Keywords

1 Introduction

1.1 Statement of the Problem

In recent years, deliberate educational policies and strategies have been implemented as attempts to improve students’ achievement and reform the whole schooling process in many countries (Fullan, 2009). School leadership practices are considered the most significant factor of the major impacts on students’ learning (Hattie, 2009). Moreover, Hargreaves and Shirley (2009) suggest that school leadership has to seek for ceaseless changes to cope with the developing needs of the learners. Since school leaders are responsible for schools’ improvement, they need to develop their staff to reach their optimum performance (Ellett & Teddle, 2003) as their teaching approaches and practices are closely linked with students’ achievement and thus the overall school improvement (Lambert, 2003).

1.2 Rationale for the Study

Since The Knowledge and Human Development Authority (KHDA) in Dubai established the Dubai School Inspection Bureau (DSIB) to provide information on the standard of private schools in the emirate of Dubai, schools ratings (weak, acceptable, good, very good, outstanding) have been the major indicator of the quality of teaching and learning each school has (KHDA, 2009). Therefore, school owners, parents, educators, and other stakeholders are becoming close observers of the inspection process and reports. In addition, the researchers have been working in the educational field as teachers and academic heads of departments for more than 15 years and have recently witnessed the improvement of school rating from “acceptable” to “good” soon after a new principal was appointed which is a worthy case study to be examined.

1.3 Aim, Objectives, and Research Questions

The aim of this paper is to investigate the successful practices of school leaders that lead to school improvement. To effectively achieve this, the broad aim of the study is divided into three objectives: to identify school leaders and teachers’ perception of school improvement, to look into the different dimensions of school improvement, and to identify the most significant practices of school leadership on school improvement. These objectives are structured as research questions as follows:

  1. 1.

    What are school leaders and teachers’ perceptions of school improvement?

  2. 2.

    What are the different dimensions of school improvement?

  3. 3.

    What are the successful practices of the school leadership that lead to school improvement?

2 Literature Review

2.1 Conceptual Analysis

School leadership refers to both managerial and administrative decisions and behaviors by the school governing body to influence students’ achievement considering both their needs and desires (Sergiovanni, 2009). Moreover, Cuban (1988) states that there is an obvious distinction between leadership and management as leadership is linked with change while management is regarded as maintaining activity.

School improvement refers to the planned educational change that increases learners’ outcomes (Gordon, 2016). It can be also conceptualized as the continuous progress of the school in achieving the educational goals it was established for. Teaching and learning, school environment, equal learning opportunities, clear and focused mission, school-home relationship, and monitoring students’ progress are all aspects that can clearly identify school improvement (Bush, 2007).

2.2 Theoretical Framework

The capital theory of school effectiveness and improvement has four major concepts that are closely linked with learners’ achievement. According to Hargreaves (2001), these four concepts are: outcomes, leverage, intellectual capital, and social capital. For him, outcomes refer to the achievements of the broad educational goals that are either cognitive or moral. He also defines leverage as the relationship between teachers’ input and the educational output. He elaborates on this relationship and links between school improvement and the balance between teachers’ efforts and the change in students’ intellectual and moral dimensions. He concludes that both intellectual and social capitals are key factors in the school improvement process.

In transformational leadership theory, subordinates are stimulated and inspired to fulfill goals set by their leader (Odumeru & Ifeanyi, 2013). This theory identifies four major components of the transformational leader style: charisma or idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and personal and individual attention (Jung & Sosik, 2002). Charisma refers to the admirable manners according to which the leader behaves and deals with subordinates in different situations. Inspirational motivation is the extent to which the leader can push the followers to reach their optimum performance by setting clear framework and specific objectives. Personal and individual attention identifies the leader’s individualized attention to each follower’s needs.

2.3 Dimensions of School Improvement

Academic performance, learning environment, and efficiency are the main dimensions of school improvement according to Eastern Kentucky University (2008). These dimensions are examined as follows:

Academic Performance

Curriculum

Curriculum improvement includes leveling up grade level expectations, abolishing ongoing assessment, and replacing end-of-subject exams with periodic summative exams (Winter, 2014). Furthermore, Apple and Jungck (2014) advocate teachers’ engagement in the processes of curriculum design and development. They believe that practitioners’ inputs in the curriculum are the right approach as multiple perspectives are considered which allow a simple, yet effective curriculum design.

Classroom Instructions and Evaluation

Many education policy-makers worldwide believe that effective classroom evaluation leads to a successful educational process (Barzanò & Grimaldi, 2013). Furthermore, literature has confirmed the effect of school leadership on nurturing teachers’ learning and development as a key role of school leadership (Flores, 2004). The purpose of teachers’ evaluation is to judge both accountability and improvement. However, tensions and ambiguity might exist by the emerging of the two functions (Flores, 2018). Inconsistent or unfair application of these two functions is regarded as lack of integrity (Campbell & Derrington, 2017). Consequently, a general and specific approach is required when chasing effective teachers’ evaluation (Flores & Derrington, 2017).

Learning Environment

School Culture

The impact a principal has on the school is of indirect nature through its culture which in return has a direct influence on students’ achievement (Watson, 2001). Consequently, Fink and Resnick (2001) suggest that it is the role of the school leader to maintain a hospitable and welcoming culture that promotes teaching and learning. Gerrard and Farrell (2013) likewise highlight the importance for principals to apprehend the school culture prior to any intended change as they are in the front line of the educational system, and their perception of the appropriate culture is a key factor determining the success or the failure of enhancing teaching and learning.

Student, Family and Community Support

Positive school-family relationships have a vital impact on students’ achievement and progress in all levels of education (Morera et al., 2015). Consequently, Gilroy (2018) names parents’ involvement in the young learners’ education as the most significant key in any desired progress in the quality of teaching and learning. Moreover, Bush (2007) argues that it is the school leadership role to have more parents engaged in the learning of their children which can be monitored through the number of parents keen on attending school-parents’ meetings.

Professional Development

The relationship between professional development and quality education was examined in a recent study by Giraldo (2014). The findings he concluded after analyzing qualitative and quantitative data collected from four different instruments showed a dramatic change in teachers’ performance and students’ achievement. Hannay et al. (2003) add that professional development and performance appraisal need to be consistent to accurately measure the academic growth.

3 Methodology

3.1 Research Paradigm

To get unbiased and truthful answers to the research questions, a pragmatic paradigm is utilized to allow flexibility. Consequently, singular and multiple realities will be concluded from both qualitative and quantitative methods (Creswell & Clark, 2011). Accordingly, this paradigm supports a relational epistemology, non-singular reality ontology, a mixed methods methodology, and a value-laden axiology (Kivunja & Kuyini, 2017).

3.2 Research Design

This paper benefits from the mixed method to reach the best understanding of the research topic. In spite of being relatively new, the mixed method ensures the optimum results, candid analysis, and accurate understanding of the investigated topic (Creswell, 2014). Furthermore, objectivity and subjectivity integrate to emphasize inductive and deductive approaches which give a valued opportunity to segregate concepts from practical perceptions (Morgan, 2007).

3.3 Setting and Data Collection Plan

The setting of this research is a private school in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Three instruments representing the mixed method will be used to collect data. A questionnaire is distributed to teachers and administrative members to collect data related to the first research question. Moreover, an interview is conducted with the school principal and data collected will be analyzed to answer the third research question. The research also investigates DSIB inspection reports for the school of the academic years 2014–2015 and 2018–2019 to answer the second research question. With this document analysis, data selection is required instead of data collection (Bowen, 2009).

3.4 Population and Sampling

The population of this study is 170 teachers and administrative members representing the teaching and nonteaching staff working in the school along with the school principal. For the quantitative method, 100 participants are involved in the questionnaire, 90 teachers and 10 administrative staff. To increase the efficiency of the research, stratified random sampling technique is implemented. This approach fortifies the study and makes its findings more reliable (Creswell, 2014). Furthermore, since it is a case study, a purposeful sample technique is applied and the school principal is interviewed when conducting the qualitative method.

3.5 Instruments

The first instrument is teachers’ and leadership members’ perceptions of school improvement questionnaire. The second instrument is a semi-structured open-ended question interview with the school principal. The third instrument is the DSIB school reports of the academic years 2014–2015 and 2018–2019.

3.6 Validity and Sensitivity

Validity is an assessment of the reliability of the quantitative instrument that improves the precision of the data collected and the examination of the findings (Messick, 1995). In this study, the validity of the quantitative approach is obtained as it is taken from a dissertation research paper in the British University in Dubai (BUiD) and published on its website (BUiD, 2016). Similarly, questions of the interview are approved by academics and peer researchers in the same university.

Sensitivity is defined as whether or not the instrument is capable of accurately measuring variability in responses (Zikmund, 2003). To ensure that the study quantitative instrument is sensitive, participants choose from a five Likert-Scale ranging from strongly disagree, disagree, neither, agree, and strongly agree.

4 Results, Analysis, and Discussions

4.1 Data Analysis

For the quantitative method, questionnaires are distributed and filled in as hard copies, and all data is manually uploaded to Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software. The SPSS is utilized to compare between different questions of the questionnaire. For the qualitative method, tabulating technique is used for both the semi-structured open-ended questions interview and the DSIB inspection reports.

4.2 Discussion of Quantitative Data

Responses to the questionnaire questions vary according to each domain. The first domain related to leadership and management shows dissatisfaction among participants about the relationship the school leadership has with them (questions 3–6). However, on the academic level, the overall responses express their agreement with the leadership practices (questions 1, 2, 7, 8).

The second domain of the questionnaire is about teaching and learning approaches of the school leadership. In this section, participants agree with the approaches the school leadership guides them to. On the other hand, the last domain which is about the school culture, responses largely vary from the extreme agreement about the learning opportunities offered to learners to the disagreement about parents’ engagement.

4.3 Discussion of Qualitative Data

The DSIB reports of the school inspection show the main areas of improvement of the school in the academic year 2014–2015 and 2018–2019 as follows:

  1. 1.

    Students’ achievement improved from 18 “Acceptable” indicators in 2014–2015 to only 3 “acceptable” indicators in 2018–2019 which means that 15 different areas of improvement changed to “Good” in students’ achievement.

  2. 2.

    Students’ personal and social development enhanced from 8 “Good” indicators in 2014–2015 to “Very good” in 2018–2019.

  3. 3.

    Teaching and Assessment enhanced as 4 “Acceptable” indicators in 2014–2015 changed to only 2 “Acceptable” indicators in 2018–2019 which means that 2 of the areas improved to “Good”.

  4. 4.

    Curriculum improvement is significant as it changed from 4 “Acceptable” indicators and 4 “Good” indicators in 2014–2015 to 4 “Good” indicators and 4 “Very good” indicators consecutively in 2018–2019.

  5. 5.

    School leadership and management improved from 4 “Acceptable” indicators and 1 “Good” indicator in 2014–2015 to 4 “Good” indicators and 1 “Very good” indicator consecutively in 2018–2019.

The interview with the school principal reveals several aspects of his leadership practices that are effectively interpreted when linked with DSIB reports. The principal says that the improvement of the curriculum is due to the cumulative efforts of all teachers and coordinators along with the head of academics in the school. He also explains that parents’ involvement in the teaching and learning of their children is fostered by the regular teachers-parents and leadership-parents’ forms held along with the parents’ council that links between parents and the school administration.

The principal also reveals how the school culture is promoted by ensuring a positive relationship between the different subordinates and the school leadership. He also adds that the teachers’ council is a crucial step to ensure that teachers’ needs and demands are delivered to the governing board of the school. His personal engagement in professional development and class observation is another key behind building a healthy rapport with the teachers along with the regular meetings with the teachers.

4.4 Key Findings

There are some key findings that can be summarized as follows:

  1. 1.

    School principal practices have a significant impact on the overall school improvement.

  2. 2.

    Parents’ engagement in their children’s learning is a cornerstone in school improvement.

  3. 3.

    Curriculum reform, as a main indicator of school improvement, starts with the practitioners’ engagement in its design and development.

  4. 4.

    Data-driven professional development for both teachers and leadership members is vital for school improvement in areas of attention.

5 Conclusion

5.1 Implications of the Current Study

Many studies on the best practices of leadership practices for school improvement have been conducted. To situate this study amongst similar studies, various related works were investigated and their findings are compared with the findings of this research. What makes this study distinct from other studies is that it relies on three different instruments and the cumulative analysis of the collected data is utilized to conclude with the best practices of leadership on school improvement.

5.2 Limitation of the Current Study

Time limit is the major limitation of this case study as it was conducted in a short time. Moreover, teachers’ consents were not easily obtained particularly when they knew that they were to evaluate the practices of the school leadership regardless of the researchers’ confirmation of the absolute confidentiality.

5.3 Recommendations for Future Research

It is recommended not to limit the qualitative instrument to the school principal as it would be more beneficial to listen to teachers’ insights and suggestions for the future research. It is also recommended that a comparative analysis of similar studies in the same context be conducted to best conclude with generalized successful practices of school leadership for school improvement.