ACADEMIA Letters The observations of a principal’s transformational leadership Kenneth Tuttle Wilhelm, University College Fairview This case study into Transformational Leadership (TL), focuses on a Principal who exhibited TL in the management of a school. The study was based on observations of the Principal’s actions and decisions, and matched these actions with research in the field of TL. In addition to the literature review that informed the study, and the observations of the researcher, an interview was conducted with the Principal after the case observations were completed. At the time of this case study, a new K-12 school, in urban southern Malaysia, was entering it’s fourth year. The founding principal stayed with the school through most of the third year of the school’s existence. During the last quarter of the third year, a transitional principal arrived, and stayed on into the fourth year of the school. It’s the second principal that is the subject of this report. The leadership of the school in the first years, resulted in numerous curriculum and staffing issues, that were fomenting to a crisis level. With the arrival of the transitional principal, a transformation began to take hold of the school. This case study was intent on looking at analyzing the leadership of one school in the context of TL, asking whether TL would be an appropriate strategy when approaching the startup of a school? Interestingly, Zaech, and Baldegger, in 2017 looked at this very question. As an aside, it’s important to note that at least as early as 1999, Avolio, Bass, and Jung, were redefining their own conceptual framework of TL, to include Contingent Reward. This is relevant because in Zaech and Baldegger (2017), Contingent Reward was included as an integral and measured contributing Independent Variable of TL. At the time of the second principal’s arrival, the faculty was made up of recent hires, and a small number of new hires within the past 6-12 months, and only a handful of teachers from the day the school had opened, less than three years before. Essentially, there was a near Academia Letters, July 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0 Corresponding Author: Kenneth Tuttle Wilhelm, kennetht.ucf@fairview.edu.my Citation: Tuttle Wilhelm, K. (2021). The observations of a principal’s transformational leadership. Academia Letters, Article 1839. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL1839. 1 complete turnover of staff within the first two years, in particular the whole secondary had turned over, all but one teacher. As a new school, trying to implement a new secondary curriculum system that nearly all the teachers were unfamiliar with, the early leadership had negatively affected the faculty’s morale. Thus, as the second principal arrived, he had to lead the faculty change directions, and build momentum toward levels of measurable success. While observing this principal, this author started with an existing model of personality characteristics for leadership, to identify traits exhibited. The following traits were observed: Judgement, Dependability, Decisiveness, Tact, Integrity, Bearing, Courage, Knowledge, and Enthusiasm. Meaning that this principal consistently exhibited over time, nine of the 14 traits identified by the US Marine Corp as essential for leaders in the field of battle (Leadership Traits: JJ DID TIE BUCKLE, n.d.). In the realm of leadership theory in for Education, Leithwood, Harris, and Hopkins, (2008), proposed their own specific personality traits for Educational Leaders: Open Minded / Ready to Learn; Flexible (instead of dogmatic); Persistent; Resilient; and Optimistic. These six characteristics overlap with the JJ DID TIE BUCKLE model. The leader in this case study, turns out to have spent quite a bit of his leadership career practicing an educational version of TL, as developed by Leithwood, and Jantzi, (2000). This modified approach of TL, identifies six factors rather than four: Vision & goals; Intellectual stimulus; Individual support; Symbol of professionalism and values; Demonstration of high performance expectations; and Development of structures that foster participation in decisions (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2000). One specific strategy observed almost immediately, was giving teachers the opportunity to reflect on their work, based on data that were both anecdotal during classroom activity and formally assessed. This was supported through professional development programs, and continuing coaching sessions. Teachers were also expected to share their reflections of student improvements, and what they felt resulted from the teachers’ initiatives, that facilitated success. This was an intentional TL strategy (J. Mackle, personal communication, January 31, 2020). This Principal also established expectations that teachers were involved in the school level decision making, in anything involving or impacting their work in the classrooms. This was such that teachers were able to give their thoughts, feedback, on decisions the principal had to make. Which as a strategy, is supported by the research of Geijsel, Sleegers, Leithwood, and Jantzi, (2003), who found that teachers upon inclusion in the Vision Building of the school, become more committed to the school, exhibiting higher levels of extra effort. Further, this Principal expected that Teaching Teams, within subject areas, and across Academia Letters, July 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0 Corresponding Author: Kenneth Tuttle Wilhelm, kennetht.ucf@fairview.edu.my Citation: Tuttle Wilhelm, K. (2021). The observations of a principal’s transformational leadership. Academia Letters, Article 1839. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL1839. 2 grade levels, must develop shared-leadership in their cooperative efforts. It was observed that Teaching Teams, were quite democratic and collegial, evolving from the guidance of the principal, who was involved with all team level meetings, demonstrating, mentoring, and supporting a more shared leadership environment within teams. Shared leadership fosters more respect, trust, collegiality and responsibility to the group. These teams were more successful than previously, becoming the High Performance Teams that Pearce, and Sims, (2002), recognized in their research. Where teams that have higher levels of shared leadership, are significantly more high performing. This Principal also brought in to effect, policies and procedures to not only streamlined teacher and administrative activities, but established, with collaborative teacher input, goals and targets. This was an intentional strategy as confirmed by the Principal himself, and an effective use of Transactional Leadership (J. Mackle, 2020). Interestingly, this is supported by the research of Bass, Avolio, Jung, and Berson, (2003), who found that High Performing Teams need clearly expressed goals and targets. As this school is considered a ‘startup’, (less than three years of age), was actually quite a large organization, with over 50 administrators and teachers. In support of Transactional Leadership along side of TL, Zaech, and Baldegger (2017) found, that in large startups, a high level of Transactional Leadership was positively related to organizational success. In terms of leadership at the top of the school, this Principal, developed a close, respectful, and trusting relationship with the Deputy Principal. This contributed to the strengthening of the Deputy’s role in the school, with the Deputy then being able to contribute their expertise to the school’s transformation. This was another intentional TL strategy on the Principal’s part, as he confirmed in the post study interview (J. Mackle, 2020). Beyond the Deputy Principal, he developed close, supportive relations with the sectional leaders in the school. His manner was always more of coaching, rather than directing. In particular, he was very supportive of leaders and teachers pursuing further professional development at every opportunity. A leader needs to understand that success, is dependent on the totality of the efforts, be they: individual, team, group, vertical or horizontal. The key is to maximise the potential of individuals, and the groups or teams that are formed, with targets and goals laid out. In the educational organization, individual and group contribution of each teacher, is arguably, significantly important. TL implemented well, guides and rewards the individual for their success and impact upon student results and achievement. As Leithwood et al (2008), pointed out in their extensive literature review, school leadership is actually second to the influence of Classroom Teaching. But as found by Ross, and Gray, (2006), Transformational Leadership directly effects the level of Teacher Commitment to the school’s mission. Academia Letters, July 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0 Corresponding Author: Kenneth Tuttle Wilhelm, kennetht.ucf@fairview.edu.my Citation: Tuttle Wilhelm, K. (2021). The observations of a principal’s transformational leadership. Academia Letters, Article 1839. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL1839. 3 When teachers are encouraged, empowered, to become practitioners that are reflective, and engaged with researching their own work and it’s relation to student outcomes, the results are very positive. Not only in terms of student results, but also in increasing the teachers’ self-esteem and recognition of their value in the classroom and the wider school community (J. Mackle, 2020). It starts with building a Vision of where the organization needs to go, along with ensuring that teachers are benefiting from Intellectual Stimulation, as these are significantly related to the Teachers’ commitment and their expenditure of extra effort (Geijsel et al, 2003). There can not be an absence of some facet of Transactional Leadership. In education, Contingent Reward facilitates the TL (Riaz & Haider, 2010). And just as we measure students, we have to assess what the teachers accomplish. And if the leader’s work, is really Transformational, Riaz, and Haider (2010), found that it will foster more career satisfaction among teachers. Research by Shatzer, Caldarella, Hallam, and Brown (2014), argues that Instructional Leadership is more important than TL. Suggesting factors such as: Monitoring student progress; Protecting instructional time; Providing incentives for learning; Providing incentives for teachers. Ensuring that rewards are contingent upon results. Through these actions, Shatzer et al, suggest that the principal’s behaviors indirectly affect student achievement. However, this author interprets Shatzer’s research as complimentary to Leithwood, and Jantzi (2000), postulating that such school leadership factors actually dovetail with Leithwood’s TL factors: Symbol of professionalism & values; Demonstration of High performance expectation; Developing structures to foster participation in decisions. Looking at leadership in the Military, Williams (2009) found that leaders who performed the best, had some level of Exposure (direct and indirect) to leadership and/or first-hand leadership Experience in their background, that coupled with their training was of significance towards predicting successful outcomes. The take away here is that TL requires training and experience to be highly successful. One of the keys that this author sees in TL, is that the leader must be engaged with the whole staff, and equally cognizant of organizational need, and followers’ needs. Without leadership attention at the follower level, there is no stable, sustainable success in TL. Academia Letters, July 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0 Corresponding Author: Kenneth Tuttle Wilhelm, kennetht.ucf@fairview.edu.my Citation: Tuttle Wilhelm, K. (2021). The observations of a principal’s transformational leadership. Academia Letters, Article 1839. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL1839. 4 References Avolio, B. J., Bass, B. M., & Jung, D. I. (1999). Re‐examining the components of transformational and transactional leadership using the Multifactor Leadership. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 72(4), 441-462. Bass, B. M., Avolio, B. J., Jung, D. I., & Berson, Y. (2003). Predicting unit performance by assessing transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of applied psychology, 88(2), 207. Geijsel, F., Sleegers, P., Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2003). Transformational leadership effects on teachers’ commitment and effort toward school reform. Journal of educational administration, 41(3), 228-256. Hay, I. (2006). Transformational leadership: Characteristics and criticisms. E-journal of Organizational Learning and Leadership, 5(2). Leadership Traits: JJ DID TIE BUCKLE, (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.managetrainlearn.com/page/JJDID-TIE-BUCKLE Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2000). The effects of transformational leadership on organizational conditions and student engagement with school. Journal of educational administration. 38(2), 112. Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2008). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership. School leadership and management, 28(1), 27-42. Mackle, J. (2020, January 31). Email communication. Park, C. K., Lim, D. H., & Ju, B. (2016). Transformational leadership and teacher engagement in an international context. In Handbook of research on global issues in next-generation teacher education (pp. 22-42). IGI Global. Pearce, C. L., & Sims Jr, H. P. (2002). Vertical versus shared leadership as predictors of the effectiveness of change management teams: An examination of aversive, directive, transactional, transformational, and empowering leader behaviors. Group dynamics: Theory, research, and practice, 6(2), 172. Riaz, A., & Haider, M. H. (2010). Role of transformational and transactional leadership on job satisfaction and career satisfaction. Business and Economic horizons, 1(1), 29-38. Academia Letters, July 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0 Corresponding Author: Kenneth Tuttle Wilhelm, kennetht.ucf@fairview.edu.my Citation: Tuttle Wilhelm, K. (2021). The observations of a principal’s transformational leadership. Academia Letters, Article 1839. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL1839. 5 Ross, J. A., & Gray, P. (2006). Transformational leadership and teacher commitment to organizational values: The mediating effects of collective teacher efficacy. School effectiveness and school improvement, 17(2), 179-199. Shatzer, R. H., Caldarella, P., Hallam, P. R., & Brown, B. L. (2014). Comparing the effects of instructional and transformational leadership on student achievement: Implications for practice. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 42(4), 445-459. Williams, C. J. (2009). Exposure and Experience: Additional Criteria for Selecting Future Operational Theater Commanders. Navel War College, Newport, RI: Joint Military Operations Department. Zaech, S., & Baldegger, U. (2017). Leadership in start-ups. International Small Business Journal, 35(2), 157-177. Academia Letters, July 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0 Corresponding Author: Kenneth Tuttle Wilhelm, kennetht.ucf@fairview.edu.my Citation: Tuttle Wilhelm, K. (2021). The observations of a principal’s transformational leadership. Academia Letters, Article 1839. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL1839. 6