26. Educational Leadership
Paper
"Follow the Leader" Capturing the Perspectives of Post- Primary Principals in the Irish Voluntary School Sector Implementing Distributed Leadership
Maree O'Rourke, Shivaun O'Brien
Dublin City University, Ireland
Presenting Author: O'Rourke, Maree;
O'Brien, Shivaun
Distributed leadership in schools has become a dominant policy focus in Ireland and abroad, as evidenced by significant changes in the literature on distributed leadership and the recent policy changes that have led to the promotion of distributed leadership in the post-primary school sector. A seismic shift in the level of consciousness among the stakeholders regarding the nature and purpose of school leadership at the post-primary level introduced the concept of school leadership teams, commencing a distributed leadership model. The reimagining of school leadership ensures the roles and responsibilities of teachers and school-based stakeholders demand a significant change in how leadership is perceived and how the model functions within the post-primary school system.
This research study seeks to investigate school principals' perspectives at the post-primary level. This study investigates the perspective of voluntary secondary school principals implementing Department of Education (DE) CL003/2018 on Leadership and Management. It examines principals' perspectives to discover how the recent change in leadership policy plays out in Ireland's voluntary secondary school sector.
From an Irish perspective, there is a shortage of empirical evidence concerning post-primary school principals' perspectives on implementing the new model of distributed leadership outlined in the Department of Education (DE) CL003/2018. Yet, the transformation of the role of the principal within an emergent leadership model is essential to the sustainability and development of distributed leadership in schools. According to Redmond (2016), "capturing and synthesising principal perspective has thus become an important tool in uncovering the story of modern school leadership" (p.29). Murphy (2020) recognises that while "policy reforms have influenced the preparation and development of school leaders at all levels in the system, there is little available research on principals' perceptions of their preparation to lead schools in the contemporary policy context" (p.1).
The research question asks: What is the experience of school principals in implementing distributed leadership in voluntary secondary schools?
The sub-questions are:
- Does the implementation of the Department of Education (DE) CL 003/2018 change the principal's role within the school's leadership framework?
- Does the micropolitics of a school impact the implementation of the Department of Education (DE) CL003/2018?
- What strategies are used by principals to motivate staff when implementing the Department of Education (DE) CL003/2018?
- Is there a distribution of accountability and responsibility within the distributed leadership framework per Department of Education (DE)CL003/2018?
The first question seeks to discover if the role of the principal has changed because of the introduction of DE CL003/2018. Does a new model of leadership involve a new model of principalship?
The second research question focuses on the fundamentally political nature of school leadership.
The third question examines motivating teachers to engage in distributed leadership practice. Changing the model of school leadership requires a whole-school commitment to the process.
The fourth question explores the concept of accountability and responsibility within distributed leadership. Is distributed leadership possible without distributed responsibility and accountability? How do the legislative responsibilities of the principal correlate with a distributed model of school leadership?
The research study examines distributed leadership practice from the principal's perspective. The research study seeks to discover if the underlying concepts of power, motivation, and accountability fundamentally influence the principal's perspective on implementing distributed leadership. The research question and the sub-questions inform the focus of the literature review and provide the rationale for including selected literature.
The research study is significant as it investigates the experience of principals within their school context and captures their perspectives for the consideration of policymakers and practitioners for the future development of distributed leadership.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe researcher adopts a pragmatic approach, with a case study methodology in a mixed-method sequential quantitative > qualitative research design. The strength of this design is that the phases build on each other, although it is challenging to conduct as additional time is required to complete each step. All research questions are explored by analysing data strands separately and connecting them appropriately. The qualitative data gathering in Stage 2 of the research occurred to obtain more detailed information from principals after collecting data in Stage 1.
Case study boundaries with a clear definition by the researcher are required and assist the researcher in defining the case. A bounded context can contain a person, an organisation, a policy, or any given unit of study. The case study boundary in this research is the voluntary secondary school sector. The case under investigation is the experience of school principals within the sector implementing the Department of Education (DE) CL003/2018 from its introduction in 2018 to the first biennial review. Therefore, the unit of analysis is the school principal in the voluntary secondary school implementing the Department of Education (DE) CL003/2018.
The two-stage research design involved gathering quantitative and qualitative data. The emphasis or balance within the mixed-method approach is more on qualitative than quantitative data collection. The study involved a board survey with in-depth interviews.
Stage 1 of the study gathered data from a census survey. The quantitative data collected in Stage 1 is through an online survey questionnaire, including 'attitudinal' and 'open' questions, with a Likert scale design generating descriptive statistics. Through online surveys, a researcher can collect data quickly and efficiently.
The qualitative data collection involves using Zoom. Semi-structured interviews are conducted with ten voluntary secondary school principals to inform the qualitative research.
The results are examined and interpreted within the context of the literature review using Braun & Clarke's (2006) six-step framework for applying thematic analysis. A thematic analysis aims to identify themes, in the data, with patterns emerging used to address the research questions. The methodological approach is systematic and rigorous; the same quantitative and qualitative questions appear. The semi-structured interviews and online survey findings acknowledge the study's implications and limitations.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe research findings confirm the importance of the micropolitical climate of the school when introducing change emanating at a macro-political systemic level. The implementation is contextual to each school sector and, within each sector, contextual to the culture and political dynamic of the school community. The research study findings corroborate the literature. Understanding the process's contextual and relational aspects, knowing and understanding people and the school culture, and managing the change process is a crucial role of the principal and is central to the successful implementation of distributed leadership. The research study uncovers the importance of the motivational strategies deployed by the principals when implementing distributed leadership. The principals seek to empower and encourage staff involvement through intrinsic and extrinsic motivational approaches on an individual and collective level. The extent of distributed responsibility and accountability within a distributed leadership framework is evolving. While opportunities for greater collaboration and an enhanced leadership structure within schools are acknowledged, other challenges hinder the development and sustainability of a genuine distributed leadership model. The research study shows that power, motivation, and accountability fundamentally impact the principal's perspective on implementing distributed leadership. Changes in education policy and practices also require attitudinal change. It is evident in this research that since the introduction of the Department of Education (DE) CL 003/2018, principals have fostered and developed a positive attitude among school staff towards a distributive leadership model. However, the study illustrates the development of distributed leadership requires continuous professional development for principals to develop sustainable leadership capacity within the voluntary secondary school sector. The essential time to hold strategic leadership team meetings and the consideration of a generic leadership title for posts of responsibility emerges with recommendations for further research and policy development.
ReferencesDe Nobile, J. (2018) Towards a theoretical model of middle leadership in schools, School Leadership & Management, 38:4, 395-416, DOI: 10.1080/13632434.2017.1411902 https://www-tandfonline-com.dcu.idm.oclc.org/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080%2F13632434.2017.1411902
Forde, C., Hamilton, G., Ní Bhróithe M., Nihill, M., & Rooney, A (2019) Evolving policy paradigms of middle leadership in Scottish and Irish education: implications for middle leadership professional development, School Leadership & Management, 39:3-4, 297-314, https://www-tandfonline-cGurr, D. (2018) School middle leaders in Australia, Chile and Singapore. School Leadership & Management. 39. 1-19. 10.1080/13632434.2018.1512485. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327328446_School_middle_leaders_in_Australia_Chile_and_Singapore
King, F., Stevenson, H. (2017) Generating change from below: what role for leadership from above? Journal of Educational Administration 55, 657–670. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316984798_Generating_change_from_below_what_role_for_leadership_from_above
Lahtero, T J., Ahtiainen, RS., Lång, N. (2019) Finnish principals: Leadership training and views on distributed leadership https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/304896/2019_Lahtero_Ahtiainen_L_ng_Distributed_leadership.pdf?sequence=1
Lárusdóttir, S., O'Connor, E. (2017) 'Distributed leadership and middle leadership practice in schools: a disconnect?', Irish Educational Studies, 36(4), pp.423-438. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317368004_Distributed_leadership_and_middle_leadership_practice_in_schools_a_disconnect
Liu, Y. (2020) 'Focusing on the Practice of Distributed Leadership: The International Evidence From the 2013 TALIS', Educational Administration Quarterly, 56(5), pp. 779–818. doi: 10.1177/0013161X20907128. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0013161X20907128
Lumby, J. (2013) Distributed leadership: the uses and abuses of power. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 41 (5)https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1741143213489288
Mifsud., D. (2017) Distributed leadership in a Maltese College: the voices of those among whom leadership is 'distributed' and who concurrently narrate themselves as leadership 'distributors', International Journal of Leadership in Education, 20:2, 149-175, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13603124.2015.1018335
Murphy, G. (2019) 'A systematic review and thematic synthesis of research on school leadership in the Republic of Ireland: 2008–2018', Journal of Educational Administration. https://www-emerald-com.dcu.idm.oclc.org/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JEA-11-2018-0211/full/html
Murphy, G. (2020) 'Leadership preparation, career pathways and the policy context: Irish novice principals' perceptions of their experiences, Educational Management Administration & Leadership. DOI: 10.1177/1741143220968169. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/345672931_Leadership_preparation_career_pathways_and_the_policy_context_Irish_novice_principals'_perceptions_of_their_experiences
O'Donovan, M. (2015) The Challenges of Distributing Leadership in Irish Post-Primary Schools. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 2015, 8(2), pp.243-266. Available at: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1085879.pdf
Supovitz, J., D'Auria, J., Spillane, J P. (2019) Meaningful & Sustainable School Improvement with Distributed Leadership. CPRE Research Reports.
https://repository.upenn.edu/cpre_researchreports/112
Spillane, J, P., Anderson, L. (2019) Negotiating Policy Meanings in School Administrative Practice: Professionalism, and High Stakes Accountability in a Shifting Policy Environment North western University Connecticut College - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335018576_Negotiating_Policy_Meanings_in_School_Administrative_Practice_Practice_Professionalism_and_High
Redmond, M. (2016) Affective Attunement- Emotion & Collaboration – A Study of Irelands Voluntary Secondary School Principals https://www.jmb.ie/Site-Search/resource/246
file:///C:/Users/mor1/Downloads/Affective%20Attunement%20-%20A%20Study%20of%20Ireland's%20Voluntary%20Secondary%20Principals.pdf
26. Educational Leadership
Paper
The Prediction of Teacher Well-Being through Distributed Leadership: A Cross-Cultural Study
Busra Kulakoglu, Anıl Ersöz
Middle East Technical University, Turkiye
Presenting Author: Kulakoglu, Busra;
Ersöz, Anıl
Teacher professional well-being (TPW) is now a salient field of study as it has been found to be directly or indirectly related to school effectiveness by affecting various factors, such as teacher health (Gray et al., 2017), teacher effectiveness (Duckworth et al., 2009), student achievement (Branand & Nakamura, 2016), and teachers’ organizational commitment (Creemers & Reezigt, 1996). Despite the different definitions and operationalizations of TPW due to its multidimensional nature, the recent conceptual framework offered by OECD (Viac & Fraser, 2020) defined it around physical, mental, cognitive, subjective, and social dimensions. However, while considerable literature has grown around the theme of general well-being, the literature review revealed a paucity of research on TPW (Yildirim, 2015).
The challenging nature of tasks for schools to function properly requires principals to be in two places at once, which is an impossible task to accomplish, so there needs to be a distributed form of leadership allowing teachers and principals to share various leadership functions (Day et al., 2020). Distributed leadership (DL) points out the importance of “interactions among leaders, followers, and their situation” (Spillane, 2005, p. 145), meaning that the functioning of interrelational practices matters. Therefore, DL functions have been conceptualized in relation to developing people, instructional management, and organizational decision-making (Liu & Printy, 2017).
According to the literature, leadership is contextualized differently across the world due to the differences in people’s perceptions and practices of leadership (Hofstede, 1984; House et al., 2014). Therefore, this study investigates the relationship between TPW and DL functions, taking into account the cultural dimensions within clusters of countries. Country clusters were created in this study in a way that countries within clusters exhibit cultural resemblance, whereas cultural dissimilarity exists across clusters. Consequently, the following clusters were established: a Balkan cluster with Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovenia, Romania and Türkiye; an Anglo-Saxon cluster with the USA, United Kingdom and Australia; a Nordic cluster with Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden; and an East and South East Asia cluster with Japan, South Korea and Singapore. It is hypothesized that there are differences across country clusters in terms of predicting TPW through different DL dimensions. It seems plausible to explain the differences among country clusters in terms of their differences in DL and TPW due to some cultural characteristics (e.g., power distance, individualism/ collectivism) dominant within clusters.
In light of all this information, this study aims to investigate the relationship between TPW and DL practices within the school by looking at the issue from an intercultural lens. Liu et al. (2022) emphasized that there is inconsistent evidence on the direct relationship between TPW and DL practices in the literature, where they also find that there is no direct relationship between TPW and DL in China school setting. However, a study conducted in Türkiye found that DL has a positive and significant effect on teachers’ organizational happiness (Algan & Ummanel, 2019). Additionally, Thien and Lee (2023) pointed out the research gap in school-level dimensions and TPW and found that in order to cultivate TPW, involvement in the decision-making process, and healthy and positive communication among the principal and teachers is needed in the Malaysian context. As seen, there are differences among contexts about the possible relationship between TPW and DL (or its sub-dimensions) is apparent. From this point of view, there is a need to answer the research question, “Is there a significant difference among different country clusters regarding the relationship between DL and TPW?”
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis study aims to understand whether TPW is predicted by different DL dimensions across four country clusters introduced in the previous section. The TPW construct was measured with 28 items that resemble the OECD’s TPW conceptualization (Viac & Fraser, 2020). Of these 28 items, 12 are related to “job satisfaction,” 10 to “self-efficacy,” two to “psychosomatic symptoms,” three to “teacher-student relationship,” and one to the “feeling of trust” dimensions. The DL construct was measured with 13 items corresponding to Printy and Liu’s (2021) operationalization of DL. Of these 13 items, six are related to “developing people,” five to “managing instruction,” and two to “organizational decision-making dimensions.”
Firstly, Little’s test was used to determine whether data were missing completely at random, and then multiple imputation was applied to handle the missing data (Baraldi & Enders, 2013). Secondly, measurement invariance in the clusters was checked for TPW and DL dimensions using multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis(CFA).
In this study, the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2018 dataset is used, which is collected by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) from a broad range of countries in order to help these countries to cope with the challenges they face (OECD, 2019). For four country clusters, the teacher-level data includes 90,534 teachers, while group-level data includes 5,362 principals as participants in total. Because the TALIS 2018 dataset has a nested data structure with teachers nested in schools, two-level hierarchical linear models were applied to the country clusters using the lme4 package (Bates et al., 2015) in R. Principals’ DL functions modeled as group-level variables, whereas TPW was modeled as the individual-level variable. These models regarded each cluster as unique and allowed us to compare clusters in terms of their cultural characteristics. A similar approach has been used by Liu and Benoliel (2022) to investigate multi-country data. Intra-class correlation (ICC) was derived to assess the lower-level outcome variance that can be attributed to higher-level variables. It showed that for each country cluster, it is reasonable to conduct a multi-level analysis. Furthermore, prior to analyses, we grand-mean centered the group-level independent variables as we hypothesized the effects of group-level variables on individual-level outcomes (Hofmann & Gavin, 1998).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe preliminary analysis results indicated that the multicollinearity assumption is verified by the correlation matrix and VIF, and the normality assumption is satisfied through QQ plots, as almost all points fall approximately along the reference line. Four CFA models showed measurement variance across country clusters, so that the results of the HLM should be interpreted carefully when the means across the clusters are compared.
Two-level linear models partitioned the variance in TPW that is associated with teacher-level and school-level variations. The results from unconditional models of TPW for each country cluster showed that variations between schools could explain variations in TPW ranging from 10.25% to 14.81%. Therefore, it seems that two-level models are appropriate. Building on the baseline model, adding principals’ DL functions as a random effect contributed to the explained variance of TPW ranging from 5% to 10%. The results from the random effect model indicated that each principal DL function is positively related to TPW, even though their significance varies across country clusters. For example, the organizational decision-making and developing people functions were found to be significant predictors of TPW in the Balkan countries cluster; only the managing instruction function of DL was found to be related to TPW in the Nordic countries cluster. This and many similar results of the present study can be explained by the cultural differences in terms of individualism/collectivism and power distance across country clusters.
ReferencesAlgan, E. K., & Ummanel, A. (2019). Toward sustainable schools: A mixed methods approach to investigating distributed leadership, organizational happiness, and quality of work life in preschools. Sustainability, 11(19), 5489.
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., Walker, S., Christensen, R. H., Singmann, H., & Dai, B. (2015). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1–7. 2014.
Baraldi, A.N. & Enders, C.K. (2013) Missing data methods, in T.D. Little (Ed) The Oxford handbook of quantitative methods in psychology (Vol. 2) 1–34.
Creemers, B. P., & Reezigt, G. J. (1996). School level conditions affecting the effectiveness of instruction. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 7(3), 197-228.
Day, C., Sammons, P., & Gorgen, K. (2020). Successful school leadership. Education Development Trust.
Duckworth, A. L., Quinn, P. D., & Seligman, M. E. (2009). Positive predictors of teacher effectiveness. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(6), 540-547.
Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. 1998. Centering decisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research in organizations. Journal of Management, 24, 623-641.
Hofstede, G. (1984). Cultural dimensions in management and planning. Asia Pacific journal of management, 1, 81-99.
House, R. J., Dorfman, P. W., Javidan, M., Hanges, P. J., & De Luque, M. F. S. (2014). Strategic leadership across cultures: GLOBE study of CEO leadership behavior and effectiveness in 24 countries. Sage Publications.
Liu, Y. (2021). Distributed leadership practices and student science performance through the four-path model: examining failure in underprivileged schools. Journal of Educational Administration.
Liu, L., Liu, P., Yang, H., Yao, H., & Thien, L. M. (2022). The relationship between distributed leadership and teacher well-being: The mediating roles of organisational trust. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 17411432221113684. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221113683
OECD. (2019). TALIS - The OECD teaching and learning international survey. https://www.oecd.org/education/talis/
Spillane, J. P. (2005). Distributed leadership. The Educational Forum, 69(2), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131720508984678
Thien, L. M., & Lee, H. C. (2023). The effects of school culture dimensions on teacher well-being across under-enrolled and high-enrolment schools. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 7(1), 100396.
Viac, C., & Fraser, P. (2020). Teachers’ well-being: A framework for data collection and analysis (OECD Education Working Papers No. 213; OECD Education Working Papers, Vol. 213). https://doi.org/10.1787/c36fc9d3-en
Yildirim, K. (2015). Testing the main determinants of teachers’ professional well-being by using a mixed method. Teacher Development, 19(1), 59-78.
|
