Chapter 2

Literature Review
Organization of Literature Review
This chapter examines the organizational capacity, in particular the teacher capacity,
leadership and teacher capacity building. In line with that, principals involvement and
the strategies that they employ in building their teachers capacity are also
investigated.
2.0 Introduction
The interest to create an identity for Malaysian education, since independence, has
designed the national curriculum where newer school improvement programs like
KBSR, KBSM, Reading Literacy, Smart Schools, Sekolah Harapan Negara,
PPSMI and Cluster Schools have been strategically planned and implemented
throughout the nation. Sharif and San (2001) observed the main factors that contribute
to the implementation of the KBSR and KBSM Invention Curriculum and concluded
that the teachers are one such critical factor where the teachers attributes, such as
competence and knowledge, as well as commitment and dedication are vital for the
implementation of such programmes in the Malaysian schools. These teachers
attributes guide and mould them in delivering the instructions for student learning in
their schools. Day by day, these attributes build the individual teachers capacity in
order to sustain the needs of the learners and the school. But, these teachers need
some resources not only to build their capacity but also help sustain these attributes of
capacity in the long run and among the resources mentioned school principals take the
number one spot.

2.1 Capacity
Meyer (1992) defines capacity as readiness or staff preparedness to deal with change
while Concoran and Goertz (1995) extended the definition for capacity into new areas
as well by defining capacity as the maximum or optimum amount of production.
Micheal and Sackney (2000) define capacity as a concept of learning community
while Hopkins (2001, 2002) related capacity to internal conditions of a school that
enable all functions of a school. Meanwhile, Newman, King and Youngs (2000)
compliments that it is not only the learning of individual teachers that needs to be
looked at but also other dimensions of organizational capacity of the school.
According to them, there are four components of capacity:
(i) Teacher capacity that includes knowledge, skills and dispositions of
individual teachers,
(ii) A professional learning community working collaboratively to set goals
for student learning; assess student achievement; engage in inquiry and
problem-solving,
(iii) Program coherence that coordinates school programs and focuses on
clear learning goals, and
(iv) Technical resources such as high-quality curriculum, instructional
material, assessment instruments, technology, workspace and physical
environment.

By adding human capital into the first component, Fullan (2000) is convinced that if
the relationships within the schools are continually developing, then the skills of the
individuals within the school can be easily realized. However, Hargreaves (2011)
definition of capacity as the ability of teachers to enhance student learning seems
more fit for this study.

2.2 School Capacity

School capacity includes the knowledge, skills, and dispositions of individual staff
members. In order to advance student achievement, teachers, administrators, and other
staff must be professionally competent in instruction and assessment appropriate to
the curriculum for their particular students, and they must hold high expectations for
all students learning, irrespective of whether the school aims for basic skills or more
authentic intellectual work (King & Newmann, 2001). In any case, this aspect of
capacity definitely refers to the individual human capacity within the school.

Dinham and Crowther (2011) identified three inter-related aspects to school capacity
as shown in Table 2.1 below. The first refers to material features such as students,
staff (teaching, administrative, others), infrastructure and other resources including
finances. Often these material features are dependent on levels of student enrolment
through fees and funding arrangements. The second aspect of school capacity refers to
more intangible features such as school culture and climate, staff cohesion and
motivation, distributed leadership capacity, principal effectiveness, professional
learning, corporate memory, pedagogical approaches and effectiveness and teacher
quality. Effective leaders seek to increase both material and intangible capacity
through their decisions, strategies and actions. The third aspect refers to wider
resourcing and support for schools and education at systemic, state, national and even
international levels (e.g. OECD).

Table 2.1:

Inter-related aspects of school capacity

School capacity

Material

Culture & climate

Aspects

Students,
Staff, and
Infrastructure

Staff coherence,
motivation, distributed
leadership, strategies
and actions

Resourcing &
support
Systematic, state,
national and
international

In each of the three aspects mentioned above, it is not unusual to see a combination of
carrots and sticks used in an effort to lift performance and build capacity in
education.

Hargreaves (2001, 2003a, 2003b) also simplifies organizational capacity into the
number of concepts (resources) and the relationship (between these concepts to
demonstrate how leaders build capacity). In addition to the obvious importance of
material capital (financial and physical resources), he confirms that a schools
organizational capacity is organized into three subsidiary forms of capital, namely,
intellectual, social and organizational capital.

According to Stewart (1997, 2001), intellectual capital includes what is often called
human capital, and consists of the totality of the knowledge, skills, competences and
expertise of the schools members (students as well as staff) as well as the knowledge
and skills of others (parents, governors, partners, etc.) that might be tapped to support
the schools internal intellectual capital.

Social capital, has two sides: one is the degree of trust among members of the school
and between them and any external people and the other is the extent to which the
norm of reciprocity exist between those in trusted relationships. Trust and reciprocity
combine in social capital to bind people into networks of various kinds (Bryk and
Schneider, 2002; Tschannen-Moran, 2004; Kochanek, 2005).

While defining the organizational capacity as those resources and processes that bear
directly or indirectly on what happens in classrooms, Hargreaves advocates that
organizational capacity can be increased, developed or built, mainly by action taken
by those with responsibility for the schools management and strategic leadership, that
is, the ability to provide the direction and motivation for the organizations members
lies with the leadership of the organization. With improved organizational capital,
most school leaders are able to use their enhanced skills to mobilize and even to
increase the organizations intellectual and social capital to support the innovation
needed to create and embed the new practices in teaching and learning on which
improved student performance rests (Hargreaves, 2003a).

However, Hargreaves, (2011) reveals that more pressure is being given towards
improving the quality of education outputs, mainly in terms of student performances
in recent years. Hence, the focus is on improving the quality of teachers towards
student improvement and performance.

It is this improvement process towards

upgrading the quality of teachers that Hargreaves (2001, 2003) defines as teacher

capacity building for schools.

2.3 Teacher Capacity

In all educational organizations, teachers are directly involved with students.
When teachers received professional-development opportunities targeted specifically
to their teaching needs, and practiced what they have learned, they were very likely to
improve student performance on all measures significantly (Denson, 2003).

Therefore, the main discussions of capacity are often directed towards what teachers
need to acquire and be able to utilize. But then we should always take heed of the
nature of teacher capacity: being multidimensional and always evolving. Early
investigations about knowledge base for teaching had mentioned about propositional
knowledge, procedural knowledge and skills. Meanwhile, research on staff
development dealt with the content learning in workshops and the methods of skills
training (Joyce and Showers, 1983). More recently, scholars have broadened their
attention to the other areas of teacher capacity. For the purpose of this research,
definition of teacher capacity by ODay, Goertz, and Floden (1995) that comprises
four dimensions, namely, knowledge, skills, dispositions, and views of self is being
referred to.
According to ODay et al. (1995), teacher capacity dimensions are
interdependent and interactive. When teachers display a strong commitment to
improve student learning, then there is a sincere search for new knowledge and skills
from the teachers thus increasing their capacity. In other words, changes along one

dimension leads to changes in the other dimensions.

2.3.1 The Knowledge Dimension

Knowledge refers to the ability of teachers to assist students learning which is much
dependent on the teachers' own knowledge base. Theorists have further divided it as
the required knowledge of the subject matter, knowledge of curriculum, knowledge
about students, and knowledge about general and subject-specific pedagogy (ODay
et al.,1995). Pedagogical content knowledge, on the other hand, identifies the
distinctive bodies of knowledge for teaching. It represents the blending of content and
pedagogy into an understanding of how particular topics, problems or issues are
organized, represented, and adapted to the diverse interests and abilities of learners,
and presented for instruction. Pedagogical content knowledge is the category most
likely to distinguish the understanding of the content specialist from that of the
pedagogue (Shulman, 1987). Teachers with effective pedagogical content knowledge
know the relevant disciplinary standards, and know how to teach in ways that
facilitate student learning of the standards. Indeed, effective pedagogical content
knowledge requires teachers to know how to teach the content of their subject in ways
that can easily facilitate student learning (Ballantyne, Sanderman, & Levy, 2008).

In addition to strong subject matter knowledge, Darling-Hammond, and Bransford

(2005), acknowledge that all teachers should have a basic understanding of how people
learn and develop, and how children acquire that learning. Further teaching professionals

must be able to apply that knowledge in developing curriculum that attends to students
needs, the demands of the content, and the social purposes of education that includes
teaching specific subject matter to diverse students, in managing the classroom, assessing
student performance, and using technology in the classroom.

Research has also documented the influence of such knowledge on instructional

practice, including both teachers' explicit propositional knowledge and the more
implicit understandings and beliefs they have developed in their experience as
learners and teachers. Recent studies have also shown that the more complex thinking
and problem solving abilities set forth in the new student standards require teachers to
have a deeper and more flexible knowledge base than is either required of basic skills
approaches or developed in teachers' undergraduate, pre-service, or in-service
education (ODay et al., 1995).

2.3.2 The Skills Dimension

Knowledge of what and how to teach need to be combined with the skills to
teach. Brophy and Good (1986) and Rosenshine (1987) stated that early research on
both generic and holistic teaching strategies revealed about closer relationships
between teachers' pedagogical skills and student learning while Newmann, Marks,
and Gamoran (1995) state that researchers were beginning to identify links between
the changes in pedagogy sought by the reforms and students' performance on the more
complex problems and analytical tasks recently.

2.3.3 The Dispositions Dimension

While there is a common understanding that teachers dispositions involve teachers'
attitudes toward the subject matter, attitudes toward students, expectations for student
achievement, and beliefs about sources of student success, Jacobson (2011) includes
passion, persistence, and commitment within the dispositions of the individual
teacher. According to Lee and Oxelson (2006), teacher attitudes are more strongly
influenced by training rather than by other factors such as length of experience.

However, the most often mentioned key components that evolved during interviews
with teachers, according to ODay et al. (1995), seem to be the teachers attitudes
toward change and commitment to student learning. This component is particularly
addressed as the reform goals of high performance for all students (Katz and Raths,
1986). Having the disposition to meet new standards for student learning facilitates
necessary changes in practice, in addition to knowledge and skills (National Center
for Research on Teacher Education, 1988).

2.3.4 The Views of Self

Teachers' views of self is connected to the capacity to teach in different ways and
making attempts to change their practices. It is also connected to their beliefs about
their role in classroom activity, and to the persona they adopt in the classroom.
Teachers' views of themselves as learners, including what, where, and how they will
learn are also important in identifying views of self (ODay et al., 1995). Indeed

teachers beliefs about their self-efficacy has already been identified as one of the
most important variables that determines teachers performance and effectiveness in
schools. Further researches on teachers beliefs about their self-efficacy indicate that
self-efficacy is closely related to student achievement (Temel, Ferudun, Ali Cagatay,
& Hasan, 2012).

2.4 Teacher Capacity Building

As the teacher's role becomes more and more challenging in this modern era,
the challenges upon teachers and the capacity with which they can perform
excellently not only depends on school principals wise thinking but also adds
more demand for the principals involvement and their engagement to build
their teachers capacity for better student learning. Knowing that the
accomplishment of school aims and objectives depend very much on teachers
as the prime movers, these teachers need to be equipped with the relevant
knowledge, skills, dispositions, and views of self. This big responsibility for
the principals may require them to exercise their role as instructional leaders.
Effective school leaders have always been rated as those who emphasize the
importance of instructional leadership. Instructional leadership is therefore a
sine qua non to teacher capacity building. The principal, therefore, should
accept teacher capacity building as an enormous opportunity for them to
engage into fulfilling many of the educational demands. Hence his/her role as
organization manager/administrator focusing largely on technical aspects needs

a paradigm shift towards greater focus on human development aspects

involving teacher capacity as instructional leader (Omar, Kuan, Kamaruzaman,
Marinah, & Jamal, 2011).

Though small and large qualitative and quantitative studies and reviews have
validated existing initiatives of capacity building literature, as claimed by
Cohen (1998) and Desimon et al., (2002), the best practices in capacity
building have been discussed and reported by Fullan (2010), Garet et al.,
(2001), and Wenglinsky (2002). Hattie (2009) even claims that meta-analyses
of effects of capacity building have shown compelling findings of its impact on
teacher learning and student achievement.

Among all other dimensions of organizational capacity of the school, teacher

capacity is the most important internal condition that needs to be advanced for
better student learning in schools if principals focus is centered on student
learning. When school leaders show high involvement in school improvement
activities they are more committed to lead the learning in schools. Therefore,
school leaders high involvement in teacher capacity building will make leaders
as well as the teachers more committed to improvement and sustainability of
student learning (Fullan & Miles, 1992). This involvement helps leaders to
change from an anxious and uncertainty state to stabilization and coherence in
all their efforts towards building the school capacity including that of the
teachers in their schools.

Contemporary researches on School Improvement have been focusing on the

concepts of capacity (NCSL 2001). There is also a growing source of evidence
within the school improvement area which heads towards the importance of
teacher capacity building as a means of sustaining school improvement (Fullan,
2001; Hopkins & Jackson, 2002; Mitchell & Sackney, 2000). Building teacher
knowledge and skills, in other words, building teachers capacity has been one
of the four major capacity-building strategies observed in 22 districts in
California, Colorado, Florida, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, and
Texas over a two-year period. The other three strategies include: interpreting
and using data; aligning curriculum and instruction; and targeting interventions
on low-performing students and/or schools. Although these four strategies were
found to be prevalent in just about any district, some school leaders embrace
these activities in a more comprehensive way and use them as major
mechanisms for enacting improvement (Massell, 2000).

There is strong evidence in the research of the positive impact of teacher

capacity-building on student achievement. Teachers who were offered highquality professional development used the teaching methods that they were
taught to lead to higher achievement gains in selected schools (DarlingHammond, 1999). Further, in a comparative analysis of highly successful
schools with lower achieving schools, researchers found that the lower

achieving schools had limited teacher capacity building initiatives . Therefore

teacher capacity building needs to be looked at more seriously as it can affect
student learning and achievement. Further, increase in teacher capacity will
lead to improvements in student learning in schools. But then the need to build
teacher capacity lies in the hands of the principals (King & Newmann, 2001).

Conceptual Framework of the Study

MacBeath, (1988) and Harris, (2002) have found in their studies of effective
leadership, that leaders provide guidance by involving themselves within the school
and among people where individuals feel confident in their own capacity, in the
capacity of their colleagues and to promote continuous professional development.
This form of professional development gives much help in building the internal
conditions of teacher capacity. When professional work is not focused on the internal
conditions of the school, student learning will not improve. Therefore, these
supporting conditions need to be given priority as similar as the curriculum or other
priorities the school has itself (Hopkins, 2002).

We acknowledge that the capacity to produce worthwhile and substantial student

learning is a function of the interaction among these elements, and not the sole
province of any single one, such as teachers knowledge and skill, or curriculum. At
the same time, the teachers intellectual and personal resources not only influence
their instructional interactions, they also shape how the teachers apprehend, interpret,

and respond to materials and students. There is considerable evidence that teachers
vary in their ability to notice, interpret, and adapt to differences among students.
Important teacher resources in this connection include their conceptions of
knowledge, understanding of content, and flexibility of understanding; acquaintance
with students knowledge and ability to relate to, interact with, and learn about
students; and their repertoire of means to represent and extend knowledge, and to
establish classroom environments. All these resources mediate how teachers shape the
quality of instruction. Consequently, teachers opportunities to develop and extend
their knowledge and capabilities can considerably affect the quality of their
instruction that affects student learning and achievement as shown in Figure 2.1
below.

Principals
Involvement

BUILDING TEACHER
CAPACITY

Knowledge
Skills
Dispositions
Views of Self

Instructional
Quality

Student
Learning/
Achievement

Principals
Strategies

Figure 2.1: Conceptual Framework for Teacher Capacity Building

adapted from Fred Newmanns (2000) Research

However, an individual teachers capacity to accomplish the school goals and any
new reform activities depends not only on his/her personal capacity, but even more
importantly on the resources present within the context where they teach (ODay,

Goertz, & Floden, 1995). Hence, at the school level, the appropriate capacity for
teachers in relation to the educational changes looked upon not only depends on the
teachers ability to form a community of practice but also on leadership that in large
part determines the professional culture of the school. In line with that comes the
argument of Smylie, Miretzky, and Konkol (2004) that teacher development is
fundamentally a problem and function of the school organization, which has to
manage teachers individually and collectively as human resources.

In order for the teachers to provide quality instruction for better student learning and
achievement, it is imperative that they have the necessary resources and support for
capacity building (knowledge, skills, dispositions, and views of self) within their
organization. Principals who are focused on student achievement and learning
continually build their teachers capacity. As instructional leaders in their schools,
these principals through their involvement may have been executing many different
strategies in building their teachers capacity. It is therefore the purpose of this study
to investigate and understand their involvement and the various strategies that they
employ for teacher capacity building in their schools.

2.5 Leadership and Teacher Capacity Building

Four sets of leadership qualities and practices in different contexts have been
identified in literature: building vision and setting directions; understanding and

developing people; redesigning the organisation; and managing the teaching and
learning programme. Leaders do not seem to do all these things all the time and if
they do, they go about doing each set of practices in ways that certainly vary by
context (Leithwood, Harris, & Hopkins, 2008). In the practice of understanding and
developing people, it is important that leadership improves staff performance that
includes staff members motivations, commitments, capacities (skills and knowledge)
and the conditions in which they work. Considerable emphasis on school leaders
contributions to building staff capacity, has already been reflected in their role as
instructional leaders in many countries.
In their report on seven strong claims about successful school
leadership, Leithwood et al., (2008), highlighted that when the school
leaders enacted the core leadership practices, the greater was their
influence on teachers capacities, motivation and beliefs regarding
the supportiveness of their working conditions which in turn had a
significant influence on classroom practices and strong effects of
leadership

practices

on

teachers

emotion

can

shape

their

motivations (levels of commitment, sense of efficacy, morale, job

satisfaction, stress and the like) and subsequently the effects on
their pupils learning.

While there is a strong agreement between studies that teacher learning is crucial for
improving instructional practices, and the available evidence points to important

conditions associated with school organization, the task, and the individual, school
organizational conditions beginning from transformational leadership practices,
participative decision-making, teaming, teacher collaboration, an open and trustful
climate, cultures which value shared responsibilities and values, can foster this
teacher learning in schools and hence their overall capacity .

Fullan (2010a) suggests that capacity building concerns competencies, resources and
motivation. Individuals and groups are high in capacity if they possess and continue to
develop the knowledge and skills and committed to putting the energy to get
important things done collectively and continuously. In essence, capacity building
implies that people take the opportunity to do things differently, to learn new skills
and to generate more effective practice. In order to make a performance difference for
the entire school, capacity building must be systemic, argues Sharrat and Fullan
(2009). They also note that capacity building is a highly complex, dynamic,
knowledge-building process, intended to lead to increased student achievement in
every school. To achieve that goal, consideration must be given to the approaches that
will result in systemic capacity building.

In the United States, schools had recognized the importance of teacher capacity
building as a lever of school improvement, and were sharing good practice as a matter
of routine. Teacher capacity building is also explicitly linked to targets which are set
in consultation with staff and other stakeholders. Emphasis has been put on the

education departments working closely with school boards, building capacity by

creating leadership teams at all levels and creating more professional learning
opportunities for educators (NCSL, 2006).

As we talk more and more of individual teachers capacity to accomplish the

prescribed goals, we tend to forget that the leadership that takes responsibility and
provide the necessary and relevant support for TCB requires a strong leadership
capacity. Research in Hong Kong and North America, has shown that the influence of
principals leadership capacity on teachers sense of efficacy is shown to be significant
(Albright & Masturah, 2006). As advocated by Smylie, Miretzky, and Konkol (2004),
teacher development is fundamentally a function of school organization, and therefore
school leadership has to build their teachers capacity individually and collectively to
ensure that there exist a continuous and dynamic internal human resource.

In formal organization such as school, the leadership is in a position to determine the

capacity of its teachers to a considerable degree. The principals involvement in
building their teachers capacity affect the attitude, climate, progress, co-operation and
direction of efforts of the school. A schools mission and vision can be achieved by
principals involvement in the school matters and many effective leaders fail to build
their school capacity because these leaders fail to involve themselves seriously in
TCB (Farahbakhsh 2007).

Indeed, educational leadership has been called the bridge that can bring together the
many different reform efforts in teaching and learning. Teachers are on the front lines
of teaching and learning, close to the children. But principals at the school level, are
uniquely positioned to provide a climate of high expectations, a clear vision for better
teaching and learning, and the means for everyone in the system to realize the vision.

Patterson (2001) complimented that when the principal directs task of teachers
holding high expectations with aligned curriculum then the teachers would work
cooperatively and this makes the school an effective institution. Smith and Andrews
(1989) further advocated that when principals function as instructional leaders, they
were able to define the school mission, promote positive learning environment,
observe and give feedback to teachers, manage curriculum and instruction, and assess
the instructional program. It is the principal with an instructional leadership position
that facilitates teacher growth and not one with the traditional leadership (Marks &
Printy, 2003).
To ensure teachers implement effective teaching and learning, Hallinger (2005)
emphasized that, principals are required to be deeply engaged in the school
instructional programs. Principals who take the role of instructional leader seriously,
will focus their efforts toward improving teaching and learning (Jenkins, 2009). The
role of principal as more an administrator in many schools are attributed to lack of
training for the principals, time constraint, too much paper work and community
perception towards them (Fullan, 1991). Generally, principals do not see themselves

as instructional leaders and many are of the belief that anything that has to do with
teaching and learning is best assigned to teachers (Phillips, 2003). The latest study by
Grigsby et al. (2010) indicated that the level of change in instructional leadership
experiences has not been fully achieved even though there has been an increase in the
accountability for principals.
Different definitions of instructional leadership had been given and could be found in
the latest literature. Originally, (1980s) instructional leadership involved traditional
tasks such as setting clear goals, allocating resources to instruction, managing the
curriculum, monitoring lesson plans, and evaluating teachers (Lashway, 2000). Today
instructional leadership includes much deeper involvement in the "core technology"
of teaching and learning, carries more sophisticated views of professional
development, and emphasizes the use of data to make decisions (Deborah, 2002). The
National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESPS) frames instructional
leadership in term of "leading learning communities". In NAESPS's view, an
instructional leader has six roles: making student and adult learning the priority;
setting high expectation for performance; gearing content and instruction to standard;
creating culture of continuous learning for adult; using multiple sources of data to
access learning; and activating the community's support for school success (National
Association of Elementary School Principals, 2001). In addition, there are several
specific behavior of instructional leadership such as making suggestions, giving
feedback, modeling effective instruction, soliciting opinion, supporting collaboration,
providing professional development opportunities, and giving praise for effective

teaching. In short, deep appreciation and wide practice of instructional leadership can
enable principals to successfully develop teacher capacity in aspects of teaching and
learning.
Recent research initiatives, and implications for leadership development have
recognized some basic claim that the central task for leadership is to help improve
employee performance, and such performance is a function of employees beliefs,
values, motivations, skills and knowledge and the conditions in which they work.
Considerable evidence based on the recent syntheses, collected from both school and
non-school contexts consistently insist on four sets of leadership qualities and
practices: building vision and setting directions; understanding and developing
people; redesigning the organisation; and managing the teaching and learning
programme. It is through the lens of understanding and developing people, the
principals can make a significant contribution to build their teachers motivation, and
dispositions (commitment, capacity and resilience) other than knowledge and skills
that teachers and other staff need in order to accomplish organisational goals
(Leithwood, Harris, & Hopkins, 2008).

Within schools, Harris (2010) says that the social exchange theory of leadership still
prevails where leaders provide services to a group in exchange for the groups
approval or compliance with the leaders demands. She continues that the
maintenance of the leaders power and authority rests on his or her continuing ability
to fulfill follower obligations. On the other hand when leaders are seen as

manipulators using resource distribution, administrative assignments, appointments,

and advancement opportunities as rewards, a majority of them also used control
tactics associated with materials, resources, work factors within and outside the
classroom, and opportunities to gain teacher input. These tactics substantially affected
the teachers morale. Furthermore, teacher involvement in school-wide activities
significantly decreased. Teachers low self-esteem was attributed to the fact that the
principal made them feel as if their thoughts and opinions were not valid or important.
As a result, teachers felt anger, depression, and anxiety, which hindered their input
and leadership (Blas, ).
Principals are also held more accountable for their student learning. They are being
called on to lead in the redesign of their schools and school systems. In an outcomebased and accountability driven era, principals have to lead their schools in the
rethinking of goals, priorities, finances, staffing, curriculum, pedagogies, learning
resources, assessment methods, technology, and use of time and space. They have to
recruit and retain top staff members and educate newcomers and veterans alike to
understand and become comfortable with an education system undergoing dramatic
and continuing change (Levine, 2005). As Glatthorn (2000) puts it, principals can best
discharge their leadership role if only they develop a deep and broad knowledge base
(with respect to curriculum).
In Hong Kong, research has shown that the influence of principals leadership
behaviors on teachers sense of efficacy is shown to be significant (Hipp, 1997; Yu,

Leithwood, & Jantzi, 2002). Lines of communication between them need to remain
open.

Without

such

close

interdependence

between

individual

and

organizational/school capacities, an all-encompassing capacity may be limited in its

tendency to locate the problem within the individual. In the U.S. these are emerging
as the central elements of state and national policies to build teacher quality (National
Commission on Teaching and Americas Future, 1997; Wilson, 2002; Berry, 2002;
Meadows and Knapp, 2002). Alternatively, in developing countries there are
conceptual and contextual problems inhibiting teachers dispositions towards capacity
for development, revealed as a gap between theory and practices in teacher education
(Mohammad, 2004).

Research in the area of school leadership advocates that principals leadership is the
main factor of school success and greater gains in student academic achievement in
schools with strong principal leadership have been reported (Andrew & Soder, 1987;
Barth, 1990). They said that the school principal is critical in ensuring academic
achievement, especially for low income students.

According to Barth (1990), the principal is the most important reason why teachers
grow or are stifled on the job and staff development was found to be a key to success.
Successful principals empowered their staff through collaboration and shared
leadership. They also encouraged risk taking and problem solving (Davenport &
Anderson, 2002).

Bell (2001), in a report from a symposium of High-Performing, High-Poverty Schools

in Sacramento, California in December 2000 discussed reasons for the high
performances of the schools. A dialogue between nationally known researchers, such
as Joyce Epstein from Johns Hopkins University and Patricia Davenport from the
American Productivity and Quality Center, and the school participants concluded the
session with lessons learned for future work. In addition to restating the value of
strong principal leadership, they said, effective site leadership also meant shared
leadership. They also said this shared leadership was an integral part of how schools
conducted business. The staff could be trusted to make academic and instructional
decisions.

Among the claims that contributed to student learning, successful school leadership
that enacts practices to promote school quality, equity and social justice through
building powerful forms of teaching and learning; creating strong communities in
school; nurturing the development of educational cultures in families; expanding the
amount of students social capital valued by the schools remains the most important
one (Leithwood and Riehl, 2003). However, one can conclude here that it is
particularly important that the school principals have the leadership capacity to focus
on issues of leadership including building the capacity for teachers so as to instill
confidence that motivates teachers into a common vision of the future or to achieve

their common objectives in schools, without forgetting special attention on the softer
aspects of capacity development (Ahmed & Hanson, 2011).

Adam and Kranot (2006) believe that positive job experiences can promote teachers
satisfaction on the job which is a significant factor in explaining their perceived
capacity. Further they emphasize that it is transformational leadership that is more
likely to increase teachers on-the-job challenge and support their initiatives and, in so
doing, increase their job satisfaction. In other words, they contribute it to the
transformational leadership style for the shaping of these experiences.

2.6 Leadership and Involvement

The principals involvement is instrumental in setting the tone of the school,
helping to decide on instructional strategies, organizing and distributing the schools
resources. Principals show their direct involvement with the innovation and in their
facilitation of teacher interaction and other key sub process that happen in schools
(Hord, 1987). In one of his major study conducted, while looking at the reading
achievement in four instructionally effective inner-city elementary schools, Weber
(1971) found that common to the four schools was strong leadership embodied in the
principals involvement.

Principals high involvement, seen in his personal commitment to change, could make
other members in a school to be highly involved. This eventually can influence the

families, students, and community members to be highly involved. This change

process creates a positive working relationship among teachers and the principal.

In successful schools there is a culture that shows everyone is focused around

learning. Connell (1999) described these schools as where everyone was involved in
the work of the school. In her study of high performing and high poverty schools, she
found that a staff focused on engagement in the school is an important aspect of
school success. She elaborated, The primary thing is for the principal to be engaged
in his school. There is a not a high achieving school where the staff isnt serious about
their work and where theyre not focused. You can sense that people in a building are
moving in the same direction. Everybody knows their job and why theyre there, even
the lunch-room aide. In low achieving schools, everyone is an island unto
themselves. (p. 17). In summary by showing high involvement, the leader is able to
influence the mission of the school and create a culture of learning and success for all
students.
Lavine and Lezotte (1990) identified seven outstanding characteristics in unusually
effective schools. They are productive school climate and culture, focus on student
acquisition of central learning skills, appropriate monitoring of student progress,
outstanding

leadership,

salient

parent

involvement,

effective

instructional

arrangements and implementation and high operationalised expectations and

requirements for students. Among those seven outstanding characteristics all seven
characteristics demonstrated the need for leadership involvement.

Yet, the pertinent involvement of leadership is highly expected in outstanding

leadership where a leader needs to involve in frequent and personal monitoring of
school activities and sense making; high expenditure of time and energy for school
improvement actions and teacher support; acquisition of resources; superior
leadership and availability and effective utilization of instructional support personnel.
Therefore the need for personal involvement which consumes high expenditure of
leaders time as well as energy for school improvement actions is needed to support
the teachers.
In successful schools, principals are not fixtures in the front office. They show high
involvement in the instructional program of the school (Lomotey, 1989; Whitaker,
1997). They know what is going on instructionally because they are visible in every
classroom. They make frequent classroom visitations, most visiting daily (Davenport
& Anderson, 2002; Papalewis & Fortune, 2002; Whitaker, 1997).

2.6.1 Level of Involvement

Level of involvement is a measure of how personally and emotionally an individual is
involved in an activity or process relevant to him/her (Grunig & Hunt, 1984).
Involvement increases the likelihood of individuals attending to and comprehending
messages (Pavlik, 1988). In general, persons with high involvement analyze issues
more often, prefer messages that contain more and better arguments (Heath, Liao, &

Douglas, 1995; Petty & Cacioppo, 1981, 1986), and attain greater knowledge levels
(Chaffee & Roser, 1986; Engelberg, Flora, & Nass, 1995).
2.6.2 High Involvement
High involvement places substantial demands on all participants in terms of their
ability to solve problems, contribute to group discussions, and perform a wide array of
technical work-related activities that contribute to the organizations basic
effectiveness (Lawler, 1992, p. 53). Further, high involvement and collaboration leads
to much patience, perseverance, and learning, in addition to a moral commitment to
group decision-making.

Lawler (1992) studied the organizational and performance characteristics of

management systems and found that regardless of area, the best performing groups
leaned toward the participative end of his scale, which extended across a continuum
from exploitive-authoritative to participative practices. He found that the more
participative the group, the more successful it was. Characteristics such as group
involvement, mutual trust, information sharing, high degrees of teamwork, and group
decision-making were evident in the most successful groups he studied. Lawler (1992,
1986) proposed that high involvement or participative organizations can be developed
and that choices about information, power, knowledge, and rewards are critical. He
equates involvement for participation, in his earlier works.

The principal is in an excellent position to initiate, encourage, or block any change or

reform that comes along. It is no longer desirable for principals to simply act as
middle managers who take someone elses plans and ensure compliance by the
school faculty and staff (Barth, 1990). Many school boards and superintendents
encourage principals to take on the responsibilities of school improvement, initiating
change, and empowering teachers by showing greater involvement.

Perhaps one of the most crucial factors in the development of high involvement in a
school is the principals relationship with teachers, staff, and other stakeholders. Barth
(1990) proposed that there is no relationship in the school that has a greater effect on
life within the school than the teacher-principal relationship. He contended that if the
teacher-principal relationship is helpful, trusting, and supportive, then relationships
with other stakeholders would be the same. There are other researchers who have also
found the relationship between teachers and their principals to be extremely
significant. Fullan (1991) found that the principal was the key to the continuous
professional development of teachers. He stated, Probably the most powerful
potential source of help or hindrance to the teacher is the school principal (Fullan, p.
143).

The professional development of teachers can be greatly enhanced by a supportive

principal. Leithwood (1992) summarized three areas of teacher development that the
principal can influence: the development of professional expertise, psychological
development, and career-cycle development (p. 87). Leithwood explained that the

contemporary view of teaching is [teaching] is a non-routine activity drawing on a

reliable body of technical knowledge and conducted in collaboration with other
professional colleagues (p. 100). Instead, the development of the teacher as a whole
person should be considered. The principal is the lead teacher who guides the
school to create a feeling of community (Boyer, 1995). Developing attitudes,
character, morale, self-esteem, and a sense of belonging in teachers, as well as in
students, can be just as important as developing knowledge and skills.

Principals must be willing to make the personal changes necessary to bring their
behavior into line with the vision of high involvement which is being developed. In
other words, they must be consistently highly involved and must be willing to become
one of the group, an equal partner with teachers and staff members, walking the talk.
Actions speak louder than words. Principals must step out of the limelight and into the
trenches. Principals must model what all relationships will be and make conscious
efforts to develop positive, trusting relationships throughout the school. It is important
that the teachers trust each other as well as trust the principal.

In brief, principals must be a source of recognition and encouragement, giving credit

where due, investing in the development of teachers, always looking for opportunities
to promote any and all members of the school family, in other words, become the
schools change master.

When we talk about the many things that principals must do to help the teachers grow,
the school reach a certain standard, one question seems to be hitting hard in our mind.
Are there any payoffs to these leaders in being highly involved? What makes them
continue to be engaged for better student learning? Ann Howard (1997) clarifies that
leaders with high involvement naturally accrue the following positive outcomes that
are considered payoffs to themselves. Through their high involvement these leaders
gain greater commitment to the organization, more job satisfaction, more clarity about
what they were supposed to do, and relief from routine work and decision making,
although greater effort was needed for more challenging roles such as creating a
vision, inspiring others, or forming cross-organizational partnerships. In addition,
other payoffs to the organization come in the form of quality output, other outcomes,
and even more projected improvement.

2.7 Strategies for Teacher Capacity Building

Leithwood, Day, Sammons, Harris and Hopkins (2006) explain that principals in
schools have great opportunity to influence their teachers towards achieving their
aims in school improvements. Although the effects of school leadership on students
are mostly indirect but the effects through their actions are great among teachers both
direct and indirect. Usually, the leaders use some forms of actions which are called
strategies.

Strategy, the word derived from Greek, means a plan of action designed to achieve
particular aim, goal or vision. It is concerned with how different engagements are
linked in order to attain success. There are many strategies identified and utilized by
principals for school improvement. The principal applies these strategies to improve
their teachers capacity for school improvements which enables teachers to teach
collectively, purposefully in order to achieve the organizational needs. Implicit in this
framework of strategies, the principal is actually allowing teachers to develop
professionally, while the school becomes a dynamic setting for teaching and learning.
In other words, the principal is building the teachers capacity through these powerful
strategies known in literature.
2.7.1 Supervision
In the education and organizational theory literature, supervision is the process of
directing or guiding people to accomplish the goals of the organization in which they
work (Daresh, 1989), the ultimate objective of supervision is offering the agencys
service to the consumer in the most efficient and effective manner possible (Kadushin,
1985). Effective supervision, Mentoring, and Coaching accomplishes three broad
purposes: 1) quality control in which the supervisor is responsible for monitoring
employee performance; 2) personnel development in which the supervisor is
responsible for helping practitioners rene their skills and elaborate both their
discipline-specic knowledge and their technical competencies; and 3) promoting
commitment to the eld and position, which, in turn, enhances motivation

(Sergiovanni, 1991).
Glatthorn (

) defines supervision as a set of comprehensive services provided and

process used to help teachers facilitate their own professional development to lead
improved instruction. Pajak (

) reviews supervision into categories such as

communication, staff development, instructional program, planning and change,

motivating and organizing, observation and conferencing, curriculum, problem
solving and decision making, service to teachers, personal development, community
relations and research and program evaluation. These twelve dimensions represent the
complex duties of instructional leaders which principals employ in this strategy as
instructional supervision.
2.7.2: Role models
The term role modeling refers to an act of continuous social learning. This
takes place when an individual observes someone and learns from him/her. It is a
process that allows teachers to learn new behaviors without the trial and error of doing
things for themselves (Bandura, 1977). The role model principals usually help
facilitate teaching practices in the school so that they can emulate their behaviors in
teaching. The principal observes teaching, spends time in the classroom to know what
is going on and helps teachers with their instructional efforts. Role Model can be
used to share or learn about teaching where it usually occurs through team-teaching
activities in the same school, also described as working together and involving
hands on activity.

2.7.3 Coaching/Mentoring
The strategy, coaching addresses performance in some aspect of an
individual's work or life while mentoring is more often associated with much broader,
holistic development and with career progress of the individual (Clutterbuck, 2008).
Coaching focuses on the interaction with a purpose of enhancing performance, by
providing goals, techniques, practice and feedback. The coach helps the person
increase competence and the probability of success without giving much importance
to the relationship. On the other hand, mentoring achieves its purposes primarily
through building a relationship. The mentor is usually someone higher up in the
organization, someone who has experience and knowledge about whos who,
whats what, and how things get done. It is a formal relationship structured
around the developmental needs of the mentee (Veale & Wachtel 1996).
With the right sense of understanding the strategies of coaching/mentoring and the
related skills, school principals can easily engage themselves as curricular and
pedagogical coaches/mentors. These principals can watch individual teachers
lessons, prepare and give instructional presentations; and speak on one-to-one about
classroom methods. Teachers observe one another regularly and provide feedback in
an internal, critical friends format. In addition to this one-to-one approach, for teacher
capacity building, larger peer-directed efforts are also carried out. Teachers are
encouraged to give presentations to their colleagues on technique projects or subjects
that one may have learned from previous experience. This may even build a
professional community where educators feel more comfortable instituting new

pedagogical approaches in a supportive and collaborative environment.

Through good coaching, principals can dig deep to find out what makes their
teachers heart beat by using a variety of coaching techniques that elicit what gives
individuals meaning and significance and to explore their personal purposes.
Coaching is all about enabling others (Sparrow, 2013). This strategy can be used to
build teachers capacity and at the same time keeps them away from being
undervalued, under-developed or start looking elsewhere for the opportunities and
stimulus they need.
In Malaysia, School Improvement Programme (SIP) by Institut Aminuddin Baki is
suggesting for coaching/mentoring courses to be provided to school leaders in the low
achievement schools to help build the teacher potential and hence student
achievement (Noraini & Hamidon, 2011).

2.7.4

Continuous Learning Opportunities

It is a process whereby an individual teacher and the teacher community in a school

grow together. There seemed to be a shared vision among the community of learners.
The practice of shared vision involves the skills of unearthing shared pictures of the
future that foster genuine commitment and enrollment rather than compliance. It also
involves collaborative efforts in small groups working together within a larger group
of teachers in schools to organize academic, and social accomplishments (Norwood,
2007).

Through collaboration and commitment teachers are empowered to work together and
achieve goals. In this process top-down and bottom-up management styles will help
teachers to share diverse ideas and compromise for one vision and one mission
Principals need to lead all teachers from the center rather than the top whereby the
principal as an instructional leader is changing to one that reflects the principals role
within a community of learners and leaders. In mastering this discipline, leaders learn
the counter-productiveness of trying to dictate a vision, no matter how heartfelt.
2.7.5 Collegial Conversation
A Collegial Conversation is useful for its suggestion of five steps to guide
professional conversations, particularly as a way to get teachers thinking about
making changes to their current teaching practice. The process begins with the teacher
giving a reasonably detailed description of a lesson carried out, what students did, and
how they were assessed. Then colleagues ask clarifying questions, which the teacher
responds to in step three. In step four the colleagues offer feedback and suggestions.
Step five is the teachers opportunity to respond and conclude the session. The
process guides effective sharing, reflection and professional conversations with trust
and openness.

2.7.6 Staff meeting

A staff meeting is a great time to publicly recognize teachers who have gone above
and beyond or modeled the schools values in a particular way. By describing
the teachers good work, a principal can help everyone understand what
matters most to them. Staff meetings are also a good time to share positive
teachers feedback with the team. (Youngwirth, 2012). Several activities
within a staff meeting, as shown below, can fetch far reaching objectives in
building the teachers capacity
(a) Updating the Status of Schools Goals
Principals can discuss how the school is doing in terms of its learning goals. This can
be especially valuable if the goals are tied to a teaching and learning programs. When
different staff members share responsibility for goals, it is also a rich opportunity for
reinforcing accountability and enhancing communication throughout the school.
Principals should also consider discussing schools plan updates on a quarterly basis.
(b) Presenting Mini Case Studies
Principal can invite staff members to present mini case studiesnew things, they
have learned about the teaching profession during the previous week.
(c) Sharing Reports and Presentations
After teachers return from meetings, conferences or other educational events,
principals can use some time in the next staff meeting to share key takeaways. Besides
spreading the knowledge beyond the individual attendee, this gives team members
better opportunities to work on their presentation skills. Inviting an outside speaker to
present at a staff meeting may also be a valuable event.

(d) Discussing Process Improvement

The staff meeting is an excellent forum for addressing ways to improve the schools
instructional processes and procedures. Using tools such as flowcharts and checklists,
the team can take a closer look at daily instructional processes, pinpoint areas for
improvement and discuss possible solutions. From there, principals can decide
together which changes should be made, how those changes can be implemented and
how the resulting process will be evaluated. Assessing a new instructional process
provides yet another opportunity for team members to take an active role in the
schools ongoing development.
By engaging in discussions of this nature, a staff meeting can go above and beyond
operational details, and act as organizational glue, strengthening the schools culture
and keep every teacher focused on a common vision and goals. Principals conduct
closed door discussion in the areas of needed and identified instruction methods.
Schools can also use trainers model for the use of effective instructional practice.
Staff meeting topics are specifically targeted to address teacher burnout such as stress
management, time management, student discipline problems, extra curricular
activities as well as instructional practices.
2.7.7

Table talk
This is a casual conversation about teaching and student learning. Teachers

staff rooms or lunch rooms are used as conveniently as they wish to talk about what
happens in the classroom on the day. Table Talk is a low-pressure way to discuss
subject matters on instruction to strengthen relationships among teachers and to

exercise some professionalism of their work. By organizing these focused table talks,
principal can help participants gain professional knowledge and vocabularies in
different professional areas during this one hour program. Experts agree that people
need broader knowledge to build a good life, and a better career.
In a study on Building Teacher Capacity: Orienting Patterns of Practice to
focus on student learning (any reference), one teacher said,
Because I am enthusiastic and have a good working relationship with my
peers, I have influence. I tell my colleagues that once you try a lesson and have
success, you build your confidence and understanding.
In one school piloting teachers used lunch room table talk to tell their peers
about what was happening in their classrooms: I make it a practice to come down to
lunch and say what fun we just had in math class. Then I tell the teachers there what
we did during the lesson and how the kids responded, said one teacher. As her
principal noted, the tone of conversation in his building had changed. Instead of the
grumbling about this kid or that form, teachers were talking about their practice.
With attention refocused on the reason they were teachers, their sense of commitment
and satisfaction increased.(Any reference for this)
2.7.8 Face to face
This strategy involves teacher leaders who are close to teachers and classroom
management and move refinements along principals. They support the teachers
individually with close care for learning improvement. Teachers would want the
principals to provide information one-on-one or in small group meetings and this

strategy allows for two way communication in its best form. It is also considered by
many as an interesting and effective relationship building technique.

2.7.9

Net working

Networking is beyond the four walls of the classroom and by locating information
from worldwide sources wherever these may be located. The implications for teachers
as they assist their students in collaborating with other learning groups and using
networks to research assignment topics is that they cease to be the main source of
knowledge in the classroom. Instead, teachers roles change from being a sage on the
stage to becoming a guide on the side. Through collaboration and networking,
professional teachers promote democratic learning within the classroom and draw
upon expertise both locally and globally. (A Planning Guide, p. 43)
Yukl ( ) includes networking in his Multiple Linkage model of leadership as one of
eleven critical managerial practices. He describes this practice as Socializing
informally, developing contacts with people who are a source of information and
support, and maintaining contacts through periodic interaction, including visits,
telephone calls, correspondence, and attendance at meetings and social events.
2.7.10 Team building
Team building refers to a wide range of activities, in schools, which is designed for
improving team performance. Team building is pursued via a variety of practices, and
can range from simple bonding exercises to complex simulations and multi-day team
building retreats designed to develop a team usually falling somewhere in between. It

generally sits within the theory and practice of organizational development of school
groups. Team building can also be seen in day-to-day operations of the school
organization and team dynamic can be improved through successful leadership. Team
building is an important factor in any environment, its focus is to specialize in
bringing out the best in a team to ensure self development, positive communication,
leadership skills and the ability to work closely together as a team to problem solve.
A team leader, the principal, is usually goal-oriented to keep the team on track.
He/She must promote a safe environment where members can openly discuss issues.
The principal must build confidence amongst teachers by building and maintaining
trust and offering the teachers responsibilities. A leader should be technically
competent in matters relating to team tasks and goals. It is important for a principal to
set a manageable list of priorities for the team to keep members focused. Bowers
(1991) contends that when the principal was involved more with the personal and
professional welfare of the instructional staff, teacher satisfaction with development
programmes was usually high. Further, the more supportive the principal seemed to
be, the more likely were the teachers to view development as group-based and hence
become a more cohesive staff and individual teachers felt less isolated about their own
roles in development programmes.
2.7.11

Professional membership

Professional membership is usually a membership seeking to further teaching

profession, the interests of individuals engaged in that profession. A group of people

in a teaching profession entrusted with maintaining control or oversight of the

legitimate teaching. This body acts "to safeguard the public interest;" organizations
which "represent the interest of the professional practitioners," and so "act to maintain
their own privileged and powerful position as a controlling body."
Many professional bodies related to teaching profession are involved in the
development and monitoring of professional educational programs, and the updating
of skills, and thus perform professional certification to indicate that a person
possesses qualifications in the subject area. Sometimes membership of a professional
body is synonymous with certification, though not always. Membership of a
professional body, as a legal requirement, can in some professions form the primary
formal basis for gaining entry to and setting up practice within the profession
2.7.12

Professional development

DallAlba and Sandberg (2006) view professional development as a capacity

building strategy. Professional development refers to skills and knowledge
attained for both teachers personal development and career advancement.
Professional development encompasses all types of facilitated learning
opportunities, ranging from college degrees to formal coursework, conferences
and informal learning opportunities situated in teaching practice. It has been
described as intensive and collaborative, ideally incorporating an evaluative
stage. There are a variety of approaches to professional development, including
consultation, coaching, lesson study, mentoring, reflective supervision and

technical assistance.
These programs may be formal, or informal, group or individualized. Individuals may
pursue professional development independently, or programs may be offered by
human resource departments. Professional development on the job may develop or
enhance process skills, sometimes referred to as leadership skills, as well as teaching
skills.
Professional development opportunities in school range from a single workshop to a
day-long academic course, to services offered by a medley of different professional
development providers and varying widely with respect to the philosophy, content,
and format of the learning experiences. Some examples of approaches to professional
development include:

Case Study Method - The case method is a teaching approach that consists in
presenting the teachers with a case, putting them in the role of a decision
maker facing a problem (Hammond 1976) - see also Case method.

Consultation - to assist teachers to clarify and address immediate concerns by

following a systematic problem-solving process.

Coaching - to enhance teacher competencies in a specific skill area by

providing a process of observation, reflection, and action.

Communities of Practice - to improve professional practice by engaging in

shared inquiry and learning with other teachers who have a common goal

Lesson Study - to solve practical dilemmas related to intervention or

instruction through participation with other professionals in systematically
examining practice

Mentoring - to promote an individuals awareness and refinement of his or her

own professional development by providing and recommending structured
opportunities for reflection and observation

Reflective Supervision - to support, develop, and ultimately evaluate the

performance of teachers through a process of inquiry that encourages their
understanding and articulation of the rationale for their own practices

Technical Assistance - to assist teachers and the organization to improve by

offering resources and information, supporting networking and change efforts.

On one hand, researchers content that professional development for teachers is often
recommended as a strategy for school improvement. On the other, they stress that in
order for professional development to succeed, it should concentrate on instruction
and student outcomes in teachers specific schools; provide opportunities for collegial
inquiry, help, and feedback; and connect teachers to external expertise while also
respecting teachers discretion and creativity (Newmann, King, & Youngs, 2001).
Similar criticisms regarding professional development were found in the writings of
Massell (2000) which found professional development being practised as the traditional
one-shot workshop/staff training that lacks sustained follow-up support for teachers to
apply new ideas in their classrooms. Professional development enhances teacher

capacity by strengthening the knowledge and skills in several key areas by:
introducing a differentiated unit structure to teacher planning; emphasizing
student-centered classroom instruction; and encouraging the use of systematic
formative assessments and differentiated summative assessments.

2.7.13

Teachers teacher

Teachers teachers are teacher consultants who organize avenues for teachers with
difficulties in teaching and learning and to guide those teachers to face challenges.
These teacher consultants outline the different ways that these teachers can share
expertise in staff meetings, team teaching, improvement program planning,
supervising and evaluation. They help to put this information on a website, along with
a link to information about the teacher consultants, their areas of expertise, and the
areas that they are interested in developing. Each teacher consultant plans to set up set
up meetings with interested teachers to explore their area of difficulty and involve in
improvement strategies.
2.7.14

Staffing -mix

This is a strategy where principals manage curriculum leaders and teachers resources
in teaching which involves organizing groups of teachers with different professional
backgrounds, skills, grades, qualifications, expertise and experience in order to
achieve optimal student learning. This distinctive feature of educational care has
become more prominent during recent decades with the emergence of numerous new
professions, specialties and occupations. In a school a principal organizes the
teachers expertise to meet in groups to improve student learning. This

conceptualization focuses on the proportion of highly qualified staff members in the

overall pool of professional resources.
2.7.15 Teacher Leader

Teacher leadership has been characterized as one in which teachers develop

expertise by working collaboratively. It can bring beneficial effects on school
improvement, school and teacher effectiveness and teacher motivation and
retention, only if the right conditions are in place in order for teacher leadership
to flourish (Muijs & Harris, 2003). In claiming the importance of teachers
commitment to change for school improvement, Gurcharan Singh (2012),
regards teacher leadership as an important strategy that allows teacher leaders
to share their understanding and develop teacher commitments for meaningful
change in improving schools.

Though there seem to be many activities in which teacher

leaders engage (Lord and Miller, 2002; Silva et al., 2000), some
of them include being a coach or consultant to individual
teachers, managing the curriculum, serving as department
chair, developing curriculum or materials, mentoring new
teachers, coordinating professional development, facilitating
action research, managing the distribution of materials needed
for teaching, and participating in decision making (Harris &
Muijs, 2005).

Teacher leaders may engage in any of these activities, but they

often engage in the latter by helping their colleagues improve
their practice. These practice-improvement roles are the focus
of teacher leaders who will help teachers generate human
resources i.e. specific qualities, most notably, knowledge,
skills, and commitments (Gamoran et al., 2003). These
resources will be about teaching. They are likely to include
content knowledge, a better understanding of the subjects
they teach; pedagogical content knowledge, insights into how
to help children grasp that subject; knowledge about how to
manage the classroom; and appreciations of the problems
children (or specific sets of children) will have with different
aspects of the subject taught, as well as beliefs about who can
learn what (Shulman, 1987).

Leadership practices of teachers as formal leaders usually prevail when they take roles
such as department heads, subject heads, coordinators for special program, teacher
mentors. These teacher leaders help other teachers to embrace goals to understand the
changes that are needed to strengthen teaching and learning and to work together for
their school improvement. There is research literature to suggest that teacher leaders
have been empowered to help other teachers in order to build capacity for curricular

change (Harris, 2004; Muijs and Harris, 2003; Rinehart et al., 1998; Spillane et al.,
2001, 2004).

2.7.16: Teacher Researcher

Teacher researcher is defined as a teacher who carries out research as systematic
investigations of how teaching influences student learning over time in a single
classroom or learning community. It is inquiry that is systematic, intentional,
contextual, ethical and above all responsive to the learners strengths and challenges.
The model of teacher research involves action research, the case study and
instructional interventions.
Teacher Researchers begin their inquiry by first studying their students, their
learning, and their context in systematic ways. Based on preliminary analyses of
the data they have gathered, Teacher Researchers justify an area of inquiry or
question they want to pursue to respond to their students needs. Then they
explore the literature systematically to identify promising approaches,
instructional strategies and procedures for implementation, data collection and
analysis. Teacher Researchers are mentored in this process of development by
facilitators from universities.
Teacher research is valued in preparing teacher leaders as teachers are able to
advocate, speak, and take action, on behalf of the students they serve. To take
action in informed, ethical, and responsive ways, teachers must be skilled in the
tools of instruction and the habits of inquiry essential to understand how to

promote student learning. Teacher research is important because it is a powerful

experience that develops a richer understanding of teaching and learning. The
steps of teacher researchasking questions about students learning needs,
designing an intervention around a set of instructional strategies to address these
needs, planning systematic ways to gather and analyze data in order to investigate
the effects of the interventiondevelop habits of mind that enable teacher leaders
to make instructional decisions that further their students academic achievement.
One of the most common claims is that teachers will become better at what they
do by conducting research and that the quality of learning for their pupils will be
higher. It has also been asserted that teacher researchers will stimulate positive
changes in the culture and productivity of schools and raise the status of the
occupation of teaching in the society. Additionally, it has been declared that
teacher research will produce knowledge about teaching and learning that will be
useful to policy-makers, academic researchers, and teacher educators (Zeichner
2003).

Gender and Leadership

Women are slowly gaining ground in leadership positions across all fields. Womens
participation in the workforce and in leadership roles has undergone a dramatic
change in the past 20 to 25 years. Schools in Malaysia are beginning to be led by
women principals in an increasingly greater pace than before.

Further, women ascribed more importance to relational leadership, leadership for

social justice, spiritual leadership, leadership for learning, and balanced leadership, in
contrast to the traditional literature on leadership that was developed around mens
lived experiences as principals (Grogan, 2010). We believe that a diverse collective
leadership of this nature is more likely to frame problems and solutions very
differently from the traditional approach. It is said that women have learned to work
in relationship with others collaboratively. In addition, women often bring a social
justice orientation to their work.

While women have been found to be more transformational in their leadership styles,
institutions that favor or require transformational leadership styles may provide
women leaders with an advantage. Further it is noted that men conform more toward
being more task oriented, self-assertive and motivated to master their environment
while women conformed more toward being more interpersonal, selfless and
concerned with others. This is often distinguished as an advantage to women for being
more person orientation over task-orientation unlike the men (Bass & Avolio, 1994).

Women may identify them as not only as leaders, but also as women, as racial/ethnic
individuals, as mothers, etc., all of which intersect with one another. Together with the
challenges of work-family balance, caretaking responsibilities, gender role
expectations, connectedness and affiliation with multiple communities while
exercising their leadership, they may make good leaders in environments that seek
such an approach. Besides, there is also strong evidence to support the tendency for

women to adopt a more collaborative, cooperative, or democratic leadership style than

men who adopt a more directive, competitive, or autocratic style; this emerged in all
types of studies ( Chin, 2011).

As compared to the men, Brunner and Grogan (2007) found that women have spent
more time in the classroom learning effective teaching methods before they take on
leadership positions. Therefore, it may not be wrong to say that women could have a
slight advantage in their leadership stakes, in particular their instructional leadership
tasks.
Hence, it is now believed that these gendered approaches to leadership could result in
better addressing of teacher development issues and women principals may have an
edge over their male counterparts in terms of the selection and practices of strategies
for teacher capacity building in their schools. It is possible that the women principals
may choose different strategies for different reasons and may even practice them very
differently than their male counterparts in building their teacher capacity.

Summary
This chapter describes the related literature on capacity, school capacity, teacher
capacity building, leadership and teacher capacity building. In addition to that the
leadership involvement towards teacher capacity building and the strategies of teacher
capacity building that were already present in the literature, and some comparisons
between women and men leaders that were reported in earlier studies.