Leadership Styles of Public Secondary School Heads in Goa District, Philippines
- Salvador V. Briones II
- Shane C. Briones
- 2089-2097
- Apr 19, 2025
- Education
Leadership Styles of Public Secondary School Heads in Goa District, Philippines
Salvador V. Briones II and Shane C. Briones
College of Education, University, Partido State University, Goa, Camarines Sur, Philippines
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.903SEDU0162
Received: 14 March 2025; Accepted: 19 March 2025; Published: 19 April 2025
ABSTRACT
Great school leaders had common characteristics but their leadership styles differed, and at times, they even switched to other styles according to the need. Schools needed leaders with a vision of improving school’s learning environment within a well-functioning school-based management system. This paper presented the leadership styles of public secondary school heads in Goa, Camarines Sur, Philippines. This paper described their leadership orientation, explained the extent of acceptance of their leadership styles, enumerated the best leadership practices, and explained the differences on the leadership orientation. This study employed descriptive methods and quantitatively obtained the data from 127 public secondary school teachers of Goa District, Division of Camarines Sur, Philippines. An adopted survey questionnaire was utilized, consisting of demographic profile, leadership styles indicators and best practices of school heads. The samples were randomly selected through stratified random sampling. Findings revealed that public secondary school heads in Goa district were “Task Oriented”. The level of acceptance to this leadership style was marked as “acceptable”. Moreover, the study showed that “communicative” was the best leadership practice of public secondary school heads. However, a statistical difference among the leadership styles was also found. Researchers concluded that effective communication was among the best practices of school heads that teachers liked the most. These practices promoted continual growth both for schools and teachers. Considering the differences in leadership styles of school heads, the researchers, with affirmations from majority of the public school teachers, strongly recommended that school heads should have considered the contingency approach to leadership, meaning leadership style should always match to the situation.
Keywords: Leadership Styles, Public Secondary School Heads, Task Oriented, Relationship Oriented, Contingency Approach
INTRODUCTION
The Philippine educational system is tremendously challenging particularly in the managerial competence of its officials. Mostly, school heads face and see challenges as their worst constant companion with a lot of responsibilities and accountabilities underlying their position. This requires the school heads to have a good leadership style to address all the issues and challenges in their school and at the same time motivating the faculty and students to perform well.
Leadership according to Ward (2018) is the art of motivating a group of people to act towards achieving a common goal. This captures the essentials of being able to inspire others and being prepared to do so. Teachers’ commitment is a function of an effective leadership style which is crucial to effective school administration, teacher satisfaction and retention. The role of the school head is the key to a school’s ability to meet the needs of the teachers, students, and parents it serves.
However, the impact and the influence the school head on teacher’s commitment is not a simple relationship. School head in today’s schools require the person in the position to carry out a countless number of functions as well act in a variety of different roles. The principal as the school head sets the tone for the school through varied leadership styles or behaviors displayed as leadership functions are carried out (Eboka, 2016).
Leadership styles are the various patterns of behaviors leaders adopt in the process of directing the efforts of subordinates towards the achievement of organizational goals. They are perceived by teachers and determine considerably their mental and emotional attitude towards their job. Invariably, the extent to which principals influence the attainment of school objectives is seemingly dependent on the leadership styles adopted. It is in this sense that the researchers conducted a study that analyzed the leadership styles of the school heads in the different public secondary schools in Goa District, Camarines Sur.
Specifically, this study addressed the following: the leadership orientation of public secondary school heads in Goa district; understand the extent of acceptance of the leadership styles of the different public secondary school heads in Goa district; identify the best leadership practices of public secondary school heads in Goa district; and determine if there is a statistical difference on the leadership orientation of the public secondary school heads in Goa district.
Moreover, this study adheres to the common line that Annan, (2022) stresses “leaders are not born, they are made”, that leadership can be learned, there is no single leadership style that fits all, and the correct leadership style is based on the needs of the followers and the organization.
This study, therefore, is anchor on contingency approach to leadership. a modern leadership styles which is a combination of prevailing styles and what the leader see fit accordingly to the situation. It came from the idea of merging task oriented approach to leadership and relationship approach to leadership. Figure 1 illustrates the conceptual paradigm of the study, as conceptualized by the authors.
Fig. 1 Conceptual Paradigm
METHODOLOGY
This study employs the descriptive method of research. This method was used in quantitative way of obtaining data on the most common leadership orientation of public secondary school heads in Goa district, the extent of acceptance of the leadership styles of the public secondary school heads in Goa district, the best leadership practices of public secondary school heads in Goa district and to test if the leadership orientation are statistically different.
Data obtained in this study were taken from the public secondary school teachers of Goa District, Division of Camarines Sur. The study involved a larger population of schools, from which five schools, labeled as S1, S2, S3, S4 and S5, were selected through a stratified random sampling. The selection process ensured a representative sample based on the school size and performance.
With a population of 200, the researchers aimed for a sixty percent (60%) data retrieval of rate. Ultimately, one hundred twenty-seven (127) participated in the study. The samples were selected through stratified random sampling, with schools serving as the basis for stratification and calculator to randomly determine the samples.
An adopted survey questionnaire was used to determine the respondents’ rating on the common leadership orientation, the extent of acceptance of the leadership styles, the best leadership practices of public secondary school heads in Goa district and to test if the leadership orientations are statistically different.
The questionnaire is composed of three parts. Part A seeks to gather data regarding the demographic profile of the respondents. Part B lists down the leadership style indicators along with their level of engagement and the extent of acceptance of the leadership style and Part C enumerates the best practices a school head possesses.
Instructions to the respondents were also provided in the questionnaire to check their corresponding ratings using the five-point Likert scale.
This study used the mean, weighted mean, standard deviation and analysis of variance (ANOVA) to statistically analyze and test the data gathered. Further, a post hoc test was conducted to measure specific statistical differences between pairs of means using the Duncan’s Multiple Range test (DMRT).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Numerous studies had emphasized the importance of school leadership in improving outcomes for school and its students. It is very true that the type of leadership style that each school head employs may differ. School leadership style is the manner and approach of providing direction, implementing plans, and motivating people. As seen by the teachers, it includes the total pattern of explicit and implicit actions performed by their school head.
There are many good and valid ways to lead and each school head may succeed for a particular leadership style and philosophy they may implement. The researchers specifically identified two major leadership styles used by public secondary school heads in Goa district, the task oriented and relationship oriented.
Leadership Orientation of Public Secondary School Heads in Goa District
School heads have the ability to maintain good interpersonal relations with their teachers and motivate them to help in achieving the organizational objectives. It reveals a mean for the Task oriented of 4.08, while relationship oriented got a mean of 3.99. With a difference of 0.09, this tells that the school heads in Goa district are “Task oriented” as presented in table 1.
In particular, the known behavior of the school heads that defines them of being a task oriented are “encourages group members to do high-quality work”, “develops a plan of action for the group”, “clarifies his or her own role within the group”, “makes suggestions about how to solve problems”, “provides a plan for how the work is to be done”, “steps standards of performance for the group”, “defines role responsibilities for each group member”, “makes his or her perspective clear to others”, “tells the group members what they are supposed to do”, and “provides criteria for what is expected of the group” with a mean of 4.23, 4.13, 4.12, 4.12, 4.10, 4.08, 4.06, 4.04, 4.01 and 3.95, respectively.
Moreover, the leadership style known behavior that got the highest mean is “encourage group members to do high-quality work”. Three of the five schools, S2, S3 and S5, marked this indicator with the highest mean. However, the leadership behavior that got the lowest mean is the “treats other fairly”. This supports the statement of some of the respondents that “si principal man kaya ngaya permi may pinapaburan (because the principal was always biased)”.
S1, S2, S4 and S5, manifested the highest mean in favor of the task oriented approach compared to the relationship oriented approach. S3 is the only school that gets the highest mean for relationship oriented approach. Furthermore, the leadership style known behavior “encourages group members to do high-quality work”, that marks the highest mean, is in the task oriented approach, while the behavior “response favorably to suggestions made by others”, that marks the lowest mean, is in the relationship oriented approach
Table 1 Leadership Orientation of the Public Secondary School Heads of Goa District (N=12)
| Leadership Style known Behavior | Public Secondary Schools | Mean | VI | ||||
| Task Oriented | S1 | S2 | S3 | S4 | S5 | ||
| 1. Tells the group members what they are supposed to do. | 3.98 | 3.95 | 4.20 | 3.14 | 4.79 | 4.01 | Often |
| 3. Steps standards of performance for the group. | 3.90 | 3.75 | 4.20 | 3.68 | 4.84 | 4.08 | Often |
| 5. Makes suggestions about how to solve problems. | 3.83 | 3.95 | 4.50 | 3.49 | 4.84 | 4.12 | Often |
| 7. Makes his or her perspective clear to others. | 3.88 | 3.50 | 4.50 | 3.49 | 4.84 | 4.04 | Often |
| 9. Develops a plan of action for the group. | 3.90 | 3.90 | 4.30 | 3.59 | 4.95 | 4.13 | Often |
| 11. Defines role responsibilities for each group member. | 4.03 | 3.65 | 4.40 | 3.40 | 4.84 | 4.06 | Often |
| 13. Clarifies his or her own role within the group. | 4.03 | 3.80 | 4.40 | 3.58 | 4.79 | 4.12 | Often |
| 15. Provides a plan for how the work is to be done. | 3.93 | 3.70 | 4.40 | 3.68 | 4.79 | 4.10 | Often |
| 17. Provides criteria for what is expected of the group. | 3.88 | 3.55 | 4.10 | 3.45 | 4.79 | 3.95 | Often |
| 19. Encourages group members to do high-quality work. | 3.98 | 4.05 | 4.60 | 3.74 | 4.79 | 4.23 | Always |
| Weighted Mean | 3.93 | 3.78 | 4.36 | 3.52 | 4.83 | 4.08 | Often |
| Relationship Oriented | |||||||
| 2. Acts friendly with members of the group. | 3.73 | 3.95 | 4.80 | 3.44 | 4.82 | 4.15 | Often |
| 4. Helps others in the group feel comfortable | 3.63 | 3.50 | 4.50 | 3.32 | 4.84 | 3.96 | Often |
| 6. Response favorably to suggestions made by others. | 3.50 | 3.55 | 4.30 | 3.28 | 4.83 | 3.89 | Often |
| 8. Treats others fairly. | 3.60 | 3.40 | 4.50 | 3.03 | 4.74 | 3.85 | Often |
| 10. Behave in a predictable manner toward group members. | 3.65 | 3.70 | 4.60 | 3.46 | 4.82 | 4.05 | Often |
| 12. Communicates actively with group members. | 3.83 | 3.35 | 4.30 | 3.55 | 4.74 | 3.95 | Often |
| 14. Communicates actively with group members. | 3.93 | 3.35 | 4.80 | 3.34 | 4.74 | 4.03 | Often |
| 16. Shows flexibility in making decisions. | 3.75 | 3.20 | 4.70 | 3.40 | 4.79 | 3.97 | Often |
| 18. Disclose thoughts and feelings to group members. | 3.68 | 3.45 | 4.60 | 3.73 | 4.74 | 4.04 | Often |
| 20. Helps group members get along with each other. | 3.68 | 3.45 | 4.50 | 3.76 | 4.90 | 4.06 | Often |
| Weighted Mean | 3.70 | 3.49 | 4.56 | 3.43 | 4.80 | 3.99 | Often |
Note: 1:00-1.79-Never, 1.80-2.59-Seldom, 2.60-3.39-Occasionally, 3.40-4.19-Often, 4.20-5.00-Always; VI-Verbal Interpretation
This finding supports the claim of Jacob and Ayoko. (2023) that one of the dominant and effective leadership styles among managers of any enterprise and even academic institution is a task oriented leadership. This leadership is primarily focused on getting tasks completed. Leaders who are task oriented are highly goal-focused and work effectively towards predetermined objectives. This style of leadership is less concerned with the individuals and teams performing the work just as long as the work is done on time and to the required standard. Everything is focused towards achieving the task. At the end, this style of leadership ensures deadlines are met and tasks are completed.
Extent of Acceptance of the Leadership Styles of the Different Public Secondary School Heads in Goa district
Table 2 Extent of Acceptance of the Leadership Styles of the Different Public Secondary School Heads of Goa District (N=127)
| Leadership Style known Behavior | Public Secondary Schools | Mean | VI | ||||
| Task Oriented | S1 | S2 | S3 | S4 | S5 | ||
| 1. Tells the group members what they are supposed to do. | 3.92 | 4.10 | 4.50 | 3.28 | 4.74 | 4.11 | A |
| 3. Steps standards of performance for the group. | 3.82 | 3.95 | 4.40 | 3.55 | 4.84 | 4.11 | A |
| 5. Makes suggestions about how to solve problems. | 3.90 | 4.30 | 4.70 | 3.41 | 4.74 | 4.21 | HA |
| 7. Makes his or her perspective clear to others. | 3.74 | 3.70 | 4.60 | 3.46 | 4.84 | 4.07 | A |
| 9. Develops a plan of action for the group. | 3.79 | 4.15 | 4.70 | 3.62 | 4.84 | 4.22 | HA |
| 11. Defines role responsibilities for each group member. | 3.90 | 3.80 | 4.50 | 3.36 | 4.84 | 4.08 | A |
| 13. Clarifies his or her own role within the group. | 3.95 | 4.00 | 4.60 | 3.47 | 4.89 | 4.18 | A |
| 15. Provides a plan for how the work is to be done. | 3.82 | 3.85 | 4.60 | 3.53 | 4.79 | 4.12 | A |
| 17. Provides criteria for what is expected of the group. | 3.74 | 3.85 | 4.50 | 3.56 | 4.79 | 4.09 | A |
| 19. Encourages group members to do high-quality work. | 3.90 | 4.30 | 4.70 | 3.71 | 4.89 | 4.30 | HA |
| Weighted Mean | 3.85 | 4 | 4.58 | 3.50 | 4.82 | 4.15 | A |
| Relationship Oriented | |||||||
| 2. Acts friendly with members of the group. | 3.95 | 3.90 | 4.80 | 3.33 | 4.79 | 4.15 | A |
| 4. Helps others in the group feel comfortable | 3.77 | 3.85 | 4.80 | 3.42 | 4.84 | 4.14 | A |
| 6. Response favorably to suggestions made by others. | 3.72 | 3.90 | 4.50 | 3.36 | 4.63 | 4.02 | A |
| 8. Treats others fairly. | 3.64 | 3.80 | 4.70 | 3.33 | 4.79 | 4.05 | A |
| 10. Behave in a predictable manner toward group members. | 3.69 | 3.80 | 4.80 | 3.51 | 4.84 | 4.13 | A |
| 12. Communicates actively with group members. | 3.85 | 3.75 | 4.40 | 3.51 | 4.84 | 4.07 | A |
| 14. Communicates actively with group members. | 4.00 | 3.85 | 4.80 | 3.47 | 5.00 | 4.22 | HA |
| 16. Shows flexibility in making decisions. | 3.77 | 3.35 | 4.70 | 3.56 | 4.79 | 4.03 | A |
| 18. Disclose thoughts and feelings to group members. | 3.67 | 3.55 | 4.60 | 3.53 | 4.79 | 4.03 | A |
| 20. Helps group members get along with each other. | 3.77 | 3.80 | 4.50 | 3.47 | 4.84 | 4.08 | A |
| Weighted Mean | 3.78 | 3.76 | 4.66 | 3.45 | 4.82 | 4.09 | A |
| General Weighted Mean | 3.82 | 3.88 | 4.62 | 3.48 | 4.82 | 4.12 | A |
Note: 1:00-1.79-UnAcceptable, 1.80-2.59-Slightly Unacceptable, 2.60-3.39-Slightly Acceptable, 3.40-4.19-Acceptable, 4.20-5.00-Highly Acceptable; HA-Highly Acceptable, A-Acceptable; VI-Verbal Interpretation
School heads and their leadership styles play an important role in the growth of their respective schools. The extent of acceptance of the leadership styles of the different public secondary school heads in Goa district refers to the process of influencing the behavior of the teachers in a manner that they strive willingly and enthusiastically towards the achievement of groups’ objectives.
Result of the study shows that the leadership styles along with the leadership behaviors of the public secondary school heads in Goa district are “acceptable” with a general weighted mean of 4.12, as presented in table 3. Nevertheless, two of the school heads gained a mark of “highly acceptable” for their leadership style with a general weighted mean of 4.62 and 4.82. However, leadership style of the school head from S4 got the lowest mean of 3.48.
Additionally, teachers put more emphasis on the three leadership behaviors by marking it high compared to other leadership behaviors. These are “encourages group members to do high quality work”, “develops a plan of action for the group” and “makes suggestions about how to solve the problems”. These shows that the school heads are actively involved in the process. Martin J. et al. (2014) noted that “managers who are able to take a coaching approach develop a partnership with their teammates and establish a shared vision for what needs to be done and how these goals will be accomplished.
This sort of relationship will give a more personal and active role in each individual’s development, create a relationship of trust, and foster an environment of continual growth”. Trust, at some point, is a way of garnering the commitment and engagement of the employees and are considered more important than recognition and appreciation.
Best Leadership Practices of Public Secondary School Heads in Goa District
Table 3 Best Leadership Practices of Public Secondary School Heads in Goa District (N=127)
| Best Practices | S1 | S2 | S3 | S4 | S5 | Total | Rank |
| 1. Aligning | 22 | 14 | 9 | 19 | 19 | 83 | 2 |
| 2. Collaborating | 20 | 7 | 8 | 19 | 19 | 73 | 4 |
| 3. Communicative | 25 | 16 | 8 | 22 | 19 | 90 | 1 |
| 4. Confidence Builder | 14 | 11 | 6 | 10 | 18 | 59 | 9 |
| 5. Empowering | 18 | 7 | 8 | 10 | 18 | 61 | 6.5 |
| 6. Motivating | 21 | 13 | 8 | 19 | 19 | 70 | 5 |
| 7. Plans Ahead | 23 | 14 | 8 | 13 | 19 | 77 | 3 |
| 8. Serving | 16 | 6 | 9 | 13 | 17 | 61 | 6.5 |
| 9. Trustworthy | 15 | 4 | 7 | 8 | 19 | 53 | 10 |
| 10. Win-win Problem Solver | 15 | 6 | 9 | 12 | 18 | 60 | 8 |
Table 3 presents the ten (10) known best leadership practices. Among these practices, the top three excellent leadership practices of the public secondary school heads in Goa District are the “communicative” as rank 1, “aligning” as rank 2 “plans ahead” as rank 3. Communicative is the readiness of the school heads to talk and impart information to the teachers and students. Aligning means giving support to the teachers by placing them according to their expertise. And the plans ahead practice is about carefully thinking about what might happen in the future or make plans for things the school wants to do in the future. Nonetheless, the three best leadership practices that the public secondary school heads are least engage in are the “trustworthy”, “confidence builder” and “win-win problem solver” who ranks as 10, 9 and 8, respectively. Other leadership practices are: collaborating-working or functioning together with the teachers and students harmoniously to create or produce something, motivating- promotes the desire of or willingness of the teachers to do and to achieve something, empowering- making the teachers stronger and more confident, especially in controlling their life and claiming their rights and serving-effectively understands the needs of the teachers and provide them superior value.
In addition, respondents identified another best practice demonstrated by school heads that was not included in the predefined list—the ability to “model the way.” This means that school heads serve as role models, setting an example for others to follow. “Modeling the way” involves leading by example, demonstrating the behaviors a leader expects from others before asking them to adopt them (Cohen, 2024). People are more likely to trust and follow what they consistently see their leaders do rather than just what they hear them say. Great leaders should embody the desired approach, setting an example by aligning their actions with their values and those of their school.
Result of this study supports the claim of Mart. et al. (2014) that “effective communication skill is a key to building trust with your teammates and getting them to buy into your vision”. Furthermore, her study proved that communication fosters cohesive bonds, commitment, and that builds an environment of continual growth.
Additionally, Salfi (2011), revealed in his study that the majority of the head teachers of successful schools developed a common and shared school vision and promoted a culture of good communication, collaboration, support and trust. Good school head emphasizes the importance of alignment and empowerment, meaning, placing the teachers according to their expertise and empowering them to lead and distributed leadership responsibilities throughout the school.
People in leadership positions in any schools have the ability to promote a supportive and productive work environment with their actions, decisions and overall leadership styles. Beyond fostering a pleasant work environment, the leadership styles and traits of school heads can also impact the bottom line of the operation. The difference between leadership styles is subtle, but important.
Statistical Difference on the Leadership Orientation of the Public Secondary School Heads in Goa district
Statistical difference on the leadership styles of the public secondary school heads in Goa district was also tested. Data were revealed in table 4.
Table 4 Difference on the Leadership Orientation of the Public Secondary School Heads in Goa District
| Summary of Data | ||||||
| Treatments | ||||||
| S1 | S2 | S3 | S4 | S5 | Total | |
| N | 40 | 20 | 11 | 39 | 17 | 127 |
| ∑X | 76.29 | 74.86 | 90.8 | 69.49 | 96.32 | 407.76 |
| Mean | 3.8145 | 3.743 | 4.54 | 3.4745 | 4.816 | 4.078 |
| ∑X2 | 291.272 | 281.3446 | 412.675 | 241.8253 | 463.9118 | 1691.03 |
| Std.Dev. | 0.1178 | 0.2453 | 0.1527 | 0.1418 | 0.0427 | 0.5351 |
| Result Details | ||||||
| Source | SS | df | MS | |||
| Between-treatments | 26.0791 | 4 | 6.5198 | F = 273.20461 | ||
| Within-treatments | 2.2671 | 95 | 0.0239 | |||
| Total | 28.3462 | 99 | ||||
Data presented on table 4 showed that leadership styles of the public secondary school heads in Goa district are statistically different at p<.05, with the f-ratio value of 273.20461, the p-value of <.00001.
In other words, the leadership styles of school heads from S1 with a weighted mean of 3.81, S2 with a weighted mean of 3.74, S3 with a weighted mean of 4.54, S4 with a weighted mean of 3.47 and S5 with a weighted mean of 4.82 are statistically different from each other.
Further, a post hoc test to measure specific statistical differences between pairs of means was done using Duncan’s Multiple Range test (DMRT).
Table 5 Duncan’s Multiple range Test on the Statistical Difference on the Leadership Orientation of the Public Secondary School heads in Goa District
| Test between Means | Mean differences | Computed Duncan’s MRT | Statistical Significant | |
| Difference between highest mean and lowest mean | S5-S4 | 1.35 | 0.21903 | A |
| Difference between second highest mean and lowest mean | S3-S4 | 1.07 | 0.21903 | A |
| Difference between third mean highest and lowest mean | S1-S4 | 0.34 | 0.21903 | B |
| Difference between fourth highest mean and lowest mean | S2-S4 | 0.27 | 0.21903 | B |
Note: Mean of S1=3.81, Mean of S2=3.74, Mean of S3=4.54, Mean of S4=3.47, Mean of S5=4.82; Common letters-No Statistical difference
Table 5 revealed that the difference between the highest mean and lowest mean, which is 1.35, is greater than the computed DMRT which is 0.21903. This means that the highest mean is statistically significant from that of the lowest mean. Furthermore, statistical significance also exists between the second highest mean and the lowest mean. However, the third highest mean and the fourth highest mean does not differ significantly from that of the lowest mean with the difference of 0.34 and 0.27, respectively.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
The researchers concluded that the public secondary school heads of Goa district employ a Task Oriented approach in managing and running their respective schools. The extent of acceptance of this leadership style marked as “acceptable”. Although the leadership style of the school head is acceptable to the teachers, some of them prefer the relationship oriented approach. When it comes to the engagement of the school heads a mean of 4.04 was revealed, meaning school heads are “often” engage on the identified leadership behaviors. Moreover, this study determined that effective communication is one of the best practices of a school head that the teachers likes the most for these practice promotes continual growth both for the school and the teachers.
In general, it was concluded that the leadership styles of public secondary school heads in Goa district are statistically different. With this result, the researchers recommend that school heads should also consider the contingency approach to leadership such as leadership style should always match to the situation, especially during this trying times.
REFERENCES
- Annan, B. (2022). Leadership Styles of Africans: A Study Using Path-Goal Leadership Theory. SAM Advanced Management Journal. DOI:https://doi.org/10.52770/RCEJ9995
- Cohen, Z. (2024). Leading by Example as a School Administrator. Retrieved from https://www.edutopia.org/article/leading-example-school-administrator/
- Eboka, O. C. (2016), Principals Leadership Styles and Gender Influence on Teachers Morale in Public Secondary Schools. Journal of Education and Practice, Vol. 7, No. 15.retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1103226.pdf
- Jacob O. N. and Ayoko, V. O. (2023). Task Oriented Leadership Style and Performance of Educational Intstitutions in Nigeria. Ta’Lim Va Rivojlanish Tahlili Onlayn Ilmiy Jurnali. Retrieved from https://sciencebox.uz/index.php/ajed/article/view/6134
- Martin, J., McCormack, B., Fitzsimons, D., & Sprig, R. (2014). The importance of inspiring a shared vision. International Practice Development Journal, 4(2), Article 4. https://www.fons.org/library/journal/volume4- issue2/article4
- Salfi, N. A. (2011). Successful Leadership Practices of Head Teachers for School Improvement: Some Evidence from Pakistan. Joournal of Educational Administration. DOI: 10.1108/09578231111146489
- Ward, S. (2018), What Is Leadership? And Can You Learn to Be a Good Leader? Retrieved from https://www.thebalancesmb.com/leadership-definition-2948275