Instructional and transformational leadership: alternative and complementary models?

Abstract

Instructional and transformational leadership are two of the most important, and enduring, leadership models, as noted by Hallinger (1992). However, they are different in one important respect. Instructional leadership is primarily about the direction of leaders’ influence because of its focus on improving teaching and learning (Bush, 2011; Bush and Glover, 2014). The processes by which improvement occurs are secondary to this orientation. In contrast, transformational leadership is mainly about how leaders exert their influence on followers. Leaders are thought to inspire their colleagues to increase their followers’ commitment to organizational goals (Leithwood et al., 1999). A link between instructional and transformational approaches is possible if organizational goals focus on learning but this is by no means inevitable. The first article in this issue, by Paul Calderella, compares the effects of instructional and transformational leadership on student achievement. Drawing on a survey of 590 teachers in 37 elementary schools in the Intermountain West of the USA, the author compared the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire and the Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale to assess their relative impact. He concludes that instructional leadership is more effective than transformational leadership practices, partly because its specific focus is on student achievement, as noted above. In the second article, David Dunaway discusses superintendents’ perceptions of the school improvement process in the South-Eastern USA, drawing on the business model developed by Edwards Deming. The author received 226 valid responses to his online survey and notes a lack of fidelity between superintendents’ beliefs about the process and how they perceive those tasked with implementation He concludes that further research is required to establish if the improvement process led to improved teaching and learning. Scott Marsh’s article is the first of three to focus on leadership in Australia. He examines leadership for learning in Australian independent schools. He identified 10 key elements of this theme, through an extensive literature review, and used this to develop questions for an online survey of teachers in seven independent schools in Sydney. He received 293 replies (a 47% response rate) and concludes that they reflect a distributed view of leadership and a positive attitude towards team work. The second Australian article, by Sue Saltmarsh, addresses the role of the principal in fostering parent-school engagement. The data from 22 focus groups of parents in New South Wales show that parents regard the principal’s role as the key to the success of parent–school relations. The author notes that, despite recent interest in distributed leadership, as also noted by Scott Marsh, the parents confirmed the persistence of a top-down view of the single-handed leader. Whether Educational Management Administration & Leadership 2014, Vol. 42(4) 443–444 a The Author(s) 2014 Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1741143214526830 emal.sagepub.com