Principals transforming schools as caring leaders

C P van der Vyver North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus South Africa

IntroductionSchool leadership has an effect on learner output & performance

The management/leadership style of the principal determines the climate in the school and influences the educator’s experience of the quality of his/her working life and working environment.

"It makes sense that if employees believe their managers care about them, then organizational benefits will result (Kroth & Keeler, 2012)

“Teachers and students alike work better when they are cared about” (Day, 2004)

"Caring may improve teaching outcomes, and hence be a competency worth developing for pedagogical reasons. Caring may help leaders produce better outcomes, and hence be a competency that leadership courses might put forward" (Kroth & Keeler, 2012).

Problem & Rationale

Research about caring has been significant in at least two disciplines, nursing and education (caring for students). It has received less attention in management and leadership literature. A lack of care in schools contributes to the following:• Declining levels of effectiveness in the organisation• A lack of commitment • A decline in performance of educators • Negative organisational relationships which further contributes to a

negative school climate.• Poor academic performance of learners • Withhold care from others

The school leader thus has a duty to care for and to care about teachers. No clear guidelines for school leaders on how to optimise their caring leadership

Research Aims

The research pivoted on the question whether South African school principals fulfilled their caring role towards teachers?

The purpose of this research was to determine the principal’s perceptions of psychological care given to educators and to compare it to the level of psychological care experienced by educators.

A second aim was to develop a management strategy for optimising psychological aspects of care in school leadership.

Conceptual-theoretical framework

Caring school leadership defined:The school principals‘ concern about the wellbeing of the educator,

which manifetsts in sympathy, empathy and a commitment to the educator. This concern further includes the provision in physical, personal, social, emotional and self-actualising needs of the educator.

Caring leadership closely relates to leadership styles and theories that regard the people in the organisation as important.

Transformational leadership include individual support, organisational values, intellectual stimulation and participatory decision making.

Moral leadership which is based on moral authority in the sense of shared values, ideas and ideals

Servant leadership the leader accepts the role of encourager and supporter

Conceptual-theoretical framework

Determinants of caring leadershipA review of the caring literature from nursing, education, management and leadership.

Instruments:CDI (Caring Dimensions Inventory) of Watson & Lea (1997)The Servant Leadership Behaviour Scale (Sendjaya et al., 2008)Servant Leadership Assessment Instrument (SLAI) Patterson (2003)

Models:The Watson caring model (Rexroth & Davidhizar:2003)The care model for teacher training programmes (Smith & Emigh, 2006)The care model of Tronto (Fine:2007) The care model of Beck (Beck:1992)

Conceptual-theoretical framework

Determinants of care in principal leadership

Study Population & Sample

 A systematic stratified cluster sample of 83 schools with more

than 15 teachers each was drawn from the total population of n= 1377 schools.

 All the principals (n=83) and teachers were invited to participate

in the survey.  The sample can be regarded as representative of the entire North

West Province.  Seventy two of the 83 schools responded to the questionnaires

(86.7%); 65 principals and 1041 teachers participated in the survey.

  

Research Methodology

Non experimental design embedded in the post positivistic paradigm: Survey Research

Structured questionnaire – Caring School leadership Questionnaire (CSLQ) Four point Likert scale with 59 items of which 26 specifically addressed psychological aspects

  Cronbach alpha coefficients varied between 0.83 and 0.98. Since

the values were larger than 0.7, the questionnaire could be regarded as reliable.

A factor analysis confirmed validity (3 factors = 3 determinants of care)

 Calculation of the practical significance (effect size – d-value

where d = 0.8 indicates a large effect)

Results

Principals’ vs. teachers’ ratings of care

Determinant of

careRespondents M SD p-value d-value

Psychological

Principals (N=65)

Teachers(N=1041)

3.5

3.0

0.27

0.4

<0.0001 1.20***

Workplace/Organisational

Principals

Teachers

3.6

3.2

0.3

0.4<0.0001 1.12***

ManagementPrincipals

Teachers

3.7

3.1

0.26

0.4<0.0001 1.41***

Items that contributed most towards a positive rating of care by the teachers

RankItem

No

Item

My principal……M SD Response

Not at all(%)

To a small extent

(%)

To some extent

(%)

To a large extent

(%)

1 B52Shares successes with teachers

3.34 0.811 4 9.6 35.1 51.3

2 B29Sees to a school safety policy

3.32 0.795 3.2 11 36.3 49.4

2 B32Limits school vandalism

3.32 0.767 2.9 9.6 39.5 47.9

4 B30Sees to it that buildings are kept

in a good condition 3.31 0.817 3.9 11 35.7 49.4

5 B61Commits to the vision and mission

of the school 3.3 0.821 3.4 13 34.1 49.6

6 B54Demonstrates self-confidence to

lead 3.29 0.842 4.5 12 34.5 49.3

7 B28Maintains healthy school

discipline 3.26 0.812 3.4 13 37.6 45.8

8 B15Respects us

3.24 0.816 4 12 39.5 44.4

9 B27Provides a safe working

environment 3.23 0.833 4 14 37.3 44.9

10 B42Works towards the benefit of the

whole school community 3.22 0.831 4.2 13 38.6 44

Items that contributed least towards a positive rating of care by the teachers

RankItem

No

Item

My principal……M SD Response

Not at all(%)

To a small extent

(%)

To some extent

(%)

To a large extent

(%)

1 B2Understands my feelings

2.95 0.866 7.4 18 46.9 27.5

1 B13Is interested in my experiences

2.95 0.87 6.8 20 44.7 28.8

3 B63Supports me personally

2.93 0.927 9.7 18 42.8 29.9

4 B4Imagines him/ her in my situation

2.93 0.927 9.7 17 42.8 30.1

4 B6Is conscious of others’ feelings

2.93 0.841 6.4 20 48.1 25.8

4 B10Sees my ideas as important

2.93 0.839 6.6 20 48.8 25.1

7 B44Empowers me through

participative decision-making 2.92 0.888 7.8 20 43.9 28

8 B58Makes an effort to defend me

2.91 0.903 9 18 44.8 27.8

8 B19Protects my self-interest

2.89 0.851 6.8 22 47 24.6

10 B8Takes an interest in my personal

life 2.69 0.938 13 25 41.7 20.3

Findings

• To determine how principals rated their care-giving:

Principals rated their care giving very high

• To determine whether significant discrepancies existed between principals’ rating of their care-giving and teachers’ experiences thereof:

Significant discrepancies existed between principals rating and teachers’ experiences. (very large d values) • To identify the determinants of care that contributed the most

and the least towards principals care-giving and teacher’s ratings thereof.

Contributing most was workplace/organisational determinantsContributing least was psychological determinants.

Towards a strategy

Emotional intelligence of principalsStrategy – Addressing emotional intelligence as part of the PGP

Principals not addressing emotional/psychological needs of educatorsStrategy – Establishing a wellness program at the school

Honest relationships, build on moral valuesStrategy – To identify the common and core values in the school and develop a school specific code of conduct (For management and educators), based on these values.

Recommendations

Education/Training •Determinants of care and specific psychological care could be addressed in specific training programmes eg. ADE or PGDipl in School leadership. Short courses for principal training, could adress psychological determinants of caring leadership.•Training opportunities for principals, specifically with regard to the development of emotional intelligence.

School levelWith the appointment of principals, the SGB could take into account the results of personality evaluations. If personality evaluations shows specific development areas, the principal should receive guidance.Principals should annually do a self evaluation, to determine if they adress their caring role with regard to educators optimally.

Recommendations

School level• With the appointment of principals, the SGB could take into

account the results of personality evaluations. • If personality evaluations shows specific development areas,

the principal should receive guidance or psycotherapy. • Principals annually do a self evaluation, to determine if they

adress their caring role with regard to educators optimally. • Principals annually undergo a 180o-evaluation to determine if

they adress their caring role with regard to educators optimally.

Future research

The relation between caring leadership and school effectiveness/success in diverse contexts.