Assignment 3: Chapter 1 3 (Draft)

Title of Research:
The Effect of Principal Leadership Practice and Its Influence on Students ExtraCurricular Achievement.

MARGARET LIM PEI TEE

(YHA 130006)

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the study
Leadership is not about personality; its about behavioran observable set of skills and
abilities . The face of leadership is changing. Traditional ideas of leadership as positional,
hierarchical, directive, autocratic and task driven are increasingly less effective as expectations
change and unpredictability and uncertainty become part of the modern world. Global, economic
and societal changes mean that leaders are now required to be more responsive, adaptable,
creative and collaborative. Leadership today requires a more relational approach, and engaging
and developing individuals and teams in time of uncertainty and change necessitates a different
level of leadership and style -Ladkin (2010).
The leadership in education means directing the training of minds towards the achievement
of school goals which is set by the school head / principal. (Syed Hassan Waqar)stated the
principal is expected to be an instructional leader who can support, inspire, and develop students
and teachers, as well as communicate effectively with all publics within the educational
environmentP. Hallinger, & Heck, R. H. (1998)found that a school leaders leadership style is
the main factor that greatly influences school effectiveness and should be underscored.
The Malaysias National Education Blueprint (2013 2025) is the current point of
reference for Malaysian school leaders to benchmark their school reform efforts towards
sustaining school effectiveness. School plays an important role in the construction of the next
generation (Rahimah, 2005). Shift 5 of this (Blueprint, 2012), identifies with the past findings of

and asserts that the quality of school leaders is the second biggest school-based factor in
determining student outcomes, after teacher quality. Past studies had also found that effective
school leadership is essential to ensure ongoing school improvement.(Muijs, 2006; Simkins,
2003). Besides, studies from several countries across the world have linked school achievement
with effective school leadership. (Bush, 2008; Ghamrawi, 2011; Harris, 2004) The principal is
view as a key agent, the cornerstone of a good school, without a principals leadership to raise
students achievement, schools cannot succeed.
Researches on distributed leadership, sustained leadership, and lateral capacity building
deepen understanding of educational leadership. (Elmore, 2000),(Spillane & Camburn, 2006) ,
(Hargreaves, 2008) and Fullan (2005, 2006) expand the concepts of leadership related to school
improvement.

Marzano, Waters, and McNulty (2005)identify leadership qualities that are

positively linked to student learning. Through their meta-analysis of research, Owings et al.
(2006)concluded that effective leadership affects student achievement. Therefore theres an
overall consensus that principals leadership is a dynamic process dependent upon the
relationship between the leader and those being led. In the school context, the being led referred
to the teachers and the students.
According to Leithwood (2000b) there are six types of leadership styles practiced in
schools: instructional leadership, transformational leadership, moral leadership, participative
leadership, managerial leadership and contingency leadership. At the same time, the challenge of
restructuring the education system and all kinds of uncertainties had led to a change from
instructional leadership to transformational leadership. (Leithwood, 2000b) However, researches
regarding educational leadership still state that instructional leadership (P. M. Hallinger, J. F.,

1985) and transformational leadership (Griffith, 2004; Ross, 2006) proved significant to the
success of the schools.
1.2 Research Problem
There has been a great deal of researches done to prove that there is a significant
influence of principals leadership style on the school achievement. However, theres very little
researches which addressed the relationship between leadership style of principals and school
achievement in co-curricular activities, nor has any research revealed the efficacy of senior
assistant of CCA towards the relationship between leadership style of principal and school cocurricular achievement.
1.3 Purpose of the Study
This study aims to identify the influence of principals leadership style on the selfefficacy of senior assistant of co-curricular activities (CCA) and school co-curricular
achievement. Additionally, this study examine whether the senior assistant of co-curricular
activities (CCA) self-efficacy is a valid mediator of the relationship between transformational
and transactional leadership of principal and school co-curricular achievement.
1.4 Research Questions
1.
What is the level of school achievement in co-curricular activities, in term
2.
3.

of management, students participation and achievement?

What is the leadership style of the school principal?
What is the level of self-efficacy among the senior assistant of co-

4.

curricular activities?
Is there any relationship between principals leadership style and the

5.

school achievement in co-curricular activities?

Is principals leadership style affecting the self-efficacy of the senior
assistant of co-curricular activities?

6.

Is self-efficacy of the senior assistant of co-curricular activities a factor of

7.

the school achievement in co-curricular activities?

Is the self-efficacy of senior assistant of co-curricular activities a mediator
of the relationship between principals leadership style and school

8.

achievement in co-curricular activities?

Is there any relationship between the demographic factors and principals

9.

leadership style?
Are demographic variables moderator of the relationship between
principals leadership style and school achievement in co-curricular

10.

activities?
Is the model of principal leadership style and school achievement inco-

curricular activities valid?

1.5 Significance of the study
The Malaysian school curriculum is committed to developing the child
holistically along intellectual, spiritual, emotional, and physical dimensions, as
reflected in the National Education Philosophy. Programmes and initiatives to
develop non-academic components are present both during formal class time as well
as through a variety of after-school co- curricular activities. (Blueprint, 2012) Every
child in Malaysia national schools is expected to participate in at least 1 sport, 1 club,
and 1 uniformed body. The Ministry has made participation in co-curricular activities
a requirement for graduation and scholarships for further education.
Therefore, the results of this study it is important to be used as a guide to various
parties such as the following:
1. To provide information to the principals, the District Education Office, the
Department of Education and the Ministry of higher education, regarding the real
situation for co-curriculum management by the principals in secondary schools.
Educators may utilize the findings to better understand which leadership styles

enhance a positive school culture and improve student achievement in cocurricular activities.
2. Find the right person for the right job The Ministry will be able to institute a
succession planning process for principalship, that identifies and cultivates highpotential individualsensure that there is a ready pool of candidates that can be
called upon as soon as an opening is available.
The study explored the relationship between principal leadership style and school
culture as assessed by teachers and the principal at the secondary school level.
Differences between schools in terms of size, demographics, and principal and
teacher experience were explored. Principals may utilize the findings to better
understand which leadership style enhance a positive teachers efficacy and improve
student achievement in general, and in co-curricular activities specifically.

1.6 Limitations and further research

First, the data will be largely gathered by means of self-reported questionnaires
and are subject to biases. In this respect, the study does not differ from previous
research.However, recent research suggests that self-reported data are not as limited
as was previously believed, and people often perceive their social environment
accurately. Regarding leadership style, in contrast to most research, centering on
leaders perceptions of their own behaviors, the study of subordinates perceptions of
the leaders behavior might be most useful in examining linkages between
organizational variables and leadership styles.
Second, in this study new issues is examined the relationship between
principals leadership style and school achievement in co-curricular activities.
However, since only secondary schools were involved, more research is needed to

examine the appropriateness of the measures to high schools and matriculation

colleges.
Third, regarding the generalizability of the outcomes, I am aware that since the
sample was limited to the state of Selangor, any attempt to generalize the studys
ndings, Leadership style conclusions, and implications to the whole population of
teachers

in

the

entire

country

must

be

approached

Thepresentresultsprovideanimpetusforfurtherresearchregardingthe

with

caution.

self-efficacy

of

senior assistant of co-curricular activities and its signicance for the achievement of
the schools co-curricular activities in relation to the principals learning style. The
results of this study also require further analysis of the inuence of other variables, in
an attempt to extend our understanding of how schools can improve their
achievement in co-curricular activities.
1.7 Operation Definition
Co-curricular activities (CCAs): previously known as Extracurricular Activities
(ECA) are activities that educational organizations in some parts of the world
create for school students. They are activities which all school students must
attend alongside. In Malaysia, the policy was introduced by the Ministry of
Education, which believes extra activities for school students are a means to
enhance social interaction, leadership, healthy recreation, self-discipline and self

confidence.
Effectiveness (EFF): a leaders effectiveness as seen by both self and others in
meeting the job-related needs of followers, representing followers needs to
higher- level managers, contributing to organization effectiveness, and
performance by the leaders work group (Bass, 1985).

Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ 5X):

measures perceived leadership styles.

School Improvement Questionnaire (SIQ II): a survey instrument that measures

school climate.
Student achievement: an assessment of student performance in a given discipline

or skill area.
Teacher efficacy: self-perceived belief in ones capabilities to bring about desired

outcomes (Bandura, 1993)

Transactional leadership (TF): a leadership style that occurs when leaders

a survey instrument that

intervene to make some correction and generally involves corrective criticism and
negative reinforcement. The leader engages in active management and intervenes

when followers have not met standards or problems arise.

Transformational leadership (TS): a leadership style that inspires and motivates
followers to demonstrate commitment to a shared vision. Leaders engage in
behaviors that clearly communicate high expectations to followers and encourage
collegiality and cohesiveness.

CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

1.0 Introduction
The purpose of the study is to identify the influence of principals leadership style on the selfefficacy of senior assistant of co-curricular activities (CCA) and school co-curricular
achievement. Additionally, this study examine whether the senior assistant of co-curricular
activities (CCA) self-efficacy is a valid mediator of the relationship between transformational
and transactional leadership of principal and school co-curricular achievement. The topics
discussed views of leadership style (Transformational &Transectional Leadership), School
Performance (Co-curricular & Sports Achievement), Self -Efficacy of The Senior Assistant of
Co-Curricular Activities, Leadership Styles and school achievement. The conceptual framework
is also discussed in this chapter.

2. Leadership Style
Leadership style is a leader's style of providing direction, implementing plans, and motivating
people toward reaching organizational or personal goals. There are many different leadership
styles that can be exhibited by leaders in the political, business or other fields. Leadership style
research has been dominated by self-report perceptions of subordinates about their leader's
behaviour patterns in decision making, interpersonal relations, planning, instructional leadership,
and management efficiency. Categories of leadership styles have increased in the postmodern
literature. Among the more recent categories are charismatic leadership, social justice leadership,

gender and race leadership, moral leadership, and spiritual leadership. The two rather global
categories of leadership styles chosen for this study are transactional and transformational
leadership style.

2.1

Transactional Leadership
This leadership style starts with the idea that team members agree to obey their leader

when they accept a job. The "transaction" usually involves the organization paying team
members in return for their effort and compliance. The leader has a right to "punish" team
members if their work doesn't meet an appropriate standard. Transactional leadership, assumes
that people are motivated strictly by reward and punishment. This style generally does not appeal
to the values, morals, or other intrinsic characteristics of most people. The transactional leader is
highly focused on task, provides very clear direction, and oversees productivity in detail. When a
subordinate fails, the next step is a penalty or punishment. (Bass, 1985)

2.2

Transformational Leadership
In the 1970s and 1980s, researchers such as J. M. Burns and B. M. Bass defined

transformational leadership theory. According to Burns (1978), transformational leadership

occurs when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers
raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality (p. 20), and results in a
transforming effect on both leaders and followers. Bass (1985) built on Burns (1978) work and
described transformational leadership in terms of the impact that it has on followers; followers

feel trust, admiration, and loyalty toward the leader. Transformational leaders motivate followers
to do more than the latter originally expected to do. Transformational leadership consists of four
factors charisma or idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and
individualized consideration
Transformational leadership raises the level of commitment of members and empowers
them to affect positive changes in the organization. Transformational leaders are described as
exhibiting charismatic leadership behaviors. These leadership styles can be effectively utilized in
various organizational settings and can be applied in schools to affect growth in improving
student learning and school culture. Transformational leadership grows out of the assumption
that people will follow a leader who inspires and motivates them. In this theory, the leader
motivates and inspires by developing a compelling vision, selling that vision, and focusing on
developing relationships with followers as a teacher, mentor, and coach. The transformational
leader engages subordinates by spending a great deal of time building trust and demonstrating a
high level of personal integrity. The ultimate goalas the name saysis to transform followers
goals, vision, and sense of purpose, molding them into a cohesive team. This type or style of
leadership often focuses on the big picture and on concern for people and their individual
needs
2.3

School Performance (Co-curricular & Sports Achievement)

School performance was always measured by academic achievement. However, Each

year, schools in Malaysia are required to conduct a self-assessment using the Standard of Quality
Education Malaysia, or Standard KualitiPendidikan Malaysia (SKPM), on five dimensions
related to school quality: leadership and direction, organisational administration, administration

of students welfare, curricular and co-curricular activities, teaching and learning, and student
outcomes. For the last dimension, the schools consider both academic and non-academic
outcomes including co-curricular participation and the attitudes, behaviours, and moral values
demonstrated by students at school.
Co-curricular involvement provides students with opportunities to develop their
individual talents and interests outside of a formal classroom setting. Such activities also provide
excellent leadership opportunities (Malaysia, 2012) Co-curricular activities are educational
experience performed outside the classroom. According to Abd. Alim (1995) co-curricular
activities are continuation and strengthening of the curriculum program in the classroom. Indeed
co-curricular activities important to help complement and enhance the learning process in the
classroom, in addition it can show changes in behavior and greatly influenced the character of
students. Therefore, the Ministry of Education require all schools to implement co-curricular
activities and each student were required to engage in three types of co-curricular activities,
namely the uniformed groups, the clubs and societies and the sports and games groups. Abd.
Alim (1995)concluded that co-curricular activities is a field learning process based on various
activities planned and carried out by the schools.
Schools Inspectorate has been using Standard Quality of Education (SKPM) since 2004
to assess the capability and potential of school administrators for supervising teaching and
learning process, managing resources and raising excellence students. SKPM is a self-rating
exercise requested by MOE done by schools and this process is monitored and supervised by the
district education office (PPD) and state education department (JPN). This study is looking into
last dimension Element 12, which is the students outcome in the area of Academic, Co-curricular

Activities and Behavior, focusing on sub-element 12.6: Achievement of Students in Cocurricular Activities.
2.3.1

School Co-curricular and Sports Achievement (Aspect of Management)

Proper and effective management is important to ensure the success of CCA in school.
Co-curriculum and sports management are:
2.3.1.1 Management of stocks and sports equipment inventory
2.3.1.2 Development plan

2.3.2

School Co-curricular and Sports Achievement (Aspect of Students Participation and

Achievement)
Records of students participation and achievement in CCA and sports events and
competition in various levels provide evidences for the School Co-curricular and Sports
Achievement.
2.3.2.1 Participation of students in CCA and Sports events in various levels.
2.3.2.2 Achievement of students in CCA and Sports Competitions in various
levels.

2.4

Self -Efficacy of The Senior Assistant of Co-Curricular Activities

Most people believed that school management is only due to the leadership of the principal
(Abdullah, 2004), without taking into consideration that leadership of all the school leaders also

played their part in contributing towards the success of a school (Mahmood, 2005). In Malaysia
context, school leaders consist of a group of school administrators headed by the school pricipal.
They are the senior assistant in administration and academic, senior assistant of Students Affair,
Senior Assistant of Co-Curricular Activities, Senior Assistant of Afternoon Session and Subjects
Senior Teachers. Past research on school achievement had shown that school leadership has
strong influence towards the success of a school besides raising the self-confidence and
professional efficacy of the teachers. (Griffith, 2004; Leithwood, 2000a; Ross, 2006)
Efficacy is the beliefs and professional knowledge and the manners in which these beliefs
and professional knowledge influence teaching behaviors. An individuals perception of his or
her ability is often a better predictor of their capabilities than what he or she can actually
accomplish, since self-efficacy beliefs help determine what an individual does with the
knowledge and skills that he or she possesses. An individuals efficacy beliefs can influence and
enhance their accomplishments and well being in numerous ways. Principal efficacy has been
found to influence leadership behavior, such as effort, innovation, planning and organization,
persistence, resilience, enthusiasm, willingness to work with difficult students, and commitment
to teaching and career longevity. Motivated and confident teachers are more effective. Principals
make decisions based upon their beliefs; these decisions and actions have significant impact
upon the learning (M. Tschannen-Moran, Hoy A. M, & Hoy, W., 1998). This study looks into the
Self Efficacy of The Senior Assistant of Co-Curricular Activities. Being a member of school
administrators, they are setting the school policy on Co-curricular activities and sports under the
directive of the school principal, in the mean time they faced teachers advisers of various school
clubs and societies, which they are giving out instructions and directives.
2.4

Leadership Styles and school achievement

A review of leadership styles within school environments has suggested that there are similar yet
distinct differences in the styles used (Mortimore, 1997). (Judge (2004); Mahmood, 2005)
supported the findings that the success of a school depends on the leadership styles of the school
principal. Kythreotis, Pashiardis, and Kyriakides (2010)provide some empirical support for the
model of direct effects of principals leadership style on student academic achievement,
moreover student achievement gains were found to be related with five factors at the school
level: the principals human resource leadership style and four dimensions of organizational
culture.
P. Hallinger (2011)further suggested that leadership does not directly impact student learning;
rather, its impact is mediated by school-level processes and conditions. Moreover, his study has
suggested that school leadership both inuences and is inuenced by these school-level
conditions (P. H. Hallinger, R.H. , 2010).
2.5

Conceptual Framework
MEDIATOR
Self Efficacy of Senior Assistant
of Co-curricular Aktivities
DEPENDENT VARIABLE

INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
Principal Leadership Style
Transformational
Transactional
DEMOGRAPHY

Gender
Educational Background
Year of Service as Principal
Location of School

School Co-curricular & Sports

Achievement
Management
Students Participation and
Achievement Record

Fig. 2.1: The Conceptual Framework of the study

Based on the discussion above, this study aimed to examine the relationship between the
principals leadership style on the self-efficacy of senior assistant of co-curricular activities
(CCA) and school co-curricular achievement. This study also examine whether the senior
assistant of co-curricular activities (CCA) self-efficacy is a valid mediator of the relationship
between transformational and transactional leadership of principal and school co-curricular
achievement.
2.6

Conclusion

There has been a great deal of researches done to prove that there is a significant influence of
principals leadership style on the school achievement. However, theres very little researches
which addressed the relationship between leadership style of principals and school achievement
in co-curricular activities, nor has any research revealed the efficacy of senior assistant of CCA
towards the relationship between leadership style of principal and school co-curricular
achievement.
School excellence depends on effective leadership. While the students' performance depends on
the quality of teachers in school, the quality of teachers instruction depends on teachers ' selfbeliefs for his ability to influence students performance. Based on the above premises, in order
to enhance students performance, the self-efficacy of teachers is an important deciding factor.
Therefore, this study focused on studying the effects of direct and indirect leadership of school
principal toward students achievement, specifically achievement in co-curricular activities and
sports.

CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
The purpose of the study was to explore the relationship among the perceived principal
leadership style, self-efficacy of Senior Assistant of Co-curricular Activities, and school
achievement in co-curricular activities. This chapter will discuss the instrumentation and
methodology utilized to gather and analyze the data for the study.
Participants
The population for this study included 272 secondary schools with 272 principals and 272 senior
assistant of co-curricular activities employed in the state of Selangor, at central of Peninsular
Malaysia.

The schools that participated included a mix of urban, suburban, and rural schools

from diverse geographic areas of the state and were fairly representative of the state in terms of
socio-economic status, urban-rural context, and size. Prior to data collection, it was determined
that a minimal acceptable sample size would be 50% or 272 respondents. The sample included
Variables
The independent variables in this study are perceived principal leadership style that included
Charisma,

Intellectual

Stimulation,

Individualized

Consideration,

Contingent

Reward,

management-by-Exception, and Laissez-Faire as measured by The Multifactor Leadership

Questionnaire 5X (MLQ; Bass &Avolio, 1990).

The leaders form was developed to be

completed by an individual to measure his/her self-perceived leadership styles. The dependent

variable

is

the

school

co-curriculum

achievement

assessed

by

the

Instrument

PencapaianKokurikulumSekolah (IPKS) survey. The outcome of the IPKS survey is used as the

dependent variable in this study because the researcher attempted to discover whether leadership
styles impact school achievement in co-curricular activities. The mediator, senior assistant of cocurricular self-efficacy, is measured by principal sense of efficacy scale by Megan TschannenMoran .
Instrumentation
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire
The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Form 5X was developed and tested by Avolio
and Bass (2004). The instrument is copyrighted by Bass and Avolio and published by Mind
Garden, Inc. It was developed to measure aspects of transformational, transactional, and nonleadership leadership styles as well as outcomes of leadership. The 36-item instrument contains
12 scales:

Idealized Influence (Attributed)

Idealized Influence (Behavior)

Inspirational Motivation

Intellectual Stimulation

Individualized Consideration

Contingent Reward

Management-by-Exception (Active)

Management-by-Exception (Passive)

Laissez-faire Leadership

Idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized

consideration were transformational leadership style scales measured by the MLQ.
Contingent reward and management-by-exception were transactional leadership style
scales and laissez-faire leadership was the non-leadership component. Table 3-1 provides a
sample statement in each area.
TF - Idealized influence

Talks enthusiastically about what needs to be

accomplished.
TF - Inspirational motivation
Instills pride in me for being associated with
him
TF - Intellectual stimulation
Seeking differing perspectives when solving
problems
TF - Individualized consideration
Considers me as having special needs, abilities,
and aspirations form others
TR Contingent reward
Discusses in specific terms who is responsible
for achieving performance targets
TR - Management-by-exception
Focuses attention on irregularities mistakes and
exceptions and deviations from standards
LF Non-leadership
Is absent when needed
Table 3-1. Transformational leadership scale statements
All of the leadership style scales have four items per scale. Leadership styles scores for each of
the nine leadership style scales represent the average scores for the items in each scale.
Transformational leadership styles scores are derived by averaging the scores from the items
contained in the idealized influenced, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and
individualized consideration scales; a total of 20 items.
Transactional leadership styles scores were derived by averaging all of the scores fromthe items
in the contingent reward and management-by-exception scales, a total of 12 items. Because

laissez-faire leadership was the only scale measuring non-leadership, non-leadership style score
was equivalent to the laissez-faire leadership scale score.
In their MLQ technical report, Bass and Avolio (1995) discussed the construct validation process
associated with the MLQ-5X. An early version was evaluated by a panel of six leadership
scholars, and their recommendations were included in the final instrument development. Since
that time, 14 samples have been used to validate and cross-validate the MLQ Form 5X. The
MLQ-5X was selected for use in this study because of the data indicating reliability and validity
of the instrument. Alpha reliability coefficients for the MLQ-5X rater form scales have all been
shown to be above .82 with the exception of management-by-exception (.79) and laissez-faire
(.77). The reliability coefficients for the rater form subscales yielded a range of .77 through .95.
School Co-curriculum Achievement Instrument / Instrument PencapaianKokurikulumSekolah
(IPKS)
School Co-curriculum Achievement was assessed through the Standard of Quality Education
Malaysia-School Rating Instrument (SKPM 2-IPS: Elemen III 8.2, 11.2 and 12.6). First part of
the items were multiple-choice demographic questions. The remaining 3 parts were self-assessed
calculation done by the school.

Figure 2: Sample of calculation of 10% achievement marks for co-curricular activities (Elemen
12.6)
Principal Sense of Efficacy Scale (PSES)
The PSES (M. Tschannen-Moran & Gareis, 2004) is used to assessed the sense of efficacy of
senior assistant of co-curricular activities, taken into consideration that senior assistant of cocurricular activities is one of the school leaders. The PSES is an 18-item scale which assesses a
principals belief about his/her management skills. Respondents rate their confidence on a 9 point
Likert-type scale from 1 (none at all) to 9 (a great deal). The PSES consist of three subscales
(Efficacy for Management, Efficacy for Instruction, and Efficacy for Moral Leadership).
Respectively, sample items include prioritize among competing demands of the job, facilitate
student learning in your school, and promote ethical behavior among school personnel. Score
can range from 18 to 162, with higher scores reflecting higher sense of principal efficacy.
Construct validity was supported by negative correlation with work alienation and positive

correlation with trust in teachers. The scale has good internal consistence with alphas of .91 for
the total scale and .86 to .89 for the subscales.
Design of the Study
This section includes information about testing the hypotheses, drawing the sample, controlling
for biases, and preparing the instrument and survey packets. Three self-assessed surveys are used
in this study, with each survey requiring less than 20 minutes to complete. Names of all
principals and senior assistants are obtained from the states Department of Education. Data on
leadership, sense of efficacy and school co-curricular activities will be collected by the
instruments previously discussed.
Data Collection
The population for this study will be drawn from secondary schools in the state of Selangor,
central of Malaysia. Permission to conduct the study was obtained from the State Department of
Education. Secondary schools in the state will be sent a full packet and received a phone call
from the researcher. A follow-up phone call will be made to schools that did not respond. For
each school, a single transformational leadership score was computed by first averaging all the
principals responses for each survey statement associated with each transformational
component: idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and
individualized consideration. The average individual principals transformational component
scores are then averaged to arrive at a single composite transformational leadership score. A
similar procedure will be followed for transactional per the MLQ procedure outlined in Avolio
and Bass (2004)

Summary
This chapter described the process that the researcher will go through in order to complete the
study.

Research instruments are identified that would allow for objective analysis and

demonstrated adequate reliability. Chapter 4 will presents the analysis of data for this study.
Descriptive statistics will be presented to help the reader better understand the data. Multiple
regression will be used to explain the findings.

REFERENCES
Abd. Alim, A. R. (1995). Pengurusan Kokurikulum. Shah Alam: Penerbit Fajar Bakti.
Abdullah, A. S. (2004). Kepimpinan unggul tonggak pengurusan pendidikan
cemerlang. Jurnal Pengurusan Dan Kepimpinan Pendidikan, 14(1), 18-30.
Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (2004). Multifactor leadership questionnaire. Mind
Garden, Menlo Park, CA.
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and
functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28, 117-148.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. . New York:
Free Press.
Blueprint, M. (2012). Malaysia Education Blueprint: 2013 - 2025.
Burns, J. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.
Bush, T. (2008). Leadership and management development in education. London:
Sage.
Elmore, R. F. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership: Albert Shanker
Institute Washington, DC.
Ghamrawi, N. (2011). Trust Me: Your School Can Be Better-A Message from Teachers
to Principals. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 39(3),
333-348.
Griffith, J. (2004). Relation of principal transformational leadership to school staff job
satisfaction, staff turnover, and school performance. Journal of Educational
Administration, 42(3), 333-356.
Hallinger, P. (2011). Leadership for learning: Lessons from 40 years of empirical
research. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(2), 125-142.
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1998). Exploring the principals contribution to school
effectiveness. . School effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(2), 157-191.
Hallinger, P. H., R.H. . (2010). Collaborative leadership and school improvement:
understanding the impact on school capacity and student learning. School
Leadership and Management, 30(2), 95-110.
Hallinger, P. M., J. F. (1985). Assesing the instructional leadership behavior of
principals. . Elementary School Journal,, 86(2), 217-248.
Hargreaves, A., Fink, D. ( 2008). Distributed leadership: democracy or delivery?
Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 229-240.
Harris, A. (2004). Distributed leadership and school improvement: Leading or
misleading? . Educational Management and Administration, 32(1), 11-24.
Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. . (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership:
A meta-analytic test of their relative validity. . Journal of Applied Psychology,
89(5), 755-768. .
Kythreotis, A., Pashiardis, P., & Kyriakides, L. (2010). The Influence of School
Leadership Styles and Culture on Students' Achievement in Cyprus Primary
Schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 48(2), 218-240.
Ladkin, D. (2010). Rethinking Leadership: A New Look at Old Leadership Questions
(New Hirizons in Leadership studies). Massachusetts, USA: Edward Elgar
Publishing Limited.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. . (2000a). The effects of transformational leadership on
organizational conditions and student engagement with school. Journal of
Educational Administration, 38(2), 112-129.

Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. . (2000b). The effects of transformational leadership on

organizational conditions and student engagement with school. Journal of
Educational Administration, 38(2), 112-129.
Mahmood, H. (2005). Kepimpinan profesionalisme : Satu utopia? . Pemimpin, 5, 3951.
Malaysia, K. P. (2012). Malaysia Education Blueprint (2013-2025): Preliminary
Report - Executive Summary
Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School Leadership that Works:
From Research to Results: ERIC.
Mortimore, P. (1997). Key characteristics of effective schools. Jendela Minda,, 1(1),
1-35.
Muijs, D., & Harris, A. (2006). Teacher led school improvement: Teacher leadership in
the UK. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 961-972.
Owings, W. A., Kaplan, L. S., Nunnery, J., Marzano, R., Myran, S., & Blackburn, D.
(2006). Teacher quality and troops to teachers: A national study with
implications for principals. NASSP Bulletin, 90(2), 102-131.
Rahimah, H. A. (2005). Kepengetuaan dan kepimpinan sekolah: Pembangunan dan
penambahbaikan pengajaran. Jurnal Pemimpin, 5, 1-10.
Ross, J. A., & Gray, P. (2006). School leadership and student achievement: The
mediating effects of teacher beliefs. . Canadian Journal Of Education, 29(3),
789-822.
Simkins, T., Sisum, C., & Muhammad Memon. (2003). School leadership in Pakistan:
Exploring the headteachers role. School effectiveness and School
Improvement, 14(3), 275-291.
Spillane, J. P., & Camburn, E. (2006). The practice of leading and managing: The
distribution of responsibility for leadership and management in the
schoolhouse. American Educational Research Association.
Syed Hassan Waqar, D. K. S. A Study about the Leadership Styles of Public and
Private School Principals Journal of Elementary Education, 18 (1-2)((1-2)), 520.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Gareis, C. R. (2004). Principals' sense of efficacy: Assessing
a promising construct. Journal of Educational Administration, 42(5), 573-585.
Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy A. M, & Hoy, W. (1998). Teacher Efficacy: Its Meaning and
Measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2 (Summer 1998)), 202-248.