LEADERSHIP STYLES OF PRINCIPALS AND THE
CLIMATE OF THEIR SCHOOLS AS PERCEIVED
BY TEACHERS IN SELECTED SECONDARY
SCHOOLS IN KUALA LUMPUR
BY
CHAN LAI SIM
INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA
MAY 1998
LEADERSHIP STYLES OF PRINCIPALS AND THE
CLIMATE OF THEIR SCHOOLS AS PERCEIVED
BY TEACHERS IN SELECTED SECONDARY
SCHOOLS IN KUALA LUMPUR
BY
CHAN LAI SIM
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEGREE
OF MASTER OF EDUCATION
KULLIYYAH OF ISLAMIC REVEALED KNOWLEDGE
AND HUMAN SCIENCES
INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA
MAY 1998
ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS
2
The purpose of this study is to ascertain the dominant leadership style of the
principals and the dominant school climate as perceived by teachers and to determine
the relationship between the leadership style of secondary school principals and the
climates of the schools they administer in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur.
The instrument used was a self-administered 37-item questionnaire measuring
leadership style and school climate. It was administered to 240 randomly selected
teachers from eight secondary schools in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia. Comparison of mean scores was conducted to determine the dominant
leadership style and school climate, while the relationship between leadership style
and school climate was determined by using the Pearson Product Moment
correlation.
The study found that: (1) All the principals practise the three leadership styles - taskoriented, bureaucratic, and participative styles - on a different level; (2) The
dominant leadership style of secondary school principals in Kuala Lumpur is the
task-oriented style; (3) The three school climates - reward and participation,
structure, and warmth and support - are associated with all the schools; (4) The
dominant school climate associated with the majority of secondary schools in Kuala
Lumpur is the structure climate; and (5) There is a relationship between each
leadership style and school climate in the secondary schools in Kuala Lumpur.
APPROVAL PAGE
3
I certify that I have supervised and read this study and that in my opinion it conforms
to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and
quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Education.
__________________________
DR. MUSAK MANTRAK
Supervisor
Date : ________________
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable
standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a
thesis for the degree of Master of Education.
_________________________
DR. MOHYANI RAZIKIN
Examiner
Date : ________________
This thesis was submitted to the Department of Education and is accepted as partial
fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Education.
__________________________
DR. ROSNANI HASHIM
Head, Department of Education
Date : ________________
This thesis was submitted to the Kulliyyah of Islamic Revealed Knowledge and
Human Sciences and is accepted as partial fulfilment of the requirements for the
degree of Master of Education.
____________________________
DR. JAMAL BARZINJI
Dean, Kulliyyah of Islamic
Revealed
Knowledge and Human Sciences
Date : ________________
DECLARATION
4
I hereby declare that this thesis is the result of my own investigations, except where
otherwise stated. Other sources are acknowledged by footnotes giving explicit
references and a bibliography is appended.
Name
CHAN LAI SIM
Signature ____________________
Date _____________
5
 Copyright by Chan Lai Sim and
the International Islamic University Malaysia
6
Dedicated to:
my father, Chan Sau Wing
and
my mother, Chew Geok Keow
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am deeply indebted to the numerous individuals who have significantly contributed
to the development and completion of this study.
7
Deep and sincere appreciation is expressed to Dr. Musak Mantrak, my supervisor,
Dr. Mohyani Razikin, my second reader, Dr. Ratnawati Mohd Ashraf, my Statistics
lecturer, and Dr. Mohamad Sahari Nordin, my Research Methodology lecturer.
Sincere appreciation is also expressed to Dr. Rosnani Hashim, Associate Professor
Dr. Ghulam Nabi Saqeb, Dr. Aref Tawfiq Mohd Ali Al-Atari, and all the lecturers
who have taught me. Their support, guidance, encouragement and advice afforded
invaluable contribution to this study.
My genuine thanks go to all the principals and teachers who were involved in this
study. I also wish to thank the teachers and the principal of Sekolah Menengah
Bandar Baru Seri Petaling, Kuala Lumpur, for their assistance in conducting the pilot
study and invaluable advice. My thanks also go to Institut Aminuddin Baki (IAB),
Ministry of Education Malaysia, for giving me the opportunity to enhance my
knowledge, and the International Islamic University Malaysia for providing me the
chance to conduct this research.
Finally, but most importantly, I wish to express my gratitude to my family. I wish to
thank my father, Chan Sau Wing, mother, Chew Geok Keow, and sister, Chan Lai
Peng, for their patience and understanding. Their moral support, encouragement,
and love made it possible for me to complete this study.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract ........................................................................................
Abstract in Arabic ..........................................................................
Approval Page ...............................................................................
Declaration ....................................................................................
Acknowledgements ........................................................................
List of Tables ................................................................................
CHAPTER I : INTRODUCTION .................................................
8
ii
iii
iv
v
viii
xi
1
Statement of the Problem ...................................................
Purpose of the Study ...............................................
Research Questions .................................................
Delimitations of the Study ...................................................
Limitations of the Study ......................................................
Significance of the Study .....................................................
Definition of Terms .............................................................
CHAPTER II : REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Introduction .......................................................................
A Historical Overview ........................................................
Theory and Research on Leadership Style
Definition ...............................................................
Leadership Style .....................................................
Conclusion .............................................................
Theory and Research on School Climate
Definition ...............................................................
Historical Development ...........................................
Leadership Style and School Climate
Introduction ............................................................
Relationship between Leadership Style
and School Climate .................................................
Summary............................................................................
4
5
6
6
7
7
8
10
11
13
16
26
28
29
34
35
40
CHAPTER III : RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Introduction ....................................................................... 42
Population ......................................................................... 42
Sample and Sampling Procedure ......................................... 43
Sample .................................................................... 43
Instrumentation ................................................................... 44
Section A ................................................................ 44
Section B ................................................................ 44
Section C ................................................................ 46
Establishing validity and reliability ............................
Research Procedure ............................................................ 49
Initiation ................................................................. 49
Pilot Study .............................................................. 50
Data Collection ....................................................... 51
Statistical Analysis .............................................................. 53
Summary ........................................................................... 54
CHAPTER IV : ANALYSIS AND RESULT
Introduction .......................................................................
Preliminary Analysis ...........................................................
Coding Data ...........................................................
Examining Data ......................................................
Descriptive Analysis ...........................................................
Analysis of Demographic Data ............................................
Dominant Leadership Style .................................................
9
55
56
56
56
57
59
62
47
Dominant School Climate ................................................... 63
Relationship Between Leadership Style and School Climate ..
Summary ........................................................................... 67
65
CHAPTER V : CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Findings ............................................................................. 68
Discussion .......................................................................... 69
Conclusion ......................................................................... 72
Recommendations for Further Research ............................... 74
BIBLIOGRAPHY .........................................................................
75
APPENDIX A - Questionnaire (English version) ............................
88
APPENDIX B - Questionnaire (Bahasa Malaysia version) .............
94
APPENDIX C - Demographic data of respondents ......................... 100
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
3.1
The sample size and the response rate from the
selected schools
52
3.2
Reliability coefficients of the questionnaire
53
4.1
Distribution of missing data
57
4.2
Central tendency and variability of items in the
questionnaire
58
10
4.3
Descriptive statistics of each leadership style and
school climate
59
4.4
Sex of respondents
60
4.5
Age of respondents
60
4.6
Qualification of respondents
61
4.7
Teaching experience of respondents
61
4.8
Scores of leadership styles
62
4.9
Mean scores of leadership style
63
4.10
Scores of school climates
64
4.11
Mean scores of school climate
65
4.12
Correlation coefficients between leadership style
and school climate
66
11
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
What makes a school effective? After interviewing 60 corporate and 30 public
sector leaders, Bennis and Nanus (1985) concluded, “the factor that empowers the
work force and ultimately determines which organizations succeed or fail is the
leadership of those organizations”. On the same note, Leithwood and Steinbach
(1990) stated that leadership is one of the key variables making a positive difference
in students’ experience of school. Many new schools have been built in an effort to
keep pace with the rapid increase in the population. New developments have also
occurred in program organization. Despite these efforts, we are not achieving the
potential we envision. According to Illich (1974) and Silberman (1970), schools
face many problems and children face a dreary experience in schools. They imply
that the concern is mainly for the conditions within the school which are not
conducive to learning. In essence, the concern is for leadership style and school
climate. Leadership style and school climate have been considered as important
variables to achieve effectiveness (Handy, 1976; Sergiovanni & Starratt, 1988).
Conceptualizations of climate and its components have been diverse and only
marginally interrelated. It also seems to have become fuzzier with the passage of
time (James & Jones, 1974; Silver, 1983). The concept of climate was first studied
by Lewin (1935) who introduced his theory of motivation. Since then, numerous
researchers have attempted to study and define climate. Early proponents of
organizational climate such as Litwin and Stringer (1968) defined school climate as
12
the set of internal characteristics that distinguishes one school from another and
influences the behaviour of its members. Hoy and Miskel (1987) defined climate as
an enduring quality of the school environment that is experienced by teachers, affects
their behaviour, and is based on their collective perceptions of behaviour in schools.
Litwin and Stringer have also developed a questionnaire to perceive the dimensions
of school climate. This questionnaire was adapted and administered in this study.
Research evidence of Rutter et al. (1979) showed that schools do make a difference
in spite of the strong influences of home background and other social factors. The
attitudes and motivation of principals are seen to have a decisive influence on the
atmosphere or climate of schools. Simple observation reveals that different leaders
work in different ways. Researchers after World War 2 turned their attention from
leadership traits to leadership behaviours. They found distinctive patterns.
Eventually, these findings led to the notion of style: the characteristic way in which a
leader uses power, makes decisions, and interacts with others. Style was quickly
accepted as an important element in leadership, partly because it provided an
understandable explanation of everyday experience (Lashway, 1997).
The concept of leadership style was first identified by a team of researchers at Ohio
State University. Hemphill and Coons (1950) found that leadership consisted of two
main dimensions, which were subsequently labeled 'consideration' and 'initiating
structure'. These two dimensions were later used as a basis for other studies of
leadership styles. Thus emerged two best-known theories in leadership style
research: ‘task-orientation’ and ‘relationship-orientation’. In the former theory,
some leaders are fascinated by the technical challenges of getting things done:
setting goals, organizing meetings, and monitoring activities. On the other hand, in
13
the latter, other leaders seem more attuned to the people around them, displaying
great skill at communicating and motivating (Lashway, 1997).
Over the years, researchers have described style in a variety of ways. They argue
that the effectiveness of different styles depends on the situation. As school
situations differ, leadership styles of effective principals may also differ according to
situations. The task of the principal is becoming more complex and difficult.
Knowledge of styles thus helps principals recognize how they operate and how
others are affected.
The principal’s leadership style is seen as a crucial factor in encouraging both a
sense of collective responsibility among staff and a sense of commitment to the
school among students and their parents. Perhaps the most important characteristic
of schools with a positive climate is that students, teachers, and other staff feel that
they are known and valued members of the school community (Nicholson, 1989).
In a report by Her Majesty’s Inspectors (HMI), Secondary Schools: An Appraisal by
HMI (1988), based on inspections of 185 schools in England in the period 19821986, they found that high-quality leadership and good management as among the
most significant determinants of a good school. There were no determinants for
successful leadership, though delegation, communications and relationships are
mentioned, achieved through clearly established structures of meetings which drew
in maximum staff participation.
The effective schools had clear aims and objectives translated into precisely focused
and specific guidelines and checklists for action. They had the capacity to manage
14
change by anticipating problems and planning to solve them in a mutually supportive
climate. They manage material resources well, including their actual buildings, and
develop strong links with their communites.
Education Vision was formulated as a reformation in the education system of
Malaysia in view of Vision 2020. There are eight important areas in Education
Vision. Three areas which are in line with this study are the leadership and
management styles, caring service, and caring school. A school and its members principal, teachers, students, and staff - are considered as a big family. Therefore a
school plays an important role in the process of development.
Statement of the Problem
Schools are different whereby they vary in size and complexity. Some are lively,
some are happy. By contrast, others are dour and somewhat forbidding. Similarly,
the role of principal will vary from place to place, a result of organizational and
community expectations. The principal, as the leader of the school, can influence the
functions of the school with his attitudes, biases and personal characteristics. The
relationship of the leadership style of the principal and the climate of the school
should be apparent.
A review of the literature revealed that studies concerning leadership style and
school climate especially in Malaysia are limited. Abdul Ghani (1994) did a study to
identify the leadership styles of secondary religious schools principals in the state of
Selangor. The study showed that the principals had different leadership styles:
directive, supportive, participative, and goal-oriented leadership. He concentrated
only on secondary religious schools. Another study was done by Norisah (1996) to
15
describe secondary school teachers’ perceptions of school climate and found that
most teachers regard their school climates as positive. She concentrated only on the
aspect of school climate. An earlier study was conducted in Kuala Lumpur by
Rahimah (1981) but she focused on three aspects: leadership style, school climate
and student achievement. Moreover her study was conducted in elementary schools.
Internationally, studies to examine the relationship between leadership style and
school climate were conducted in America (e.g. Eicholtz, 1984; Lebert, 1993;
Warner, 1993; Bulach et al., 1994; Haskin, 1995); Australia (e.g. Ogilvie & Sadler,
1979; Dinham et al., 1995); Canada (e.g. Withrow, 1994); Taiwan (e.g. Leu, 1977);
and Israel (e.g. Shechtman et al., 1994).
It is therefore imperative that a study to examine the relationship between leadership
style and school climate be made particularly in a Malaysian context. The problem
explored in this study is the secondary school principalship in terms of the principal's
leadership style and school climate as perceived by teachers.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the study is to examine the characteristics of the secondary school
principalship in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur. More precisely, the study is
conducted to determine the relationship between the leadership style of secondary
school principals and the climate of the schools they administer as perceived by
teachers.
Research Questions
16
1.
What is the dominant style of leadership which can be identified with
secondary school principals in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, as perceived
by teachers?
2.
What is the dominant climate, as perceived by teachers, associated with the
secondary schools in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur?
3.
Is there a relationship, according to teachers’ perceptions, between the
leadership style of secondary school principals and the climate of the schools they
administer in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur?
Delimitations of the Study
1.
The study is limited to secondary schools in the Federal Territory of Kuala
Lumpur. Hence, the results of the study are only generalized to the responses of
teachers in Kuala Lumpur.
2.
The study is limited to the investigation of leadership style and school
climate. No effort is made to study the effectiveness of the principals.
3.
The respondents are limited to the teaching staff only and do not include the
senior assistants and afternoon supervisors.
Limitations of the Study
17
1.
The instruments used are based on the Western culture. Therefore certain
intangible factors may not have been clear to respondents.
2.
Certain external factors may have influenced individuals differently. Climate
was measured by teachers' perceptions which could vary.
Significance of the Study
School climate is a primary concern of practitioners. It has also been identified as
one of the most important aspects of an effective school (Clift & Waxman, 1985;
Keefe et al., 1985). Thus the relationship between school climate and leadership
style of principals have to be determined.
Some writers argue that leadership is a major determinant of organizational
effectiveness (e.g. Chandler, 1962; Katz & Kahn, 1978; Peters & Waterman, 1982),
whereas other writers express doubts that leaders have any substantial influence on
the performance of their organization (e.g. Pfeffer, 1977; Meindl, Ehrlich &
Dukerich, 1985). Because of this difference in opinion, the notion that leadership
style of a principal influences the school climate which in turn will reflect on the
effectiveness of the school is debatable. Thus, this study hopes to make verifications
to the existing body of research.
The study will also provide additional information on the secondary school
principalship particularly in Malaysia with regard to the leadership style of principals
and its relationship to school climate. This study specifically hopes to produce
empirical data based on local contexts to benefit educators, practitioners and
administrators as well as to build a body of knowledge on educational administration
18
practices in Malaysia. The results of this study could also assist the relevant
divisions of the Ministry of Education, for example IAB (Institut Aminuddin Baki),
in preparing the guidelines on the training of principals. It is hoped that the findings
of this study will not only increase the understanding of organizational behaviour in
schools in Kuala Lumpur, but also contribute to general organizational theory and
administrative practice in Malaysia.
In terms of teachers' professional growth and development, it is clear that dimensions
of school climate have indirect impact on learning. School climate is a blend of
principal's leadership style and teachers' interactions. Accordingly, this study will
determine the most often used leadership style and its effect on the school climate.
Hence, this study also specifically hopes to benefit educators and administrators by
adding to their knowledge on how to achieve a positive school climate in future.
Definition of Terms
Leadership Style:
Refers to the manner (behaviour) in which the principal behaves that could influence
his subordinates. Some principals are task-driven, focusing on the technical
challenges of reaching goals. Others, by contrast, are more concerned with the
human dimensions of the job, concentrating on motivation and communication. The
three leadership styles examined in this study are the task-oriented, participative, and
bureaucratic styles. These leadership styles of the principals will be determined by
items measuring teachers’ perceptions of their principals’ leadership styles.
School Climate:
Refers to a set of internal characteristics that distinguishes one school from another
which results from processes within the school as well as environmental conditions
19
of the school. The concept refers to teachers' perceptions of the general work
environment of the school. The three dimensions of school climate examined in this
study are situational structure and constraint; warmth, support, and encouragement;
and emphasis on reward and punishment. To ascertain the school climate associated
with the secondary schools selected, a teacher perception school climate
questionnaire will be administered.
Secondary School Principal:
Refers to an individual who is administering a single secondary school. This
includes appointed principals or individuals awaiting formal appointment but
occupying the position of principalship. The appointment of a principal in Malaysia
is done by the Ministry of Education based on a set of criterias, for instance,
seniority, ranking and years of teaching and working experience.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
20
Introduction
The two main variables considered in this study are leadership style and school
climate. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between leadership
styles of secondary school principals and school climates in the Federal Territory of
Kuala Lumpur as perceived by teachers. The earliest theories on leadership and
organizations were mostly related to management and administrative sciences until
the 1950s when the need for theory in educational administration arose.
Nevertheless, these theories could be applied to education as the similarities were
much more significant than their differences (Simmons, 1977). They developed
from the behavioural sciences as well as from psychology, and they form the basis of
this study. Relevant literature is mostly gathered from literature in the United States.
The fundamental aim of this chapter is to provide the approaches to and findings on
leadership style and school climate. The first section of this chapter provides a
historical overview of the two variables. The second deals exclusively with Theory
and Research on Leadership Style, while the third with Theory and Research on
School Climate. The fourth section is devoted to the main task of relating leadership
style and school climate.
A Historical Overview
There are three major phases in the study of administration (Getzels, Lipham &
Campbell, 1968; Hoy & Miskel, 1987). The first phase, beginning from about 1900,
is classical organizational thought which includes the work of Frederick W. Taylor
on Scientific Management in 1911 which emphasizes on increasing the efficiency of
21
the organization; Fayol (1949) of Fayol's Elements; and Gulick and Urwick (1937)
who extended Fayol's Elements. The principles of Scientific Management, and later
the work of Fayol and Gulick, were in fact applied by a number of early students of
school administration to the educational enterprise (e.g. Bobbitt, 1913; Cubberley,
1916; Reeder, 1931).
The second phase, which developed partly as a reaction against Scientific
Management is the Human Relations Approach. Its beginning date from around
1930 and its first great exponent is Mary Parker Follett with her work on human
integration and the resolution of conflict. Elton Mayo, Fritz J. Roethlisberger and
William J. Dickson of the Hawthorn Studies (Mayo, 1933; Roethlisberger &
Dickson, 1939) provided empirical data to support her view. The emphasis of this
approach is on the social and psychological needs of the workers. Among the most
influential and widely accepted theories were McGregor’s (1960) Theory X and
Theory Y; Likert’s (1961) System 1-4 theory; and the ground-breaking study by
Lewin, Lippitt and White (1939) who suggested that democratic, participative
behaviour engaged subordinates and increased the performance of the group or
organization.
The third phase is the behavioural or social science approach with important figures
such as Barnard (1964) who popularized the idea of the leader in the organization as
a ‘social engineer’ who should put equal importance on the ‘formal’ and ‘informal’
organization (human aspects); Simon (1945) who emphasized on the importance of
environment; Parsons (1951) who attempted to construct a general theory of social
action; and Bakke (1952) and Argyris (1957) who emphasized the importance of
personality and formal organization.
22
There are three categories of climate theories (Litwin & Stringer, 1968). The first is
the theory of Individual Behaviour. Many psychologists have tried to study the
individual behaviour in organizations, but in particularistic or molecular terms.
Vroom (1964) acknowledged the importance of situational variables, but did not
provide a format by which such variables can be measured and mapped. Moreover
he did not relate the situational variables to sociological and organizational concepts
of the situation. To overcome this, Schein (1965) pointed out the need to link
motivational and organizational concepts.
The second theory is the Management Theory. McGregor (1960) developed what he
called “managerial climate” defined in terms of the manifestations of the
assumptions of management. McGregor used the concept of a psychological climate
to complete his analysis of effective management, but the broader implications of the
concept were not examined. Blake and Mouton (1985) also saw the need for a
general concept of organizational climate. This theory also has not provided a
systematic or generally useful linkage.
The third theory is called the Organizational Theory which is interested in
descriptive rather than normative explanations of human behaviour in organizations
and has dealt indirectly with notions of organizational environments. The cognitive
or economic behaviour theories of organization, such as those proposed by March
and Simon (1958) and Cyert and March (1963), view organizations as systems for
making decisions.
23
In education, Owens (1970), an organizational theorist, emphasised on the
importance of human element in the informal organization, especially in schools.
According to Owens, the teacher was more than a job description and a school was
more than line and staff organizational chart. Interaction and communication is very
important to achieve educational goals. He also stated that schools differ markedly,
not only in architecture, socio economic status and ethnic population but also in
atmosphere, tone, and climate. This is why there is growing interest in educational
administration and this interest has increased the number of research done on
leadership style and school climate.
Theory and Research on Leadership Style
Definition
Leadership studies have begun in the 1950s and since then, numerous definitions
have emerged. Researchers usually define leadership according to their individual
perspective and the aspect of the phenomenon of most interest to them (Yukl, 1989).
More than 3,000 empirical studies which vary widely in content and scope have
examined leadership but with no clear definition of leadership (e.g. Stogdill, 1974;
Bennis & Nanus, 1985; Bass & Stogdill, 1990).
Most definitions on leadership focused on the influence leaders have on followers.
Campbell, Corbally and Nystrand (1983) considered leadership to be a process
through which an individual (the leader) secures the cooperation of others
(followers) toward goal achievement in a particular setting. Yin (1994) stated that
leadership involves a process in which the leader influences subordinates. Similar
definitions were also given by Fiedler, Chemers and Mahar (1976), Yukl (1989),
Ansari (1990), Bass and Avolio (1993), Block (1993), Clark, Clark and Campbell
24