IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsoctx/v5y2015i2p537-565d50571.html

Complexity and Volume: An Inquiry into Factors that Drive Principals’ Work

Author

Listed:
  • Katina Pollock

    (Faculty of Education, Western University, 1137 Western Rd., London, ON N6G 1G7, Canada)

  • Fei Wang

    (Faculty of Education, Department of Educational Studies, The University of British Columbia, 2125 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada)

  • David Cameron Hauseman

    (Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto, 252 Bloor Street West, Toronto, ON M5S 1V6, Canada)

Abstract

Background: The work of contemporary school principals is intensifying in terms of its complexity and volume. Many factors moderate and drive such work intensification. This study aims to understand what and how factors interact to complicate principals’ work. Methods: Focus groups and an online survey were used for data collection. Three focus group sessions with eight principals were conducted to help develop and refine the online survey. The survey covers 12 key areas in principals’ work and was distributed among the members of Ontario Principals’ Council. Descriptive statistics, correlation and factor analysis were conducted on survey results. Results: The study shows that there are many key areas that moderate principals’ work, such as administrative duties and responsibilities, jurisdictional policies, external influences, partnerships, and challenges and possibilities. School principals are experiencing increased expectations at work in terms of the number of tasks they are expected to undertake, the duration of time they are required to complete those tasks, and the many challenges they face at their work. Conclusions: Principals’ choice of leadership approaches and practices is subject to factors that exist within and beyond schools. Such factors moderate the way that principals carry out their work and limit their choices in exercising their professional autonomy.

Suggested Citation

  • Katina Pollock & Fei Wang & David Cameron Hauseman, 2015. "Complexity and Volume: An Inquiry into Factors that Drive Principals’ Work," Societies, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-29, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:5:y:2015:i:2:p:537-565:d:50571
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/5/2/537/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/5/2/537/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eberts, Randall W. & Stone, Joe A., 1988. "Student achievement in public schools: Do principals make a difference?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 291-299, June.
    2. Brian A. Jacob & Lars Lefgren, 2005. "Principals as Agents: Subjective Performance Measurement in Education," NBER Working Papers 11463, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Douglas N. Harris & Stacey A. Rutledge & William K. Ingle & Cynthia C. Thompson, 2010. "Mix and Match: What Principals Really Look for When Hiring Teachers," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 5(2), pages 228-246, April.
    4. Mark J. Martinko & William L. Gardner, 1990. "Structured Observation Of Managerial Work: A Replication And Synthesis," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 329-357, May.
    5. Brewer, Dominic J., 1993. "Principals and student outcomes: Evidence from U.S. high schools," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 281-292, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tara Béteille & Demetra Kalogrides & Susanna Loeb, 2011. "Stepping Stones: Principal Career Paths and School Outcomes," NBER Working Papers 17243, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Elizabeth Dhuey & Justin Smith, 2014. "How important are school principals in the production of student achievement?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(2), pages 634-663, May.
    3. Gregory F. Branch & Eric A. Hanushek & Steven G. Rivkin, 2012. "Estimating the Effect of Leaders on Public Sector Productivity: The Case of School Principals," NBER Working Papers 17803, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Brewer, Dominic J., 1996. "Does more school district administration lower educational productivity? Some evidence on the "Administrative Blob" in New York public schools," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 111-124, April.
    5. Ballou, Dale & Podgursky, Michael, 1995. "What makes a good principal? How teachers assess the performance of principals," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 243-252, September.
    6. Goldhaber, Dan & Grout, Cyrus & Wolff, Malcolm & Martinková, Patrícia, 2021. "Evidence on the Dimensionality and Reliability of Professional References’ Ratings of Teacher Applicants," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    7. Mike Helal & Michael Coelli, 2016. "How Principals Affect Schools," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2016n18, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    8. Billger, Sherrilyn M., 2007. "Principals as Agents? Investigating Accountability in the Compensation and Performance of School Principals," IZA Discussion Papers 2662, IZA Network @ LISER.
    9. Jason A. Grissom & Demetra Kalogrides & Susanna Loeb, 2012. "Using Student Test Scores to Measure Principal Performance," NBER Working Papers 18568, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Miller, Ashley, 2013. "Principal turnover and student achievement," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 60-72.
    11. Brewer, Dominic J, 1996. "Career Paths and Quit Decisions: Evidence from Teaching," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 14(2), pages 313-339, April.
    12. Ignacio Tavares De Araujo Junior & Alessio Tony C. Almeida & Hilton M. B. Ramalho, 2018. "Managerial Effort Under Asymmetric Information: The Case Of Public Schools In Brazil," Anais do XLIV Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 44th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 127, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    13. Billger, Sherrilyn M., 2007. "Principal Accountability at Private Secondary Schools," IZA Discussion Papers 3162, IZA Network @ LISER.
    14. Sherrilyn M. Billger, 2007. "Principals as Agents? Investigating Accountability in the Compensation and Performance of School Principals," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 61(1), pages 90-107, October.
    15. Terrier, Camille, 2020. "Boys lag behind: How teachers’ gender biases affect student achievement," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    16. Carolyn J. Heinrich & Gerald Marschke, 2010. "Incentives and their dynamics in public sector performance management systems," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(1), pages 183-208.
    17. Dan Goldhaber & Cyrus Grout & Nick Huntington-Klein, 2017. "Screen Twice, Cut Once: Assessing the Predictive Validity of Applicant Selection Tools," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 12(2), pages 197-223, Spring.
    18. Danuta DiskienÄ— & Virginijus TamaÅ¡eviÄ ius & AgnÄ— KalvaitytÄ—, 2018. "MANAGERIAL ROLES IN SMEs AND THEIR EFFECT ON PERCEIVED MANAGERIAL EFFECTIVENESS IN LITHUANIA," Organizations and Markets in Emerging Economies, Faculty of Economics, Vilnius University, vol. 9(1).
    19. Hinrichs, Peter, 2021. "What kind of teachers are schools looking for? Evidence from a randomized field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 395-411.
    20. Andrew L. Kun & Raffaella Sadun & Orit Shaer & Thomaz Teodorovicz, 2022. "How does working from home during COVID-19 affect what managers do? Evidence from time-use studies," POID Working Papers 029, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:5:y:2015:i:2:p:537-565:d:50571. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.