Aplicación de los indicadores cualitativos

Excellence is something difficult to define, very subjective, multidimensional and holistic, as such, according to Sergiovanni (1984), to consider whether a school is excellent, a person needs to observe for themselves the condition of the school. Regarding the meaning of excellence, Sergiovanni explained that different people perceive excellence differently. Parents for instance, would see excellence in a more holistic way including critical thinking and problem solving, passion in seeking knowledge, as well as interpersonal competence. In brief, excellence in the parents’ view is not limited to the academic but also includes non-academic aspects of their children’s development. As time goes by, the meaning of excellence expands. In the 21st _{century for instance, school excellence is determined by three factors which are}

students’ character, social emotional skills, and academic competency (Bencivenga & Elias, 2003). Bencivenga and Elias further added that, for visionary educational leaders, the way excellence is assessed is even broader - through both school and - success in achieving their goals in life outside of school. Goddard, Skrla & Salloum (2017) supported the idea of Bencivenga and Elias (2003) that leaders in the 21st

century emphasise not only test scores but also character building. This is argued that modern leaders view academic performance and good manners as having the same importance in developing students’ potential.

Manning (2013) emphasised that leaders must adapt their behaviour according to the situation, as improper behaviour leads towards ineffectiveness of leadership in organisations. This is supported by Harris and Manning (2014) who said, in creating improvement the principals should identify what works best and adapt within their

35

contexts. However, with the growing demands of educational excellence as a target, the responsibility towards improving school performance should not lie with the principals alone (Jones & Harris, 2014), even though it is admitted by principals that they are responsible for empowering others to change (Jones et al., 2015). Harris and Manning (2014), who described high performance as not a matter of accident, fate or luck but instead depending on focus, persistence and resilience, also agreed that even in the most difficult and challenging circumstances, the success of the school lies on its people. In a recent study by Wang et al. (2016) involving women principals in a primary school in Singapore, one of the participants emphasised that the school does not belong to her alone, but it is co-owned by the school community. As such, the notion of leading for excellence does not only evolve around adapting proper behaviours, but also emphasises the shared responsibilities between leaders or principals and the staff.

In the above-mentioned study by Wang et al. (2016), the way the principals led was determined by the needs of their staff. In enhancing the development of staff, the principal at the same time should build a good partnership with the stakeholders. Wang

et al. clearly show that the way women principals lead their schools is not only determined by the principals’ internal qualities and personalities, but also by external qualities or efforts, particularly the effort to build relationship with the stakeholders. Based on the needs of the staff, there is a necessity for the principals to continue the legacy of previous principals as long as they find it beneficial, to modify it where necessary, or to introduce new practices to improve academic results and students’ non-academic achievements (Wang et al., 2016). Team leadership is claimed to provide the answer to knowing the needs of the staff as Wang et al. suggest. Team leadership, according to Northouse (2010), is about engaging leaders in a process of

36

deciding whether monitoring or taking action is the most suitable course for the team. It can be argued that these studies by Northouse (2010) and Wang et al. (2016) show that various leadership approaches are required at various times based on need and purpose.

While most of the extant research emphasised the perception of principals, middle leaders, and teachers as well as other staff in the school, the perspectives of the students are sometimes neglected (Gentilucci & Muto, 2007). Gentilucci and Muto, who described students as ‘consumers of education’, propose that if we want to understand the leadership behaviour and academic achievement of the students, it is crucial to understand the students’ perspectives. In the study conducted by Gentilucci and Muto, the students perceived a clear distinction between principals’ visibility and their approachability in the schools. Principals who are consistently around schools will easily be approached by their students who can always engage with them. With the presence of the principals in the classroom, apart from encouraging students to be focused on their work, the students also opined that classroom behaviour often improved. According to the students in the study, the interactive principals, or those described as teacher-principals, have more powerful influence on the students’ learning as compared to administrator-principals - the passive principals who just sit at the back of the classroom (Gentilucci & Muto, 2007). If the presence of the principals around the school leads towards good academic performance, improvement in classroom behaviour and better engagement, it is clear that leading for excellence require high levels of commitment from principals. Gentilucci and Muto’s study raises the question of what would be the best way for the principals to manage their busy schedules so that they are able to make themselves visible to the students. However,

37

since the participants in the study consist of men and women principals, the extent to which the gender of principals has an influence on students’ learning is arguable. In Pakistan, a study investigating the effect of leadership behaviour of secondary school principals on students’ academic achievement shows that there were differences between what the observer or the teachers perceived and what the school principals themselves perceived (Tatlah, Iqbal, Amin & Quraishi, 2014). The results of the study showed that according to the principals themselves, the leadership behaviour of principals had an effect on students’ academic achievement. Nevertheless, the observer and the senior secondary school teachers found that there was no direct attributable effect of the principals’ leadership behaviour on students’ academic achievement. This difference in perception could be rooted in the national context pertaining to the job style and commitments of public sector school principals. When the principals have to perform a broad array of duties in addition to the academic commitment within their official hours, this could probably be the reason for a lesser focus on the academic activities of the principals found by the observers to have less effect on students’ academic achievement than the principals perceived (Tatlah et al., 2014). The study by Tatlah et al. clearly shows that even in the same context, the observer and the principals themselves perceived differently.

The literature on this subtopic, ‘Leading for Excellence’, indicates that a complex range of factors shape and influence the way a principal should lead a school towards excellence. Whilst it is known that many factors determining school excellence are subjective, it can be argued that leading towards excellence mainly centres on the principals’ activities and behaviours. With the constant intrinsic changes of the school environment, it is contended that school leadership requires principals who are strong, effective and responsive in order to inspire and enhance the ability of the teachers,

38

staff and students to perform excellently. Given the concept of leadership as being in a relationship with others (Grogan & Shakeshaft, 2011), perhaps two other important aspects to consider when speaking about leading for excellence are social justice and spirituality, both of which address injustice in education. The following section will look at leadership in relation to social justice and spirituality.