See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/335874524

Gender, school leadership and teachers’ motivations: The key role of culture,
gender and motivation in the Arab education system

Article  in  International Journal of Educational Management · September 2019

DOI: 10.1108/IJEM-02-2019-0054

CITATIONS READS

3 1,367

2 authors:

Asmahan Masry-Herzallah Khalid Arar

Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Al Qassimi College Texas State University
40 PUBLICATIONS   103 CITATIONS    355 PUBLICATIONS   1,614 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Education and Immigration: Policy, Leadership and Praxis View project

Unravelling Educational Leadership and Administration in the Middle-East and North Africa View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Khalid Arar on 21 September 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0951-354X.htm

Arab
Gender, school leadership and education
teachers’ motivations system

The key role of culture, gender and motivation

in the Arab education system 1395
Asmahan Massry-Herzallah and Khalid Arar Received 8 February 2019
Al-Qasemi Academic College of Education, Baqa El-Garbiah, Israel Revised 4 May 2019
Accepted 7 May 2019

Abstract
Purpose – The research investigates perceptions of teachers in the Arab education system in Israel
concerning the effect of their principal’s leadership and gender on their motivation. Relying on Hofstede’s
cultural dimensions as an analytic tool to understand the Arab school, the purpose of this paper is to answer
the following research questions: first, how do the teachers perceive the leadership style and gender of their
principal and what influence do these perceptions have on their motivation? Second, what are the influences
of the different dimensions of culture described by Hofstede on the teachers’ motivation?
Design/methodology/approach – To answer these questions, 18 teachers from different schools in the
Arab education system (10 female and 8 male) were interviewed.
Findings – The research revealed three themes which describe the teachers’ perceptions of their principals’
leadership styles with consideration of the principals’ gender: the principals’ involvement and sharing of
school operations and decision making with the teachers; the extent of autonomy given to teachers; and
establishment of principal–teacher relationships.
Originality/value – The paper concludes with implications of these leadership styles for teachers’
motivation for work, and suggestions are given to improve Arab principals’ practices and thus to enhance
teachers’ motivation.
Keywords Gender, Motivation, Arab education, School leadership, Hofstede’s cultural dimensions
Paper type Research paper

Educational research literature indicates that the school principal constitutes one of the
most significant factors for school success (Arar and Masry-Herzallah, 2018; Nir and
Hameiri, 2014), the improvement of teachers’ good citizenship behavior (Bogler and Somech,
2005), and for a positive educational and social climate (Kutsyuruba and Walker, 2014). The
principal constitutes a model for imitation and influences teachers’ performances (Nir and
Hameiri, 2014) and can affect their motivation (Eyal and Ruth, 2011).
Yet, rapid global dynamics and different government reforms have set multiple
challenges for school principals, especially due to different stakeholders’ involvement in
school operations. In the Arab education system in Israel, principals often face the
conflicting expectations of different stakeholders: the stipulations of the Ministry of
Education opposite the narrative of their own national minority (Arar and Masry-Herzallah,
2016). This is largely because Israeli Ministry of Education policies are created at a distance
from the Arab schools and detached from its socio-political environment.
Various studies have found that the employee’s cultural socialization influences the level
of their commitment to their workplace: differences in employees’ approaches to their
workplace stem from and are influenced by their society’s culture (Hofstede, 2001). This is
also true for school principals who are influenced by the culture within which they operate
(Hofstede, 2001). There are significant differences between individualistic and collectivist
International Journal of
cultures and leaders need to adjust to the cultural context in which they work (Sabri, 2012). Educational Management
Thus, the present study assumes that there are unique cultural differences and nuances in Vol. 33 No. 6, 2019
pp. 1395-1410
the Arab national minority in Israel that significantly influence its education system, © Emerald Publishing Limited
0951-354X
especially school principals, working with multiple stakeholders in a constantly changing DOI 10.1108/IJEM-02-2019-0054
IJEM global environment. The research focused on teachers’ perceptions of significant
33,6 components of school leadership and the influence of these components on their
motivation, also considering the issue of the principal’s gender and various cultural aspects.
This is actually a development of our previous research (Arar and Masry-Herzallah, 2016)
tracing factors that enhance and/or hinder motivation in the Arab education system.

1396 Literature overview

School leadership and motivation
Various studies have found a correlation between the teacher’s work environment, their
behavior and their motivation for work. One of the most influential factors in the work
environment is the principal’s behavior and his relationship with the teachers (Arar and
Masry-Herzallah, 2016; Nir and Hameiri, 2014). Direct correlations have been found between
the principal’s behavior and staff commitment, professional involvement and tendency to
innovate (Arar and Masry-Herzallah, 2018; Kutsyuruba and Walker, 2014).
Educational leaders’ use of a “formative” or distributed leadership style has been found
to enhance employees’ internal motivations, allowing them autonomy to perform their role
and increasing their sense of responsibility and commitment (Eyal and Ruth, 2011;
Leithwood et al., 2008). Perceived school support is seen as a most salient motivating factor
at both the personal and school level (Van Maele and Van Houtte, 2012), while collaboration
increased integrated regulations at both the personal and institutional level especially
during reform implementation (Wei, 2013). Tajasom and Ahmad (2011) indicated that
principals in private schools have greater power and effects on teacher motivation than in
public schools when they use transformational rather than transactional leadership. A
similar conclusion was drawn in Islamic schools in Thailand, where Othman and Wanlabeh
(2012) found that although teachers perceived that their principals exhibited
transformational leadership more frequently than transactional leadership, the principals
were viewed to display more idealized influence and inspirational motivation rather than
individual consideration and intellectual stimulation practices.
The school climate significantly influences the staff’s and pupils’ sense of satisfaction.
The principal is therefore expected to create a common culture based on collegial
cooperation, encouraging productive relationships that can lead to the realization of school
goals and positive relations with the school community including parents and other
stakeholders (Vanthournout et al., 2014). In other words, the ideal principal is one who
strives to improve education through collaborative effort in a supportive environment so
that an action program can be produced to mobilize the entire school (Li et al., 2016).
Teachers should be encouraged to voice their opinions, and the difficulty and complexity
involved in the teaching process should be recognized (Arar and Masry-Herzallah, 2016).
The principal can significantly influence the improvement of teaching by directly
assisting teachers, helping to foster and develop the staff, providing learning programs and
performing action research in order to implement innovations in teaching (Heck and
Hallinger, 2010). Arar and Masry-Herzallah (2016) indicate that when the principal shares
decision making with the staff, this improves teachers’ motivation and increases their job
commitment. Taking part in decision making expands the teacher’s role, increasing their
sense of control and autonomy and improves their commitment to effective teaching
(Collie et al., 2016). Teachers with strong motivation create a better social, psychological and
physical environment for their students, so that they improve the school’s achievements and
these processes increase teachers’ willingness to participate in improving the education
process (Tsemach and Shapira-Lishchinsky, 2016).
The above review indicates that teachers’ motivation depends on principal’s leadership
styles. It is important to encourage teacher autonomy, and that teacher motivation can be
enhanced when teachers are provided with tools that will allow them to conduct high-quality
educational work, and to feel that they fulfill their sense of mission (Leithwood et al., 2008). Arab
Thus, a participatory transformational style of leadership that allows teachers to participate education
in decision making and goal setting could be a powerful tool (Hallinger, 2012). Such a style system
would support team work, providing social support for staff and professional reciprocity and
respect all of which have been shown to increase teacher motivation. Within such a school
climate, student and school achievements can be expected to improve, and, in turn, also
improving teacher motivation ( Jacobson, 2011; Leithwood et al., 2008). 1397
The Arab education system in Israel: leadership, gender and motivation
The Arab population in Israel is a national minority that constitutes about twenty-one
present of the population in Israel (CBS, 2018). The Arab society in Israel is defined as a
traditional collective society, in contrast to the Jewish society in Israel which is considered a
“Western” individualist society.
Literature concerning the Arab education system in Israel testifies to the existence of
severe gaps in inputs and outputs between the Arab and Jewish education systems. The
Arab education system receives discriminately lower government budgets for students’
education and for the educational infrastructure. The government fails to recognize the
Palestinian Arab historical and cultural narrative in its learning programs and ignores the
right of this minority to influence their learning contents or to participate in educational
policy decision making (Arar and Masry-Herzallah, 2018).
In traditional society religious institutions, the educational system and even the family,
people’s behavior is controlled through collectivist moral-value dictates that stipulate
correct behavior (Oplatka and Arar, 2016). The Arab society is still, patriarchal and gender
regulations control women’s role definition and determine the space within which women
can function in contrast to the Jewish majority population, which is largely oriented to the
modern Western culture (Arar, 2014).
Consequently, only a very few Arab women succeed in breaking through the “glass
ceiling” that restricts their aspirations for social mobility. A review by the Galilee
Association indicated that less than 1 percent of Palestinian Arab women in Israel work in
senior management (Ghara, 2013). The Gender separation norm encourages employers in
the public sector to prefer women for roles serving females and children, thus protecting
them from competition with men (Sa’ar et al., 2011); however, in the Arab educational
system, Arab mayors fight to preserve for men for the few available senior public-sector
posts as part of their political capital. Women constitute 60 percent of the managerial staff of
Israeli schools; in the Jewish schools, women constitute 77 percent of principals, while in the
Arab schools, women constitute 58 percent of the principals.
In the context of leadership, the development of educational leadership in Arab schools is
a challenge due to the lack of jobs in the Arab society in general, and in the Arab education
system in particular (Arar and Masry-Herzallah, 2016). This situation creates competition, a
struggle for administrative positions in schools. The sense of struggle in reinforced by
gender context, where an Arab man feels threatened by an Arab woman competing with
him for the same management job (Arar and Oplatka, 2013). However, it is important to note
that women constitute a high ratio of employees in the Arab education system, namely, 37
percent of Arab women are employed in the education system (CBS, 2018).
The largely traditional patriarchal and collective culture of the Arab society also
influences the character of the school management, so that it retains various masculine
characteristics (Arar and Masry-Herzallah, 2018). Thus, Arab schools are run in a
hierarchical, authoritarian manner, policy is determined by the principal without staff
participation, and a social and power distance is maintained between the principal and the
teachers in order to avoid conflicts or social interaction inside or outside the school
(Arar and Oplatka, 2013). This authoritarian style reflects the patriarchal Arab family; thus,
IJEM the Arab school faithfully represents Arab society and culture. Arar and Oplatka (2013)
33,6 indicated that Jewish male principal will aspire to be available, and cooperative, with an
open mind and commitment to the educational framework, while male Muslim principal will
aspire to be distant, neutralizing feeling, conveying control and evading sharing things with
others, especially not with women teachers.
Some researchers from the Arab world ( Jordan, Saudi-Arabia and Arab society in Israel)
1398 dealt with existence of barriers/obstacles to or factors that facilitated women’s career building.
For example, low self-confidence and self-esteem with respect to their management
capabilities may deter or stunt women’s career advancement in school. Another major
obstacle is the socio-cultural structuring that bifurcates the society into male and female
arenas, while power is held by males’ restrictions. Women need to achieve a workable balance
between the demands of their family role and their role as leaders and administrators in the
educational institution (Arar and Oplatka, 2015). Men tend to undertake roles in the public
sphere while women undertake roles in the private sphere, and, since school principalship is a
public role, women who undertake this role can expect to meet both overt and covert
resistance (A’li and Da’as, 2016).
From the few researchers on women’s leadership styles in Arab societies, it seems that
women adapt what is usually identified as a “masculine” authoritative leadership style in their
early career in educational management (Arar and Oplatka, 2013). After establishing their
authority and leadership in the schools, they shift to an “androgenic” style, that is, a
combination of “masculine” and “feminine” leadership styles (Oplatka, 2006). Additionally,
most of the women leaders refrain from making decisions concerning building construction
because any physical aspect of school management seems to be considered a male issue. In the
Arab society in Israel, detailing masculine and feminine styles of leadership, which are
influenced by traditional patriarchal norms and attitude, school management has largely
remained a male domain (Arar, 2014). Arar (2018) indicated that there is a connection between
traditional values, cultural values and the principal’s administrative style in the Arab
education system. Both male and female principals tend not to engage in dialog and emotional
discourse with teachers, in line with the traditional Arab society’s behavioral norms and codes.
Similarly, research has demonstrated the influence of culture on the principal’s administrative
style in different cultures (Sabri, 2012) and on decision making (Husted and Allen, 2008).
Studies in the Arab world have found that Arab teachers generally have negative
attitudes toward female leadership (Addi-Raccah, 2006; Akkary, 2013) and often both male
and female teachers prefer working with male principal rather than a female (Akkary,
2013; Da’as, 2017). Arar and Oplatka (2013) studied attitudes toward the gradual
feminization of school principalship in the Arab society in Israel. Their results revealed a
wide gap between the attitudes of men and women, with women expressing more
favorable attitudes toward working female principalship. Similarly, Asbah et al. (2014)
examined gender perceptions of male and female teachers in Israel toward female
principals, and found that the teachers, especially the male teachers, expressed resistance
to the notion of gender equality. Another study by Da’as (2017) indicated that there are
differences between the perceptions of female and male teachers regarding the authority
of female and male principals. Female teachers accept the authority of a male principal but
are less likely to accept the authority of a female principal.

Arab teachers and motivation

Arar and Masry-Herzallah (2016) concluded that three main groups of factors detrimentally
influence Arab teachers’ motivation to teach in the Arab education system in Israel,
difficulties emanating from Arab society culture and norms, the school culture that is also
influenced by these norms and the overarching influence of Israeli government policy
toward the Arab minority.
 Both the school climate and organizational culture immensely influence teachers’ Arab
motivation, especially when the principal’s management style and the boundaries of the education
autonomy given to the Arab teachers in school, like involvement in the classroom teaching and system
detachment from the organizational and collective work of the school, including participation
in decision making at the strategic and systemic level reduces the space for collaboration, and
increases the teachers’ sense of professional isolation and negatively influences the teachers’
motivation to improve their teaching and functioning especially when burdened by the 1399
demands of accountability. Teachers’ motivation depends on the principal’s sense of trust in
the school staff. Although Arar and Masry-Herzallah (2018) found that most Arab teachers are
not used to team work, peer learning or advancing projects in collaboration with others, they
often feel alienated and stressed, frustrated and lacking motivation.
Hofstede’s (2001) four dimensions of culture can be used to examine the characteristics of
a particular culture and their implications for the principal’s leadership style in school. The
four dimensions are: individualism/collectivism, power distance, masculinity-femininity and
avoidance of uncertainty.
The individualist/collectivist dimension. Individualist societies emphasize personal goals
and interests; the self is described as independent and the uniqueness of each individual is
stressed. Collectivist cultures, contrastingly, focus on social order and mutual dependence
between people in different roles. Society is at the center and emphasis is given to mutual
dependence between individuals.
The power distance dimension relating to authority and power. In cultures characterized
by strong differences in power, there is an expectation that members of the society,
especially those who lack authority and power, will consent to this inequality. In cultures
where this power distance is less, value is given to the equal distribution of power and
authority throughout the society.
The dimension of avoidance of uncertainty. People who belong to cultures in which there
is a strong avoidance of uncertainty easily become distressed in new, unclear or situations
which are not understood. They try to avoid such situations through strict codes of behavior
and belief in absolute truths. Members of such cultures tend to search for security and to be
more obsessive, intolerant, aggressive and emotional. In contrast, people in cultures which
are less inclined to avoid uncertainty, tend to take risks and be calmer, more tolerant,
thoughtful and non-aggressive.
The dimension of masculinity/femininity. Masculine culture emphasizes the distinction
between men and women. Men are expected to strive for material success and to be assertive,
ambitious and competitiveness, while women are not expected to undertake professional
work. In contrast, feminine culture also values men who take care of non-material aspects of
life and women who work in professions and technical work.
A clear conclusion that emerges from the above survey is that school principals are those
who have the power to significantly influence teachers’ motivation, but feminine and
masculine styles of management differ (influenced by the culture in the school’s environment)
with different consequences for teachers’ motivation. There has been little research on this
issue in the Arab education system in Israel. The present paper undertakes to fill this gap in
knowledge and investigates male and female teachers’ viewpoints on the influence of the
principal’s gender and different dimensions of Arab culture, on their motivation.

Methodology
Setting the research context
Relying on Hofstede’s cultural dimensions as an analytic tool to understand the Arab school,
we attempted to describe the characteristics of school leadership and its implications on
teachers’ motivation, in a period when more and more Arab women have undertaken school
IJEM management in Arab schools, although there is still little knowledge about the
33,6 characteristics of their management. We also took into consideration that the perception
of gender differences means that women principals need to take a different path to acquire
their status and they experience this process in a different way than do men (Arar and
Oplatka, 2013, 2015).
The research investigated perceptions of teachers in the Arab education system in Israel
1400 concerning the effect of their principal’s leadership and gender on their motivation. The
study was guided by the following research questions:
RQ1. How do the teachers perceive the leadership style and gender of their principal and
what influence do these perceptions have on their motivation?
RQ2. What are the influences of the different dimensions of culture described by
Hofstede on the teachers’ motivation?

Research method
Data collection
In order to examine perceptions of teachers in the Arab education system concerning male
as compared to female principals’ leadership styles and their influence on their motivation,
we chose a qualitative research paradigm, in-depth semi-structured narrative interviews.
Qualitative methodology was used for empirical data collection and analysis because
qualitative research can provide intricate and detailed understating of perceptions,
meanings and intentions (Cohen et al., 2011). Participants were selected as a convenience
sample using the snowball method, to represent the different Ministry of Education regions.
In-depth semi-structured narrative interviews were conducted with each teacher between
May and August 2015. Participants were asked how they regarded the issue of motivation,
leadership and Gender in Arab schools from their own points of view (Creswell, 2007).
All participants were individually interviewed in Arabic by a research assistant with a
Master’s Degree. The interview took place in the schools, a café or the interviewee’s home
according to their choice and lasted for about 90 min. At the beginning, the objective of the
study was explained, and confidentiality was promised. Participation was consensual;
interviewees were able to terminate the interview at will. The purpose of the interviews was
to enable the participants to tell their stories in their own language, and to use these stories
to construct narratives of their perceptions of motivation and leadership in the school
enabling them to provide meaning for their experiences. The use of a semi-structured
interview is especially suitable for this research, focusing on the interviewees’ perceptions
and their inner worlds, and allowing the researcher to expand on subjects that they wish to
understand better by determining the subject for discussion (Cohen et al., 2011).
The interview questions aimed to understand the teachers’ experiences and the
meanings that they gave to those experiences including the characteristics of their
interactions with the principal. Each interview was preceded by a short explanation of the
research and began with the request: “tell me something about yourself and the substance of
your role.” This initial request allowed the interviewee to tell their story without any
interference. Clarifying questions then enabled deeper discussion on subjects and events
that they had mentioned and also to clarify subjects that had not yet been mentioned
concerning principal–teachers interaction (Marshall and Rossman, 2012).

Participants
The interviewees were chosen as a convenience sample using the snowball method, to
represent the different Ministry of Education regions. In sum, 18 teachers from different
schools in the Arab education system were interviewed (10 female and 8 male). Most of them
had more than three years’ teaching experience. Their mean age was 39 years (ranging from Arab
26 to 48). The interviewees all worked in elementary and junior high schools (10 from education
compulsory public elementary schools and 8 from secondary education). All the participants system
had academic degrees. Table I describes the characteristics of the respondents. The names
used are fictitious.

Data analysis 1401

The interview texts were transcribed by the first author ant underwent the four stages of
analysis according to the suggestion of Marshall and Rossman (2012): “organizing the data,”
“generating categories, themes and patterns,” “testing any emergent hypothesis” and
“searching for alternative explanations.” This analysis aims at identifying central themes in
the data, searching for recurrent experiences, feelings and attitudes, to code, reduce and
connect different categories into central themes that answer the research questions. Coding
was guided by the principles of “comparative analysis” (Strauss and Corbin, 1998),
including comparison of any coded element in the emergent categories and sub-categories.
Structured analysis and peer review were completed by the second author, which enhanced
trustworthiness and reliability (Marshall and Rossman, 2012). The use of systematic data
collection procedure and peer analysis contributes to the credibility and authenticity of the
data. Since this was a small sample from specific group of participants, this limits
generalization of the findings to other social contexts. The reader is invited to judge the
applicability of the findings and conclusions to other similar circumstances. In the initial
analysis, relevant data were identified and sorted into preliminary themes without any
uniformity or connection between them to understand the general meaning of the data. The
second stage involved mapping analysis: similar preliminary themes were gathered into
categories, and connections drawn between them. The mapping analysis involved finding
connections between each category and its sub-categories and between the categories. In
order to reinforce the reliability of the data, the analysis was conducted by the second
author, while the first author acted as a critic, strengthening the analysis at the different
stages (Marshall and Rossman, 2012). The identified categories included: school decision-
making process or teachers’ participation in decision making, autonomy, and establishment

Teaching
No. Name Sex experience Degree Age Role

1 Muhamed Male 5 BA 30 Subject coordinator and teacher

2 Hala Female 10 MA 35 Teacher
3 Reem Female 6 BA 30 Teacher and homeroom teacher
4 Hyam Female 5 BA 28 Teacher
5 Muamna Female 12 MA 38 Social education coordinator and homeroom teacher
6 Ahmed Male 15 BA 40 Subject coordinator and teacher
7 Rasha Female 18 BA 41 Teacher
8 Aya Female 6 BA 29 Teacher
9 Hassan Male 22 MA 48 Deputy principal
10 Amal Female 10 MA 35 Teacher and coordinator
11 Achlas Female 16 MA 40 Teacher and social education coordinator
12 Azal Female 20 BA 45 Homeroom teacher
13 Hannan Female 9 MA 33 Homeroom teacher
14 Hitham Male 16 BA 40 Teacher
15 Saad Male 18 BA 43 Teacher
16 Kerem Male 4 BA 29 Teacher Table I.
17 Hamed Male 11 MA 36 Teacher Characteristics of the
18 Adam Male 3 BA 26 Teacher respondents
IJEM of relations between the principal and the teachers, distinguishing between male and female
33,6 principals and different administrative styles.
Limitations. The research was a preliminary-explorative study that did not investigate a
representative sample and so generalization of its findings is limited. Future research should
investigate a larger more population, representing the different cross-sections of the Arab
society and the different school age groups.
1402
Findings
From the analysis of the interviewees’ accounts, three major themes emerged which describe
the teachers’ perceptions of their principals’ leadership styles with consideration of the
principals’ gender: the principals’ involvement and sharing of school operations and decision
making with the teachers; the extent of autonomy given to teachers; and establishment of
principal–teacher relationships.

“When I participate in decision-making, I feel that I belong to the school”

Research indicates a positive correlation between the extent of the teacher’s involvement in
school activity and their level of motivation (Arar and Masry-Herzallah, 2016). The findings
emphasized the importance of teachers’ participation in decision making, which leveraged
their motivation and commitment, while open and transparent discussion in the school
strengthened their sense of belonging and their feeling of self-efficacy. However, most of the
teachers noted that they only enjoyed restricted participation in school decision making,
focusing on particular goals and no participatory culture was evident in the school.
Nevertheless, the interviewees indicated that there are clear differences in the decision-
making processes of male in comparison to female principals. Most of them indicated that
female principals’ decision-making processes are neither transparent nor clear. This was
evident from the testimony of Muhamed, a subject coordinator in an elementary school:
I have worked with a female principal and then with a male principal. Working with the female
principal there was restricted participation of teachers, even the manner in which teachers were
selected was unclear and not transparent. In contrast the male principal was very transparent and
the considerations for sharing were clear to all staff members, even if the considerations were not
always professional.
Similarly, Hala, a Hebrew teacher in a large elementary school, explained her view of the
difference between male and female principals:
My school principal retired last year. He was a very centralized manager, and stringent. The school
structure was clear. He only worked with the managerial staff. Now we have a new female principal.
She has introduced a new organizational culture, sharing decision-making with the teachers. But she
has not done this professionally, rather she uses tends to prefer favorites, something that frustrates
the staff. This managerial style has detrimentally influenced my motivation since there is no uniform
language, no transparent school policy, and that increases tension due to uncertainty.
To sum up, the interviewees indicated their lack of satisfaction regarding the extent which
female or male principals enable their participation in school decision making. They noted
the lack of an organizational culture that supported their participation. However, they also
noted differences in the level of participation offered between male and female principals.
Both male and female principals only enabled partial participation, usually only including a
small group of role holders. Male principals were seen as more transparent and easier to
understand on the issue of participation and the choice of those who participate. In contrast,
female principals do not share the underlying motivation for the choice of participants and
the goal of the participation. The next theme relates to the principal’s consideration of
teachers’ autonomy and its influence on the teachers.
Teachers’ autonomy and motivation Arab
Autonomy is a central component for the improvement of teachers’ motivation and commitment education
to the school (Arar and Masry-Herzallah, 2018). The teachers see their autonomous space as an system
important condition for their teaching and it influences their commitment to advance the school.
Their autonomic space enables the teachers to make professional-pedagogical decisions without
coercion or constriction by the principal or Ministry of Education policies, while determination
of the boundaries of the teacher’s autonomy depends heavily on their principal’s leadership 1403
style. This was expressed by the female teacher Hyam, an Arabic language teacher in a junior
high school: “once I feel that I have broad independence at work, I give of myself with a full
heart, it helps me to be creative, increases my motivation, I continuously enrich myself and feel a
sense of satisfaction and challenge at work.”
Nevertheless, many of the teachers noted that the autonomy that they receive in the school is
mostly limited to their classroom teaching work, but outside the classroom, in the organizational
space they have far less autonomy. For example, Muhamed, a teacher and subject coordinator
in an elementary school, noted that he was the “king” with regard to teaching of his discipline,
where he had complete autonomy, but as a subject coordinator it did not work like that, and the
principal determines the field of responsibility and mostly determines his work program.
The interviewees pointed up differences between male and female principals in the
extent to which they were willing to grant teachers an autonomous space. Female principals
were perceived as less willing to provide an autonomous space for teachers than their male
counterparts. As explained by Muammina, a homeroom teacher and social education
coordinator in an elementary school:
I worked for five years with a male principal as the social education coordinator. He allowed me an
autonomous space; I received his full backing. When the principal was replaced by a female
principal, the rules of the game changed. Suddenly I had no autonomous space, the female principal
determined everything, and I simply implemented her decisions, she wouldn’t allow the coordinator
to advance their role without her permission and strict supervision.
The interviewees mentioned other issues relating to the grant of autonomy to teachers and
differences between the consideration of male and female principals, as explained by Azal,
an elementary school homeroom teacher:
One of the differences between male and female principals is that male principals are more flexible
than female principals, they don’t create such a stressful atmosphere as female principals. From my
experience in teaching, this is very obvious. For example, my female principal thinks it is very
important to comply with Ministry of Education demands, and she doesn’t care if it is possible or
not, so we’re continually writing reports and documentation, she doesn’t allow the teachers to work
to advance their work without interference. This reality is not healthy, restricting the teachers’
autonomous space and their motivation.
The interviewees’ testimony indicates that both male and female principals do not allow the
teachers an autonomous space that corresponds with the teachers’ needs. Female principals
are seen by the teachers as less willing to allow them autonomy because of their continual
intervention in the teachers’ daily work. They also transmit a sense of a burden and pressure
to comply with the demands of their superiors. In contrast, male principals are seen as
allowing a larger extent of autonomy to the teachers due to a more flexible working style that
is less burdensome and radiates less stress. They intervene less in the teachers’ daily activities
and emphasize products rather than process. The next section details interviewees’
descriptions of how school principals establish relations with their teaching staff.

Establishing principal–teacher relationships

The principal’s central position in the organizational culture, means that positive principal–
teacher relationships and the principal’s support of the teachers are important factors
IJEM influencing teachers’ motivation to advance educational work and effective pedagogy
33,6 (Collie et al., 2016). As Hanan, a homeroom teacher, put it: “When the principal supports the
teacher, then the teacher understands that the principal is available for him when coping
with the different problems he encounters or to provide counsel and help making decisions.”
As the teacher Ahmed noted: “the principal’s support means that the principal cares about
the teacher and values the teacher’s work performances.”
1404 The interviewees characterized their school environment as pleasant, an environment that
enables formative evaluation for their development, providing effective support based on
good communication and open participatory discourse. Yet, the interviewees did not indicate
any clear differences in the extent of principal’s support and attentiveness between male and
female principals. However, the interviewees expressed certain reservations concerning
principals’ support for their work. Aya, a mathematics teacher in junior high school, noted
that her male principal was always busy: “he almost never left his room, was detached from
school events and even if teachers asked for his counsel he did not listen and continued with
whatever he had been doing.” In addition to the words of these teachers, Azal, a homeroom
teacher, described the disappointing lack of support she received from her female principal:
This year I had a student who became attached to me emotionally, I went to the principal and
shared the issue with her, and her answer was that I needed to cope and support the students. I
continued to ask for help with this, but she didn’t pay attention, and I continued to operate as I felt
was right. When I encountered a difficult problem with the student’s parents the principal did not
back me, she even blamed me harshly. I suffered from severe mental distress and till today I feel a
lack of self-confidence, I am frustrated […].
The teachers also indicated that the principal should support staff work, the organization’s
collective work, action that relies on containment and advance high-quality pedagogy
(Yammarino et al., 2012). Team work of this kind can influence the teachers’ motivation to
promote educational activity.
The interviewees highlighted the influence of the school’s organizational culture on their
motivation, noting that the principal was responsible for the progress of their collegial
collaborative work and joint decision making (Arar and Masry-Herzallah, 2016). However,
they noted that these processes were often defective in their schools, especially the aspect of
collaborative work as the teacher Hannan, a homeroom teacher in Grade 4, explained:
As the homeroom teacher, this year I encountered a lot of problems in my class, most of them
relating to other teachers teaching the class and their relations with the students. I was unable to
harness them for collaborative work. I appealed to the male principal. He did not give me any
solution or talk with the other teachers about it. I am very frustrated, disappointed by the school
climate. There is no cooperation between staff members and the principal.
And Saad, a science teacher in an elementary school, had a similar tale to tell:
I went to the female principal and asked for the counselor’s help in looking after one of the students
in my class. I was surprised by her answer, that it was not the role of the counselor, but mine. I told
her that I did not know how to cope with the student. Her answer was a categorical no […] and to
my regret when there is no staff work directed by the principal, the teacher will continue to feel
frustrated and lack motivation.
The findings indicate that the principal’s support for the teachers is a significant factor
influencing their motivation. The interviewees thought there should be support for the
individual teacher, devoting time to listening to them and providing advice concerning
students and teaching. The interviewees also envisaged principal support as including the
creation of an organizational collective culture, where shared work could improve teachers’
sense of belonging, commitment and motivation, and promote educational performances. No
differences were mentioned between male and female principals in this context.
Concluding discussion Arab
Research and writing on teachers’ perceptions of male and female school principals’ leadership education
style, gender and motivation help to express their voices, identify barriers, and empower them, system
including empowering male and female principals who lead educational processes.
The present study aimed to identify teachers’ perceptions of male and female school
principals’ leadership styles in the Arab education system in Israel, and the implications of
these styles for teachers’ motivation for work. Three main themes emerged from the 1405
teachers’ testimony, which describe their perceptions of the leadership styles of their
principals and the implications of this on teachers’ motivation, with consideration of the
principals’ gender.
The results indicate that Arab teachers precede their principals as to not promote a work
culture based on cooperation and participation in school work, and decision making is made by
the principals alone and not collectively. These findings are in line with the findings of Arar and
Masry-Herzallah (2018), which described the prevalent leadership style in the Arab education
system as an authoritative style, so that the principal rarely allows teachers to participate in the
determination of the school’s policies, and the principal maintains a social distance from the
teachers. The interviewees indicated that their principal’s leadership style is with high power
distance, which is represented by a lack of equality in a group, emphasized conformity,
obedience to rules and regulations in order to meet the expectations of the environment, i.e.
improved academic achievements (Arar and Oplatka, 2015). These findings comply with the
values of Israeli Arabs who are described as belonging to a traditional collectivistic culture, with
high power distance, low uncertainty avoidance and masculinity (Da’as, 2017).
So, the finding suggests that the principals should work to develop a collaborative work
culture and give the teachers a significant place to improve teachers’ motivation. The
teachers saw the principals as potential partners in the construction of collective teaching
practices through cooperative teacher–principal relationships based on reciprocal
assistance and team work to solve problems that arise in the acts of teaching and
learning (Arar and Oplatka, 2015).
Moreover, the findings indicated that the teachers’ motivation is affected by the extent of
autonomy they receive. The principals’ leadership style also does not encourage teachers’
autonomy in the schools, again reflecting characteristics of the Arab male-dominated
patriarchal society. It was clear that the principals played a major role in determining the
extent of the teachers’ autonomy (Arar and Masry-Herzallah, 2018). Substantive autonomy
enables the teachers to take risks and improves their learning and teaching processes (Eyal
and Ruth, 2011).
The principals put less emphasis on guiding the teachers’ independent work (Arar and
Masry-Herzallah, 2016), or allowing the staff an autonomous space that would allow them to
act out of professional considerations. The finding indicates also a low avoidance of
uncertainty in the principals’ leadership style like the Arab society which considered as a
society that avoids uncertainty, believing that diversity is dangerous and trying to minimize
vagueness through strict religious rules and regulations (Hofstede, 2001). The research
evidence shows that despite various reforms and innovative global trends in educational
leadership, principals in the Arab education system still adhere to the cultural practices of
Arab society, adopting a non-innovative leadership style, inappropriate for the modern era,
hesitating to take risks to advance novel programs or even to enable their teachers to do so.
They hesitate to adopt new work patterns which might challenge traditional Arab values. The
principals do not share decision making with teachers, as accepted in the twenty-first century.
This finding suggests that the degree of autonomy and participation of teachers in
decision making depends on the leadership style of the school principal. Therefore, in order
for principals in the Arab education system to advance this dimension, they need to take a
number of steps: to reexamine their leadership styles, This cultural and organizational code
IJEM learns the uniqueness of human and social capital in the Arab school and then trains and
33,6 empower teachers in the education system, to understand the hidden and visible meanings
of this. In order to increase the level of commitment and belonging of teachers who will feel
significant and will advance the system in mutual trust, in order to promote the
achievements of the students in the school.
The teachers also noted that the principal should create an educational culture and
1406 climate based on attentiveness and dialog in personal dealings with individual teachers and
at the collective level of the school. They felt that open and transparent discussion could
strengthen their sense of belonging and self-efficacy and empower their role performance.
They noted that the principal could promote teachers’ pedagogic development by providing
a personal model, follow-up, dialog and direct communication. They saw their principals
as a main force for support and assistance when needed, through the dynamics of
interpersonal relations. This sort of leadership improves teachers’ motivation to work
(Li et al., 2016). The interviewees indicated that this issue was very complicated in their
schools. They noted their sense of isolation when they wanted to advance certain daily
activities, describing principals who had an assertive and authoritarian style of
management and who put less emphasis on personal guidance for the teachers. This was
true for both the male and female principals. This authoritarian leadership style reflects the
Arab patriarchal society so that the Arab school replicates the hierarchical structure of this
society’s culture, with high power distance and masculinity.
The principal should give a significant place to the evaluation of his staff, listen to them
and encourage communication between the different teams while providing full support in
order to promote the attainment of school goals in an effective manner. The principal should
and help teachers to overcome the obstacles they face by establishing an organizational
climate that protects, provides consideration, is containing and empathetic, and permits
professional dialog for all.
Moreover, when we compare between male and female school principals’ leadership
styles, when feminine values are more dominant then teachers’ motivation is higher. The
findings indicate that it is actually female principals in the Arab education system who
adopt an assertive, strict leadership style that does not advocate giving autonomy to
teachers or allow them to participate in decision making, while the interviewees perceived
the male principals as more flexible and less rigid. These findings resemble those of
Arar (2014), which indicated that female Arab principals initially adopt an authoritarian
masculine leadership style when they are appointed as principals in order to comply with
values of the mostly traditional Arab society, although as they gain confidence, they exhibit
more feminine characteristics such as care, concern and innovation.
Da’as (2017) and Akkary (2013) pointed up differences in the Arab education system in
the extent of acceptance of male or female principals’ authority between male and female
teachers. Female teachers accepted the authority of both male and female principals to the
same extent; however, male teachers were unwilling to accept the authority of female
principals. This reality leads Arab female principals, like the male principals, to adopt an
authoritarian leadership style appropriate for Arab norms and values, developing a strict
and inflexible organizational culture and permitting little open discourse with teachers.
Arab women attaining managerial roles are expected to demonstrate strength, to develop
connections with the local authority and parents’ committees usually headed by men and
often male superintendents (Shapira et al., 2011) .Female principals’ reticence to share
decisions with their staff may be due to their lack of confidence and fear that they would be
seen as weak and less able to lead and manage. Thus too, female principals’ perceived
reticence to allow the teacher’s autonomy may be due to their fear of losing control over
events in the school or lack of ability to cope with surprises and failures if teachers do not
meet their required goals. They are required to be accountable to the traditional Arab
society and serve as models for young women in that society. The findings indicate Arab
that both male and female principals give little support and rarely develop effective education
communication based on containment of their staff’s concerns. Again, this distance reflects system
formal masculine-style codes that determine relationships in the Arab society dominated by
“hamullas” (extended families) with a patriarchal structure.
To conclude the leadership style of Arab principals in the education system, they are
working with individualist values, masculinity, with high power distance and low 1407
uncertainty avoidance.
To conclude the teachers’ testimony according to Hofstede’s four dimensions of culture,
male and female principals in the Arab education system could improve the motivation of
their teachers if they would create a school culture with collectivist values, decrease the
power distance, be more willing to encounter uncertainty and take risks and apply more
feminine values, such as empathy and the development of social relations. Arab school
principals would be more effective if they would encourage collectivist values and
collaborative relations among their staff, define the organization’s goals and allow teachers
to participate in decision making, within a culture based on concern for the needs of others
and equality (Hofstede and McCrae, 2004). They need to rethink decision-making strategies
and the way in which decisions are transmitted to teachers, to explain and justify their
decisions and their implications including the ways in which they intend to implement the
decisions. They should demonstrate sensitivity to the teachers’ personal needs, giving them
a sense that they are concerned about their rights and welfare, holding regular staff
meetings to improve interpersonal communication. Such consideration would increase the
sense of just management and improve teachers’ motivation.

Empirical and practical implications

The present study contains a theoretical contribution to the organizational-educational
research field. This was the first study of the relationship between cultural values
dimensions, motivation and gender in the Arab education system.
Although the qualitative method used in this study provided a profound picture of the
leadership style, gender and motivation in the Arab education system, its small sample
limits generalizability to similar contexts elsewhere. Future studies should use varied
tools and research methods, in different nations and contexts so as to allow the research to
inform programs of leadership development how to prepare principals for working in a
multicultural society.
These findings are important for policy makers at the Ministry of Education who are
responsible for training new principles or providing advancement courses for working
principals. They need to strength the areas in which the focus should be on promoting an
effective, male and female leadership, both in the context of the relationship between the
teachers and the principal, and in the context of organizational learning and professional
development of the principals and staff in these directions in order to contribute to coping
with difficulties and crises, and they should give much attention to the local and national
cultural mechanism.

Challenging conclusions
In some sense, our findings reconstruct educational leadership in terms of gender, culture
and motivation as they show how the social position of the educational leader influence
his/her leadership style. Thus, while many leadership theories give an impression of
universal organizational phenomenon, our findings emphasize the particular nature of
educational leadership and its highly contextualized activities. For example, in the Arab
society, the gender of the principal has been much influential from the local culture. In this
case gender was entwined within the local cultural context. Thus, any analysis of
IJEM leadership behavior should take in consideration national and ethnic cultures,
33,6 organizational arrangements, intercultural interactions and local educational ideologies.
Without this analysis, any change initiative will be impeded many cultural, organizational
and ethnic barriers that are particular to the educational system in which the change is
intended to be implemented. Our cultural insights should be considered in leadership
development programs and policy making.
1408
References
Addi-Raccah, A. (2006), “Accessing internal leadership positions at school: testing the similarity-
attraction approach regarding gender in three educational systems in Israel”, Educational
Administration Quarterly, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 291-323.
Akkary, R.K. (2013), “The role and role context of the Lebanese school principal: toward a culturally
grounded understanding of the principalship”, Educational Management Administration &
Leadership, Vol. 42 No. 5, pp. 718-742.
A’li, N. and Da’as, R. (2016), “Arab women in Israeli politics: aspirations for fundamental equality or
preservation of gender inequality”, Cultural and Religious Studies, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 67-86.
Arar, K. (2014), “Deputy-principals in Arab schools in Israel: an era of reform”, International Journal of
Educational Management, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 96-113.
Arar, K. (2018), “Arab principals’ and teachers’ perceptions of trust and regulation and their
contribution to school processes”, Leadership and Policy in Schools, pp. 1-16.
Arar, K. and Masry-Herzallah, A. (2016), “Motivation to teach: the case of Arab teachers in Israel”,
Educational Studies, doi: 10.1080/03055698.2015.1127136.
Arar, K. and Masry-Herzallah, A. (2018), “Trust among teachers and educational counsellors in the
Arab education system”, International Journal of Leadership in Education, pp. 1-13, available at:
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2018.1481534
Arar, K. and Oplatka, I. (2013), “Gender debate and teachers’ constructions of masculinity vs.
femininity of school principals: the case of Muslim teachers in Israel”, School Leadership &
Management, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 97-112.
Arar, K. and Oplatka, I. (2015), “Muslim and Jewish teachers’ conceptions of the male school principal’s
masculinity: insights into cultural and social distinctions in principal-teacher relations”,
Men and Masculinity, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 22-42.
Asbah, K.A., Nasra, M.A. and Abu-Baker, K. (2014), “Gender perceptions of male and female teachers in
the Arab education system in Israel”, Journal of Middle East Women’s Studies, Vol. 10 No. 3,
pp. 109-124.
Bogler, R. and Somech, A. (2005), “Organizational citizenship behavior in school. How does it relate to
participation in decision making?”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 43 No. 5,
pp. 420-438.
CBS (2018), Annual Statistical Abstract, CBS, Jerusalem.
Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2011), “Surveys, longitudinal, cross-sectional and trend
studies”, Research Methods in Education, 7th ed., Routledge, Abingdon, pp. 261-264.
Collie, R.J., Shapka, J.D., Perry, N.E. and Martin, A.J. (2016), “Teachers’ psychological functioning in the
workplace: exploring the roles of contextual beliefs, need satisfaction, and personal
characteristics”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 108 No. 6, pp. 788-799.
Creswell, J.W. (2007), Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design, Sage Publication, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Da’as, R.A. (2017), “School principals’ leadership skills: measurement equivalence across cultures”,
Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 207-222.
Eyal, O. and Ruth, G. (2011), “Principal’s leadership and teachers’ motivation: self-determination theory
analysis”, paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO,
May 4, 2010.
Ghara, R. (2013), Arab Society in Israel: 6th Book, Van Leer Institute, Jerusalem (in Hebrew).
Hallinger, P. (2012), “School leadership that makes a difference: lessons from 30 years of international Arab
research”, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 359-367. education
Heck, R.H. and Hallinger, P. (2010), “Testing a longitudinal model of distributed leadership effects on system
school improvement”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 21 No. 5, pp. 867-885.
Hofstede, G. (2001), “Culture’s recent consequences: using dimension scores in theory and research”,
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 11-17.
Hofstede, G. and McCrae, R.R. (2004), “Personality and culture revisited: linking traits and dimensions 1409
of culture”, Cross-Cultural Research, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 52-88.
Husted, B.W. and Allen, D.B. (2008), “Toward a model of cross-cultural business ethics: the impact of
individualism and collectivism on the ethical decision-making process”, Journal of Business
Ethics, Vol. 82 No. 2, pp. 293-305.
Jacobson, S. (2011), “Leadership effects on student achievement and sustained school success”,
International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 33-44.
Kutsyuruba, B. and Walker, K. (2014), “The lifecycle of trust in educational leadership: an ecological
perspective”, International Journal of Leadership in Education: Theory and Practice, Vol. 18 No. 1,
pp. 106-121, available at: www.researchgate.net/publication/266317036_The_lifecycle_of_
trust_in_educational_leadership_An_ecological_perspective
Leithwood, L., Harris, A. and Hopkins, D. (2008), “Seven strong claims about successful school
leadership”, School Leadership and Management, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 27-42.
Li, L., Hallinger, P. and Ko, J. (2016), “Principal leadership and school capacity effects on teacher
learning in Hong Kong”, International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 30 No. 1,
pp. 76-100.
Marshall, C. and Rossman, G. (2012), Designing Qualitative Research, 6th ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Nir, A. and Hameiri, L. (2014), “School principals’ leadership style and school outcomes: the mediating
effect of powerbase utilization”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 52 No. 2,
pp. 210-227.
Oplatka, I. (2006), “Women in educational administration within developing countries: towards a new
international research agenda”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 44 No. 6, pp. 604-624.
Oplatka, I. and Arar, K.H. (2016), “Leadership for social justice and the characteristics of traditional
societies: ponderings on the application of western-grounded models”, International Journal of
Leadership in Education, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 352-369.
Othman, A. and Wanlabeh, N. (2012), “Teachers’ perspectives on leadership practices and motivation
in Islamic private schools, Southern Thailand”, Asian Education and Development Studies, Vol. 1
No. 3, pp. 237-250.
Sa’ar, A., Sachs, D. and Aharoni, S. (2011), “Between a gender and a feminist analysis: the case of
security studies in Israel”, International Sociology, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 50-73.
Sabri, H.A. (2012), “Re-examination of Hofstede’s work value orientations on perceived leadership
styles in Jordan”, International Journal of Commerce and Management, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 202-218.
Shapira, T., Arar, K. and Azaiza, F. (2011), “ ‘They didn’t consider me and no-one even took me into
account’: female school principals in the Arab education system in Israel”, Educational
Management Administration & Leadership, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 25-43.
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1998), Basics of Qualitative Research Techniques, Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Tajasom, A. and Ahmad, Z.A. (2011), “Principals’ leadership style and school climate: teacher’s
perspectives from Malaysia”, The International Journal of Leadership in Public Services, Vol. 7
No. 4, pp. 314-333.
Tsemach, S. and Shapira-Lishchinsky, A. (2016), “The connections between teachers’ perceptions of
school principals’ authentic leadership, their sense of psychological empowerment, and
regressive behaviors and citizenship behaviors”, Magamot: Behavioral Sciences Quarterly,
Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 126-156 (in Hebrew).
IJEM Van Maele, D. and Van Houtte, M. (2012), “The role of teacher and faculty trust in forming teacher’s job
33,6 satisfaction: does year experience makes difference?”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 28
No. 6, pp. 879-889.
Vanthournout, G., Noyens, D., Gijbels, D. and Bossche, P. (2014), “The relationship between workplace
climate, motivation and learning approaches for knowledge workers”, Vocations and Learning,
Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 191-214.
Wei, Y.E. (2013), “Using multilevel structural equation models to examine personal and school effect on
1410 teacher motivation”, Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of American Education Research
Association, San Francisco, CA, April 27–May 1.
Yammarino, F.J., Salas, E., Serban, A., Shirreffs, K. and Shuffler, M.L. (2012), “Collectivistic leadership
approaches: putting the ‘we’ in leadership science and practice”, Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 382-402.

Corresponding author
Khalid Arar can be contacted at: [email protected]

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]

View publication stats