An investigation of the relationship among principal instructional leadership, collective teacher efficacy and teacher job satisfaction: A structural equation modeling approach
Publisher: name: The University Of Kurdistan
Year: 2021

description: Although a significant body of research on instructional leadership has been\ncarried out in Western societies, few empirical studies have only recently\nbeen carried out in the developing and non-western societies. The present\nstudy was carried out to shed more light on leadership research in Iran, in\nwhich previous empirical studies on principal instructional leadership are\nvery few. In so doing, the present study was set to explore the relationship\nbetween principal instructional leadership, teacher collective efficacy, and\njob satisfaction in Iranian primary schools. In fact, the current study sought to\nunderstand how principal instructional leadership and teacher collective\nefficacy influence job satisfaction in Iran. Survey data collected from 292\nteachers were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis and structural\nequation modeling (SEM). This study employed a cross-sectional, survey\nresearch design. Data were collected from teachers in 12 public primary\nschools in Kurdistan province. The schools included grades 1- 5. Data were\ncollected in fall semester of the academic year 1396/1397. A letter of\ninvitation, consent form, and the survey package were given by hand or sent\nelectronically to teachers in the schools. Participants were given one week to\nrespond to the questionnaire. The sample of respondents consisted of 193\nmales and 99 females. Three instruments were used to collect the required\ndata for the present study. Principal Instructional Leadership (PIL) was\nmeasured by the 50 item version of the Principal Instructional Management\nRating Scale-Teacher Form (PIMRS; Hallinger, 1982, 1990, 2015). It should\nbe noted that the PIMRS does not measure ‘leadership effectiveness’, but rather the degree of role engagement. Collective Teacher Efficacy (CTE) was\nmeasured by a twelve-item scale developed by Goddard and colleagues\n(Goddard et al., 2000) and adapted by Leithwood (2010). The scale employed\na seven-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 7 (Strongly\nAgree). Job satisfaction was measured with two items from Carpara et al.\n(2003) on a 9-point scale, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree.\nThe researchers followed Brislin’s (1970) backwards translation method for\ntranslating the surveys from English to Persian. The original English versions\nwere first translated into Persian by a professional translator. Then, the\nPersian version was translated back into English by a second native speaker\nwho was unfamiliar with the original version. The two versions were then\ncompared, discrepancies identified and discussed, and refinements made to\nthe Persian version. The researchers also rephrased some items to ensure their\nsuitability for Iranian educators without altering the original meaning.\nAlthough each of these instruments had been subject to extensive testing for\npsychometric properties in previous research, we tested the measurement\nproperties of the Persian translated version of the three instruments in order\nto validate their use in the Iranian context. Reliability was measured with\nCronbach's alpha test of internal consistency. Construct validity of the scales\nwas assessed through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The results\nsubstantiated the hypothesized conceptual model suggesting positive\nrelationships among principal instructional leadership, collective teacher\nefficacy and teacher job satisfaction. It was also revealed that principal\ninstructional leadership had a positive effect on collective teacher efficacy\nand teacher job satisfaction. In other words, teachers will have more\ncommitment, professional engagement, and job satisfaction when they find\ntheir school managers' educational management behaviors appropriate. The\nfindings of the present study will offer theoretical and pedagogical\nimplications for school leadership in Iran. It also adds to the existing body of\nresearch on the effects of principal instructional leadership in non-Western,\ndeveloping societies\nIt is thought that teachers' perceptions of collective efficacy are related to school\nprincipals' leadership behaviors. School leadership comprises influencing and\ndirecting the school staff to accomplish common objectives (Leithwood &\nReihl, 2005). The sense of collective efficacy can develop in teachers,\ndepending on school leadership behaviors (Ross & Gray, 2006). Collective\nefficacy beliefs are expected to increase as school leaders increase the sense\nof efficacy in teachers and their beliefs that they can improve the quality of\neducation as a group. In this respect, because it is thought that teacher selfefficacy and school leadership behaviors are related to collective teacher\nefficacy, the relationship between these constructs seems to be logical. In\nother words, as school principals' effective leadership behaviors increased,teachers' collective efficacy beliefs also increased in their schools. At the\nsame time, school principals' effective school leadership behaviors positively\nand significantly predicted collective teacher efficacy. These findings of the\nstudy are partially in line with those that report a relationship between school\nadministrators' different leadership behaviors and collective teacher\nleadership (Brinson & Steiner, 2007; Calık et al., 2012). Strong leadership\nfacilitates teacher collaboration and enables teachers to overcome difficulties\n(Bandura, 1993). School leadership pertains to influencing and directing\nothers for the accomplishment of common objectives to improve the quality\nof education at school (Leithwood & Reihl, 2005). Enhancing teachers'\ncollective efficacy is related to improving certain organizational and personal\ncharacteristics. Bandura (1997) stated that collective efficacy and selfefficacy are fed from similar sources. These sources include experiencing\nsuccess, others' experiences, verbal persuasion, and affective states; the most\nimportant of these sources is experiencing success. Therefore, practices that\nsupport these sources can be said to increase teachers' collective efficacy. In\nthis regard, there are studies that explain the influence of leadership\nbehaviors on collective teacher efficacy. Accordingly, school leaders\nrewarding teacher success and featuring the achievements at school (Marzano\net al., 2005), activities related to organizational learning, and conversations\nwith teachers about ensuring student achievement (Bandura, 1997) strengthen\nperceptions of collective efficacy. Collective teacher efficacy is a promising\nconstruct for promoting understanding of ways schools can foster student\nachievement (Tschannen-Moran & Barr, 2004, p. 189). Functioning as a\ngroup-related perception and a school-level variable, collective teacher\nefficacy is concerned with teachers’ beliefs and perceptions of the\neffectiveness of their school as a whole and their collective perceptions of the\nability to exert positive educational differences to the learners (Goddard &\nGoddard, 2001). Playing the same role as self-efficacy beliefs do in\nindividual’s performance, collective efficacy affects collective performance\nin a variety of fields such as business, sports, politics, and education.\nTeachers’ collective efficacy is conceptualized as the beliefs teachers hold\ntowards their collective competencies to positively change the functioning of\ntheir learners (Bandura, 1993). Leithwood (1993) stated that leaders'\ncontributions to the school sets the tone of a school culture that can develop\nteacher collaboration and a collective identity. School leaders raising a\npowerful vision reveal collective leadership.