Teachers' Leadership Styles And Students' Academic . - Uga
TEACHERS’ LEADERSHIP STYLES AND STUDENTS’ ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN MATHEMATICS COURSES by SUSAN ISAAC (Under the Direction of Wanda L. Stitt-Gohdes) ABSTRACT Colleges and accreditation agencies across America share the common goal of wanting to improve student performance. In this era of accountability, the pressure for teachers to improve student performance has increased. This study examined whether teachers’ classroom leadership styles compared to a change in student performance in an entry-level mathematics course at a community college in the south. For the independent variables, students completed two leadership surveys to assess their teacher’s leadership styles: Blake and Mouton’s (1964) paragraph rankings and Avolio and Bass’s (1995) Multi-factor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ5X). Students completed a pre-test and post-test to assess their mathematical skills, and the difference between those scores was the dependent variable. The analysis did not indicate any significant results at or below a probability of .05 between these leadership styles and improved student performance. This study indicated that a connection does not appear to exist between the leadership styles indicated by these surveys and a change in student performance. INDEX WORDS: Teacher leadership, Leadership, Student performance, Mathematics, Community college, Multi-factor leadership questionnaire (MLQ-5X)
TEACHERS’ LEADERSHIP STYLES AND STUDENTS’ ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN MATHEMATICS COURSES by SUSAN ISAAC B.S., East Tennessee State University, 1994 M. A., East Tennessee State University, 1997 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF EDUCATION ATHENS, GEORGIA 2011
2011 Susan Isaac All Rights Reserved
TEACHERS’ LEADERSHIP STYLES AND STUDENTS’ ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN MATHEMATICS COURSES By SUSAN ISAAC Major Professor: Wanda L. Stitt-Gohdes Committee: Electronic Version Approved: Maureen Grasso Dean of Graduate School The University of Georgia May 2011 Elaine Adams John Schell Clifton Smith
DEDICATION Without the support, patience, and love from my husband, this degree would have been impossible to complete. I thank him for being there for me. I also thank my family for their patience when I missed holidays and for their faith in me for being the first person in my family to complete my doctoral degree. I thank my co-workers for being patient at times when I was stressed trying to balance my career while furthering my education. I thank my doctoral committee for guiding me through this process, and my professors for opening a new educational world to me. I thank the members of my Community and Technical College Leadership Initiative (CTCLI) cohort for making my time in graduate school an enjoyable memory. With such support, only success could ensue – thank you all! iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES . vii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION . 1 Background of the Problem . 2 Problem Statement . 7 Purpose Statement and Research Objectives . 9 Theoretical Framework . 9 Significance of the Study . 12 LITERATURE REVIEW . 15 Leadership and Performance in the Workforce . 15 Leadership and Performance in Education . 38 Summary . 47 METHODS . 49 Purpose of the Study . 49 Research Objectives . 49 Design of Study. 50 Population and Sample . 52 Instrumentation . 55 Data Collection . 63 Data Analysis . 65 Summary . 70 v
RESULTS . 71 Research Objective One . 71 Research Question Two . 73 Research Objective Three . 73 Research Objective Four . 74 DISCUSSION . 76 Conclusions,Concerns, and Practical Effects. 85 Recommendations for Future Studies . 91 Summary . 92 REFERENCES . 94 A GMC MASTER SYLLABUS FOR MAT 106, MATH MODELING . 109 B MATH MODELING PRE-TEST. 111 C MATH MODELING POST-TEST . 115 D MIND GARDEN PERMISSION LETTER FOR MLQ-5R . 119 E IRB PERMISSION TO CONDUCT STUDY . 120 vi
LIST OF TABLES Table 1 . 18 Table 2 . 20 Table 3 . 65 Table 4 . 69 Table 5 . 72 Table 6 . 75 vii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION With increased pressure from globalization and the race to produce excellent students and future superior workers, governments are pushing for educational institutions in their countries to improve student performance (Arbuckle, 2009; Friedman, 2006; Nakamura, 2007; Schmickle, 1998). America has felt this increased pressure as demonstrated through the landmark legislation, No Child Left Behind (Herszenhorn, 2006). In addition, accrediting agencies like the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) have felt the pressure to increase assessment in order to account for student learning (Wheelan, 2009). While SACS has always focused on improving student learning, in the past ten years they have required colleges to conduct research through a Quality Enhancement Plan to demonstrate how they are improving student learning and measuring the outcomes (Commission on Colleges, 2008). In a webcast given by Dr. Belle Wheelan (2009), the president of SACS, she stated that due to the Higher Education Act of 2008, assessing student learning outcomes will be an even higher priority. SACS had already placed greater emphasis on assessing student learning outcomes with their addition of sub-section 3.3.1.1 to the 2008 SACS manual. With this change, colleges are now working to demonstrate that student learning has improved by measuring student learning outcomes (Commission on Colleges, 2008). However, educational researchers continue to search for better ways to improve student learning. 1
Throughout history, teachers have been considered an integral part of the learning process. Before formal education, learning for the workforce occurred when a master taught an apprentice how to perform specific tasks and build the necessary skills. The ancient Greeks helped to establish a foundation for education based on the master and student model, such as Socrates teaching Plato, then Plato teaching Aristotle (Coulter & Rimanoczy, 1955). The teacher teaches the student, and then the student becomes the master and teaches another student. This model of education influenced education in the Western world (Coulter & Rimanoczy, 1955). Education in its early years focused more on what was taught then toward the 1950s it focused on how it was taught, and now it focuses on how people learn (Crebbin, 2004). Some researchers believe in the expert teacher but do not agree on what constitutes an expert teacher and recognize that there is no reliable way to identify them or produce them (Bereiter & Scardamalisa, 1993; Berliner, 1986; Knighton, 2005). However, one identifying factor of an expert leader should be the teacher that can improve student performance. Teacher leadership research demonstrates that there may be a connection between the teacher’s leadership style and student learning or performance (Cheng, 1994; Pounder, 2008; Wallace, 2007; Yildirim, et al., 2008). Unfortunately, Wallace (2007) demonstrated that while teachers do not even think of themselves as leaders in the classroom, their students do. Leadership research may provide insight into what constitutes an expert teacher, and if it does, then education could modify the leadership training for the military and business leaders in order to train teachers. Background of the Problem Since the early 1900s, educational researchers have studied various ways to improve student learning; and they have examined this issue from two vantage points: the student and the 2
teacher. Some researchers have focused on improving student learning by ensuring that the teacher incorporates students’ learning styles into their teaching methods. Other researchers have focused on how the teacher can assist students in improving their learning, and a number of researchers have focused on several topics in this area: teachers’ behavior, teaching styles, teachers’ interaction with students during class, and most recently, teachers’ classroom leadership styles (Brophy, 1986; Cheng, 1994; Howell & Frost, 1989; Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996; Pounder, 2008; Shea & Howell, 1999; Wallace, 2007; Yildirim, et al., 2008). One camp of educational researchers has examined the role of teachers’ instruction in relation to student learning. According to Brophy (1986), the study of teacher behavior and student learning is referred to as “process-product,” “process outcome” or “teacher effects research” (p. 1069). Two categories of literature address this topic. First, some researchers have examined the characteristics of teachers in relation to student learning by asking the teachers and students what they believe improves student learning (Brown, Molfese, & Molfese, 2008; Carnell, 2007; Lammers & Smith, 2008; Muñoz & Chang, 2007; Naser & Peel, 1998). Second, other researchers have examined teaching styles in relation to student learning (Abbott, et al., 1998; Baird, 1973; Cantrell, Stenner, & Katzenmeyer, 1977; Johnson, Kahle, & Fargo, 2007; Sternberg, Torff, & Grigorenko, 1998; Tallmadge & Shearer, 1969). While researchers continue to search for an effective teaching style that can guarantee improved student learning, increasing pressure is placed on educational institutions to improve student learning. The leadership theories applied to the workforce since the early 1900s are now being used to examine education (Bess & Goldman, 2001). The bulk of the leadership literature relating to student performance was conducted in secondary schools and focused on principals’ leadership styles and improving student learning (Gurr, Drysdale, & Mulford, 2007; Koh, Steers, 3
& Terborg, 1995; Ylimaki, 2007). A few researchers have used this literature base as a means of studying teachers’ leadership styles in the classroom in relation to factors related to improving student learning (Cheng, 1994; Howell & Frost, 1989; Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996; Pounder, 2008; Shea & Howell, 1999; Wallace, 2007; Yildirim, et al., 2008). At first, several researchers explored the connection between charismatic leadership and worker performance by using students as subjects in simulated experiences where trained actors portrayed the leadership styles, and the leader gave a task to the students to learn and perform (Howell & Frost, 1989; Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996; Shea & Howell, 1999). Along the way, researchers investigated other leadership theories, such as transformational leadership and task versus people leadership, in relation to student learning. Instead of directly correlating teachers’ classroom leadership styles with student learning, these researchers studied teacher leadership in connection with factors related to student learning. They focused on factors like students’ reaction toward the classroom, reactions toward learning, classroom behavior, affective performance, social climate, and perception of the physical environment (Cheng, 1994; Pounder, 2008; Wallace, 2007). However, Yildirim, Acar, Buli, and Sevine (2008) are the only researchers who have made a direct link between a teacher’s classroom leadership style and student learning. Yildirim, et al. (2008) conducted an experiment with 746 eighth grade students in Turkey to determine if the students’ perception of the teachers’ leadership style or the students’ learning style was a better predictor of student achievement in verbal and quantitative areas. They found a correlation between teachers with a people-oriented leadership style and successful student achievement and a correlation for teachers with a task-oriented leadership style and unsuccessful student achievement. In addition, they did not find a significant difference with learning styles for visual, auditory, individual, tactile, or kinesthetic with students’ achievements. However, 4
they did find a significant relationship for group learning styles for verbal skills with unsuccessful student achievement and quantitative skills with successful student achievement. Although people-oriented and task-oriented leadership styles were utilized, Yildirim, et al. (2008) did not discuss the major leadership theorists in this field: Stodgill’s research in the 1940s and 1950s, the Ohio State studies in the 1950s, the Michigan State studies in the 1960s, and Blake and Mouton’s studies starting in 1964 and continuing today (Northouse, 2007). Therefore, they did not take the opportunity to look for teacher leaders who exhibited both a high people-oriented and a high task-oriented leadership style, which is the preferred leadership style described by Blake and Mouton (1964). Blake and Mouton (1985) developed a leadership grid, formerly referred to as the Managerial grid, which measures a leader’s task-orientation and people-orientation skills. Their preferred leadership style is called a 9, 9 leadership style or Team Management leadership style. These terms are used interchangeably throughout the leadership literature. In contrast, the least preferred leadership style is referred to as a 1, 1 leadership style or Impoverished Management leadership style (Blake & Mouton, 1964). Leaders can also be measured as a 1, 9 or Country Club Management leader; a 9, 1 or Authority-Compliance Management leader; or a 5, 5 or Middle-of-the-road Management leader (Blake & Mouton, 1964). Yildirim, et al. examined taskoriented leadership and people-oriented leadership separately and did not look at the interactive relationship between these two leadership factors. However, Cheng (1994) discovered that teachers with a high task-oriented and a high people-oriented leadership style in the classroom did have positive results on student factors related to student learning, such as social climate in the classroom and students’ affective performance. In addition, Cheng also found that teachers exhibiting a low task-oriented and low 5
people-oriented leadership style in the classroom had a negative result on factors related to student learning. To date, there has been no research which examines whether there is a correlation between high people-oriented and high task-oriented leadership and improved student performance. Additionally in 1999, Yukl challenged leadership theorists by emphasizing the importance of studying more than two-factor leadership theories, such as Blake and Mouton’s leadership theory. As he said, studying only two-factor leadership theories moves the field of leadership backwards and not forwards. Therefore, based on Yukl’s comments, this study will examine two leadership theories: Blake and Mouton’s people-oriented versus task-oriented leadership and transformational leadership, and it will distinguish transformational leadership from charismatic leadership by using Bass’ (1985) leadership theory. Bass and Avolio (1997) believe that leaders progressively move from laissez-faire leadership (lack of leadership), to transactional leadership (a leader using positive and negative reinforcement), to transformational leadership. This study will utilize Bass’s definition of a transformational leader. According to Bass, transformational leadership is what leaders should do in order to motivate their subordinates. A transformational leader exhibits four factors that elicit responses from followers. The first factor is “charisma,” (p. 35) which makes followers want to follow the leader’s vision. The second factor is “inspirational leadership,” (p. 62) which inspires followers to be motivated and committed to the leader’s vision. The third factor is “individualized consideration,” (p.81) which helps followers succeed as the leader acts like a mentor or coach. The fourth factor is “intellectual stimulation,” (p. 99) which fosters more imagination and mental awareness in followers. As leaders move from transactional to transformational leadership, they do not necessarily ignore transactional leadership and may use 6
positive and negative reinforcement along with these transformational traits (Bass & Riggio, 2006). With pressure from government to increase accountability in colleges, administrators and faculty look for ways to improve student learning. While some researchers have turned to leadership as a means to investigate improving student learning, all but Yildirim et al. (2008) have failed to discern if a teacher’s leadership is related to student learning. While Yildirim et al. took a step closer to examining this possibility, their research design left many questions unanswered, and they did not utilize the previous leadership research to frame their study. Therefore, teacher leadership needs to be examined further to see if it relates to student learning. Problem Statement In colleges across America, most administrators and faculty members share a common goal of improving student learning. Currently, the demand from the government and accreditation agencies for colleges to demonstrate improved student learning has increased (Wheelan, 2009). Through the landmark legislation, No Child Left Behind, the American government has pressured K-12 schools for more accountability in the performance of students; this pressure now exists at the college level by accrediting agencies like SACS (Wheelan, 2009). In this era of accountability, colleges and professors continue to search for ways to improve student learning, often by focusing on improving their teaching skills. However, emerging evidence suggests that teachers may benefit by taking the time to understand their role as leaders of students in their classrooms. While teachers may attend conferences, workshops, or other professional development opportunities to improve their teaching strategies, most teachers do not see themselves as leaders of students; yet students do perceive their teachers as classroom leaders (Wallace, 2007). 7
Researchers have shown a link between teachers demonstrating preferred and undesirable leadership styles in the classroom and factors related to student learning (Cheng, 1994; Pounder, 2008; Wallace, 2007). Two theories associated with teacher’s classroom leadership style have emerged in the literature and have been correlated to factors relating to student learning: (a) Bass’ Transformational leadership theory and (b) Blake and Mouton’s (1964) Team Management theory. Both of these studies demonstrated a correlation between students’ perceptions of teachers’ classroom leadership styles and factors related to student learning. Clearly, the next step is to determine if a relationship exists between teacher leadership styles and student learning. Yet, only one study conducted by Yildirim, Acar, Buli, and Sevine (2008) has attempted this research. However, it was limited because these researchers omitted important details about their research design. They failed to include in their research design whether or not a high-people oriented and high- task-oriented leader could be correlated with improved student performance. They did not provide a specific instrument used to measure leadership or include reliability and validity of that instrument, and they left out a group of subjects without explanation. Furthermore, while different leadership theories have been used to examine factors related to student learning, a study examining multiple leadership theories, as recommended by Yukl (1999), has not been used to evaluate the improvement of students’ academic learning. Researchers have stated the need to explore whether there is a correlation between teachers’ classroom leadership styles and student learning in the hopes that this research could provide insight into improving students’ learning. 8
Purpose Statement and Research Objectives The purpose of this quasi-experimental study was to determine which leadership style, from Blake and Mouton’s (1964) or Avolio and Bass’s (1995) theories, exhibited by teachers best relates to improving students’ performance in a first-year mathematics course at a two-year community college. These research objectives were examined: 1. To describe students who have completed a mathematics modeling course at a community college. 2. To compare students pre-test and post-test scores on mathematics competency. 3. To compare students’ perceptions of mathematics instructor’s leadership styles on Avolio and Bass’s (1995) Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ-5X) by change in mathematics competency. 4. To compare students’ perceptions of mathematics instructor’s leadership styles on Blake and Mouton’s (1964) Managerial Grid by change in mathematics competency. Theoretical Framework All humans and animals exhibit characteristics that can be used to describe and classify them such as gender, age, and ethnicity. These factors can be selected as quasi-independent variables. Leadership style is another characteristic that an individual can exhibit. This leadership style, as with other personal traits, is carried with each individual regardless of the setting. This research study examined if the quasi-independent variable of leadership related to the performance of students in mathematics courses in a two-year community college environment. Immanuel Kant referred to this type of quasi-experimental design as Transcendental Idealism, for he defined this concept as having “synthetic a priori” (Wood, 2005, p. 27) or determining that the truth comes from propositions that are applied to the world yet were not 9
derived from the world. These truths are established through argument. In other words, leadership already exists. It is a priori, but only through discussion can researchers establish its existence. This field of research has examined leadership as synthetic a priori. Leadership exists, but what it is, how it is identified, and how it affects others has been argued by leadership theorists since the beginning of this field. Several explanations of how leadership is characterized and defined exist in the leadership field. Starting with the fascination of great leaders and studying their traits, this field of leadership has grown and developed by building leadership theories through the examination and criticism of previous leadership theories. With the criticism of trait research by Stodgill (1948) and others, the leadership field began to expand its thinking to two-factor theories of leadership. The Ohio studies and Michigan studies conducted in the late 1950s and early 1960s focused on two traits of leadership: the leaders’ emphasis on the task versus the leaders’ emphasis on people. Blake and Mouton (1964) expanded this two-factor leadership theory by investigating combinations of the two traits, and they found their subordinates considered a leader as one who emphasized both the task and the people. They referred to this leader as a team management leader or scoring a nine on production (or task) and a nine on people. Blake and Mouton (1985) continued to revise the instrument for research and development. This leadership theory was further expanded by Fiedler’s (1967) Contingency Theory of leadership, which added the importance of the task structure and the leader’s position of power to the theory. Later in this field, researchers started to examine the concept of leadership. House (1976) took the leadership theory back to the study of traits and theorized that charisma played an important role in leadership, which became known as the Charismatic leadership theory. Along 10
the same time as House, Burns (1978) started investigating a leadership theory that stated a leader develops her leadership style by moving through stages, from laissez-faire leadership (not caring) to transactional leadership (using reinforcement as manipulation) to transformational leadership (changing the environment to increase the subordinate’s motivation). Bass (1985) expanded the theory of transformational leadership by stating it has nine factors: idealized influence (attributed), idealized influence (behaviors), inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, contingent reward, management-byexception (active), management-by-exception (passive), and laissez-faire. Then, Kouzes and Posner (2002) condensed Bass’s (1985) theory by combining their nine factors into four factors: “to model the way,” (p. 43) “to inspire a shared vision,” (p. 109) “to challenge the process,” (p. 173) and “to enable others to act” (p. 241). The field of leadership has developed and expanded as different researchers struggle with the concept of what quantitatively defines a great leader. Organizations want to know and be able to determine these characteristics in order to hire or train leaders to become great leaders. Leadership and great leaders exist. Researchers may be able to determine the characteristics of a great leader and develop instruments to find or train those people. However, being a great leader is not enough; these leaders should also be able to improve production. In an academic setting, the organization is the college; and the production is student performance. This study focused on teachers as leaders in the classroom and how this leadership related to student performance. Teachers have always played an important role in education from the time of apprenticeships where the teacher was the master to the time of a more formal education such as was seen in ancient Greece. Whether the teacher is passing on their wisdom or helping students recall it from a past life as Plato believed, they are the key to guiding students 11
toward knowledge and understanding (Coulter & Rimanoczy, 1955). As with leaders, over time research has focused on what makes a teacher a great teacher like Socrates, Kant, or Confucius. Bereiter and Scardamalia (1993) stated that there are expert teachers who are r
portrayed the leadership styles, and the leader gave a task to the students to learn and perform (Howell & Frost, 1989; Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996; Shea & Howell, 1999). Along the way, researchers investigated other leadership theories, such as transformational leadership and task versus people leadership, in relation to student learning.
Introduction Types of styles OpenOffice.org Writer has five types of styles: Paragraph styles affect a an entire paragraph. Character styles affect a block of text inside a paragraph. Page styles affect page formatting (page size, margin and the like). Frame styles affect frames and graphics. Numbering styles affect numbered lists and bulleted lists.
particularly leadership. This requires manager to understand the effectiveness and impact of different leadership styles towards employees' performances. ass and Avolio (1994) introduced the Full Range Leadership model (FRL). The model illustrates the most effective leadership styles are transformational and transactional leadership styles.
Object styles: Use object styles to format objects in an InDesign document with settings such as stroke, color transparency, and text wrap. Drop caps and nested styles: Create drop caps, nested styles, and GREP styles in InDesign. Work with styles: Learn how to duplicate, group, move, and reorder styles in InDesign.
Keyword: leadership style, transformational leadership, situational leadership, postsecondary education, online instruction INTRODUCTION There are many leadership styles represented LQ KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ 6SHFL¿FDOO\ WKHUH DUH D variety of leadership styles used by online college instructors. This study is an exploration of the
Leadership Styles They Adopt (Mokgolo, Mokgolo, & Modiba, 2012). There Are Several Theories And Styles Of Leadership Propounded By Different Authors From Time To Time. More Recently, the Dominant Topology of Leadership Styles Is Articulated By Bass (1980-1997) and His Associates, Avolio and Goodheim (1987).
Leadership, Servant Leadership, Situational Leadership, Authoritarian Leadership, and Moral Leadership. Although each of these styles had some very positive characteristics, it was found that Spiritual Leadership allowed for various leadership approaches to be applied as needed and these approaches were designed
Feb 07, 2019 · 4.Describe the impact of culture on leadership styles. 5.Identify five leadership styles and their effectiveness in different situations related to CLC. 6.Reflect on the importance of using varied leadership styles to advance and sustain
This study examined leadership styles in an organisation in the gas industry and how the different leadership styles impact on employees' commitment to the organisation. Specifically, the study sought to determine the relationship between leadership styles and organisational commitment. Over the past decades, several studies examined the
