Assignment 3: Chapter 1 3 (Draft)

Title of Research:The Effect of Principal Leadership Practice and Its Influence on Students Extra-Curricular Achievement.

MARGARET LIM PEI TEE(YHA 130006)

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY1.0 INTRODUCTION1.1 Background of the studyLeadership is not about personality; its about behavioran observable set of skills and abilities. The face of leadership is changing. Traditional ideas of leadership as positional, hierarchical, directive, autocratic and task driven are increasingly less effective as expectations change and unpredictability and uncertainty become part of the modern world. Global, economic and societal changes mean that leaders are now required to be more responsive, adaptable, creative and collaborative. Leadership today requires a more relational approach, and engaging and developing individuals and teams in time of uncertainty and change necessitates a different level of leadership and style -Ladkin (2010). The leadership in education means directing the training of minds towards the achievement of school goals which is set by the school head / principal. (Syed Hassan Waqar)stated the principal is expected to be an instructional leader who can support, inspire, and develop students and teachers, as well as communicate effectively with all publics within the educational environmentP. Hallinger, & Heck, R. H. (1998)found that a school leaders leadership style is the main factor that greatly influences school effectiveness and should be underscored. The Malaysias National Education Blueprint (2013 2025) is the current point of reference for Malaysian school leaders to benchmark their school reform efforts towards sustaining school effectiveness. School plays an important role in the construction of the next generation (Rahimah, 2005). Shift 5 of this (Blueprint, 2012), identifies with the past findings of and asserts that the quality of school leaders is the second biggest school-based factor in determining student outcomes, after teacher quality. Past studies had also found that effective school leadership is essential to ensure ongoing school improvement.(Muijs, 2006; Simkins, 2003).Besides, studies from several countries across the world have linked school achievement with effective school leadership. (Bush, 2008; Ghamrawi, 2011; Harris, 2004) The principal is view as a key agent, the cornerstone of a good school, without a principals leadership to raise students achievement, schools cannot succeed. Researches on distributed leadership, sustained leadership, and lateral capacity building deepen understanding of educational leadership. (Elmore, 2000),(Spillane & Camburn, 2006) , (Hargreaves, 2008) and Fullan (2005, 2006) expand the concepts of leadership related to school improvement. Marzano, Waters, and McNulty (2005)identify leadership qualities that are positively linked to student learning. Through their meta-analysis of research, Owings et al. (2006)concluded that effective leadership affects student achievement. Therefore theres an overall consensus that principals leadership is a dynamic process dependent upon the relationship between the leader and those being led. In the school context, the being led referred to the teachers and the students.According to Leithwood (2000b) there are six types of leadership styles practiced in schools: instructional leadership, transformational leadership, moral leadership, participative leadership, managerial leadership and contingency leadership. At the same time, the challenge of restructuring the education system and all kinds of uncertainties had led to a change from instructional leadership to transformational leadership. (Leithwood, 2000b) However, researches regarding educational leadership still state that instructional leadership (P. M. Hallinger, J. F., 1985) and transformational leadership (Griffith, 2004; Ross, 2006) proved significant to the success of the schools. 1.2 Research Problem There has been a great deal of researches done to prove that there is a significant influence of principals leadership style on the school achievement. However, theres very little researches which addressed the relationship between leadership style of principals and school achievement in co-curricular activities, nor has any research revealed the efficacy of senior assistant of CCA towards the relationship between leadership style of principal and school co-curricular achievement. 1.3 Purpose of the StudyThis study aims to identify the influence of principals leadership style on the self-efficacy of senior assistant of co-curricular activities (CCA) and school co-curricular achievement. Additionally, this study examine whether the senior assistant of co-curricular activities (CCA) self-efficacy is a valid mediator of the relationship between transformational and transactional leadership of principal and school co-curricular achievement.1.4 Research Questions1. What is the level of school achievement in co-curricular activities, in term of management, students participation and achievement?2. What is the leadership style of the school principal?3. What is the level of self-efficacy among the senior assistant of co-curricular activities?4. Is there any relationship between principals leadership style and the school achievement in co-curricular activities?5. Is principals leadership style affecting the self-efficacy of the senior assistant of co-curricular activities?6. Is self-efficacy of the senior assistant of co-curricular activities a factor of the school achievement in co-curricular activities?7. Is the self-efficacy of senior assistant of co-curricular activities a mediator of the relationship between principals leadership style and school achievement in co-curricular activities?8. Is there any relationship between the demographic factors and principals leadership style?9. Are demographic variables moderator of the relationship between principals leadership style and school achievement in co-curricular activities?10. Is the model of principal leadership style and school achievement inco-curricular activities valid?1.5 Significance of the studyThe Malaysian school curriculum is committed to developing the child holistically along intellectual, spiritual, emotional, and physical dimensions, as reflected in the National Education Philosophy. Programmes and initiatives to develop non-academic components are present both during formal class time as well as through a variety of after-school co- curricular activities. (Blueprint, 2012) Every child in Malaysia national schools is expected to participate in at least 1 sport, 1 club, and 1 uniformed body. The Ministry has made participation in co-curricular activities a requirement for graduation and scholarships for further education. Therefore, the results of this study it is important to be used as a guide to various parties such as the following:1. To provide information to the principals, the District Education Office, the Department of Education and the Ministry of higher education, regarding the real situation for co-curriculum management by the principals in secondary schools. Educators may utilize the findings to better understand which leadership styles enhance a positive school culture and improve student achievement in co-curricular activities.2. Find the right person for the right job The Ministry will be able to institute a succession planning process for principalship, that identifies and cultivates high-potential individualsensure that there is a ready pool of candidates that can be called upon as soon as an opening is available.

The study explored the relationship between principal leadership style and school culture as assessed by teachers and the principal at the secondary school level. Differences between schools in terms of size, demographics, and principal and teacher experience were explored. Principals may utilize the findings to better understand which leadership style enhance a positive teachers efficacy and improve student achievement in general, and in co-curricular activities specifically.

1.6 Limitations and further research First, the data will be largely gathered by means of self-reported questionnaires and are subject to biases. In this respect, the study does not differ from previous research.However, recent research suggests that self-reported data are not as limited as was previously believed, and people often perceive their social environment accurately. Regarding leadership style, in contrast to most research, centering on leaders perceptions of their own behaviors, the study of subordinates perceptions of the leaders behavior might be most useful in examining linkages between organizational variables and leadership styles. Second, in this study new issues is examined the relationship between principals leadership style and school achievement in co-curricular activities. However, since only secondary schools were involved, more research is needed to examine the appropriateness of the measures to high schools and matriculation colleges. Third, regarding the generalizability of the outcomes, I am aware that since the sample was limited to the state of Selangor, any attempt to generalize the studys ndings, Leadership style conclusions, and implications to the whole population of teachers in the entire country must be approached with caution. Thepresentresultsprovideanimpetusforfurtherresearchregardingthe self-efficacy of senior assistant of co-curricular activities and its signicance for the achievement of the schools co-curricular activities in relation to the principals learning style. The results of this study also require further analysis of the inuence of other variables, in an attempt to extend our understanding of how schools can improve their achievement in co-curricular activities.

1.7 Operation Definition Co-curricular activities (CCAs): previously known as Extracurricular Activities (ECA) are activities that educational organizations in some parts of the world create for school students. They are activities which all school students must attend alongside. In Malaysia, the policy was introduced by the Ministry of Education, which believes extra activities for school students are a means to enhance social interaction, leadership, healthy recreation, self-discipline and self-confidence. Effectiveness (EFF): a leaders effectiveness as seen by both self and others in meeting the job-related needs of followers, representing followers needs to higher- level managers, contributing to organization effectiveness, and performance by the leaders work group (Bass, 1985). Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ 5X): a survey instrument that measures perceived leadership styles. School Improvement Questionnaire (SIQ II): a survey instrument that measures school climate. Student achievement: an assessment of student performance in a given discipline or skill area. Teacher efficacy: self-perceived belief in ones capabilities to bring about desired outcomes (Bandura, 1993) Transactional leadership (TF): a leadership style that occurs when leaders intervene to make some correction and generally involves corrective criticism and negative reinforcement. The leader engages in active management and intervenes when followers have not met standards or problems arise. Transformational leadership (TS): a leadership style that inspires and motivates followers to demonstrate commitment to a shared vision. Leaders engage in behaviors that clearly communicate high expectations to followers and encourage collegiality and cohesiveness.

CHAPTER 2REVIEW OF LITERATURE

1.0 Introduction The purpose of the study is to identify the influence of principals leadership style on the self-efficacy of senior assistant of co-curricular activities (CCA) and school co-curricular achievement. Additionally, this study examine whether the senior assistant of co-curricular activities (CCA) self-efficacy is a valid mediator of the relationship between transformational and transactional leadership of principal and school co-curricular achievement. The topics discussed views of leadership style (Transformational &Transectional Leadership), School Performance (Co-curricular & Sports Achievement), Self -Efficacy of The Senior Assistant of Co-Curricular Activities, Leadership Styles and school achievement. The conceptual framework is also discussed in this chapter.

2. Leadership StyleLeadership style is a leader's style of providing direction, implementing plans, and motivating people toward reaching organizational or personal goals. There are many different leadership styles that can be exhibited by leaders in the political, business or other fields. Leadership style research has been dominated by self-report perceptions of subordinates about their leader's behaviour patterns in decision making, interpersonal relations, planning, instructional leadership, and management efficiency. Categories of leadership styles have increased in the postmodern literature. Among the more recent categories are charismatic leadership, social justice leadership, gender and race leadership, moral leadership, and spiritual leadership. The two rather global categories of leadership styles chosen for this study are transactional and transformational leadership style.

2.1Transactional LeadershipThis leadership style starts with the idea that team members agree to obey their leader when they accept a job. The "transaction" usually involves the organization paying team members in return for their effort and compliance. The leader has a right to "punish" team members if their work doesn't meet an appropriate standard. Transactional leadership, assumes that people are motivated strictly by reward and punishment. This style generally does not appeal to the values, morals, or other intrinsic characteristics of most people. The transactional leader is highly focused on task, provides very clear direction, and oversees productivity in detail. When a subordinate fails, the next step is a penalty or punishment.(Bass, 1985)

2.2Transformational LeadershipIn the 1970s and 1980s, researchers such as J. M. Burns and B. M. Bass defined transformational leadership theory. According to Burns (1978), transformational leadership occurs when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality (p. 20), and results in a transforming effect on both leaders and followers. Bass (1985) built on Burns (1978) work and described transformational leadership in terms of the impact that it has on followers; followers feel trust, admiration, and loyalty toward the leader. Transformational leaders motivate followers to do more than the latter originally expected to do. Transformational leadership consists of four factors charisma or idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized considerationTransformational leadership raises the level of commitment of members and empowers them to affect positive changes in the organization. Transformational leaders are described as exhibiting charismatic leadership behaviors. These leadership styles can be effectively utilized in various organizational settings and can be applied in schools to affect growth in improving student learning and school culture. Transformational leadership grows out of the assumption that people will follow a leader who inspires and motivates them. In this theory, the leader motivates and inspires by developing a compelling vision, selling that vision, and focusing on developing relationships with followers as a teacher, mentor, and coach. The transformational leader engages subordinates by spending a great deal of time building trust and demonstrating a high level of personal integrity. The ultimate goalas the name saysis to transform followers goals, vision, and sense of purpose, molding them into a cohesive team. This type or style of leadership often focuses on the big picture and on concern for people and their individual needs 2.3School Performance (Co-curricular & Sports Achievement)School performance was always measured by academic achievement. However, Each year, schools in Malaysia are required to conduct a self-assessment using the Standard of Quality Education Malaysia, or Standard KualitiPendidikan Malaysia (SKPM), on five dimensions related to school quality: leadership and direction, organisational administration, administration of students welfare, curricular and co-curricular activities, teaching and learning, and student outcomes. For the last dimension, the schools consider both academic and non-academic outcomes including co-curricular participation and the attitudes, behaviours, and moral values demonstrated by students at school.Co-curricular involvement provides students with opportunities to develop their individual talents and interests outside of a formal classroom setting. Such activities also provide excellent leadership opportunities (Malaysia, 2012) Co-curricular activities are educational experience performed outside the classroom. According to Abd. Alim (1995) co-curricular activities are continuation and strengthening of the curriculum program in the classroom. Indeed co-curricular activities important to help complement and enhance the learning process in the classroom, in addition it can show changes in behavior and greatly influenced the character of students. Therefore, the Ministry of Education require all schools to implement co-curricular activities and each student were required to engage in three types of co-curricular activities, namely the uniformed groups, the clubs and societies and the sports and games groups. Abd. Alim (1995)concluded that co-curricular activities is a field learning process based on various activities planned and carried out by the schools. Schools Inspectorate has been using Standard Quality of Education (SKPM) since 2004 to assess the capability and potential of school administrators for supervising teaching and learning process, managing resources and raising excellence students. SKPM is a self-rating exercise requested by MOE done by schools and this process is monitored and supervised by the district education office (PPD) and state education department (JPN). This study is looking into last dimension Element 12, which is the students outcome in the area of Academic, Co-curricular Activities and Behavior, focusing on sub-element 12.6: Achievement of Students in Co-curricular Activities. 2.3.1School Co-curricular and Sports Achievement (Aspect of Management)Proper and effective management is important to ensure the success of CCA in school. Co-curriculum and sports management are: 2.3.1.1Management of stocks and sports equipment inventory 2.3.1.2Development plan 2.3.2School Co-curricular and Sports Achievement (Aspect of Students Participation and Achievement)Records of students participation and achievement in CCA and sports events and competition in various levels provide evidences for the School Co-curricular and Sports Achievement.2.3.2.1Participation of students in CCA and Sports events in various levels.2.3.2.2Achievement of students in CCA and Sports Competitions in various levels.

2.4Self -Efficacy of The Senior Assistant of Co-Curricular ActivitiesMost people believed that school management is only due to the leadership of the principal (Abdullah, 2004), without taking into consideration that leadership of all the school leaders also played their part in contributing towards the success of a school (Mahmood, 2005). In Malaysia context, school leaders consist of a group of school administrators headed by the school pricipal. They are the senior assistant in administration and academic, senior assistant of Students Affair, Senior Assistant of Co-Curricular Activities, Senior Assistant of Afternoon Session and Subjects Senior Teachers. Past research on school achievement had shown that school leadership has strong influence towards the success of a school besides raising the self-confidence and professional efficacy of the teachers. (Griffith, 2004; Leithwood, 2000a; Ross, 2006)Efficacy is the beliefs and professional knowledge and the manners in which these beliefs and professional knowledge influence teaching behaviors. An individuals perception of his or her ability is often a better predictor of their capabilities than what he or she can actually accomplish, since self-efficacy beliefs help determine what an individual does with the knowledge and skills that he or she possesses. An individuals efficacy beliefs can influence and enhance their accomplishments and well being in numerous ways. Principal efficacy has been found to influence leadership behavior, such as effort, innovation, planning and organization, persistence, resilience, enthusiasm, willingness to work with difficult students, and commitment to teaching and career longevity. Motivated and confident teachers are more effective. Principals make decisions based upon their beliefs; these decisions and actions have significant impact upon the learning (M. Tschannen-Moran, Hoy A. M, & Hoy, W., 1998). This study looks into the Self Efficacy of The Senior Assistant of Co-Curricular Activities. Being a member of school administrators, they are setting the school policy on Co-curricular activities and sports under the directive of the school principal, in the mean time they faced teachers advisers of various school clubs and societies, which they are giving out instructions and directives. 2.4Leadership Styles and school achievementA review of leadership styles within school environments has suggested that there are similar yet distinct differences in the styles used (Mortimore, 1997). (Judge (2004); Mahmood, 2005) supported the findings that the success of a school depends on the leadership styles of the school principal. Kythreotis, Pashiardis, and Kyriakides (2010)provide some empirical support for the model of direct effects of principals leadership style on student academic achievement, moreover student achievement gains were found to be related with five factors at the school level: the principals human resource leadership style and four dimensions of organizational culture. P. Hallinger (2011)further suggested that leadership does not directly impact student learning; rather, its impact is mediated by school-level processes and conditions. Moreover, his study has suggested that school leadership both inuences and is inuenced by these school-level conditions (P. H. Hallinger, R.H. , 2010).2.5 Conceptual Framework

MEDIATORSelf Efficacy of Senior Assistant of Co-curricular Aktivities

DEPENDENT VARIABLESchool Co-curricular & Sports AchievementManagementStudents Participation and Achievement Record

INDEPENDENT VARIABLEPrincipal Leadership StyleTransformational Transactional

DEMOGRAPHYGenderEducational BackgroundYear of Service as PrincipalLocation of School

Fig. 2.1: The Conceptual Framework of the studyBased on the discussion above, this study aimed to examine the relationship between the principals leadership style on the self-efficacy of senior assistant of co-curricular activities (CCA) and school co-curricular achievement. This study also examine whether the senior assistant of co-curricular activities (CCA) self-efficacy is a valid mediator of the relationship between transformational and transactional leadership of principal and school co-curricular achievement. 2.6ConclusionThere has been a great deal of researches done to prove that there is a significant influence of principals leadership style on the school achievement. However, theres very little researches which addressed the relationship between leadership style of principals and school achievement in co-curricular activities, nor has any research revealed the efficacy of senior assistant of CCA towards the relationship between leadership style of principal and school co-curricular achievement. School excellence depends on effective leadership. While the students' performance depends on the quality of teachers in school, the quality of teachers instruction depends on teachers ' self-beliefs for his ability to influence students performance. Based on the above premises, in order to enhance students performance, the self-efficacy of teachers is an important deciding factor. Therefore, this study focused on studying the effects of direct and indirect leadership of school principal toward students achievement, specifically achievement in co-curricular activities and sports.

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGYThe purpose of the study was to explore the relationship among the perceived principal leadership style, self-efficacy of Senior Assistant of Co-curricular Activities, and school achievement in co-curricular activities. This chapter will discuss the instrumentation and methodology utilized to gather and analyze the data for the study.ParticipantsThe population for this study included 272 secondary schools with 272 principals and 272 senior assistant of co-curricular activities employed in the state of Selangor, at central of Peninsular Malaysia. The schools that participated included a mix of urban, suburban, and rural schools from diverse geographic areas of the state and were fairly representative of the state in terms of socio-economic status, urban-rural context, and size. Prior to data collection, it was determined that a minimal acceptable sample size would be 50% or 272 respondents. The sample included VariablesThe independent variables in this study are perceived principal leadership style that included Charisma, Intellectual Stimulation, Individualized Consideration, Contingent Reward, management-by-Exception, and Laissez-Faire as measured by The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire 5X (MLQ; Bass &Avolio, 1990). The leaders form was developed to be completed by an individual to measure his/her self-perceived leadership styles. The dependent variable is the school co-curriculum achievement assessed by the Instrument PencapaianKokurikulumSekolah (IPKS) survey. The outcome of the IPKS survey is used as the dependent variable in this study because the researcher attempted to discover whether leadership styles impact school achievement in co-curricular activities. The mediator, senior assistant of co-curricular self-efficacy, is measured by principal sense of efficacy scale by Megan Tschannen-Moran .InstrumentationMultifactor Leadership QuestionnaireThe Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Form 5X was developed and tested by Avolio and Bass (2004). The instrument is copyrighted by Bass and Avolio and published by Mind Garden, Inc. It was developed to measure aspects of transformational, transactional, and non-leadership leadership styles as well as outcomes of leadership. The 36-item instrument contains 12 scales: Idealized Influence (Attributed) Idealized Influence (Behavior) Inspirational Motivation Intellectual Stimulation Individualized Consideration Contingent Reward Management-by-Exception (Active) Management-by-Exception (Passive) Laissez-faire Leadership

Idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualizedconsideration were transformational leadership style scales measured by the MLQ. Contingent reward and management-by-exception were transactional leadership stylescales and laissez-faire leadership was the non-leadership component. Table 3-1 provides a sample statement in each area.TF - Idealized influence Talks enthusiastically about what needs to be accomplished.

TF - Inspirational motivation Instills pride in me for being associated with him

TF - Intellectual stimulation Seeking differing perspectives when solving problems

TF - Individualized consideration Considers me as having special needs, abilities, and aspirations form others

TR Contingent reward Discusses in specific terms who is responsible for achieving performance targets

TR - Management-by-exception Focuses attention on irregularities mistakes and exceptions and deviations from standards

LF Non-leadership Is absent when needed

Table 3-1. Transformational leadership scale statements All of the leadership style scales have four items per scale. Leadership styles scores for each of the nine leadership style scales represent the average scores for the items in each scale. Transformational leadership styles scores are derived by averaging the scores from the items contained in the idealized influenced, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration scales; a total of 20 items. Transactional leadership styles scores were derived by averaging all of the scores fromthe items in the contingent reward and management-by-exception scales, a total of 12 items. Because laissez-faire leadership was the only scale measuring non-leadership, non-leadership style score was equivalent to the laissez-faire leadership scale score.In their MLQ technical report, Bass and Avolio (1995) discussed the construct validation process associated with the MLQ-5X. An early version was evaluated by a panel of six leadership scholars, and their recommendations were included in the final instrument development. Since that time, 14 samples have been used to validate and cross-validate the MLQ Form 5X. The MLQ-5X was selected for use in this study because of the data indicating reliability and validity of the instrument. Alpha reliability coefficients for the MLQ-5X rater form scales have all been shown to be above .82 with the exception of management-by-exception (.79) and laissez-faire (.77). The reliability coefficients for the rater form subscales yielded a range of .77 through .95.School Co-curriculum Achievement Instrument / Instrument PencapaianKokurikulumSekolah (IPKS) School Co-curriculum Achievement was assessed through the Standard of Quality Education Malaysia-School Rating Instrument (SKPM 2-IPS: Elemen III 8.2, 11.2 and 12.6). First part of the items were multiple-choice demographic questions. The remaining 3 parts were self-assessed calculation done by the school.

Figure 2: Sample of calculation of 10% achievement marks for co-curricular activities (Elemen 12.6)Principal Sense of Efficacy Scale (PSES)The PSES (M. Tschannen-Moran & Gareis, 2004) is used to assessed the sense of efficacy of senior assistant of co-curricular activities, taken into consideration that senior assistant of co-curricular activities is one of the school leaders. The PSES is an 18-item scale which assesses a principals belief about his/her management skills. Respondents rate their confidence on a 9 point Likert-type scale from 1 (none at all) to 9 (a great deal). The PSES consist of three subscales (Efficacy for Management, Efficacy for Instruction, and Efficacy for Moral Leadership). Respectively, sample items include prioritize among competing demands of the job, facilitate student learning in your school, and promote ethical behavior among school personnel. Score can range from 18 to 162, with higher scores reflecting higher sense of principal efficacy. Construct validity was supported by negative correlation with work alienation and positive correlation with trust in teachers. The scale has good internal consistence with alphas of .91 for the total scale and .86 to .89 for the subscales.Design of the StudyThis section includes information about testing the hypotheses, drawing the sample, controlling for biases, and preparing the instrument and survey packets. Three self-assessed surveys are used in this study, with each survey requiring less than 20 minutes to complete. Names of all principals and senior assistants are obtained from the states Department of Education. Data on leadership, sense of efficacy and school co-curricular activities will be collected by the instruments previously discussed.Data CollectionThe population for this study will be drawn from secondary schools in the state of Selangor, central of Malaysia. Permission to conduct the study was obtained from the State Department of Education. Secondary schools in the state will be sent a full packet and received a phone call from the researcher. A follow-up phone call will be made to schools that did not respond. For each school, a single transformational leadership score was computed by first averaging all the principals responses for each survey statement associated with each transformational component: idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. The average individual principals transformational component scores are then averaged to arrive at a single composite transformational leadership score. A similar procedure will be followed for transactional per the MLQ procedure outlined in Avolio and Bass (2004)

SummaryThis chapter described the process that the researcher will go through in order to complete the study. Research instruments are identified that would allow for objective analysis and demonstrated adequate reliability. Chapter 4 will presents the analysis of data for this study. Descriptive statistics will be presented to help the reader better understand the data. Multiple regression will be used to explain the findings.

REFERENCESAbd. Alim, A. R. (1995). Pengurusan Kokurikulum. Shah Alam: Penerbit Fajar Bakti.Abdullah, A. S. (2004). Kepimpinan unggul tonggak pengurusan pendidikan cemerlang. Jurnal Pengurusan Dan Kepimpinan Pendidikan, 14(1), 18-30. Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (2004). Multifactor leadership questionnaire. Mind Garden, Menlo Park, CA. Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28, 117-148. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. . New York: Free Press.Blueprint, M. (2012). Malaysia Education Blueprint: 2013 - 2025.Burns, J. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.Bush, T. (2008). Leadership and management development in education. London: Sage.Elmore, R. F. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership: Albert Shanker Institute Washington, DC.Ghamrawi, N. (2011). Trust Me: Your School Can Be Better-A Message from Teachers to Principals. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 39(3), 333-348. Griffith, J. (2004). Relation of principal transformational leadership to school staff job satisfaction, staff turnover, and school performance. Journal of Educational Administration, 42(3), 333-356. Hallinger, P. (2011). Leadership for learning: Lessons from 40 years of empirical research. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(2), 125-142. Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1998). Exploring the principals contribution to school effectiveness. . School effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(2), 157-191. Hallinger, P. H., R.H. . (2010). Collaborative leadership and school improvement: understanding the impact on school capacity and student learning. School Leadership and Management, 30(2), 95-110. Hallinger, P. M., J. F. (1985). Assesing the instructional leadership behavior of principals. . Elementary School Journal,, 86(2), 217-248. Hargreaves, A., Fink, D. ( 2008). Distributed leadership: democracy or delivery? Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 229-240. Harris, A. (2004). Distributed leadership and school improvement: Leading or misleading? . Educational Management and Administration, 32(1), 11-24. Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. . (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity. . Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 755-768. . Kythreotis, A., Pashiardis, P., & Kyriakides, L. (2010). The Influence of School Leadership Styles and Culture on Students' Achievement in Cyprus Primary Schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 48(2), 218-240. Ladkin, D. (2010). Rethinking Leadership: A New Look at Old Leadership Questions (New Hirizons in Leadership studies). Massachusetts, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. . (2000a). The effects of transformational leadership on organizational conditions and student engagement with school. Journal of Educational Administration, 38(2), 112-129. Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. . (2000b). The effects of transformational leadership on organizational conditions and student engagement with school. Journal of Educational Administration, 38(2), 112-129. Mahmood, H. (2005). Kepimpinan profesionalisme : Satu utopia? . Pemimpin, 5, 39-51. Malaysia, K. P. (2012). Malaysia Education Blueprint (2013-2025): Preliminary Report - Executive Summary

Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School Leadership that Works: From Research to Results: ERIC.Mortimore, P. (1997). Key characteristics of effective schools. Jendela Minda,, 1(1), 1-35. Muijs, D., & Harris, A. (2006). Teacher led school improvement: Teacher leadership in the UK. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 961-972. Owings, W. A., Kaplan, L. S., Nunnery, J., Marzano, R., Myran, S., & Blackburn, D. (2006). Teacher quality and troops to teachers: A national study with implications for principals. NASSP Bulletin, 90(2), 102-131. Rahimah, H. A. (2005). Kepengetuaan dan kepimpinan sekolah: Pembangunan dan penambahbaikan pengajaran. Jurnal Pemimpin, 5, 1-10. Ross, J. A., & Gray, P. (2006). School leadership and student achievement: The mediating effects of teacher beliefs. . Canadian Journal Of Education, 29(3), 789-822. Simkins, T., Sisum, C., & Muhammad Memon. (2003). School leadership in Pakistan: Exploring the headteachers role. School effectiveness and School Improvement, 14(3), 275-291. Spillane, J. P., & Camburn, E. (2006). The practice of leading and managing: The distribution of responsibility for leadership and management in the schoolhouse. American Educational Research Association. Syed Hassan Waqar, D. K. S. A Study about the Leadership Styles of Public and Private School Principals Journal of Elementary Education, 18 (1-2)((1-2)), 5-20. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Gareis, C. R. (2004). Principals' sense of efficacy: Assessing a promising construct. Journal of Educational Administration, 42(5), 573-585. Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy A. M, & Hoy, W. (1998). Teacher Efficacy: Its Meaning and Measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2 (Summer 1998)), 202-248.