Term of Award
Doctor of Education in Education Administration (Ed.D.)
Document Type and Release Option
Dissertation (open access)
Copyright Statement / License for Reuse
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Department of Leadership, Technology, and Human Development
Committee Member 1
Committee Member 2
The purpose of this quantitative study was to examine the relationship between teachers’ perceptions of their principals’ instructional leadership behaviors and transformational leadership behaviors. In addition, the study examined the relationship between teachers’ perceptions of their principals’ instructional leadership and a principals’ level of degree and principals’ teaching area background. This quantitative study was driven by two teacher questionnaires: the Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale (PIMRS) and the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ). The subscales examined in the PIRMS include framing the school goals, communicating the school goals, supervising and evaluating instruction, coordinating the curriculum, monitoring student progress, protecting instructional time, maintaining high visibility, providing incentives for teachers, promoting professional development, and providing incentives for learning . The subscales utilized for the MLQ include idealized influence (attributes), idealized influence (behaviors), inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. In addition to the teacher questionnaires, the principals answered two demographic questions about their level of education and their principal teaching area background. A multiple regression analysis was used to determine if the transformational leadership subscales, principals’ level of degree, or principals’ teaching area background are predictors of effective instructional leadership. The findings from this study depicted a strong relationship between instructional and transformational leadership behaviors. In addition, “intellectual stimulation,” “idealized influence (behavior),” and “individual consideration” are the three best predictors of instructional leadership behaviors as identified by the regression analyses. The findings from the study did not find that a principals’ level of education or a principals’ teaching area background are predictors of effective instructional leadership as perceived by teachers.
Hallinger, P. (2007). Research on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership: Retrospect and prospect. The Leadership challenge- Improving learning in schools. Retrieved from: Http://research.acer.edu.au/research?conference?2007/7 Hallinger, P. (2008). A review of PIMRS studies of principal instructional leadership: Assessment of progress over 25 years. Paper prepared for presentation at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA) May 14, 2008, New York. Bass, B. M. (1999). Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(1), 9-32. Hallinger, P. (2008). A review of PIMRS studies of principal instructional leadership: Assessment of progress over 25 years. Paper prepared for presentation at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA) May 14, 2008, New York. Hallinger, P. (2011). A review of three decades of doctoral studies using the principal instructional management rating scale: A lens on methodological progress in educational leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(2), 271-306. Avolio, B.J. & B.M. Bass (2004). Multifactor leadership questionnaire manual (Third Edition). Lincoln, Nebraska: Mind Garden, Inc. Avolio, B.J., Bass, B.M., & Jung, D.I. (1999). Re-examining the components of transformational and transactional leadership using the multifactor leadership questionnaire. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 441-462.