leadership and the influences of teacher absenteeism/67531/metadc... · leadership style on teacher...

APPROVED: Miriam Ezzani, Major Professor John Brooks, Committee Member Linda Stromberg, Committee Member James Duke Laney, Committee Member and

Chair of the Department of Teacher Education and Administration

Bertina Hildreth Combes, Interim Dean of the College of Education

Victor Prybutok, Vice Provost of the Toulouse Graduate School

LEADERSHIP AND THE INFLUENCES OF TEACHER ABSENTEEISM

Lori Ayala

Dissertation Prepared for the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS

August 2016

Ayala, Lori. Leadership and the Influences of Teacher Absenteeism. Doctor of

Philosophy (Educational Leadership), August 2016, 93 pp., 18 tables, references, 56 titles.

This study explored campus principals' leadership behaviors and leadership styles to

determine possible influences of leadership on teacher absences. The study was viewed through

the framework of Bass and Avolio's (1985) transformational and transactional leadership styles.

The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Self-Report (MLQ-SR) was used to identify

principals' perceptions of their leadership styles. Absence data were also collected and analyzed

for the school years (2012-2013, 2013-2014, and 2014-2015). Data were triangulated using one-

on-one interviews with selected principals and teacher focus group discussions. The findings

from this study verified that leadership style (described in terms of leadership behaviors)

influenced teacher absenteeism indirectly through the culture and climate of the campus. Future

research is recommended to discover whether incentive programs decrease teacher absenteeism

and how leaders can influence their organizations through their behaviors.

Copyright 2016

by

Lori Ayala

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It has been a journey from beginning my doctoral studies in 2010 to now. I am an avid

learner, so the coursework in educational leadership fed my desire for knowledge in my field.

When I finished my coursework, I began my research on a topic that has great meaning to me,

leadership. In my studies, I have come to understand that leadership is the rise or fall of any

organization. I wanted to examine the connection between leadership and teacher absenteeism.

My family has been with me every step of the way. I would like to thank my mother,

Sara Torrez, for being one of my biggest supporters. She listened to me when I told her all about

my studies or when I faced obstacles. I would like to thank my father, Ben Torrez, for believing

in me and keeping up with every detail.

I would like thank my husband, Marcus Ayala, who has been my advocate, my supporter,

my coach, and my friend through this process. He knows almost as much as me about this topic!

I could not have done this without him.

Last, I would like to thank Dr. Miriam Ezzani. She guided me through this from the very

beginning. She has been on my side and supported me with her words, her expertise, and her

dedication to my success. I am so thankful that she was the one who helped me get here.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... iii

Chapters

1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1

Statement of Problem .............................................................................................. 2

Purpose of Study ..................................................................................................... 3

Research Questions ................................................................................................. 4

Definition of Terms ................................................................................................. 4

Assumptions ............................................................................................................ 5

Limitations .............................................................................................................. 5

2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ................................................................................ 6

Job Satisfaction ....................................................................................................... 6

Teacher Absenteeism and Student Achievement .................................................... 7

Types and Cause of Teacher Absences ....................................................... 8

Leadership, Organizational Climate, Absenteeism, and Job Satisfaction ......................................................................................... 11

Transactional vs. Transformational Leadership ........................................ 13

Summary ............................................................................................................... 19

3. METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................... 20

Research Design .................................................................................................... 20

Qualitative Data ........................................................................................ 21

Quantitative Data ...................................................................................... 21

Overview of the District ........................................................................................ 22

Student Demographic Information ........................................................... 23

iv

Data Collection Procedures ................................................................................... 28

Quantitative Data Collection ..................................................................... 28

Instrumentation ......................................................................................... 28

Qualitative Data Collection ....................................................................... 31

Data Analysis ........................................................................................................ 32

Quantitative Data Analysis ....................................................................... 32

Qualitative Data Analysis ......................................................................... 32

Procedure .............................................................................................................. 34

Reliability and Validity ............................................................................. 35

Ethical Considerations .......................................................................................... 35

Limitations and Delimitations ............................................................................... 36

Summary ............................................................................................................... 36

4. DATA ANALYSIS AND DATA INTERPRETATION .............................................. 37

A Framework: Leadership Style ........................................................................... 38

Transactional vs. Transformational Leadership ........................................ 38

Quantitative Data Findings ................................................................................... 39

Descriptive Statistics for the Independent Variable .................................. 41

Descriptive Statistics for the Dependent Variable-Teacher Absence Rate45

Multiple Regression .................................................................................. 45

Statistical Significance .............................................................................. 46

Summary ............................................................................................................... 47

Qualitative Findings .............................................................................................. 48

Principal and Teacher Perceptions of Teacher Absenteeism ................................ 49

v

Theme 1–Personal Accountability ............................................................ 49

How Principals Create School Climate and Culture ............................................. 52

Theme 2–Relationships ............................................................................. 52

Policies and Procedures ........................................................................................ 55

Theme 3–Practices .................................................................................... 56

Cultural Norms ...................................................................................................... 59

Theme 4–Culture of the School ................................................................ 60

Summary ............................................................................................................... 62

5. SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS OF FINDINGS ................................................. 64

Connection to Prior Research ............................................................................... 65

Discussion ............................................................................................................. 69

Implications for Future Research .......................................................................... 70

Implications for Policy and Practice ..................................................................... 70

Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 71

APPENDICES................................................................................................................... 72

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 88

vi

LIST OF TABLES

Table

1. Leadership Behaviors .......................................................................................................... 3

2. Six Factor Leadership Model ............................................................................................ 15

3. Transactional versus Transformational Leadership .......................................................... 16

4. Connection between Leadership Style Descriptors and Philosophies .............................. 18

5. Student Ethnic Distribution ............................................................................................... 23

6. Elementary School Student Demographic ........................................................................ 24

7. Elementary School Staff Demographics ........................................................................... 25

8. Middle School Student Demographics ............................................................................. 26

9. Middle School Staff Demographics .................................................................................. 27

10. Principals by Grade Level ................................................................................................. 28

11. Leadership Style and the Corresponding Items as Scored on the MLQ-5X ..................... 30

12. Coding Chart ..................................................................................................................... 34

13. MLQ and the Six Factors of Leadership from Bass and Avolio ....................................... 40

14. Descriptive Statistics for the Independent Variables ........................................................ 43

15. Descriptive Statistics for the Dependent Variables .......................................................... 43

16. Five I's of Transformational Leadership .......................................................................... 43

17. Model 1 Summary Transformational Leadership ............................................................. 44

18. Multiple Regression using Five I’s of Transformational Leadership ............................... 45

vii

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Policymakers have paid much attention to teacher effectiveness; however, a less

researched topic, teacher attendance, is equally important. The National Council on Teacher

Quality (NCTQ, 2014) collected school district data for 50 of the largest populated areas for the

2012–2013 school year. The researchers sought to answer the following questions: “How often

are teachers in the classroom?” and “What factors influence their attendance?” The findings

revealed that public school teachers missed almost 11 days during the average 186-day school

year, and teachers used just slightly less than the allotted short-term leave given by their school

districts. Sixteen percent of teachers were chronically absent, which accounted for almost a third

of all absences. No relationship existed between teacher absence and poverty level of school

districts. Finally, districts with formal absentee policies (to discourage teacher absences) did not

appear to have better attendance rates than those without such policies.

The NCTQ (2014) reported that districts spent approximately $424 million on substitutes

in 2012–2013, which equaled $1,800 per teacher to cover absences. This figure does not include

the costs of hiring and training substitutes. However, the responsibility of teaching students the

essential knowledge and skills for college and career readiness lies with teachers. Creating a

system with highly effective teachers is a priority for school leaders and policymakers; however,

a school culture in which teacher attendance is valued is just as important. The U.S. education

system depends on the education of future leaders, scientists, biologists, athletes, business

owners, and the like. In the long-term, loss of instructional time and costs for substitutes could

compromise the educational system and create a culture of mediocrity.

1

Statement of Problem

Excessive teacher absences cause school costs to increase because of substitute teacher

pay and may result in negative educational consequences. Results of previous research clearly

point to teacher absenteeism as a problem for school districts both financially and academically

(Clotfelter, Ladd, & Vigdor, 2009; Long & Ormsby, 1987; Spradlin, Cierniak, Shi, & Chen,

2012). The absenteeism rates for teachers in the United States averages 5%, or 9 days in a 180-

day school year. This rate is higher than that of the U.S. workforce, which is at 3%.

This study explored campus principals’ leadership behaviors and leadership style to

determine possible influences of leadership on teacher absences. Specifically, the study aimed

to:

1. Determine the relationship between the campus principals’ scores on the nine

leadership behaviors measured by the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire and

teacher absences (see Table 1).

2. Determine the effect of campus principals’ leadership styles (Transformational,

Transactional, and Laissez-faire) on teacher absences.

3. Determine the current status of campus principals’ perceptions of teacher

absenteeism.

Findings give rise to implications of actions that the school district can take to remedy the

problem of the study. Specifically, districts can provide training aimed to develop campus

principals’ leadership skills. These leadership skills can help create cultures and climates that

decrease voluntary teacher absences (see Table 1).

2

Table 1

Leadership Behaviors

Code Behavior Leadership Style

II(A) Idealized Influence (Attributed) Transformational

II(B) Idealized Influence (Behavior) Transformational

IM Inspirational Motivation Transformational

IS Intellectual Stimulation Transformational

IC Individualized Consideration Transformational

CR Contingent Reward Transactional

MBEA Management-by-Exception (Active) Transactional

MBEP Management-by-Exception (Passive) Transactional

LF Laissez-Faire Laissez-Faire

Purpose of Study

The researcher sought to determine whether teachers use personal and sick days because

they are available and considered a benefit of the job and whether the leadership style of the

campus principal influences the use of these days. Determining whether leadership positively or

negatively affects the ‘absenteeism’ culture of the school may provide awareness to school

district leaders, which could lead to breaking the cycle of voluntary teacher absences.

Previous research regarding teacher absenteeism has posed different hypotheses on the

nature of this problem. Some researchers have focused on the monetary costs of teacher

absenteeism while others have examined the effects of student achievement (Hill, 1982; Long &

Ormsby, 1987). Still others have made connections between job satisfaction, culture,

organizational climate, and leadership (Bass & Avolio, 1993; Gibson & Lafornara, 1972;

3

LeCompte & Dworkin, 1991). However, little research has considered the influence of

leadership style on teacher absenteeism as explored from the perceptions of those in the field.

Research Questions

The following research questions guided this study:

1. What is the relationship between campus principals’ scores on the six factors of

leadership (inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, individual consideration,

contingent reward, management-by-exception, passive-avoidant leadership) and

teacher absenteeism?

2. What is the current status of campus principals’ perceptions of teacher absenteeism?

3. How do principals create a climate that encourages or discourages teacher absences?

4. What cultural norms do school leaders develop regarding teacher absences?

5. What evidence exists that principals put procedures or policies in place regarding

teacher absences?

Definition of Terms

Involuntary absences. Involuntary absences include those taken for mandatory

obligations such as jury duty, professional development and training, legitimate sickness, or a

death in the family.

Transactional leadership style. Transactional leaders emphasize work standards, task

completion, training, and procedures. These leaders focus on employee obedience, rewards, and

consequences as ways to influence employee performance (Bromley & Kirschner-Bromley,

2007).

4

Transformational leadership style. Transformational leaders are those who engage with

followers, focus on higher-order intrinsic needs, and raise consciousness about the significance

of specific outcomes and new ways in which those outcomes might be achieved (Burns, 1978).

Voluntary absences. Voluntary absences include short-term time taken off with no proof

of illness.

Assumptions

The researcher made the following assumptions:

1. Principals who complete the online survey answered all items honestly.

2. The sample selected for the survey represented the population to which the researcher

made inferences.

Limitations

This study was limited by the following factors:

1. Leadership styles may change over time or may be situational.

2. District measures to reduce absenteeism were not explored.

3. Social liability may be an issue as principals may or may not want to think about

whether they influence teacher absences.

4. The sample population included only one large urban school district; therefore, the

findings are not generalizable to all public school district populations.

5. Information on absenteeism may change over time.

5

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

The literature review summarizes, interprets, and integrates research that pertains to the

research questions of this study. The review discusses teacher absenteeism, leadership styles,

and the relation between the two.

Job Satisfaction

Factors that influence teacher attendance include job satisfaction, work environment,

stress, and performance ratings. For example, if an employee is trying to withdraw from the

schoolwork environment to avoid job dissatisfaction, he or she engages in a decision-making

process that weighs the consequences of being absent (e.g., loss of pay) against the benefits of a

short reprieve (Bridges & Hallinan, 1978; Gaziel, 2004). It is likely that the cause of

absenteeism is that the employee is not happy with the terms and conditions of employment,

such as leadership style, policies, salary, physical environment, or job security (Herzberg, 1966).

If these conditions become significant, an employee may voluntarily terminate his or her

employment. However, if terminating employment is not an option, the employee may seek the

alternative by being absent (Hammer, Landau, & Stern, 1984).

Pitkoff (1993) reported that teachers who received low performance ratings from the

building principal were absent more frequently than were those who received ratings of

satisfactory or higher. Further, school leaders who offered teachers less autonomy, flexibility,

and social support, tended to report higher absenteeism rates. Dworkin, Haney, Dworkin, and

Telschow (1990) assessed stress and illness behaviors among urban public school teachers. They

operated on five hypotheses that focused on the support of peers, principals, and school

environments. All 291 respondents reported some stress-induced illness behaviors associated

6

with the teaching role. However, the researchers proposed that stress-induced illness would be

lower among teachers assigned to schools where principals were perceived as supportive.

Dworkin et al. (1990) conducted a t-test to compare levels of stress-induced illness between two

groups of principals—supportive and unsupportive. The statistically significant result (p < .001)

indicated that teachers reported less stress-induced illness leading to absences when they

perceived their principals as supportive. The other hypotheses focused on the support of peers

and principals. The results showed that those factors were not statistically significant in

predicting stress-induced illness behaviors.

Stress could lead to higher teacher absenteeism and contribute to the possibility of

teachers taking “sick” days as “mental health” days even though no physical illness is present

(Kight, 2007). Additionally, many teachers find themselves disillusioned when they dedicate

long hours without commensurate pay, inadequate resources, unappreciative principals, and

disrespectful students. However, teachers are still held accountable to state standards and school

district expectations (Despues, 1999; Dworkin, 2001). The effect of this type of stress can cause

teachers to be absent (Kight, 2007).

Teacher Absenteeism and Student Achievement

When a teacher is absent, valuable instructional time is lost and student progress may

suffer. Pitkoff (1993), the principal of New Britain High School in Connecticut, examined the

causes of absenteeism in 17 Brooklyn high schools. Specifically, he investigated the relationship

between school organizational variables and teacher absenteeism. He calculated Pearson product

correlation coefficients between school profile variables and school employee absenteeism rates.

Contradictory to the NCTQ report, which indicated that poverty was not a factor in teacher

attendance, Pitkoff (1993) found significant relationships between teacher absenteeism and lower

7

student achievement in reading, writing, and mathematics; attendance; higher dropout rates; high

minority enrollment; and poverty as defined by eligibility for the free lunch program.

Student achievement is more likely to suffer when the majority of the school population

is economically disadvantaged because these students come to school with educational gaps that

only skilled teachers can fill. Tingle, Schoeneberger, Wang, Algozzine, and Kerr (2012)

examined teacher absences and student achievement based on data from a large urban school

district in the south during a single school year. The researchers combined all documented leave

to measure teacher absence, which served as the independent variable. They also compiled

student achievement scores from End-of-Grade (EOG) tests for Grades 3 through 8 and End-of-

Course (EOC) tests for Grades 9-12 as the dependent variables. The means and standard

deviations were compared under the two categories of achievement and teacher absence by

education level (elementary, middle, high school). Pearson correlation analysis and multi-level

modeling (HLM) revealed that teacher absence negatively related to student achievement. The

researchers deduced that teacher absences can and do influence student achievement in schools

with low teacher absence rates. The findings also revealed that academic achievement suffers in

schools with a significant proportion of economically disadvantaged students. However, no

correlation existed between teacher absences and student achievement in higher socioeconomic

schools (Tingle et al., 2012).

Types and Cause of Teacher Absences

According to the literature, two types of absences from work exist: voluntary and

involuntary. Voluntary absences are usually more frequent and shorter in duration (Driver &

Watson, 1989; Johns, 1988). Dworkin et al. (1990) noted that reasons for voluntary absences

included “soft” absences such as those taken to avoid losing leave days or absences taken for

8

recreational purposes, but that are reported as sick leave. Involuntary absences are typically

longer in duration, less frequent, and out of the employee’s control (Gaziel, 2004). Causes for

involuntary absences include certified sickness, funeral attendance, or jury duty (Scott, 1998).

Some researchers have shown a connection between volitional absences and job

dissatisfaction (March & Simon, 1958). Findings from one study on absenteeism and gender

revealed that absenteeism was higher among females who had low abilities to control anxiety

(Ferris, Bergin, & Wayne, 1988). However, other researchers have reported that factors such as

gender, age, number of years of teaching experience, and personality traits were not significant

determinants of absenteeism (Porwoll, 1980; Scott & McClellan, 1990; Unicomb, Alley, Avery,

& Barak, 1992). Additionally, teachers near retirement who had accumulated a number of sick

days tended to be absent more often as they used these days as opposed to losing them

(Jacobson, 1989a).

School culture may also play a role in teacher absences in terms of written and unwritten

policies. Specifically, school culture may dictate voluntary absenteeism as quasi-legitimate,

especially if administrators do not require absence verification, such as a doctor’s note. In this

way, an uncertified sick day is accepted the same way as an involuntary certified absence due to

sickness. These types of undocumented and accepted absences may lead to an increase in days

taken off (Gibson & Lafornara, 1972).

School district policies may influence the number and frequency of absences as well.

Ehrenberg, Ehrenberg, Rees, and Ehrenberg (1991) examined the relationship between personnel

policies and teacher absences among 419 school districts in New York. The results indicated

that more sick days allowed by the school district resulted in more sick or leave days taken. On

9

the other hand, the researchers found teachers in districts that provided specific days for

professional leave and annual visitation days used leave time less often.

Regarding district policies to reduce absenteeism, Skidmore (1984) described punitive

strategies, including reporting absentee rates to the school board, associating absences with

teacher evaluations, and requiring administrative approval for leave. Positive strategies included

preapproval for leave before or after a weekend and cash bonuses for very good attendance.

Jacobson (1989b) conducted a small-scale study (n = 318) whereby a district implemented a

monetary incentive plan to reduce employee absences. The school district created a pool of

$72,809.22 from which teachers could draw one share for each day absent less than 7 days,

which was the mean number of teacher absences the prior year. At the end of the school year

(1987–1988), teachers had earned 1,274 shares at $57.15 per share. Therefore, those teachers

with perfect attendance earned a bonus of $400.12.

During the first year of implementation, the mean number of absences per teacher

decreased from 7.21 to 5.97. However, Jacobson (1989b) found that the use of personal days

increased from 1.23 to 1.51. These findings suggest that teachers may have substituted the two

categories of absence to maximize their rewards with minimum effort. The results of the

incentive program were significant, but short-term. The district saved approximately $25,000

(e.g., costs of substitutes), which allowed it to offset some fixed benefit expenses. One limitation

of the study was that it did not examine the long-term effects of the incentive program. Although

policies that advocate for incentive programs have shown some success, campus leadership style

and school culture are other considerations.

10

Leadership, Organizational Climate, Absenteeism, and Job Satisfaction

Leadership does not necessarily imply a single person. An organization or school

district, as a whole, can be transactional or transformational. According to Bass (1997), “There

is universality in the transactional-transformational leadership paradigm. That is, the same

conception of phenomena and relationships can be observed in a wide range of organizations and

cultures” (p. 130). Bass also stated, “Leadership that occurs is affected by the organizations and

cultures in which it appears” (p. 131).

Much research has supported the fact that teacher absenteeism is related strongly to

organizational climate. Imants and van Zoelen (1995) examined the relationship between school

climate, teacher absenteeism, and teacher stress in the Netherlands. They used a 38-item Dutch

school climate instrument and conducted MANOVAs to determine relationships between teacher

absence and other factors, including school climate, teacher absenteeism, collegial relations,

leadership style, and directivity of the principal. They found that school climate was related to

teacher absenteeism. Additionally, although leadership style was related positively to

absenteeism in schools, it was related to low absenteeism. Specifically, principals who were

more directive in their leadership styles had lower absenteeism rates on their campuses. One

would expect the opposite to be true wherein an open and friendly school climate should be

positive and productive leading to lower absence rates. However, while principals were

directive, it did not mean that the climate was perceived as negative only that principals had

created ‘absenteeism cultures’ at the campus that discouraged unnecessary absences.

Ali, Ali Babar, and Bangash (2011) evaluated the relationship between leadership style

and organizational commitment. They collected data from 277 medical representatives from

multi-national pharmaceutical companies and administered the Multifactor Leadership

11

Questionnaire (MLQ-5x/Short Form) (Bass & Avolio, 1985) and Organizational Commitment

Questionnaire (OCQ; Porter, Steers, Mowday, & Boulian, 1974). The results showed a

significant correlation between transformational and transactional leadership styles and

organizational commitment. A multiple regression analysis revealed a 23% effect on

organizational commitment with transformational leadership style and a 46% effect with

transactional leadership style. These results indicate that transactional leadership is a stronger

predictor of organizational commitment than is transformational leadership (Ali et al., 2011).

Leadership style affects the culture and behaviors of the employees. According to Bass

(1997), “People jockey for positions in a transactional group, whereas they share common goals

in a transformational group. Rules and regulations dominate the transactional organization;

adaptability is a characteristic of the transformational organization” (p. 132). Most research

supports the belief that schools with open climates coupled with collegial and committed

behaviors can produce greater student academic performance than schools with closed climates

(Korkmaz, 2007).

Korkmaz (2007) stated, “The principal is the key person in creating an ideal school” (p.

24). He examined the effects of leadership style (transformational and transactional) and teacher

job satisfaction on organizational health using a Likert-type questionnaire with a sample of 635

Turkish teachers. The questionnaire included transformational and transactional leadership

styles adapted from the MLQ (Bass & Avolio, 1985), an assessment of organizational health, and

items related to job satisfaction. Korkmaz analyzed the data using path analysis to assess the

relationships between the independent (leadership style) and dependent (teacher job satisfaction

and organizational health) variables. The findings revealed that teachers preferred principals

with transformational leadership styles. The findings also revealed that leadership style had a

12

profound effect on teacher job satisfaction. Teachers with high levels of job satisfaction

contributed to healthy work environments, which directly affected their enthusiasm in working

with students (Korkmaz, 2007).

Glassman (1994) studied the effects of leadership styles on job satisfaction, efficiency,

and school climate. He found positive effects on student achievement when principals treated

teachers as professionals. Williams (2009) found that involving teachers in the decision-making

process increased their self-efficacy and improved school climate. In addition to the effects on

job satisfaction and efficiency, leadership style also affects increase and/or decrease of teacher

absence rates.

Hall and Hord (1987) found that school climate depended on the leadership qualities of

principals among other factors. Ubben, Hughes, and Norris (2001) studied the qualities of

effective schools. Their findings indicated that effective schools had strong principals who

worked with their teams. Ubben et al. (2001) also noted that effective school plans to improve

student performance included forming advisory groups, creating a positive image for the school,

encouraging autonomy, delegating authority, offering school personnel training opportunities

and resources, and anticipating issues and adjusting accordingly.

Transactional vs. Transformational Leadership

For the purpose of this study, I focused on transformational and transactional leadership

styles. Bass and Avolio (1985) defined transformational leadership as composed of four

dimensions: individualized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and

individualized consideration, also known as the “Four I’s.” Individualized influence results in

leaders’ abilities to secure trust, admiration, and respect from followers, and these leaders

consider their followers’ needs above their own. Here, the emphasis is on high moral conduct.

13

Inspirational motivation involves providing meaningful and challenging work along with clear

expectations. Using inspirational motivation, leaders demonstrate commitment to organizational

goals, are outwardly optimistic, and work to build team spirit. Intellectual stimulation refers to

how the leader seeks and encourages new and creative ideas to solve common problems or

accomplish tasks. The fourth dimension is individualized consideration in which leaders listen

attentively and recognize staff members’ achievements and successes (Bromley & Kirschner-

Bromley, 2007).

Transformational leadership influences followers by inspiring, considering individual

needs and concerns, and developing shared goals (Eyal & Roth, 2011). This leadership style

empowers followers and gives them a sense of mission. Conversely, transactional leaders make

transactions or trades; this leadership style is often seen as monitoring leadership based on

rewards and consequences (Eyal & Roth, 2011). Burns (1978) was one of the first researchers to

define transactional leadership, and he defined this style as behaviors that emphasize work

standards, task completion, training, and procedures. The transactional leader focuses on

employee obedience, rewards, and consequences to influence employee performance (Bromley

& Kirschner-Bromley, 2007). Bass and Avolio (1993) defined transactional leadership as “the

focus…on maintaining efficient management and complying with organizational rules and

policies” (p. 257). Thus, leaders who exhibit a transactional style maintain tight control by

emphasizing compliance with rules and procedures (Eyal & Roth, 2011) and evaluating

performance of subordinates based on predetermined criteria (Bass & Avolio, 1985). Table 2

details Bass and Avolio’s (1985) 6-factor leadership model and includes the characteristics of

both transactional and transformational leadership.

14

Table 2

Six Factor Leadership Model

Leadership factor Description

Charisma/Inspirational Provides followers with a clear sense of purpose that is energizing, a role model for ethical conduct, and builds identification with the leader and his or her articulated vision.

Intellectual Stimulation Gets followers to question the tried and true ways of solving problems and encourages them to question the methods they use to improve upon them.

Individualized Consideration Focuses on understanding the needs of each follower and works continuously to get them to develop to their full potentials.

Contingent Reward Clarifies what is expected from followers and what they will receive if they meet expected levels of performance.

Active Management-by-Exception Focuses on monitoring task execution for any problems that might arise and correcting those problems to maintain current performance levels.

Passive-Avoidant Leadership Tends to react only after problems have become serious to take corrective action and often avoids making any decision at all.

Source: (Bass & Avolio, 1985, p. 444-445)

Burns (1978) distinguished between transactional and transformational leaders by

explaining that transactional leaders are those who exchange tangible rewards for the work and

loyalty of their followers. Conversely, transformational leaders are those who engage with

followers, focus on higher-order intrinsic needs, and raise consciousness about the significance

of specific outcomes and new ways in which those outcomes might be achieved (see Table 3).

15

Table 3

Transactional versus Transformational Leadership

Transactional Transformational

Leadership is responsive Leadership is proactive Works within the organizational culture Works to change the organizational culture by

implementing new ideas Employees achieve objectives through rewards and punishments set by the leader(s)

Employees achieve objective through higher ideals and moral values

Motivates followers by appealing to their own self-interests

Motivates followers by encouraging them to put the group’s interests first

Management-by-exception: Maintain the status quo and stresses correct actions to improve performance

Individualized consideration: Each behavior is directed to each individual to express consideration and support Intellectual stimulation: Promote creative and innovative ideas to solve problems

Source: Bogler (1999) and Burns (1978)

Bass (1997) described the differences between transactional and transformational

leadership styles as follows:

The transactional-transformational paradigm views leadership as either a matter of contingent reinforcement of followers by a transactional leader or the moving of followers beyond their self-interests for the good of the group, organization, or society by a transformational leader. The paradigm is sufficiently broad to provide a basis for measurement and understanding that is as universal as the concept of leadership itself. (p. 130)

Okulu and Korkmaz (2012) explored the influence of transformational and transactional

leadership on organizational citizenship behaviors of teachers. The researchers administered the

MLQ to 352 teachers in 30 primary schools and the Leadership-Member-Exchange Multi-

Dimensional Scale-12 (LMX-MDM-12) and Organizational Citizenship Scale (OCS) to 659

teachers in 30 primary schools. The findings revealed a statistically significant negative

relationship between transactional leadership and organizational citizenship, but no statistically

significant relationship between transformational leadership and organizational citizenship. The

16

researchers attributed these findings to teachers’ professional identities. These findings

supported the hypothesis that transformational leadership yielded positive organizational

outcomes.

Bogler (1999) supported the claim that transformational leadership increases job

satisfaction while transactional leadership has the opposite effect. Bogler examined principal

leadership style, decision-making strategies, and teachers’ perceptions of their jobs as they

related to job satisfaction. The researcher used a closed-ended questionnaire administered to 930

teachers in Israel who were asked to answer the questions based on their views of their current

principals. The data showed that teachers’ perceptions of their jobs had more to do with job

satisfaction than their principals’ leadership styles. However, teachers responded more favorably

to transformational leadership styles (Bogler, 1999).

Eyal and Roth (2011) noted that controlled regulation (i.e., as with transactional

leadership) tends to be associated with negative psychological consequences, such as burnout

and low motivation. Conversely, autonomous motivation (i.e., as with transformational

leadership) is associated with positive psychological consequences, such as well-being and high

performance (Eyal & Roth, 2011). Table 4 shows the connections between leadership style and

leadership philosophy and offers descriptions of behaviors associated with each style. Thomas

(1997) concluded that the higher the level, the better the effect on teacher morale and student

achievement. However, if a principal functions at a Level 3 or 4, it does not mean he or she will

not sometime function at a Level 1 or 2. These levels simply give some insight to the leadership

styles (Thomas, 1997).

17

Table 4

Connection between Leadership Style Descriptors and Philosophies

Levels Descriptor Philosophy Related to

1 Administrator (lowest)

It is the teacher’s job to teach and the principal’s job to run the school.

Transactional

2 Program Manager A principal’s job is to provide the best possible programs for student.

Transactional

3 Humanitarian The basis of a sound education is a good interpersonal climate.

Transformational

4 Systematic Problem Solver

Commitment to doing whatever is necessary by way of intervention and delivery to give students the best possible chance to learn.

Transformational

Thomas (1997)

Trapero and Lozada (2010) conducted a Pearson correlation analysis to determine the

relationship between leadership style and lack of integrity. They also conducted a t test to

determine significant differences between the variables. The results indicated that the

relationship between transformational leadership and integrity was stronger than that between

transactional leadership and integrity. However, the researchers concluded that the findings

could not be generalized because of limitations of the study. Specifically, the researchers

collected data from one company and did not include a random sampling of participants. All

participation was voluntary, and some employees who were invited to participate declined. The

study findings were limited to the perceptions of willing participants (Trapero & Lozada, 2010).

Webb (2008) used the MLQ to investigate the leadership behaviors (independent

variable) of the presidents of Christian colleges and universities as they related to employee job

satisfaction, absenteeism, and turnover (dependent variables). The researcher collected data

from the chief financial administrators, chief of student affairs administrators, and chief

academic affairs administrators at 105 colleges and universities. Webb used the MLQ to

18

determine college presidents’ leadership behaviors as a means to identify significant predictors

of job satisfaction. The results indicated charisma was the leadership behavior that most

predicted job satisfaction followed by contingent reward and individual consideration.

Contrarily, management by exception was a significant negative predictor of job satisfaction.

Summary

Studies show that job satisfaction, work environment, stress, and performance ratings

influence teacher attendance (Bridges & Hallinan, 1978; Gaziel, 2004). Additionally, stress can

lead to higher teacher absenteeism when no physical illness is present (Despues, 1999; Kight,

2007). School culture may play a role in teacher absences. Specifically, schools may view

voluntary absenteeism as quasi-legitimate, especially if administrators do not require absence

verification, such as a doctor’s note (Gibson & Lafornara, 1972; Imants & van Zoelen, 1995). In

addition, school district policy may influence the number and frequency of absences (Clotfelter

et al., 2009; Ehrenberg et al., 1999). Finally, leadership style plays a role in this phenomenon, as

transactional or transformational leaders affect the culture of their organizations and the

behaviors of employees differently (Bass, 1997; Bogler, 1999; Eyal & Roth, 2011; Okulu &

Korkmaz, 2012).

Many quantitative studies have brought attention to job satisfaction and organizational

climate as factors that influence absenteeism; however, mixed methods research on leadership

style as a primary factor is meager. The significance of this study is that the researcher sought to

answer the question, “What is the effect of principal leadership style on the number of teacher

absences?” The researcher also aimed to answer the “What is effective?” and “How does it

work?” questions through an in-depth study of specific schools within a large urban school

district that was successful at achieving low teacher absence rates.

19

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

Chapter 3 includes a description of the research design, the qualitative and quantitative

methodology, sampling, instrumentation, data collection process, and analysis. The intent of this

study was to determine whether leadership style influences teacher absences directly or

indirectly. A direct influence would be the enforcement of campus policies to discourage

absences or to provide incentives for good attendance. An indirect influence would include the

influence of campus culture and climate (created by principals’ leadership styles) on teachers’

decisions to call in sick. One district was studied to answer the following research questions:









teacher absences?

Research Design

The intent of this study was to apply mixed methods research to provide an in-depth

description of the leadership styles and policies that influence the number and frequency of

teacher absences in one urban school district. Mixed methods research has become necessary

and more prevalent over the past decade as some research cannot be completed adequately using

20

only one method (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2010). In using a mixed method design, I aimed to gain

a more complete understanding of the research problem, as most studies on this topic have

collected only quantitative data. The underpinning of effective leadership hinges on the

relationship between principals and teachers; therefore, through a qualitative design, I hoped to

answer the “What is effective?” and “How does it work?” questions with respect to leadership

style and its influence on teachers’ mis(use) of absences. Hence, this study is different from

other research in that I sought to understand the causes of teacher absenteeism in relation to

principal leadership style using both quantitative and qualitative methods.

Qualitative Data

I attempted to understand the influences and causes of teacher absenteeism that may be

directly related to leadership style. The qualitative data collected via semi-structured interviews

and focus group discussions revealed the perceptions, lived experiences, and social interactions

between principals and teachers that influence the absenteeism phenomena. The data also

allowed me to examine the principals’ attitudes in relation to their backgrounds and philosophies

on absenteeism. The interviews provided insight into the leadership practices of principals that

may influence teachers in their decisions to be absent (Owen, 2010).

Quantitative Data

The quantitative data included school district absence data and principal self-report,

which were essential to reveal relationships and patterns between leadership style and teacher

absences over a 3-year period. I compared the number and frequency of absences at selected

campuses to the leadership behaviors relating to each leadership style of the principals at those

schools. The quantitative research method allowed me to select specific units of analysis within

the district. The combination of quantitative and qualitative research design allowed for

21

triangulation, which is used to understand the research problem completely. Moreover, data

triangulation using different sources of data is useful when trying to understand the research

problem (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2010).

Overview of the District

Data were collected from two selected schools sites within one large urban school

district. After a comprehensive collection of quantitative data, intensity sampling was conducted

to choose units of analysis that would yield the most information and have the greatest effect on

knowledge and skills regarding school leadership style and its influence on teacher absenteeism.

A smaller number of schools allowed for a more in-depth study, particularly because the samples

were rich in information. The validity and meaning of the study was dictated by the richness of

the data procured rather than by the sample size (Patton, 2002).

The urban school district selected for this study was located in the heart of Tarrant

County. The district’s motto is, “Singleness of purpose.” Its mission statement is, “Preparing

students for college, career, and community leadership.” The vision statement is, “Igniting in

every child a passion for learning.” The district is committed to continuous improvement of

student achievement. At the time of this study, the district had 128 schools and enrolled 84,360

students from pre-kindergarten to Grade 12. Student ethnic distribution is detailed in Table 5.

The district employed 5,217 teachers, 1,267 professional support staff, 303 campus

administrators, and 41 central administration staff. The majority of schools held the Title I

designation, as determined based on the percentage of students who qualify for the free or

reduced lunch program; at the time of this study, 77% of enrolled students qualified. Of those

students, 62% were considered at-risk. This means they were in danger of not graduating high

school because of failing a prior grade, State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness

22

(STAAR) test, End-Of-Course (EOC) test(s), or being economically disadvantaged. The 2014

accountability rating was “met standard.” This means that the selected district performed

satisfactorily in all four performance indices including student achievement, student progress,

closing performance gaps, and post-secondary readiness.

Table 5

Student Ethnic Distribution

Ethnicity %

African American 22.7% Hispanic 62.8% White 11% American Indian .2% Asian 2% Pacific Islander .1% Two or More Races 1.3%

Student Demographic Information

Elementary school The information in Table 6 was taken from the 2014–2015 Texas

Academic Performance Report (TAPR). The 2015 accountability rating was ‘met standard.’

The selected school received a distinction of ‘Top 25 percent: Student progress.’ The campus

had a 100% participation rate for all student populations, which included African American,

Hispanic, White, special education, economically disadvantaged, and English language learners

(ELL). The school enrolled 687 students in Grades 1-5.

23

Table 6

Elementary School Student Demographic

Demographic Category N

Grade 1 146 2 141 3 127 4 139 5 134

Ethnicity African American 9% Hispanic 66% White 14% Other 11%

Subpopulations Economically Disadvantaged

610

Non-educationally disadvantaged

77

English Language Learners 436 At-risk 584

Average class size Grade 1 23.3 Grade 2 17.5 Grade 3 17.6 Grade 4 19.5 Grade 5 19.1

Student enrollment by program Bilingual/ESL Education 411 Gifted and Talented 43 Special Education 44

The selected school included 38 teachers, 2 professional support, 2 administrators and 7

educational aides. The ethnic distribution of staff members was 18 Hispanic, 1 African

American, and 19 White. Additionally, 33 teachers were female and five were male with zero to

more than 20 years of teaching experience (see Table 7).

24

Table 7

Elementary School Staff Demographics


Professional Staff Teachers 38 Professional support 3 Campus administration 2 Educational Aides 7

Ethnicity African American 1 Hispanic 18 White 19

Gender Male 5 Female 33

Education Bachelors 30 Masters 8 Doctorate 0

Years of Experience/Salary Beginning teachers 2/$48,800 1-5 years 10/$49,654 6-10 years 10/$52,830 11-20 years 14/$55,242 Over 20 years 2/$70,423

Average Salaries Teachers $53,597 Professional support $64,373 Campus administration $78,011

Teachers by Program Bilingual/ESL Education 11 Regular Education 24 Special Education 3

Middle school. The information in Table 8 was taken from the 2014–2015 TAPR. The

2015 accountability rating was ‘met standard.’ The school received distinctions of Academic

Achievement in Social Studies, Top 25 percent: Student progress, Top 25 percent: Closing

Performance Gaps, and Postsecondary Readiness. The campus had 100% participation rate on

the 2014–2015 TAP-R for all student populations, including African American, Hispanic, White,

special education, economically disadvantaged, and ELL. The school enrolled 520 students in

Grades 6-8.

25

Table 8

Middle School Student Demographics


Grade 6 174 7 152 8 194

African American 24 Hispanic 479

Ethnicity White 9 American Indian 1 Asian 2 Two or more races 2

Subpopulations Economically Disadvantaged 482 Non-educationally disadvantaged

38

English Language Learners 214 At-risk 426

Average class size English Language Arts 13 Foreign Languages 21 Mathematics 13.3 Science 13.6 Social Studies 15.2

The selected middle school included 40 teachers, 2 professional support, 2 administrators,

and 2 educational aides. The ethnic distribution of staff members was 9 Hispanic, 2 African

American, and 29 White. Additionally, 26 teachers were female teachers and 14 were male with

zero to more than 20 years of teaching experience (see Table 9).

26

Table 9

Middle School Staff Demographics


Professional Staff Teachers 40.4 Professional support 4 Campus administration 2 Educational Aides 2

Ethnicity African American 2 Hispanic 9 White 29.4

Gender Male 14 Female 26.4

Education Bachelors 34 Masters 6.4 Doctorate 0

Years of Experience/Salary Beginning teachers 5/$48,403 1-5 years 16/$49,448 6-10 years 8/$52,349 11-20 years 8.4/$56,582 Over 20 years 3/$60,785

Average Salaries Teachers $52,220 Professional support $61,621 Campus administration $78,232

Teachers by Program Bilingual/ESL Education 195 Career and Technical Education 119 Gifted and Talented 42 Special Education 54

Teachers by Program (population served)

Bilingual/ESL Education 11

Career and Technical Education 1.7 Regular Education 21 Special Education 5 Other 1.6

27

Data Collection Procedures

Quantitative Data Collection

For the quantitative portion of the study, data were obtained from the district research and

accountability department, which collected reports that detailed the number of absences at each

school over a 3-year period (2012-2013, 2013-2014, 2014-2015). I excluded absences taken for

professional development, jury duty, and family medical, and/or emergency leave because the

goal of the study was to determine leadership practices that influence teachers’ voluntary

absences. Those other types of absences would not be considered voluntary. Table 10 details

the number of principals serving at each level in the school district at the time of data collection.

Table 10

Principals by Grade Level

School Type Grades N

Elementary Grades K-5 83 Middle Grades 6-8 29 High Grades 9-12 16

Instrumentation

The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ-5X) short form measures a broad range

of leadership types from passive leaders, to leaders who give contingent rewards to followers, to

leaders who transform their followers into becoming leaders themselves. The Multifactor

Leadership Questionnaire Self-Report (MLQ-SR) is used to identify the characteristics of a

transformational leader and help individuals discover how they perceive their own leadership

behaviors. The questions are designed to reveal leadership characteristics. I used the MLQ-SR,

a Likert-type scale, to collect the quantitative data. The Likert scale range was 0-4 (0.0 = not at

all, 1.0 = once in a while, 2.0 = sometimes, 3.0 = fairly often, 4.0 = frequently, if not always).

28

For the purpose of this study, only the first nine leadership behaviors are used for data

analysis. Table 11 correlates with the nine leadership behaviors with Bass and Avolio’s Six

Factors of Leadership. The last three are leadership outcomes (EE, EFF, SAT), which are used

for other purposes such as developing leadership qualities in leaders of organizations, etc. The

questionnaire measures self-perceptions of leadership behaviors using 45 questions designed to

measure leadership behaviors (Bass & Avolio, 1985). Only the first 36 questions measure the

nine leadership behaviors listed above. Questions 37 – 45 measure the leadership outcomes (EE,

EFF, SAT).

The MLQ-SR yields results in percentiles for individual scores based on self-ratings for

each leadership behavior, including the leader’s score in the nine subscales and the rank

according to the norm or total participants who took the questionnaire. In this case, the norm

was determined by the scores of 3,755 participants who took the MLQ-Self-Report by Mind

Garden. The MLQ-SR scale yields scores that are averaged for all items on the scale (see Table

11). The scores can be derived by summing the items and dividing by the number of items that

make up the scale. For example, if a person scored 9 on one sub-scale, the researcher would

divide 9 by 4 (4 questions measuring that sub-scale) (9/4), which equals 2.25. That score would

then be reported according to a normed percentile. The score of 2.25 for that particular scale is

in the 10th percentile meaning that the individual scored higher than 10% of the population. If

an item is left blank, the average is calculated by dividing the total for that scale by the number

of items answered. Appendix E includes the percentiles for individual scores based on self-

ratings in the United States.

29

Table 11

Leadership Style and the Corresponding Items as Scored on the MLQ-5X

Code Behavior Leadership Style Items

II(A) Idealized Influence (Attributed) Transformational 10,18,21,25

II(B) Idealized Influence (Behavior) Transformational 6,14,23,34

IM Inspirational Motivation Transformational 9,13,26,36

IS Intellectual Stimulation Transformational 2,8,30,32

IC Individualized Consideration 15,19,29,31

CR Contingent Reward Transactional 1,11,16,35

MBEA Management-by-Exception (Active)

Transactional 4.22,24,27

MBEP Management-by-Exception (Passive)

Transactional 3,12,17,20

LF Laissez-Faire Laissez-Faire 5,7,28,33 Note: Adapted from Bass and Avolio (2004)

The intended outcomes of the MLQ are as follows:

• Measures, explains, and demonstrates to individuals the key factors that set truly

exceptional leaders apart from marginal ones

• Differentiates effective and ineffective leaders at all organizational levels

• Assesses the effectiveness of the leadership of an entire organization

• Ensures validity across cultures and types of organizations

• Administers easy; requires 15 minutes to complete

• Research is extensive and validated

30

• Provides an excellent relationship between survey, interview data, and organizational

outcomes

• Provides the benchmark measure of transformational leadership

The MLQ is copyrighted by MindGarden.com and has been tested for reliability and validity.

The questionnaire requires the purchase of license(s) to reproduce or issue the questionnaire.

Qualitative Data Collection

From the quantitative data collected, I purposefully selected schools with low absenteeism

rates for principal interviews (Appendix C) and teacher focus group discussions (Appendix D).

The goal was to interview a principal at the elementary, middle, and high school levels with the

lowest absenteeism rates in the district and conduct focus group discussions with

teacher leaders at the respective school sites. I anticipated that the interviews and focus group

discussions would provide a wider perspective of teacher absenteeism in relation to leadership

style. In the final sample selection, only principals and teachers from one elementary and one

middle school participated.

I sent emails to campus principals requesting dates and times for the semi-structured

interviews and the focus group discussions with teacher leaders. Interviews and focus group

discussions were approximately 30 minutes in length, were tape recorded, and were fully

transcribed. The qualitative data collection included two interviews with selected principals and

teacher focus group discussions with five teachers at the elementary and middle school selected.

The interviews and focus group discussions were semi-structured with open-ended questions (see

Appendices C and D). I began the interviews by informing participants about the study and

myself. I explained that the interviews would be tape-recorded and that all responses would be

31

strictly confidential. I also informed participants that if there was something they would like to

say off tape, I would oblige by stopping the tape midstream for their commentary.

Data Analysis

Quantitative Data Analysis

The first step to analyzing the quantitative data was to apply descriptive statistics on the

nine leadership behaviors and absence data using SPSS. This process allowed me to describe the

data. Results are reported in tables. I then conducted a multiple regression analysis to assess

which leadership behaviors were effective predictors of voluntary absences. Multiple regression

analysis is a powerful technique used to predict the unknown value of a variable from the known

value of two or more variables, also called the predictors. Multiple regression analysis predicts

the value of Y for given values (e.g., X1, X2; Keith, 2006). In this study, the predictor variables

were the nine subscales of leadership behaviors identified on the MLQ. The dependent variable

was the number of voluntary absences. Through multiple regression, I assessed the predictability

of leadership behaviors (independent variables) by regressing them on the voluntary absences of

teachers (dependent variable).

For multiple regression, the R-squared value and the influence of the nine leadership

behaviors were reported. In addition, the effect size is explained in terms of the study. The

effect size is the main finding of a quantitative study that indicates the magnitude, or size, of an

effect. Finally, statistical significance was stated. Statistical significance, or p-value should be

less than .05 to be considered significant.

Qualitative Data Analysis

I coded and analyzed the transcribed interviews and focus group discussions with the

intent of correlating findings with the identified leadership styles (XXXX) and the research

32

questions. More intricate codes were developed to ascertain common themes that spanned the

units of analysis using color coding (table 12). Because I collected a variety of data from the two

selected schools, I used tables and charts to organize the data in the process of analysis. Data

and document triangulation were necessary to perform a synthesis of lessons learned from the

selected sites in order to glean any contributions to the effectiveness of school leaders in their

efforts to minimize teacher absenteeism (Patton, 2002).

Basic coding is defined as marking the segments of data with symbols, descriptive words,

or category names. A priori coding uses codes developed before examining the data. The

process of data coding and analysis included a number of steps. Prior to reading interviews, I

identified key phrases that related directly to the research questions. A list of 11 codes was

formulated. Interviews were read and margins annotated to coincide with a number that was

given to each code. Interviews were read sequentially from principals and teacher focus group

discussions, one school at a time, and I compared and contrasted responses between the school

leader and teachers. Codes were streamlined based on content, as there was overlap in the

content related to each code. Codes were narrowed down to four, which later served as the most

salient themes identified in interviews and focus group discussions (see Table 12).

33

Table 12

Coding Chart

Protocol Codes and Assigned Numbers for Annotating Data

Refined Codes (Color Coded)

Correlation of Theme to Sub-questions

1 Personal accountability Internal motivation/ personal

accountability

Personal accountability 2 Work ethic

3 Dedication to students 4 Relationship with colleagues Relationships with

colleagues, administrators

Relationships 5 Principal/Teacher relationships

6 Preparations to be absent (substitute folders, substitute plans, burden on colleagues)

Preparations to be absent

Practices

7 Administrative support Campus measures, Good atmosphere,

Good working environment

Culture of School 8 Campus measures to decrease

absenteeism 9 School good place to work 10 Family oriented school 11 Good atmosphere

Procedure

I obtained approval from the university dissertation committee and permission from the

Institutional Review Board before data collection. I also submitted a copy of the proposal to the

selected school district for approval. Once approval was granted, the MLQ-SR and a summary

of the study was sent to 128 principals through email using the Mind Garden online survey

software. The data were categorized into voluntary and involuntary absences. After data were

collected and analyzed, two schools were selected for interviews based on the number of

absences reported (lowest number of absences). The purpose of interviewing principals at

different levels was to determine whether similarities and differences existed between leaders at

different levels. I selected schools with low absences to gain information related to the effect of

leadership style on low teacher absences.

34

Reliability and Validity

I established reliability and validity of qualitative data through verification. According to

Kvale (1996), verification is the process of checking, confirming, making sure, and being certain.

The ongoing analysis is self-correcting in which the researcher moves back and forth between

design and implementation to ensure congruence among question formulation, literature,

sampling, data collection strategies, and analysis. This process also requires that information is

checked systematically, and interpretation is monitored and confirmed constantly. During this

process, I used verification strategies to determine when to continue, stop, or modify the research

process to achieve reliability and validity and to ensure rigor (Kvale, 1996).

Ethical Considerations

I obtained informed consent from all participants prior to administering the MLQ,

conducting any interviews, focus group discussions, or document retrieval to ensure voluntary

participation in the study. During the entirety of data collection, analysis, and the reporting

process, I complied with research procedures set forth by the University of North Texas and the

selected district and schools. I ensured that all participants understood the nature of the study

and that, at any time, they could withdraw from the study.

Because the study was conducted at school sites, anonymity was not compromised. Data

gathered during research, such as taped interviews, interview transcripts, field notes, and

documents were kept confidential, as I guarded the names of all participants from other

participants to honor anonymity. Information included in my final dissertation is presented in

ways that masks individuals’ identities. Specifically, I was diligent to adhere to guidelines for

ethical conduct in research.

35

Limitations and Delimitations

One limitation in this study was that principals may or may not have wanted to think

about whether they influence teacher absences. Therefore, the responses may or may not be

honest. The MLQ-Self Report only measures leaders’ perceptions of their leadership behaviors.

Also, teachers in the focus group panel may have been very fond of or strongly disliked their

principals for personal reasons. Such personal feelings could have influenced their responses to

the questions. Finally, this study was delimited to only the selected schools. Therefore, the

findings cannot be generalized to all public schools in Texas or beyond.

Summary

I used a mixed method research design. Data were collected from the MLQ, interviews

with selected principals at the elementary and middle school levels with the lowest absences, and

focus group discussions with teachers. The variables examined included nine leadership

behaviors relating to the transformational, transactional, and passive-avoidant/laissez-faire

leadership styles, the six leadership factors, and the number of absences taken over a 3-year

period. I used descriptive statistics to analyze themes and patterns and make observations about

the data. Based on these results, I conducted multiple regression analysis to assess the

predictability of voluntary absences. The findings are reported in Chapter 4 based on the

quantitative (descriptive statistics and multiple regression) and qualitative analysis (interviews

and focus group discussions).

36

CHAPTER 4

DATA ANALYSIS AND DATA INTERPRETATION

Quantitative and qualitative data collected and analyzed include a questionnaire (MLQ-

Self-Report), principal interviews, and teacher focus group discussions, respectively, from two

selected schools. Inferential and descriptive statistics are summarized in tables and charts. The

quantitative data yields the leadership behaviors on each subscale and compares scores to the

norm. These results are presented in the form of nine normed scores for each participant. The

qualitative data analyses include a synthesis of themes that evolved from principal interviews

and focus group discussions as they relate to the research questions. The data collection and

analysis aimed to answer the following questions:



contingent reward, management-by-exception, passive-avoidant leadership) and teacher

absenteeism?




5. What evidence exists that principals put procedures or policies in place regarding teacher

absences?

I sought to answer the research questions through an in-depth study of specific schools in

a large urban school district that were successful at achieving low teacher absence rates. The

study is viewed through the framework of Bass and Avolio’s (1985) Transformational and

Transactional Leadership Styles. The framework will not be prominently outlined throughout

37

each section but will be weaved in through data interpretation. Hence, before proceeding into the

themes, I will discuss the framework.

A Framework: Leadership Style

The study is viewed through the framework of Bass and Avolio’s (1985)

Transformational and Transactional Leadership Styles. Transformational leadership influences

followers by inspiring, considering individual needs and concerns, and developing shared goals.

Transactional leaders make transactions or trades; this leadership style is often seen as

monitoring leadership based on rewards and consequences.

Transactional vs. Transformational Leadership

In their original operational definitions, Bass and Avolio (1985) developed a six-factor

leadership model:

• Inspirational – provides followers with a clear sense of purpose that is energizing, and

serves as a role model for ethical conduct and builds identification with the leader and

his or her articulated vision;

• Intellectual Stimulation – gets followers to question the tried and true ways of solving

problems, and encourages them to question the methods they use to improve upon

them;

• Individualized Consideration – focuses on understanding the needs of each follower

and works continuously to get them to develop to their full potential;

• Contingent Reward – clarifies what is expected from followers and what they will

receive if they meet expected levels of performance;

38

• Active Management-by-Exception focuses on monitoring task execution for any

problems that might arise and correcting those problems to maintain current

performance levels; and,

• Passive-Avoidant Leadership – tends to react only after problems have become

serious to take corrective action, and often avoids making any decisions at all. (Bass

& Avolio, 1985, p. 444-445)

These operational definitions have been categorized further into definitive leadership

styles- transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire as follows: 1, 2, 3 are transformational,

4, and 5 are transactional, and 6 is laissez-faire.









& Kirschner-Bromley, 2007). The organization of this chapter is ordered by the research

questions as they relate to quantitative and qualitative data analysis and interpretation,

respectively. The findings support the framework.

Quantitative Data Findings

To collect the quantitative data, I used the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Self-

Report (MLQ-SR)—a Likert-type scale. The questionnaire measures self-perceptions of

39

leadership behaviors (Bass & Avolio, 1985). The MLQ-SR measures a range of leadership types

to reveal leadership characteristics. I used data from the MLQ- Self-Report to answer Research

Question 1, “What is the relationship between campus principals’ scores on the six factors of

leadership (inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, individual consideration, contingent

reward, management-by-exception, passive-avoidant leadership) and teacher absenteeism?”

Tables 13-15 include a description of the data on the independent and dependent

variables. The independent variables are the nine leadership behaviors and they are all

continuous. The table below shows the correspondence between the nine leadership behaviors

reported by the MLQ and the Six Factors of Leadership from Bass and Avolio.

Table 13

MLQ and the Six Factors of Leadership from Bass and Avolio

Nine Leadership Behaviors (MLQ Results) Six Factors of Leadership from Bass and Avolio

IIA – Builds Trust = Idealized Influence (Idealized Attributes) IIB – Acts with Integrity = Idealized Influence (Idealized Behaviors) IM – Encourages Others = Inspirational Motivation

Inspirational Motivation

IS – Encourages Innovative Thinking = Intellectual Stimulation

Intellectual Stimulation

IC – Coaches and Develops People = Individual Consideration

Individual Consideration

CR – Rewards achievement = Contingent Reward

Contingent Reward

MBEA – Monitors deviations/mistakes = Mgmt-by-Except (Active) MBEP – Fights fires = Management-by-Exception (Passive)

Management by Exception

LF – Avoids Involvement = Laissez-Faire Passive Avoidant

The MLQ reports nine leadership behaviors. Within the nine leadership behaviors are the

six factors of leadership. The MLQ adds two additional characteristics- idealized influence –

40

attributes and idealized influence-behaviors. The MLQ also separates management-by-exception

into two parts-active and passive. This separation is the difference between the six factors and

the nine leadership behaviors. For the purpose of this study, I refer to the nine leadership

behaviors when reporting the descriptive statistics. When I talk about my findings concerning

Research Question 1, I discuss the six factors of leadership.

In the framework, I discuss the transformational and transactional leadership style upon

which this study was built. However, it is important to understand that the results of the MLQ-

SR do not place a leader into a category of transformational, transactional, or laissez-faire.

Rather, the MLQ-SR yields the results of each leadership behavior of those who took the

questionnaire and compared these scores to the norm in a percentile. The MLQ-SR offers a

comprehensive view of the leader and a leader may possess leadership characteristics from

multiple categories.

Descriptive Statistics for the Independent Variable

The independent variables were the nine leadership behaviors reported from the MLQ-

SR. Table 14 details the mean, standard deviation, and range of the independent variables. I

report the results in scale scores and correlate them to the percentile or norm for each scale score.

Means. Overall, principals scored themselves high in the behaviors that relate to the

transformational leadership style. They rated themselves lower in the leadership behaviors

associated with the transactional and laissez-faire leadership styles.

The means ranged from .534 to 3.644. The low means (below 1) were MBEP

(Management-by-Exception-Passive) .713 and LF (Laissez-Faire-Avoids Involvement) .534.

The low means indicate that leaders scored themselves lower than the norm scores in these areas.

The score of .713 on MBEP indicates that principals in this study scored themselves higher than

41

30% of the norm on this behavior, which is associated with the transactional leadership style.

The score of .534 for LF means that principals scored themselves higher than 40% of the norm.

This behavior is associated with the laissez-faire leadership style. The moderate mean (between

1 and 2) was MBEA (Management-by-Exception-Active-Monitors Deviations and Mistakes),

which was 1.684 or between 50%-60% higher than the norm. This behavior is associated with

the transactional leadership style. The high means (between 3 and 4) were Idealized Influence–

Attributes (3.263 or 70%), Idealized Influence-Behaviors (3.525 or 80%), Inspirational

Motivation (3.644, or between 80% - 90%), Intellectual Stimulation (3.278 or 70%), Individual

Consideration (3.497 or 70%), and Contingent Rewards (3.191 or 50%). All, except for

Contingent Rewards, are associated with the transformational leadership style. Here, the highest

mean was 3.644 for Inspirational Motivation. This finding means that the principals perceived

themselves to possess this leadership characteristic to a strong degree. The lowest mean was

.534 for Laissez-Faire-Avoids Involvement. Principals perceived themselves to have little of this

characteristic compared to the norm. Again, the principals rated themselves higher in the sub-

scales relating to the transformational leadership style and lower on the sub-scales relating to the

transactional and laissez-faire leadership styles.

Standard Deviation. The standard deviations for all nine leadership behaviors were below

1. The standard deviation scores ranged from .3983 (Inspirational Motivation-Encourages

Others) to .6998 (Management-by-Exception-Active). This finding means that little variability

existed between the mean and the highest and lowest scores for all nine leadership behaviors.

Range. The range for all nine leadership behaviors was 0-4. The Likert scale range was

0-4 (0.0 = not at all, 1.0 = once in a while, 2.0 = sometimes, 3.0 = fairly often, 4.0 = frequently, if

not always). The range of scores was typical except for MBEA, MBEP, and LF, which yielded

42

lower than normal minimum/maximum ranges from 0.0-2.8. These results suggest that some

principals who took the survey may not consider themselves to possess any traits relating to the

transactional and laissez-faire leadership styles.

43

Table 14

Descriptive Statistics for the Independent Variables

N M SD Min Max Range

IIA_Builds trust 32 3.263 .4824 2.3 4.0 1.7 IIB_Acts with integrity

32 3.525 .4792 2.0 4.0 2

IM_Encourages others

32 3.644 .3983 2.8 4.0 1.2

IS_Encourages innovative thinking

32 3.278 .5563 2.3 4.0 1.7

IC_Coaches & develops people

32 3.497 .4200 2.5 4.0 1.5

CR_Rewards achievement

32 3.191 .5497 2.0 4.0 2

MBEA_Monitors deviations & mistakes

32 1.684 .6998 .3 2.8 2.5

MBEP_Fights fires 32 .713 .5266 0.0 1.8 1.8 LF_Avoids involvement

32 .534 .6742 0.0 2.3 2.3

Table 15

Descriptive Statistics for the Dependent Variable

N M SD Min Max

Percentage of Absences 32 5.8813 1.80120 3.51 12.90

Table 16

Five I's of Transformational Leadership

N M SD Min Max

Five I's of Transformational Leadership (IIA, IIB, IM, IS, IC)

32 3.447 .3547 2.4 4.0

44

Descriptive Statistics for the Dependent Variable-Teacher Absence Rate

Mean. For the dependent variable, the mean was 5.88%. The average percentage of

teacher absence (mean) was 5.88% at the 32 schools whose leaders completed the MLQ-SR.

The teachers in this study work 187 days in a school year. The average days a teacher is absent

would equal 10.99 days.

Standard Deviation. The standard deviation for the dependent variable (percentage of

teacher absence) was 1.8. The standard deviation explains how far apart the scores are from the

mean. In this case, 1.8 is not far from the mean. Therefore, teachers missed an average of 10.99

days. For a standard deviation of 1.8, on average teachers missed between 9.19 days and 12.79

days. There is not much variability between the scores.

Range. The ranges for the dependent variable (teacher absence rates for the 3 school

years of 2012–2013, 2013–2014, 2014–2015) were 3.51% to 12.90%. On the low end, teachers

missed 6.56 days. On the high end, teachers missed 24.12 days.

Multiple Regression

In the linear regression model, the dependent variable was the average percent of teacher

absences during the three school years (2012-2013, 2013-2014, 2014-2015). Table 16 includes a

summary of predictor variables, in the model.

Table 17

Model 1 Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate

1 .348a .121 -.239 2.00478 a. Predictors: (Constant), Avoids involvement (LF), Acts with integrity (IIB), Monitors deviations & mistakes(MBEA), Rewards achievement (CR), Coaches & develops people (IC), Builds trust (IIA), Encourages innovative thinking (IS), Fights fires (MBEP), Encourages others (IM)

45

The R-squared value was .121; therefore, 12% of the dependent variable was explained

by the nine predictor variables. When accounting for errors, such as sample size or missing data,

the adjusted R-squared value was -.239. R-squared cannot be a negative value. In this case, the

negative R-squared value indicated that the sample size was too small. I ran a power analysis

with the statistical significance level set at .05, power at 80% with nine predictors, and R-squared

at .10, .20, and .30. The power analysis indicated that the sample size required should be at least

166, 88, and 62 respectively to see statistical significance.

For comparison purposes, I also ran a linear regression on just one predictor variable (the

subset of 5 I’s: IA, IB, IM, IS, and IC) to determine whether leadership behaviors associated with

transformational leadership explained more of the variance. In doing so, the R-squared value

was .001 with an adjusted R-square value of -.033. This means that the five I’s predictor

explained less than 1% of the outcome (see Table 17). Next, I will talk more about the

statistical significance of both model summaries.

Table 18

Multiple Regression using Five I’s of Transformational Leadership

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate

1 .028a .001 -.033 1.830 a. Predictors: (Constant), Five I's of Transformational Leadership

Statistical Significance

The p-value should be less than .05 to be considered significant, which ensures that a

difference or relationship exists. The p-value of the first model with nine predictors was .953,

which suggested that 95% of the time, the data were random or by chance. This finding was not

significant and could not be generalized to the greater population. The p-value of the second

linear regression using just one predictor (5 I’s subset) was .880, which was not significant.

46

Teacher Absence Rates vs. Principals’ Scores on Subset 5 I’s of Transformational Leadership

I compared teacher absence rates to the principals’ scores on the 5 I’s of transformational

leadership to address Research Question 1, “What is the effect of the campus principals’

leadership styles on teacher absenteeism?” The transformational leadership subset (the 5 I’s)

are: builds trust, acts with integrity, encourages others, encourages innovative thinking, and

coaches and develops people. The comparison was done to determine whether any patterns or

connections between the two become apparent.

Some principals rated themselves high in the transformational leadership category–5 I’s

(score of 3.8-4.0), while others rated themselves low (2.4-3.0). However, no apparent

connection existed between the scores on this subset and the actual teacher rate of attendance.

For example, the leader of the school with the lowest rate of teacher absence scored 3.3 on the

transformational leadership subset. That is a low score by comparison. I would expect that this

school leader would present more transformational leadership behaviors, which would decrease

the absenteeism rate. To compare, some of the principals with a higher score on the 5 I’s had

higher rates of teacher absenteeism. That would not make sense either. Therefore, that is why

there is no apparent connection between absence rates and the scores on the transformational

leadership subset. Keep in mind, the scores only tell us what that principal perceives their

behaviors to be, not necessarily what they actually are.

Summary

Overall, research question 1 could be answered partially by interpreting the results of the

descriptive statistics on the 32 questionnaires collected and the raw data. There appears to be no

connection between the leadership behaviors perceived by the principals and the rate of teacher

47

absence. The sample size was too small and the leadership behaviors were measured by

principals’ self-perceptions and not by their subordinates/staff.

Qualitative Findings

This section includes the analysis and interpretation of data collected from interviews and

focus group discussions with respect to one large urban school district. The schools selected for

interviews and focus group discussions were those with the lowest rate of absence for three

consecutive school years (2012–2013, 2013–2014, and 2014–2015). The qualitative data

collection and analysis aimed to answer the "What works?" and "How does it work?" questions

through in depth interviews and focus group discussions, wherein longitudinal data revealed low

teacher absenteeism in two Title 1 schools in an urban school district. The arrangement of this

section is organized by the research questions and their explicit connection to the common

themes discovered in the analysis of the research data collected. The following themes emerged

and were arranged under corresponding research questions:

• Research Question 2: What is the current status of campus principals’ perceptions of


o Theme 1: Personal Accountability

• Research Question 3: How do principals create a climate that encourages or

discourages teacher absences?

o Theme 2: Relationships

• Research Question 4: What cultural norms do school leaders develop regarding

teacher absences?

o Theme 4: Culture of the School

48

• Research Question 5: What evidence exists that the principals put procedures or

policies in place regarding teacher absences?

o Theme 3: Practices

The answers to the proceeding questions were discovered during data analysis across

evidence compiled through connected emerging themes. I coded and analyzed the transcribed

interviews to correlate findings with the identified leadership styles and the research questions

using a priori coding scheme. All documents were read a second time in the same order and

were color coded; these codes served as themes. Interviews were read sequentially from

principals and teacher focus group discussions, one school at a time, and I compared and

contrasted responses between the school leader and teachers in their respective schools as well as

between schools. Data supporting each theme will be organized by school and then principal and

teachers. I will now turn to the themes that address the research questions.

Principal and Teacher Perceptions of Teacher Absenteeism

The prominent theme that emerged here was personal accountability. From the

interviews with principals, personal accountability on the part of teachers was a major reason

why teachers did not like to miss work. They believed teachers feel accountable to their

students, colleagues, and their jobs in general. Through their hiring practices, principals selected

teachers with personal accountability as a character trait. Research Question 2 was, “What is the

current status of campus principals’ perceptions of teacher absenteeism?” The data from

principal interviews support the following theme.

Theme 1–Personal Accountability

Personal accountability is the feeling of obligation toward one’s job responsibilities or

people to whom they feel accountable. This theme came through prominently during the

49

interviews with principals and in focus group discussions with teachers. Principal interviews

revealed that personal accountability was not only linked to a teacher’s sense of duty but also to

a school culture in which teacher attendance is valued.

Elementary school. During semi-structured interviews, principals were asked a series of

questions, and they shared insights on what factors might influence teacher absenteeism. The

elementary school principal shared, “Well I think a lot of it is personal accountability.” When

asked about the principal’s influence on teacher absenteeism, the response supported the theme

of personal accountability:

Of course, I think if I’m not happy at work, you know, I feel sick. Or, I think if I don’t feel validated, then I don’t feel like I’m accountable. And I have worked in places where people feel like the state gives me the days so I’m just going to take them. And there is really more of a, like I’m teaching for a paycheck and then I’m out of here. And I don’t really feel like I have that here with the teachers. They know they’re here for the kids.

After probing a bit more by asking if there was anything else that might make a difference in

keeping teacher absences lower, the principal stated, “I think they enjoy their teams, I really

do…and really, they’re more accountable to each other and their teams. And they know they’re

going to put a burden on each other.” Here, the principal was referring to times when teachers

are absent and team members pick up the slack to ensure that tasks are completed in their

absence.

Middle school. The principal at the middle school believed that it was “the internal

motivation of the educator” and that environment does matter, which was supported by the

statement, “[school is] a place that educators are happy to work, and accountability [is

expected].” These answers included personal accountability on the part of teachers, which

supports the first theme of personal accountability through the work ethic and internal motivation

of teachers. The principal strongly believes that teachers should come to work if they are able.

50

He clearly states: “It is my expectation that if you are capable to come to work, don’t fail the

students. Come to work and do what you have been called to do.” This speaks to the

expectation of accountability that he sets for the entire campus.

Elementary school. It was important to the researcher to glean the teachers’ perspectives

on teacher absenteeism and how it might vary from the principals’ perceptions. Teacher focus

group discussions were conducted at the elementary and middle schools. This was an ideal

process for capturing the reality of teachers’ lived experiences with respect to teacher

absenteeism.

Teachers in the focus group interviews conveyed a sense of personal accountability to

their students, colleagues, and jobs. They reported that this feeling was the main reason why

they did not like missing work. Teacher 5 expressed:

I think that we want to come here to a fault because, you know, [even when] we’re sick...we come to work...not because we’re afraid of the consequences...because...we hate to miss a day and, you know, my kids fall behind...somebody has to take care of my kids.

Teacher 6 stated, “I think it’s a combination of everything, but I think just, in general on this

campus, we’re very work oriented, we’re work horses here. So, we probably put more on

ourselves than anyone, you know.” Teacher 4 agreed and shared:

I think a lot of it comes from the teachers here and, so you know, we put pressure on each other to do the right thing, to do right by the kids and so people who just come to get a paycheck...often leave...because of the environment, not necessarily that the principal is putting [pressure] on them, but also the staff here.

Middle school. Teachers in the middle school focus group shared a deep sense of

responsibility to their students and felt that leaving lesson plans was simply not enough. One

teacher indicated that learning for students was important but assessing learning was truly what

mattered. Teacher 5 stated,

51

I think if I’m not here [for] my kids, I can’t teach them...I can leave lesson plans, but I can’t really assess. I can’t see if my students are learning or if they’re doing what I’m asking them to do. So that’s one concern of mine, that’s why I try not to be absent. I just feel like we have such a responsibility and we have just a certain number of days to get them where they need to be and if we start missing days, I feel like we’re robbing the students of their education.

Teacher 4 indicated, “I see teachers taking it personally, that they…hold themselves

accountable to their students learning and, like she said, you know, if you’re not here, you can’t

hold them to that expectation.” Teacher 1 also agreed with that statement. Principals and

teachers agreed that personal accountability is a factor in the decision to miss a day of work.

Principals believe that their teachers are dedicated to their jobs and feel responsible for their

students’ learning. Likewise, teachers did not like to miss work because they feel their students

will fall behind, a substitute would not teach the lesson the way they would, and they would miss

the opportunity to assess learning throughout a given lesson. The research further reveals that

school culture is a factor in teacher absenteeism.

How Principals Create School Climate and Culture

Principals strive to create a school climate that discourages teacher absences by

developing relationships with teachers. In analyzing the interview responses, it became clear

that relationships emerged as a theme in answer to Research Question 3. Principals perceived

their relationships with the teachers as positive and trusting. They believed teachers could talk to

them about matters in their personal lives and talk with them through issues and concerns.

Theme 2–Relationships

Elementary school. The elementary school principal expressed the notion that the

relationship with the teachers was one of care and concern. The responses included words and

sentiments that indicated close principal-teacher relationships. The elementary principal stated,

52

Well I think I have a good relationship with them [teachers]. I think they know that I love them and that I have their back. And I can truly say that one thing I’m very proud of is that I’ve never bad-mouthed them to anyone in the district. I think people, when you police them, when you doubt them, when you suspect them, you’re really speaking to your own personality and the things you think you’d do. But, when you trust people like you want to be trusted and you treat them like professionals, they really don’t abuse it. And I think they don’t abuse it because the ones that do will stick out like a sore thumb. Because they’re amongst professionals and they really like each other, they’re the fastest ones to call each other out.

The elementary school principal used relationships to build trust with and among teachers in the

school. Interactions were purposeful with the end goal of treating teachers as professionals and

ultimately expecting a culture and climate where attitudes and behaviors reflected the same. The

middle school principal spoke about the frequency of communication and how it lends to shaping

school culture.

Middle school. The middle school principal indicated that building relationships with

teachers is intentional and an ongoing area of focus. The principal shared, “I work on trying to

consistently connect with our team and to get to know more about them on a daily basis. I can

tell you this is an area that I try to focus on.”

Similar to the interviews with the elementary and middle school principals, responses

from the teacher focus group interviews at both the elementary and middle schools suggested

that relationships were a key factor in assessing the climate and culture of the school.

Elementary school. The focus group discussion with the elementary school teachers

revealed that relationships with each other, their students, and their principal were important to

them. Teacher 4 described her relationship with other teachers,

I’d say that everybody really tries to work together and, you know, it’s a very close-knit group and we want to help each other out. I think we have just a strong feeling of community with the teachers. Nobody is afraid to ask for help.

53

Teachers expressed that relationships went beyond simply caring for one another. Caring for the

students prompted communication between teachers; for example, if one teacher might be sick at

home. Teacher 5 expressed,

Well, I think a lot of it is the teachers. If you’re absent, I know that people will send texts or email. If you’re at home or you’re sick, even from the doctor’s office—you’re texting to make sure x, y, and z is happening.

Teacher 4 said, “I think a lot of it comes from the teachers here. We put pressure on each other

to do the right thing, to do right by the kids.”

Teachers felt connected to each other and helped each other in many ways. Their

responses revealed that relationships were among the top reasons why teachers did not like to

miss work. When asked about the school administrator’s response to absences, Teacher 3 stated,

“I feel like they’re very fair about it. Because of that, people don’t take advantage. You know

people are out when they need to be but it’s understood.” Teacher 5 noted,

We receive so much support from each other. If I start out the day, in not such a great mood, I know that people will lift me up and I really don’t feel like…I really don’t want to take that day you know.”

Teacher 1 stated,

I’ll say I agree with what number 5 said. If we kind of feel like we need that time, we’ll go and actually seek each other out for support and we’ll get together and we’ll even pray together. We’ve done that. We’ve all gotten together to pray for each other to lift our spirits. The principal and teachers at the elementary school echoed similar messages regarding

culture and climate, which indicates that relationships created trust and anyone not ‘doing the

right thing’ would ‘stick out like a sore thumb’. There was a sense of moral grounding to why

teachers came to school each day. Similar sentiments were evident on the middle school

campus.

54

Middle school. Teachers were open and frank when speaking about the culture of their

school. Teacher 4 responded, “We can go to each other and talk if we’re having a rough day and

feel support from our teachers because they’ve gone through the same thing.” Responses were

also inclusive of principal support, with Teacher 5 responding,

I would say a lot of it is just the teachers and the principals working together and just having a goal that we both believe in and are able to move toward. Then we both kind of believe in the same thing. Everyone gets to know everyone and really get to know these kids.

Teachers explained the demeanor of the school principal when absences are inevitable. Teacher 4

expressed,

You never hear them [school administrators] complain. If you ask for a day off, they pretty much say ‘that’s fine, you can take it off.’ You put in a request for a sub and you never get any push back about missing days.

Teacher 5 also noted, “When one of us is absent, we always help each other out. If we are short

substitutes, we just cover for one another and help each other.”

Relationships are the glue that holds an organization together. Healthy relationships can

be cultivated and lead to a more positive work environment. Principals believe they cultivate

and maintain good relationships and open communication with their teachers. Concurrently,

teachers believe they can go to their principal and talk to them freely or ask them for a day off

and the principal will not give them a hard time. They feel that the principal treats them like

professionals who can handle their own responsibilities.

Policies and Procedures

Part of this research was to determine whether district or campus policies and procedures

influenced teacher absence rates. Therefore, Research Question 5 was, “What evidence exists

that principals put procedures or policies in place regarding teacher absences?” Responses to

several interview questions supported Theme 3: Practices.

55

Theme 3–Practices

Elementary school. Both principals and teachers agreed that campus routines and

procedures, such as preparing for a substitute, was a reason why teachers did not like to be

absent. The elementary school principal shared district and school measures for monitoring

absences,

Well, we have an attendance book, that’s just my own thing. And so, when a teacher is absent, you know, we put it in the attendance book. After they’ve had like five absences, then I do talk to them and we have an awareness meeting just letting them know—are you aware that you’ve been out, you know, 5 days or 8 days or whatever—that kind of thing.

The principal emphasized the importance of teachers’ professionalism through engaging in

proper communication channels ahead of time. The elementary school principal stated,

They need to let me know ahead of time because the substitute system is not very good and so a lot of times we don’t get substitutes that pick up, so then we have to make decisions whether we’re going to split the class—what we’re going to do. Because if no sub shows up, they have a split list and they’re going to split the students among themselves and so they’re actually burdening each other. Regardless of whether they’re truly sick, they need a mental day or whatever it is. I don’t really care about that because they’re grown-ups, they’re professionals, and they work extremely hard. I want them to take care of themselves. I just want them always to be very cognizant that the children need to be taken care of when they’re gone.

The principal expected her teachers to prepare for students when they were out. The

principal was concerned for the well-being of her teachers and students. She realizes that when

teachers are out, students may miss instruction and other teachers may have to pick up the slack.

Likewise, the middle school principal shared similar sentiments regarding preparing for a

substitute and taking care of students in a teacher’s absence.

Middle school. Speaking to the campus measures to decrease absenteeism, the middle

school principal shared, “I monitor absence data regularly. If an educator is showing patterns, I

56

will take it upon myself to investigate to see what may be the issue by conferencing with the

educator.” He continued,

No other person in the world can do a better job at teaching the lesson that the educator planned themselves. It is my expectation that if you are capable to come to work, don’t fail the students. Come to work and do what you have been called to do.

The principals shared their expectations of teachers with respect to absences; however,

the teachers provided other reasons as a deterrent for absence such as preparing lesson plans for

the substitute. They also worry about whether or not the substitute will teach the lesson correctly

or follow it at all. As a result, when they return, they’ve got to teach the lessons their students

missed and catch up on the current lessons.

Elementary school. Teachers would rather come to work when they did not feel well

(provided they did not have a fever or were contagious) than prepare for a substitute the night

before or that morning. Teacher 2 noted, “I look at it as it’s easier to come sick than it is to

prepare for a sick day. I’d rather come and feel crummy than have to prepare for it because it is

a lot of work.” Teacher 6 stated,

Each of us have substitute folders that we have to keep that have things such as pertinent lesson plans, class lists, procedures. And when I tell you it just stressed me out putting together that sub folder. That was a lot of work in itself, so just the idea of taking off when you don’t need to…I would just have to be deathly sick and some type of emergency for me to take off because it’s just too much preparation, so much preparation.

Teacher 4 agreed: “Yes, it is a whole lot of work if you know up front that you’re going to be

sick and you’re going to be out.” Teacher 6 stated,

I know that I write a lesson plan, but I know throughout the week I’m constantly adjusting. You know maybe this class didn’t get it so I have to you now re-adjust the activity. So when you’re planning things out and then you have to be absent that day, that just throws a monkey wrench in your whole plan and it’s so much easier just to be here.

57

Teacher 5 supports that comment and speaks to her frustration about a substitute not

following the lesson plans stating, “I feel that teachers are prepared and spend hours preparing

for a sub and they do not follow your plan and all your stuff is just left untouched—it’s so

upsetting!” Teacher 4 stated,

I think anytime you’re…that a teacher is out, you’re going to miss instruction no matter how well the teacher owns the classroom, sets up their classroom management and their lesson plans. You know, as far as math and science and all of that, it is very specific information and the substitutes that come into the building typically are not prepared and do not have the background knowledge to teach those types of things. So, definitely you’re losing instructional days if you have to be out.

Middle school. Again, responses echo the elementary teachers concern about preparing

for a substitute and worrying about whether or not they will follow the plans. Teacher 2

comments,

I think it’s more work to call in sick (group is nodding, laughing, saying mmm hmm). But, if you do call in sick, the preparations are, for one, making sure a sub has picked up your job, you know. And two, making sure that they have the necessary materials in order to get those TEKS taught—they need to be taught for that day.

Teacher 4 agreed and expressed,

I’ll second that because I’ve seen teachers that are sick or their children are sick—up here before school getting stuff ready for the sub and making sure that everything is in place for the sub so they (the students) aren’t missing a day of teaching. So, it’s not some idol worksheet, it’s the lesson that was planned.

In addition to preparing for a substitute, teachers were concerned about the way their

students would behave in their absence. They did not want to return to work the next day to

learn that their students behaved badly and/or that the principal, assistant principal, or colleagues

had to intervene. They felt that their students’ behaviors were somehow a reflection of them.

Teacher 1 stated, “I do, I definitely think that’s a concern—how they behave when I’m not here.”

Teacher 4 added, “I think that through their school years, they’ve learned over time that they can

behave differently (with a sub) and sometimes it’s acceptable because they’ve gotten away with

58

it.” These responses indicated that, in addition to the time it takes to prepare for a substitute,

teachers worry about whether he or she will follow their plans and whether their students will

misbehave when they are absent.

Principals expect certain practices to occur when teachers will be absent. They are to

maintain a substitute folder which has several emergency lesson plans and materials. If it is an

absence that they know about in advance, the principal expects them to prepare a detailed lesson

for the substitute so that the children will not miss instruction. Teachers have received this

message and follow the procedure. This task alone will cause some teachers to be present even if

they are not feeling well. Also, they are required to call the principal and communicate with the

office and their team about their absence and lesson plans. The principals and teachers feel that

when they are absent, they also put a burden on their colleagues because they will have to help

the substitute or if there is no substitute, the students will have to be split into different classes.

Again, teachers were concerned that the substitute would not carry out the lesson plans with

fidelity or correctly because they often do not have the instructional background to do so.

Additionally, students behaviors could get out of hand, which made the return to work even more

difficult.

Cultural Norms

Cultural norms are commonly referred to as “the way things are” in an organization and

relate to the way people behave, their routines, and established procedures. Principals believe

they have an influence on the culture of the school. They set the tone for expectations, student

achievement, and teacher absence among other things. Research Question 4 was, “What cultural

norms do school leaders develop regarding teacher absences?”

59

Theme 4–Culture of the School

Elementary school. The elementary school principal expressed cultural norms as an

endeavor that required modeling each and every day. The principal stated,

You have to be what you want, what you want them to be. It has to start with you. You have to be a person of integrity and you have to really love them. And not just say that you love them, but actually walk in that, you know, and in that compassion. Because whatever you want to see them model for the children, you’ve got to model for them. And, it works. I mean it 100% works. And, like I said, everybody won’t fit, but when you create a culture like that, the people that don’t fit leave because they are made to be very uncomfortable. They’re uncomfortable with their peers and they move themselves.

Modeling cultural norms can also be in the form of a conversation as expressed by the middle

school principal.

Middle school. The middle school principal indicated that cultural norms were modeled

through genuine conversation that demonstrated care and concern. The middle school principal

shared,

Communicate with your educators. Don’t make assumptions, call them in and ask them what is going on. I always aim to approach things with a genuine concern instead of using an aggressive approach.

Both principals and teachers valued the relationships developed on campus. They took time to

find out what is going on in each other’s lives and to provide support and understanding. As a

result, the bond created between principals and teachers and among teachers was strong and

influenced their decisions when it came to calling in sick or asking for a day off.

Elementary school. Teachers spoke to the sense of community and support shared

between teachers. Teacher 3 noted, “Um, I’d say that everybody really tries to work together

and you know, it’s a very close knit group and we want to help each other out.” Teacher 1

agreed, “I’m going to agree with her, and I think that we have a strong feeling of community

60

with the teachers.” Teacher 5 also noted, “Yes, you know nobody is afraid to not know what

they’re doing, not afraid to ask for help.”

Responses supported Theme 4. Teacher 5 said, “We really don’t do that. It’s not the

philosophy at this school to do that.”

Teachers at the middle school responded similarly to the question about the culture and climate

of the school.

Middle School. Elementary and middle school teachers also agreed that climate and

culture are influential factors in whether faculty members want to come to work. Teacher 4

noted,

I came from a different school, it was also middle school, and this is much more family friendly. Teachers get along and work together a lot more. There’s not so much backstabbing or talking about each other and you know not working together. So this is a very friendly environment to work in.

Teacher 3 agreed,

As number 4 was saying; basically, it’s family oriented and to my experience it has not always been that way. It has not been that way forever. I mean, now, it’s a completely different atmosphere than what it was 25, 21 years ago.

Cultural norms are a part of how people behave in an organization. The group takes on a

mentality about how to react, perceive, or speak a common language. From my understanding

through interviews with the principals and teachers, they all believed that their work place was

more or less like a family. Teachers felt supported by their principal and colleagues. Likewise,

principals trusted their teachers. School was a place they wanted to be. Elementary and middle

school principals felt that they have an influence on the culture and climate of the school. In the

interviews regarding decreasing teacher absence rates, principals speak to the policies and

procedures that have been put in place to make sure the students are taken care of when teachers

are absent.

61

Summary

This chapter included an analysis and interpretation of quantitative and qualitative data

obtained from the MLQ-SR, principal interviews, and teacher focus group discussions. These

methods were used to examine principals’ perceptions of teacher absenteeism in an urban

elementary and middle school through the lens of transformational leadership. The teacher focus

group discussions provided context and helped identify the themes of accountability,

relationships, practices, and culture and climate. The themes and findings are in line with Bass

and Avolio’s characteristics of transformational leadership.

Bass and Avolio (1985) identified the following characteristics of transformational

leaders:

• Inspirational – provides followers with a clear sense of purpose that is energizing, and

serves as a role model for ethical conduct and builds identification with the leader and

his or her articulated vision;

• Intellectual Stimulation – gets followers to question the tried and true ways of solving

problems, and encourages them to question the methods they use to improve upon

them;

• Individualized Consideration – focuses on understanding the needs of each follower

and works continuously to get them to develop to their full potential;

• Contingent Reward – clarifies what is expected from followers and what they will

receive if they meet expected levels of performance;

• Active Management-by-Exception focuses on monitoring task execution for any

problems that might arise and correcting those problems to maintain current

performance levels; and,

62

• Passive-Avoidant Leadership – tends to react only after problems have become

serious to take corrective action, and often avoids making any decisions at all. (p.

444-445)

The research questions focused on the status of campus principals’ perceptions of teacher

absenteeism, culture norms and climate of the school, and policies and procedures to discourage

teacher absences. The data indicated that principals and teachers held themselves accountable to

each other and to their students. Relationships held their schools together and provided support

for one another. The principals established practices to help discourage teacher absenteeism and

to ensure that students did not miss instruction. Finally, principals and teachers agreed that their

schools were places they wanted to work; their schools were an extension of their families.

63

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS OF FINDINGS

The researcher explored campus principals’ leadership behaviors and overall leadership

styles to determine possible influences of leadership on teacher absences. Specifically, the

researcher aimed to determine whether teachers used personal and sick days because they were

available and considered a benefit of the job and whether the leadership style of the campus

principal influenced the use of these days. Determining whether leadership positively or

negatively affected the ‘absenteeism’ culture of the school may provide awareness to school

district leaders, which could lead to breaking the cycle of voluntary teacher absences. This mixed

method study was conducted in a large urban school district to answer the following research

questions:



contingent reward, management-by-exception, passive-avoidant leadership) and teacher

absenteeism?




5. What evidence exists that principals put procedures or policies in place regarding teacher

absences?

The qualitative method of data collection to answer these questions involved interviews

with the principals, focus group discussions with the teachers, and analysis of teacher absence

data. The quantitative data collection involved the analysis of the Multifactor Leadership Self-

64

Report, descriptive statistics and multiple regression. The descriptive statistics give insight into

the leadership behaviors of the principals that are associated with the three leadership styles in

this study- transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire. The multiple regression was used to

discover whether the independent variables (nine leadership behaviors) were effective predictors

of the dependent variable, teacher absence rates. Using these methods, the researcher found that

principals can and do influence teacher absenteeism through their leadership styles. Specifically,

leadership styles influence teacher accountability, relationships, practices, and culture and

climate. The quantitative data shows us the patterns of leadership behavior in the sample. The

findings of this study have connections to research and give rise to implications of actions that

the school district can take to remedy the problem of the study.

Connection to Prior Research

Previous research on teacher absenteeism has posed different hypotheses on the nature of

this problem. Some researchers have focused on the monetary costs of teacher absenteeism

while others have examined the effects of student achievement (Hill, 1982; Long & Ormsby,

1987). Other researchers found connections between job satisfaction, culture, organizational

climate, and leadership (Bass & Avolio, 1993; Gibson & Lafornara, 1972; LeCompte &

Dworkin, 1991). However, little research has included the influence of leadership style on

teacher absenteeism as explored from the perceptions of those in the field through a mixed

methods study.

Leadership style and principal perceptions of teacher absenteeism were examined closely

in this study using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Self-Report, interviews with

principals, and focus group discussions with teachers. The two principals selected for interviews

had the lowest rates of teacher absences on their respective campuses for three consecutive

65

school years (2012–2013, 2013–2014, 2014–2015). When examining the Multifactor Leadership

Questionnaire Self-Report of the principals, it became evident that their leadership style was

more transformational than transactional or laissez-faire.

The data were examined within the framework of transformational and transactional

leadership styles (Bass & Avolio, 1985). Bass and Avolio (1985) defined transformational

leadership as composed of individualized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual

stimulation, and individualized consideration. Individualized influence results in leaders’

abilities to secure trust, admiration, and respect from followers, and these leaders consider their

followers’ needs above their own. Here, the emphasis is on high moral conduct. Inspirational

motivation involves providing meaningful and challenging work along with clear expectations.

Using inspirational motivation, leaders demonstrate commitment to organizational goals, are

outwardly optimistic, and work to build team spirit. Intellectual stimulation refers to how the

leader seeks and encourages new and creative ideas to solve common problems or accomplish

tasks. Individualized consideration is when leaders listen attentively and recognize staff

members’ achievements and successes (Bromley & Kirschner-Bromley, 2007).









66

& Kirschner-Bromley, 2007). Bass and Avolio (1993) defined transactional leadership as “the

focus…on maintaining efficient management and complying with organizational rules and

policies” (p. 257). Thus, leaders who exhibit a transactional style maintain tight control by

emphasizing compliance with rules and procedures (Eyal & Roth, 2011) and evaluating

performance of subordinates based on predetermined criteria (Bass & Avolio, 1985).

It became clear during the principal interviews and teacher focus group discussions that

the transformational leadership style was demonstrated in the selected schools and this style

supported the culture and climate of the schools. Principals nurtured relationships with their

teachers and treated them with respect (considering individual needs). They also expected their

teachers to do the right thing by coming to work every day and teaching the children (clear sense

of mission). Principals also appealed to teachers’ sense of morality and duty (high moral

conduct), and they created cultures of learning and mutual respect by giving teachers autonomy

to accomplish goals without constant supervision (empowers followers). Principals expected

teachers to teach and students to learn (shared goals). Finally, principals made their schools

places where people wanted to be, including students, staff, parents, and administration (builds

team spirit). The findings of this study also relate to teacher absenteeism as it affects student

achievement.

Tingle et al. (2012) examined teacher absences and student achievement based on data

from a large urban school district during a single school year. They found that student

achievement is more likely to suffer when the majority of the school population is economically

disadvantaged because these students come to school with educational gaps that only skilled

teachers can fill. The researchers deduced that teacher absences can and do influence student

achievement in schools with low teacher absence rates.

67

The two schools selected for this study were Title I schools. To put this in context, 89%

of the students in the elementary school were considered ‘economically disadvantaged,’ meaning

that the annual household income was such that the children received free or reduced price lunch.

At the middle school, 92% of the student body was considered ‘economically disadvantaged.’

Both principals understood that students missed valuable instruction when their teachers are

absent. Economically disadvantaged students are also more likely to fall behind when the

teacher is absent compared to their higher-income counterparts. Knowledge of this may pressure

principals to ensure that teachers are not absent. One would think a transactional approach to

lowering teacher absence rates, such as rewards for not missing days or docking pay as a

negative consequence, would be more effective. However, the data collected in this study

suggest that this is not the case. Rather, established practices ensure that students are not missing

instruction.

Both selected principals had practices in place to ensure that students were not left to do

unimportant work when a teacher was absent. They required their teachers to prepare lesson

plans and communicate with campus administration and team members to make sure students are

learning that day. However, this was not how principals ensured low teacher absence rates.

Rather, they emphasized that students need their teachers and they should be at work because it

is the right thing to do (high moral conduct). Referring to this, the middle school principal

stated,

No other person in the world can do a better job at teaching the lesson that the educator planned themselves. It is my expectation that if you are capable to come to work, don’t fail the students. Come to work and do what you have been called to do.

68

Likewise, the elementary principal stated, “I just want them to be very cognizant that the

children need to be taken care of when their gone.” Teachers understood and shared the same

sense of duty and accountability.

Discussion

The average number of absences per teacher in the school district was approximately 11

days in a 187-day school year (5.88% as stated in the findings). The number of paid absence

days given by this school district is 10 (5 local and 5 state). The consequences for exceeding the

10 allowed absences would be a dock in pay in some cases. I say some cases, since teachers

acquire state leave throughout the years and the leave days roll over from year to year; therefore,

teachers with an accumulation of days would not be docked in pay. If a teacher misses a day, it

would be subtracted from their bank of collected days. Teachers use these days for absences

because they are a benefit of the job and feel justified in using them as evidenced by the data

from the principal interviews.

It’s important to note that the middle school is what the district refers to as a “RISE”

campus. The RISE program is a federal grant given to low-performing campuses to increase

student achievement. This grant offers teachers bonuses for student growth, sponsoring clubs,

tutoring, etc. An advantage of this grant is a bonus for low teacher absences. If a teacher has

fewer than 10 days of missed work in a given school year, he or she receives a bonus at the end

of that school year. This mirrors a transactional approach to enticing teachers to take less days

off, but the data clearly demonstrates that teachers in the middle school had the lowest absences

for more than simply monetary gain. In comparison to other similar campuses who had this

grant, teachers did not have low absence rates.

69

Implications for Future Research

This study adds valuable insight into leadership styles and how they may influence

teacher absenteeism. Below are suggested areas for future research to add to the body of

research regarding this topic:

• Analyze campuses that offer monetary or other incentives through different means such

as grants or district or campus incentive programs.

• Analyze the same campuses with regard to student growth and achievement. Follow the

same group of students to evaluate progress effectively.

• Identify the leadership styles of the campus leaders using the multifactor leadership

report completed by teachers.

• Compare the above collected data to campuses that did not receive monetary or other

incentives.

Considering these recommendations for future research, I also suggest that researchers consider

longitudinal studies in large urban school districts. By conducting longitudinal studies, the

researcher could follow-up with principal interviews and teacher focus group discussions, which

allow for a more in depth study into the underlying causes of teacher absenteeism.

Implications for Policy and Practice

This study is different from other studies conducted on this topic simply because I

combined quantitative and qualitative data to reach my findings. The comparison of leadership

behaviors as reported by the MLQ-SR to leadership styles is very telling. Leaders in this study

consider themselves to be more transformational than transactional. The interviews with

principals and teachers also added another dimension of knowledge. The findings will help

districts to provide training to develop campus principals’ leadership skills. These leadership

70

skills can help create cultures and climates that decrease voluntary teacher absences. This can

save districts an immense amount of money in the cost of substitutes. It may also help the Title I

schools to improve student achievement for economically disadvantaged students by decreasing

teacher absences.

Conclusion

The implementation of a leadership development program aimed to decrease teacher

absenteeism is in order. However, more research is needed to identify common causes of teacher

absenteeism and effective ways to decrease the rates. The benefits of decreasing teacher

absenteeism will also help school district leaders to close the achievement gap that still exists

between economically disadvantaged students and non-economically disadvantaged students.

Closing this gap would be a major accomplishment on the part of district leaders and the effects

would be long lasting.

71

APPENDIX A

INFORMED CONSENT NOTICE

72

INFORMED CONSENT NOTICE

IC University of North Texas Institutional Review Board Informed Consent Notice

Before agreeing to participate in this research study, it is important that you read and understand

the following explanation of the purpose, benefits and risks of the study, and how it will be

conducted.

Title of Study: Leadership and the Influences of Teacher Absenteeism

Supervising Investigator(s): Dr. Miriam Ezzani and Dr. Jim Laney, University of North Texas

(UNT) Department of Educational Leadership.

Student Investigator: Lori Ayala, University of North Texas (UNT) Department of Educational

Leadership.

Purpose of the Study: You are being asked to participate in a research study that investigates

leadership and teacher absenteeism. This study seeks to discover the influences of unscheduled

teacher absences and the influence of leadership style on such.

Study Procedures: You will be asked to complete a leadership self-report as well as Likert scale

questions on absenteeism.

Foreseeable Risks: No foreseeable risks are involved in this study

Benefits to the Subjects or Others: This study is not expected to be of any direct benefit to you,

but I hope to learn more about the influence of teacher absenteeism to inform district leaders for

the purpose of school improvement.

Procedures for Maintaining Confidentiality of Research Records: Any information collected

from the participants will be handled only by Dr. Ezzani or Lori Ayala. No personal information

about the participants, including social security numbers, addresses, phone numbers, or names

73

will be collected. The confidentiality of your individual information will be maintained in any

publications or presentations regarding this study.

Questions about the Study: If you have any questions about the study, you may contact Lori

Ayala at [email protected] or Dr. Ezzani at [email protected].

Review for the Protection of Participants: This research study has been reviewed and approved

by the UNT Institutional Review Board (IRB). The UNT IRB can be contacted at (940) 565-

3940 with any questions regarding the rights of research subjects.

Research Participants’ Rights: Your electronic signature below indicates that you have read or

have had read to you all of the above and that you confirm all of the following:

Lori Ayala has explained the study to you and offered to answer all of your questions.

You have been told the possible benefits and the potential risks and/or discomforts of the study.

You understand that you do not have to take part in this study, and your refusal to participate or

your decision to withdraw will involve no penalty or loss of rights or benefits.

The study participant may choose to stop your participation at any time.

You understand why the study is being conducted and how it will be performed.

You understand your rights as a research participant and you voluntarily consent to participate in

this study.

You have been told you will receive a copy of this form.

IC1 Indicate your agreement to participate in the current study by selecting an option below

I Agree (1)

I Disagree, Please exit me from the survey (2)

If I Disagree, Please exit me ... Is Selected, Then Skip to End of Survey

74

APPENDIX B

MULTIFACTOR LEADERSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE- SAMPLE QUESTIONS

75

MULTIFACTOR LEADERSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE-SAMPLE QUESTIONS

This questionnaire is to describe your leadership style as you perceive it. Please answer all items

on this answer sheet. If an item is irrelevant, or if you are unsure or do not know the answer,

leave the answer blank. Forty-five descriptive statements are listed on the following pages.

Judge how frequently each statement fits you. The word "others" may mean your peers, clients,

direct reports, supervisors, and/or all of these individuals. Use the following rating scale:

LQ Leadership Style Self-Report Not At All

(0) Once in a While (1)

Sometimes (2)

Fairly Often (3)

Frequently, if not Always

(4) I provide

others with assistance in exchange for

their efforts (1)

°

° ° ° °

I re-examine critical

assumptions to question

whether they are appropriate

(2)

° ° ° ° °

I fail to interfere until

problems become

serious (3)

° ° ° ° °

I focus attention on

irregularities, mistakes,

exception, and deviations

from standards (4)

° ° ° ° °

I avoid getting involved when

important issues arise (5)

° ° ° ° °

76

APPENDIX C

SCHOOL LEADER INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

77

School Leader Interview Protocol

Note: I will begin the interview by informing the interviewee about myself and my study. An

explanation will be provided regarding the tape recording of the interview and that their

responses will be strictly confidential. They will also be informed that if there is something they

would like to say off tape, I will oblige by stopping the tape midstream for their commentary.

1. Please describe the history of your role in this school? (Background and Research

Questions 2-5 indirectly).

Probe: How long have you been with the school? Did you have a particular vision in

mind when you began your role as school leader? How has the climate of the school

changed during your time as school leader?

2. Can you tell me about your relationship with the teachers in your school? (Research

Questions 2-5 directly)

3. In your opinion, what factors influence teacher absenteeism? (Research Questions 2-5

directly)

Probe: Does the principal affect teacher absenteeism in any way?

4. Are there district and/or school measures for monitoring teacher absences? (Research

Question 5)

Probe: If so, what are they?

5. What are your expectations regarding teacher absences? (Research Question 5)

Probe: Does the district support your expectations?

6. What problems have you run into in trying to ensure minimum teacher absences?

(Research Questions 2-5)

78

Probe: Can you share some examples please. Is there anything else you think might

make a difference in lower teacher absence?

7. What advice would you give me as a school leader about how I might begin to build a

culture of care and integrity that would decrease teacher absences? (Research Questions

2-5 indirectly)

Research Questions

Cross-reference interview questions with research questions:









teacher absences?

79

APPENDIX D

TEACHER FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION PROTOCOL

80

Teacher Focus Group Discussion Protocol

Note: I will begin the interview by informing the interviewee about myself and my study. An

explanation will be provided regarding the tape recording of the interview and that their

responses will be strictly confidential. They will also be informed that if there is something they

would like to say off tape, I will oblige by stopping the tape midstream for their commentary.

1. Please briefly describe your professional history as a teacher and how long you’ve beenat this school? (Research Question 3-5 indirectly)

2. How would you describe the culture at your school? (Research Questions 3 and 4)

3. How much of the culture is attributed to the teachers? To the principal? To the district?(Research Questions 2-5)

Probe: How do administrators respond to teacher absences?

4. What things do teachers have to consider and what preparations do they have to makewhen they call in sick? (Research Question 5)

Probe: What procedures are in place? Do procedures include communication with theprincipal? Does that impact whether you call in or not? (Research Questions 2-5)

5. What makes some teachers call in absent more than others? (Research Questions 2- 5)

6. What concerns do teachers have about calling in as absent? (Research Question 5)

7. How do students respond to teacher absences? (Research Questions 2-5 indirectly)

Research Questions

Cross-references of interview questions with the research questions:






81




teacher absences?

I will conclude the focus group discussion by extending my appreciation to the participants for

their time and valuable input.

82

APPENDIX E

PERCENTILES FOR INDIVIDUAL SCORES BASED ON SELF RATINGS (US)

83

REFERENCES

Ali, N., Ali Babar, M. A., & Bangash, S. A. (2011). Relationship between leadership styles and

organizational commitment amongst medical representatives of national and

multinational pharmaceuticals companies, Pakistan (an empirical study).

Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 2, 524-529.

Avolio, B. J., Bass, B. M., & Jung, D. I. (1999). Re-examining the components of

transformational and transactional leadership using the multifactor leadership

questionnaire. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 72, 441-462. doi:

10.1348/096317999166789

Bass, B. M. (1997). Does the transactional-transformational leadership paradigm transcend

organizational and national boundaries? American Psychologist, 52(2), 130-139. doi:10

.1037/0003-066X.52.2.130

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1985). Multifactor leadership questionnaire: Form 1. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 80, 468-478.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Improving organizational effectiveness through

transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2004). Multifactor leadership questionnaire: Third edition manual

and sample set. Lincoln, NE: Mind Garden.

Bogler, V. (1999). Reassessing the behavior of principals as a multiple-factor in teachers’ job

satisfaction. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational

Research Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, April, 19-23. Retrieved from ERIC

database. (ED432800)

88

Bridges, E. M., & Hallinan, M. T. (1978). Sub-unit size, work system interdependence, and

employee absenteeism. Educational Administration Quarterly, 14(2), 24-42. doi:10.1177

/0013131X7801400203

Bromley, H. R., & Kirschner-Bromley, V. A. (2007). Are you a transformational leader?

Physician Executive, 33(6), 54-57.

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper and Row.

Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. L. (2009). Are teacher absences worth worrying about

in the United States? Education Finance and Policy, 4, 115-149. doi:10.1162/edfp

.2009.4.2.115

Despues, D. (1999, Spring). Stress and illness. Retrieved from http://www.csun.edu/~vcpsy00h

/students/illness.htm

Driver, R. W., & Watson, C. J. (1989). Construct validity of voluntary and involuntary

absenteeism. Journal of Business and Psychology, 4, 109-118. doi:10.1007/BF01023041

Dworkin, A. G. (2001). Perspectives on teacher burnout and school reform. International

Education Journal, 2(2), 69-78.

Dworkin, A. G., Haney, C. A., Dworkin, R. J., & Telschow, R. L. (1990). Stress and illness

behavior among urban public school teachers. Educational Administration Quarterly, 26,

60-72. doi:10.1177/0013161X90026001004

Ehrenberg, R. G., Ehrenberg, R. A., Rees, D. I., & Ehrenberg, E. L. (1991). School district leave

policies, teacher absenteeism, and student achievement. Journal of Human Resources 26,

72-105. doi:10.2307/145717

Eyal, O., & Roth, G. (2011). Principals’ leadership and teachers’ motivation: Self-determination

theory analysis. Journal of Educational Administration, 49, 256-275.

89

Ferris, G. R., Bergin, T. G., & Wayne, S. J. (1988). Personnel characteristics, job performance,

and absenteeism of public school teachers. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18,

552-563. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816-1988.tb00036.x

Gaziel, H. H. (2004). Predictors of absenteeism among primary school teachers. Social

Psychology of Education, 7, 421-434. doi:10.1007/s11218-004-5232-z

Gibson, R. O., & Lafornara, P. (1972). Collective legitimacy and organizational attachment: A

longitudinal case study of school personnel absences. Paper presented at the Annual

Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Retrieved from ERIC

database. (ED063674)

Glassman, N. S. (1994). Making better decisions about school problems: How administrators

use evaluation to find solutions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. Albany: State

University of New York.

Hammer, T., Landau, J., & Stern, R. (1984). Absenteeism. San-Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Herzberg, F. (1966). Work and the nature of man. New York, NY: Crowell.

Hesse-Biber, S. N., & Leavy, P. L. (2010). The practice of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Hill, S. T. (1982). You can’t afford for teachers to be out, so take these steps now to stop

absenteeism. Updating School Board Policies, 13(3), 1-4. Retrieved from ERIC database.

(ED214233)

Imants, J., & van Zoelen, A. (1995). Teachers’ sickness absence in primary schools, school

climate and teachers’ sense of efficacy. School Organization, 15, 77-87. doi:10.1080

/0260136980150109

90

Jacobson, S. L. (1989a). Attendance incentives and teacher absenteeism. Planning and

Changing, 21(2), 78-93.

Jacobson, S. L. (1989b). The effects of pay incentives on teacher absenteeism. Journal of Human

Resources, 24, 280-286. doi:10.2307/145856

Johns, G. (1988). Organizational behavior: Understanding life at work (2nd ed.). Boston, MA:

Scott and Foresman.

Keith, T. (2006). Multiple regression and beyond. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Kight, L. C. (2007). The relationship between principal’s leadership style and teacher

absenteeism (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses

database. (UMI No. 3284839)

Korkmaz, M. (2007). The effects of leadership styles on organizational health. Educational

Research Quarterly, 30(3), 22-54.

Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. London, UK:

Sage.

LeCompte, M. D., & Dworkin, A. G. (1991). Giving up on school: Student dropouts and teacher

burnouts. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin.

Long, J., & Ormsby, J. G. (1987). Stamp out absenteeism. Personnel Journal, 66(11), 94-96.

March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York, NY: Wiley.

National Council on Teacher Quality. (2014, June). Roll call: The importance of teacher

attendance. Retrieved from http://www.nctq.org/dmsView/RollCall_TeacherAttendance

Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

91

Okulu, K. H., & Korkmaz, M., (2012). Effects of transformational and transactional leadership

and leader-member exchange on teachers’ organizational citizenship behaviors.

Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 18, 7-36.

Owen, A. T. (2010). Leadership practices that influence teacher attendance in a low and high

teacher absentee school (Doctoral dissertation). Available from Jack N. Averitt College

of Graduate Studies (COGS) at DigitalCommons@Georgia Southern.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd. ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Pitkoff, E. (1993). Teacher absenteeism: What administrators can do. NASSP Bulletin, 77(551),

39-45. doi:10.1177/019263659307755106

Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Boulian, P. V. (1974). Organizational

commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 59, 603-609.

Porwoll, P. J. (1980). Employee absenteeism: A summary of research. Arlington, VA:

Educational Research Service.

Scott, K. D., & McClellan, E. L. (1990). Gender differences in absenteeism. Public Personnel

Management, 19(2), 229-253.

Scott, N. M. (1998). Teacher absenteeism: A growing dilemma in education. Contemporary

Education, 69(2), 95-99.

Skidmore, D. E., (1984). We used these few simple steps to cut teacher absenteeism in half-and

increased productive class time and community support in the bargain. American School

Board Journal, 17(3), 40-41.

92

Spradlin, T., Cierniak, K., Shi, D., & Chen, M., (2012). Attendance and chronic absenteeism in

Indiana: The impact on student achievement. Education Policy Brief, 10(3), 1-11.

Retrieved from http://www.ceep.indiana.edu/projects/PDF/PB_V10N3_2012_EPB.pdf

Thomas, V. (Ed.). (1997). What research says about management style, effectiveness and teacher

morale. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED411569)

Tingle, L. R., Schoeneberger, J., Wang, C., Algozzine, B., & Kerr, E. (2012). An analysis of

teacher absence and student achievement. Education, 133, 367-382.

Trapero, F. G. A., & De Lozada, V. M. (2010). Differences between the relationship of integrity

and leadership styles according to the model of Bernard Bass. Estudios Gerenciales,

26(114), 59-76.

Ubben, G. C., Hughes, L. W., & Norris, C. J. (2001). The principal: Creative leadership for

effective schools (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Allyn and Bacon.

Unicomb, R., Alley, J., Avery, P., & Barak, L. (1992). Teacher absenteeism: A study of short-

term teacher absenteeism in nine Nova Scotia schools which shows that teachers are

absent significantly less than workers in other professions. Education Canada, 32(2), 33-

37.

Webb, K. S. (2008). Creating satisfied employees in Christian higher education: Research on

leadership competencies. Christian Higher Education, 8, 18-31. doi:10.1080

/15363750802171073

Williams, E. (2009). Evaluation of a school systems plan to utilize teachers’ perceptions of

principal leadership to improve student achievement. Challenge: A Journal of Research

on African American Men, 15, 15-32.

93

leadership and the influences of teacher absenteeism/67531/metadc... · leadership style on teacher...

Documents