Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2023-1
Examining school leadership in a transitional context: A mixed-methods study of leadership practices and school cultures as mechanisms of educational change
This research presents the results of studies designed to observe the effects of school leadership and school culture as mechanisms of change in the context of a large-scale educational reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina. A mixed-methods approach was employed to illuminate how institutional context either activates or deactivates leadership and school cultures as mechanisms that influence teacher efficacy beliefs in times of large-scale educational reform. Quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed through three independent studies. Quantitative procedures included measurement model analysis, structural equation modeling and a non-parametric Mann–Whitney U test. The qualitative analytic approach encompassed procedures of content analysis and quantification of qualitative data from reform documents and semi-structured interviews in the form of hierarchical clustering and multidimensional scaling. The triangulation of findings occurred in the interpretation phase, characterized by the development of meta-inferences that go beyond the findings from each study.
Addi-RaccahAGavishY (2010) The LEA’s role in a decentralized school system: The school principals’ view. Educational Management Administration and Leadership38(2): 184–201.
2.
AlfirevićNBurušićJPavičićJReljaR (2016) School effectiveness and educational management: Toward a new research and public-policy agenda. In: AlfirevićNBurušićJPavičićJReljaR (eds) School Effectiveness and Educational Management: Towards a South-Eastern Europe Research and Public Policy Agenda. Split, Croatia: University of Split, Faculty of Economics, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, 145–150.
3.
AnchanJPFullanMPolyzoiE (2003) Change Forces in Post-Communist Eastern Europe: Education in Transition. Abingdon: Routledge.
4.
AndersonJCGerbingDW (1988) Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin103(3): 411.
5.
ArmstrongDJ (2004) Causal mapping: A discussion and demonstration. In: NarayananVK (ed.) Causal Mapping for Research in Information Technology. Hershey: IGI Global.
6.
BambergerM (2012) Introduction to mixed methods in impact evaluation. Impact Evaluation Notes3(3): 1–38.
7.
BanduraA (1986) Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
8.
Bar-TalDCehajic-ClancyS (2014) From Collective Victimhood to Social Reconciliation: Outlining a Conceptual Framework. In: SpiniDElcherothGCorkalo BiruskiD (eds) War, Community, and Social Change. New York: Springer New York, 125–136.
9.
BassBM (1985) Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations. New York: Free Press.
10.
BassBM (1990) From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics18(3): 19–31.
11.
BassBM (1997) Does the transactional–transformational leadership paradigm transcend organizational and national boundaries?American Psychologist52(2): 130–139.
12.
BeatonDEBombardierCGuilleminFFerrazMB (2000) Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine25(24): 3186–3191.
13.
BirzeaC (1994) Educational Policies of the Countries in Transition. Europe: Council of Europe Press.
14.
BojkovVD (2003) Democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Post-1995 political system and its funcioning. Southeast European Politics4(1): 41–67.
15.
BowenGA (2009) Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal9(2): 27–40.
16.
BridgesEM (1977) The nature of leadership. In: CunninghamLHackWNysrandR (eds) Educational Administration: The Developing Decades. Berkeley: McCutchan, pp. 202–230.
17.
BushT (1999) The vanishing boundaries: The importance of effective external relations. In: LumbyJackyFoskettNicholas (eds) Managing External Relations in Schools and Colleges: International Dimensions. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc, pp. 3–18.
DonohooJHattieJEellsR (2018) The power of collective efficacy. Educational Leadership75(6): 40–44.
20.
FarrellAM (2010) Insufficient discriminant validity: A comment on Bove, Pervan, Beatty, and Shiu (2009). Journal of Business Research63(3): 324–327.
21.
FornellCLarckerDF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research18(1): 39–50.
22.
FullanM (1999) Change Forces: The Sequel. London and New York: Routledge Falmer.
23.
FullanM (2003) The dynamic forces of change. In: AnchanJPFullanMEPolyzo (eds) Change Forces in Post-Communist Eastern Europe: Education in Transition. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 25–32.
24.
FullanM (2007) The New Meaning of Educational Change. 4th edition. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.
25.
FullanM (2011) Choosing the Wrong Drivers for Whole System Reforms. Melbourne: Centre for Strategic Education.
26.
FullanMMilesM (1992) Getting reform right: what works and what doesn’t. Phi Delta Kappan73(10): 745–752.
27.
GioiaDaChittipeddiK (1991) Sensemaking and senseginving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal12(6): 433–448.
28.
GlaserBGStraussAL (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine.
29.
GoddardR (2002) A theoretical and empirical analysis of the measurement of collective efficacy: The development of a short form. Educational and Psychological Measurement62(1): 97–110.
30.
HairJFBlackWCBabinBJAndersonRE (2010) Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th edition. London: Pearson.
31.
HallingerPLiuS (2016) Leadership and teacher learning in urban and rural schools in China: Meeting the dual challenges of equity and effectiveness. International Journal of Educational Development51: 163–173.
32.
HattieJ (2016) Mindframes and maximizers. In: 3 rd Annual Visible Learning Conference. Washington, DC, July 6, 2020—July 9, 2020.
33.
HercheJSwensonMJVerbekeW (1996) Personal selling constructs and measures: Emic versus etic approaches to cross‐national research. European Journal of Marketing30(7): 83–97.
34.
HuLTBentlerPM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling6(1): 1–55.
35.
JangEEMcDougallDEPollonDHerbertMRussellP (2008) Integrative mixed methods data analytic strategies in research on school success in challenging circumstances. Journal of Mixed Methods Research2(3): 221–247.
36.
KalliathTJBluedornaCGillespieDF (1999) A confirmatory factor analysis of the competing values instrument. Educational and Psychological Measurement59(1): 143–158
37.
KanMMParryKW (2004) Identifying paradox: A grounded theory of leadership in overcoming resistance to change. The Leadership Quarterly15(4): 467–491.
38.
KeshavarzNNutbeamDRowlingLKhavarpourF (2010) Schools as social complex adaptive systems: A new way to understand the challenges of introducing the health promoting schools concept. Social Science & Medicine70(10): 1467–1474.
39.
KomatsuT (2013) Why do policy leaders adopt global education reforms? A political analysis of SBM reform adoption in post-conflict Bosnia and Herzegovina. Education Policy Analysis Archives21: 1–16.
40.
KovačVBuchbergerI (2014) Collaboration of schools and external stakeholders. Sociologija i Prostor51(3): 523–545.
41.
KovačVRafajacBBuchbergerIMočibobM (2014) Obrazovna politika iz perspektive hrvatskih učitelja i nastavnika [Educational policy from the perspective of Croatian teachers]. Napredak155(3): 161–184. [In Croation].
42.
KovačevićJRahimićZŠehićD (2018) Policy makers’ rhetoric of educational change: a critical analysis. Journal of Educational Change19(3): 375–417.
43.
KovačevićM (2012) Saradnja nastavnika unutar kolektiva [Teacher cooperation within the collective.] In: PantićNČekić-MarkovićJ (eds) Nastavnici u Srbiji: Stavovi o profesiji i o reformama u obrazovanju [Teachers in Serbia: Attitudes Towards the Profession and about Reforms in Education]. Belgrade Serbia: Centar za obrazovne politike Beograd, pp. 50–73. [In Serbian].
44.
LamLW (2012) Impact of competitiveness on salespeople’s commitment and performance. Journal of Business Research65(9): 1328–1334.
45.
LeithwoodK (1994) Leadership for school restructuring. Educational Administration Quarterly30(4): 498–518.
46.
LeithwoodKJantziD (2000) The effects of transformational leadership on organizational conditions and student engagement with school. Journal of Educational Administration38(2): 112–129.
47.
LeithwoodKJantziD (2005) A review of transformational school leadership research 1996–2005. Leadership and Policy in Schools4(3): 177–199.
48.
LeithwoodKSunJ (2012) The nature and effects of transformational school leadership: A meta-analytic review of unpublished research. Educational Administration Quarterly48(3): 387–423.
49.
LeithwoodKSunJPollockK (2017) How School Leaders Contribute to Student Success: The Four Paths Framework. Springer International Publishing.
50.
LoogmaKTafel-ViiaKÜmarikM (2013) Conceptualising educational changes: A social innovation approach. Journal of Educational Change14(3): 283–301.
51.
LynnMR (1986) Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research35(6): 382–385.
52.
MaitlisS (2005) The social processes of organizational sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal48(1): 21–49.
53.
MarshallM (1996) Key informant technique. Family Practice13(1): 92–97.
54.
MuhammadA (2018) Transforming School Culture: How to Overcome Staff Division. 2nd edition. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
55.
NinkovicSRKnezevic FloricOC (2016) Transformational school leadership and teacher self-efficacy as predictors of perceived collective teacher efficacy. Educational Management Administration & Leadership46(1): 49–64.
56.
O’ReillyC (1989) Corporations, culture, and commitment: Motivation and social control in organizations. California Management Review31(4): 9–25.
57.
O'ReillyCAChatmanJA (1996) Culture as social control: Corporations, cults, and commitment. In: StawBMCummingsLL (eds) Research in Organizational Behavior: An Annual Series of Analytical Essays and Critical Reviews. Vol. 18. Elsevier Science/JAI Press, pp. 157–200.
58.
PantićNČekić-MarkovićJ (eds) (2012) Nastavnici u Srbiji: Stavovi o profesiji i o reformama u obrazovanju [Teachers in Serbia: Attitudes Towards the Profession and about Reforms in Education]. Belgrade Serbia: Centar za obrazovne politike Beograd. [In Serbian].
59.
PantićNWubbelsTMainhardtT (2011) Teacher competence as a basis for teacher education: Comparing views of teachers and teacher educators in five western Balkan countries. Comparative Education Review55(2): 165–188.
60.
Pasalic KresoA (2008) The war and post-war impact on the educational system of Bosnia and Herzegovina. International Review of Education54(3–4): 353–374.
61.
PawarBS (2003) Central conceptual issues in transformational leadership research. Leadership & Organization Development Journal24(7): 397–406.
62.
PawsonRTilleyN (1997) Realistic Evaluation. New York: SAGE Publishing.
PolyzoiE (2003) Harnessing the forces of change: Educational transformation in Russia. In: AnchanJPFullanMPolyzoiE (eds) Change Forces in Post-Communist Eastern Europe: Education in Transition. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 35–55.
65.
PolyzoiEand Cerna (2003) Forces affecting the implementation of educational change in the Czech Republic: A dynamic model. In: AnchanJPFullanMPolyzoiE (eds) Change Forces in Post-Communist Eastern Europe: Education in Transition. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 56–76.
66.
PolyzoiEČernaM (2001) Focus on educational change and globalization: A dynamic model of forces affecting the implementation of educational change in the Czech Republic. Comparative Education Review45(1): 64–84.
67.
QuinnRERohrbaughJ (1981) A competing values approach to organizational effectiveness. Public Productivity Review5(2): 122–140.
68.
QuinnRERohrbaughJ (1983) A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: Towards a competing values approach to organizational analysis. Management Science29(3): 363–377.
69.
RadišićJ (2012) Kompetencije nastavnika za sprovođenje promena i unapređivanje sistema obrazovanja [Teacher competencies for implementing changes and improving the education system]. In: PantićNČekić-MarkovićJ (eds) Nastavnici u Srbiji: Stavovi o profesiji i o reformama u obrazovanju. [Teachers in Serbia: Attitudes Towards the Profession and about Reforms in Education.] Centar za obrazovne politike Beograd, pp. 74–90.
70.
RadoP (2001) Transition in Education: Policy Making and the Key Educational Policy Areas in the Central-European and Baltic Countries. New York: Open Society Institute.
71.
SandelowskiMVoilsCIKnaflG (2009) On quantitizing. Journal of Mixed Methods Research3(3): 208–222.
72.
TeddlieCYuF (2007) Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of Mixed Methods Research1(1): 77–100.
73.
TeodorovićJStankovićDBodrožaBMilinVĐerićI (2016) Education policymaking in Serbia through the eyes of teachers, counselors, and principals. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability28(4): 347–375.
74.
TorranceH (2012) Triangulation, respondent validation, and democratic participation in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research6(2): 111–123.
75.
TremblayM-A (1957) The key informant technique: A nonethnographic application. American Anthropologist59(4): 688–701.
76.
TuthillELButlerLMMcGrathJM, et al. (2014) Cross-cultural adaptation of instruments assessing breastfeeding determinants: a multi-step approach. International Breastfeeding Journal. 9(1): 16.
77.
van KnippenbergDSitkinSB (2013) A critical assessment of charismatic–transformational leadership research: Back to the drawing board?The Academy of Management Annals7(1): 1–60.
78.
VicanDAlfirevićNPavičićJ (2019) Croatian policy and experience in developing educational leadership and management: Work in progress, or a failed experiment? In: Hjörtur IngþórssonÁAlfirevićNPavičićJVicanD (eds) Educational Leadership in Policy. Berlin: Springer International, pp. 221–244.
79.
WanatCL (2008) Getting past the gatekeepers: Differences between access and cooperation in public school research. Field Methods20(2): 191–208.
80.
WeickKE (1988) Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations1. Journal of Management Studies25(4): 305–317.
81.
WhiteJWLowenthalPR (2009) The cyclical rhetoric of educational reform and the rationalization of a failed zeitgeist. JEP: eJournal of Education Policy5.
82.
WongGGreenhalghTWesthorpGPawsonR (2012) Realist methods in medical education research: What are they and what can they contribute?Medical Education46(1): 89–96.
83.
YuklG (1999) An evaluative essay on current conceptions of effective leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology8(1): 33–48.
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.
