Revisiting the Importance of the Direct Effects of School Leadership on Student Achievement: The Implications for School Improvement Policy

252 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Exploring the mediating effects of trust on principal leadership and teacher professional learning in Hong Kong primary schools (2016, background): “This observation reflects a recurring debate in the literature on leadership for learning concerning the nature of the paths that link leadership, teaching and learning in schools (e.g. Hallinger and Heck, 2010, 2011; Bossert et al., 1982; Bridges, 1967; Erickson, 1979; Gross and Herriot, 1965; Hall”
National contexts influencing principals' time use and allocation: economic development, societal culture, and educational system (2012, background): “Nettles and Herrington (2007) assert that principals must spend more time attending to the education of high-risk students than was the case in the past.”
Comparing the effects of instructional and transformational leadership on student achievement (2014, background): “Direct effects commonly account for a small, but meaningful and significant, portion of the variability in student achievement and merit further investigation (Nettles and Herrington, 2007).”
Principal Leadership and Teacher Motivation under High-Stakes Accountability Policies (2010, unknown): “Principals have an indirect (rather than direct) effect on school and student performance, as they shape the school's internal processes, climate, relationships, and resources ( Hallinger & Heck, 1996 ; Korkmaz, 2007 ; Leithwood, Louis, Anderson, & Wahlstrom, 2004 ; Nettles & Herrington, 2007 ).”