Fundamentals of

Leadership
Lamar University - EDLD 5311

Ann Okafor
11-23-2020
Week 1: Exploring Leadership

There have been many studies done over the different styles or approaches to leadership. From the laissez-

faire leader all the way up to the micromanager, leaders often find themselves using different management styles

to best suit the needs, focus, and motivation of their group or organization. How leaders approach leadership has

evolved over the century from an importance on control, obedience, and respect to an era where group processes,

perspective, and skills take hold (Northouse, 2019). While there are several types of approaches to leadership

styles, with pros and cons for each, the focus will be on the comparisons between transaction, servant, and

transformational leadership.

The most traditional of the three approaches to leadership is the transactional leadership style.

Transactional leaders, which is a bureaucratic style, place a high importance on structure and order. According to

the lecture, the transactional leadership approach resembles that of a business transaction, in which the focus is

between the leader and the follower (Bass, 1990). There is a clear social hierarchy, and everyone knows their

place within the organization. They create clear rules and expectations for their organization and will monitor

their followers to ensure their rules are being upheld. To make sure goals are being met, transactional leaders

prefer to adopt a reward and punishment system as way to motivate its followers. This approach is typically seen

in a classroom setting where a teacher will set expectations and procedures for students to follow and will reward

or punish students based on their behavior and performance on assessments. However, there is a reason why some

approaches are more popular than others. While the transactional approach has clear expectations and is generally

straightforward, creativity and personal initiative are often limited. Followers are expected to comply with the

rules and expectation put forth by the organization. These leaders are not interested in innovation or changing the

future of their organization and will punish those who do not adhere to their policy. Their focus is on the process,

such as planning and execution, and establishing good relationships with their followers. This leadership approach

works best in organizations where rules and structure are very important and can be very effective when things

need to be done in a time orderly fashion, such as an emergency or time sensitive projects. Examples of where

this approach may be found include the military, sport leagues, and the big four accounting firms.
 Next, is the servant leadership approach. Robert Greenleaf, the founder of the modern servant leadership

movement, was among the first to describe what a servant leader is. In his words: “The Servant Leader is servant

first. It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first.” (Greenleaf, 1977, p. 13-14). Servant

leaders have a strong desire to serve and build relationships with their followers. They prefer to focus on the needs

of others before their own self-interest (Kiker, Callahan & Kiker, 2019, p. 178). An example used by Northouse

includes a well-known professor at a major research university who puts the names of other researchers before

her own in publications because she knows it will benefit them more than her (2019). According to Laub (1999)

and Spears (2004), servant leaders are characterized as being good listeners, they show empathy and value to

others, they are concern about developing their followers, and helping to build their community. The strengths of

this approach include leaders being altruist, sharing control with its followers, and its followers experience

autonomy approach (Liden, Wayne, et al., 2008). However, due to less stringent rules by the leader, there are

several problems that may arise. Leaders may be perceived as weak and may not have the power to get things

done. Also, goals may take longer to reach since the focus is on individual development, not the groups.

And lastly, the transformational leadership approach, which is a combination of several leadership styles.

This approach is focused on changing and transforming the group. The transformational leadership has become a

popular approach among organizations because of its focus on personal motivation and the development of the

follower (Bass & Avolio, 2006). A transformational leader is perceived as dominate and self-confident

(Northouse, 2019). They use charisma and enthusiasm to influence their followers to reach their goals. (2019)

These leaders focus on values and morals of their followers and are concerned with change. They are very

articulate with their goals and set very high expectations for their organization. The purpose is so that followers

will build an emotional connection with their leader and have confidence and full obedience to the leader’s ideas.

Some strengths of the leadership approach include, followers are encouraged and rewarded, the values and needs

are the followers are central, and followers play an important role the decision-making process (2019). This

approach is best suited for environments that are less structured and are willing to be reflexive and open to change.

While on the surface these three approaches may seem vastly different, there are some similarities between

them that should be pointed out. All three leadership styles are about achieving set goals. The servant leader will
try to understand and guide its followers to achieve their professional and personal goals while also ensuring a

pathway towards the goal (Kiker, Callahan & Kiker, 2019, p. 177). Transactional leaders prefer to think inside

the box and use goals that have already been established by the organization. Followers of transactional leaders

know what role they play and the exact requirements they must complete to reach the goals of the organization

(Bass, 1985). Under the transformational leadership approach, setting goals is a process that involves the group

collaborating towards a common goal. The mission, values, and standards are clearly stated, and members are

encouraged to share ideas and have open dialogue with one another. Both servant and transformational leadership

styles show concern for others, integrity, and role modelling (Vevere, Velga & Liniņa, 2016). They both also

show encouragement to their followers and leave opportunities for them to grow and develop (Kiker, Callahan &

Kiker, 2019). And one unique similarity between transactional and transformational leadership styles is that they

both adhere to high ethical standards for others and themselves (Avolio & Gardner, 2005). Effective leadership

is critical for any organization. There are pros and cons to all three types of leadership styles. For those in

education, transformational and servant styles are most appropriate for their schools due to changing

demographics, technology, funding, etc., while those in the NFL would prefer their structure the way it is. But

whichever leadership style a leader decides to adopt, it will not only impact themselves but also the followers and

the organization in which the leader is a part of.

 References:

Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms

of leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 16, 315−338.

Bass, B. M. (1985) Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.

Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision.

Organizational Dynamics. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(90)90061-S

Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Desravines, J., Aquino, J., & Fenton, B. (2016). Breakthrough principals: A step-by-step guide to building

stronger schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, a Wiley Brand.

Greenleaf, R. K. 1977. Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. New

York: Paulist Press.

Kiker, D. S., Scully Callahan, J., & Kiker, M. B. (2019). Exploring the boundaries of servant leadership: A meta-

analysis of the main and moderating effects of servant leadership on behavioral and affective outcomes.

Journal of Managerial Issues, 31(2), 172–197. Retrieved from https://search-ebscohost-

com.libproxy.lamar.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=137336121&site=eds-live

Laub, J. A. (1999). Assessing the servant organization: Development of the servant organizational

leadership assessment (SOLA) instrument. Dissertation Abstracts International, 60(2), 308. (UMI

No. 9921922)

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. (2008). Servant leadership: Development of a

multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment. Leadership Quarterly, 19, 161–177.

Northouse, P. G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed., pp. 6). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Publications.
Spears, L. 2004. “Understanding the Practice of Servant Leadership." In Servant leadership: Succeeding through

trust, bravery and forgiveness. Eds. L. Spears and M. Lawrence. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

van Dierendonck, D. (2011). Servant leadership: A review and synthesis. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1228–

1261. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310380462

Vevere, Velga & Liniņa, Iveta. (2016). Ethical leadership: Meaning and measurement. Latvian Retail Traders’

Perspective. Economics and Culture. 13. 10.1515/jec-2016-0006.

Week 2: Exploring Self-Assessments

Keirsey Assessment

According to the Keirsey Assessment, my results matched the Guardian temperament. Compared to the

other three temperaments, guardians are the most concerned about serving society and preserving social

institutions (Keirsey, n.d.). We tend to be traditional in our thinking and prefer order and consistency over changes

that could affect our security. Our core characteristics include being dependable, responsible, stabilizing leaders,

and humble. We take our tasks seriously and we are very meticulous about structure, policies, and procedures.

However, we are uncomfortable with being the center of attention, avoid confrontations, and are extremely

cautious with change.

While I am not surprised by the findings, it is interesting to see where my strengths and weaknesses are,

how my temperament gets along with others, and how people with my temperament prefer to lead. I have always

been a follower of the law and I have tremendous respect and loyalty to those in authority. I believe that those in

authority are in their position for a reason. Although I enjoy collaborating with others, but I do not enjoy giving

orders or being in the center of attention. Instead, I prefer to focus on the growth and well-being on my followers

and serving my community in any way that I can. I want others to feel comfortable confining with me and to

know that I am confident in my abilities. While I get the importance of being a transformation leader, I am a

servant leader by heart. However, I do get worried and stressed easily. I have this unending need to please

everybody, that I often forget to take care of myself, which is a common weakness of guardians (Keirsey, n.d.). I

hate procrastination and it will only lead to more anxiety and stress, so I prefer to complete tasks as soon as

possible. When I notice that I am losing control over a situation, I try to fix as many things as I can to the point

that I feel hopeless.

After doing some self-reflecting, I think I need to spend more time with those with other temperaments

and personalities so that I can hear more diverse opinions. This will allow me to be more open to changes. To

control my anxiety, I to continue being organized and to make sure I have most things planned out. This will give

me time to make any necessary adjustments to avoid potentially negative situations. I should also learn to relax
and spend more time on myself. I would like to incorporate more meditation and exercise in my life. I think this

will help reduce my anxiety and allow me to enjoy life just a little bit more.

Blake and Mouton Managerial Grid

The Blake and Mouton Managerial Grid (also known as task vs. people) is a self-assessment questionnaire

that describes a person’s leadership style based on their concern for tasks or their concern for people (Black &

Mouton, 1985). Based on how a leader scores, they are placed in one of four quadrants: authoritarian, team leader,

country club, and improvised. Authoritarians are rated high on tasks and low on people, while improvised leaders

rate low on tasks and people. After completing the questionnaire, I scored a 6.2 on people and a 6.2 for tasks.

This point of intersection on the grid puts me in the team leader section. Team leaders have high concern for tasks

and high concern for people. What makes team leaders very productive is that we encourage members of our team

to achieve their tasks, but also care about developing and strengthening their relationships with each other.

My results on this assessment matched closely with my score on the Keirsey temperament assessment. As

a guardian, I value both people and work and I am most satisfied when working with others that allow me to serve

and facilitate others while still focusing on achieving my goals. (Keirsey, n.d.) The team leader also matches

closely to the transformational leader. A transformational leader is someone who articulate their goals and sets

high expectations (Northouse, 2019). These leaders provide support and encouragement, while also inspiring their

followers to reach their goals. It is comforting to know that I already prosses some ideal leadership qualities.

To be an effective leader, I want my followers to be motivated and have positive interactions with each

other. I will have high concern for their well-being by being transparent and having clear communication with

them. I will also try to have opportunities for team-building exercises to create a harmonious relationship with

my followers. As for tasks, schedules and deadlines are a must. Structures and roles need to be in place if I want

my followers to reach our team goal. While I still have some things to work, notably my fear of change, I see this

as an opportunity for growth to becoming a very effective leader.

Transformational Leadership Framework (TLF)

The Transformational Leadership Framework (TLF) is self-assessment that measures the performance of

a school to identify and address areas of improvement (Desravines, Aquino & Fenton, 2016). In the TLF is

personal leadership which is describes how leaders act and approach these issues. According to TLF (2016), there

are five levers or style of personal leadership: belief-based and goal-driven, equity-focused, interpersonal

leadership, adaptive leadership, and resilient leadership. After completing the assessment, ranked myself high on

belief-based and goal-driven and interpersonal leadership. As expected, I ranked lower on adaptive leadership.

Change has always been a weak spot for me. Belief-based and goal-driven leaders set high, but achievable goals

because they believe in their students or followers’ ability to complete the task. Interpersonal leaders prefer to

build trusting relationships and are decisive in how they choose to communicate with stakeholders.

Before I took the assessment, I assumed that I would only rank high as an interpersonal leader. Being

transparent about my goals and expectations and building trust has always been my philosophy. Apparently,

however, I also value setting high expectations and focusing on the needs of my students over adults. I think the

belief-based and goal-driven and interpersonal leadership skills create a good mix for an ideal leader (2016).

Goals need to be high but achievable and leaders should be transparent about these expectations. To create a

culture of urgency, an effective leader needs to facilitate a culture of trust among its followers and stakeholders.

By seeking multiple perspectives, leaders can help develop a shared mindset to predict and plan how to combat

problems and to reach their goals.

To be an effective leader going forward, I need to improve on my adaptive leadership skills. I need to

challenge the status quo by taking risks on traditional policies and practices at schools, especially those that have

proven to not make a positive impact on students (2016). To be an effective leader, staff need to be a part of the

decision-making process from the very beginning. I need to take charge of the possible negative feedback because

of the changes by creating a safe environment for followers to express their concerns. They will be assured that

their opinions are valued and will be addressed quickly.

TEA Principal Competencies self-assessment

The TExES Principal (268) examination is to help ensure future instructional leaders are prepared for the

day-to-day tasks in Texas schools (“Principals,” n.d.). The purpose of the TEA Principal Competencies self-

assessment is to measure our current understanding and skill level to the state standards. These skills are very

important as they are included in the Texas Principal Evaluation and Support System (T-PESS). Before I can

begin developing my Practicum Plan, I need assess which domains and competencies need to see growth so that

I can become an effective leader. While I scored high in Domain I, Domain III was my weakest, and it may have

to with my temperament and leadership style.

Domain I focus is on school culture (“Principals,” n.d.). New principals need to know how to create a

culture that sets clear and high expectations. As a belief-based goal driven leader, I want to set ambitious goals

for my followers because I believe each student can achieve at high levels (Desravines, Aquino & Fenton, 2016).

However, students cannot achieve these goals unless teachers increase the rigor in their curriculum. That is why

it is important to develop a plan that promotes student achievement (“Principals,” n.d.). The culture should be

positive, safe, and inviting for all stakeholders. According to Breakthrough Principals, interpersonal leaders are

consistent in their communication to all stakeholders, including staff, students, and parents (Desravines, Aquino

& Fenton, 2016). Using communication effectively and providing supportive feedback helps to promote an

optimistic and safe campus environment for everyone (“Principals,” n.d.).

Domain III, human capital, is a skill that I felt the least confidence in. According to Keirsey, guardians

tend to be concerned with other people’s thoughts about them (Keirsey, n.d.). They idea of observing my followers

and providing them with critics is nerve-racking and I fear that this will lead to negative interactions with my

peers. In the upcoming months, I would like to work with my mentor to see how she uses data to evaluate the

staff. I would like to see the process of hiring, training, and retaining teachers to promote high-quality teaching.

But most importantly, I would like to observe and learn how to provide feedback to staff members while also

being reflective on my own performance.

 According to the Texas Principal Evaluation and Support System (T-PESS), the purpose of the Texas

Principal Standards is to guide principals to improve instructional quality and student achievement (“Principals,”

n.d.). The Texas Principal Standards is divided into five standards: instructional leadership, human capital,

executive leadership, school culture, and strategic operations. These standards are closely aligned with the TEA

Principal Competencies. Completing the self-assessment provided me the opportunity to evaluate my abilities to

see if I could fulfill these standards.

I rated myself high on standard 4, school culture. It will be my responsibility to establish a vision that is

shared about stakeholders and making sure I follow through with this vision. Communication is very important,

and it must be done effectively and efficiently to staff and students. One of the reasons why my district rated high

in employee satisfaction was because the staff felt well-inform about decisions that were being made at the higher

level. While my school does not have PTA/PTEs, we do provide opportunities for families to be involved in their

student’s learning, such as Community-in-Schools, weekly home visits, and yearly project-based learning

showcases.

TEA Principal Competencies

As with TEA Principal Competencies, I ranked myself low in Standard 2 which is human capital. (n.d.)

Again, it goes back to my insecurities of telling other people how to complete their own task. But I now understand

the importance of this standard which is why I am making it my focus in my practicum plan. My staff will be the

most important ingredient to improving student achievement. As an effective principal, I need to invite in

opportunities that will allow teachers to develop and grow, such as leadership teams, professional development,

and meaningful observations (“Principals,” n.d.). To do this, I will need to select candidates who align with the

school’s vision and offer the skills that are needed. Observations will focus on teacher’s glow and growth areas,

with valuable feedback on how to improve. I want to create an environment where staff, students, and families

will feel safe and comfortable, but that will only happen if choose and retain the right people.
 References:

Blake, R.R., Mouton, J.S. (1985). The managerial grid III: the key to leadership excellence. Houston: Gulf

Publishing Co.

Desravines, J., Aquino, J., & Fenton, B. (2016). Breakthrough principals: a step-by-step guide to building

stronger schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, a Wiley Brand.

Keirsey Temperament Assessment. (n.d.). Retrieved January 28, 2020, from https://www.keirsey.com/

Northouse, P. G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed., pp. 6). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Publications.

Principals: Texas Principal Standards- T-PESS. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://tpess.org/principal/standards/

Week 3: Essential Competencies of Leadership (1-6)

Part 1: Case Study 1 – Root Cause Analysis

1. Developing 2. Leading in the 3. Making 4. Communicating 5. Resolving 6. Motivating and

Trusting Realization of Shared Effectively Conflict & Developing
Relationships the Vision Decisions Issues Others

We agreed with A common We agreed that In competency 4, Most of us For the last
was that there theme we found Mr. Rodger did we agreed that agreed that the competency, we
was a lack of in competency 2 not use the right communication lack of trust, a agreed that there
trust between Mr. is that there was level of was severely shared vision, was a lack of
Rodger and the a lack of vision involvement lacking. While he and motivation and
staff which led to at LHS. He when trying to did a good job communication developing others.
some resistance lacked teacher address this listening and was causing Mr. Rodger was not
by the teachers. buy-in because issue. At first, receiving conflicts at LHS. providing adequate
The staff did not he failed to he talked to information, an Rodger was not support for his staff
trust him because communicate his departments important aspect prepared for the and student.
he was still new, vision with the heads about of communication, reaction he got Although he
and he had not staff. He offered creating an he still went about at the faculty. wanted to solve the
built a strong, no clarity on early college it the wrong way. He used broad achievement gap,
trusting how the staff but excluded His comments comments, and he was not
relationship with provide and the rest of the were too broad this made considering the
them yet. Instead student their staff from and not specific teachers to needs of the
of the meeting students with the adding in any enough. Instead, become teachers. He did not
being about necessary tools input. Instead, the staff found his defensive. trust they would
addressing the and skills they the idea fell remarks offensive Teachers were use the new
student gap, needed for through and by saying report more concerned equipment if given
teachers we on college. Based that was that. was exaggerated. about addressing to them. Yet, he
the defensive on some of the He later Another peer their own needs acknowledged that
mode and comments made expanded the commented that over student the teachers were
accused the by the staff, the amount of students were so achievement. still using outdated
report by Mr. teachers do not involvement by busy working that The instructional
Jones as being fully understand having a faculty college just did conversation techniques that
exaggerated. Mr. the needs of the meeting, but he not seem between Mr. were not helping
Rodger’s students. still left out necessary. The Rodger and Mr. increase student
comments were students, meeting became Jones should engagement and
too broad, and he parents, and the unproductive have been more achievement. By
made it appear community. because the detailed about being dismissive,
that the teachers When it comes teachers were the student gap he missed out on an
were ultimately to decisions more focused on and what skills opportunity to help
to blame for the such as shifting the blame, were needed for the teachers to
student gap and instruction and suggesting that them to be develop their
therefore college students were successful. Mr. instructional
incompetent. He readiness, the either not Rodger should knowledge. The
also appears to collaborative interested in have also teachers were not
not have a whole model works college or were addressed the concern with
lot of confidence the best. too busy partying. teacher’s changing the ways
in his staff and Instead, the comments because there was
does not see the meeting should before quickly no motivation to do
point of have been about so. If Mr. Rodger
increasing addressing the moving on to the provided
funding, as he student data. appropriate
does not expect achievement gap. funding, this will
them to utilize not only satisfy the
the new needs of the
equipment teachers but will
effectively. also help increase
engagement from
students with more
independent,
hands-on activities.

According to Mr. Rodger, the overarching problem is that students are graduating Landon High School

(LHS) not fully prepared for college (Case Study #1, n.d.). A counselor from a local community college

mentioned that students were not enrolling at King Community College (KCC) in high numbers and the ones that

were there were struggling to graduate. To address this problem, Mr. Rodger had a faculty meeting to discuss this

issue with the staff and the go over the data.

To get to the root cause of the problem, I had to first formulate some questions. My first question after

looking at this case study was why were the students at LHS not fully prepared for college? Mr. Rodger mentioned

that the school lacked funding and equipment that the students needed to be successful. But after more thought,

Mr. Rodger realized that even with the much-needed resources, it would probably not be utilized in the most

efficient way. Teachers at LHS prefer teacher-led instruction, such as lectures and few hands-on activities. This

leads to my next question, why do teachers rely on old ways of instruction? Could this be reason why students

are not prepared for college? In a teacher-led classroom, students are typically quiet and independent. The teacher

is in full control and everything flows at the teacher’s pace. However, this does not give students the opportunity

to collaborate or communicate which are essentials skills students need to master to be college ready. Students at

LHS are not doing well because they might the find the classes are boring due to lack of engagement. They are

not being allowed to express themselves and direct their own learning. Based on the feedback at the faculty

meetings, teachers are not interested in changing their ways because they believe most students do not want to go

to college. This leads to my third question, why do teacher think students do not want to go to college? At this

point, more data is needed to know how the students are performing and how do they compare to other schools
with similar demographics. It can be assumed that student achievement at LHS is poor and this may cause teachers

to think their students do not care about their education, much less college. However, a teacher expectation of

their students can play a huge role on the actions and behaviors of students (Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968). The

staff’s negative expectations of their students may be influencing their students to perform negatively. With that

said, some teachers said that the problem was because students could not afford college (Case Study #1, n.d.). So,

my fourth question is why can students not afford college? The case study mentions that most students come from

low socioeconomic backgrounds. But how does that effect student achievement? Most of the students already

have part-time jobs to help assists their families. These students are probably more preoccupied with taking care

of their families and are trying to meet their basic needs over preparing for college. This could be a reason why

students might not be doing well at LHS and KCC.

Based on that data, there is a large low socioeconomic student population, nearly 50% of students had

parents without a high school diploma, and most of the students had part-time jobs. After reviewing the case

study, including the feedback from the teachers and the data, I believe the root cause is that the students are more

focused on with their needs at home over preparing for college.

If I were Mr. Rodger, my action plan would be to provide students with additional services and support

while they are still in high school. The school should create a support network that includes the student’s family,

the school, and the community. To do this and to keep it viable, Mr. Rodger should build trust with key

stakeholders, including the student’s families and the changing community (Martin, 2017). He needs to create a

collaborative vision with clears goals so that everyone knows what is expected out of each other and themselves.

One of the goals should be for teachers to hold high, positive expectations of their students. Mr. Rodger can

increase motivation from his staff by remembering that teachers have needs to. By providing teachers with the

necessary funding, this will help develop the teachers’ instructional knowledge about independent, student-led

activities that can lead to student engagement. He should practice good communication, including having regular

meetings with all stakeholder. He should listen to their feedback before coming to a final decision. And lastly, he

and his staff should continue looking over data to find gaps in student achievement and ways to motivate their

students for college.

 References:
Case Study #1. (n.d.) EDLD 5311 Fundamentals leadership. Retrieved from luonline.blackboard.com

Martin, Gary E. (2017). School leader internship: developing, monitoring, and evaluating your leadership. New

York, NY: Routledge.

Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. The urban review, 3(1), 16-20.
Part 2: Essential Competencies and Root Cause Analysis

This week’s case study was about a new principal, Mr. Rodger, and his goal to better prepare his students

for college. He did this by reflecting on some of this issues that he thought were causing problems, such as lack

of funding and teacher-led instruction (Case Study #1, n.d.). To address this issue, he held a staff meeting to

discuss comments made by a nearby community college counselor and had his staff look over some data. Before

I could find out what the root cause of the student gap at LHS, I had to first look at Mr. Rodger and his leadership

competencies. There are several competencies that make an efficient leader including, trust, vision,

communication, shared decision-making, resolving conflict, and motivation and developing others (Martin,

2017). In my own analysis, Mr. Rodger showed some strengths in communication and shared decision-making.

Mr. Rodger used communication effectively by using a faculty meeting to reach his intended audience and showed

leadership by listening and receiving information from the staff to get a clearer picture of the problem (Case Study

#1, n.d.). And because preparing students for college involves instruction and learning, he used the best level of

involvement which is collaboration (Martin, 2017). However, I thought he was weak in the other competencies.

His staff lacked trust in him and questioned his report (Case Study #1, n.d.). No clear vision has been established

and that was evident by the push back he got from the department heads after suggesting opening an early college.

Teachers did not appear to be motivated to change their mode of instruction because of lack care to their need,

which led to conflict between them and Mr. Rodgers.

Most of my peers’ and I agreed on several things about Mr. Rodger’s leadership skills. We agreed with

was that there was a lack of trust between Mr. Rodger and the staff which led to some resistance by the teachers

(Case Study #1, n.d.). Although he did a good job listening and receiving information, we found he lacked teacher

buy-in because he failed to communicate his vision clearly with the staff. The comments at the staff meeting were

too broad and not specific enough to be of value. The meeting was also missing key stakeholders, such as students,

their families, and the community. My only disagreement was with competencies four and five. I personally think

outside communication is just as important as inside communication. The community demographics is changing,

and I think he was right to be concern about the school’s reputation. I also think having meetings like this, and

not behind doors, will help ease the tension between the Mr. Rodger and his staff. This would be a great
opportunity for the school to reflect on the comments that were made to create a shared vision (Martin, 2017).

The peer who I disagreed with clarified her comments to me and I was able to better understand her reasoning,

but I still think Mr. Rodger is moving in a positive step forward. One comment, however, did make me see things

differently than I had before. She had mentioned that the department heads not only did trust Mr. Rodger’s ability

to leader but were also not comfortable with the change of culture and climate the new early college will bring. I

thought that was very inciteful. I think a big issue at LHS is fear of change.

My biggest takeaway this week was the root cause analysis. Solving problems in education is hard enough

but finding the root cause of the problem can be even more tough. Overall, I found the root case analysis easy to

use because of how concise and logical its approach is. After reading the case study, I initially thought some of

the problems were obvious and easy fixes. However, after analyzing the case study some more using the root

cause analysis and the reading discussion posts by my peers more thoroughly, I found that some of the obvious

mistakes from Mr. Rodger could have easily been done by me. Opening a new school to prepare students for

college might seem like a good decision, but by only discussing the idea with the department heads, it shows Mr.

Rodger lacks effective communication and decision-making leadership skills (“Case Study,” n.d.). His intended

audience, which is the staff and students, were not given a voice in this decision-making process and neither were

student’s families. By using broad statements at the faculty meeting, he created an unsafe environment for

communication. For me to be an effective, each problem needs to be solved by creating an action plan, not a

temporary solution (Martin, 2017). After identifying the need or problem, I should ask questions and keep asking

questions to understand why this problem is occurring. I should collect data and analyze the findings to get to the

root cause. If my initial analysis does not lead to the root cause, I should go back and formulate some more

questions. Once the root cause is found, I can then develop an action plan to address the root cause and its

symptoms. With that said, I would still prefer to collaborate with other leaders and stakeholders before revealing

my recommendations. I would need more data about the school and the community. I would also need to know

more about the other competencies of a leader to better evaluate Mr. Rodger’s leadership skills.
 References:

Case Study #1. (n.d.) EDLD 5311 Fundamentals leadership. Retrieved from luonline.blackboard.com

Martin, Gary E. (2017). School leader internship: developing, monitoring, and evaluating your leadership. New

York, NY: Routledge.

Week 4: Essential Competencies of Leadership (7 – 12)

Part 1: Case Study 2 – Root Cause Analysis

7. Managing 8. Supporting 9. Using Power 10. Creating and 11. Initiating 12. Evaluating
Group Others with Ethically Managing a Change Student,
Processes Appropriate Positive Personnel, and
Leadership Culture and Program
Style Climate Performance
We agree that We agree that A common We agreed Mr. We think that We agreed that Mr.
Mr. Kelly Mr. Kelly used theme we Kelly’s handling Mr. Kelly was Kelly does not
struggles with the directive noticed was that of the observations unrealistic with know how to
effectively style to force his Mr. Kelly and feedback was his expectations. evaluate his staff
managing group teachers to lacked referent unprofessional. He Most of us agree effectively. He did
processes. There comply with the power. While seems to be that change not provide them
was no evidence new district’s he did not use unaware of the takes time. with clear
of the teachers literacy policy. his power climate and how Change does not expectations or
working The teachers are unethically, he his feedback has happen adequate
collaboratively to required to did use his affected the overnight or information on
help implement attend the two- power to morale. His even within six what the program
the literacy day training at negatively comments have weeks. It can was to look and
strategies. We the beginning of impact his negatively sometimes take sound like. His
also do not see the year with no teacher’s lives. affected the years to initiate comments about
Mr. Kelly input from the He did not trust culture at change. It does the teacher’s
working with the staff if they his teachers to Bayview. Instead not help that he performance is
staff to improve thought this use the of recognizing the did not have a mostly negatively
the reading scores training was strategies teachers that were follow up with no positive
besides the initial necessary. We effective. His performing well, professional feedback or advice
training. He has noticed that he negative he chose to focus development to on how they can
not invested time expected the feedback on the negative. help prepare the improve. Teachers
and effort to staff to toward his He did not give school for the are unaware what is
support the staff implement the teachers after enough attention new change. considered on
with this new program and the and care to the People are often target or proficient
program with know exactly walkthroughs culture and resistant to due to Mr. Kelly’s
effective teaching what the broke the climate. By change. lack of
strategies. We expectations teacher’s introducing the Showing them communication and
think that Mr. were. There is morale. Mr. literacy program, how the program follow up.
Kelly should no evidence that Kelly took he unintendedly would have
allow teachers he gave clear away the changed the helped save
additional time to goals and opportunity for climate and made them time could
practice the expectations. It his teachers to the teachers feel have increase
strategies and appears many feel empowered defeated. buy-in. The lack
learn more about did not know and motivated of spirit that Mr.
how to properly they were to continue Kelly observed
implement the supposed to using the from his
literacy program. implement this literacy walkthroughs
program program. may be from
immediately. Instead, he teachers being
made teachers forced to
feel like that implement the
 they were program instead
incapable of of feeling
reaching the empowered to
desired do so.
outcome.

For Case Study #2 (n.d.), we are introduced to Mr. Kelly, a second-year principal at Bayview high school

(“Case Study #2,” n.d.). At the request of the district’s assistant supervisor, Mr. Kelly attended a two-week

training about a new literacy program that the district was interested in implemented at Bayview. After reviewing

the data, he realizes that the school’s reading test scores were below both the district and state averages. He

decides to hold a two-day training for all teachers for this new literacy program. However, after doing his first

walkthrough, he notices that most teachers are implementing the program in the classroom and are not using best

teaching practices. Mr. Kelly found this concerning and left his teachers are negative feedback. This has caused

the morale from teachers to drop. So, what went was the problem and how can it be resolved. To find the root

cause and create an action plan requires me to use the root cause analysis.

The main problem at Bayview was that teachers were not implementing the district’s new literacy initiative

(“Case Study #2,” n.d.). But why not? Although the staff at Bayview seem initially interested in the problem and

were working hard, it appears that they are not doing anything (Martin, 2017). This one of the factors in resistance

to change. Some teachers may be resistant to change because they needed more time experiment with it, or they

may lack the skill. We also know that five teachers were already successful in increasing student growth and do

not see the need to implement the program. But we know that the new program is highly regarded, why are

teachers still resistant to the program? I think it because they do not understand what the expectation are, thus

were not prepared for their first evaluation. Mr. Kelly may have thought his teachers knew what he expected from

them after they attended a two-day training. So why did they know what was expected from them after the

training? Looking through the case study, I did not see any evidence of follow up which is key in managing group

processes. There was also no evidence of collaboration among teachers or even support from Mr. Kelly before

their first observation. They were also not given an adequate amount of time to learn and process the new program.

So why did Mr. Kelly not offer a follow up after the initial meeting to clear up some misunderstandings? I think
it was because he was using his directive power to force his teachers to comply with the district’s new literacy

initiative (Martin, 2017). This leadership style reminds me of the autocratic style which focused on high task and

low relationships (Fong, 2018). He tried to keep all the power to himself by planning and scheduling the main

responsibilities and tasks but did not monitor or follow up with the teachers (Martin, 2017). He did not offer

clarity of expectations and goals (“Case Study #2,” n.d.). He had made the assumptions that they knew what was

expected out of them and the purpose of the program. But why would he assume they knew? They are not mind

readers. I think this highlights a problem of poor communication at Bayview Elementary. Mr. Kelly lack of

communication with his staff of what is exactly expected of them is probably causing the misunderstanding of

the program. Since there was no follow up after the initial training, teachers were left in the dark about how to

implement the literacy program properly. His poor communication skills with his staff may stem from his lack of

relationship with them (Martin, 2017). This lack of relationship between Mr. Kelly and his staff may be causing

the resistance to change and the low morale at work.

Based on this analysis, I believe the root cause of the problem is Mr. Kelly’s lack of trust or have confidence

in his teacher’s abilities. I think the teachers realize this and it is killing productivity. Leaders who do trust their

followers will spend more time monitoring the tasks than the relationships (Fong, 2018). Instead of giving his

teachers extra support and time to figure out the program, he spent his time heavily scrutinizing their work (“Case

Study #2,” n.d.). He refused to delegate the task into formal or informal groups (Martin, 2017). He preferred to

keep all the power and knowledge to himself.

My action plan for Mr. Kelly is for him to work on trusting his staff and communicating effectively. To

build trust, Mr. Kelly needs to be a referent leader (Martin, 2017). Teachers need to be able to identify with and

believe in their leader and the best way for Mr. Kelly to accomplish this is by building trusting relationships. He

needs to be more open about this vision and expectations. According to competency 7, managing processes, Mr.

Kelly needs to schedule a follow up meeting if he wants meetings like this to be taken seriously and be more

productive in the future. This follow up also needs to be extensive if he wants to be accepted into the Bayview

culture. To be an effective referent leader, he should also collaborate more with the teachers to find a common

ground in the vision and how they can achieve it. Mr. Kelly should adopt the collaborative leadership style which
values and appreciates its followers’ knowledge and skills and works to help further develop those skills. Better

decisions are usually made using the collaborative leadership style, so Mr. Kelly should try to share the

responsibility and the decision-making for this program. The collaborative leadership style helps reduce resistance

to change since it involves working with others. This will allow him to be more aware of the growing negative

climate at Bayview and to take action to fix it. This style will also help with communicating effectively. While

collaborating, Mr. Kelly should provide feedback and offer clarity for any misunderstandings from the initial

training. He should offer support and development to those who will be directly involved in the implementing the

literacy program. And just like with trust, effective communication will help fix the climate at Bayview by getting

to know the feelings and atmosphere of the school.

 References:

Case Study #2. (n.d.) EDLD 5311 Fundamentals leadership. Retrieved from luonline.blackboard.com

Donna Fong. (2018). Leadership self-assessments. Retrieved from luonline.blackboard.com

Martin, Gary E. 2017. School leader internship: Developing, monitoring, and evaluating your leadership. New

York, NY: Routledge.

Part 2: Essential Competencies and Root Cause Analysis

This week’s case study was about Mr. Kelly, a second-year principal at Bayview high school (“Case Study

#2,” n.d.). Mr. Kelly attended a two-week training about a new literacy program at the request of the district’s

assistant superintendent. After attending the training, Mr. Kelly decides that he wants to implement the program

at Bayview. He reviews the data and realizes that the school’s reading test scores were lower than district and

state averages. At the beginning of the next school year, Mr. Kelly decides to hold a two-day training for all

teachers for this new literacy program. However, after doing his first walkthrough, he notices that most teachers

are not using best teaching practices. He also notices that most teachers are resisting implementing the literacy

program into their classroom. Disappointed with his first walkthrough, Mr. Kelly left a mostly negative feedback

toward his staff. Most teachers did not take the feedback well which caused the morale are Bayview to decrease.

I thought most of the problems at Bayview could be fixed if Mr. Kelly could be more of a referent leader who

encouraged collaboration (Martin, 2017). Instead, Mr. Kelly used his directive power to force change. He also

lacked effective communication skills which led to confusion and resistance from the staff (“Case Study #2,”

n.d.).

For Case Study #2, my peers and I mostly agreed regarding the different aspects of the problem. Most of

my peers’ and I agreed that Mr. Kelly struggles with effectively managing group processes (Martin, 2017). There

was no evidence that the teachers were able to collaborate to help implement the literacy strategies. Most of the

posts I read agreed that Mr. Kelly used the directive style to force his teachers to comply with the new district’s

literacy policy. We thought the best style of leadership to help support his teachers was the collaborative style.

This would have allowed teachers to work with each other and better learn the program. It would have also cleared

up any misunderstandings and confusion. While he did not use his power unethically, he did use his power to

negatively impact his teacher’s lives by giving mostly negative feedback (“Case Study #2,” n.d.). We also noticed

his lack of confidence in his teachers to use the literacy strategies effectively. His mostly negative feedback toward

his teachers after the walkthroughs broke the teacher’s morale. He could use his referent powers to find a

consensus in his vision (Martin, 2017). This would require Mr. Kelly to use effective communication and a strong

belief in the teachers’ abilities. We agreed that Mr. Kelly could have handled the observations and feedback better.
It seems like he is unaware of the negative climate he has created by introducing this program. Instead of feeling

empowered, we noticed that they instead felt unmotivated and defeated. His expectations were just not realistic.

He expected to see change in six weeks after only a two-day training. Like one post mentioned, change can

sometimes take years. It does not help that he did not have a follow up professional development to help prepare

the school for the new change (“Case Study #2,” n.d.). Showing them how the program would have helped save

them time could have increase buy-in and reduce the resistance (Martin, 2017). The lack of spirit that Mr. Kelly

observed from his walkthroughs may be from teachers being forced to implement the program instead of feeling

empowered to do so. We agreed that Mr. Kelly does not know how to evaluate his staff effectively. He needs to

work on improving his effective communication skills. He did not provide them with clear expectations or

adequate information on what the program was to look like and sound like. His comments about the teacher’s

performance is mostly negatively with no positive feedback or advice on how they can improve (“Case Study

#2,” n.d.). Teachers were unaware what was considered on target or proficient.

Overall, it appears that most of us came to the same conclusion about this week’s case study. At first, I

thought the problem was the student’s reading scores but after analyzing this week’s discussion posts and using

the root cause analysis, I was able to figure out what the real problem was. The teachers were resistant to the new

district’s literacy policy and it was causing tension. We noticed that Mr. Kelly did not have trust or confidence in

his staff’s abilities to teach effectively. He also did not communicate effectively to his staff what his vision was

and what was expected out of them. Because of this, I felt confident about my action plan after completing the

root cause analysis. If I were at Bayview Elementary, I would recommend that Mr. Kelly work on trusting his

staff and to learn how to communicate more effectively. He should strive to be a referent leader that uses his

collaborative powers to help implement the new literacy program and ultimately improve student achievement

(Martin, 2017).
 References:

Case Study #2. (n.d.) EDLD 5311 Fundamentals leadership. Retrieved from luonline.blackboard.com

Martin, Gary E. 2017. School leader internship: Developing, monitoring, and evaluating your leadership. New

York, NY: Routledge.

Week 5: Reflection on Course Learning Outcomes

During this course I took several self-assessment tests to measure my leadership styles, personality, and

temperaments. The Keirsey Assessment is a widely use tool for organizations to help leaders and followers to

better understand each other (Keirsey, n.d.). Testers are divided into four temperaments or observable personality

traits, such as artisans, guardians, idealists, and rationals. According to the Keirsey Assessment, my results

matched the Guardian temperament. Another self-assessment is the Task v. People assessment. This test measures

how we prioritize our tasks and relationships which in turn determines our preferred leadership style (Fong, 2018).

People that emphasis high task and high relationships are the ideal leader and are referred to as Team Leader.

After completing the questionnaire, I scored a 6.2 on people and a 6.2 for tasks, which puts me in the team leader

section. The Transformational Leadership Framework (TLF) assessment is self-assessment that measures the

performance of a school to identify and address areas of improvement (Desravines, Aquino & Fenton, 2016).

After completing the Transformational Leadership Framework (TLF) assessment, I ranked myself high on belief-

based and goal-driven and interpersonal leadership. In addition to the different leadership style, there are 12

essential competencies for leadership development (Martin, 2017). These competencies give leaders the necessary

information to guide them for future actions. I was able to analyze two different case studies about new leaders

and their current performance. Using the 12 competencies, I had to identify the root cause of the problem and

address how these problems could be avoided in the future with an action plan.

After completing the several assessments, I realized that my strengths were being dependable, responsible,

and humble (Keirsey, n.d.). As a Guardian, I take my tasks very seriously and I can be very meticulous about

structure, policies, and procedures. As a team leader, I value both people and work and I am most satisfied when

working with others that allow me to serve and facilitate others while still focusing on achieving my goals (Black

& Mouton, 1985). The team leader also matches closely to the transformational leader. A transformational leader

is someone who articulate their goals and sets high expectations (Northouse, 2019). These leaders provide support

and encouragement, while also inspiring their followers to reach their goals. It is comforting to know that I already

prosses some ideal leadership qualities. I have always been transparent about my goals and expectations. I value
setting high expectations and focusing on the needs of my students over adults (Desravines, Aquino & Fenton,

2016). I think the belief-based and goal-driven and interpersonal leadership skills create a good mix for an ideal

leader. Goals need to be high but achievable and leaders should be transparent about these expectations.

Although I enjoy collaborating with others, but I do not enjoy giving orders or being in the center of

attention. Instead, I prefer to focus on the growth and well-being on my followers and serving my community in

any way that I can. I want others to feel comfortable confining with me and to know that I am confident in my

abilities. However, I do get worried and stressed easily. I have this unending need to please everybody, that I

often forget to take care of myself, which is a common weakness of guardians (Keirsey, n.d.). I hate

procrastination, so I prefer to complete tasks as soon as possible. When I notice that I am losing control over a

situation, I try to fix as many things as I can to the point that I feel hopeless. Of the twelve competencies, I feel

like the ones I would need to put more focus on are resolving conflict and issues and initiating change (Martin,

2017). I prefer to avoid conflict as much as possible, but I understand the mediating conflict is part of being a

leader. When it comes to change, I am aware that there will be a of resistance, but I am not sure how I will be

able to motivate and inspire them to buy-in to change.

After taking the TLF self-assessment, I was surprised to find out that I ranked high in belief-based and

goal-driven, one of the five personal leadership levers. (Desravines, Aquino & Fenton, 2016) I assumed that I

would only rank high as an interpersonal leader. After doing some more research, however, I had to agree with

this assessment. I hold high, but achievable goals for myself and coworkers. I hold everyone accountable for any

of the outcomes. But at the end of the day, the focus must always be needs of students, not adults.

I have been most excited about learning more about myself. Before taking this course, I have always seen

myself as a follower and not a true leader. However, after taking the assessments and reading mora about

leadership styles and competencies, I realize that leadership comes in different varieties depending on the

organization current situation and goals. I think I am naturally a servant leader, but I realize to be an efficient

leader in today’s world I should aim to be a transformational leader. I am looking forward to developing each of

these skills as I continue this leadership program.

 I am still anxious about taking the lead and being the center of attention. I am more than happy to share

my time and energy with anyone who needs it. When it comes to solving problems, I usually take an empathetic

approach. Which means, I tend to take things too personally. When I start working on my leadership program, I

worried that I might have to deal with conflict, and I am afraid of the criticism that might come from it. Especially

since this project means so much to me.

A lot of the activities my mentor I choose for my practicum plan have me interviewing leaders of the

different departments, including the school board. This will allow me to hear from those with other temperaments

and personalities. Some of the activities I have chosen include teachers from different departments collaborating

with each other to get a better understanding of each team and how we instruct our students. I want my followers

to be motivated and have positive interactions with each other. I will have high concern for their well-being by

being transparent and having clear communication with them. I will also try to have opportunities for team-

building exercises to create a harmonious relationship with my followers. I need to improve on my adaptive

leadership skills. I feel like my leadership program will allow me to challenge the status quo by taking risks on

traditional policies and practices at schools (Desravines, Aquino & Fenton, 2016). As I implement my leadership

program, I want to make sure that the staff is a part of the decision-making process from the beginning to the end.

Since they will be the ones impacted by the change, they should be able to give feedback on how I am doing and

what areas of concern they have. This will also give me the opportunity to work on identifying problems and

coming up with an action plan. I will continue to use the resources that I learned from this course I continue to

progress through this program. I will continue to refer to the assessments to see what areas I need to work on and

the 12 competencies so that I do not make the same mistakes that I read about in the case study.
 References:

Desravines, J., Aquino, J., & Fenton, B. (2016). Breakthrough principals: a step-by-step guide to building

stronger schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, a Wiley Brand.

Keirsey Temperament Assessment. (n.d.). Retrieved January 28, 2020, from https://www.keirsey.com/

Martin, Gary E. (2017). School leader internship: Developing, monitoring, and evaluating your leadership. New

York, NY: Routledge.

Northouse, P. G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed., pp. 6). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Publications.