The Leadership Roles of a Principal in

Improving School Effectiveness

Burhanuddin

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to investigate the leadership

roles and practices of the principal in improving school effectiveness.
This descriptive study involved the principal, counselor, and 11
teachers from the Tonsley Park Primary School in South Australia.
The findings showed that all respondents generally regarded team
leader as the most important role, while supervisor was rated as the
least important. Of the 20 tasks observed, generally revealed that a
principal should work cooperatively with staff to ensure more effective
use of their skills. While, the task of a principal in making decisions
on staff development programs was not necessarily expected by the
practicing teachers. All respondents considered organization! coordi-
nation as the most important area within which a principal should
provide more leadership, while curriculum or instructional improve-
ment and innovation was regarded as the least important.

Key words: leadership role, principal, teachers, school effectiveness.

New dimensions for the principal leadership roles came from the impact
of recent changes in education. These changes also happened in Australia
and the United States, (Heck, 1991). They encourage the expansion of
the roles of school principals in scope and complexity. In the United

Burhanuddin is a lecturer at the Department oJ Educational Administration, Faculty of

Education (FIP) IKIP lvfALANG. This article is an excerpt from a study conducted for his
thesis while he was a post graduate student at the Master Degree Program oJ Flinders
University, Adelaide, Australia.

:.;33
334 THE JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, December 1997, Volume 4, Special Edition

States, for instance, the concept of principalship has evolved from 'prin-
cipal teacher' in the early New England Schools (Boyer, 1983; Blank,
1987) through an increased concern with managing the school (Glasman
& Nevo, 1988), to today's diverse set of role descriptions (Heck, 1991).
This emphasis has occurred in Australia where principals are expected
to play key roles in operating a self managing school (Caldwell, .1992;
Macpherson, 1993). Changes in the roles of school principals in Australia
are profound (Caldwell, 1992) and meeting these changed and changing
roles is significant in improving school effectiveness. TIle development
and expansion of such a concept may describe a new set of expectations
for school principals (Blank, 1987:70), who are expected to be able to
deal with a variety of educational demands, and to establish appropriate
priorities in improving school effectiveness.
Reflection on the democratization of school administration in the
Australian context has also resulted in a new perspective of the principal's
role. They are now expected to have the ability to respect and facilitate
the collaborative, participatory decision making processes involving and
unfolding from the communicative interaction of the school community.
Sergiovanni (1987, cited in Watkins, 1991) addressed such a perspective
to the Victorian Association of Principals of Secondary Schools, em-
phasizing the transformational leadership that can be equated with fa-
cilitating leadership, in which the principals are more concerned with
the concept of power to than power over in order to help people (school
staff) more successful. Such strategies are required for the successful
transition to a system of self managing schools (Caldwell and Spinks,
1992: 50) by gathering and using the constructive forces and gaining a
high commitment from people involved in the system.
Further supports for such challenging phenomenon come from many
investigations, studies or research works conducted by researchers and
experts in educational leadership settings. In recent years, for instance,
the principalship has been the focus of considerable discussions in the
context of initiatives designed to increase school effectiveness. Many
perspectives and a growing body of literature support the view that the
principals are the key actors in improving the quality of schools (Barth,
1990; Bossert, et aI., 1982; Braun, 1989; Sergiovanni, 1987). Although
the specific connections between principals, leadership and educational
outcomes remain unclear and produce various conclusions, there is con-
 Burhanuddin, The Leadership of a Principal in Improving 335

tinuing support for such a relationship and for further research on

principalship (Davies, 1987; Heck, et aI., 1990). Researchers are interested
in studying such a relationship. Dow and Oakley (1992), for instance,
said thatto date, the research on school effectiveness has established a
number of factors that appear important in identifying effective schools.
One factor that appears consistently in all the studies is principal lead-
ership. The principal is perceived as the most powerful fulcrum for
improving school effectiveness (Finn 1987).
Harber (1992) summarized the research in this field and presented
a complete list of the main factors in school effectiveness. Among those
factors, the leadership roles of the principal and senior management team
are perceived as vital. It is helpful to view principal leadership as
manifested in several roles, each of which contributes both uniquely and
interdependently to building and maintaining successful schools (Ser-
giovanni, 1987).
A complete description of principal leadership roles is introduced
by Sergiovanni (1987) based on the observed behaviour of principals in
successful schools. He identified those interdependent roles which develop
and be expressed in the modem principalship. The first role is states
person. Principals are primarily concerned with their school's overall
mission, philosophy, working assumptions, educational program and the
school design, values and beliefs as well as with the quality and relevance
of the school's broad goals and objectives. They also communicate the
school direction and emphasis to outside forces, seeking support and
obtain necessary resources, and accepting responsibility for developing
policy and practices within the school. The second role is educational
leadership. A school principal is also responsible for the development
and articulation of educational programs including teaching objectives,
subject content organizations, methods, classroom climates, and evalu-
ation. The third role is supervisory leadership. This refers to the principal's
work with teachers which seeks to obtain their commitment to school
goals and motivate them towards the achievement of these goals. Such
a role encompasses staff development and clinical supervision. The 4th
is organizational leadership. Principals are expected to ensure that school
purposes, objectives, and work requirements are reflected in organiza-
tional structure pattern. The fifth role is administrative leadership. Al-
though this is admitted to be the least glamorous of the six, it is
336 THE JOURNAL OF EDUCATION. December 1997. Volume 4. SpecialEdition

nonetheless important to provide the systems and organizational arrange-

ment for efficiency and effectiveness. TIle sixth is team leadership. As
a team leader, the principal helps teachers to develop mutual support
and trust as they work together to establish an effective school.
A school principal occupies a key position in the schooling system.
He/she undertakes numerous functions within the diverse roles as a
school executive (Davies, 1987). The duties and responsibilities he/she
exercises in each role determine the success of school improvement
endeavour.
Among the various roles and functions, much literature on school
effectiveness suggest that 'principal leadership is an essential ingredient
in creating and maintaining an effective school' (Dow and Oakley, 1992).
Wright and Renihan (1985) also note that leadership is critical in influ-
encing how effective a school will be. Leadership has been identified
as a significant role in managing organizational activities, and has
prompted current research into the leadership roles principals play
(Baskett and Miklos, 1992). It can be observed in such school activities
as curriculum or instructional improvement, staff development, commu-
nity relations, and school planning and management.
For the intensive observation, this study highlighted leadership areas
from a recent study of Blank (1987) in the V.S. that was designed to
provide a systematic analysis of the leadership activities and behaviour
of the principal: (1) instructional improvement and innovation, including
instructional innovation led by the principal; the principal's role in
decision making on curriculum design and change; and the principal's
efforts to increase academic learning time during the school day; (2)
educational goal consensus, or the extent to which the principal develops
consensus among staff on annual goals for the school; (3) staff devel-
opment, including the principal's role in staff development programs
and the proportion of time in faculty meetings spent on curriculum and
instructional matters; (4) seeking district or community support/resources.
This includes interaction with district administrators Circommunity in
seeking support for school improvement; (5) involving staff in planning,
especially in planning school policy and program changes; and (6)
exercising authority in school policy and organization, including the
principal's role in selecting staff, deciding rules for students, and sched-
uling and assigning teachers.
 Burhanuddin, The Leadership of a Principal in Improving 337

These areas emerge from Glasman's (1984) typology of principal

roles, and the measures of leadership behaviour by principals. Of the
six areas, the first three are identified by Blank (1987) as the indicators
of the principal leadership as an 'educator' and the last three tend to
indicate leadership as an 'administrator'. Blank (1987) found that most
principals differed considerably in perceiving the importance of each of
these areas, but in general principals tend to be leaders with specific
aspects of school organization and with issues that are related to district
policies and priorities. Meanwhile, Bossert and his colleagues (1982)
also summarized recent studies of effective principals and successful
schools in the following areas: (1) goals and production emphasis, (2)
power and decision making, (3) Organization/Coordination, and (4) Hu-
man Relation/School and Community Relations.
For the purpose of concept clarification, the terms of leadership,
role, and effectiveness should be explained. Leadership is defined as
influence, the art or process of influencing people so that they will strive
willingly and enthusiastically toward the achievement of group goals
(Koontz, et aI., 1984:506). In terms of managerial purposes, leadership
is defined as the process of directing and influencing the task-related
activities of group members (Stoner, et al., 1985:569). TIle term role
refers to the structural or normative elements defining the behaviour
expected of the incumbents or actors, that is, their mutual rights and
obligations. In this sense, it is what is supposed to be done in order to
carry out the purpose of the system rather than what is actually done
that defines the institutional role (Getzels, et al., 1968:60). Effectiveness
in this study was defined as the degree to which desired effects are
produced or the level of goal achievement attributable to teaching (Power,
1989:47)
TIle leadership roles played by principals provide a framework for
all of their major tasks and functions in improving school effectiveness.
Sergiovanni (1987) contends that the forces of leadership are articulated
within each role, and together they provide the context for reflective
practice within the principalship.
To clarify the leadership roles which are perceived by the school
staff as significant for school improvement, the existing demands on the
changing and expanding roles of school principals, particularly in South
Australia, were examined. The main purpose of this study was then to
338 THE JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, December 1997, Volume 4, Special Edition

investigate the leadership roles of the school principal, and to examine

the role of leadership in a principal improving school effectiveness. The
leadership roles of the principal were based on ati examination of relevant
literature, as tested against the opinions of the staff of a local primary
school focussing on the general areas: (1) curriculum or. instructional
improvement and innovation; (2) staff development; (3) organization/co-
ordination; and (4) school and community relations. There were four
research questions to answer: What are the important leadership roles
of the school principal in improving school effectiveness? How do
practicing teachers and their principal view these leadership roles? What
are the important leadership practices a principal might adopt in improving
school effectiveness? In which areas do the leadership practices of
principals have the greatest effect ?
Although the Principal fills many roles in achieving school effec-
tiveness, this study focused attention only on the leadership role. The
emphasis was on the leadership roles of a primary school principal in
improving school effectiveness based on the perceptions or opinions of
the principal and his practicing teachers. These will limit the scope of
investigations and discussions of the study. The overall findings cannot
be generalized to the wider population, but rather they will be used as
to discuss school leadership and to provide some direction for future
research.
Such a study in South Australia was considered important due to
the lack of research in this area, especially in primary schools. The
importance of this study lies then in the fact that it contributes to
clarification of the changing roles of school principals in South Australia
in carrying out educational development, and, as a consequence, in
enhancing their efficiency and effectiveness. Furthermore, the findings
bring a clearer understanding of the leadership roles of the school
principal and provide a basis for other studies that might focus on such
issues at different levels of the school system.

METHOD

Generally, this study can be categorized as descriptive in nature

for it tried to describe a given state of affairs as fully and carefully as
possible (Fraenkel and Wallen, 1990), involving an intensive investigation
 Burhanuddin, The Leadership ofa Principal ill Improving 339

of a 'social unit' (Mason and Bramble, 1989). In this case, the researcher
examined the perceptions and opinions of staff at the Tonsley Park
Primary School in South Australia in terms of the leadership roles of a
school principal in school improvement. Such an approach was chosen
as it enabled the researcher to focus on one aspect of the problem (Bell,
1989) within the context of principalship, namely the perceived leadership
roles of the principal in improving school effectiveness. The study also
included a literature review which provided the understanding and insights
necessary for the development of a logical framework related to the
researched problems (Gay, 1987) used as a basis for designing the
research and analyzing the results.
The study involved the principal, counselor, and 11 teachers from
the Tonsley Park Primary School (TPPS). No sampling was undertaken
(Salisbury, 1993) because there was no intention to draw general con-
clusions for the larger population.
To gather the data systematically, a questionnaire that consists of
two sections of items was developed and used to measure perceptions
of principal leadership roles in general. This was administered to the
principal of the Tonsley Park Primary School, a school counsel or and
11 teachers. Items in the first section were based on the observations
and descriptions of leadership roles made by Sergiovanni (1987), that
were designed to identify the perceived importance of various leadership
roles of a principal in improving school effectiveness. From the research
literature review, ten leadership roles were adapted as the structured
items: exerciser of authority, decision maker, manager, strategist, edu-
cational leader, supervisor, organizer, administrator, team leader, and
initiator (Gay, 1987). Respondents were required to indicate their per-
ceptions on the importance of each role by ranking them in order of
significance, with a 1 indicating the most important and a 10 the least
important. The second section and a set of interview questions were
based on aspects of principal leadership applied in the U.S. in observations
made by Blank (1987). Items in the second section of the questionnaire
consisted of 20 structured questions or statements. Each respondent was
asked to indicate their opinion on the importance of these tasks of the
principal for school improvement by rating them using the Likert scale
(Tuckman, 1978) as: very important, important, useful, minor value, no
value. This section attempted to identify the specific tasks in which a
340 THE JOURNAL OF EDUCATION. December 1997. Volume 4. Special Edition

principal might be expected to provide leadership. As well as completion

of the questionnaires, interviews were held with the principal and school
counselor to obtain information on leadership from the school principal.
This study did not use any statistical tests for it did not include
any observations of two related samples (Fraenkel and Wallen, 1990)
or testing hypotheses (Gay, 1987). Since the number of respondents were
small, the analysis of responses in the questionnaire used tabulation in
the presentation and identified some differences of opinions among the
group of respondents in accordance with the procedure suggested by
Bell (1989). The responses of the interviews were used primarily to
complement responses to the questionnaire. The researcher has summa-
rized the results of the interviews with the principal and the counselor,
highlighting some important points as additional information for analysis
and comparison of the questionnaire findings. All the data were then
analyzed, initially to identify the perceived importance of the leadership
roles of the school principal, and to establish the perceived importance
of those roles in improving school effectiveness. TIle opinions of the
principal and the school staff in this study were identified and then
compared with the information from the literature review.

RESULTS

The analysis of the important leadership roles were conducted by

ranking the mean values obtained by each role, or from 10 leadership
roles adapted as the structured items or indicators in this study. It then
follows that the closer the mean value of each role (item) to 1 the more
important the role as perceived by respondents, and the closer the value
is to 10 the less important the perceived role. Thus it can be stated that
the mean values of each role were: exerciser of authority (7.0), decision
maker (5.15), manager (5.38), strategist (5.38), educational leader (4.92),
supervisor (8.84), organizer (6.69), administrator (3.15), team leader (2.8)
and initiator (5.61).
TIle data shows that respondents clearly regarded the category of
team leader as the most important, while supervisor was the least im-
portant. For further analysis, the mean values of the perceived leadership
roles can be discussed by considering the following scale (table 1).
 Burhanuddin, The Leadership a/a Principal in Improving 341

Table 1 Rating Scale and Its Category

Rating Scale Category

2.8-4.8 high
4.9-6.9 medium
7.0-9.0 low

It is clear that two leadership roles were highly rated by all re-
spondents: team leader and administrator. Six leadership roles received
medium leadership ratings: decision maker, manager, strategist, educa-
tional leader, initiator, and organizer. The two roles of exerciser of
authority and supervisor received low ratings.
A comparison within the responses of the principal was made
through the rank ordering of mean values obtained by the principal and
the practicing teachers. In this case, except for the role 'exerciser of
authority', all the other roles were ranked differently by the principal
and all respondents. All respondents, for instance, ranked 'team leader'
as 1st, while the principal ranked it as 5th. 'Administrator' was ranked
by all respondents as 2nd, whereas the principal regarded it as the most
important. Finally, 'Supervisor' was ranked by all respondents as lath
or the least important, while the principal ranked it as 6th.
Additional comments regarding the leadership roles of a principal
were received from the principal. He wrote, in general, that: ' ... this
order will vary according to the skills of people to whom some of these
roles can be delegated in a particular school. A good principal will be
flexible about this'.
111e data analyzed also shows that the principal ranked the decision
maker as the 7th, while the group regarded it as 4th. However, he
commented that this role depends on the kind of decision. Major decisions
should be made with wide consultation with staff, parents, students. Very
minor decisions should be made quickly by the person best fitted to
make them. Principals should ensure effective communication of all
decisions actually happens. Hard to rate this one.
With regard to the important leadership practices a principal might
adopt in improving school effectiveness, there were four major leadership
342 THE JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, December 1997, Volume 4, Special Edition

areas examined in this study within which a principal is expected to

provide leadership. 111ey are instructional improvement and innovation,
staff development, organization and coordination, and school and com-
munity relations. The Likert scale used in the questionnaire showed that
a value of 1 indicated great importance and 5 no value. Respondents
were asked to rate each task in order of importance by assigning such
a scale. Thus, the greater the importance of a given task category the
lower the mean value obtained.
To analyze the results, the data were summarized and discussed
separately according to each leadership area. Based on the weighted
scores obtained by each item, the mean values of each category were
calculated. Finally, the degree of importance obtained by a certain task
was revealed within the main areas ofleadership. To do this, the researcher
simply rounded off the figures of each mean value (for instance, the
main value 1.6 becomes 2 and 2.4 becomes 2) then converted to the
rating scale attached in the questionnaire.
In the area of instructional improvement and innovation, the findings
indicate that four categories were regarded as the important tasks of a
principal with the mean value 2, within which he or she is expected to
have a leadership role: (1) increase educational goal consensus among
staff; (2) initiate curriculum innovation in the school; (3) modify the
curriculum to meet community and student expectations; and (4) utilize
community resources in implementing the curriculum. The remaining
two tasks were seen as useful (with the mean value 2.77), namely: (1)
the conducting of workshops with staff to improve teaching skills; and
(2) making decisions on curriculum or instructional design changes.
In staff development, the data analyzed suggested that four tasks
were regarded as important (with the mean value 1.85-2.23). Those
were: (1) contributing to the selection of new staff; (2) making decisions
on staff placement and scheduling; (3) using staff meeting to deal with
curriculum and instructional matters; and (4) Encouraging and give
direction to teacher's professional growth. While one task: 'make deci-
sions on staff development programmes', was rated as useful with the
mean value 2.85.
In the area of organization and coordination, the important of
principal leadership can be summarized that all respondents rated the
 Burhanuddin, The Leadership of a Principal in Improving 343

task 'work cooperatively with staff to ensure more effective use of their
skills', as the most important with the mean value of 1.46.
The other categories obtained the mean value of 2, rated by re-
spondents as important tasks of a principal, namely: (1) organizing school
activities so as to achieve overall purpose; (2) solving problems and
make decisions relating to school purpose; (3) promoting health and
stability of staff and students; (4) representing the interests and expec-
tations of staff to the department (5); and providing systems and organ-
izational arrangements for efficiency and effectiveness.
In the area of school and community relations, all the categories
observed were rated as important tasks with the mean values (1.77-2.17).
They were: (1) encouragement of parents participation in solving school
problems; (2) encouragement and facilitate parent visits to the school;
and (3) development of regular and systematic methods of reporting to
parents on school activities.
The separaterank ordering of each item from the 20 leadership
tasks revealed that all respondents (the principal, teachers, and counselor)
agree that the principal should 'work cooperatively with staff to ensure
more effective use of their skills'. Such a task had a mean value of
1.46. On another hand, the respondents did not necessarily expect a
principal to make decisions on staff development programs (with the
mean value of 2.85). To simplify analysis of the overall results, the
mean values obtained by each item were converted to the following
scale (Table 2).

Table 2 Converted Scale and Its Category

Rating Scale Category

1.4-1.9 high
2.0-2.5 medium
2.6-3.1 low

Based on this scale, the following leadership practices or tasks with

a mean value of 1.4-1.9, were seen as most important: (1) promote
health and stability of staff and students; (2) work cooperatively with
344 THE JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, December 1997, Volume 4. Special Edition

staff to ensure more effective use of their skills; (3) encourage parent
participation in solving school problems; (4) provide systems and or-
ganizational arrangements for efficiency and effectiveness; (5) encourage
and facilitate parent visits to the school; and (6) encourage and give
direction to teacher's professional growth.
The following leadership practices with a mean value of 2-2.5
(medium) were considered to show moderate importance: (1) increase
educational goal consensus among staff; (2) contribute to the selection
of new staff; (3) make decisions of staff placement and scheduling; (4)
organize school activities so as to achieve overall purpose; (5) solve
problems and make decisions relating to school purpose; (6) represent
the interests and expectations of staff to department; (7) initiate curriculum
innovation in the school; (8) modify the curriculum to meet community
and student expectations; (9) use staff meeting to deal with curriculum
and instructional matters; (10) utilize community resources in imple-
menting the curriculum; and (11) develop regular and systematic methods
of reporting to parents on school activities.
Only three tasks received relatively low ratings within the mean
value of 2.6-3.1. 1110se were (1) conduct workshops with staff to
improve teaching skills; (2) make decisions on staff development pro-
grams; and (3) make decisions on curriculum or instructional design
changes.
The areas where the leadership practices of principals have the
greatest effect were revealed by analyzing the concerns by the principal
and all respondents. From the four leadership areas observed, it can be
concluded that the principal regard 'school and community relations' as
the most important or as the first priority of his leadership endeavours
ask, ranked it as 1st, whereas the others (practicing teachers) ranked it
as 2nd. Surprisingly, 'curriculum or instructional improvement and in-
novation' was ranked by the principal and all another respondents as
the last priority of concern, and ranked it as 4 .th. The data indicated
that, except in curriculum or instructional improvement and innovation,
the principal and all respondents differed as to the importance of the
principal leadership.
Since the questionnaire were constructed in two sections of items,
a comparison of the results of each should be analyzed in order to shows
whether there significant differences. The findings of section 1 indicates
 Burhanuddin, The Leadership ofa Principal in Improving 345

that the team leader role was selected by all respondents as the most
important role a principal should provide in improving school effective-
ness. It was suggested that a principal use a team approach, providing
support and facilitate the team decisions. This is in accord with the
findings of section 2, where the most important task of a principal was
to work cooperatively with staff as a team. This is also related with the
overall ranking of the leadership areas, that organization and coordination
were regarded as the highest priority within which a principal must
provide more leadership. The achievement of such a responsibility is
facilitated through the role of a principal as a team leader.
The leadership role of 'supervisor' observed in section 1 was con-
sidered by respondents as the least important. This was also supported
by the findings of section 2 where the use of principal influences in
making decisions on staff development received a low rating. This was
also supported by the findings of the observation of leadership areas,
where most respondents did not expect a high degree of principal in-
volvement in instructional improvement and innovation as a part of
supervisory function in the school setting.
TIle principal, however, wrote that some decisions might be made
quickly by the person best fitted to make them. In other words, it depends
on the kind of decisions. Major decisions should be made with the
involvement of the whole staff, parent, and community.

DISCUSSION

TIle analysis of the data on leadership roles of the principal revealed

that 'team leader' was identified by all respondents as the most important
role, and ' supervisor' as the least important. The trends highlighted in
the literature review supported this finding, where democratization of
school administration in the Australian context has prompted the necessity
of a team leadership approach by which a principal and his/her staff
members work together to establish an effective school (Sergiovanni,
1987; Watkins, 1991).
TIle differing perceptions of teachers and the principal revealed in
this study were congruent with the views expressed in the literature
review, especially with respect to the complexity of the role (Heck,
346 THE JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, December 1997, Volume 4, Special Edition

1991), its ambiguity (Duignan, 1987) and different definitions of lead-

ership (Bass, 1990).
On the other hand, whereas the responses of all respondents as a
group produced the ranking of the above-mentioned two roles, the prin-
cipal rated the category 'administrator' as the most important and 'or-
ganizer' as the least important. Although none of the research works or
professional literature reviewed considered a model of the rank ordering
of the leadership roles, such a finding significantly contradicts the new
dimensions for principal leadership in Australia (Caldwell, 1992) that
moved from the principal as an 'administrator' to the principal asa
'leader' (Blank, 1987; Berry and Ginsberg, 1990; Heck, 1991).
TIle concern of this study is not to exclude either administration
or leadership, but rather to examine the concern as to whether the
emphases are in balance and support each other (Sergiovanni, 1987).
Moreover, it was clearly suggested that leadership should be emphasized
over administration in terms of better performance of the schooling
system (Sergiovanni, 1990). Some different opinions were expressed in
the principal's responses in the questionnaire and the interview. He
considered that he might differ from other principals, in that, while
others may emphasize curriculum and leadership changes, he put priority
and emphasis on the basic administrative functions. TIle most important
role of a principal is to make sure that the basic running of the school
is good, and that administrative functions must work well.
Discussing the overall ranking with the literature review, neverthe-
less, indicated that none of the observed roles were found to be unnec-
essary, even though two roles (supervisor and exerciser of authority)
received low ratings. This suggests that all 10 leadership roles examined
in this study have some effects on improving school effectiveness.
TIle analysis of leadership practices and principal leadership areas
showed that all respondents strongly supported the view that a principal
should work cooperatively with staff to ensure more effective use of
their skills. They regarded this as the most important role and expected
the principal to provide leadership in this category. This finding appears
to be consistent with the concept of 'team leadership' and with the
perceptions expressed in the literature review that successful schools
tend to be better organized, and coordinated (Michigan State Department
of Education, 1974) with school staff members working together to
provide a support mechanism for a principal {Sergiovanni, 1987; Hord,
 Burhanuddin, The Leadership of a Principal in Improving 347

et al., 1983). It was also supported by a changed view of principals as

endorsed by Sergiovanni (1987, cited in Watkins, 1991:31) in a recent
address to the Victorian Association of Principals of Secondary Schools,
that as transfonnative leaders, the principals 'are more concerned with
the concept of power to than power over. They are concerned with how
the power of leadership can help people become more successful...'
Of the 20 tasks investigated, all respondents regarded the task
'making decisions on staff development' as the least important. This
suggests a low priority for this role. 111is, however, differs from the role
expectations revealed in the literature review where the decision making
process as being an essential area for an effective principal where he/she
should have more power (Bossert, et al., 1982) particularly in making
decisions impacting on the school organization and the improvement of
teaching and learning (Glasman, 1984; Pashiardis, 1993). Although there
might be strong involvement of School Councils and the Education
Department in producing school policies as examined in this study,
Chapman (1987) suggested that the principals' decision making respon-
sibility has expanded to meet new situational demands. In the context
of school improvement, this study may suggests that a principal should
have more influences in the school policy and decision making process.
A further discussion based on the overall ranking of the 20 tasks
indicated that all respondents considered the certain categories as the
most important tasks which relate to the issue of school organization,
community, and staff development. They include: (1) to promote health
and stability of staff and students, (2) to work cooperatively with staff;
(3) to encourage parent participation in solving problems; (4) to provide
systems and organizational arrangements for efficiency and effectiveness;
(5) to encourage and facilitate parent visits; and (6) to encourage and
give direction to teacher's professional growth. But, none of the instruc-
tional tasks received a high rating from respondents. This is also consistent
with the rank ordering of concerns made by the principal and his staff
who perceived this concern as the last priority. Of the other tasks, most
are related to the issues of instructional and staff development and
received medium and low ratings.
Since there was no intention to compare all the tasks with a particular
preference, the researcher focused only on the significant issue: the
instructional task. Most of the opinions expressed in the literature review
contradicted the above finding, suggesting that a principal should be
348 THE JOURNAL OF EDUCATION. December 1997. Volume 4. Special Edition

more involved in dealing with the curriculum and instructional matters

(Lipham and Hoeh, 1974; Smyth, 1980; Bossert, et al., 1982; Jordan,
1986). The most crucial issue is to focus leadership roles on instructional
issues (Berry & Ginsberg, 1990) or as pointed by Heck (1991) 'providing
strong educational leadership'. Based on the observations made by
Caldwell (1992), this emerged as a new dimension that involves 'the
nurturing of a leaming community' including students, teachers, parents
and others with stakes and interest in the school. It was also suggested
that since this aspect directly related to improved teaching and learning,
a principal should provide increased leadership in this area in order to
achieve the overall school goals successfully.
However, as revealed in the interview, the principal emphasized
administrative responsibility as more important than curriculum and
leadership because the situation needed it. For example, the need to deal
with the emerging and the diverse needs of the students and staff, the
Department policies, and community, more administrative activity was
required in order to provide better arrangements. This is in accordance
with the findings of Blank (1987:72) that 'principals tend to be leaders
with specific aspects of school organization and with issues that are
related to district policies and priorities'.
It was found that a principal tends to be expected to provide
leadership in terms of school organization/coordination, staff develop-
ment, and school and community relations. Similar views were also
revealed in the observations made by Blank (1987). While the areas of
instructional leadership is considered less important, it is still considered
to be part of the leadership role of the principal, and once again, this
reflects the findings of the literature review (Blank, 1987).

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

Conclusions
Based on the findings of this study, the following conclusions may
be drawn: (1) The most important leadership role in school improvement
is 'team leader', in which a principal is strongly expected to use a team
approach, providing support and backing to team decisions. While other
roles were also found to have some effect on improving school effec-
tiveness, the roles of exerciser of authority and supervisor received low
ratings; (2) Principals and their staff may have significantly different
 Burhanuddin, The Leadership ofa Principal in Improving 349

opinions on perceptions of the 'team leader' role. The principal ranked

it as 5th, while all respondents regarded it as 1st in importance. Except
for the role 'exerciser of authority', all the other roles were also ranked
differently by the principal and all respondents; (3) All identified lead-
ership tasks were found to be important. However, the overall ranking
indicated that all respondents most strongly agreed that a principal should
work cooperatively with staff to ensure more effective use of their skills.
On the other hand, they did not necessarily expect a principal to make
decisions on staff development programmes; (4) The category of tasks
known as 'organization/coordination' is the most important area in which
the leadership practices of principals are likely have the greatest effect;
and (5) The category of 'curriculum or instructional improvement and
innovation' is the least important area in which a principal might provide
strong leadership.

Suggestions
This study sought the opinions of the principal and his practicing
teachers in a school setting regarding leadership roles of a principal in
improving school effectiveness. Although there was not any intention to
draw general conclusions for all schools or a wider population, however,
the findings remind us (teachers, principals, and educational experts in
Indonesia) to highly participate in the development programs of educa-
tional management. In the future, the principals will find some challenges
as resulted from the new trends and educational reform movements all
over the world, or especially Asia. They are supposed to play key roles
in operating a modem school successfully, which need special skills in
.educational leadership that fit with the existing situations. In this concern,
there is no other choice that a principal should be able to apply an
effective management system in a school system or a college, reflecting
the emerging conditions of the society.
To clarify the leadership roles of a principal, it is also suggested
that: (1) a similar study should be carried out involving other respondents
such as parents, students, school clerical assistants and Education De-
partment officers; (2) a comparative study of leadership roles should be
carried out between different school settings; (3) a further study should
be held to reveal the factors affecting principal leadership behaviours;
350 THE JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, December 1997, Volume 4, Special Edition

and (4) a correlational study regarding the perceived leadership roles

and their effects on school effectiveness should be conducted.

REFE}U:NCES .
Barth, R.S. 1990. Improving Schools from Within. San Fransisco: Jossey - Bass.
Baskett, S. and Miklos, E. 1992. Perspectives of Effective Principals. The
Canadian Administrator, 32 (1): 1-9.
Bass, B.M. 1990. Bass & Stogdill's Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research,
and Managerial Applications. New York: The Free Press.
Bell, J. 1989. Doing Your Research Project: A 'Guide for First-Time Researchers
in Education and Social Science. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Berry, B. and Ginsberg, R. 1990. Effective Schools, Teachers, and 'Principals:
Today's Evidence, Tomorrow's Prospects. In Cunningham, L.L. and
Mitchell, B. (Ed), 1990. Families, Communities, and Schools. Chicago,
Ill: The National Society for the Study of Education.
Blank, RK 1987. The Role of Principal as Leader: Analysis of Variation in
Leadership of Urban High Schools. Journal of Educational Research, 81
(2): 69-79.
Bossert, S.T., Dwyer,D.C., Rowan, B. and Lee, G.V. 1982. The Instructional
Management Role of the Principal. Educational Administration Quarterly,
18 (3): 34-64.
Boyer, E. 1983. High School: A Report on Secondary Education in America.
New York: Harper and Row.
Braun, J. 1989. Communicating the Vision. The ATA Magazine, 69 (3): 23-25.
Caldwell, B.J. 1992. The Principal as Leader of the Self-Managing School in
Australia. Journal of Educational Administration, 30 (3): 6-18.
Caldwell, B. J. and Spinks, J. M. 1992. Leading the Self-Managing School.
London: The Falmer Press. .
Chapman, J. 1987. The Principal in a New Network of Human Relationships.
In Simpkins, W.S., Thomas, AR. and Thomas, E.B. (Eds.). 1987. Principal
and Change: The Australian Experience. Armidale, N.S.W.: University of
New England Teaching Monograph.
Davies, L. 1987. The Role of the Primary School Head. Educational Management
and Administration, 15 (1):43-47.
Dow, LL and Oakley, W.F. 1992. School Effectiveness and Leadership. Alberta
Journal of Educational Research, 38 (1): 33-45.
Duignan, P.A 1987. The Principal's Role: Problems and Pressures. In Simpkins,
W.S., Thomas, AR. and Thomas, E.B. (Eds.). 1987. Principal and Change:
The Australian Experience. Armidale, N.S.W.: University of New England
Teaching Monograph. .
 Burhanuddin, The Leadership of a Principal ill Improving 351

Finn, C.E. 1987. How To Spot an Effective Principal. BSL Main Collection,
67 (1): 20-22.
Fraenkel, J.R. and Wallen, N.E. 1990. How to Design and Evaluate Research
in Education. New York: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.
Gay, L.R. 1987. Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and
Application. Columbus: Merrill Publishing Company.
Getzels, J.W., Lipham, J.M., and Campbell, R.F. 1968. Educational
Administration as a Social Process: Theory, Research, Practice. New
York: Harper & Row, Publishers.
Glasman, N. 1984. Student Achievement and the Principal. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 6 (3): 283-'-297.
Glasman, N. and Nevo, D. 1988. Evaluation in Decision Making: The Case of
School Administration. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Harber, C. 1992. Effective and Ineffective Schools: An International Perspective
on the Role of Research. Educational Management and Administration,
20 (3): 161-162.
Heck, R.H. 1991. Towards the Future: Rethinking the Leadership Role of the
Principal as Philosopher-King. Journal of Educational Administration, 29
(3): 67-76.
Heck, R. H., Larsen, T.J. and Marcoulides, G.A. 1990. Instructional Leadership
and School Achievement: Validation of a Causal Model. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 26 (2): 94-122.
Hord, S.M., Hall, G.E. and Stiegelbauer, S. 1983. Principals Don't Do It Alone:
The Role of the Consigliere. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of
the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada, April.
Jordan, I. 1986. Principals of Effective Schools are Strong Instructional Leaders.
Unicorn, 12 (3): 169-173.
Koontz,H., Q'Donnel, C., and Weihrich, H. 1984. Management. New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Lipham, J.M. and Hoeh, J.A. 1974. The Principalship: Foundations and
Functions. New York: Harper & Row Publishers.
Macpherson, R.J.S. 1993. Administrative Reforms in the Antipodes:
Self-Managing Schools and the Need for Educative Leaders. Educational
Management and Administration, 21 (1): 40-50.
Mason, EJ. and Bramble, W. J.1989. Understanding and Conducting Research.
Applications in Education and the Behavioral Sciences. New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Michigan State Department of Education. December 1974. Michigan
Cost-Effectiveness Study: An Executive Summary.
Pashiardis, P. 1993. Group Decision Making: the Role of the Principal.
International Journal of Educational Management, 7 (2): 8-1l.
352 THE JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, December 1997, Volume 4, Special Edition

Power, C. 1989. Assessing the Effectiveness of Secondary Schooling in Australia.

Studies in Educational Evaluation, 15: 47~50.
Salisbury, J. 1993. Understanding Research in Education. Hand Out, School
of Education, Flinders University of South Australia.
Sergiovanni, TJ. 1987. The Principalship: A Reflective Practice Perspective.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Sergiovanni, TJ. 1990. Value - Added Leadership: How to Get Extraordinary
Performance in Schools. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers.
Smyth, WJ. (Ed). 1980. The Principal As an Educational Leader: To Be, or
Not To Be? The Australian Administrator, 1 (1): 1-4.
Stoner, lA.F., Collins, R.R. and Yetton, P.W. 1985. Management in Australia.
Sydney: Prentice Hall of Australia Pty Ltd.
Tuckman, B.W. 1978. Conducting Educational Research. New York: Harcourt
Brace Jovanovich, Inc.
Watkins, P. 1991. Devolving Educational Administration in Victoria: Tensions
in the Role and Selection of Principals. Journal of Educational
Administration, 29 (1): 22~38.
Wright, R. and Renihan, P. 1985. The Saskatchewan Principalship Study: A
Review of the Literature. (Report No. 127). Regina, SK: Saskatchewan
School Trustees Association Research Center.