Transformation of roles and responsibilities of principals in times of change

Abstract

Schools in Abu Dhabi are going through transformation and reform. The New School Model (2010) introduced changes to the curriculum and teaching and learning methodologies. In line with these changes, recently introduced ‘Principal Professional Standards’ and ‘Performance Evaluation’ documents have conceptualized new roles and responsibilities allocated to principals. To enhance the capacity of principals to lead and implement change, the Abu Dhabi Education Council (ADEC) has provided professional development. Within the context of professional development received and in lieu of school changes and reform, this paper focuses on roles and responsibilities of principals and challenges faced as far as implementing them. Semi-structured interviews with 16 principals formed the main source of data collection and analysis. The findings presented examine anticipated roles and responsibilities and challenges faced implementing them as contextualized within the framework of the professional standards and performance evaluation documents.

Keywords

Principal professional development principal evaluation professional standards for principals principal performance school leadership and school reform

Context of the study

The UAE is a federation of seven emirates situated in the southeast of the Arabian Peninsula. Islam is the official religion and Arabic is the official language. Education reforms and changes to the schooling system have become a priority for desirable sustainable development. According to his Highness Sheikh Mohammed Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi, the Deputy Supreme Commander of the UAE Armed Forces and the Chairman of Abu Dhabi Educational Council (ADEC), “the UAE has begun a journey of growth and modernization, as far as reforming the educational system” (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2008, p.1).

Educational reforms in Abu Dhabi are taking place through ADEC, a non-federal government authority established by Sheikh Khalifa in September 2005. ADEC has been allocated the task of developing schools and educational institutions in the emirates of Abu Dhabi. The council, with the Ministry of Education, is in charge of formulating reform plans within the framework of the UAE’s general education policy. ADEC is charged with the task of developing education through curricular, pedagogical and school leadership reforms (Kanaan, 2008).

Educational changes and school reforms

In the UAE, the reform agenda for improving schools is strongly voiced by researchers and government officials (Davies, 1999; Safran, 1997). Dr. Al Khaili states, “we don’t just want to improve our education system, our schools and the performance of our students…we want to be ranked as one of the best education systems in the world” (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2008, p.1). In this climate of reform, principals are seen as catalysts for change, initiating improvement by enacting roles and responsibilities framed by the professional standards and evaluated against performance elements and Irtiqa’a¹, the school self-evaluation process. The government’s desire for change is strongly supported by professional development in building individual and collective school capacity. Professional development for principals is considered a crucial factor enhancing their capabilities to transform schools and implement change in line with the New School Model which, in the early stages, was initiated through the Public Private Partnership scheme². Lifting school performance is tied to the ever-expanding scope of what principals are expected to do with regard to not only meeting the professional standards and performance evaluation criteria, but also fulfilling Irtiqa’a requirements.

Public private partnership scheme and the ‘New School Model’

As part of the reforms to initiate change in education, the Public Private Partnership (PPP) scheme was piloted by ADEC in 2006. The PPP scheme was launched to improve standards in public and private schools. Improving the education system with a focus on raising student achievement witnessed not only the PPP initiative, but also the launch of the New School Model (NSM) in September, 2010. Key elements of NSM are driven by a student-centered learning approach, design of world-class facilities based upon the highest international standards, a technology-rich learning environment and a proactive approach that ensures the health, safety and well-being of all students. The NSM focus on raising students’ performance is claimed to promote free thinkers and independent learners through application of a whole-child philosophical approach (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2010). From September 2010, implementation of the NSM is expected to involve 171 Kindergartens and Cycle 1 schools³. The NSM will be fully implemented across all government schools by the year 2016 (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2012a). Through implementation of NSM, ADEC aims to standardize the curriculum, pedagogy and resources across all public schools in Abu Dhabi.

The NSM is claimed as, “a new approach to teaching and learning…to raise academic outcomes of Abu Dhabi students to the internationally competitive level necessary to achieve the Abu Dhabi economic vision 2030” (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2010). It adopts bilingual teaching (Arabic and English) and the introduction of English as a medium for instruction in Science and Mathematics. The curriculum aims to develop Arabic and English language literacy. Dr. Al Khaili notes that the new curriculum, advanced teaching methods and learning materials and resources will enhance performance by developing the student as a communicator, a thinker and a problem solver appreciative of the UAE heritage and culture (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2008).

Professional standards for principals: Anticipated roles and responsibilities

ADEC has identified five categories of professional standards for principals with delineating roles and responsibilities. ADEC has also devised performance evaluation and professional development responses aligned with the standards. The five professional standards are: ‘Leading Strategically’; ‘Leading Teaching and Learning’; ‘Leading the Organization’; ‘Leading People’; and ‘Leading the Community’. In the following section, each standard is examined within a contemporary literature base underpinned by research.

In terms of ‘Leading Strategically’, ADEC expects principals to, “create an understanding of the vision of learning that is shared and supported by all stakeholders” (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2011, p. 26). Principals, charged with developing a collaborative school vision of excellence and equity, are responsible for setting and achieving goals and targets using appropriate technologies as learning tools and participating in programs of self-development. They are expected to be knowledgeable and able to perform the following task components:

Implementing and communicating ADEC’s strategic plan and vision 2030;

Demonstrating a knowledge of local, national and global educational trends;

Constructing strategic plans and processes for school improvement;

Emphasizing the importance of communication both within and beyond the school;

Utilizing new educational technologies in the delivery of the curriculum and in strengthening the efficiency of school organization;

Involvement and initiating change processes; and

Valuing the need for creativity and innovation.

According to relevant school improvement literature, vision plays an important role in reform and a shared vision offers an organization a sense of direction and unified purpose (Barth, 1990; Day, 2000). Weller et al. (1994) define vision as an all encompassing driving force of organizations to express their unique purpose and philosophy. Barth (1990) claims visions depict, “an overall conception of what the educator wants the organization to stand for; what its primary mission is; what its basic core values are; a sense of how the parts fit together; and, above all, how the vision maker fits into the grand plan” (p. 148). Leading strategically is, however, more than just developing a vision. It concerns creating a shared mission statement with staff and community input (Darling-Hammond et al., 2007); establishing goals; and designing strategic plans that record and monitor progress (Bryson, 1995). The study conducted by Ibrahim and Al-Mashhadany (2012) on the role of educational leaders in tackling change in public schools in Al Ain, UAE, revealed that principals demonstrated a reasonable understanding of their role as strategic leaders, with 50% strongly agreeing on the value of this role, 26% agreeing, 6% expressing some uncertainty, 4% disagreeing and 16% strongly disagreeing. Ibrahim and Al-Mashhadany note that few principals were convinced that it was their role to develop the vision.

The ‘Leading Teaching and Learning’ standard is connected to roles and responsibilities of principals as educational and instructional leaders of schools. Relevant literature attributes the role to: developing, implementing, and evaluating programs through academic and systemic reviews aimed at creation of effective programs in line with changing pedagogies (Bredson and Joanasson, 2000; Meador, 2008); monitoring teacher and student progress; creating positive learning environments (Day, 2000); and influencing teacher learning through involvement in the design, delivery and assessment of professional development outcomes (Bredeson and Johansson, 2000). As lead professionals, principals are expected to raise student achievement (Cotton, 2003; Davis et al., 2005; Hallinger and Heck, 2010; Leithwood et al., 2004). Newman et al. (2000) state: “we recognize the principal’s leadership as a critical force in the school’s capacity to educate students” (p. 264). Davis et al. (2005) explain that principals can influence student achievement in two primary ways: 1) through development of effective teachers, and 2) through effective organizational processes. Despite the literature advocating the role of principals as instructional leaders influencing teaching and learning, Davis et al. (2005) comment that, in practice, few principals act as instructional leaders. Their days are filled with activities of management, scheduling, reporting, handling relations with parents and community and dealing with the multiple crises and special situations that are inevitable in schools. Further, most principals spend relatively little time in classrooms and even less time analyzing instructional strategies with teachers. Principals may arrange time for teachers to meet and engage in professional development but rarely provide intellectual leadership for growth in teaching and monitoring learning. With respect to the ‘Leading Teaching and Learning’ standard, ADEC expects principals to set high standards for teaching and learning, raise student achievement and create collaborative and accountable structures that enhance curriculum delivery. The implementation of this standard requires being knowledgeable about:

ADEC Curriculum Standards;

Strategies for improving achievement;

Development of a culture that motivates students to learn;

Modes of learning and models of teaching;

The use of technology to support teaching and learning;

Strategies for ensuring access, inclusion and diversity; and

Strategies for developing effective teachers.

The ‘Leading the Organization’ standard focuses on principals as organizational leaders. Principals are expected to promote the success of all students through insightful management of the organization, operations and resources to develop a safe, efficient and effective learning environment. Principals in this capacity are charged with writing, reviewing and implementing policies and procedures as needed. Policy transmission to stakeholder groups also falls within this jurisdiction of what principals do to maintain effective organizations. An effective student handbook, for example, can ensure students, teachers, and parents have sufficient understanding on policies and procedures to determine accountability (Meador, 2008). Leading the organization is a highly contextualized activity which means principals must be prepared to change and adapt their strategies to changing environmental conditions (Hallinger and Heck, 2010). In relation to this, Harris (2010) suggests that knowledge about change and management of change is important. Here, the main problem is not the predictable resistance to change or the change itself, but the model employed to bring about change (Harris, 2010). Achieving system-wide transformation requires stakeholders communicating and connecting to drive change forward and aligning effort to purpose. Meaningful change cannot be delivered using existing structures, ideas or capabilities and requires forging, nurturing and sustaining the development of knowledge, skills and competencies with new ways of working (Harris, 2010). In terms of leading the organization, Ibrahim and Al-Mashhadany’s (2012) study showed that 95% of principals acknowledged the need to change first in order to be able to lead change. Principals also attested to the significance of ensuring that the school’s strategic plan is in keeping with that of national aims and understanding the importance of assessing needs before leading change. Of interest in the UAE is that principals continue to be unsure if they have absolute power to implement change that works in the best interest of the learner and in doing what is best from their viewpoint and that of the school’s vision (Ibrahim and Al-Mashhadany, 2012). ADEC’s ‘Leading the Organization’ standard requires principals to initiate shared leadership, develop collaborative management and decision-making styles, effect equitable management of staff resources, develop a culture that promotes self-motivation, provide a safe, secure and healthy school environment and collaborate with others in strengthening organizational capacity. Principals are required to have knowledge on:

ADEC’s organizational structure;

The importance of two-way communication;

Principles and models of school self-evaluation;

Principles and strategies to enhance school improvement;

Planning and implementing change;

Informed decision-making; and

Financial planning and budget management.

Leadership in today’s complex environment requires the efforts of “many rather than a few” (Harris and Lambert, 2003, p. 4) to create change. It requires a ‘new professionalism’ based on mutual trust, recognition, empowerment and support of others (Muijs and Harris, 2003). Leader-centrism (subordination of teacher–follower roles), heroic forms of leadership and anti-leadership arguments have spurred movement towards shared leadership, distributed practice (Gronn, 2002) and development of professional learning communities (Fullan, 2002). Within this frame, Harris (2010) notes the principal’s responsibility, “is primarily to hold the pieces of the organization together in a productive relationship… maximizing the human capacity within the organization” (p. 14). Leading people paves the way for a discussion on teacher leadership and the impact of this on change. York-Barr and Duke (2004) suggest teacher leadership encourages shared practice because it is embedded in the language and practice of educational improvement. The many benefits of teacher leadership include: involvement in decision-making; new learning; increased self-efficacy; and higher levels of morale. ADEC’s ‘Leading People’ standard confirms the role principals play through: developing shared purpose and direction; building and sustaining effective teams; engaging in shared leadership, facilitating productive and positive work relationships; and engaging in rigorous professional development for self and staff. Knowledge components required are:

Developing interpersonal relationships and their value in the school environment;

Leading adult learning and models of continuous professional development;

Pursuing ways to promote individual and team development;

Initiating ways to build and sustain a learning community;

Planning to sustain school improvement; and

Being aware of the impact of change on people and schools.

Principals’ ability to influence the structure, culture and mission of the school is well documented in the literature. The National Staff Development Council, for example, cite principals as key players who provide strong leadership in staff development through their advocacy, support, and ability to influence others (National Staff Development Council, 1995). Similarly, the Standards for School Leaders articulate knowledge, dispositions, and performance competencies that principals need to promote the success of all students by advocating, nurturing, and sustaining a school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning and staff development (Interstate School leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC), 1996). However, as Golde (1998) points out, traditional school structures and norms often mitigate against the development of learning communities where all staff are committed to continuous learning. In such circumstances, part of the principal’s role is to help people inside and outside of the school unfreeze current values, expectations, structures and processes so new ways of thinking about teaching and learning can be considered (Bredeson, 1999). As Dufour and Berkey (1995) suggest, focusing on people is the most effective way to change any organization, and it can be argued that “organizations do not change, only individuals change” (p. 2). To accommodate this, principals need to create conditions which promote the growth and development of professionals within their schools (DuFour and Berkey, 1995). As Fullan (2002) notes, when the momentum for change involves the majority of people within an organization then transformation can occur (Fullan, 2002). If this premise is accepted, then principals must be involved in creating conditions and opportunities which enable school reform and development to occur in an attempt to alter professional practice (Fullan, 2000). ADEC’s standard of ‘Leading the Community’ draws together the following elements: maintaining effective communication with all stakeholders; collaborating with people within the school community; developing productive partnerships with external agencies, industry and commerce; liaising with agencies, organizations and ministries for the well-being of students and families; and incorporating national heritage and culture into the fabric of the school. In light of this, the knowledge competencies needed include:

Knowledge of the importance of current issues and trends in education;

The benefit of using local community resources; and

Work of agencies, organizations and ministries and opportunities for collaboration.

The above standards and elements are displayed in Table 1. They map the newly anticipated roles and responsibilities of principals. Each standard is delineated into corresponding elements which guides principals in fulfilling their performance evaluation and ADEC’s school self-evaluation–Irtiqa’a approach.

Table 1.

Principal performance evaluation and professional standards (ADEC, 2011).

Standard: Leading Strategically: Principals are visionary leaders of the school
Leading strategically	Element 1: Vision and strategic goals	Element 2: Leading change	Element 3: School planning
Standard: Leading Teaching and Learning: Principals are the educational and instructional leaders of schools
Leading teaching and learning	Element 4: Curriculum	Element 5: Teaching effectiveness	Element 6: Student achievement
	Element 7: Learning environment
Standard: Leading People: Principals are the apex of the school leadership team
Leading People	Element 8: Continuous learning	Element 9: Professional development	Element 10: Principal as leader
	Element 11: Conflict management	Element 12: Distributed leadership
Standard: Leading the organization: Principals are the organizational leaders of schools
Leading the organization	Element 13: Policies and procedures	Element 14: Finances	Element 15: resources and facilities
Standard: Leading the Community: Principals are the leaders of the school community
Leading the community	Element 16: parent involvement	Element 17: collaborating with community stakeholders	Element 18: sharing learning

Principal performance evaluation

School principals are influential in raising teacher and student achievement (Hallinger and Heck, 1996), which makes assessing their performance both necessary and challenging. ADEC’s ‘Principal Performance Evaluation’ document is a tool for attestation in the sense that it provides the government and principals with information on professional growth and identified areas of need, albeit personal or school based. Data collected is essential in constructing future professional and school development plans.

The ‘Principal Performance Evaluation’ document is evidence-based against the internationally benchmarked ‘Professional Standards for Principals’ (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2012b). It is based on the 18 elements covering all five standards (Table 1).The elements form a measure and/or guide for principals to rate their performance. As measures and/or guides, the elements are delineated into categories demarcating varying levels of expertise, progressing from pre-foundation through to foundation, emerging, established, accomplished, and exemplary. With reference to the document, the principal is responsible for assembling evidence of performance to facilitate a dialogue during the evaluation process. Evidence from practice, collected over the year, assists in matching work undertaken to a particular category. The resulting construction of an individual evidence-based portfolio is considered useful in determining professional capabilities on the aforementioned continuum of performance. A lack of significant quality evidence in any one particular standard and/or element is considered a useful gauge in determining pathways for future growth and development (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2012b). The standards and elements are also an expected guide to evaluate school performance in line with Irtiqa’a.

School self-evaluation framework—Irtiqa’a

The Abu Dhabi Government’s intention is to put education first by creating a high-quality, comprehensive education system that applies world-class standards and expertise (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2012c). Within this context, school self-evaluation and inspection are considered key drivers for reform and school improvement. In September 2012, the school self-evaluation framework—‘Irtiqa’a’—was introduced. The central feature of ADEC’s Irtiqa’a approach is to encourage school self-evaluation as a management tool, with data recorded and communicated to authorities electronically using the self-evaluation form (SEF). Apart from assisting in the accountability process of inspection, self-evaluation is envisaged as helping schools monitor the quality of education they provide and explore ways of improvement through development of school improvement plans based on eight areas of performance:

Students’ attainment and progress;

Students’ personal development;

The quality of teaching and learning;

The meeting of students’ needs through the curriculum;

The protection, care, guidance and support of students;

The quality of the school’s buildings and premises;

The school’s resources to support its aims; and

The effectiveness of leadership and management (ADEC-Irtiqa'a, 2012c, p. 7).

Core values underpinning Irtiqa’a are: unrelenting commitment to high-quality and continuing improvement; transparency and integrity; and co-operation and partnership. The objectives include: 1) identifying levels of performance quality in schools within the emirate of Abu Dhabi; 2) providing schools with clear recommendations for improvement; 3) informing policy-making at sector level; and 4) encouraging the sharing of best practice in education and the exchange of professional expertise (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2012c. p. 4). Fulfilling the requirements of Irtiqa’a provides yet another dimension that holds principals accountable for managing change and improving schools. As Irtiqa’a is expected to be facilitated and functionalized by principals themselves, the tool encourages self-reflection on practice with a view to improvement. Professional development has and continues to be initiated to enhance principal performance in implementing the professional standards and Irtiqa’a.

Professional development within a context of change

To achieve the Abu Dhabi Economic Vision 2030⁴ and better equip school leaders to support education reforms, ADEC has and continues to provide professional development and training in strategic leadership, methods of leading people, organizations and communities, and, more specifically, in leading teaching and learning related to the NSM and school self-evaluation (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2010). The training conducted during the 2010 period focused on nine key modules of leadership development: creating a compelling vision; leading through technology; understanding your leadership style; promoting teamwork; supporting student-centered learning; implementing the curriculum of NSM; developing high-quality teachers; and building a student-centered environment (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2010). Principals and vice-principals were provided with a ‘School Leadership Handbook’ and a ‘Professional Standards for Principals Handbook’ (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2011) to assist principals undertake their roles and responsibilities.

The need for school leaders to maintain the momentum of professional development and participate in activities related to improving standards in teaching and student performance underpins ADEC’s ‘Qiyada⁵ Professional Development’ program. The program focuses on leadership training for Kindergarten and Cycle 1, 2 and 3 principals and vice-principals. Since September 2012, it is estimated that 800 principals, vice-principals and faculty heads across the Emirate of Abu Dhabi have attended this professional development program. Professional development offered to principals includes training on: leadership styles; building teams and special education; literacy instruction; and strategies for supporting teachers by helping them plan literacy blocks which provide a range of teaching strategies. The aim of Qiyada Professional Development is for principals to develop understandings and skills that will allow them to observe, assess and support classroom teachers in their planning and implementation of student-centered classrooms.

The role of principals in time of change

Global educational trends and expectations for school improvement place schools at the crossroads where maintaining tradition and initiating change (Hallinger and Kantamara, 2000) appear juxtaposed. In the face of mounting political pressure, schools have been slow to make significant changes in their practices (Caldwell, 1998; Fullan, 2001; Murphy and Adams, 1998), and the reasons that account for this can be traced to the role schools play as institutions of cultural transmission (Dimmock and Walker, 2000; Drucker, 1995; Fullan, 2001). Competing pressures for stability and change continue (Cuban, 1988; Lam, 2003; Tyack and Cuban, 1995) and revolve around conflicting expectations which Fullan (2001) and Hallinger (1998a;1998b) suggest may necessitate new principal capacities: understanding educational trends as they are evolving globally and interpreting them in ways that help local practitioners make sense of them; shaping a school culture that motivates and supports students and staff for lifelong learning and change; and organizing the school’s fiscal, educational, and human resources to achieve its vision of new educational practices.

Principals’ roles are now multi-dimensional to encompass complex duties and responsibilities. Their positions are sometimes uncomfortable given the confusion that surrounds them in times of change and, as Cushman (1992) suggests, administrators from widely different settings go through a dilemma of role reconciliation where strong leadership and participatory decision-making appear juxtaposed in forming the backbone of change. Principals must work with all stakeholder groups to solidify and increase commitment to the reforms. Here, Gronn (2002) notes, they must conform to distributed management practices where work undertaken in committees and councils extends across vertical and horizontal school organizational levels inclusive of parents. As Fullan (2002) suggests, the role of the leader must be, “to ensure that the organization develops relationships that help produce desirable results” (p. 68).

Day et al. (2000) explain that effective leaders combine different leadership characteristics depending on context and their position in the change process. For example, in order to turn ‘failing schools’ around, assertive leadership is needed. Schools deemed to be on the move need facilitation, coaching and assistance. Professional communities need greater scope for participative problem-solving to enhance desired school development. Day et al. (2000) caution that tensions and dilemmas accompanying leadership remain, irrespective of which position on the change continuum principals find themselves placed. Tensions and dilemmas embody balancing and integrating ‘internal versus external change demands’ and achieving a balance between the centralized mission and vision of the school.

In the context of Abu Dhabi, change and the need for reform are omnipresent and school principals find themselves adapting to new roles and responsibilities as stipulated by the recently introduced ‘Professional Standards for Principals’ and ‘Principal Performance Evaluation’. The findings from this study capture the perception of enacted roles and responsibilities as per ADEC’s professional standards and the challenges principals face implementing them in practice.

Methodology

Portraying principals’ perception of anticipated roles and responsibilities and identifying challenges of implementation in practice is complex, as it draws on the uniqueness of site and individual viewpoint. For this reason a qualitative approach that seeks to listen to participants’ voices and builds an understanding based on their ideas was employed to position this study. In qualitative research, Creswell (2003) and Becker (1998) argue that researchers use the literature and empirical material in a manner consistent with the assumption of learning from the participant and not prescribing the questions that need to be answered from the researcher’s standpoint. In this study, semi-structured interviews with 16 principals were used to collect data.

Semi-structured interviews

Semi-structured interviews allow the researcher to enter the inner world of another person to gain understanding from their perspective (Patton, 1990). For the purposes of this study, semi-structured interviews afforded depth of data (Denzin and Lincoln, 2003) because principals were encouraged to reflect, discuss and share their thoughts, beliefs and experiences on roles, responsibilities, challenges, learning, and use of knowledge to initiate and manage change. An interview guide was constructed to steer the conversation. Questions contained were designed to elicit information on benefits and areas of improvement of professional development and challenges faced with respect to implementing anticipated roles and responsibilities as per the professional standards and performance elements. Interviews were scheduled to last an hour, with researchers conducting interviews in respective school sites. The bilingual (Arabic/English) researcher was present at all interviews. Interviews were not audio taped as this was considered culturally inappropriate by the majority of participants themselves.

Sample selection

Kindergarten, Cycles 1, 2 and 3 Emirati principals who undertook professional development over a 2-year period participated in the semi-structured interviews and follow-up questionnaire. For time and logistic constraints, Al Ain and the Western region (also within the Emirate of Abu Dhabi) were excluded from the sample selection and only schools classified within Abu Dhabi’s immediate geographical boundaries were considered. Since the target of this study was Emirati principals, two common⁶ co-ed schools and one co-ed Cycle 1 school run by non-Emirati principals were excluded.

There are 123 public schools in the City of Abu Dhabi (Table 2). From this pool of schools, 78 principals received professional development organized and facilitated by ADEC during the academic years 2010–2012 (Table 3). The selection of principals for this research was drawn from this population across school cycles and types displayed in Table 2. Because certain school types had smaller representation than others, the decision was made to adopt a systematic sampling method to assist with sample selection. School cycles and common schools, regardless of gender, were combined for the sake of depicting a well-balanced sample. Through the systematic sampling method, the following school categories emerged: 1) Kindergartens, 2) Cycle 1 schools (grades 1–5, boys’ schools and girls’ schools), 3) Cycle 2 schools (grades 6–9, boys’ schools and girls’ schools), 4) Cycle 3 schools (grades 9–12, boys’ schools and girls’ schools) and 5) common schools (boys’ common schools, girls’ common schools and co-educational common schools).

Table 2.

School distribution in the City of Abu Dhabi (ADEC School Finder, 2012).

KG	Common schools girls	Common schools boys	Common co-ed	Cycle 1 girls	Cycle 1 boys	Co-ed- Cycle 1	Cycle 2 girls	Cycle 2 boys	Cycle 3 girls	Cycle 3 boys
26	3	6	3	21	21	1	11	11	12	10

Table 3.

Distribution of principals who received professional development in public schools in the City of Abu -Dhabi (ADEC School Finder, 2012).

KG	Common schools girls	Common schools boys	Common co-ed	Cycle 1 girls	Cycle 1 boys	Co-ed Cycle 1	Cycle 2 girls	Cycle 2 boys	Cycle 3 girls	Cycle 3 boys
24	1	2	1	17	19	1	7	3	2	2

Kindergarten schools are run by females. All Cycle 1 girls’ schools are run by females and Cycle 1 boys’ schools are run by either males or females. Cycle 2 and Cycle 3 girls’ schools are run by females, and Cycle 2 and 3 boys’ schools are run by males. In terms of this study, selection of principals by gender was not a determining criterion; principals were selected according to school type and picked randomly as per the sampling method used (see Table 4).

Table 4.

Distribution of research participants-principals interviewed per school cycle and school type.

Cycle and type of school	Total number of principals who received professional development	Participants per cycle and school type
KG	24	5
Common schools (gender segregated and co-ed)	4	1
Cycle 1 (Girls’ schools and Boys’ schools)	36	7
Cycle 2 (Girls’ school and Boys’ schools)	10	2
Cycle 3 (Girls’ school and Boys’ school)	4	1

Following the systematic sampling process, a random sample of principals was selected from the aforementioned school categories. Table 4 provides a breakdown of this. From the 24 Kindergartens, five school principals were selected. With reference to the Cycle 1 boys’ schools and girls’ schools category, out of 36 schools, seven school principals were selected. From the Cycle 2 boys’ schools and girls’ schools category, out of 10 schools, two school principals were selected. From the Cycle 3 boys’ schools and girls’ schools category, out of five schools, one school principal was chosen and from the common schools, out of four schools, one common co-educational school was selected. The common school selected was a combination of Kindergarten and Cycle 1 to grade 3. Across schools, 16 principals who received professional development were selected.

Data analysis

Data collected from the semi-structured interviews was coded according to ‘Professional Standards for Principals’ and the 18 elements contained in the ‘Principal Performance Evaluation’ document. As noted earlier, the five professional standards were: ‘Leading Strategically’; ‘Leading Teaching and Learning’; ‘Leading the Organization’; ‘Leading People’; and ‘Leading the Community’. The 18 performance elements were: vision and strategic goals, leading change, school planning, curriculum, teaching effectiveness, student achievement, learning environment, continuous learning, professional development, principal as leader, conflict management, distributed leadership, policies and procedures, finances, resources and facilities, parent involvement, collaborating with community stakeholders and sharing learning (Table 1).

Findings

The data revealed principals’ roles and responsibilities were aligned with the five professional standards and corresponding 18 elements as stipulated by ADEC. The professional development principals received was aimed at strengthening their knowledge and skills to lead schools within the scope of the professional standards and performance evaluation documents. Professional development covered all five professional standards and elements with the exception of: continuous learning; conflict management; and shared learning. Data also revealed that the newly introduced professional standards and performance evaluation criteria have shaped principals’ perception of their roles and responsibilities. As confirmed by Principal-9:

With the New School Model and educational changes, I am allocated more roles and responsibilities.

Which, according to Principal-16:

Is more in-depth. I have to do teacher appraisal which is more specific and detailed as compared to the previous appraisal. Before our role didn’t encompass educational components and we were leading without an educational conceptualization of our role. Currently our role requires more reflection on what we do. We need to think about improving our school especially in terms of analyzing the data of school achievement.

Principal-11 added:

I have to observe teachers and monitor students. I have to document and evidence their performance and achievements.

Although principals support the notion of reform and change through enacting the standards, albeit with professional development input, tensions and conflict are omnipresent and revolve around implementing anticipated roles and responsibilities in practice. The findings presented examine the challenges faced contextualized within the framework of the professional standards and performance evaluation elements.

Standard: Leading strategically

Principals confirmed that their role is to produce leaders and global citizens in keeping with the country’s 2030 vision and ADEC’s underpinning NSM principles (Principal-1; Principal-3; Principal-4; Principal-8). Principal-2 stated:

My role is to plan for the future and to write strategies for the school. I have made committees to replace the old mission statement with a new one in harmony with the professional standards and the NSM.

As part of leading the school community strategically and within the scope of change, principals are required to solve stakeholder demands of various dimensions on a daily basis. As Principal-3 explained:

My role dictates that I convince teachers with the new school changes as far as shifting from textbook-based teaching to student-centered learning pedagogy. With these curricular changes I face so many challenges in terms of preparing and convincing my teachers to adopt new curricular and pedagogical changes and some are not ready. Another challenge is to convince teachers to readjust their planning. I have to convince parents about the changes.

In line with school planning, the current discourse on the roles principals are expected to fulfill is embedded in the ‘effective school’ research base, where planning for school improvement is based on an analysis of student achievement data, teacher appraisals and systemic reviews. Principals are expected to chart a course for school improvement by designing school improvement plans based on need. Principal-6 stated:

My role has now embodied constructing a school development plan that solves school issues and problems.

The difficulty in designing school improvement plans revolve around collaboration and consultation with various stakeholder groups—vice-principals, heads of faculty, social workers and parents (Principal-7; Principal-13). Principals stated they had to liaise with different departments to evaluate strengths and weaknesses in construction of the plans (Principal-3; Principal-7). Apart from the additional time commitment this involves and their limited knowledge about facilitative processes, principals indicated that they did not have a system for data collection, storage and retrieval of information. As Principal-6 confirmed:

I had to create a system for collecting data related to student achievements.

Standard: Leading teaching and learning

An area of focus in this standard is the curriculum. Curricular changes introduced within the NSM framework (September, 2010) has imposed layers of additional responsibilities making this a challenge for all principals. Curricular-related issues amounted to: coming to grips with curriculum demands; gauging the suitability of the curriculum to meet the needs of learners at various levels of the schooling system; changing teacher habits to value student-centered teaching and learning as opposed to textbook learning; using the medium of English to deliver Science and Math; preparing teachers and parents to accept curricular changes that revolve around inquiry, discovery and project-based learning; and bringing parents on board with newly introduced educational changes (Principal-4; Principal-5; Principal-13).

As part of this standard, principals are expected to develop teacher effectiveness. In relation to this, principals expressed the need to observe teachers to ensure implementation of the new curriculum occurs in practice and student-centered pedagogies are facilitated. Principals explained that most teachers do not meet the performance areas required for appraisal. With the new pedagogies and English medium teachers (EMTs) expected to deliver Science and Math in English, there are additional responsibilities attached to managing teacher performance and appraisal. Principals indicated that constructing lesson plans and conducting teacher appraisals was a daunting, demanding role, especially since principals are expected to benchmark teacher performance against internationally prescribed standards. As administrators, principals are expected to provide evidence of teacher performance through formal and informal observations (Principal-1; Principal-8; Principal-16). The demands of this task are complex and far reaching, captured as:

I sit with my teachers in the classroom and give feedback. The head of faculty and I demonstrate coaching strategies to monitor the teachers’ progress and evaluate their performance (Principal-1);

I follow up with teachers to monitor their teaching. I follow up assessments and look at teacher lesson plans and resources adopted to improve the student achievement. I check if there are portfolios and the worksheets are sent home for parents (Principal-2);

and

I follow up on pedagogical needs of teachers. Based on need, each teacher will write her development plan. I assess teacher performance and propose developmental plans (Principal-4).

Principals’ new roles and responsibilities involve them observing classroom environments, supporting students and following up on their academic progress and need. Principals claim to fulfill this aspect of their role as they engage in school ‘walkthroughs’ and classroom observations to monitor the learning environment. They focus on catering for student need by monitoring teaching and learning aligned with required standards and outcomes (Principal-3; Principal-6; Principal-10). As Principal-12 notes:

I do walkthroughs to observe the students in the classes and teachers. I read student portfolios and talk to parents. I attend classes to observe what’s going on in the school.

Embedded in the ‘Leading Teaching and Learning’ standard is an expectation that principals will analyze student data and plan future pedagogical improvements based on need. Principals endorsed this and commented that they look at the data and analyze it to raise the level of student achievement (Principal-1; Principal-3). The challenges principals face in undertaking this aspect of role performance are multi-faceted. In order to monitor and improve student achievement levels, the data analysis process needs to be followed up by action plans to support at-risk students. Principals’ claim that the support of cluster managers is essential in helping them analyze the data, compare the results with that of previous years, track progress and/or regression of student learning, construct internal assessments and conduct observations to check on acquisition of learning outcomes. This is then followed up with feedback that explains the progress and level of learning acquired by each student. This feedback is submitted to the head of faculty and teachers (Principal-4; Principal-10; Principal-11; Principal-14 Principal-15; Principal-16). Apart from the vast array of tasks involved, Principal-8 added:

With the current educational changes we are asked to submit documentation, data and statistics about student achievement and this is time-consuming.

In addition, as noted by Principal-13:

Convincing the parents about the new assessment scheme and how children are assessed is a problem. Parents still don’t accept the grade letters and they want numbers and they don’t understand the indicators about their children’s achievement. They don’t understand what their child should do to reach the learning outcomes aspired.

Standard: Leading people

The notion of the principal as a leader is embedded within this standard of ‘Leading People’. Data revealed principals have a conceptual understanding of what it means to lead people but use different discourses to explain this. Principal-1 claimed:

I lead by love. Relationships become better when you lead by love because it brings reciprocal respect among the school members. I lead through support. I observe and then I respond. I lead through ADEC’s policies and guidelines.

Principal-2 said:

Leadership is about commitment, having knowledge and organizational skills. Principals need to learn all the time to lead. They need to be proactive and have the knowledge about evaluation, planning and improvement.

Principal-6 said:

I lead through decision-making within the boundaries of the centralized authority and the system. I need to be diplomatic in decision-making. A leader functions within the system and leadership is about being rational in communicating, explaining and justifying ADEC’s policies to stakeholders.

Principal-15 stated:

Leadership means to be available when my staff and teachers need me to support them. Leadership means my teachers and staff know what to do and fulfill their tasks even when I am not there. Everything should be on track even if I am not there.

Finally, Principal-6 said:

Leadership is the potential of identifying the strengths and weaknesses in my school and how to overcome the weaknesses with the help of my team.

Principals said they lead people by providing professional development. For example, Principal-5 stated:

I ask teachers to attend classes with other teachers who have a better performance. I give my teachers the opportunity to attend classes with another teacher in the school and in other schools to learn better.

Principal-2 added:

I gave workshops about the notion of mission and vision. I organized and facilitated workshops for teachers and staff.

Principal-3 explained:

I motivate teachers through giving certificates, verbal reinforcement and recognition. However, some teachers are not reflective.

Through undertaking such activities, principals described themselves as catalysts for change. They felt they were fulfilling the requirements of the leading people standard by introducing training to help teachers achieve a desirable appraisal level. Furthermore, they had provided training on how to meet the expectations of appraisal and familiarized them with the pedagogical demands of the NSM (Principal-9; Principal 10; Principal-11).

Principals accepted the view that with their burgeoning responsibilities, distributing tasks to other staff and administrators was necessary. They claimed they were aided by their vice-principal, heads of faculty, secretaries and committees such as those associated with health and safety, school improvement, catering for students with special needs and professional development (Principal-2; Principal-6). Within the framework of exercising distributed leadership, Principal-16 indicated:

I allocate administrative and managerial roles for my team.

Principal-10 added:

My role now involves reorganizing administrative restructuring of the school. I need to create and allocate new administrative responsibilities to address the new demands and achieve educational change and this is a challenge. With the NSM, new administrative positions were created such as the head of faculty, academic assistant and subject area coordinator. I can’t meet the challenges of the NSM without the administrative restructuring.

Principal-3 added:

I share management through the implementation and practice of the school management team. I allocate administrative tasks for teachers. I created a scope for middle managers to share the administrative load. I created team leaders.

Principals share reviewing and constructing internal policies with other staff members. Some initiate policy and procedure writing in committees (Principal-2; Principal-3; Principal-6; Principal-13). Principal-4 added:

I receive the policy guidelines from ADEC. This is followed by allocating specialized committees for different policies. Each committee will cater for writing specific school policies within ADEC’s guidelines.

Principal-16 also claimed that:

I have established a school administrative board and established committees such as those involved with strategic planning, team leadership, academic, extra-curricular activities, assessment, health and safety, discipline and constructing school improvement plans detailing key performance indicators.

Distribution of leadership was also seen to encompass collaboration in areas of school budgeting. Principal-6 stated:

I sit with the parents, teachers and social workers and allocate the budget we need for each professional criteria or area in our school. As a team, we try to break down what expenditures we need and then we send our proposal to ADEC.

Standard: Leading the organization

Within this standard, principals voiced their roles, responsibilities and challenges in terms of: 1) policies and procedures; 2) finances; and 3) resources and facilities. Principals indicated that they do not write policies; they receive policies from ADEC and implement them. Principals are expected to cater for constructing internal policies based on the NSM Policy Manual, for example, policies on: school visits, attendance, absences, students’ assessment and health and safety (Principal-7; Principal-10; Principal-11; Principal-13). In support of this, Principal-3 explained:

I write policies for the parent handbook and this includes student behavior policies. Policies come from ADEC. I adapt the ADEC policies to suit my school needs and the area and context of the school. I had to make new policies relevant to: literacy and reading, student leadership, use of technology and integration with the local community such as hospitals and the police department.

In terms of finances, principals are not fully in charge of budgeting. ADEC allocates a budget for schools, based on student numbers. ADEC provides a budget breakdown. Each component of the budget has a fixed percentage and principals need to abide by the percent allocated for each component of the budget, and percentages for each component vary. Principals are allowed to transfer 20% of the total budget across different expenditure components. However, they need to justify this transfer and changes in the breakdown. Principals voiced difficulty in conducting the transfer because this is a new responsibility (Principal-3; Principal-4; Principal-6; Principal-8; Principal-9; Principal-11). Principal-8 summarized the challenges as:

Budgeting hinders us because we have to follow ADEC’s breakdown of expenditures. If we need extra budget for a specific area, we can apply for a budget transfer approval. We are in charge of breaking down the budget but need to justify our expenditures. Justifying budget transfers requires presenting evidenced-based documents and this is complex for us.

Principal-5 stated:

The budget allocated to each school doesn’t include an allotment for professional development; professional development remains under the umbrella of ADEC’s budget and not school budget. Budgeting comes from ADEC; they tell us what to spend it on. ADEC categorizes our spending.

Principals have contributed to improving the physical facilities of their schools by providing facilities for special needs students such as ramps, elevators, a computer lab and a meeting room for parents Nevertheless, resources and facilities are usually allocated and granted by ADEC according to the school needs and is tied to the breakdown of the budget as prescribed by ADEC (Principal-5; Principal-7; Principal-8).

Standard: Leading the community

Within this standard, principals’ responses reflected views on parental involvement and collaborating with community stakeholders. According to ADEC’s NSM Policy Manual, parents are required to be involved in their children’s learning and it is the schools responsibility to consolidate home/school links. The role of principals is to be a facilitator for parental involvement. Within this dimension, principals are expected to communicate and share matters of education with parents. Parents and teachers are invited to contribute to the school development plan. Parents are also expected to participate in goal-setting and volunteer their services to benefit the school. For principals, this involves planning and facilitating mechanisms to encourage parental involvement (Principal-3; Principal-5; Principal-14). Principal-6 stated:

Parental involvement is new. I have to monitor sending weekly plans to parents and organize parent/teacher meetings.

Principal-11 added:

My responsibilities now are to explain to the parents about the NSM and how they can be involved in the learning process of their children and share with them the policies and invite them to school events.

Discussion

In Abu Dhabi, work parameters and roles and responsibilities principals are expected to fulfill have altered substantially with the introduction of the reforms designed to achieve Vision 2030 (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2010) and the quest to be ranked as one of the best education systems in the world (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2008). In this climate of change, principals are seen as catalysts for initiating improvement by enacting roles and responsibilities framed by the professional standards and appraised against the performance evaluation criteria and Irtiqa’a (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2012b, 2012c). The complex nature of principals’ roles and responsibilities is summarized by Principal-9 as:

Now we have more responsibilities and roles. Principals used to be managers but now our roles are beyond management. We are expected to perform more tasks in diversified areas such as: observing and monitoring performance standards, conducting appraisal for teachers, organizing professional development, conducting maintenance, writing policies and following up with parents.

Principal-9 added:

My role now includes so many responsibilities within the changes that came as part of the NSM. Part of my role and responsibility is school inspection and distributing tasks among staff and administrators and observing classroom environments and supporting and monitoring special needs students. I also try to implement health and safety measures in my school.

Principal-11 noted:

I have to observe both teachers and students. I have to document teachers’ and students’ work and achievements. I have more of a leadership role now and this includes giving workshops on the educational changes for parents and teachers.

Principals are expected to lead change in line with ADEC’s professional standards (Abu Dhabi Education Council, 2011). This has created pressure to adjust and develop leadership capacities that are more inclusive and informed by practice. For example, embodied within the ‘Leading Community’ standard, principals are expected to: maintain effective communication with all stakeholders; collaborate with people in the community; develop productive partnerships with external agencies, industry and commerce; liaise with agencies, organizations and ministries for the well-being of students and families; and incorporate national heritage and culture into the fabric of the school. As Harris and Lambert (2003) and Muijs and Harris (2003) note, the nature of such demands call for a new professionalism based on empowerment and support of others. Principals reported that accommodating and implementing the ‘Leading the Community’ standard had obligations that are not only new but also call for forward planning and systemic adjustment. Fulfilling the requirements of the ‘Leading Teaching and Learning’ standard equates to the same thing. Expectations of new roles and responsibilities have pushed the boundaries of previously accepted traditional top-down practice to a decidedly hands-on approach where principals duly monitor and analyze student assessment data and conduct teacher appraisal in an effort to improve learning and teaching. As Principal-5 commented:

We have more multilayered and complex responsibilities especially now that we need to do the teachers’ appraisal. Before, the appraisal was done through subject area supervisors. We are now autonomous in conducting teacher appraisal, teacher transfer and hire and fire. More responsibilities come with this empowerment.

Principals claim that their new roles and responsibilities necessitate knowledge and skills they have had to learn through professional development, and that fulfillment of task requirements is challenging because of the newness of the tasks and their own limited knowledge base (Principal-3; Principal-4; Principal-6; Principal-12; Principal-13). The situation reported supports Davis et al.’s (2005) claims that despite contemporary literature advocating the role of principals as instructional leaders, provision of intellectual leadership for growth in teaching and learning continues to be a struggle in terms of delivery.

Principals claim that the challenges they face in line with their multidimensional roles and responsibilities are complex. Meeting the requirements of NSM and the new learning and teaching pedagogies meant they needed help. For example, in order to monitor and improve student achievement levels, principals needed the help of cluster managers to analyze the data, compare the results with that of previous years, track and monitor progress and develop action plans. Following this, dissemination of data to heads of faculty and teachers was also the responsibility of principals. Distributing leadership and sharing management of learning and teaching with other senior staff is part of the autonomy given to and expected by Emirati principals, but this new way of working needs adjustment. Communication with ‘others’ across school levels and an increase in documentation that formed part of the data-gathering, analysis, storage and transmission process was reportedly time-consuming. Parental involvement in children’s learning is strongly advocated by ADEC, and here principals felt that parents’ lack of information about the new curriculum and methods of assessment created problems of miscommunication and expectations. Principals reiterated that it was very important to raise parental awareness on matters of educational importance because, as Principal-11 noted:

When parents don’t understand their roles and responsibilities this negatively impacts our performance because our roles are interwoven with parents fulfilling their own roles and responsibilities. We can’t meet our role expectations if parents do not know what to do to support us.

With the complex nature of changes encountered, principals expressed the need for a deeper understanding of the standards set by ADEC. They noted that increasing their knowledge and skill competencies would help them manage their multidimensional roles and responsibilities.

Principals emphasized the need for continuous professional development provided by ADEC. They confirmed that they received support in areas related to: school policies and procedures; monitoring lesson plans; teacher observations; appraisals and feedback; facilitating professional development for teachers; helping collect evidence-based documents to present to ADEC; addressing curricular deficiencies and needs; and budget breakdowns (Principal-1; Principal-2; Principal-3; Principal-15; Principal-16). Professional development has encouraged principals to be reflective on “improving our school especially in terms of analyzing the data for student achievement“ (Principal-16). However, also required in terms of professional development input are systems and procedures that facilitate management, retrieval and storage of school information and data. Principals claim that this forms an essential aspect of their practice when it comes to fulfilling government requirements such as those concerning Irtiqa’a. Ready access to evidence-based documents will make the process of judging individual and school performance easier to manage (Principal-3; Principal-6).

Conclusion

Challenges of context are complex, multi-faceted and reflective of an educational landscape driven by the need to change and reform. Principals demonstrate an awareness of the part they play in bringing about change and implementing reforms by accepting their new roles and responsibilities and endeavoring to implement them in practice. Findings from this study revealed that some aspects of the newly stated roles and responsibilities were being enacted in practice while others continue to fall in the anticipated category owing to challenges encountered. Aspects of practice not addressed by principals yet inherent in the standards were those related to the need for continuous learning, conflict management and shared learning. Many challenges revolved around the intertwined nature of the principal and stakeholders understanding their roles and responsibilities. A dilemma of note exists where teachers were not meeting their performance standards, and this had a negative impact on principals’ appraisal.

Professional development for principals has been designed to achieve ADEC’s expectations which are: 1) to meet the professional performance standards; 2) to fulfill the requirements of principal performance evaluation; and 3) to comply with school self-evaluation–Irtiqa’a approach in an attempt to introduce school reform and achieve Vision 2030 in the emirate of Abu Dhabi. In light of the research findings, further research into the roles and responsibilities of principals are required. To fulfill and initiate change and reform, a more authentic take on what it means to lead schools is needed in times of change. Without valid information, problems of practice may remain unchallenged and the true value of the reforms may take longer to establish.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

None declared.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

References

Abu Dhabi Education Council (2008) Together, ADEC Newsletter, 1, 1. Abu Dhabi: Abu Dhabi Education Council.

Abu Dhabi Education Council (2010) New School Model Manual. Abu Dhabi: ADEC.

Abu Dhabi Education Council (2011) Professional Standards for principals. Abu Dhabi: ADEC.

Abu Dhabi Education Council (2012a). Together, 8. Abu Dhabi: ADEC.

Abu Dhabi Education Council (2012b). How do you Monitor the Process of School Improvement? Available at: www.adec.ac.ae/ADEC%20Shared%20Documents (accessed 1 November 2012).

Abu Dhabi Education Council (2012c). Irtiqa’a Framework for the inspection of private schools in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi. Available at: www.Adec.ac.ae?ADEC%20Documents (Accessed 18 January 2013).

ADEC launches New School Model (2009). Available at: http://www.ameinfo.com/242007.html.AbuDhabiEducationCouncilpressrelease (accessed 29 May 2012).

ADEC School Finder-2012 (2013). Available at: http://www.adec.ac.ae/School%20Finder%20Assets/eng/SchoolFinderV5_new.html# (accessed 7 March 2013).

Barth

(1990) Improving Schools from Within. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

10.

Becker

(1998) Tricks of the Trade: How to Think of your Research while doing it. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

11.

Bredeson

(1999) Negotiated Learning: Union’s contracts and teacher professional development. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association in Montreal, Canada, 20 April.

12.

Bredeson

Johansson

(2000) The school principal’s role in teacher professional development. Journal of In-Service Education 26(2): 385–401.

13.

Bryson

(1995) Strategic Planning for Public and Non-Profit Organizations: A Guide to Strengthening and Sustaining Organizations Achievement. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

14.

Caldwell

(1998) Strategic leadership, resource management and effective school reform. Journal of Educational Administration 36: 445–461.

15.

Cotton

(2003) Principals and Student Achievement: What the Research Says. Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

16.

Creswell

(2003) Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

17.

Cuban

(1988) The Managerial Imperative and the Practice of Leadership in Schools. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

18.

Cushman

(1992) The essential school principal: A changing role in a changing school. Available at: http://www.essentialschools.org/resources/92 (accessed 6 June 2013).

19.

Darling-Hammond

LaPointe

Meyerson

(2007) Preparing School Leaders for a Changing World: Lessons from Exemplary Leadership Development Programs. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford Educational Leadership Institute.

20.

Davies

(1999) Education and the Arab World. Partnership: A Theme for Education and Communities in the Twenty- First Century (51–88).UAE: The Emirates Center for Strategic Studies and Research.

21.

Davis

Darling-Hammond

LaPointe

(2005) School leadership study: Developing successful principals. Stanford, California: Stanford University, Stanford Educational Leadership Institute.

22.

Day

(2000) Beyond Transformational Leadership. Educational Leadership April 2000: 56–59.

23.

Day

Harris

Hadfield

(2000) Leading Schools in Times of Change. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.

24.

Denzin

Lincoln

(2003) Strategies of qualitative inquiry (2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

25.

Dimmock

Walker

(2000) Introduction justifying a cross-cultural comparative approach to school leadership and management. School Leadership and Management 20: 137–141.

26.

Drucker

(1995) Managing in a Time of Great Change. New York: Talley House, Dutton.

27.

DuFour

Berkey

(1995) The Principal as Staff Developer, Journal of Staff Development 16 (4): 2–6.

28.

Fullan

(2000) The return of large-scale reform. Journal of Educational Change 1: 1–23.

29.

Fullan

(2001) Leading in a Culture of Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

30.

Fullan

(2002) The change leader. Educational Leadership 59 (8): 16–20.

31.

Golde

(1998) School-based Continuous Professional Development: School leaders’ responsibilities. Paper presented at the Leading Education in the 21st Century conference, Riga, Latvia.

32.

Gronn

(2002) Distributed leadership as a unit of analysis. The Leadership Quarterly 13 (4): 423–451.

33.

Hallinger

Heck

(1996) Reassessing the principal’s role in school effectiveness: A review of empirical research, 1980-1985. Educational Administration Quarterly 32: 5–44.

34.

Hallinger

(1998a). Educational change in Southeast Asia: The challenge of creating learning systems. Journal of Educational Administration 36: 492–509.

35.

Hallinger

(1998b) Educational reform in the Asia Pacific. Journal of Educational Administration 36: 417–425.

36.

Hallinger

Heck

(2010) Collaborative leadership and school improvement: Understanding the impact on school capacity and student learning. School Leadership and Management 30 (2): 95–110.

37.

Hallinger

Kantamara

(2000) Leading educational change in Thailand: Opening a window on leadership as a cultural process. School Leadership and Management 20: 189–206.

38.

Harris

(2010) Leading system transformation. School leadership and Management 30 (3): 197–207.

39.

Harris

Lambert

(2003). Building Leadership Capacity for School Improvement. Milton Keynes: Open University.

40.

Ibrahim

AMM

Al-Mashhadany

(2012) Roles of educational leaders in inducing change in public schools – Al Ain as a case. International Journal of Arts and Science 5 (3): 195–216.

41.

Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLIC) (1996) Standards for School Leaders. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.

42.

Kanaan

(2008) Education Reforms on the Fast Track. Available at: http://Khaleejtimes.com (accessed April 23, 2009).

43.

Leithwood

Louis

Anderson

(2004) How Leadership Influences Student Learning: Review of Research. New York: Wallace Foundation.

44.

Lam

(2003) Balancing stability and change: Implications for professional preparation and development of principals in Hong Kong. In: Hallinger

(ed). Reshaping the Landscape of School Leadership Development: A Global Perspective. Lisse: The Netherlands Swets & Zeitlinger.

45.

Meador

(2008) Role of the Principal: Keys to being an effective principal. Available at: http://teaching.about.com/od/admin/tp/Role-Of-ThePrincipal.htm (accessed 8 April 2013).

46.

Muijs

Harris

(2003) Teacher Leadership: A Review of the Literature. Educational Management & Administration 31 (4): 437–449.

47.

Murphy

Adams

(1998) Reforming America’s schools 1980–2000. Journal of Educational Administration 36: 426–444.

48.

National Staff Development Council (NSDC) (1995) Standards for Staff Development: High School edition. Oxford: National Staff Development Council.

49.

Newman

King

Youngs

(2000) Professional development that addresses school capacity: Lessons from urban elementary schools. American Journal of Education 108 (4): 259–299.

50.

Patton

(1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

51.

Safran

(1997) The Psychology and Politics of Parent Involvement: Abu Dhabi. The Emirates Center for Strategic Studies and Research.

52.

Tyack

Cuban

(1995) Tinkering Towards Utopia: A century of American Public School Reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

53.

Weller

Hartley

Brown

(1994) Principals and TQM: Developing Vision. The Clearing House 67 (5): 298–301.

54.

York-Barr

Duke

(2004) What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship. Review of Educational Research 74 (3): 255–315.