transformational leadership, greater productivity is achieved through commitments of members involved. Apart from commitments, it also focuses on members’ capacities.  In addition, moral leadership focuses on integrity. Therefore; leadership ought to be based on values (Bush & Glover, 2014). This type of leadership that is based on values can also be described by other terms including spiritual and authentic leadership. Distributed leadership is also another type of leadership, which is concerned with shared leadership rather than individual. Recently, many scholars have focused greatly on distributed leadership. It plays vital roles in most schools such as relieving head teachers from doing a lot of work as well as enhancing joint working. The other type of leadership is teacher leadership, which is closely related to distributed leadership. It contributes greatly towards school improvement. Other types of leadership includes system and contingent (Bush & Glover, 2014). The main purpose of this paper is to discuss concepts related to school leadership and school improvement.

There exists a relationship between culture and leadership. Culture is related to lifestyle and behavior exhibited by a particular group of people. Culture among members of an organization is established and created by rules, leadership behavior and daily routines (Schein, 2004). Culture can be changed after a certain period of time especially when organizational goals have changed. These processes involved while creating culture is one of significant features of leadership. Thus, leadership and culture are related. However, many studies have focused on leadership than culture, thus bringing confusion of what leadership entails (Schein, 2004). For instance, the following are some of the examples that explains how culture is related to leadership.

1. Edgar Schein was called by Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) to provide guidance on how communication can be improved as well as making better decisions. He observed the following; confrontations and excessive emotionality among other factors that impacts negatively on communication. Afterwards, he provided some suggestions regarding better listening and reducing level of frustration. However, suggestions provided bore no fruits as the group’s basic style didn’t change (Schein, 2004).
2. The second scenario is related to Ciba-Geigy Company, which is located in Switzerland. Businesses are dynamic in nature, thus this company needed guidelines for innovation that can help it to deal effectively with dynamic environment. Edgar wrote a memo to address those innovative issues. However, meetings called by Edgar were unsuccessful despite managers agreeing unanimously that change could be vital. Therefore these two examples shows that there is a relationship between culture and leadership (Schein, 2004).   

Theories and Styles of Leadership and Management

There are many leadership theories such as trait, great man, authentic and role theories. According to great man theory, leaders are born with inherited traits (Bush & Glover, 2014). The following are some of the primary traits of a successful leader; maintaining calmness especially under pressure, accepting mistakes and understanding most areas. On the contrary to the great man’s theory, behavioral theory suggests that leaders are not born. It is believed any person can be a leader through learning (Bush & Glover, 2014). Besides, role theory is concerned with some of the roles that are played by an individual within a school or an organization. Individual’s behavior is shaped through information acquired regarding leadership values within a school.

Role conflict may occur when an individual does not behave according to the expectations. For instance, when students start to carry out some of the roles of their teachers or head teacher. Other than leadership theories, there are also exists several leadership styles, for example, Lewin’s and Likert’s leadership styes (Bush & Glover, 2014). Autocratic and democratic are some of the styles that were identified by Lewin’s group. Autocratic leadership is a form of dictatorship where decisions are made by leaders. On the contrary, leaders consult their subjects while making important decisions basing on democratic leadership. For instance, head teacher can consult teachers as well as students while making important decisions and making necessary changes on school operations, therefore; enhancing understanding and reducing conflicts. On the other hand, some of the styles identified by Likert includes exploitative and benevolent authoritative styles. Exploitative style uses top down approach, thus all communications are made by leaders. On the contrary, people’s ideas and suggestions may be used to make important decisions basing on benevolent style (Bush & Glover, 2014).

Instructional Leadership

Currently, the term instructional leadership is not mostly used. It changed to education administrators. There are some responsibilities that were expected to be carried out by school principal such as managerial roles (Bush & Glover, 2014). These roles were identified by Cuban. In early 1980’s, instructional leadership was perceived as roles played by school principals. For instance, USA policymakers embolden principals to play vital roles in schools, for example, by making better decisions. The following are some of the terms that were used to describe instructional leaders; directive leaders, culture builders and goal-oriented. Basing on Hallinger and Murphy’s model, the following are some of the roles of school principals: defining mission statement of a school, program management and enhancing positive climate for learning (Hallinger, 2005). Defining mission statement consists of the following; framing and communicating goals. Thus, the school’s core purpose is stated and described explicitly by the principal. Apart from goal’s framing role, the principal also ensure that the community is well informed about school’s goals (Hallinger, 2005). The second role, which is program management, is concerned with instruction control. Thus, ensuring that both teachers and students are carrying out their roles as per the instructions given. Apart from instruction control, the principal has a responsibility of coordinating all activities that are carried within the school. Besides, the principal also keeps track of student’s progress. In this dimension, school principal needs to be more committed, thus ensuring that school has improved greatly. The third role of the school principal, which is enhancing positive climate for learning, is associated with rewards that are given to the hardworking teachers and students, hence increasing their morale. Therefore, the school principal needs to ensure that there is continuous amelioration of teaching as well as learning (Hallinger, 2005).

Types of Leadership

Basing on Heck and Hallinger’s literature review, many researchers have been focusing much on instructional leadership. These researchers come from many countries such as Asia and Europe. Previously, PIMRS were used widely in the United States to study instructional leadership (Hallinger, 2005). Afterwards, this instrument spread to other countries across the globe such as Europe and North America. There were 116 studies from 1983 to 2005, thus supporting the fact that this type of school leadership has been a center of great interest to many researchers. The following are some of the findings of these researches; understanding impacts of experience, gender and size of the school on instructional leadership (Hallinger, 2005). Besides, these researches have also revealed that instructional leaders plays some vital roles in determining quality of the outcomes.  

Initially, school leadership was associated with the roles played by head teachers, thus ignoring other teachers and staff members within the school (Spillane, 2005). Today, that notion has changed drastically. For instance, many scholars around the globe are talking of distributed as well as shared leadership rather than lone leadership. To understand fully concepts related to distributed leadership, a research was conducted between 2003 and 2004 (MacBeath, 2005). National College of School Leadership (NCSL) provided all the financial support required during the research. A total of 11 schools were involved including secondary, middle and primary schools. Besides, two junior schools were also involved. These schools are located within Eastern region such as Essex and Hertfordshire. There was a meeting held with relevant school stakeholders such as head teachers, which aimed at informing them about the reasons for conducting the study (Spillane, 2005). Apart from briefing stakeholders, some of the reasons why leadership study was important were also stated explicitly during the meeting. Besides, this also enabled head teachers to prepare adequately, therefore; participating fully during the study. It also assisted researchers to familiarize themselves with relevant concerned parties, thus creating mutual understanding.

First and foremost, head teachers were asked what the term ‘distributed leadership’ meant. Data was collected by using several techniques such as interviewing. Other than interviewing, shadowing method was also used. Head teachers were interviewed in a sequential fashion, i.e. one by one, and afterwards, several head teachers from each school were interviewed at once (MacBeath, 2005). Collected data was shared to other staff members from all the schools that were involved through a questionnaire. In total, 302 out of 451 questionnaires were returned. Questionnaire was divided into the following sections; school culture and leadership. The following are some of the conclusions drawn from the research; staff share a common vision and also have commitment, thus ensuring that the school has achieved its mission (MacBeath, 2005).

Recent Research on Instructional Leadership

Distributed leadership is based on trust and accountability. Trust is concerned with confidence on some other person. For instance, teachers can rely on their head teachers. Lack of trust leads to mistrust, which later results in corrosive influence (MacBeath, 2005). Trust brings along a lot of benefits such as hassle-free relationships. It is enhanced with accountability. Accountability is concerned with liability, thus head teachers can explain explicitly how school resources have been utilized. There exist several ways in which trust can be generated within a school, for instance head teachers can request the staff to give their suggestions and views on what they believe. Also, head teachers can keep track of performance, and thereafter, holding staff accountably (MacBeath, 2005). Thus, trust is vital, thus enables a school to achieve its goals. For instance, one of the head teachers from middle school said that operations will run smoothly as long as staff is trustworthy. Other than trustworthy, staff should also be skilled. People’s perception towards others is very vital, thus respecting ideas and views of others. This leads to mutual agreement and hence enhances empathy rather than individualism. Besides, better decisions can also be made, thus increasing school performance and resolving some of the problems encountered peacefully (MacBeath, 2005).

This leadership is not only limited to group performance, but also focuses on supervision roles and results (Bush & Glover, 2014). Success is measured basing on school’s reward system. The following are some of its basic assumptions:

1. Performance is enhanced under clear instructions.
2. Workers can be motivated through rewards as well as punishments.
3. Junior staff should be monitored carefully, thus making sure that they are working according to the expectations.

Transactional leaders ensure that employees are given all their needs, thus maximizing efficiency. Besides, they also ensure that employees are aware of their responsibilities and rewards for accomplishing a particular task. They also explain a punishment that an employee can be given in case of failing to carry out a specific task properly under stipulated instructions. Also, they provide feedback regarding employees’ performance (Bush & Glover, 2014). This leadership style has some limitations such as discouraging creativity among employees. Its dimension includes; contingent rewards, passive and active management by exception. Contingent reward is related to the act rewarding employees for meeting specified expectations. On the other hand, passive management restricts head teacher from interfering with activities of the staff, and therefore, intervening only when the need arises. In active management dimension, head teachers predicts problems, therefore; keeping track of the progress and providing corrective measures (Bush & Glover, 2014).

In transformational leadership, head teachers and teachers work together for a common purpose. Thus, motivation is not a one way process rather a two way process. Thus, head teacher motivates teachers (Bush & Glover, 2003). Similarly, teachers motivates head teachers. This type of leadership has been a center of interest for scholars over the recent years as it help followers to exploit their potentials fully (Bush & Glover, 2003). Decision are made after series of consultations between leader and followers. In school context, teachers can take part in decision making process, therefore; maximizing productivity. The following are some of the roles played by transformational leader in a school:

1. Developing a common vision.
2. Discussing with teachers about school goals, and afterwards, reaching agreement.
3. Promoting innovation among staff.
4. Involving teachers in the entire process of making important decisions.
5. Enhancing collaboration and mutual trust among staff.
6. Strengthening school values (Bush & Glover, 2003).

Distributed Leadership

Transformational leadership is made up of the following components; individualized consideration, charismatic leadership, intellectual simulation and inspirational motivation. In charismatic leadership, leaders set a good example to their followers. Consequently, followers usually follow foot-steps of their leaders (Bush & Glover, 2003). Also, leaders need to express willingness of taking risks. In inspirational motivation, leaders need to motivate followers. Besides, generating enthusiasm. They also encourage others to be innovative. On the other hand, intellectual simulation enables leaders to integrate new ways of carrying out operations, thus enhancing productivity (Bush & Glover, 2014). Also, they criticize others privately rather than publicly that can lower followers’ morale, hence reducing their performance. Regarding individualized consideration, leaders listen carefully to other’s needs. Apart from listening to followers’ needs, they also have empathy, thus respecting ideas of other people. Leaders also interact with their followers, and therefore; becomes aware of their individual issues and problems. Thus, staff members are encouraged to attain their own personal goals.  

Recent researches have revealed that school leadership has contributed immensely towards school improvement (Hallinger & Heck, 2010). For instance, it was established that principal leadership has enhanced school learning. It also enhances school development. These conclusions regarding principal leadership were drawn from a research that has been conducted for over 50 years. However, neither of the researches conducted provided clear reasons as to why leadership contributes to improvement (Hallinger & Heck, 2010). To understand concepts related to school improvement and leadership, the following models were studied: direct effects, reciprocal effects, mediated effects and reversed mediated effects model. First and foremost, the following two assumptions are put into consideration; decline and improvement changes must be examined by school improvement research and improvement leadership is aimed at learning growth (Hallinger & Heck, 2010). In direct effects model, learning outcomes has been explained in accordance with leadership. However, this research was aborted by many researchers as it didn’t yield fruits. On the other hand, mediated effects is concerned with principal’s activities such as creating a cool academic environment for learning, therefore; resulting in improvement (Hallinger & Heck, 2010). In reversed mediated effects, changes in leadership is as a result of learning changes on contrary to mediated effects. Lastly, reciprocal effects model is concerned with mutual influence between leadership and school improvement. This researched focused on understanding contributions of collaborative leadership towards school improvement (Bert, Kyriakides & Antoniou, 2013). From the research, most of the analyses showed that contribution of leadership towards school improvement can be explained well using reciprocal effects model. Thus, relationship between improvement and leadership changes over time.

Conclusion

To conclude, there exists a close relationship between school leadership and improvement. School leadership involves management of school activities ranging from setting goals to evaluating teachers. School leadership has changed from instructional leadership to education management in 21^st century. Leadership can be classified into many categories such as instructional and managerial leadership. Regarding instructional leadership, there are some responsibilities that were expected to be carried out by school principal such as managerial roles. Besides, in transformational leadership, head teachers and teachers work together for a common purpose while transactional leadership is not only limited to group performance, but also focuses on supervision roles and results. The following are some of the roles played by school leadership in school improvement; enhancing school learning and school development.

References

Bert, P.M., Kyriakides, L. & Antoniou, P. (2013). A dynamic approach

to school improvement: main features and impact, School Leadership & Management, 33:2, 114-132, DOI: 10.1080/13632434.2013.773883

Bush, T., & D. Glover. (2003). School Leadership: Concepts and Evidence. Nottingham:

National College for School Leadership.

Bush, T. & Glover, D. (2014) School leadership models: what do we know? School

Leadership & Management, 34:5, 553-571. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2014.928680 

Hallinger, P. & Heck, H. R. (2010) Collaborative leadership and school improvement:

understanding the impact on school capacity and student learning, School Leadership and Management, 30:2, 95-110. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/13632431003663214

Hallinger, P.  (2005). Instructional Leadership and the School Principal: A passing fancy that

refuses to fade away. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4:3, 221-239

MacBeath, J. (2005) Leadership as distributed: a matter of practice, School Leadership &

Management, 25:4, 349-366, DOI: 10.1080/13634230500197165

Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational Culture and Leadership. John Wiley and Sons

Spillane, J. P. (2005) Distributed Leadership, the Educational Forum, 69:2, 143-150. Retrieved from https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131720508984678