How leadership and management dynamics contribute to school effectiveness

Abstract

This study compares an effective school and ineffective school, in terms of how internal leadership and management of each school contribute its effectiveness. As a result, the study explores why one of two schools located within the same socio-economic environment, funded uniformly and controlled by the government at same levels of commitments is effective, while the other seems ineffective. Therefore, this thesis raises questions to know how internal school stakeholders’ leadership and management practices contribute to school effectiveness in each of the schools. A comparison was undertaken by firstly exploring how school leadership and management practices of School Leadership and Management Teams (SLMT) and secondly, understanding how teachers’ classroom leadership and management contribute to school effectiveness respectively. Therefore, in an attempt to answer the main research question: How do leadership and management dynamics contribute to school effectiveness? Other identified sub-questions were raised. Furthermore, a review of relevant literature uncovered what makes good and quality school leadership, management and; classroom leadership and management in ensuring school effectiveness. Data was collected from identified key role players within the two sampled schools. They include a school principal, vice-principal, Head of Departments (HOD), a teacher and classroom student leader (class captain) each, making-up a total of ten participants in the study - (five participants from each school). The researcher utilised one-on-one semi-structured interview, observations and document analysis or review in order to obtain rich qualitative data. By adopting the a-priori approach of data analysis, codes were generated manually from the interviews, observations and documents analysis/reviewed and measured against identified school leadership and management and; classroom leadership and management sub-themes/criteria in the literature reviewed in this study. From the data obtained, analysed and discussed, it was found that School A was exceptional in terms of leadership and management practises compared to School B. Although School A and B showed similar, but negligible characteristics in school planning, organising, management of change and; coordination of school teaching and learning, School A’s strength in terms of management of the school, lies in its availability of school policy on teaching, decision-making, delegating, control, motivating, communicating, management of interpersonal relationships, school climate, culture, change, management of conflict and school school-community relationships. In addition, even though School A and B teacher exhibited similar elements like, teaching methods ability, planning of their teaching and they both lack written classroom policy in their classroom leadership and management practices, differences like classroom leadership, motivation, communication, classroom climate and control exhibited by School A teacher during teaching and learning makes him far better, in comparison to School B teacher. Conclusively, the exceptional leadership and management practices by the School Leadership and Management (SLMT) of School A and its teacher in comparison to School B brought about multiplicity of other findings in this study. In the overall, it is believed that the interrelatedness of the exceptional leadership and management behaviour and practices of school A SLMT and teacher, is a consequence of the culture of the school, which has been built and maintained over the years and thus, influenced its climate in contributing to school effectiveness.