Effective Leaders in Educational Settings

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Sample
Method
Results of Hypotheses Testing
References

Introduction

The main aim of this empirical inquiry was to gather student teachers’ views to determine the gender differences in the effectiveness of educational leaders and also to understand what kind of qualities are inherent to effective leaders. In gender differences, research has long supported the precept that males are perceived to be more competent than females when considering work-related contexts and characteristics such as emotional stability, ability to make correct decisions, and analytic capability (Burns & Martin, 2010). Research is still divided into qualities or competencies that should be considered most effective for educational leaders.

Scholars such as Fleet, Soper, Serman, and Madden (2015) have underscored qualities that include role modeling, mentoring staff, inspiring and motivating staff, developing a learning culture, developing partnerships, building effective relationships with students, and developing professional networks. Others, such as Fuller (2014) and Supovitz (2015) have elaborated on core qualities such as the capacity to model behavior, the ability to demonstrate leadership in curriculum development, and competence to develop staff. The present paper set to clarify if educational leaders are more successful based on their gender and what qualities are inherent to effective leaders in educational settings.

Sample

A sample of 20 student teachers was selected from the educational institution to participate in the study. Random sampling technique was used to select the sample owing to its ease of use, convenience, and potential to reduce selection and researcher bias (Creswell, 2003). Additionally, the sampling technique has been widely used in educational research as it allows for generalizations (i.e., statistical inferences) from the sample to the population and the consequent attainment of external validity (Kis & Konan, 2014).

Method

This study employed a quantitative research approach and a descriptive research design to determine if leaders are more successful based on their gender and what qualities are inherent to effective educational leaders. A quantitative approach, according to Creswell (2003), “is one which the investigator primarily uses postpositivist claims for developing knowledge, employs strategies of inquiry such as experiments and surveys, and collects data on predetermined instruments that yield statistical data” (p. 18). In this study, the researcher aimed to determine the role of gender in leadership and the inherent qualities of leadership by specifying two narrow hypotheses and collecting quantitative data using the survey technique to support or refute the hypotheses. The quantitative research approach was selected not only because of its capability to generate objective findings arising from numerical data analysis but also due to the generalizability of the results to the larger students’ population (Creswell, 2003).

A descriptive research design was used in which the attitudes of the study participants were assessed once to determine the qualities of a good leader in an educational process and whether differences between male and female leaders play an important role in the sphere of education. The descriptive research design is able to depict the participants in an accurate way and is less expensive compared to other research designs such as experimental and correlational (Creswell, 2003).

A survey technique was employed to collect field data from the 20 participants. A standardized questionnaire using closed-ended questions and a Lickert-type response scale (positive, negative, indifferent) was administered to the participants to assess their attitudes to the main variables of interest (qualities of a good leader and gender differences in leadership). A survey of this nature provided the researcher with the needed flexibility in data analysis, including the ability to analyze multiple variables to prove or disapprove the set hypotheses.

Results of Hypotheses Testing

Leadership Qualities

Only 4(44.4%) of males and 3(27.3%) of females agreed that educational leaders should demonstrate qualities of effective communication, confidence, and commitment. The majority of the respondents were in agreement that good educational leaders should demonstrate leadership in curriculum development and also show good teacher behaviors (see Figure 1). Consequently, the study was unable to prove that the rule of 3Cs’ (communication, confidence, and commitment) is effective for students as leaders.

From the above figure, it is evident that only a small proportion of respondents (33.3% males and 18.2% females) believed that teaching influence is an important leadership quality in the education sphere. A slightly higher number of respondents (44.4% males and 27.3% females thought that leadership qualities of communication, confidence, and commitment are not as important as leadership in curriculum development and teacher behavior.

Gender Importance in Leadership

One sample t-test was conducted using SPSS to test the mean value of male and female respondents who were in agreement that gender roles had to be considered due to the fact that male leaders are better in coordinating students and giving orders while female students demonstrate good skills in explanation and communication. Shapiro-Wilk test of normality was also done to know if the mean distribution of the responses was normal to give credence to the assertion that gender roles are important in considering leaders in educational settings. The results of the tests are demonstrated in Table 1 and Table 2 below.

Table 1: One-Sample Test

	Test Value = 18
	t	df.	Sig. (two-tailored)	Mean Difference	“95% confidence interval of the difference.”
					Lower	Upper
Male (N=9)	4.572	9	0.03	28.86	16.27	30.0
Female (N=11)	4.895	11	0.02	25.54	16.80	28.75

Table 2: Test of Normality

	Kolmogorov-Smirnova^a			Shapiro-Wilk
	Statistic	df.	Sig.	Statistic	df.	Sig.
Males (N=9)	.138	9	.0038	.847	9	.0045
Females (N=11)	.148	11	.0048	.925	11	.003

Drawing from the tables, it is clear that no significant relationship was found between gender roles and leadership in educational settings as the p-values from the one-sample test and the test of normality are less than 0.05 (the level of significance normally used for the tests). Consequently, the hypothesis that gender role is not important in an educational process because students are not usually bothered by their gender differences was proved. Overall, the calculated mean effect size demonstrates that there was no statistically significant difference between the perceptions of male and female participants with regard to the importance of gender roles in shaping effective leaders in the sphere of education.

Discussion of the Findings

The findings of this study differed from the results of other studies (e.g., Dunlap & Kladifko, 2015; Supovitz, 2015) that demonstrated effective communication, confidence, and commitment are core qualities of a leader in educational settings. The small sample size used in this study could perhaps explain the differences in findings as to the mentioned studies utilized large representative samples. Nevertheless, the finding that leaders in educational settings should demonstrate adequate leadership in curriculum development is consistent with the results of scholars who found that the capacity to develop the curriculum is a core component of leaders in educational settings (Fleet et al., 2015).

In gender roles, the findings of this study reinforced the assertions of several scholars (e.g., Fuller, 2014; Kis & Konan, 2014; White & Ozkanii, 2011) who found gender not to be an important factor in deciding one’s leadership capabilities in educational settings. Overall, the findings of this study are important in reinforcing the fact that female educational leaders can be as effective as their male counterparts when given the opportunity to lead educational institutions. However, more research needs to be undertaken to investigate if environmental factors (e.g., school location, funding, etc.) affect the capacity of educational leaders to lead effectively based on their gender.

References

Burns, G., & Martin, B.N. (2010). Examination of the effectiveness of male and female educational leaders who made use of the invitational leadership style of leadership. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 16(1), 30-56.

Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Dunlap, J., Li, J., & Kladifko, R. (2015). Competencies for effective school leadership: To what extent are they included in Ed.D. leadership programs? Educational Leadership and Administration: Teaching and Program Development, 26(1), 14-26.

Fleet, A., Soper, R., Semann, A., & Madden, L. (2015). The role of the educational leader: Perceptions and expectations in a period of change. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 40(3), 29-37.

Fuller, K. (2014). Gendered educational leadership: Beneath the monoglossic façade. Gender & Education, 26(4), 321-337.

Kis, A., & Konan, N. (2014). A meta-analysis of gender differences in terms of teacher views on the instructional leadership of principles. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(6), 2139-2145.

Supovitz, J. (2015). School leadership lessons from England. Phil Delta Kappan, 97(3), 38-41.

White, K., & Ozkanii, O. (2011). A comparative study of perceptions of gender and leadership in Australian and Turkish universities. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 33(1), 3-16.

Click Here To Order Now!