This study provides meta-analytic evidence supporting the validity of the Learning-Centered School Leadership Framework, as a whole and its core dimensions, in predicting student achievement. We conducted a meta-analysis on 208 effect sizes from 26 studies to estimate the direct and indirect effect sizes of the framework overall, as well as each of its seven dimensions. We also performed moderator analyses to assess the generalizability of predictive validity across school levels and locations. The results suggested that the framework overall successfully predicted student achievement, as reflected in direct effects (d = 0.249, SE = 0.064) and indirect effects (d = 0.218, SE = 0.051). Moderate to high direct and indirect effects were observed for the dimensions concerned with commitment and passion for school renewal, distributive and empowering leadership, coherent curricular programs, and real-time and embedded instructional assessment. Furthermore, moderator analyses revealed heterogeneity in effect sizes across studies. Differences in effect sizes of principal leadership were observed between urban and rural/suburban schools, but not between elementary and secondary schools. We extend previous work by further examining the predictive validity of the framework and assessing the generalizability across different settings through a meta-analysis.
AhnJ.BowersA. J.WeltonA. D. (2021). Leadership for learning as an organization-wide practice: Evidence on its multilevel structure and implications for educational leadership practice and research. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 27(6), 1–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2021.1972162
2.
AloeA. M.ThompsonC. G. (2013). The synthesis of partial effect sizes. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 4(4), 390–405. https://doi.org/10.5243/jsswr.2013.24
3.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing.
4.
AntoniouP.LuM. (2018). Evaluating the measuring properties of the principal instructional management rating scale in the Chinese educational system: Implications for measuring school leadership. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(4), 624–641. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143217700282
5.
BlitzH. M.SalisburyJ.KelleyC. (2014). The role of cognitive validity testing in the development of CALL, the comprehensive assessment of leadership for learning. Journal of Educational Administration, 52(3), 358–378. https://doi.org/10.1108/jea-01-2013-0008
6.
BoyceJ.BowersA. J. (2018). Toward an evolving conceptualization of instructional leadership as leadership for learning: Meta-narrative review of 109 quantitative studies across 25 years. Journal of Educational Administration, 56(2), 161–182. https://doi.org/10.1108/jea-06-2016-0064
7.
CamburnE.HuffJ.GoldringE.MayH. (2010). Assessing the validity of an annual survey from measuring principal leadership practice. Elementary School Journal, 11(2), 314–335. https://doi.org/10.1086/656302
8.
DayC.GuQ.SammonsP. (2016). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: How successful school leaders use transformational and instructional strategies to make a difference. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 221–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X15616863
9.
GoldringE.CravensX.PorterA.MurphyJ.ElliottS. (2015). The convergent and divergent validity of the Vanderbilt Assessment of Leadership in Education (VAL-ED) Instructional leadership and emotional intelligence. Journal of Educational Administration, 53(2), 177–196. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-06-2013-0067
10.
GrissomJ. A.EgaliteA. J.LindsayC. A. (2021). How principals affect students and schools: A systematic synthesis of two decades of research. The Wallace Foundation.
11.
HallingerP. (2011). A review of three decades of doctoral studies using the principal instructional management rating scale: A lens on methodological progress in educational leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(2), 271–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x10383412
12.
HallingerP. (2018). Bringing context out of the shadows of leadership. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143216670652
13.
HallingerP.MurphyJ. (1985). Assessing the instructional management behavior of principals. The Elementary School Journal, 86(2), 217–247. https://doi.org/10.1086/461445
14.
HallingerP.WangW. C.ChenC. W. (2013). Assessing the measurement properties of the principal instructional management rating scale: A meta-analysis of reliability studies. Educational Administration Quarterly, 49(2), 272–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x12468149
15.
HallingerP.WangW. C.ChenC. W.LiD. (2015). Validity of the PIMRS. In HallingerP.WangW. C. (Eds.), Assessing instructional leadership with the principal instructional management rating Scale (pp. 85–115). Springer.
16.
HedgesL. V.TiptonE.JohnsonM. C. (2010). Robust variance estimation in meta-regression with dependent effect size estimates. Research Synthesis Methods, 1(1), 39–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.5
17.
HittD. H.TuckerP. D. (2016). Systematic review of key leader practices found to influence student achievement: A unified framework. Review of Educational Research, 86(2), 531–569. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315614911
18.
JacobR.GoddardR.KimM.MillerR.GoddardY. (2015). Exploring the causal impact of the McREL Balanced leadership program on leadership, principal efficacy, instructional climate, educator turnover, and student achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37(3), 314–332. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373714549620
LeithwoodK.JantziD. (2006). Transformational school leadership for large-scale reform: Effects on students, teachers, and their classroom practices. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17(2), 201–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243450600565829
21.
LeithwoodK.SunJ.SchumackerR.HuaC. (2023). Psychometric properties of the successful school leadership survey. Journal of Educational Administration, 61(4), 385–404. https://doi.org/10.1108/jea-08-2022-0115
22.
LiebowitzD. D.PorterL. (2019). The effect of principal behaviors on student, teacher, and school outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 89(5), 785–827. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319866133
23.
MaX.ShenJ.ReevesP.WuH.RobertsL.ZhengY.ChenQ. (2024). Effects of the “High Impact Leadership for School Renewal” project on principal leadership, school leadership, and student achievement. Education Sciences, 14(6), 600. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14060600
24.
MarksH. M.PrintyS. M. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: An integration of transformational and instructional leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 370–397. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x03253412
25.
MarzanoR.WatersT.McNultyB. (2005). School leadership that works. ASCD.
26.
MinorE. C.PorterA. C.MurphyJ.GoldringE. B.CravensX.ElloittS. N. (2014). A known group analysis validity study of the vanderbilt assessment of leadership in education in US elementary and secondary schools. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 26(1), 29–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-013-9180-z
27.
MurphyJ.ElliotS. N.GoldringE.PorterA. C. (2006). Learning-centered leadership: A conceptual foundation. Wallace Foundation.
28.
PorterA. C.GoldringE.MurphyJ.ElliottS. N.CravensX. (2006). A framework for the assessment of learning-centered leadership. Wallace Foundation.
29.
PorterA. C.PolikoffM. S.GoldringE.MurphyJ.ElliottS. N.MayH. (2010a). Developing a psychometrically sound assessment of school leadership: The VAL-ED as a case study. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(2), 135–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670510361747
30.
PorterA. C.PolikoffM. S.GoldringE. B.MurphyJ.ElliottS.MayH. (2010b). Investigating the validity and reliability of the Vanderbilt assessment of leadership in education. The Elementary School Journal, 111(2), 282–313. https://doi.org/10.1086/656301
31.
PustejovskyJ. E.TiptonE. (2022). Meta-analysis with robust variance estimation: Expanding the range of working models. Prevention Science, 23(3), 425–438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-021-01246-3
32.
ShenJ. (2023). Theory of birufcated educational system and its implications for school improvement. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 26(2), 223–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2020.1808708
33.
ShenJ.BurtW. (Eds.), (2015). Learning-centered school leadership: School renewal in action. Peter Lang.
34.
ShenJ.CooleyV. E. (2012). Chapter 6 Learning-Centered Leadership Development Program for Practicing and Aspiring Principals. In Successful school leadership preparation and development (pp. 113–135). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
35.
ShenJ.CooleyV. E. (2013). Introduction. In ShenJ.CooleyV. E. (Eds.), A resource book for improving principals’ learning-centered leadership (pp. 1–15). Peter Lang Publishing.
36.
ShenJ.CooleyV. E. (2015). Facilitating school renewal via the Learning-centered leadership development program: An introduction. In ShenJ.BurtW. (Eds.), Learning-centered school leadership: School renewal in action (pp. 3–21). Peter Lang Publishing.
37.
ShenJ.CooleyV.MaX.ReevesP.BurtW.RaineyJ.M.YuanW. (2012). Data-informed decision-making on high-impact strategies: Developing and validating an instrument for Principals. Journal of Experimental Education, 80(1), 1–25.
38.
ShenJ.MaX.CooleyV. E.BurtW. L. (2016). Mediating effects of school process on the relationship between principals’ data-informed decision-making and student achievement. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 19(4), 373–401. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2014.986208
39.
ShenJ.MaX.GaoX.Bierlien PalmerL.PoppinkS.BurtW.LenewayR.McCrumbD.PearsonC.RaineyM.ReevesP.WegenkeG. (2019). Developing and validating an instrument measuring school leadership. Educational Studies, 45(4), 402–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2018.1446338
40.
ShenJ.WuH. (2025). The relationship between principal leadership and student achievement: A multivariate meta-analysis with an emphasis on conceptual models and methodological approaches. Educational Administration Quarterly, 61(2), 234–281. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x241286527
41.
TanC. Y.DimmockC.WalkerA. (2024). How school leadership practices relate to student outcomes: Insights from a three-level meta-analysis. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 52(1), 6–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432211061445
42.
Tanner-SmithE. E.TiptonE.PolaninJ. R. (2016). Handling complex meta-analytic data structures using robust variance estimates: A tutorial in R. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 2(1), 85–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40865-016-0026-5
43.
ThienL. M. (2020). Psychometric analysis of a Malay language version of the principal instructional management rating scale. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 50(4), 711–733. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220942514
44.
TiptonE. (2015). Small sample adjustments for robust variance estimation with meta-regression. Psychological Methods, 20(3), 375–393. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000011
45.
TiptonE.PustejovskyJ. E. (2015). Small-sample adjustments for tests of moderators and model fit using robust variance estimation in meta-regression. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 40(6), 604–634. https://doi.org/10.3102/1076998615606099
46.
Wallace Foundation. (2009). Assessing the effectiveness of school leaders: New directions and new processes.
47.
WuH.GaoX.ShenJ. (2020). Principal leadership effects on student achievement: A multilevel analysis using programme for international student assessment 2015 data. Educational Studies, 46(3), 316–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2019.1584853
48.
WuH.ShenJ. (2022). The association between principal leadership and student achievement: A multivariate meta-meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 35, Article 100423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100423
49.
WuH.ShenJ.ZhangY.ZhengY. (2020). Examining the effect of principal leadership on student science achievement. International Journal of Science Education, 42(6), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1747664
50.
ZhanX.AnthonyA. B.GoddardR.BeardK. S. (2023). Development, factor structure, and reliability of the shared instructional leadership scale in public secondary schools. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 51(1), 75–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220963103
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
