Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
PREFERRED ADMINISTRATOR LEADERSHIP STYLES BY HIGHLY EFFECTIVE
ELEMENTARY TEACHERS
A Dissertation
Presented to
The Faculty of the Education Department
Carson-Newman University
In Partial Fulfillment
Of the
Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Education
By
Jamelie Kangles Johns
March 2021
ii
Dissertation Approval
Student Name: Jamelie Kangles Johns CNU ID: 445741 Date: March 15, 2021 Dissertation Title: Preferred Administrator Leadership Styles by Highly Effective Elementary Teachers
This dissertation has been approved and accepted by the faculty of the Education Department,
Carson-Newman University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree, Doctor of
Education.
Dissertation Committee:
Dissertation Chair: Dr. Mark Gonzales, Ed.D.
Methodologist: Dr. P. Mark Taylor, Ph.D.
Content member: Dr. Sarah Cates, Ed.D.
Approved by the Dissertation Committee Date: 3/15/2021
iii
Copyright 2021
Jamelie Kangles Johns
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
iv
I hereby grant permission to the Education Department, Carson-Newman University, to
reproduce this research in part or in full for professional purposes with the understanding that in
no case will it be for financial profit to any person or institution.
Jamelie Kangles Johns, March 2021
v
Abstract
This study aims to determine the preferred leadership styles by highly effective elementary
teachers. A qualitative study was conducted in a mid-size urban school district with six highly
effective elementary teachers. Data were drawn from surveys, individual interviews,
observations of teachers interacting with principals, and a focus group. Analysis of the data
confirmed that highly effective teachers prefer a democratic leadership style or one with similar
characteristics. Highly effective teachers want to work for administrators who foster
collaboration and input as a part of the school vision and who build trust and relationships with
and among teachers. Principals, who use a democratic leadership style, or one with similar
qualities, will be more likely to recruit, retain, and grow highly effective teachers. This study
proves that the administrator’s leadership style must be tied to the needs of the teachers and the
situation at hand. Maslow’s Hierarchy is used as the theoretical framework. Teacher motivation
and job satisfaction were revealed throughout this study as dependent on leadership. Further
research is needed to determine if the results from this study would be similar with a larger
cohort of educators.
Keywords: leadership style, highly effective teacher, Maslow’s Hierarchy, Path-Goal
Leadership Theory
vi
Acknowledgements
To Steven, Scarlett and my family – I love you all and am so grateful to have you in my
corner. Thank you for your support, encouragement, and understanding when I needed time to
do my work. I would not have gotten through this without you. Teamwork makes the dream
work.
Thank you to the teachers who participated in this study. Your willingness to give your
time to the research was much appreciated. Each of you is inspirational in the classroom and
administrators are lucky to have you work for them. I hope that our time spent together will
encourage administrators to support teachers in the ways we have discovered work best for
teachers like you.
I appreciate my committee members for asking questions and giving feedback at just the
right times when it was needed. Thank you to Dr. Mark Gonzales for chairing my committee and
encouraging me to move at my own pace. I am grateful for Dr. P. Mark Taylor and Dr. Sarah
Cates for serving on my committee. You made this feel like a collaborative process and
provided much needed feedback while allowing me to own the work.
Thank you to Jill L., Jamie, Saunya, Denver, and Debbie for venturing through the
doctoral program with me. The journey was more fun with you all by my side. To Aimee,
Stacey, and Jill B. - thank you for always encouraging me to strive for excellence and to continue
learning.
To my parents who always taught me that education is one of the most valuable things in
the world. With education, there are no limits.
vii
Table of Contents
Title Page …………………………………………………………………………………..… i Dissertation Approval ……………………………………………………………………… ii Copyright Statement.………………………………………………………………………… iii Permission to Reproduce …………………………………………………………………..… iv Abstract ……………………………………………………………………………….……… v Acknowledgements ………………………………………………………………………… vi Table of Contents …………………………………………………………………..……… vii Chapter 1: Introduction and Background ……………………………………………… 1 Introduction and Background ……………………………………………………………… 1 Statement of the Problem …………………………………………………………….……… 2 Purpose and Significance of Study ………………………………………………………… 2 Research Question ………………………………………………………………….……… 3 Theoretical Foundation ……………………………………………………………………… 3 Rationale for the Study……………………………………………………………..………… 6 Research Positionality ……………………………………………………………………..… 6 Limitations and Delimitations ……………………………………………………………..… 7 Definition of Terms ………………………………………………………………………… 8 Organization of Study ……………………………………………………………………… 9 Summary……………………………………………………………………………………… 10 Chapter 2: Literature Review …………………………………………………………… 11 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………… 11 Methodology of Literature Review ……………………………………………………...… 12 Theoretical Framework ……………………………………………………………………… 12 Leadership ……………………………………………………...…………………………… 17 Leadership Styles …………………………………………………………………………… 19
Transactional and Transformational Leadership…………………………………… 19 Path-Goal Leadership Theory ……………………………………………………… 21 Situational Leadership ……………………………………………………………… 24
Hersey and Blanchard………………………………………..………………… 24 Daniel Goleman……………………………………………….………………… 28
Coercive……………………………………………….…………………… 29 Authoritative………………………………………….…….……………… 29 Affiliative………………………………………………..………………… 30 Democratic……………………………………………….………………… 31 Pacesetting……………………………………………….………………… 31 Coaching……………………………………………….…………………… 32 Summary……………………………………………….…………………… 32
Adult Learning ………………………………………………….…….…….……………… 33 Teacher Job Satisfaction …………………………………………………………………… 35
viii
Teacher Retention…………………………………………………………………………… 37 Effective Teachers…………………………………………………………………………… 38 Summary …………………………………………………………………………………… 40 Chapter 3: Research Methodology………………………………………………………… 42 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………… 42 Research Question …………………………………………………………………………… 42 Description of the Research Approach ……………………………………….……………… 42 Description of the Study Participants and Setting …………………………………………… 44 Data Collection Procedures………………………………………………………………… 45 Ethical Considerations ………………………………………………………………..……… 46
Data triangulation……………………………………………………………….…… 47 Peer-debriefing……………………………………………………………….….…… 47 Member checks……………………………………………………………………… 48 Reflective journal……………………………………………………………….…… 48 Thick descriptions……………………………………………………………….…… 49
Data Analysis Procedures…………………………………………………………………… 49 Summary …………………………………………………………………………………… 51 Chapter 4: Presentation of Findings ……………………………………………………… 52 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………… 52 Participants ………………………………………………………………………………… 53 Summary of the Data ………………………………………………………………………… 54 Overview of Survey Data …………………………………………………………………… 57 Overview of Interview Data ……………………………………………..………………… 60
Teacher One ……………………………………………………………………..…… 61 Teacher Two …………………………………………………………………..…… 62 Teacher Three ……………………………………………………………………..… 63 Teacher Four …………………………………………………………………..…… 64 Teacher Five ………………………………………………………………………… 65 Teacher Six ……………………………………………………………………..…… 66
Overview of Observations …………………………………………………………………… 67 Summary …………………………………………………………………………………… 69 Chapter 5: Conclusions, Implications, and Recommendations ………………………... 72 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………… 72 Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………………… 72 Implications ………………………………………………………………………………..… 74 Recommendations for Future Research ……………………………………………………… 75 Summary …………………………………………………………………………………… 76 References and Appendices ……………………...……………………………...………… 78 References ………………………………………………………………………….……… 78 Appendix A Informed Consent Form Teacher Participant…………………………………… 92
ix
Appendix B Informed Consent Form Principal Participant ………………………………… 95 Appendix C Participant Survey……………………………………………………………… 98 List of Figures……………………...……………………………………………………...… Figure 2.1 Maslow’s Motivation Model ……………………………………………….…… 13 Figure 2.2 Path-Goal Leadership Theory …………………………………..……………… 22 Figure 2.3 Four Basic Leader Behavior Styles ……………………………………………… 25 Figure 2.4 Situational Leadership Model ………………………………….………………… 27 List of Tables……………………...……………………………………………………...… Table 4.1 Survey Respondent Teaching Experience ………………………………………. 54 Table 4.2 Results from Coding ……………………………………….…………………… 56 Table 4.3 Teacher Questionnaire Leadership Statement Responses ………………………… 58 Table 4.4 Teacher Questionnaire Leadership Action Responses…………………………… 59 Table 4.5 Themes from Open-Ended Questions……………………………….…………… 60
1
Chapter 1 Introduction and Background
Teaching is a rewarding profession, but there are times when educators might become
complacent in their work (Weinbaum, Weis, & Beaver, 2012). Complacency might occur when
teachers stick to the same lessons and materials they have used for years. It also might occur
when the school leader fails to establish a positive and healthy professional learning environment
(Blanca & Ramona, 2017). School leaders are charged with igniting teachers’ passion to help
them grow to be even better (Blanca & Ramona, 2017). School leaders have the ability to
influence the implementation of quality professional growth in the school (Bredeson, 2000).
Leadership in education plays an integral role in creating a positive school culture and
influencing student learning and achievement (Greenfield, 2007).
The National Staff Development Council adopted standards for staff development and in
the description principals are cited as key players who provide strong leadership in staff
development through their advocacy, support, and ability to influence others (NSDC, 1995).
Furthermore, the Tennessee State Board of Education designed the Instructional Leadership
Standards to identify ethical and effective instructional leaders’ core performance indicators. One
of these standards states that the “ethical and effective instructional leader develops the capacity
of each educator by designing, facilitating, and participating in collaborative learning informed
by multiple sources of data” (TSBE, 2018). One indicator of success is that effective teachers are
recruited, inducted, supported, retained, and developed by these school leaders (TSBE, 2018).
Among educational policymakers, researchers and practitioners, there is consensus that
teacher professional growth is crucial to school improvement (Bredeson, 2000). However, there
continues to be a need to communicate the importance of continuous learning and growth to
educators (Bredeson, 2000). Developing effective teachers is an important part of instructional
2
leadership (TSBE, 2018; NSDC, 1995; Barber & Mourshed, 2007). School leaders must continue
to focus on the specific professional development of teachers already considered effective in
their craft (Barber & Mourshed, 2007). Students deserve the best teachers and principals must do
their part to provide the best teachers to them.
Statement of the Problem
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, teachers are leaving the profession at a rate that
has continued to climb for the past four years (Grundy, 2018). The brief, “Musical Chairs:
Teacher Churn and its impact on Indianapolis Public Schools” published by Teach Plus stated,
“For teachers who voluntarily left a school at some point in their career, 49% cited school
leadership and 40% cited school culture as reasons for leaving (n.d.).” The principal is the one
who leads the school and the effective teachers must be on board and have opportunities to grow
in ways that best suit them (TSBE, 2018).
The majority of the research shows that principal leadership is a key factor in a teacher’s
decision to stay at a particular school. A principal must spend time considering the way he or she
leads the teachers. A principal must consider the leadership styles used with each teacher and
adjust accordingly (Hallinger, 2003; Hersey & Blanchard, 1977; Goleman, 2000; House, 1971).
This study examines the different leadership styles that principals use and determines which are
preferred by teachers who are considered highly effective. If schools need to retain highly
effective teachers, school leaders must know the best ways to support them in their development.
Purpose and Significance of the Study
The purpose of this qualitative study is to determine the characteristics of best leadership
styles that highly effective elementary teachers prefer from their administrators. School leaders
have various learning styles to consider when working with teachers in their building (Blanca &
3
Ramona, 2017). In order to recruit, retain, and grow highly effective teachers, school leaders
must adapt their leadership style to accommodate them (Baptiste, 2019). As a school leader, one
must consider the actions taken to help highly effective teachers be satisfied and grow in their
job (Mehdinezhad & Mansouri, 2016).
This study focused specifically on the perceptions of the preferred leadership styles of
highly effective teachers. It contributes to the existing body of research on leadership styles,
specifically enhancing the limited research on highly effective teachers’ needs. School leaders
who want to retain and grow highly effective teachers will likely benefit from the study results.
Research Question
One research question and two sub-questions directed this qualitative study:
Which administrative leadership styles do highly effective teachers prefer?
• What are the perceptions of highly effective teachers of the three different administrative
leadership styles?
• What are the preferred characteristics of administrative leadership styles by highly
effective elementary teachers?
Theoretical Foundation
Abraham Maslow developed a hierarchy of needs to help show how people strive through
their lives to achieve self-actualization. Self-actualization is that people are driven from within to
realize their full growth potential (Owens & Valesky, 2015). He believes that once human needs
of survival are met, a hierarchical pattern unfolds to show continued growth and development.
Maslow (1943, 1954) stated that people are motivated to achieve certain needs and that some
needs take precedence over others. His hierarchical pattern includes the following five stages:
basic physiological needs, security and safety, social affiliation, esteem, and self-actualization.
4
The first four needs are referred to as deficiency needs because not having them motivates
people to meet them and because until the need is met, people cannot move to the next need
(McLeod, 2020).
The higher-order need, self-actualization, is called a growth need as it is never fully met, and
people will always be motivated to keep growing (Owens & Valesky, 2015). In the sixties and
seventies, Maslow expanded the hierarchy of needs from five-stages to eight-stages, which added
cognitive, aesthetic, and transcendence needs as three more growth needs (McLeod, 2020). The
following is an outline of Maslow’s eight-stage model:
1. Biological and physiological needs—air, food, drink, shelter, warmth, sex, sleep, etc.
2. Safety needs—protection, from elements, security, order, law, stability, freedom from fear.
3. Love and belongingness needs—friendship, intimacy, trust, and acceptance, receiving and
giving affection and love; affiliating, being part of a group.
4. Esteem needs—Maslow classified into two categories: esteem for oneself (dignity,
achievement, mastery, independence) and the desire for reputation or respect from others
(status, prestige).
5. Cognitive needs—knowledge and understanding, curiosity, exploration, need for meaning
and predictability.
6. Aesthetic needs—appreciation and search for beauty, balance, form, etc.
7. Self-actualization needs-realizing personal potential, self-fulfillment, seeking personal
growth and peak experiences.
8. Transcendence needs—a person is motivated by values that transcend beyond the personal
self.
5
Path-Goal theory, for this study, serves as a companion to Maslow’s hierarchy. Path-Goal
theory, inspired by Martin Evans (1970) and further developed by Robert House (1971), is a
process in which leaders select specific behaviors that are suited to their employees’ needs and
their working environment, so the leader may best guide their employees (Northouse, 2012).
Leaders will have to engage in different types of leadership behavior depending on the specific
situation. The original Path-Goal theory identifies four styles: achievement, directive,
participative, and supportive leader behaviors.
According to the Path-Goal theory, employees interpret their leader’s behavior based on their
needs, such as the degree of structure they need, affiliation, perceived level of ability, and the
desire for control (Path-Goal Leadership Theory, 2013). So in a school setting, if a principal
provides more structure than what the teachers need, they become less motivated. This
framework lays out the different leadership styles and shows that leaders must be aware of the
teachers’ needs and adapt their leadership style accordingly.
Viewing Path-Goal leadership styles through the lens of Maslow’s hierarchy will help school
administrators know how to best motivate highly effective teachers by meeting their individual
needs to help them reach their potential.
Glaser and Strauss (1967) introduced grounded theory as a practical method for conducting
research that focuses on the inductive and interpretive process by analyzing "the actual
production of meanings and concepts used by social actors in real settings.” The process of
generating theory involves synchronized data collection, coding, and data analysis. These
processes “should blur and intertwine continually, from the beginning of an investigation to its
end” (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). The researcher must be aware of this process from the beginning
of data collection to the generation of theory. Arrival at themes is inductive as the researcher
6
frames the analysis in ever more abstract terms moving from minute details in the raw data to
concepts to categories to saturation and a core category to hypotheses and tentative theories and
finally to theories or themes (Glaser & Strauss, 1967).
Rationale for the Study
Numerous studies have verified that the classroom teacher’s quality makes the biggest
difference in student learning (Darling-Hammond, 2000, Barber & Mourshed, 2007). According
to data collected in Tennessee, 48% of students in grades 4-8 have access to a highly effective
math teacher, and 24% have access to a highly effective ELA teacher (Tennessee Department of
Education, 2016). School leaders must work diligently to grow teachers to be highly effective
and then retain them once they are highly effective (TSBE, 2018). The way the school
administrator leads impacts teachers (Ch, Ahmad, Malik, & Batool, 2017; Kars & Inandi, 2018;
Rana, Malik & Hussain, 2016). While there is a plethora of research on different leadership
styles that principals may adopt, there is little research on how administrators can best support
these highly effective teachers as compared to all teachers. This study will give a picture as to
how the school administrator can best lead highly effective teachers.
Researcher Positionality Statement
The researcher has 18 years of education experience in elementary education as a teacher,
instructional coach, district leader, and assistant principal. She has a Bachelor of Science in
Psychology, a Master of Arts in Elementary Education, and an Educational Specialist degree in
Instructional Leadership and Curriculum and Instruction. The researcher is currently serving in
her third year as an assistant principal in an elementary school filled with highly effective
teachers. A personal interest in this topic surfaced, as there is a desire for the researcher to
continue to move the school forward while honoring teachers’ expertise. The researcher has
7
served under various leaders, but watching leaders in action is not the same as serving as a
school leader. Although the researcher can identify specific instances with the administrators
that inspired personal growth and passion for teaching and learning, it is not always easy to
emulate them. Teachers have so many different needs and different learning styles that school
leaders must consider when supporting them. Having a better understanding of how highly
effective teachers want to be led will improve researcher’s job quality as well as other school
leaders in similar situations.
Limitations, Delimitations, and Assumptions
All research includes limitations, delimitations, and assumptions, and they were
considered in this study.
Limitations are constraints that are beyond the researcher’s control but could affect the
study outcome (Simon & Goes, 2013). First, the study was conducted in one urban school
district. A second limitation is that teachers were selected based on their level of effectiveness
scores from previous years. Due to canceled state testing in the spring, the teachers do not have
scores for the current year. The lack of sources limits the sample group to teachers who had data
from at least two years ago and cuts out any teachers who have only served one year in the
district or one year of teaching. A third limitation is that teachers in grades k-2 use school-wide
achievement and growth data combined with individual observations in determining their level
of effectiveness. They do not receive individual achievement scores based on their performance.
Therefore, primary grade teachers were not included in this study.
Delimitations are intentional decisions made by the researcher to limit the study (Simon
& Goes, 2013). The researcher chose to limit the sample to elementary teachers. The study might
may provide different results if it expanded to include secondary or higher education. The
8
personalities and preferences of teachers are different across different levels of education. Most
school leaders will not have teachers in elementary and secondary at the same time. A final
delimitation in the methodology’s design is that the researcher solely conducted the observations
and interviews, which removed the option for other perceptions considered.
Often there are beliefs from the study that cannot be proven. These are necessary
assumptions to conduct the research study (Simon & Goes, 2013). The assumption was made
that participants answered the questions honestly and accurately in both the survey and the
interview. During the observation, the researcher assumed that the interactions were authentic
between the administrator and the participant. In order to help them answer honestly and interact
authentically, identities were kept confidential.
Definition of Terms
The following terms are used throughout the study and are central to the research
question:
• Highly Effective Teacher—A teacher who has scored a level of effectiveness of 4 or 5 in the
past three years.
• Level of Effectiveness—Evaluation composite weightings are based on 50% teacher
observation, 15% student achievement score, and 35% student growth score. (Tennessee
Department of Education, 2019)
• Level 4 Teacher—A teacher at this level comprehends the instructional skills, knowledge, and
responsibilities described in the Tennessee evaluation rubric and implements them skillfully
and consistently. He/she makes a strong impact on student outcomes. (Tennessee Department
of Education, 2018)
• Level 5 Teacher—A teacher at this level exemplifies the instructional skills, knowledge, and
9
responsibilities described in the Tennessee evaluation rubric and implements them adeptly and
without fail. He/she meets ambitious teaching and learning goals and makes a significant
impact on student outcomes. Performance at this level should be considered a model of
exemplary teaching. (Tennessee Department of Education, 2018)
Organization of the Study
This study is organized into five chapters: Chapter One, Introduction; Chapter Two,
Literature Review; Chapter Three, Methodology; Chapter Four, Presentation of Findings; and
Chapter Five, Conclusions, Implications, and Recommendations. Chapter One details a
discussion of the overview of the study through the introduction and background of the study; a
statement of the problem; the purpose and significance of the study; the theoretical and
conceptual framework that provides constructs for the study; the qualitative research question;
the rationale for the study; the positionality statement of the researcher; limitations,
delimitations, and assumptions; definitions; and the organization of the study. Chapter Two
includes a review of the most relevant and current literature. The second chapter examines the
research related to leadership styles and how they impact adult learning, teacher job satisfaction,
teacher retention, and effective teachers. Chapter Three includes the methodology and
procedures of the study through a discussion and description of the research design, setting and
participants, instruments used to gather data; data process and analysis, ethical considerations;
and methods to increase validity and credibility. Chapter Four includes the analysis of the data
and the presentation of findings. Chapter Five reports the conclusions, implications, and
recommendations of this research.
10
Summary
This qualitative study gathered the perceptions of highly effective elementary teachers
regarding their school administrators’ preferred leadership styles. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs
served as the theoretical framework and Path-Goal leadership theory served as the conceptual
framework for the study and its analysis of data. The analysis and findings of this study provide
information to school administrators on how to lead best and support the highly effective
teachers they serve.
11
Chapter 2 Literature Review
The previous chapter introduces the study, presents the research question, and orients
readers to the important role of school leadership. It also offers challenges presented in teacher
retention and job satisfaction based on the leadership of the principal. A plethora of research has
been conducted on leadership styles that are preferred by employees. While there are a variety of
different pathways for leaders to follow, there is overlap in the qualities of leadership styles and
definitions. Reviewing the literature that examines the leadership styles and their impact on
highly effective teachers informs this research study and provides guidance to school leaders as
they try to best support their highly effective teachers.
A major problem across the United States is that teachers become dissatisfied with their
work (Weinbaum, Weis, & Beaver, 2012). Two common factors lead to this lack of satisfaction:
one is the leadership styles under which teachers are working, and the second is the increasing
demands of accountability (Anghelache, 2014; Weinbaum et al., 2012). The literature review
research shows that principal leadership is a key factor in a teacher’s decision to stay at a
particular school or in the profession. If schools need to retain highly effective teachers, school
leaders must know the best ways to support them in their development. It is important to
understand teacher preferences for how they want and need to be led.
The chapter opens with the methodology used in conducting the review and introduces
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs as the theoretical framework. Next, a description of leadership and
the leadership styles commonly used is provided. It continues by analyzing school leaders’
impact on adult learning, job satisfaction, and teacher retention. A definition of highly effective
teachers and the principal’s role in establishing professional learning communities for them
12
concludes the chapter. This review seeks to ground and support the need for further research
between highly effective teachers and their school leaders’ preferred leadership styles.
Methodology of Literature Review
The literature review compiled for this dissertation includes the central ideas and
common understandings from articles, books, and research studies addressing leadership styles
in education. The purpose of the review is to synthesize the literature for readers and support the
necessity for further research related to the needs of highly effective teachers when related to
principal leadership styles. A concerted effort was made to confine the literature reviewed
between the years 1990 and 2020, except for historical works cited that provide a further
understanding of the evolution and theoretical base related to leadership styles.
The literature obtained in this literature review was collected using the following
databases from the Carson Newman University library: EBSCOhost, Education Research
Complete, ERIC, and ProQuest. Internet search engines and Google scholar were used.
Keywords used included: principal leadership styles/behaviors, Maslow’s needs hierarchy,
teacher retention, teacher job satisfaction, and effective teacher.
Theoretical Framework
Abraham Maslow developed a hierarchy of needs to help show how people strive through
their lives to achieve self-actualization, which is that people are driven from within to realize
their full growth potential (Owens & Valesky, 2015). He believes that once human needs of
survival are met, a hierarchical pattern unfolds to show continued growth and development.
Maslow (1943, 1954) stated that people are motivated to achieve certain needs and that some
needs take precedence over others. His hierarchical pattern includes the following five stages:
13
basic physiological needs, security and safety, social affiliation, esteem, and self-actualization.
The first four needs are referred to as deficiency needs because not having them motivates
people to meet them and because until the need is met, people cannot move to the next need
(McLeod, 2018). The higher-order need, self-actualization, is called a growth need as it is never
fully met and people will always be motivated to keep growing (Owens & Valesky, 2015).
In the sixties and seventies, Maslow expanded the hierarchy of needs from five-stages to
eight-stages, which added cognitive, aesthetic, and transcendence needs as three more growth
needs (McLeod, 2018). Figure 2.1 shows Maslow’s Motivation Model.
Figure 2.1. Maslow’s Motivation Model (McLeod, 2018)
Maslow applied the theory to organizations, hypothesizing that it was the leaders’ task to
achieve the motivation of the employees by addressing the basic needs of the individuals and
allowing them to reach self-actualization, the top of the hierarchy of needs (Maslow, 1943). This
theory has been utilized in various contexts applies to education (Duff, 2013).
14
Often Maslow’s theory has been utilized as a framework for motivating students in the
classroom. For example, students with low self-esteem will not progress academically at an
optimum rate until their self-esteem is strengthened. These basic needs also have to be fulfilled
in teachers and the members of the administration of a school (Howard, Howell, & Brainard,
1987). As Schoen and Teddlie (2008) explained, this fulfillment ensures success in schools.
School characteristics such as space, light, and heat are considered psychological needs. The
safety needs are addressed by safety from physical harm. Promoting positive relationships
among all the administrators, faculty, and students addresses the social needs of friendship and
acceptance. The esteem needs are acknowledged by achieving and recognizing individual
success in school. Schoen and Teddlie claimed that self-actualization is achieved after
individuals within the school can maximize their potential while reaching their personal goals
(2008). Heller (2002) and Rooney (2003) asserted that when their fundamental needs are
satisfied, both the teachers and the students function effectively and efficiently. The satisfaction
of the fundamental needs results in a caring and satisfying environment where all members care
about the welfare of the others, thus fostering excellent learning and teaching atmosphere (Duff,
2013; Heller, 2002; Rooney, 2003).
In regard to an organization and a school (Drafke, 2009; Jerome, 2013), the hierarchical
needs could be explained by the following examples:
Physiological needs: This could be considered an adequate salary that allows employees
to buy items to fulfill their basic needs.
Safety needs: This includes a safe environment without the risk of being physically
harmed. At school, staff and students practice safety drills for fire, tornado, and active shooter
situations. Staff members also have health insurance and retirement plans offered.
15
Belongingness needs: Schools include staff members in a variety of committees and
decision making. Staff members are often a part of a team to rely on each other and support each
other. There are also social events held among the staff members.
Esteem needs: School staff members need to be recognized for their achievements in
formal ways such as titles, awards, and promotions and informally with specific praise like a
handwritten note or conversation. Many states and districts have a “Teacher of the Year” award.
Self-actualization needs: Teachers have a level of achievement they are often striving
toward. This need can be satisfied by providing them with opportunities for growth, leadership,
and responsibility.
Maslow (1943) initially stated that individuals must satisfy lower level deficit needs
before progressing to meet higher level growth needs. However, he later clarified that
satisfaction of a need is not an “all-or-none” phenomenon, admitting that his earlier statements
may have given “the false impression that a need must be satisfied 100 percent before the next
need emerges” (1987, p. 69).
In 1990, Bellott and Tutor disagreed with Maslow’s Hierarchy when it comes to teachers.
They researched with the Tennessee Career Ladder Program and proved that teachers are less
satisfied with their personal achievement of esteem than with the achievement of self-
actualization (as cited in Gawel, 1997). Teachers become teachers because they want to do what
is best for others, not themselves (Gawel, 1997). Therefore, according to Bellott and Tutor
(1990), Maslow’s theory, esteem as a lower order that must be fulfilled before self-actualization,
does not hold true for elementary teachers. This finding may begin to explain why administrators
16
must focus more closely on the esteem needs of teachers, individually and collectively (Gawel,
1997).
Although Maslow (1970) did study self-actualized females, such as Eleanor Roosevelt
and Mother Teresa, they comprised a small portion of his sample. This makes it difficult to
generalize his theory to females and individuals from different ethnicities and social classes
(McLeod, 2018). This is perhaps why Maslow’s theory does not always apply to teachers, as
most are females (McLeod, 2018).
Tay and Diener (2011) tested Maslow’s theory by analyzing the data of over 60,000
participants from 123 countries representing a variety of socio-economic backgrounds, races, and
cultural differences. Respondents answered questions that closely resembled Maslow’s model.
The results of the study support the view that universal human needs appear to exist regardless of
cultural differences. However, the ordering of the needs within the hierarchy was not correct.
“Although the most basic needs might get the most attention when you do not have them,”
Diener explains, “you don’t need to fulfill them in order to get benefits [from the others].” (Tay
& Diener, 2011).
School leaders might make two common mistakes when considering Maslow’s Hierarchy
with teachers (Raman, 2017). The first is that leaders might continue to use safety and social
belonging to “accumulate points on an external scorecard,” which can give external esteem but
not internal happiness or a sense of achievement (Raman, 2017). School leaders must be willing
to let go of the external needs to progress to their full potential. The second mistake is that
leaders may believe that the scaling of Maslow’s Hierarchy is linear amongst their teachers
(Raman, 2017). This is not the case with teachers. Younger generations of employees do not
17
need the linear progression. Instead, many choose to address self-actualization much earlier and
are not motivated by external sources (Raman, 2017).
Leadership
The Oxford Dictionary defines leadership as the action of leading a group of people or an
organization (Oxford, n.d.). If people were asked what leadership means, various responses
would be given as it means different things to different people. A simple definition is that
leadership is the art of motivating a group of people achieve a common goal (Ward, 2020). This
leadership definition captures the essentials of being able and prepared to inspire others (Ward,
2020). Leadership can facilitate a team to realize and create high levels of collaboration, trust,
and respect, creating an environment in which collective learning and increased responsibility
thrive (Greenfield, 2007). Leadership matters and makes a difference for employees. Leadership
style influences organizational climate—by the way that managers motivate direct reports, gather
and use information, make decisions, manage change initiatives, and handle crises (Goleman,
2000). In its 1998 round-up of America’s most admired companies, Fortune identifies the
common denominator of exemplary organizations. "The truth is that no one factor makes a
company admirable,” wrote Thomas Stewart, "but if you were forced to pick the one that makes
the most difference, you'd pick leadership” (as cited in Bennis, 1999).
Leadership provides the foundation of an organization. It gives energy to the work and
empowers the workforce (Bennis, 1989). This empowerment, the collective effect of leadership,
is most evident in four themes. 1. People feel significant: they believe they can make a difference
in the organization. 2. Learning and competence matter: leaders and employees value learning. 3.
People are part of a community effort: unite people and give a collective identity. 4. Work is
exciting: motivate employees through collective goals (Bennis, 1989).
18
A leader can make or break an organization. Without leaders who attract and retain talent,
manage knowledge, and unlock people's capacity to adapt and innovate, an organization's future
is in jeopardy (Bennis, 1999). The key to “future competitive advantage will be the
organization's capacity to create the social structure capable of generating intellectual capital,”
and leadership is the key to realizing the full potential of intellectual capital (Bennis, 1999).
A study of 200 global companies reveals that soft skills have a lot to do with emotional
intelligence, which, Daniel Goleman argues, is the key component of leadership (Goleman,
2000). Emotional intelligence comprises self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and
social skill (Goleman, 2004). In the workplace, it is not simply in the ability to control your
temper or get along with others. Rather, it involves knowing your own and your colleagues’
emotional makeup well enough to be able to move people in directions that help accomplish
company goals (Goleman, 2004). Research suggests that the most effective executives use a
collection of distinct leadership styles—each in the right measure, at just the right time. Such
flexibility is tough to put into action, but it pays off in performance (Goleman, 2000).
In a school setting, the principal leads the school community toward the purpose and
common goals. Although the principal has the authority in the school, the key is for the principal
to lead without utilizing power (Ch, Ahmad, Malik, & Batool, 2017). She has a responsibility to
identify the objectives and goals as well as the structure in the group. The basic work of a
principal is to develop a supportive environment for the staff members so that they will be able
to accomplish their goals and objectives (Ibukun, 1997). The principal’s attitude with teachers
creates a positive relationship and creates either a positive or negative school environment (Ch,
et al., 2017). According to Simmonds (1994), there is a positive and effective relationship
between the principal’s behavior and the teachers’ performance. The principal’s leadership style
19
affects the school environment, teacher job satisfaction, and student performance (Ch, et al.,
2017).
Leadership Styles
Transactional and Transformational Leadership
James Burns (1978) compared two types of leadership in his book, Leadership. His
distinction between transactional and transformational leadership, for decades, identified the
styles of those in leadership roles (Sergiovanni, 2007).
Transactional leadership is like a business transaction where leaders engage in exchanges
with followers (Lynch, 2016). Transactional leadership focuses on results, conforms to an
organization’s existing structure, and measures success according to that organization’s systems
of rewards and penalties (“What is transactional…,” 2018). The followers have needs to achieve
and leaders have goals to achieve. In exchange for completing job performance tasks, followers
are rewarded. Everyone involved must see the something for something exchanged as it is for
this style to work (Lynch, 2016). A transactional leader is someone who values order and
structure (“What is transactional…,” 2018). Transactional leadership relies on self-motivated
people who work well in a structured, directed environment (“What is transactional…,” 2018).
In transactional leadership, the emphasis is on managing the individual’s performance
and determining how well he or she performs in a structured environment (“What is
transactional…,” 2018). The leadership style was developed by Max Weber, a 20th century
German sociologist, and was widely used after World War II in the United States when the
government needed rebuilding and required a high amount of structure for national stability
(“What is transactional…,” 2018).
20
The transactional leadership model is likely to succeed in a crisis or in projects that
require specific processes (Lynch, 2016). Teachers often see their role as a higher purpose than
money, and therefore, this style often does not work in the school setting (Green, 2017).
However, in a school setting in crisis, like a lower-performing school that needs to turn around,
perhaps this style could work (Green, 2017). This is why teaching incentives are offered when
performance improves in high needs schools (Lynch, 2016).
Transformational leaders have clear goals and vision, communicate the vision and goals
to the appropriate stakeholders, and are able to gain buy-in from the stakeholders. Principals,
who use a transformational style, develop positive relationships with necessary stakeholders, and
these relationships are built around a common set of beliefs, values, and norms (Green, 2017).
Transformational leadership refers to leadership skills in principals who can pioneer the school
to a new level at the brink of school development (Kouzes, 2009). These principals empower the
teachers to make decisions and create a culture for teachers to participate. Essentially, they share
their power; distribute leadership tasks; and inspire others to lead, create, manage, and
implement an instructional program that meets the needs of all students (Green, 2017; Yang,
2013). One of the best uses of this leadership style is an organization that is outdated and
requires serious revamping or a small company that has big dreams and wants to change and
adapt to get there (“What is transformational…,” 2018).
Transformational leadership has a deep sense of shared purpose to motivate teachers and
staff. Transformational principals can tap into teachers’ emotions and keep the goals in mind to
make business decisions while guiding from a place of support (Lynch, 2016). One downside to
this approach to leadership is that confidence is placed in a transformational leader more than the
employees, and therefore, if the leader leaves, the work may not continue (Amanchukwu et al.,
21
2015). However, these leaders “develop workplace conditions for teachers and other
professional staff that promote effective professional development practices and student
learning” (Green, 2017). Bass and Avolio (1994) further identified four transformational
leadership domains: idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and
individualized consideration. This concept is built upon the idea that transformational leadership
is a more effective and moral form of leadership than transactional leadership (Bass & Avolio,
1994).
Transactional leaders favor a rewards and punishment approach, whereas
transformational leaders favor a holistic view of an organization and its future. Transformational
leaders establish norms for behavior (Cohen, McCabe, Michelli, & Pickeral, 2009), build
capacity amongst followers, and find value in what each individual or group brings to reaching
the organization’s goals (Sergiovanni, 2007). In order to meet the challenges of leading today’s
schools, principals must combine the best of each style by becoming more transformational in
their thoughts and actions (Bromley & Kirschner-Bromley, 2007). Studies suggest that
transformational leadership affects teachers’ commitment and their attitudes toward their jobs
(Hallinger, 2003).
Robert House Path-Goal Leadership Theory
In 1971, Robert House expanded on the expectancy theories of motivation by examining
contingencies under which leader behavior might affect each element of motivation (Evans,
1996). The theory is a process by which leaders select specific behaviors that are best suited to
their employees’ needs and their working environment so that leaders may best guide their
employees through their path in the obtainment of the daily work goals (Northouse, 2012). The
theory is based on the premise that an employee’s perception of expectancies between his effort
22
and performance is greatly affected by a leader’s behavior (Management, n.d.). The leaders help
group members attain rewards by clarifying the paths to goals and removing performance
obstacles (Path Goal, 2019). They do so by providing the information, support, and other
resources required by employees to complete the task (Management, n.d.). The theory argues
that leaders will have to engage in different leadership behavior types depending on the nature
and demands of a particular situation (Path Goal, 2019).
House’s theory advocates servant leadership. Leaders act as coaches and facilitators to
their employees and do not view leadership as a position of power (Management, n.d.). A
leader’s effectiveness depends on several employee and environmental contingent factors and
certain leadership styles. These are explained in figure 2.2 below.
Figure 2.2: Path-Goal Leadership Theory (Management, n.d.)
The original path-goal theory identifies four leader behaviors rooted in four styles (Path Goal
2019):
23
1. The directive path-goal clarifying leader behavior refers to situations where the leader
lets employees know what is expected of them and tells them how to perform their tasks.
The theory argues that this behavior has the most positive effect when the employees’
role and task demands are ambiguous and intrinsically satisfying.
2. The achievement-oriented leader behavior refers to situations where the leader sets
challenging goals for employees, expects them to perform at their highest level, and
shows confidence in their ability to meet this expectation. Occupations in which the
achievement motive was most predominant were technical jobs, salespersons, scientists,
engineers, and entrepreneurs.
3. The participative leader behavior involves leaders consulting with employees and asking
for their suggestions before making a decision. This behavior is predominant when
employees are highly personally involved in their work.
4. The supportive leader behavior is directed towards the satisfaction of employees’ needs
and preferences. The leader shows concern for the employees’ psychological well-being.
This behavior is especially needed in situations in which tasks or relationships are
psychologically or physically distressing.
Path-goal theory assumes that leaders are flexible and can change their styles as situations
require. It is useful because it reminds leaders that their central purpose as a leader is to help
employees define and reach their goals efficiently (Path Goal, 2019). House revised his theory in
1996 to address the effects of leaders on the motivation and abilities of immediate subordinates
and the effects of leaders on work unit performance (House, 1996). The reformulated theory
includes two additional classes of leader behavior. The essence of the theory is that “leaders, to
be effective, engage in behaviors that complement subordinates’ environments and abilities in a
24
manner that compensates for deficiencies and is instrumental to subordinate satisfaction and
individual and work unit performance” (House, 1996, p. 324).
Situational Leadership
Situational leadership is a flexible leadership style. The leader adapts to the existing
work environment and the needs of the organization. It is not based on a specific skill of the
leader; instead, she modifies the management style to suit the organization’s requirements (What
is situational…, 2019). Leaders must be able to move from one leadership style to another to
meet an organization’s changing needs and employees. These leaders must have the insight to
understand when to change their management style and what leadership strategy fits in each
situation (“What is situational…”, 2019).
There are two mainstream models of Situational Leadership. No matter which model is
followed, they both are grounded in the belief that the leader can adapt and be flexible based on
the situation.
Hersey and Blanchard. Leadership style means how someone acts in line with a
specific theory or model, e.g. to be directive or supportive (Hersey & Blanchard, 1977).
Leadership models have become more significant as people and organizations face different
changes like never before, but the important thing is to select a suitable model to run an
organization according to its needs (Garner & Stough, 2002). According to Hersey and
Blanchard (1969), the leader must learn the situation and select a style accordingly.
The situational leadership model is a useful tool that can help leaders in all organizations
achieve their targets. It addresses the task behavior, relationship behavior of the leader, and the
25
readiness level of employees (Hersey & Blanchard, 1984). Task behavior is the extent to which a
leader engages in one-way communication by explaining what each follower is to do as well as
when, where, and how tasks are to be accomplished (Hersey & Blanchard, 2014). Relationship
behavior is the extent to which a leader engages in two-way communication by providing
socioemotional support, “psychological strokes,” and facilitating behaviors (Hersey &
Blanchard, 2014). Originally, it was thought that these two behaviors worked in a continuum
and a leader was on one end of the spectrum or the other. However, the notion that task
behaviors and relationship behaviors were either/or styles of leadership was dispelled by studies
conducted at Ohio State University and instead it is suggested that by observing leaders, one
would notice that some leaders had styles characterized by both high task and high relationship
behavior (Hersey & Blanchard, 2014). This is illustrated in Figure 2.3.
Figure 2.3 Four basic leader behavior styles (Hersey & Blanchard, 2014)
26
Situational leadership is based on (1) the amount of direction (task behavior) a leader
gives, (2) the amount of socioemotional support (relationship behavior) a leader provides, and
(3) the readiness level that followers exhibit on a specific task, function, activity, or objective
that the leader is attempting to accomplish (Garner & Stough, 2002). The model describes the
followers’ readiness as their ability, willingness, and the level they assume responsibility to
perform organizational tasks (Garner & Stough, 2002). In other words, the leader needs to select
the way that best suits a particular situation depending upon the readiness levels of followers
(Garner & Stough, 2002). The model dictates that there is no single way to lead teams (Hersey &
Blanchard, 1984).
Figure 2.4 relates the readiness level of a follower for completing a particular job
objective to the optimum leadership style of a principal for maximizing teacher job performance.
The appropriate leadership style (leader behavior) is represented on the curved line running
through the four leadership quadrants introduced in figure 2.3. The readiness level of the
individual or group being supervised (follower readiness) is shown below the leadership model
as a continuum.
27
Figure 2.4 Situational Leadership Model (Hersey & Blanchard, 2014)
Blanchard and Hersey designed their matrix of Situational Leadership off four leadership
styles: telling, selling, participating, and delegating (“What is situational…”, 2019). Telling
style refers to a high-task, low-relationships style where the leader gives explicit directions and
supervises closely. It is geared toward low maturity followers (Kenton, 2019). Selling style
refers to high-task, high-relationship style, in which the leader attempts to sell his ideas to the
group by persuasively explaining task directions. This is used with moderate maturity followers -
ones who have the ability but are unwilling to do the job (Kenton, 2019). Participating style
refers to a low-task, high-relationship style that emphasizes shared ideas and decisions. Leaders
tend to use this style with moderate followers who are experienced and those who are not as
confident to do the tasks assigned (Kenton, 2019). Delegating style refers to low-task, low
28
relationship when the leader allows the group to take responsibility for task decisions. It is best
used with high maturity followers (Kenton, 2019). Based on this research, the conclusion could
be drawn that a delegating leadership style would be best used with highly effective teachers.
Daniel Goleman Leadership Styles. Daniel Goleman added to the research by
considering the elements that characterize a leader by identifying the behaviors that made people
effective leaders. He believed that leaders must be intelligent but it was not enough to define a
leader and instead their emotional intelligence separated them from others. Emotional
intelligence is the ability to manage ourselves and our relationships effectively (Goleman, 2000).
His research has shown that the most successful leaders have strengths in the following
emotional intelligence competencies:
• Self-awareness: ability to read and understand your emotions and their impact on
work, performance, and relationships; accurate self-assessment of your strengths
and weaknesses; and self-confidence.
• Self-management: self-control, trustworthiness, conscientiousness, adaptability,
achievement orientation or the drive to meet an internal standard of excellence,
and initiative.
• Social awareness: empathy, organizational awareness; and service orientation.
• Social skill: visionary leadership; ability to influence others; develop others;
communicate; initiate ideas and lead people in a new direction; conflict
management skills; building bonds with others; promote cooperation,
collaboration, and team building (Goleman, 2000).
29
There are six basic leadership styles; each uses the key components of emotional
intelligence in different combinations (Goleman, 2000). Like Hersey and Blanchard (1969),
Goleman argues the best leaders do not rely on just one leadership— they are skilled at several
and have the flexibility to switch between styles as the circumstances dictate (Goleman, 2000).
Leaders who have mastered four or more— especially the authoritative, democratic, affiliative,
and coaching styles— have the best climate and performance (Goleman, 2000). These four
produce positive overall results on an organization’s climate while the authoritative style is the
most strongly positive (Goleman, 2000).
Coercive. The coercive leader typically uses top-down decision making to change the
direction of an organization (Goleman, 2004). Often the employees feel disrespected, lose a
sense of ownership, and feel little accountability for their work. It is easy to see why this
leadership style is the least effective in most situations (Green, 2017). Therefore it should only
be used sparingly and with caution in situations such as a turnaround or when shocking bad
habits is necessary (Goleman, 2000). It is always appropriate after a genuine emergency and it
can sometimes work with a problem employee in which all other efforts have failed (Goleman,
2000). It should only be used in the short-term as it could have long-term effects on morale
(Green, 2017). Coercive leaders rely on their drive to achieve, initiative, and self-control as their
underlying emotional intelligence competencies (Goleman, 2000).
Authoritative. Research indicates that the authoritative one is the most effective of the six
leadership styles, driving up every aspect of climate (Goleman, 2000). The authoritative leader is
a visionary who motivates people by making it clear to them how their work fits into a larger
version of the organization. This supports Bennis’ (1998) argument that when people feel
significant and part of the team they can make progress and reach the goals together. An
30
authoritative leader makes the end goals clear to everyone, but generally trusts the employees to
devise their own plan to meet the goals (Goleman, 2000). This style works particularly well
when organizations are lost or need a new course of action (Green, 2017). It does not work well
when the team is more experienced than the leader or if the leader becomes overbearing (Green,
2017). Authoritative leaders rely on their self-confidence, empathy, and change catalyst as their
underlying emotional intelligence competencies (Goleman, 2000).
Affiliative. Affiliative leaders work to keep employees happy and create strong emotional
relationships (Goleman, 2000). This style is the opposite of the coercive style in that the leader
puts people first. Affiliative leaders offer ample positive feedback and are skilled at helping the
employees develop a sense of belonging. Employees are given flexibility and freedom to do
their job how they feel is most effective. This style is best when building a team, increasing
morale, improving communication, or repairing broken trust (Goleman, 2000). The affiliative
style has its downfalls in that exclusive focus on praise can allow poor performance to go
uncorrected (Green, 2017) and because constructive feedback is not provided, employees do not
have clear directives to follow (Goleman, 2000). This style is best used in conjunction with the
authoritative style where leaders set the vision and standards first and then combining that with
the caring, nurturing approach of an affiliative leader. Affiliative leadership is synonymous with
Robert Greenleaf’s servant leadership. The servant-leader is “servant first,” which means that the
school leader makes sure that other people’s needs are being served (Greenleaf, 1970); it is about
helping others by identifying and meeting the needs of colleagues, customers, and communities
(Keith, 2019). Servant leadership takes the focus from the end goal to the people who are being
led (Lynch, 2016). As the leader takes time to care for others, there is an emphasis on “ethic of
care” needed in school buildings (Ubben, Hughes, & Norris, 2017). A servant leader exists to
31
serve others and is necessary for school as we are in the service business. Affiliative, or servant,
leaders rely on their empathy, building relationships, and communication as their underlying
emotional intelligence competencies (Goleman, 2000).
Democratic. Democratic leaders make final decisions, but include the team throughout
the decision-making process (Amanchukwu, Stanley, & Ololube, 2015). When the next steps
that an organization must take are unclear, it can help to have a democratic leader (Goleman,
2000). It involves the redistribution of authority and power between staff to provide employee
involvement in the decision making. By spending time getting people’s ideas and buy-in, a
leader builds trust, respect, and commitment (Goleman, 2000). It can be a powerful way to
realize the potential within teams and organizations (“Democratic leadership”, 2017) and provide
flexibility and responsibility (Goleman, 2000). Democratic leadership can be established with
open and honest communication, respect for all ideas, a commitment to decisions, and a clear
explanation of roles (“Democratic leadership”, 2017). When speed and efficiency are needed,
this leadership type may not be the best (Green, 2017). Also, if the team members do not have
the knowledge and expertise to provide high-quality input, this leadership style may not be
effective (Green, 2017). Democratic leadership often produces good results which is evident
from the level of satisfaction among staff. However, democratic leaders will have to learn to put
their foot down and come to a decision in certain situations (“Democratic leadership”, 2017).
Democratic leaders rely on their collaboration, team leadership, and communication as their
underlying emotional intelligence competencies (Goleman, 2000).
Pacesetting. A pacesetting leader sets extremely high performance standards and models
these same standards himself (Goleman, 2000). This leader is obsessive about doing things better
and faster, expects the same from employees, and quickly demands more from them if they are
32
not responding fast enough. The pacesetting leader can destroy climate as many employees feel
overwhelmed by the demands and morale drops (Green, 2017). Employees often do not feel
trusted to take the initiative and their flexibility and responsibility diminish as the leader often
jumps in and takes over (Goleman, 2004). Like the coercive leadership style, pacesetting should
be used sparingly. It works well when all employees are self-motivated, highly competent, and
need little direction or coordination (Goleman, 2000). Pacesetting leaders rely on their
conscientiousness, drive to achieve, and initiative as their underlying emotional intelligence
competencies (Goleman, 2000).
Coaching. A coaching leader helps employees identify their strengths and weaknesses
and tie them to their personal and professional goals (Goleman, 2000). They make plans with
their employees about their roles and responsibilities in carrying out professional growth plans
and giving constructive feedback (Green, 2017). Coaching takes time and positively affects
performance because it focuses on personal development (Goleman, 2000). However, Goleman’s
research shows that of the six styles, the coaching style is used the least often because leaders do
not have time in the high-pressure role to slow down and help employees grow (Goleman, 2000).
When an employee knows what is expected and how their work fits into a larger vision, they are
committed to the organization and seeing success. Coaching is best when the employees are open
to growing and improving their performance (Goleman, 2004). Coaching leaders rely on their
ability to develop others, empathy, and self-awareness as their underlying emotional intelligence
competencies (Goleman, 2000).
Summary. Many managers mistakenly assume that leadership style is a function of
personality rather than strategic choice. Instead of choosing the one style that suits their
temperament, they should ask which style best addresses the demands of a particular situation
33
and adapt their style based on the needs of the employees and organization at the given time
(Goleman, 2004; Hersey & Blanchard, 1969, 1977, 1984; House, 1971). Understanding the
learning styles will help the school leader best adjust to the personnel being served.
Adult Learning
School leaders establish a learning environment for teachers to grow professionally. The
Tennessee State Board of Education Instructional Leadership Standards, call for school leaders
to develop capacity of each educator by designing, facilitating, and participating in collaborative
learning informed by multiple sources of data (TSBE, 2018). It is important to note that even
though the approach to teaching adults and children should be done in different ways to optimize
particular group’s learning potential, much of the basic principles of learning are the same
(Boyle, 2016). Learning structures must be in place that cater to the needs of the staff to produce
results (Boyle, 2016).
Malcolm Knowles’ Andragogy Theory resonates throughout the literature on adult
learning (Broad & Evans, 2006; Fenstermacher & Berliner, 1983; Loeng, 2018). The theory
essentially states that adult learning is self-driven and does not require the same teacher-centric
approach found in educational settings with children (Knowles, 1980). In 1980, Knowles made
four assumptions about the characteristics of adult learners that are different from the
assumptions about the characteristics of child learners. In 1984, Knowles added the fifth
assumption.
1. Self-concept—as a person matures his/her self-concept moves from one of being a
dependent personality toward one of being a self-directed human being (Knowles,
1980).
34
2. Adult learner experience—as a person matures he/she accumulates a growing
reservoir of experience that becomes an increasing resource for learning (Knowles,
1980).
3. Readiness to learn—as a person matures his/her readiness to learn becomes oriented
increasingly to the development tasks of his/her social roles (Knowles, 1980).
4. Orientation to learning—as a person matures his/her time perspective changes from
one of postponed application of knowledge to immediacy of application, and
accordingly his/her orientation toward learning shifts from one of subject-
centeredness to one of problem-centeredness (Knowles, 1980).
5. Motivation to learn—as a person matures the motivation to learn is internal
(Knowles, 1984).
These assumptions help school leaders provide insight into how adults learn and can help
them be more effective in supporting teachers in their own professional learning journey (TEAL,
2011). Regardless of the intended audience, effective teaching involves understanding what
motivates and engages the learner (Graham, 2017).
From the assumptions, Knowles also suggested four principles to apply to adult learning
that would be important for school leaders to consider when designing adult learning
opportunities for teachers (Graham, 2017). In professional learning settings, teachers are
involved in the planning and evaluating their instruction, providing experiences that are a basis
for new knowledge, engaged in new learning that has immediate relevance, and granted
opportunities to problem-solve (Knowles, 1984). Broad and Evans (2006) support Knowles’
principles in that “authentic themes and issues in the day-to-day work of teaching” must be at the
focus when working with adult learners. Oftentimes teachers argue that professional learning
35
experiences are “disconnected and decontextualized” and therefore by following Knowles’
principles, school leaders can head off this issue (Stein, Smith & Silver, 1999).
In order to be effective with adult learners, school leaders should: set a cooperative
climate for learning in the school; assess the teacher’s specific needs and interests; develop
learning objectives based on the learner’s needs, interests, and skill levels; design sequential
activities to achieve the objectives; work collaboratively with the teachers to select methods,
materials, and resources; and evaluate the quality of the learning experience and make
adjustments as needed while assessing further learning needs (Knowles, 1984). The art of
teaching adults effectively requires an understanding of the theories for how adults learn. The
science of teaching adults effectively requires knowing how to apply the theories to best reach
the individual adult learner in an engaging and motivating way (TEAL, 2011).
Teacher Job Satisfaction
The inner workings of a company, which consist of leadership styles, company
environment, and individual relationships, affect the job satisfaction of workers (Humpert, 2016;
Khan et al., 2017; Parke, 2018). Parke (2018) further explains that inspiration, self-esteem,
organizational commitment, and corporate social accountability all exhibit positive relationships
with job satisfaction. Blanca and Ramona (2017) said an appropriate work environment and great
leader relationships inspire higher job satisfaction. These characteristics are linked to principals’
behaviors in the leadership styles that they utilize (Blanca & Ramona, 2017).
Principals’ leadership behaviors can influence teachers' experiences and work lives (Ch,
et al., 2017; Kars & Inandi, 2018; Rana, Malik, & Hussain, 2016). The leadership behaviors of
principals are closely linked to teachers’ sense of self-efficacy (Mehdinezhad & Mansouri,
36
2016), which could have a long-lasting effect on teachers’ overall job performance and
organizational commitment (Baptiste, 2019). Principals that lead with idealized influence instill a
sense of faith for a better future in all members of their organizations, including the students
(Berson & Oreg, 2016). According to Sinek (2017), principals who create cultures free from fear
can focus on and foster student success. By helping teachers set goals, principals provide
meaningful and challenging cultures, thereby directly impacting teachers’ job satisfaction
(Baptiste, 2019). The basic definition of job satisfaction is how happy an individual is within his
or her job and the contributing factors, for example, the type of work they do and their employer
(Perera, Granziera, & McIlveen, 2018). Teachers’ job satisfaction affects more than just teachers;
it affects everyone in the community including students, other teachers, school administrators
and even whole school districts (Banerjee, 2017).
Ch et al. (2017) studied the association between principals’ leadership styles and teachers'
job satisfaction. A total of 200 teachers were randomly selected to answer a questionnaire that
focused on demographic variables, principals' leadership styles (coercive and democratic), and
job satisfaction (Ch et al., 2017). Ch et al. (2017) concluded that most of the principals used a
democratic type of leadership, as reflected by their efforts to take suggestions from teachers and
the cooperation and support they provided to teachers. However, the schools’ operational goals
and policies were determined primarily by the principals (Ch et al., 2017). Study findings also
revealed that democratic leadership was significantly linked to teachers' job satisfaction. Thus,
Ch et al. (2017) argued that principals are tasked with improving the participation of teachers in
the decision-making processes of school communities.
37
Teacher Retention
Teacher retention is one of the primary reasons why there is a teacher deficit, and it is a
major concern to not only researchers but administrators and educators in k-12 settings (Adnot,
Dee, Katz, & Wyckoff, 2017; Papay, Bacher-Hicks, Page, & Marinell, 2017). Teachers’ work
experiences can vary depending on their principal’s leadership styles or leadership behaviors in
schools, and these are stated as some of the reasons teachers are dissatisfied (Farinde-Wu &
Fitchett, 2016). According to Dahlkamp, Peters, and Schumacher (2017), organizational
leadership was a reason for teachers’ decisions to stay in the profession. Shaw and Newton
(2014) discovered that teachers hope to see a competent school leader aligned with the vision of
the school and one which includes teachers in the decision-making. The research shows that
principals who keep large amounts of teachers can create trust, show proactivity, and exhibit an
understanding of the teaching staff for which he or she is accountable (Shaw & Newton, 2014).
Successful principal leadership is the main aspect of significantly impacting teacher job
satisfaction and a great school environment (Demirtas, Ozer, Demirbilek, & Bali, 2017; Dou,
Devos, & Valcke, 2017). Principals must know how his or her personal behaviors affect their
teachers’ job satisfaction (Damanik & Aldridge, 2017; Dou et al., 2017). Gomba (2015) analyzed
the relationship between administrative leadership, teacher autonomy, and the intent of educators
to stay at an institution in rural Zimbabwe. The outcome shows that school leadership has a
considerable effect on teacher retention (Gomba, 2015). Researchers have discovered that
efficient leaders promote constant possibilities for teamwork in order for teachers to grow and
learn from each other (Dahlkamp et al, 2017).
Shaw and Newton (2014) concluded that leadership support and organizational capability
to create efficient relationships considerably impact both beginner and experienced teachers to
38
stay on the job. Administrators can impact teachers’ satisfaction when they foster personal
development and autonomy while increasing empowerment in an academic setting (Dou et al.,
2017; Ouellette et al., 2017). Teacher job satisfaction paired with an excellent school
environment makes for a very successful learning environment that elevates student performance
(Damanik & Aldridge, 2017; Demirtas et al., 2017; Dou et al., 2017). Carver-Thomas and
Darling-Hammond (2017) similarly discovered that the best school administrators create a
mutual environment that leads to greater retention rates and the principal’s leadership style does
make a difference.
Effective Teachers
Teacher effectiveness refers to a teacher’s ability to improve student learning measured
by student gains on standardized achievement tests (Little, Goe & Bell, 2009). Although this is
one important aspect of teaching ability, it is not a comprehensive and robust view of teacher
effectiveness. Researchers have promoted the idea that definitions of teacher effectiveness
should encompass student social development in addition to academic goals (Brophy & Good,
1986, Campbell, Kyriakides, Muijs, & Robinson, 2004). Goe, Bell, and Little (2008) established
a five-point definition of effective teachers that consists of the following:
• Effective teachers have high expectations for all students and help students learn, as
measured by value-added or other test-based growth measures, or by alternative
measures.
• Effective teachers contribute to positive academic, attitudinal, and social outcomes for
students such as regular attendance, on-time promotion to the next grade, on-time
graduation, self-efficacy, and cooperative behavior.
39
• Effective teachers use diverse resources to plan and structure engaging learning
opportunities; monitor student progress formatively, adapting instruction as needed; and
evaluate learning using multiple sources of evidence.
• Effective teachers contribute to the development of classrooms and schools that value
diversity and civic-mindedness.
• Effective teachers collaborate with other teachers, administrators, parents, and education
professionals to ensure student success, particularly the success of students with special
needs and those at high risk for failure.
This definition focuses on measuring multiple components of teacher effectiveness. The first
addresses student achievement gains on standardized tests while the other points focus on teacher
contributions that may ultimately, indirectly improve student learning but are more difficult to
measure (Goe, Bell, Little, 2008).
The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards was founded in 1987 to advance
teaching and learning quality. Their website boasts that by completing the certification process it
“elevates and empowers teachers to be their best” and is the “profession’s mark of accomplished
teaching” (NBPTS, 2020). National Board has Five Core Propositions (2015) for teaching that
are held in common for all teachers to underscore an accomplished teacher’s commitment to
advancing student learning and achievement.
1. Teachers are committed to students and their learning.
2. Teachers know the subjects they teach and how to teach those subjects to students.
3. Teachers are responsible for managing and monitoring student learning.
4. Teachers think systematically about their practice and learn from experience.
5. Teachers are members of learning communities.
40
The two bodies of research have overlap in their definition of effective teachers. Obviously,
student learning is at the forefront, but there are specific attributes that further define an effective
teacher. The last point made in each definition refers to the importance of teacher collaboration
and learning from each other. It is believed that establishing professional learning communities
develops capacity and improves students’ learning at school. In order to develop capacity and
maintain it, establishing “professional learning communities” at school is one of the
administrative roles that school principals should fulfill (Balyer, Karatas & Alci, 2015). The
National Association for Elementary School Principals identifies that the school leader is
responsible for establishing the shared mission, vision, values, and goals; having a commitment
to results; engaging in continuous improvement; establishing a culture of collaboration; having
collective inquiry; and supportive and shared leadership (NAESP, 2008). In order for teachers to
have opportunities for collaboration in learning communities, school principals must lead and
structure the school in a way that allows effective teachers to continue to grow and learn together
(NAESP, 2008; Balyer, Karatas & Alci, 2015).
Summary
Two major factors that influence teachers to leave the profession are accountability and
administrator leadership styles (Weinbaum et al., 2012). These two factors are crucial
components that contribute to teacher job satisfaction or dissatisfaction (Epps & Foor, 2015).
According to Voon, Lo, Ngui, and Ayob. (2011), the leaders of any organization must take into
consideration the effect of their leadership styles on the organization’s success. Clear
connections are drawn from the literature that the role of the principal and leadership style
influences the teacher learning experience (Knowles, 1984; TEAL, 2010), job satisfaction
(Humpert, 2016; Khan et al., 2017; Parke, 2018; Blanca & Ramona, 2017), retention (Demirtas,
41
Ozer, Demirbilek, & Bali, 2017; Dou, Devos, & Valcke, 2017; Damanik & Aldridge, 2017; Dou
et al., 2017), and effectiveness (Balyer, Karatas & Alci, 2015; NAESP, 2008; Balyer, Karatas &
Alci, 2015). The research points out that leaders should adapt their leadership style based on the
needs of the employees and organization at the given time (Goleman, 2004; Hersey & Blanchard,
1969, 1977, 1984; House, 1971). This literature review explored the best leadership styles for
highly effective teachers and how a principal’s leadership style affects highly effective teachers.
Studies linking highly effective teachers and their preferences on principal leadership
styles are difficult to find in the literature. Much of the research focuses on new teachers or
teachers in general. This study is designed to identify the preferences on the leadership styles of
highly effective teachers, which is missing from the research. School leadership is an ever-
evolving role with many demands. Identifying the leadership styles referred by highly effective
teachers will help school leaders to determine how to best support and meet these teachers’
unique needs, which will retain highly effective teachers.
42
Chapter 3: Research Methodology
Introduction
Qualitative research is used to understand concepts, opinions, or experiences (Bhandari,
2020). The researcher for this study is an assistant principal who is highly interested in using
leadership styles that best support highly effective teachers to recruit, retain, and grow them
professionally. The researcher’s role in qualitative research is to attempt to access the thoughts
and feelings of study participants (Sutton & Austin, 2015). This qualitative study aimed to
investigate the preferences of highly effective teachers of their school principal’s leadership
styles. This chapter presents the research design and methodology to readers, including the
research question, the specific research approach, description of the study participants and
setting, data collection and analysis procedures, ethical considerations related to the study, and a
summary of the process.
Research Question
One research question and two sub-questions directed this qualitative study:
Which administrative leadership styles do highly effective teachers prefer?
• What are the perceptions of highly effective teachers of the three different administrative
leadership styles?
• What are the preferred characteristics of administrative leadership styles by highly
effective elementary teachers?
Description of the Research Approach
Guba and Lincoln (1988) explain that qualitative research was considered in education in
order to consider the participants’ perspectives and experiences (as cited in Ary, Jacobs, Irvine,
43
& Walker, 2019). Qualitative research involves fieldwork and recognizes that the researcher is
subjectively studying others’ reality, perceptions, and experiences (Ary, Jacobs, Irvine, &
Walker, 2019). A qualitative research design was selected due to the need to learn from the
perspectives of the participants. Choosing to use qualitative research allowed for greater insight
into the underlying reasons that highly effective teachers prefer specific characteristics in the
leadership style and approach of their school principals to determine the preferred leadership
styles.
The purpose of the study is to generate ideas throughout the process and end with a unified
theory emerging from the data and closely linked to, or grounded in, data – as opposed to the
kind of verification of ideas sought in quantitative study (Feeler, 2012). The research focused on
building a theory of what leadership styles are most preferred by highly effective teachers.
Glaser and Strauss (1967) developed a grounded theory to formalize the operations needed to
develop theory from empirical data. Grounded theory research focuses on gathering data about
people’s experiences in a particular context and then inductively building a theory “from the
bottom up” (Ary, Jacobs, Irvine, & Walker, 2019). Grounded theory moves beyond description
to generate or discover a theory that emerges from the data and provides an explanation of a
process, an action, or an interaction (Ary, Jacobs, Irvine, & Walker, 2019).
Grounded theory aligns with the study’s goal as data is collected from surveys, interviews
with participants, observations, and a focus group to discover how school administrators can best
support highly effective teachers. The data is analyzed to draw conclusions from the coding
based on dominant themes that surface.
44
Description of the Study Participants and Setting
The study took place in a midsize school district located in Tennessee. The district has 78
schools serving approximately 44,000 students living in urban, suburban, and rural communities.
The district consists of 3% Asian students, 30% Black or African American, 14% Hispanic or
Latinx, and 52% white students. The district is divided into five learning communities. There are
3200 classroom teachers and 176 administrators serving the students in the district.
Approximately 86% of teachers are retained from one year to the next. There are 42 elementary
schools in the district serving about half of the student population. Within these elementary
schools are 214 classroom teachers serving students in grades 3-5 who are considered highly
effective.
All full-time, certified teachers receive a level of effectiveness score at the end of each
school year. This overall evaluation score includes both qualitative and quantitative measures of
teaching quality. The three components of the evaluation are observations, achievement, and
growth. These three components come together to comprise an educator’s overall Level of
Effectiveness (LOE) score. Highly effective teachers in this district are identified by having a
level 4 or 5 LOE.
Since LOE scores are confidential, the district data office compiled a list of teachers who
meet the criteria of a highly effective elementary teacher. The district data office sent the survey
to the 214 teachers so the researcher would not know their identity. This initial data was
collected to identify trends in leadership qualities that highly effective teachers prefer. Further
examination of perspectives was gathered by identifying a sample group that warranted follow-
up interviews and observations based on their survey data.
45
Data Collection Procedures
Surveys were administered through Google Forms. The surveys were sent out to 214
elementary teachers considered highly effective. The survey consisted of Likert scale questions
and closed-response questions to gauge participant perspectives on leadership qualities,
behaviors, and characteristics. There were also open-ended questions to ask participants on their
specific interactions with administrators, which provided the opportunity to ask follow-up
questions. The researcher received responses from 33% of the teachers who were sent the survey.
The survey included a question to ask if they are willing to participate in the study further and
provide their name.
From these survey responses, the researcher used convenience sampling to select six
elementary teachers that warranted follow-up interviews and observations. Convenience
sampling is choosing a sample based on availability, time, location, or ease of access (Ary,
Jacobs, Irvine, & Walker, 2019). Six teachers with a variety of years of experience were selected
from within the district based on their responses and if they were willing to continue the research
process. An interview was conducted with each participant to inquire further about leadership
styles based on survey responses and to organize opportunities for observations. This interview
was recorded over zoom, transcribed, and coded.
The participant and the school administrator then interacted in a professional growth
conversation or interaction and the researcher observed for characteristics of leadership styles.
The purpose of direct observation is to determine the extent to which a particular behavior is
present (Ary, Jacobs, Irvine, & Walker, 2019). The purpose of this observation was to see the
interaction between the principal and the teacher and observe if the reality of the interaction
46
draws the same conclusions as the interview and survey. The observations were recorded over
zoom, transcribed, and coded.
A focus group was scheduled as a follow up to ask further questions of the participants on
how the interaction helped them grow professionally, follow up on their preferences in
leadership qualities based on the interactions, and share conclusions drawn from the data. The
researcher shared data from the survey responses, interview, and observation to ask follow up
questions and draw conclusions from the participant. This focus group served as a member check
in addition to collecting further data. The focus group was recorded over zoom, transcribed, and
coded.
Ethical Considerations
Colleges and universities engaging in research with humans form an Institutional Review
Board (IRB) that must approve each proposal and certify that the research will be conducted in
accordance with the law (Ary, Jacobs, Irvine, & Walker, 2019). Once the approval was given,
data collection began.
Participants were selected from schools different from the researcher to encourage honest
reflection from teachers who do not have a working relationship with the researcher. In order to
preserve confidentiality, all participants’ names were kept anonymous using pseudonyms. All
participation was voluntary. No signed forms were needed for the initial survey; if they chose not
to participate they did not need to fill out the survey. All participants were required to sign a
consent form before interviewing or observing.
Personal experiences can create biases. However, the study used methods of
trustworthiness to address potential problems of bias. For a qualitative study to be trustworthy,
47
the researcher must demonstrate its true value, provide a basis for applying the findings, and
provide for external reviewers to make judgments about the consistency of procedures and
neutrality of findings (Ary, Jacobs, Irvine, & Walker, 2019). Trustworthiness is about
establishing four things: credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability (Ary,
Jacobs, Irvine, & Walker, 2019). The methods of trustworthiness for this research included data
triangulation, peer-debriefing, member checks, reflective journal, and the use of detailed
descriptions of context that were sufficiently thick and substantial.
Data triangulation
In data triangulation, the researcher investigates whether the data collected with one
procedure or instrument confirm data collected using another procedure or instrument (Ary,
Jacobs, Irvine, & Walker, 2019). In this study, surveys, interviews, observations, and a focus
group were used. By collecting data from a combination of data sources, the likelihood of
understanding the perspectives of the highly effective teachers from various points of view was
increased.
Peer-debriefing
Validity based on consensus is defined as “agreement among competent others that the
description, interpretation, evaluation, and thematics” are correct (Eisner, 1998, p. 112 as cited in
Ary, Jacobs, Irvine, & Walker, 2019). Peer debriefing is one method used to provide consensus
on a topic. Peer debriefers can keep a researcher honest by going through the researcher’s data
periodically to point out bias when necessary (Ary, Jacobs, Irvine, & Walker, 2019). A colleague
who has conducted research for her doctorate program was used as a peer debriefer to ensure that
the evidence presented was interpreted in a manner that was ethical and similar to the researcher.
48
Member checks
Member checks are a way to gather participant feedback on the data collected. During a
member check, participants have the opportunity to agree or disagree with what the researcher
has said about them, review or critique field notes, and provide feedback to the researcher on the
interpretations of the data by clearing up misconceptions, identifying inaccuracies, or provide
additional data (Ary, Jacobs, Irvine, & Walker, 2019). During the focus group, the participants
were given a chance to provide feedback on the study’s findings, descriptions of interviews and
experiences, and provide further insight into the study. They were also given a chance to read
the findings and ensure the accuracy of reporting.
Reflective Journal
Bias may result in a qualitative study from selective observations, hearing only what the
researcher wants to hear, or allowing personal attitudes, preferences, and feelings to affect data
interpretation (Ary, Jacobs, Irvine, & Walker, 2019). Self-reflection is the most common strategy
to control for bias (Ary, Jacobs, Irvine, & Walker, 2019). The self-reflection is used to recognize
the researcher’s own biases and actively seek them out. Having this “awareness” through
different points in the process is imperative (Gilgun, 2010). The researcher wrote down relevant
thoughts, experiences, emotions, biases, favored theories, etc. and reflected on them individually
and collaboratively with colleagues. This happened during the design process, implementation,
while conducting the analysis, during the write-up of the research, and during application to
practice. The reflective journal was used to keep track of thoughts during and after interviews
and the focus group.
49
Thick Descriptions
The researcher’s responsibility is to provide sufficiently rich, detailed, thick descriptions
of the context so that potential users can make the necessary comparisons and judgments about
the similarity and transferability of the study (Ary, Jacobs, Irvine, & Walker, 2019). The
researcher provided accurate, detailed, and complete descriptions of the context and participants
to help the reader determine transferability.
Data Analysis Procedures
An ongoing process of systematically coding and analyzing data occurred with the survey
responses, interview responses, observation notes and transcript. The constructivist nature of
qualitative research (Charmaz, 2000) allowed for the opportunity to engage in a constant
comparison analysis throughout the process as new data were gathered and new potential themes
emerged. A constant comparative analysis in grounded theory encourages one to compare data to
other data during coding. This begins with open coding and the development of categories by
reducing core categories to reach a theme (Fram, 2013). This constant turning over of data to the
point of absorption in order to allow categories to emerge is useful during triangulation and
synthesis.
Three types of coding were used in this study: open coding, axial coding, and selective
coding. Open coding was used to develop major or core categories while axial coding was used
to develop categories around the core (Ary, Jacobs, Irvine, & Walker, 2019). Axial coding
differs from open coding through its focus upon a close and precise examination of relationships
between variables (Saldaña, 2016). Axial coding was used to collapse open codes into categories
by searching for relationships between the indicators. Each code was examined and organized
50
into categories, looking for connections between the open codes from the original data. Themes
developed from the data during selective coding considered a “when-then” logic, accounting for
variations in observations and explaining how implementation was occurring with fidelity
(Saldaña, 2016). Once categories were identified, selective coding was used to reexamine the
data, looking for specific relationships connecting the subthemes to a dominant theme.
Surveys were administered through Google Forms. The surveys were sent out to 214
elementary teachers considered highly effective. The survey consisted of Likert scale questions,
closed-response questions, and open-response questions to gauge participant perspectives on
leadership qualities, behaviors, and characteristics. There were also open-ended questions to ask
participants on their specific interactions with administrators, which provided the opportunity to
ask follow-up questions. The researcher received responses from 33% of the teachers who were
sent the survey. The survey included a question to ask if they are willing to participate in the
study further and provide their name. The survey responses were read and analyzed using
Google Forms. Quantitative data was analyzed from the Likert scale items and the closed-ended
questions. Common statements and key words were identified from the open-ended questions.
Open-ended responses that warranted more explanation were noted. Convenience sampling was
used to identify ten teachers to further participate in the study. Six committed to interviews,
observations, and focus groups.
The interviews were conducted over zoom, scheduled based on the participant’s
availability, and video recorded. These interviews took about 15 minutes. Follow up questions
based on the participant survey responses were asked in order to clarify data and elaborate on
ideas. The interviews were transcribed and coded for key ideas and phrases. These common
ideas were used as the raw data and to establish open codes.
51
The observation of the teacher and the principal was conducted over zoom and recorded.
Open coding began after the observations so that these details could be analyzed. Key elements
of leadership qualities based on leadership styles identified in the research were examined. Axial
coding was used to group the techniques and skills of the school leader so that they could be
analyzed. Each code was examined and organized into categories, looking for connections
between the open codes from the original data.
The focus group was conducted over zoom. While open and axial coding continued to be
added, the focus here was on selective coding. The skills and qualities identified by the
participants throughout the interviews and observations were grouped and presented to the
group. Once categories were identified, selective coding was used to reexamine the data, looking
for specific relationships connecting the subthemes to two dominant themes. Selective coding
was used to analyze the top results to decide how these techniques, qualities, and skills best
support the highly effective teacher.
Summary
The research for this study took place in elementary schools in one school district. The
highly effective elementary teachers were sent surveys regarding what they believed were the
qualities of school leaders that they prefer to work with. Afterward, specific teachers were
identified and interviewed based on their responses. Observations were conducted of the teacher
and school leader interacting in a professional growth conversation. Finally, teachers had a focus
group interview. Of these leadership qualities identified by the participants, the top responses
from teachers were summarized and characterized by leadership styles.
52
Chapter 4: Presentation of Findings
Introduction
The purpose of this qualitative study is to learn the preferred administrative leadership
styles by highly effective elementary teachers. All research was conducted within an urban
school district based on teacher availability.
Data collection included surveys, individual interviews with participants, observations of
feedback conversations between the participants and their current principal, and a follow-up
focus group. The collection and analysis of data was ongoing, occurring across three months. As
information was collected, it was analyzed through open, axial, and selective coding. Member
checks and peer reviews of the emerging findings were conducted to ensure trustworthiness was
maintained in the study and findings.
Teacher surveys were created on Google Forms and emailed to 214 third through fifth
grade teachers deemed highly effective by the school district. Teachers were given one week to
answer the survey. Seventy teachers responded and six teachers were selected to further
participate beyond the survey. Participants were selected based on their years of experience,
willingness to participate, and survey responses.
The interviews and observations, recorded on zoom, were conducted based on the
teacher’s and researcher’s availability. All six teachers participated in the interview. Five of the
six teachers participated in the observation as they reflected with their principal on a lesson. All
six teachers participated in the focus group conducted over zoom based on the participants’
availability. The focus group was presented with data gathered and synthesized by the
researcher. During the focus group, the participants were given a chance to provide feedback on
53
the study’s findings, descriptions of interviews and experiences, and further insight into the
study.
One research question and two sub-questions directed this qualitative study:
Which administrative leadership styles do highly effective teachers prefer?
• What are the perceptions of highly effective teachers of the three different administrative
leadership styles?
• What are the preferred characteristics of administrative leadership styles by highly
effective elementary teachers?
This chapter presents the findings relevant to the study. After a detailed description of
participants, the data is represented in a concise summary and data table, followed by data
presented from surveys, interviews, and observations; and concludes with a summary of the
focus group and conclusions drawn.
Participants
The study took place in a midsize school district located in Tennessee. The district has 78
schools serving approximately 44,000 students living in urban, suburban, and rural communities.
There are 42 elementary schools in the district serving about half of the student population.
Within these elementary schools are 214 classroom teachers serving students in grades 3-5 who
are considered highly effective.
The survey was sent to the 214 highly effective elementary teachers who teach grades 3-
5. Seventy participants volunteered to complete the survey. Of the participants, six are male and
64 are female. Participants have a variety of years of experience: 30% of respondents have 11-15
years of experience; 27% of respondents have more than 20 years of experience; 19% have 6-10
54
years of experiences; 17% have 16-20 years of experience; and 7% have less than five years of
experience.
Table 4.1
Years of Teaching Experience for 70 Survey Participants
1-5 years 6-10 years 11-15 years 16-20 years 20 + years
5 13 21 12 19
7% 19% 30% 17% 27%
The survey questions guided the researcher to select participants for more in-depth and
personal interviews. Six participants were selected to participate in the interview, observation,
and focus group. Teachers were selected from each range of years of experience (two 6-10 years,
two 11-15 years, one 16-20 years, and one 20+ years).
Summary of the Data
Throughout the data collection process, some common themes emerged for qualities and
actions that highly effective teachers’ desire in their principals. Highly effective teachers want
principals to have a clear vision, hire effective teachers, establish collaborative teams, and
maximize resources equitably. Teachers want professional growth and reflection opportunities,
be included in the decision making, creative freedom in the classroom, and collaboration with
their principal including two-way dialogue. They need principals to build relationships, be
personable, be open and honest, trust their staff, model expectations, and be knowledgeable and
supportive. Finally, teachers want direct conversations and for principals to address teachers
individually based on their own needs in the given situation. This requires adaptability and
55
flexibility on the part of the leader and strengthens the teachers’ relationships as it takes away
some of the tension that forms on teams. These themes are represented in Table 4.2.
Highly effective teachers want to work for administrators who foster collaboration and
input as a part of the school vision. This is important as it supports the teachers’ desires for input
and choice as well as collaboration. Highly effective teachers also prefer to work for
administrators who build trust and relationships with and among teachers. This is important as
teachers desire this relationship and trust with their administrator and want it to be reciprocated.
It also supports the teachers’ desire to trust and build relationships with their colleagues and a
principal must hold each teacher accountable for teachers to feel equitably responsible for the
school’s success. This summary is supported by the following descriptions and overviews of the
surveys, interviews, and observations.
56
Table 4.2 Data Sorted in Levels of Coding for Research Question One: Which administrative leadership styles do highly effective teachers prefer? ____________________________________________________________________________________ Raw Data Open Coding Axial Coding Selective Coding
57
Overview of Survey Data
The survey contained closed-ended, open-ended, and Likert-type items. The first nine
items were likert-type questions in which teachers chose the degree to which they agreed with
statements that identified a particular leadership style as a preference. These items came from
Peter Northouse’s survey in his book Introduction to Leadership (Northouse, 2012). Questions
10-18 were closed-ended questions designed to determine the school leader’s preferred actions to
lead to perceptions of the leadership styles. These questions were compiled from Kurt Lewin’s
Leadership Styles Framework. (MindTools, n.d.). In addition, the teachers had two open-ended
questions and three personal demographic questions. Finally, teachers could opt in to participate
in the study further and provide their contact information.
Table 4.3 represents the choices made by the 70 participants as they stated the amount
they agreed with each statement. Questions 1, 4, and 7 lend themselves to an authoritarian
leadership style. Questions 2, 5, and 8 lend themselves to a democratic leadership style.
Questions 3, 6, and 9 lend themselves to laissez-faire leadership style. Based on these questions,
it could be concluded that the majority of highly effective elementary teachers do not prefer
authoritarian leadership styles by their principal. While questions 2 and 5 scored very agreeable
for the democratic leadership style, question 8 was not conclusive. Laissez-faire leadership
statements were scored in a variety of ways by the participants and therefore, conclusions would
be difficult to be drawn to form an opinion on this leadership style.
58
Table 4.3
Teacher Questionnaire: Leadership Style Statements
Question Number
Strongly Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
Leadership Style
1 25.7% 58.6% 12.9% 2.9% 0 Authoritarian
4 12.9% 48.6% 24.3% 12.9% 1.4% Authoritarian
7 14.3% 57.1% 14.3% 12.9% 1.4% Authoritarian
2 0 0 0 38.6% 61.4% Democratic
5 0 1.4% 4.3% 44.3% 50% Democratic
8 24.3% 52.9% 14.3% 7.1% 1.4% Democratic
3 4.3% 38.6% 32.9% 21.4% 2.9% Laissez-faire
6 0 8.6% 20% 58.6% 12.9% Laissez-faire
9 7.1% 45.7% 27.1% 18.6% 1.4% Laissez-faire
Questions 10-18 were closed-ended questions designed to determine the school leaders’
preferred actions based on leadership styles that they exhibit. Table 4.4 represents the selected
answer choices and how they align with each of the leadership styles. As was consistent with the
first nine statements, it is clear that most highly effective teachers do not prefer the authoritative
style. The democratic leadership style statement was selected the most often seven out of nine
items, each being selected by a large majority of participants. The majority of the participants
selected two laissez-faire leadership style statements.
59
Table 4.4
Teacher Questionnaire: Leadership Actions Based on Leadership Styles
Question Number
Democratic Style Statement
Authoritative Style Statement
Laissez-faire Style Statement
10 95.7% 1.4% 2.9%
11 97.1% 0 2.9%
12 15.7% 17.1% 67.1%
13 20% 17.1% 69.9%
14 81.4% 2.9% 15.7%
15 72.9% 5.7% 21.4%
16 94.3% 2.9% 2.9%
17 77.1% 5.7% 17.1%
18 98.6% 1.4% 0
Two open-ended questions were provided in the survey to learn about specific
interactions with and perceptions of principals. First, participants were asked to describe a
situation in which a principal gave feedback that helped the participant improve teaching
practice. Second, participants were asked what is the one thing they would tell their principal
they need to be best supported by them as a professional. These statements were open-ended and
therefore a variety of answers were received. There were some consistent responses and themes
that emerged. They are listed in Table 4.5.
60
Table 4.5
Themes from Open-Ended Responses
Question 19: Describe a situation in which a principal gave you feedback to improve your teaching practice. How did it help you?
Question 20: If you could tell your principal one thing that you wish he or she would do that would best support you in your professional growth as a teacher, what would it be? Why?
• Reflect on practices and beliefs • Implement new ideas or a change in practice • Asked questions and have reflective
dialogue • Co-construct next steps together • Teacher provides a struggle, administrator
might provide a resource or suggestion • Offer time for collaboration or
modeling/observing to improve based on need
• Provide resources or professional development opportunity
• Encouragement that they are on the right path
• Build relationships • Be present in the classrooms • Give specific feedback and goals • Provide choices in professional development • Provide opportunities for leadership based on
strengths • Allow teachers to provide input and listen • Trust the teachers • Encourage and support the teachers • Clear communication about expectations • Don’t expect us to carry everything alone • Model expectations for us
Overview of Interviews
The interviews were conducted over Zoom based on the availability of the teacher and
the researcher. All interviews were recorded and later transcribed for coding. The interviews
took an average of 15 minutes. The interviews focused on asking participants to provide the
rationale for choices made or statements shared on the survey, asking for specific examples or
non-examples of quality leadership interactions, and asking for the most important characteristics
of school leaders.
61
Teacher One
Teacher One is female and has taught 28 years in nine different schools and worked for
nine different principals. She referenced if she could tell her principal one thing he or she could
do to better support her professional growth, it would be to trust the people that have been hired
to do the job, treat us as professionals, and listen to what we are saying about what is working
and what is not. She elaborated by saying a principal can show trust by asking questions and
having a conversation to allow the teacher to share in the decision making instead of asking
judgmental questions.
Next, she explained how she prefers a principal to make decisions in the school and the
type of involvement teachers should have. While some decisions just need to be made, decisions
that impact teaching should have input from teachers. She shared frustration when minute
decisions are discussed at length that do not impact teaching and learning as well as when some
people on the staff do four jobs while others do none. The principal should get input from
teachers on things like schedules. The principal must make sure they equitably utilize the
resources they have to the best of their ability by finding different people’s strengths; otherwise,
the highly effective ones get burnt out quickly. Another preference is that when principals need
to make changes, they should get input from staff so more voices are heard. Sometimes the
changes are easy to work out when we listen to other people’s ideas. Collaborative problem
solving is important because we have ideas to bring that could be more effective, efficient, and
equitable and even if they are not used, they should at least be listened to by someone.
Finally, Teacher One explained that the number one quality she looks for in a school
leader is someone who trusts her and believes in her to do the things they hired her to do and
knows her on a personal level.
62
Teacher Two
Teacher Two is female and has taught 16 years in three different schools and worked for
11 different principals. She appreciates when her principal notices the things she is doing,
encourages her to continue doing them, and to share strategies with others. It helps her to know
what the expectations are and that she is meeting them when she gets that encouragement. Over
time this encouragement has built up her confidence in her practices and her principal’s
perception of her. She also prefers that principals have the courage to address people directly
when they are not following the expectations as general statements do not address the problem
and cause conscientious teachers to doubt themselves, especially when there is no relationship
with the principal.
Next, she shared that principals need to know their teachers by visiting their classrooms
often and having informal reflective conversations in addition to the formal observations. This
helps build a mutually respectful relationship with trust between the teacher and principal which
is important to her. Once this is established, teachers can be trusted to do their great work in the
classroom with accountability, but not be micromanaged by the administration. Principals can
effectively put collaborative teams together and offer ways to collaboratively problem-solve if
they know their staff well. The best years of her career have been when she has been put with
collaborative teams and a principal can achieve that by hiring good people, putting them
together, and creating a trust environment in the building where they all work together.
Teacher Two also shared that she wants to be a part of the decision-making process at
school. The leadership team often does not provide enough opportunity to gain staff input and so
there should be more opportunities within the school for teachers to give their opinion and their
ideas because although you cannot bring everyone to the table for decision making to happen, a
63
principal might miss out on some great solutions by only talking to eight people instead of
surveying everyone.
According to Teacher Two, the number one factor in teacher working conditions and job
satisfaction is the principal. You can be in a challenging situation and with a supportive principal
and feel excited to go back to school every day because you want to keep trying; and you can be
in a not so bad situation but feel awful because of the toxicity of the culture that the principal has
created. After having nine principals in nine years, she decided that she would only work for a
leader that she trusts and respects and that comes from a principal who will treat every child,
every parent, and every teacher with respect and value and invest in her as a professional.
Teacher Three
Teacher Three is male and has taught 11 years in four different schools and worked for
six different principals. If he could tell his principal one thing, he would ask the teachers for
updates on what is going well and what is not. The classrooms, school culture, and instruction
level can all be improved by collaborating on successes and shortcomings. A principal should
ask teachers how they best need support and then have structures to hear those needs, whether it
is a suggestion box, survey, in person conversation, or email. This would help the teachers feel
more connected to the principal. The principal needs to be open for communication and one way
to do that is by being vulnerable with the teachers which breaks down walls.
Next, he elaborated on the differences between teachers on the staff and how the school
leader must react differently based on the teacher. Some teachers are more self-motivated while
others do the bare minimum or do not know exactly how to succeed in the classroom. If a teacher
is doing well, the principal should encourage and support, but if the teacher is not doing well, the
64
principal should provide a more step-by-step approach. If a teacher is effective and doing their
work well, then the principal can be more open-minded to let the teacher try different things. If
the teachers are not doing as well, the principal should lead them differently.
Teacher Three wants to work for a principal who has a strong mission statement so
whether the teachers are working independently or collaboratively, they are all aligned on what
they are trying to accomplish. He also looks for a principal who can maximize teacher strengths
while also providing meaningful feedback to help the teacher grow. The school principal should
work to help the staff build each other up and build the collective efficacy. To do that, the
principal has to be open and honest and set those clear expectations.
Teacher Four
Teacher Four is female and has taught 11 years in two different schools and worked for
four different principals. It is important to her that principals provide specific feedback to help
her grow. A principal should do this by getting to know the teachers and the students in the
classroom so feedback can be tiered to the needs and by visiting the classroom frequently for
informal observations. It is also important that she feel encouraged and know where she stands
with the principal. For example, she likes to know when she has done the right things and gets
praise for successes. If the teacher is doing something incorrectly, she appreciates a direct
conversation from the principal to fix it. She also expects the principal to have candid
conversations with others so there is clear messaging to the right people when needed. When the
principal gives general statements to the whole staff, everyone wonders if it is directed at them or
not and so there is confusion.
65
Next, she mentioned that she is a learner and so it is important to her that there are
opportunities for reflective dialogue and brainstorming together with the principal. However, she
does not want to be micromanaged. As long as the teacher hits the standards and scores are
where they need to be, the lessons do not need to be nitpicked. Instead, she welcomes the chance
to grow professionally by being challenged to think about things differently.
Finally, when asked what the top qualities are she looks for in a principal, Teacher Four
stated she wants a principal to lead by example, be relatable so she feels comfortable coming to
them with concerns, and have experience in the classroom. Most importantly, principals should
back the teachers as professionals and have high expectations for the staff to meet their students’
needs.
Teacher Five
Teacher Five is female and has taught eight years in five different schools and worked for
six different principals. It is important to her that principals know her personality as a teacher. By
knowing that, the principal can reflect with her on teaching and learning, help solve problems,
and look at the teacher’s strengths to help strengthen areas of the school outside of her
classroom. The principal and teacher must trust each other. She shared that she likes for the
principal to know what she is doing and the special things that make her unique as a teacher, and
she also likes to have the principal input and insight when she has new ideas to try in the
classroom or the school. She wants to feel support from the principal, but does not necessarily
need help and will seek it out when necessary.
Next, she elaborated on how she wants to know where she stands with her principal. This
happens by building a relationship and receiving feedback in informal and formal settings. She
66
wants to hear positive praise on the things that are going well to celebrate together and hear areas
for growth so she can continue to do her best.
Finally, Teacher Five says that the qualities she looks for in a principal are optimism and
encouragement. She feels that positivity is contagious and so she likes that pump up feeling that
comes from the leader. She also looks for a leader who is passionate about preparing the students
for their next step. This is accomplished by keeping laser-focused on the task at hand, making
sure teachers are equipped and ready to do this work every day, and dedicated to the work.
Teacher Six
Teacher Six is female and has taught nine years in one school and worked for three
different principals. She feels it is important that a principal recognizes the teacher’s strengths
and share them with the teacher in order to build relationships and for the teacher to trust the
principal. This type of encouragement is important especially before receiving growth feedback.
She also elaborated on the idea that principals must model the expectations for the teachers. They
need to gain traction and participation from all the staff and if the principal can model what that
looks like then she is more likely to reach the goals and have everyone on the same page. This
will help staff members meet short-term and long term goals.
Next, she shared the importance of a principal establishing a Professional Learning
Community culture in the school. Teams can work better together and everyone can contribute,
but this happens because the principal sets that as the expectation so collaborative problem
solving and planning can happen. All of the students win when we work together. The principal
also needs to be open and approachable so they can listen to ideas without feeling attacked.
67
Again, the principal then sets up the expectation that all the students win when the teachers and
principal work together to solve problems.
Finally, Teacher Six shared the most significant quality she looks for in a school leader is
trust. They need to practice what they preach. She holds principals to the same or higher
standard and so she needs to see that the principal can walk the walk and then be open with the
staff. Once that trust is established, then the highly effective teachers can be set out to do their
magic for children. The team can work together and do not need to be micromanaged. The
principal should have direct and difficult conversations with the teachers who are not meeting the
standard. This is how the principal can practice what they preach and build trust.
Overview of Observations
In this school district, principals must observe each teacher a given number of times and
provide feedback in a reflective conversation that is then summarized in writing. Teachers who
are professionally licensed and considered highly effective receive four observations a year for a
minimum of ten minutes each. The observations and reflective conversations are centered on a
rubric with indicators in six different domains: Planning and Preparation for Learning;
Classroom Management; Delivery of Instruction; Monitoring, Assessment, and Follow-Up;
Family and Community; and Professional Responsibilities. For this study, the researcher
observed one reflective conversation between the principal and the participant. Five of the six
participants were observed as they interacted with their principals. The observations were
recorded over Zoom and later transcribed and coded. The observations lasted an average of 18
minutes. After the observation, teachers were asked to reflect to the researcher in writing sharing
their biggest takeaway from the feedback session and the principal’s actions that prompted that
takeaway.
68
In all five observations, there was evidence of the principal working to build relationships
with the teacher, providing positive and encouraging feedback, setting clear expectations,
reflecting on student learning, and asking reflective questions to gain input from the teacher.
Principals worked to build relationships by asking personal questions or making personal
connections with the teachers. In each observation, principals shared something they enjoyed
seeing in the classroom or teacher/student growth that they had noted from a previous session.
They highlighted effective practices that they noticed which set clear expectations.
In each observation, principals asked at least three reflective questions to gain input from
the teacher. Some examples of this include “Tell me about the problems you selected for this
lesson?” “How are you supporting those students beyond this lesson?” “What are your
takeaways initially from this lesson?” “Where are your students in their learning of the clear
learning target?” “What have you learned this year that will change your teaching practice in the
future?” Most of the questions were answered within the feedback session while some, like the
last example, were for teachers to marinate on and respond in writing.
When teachers were asked to reflect on their takeaways from the feedback session, all
five teachers identified specific actions that the principal had that led to their learning and
professional growth. Teacher One shared that the principal mentioned more than one time for her
to reflect on how she supports her high achieving students and then reiterated it at the end of the
meeting. So the principal was focused on this specific practice in the conversation. Teacher Two
responded similarly saying that her principal continued to reiterate student independence
throughout their conversation so she took this idea away. However, she also noted that her
principal is proud of her work and she is doing an excellent job because he mentioned this
multiple times. In fact, four of the five teachers mentioned that their principal is proud of them
69
and happy with their work as a takeaway from the feedback session. Teacher Four elaborates that
even though the principal is proud of her, she also wants her to continue to stretch herself by
suggesting something to think about differently.
Teacher Five also states that she knows the principal approaches her feedback based on
her personality. Because the teacher is already hard on herself as a perfectionist, she believes the
principal considers this when she delivers her feedback. Teacher Four noted that her principal
pays attention during planning meetings to see how the teachers interact and learn from each
other. She was thrilled when the principal commented that she noticed the teacher used a tip in
her lesson that a colleague discussed in their planning session.
Summary
The common themes that emerged for qualities and actions that highly effective teachers’
desire in their principals were presented in this chapter. The first big idea that surfaces is related
to collaboration and input around a school vision. Highly effective teachers want principals to
have a clear vision, hire effective teachers, establish collaborative teams, and maximize
resources equitably. Teachers want professional growth and reflection opportunities, be included
in the decision-making, creative freedom in the classroom, and collaboration with their principal
including two-way dialogue. This concludes that highly effective teachers prefer a leadership
style that fosters collaboration and input as a part of the school vision.
The second big idea that surfaces is related to relationships. Highly effective teachers
need principals to build relationships, be personable, be open and honest, trust their staff, model
expectations, and be knowledgeable and supportive. Teachers want direct conversations and for
principals to address teachers individually based on their own needs in the given situation. This
70
requires adaptability and flexibility on the part of the leader and strengthens the teachers’
relationships as it takes away some of the tension that forms on teams. This concludes that highly
effective teachers prefer a leadership style that builds trust and relationships with and among
teachers. This is important as teachers desire this relationship and trust with their administrator
and want it to be reciprocated. It also supports the teachers’ desire to trust and build
relationships with their colleagues and a principal must hold each teacher accountable for
teachers to feel equitably responsible for the success of the school.
These ideas were presented to the teachers during the focus group. The teachers drew the
same conclusions as the researcher and confirmed the findings from the data collection process.
To further examine and identify preferred leadership styles, leader behaviors from Path-Goal
theory were presented to the teachers and they were asked about their preferences. The original
Path-Goal theory identifies four styles: achievement, directive, participative, and supportive
leader behaviors (House, 1971). The teachers were presented with these definitions:
• Directive (task-oriented): The principal informs his/her followers on what is expected of
them, such as telling them what to do, how to perform a task, and scheduling and
coordinating work.
• Supportive (relationship-oriented): The principal makes work pleasant for the workers by
showing concern for them and being friendly and approachable.
• Participative (relationship-oriented): The principal offers guidance to group members, but
also participate in the group and allow input from group members before making
decisions.
71
• Achievement (relationship-oriented): The principal sets challenging goals for the staff,
expects them to perform at their highest level, and shows confidence in their ability to
meet this expectation (Northouse, 2012).
The focus group participants concluded that principals need supportive, participative, and
achievement behaviors to do an excellent job with teachers. The supportive behavior is nice, but
by itself, the school will not get anything done. The participative behavior is nice to an extent,
but the leader also has to trust the staff to do things and delegate so the leader is not doing it all.
Achievement behavior is also important, but if the principal goes straight to setting the goal and
does not have relationships or is not approachable, it will probably not be met because people
work harder for people who like them and are concerned about them. And while there are times
that directive behaviors are necessary and understood, Teacher Three shared it is not preferred
for the majority of the time by him or most of the highly effective teachers with whom he works.
Finally, during the focus group, teachers were presented with three leadership styles and
their definitions: authoritative, democratic, and laissez-faire. All six teachers agreed that
democratic leadership was their preferred leadership style. Teacher Two shared that she has
worked for principals who typically lean towards each of these leadership styles and democratic
just works the best for most teachers. Teacher One shared that her preference is a laissez-faire
style of leadership, but that cannot work for everyone because then everyone is flailing with no
direction and that is why she prefers democratic. Teacher Four shared that she feels that the
principal has to meet each teacher where they are, just like teachers do with students, and so
having the ability to change leadership course depending on the situation and the person is
important.
72
Chapter 5: Conclusion
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to determine the leadership styles preferred by highly
effective elementary teachers. The six participants were selected from the initial 70 survey
respondents. The research data was obtained through participant interviews, observations, and a
focus group discussion. A grounded-theory approach was used for this qualitative study with
Maslow’s Hierarchy (1943, 1954) and Path-Goal Leadership Theory (House, 1971) serving as
the theoretical and conceptual frameworks. The study was driven by the research question:
Which administrative leadership styles do highly effective teachers prefer?
This chapter reviews the research question and what has been learned from the study.
Implications that may influence school leaders are shared along with limitations affecting the
findings. Additionally, recommendations for further research based on the study findings are
provided.
Conclusions
A qualitative analysis using coding was used to answer the research question. Selective
coding revealed preferred characteristics of leadership styles by highly effective elementary
teachers. Effective teachers prefer leadership styles that foster collaboration and input as a part of
the school vision and they prefer leadership styles in which principals build trust and
relationships with and among teachers. A democratic leadership style provides the opportunity
for teachers to be seen as leaders, relationships to be formed, and encouragement to be given
along the way. Principals, who use a democratic leadership style, or one with similar qualities,
will be more likely to recruit, retain, and grow highly effective teachers.
73
Effective teachers want to have the opportunity for leadership, growth, and equitable
responsibility within the school. This desire is the definition of self-actualization from Maslow’s
Hierarchy. Maslow believed that people strive through their lives to achieve self-actualization,
which is that people are driven from within to realize their full growth potential (Owens &
Valesky, 2015). Maslow (1943) initially stated that individuals must satisfy lower level deficit
needs before progressing to meet higher level growth needs. However, he later clarified that 100
percent satisfaction of one need is not necessary before the next need emerged (Maslow, 1987).
According to Bellott and Tutor (1990), Maslow’s theory, esteem as a lower order that must be
fulfilled before self-actualization, does not hold true for elementary teachers. As Raman (2017)
argued, Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs is not linear, especially with teachers. Most teachers need
self-actualization much earlier and are not motivated by external sources (Raman, 2017).
Throughout this study, teachers showed evidence of three needs from Maslow’s
Hierarchy. Self-actualization, as mentioned, trended throughout the data as teachers want to give
input and have choices in how the school is run. A sense of belonging also surfaced in the study.
Teachers want to build relationships with their colleagues and their principal. These relationships
help the teachers feel secure when there are disagreements or difficult conversations. They can
rely on the relationship to know they can make it through the difficult times because they all
have a similar purpose. Third, they need to build esteem by receiving positive praise and
encouragement from their school leader. They need their strengths to be identified before
receiving feedback. This study proves that the administrator’s leadership style must be tied to
the needs of the teachers. Maslow’s Hierarchy is a good foundation for identifying the needs that
should be met.
74
Leadership is the art of motivating a group of people to achieve a common goal (Ward,
2020). According to Simmonds (1994), there is a positive and effective relationship between the
principal’s behavior and the teachers’ performance. The principal’s leadership style affects the
school environment, teacher job satisfaction, and student performance (Ch, et al., 2017). Robert
House’s Path-Goal Leadership Theory argues that leaders will have to engage in different
leadership behavior types depending on the nature and demands of a particular situation (Path
Goal, 2019). House’s theory advocates servant leadership. Leaders act as coaches and
facilitators to their employees and do not view leadership as a position of power (Management,
n.d.). The original path-goal theory identified four leader behaviors rooted in four styles:
directive, achievement-oriented, participative, and supportive (Path Goal, 2019). The first
behavior is task-oriented, while the other three are relationship-oriented behaviors. The study
participants identified the relationship-oriented behaviors as preferred, and stated that all three
are necessary at different times.
Implications
The study revealed that highly effective teachers prefer leadership styles that foster
relationships, collaboration, and input as part of the school’s vision. Specifically, highly
effective teachers typically prefer a democratic leadership style or a style with similar qualities
(Razak, Jaafar, Hamidon, & Zakaria, 2015). It would be wise for current and future
administrators to consistently reflect on their leadership styles and adjust according to the
situation at hand (Razak et al, 2015).
The study also has implications for ongoing professional development, which should be
offered to school administrators to improve their leadership (Razak et al, 2015). Central office
leadership and school boards should prioritize school administrators to receive ongoing
75
professional development and coaching in applying leadership styles to given situations (Razak
et al, 2015). The primary work of a principal is to develop a supportive environment for the staff
members so that they will be able to accomplish their goals and objectives (Ibukun, 1997). The
principal’s leadership style affects the school environment, teacher job satisfaction, and student
performance (Ch, et al., 2017). So this must be the focus of principal leadership trainings and
professional development.
Teacher motivation and job satisfaction were revealed throughout this study as dependent
on leadership. School leaders must look at their leadership style in order to ensure both of these
factors are considered when making decisions within the school building. Administrators should
place a major emphasis on considering teacher motivation and job satisfaction of highly effective
teachers.
Recommendation for Further Study
Limitations existed in this study, which should caution one against over-generalizing the
findings from this study. One significant limitation is the context in which the study occurred.
The participants teach third through fifth grade in a mid-size, urban school district. Although 214
teachers fit the criteria for highly effective, only six participants were selected for the study,
limiting the findings to a narrow and confined perspective. In order to discover a wide variety of
opinions from highly effective teachers, a larger number of participants or a more comprehensive
range of grade bands should be studied. A future study may consist of gathering data from
principals based on the leadership styles they are using or not using to retain and support highly
effective teachers.
76
Summary
The purpose of this qualitative study was to determine the characteristics of best
leadership styles that highly effective elementary teachers prefer from their administrators. The
study revealed that highly effective teachers prefer leadership styles that foster relationships,
collaboration, and input as a part of the school’s vision. The participants in this study identified
democratic leadership as the preferred leadership style in most situations. School leaders have
various learning styles to consider when working with teachers in their building (Blanca &
Ramona, 2017). In order to recruit, retain, and grow highly effective teachers, school leaders
must adapt their leadership style to accommodate them (Baptiste, 2019). As a school leader, one
must consider the actions taken to help highly effective teachers be satisfied and grow in their
job (Mehdinezhad & Mansouri, 2016). This study supported this concept in that the highly
effective teachers preferred a leadership style that was best for the situation. They call for a
leadership style that shows trust in the people until the trust is broken and then should take a
different leadership approach.
The majority of the research shows that principal leadership is a key factor in a teacher’s
decision to stay at a particular school. The study results drew the same conclusion as participants
all cited the importance of the principal and his/her leadership. A principal must spend time
considering the way he or she leads the teachers. A principal must consider the leadership styles
used with each teacher and adjust accordingly (Hallinger, 2003; Hersey & Blanchard, 1977;
Goleman, 2000; House, 1971).
Proven through this study are the preferred characteristics of administrative leadership
styles. Teachers gave their opinions are the administrative leadership styles. Conclusions were
drawn that the administrative leadership style that highly effective teachers most prefer is a
77
democratic leadership style. This study revealed the importance of building relationships,
collaboration, gathering input, and providing choice to highly effective teachers by school
administrators. Highly effective teachers prefer a democratic leadership style, or something with
similar qualities, most of the time. School leaders who want to recruit, retain, and support highly
effective teachers should adjust the leadership style depending on the situation to provide a
democratic style as often as possible. The results reveal school administrators need to make it a
priority to reflect on their leadership styles. Administrators can then embed structures into the
school that foster this leadership style and ensure highly effective teachers are recruited and
retained.
78
References
Adnot, M., Dee, T., Katz, K. & Wyckoff, J. (2017). Teacher turnover, teacher quality, and
student achievement in DCPS. (2017). Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(1),
54-76. DOI: 10.3102/0162373716663646.
Amanchukwu, R. N., Stanley, G. J., & Ololube, N. P. (2015). A review of leadership theories,
principles, and styles, and their relevance to educational management. Management, 5(1),
6-14. DOI: 10.5923/j.mm.20150501.02
Anghelache, V. (2014). Professional satisfaction of teachers from kindergarten: Preliminary
study. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 7(4), 37-42. Retrieved from
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1053258.pdf
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Irvine, C.K., & Walker, D. A. (2019). Introduction to research in
education (10th ed.). Boston: Cengage.
Balyer, A. Karatas, H., & Alci, B. (2015). School principals’ roles in establishing collaborative
professional learning communities at schools. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences,
197, 1340-1347.
Barber, M. & Mourshed, M. (2007). How the world’s best-performing school systems come out
on top. McKinsey Report. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/social-
sector/our-insights/how-the-worlds-best-performing-school-systems-come-out-on-top
Banerjee, N. (2017). Teacher job satisfaction and student achievement: The roles of teacher
professional community and teacher collaboration in schools. American Journal of
Education, 123(2), 203-241. https://doi.org/10.1086/689932
79
Baptiste, M. (2019). No teacher left behind: The impact of principal leadership styles on teacher
job satisfaction and student success. Journal of International Education and Leadership,
9(1).
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through
transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Bellott, F.K., & Tutor, F.D. (1990). A challenge to the conventional wisdom of Herzberg and
Maslow theories. Paper presented at the Nineteenth Annual Meeting of the Mid-South
Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA.
Bennis, W. (1989). Why leaders can’t lead. California: Jossey-Bass.
Bennis, W. (1999). The leadership advantage. Leader to Leader, 12, 18-23.
Berson, Y., & Oreg, S. (2016). The role of school principals in shaping children’s values.
Psychological science: Research, theory, & application in psychology and related sciences,
27(12), 1539-1549.
Bhandari, P. (2020). An introduction to qualitative research. Retrieved from
https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/qualitative-research/
Blanca, G. & Ramona, T. (2017). What makes work meaningful? Studies in Business and
Economics, 12(2), 1-8, DOI 10.1515/sbe-2017-0020
Boyle, M. (2016). Five ways adults learn differently than children. Retrieved from
https://learnkit.com/2016/01/13/adult-learning-needs/
Bredeson, P. (2000). The school principal’s role in teacher professional development. Journal of
In-Service Education, 26.
80
Broad, K., & Evans, M. (2006). A review of literature on professional development content and
delivery modes for experienced teachers. Ontario, Canada: Ontario Institute for Studies in
Education.
Bromley, H. R., & Kirschner-Bromley, V. A. (2007). Are you a transformational leader? The
Physician Executive, 33, 54-57.
Brophy, J., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M.C. Wittrock
(Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 328-375). New York: Macmillan.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Campbell, R. J., Kyriakides, L., Muijs, R. D., & Robinson, W. (2003). Differential teacher
effectiveness: Towards a model for research and teacher appraisal. Oxford Review of
Education, 29(3), 347-362.
Carver-Thomas, D. & Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher turnover: Why it matters and what
we can do about it. Learning Policy Institute. Washington, DC.
Ch, A. H., Ahmad, S., Malik, M., & Batool, A. (2017). Principals' leadership styles and teachers'
job satisfaction: A correlation study at secondary level. Bulletin of Education & Research,
39(3), 45-56.
Charmaz, K. (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cohen, J., McCabe, E., Michelli, N., & Pickeral, T. (2009). School climate: Research, policy,
practice, and teacher education. Teachers College Record, 111(1), 180-123.
81
Dahlkamp, S., Peters, M. & Schumacher, G. (2017). Principal self-efficacy, school climate, and
teacher retention: a multi-level analysis. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 63(4),
357-376.
Damanik, E. & Aldridge, J. (2017). Transformational leadership and its impact on school climate
and teachers’ self-efficacy in Indonesian high schools. Journal of School Leadership,
27(2), 269-296.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy
evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8 (1).
Democratic leadership: The most effective leadership style for school heads. (2017). Retrieved
from https://www.eduexcellence.org/blog/360/democratic-leadership-the-most-effective-
leadership-style-for-school-heads
Demirtas, H., Ozer, N., Demirbilek, N. & Bali, O. (2017). Relationship between the perceived
principal support, trust in principal and organizational commitment. International Online
Journal of Educational Sciences, 9(4), 1075-1092.
https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2017.04.013
Dou, D., Devos, G. & Valcke, M. (2017). The relationships between school autonomy gap,
principal leadership, teachers’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Educational
Management Administration and Leadership, 45(6), 959-977. DOI
10.1177/1741143216653975
Draftke, M. (2009). The human side of organizations (10th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice
Hall.
Duff, B.K. (2013). Differences in assessments of organizational school climate between teachers
and administrators (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from
82
https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1722&co
ntext=doctoral
Eisner, E. W. (1998). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and enhancement of educational
practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill-Prentice Hall.
Epps, R. B., & Foor, R. M. (2015). Relationships between teacher efficacy and job satisfaction
among novice and experienced secondary agricultural educators. Career and Technical
Education Research, 40(2), 125. doi:10.5328/cter40.2.125
Evans, M.G. (1970). The effects of supervisory behavior on the path-goal relationship.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 5: 277-298.
Evans, M. (1996). R.J. House’s “A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness”. Leadership
Quarterly, 7(3), 305-309.
Farinde-Wu, A. & Fitchett, P. (2016). Searching for satisfaction: black female teachers’
workplace climate and job satisfaction. Urban Education, (53)1, 86-112.
Feeler, W. G. (2012). Being there: A grounded-theory study of student perceptions of instructor
presence in online classes. Educational Administration: Theses, Dissertations, and
Student Research.
Fenstermacher, G.D., & Berliner, D.C. (1983). A conceptual framework for the analysis of staff
development. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
Fram, S. (2013). The constant comparative analysis method outside of grounded theory. The Qualitative
Report, 18(1), 1-25.
Garner, L., & Stough, C. (2002). Examining the relationship between leadership and emotional
intelligence in senior level managers. Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
23(2), 46- 48.
83
Gawel, J. (1997). Herzberg’s theory of motivation and Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Retrieved
from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED421486.pdf
Gilgun, J. F. (2010). Reflexivity and qualitative research. Current Issues in Qualitative Research,
1, 1-7.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for
qualitative research. New York: Aldine.
Goe, L., Bell, C., & Little, O. (2008). Approaches to evaluating teacher effectiveness: A research
synthesis. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED521228
Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review, 2-17.
Goleman, D. (2004, January). What makes a leader? Harvard Business Review.
Gomba, C. (2015). Why do they stay: factors influencing teacher retention in rural Zimbabwe.
International Journal of Instruction, 8(2), 55-68.
Graham, S. (2017). A simple, easy to understand guide to andragogy. Retrieved from
https://www.cornerstone.edu/blogs/lifelong-learning-matters/post/a-simple-easy-to-
understand-guide-to-andragogy
Green, R. L. (2017). Practicing the art of leadership: A problem-based approach to implementing
the Professional Standards for Education Leaders. New York: Pearson.
Greenfield, D. (2007). The enactment of dynamic leadership. Leadership in Health Services,
20(3), pp. 159-168 https://doi.org/10.1108/17511870710764014
Greenleaf, R. (1970). The servant as a leader. Indiana: Paulist Press.
84
Grundy, A. (2018). Educators are leaving the workforce for other careers. Retrieved from
https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2018/05/teachers-leaving-workforce.html
Guba, E.. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1988). Do inquiry paradigms imply inquiry methodologies? In D.
M. Fetterman (Ed.), Qualitative approaches to evaluation in education (pp. 89-115). New
York: Praeger.
Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and
transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 329-352.
doi:10.1080/0305764032000122005
Heller, A. D. (2002). The power of gentleness. Educational Leadership, 59(8), 76–79.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. (1969). Life-cycle theory of leadership. Training and Development
Journal, 23(5), 26-34.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1977). The management of organizational behaviour, Upper
Saddle River N. J.: Prentice Hall.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, P. (1984). The life cycle theory of leadership. Training and
Development Journal, 23(5), 54-62.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, P. (2014). Situational leadership: A summary. Retrieved from
https://com-peds-pulmonary.sites.medinfo.ufl.edu/files/2014/01/Hanke-Situational-
Leadership.pdf
House, R. J. (1971). A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 16, 321-338.
House, R. J. (1996). Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy and a reformulated theory.
The Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 323-352.
Howard, E., Howell, B., & Brainard, E. (1987). Handbook for conducting school climate
improvements projects. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.
85
Humpert, S. (2016). What workers want: job satisfaction in the U.S. Management Research and
Practice, 8(1), 39-45
Ibukun, W.O. (1997). Educational management, theory and practice. Lagos: Greenland
Publishers.
Jerome, N. (2013). Application of the Maslow’s hierarchy or need theory; impacts and
implications on organizational culture, human resource and employee’s performance.
International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 2(3), 39-45.
Kars, M., & Inandi, Y. (2018). Relationship between school principals' leadership behaviors and
teachers' organizational trust. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 74, 145-164.
doi:10.14689/ejer.2018.74.8
Keith, K. M. (2019). Definition of servant leadership. Retrieved from
http://toservefirst.com/definition-of-servant-leadership.html
Kenton, W. (2019). Hersey-Blanchard Model. Retrieved from
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hersey-and-blanchard-model.asp
Khan, M., Rashed, C., Saha, S. & Islam, M. (2017). What makes employees satisfied with their
jobs. Review of General Management, 26(2), 1-18
Knowles, M. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.
Knowles, M. (1984). The adult learner: A neglected species (3rd Ed.). Houston, TX: Gulf
Publishing.
Kouzes, J. (2009). The leadership challenge (4th ed.). Electronic Industry Press: Beijing.
86
Leadership. (n.d.). In Oxford Online Dictionary. Retrieved from
https://www.lexico.com/definition/leadership
Little, O., Goe, L., & Bell, C. (2009). A practical guide to evaluating teacher effectiveness.
National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED543776.pdf
Loeng, S., (2018). Various ways of understanding the concept of andragogy. Cogent Education,
5, 1-15. DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2018.1496643.
Lynch, M. (2016). Four major types of educational leadership. Retrieved from
https://www.theedadvocate.org/4-major-types-of-educational-leadership/
Management Study Guide. (n.d.). House’s path-goal theory. Retrieved from
https://www.managementstudyguide.com/houses-path-goal-theory.htm
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370-96.
Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper and Row.
Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.
Maslow, A. H. (1971). Religions, values, and peak experiences. New York: Penguin. (Original
work published 1966)
Maslow, A. H. (1987). Motivation and personality (3rd ed.). Delhi, India: Pearson Education.
McLeod, S. A. (2020). Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Simply Psychology. Retrieved from
https://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.htm
Mehdinezhad, V., & Mansouri, M. (2016). School principals' leadership behaviours and its
relation with teachers' sense of self-efficacy. International Journal of Instruction, 9(2), 51-
60.
Musical Chairs: Teacher Churn and its impact on Indianapolis Public Schools. (n.d.). Teach Plus.
87
Retrieved from
http://www.teachplus.org/sites/default/files/publication/pdf/musical_chairs.pdf
National Association of Elementary School Principals. (2008). Leading learning communities:
Standards for what principals should know and be able to do. Retrieved from
https://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/resources/1/Pdfs/LLC2-ES.pdf
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. (2020). What teachers should know and be
able to do. Retrieved from http://accomplishedteacher.org/introduction/
National Staff Development Council. (1995). Standards for Staff Development: high school
edition. Oxford: National Staff Development Council.
Northouse, P. G. (2012). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Ouellette, R., Frazier, S., Shernoff, E., Cappella, E., Mehta, T., Martinez-Lora, A., Cua, G. &
Atkins, M. (2017). Behavior Therapy, 45(6), 2-45. DOI: 10.1016/j.beth.2017.11.011.
Owens, R.G., & Valesky, T.C. (2015). Organizational behavior in education: Leadership and
school reform (11th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Papay, J., Bacher-Hicks, A., Page, L. & Marinell, W. (2017). The challenge of teacher retention
in urban schools: evidence of variation from a cross-site analysis. Educational Researcher,
46(8), 434-448. DOI: 10.3102/0013189X17735812.
Parke, M. (2018). Does it work for you? London Business School Review, 29(1), 14-17,
https://doi.org/10.1111/2057-1615.12207
Path Goal. (2019). What is path-goal theory? Retrieved from https://pathgoal.com/path-goal-
theory/
Path-Goal Leadership Theory. (2013). Retrieved from
http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/leader/lead_path_goal.html
88
Perera, H., Granziera, H. & McIlveen, P. (2018). Profiles of teacher personality and relations
with teacher self-efficacy, work engagement, and job satisfaction. Personality and
Individual Differences, 120, 171-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.08.034
Raman, R. (2017). What Maslow can teach us about leadership. Retrieved from
https://hackernoon.com/what-maslow-can-teach-us-about-leadership-a1088198874
Rana, S., Malik, N., & Hussain, R. (2016). Leadership styles as predictors of job involvement in
teachers. Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, 31(1), 161-182.
Razak, N. A., Jaafar, S. B., Hamidon, N. B., & Zakaria, N. B. (2015). Leadership styles of
lecturer’s technical and vocational in teaching and learning. Journal of Education and
Practice, 6(13), 154-158. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1080512.pdf
Rooney, J. (2003). Principals who care: A personal reflection. Educational Leadership, 60(6),
76–78.
Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. London: Sage.
Schoen, L., & Teddlie, C. (2008). A new model of school culture: a response to a call for
conceptual clarity. School Effectiveness & School Improvement, 19(2), 129–153.
Sergiovanni, T. (2007). Rethinking leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Shaw, J. & Newton, J. (2014). Teacher retention and satisfaction with a servant leaders as
principal. Education, 135(1), 101-106.
Simon, M. & Goes, J. (2013). Assumptions, limitations, delimitations, and scope of the study.
Retrieved from www.dissertationrecipes.com
Simmonds, A. (1994). Teachers’ perceived leadership behavior of principals and teachers’
performance in a sample of all age schools in rural and urban Jamaica (Unpublished
thesis). University of the West Indies, Jamaica.
89
Sinek, S. (2017). Leaders eat last: Why some teams pull together and others don't. London, UK:
Portfolio Penguin.
Stein, M.K., Smith, M.S., & Silver, E.A. (1999). The development of professional developers:
Learning to assist new teachers in new ways. Harvard Education Review, 69(3), p. 237-
269.
Sutton, J. & Austin, Z. (2015). Qualitative research: Data collection, analysis, and management.
The Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, 68(3), 226-231.
Tay, L., & Diener, E. (2011). Needs and subjective well-being around the world. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 354-356. doi:10.1037/a00
TEAL Center. (2011). Adult learning theories. Retrieved from
https://lincs.ed.gov/sites/default/files/11_%20TEAL_Adult_Learning_Theory.pdf
Tennessee Department of Education. (2016). Equitable access to highly effective teachers for
Tennessee students. Retrieved from
https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/education/reports/equitable_access_web.pdf
Tennessee Department of Education. (2018). TEAM performance level guide. Retrieved from
https://team-tn.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/EE_TEAM-Performance-Level-
Guide_122018.pdf
Tennessee Department of Education. (2019). Educator evaluation composite weightings.
Retrieved from
https://gallery.mailchimp.com/b28b453ee164f9a2e2b5057e1/files/40d51855-59ba-430e-
8d1a-
3b8842dbe944/Evaluation_Guidance_2018_19.pdf?mc_cid=0d4ac5e928&mc_eid=1d55
743221
90
Tennessee State Board of Education. (2018). Tennessee instructional leadership standards 5.106.
Retrieved from
https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/stateboardofeducation/documents/policies/5000/5.106
%20Tennessee%20Instructional%20Leadership%20Standards%20Policy%207-27-18.pdf
Ward, S. (2020). The definition of leadership. Retrieved from
https://www.thebalancesmb.com/leadership-definition-2948275
Ubben, G. C., Hughes, L. W., & Norris, C. J. (2017). The learning community. In K. Davis
(Ed.), The principal: Creative leadership for excellence in schools (pp. 23-37). New Jersey:
Pearson.
Voon, M. L., Lo, M. C., Ngui, K. S., & Ayob, N. B. (2011). The influence of leadership styles on
employees’ job satisfaction in public sector organization in Malaysia. International Journal
of Business, Management, and Social Sciences, 2(1), 24-32.
Weinbaum, W., Weis, M., & Beaver, J. (2012). Learning from NCLB: School responses to
accountability pressure and student subgroup performance. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium
for Policy Research in Education.
What is situational leadership? How flexibility leads to success. (2019). Retrieved from
https://online.stu.edu/articles/education/what-is-situational-leadership.aspx
What is transactional leadership? How structure leads to results. (2018). Retrieved from
https://online.stu.edu/articles/education/what-is-transactional-leadership.aspx
What is transformational leadership? How new ideas produce impressive results. (2018).
Retrieved from https://online.stu.edu/articles/education/what-is-transformational-
leadership.aspx
91
Yang, Y. (2013). Principals’ transformational leadership in school improvement. Journal of
Academic Administration in Higher Education, 9(2), 77-83.
92
Appendix A
Informed Consent Form – Teacher Participant
Title of Project: Preferred Administrator Leadership Styles by Highly Effective Elementary Teachers
Principal Investigator: Jamelie Kangles Johns, Carson-Newman University
Participant’s Printed Name: ___________________________________
I would like to invite you to take part in a research study titled “Preferred Administrator Leadership Styles by Highly Effective Elementary Teachers”. Taking part in this study is entirely voluntary. I urge you to contact me to discuss any questions that you may have about this study prior to consenting to participate. Please take your time to make your decision. If you decide to participate, you must sign this form to show that you want to take part.
Section 1. Purpose of the Project
School leaders are charged with igniting passion in teachers to help them grow to be even better. School leaders have the ability to influence the implementation of quality professional growth in the school. Leadership in education plays an integral role in creating a positive school culture and influencing student learning and achievement.
The majority of the research shows that principal leadership is a key factor in a teacher’s decision to stay at a particular school. A principal must spend time considering the way he or she leads the teachers. A principal must consider the leadership styles that are used with each teacher and adjust accordingly. This study examines the different leadership styles that principals use and determines which are preferred by teachers who are considered highly effective. If schools need to retain highly effective teachers, school leaders must know the best ways to support them in their development.
Section 2. Methods and Procedures
I would like to recruit 8 teachers to voluntarily participate who have responded to the survey. These volunteers will participate in an interview, an observation, and a focus group. An in person interview will be conducted with each participant to inquire further about leadership styles based on survey responses and to organize opportunities for observations. This interview will be video recorded.
I will then observe the participant and the school administrator interacting in a professional growth conversation. The observations will be video recorded. Finally, a focus group will be scheduled as a follow up to ask further questions of the participants on how the interaction helped them to grow professionally and to follow up on their preferences in leadership qualities based on the interaction. I will share data from the survey responses, interviews, and observations during the focus group to ask follow up questions and draw conclusions from the participants. The focus group will consist of the 8 teachers discussing the ideas together and will be video recorded.
The interviews and focus group will take place during non-school duty time or before/after the work day. The observations will be scheduled based on the participant and principal availability.
93
The video files and data obtained as a part of this study will remain absolutely confidential and anonymous. In order to fully protect anonymity of participants, pseudonyms will be used for naming all participants, schools, and districts associated.
Section 3. Time and Duration of the Study
Teachers will be asked to participate in a 10-15 minute interview. The observation will also last 10-15 as the teacher and principal interact together during a feedback and professional growth conversation. The focus group will last between 30-45 minutes.
Section 4. Discomforts and Risks
There are no known risks associated with this study.
Section 5. Benefits
Possible benefits of this study include teachers developing an understanding of leadership styles that they prefer to work with as they reflect on the leadership qualities of leaders with whom the work.
Section 6. Statement of Confidentiality
In order to protect the confidentiality of participants, all data collected will not include names. Instead teachers will be named as teacher, followed by a number. For example, “teacher 1”. The name of the schools and school districts will not be included in the reporting of this study in order to add a layer of participant anonymity. The school district will be referred to as “Urban School District” throughout the study and schools will be numbered throughout in the same likeness as teachers.
Section 7. Privacy and Confidentiality Measures
When the recordings and transcriptions are not actively being utilized for research and data analysis, they will be kept in a password protected digital file on the researcher’s home computer. The documents and recordings related to this study will be maintained for five years after the study is complete and will be deleted and destroyed at the end of the five years.
Section 8. Voluntary Participation
Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. You may withdraw from participating in the study at any time. As a participant, you are committing to participate in an interview, an observation, and a focus group. As a participant, you may request a copy of the transcriptions related to your personal interview, observation, or focus group remarks. Upon completion of the study, you may also request a copy of the results. Overall findings will be shared with the participant group once the study is complete.
Section 9. Signature and Consent
Your signature below means that you have received this information, have asked the questions you currently have about the research, and have received answers to those questions. You will receive a copy of the signed and dated form to keep for future reference.
Teacher Participant: By signing this consent form, you indicate that you are voluntarily choosing to take part in this research.
94
__________________________ _________ __________ ______________________
Signature of Participant Date Time Printed Name
Principal Investigator: Your signature below means that you have explained the research to the participant or participant representative and have answered any questions about the research.
__________________________ _________ __________ ______________________
Principal Investigator Date Time Printed Name
95
Appendix B
Informed Consent Form – Principal Participant
Title of Project: Preferred Administrator Leadership Styles by Highly Effective Elementary Teachers
Principal Investigator: Jamelie Kangles Johns, Carson-Newman University
Participant’s Printed Name: ___________________________________
I would like to invite you to take part in a research study titled “Preferred Administrator Leadership Styles by Highly Effective Elementary Teachers”. Taking part in this study is entirely voluntary. I urge you to contact me to discuss any questions that you may have about this study prior to consenting to participate. Please take your time to make your decision. If you decide to participate, you must sign this form to show that you want to take part.
Section 1. Purpose of the Project
School leaders are charged with igniting passion in teachers to help them grow to be even better. School leaders have the ability to influence the implementation of quality professional growth in the school. Leadership in education plays an integral role in creating a positive school culture and influencing student learning and achievement.
The majority of the research shows that principal leadership is a key factor in a teacher’s decision to stay at a particular school. A principal must spend time considering the way he or she leads the teachers. A principal must consider the leadership styles that are used with each teacher and adjust accordingly. This study examines the different leadership styles that principals use and determines which are preferred by teachers who are considered highly effective. If schools need to retain highly effective teachers, school leaders must know the best ways to support them in their development.
Section 2. Methods and Procedures
I would like to recruit 8 teachers to voluntarily participate who have responded to the survey. These volunteers will participate in an interview, an observation, and a focus group. An in person interview will be conducted with each participant to inquire further about leadership styles based on survey responses and to organize opportunities for observations. This interview will be video recorded.
I will then observe the participant and the school administrator interacting in a professional growth conversation. The observations will be video recorded. Finally, a focus group will be scheduled as a follow up to ask further questions of the participants on how the interaction helped them to grow professionally and to follow up on their preferences in leadership qualities based on the interaction. I will share data from the survey responses, interviews, and observations during the focus group to ask follow up questions and draw conclusions from the participants. The focus group will consist of the 8 teachers discussing the ideas together and will be video recorded.
The interviews and focus group will take place during non-school duty time or before/after the work day. The observations will be scheduled based on the participant and principal availability. The video files and data obtained as a part of this study will remain absolutely confidential and
96
anonymous. In order to fully protect anonymity of participants, pseudonyms will be used for naming all participants, schools, and districts associated.
Section 3. Time and Duration of the Study
Principals will be asked to participate in a feedback and professional growth conversation with the teacher participant. This conversation will last 10-15 minutes.
Section 4. Discomforts and Risks
There are no known risks associated with this study.
Section 5. Benefits
Possible benefits of this study include teachers developing an understanding of leadership styles that they prefer to work with as they reflect on the leadership qualities of leaders with whom the work. Also, principals might gain insight into the leadership styles that their highly effective teachers prefer.
Section 6. Statement of Confidentiality
In order to protect the confidentiality of participants, all data collected will not include names. Instead teachers will be named as teacher, followed by a number. For example, “teacher 1”. Likewise, principals will be names as principal followed by a number. The name of the schools and school districts will not be included in the reporting of this study in order to add a layer of participant anonymity. The school district will be referred to as “Urban School District” throughout the study and schools will be numbered throughout in the same likeness as teachers.
Section 7. Privacy and Confidentiality Measures
When the recordings and transcriptions are not actively being utilized for research and data analysis, they will be kept in a password protected digital file on the researcher’s home computer. The documents and recordings related to this study will be maintained for five years after the study is complete and will be deleted and destroyed at the end of the five years.
Section 8. Voluntary Participation
Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. You may withdraw from participating in the study at any time. As a principal participant, you are committing to participate in an observation which consists of a feedback conversation with your teacher participant. As a participant, you may request a copy of the transcriptions related to your personal observation. Upon completion of the study, you may also request a copy of the results. Overall findings will be shared with the participant group once the study is complete.
Section 9. Signature and Consent
Your signature below means that you have received this information, have asked the questions you currently have about the research, and have received answers to those questions. You will receive a copy of the signed and dated form to keep for future reference.
Principal Participant: By signing this consent form, you indicate that you are voluntarily choosing to take part in this research.
97
__________________________ _________ __________ ______________________
Signature of Participant Date Time Printed Name
Principal Investigator: Your signature below means that you have explained the research to the participant or participant representative and have answered any questions about the research.
__________________________ _________ __________ ______________________
Principal Investigator Date Time Printed Name
98
Appendix C
Leadership Style Survey (in Google Forms)
For each of the statements below, circle the number that indicates the degree to which you agree or disagree. Give your immediate impressions. There is no right or wrong answer.
Strongly disagree-1, disagree-2, neutral-3, agree-4, strongly agree-5
1. Teachers need to be supervised closely, or they are not likely to do their work.
1 2 3 4 5
2. Teachers want to be a part of the decision-making process. 1 2 3 4 5 3. In complex situations, school leaders should let teachers work problems out
on their own. 1 2 3 4 5
4. As a rule, teachers should be given rewards or consequences in order to be motivated to achieve school objectives.
1 2 3 4 5
5. Most teachers want frequent and supportive communication from their principals.
1 2 3 4 5
6. As a rule, principals should allow teachers to evaluate their own work. 1 2 3 4 5 7. Most teachers feel insecure about their work and need direction. 1 2 3 4 5 8. Principals need to help teachers accept responsibility for completing their
work. 1 2 3 4 5
9. In most situations, teachers prefer little input from the principal. 1 2 3 4 5 Please consider each prompt and respond with what you most likely prefer from a school leader in each situation.
10. When considering my action steps after an observation, I prefer my principal to: a. Ask my opinion on next steps and discuss ideas together. b. Direct or tell me the next steps. c. Ask me for my next steps.
11. When selecting professional development opportunities, I want my principal to: a. Require me to attend certain sessions. b. Provide me with choices to attend. c. Provide the same sessions to all teachers so we have the same experience.
12. I am highly skilled and motivated. I a. Can be set free to do my thing. b. Need creative planning sessions with my principal. c. Should be subject to the same workplace strategies and processes as everyone
else. 13. The best way for my principal to ensure that the school meets its goals is to:
a. Lead from the front. b. Encourage participation from everyone. c. Delegate often and widely.
14. The principal should: a. Let the leadership team make the school decisions.
99
b. Make the decisions but not until teams have had input. c. Make a decision but not until the team has been told the rationale.
15. If I lack motivation, I want my principal to: a. Closely manage my tasks to ensure I am following procedures correctly. b. Make an extra effort to ensure I am involved in team discussions. c. Back off, as I probably need some space.
16. Each of these characteristics of leadership are important at different times and to different people. As a highly effective teacher, which is most important to you?
a. It is important that the school leader make most of the decisions in the school. b. It is important that the school leader trust his/her staff members to help make
decisions. c. It is important that the school leader let teachers resolve problems on their own.
17. Each of these characteristics of leadership are important at different times and to different people. As a highly effective teacher, which is most important to you?
a. It is important that the school leader take full responsibility for the decisions in the school.
b. It is important that the school leader delegate tasks and responsibilities to the staff members who best fit the need.
c. It is important that the school leader provide consistent feedback to the teachers. 18. Each of these characteristics of leadership are important at different times and to different
people. As a highly effective teacher, which is most important to you? a. It is important that the school leader provide motivation to the teachers with
rewards. b. It is important that the school leader create an environment for collaborative
problem solving. c. It is important for the school leader to give little guidance or direction to teachers.
19. Describe a situation in which a principal gave you feedback to improve your teaching practice. How did it help you?
20. If you could tell your principal one thing that you wish he or she would do that would best support you in your professional growth a teacher, what would it be? Why?
Demographics:
• Male/female • Number of years in education ranges
Follow up:
Thank you for participating in this survey to help school leaders best support highly effective teachers. I would like the opportunity to follow up with participants to hear more about your experiences. Are you willing to be contacted for a follow up interview based on your survey responses?
100
Yes/no
Please list your email address here. Your contact information will not be linked to your survey results and you will remain anonymous.
Email address:
