Download pdf - The Study of Indigenous Dimensions of the Principals’ Instructional Leadership Role in Iranian Elementary Schools based on Grounded Theory

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 89 ( 2013 ) 817 – 820

1877-0428 © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Huseyin Uzunboylu, Near East University, Faculty of Education, Cyprusdoi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.08.938

ScienceDirect

2nd Cyprus International Conference on Educational Research, (CY-ICER 2013)

The study of indigenous dimensions of the principals' instructional leadership role in Iranian elementary schools based on grounded

theory Bijan, Abdollahi * Soraya, ghoorehjili Marziyeh, Karimi

Assistant professor(Ph.D.) , Department of Educational Administration Faculty of Education and Psychology Kharazmi University, No.43, Mofateh Ave, Tehran 1571914911 Iran.

Kharazmi University, M. A. of educational management Kharazmi University, No.43, Mofateh Ave, Tehran 1571914911 Iran Kharazmi University, Ph.D. student of educational management Kharazmi University, No.43, Mofateh Ave, Tehran 1571914911 Iran

Abstract

Some researchers have studied the role of school principals as instructional leaders and its effect on the teaching and learning processes, and they have posed several different behaviours and dimensions for the instructional leaders. Purpose of Study: The main purpose of this article was to identify behaviours, indexes, and indigenous dimensions of instructional leadership of the principals in the elementary schools of Hamadan, Iran. The research method was the grounded theory (one of the qualitative research methods). The population included instructional experts such as the faculties of the educational management college in Kharazmi University, experienced principals, excellent principals, experienced teachers, instructional assistants, instructional foremen, and the authorities of the elementary schools. Theoretical sampling method was used to select the sample. Data was gathered by semi-structured interviews. Data adjustment was accomplished manually. Systematic method and coding process were used for analyzing data based on grounded theory. Domains and dimensions of instructional leadership behaviours which were directly obtained from data of our model included: trust – making (making ready), observing the classroom, peer coaching, making Professional Learning Communities, managing Teaching-Learning Process, action research, gathering and interpreting systematic information. The factor structure of the seven aforementioned dimensions and the indexes of the instructional leadership behaviours were confirmed and goodness of fit indexes were acceptable and reasonable, too. Keywords: instructional leadership, elementary school principals, teachers, dimensions of instructional leadership behaviours, Iran;

© 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1. Introduction

Leadership has been defined in as many ways as there are researchers and authors publishing works regarding leadership. Merriam-Webster OnLine Dictionary (2003) defines leadership as the act of leading or having capacity to lead. Merriam-Webster OnLine Dictionary defines lead as directing a course or directing operations, activity, and performance. Authors and researchers have created their own definitions of leadership. Northouse (2004) defined

Bijan, Abdollahi

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

© 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Huseyin Uzunboylu, Near East University, Faculty of Education, Cyprus

818 B. Abdollahi et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 89 ( 2013 ) 817 – 820

leadership as “… a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (p. 3). Leadership is the foundation for successful schools and has an indirect effect on student achievement through various characteristics and actions (Glickman, 2002; Marzono, Waters, & McNulty, 2005; Weber, 1989). In the 1980s, instructional leadership research began to emerge. Hallinger, Murphy, Weil, Mesa, and Mitman (1983) suggested that a principal’s instructional leadership role could be divided into three dimensions: defining the school’s mission, managing the instructional program, and promoting a positive school-learning climate. The three dimensions contained 11 job functions. The 11 job functions included framing school goals, communicating school goals, supervising and evaluating instruction, coordinating curriculum, monitoring student progress, protecting instructional time, promoting professional development, maintaining high visibility, providing incentives for teachers, developing and enforcing academic standards, and providing incentives for learning. These functions provide leaders with the standards for being effective instructional leaders in their organizations.

Hallinger and Murphy (1985) cited Brookover, et al. (1982), Clark (1980), Hallinger (2003), Leithwood and Montgomery (1982), and Purkey and Smith (1983) as research indicating principals have an indirect effect on school effectiveness. The principal was seen as the primary instructional leader within the school setting. In studies reviewed by Hallinger and Murphy, few outcomes had identified organizational and personal factors that impact instructional leadership. Additionally, there was no instrument to measure these factors. The results of Hallinger and Murphy study showed that, in general, principals were more actively involved in managing curriculum and instruction than the literature suggests. Also, results showed that principals did not generally view the students as a key audience and few made regular efforts to maintain a close relationship with students. This conclusion was apparent in several job functions including communicating goals, monitoring student progress, and maintaining high visibility. Marshall (2005) studied perceptions of middle school teachers and principals regarding instructional leadership behaviors. Marshall found that no significant difference existed between the middle school teachers’ and principals’ perceptions of important instructional leadership behaviors. Blase and Blase (2002) examined leadership behaviors that have direct effects on teachers and classroom instruction. The results found two themes from the data: talking with teachers to promote reflection and promoting professional growth. Effective instructional leaders talk with teachers to promote reflection by making suggestions, giving feedback, modeling, using inquiry, soliciting advice and opinions, and praising their teachers. Emphasizing the study of teaching and learning; supporting collaboration among educators; developing coaching relationships among educators; applying the principle of adult learning, growth, and development to staff development; and implementing action research to inform instructional decision making are all highly rated items from teachers concerning their professional growth. The authors suggested these behaviors make the administrator more approachable and less intimidating, thus creating a more effective school culture of behaviors that are expected and routine.

2. Methodology

The research method was the grounded theory (one of the qualitative research methods). Theoretical sampling method was used to select the sample which were instructional experts. Generally 20 persons of the faculties of the educational management college in Kharazmi University, experienced principals, excellent principals, experienced teachers, instructional assistants, instructional foremen, and the authorities of the elementary schools in Hamadan included the statistical sample. In-depth interview was the instrument used to gather data. Data adjustment was accomplished manually. Systematic method and coding process were used for analyzing data based on grounded theory. Analytic process included three phases of coding: Open coding; In this phase, the text of interviews was separated into smaller parts. These parts were conceptualized by a continuous comparative process and so the categorization was accomplished. Axial coding: A main category was selected from the collection of open categories and considered as the axial category in the center of coding process and its subcategories and their relations were determined. Selective coding: It can be generally cited that analytic process begins with open coding and ideally ends in selective coding, but selective coding is not necessary or mandatory for all such researches.


3. Findings

Domains and dimensions of instructional leadership behaviors which were directly obtained from data of our model included:

trust – making (making ready) which its behavioral dimensions include a) developing a common vision; b) making a positive relationship; c) modeling; d) developing a participatory culture; and e) mutual respect.

observing the classroom, that's leaders should consider the following behavioral dimensions to have an effect on the teaching – learning process: a) planning for observing the classroom include making ready and conference before class observation; b) observing teacher's classroom; and c) giving feedback include information analysis, conversation, and supervisory approach.

Peer coaching which its behavioral dimensions include a) planning for observation; b) observing teacher's classroom; and c) giving feedback.

making Professional Learning Communities, that's leaders should consider the following behavioral dimensions to have an effect on the instructional and non-instructional personnel: a) teachers' individual professional development; b) teachers' group professional development; c) staff development; d) self – development; e) making a learning network; f) organizational learning ( school as a learning community).

managing Teaching-Learning Process which its behavioral dimensions include helping teachers to plan and design instructionally, to present an effective instruction, to evaluate the students, to manage and organize the classroom, to design physical and mental environment of teaching and learning, and to interact with the students.

action research, that's dimensions and duties of instructional leaders about teachers' action research include: a) facilitating action research process; b) enforcing action research process; and c) circulating and diffusing the results of action research.

gathering and interpreting systematic information which its behavioral dimensions include gathering and interpreting systematic information about teachers' behaviors, school outcomes, and students developments.

4. Conclusion

Instructional leadership is an organizational function which provides job–embedded learning opportunities for teachers' professional development in order to improve students' instructional activity and development. An instructional leader considers the instructional quality as the first school priority. In instructional leadership, attention is fastened on learning instead of teaching, so that Dufour (2002) suggested the term of learning leader instead of instructional leader. The results of this research indicated that our indigenous instructional leadership model included 7 categories and 25 behavioral dimensions as follows:

a. trust – making: 1) developing a common vision; 2) making a positive relationship; 3) modeling; 4) developing a participatory culture; and 5) mutual respect.

b. observing the classroom: 1) planning for observing the classroom include making ready and conference before class observation; 2) observing teacher's classroom; and 3) giving feedback include information analysis, conversation, and supervisory approach.

c. Peer coaching: 1) planning for observation; 2) observing teacher's classroom; and 3) giving feedback.

d. making Professional Learning Communities: 1) teachers' individual professional development; 2) teachers' group professional development; 3) staff development; 4) self – development; 5) making a learning network; 6) organizational learning ( school as a learning community).


e. managing Teaching-Learning Process: helping teachers 1) to plan and design instructionally, 2) to present an effective instruction, 3) to evaluate the students, 4) to manage and organize the classroom.

f. action research: 1) facilitating action research process; 2) enforcing action research process; and 3) circulating and diffusing the results of action research.

g. gathering and interpreting systematic information: 1) about teachers' behaviors, 2) about school outcomes, and students developments.

The importance of the role of school principals as instructional leaders and its direct effect on improving the teaching and learning processes have been widely studied. Instructional leadership is a comprehensive term includes different activities for teachers professional development, and everyone has conceptualized and developed its dimensions based on his experiences, needs, and purposes, and so various behavioral indexes have been determined for it. Findings resulted from wide studies about job behaviors of school principals denote various dimensions and indexes of instructional leadership behaviors of school principals. Many researchers such as Hallinger and Murphy (1985), Glickman, Gordon and Ross-Gordon (2007), Blasé & Blase (2002), Phillips (2003), protected multidimensionality of instructional leadership behaviors.

References

Blase, J., & Blase, J. (2002). Teachers’ perceptions of principals’ instructional leadership and implications. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 1(3), 256–264.

Freeman Long, Cheryl Leanne (2008). Instructional leadership: perceptions of Mississippi career and technical education administrators and teachers. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation) Mississippi State University.

Glickman, C. D. (2002). Leadership for learning. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Glickman, C., Gordon, S., & Ross-Gordon, J. (2007), Supervision and Instructional leadership: A developmental approach. (7th

Ed.), Boston: Pearson. Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership.

Cambridge Journal of Education,33(3), 329–351. Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. (1985). Assessing the instructional management behavior of principals. The Elementary School

Journal, 86(2), 217–247. Hallinger, P., Murphy, J., Weil, M., Mesa, R., & Mitman, A. (1983). Effective schools: The specific policies and practices of the

principal. National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 67(1), 83–91. Marshall, A. K. (2005). Instructional leadership: Perceptions of middle school principals and teachers. ProQuest, (UMI No.

3196395). Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School leadership that works: From research to results. Aurora, CO:

McREL. Merriam-Webster OnLine Dictionary (11th ed.) (2003). Retrieved October 27, 2007 from http://merriam-webster.com Northouse, P. G. (2004). Leadership: Theory and practice (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Phillips, J. (2003), Manager-Administrator to Instructional Leader: Shift in the Role of the School Principal Faculty of

Education, University of Malaya. Weber, J. R. (1989). Leading the instructional program. In S. C. Smith and P. K. Piele (Eds.), School Leadership: Handbook for

Excellence (2nd ed., pp. 191–224). Retrieved on November 5, 2007, from the ERIC database.