Students’ Academic Achievement
This indicator is a direct measure of the outcome of the school. The student background section of the TIMSS data is the source of the mathematics and science academic achievement of the students. Only the student’s academic achievement data that correspond to those schools with an authoritative principal and schools with integrative principals are analyzed.
Figure 4 (Appendix) is a histogram that compares the academic achievement in science of the students from schools with integrative principals and school with authoritative principals. The histogram indicates that the mode of both data sets is the same (i.e. “Agree”). However, if the two modes are compared, the academic achievement mode of the students who come from schools with integrative principals exceeds the one of the students from the schools of authoritative principals.
A similar trend is found when the mathematics academic achievement is related to the two principal’s leadership styles. Figure 5 (Appendix) illustrates that the mode of the data set of mathematics achievement from schools with the integrative leadership style exceeds the mode of the mathematics academic achievement from schools with an authoritative leadership style (see “Agree” and “Strongly Agree” responses).
Overall all, both science and mathematics students’ academic achievement data show that schools with integrative principals tend to have better outcomes in term of mathematics and science achievement of the students. This cause and effect relationship could be direct (principal leadership style academic achievement) or/and indirect (principal leadership style school environment academic achievement). Related to the direct relationship, one of the organizational elements that school principals affect is the people element, specifically, students. The principal’s influence on students could be through motivation, modeling positive behaviors, recognition, and providing individualized support. This direct influence requires continued interaction and communication between the principal and the students. In the indirect relationship, the principal’s effects on teachers may be related to an increase of high outcomes of schools. Heck et al. (1990) found that in high producing schools, the principal spends more time in the classroom than their counterparts in low producing schools. They supervise and support teachers as well as coordinate the school’s instructional program.