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

net/publication/358734170

School Administrators Leadership Styles in the New Normal

Article · February 2022

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.6136856

CITATION READS

1 1,827

11 authors, including:

Dale Linox
World Journal of Education and Humanities Research
91 PUBLICATIONS 4 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Dale Linox on 20 February 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 E-ISSN 2687-6778

World Journal on Education and Humanities Research

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
Vol. 3, Issue 1, pp. 81-92
Received, December 2021; Revised January 2022;
Accepted February 2022
DOI: https:doi10.5281/zenodo.6136856

School Administrators Leadership Styles in the

New Normal
Mary Jane Z. Beceril, Marile C. Carcallas, Jennelyn D. Bentillo, Heide S. Omilig,
Marjorie A. Nellas, Marita C. Pacaldo, Edgardo B. Cabilla, Pedrito S. Ocba

Corresponding Author: Mary Jane Beceril, mjbeceril@gmail.com

Abstract: The majority of administrators have difficulty identifying and implementing

the most effective leadership styles in their organizations. Thus, this study evaluated
the administrators' instructional and administrative leadership style and methods. As a
result of these findings, this research attempts to established the impact of instructional
and administrative style leadership as a whole on teacher performance outcomes and to
identify potentially helpful intermediate elements generated by certain leadership
behaviors. Admins' leadership in this new normal requires more research into how they
can effectively help instructors in online learning contexts, according to the data.
Findings from this study also open a new research topic on school principalship,
performance, and effectiveness.

Keywords: Instructional and administrative leadership, New normal setting

1. Introduction

Because of today's fast-paced developments and ever-increasing needs, educational

institutions are being compelled to become more dynamic (McLoughlin & Lee, 2011;
Handoyo & Anas, 2019). One of the most essential organizational structures is that of
educational institutions, where both input and output are "human." Students with
leadership potential will be identified, selected, and educated in schools that are
arranged to suit the demands of the 21st century information age. The school
administrator is a fundamental part of these organizations (Bridges, 1982; Greenfield
& William, 1995; Waldron & McLeskey, 2010). For educational institutions to remain
viable in the face of changing global conditions, they must have an effective
management style, strong cultural texture, and strategic leadership that is consistent
with the changing world.

Currently, most administrators are having difficulty finding the right leadership style to
use in their administrations (Bafadal et al., 2019; Lee & Mao, 2020) This means that
leaders may help clear up the uncertainty caused by the overlap of tasks in work

Beceril et al., (2022). School administrators’ leadership styles in the new normal
. Copyright (c) 2022. Author (s). This is an open term of Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
www.wjehr.com
 E-ISSN 2687-6778

practices, administration, and command and control at the highest levels of the
management team's work unit by implementing effective leadership practices
(Sirisookslip et al., 2015). Since the majority of educational activities take place in
schools, sustained leadership is of great importance (Kalkan, et al., 2020).

While the link between school leadership and student achievement has been shown in
previous studies, the reality is far more complicated and unexpected (Sharma, 2018).
Findings on this association aren't always clear-cut. A correlation between school
leadership style and school performance has been found in several research. A
principal's leadership style, according to Ubben and Hughes (1992), may help or hinder
the performance of a school by fostering or restricting a productive environment for
students and teachers alike. Effective school leaders, a healthy atmosphere in schools,
and positive attitudes in teachers are generally seen to have a direct or indirect impact
on school performance and student accomplishment (Hallinger & Heck, 1998; Kruger,
Witziers, & Sleegers, 2007; Witziers, Bosker, & Kruger, 2003). However, even though
it appears to be a simple equation, successful school leadership and better school
performance is really rather complicated and unexpected.

Leadership

There has been a shift in the responsibilities of school administrators due to the shifting
nature of leadership within educational institutions. Professionalization of the
principalship (Van der Westhuizen and van Vuren 2007) and a focus on creating a
common vision are two ways this is reflected (Ngcobo and Tikly 2010). For the
principal, this means overseeing resource allocation and assessment, as well as assuring
student safety on the campus and in the building. It is necessary to have these systems
in place to guarantee that teaching and learning are of the highest quality, regardless of
the situation. All educators may be used to their full potential by using dispersed
leadership, as we'll see in more detail below. Leadership style has also garnered great
attention, in addition to an emphasis on the personal traits and jobs and activities of
primary school administrators. A leader's leadership style may be defined as the line
that runs through all of their actions and interactions (De Jong and Van Doorne-Huiskes
1992). A leader's leadership style is influenced by a variety of elements, including the
leader's personality and prevailing set of values.

The notion of leadership is becoming more prevalent in educational literature.

Leadership has been the subject of several books and articles on how to define the term,
what it should include, and the consequences it has. The literature on leadership is rife
with terminology, yet little agreement exists on what leadership is and how it should be
practiced. Ribbins and Gunter (2002) attempted to map the area of leadership studies
by comparing and contrasting the notions of administration, management, and
leadership, revealing the enormity of the complexity in the subject. Vision, planning,
and policymaking were once considered the first three steps in the administration
process. Consequently, the terms "administration" and "management" were merged into
a single concept. There are others who believe that the term "leadership" encompasses
everything from policy to principles to vision. According to Richmon and Allison
(2003), a quest for a clear definition of leadership is a futile endeavor since it does not
exist. To this, Krüger (2010) adds his voice of agreement, noting that leadership can be
understood in many ways, including as a process of influence, a process of leading and

Beceril et al., (2022). School administrators’ leadership styles in the new normal
. Copyright (c) 2022. Author (s). This is an open term of Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
www.wjehr.com
 E-ISSN 2687-6778

following, a personality trait, a mode of communication, a means of achieving goals, a

means of establishing structure, and a means of igniting change.

Leaders, according to Msila (2011), should deliberate whether they want to function in
an instructional or transformative framework. In South Africa, instructional leadership
is becoming more widely accepted as a viable strategy for school reform. There has
been insufficient emphasis paid to the methods through which change might be
achieved, such as the requirement for modeling, monitoring, and professional
communication. Through high quality classroom observation and discussion, as well as
consistent standards for both student and educator conduct and practice, these may be
achieved.

The study of what elements contribute to better education is an important subject of

school leadership research. It has a tangential relationship to educational changes. This
study topic has examined and assessed the necessity of investing in school leadership
improvements. They include Elmore (1996, 2004) and Fullan (2009), as well as Harris
(2009b), Harris (2009a), Louis (2007), and Hargreaves (2009, 2009; Hargreaves &
Fullan; 2009; Hargreaves & Goodson; 2006; Hargreaves & Shirley, 2012). In all of
their studies, they have emphasized the role of school leadership in improving education
results and in the implementation of policies and reform programs. Many studies have
focused on policies and their content, but not on the reform processes themselves or the
surrounding contexts. As a result, several researchers have expressed concern about this
gap in knowledge. There is a lack of attention to the political, historical, and long-term
components of transformation in education leadership theory. A real illustration of this
are the generational transformations in teachers and school leadership that have taken
place over the past few decades as a result of large-scale economic and demographic
changes.

Other others have been more hesitant regarding the role of school leadership in the
process of change When analyzing school culture and environment on school
transformation, Lindhal (2011) found that leading reform and considerable progress
might be challenging. Schools, change processes, and the leader's position are all
intricately intertwined. Furthermore, there have been unreasonably high hopes for
leadership development. We need to be cautious and not demand too much from school
leaders and their accomplishments, as Gronn (1997) even referred to the "romantic of
leadership" (p. 281).

Other studies have examined how school leaders' attempts to enhance education are
affected by their leadership positions. School leadership changes can be better
understood by examining the impact of school leadership on student outcomes, which
is an essential part of this line of research. Many studies, conducted over the last three
decades, show that strong leadership in schools is critical to improving student
achievement. The impact of school leadership has been studied over the past 52 years
by Hallinger (2014). 38 high-quality scientific research have been found by him that
can assist assess the influence of school leadership on educational outcomes findings
.'s Some of the most significant contributions to school leadership research and
development have come from Leithwood, Seashore Louis, Anderson, and Wahlstrom
(2004); Robinson et al. (2009); as well as Witziers, Bosker and Kruger (2003) in the
United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States. Together, these studies show that
school leadership has a statistically measurable impact on educational outcomes; that

Beceril et al., (2022). School administrators’ leadership styles in the new normal
. Copyright (c) 2022. Author (s). This is an open term of Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
www.wjehr.com
 E-ISSN 2687-6778

school leaders have an indirect influence; that they help create the conditions for
learning; and that there are specific leadership practices that actually help improve
education outcomes.

There is no denying that educational institutions, like any other business, require
capable administration and leadership. The promotion of a culture of lifelong learning
and teaching is a challenge for everyone in the field of school leadership and
administration (Cruz et al., 2016). Everyone has their own way of thinking about what
leadership is, but according to recent research by Taylor (2020), the most universal
consensus is that a good leader must have a strong grasp of interpersonal impact. There
are some who are born with this capacity, and perhaps that is what sets effective leaders
apart from those who are just ordinary. No school in the 180 assessed by Nannyonjo
(2017) was able to increase student accomplishment records without good school
leadership, according to the report. In this study, there is a definite link between
effective school leadership and improved student results. Good school leadership has a
direct influence on student experience and academic success, according to this study.
authority, they must earn it now.

2. Purpose of the Study

Responding to these current issues and challenges pushes the researcher to conduct this
study. It is inevitable that there is a divergence between school head and their
subordinates, the teachers, lead to an unhealthy working environment and social stress
to everyone. This study assessed the administrators in terms of instructional and
administrative leadership that elevate school performance.

3. Research Methodology

This research utilized descriptive research method to gather the information about the
extent is the manifestation of the practices of the school heads in terms of instructional
and administrative leadership. The research environment was the selected school in the
province of Cebu. Teacher and Administrators were considered in the study. Research
instrument were adopted from the study of Manatad (2018), it focuses on the
administrative and supervisory leadership style in relation to teaching and learning
process in the school.

A transmittal letter will be prepared and address to the office of the district supervisor,
requesting permission to conduct the study as the request will be approved; the
researcher will start to distribute questionnaires to the administrators and teachers.
Questionnaires will be retrieved and data will be collated. Data and information with
regards to the study will be treated with utmost confidence.

Beceril et al., (2022). School administrators’ leadership styles in the new normal
. Copyright (c) 2022. Author (s). This is an open term of Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
www.wjehr.com
 E-ISSN 2687-6778

4. Results and Discussions

Table 1. Instructional Leadership Style

Instructional Leadership Style Teachers Administrator
Mean VD Mean VD
School Principals manage school operations in 2.08 M 3 WM
accordance to school’s goals.
School heads ensure that teacher’s instruction in 2.02 M 3 WM
classroom aim to achieve goals.
Principals/ school heads utilize student’s 2.17 M 3 WM
performance and examination results in promoting
curricular development.
Principal of school heads use student’s 2.22 M 3 WM
performance levels and examination results to set
goals.
Principals/ school heads endeavor to ensure clarity 2.12 M 3 WM
within the school about the responsibility for
coordination the curriculum.
Principals/School heads make sure that teachers 2.14 M 3 WM
professional development activities are aligned with
school goals and curricular objectives.
Principal /school heads work with teachers to 2.51 WM 3 WM
address weakness and pedagogical problems
Principal/school heads solve problems with 2.41 WM 3 WM
teachers when there are challenges to teaching-
learning in a particular classroom.
Principals/administrators inform teachers about 2.31 WM 3 WM
possibilities to update their curricular knowledge
and instructional skills.
Principals/school heads make frequent 2.49 WM 3 WM
suggestions to teachers on how to improve
instruction in classrooms.
Grand Mean 2.25 WM 3 WM

In order to determine the perceptions of the respondents’ group in terms of instructional

leadership styles of the administrators, the mean results were provided in the table. As
shown in table 1, the statement principal /school heads work with teachers to address
weakness and pedagogical problems got the highest weighted mean of 2.51 which
verbally described as well manifested. While the statement school heads ensure that
teacher’s instruction in classroom aim to achieve goals got the lowest weighted mean
of 2.02, which verbally described as manifested. Overall, the teacher group got a final
weighted mean of 2.25 which verbally described as well manifested. This indicates a
positive result in terms of the instructional leadership style of the administrator. On the
other hand, administrators gave an overall weighted mean of 3 which verbally described
as well manifested. Principals play an important influence in determining the course of
the school, according to Lynch (2015). Principals play a key role in working together
with staff to set clear, quantifiable, and time-based goals for the school that ultimately
lead to improved academic outcomes for students (Halinger, 2003). As a result of these
results, administrators are expected to communicate and promote school-wide goals.

Beceril et al., (2022). School administrators’ leadership styles in the new normal
. Copyright (c) 2022. Author (s). This is an open term of Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
www.wjehr.com
 E-ISSN 2687-6778

Table 2. Administrative Leadership Style

Administrative Leadership Style Teachers Administrator
Mean VD Mean VD
Principals/school head see their role as making the 2.63 WM 3 WM
school accountable internally and to stakeholders
outside the school.
Principals/ school heads ensure that DepEd approved 2.57 WM 3 WM
instructional approaches are explained to new
teachers.
Principals/ school heads make sure that all teachers 2.68 WM 3 WM
are held accountable for improving their teaching
skills.
Principals/school heads focus on convincing 2.42 WM 3 WM
students’ parents of the need for new ideas and
procedures at the school.
Principals/school heads ensure that everyone in the 2.54 WM 3 WM
school follows the official rules.
Principal /school heads significantly involved in 2.61 WM 3 WM
dealing with problems of scheduling of teachers and
courses.
Principal / school heads ensure adequate 2.64 WM 3 WM
administrative procedures in reporting to higher
authorities.
Principals/ school head focus on creating an orderly 2.56 WM 3 WM
and task-oriented atmosphere in the school.
Principals/school head see their role as making the 2.63 WM 3 WM
school accountable internally and to stakeholders
outside the school.
Principals/ school heads ensure that DepEd 2.65 WM 3 WM
approved instructional approaches are explained to
new teachers.
Grand Mean 2.59 WM 3 WM

Table 2 presents how both the administrators and the teachers assessed the
administrative style of the school administrator. As shown in table, the statement
principals/ school heads make sure that all teachers are held accountable for improving
their teaching skills got the highest weighted mean of 2.68 which verbally described as
well manifested. While the statement Principals/school heads focus on convincing
students’ parents of the need for new ideas and procedures at the school goals got the
lowest weighted mean of 2.42 which verbally described as well manifested. Overall,
the teacher group got a final weighted mean of 2.59 which verbally described as well
manifested. This indicates a positive result in terms of the administrative leadership
style of the administrator. Administrators on the other hand, gave an overall weighted
mean of 3 which verbally described as well manifested in terms of administrative
leadership. Administrative leadership, according to Head & Alford (2015) is the
coordination of duties to grow and sustain an organization. An effective administrative
leader is capable of creating systems that safeguard and sustain vital operational
functions to satisfy the demands of stakeholders. Administrative leaders, on the other
hand, establish purpose, encourage employees to achieve a shared vision, and ensure

Beceril et al., (2022). School administrators’ leadership styles in the new normal
. Copyright (c) 2022. Author (s). This is an open term of Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
www.wjehr.com
 E-ISSN 2687-6778

objectives and outcomes are met. This shows that school leaders have a high level of
competence when it comes to running their prestigious institutions.

Table 3. Significant difference (Instructional Leadership)

Variable 1 Variable 2
Mean 2.247 3
Variance 0.030268 0
Observations 10 10
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
df 9
t Stat -13.6869
P(T<=t) one-tail 1.25E-07
t Critical one-tail 1.833113
P(T<=t) two-tail 2.49E-07
t Critical two-tail 2.262157

Table 3 shows the test significant difference between the group respondents in terms of
instructional leadership. The data shows that the p- value P (T<=t) two tail (2.49E-07)
gives us the probability that a value of the t-statistic (-13.6869) would be observed that
it is less than in absolute value than t Critical two tail (2.26). Since the p-value is less
than our alpha 0.05, hence the data reject the null hypothesis that there is no significant
difference between group respondent’s perception on the administrator’s instructional
leadership.

Table 4. Significant difference (Administrative Leadership)

Variable 1 Variable 2
Mean 2.593 3
Variance 0.005601 0
Observations 10 10
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
df 9
t Stat -17.1972
P(T<=t) one-tail 1.71E-08
t Critical one-tail 1.833113
P(T<=t) two-tail 3.42E-08
t Critical two-tail 2.262157

Table 4 shows the test significant difference between the group respondents in terms of
administrative leadership. The data shows that the p- value P (T<=t) two tail (3.42E-
08) gives us the probability that a value of the t-statistic (-17.1972) would be observed
that it is less than in absolute value than t Critical two tail (2.2621). Since the p-value
is less than our alpha 0.05, hence the data reject the null hypothesis that there is no
significant difference between group respondent’s perception on the administrator’s
administrative leadership.

5. Conclusion

School leaders are expected to play a pivotal role in educational systems, in which state
policies regarding decentralization and accountability provide new challenges. The

Beceril et al., (2022). School administrators’ leadership styles in the new normal
. Copyright (c) 2022. Author (s). This is an open term of Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
www.wjehr.com
 E-ISSN 2687-6778

same applies to expectations about innovation, the improvement of quality in education

and the finding of solutions for problems that arise from important changes in the
profiles and background of students entering the school. Findings shown that
instructional and administrative style of leadership were manifested and this report
makes up the balance about the importance of the, relatively l total effect of leadership on
teacher’s performance outcomes and identifies promising intermediary factors which,
stimulated by specific leadership behaviors. Moreover, findings of this study open a new
area of research on school principalship, performance, and effectiveness.

References

Bafadal, I., Nurabadi, A., Sobri, A. Y., & Gunawan, I. (2019). The competence of
beginner principals as instructional leaders in primary schools. International Journal of
Innovation, Creativity and Change, 5(4), 625-639.

Bush, T., Kiggundu, E. and Moorosi, P. (2011), Preparing new principals in South
Africa: the ACE: School Leadership Programme, South African Journal of Education,
31 (1): 31-43

Bridges, E. M. (1982). Research on the school administrator: The state of the art, 1967-
19801. Educational Administration Quarterly, 18(3), 12-33.

De Jong, A. M., & van Doorne-Huiskes, J. (1992). Leiderschapsstijl: verschillen tussen

mannen en vrouwen. Vrouwen, leiderschap en management, 23-36.

Elmore, R. (1996). Getting to scale with good educational practice. Harvard

Educational Review, 66(1), 1–27. https://doi.
org/10.17763/haer.66.1.g73266758j348t33 Elmore, R. (2004). School reform from the
inside out. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Fullan, M. (2016). Coherence. Thousand Oaks, CA: Crowin

Greenfield Jr, W. D. (1995). Toward a theory of school administration: The centrality

of leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31(1), 61-85.

Gronn, P. (1997). Leading for learning: organizational transformation and the

formation of leaders. Journal of Management Development, 16(4), 274–283.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02621719710164553.

Handoyo, S., & Anas, S. (2019). Accounting Education Challenges in the New
Millennium Era. Journal of Accounting Auditing and Business, 2(1), 35-46.

Hargreaves, A., & Goodson, I. (2006). Educational change over time? The
sustainability and nonsustainability of three decades of secondary school change and
continuity. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(1), 3–41. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0013161X05277975

Beceril et al., (2022). School administrators’ leadership styles in the new normal
. Copyright (c) 2022. Author (s). This is an open term of Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
www.wjehr.com
 E-ISSN 2687-6778

Hargreaves, A., & Shirley, D. (2012). The global fourth way. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press

Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. (1998). Exploring the principal's contribution to school
effectiveness: 1980-1995. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(2), 157-
191.

Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of

instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of education, 33(3),
329-352.

Hallinger, P. (2014). Reviewing reviews of research in educational leadership: An

empirical assessment. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50(4), 539–576.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X13506594

Harris, A. (2009b). Does politics help or hinder educational change?Journal of

Educational Change, 10(1), 63–67. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10833-008-9093-7

Head, B. W., & Alford, J. (2015). Wicked problems: Implications for public policy and
management. Administration & society, 47(6), 711-739.

Kalkan, Ü., Altınay Aksal, F., Altınay Gazi, Z., Atasoy, R., & Dağlı, G. (2020). The
relationship between school administrators’ leadership styles, school culture, and
organizational image. Sage Open, 10(1), 2158244020902081.

Kruger, M., Witziers, B., & Sleegers, P. (2007). The impact of school leader variables
on school level factors: Validation of a causal model. School Effectiveness and School
Improvement, 18(1), 1-20.

Krüger, M. L. (2010). Leading schools in the knowledge society: On the way to leaders
of learning in inquiry-based schools. In Global perspectives on educational leadership
reform: The development and preparation of leaders of learning and learners of
leadership. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Lee, S. W., & Mao, X. (2020). Recruitment and selection of principals: A systematic
review. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 1741143220969694.

Leithwood, K., Seashore Louis, K., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How
leadership influences student learning. New York, NY: The Wallace Foundation.

Lindhal, R. A. (2011). The Crucial Role of Assessing the School's Climate and Culture
in Planning for School Improvement. Educational Planning, 20, 16–30.

McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. J. (2011). Pedagogy 2.0: Critical challenges and responses
to Web 2.0 and social software in tertiary teaching. In Web 2.0-based e-learning:
Applying social informatics for tertiary teaching (pp. 43-69). IGI Global.

Beceril et al., (2022). School administrators’ leadership styles in the new normal
. Copyright (c) 2022. Author (s). This is an open term of Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
www.wjehr.com
 E-ISSN 2687-6778

Msila, V. (2011), School management and the struggle for effective schools, Africa
Education Review, 8 (3): 434-449

Ngcobo, T. and Tikly, L.P. (2008), Think Globally, Act Locally: A Challenge to
Education Leaders, Paper presented to the CCEAM Conference, September, Durban

Ribbins, P., & Gunter, H. (2002). Mapping leadership studies in education: towards a
typology of knowledge domains. Educational management & administration, 30(4),
359-385.

Robinson, V., Rowe, K., & Lloyd, C. (2009). The impact of leadership on student
outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational
Administration Quarterly. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44, 635–674

Richmon, M. J., & Allison, D. J. (2003). Toward a conceptual framework for leadership
inquiry. Educational Management & Administration, 31(1), 31-50.

Saowanee Sirisookslip, Wallapha Ariratana, Tang Keow Ngang. (2015). The Impact of
Leadership Styles of School Administrators on Affecting Teacher Effectiveness,
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,Volume 186,2015,Pages 1031-1037,ISSN
1877-0428, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.022.

Sharma, P. (2018). PRINCIPAL’S LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOR AND SCHOOL

CLIMATE: A REVIEW OF RESEARCHES. IMPACT: International Journal of
Research in Humanities, Arts and Literature, 6(4), 289-300.

Vélez, S. C., Lorenzo, M. C. A., GarridoJ, M. M. (2017). Leadership: Its Importance in

the Management of School Coexistence. Procedia–Social and Behavioral Sciences,
237, 169–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2017.02.059

Ubben, G., & Hughes, L. (1992). The principal: Creative leadership for effective
schools. Meedham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon

Yukl, G. (2008). Leadership in organizations. Pearson Education.

Van der Westhuizen, P. and van Vuuren, H. (2007), Professionalising principalship in

South Africa, South African Journal of Education, 27 (3): 431-445

Witziers, B., Bosker, R., & Kruger, M. (2003). Educational leadership and student
achievement: The elusive search for an association. Educational Administration
Quarterly. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34, 398–425. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0013161X03253411

Waldron, N. L., & McLeskey, J. (2010). Establishing a collaborative school culture

through comprehensive school reform. Journal of Educational and Psychological
Consultation, 20(1), 58-74.

Beceril et al., (2022). School administrators’ leadership styles in the new normal
. Copyright (c) 2022. Author (s). This is an open term of Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
www.wjehr.com
 E-ISSN 2687-6778

Witziers, B., Bosker, R., & Kruger, M. (2003). Educational leadership and student
achievement: The elusive search for an association. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 39(3), 398-425.

Xaba, M. (2012), A qualitative analysis of facilities maintenance -- a school governance

function in South Africa, South African Journal of Education, 32 (2): 215-226

Copyright (c) 2022. Author (s). This is an open term of Creative Commons Attribution
License (CC BY). To view a copy of this license, visit
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Beceril et al., (2022). School administrators’ leadership styles in the new normal
. Copyright (c) 2022. Author (s). This is an open term of Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
www.wjehr.com

View publication stats