Educational Management

Administration & Leadership

Leadership practices 1–20
ª The Author(s) 2019

of principals of high-performing Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1741143219884076
community high schools: journals.sagepub.com/home/ema

Evidence from Nepal

Jeevan Khanal , Freya Perry and Sae-Hoon Park

Abstract
Empirical studies of school leadership in South Asia are limited. This qualitative study examines the
ways in which principals in three award-winning community high schools enact leadership practices
in their specific contexts in Nepal. The results reveal that the principals used multiple frames of
leadership and were proactive towards reforms. High levels of interest, collaboration, prohibition
of political activities inside the school, approachability for parents, recruitment of high-quality
teachers and innovative programmes proved to be critical for success. This study has implica-
tions for how principals enact their role to transform low-performing schools into high-performing
schools within a short period.

Keywords
Nepal, principals, teachers, leadership, low-performing schools, high-performing schools, student
achievement

Implementing school reforms within the limitations of financial, physical and change-resistant
foundations such as community schools in urban and low-income country contexts is an interna-
tional challenge. A shift in the school environment and beliefs is imperative to produce the change
needed for a school to reform and thrive. Bolman and Deal (2008) proposed that to accomplish
school reform, school leaders need to have thoughtful effects on parents, teachers, and students
and, thus, decisions about reform have ethical importance. Further, in holding leaders responsible
and analyzing the significance of their actions, they outlined four frames of leadership for research-
ers to systematically understand the leadership role (Bolman and Deal, 2008). Thus, this study
utilizes the hypothetical model of Bolman and Deal (2008)’s Four Frameworks Approach. Bolman
and Deal identified four unique frames from which people view their world and accordingly enact
their leadership role. These are (a) structural, (b) human resource, (c) political and (d) symbolic.
Although there are numerous ways by which effective leadership behaviour can be studied, the

Corresponding author:
Sae-Hoon Park, Department of Education, Chonbuk National University, South Korea.
Email: shpark@jbnu.ac.kr
2 Educational Management Administration & Leadership XX(X)

framework provided by Bolman and Deal (2008) has been widely acknowledged as a valid guide
for investigation of leadership practices in school reform (Bradbury et al., 2011; Fruedhauf, Al-
Khalifa, and Coniker, 2015).
The first frame, the structural frame, emphasizes goals and efficiency. The main factor of this
frame demands that the organization (i.e. the school) should be designed in order to have supreme
efficiency. The structural frame assumes that effective leaders set out clear and established goals.
The organization differentiates people into specific roles and coordinates diverse activities through
structural motivation, policies and rules. An effective structural leader, therefore, conducts the
analysis of the context and uses data to solve the organizational problems through the introduction
of new policies and rules (Bolman and Deal, 2008).
The second frame, the human resources frame, focuses on human needs and reasonably sup-
poses that those organizations that meet the basic needs of employees will work better than those
that do not. Human resource leaders seek qualified and dedicated human resources. Leaders in this
frame emphasize the value of relationships and seek to lead through facilitation, motivation and
empowerment (Bolman and Deal, 1997). Further, this frame seeks to find the right person for the
right position (Bolman and Deal, 2008).
The third frame, the political frame, highlights issues of conflict and competition among
different interests for scarce resources. The successful leader considers how best to allocate limited
resources to their organization (Bolman and Deal, 2008). Leaders who override the political frame
are networkers, coalition-builders and negotiators. An organization may have groups and individ-
uals with differences in values and beliefs. This conflict is seen as a normal by-product of
collective action, but a successful leader will overcome these differences to find a unified vision
all can commit to.
In turn, the final frame, the symbolic frame, understands that organizations function in a chaotic
world and are dynamic, non-linear entities. Under strong leadership, the organization develops
symbols and a culture that shapes human behaviour unassumingly, providing a shared sense of
mission and identity. The symbolic leader thereby imparts a sense of enthusiasm and commitment
through their own charisma and commitment (Bolman and Deal, 2008).
Research on school leadership in countries across all six continents has vastly increased in
recent years (Bush, 2018c). Whilst the successful leadership practices of principals under this
framework have been investigated extensively in Western and high-income country contexts
(Pourrajab and Ghani, 2016), there has been limited research in Eastern and low-income contexts
(Bush, 2018b). Less clear, moreover, is which frame or style of leadership is favoured by school
principals and which frame is linked to their practices to lead the school reform in low-income
countries. Applying educational leadership theories and models of school reform which are bor-
rowed from high-income countries (such as the four-frame model of Bolman and Deal) in lower-
income countries presents a number of limitations. This is due to the vastly different socio-cultural
and economic contexts in which school principals work (Bush, 2011; Bush, 2018a; Walker and
Dimmock, 2002; Wolhuter, Walt, and Steyn, 2016). These contextual factors apply not only to
geographical, social and economic parameters but also to the specific community, including the
dynamics of the teachers, parents and students. In their school reform, a successful school principal
handles his or her contextual demands and applies unique practices according to the contextual
requirements (Bush, 2017; Goldring et al., 2008; Grint, 2005). Evans (2007) has illustrated, for
example, that school leaders negotiate multiple contexts and stakeholders, often with competing
and overlapping interests. Leadership success, therefore, depends on responding to and under-
standing the underlying causes of the problems they encounter within their given context. Despite
Khanal et al.: Leadership practices of principals of high-performing community high schools 3

this, much of the academic literature discusses perspectives of leadership practices from high-
income countries, giving an impression that these practices are universal.
This study therefore aims to document successful leadership practices for school reform in the
context of Nepal. In doing so, it hopes to inform the broader discourse on effective leadership
practices for school reform in low-income countries. The authors argue that the four frameworks
provided by Bolman and Deal (2008), whilst providing a structured approach for the analysis, also
allow flexibility for the specific contextual findings of leadership practices in Nepal. Thus, the
study investigates which of the four frames are most likely to be adopted in effective leadership
practices and examines how they may be adapted in the contextual practices of school principals of
reformed community schools in Nepal. The findings of this study could be useful for the profes-
sional development of community school principals who must overcome challenges such as
political interference, low teacher motivation and low parental trust for the improvement of
academic success. In particular, to highlight international variations in leadership styles, this study
uses the four frames underpinned by the following questions:

1. In the context of Nepal, what leadership frames are effective principals most likely to use in
their work for better outcomes?
2. How do these effective Nepalese principals adapt their leadership practice to their unique
context?

School leadership challenges in the context of Nepal

Nepal is a low-income country located in the Himalayan belt, landlocked between India and China.
The country is rich with cultural, ethnic, linguistic and religious diversity. The latest census found
that there are 125 caste/ethnic groups, more than 123 mother-tongue languages and ten types of
religion practised (Nepal Population Report, 2016: 88–93). There are three categories of school in
Nepal: community schools, private schools and religious schools. Whilst community schools are
funded, executed and maintained by the government, private schools are solely owned by indi-
vidual investors and are not regulated by the government. There are 29,207 community schools,
6015 private schools and 1086 religious schools in Nepal that serve students from Grade 1 to Grade
12 (Ministry of Education, Science and Technology of Nepal, 2016). As per existing policy,
community schools are decentrally governed, with the management and leadership of the schools
shared between the school principal and School Management Committee (SMC), an elected body
comprised of community members and parent representatives.
In comparison with private schools, community schools typically have better human and phys-
ical resources. Most community schools have their own land and buildings, and employ qualified,
trained and comparatively well-paid teachers (Singh, 2016). Despite this, the average success rate
for students completing their School Leaving Certificate (SLC) in private schools stands at 90%,
whilst the average community school will score between just 30% and 50% (Rai, 2014). This
means that not even one-third of students studying in community schools manage to secure the
minimum marks required to pass their final exam. Although recently the SLC was changed to the
Secondary Education Exam (SEE), the success rate of private schools has remained consistently
high (circa 90%) and the results of community schools continue to paint a bleak picture, with the
success rate hovering at around 40% (Kathmandu Post, 2017).
4 Educational Management Administration & Leadership XX(X)

Due to higher academic achievement, private schools have increasingly attracted students and
parents away from the government-managed community schools. The poor-quality education of
these schools has seriously undermined public confidence in the education system and has encour-
aged further growth in private education (Mathema, 2007). This has resulted in the closure or
merger of many community schools due to the lack of students. Consequently, community schools
have become a ‘refuge’ for children from disadvantaged and poor families who are unable to afford
the private school fees. Thus, two distinct education systems are being created and have conse-
quently perpetuated the stratification of society, threatening social cohesion (Mathema, 2013).
Oplatka (2004) has identified that the challenges faced by community school principals for
school reform in Nepal are similar to those reported by their colleagues in other developing
countries. Research suggests that community schools in Nepal are performing poorly due to the
lack of power and authority of principals, low teacher accountability, political activities among
teachers, intervention by political parties in the hiring, promotion and rewarding of inefficient
teachers due to political affiliation, low community support and low parental trust (Gautam,
Alford, and Khanal, 2015; Mathema, 2007; Mathema and Bista, 2006: Thapa, 2011). Moreover,
Mathema and Bista (2006) revealed that supervision of teaching, teachers’ performance manage-
ment and monitoring of students’ improvement and their achievement are neglected in the oper-
ation of community schools in Nepal. Additionally, principals are often found to be heavily
occupied with administrative tasks, managing people and finances, rather than leading on teaching
and learning activities in their schools (Bhattarai, 2015).
During and since the decade-long civil war known as the Maoist Insurgency (1996–2006),
major political parties have become involved with the teacher unions, encouraging and, in some
instances, forcing teachers to engage in political activities (Pherali, 2013). Some community
school teachers are protected from disciplinary action by political parties and there have been
cases where teachers are even paid full salaries for minimal professional work (Shrestha, 2014).
Moreover, political parties of Nepal and their sister organizations have been found using commu-
nity schools as sites for demonstrations and political activities, promoting partiality for their own
political associates and indoctrinating students and teachers with their ideologies (Loo Niva Child
Concern Group Nepal, 2013).
Nonetheless, a handful of Nepalese community schools have been successfully reformed. These
schools consistently perform higher on average than other community schools and continue to be
popular among students and parents. It is essential to understand how these schools successfully
reformed in contrast to the majority of community schools despite operating under apparently
similar settings in terms of infrastructure, teachers, students, and government support. As the
empirical evidence has consistently identified strong school-level leadership as a key contributing
factor in school reform (Darling-Hammond et al., 2007; Day and Sammons, 2013; Khanal and
Park, 2016; Leithwood, Harris, and Hopkins, 2008; Leithwood et al., 2004), this research seeks to
identify the core leadership practices of successfully reformed schools in Nepal.
A significant challenge, however, is the very definition of the role and duty of the community
school principal in the context of Nepal. The Education Act, 1971 (sixth amendment, 2010, Rule
93(1)) states that ‘There shall be a headmaster (principal) in each school to function as the
academic and administrative chief of the school’ (Nepal Law Commission, 2002: 93). The selec-
tion criteria broadly includes: teaching experience, educational qualification, teacher training,
management training, leadership capacity, proposed school development plan, and presentation.
Current legislation prescribes the key functions of a principal, the majority of which are related to
administrative and managerial tasks, in addition to teaching 12 classes per week (Shah, 2016).
Khanal et al.: Leadership practices of principals of high-performing community high schools 5

Despite their distinct role in the school, principals are therefore counted in the national student–
teacher ratios and the minimum qualification to become a principal is same as that for teachers. In
other words, the school principal role is not seen as a distinct leadership position in the community
school (Singh, 2016). Understanding how, then, a principal conceptualizes and enacts his or her
role and position of leadership in reform schools becomes an increasingly pertinent question.

Methodology
The study adopted a qualitative approach, with in-depth, semi-structured interviews as the main
method of researching the phenomenon of experiences and perception of school principals. The
interviews were constructed using the narrative method, which views a conversation as a process
building towards a success story (Creswell, 2007). This method was identified as a suitable tool for
deconstructing the complex issue of leadership (Raymond and Surrenant, 1998). This methodology
was favoured over quantitative evidence which cannot, by itself, provide detailed accounts of the
leadership practices followed by the school principals to transform their school. For example, the
evidence of leadership practices is measured at a level of abstraction not directly implementable by
the real school leader in the real school context. Additionally, the philosophy behind these prac-
tices and how such practices are enacted to transform the school can be captured only through a
qualitative approach (Noman, Hashim, and Abdullah, 2016).

Selection of the schools

Knowing the poor condition and low-student performance of most community schools in Nepal,
the authors were interested in effective leadership practices in community schools rather than
private schools. Both the literature review and the context of community schools led us to focus
on the principals of community schools that had been given awards for their high performance and
considered as having been quickly reformed. Three schools were purposively chosen on the basis
of the national award for students’ achievement, considering the length of time in which the school
had reformed following the recruitment of a new principal.
As part of National Education Day, Nepal’s Ministry of Education, Science and Technology
annually awards prizes of excellence to six community schools and six private schools across the
country. The selection criteria for the best schools are the average GPA (Grade Point Average)
obtained by the students in SEE (Grade 10) examination (90%) and total number of students
registered in Grade 9 (10%) (Edusanjal, 2018). Among the schools who agreed to participate in
the study, two of the schools have been given the award twice and the other has been given the
award once during the period 2014 to 2018, under the current principalship. All of the community
schools in this study offered education from Grade 1 through to Grade 12.
Self-report by the District Education Officers confirmed that the proposed schools had under-
gone quick reform and transformation thanks to the present leadership. The perception of District
Education Officers was important in selecting the community schools since Nepal’s education
system does not have an external assessment system to track the progress of reforming schools.
District Education Offices were responsible for overseeing local informal and school-level edu-
cational activities, including coordinating, monitoring and evaluating the educational activities of
their respective district (Minister of Education, Science and Technology of Nepal, 2019). District
Education Officers claimed that principals of the selected schools were able to promote democratic
participation, end political intervention, distribute the resources excellently to boost student
6 Educational Management Administration & Leadership XX(X)

Table 1. Demographics of schools and principals.

Working
No. of No. of National award experiences of Age of
teachers students for outstanding school principal school
School in 2018 in 2018 student achievements in years principal Pseudonym Gender

School one 44 1200 2017 9 50 Ram Male

School two 23 900 2016 3 45 Deepak Male
2018
School three 22 524 2015 3 42 Shyam Male

achievement, recruit additional qualified teachers, encourage and accept the parental involvement,
reduce dropout and repetition rates as well as to increase the number of students.
All three principals had at least three years of experience in a leadership position. Whilst there
are limitations to this small sample size, qualitative inquiry does not dictate large samples since
‘[s]ample size depends on what you want to know, the purpose of the inquiry, what’s at stake, what
will be useful, what will have credibility, and what can be done with available time and resources’
(Patton, 2002: 244). Similarly, a study needs only a few respondents when the study’s intent is
narrow, interview dialogue is strong, and if the analysis provides in-depth exploration of the
narratives or conversation (Malterud, Siersma, and Guassora, 2016). The demographic information
of each school and principal is presented in Table 1.

Data collection
With no respondent triangulation, the self-report approach was adopted because ‘no one else has
access to more information’ than oneself and that evidence provided by the interviewees them-
selves is rich with motivational and other introspective details that others might not be aware of
(Paulhus and Vazire, 2007: 227). In this sense, it is further considered accurate (McDonald,
2008). Thus, semi-structured interviews were conducted on a one-on-one basis to gather infor-
mation related to the school’s challenges, the strategies that had helped to address those chal-
lenges, and the degree to which the school’s achievement could be credited to the principal.
Specific questions, along with follow-up questions, included: How would you describe your
leadership style? How would you describe your leadership strengths and weaknesses? What are
the strategies you applied for the change? What challenges do you face when you try to reform
the school? Was there a time when you were trying to transform the school that you thought it
was counterproductive? How did you deal with the reluctance from teachers when new policies
and revolutionary changes were introduced?
The school principals were interviewed over a one-month period. Prior to the face-to-face semi-
structured interviews, a consent letter with the purpose of the study was sent to the school principal.
The principals were allowed to fully or partially withdraw at any point of the interview and up to
the time of the final draft. The length of time for interaction enabled the discussions to be
personalized to the involvements of individuals and their school contexts.
Interviews were conducted in the school principals’ offices, in their native (Nepali), language
and were recorded, then translated and transcribed later for coding. During the interview, the
principal was required to reflect on their experiences, how they performed in leading the
Khanal et al.: Leadership practices of principals of high-performing community high schools 7

Table 2. Conditions for coding frame responses based on Bolman and Deal framework.

Four leadership frames Domain

Structural Mission, strategy, rules, policies, decision

Human resources Individual commitment and motivation, needs, sensitive, collaborative,
participative, responsive, coach, guidance
Political Conflict, participation and involvement, uncertainty, influence others,
negotiator, persuasive, strong alliances
Symbolic Motivate, creating transition, mourning the past, inspirational, energize and
inspire, charismatic, sense of mission, enthusiastic, loyalty
Domain that does not fit in Mistrust, adaptation, monitoring, evaluation
framework

transformation in schools and how they acted in their role. Principals were encouraged to express
opinions, views, experiences and attitudes freely. When needed, terminology and questions were
clarified immediately to avoid ambiguity and principals were given the opportunity to follow-up
where insights were revealed (Gray, 2004). Principals were not given remuneration for their
participation.

Data analysis
The transcribed data was coded manually using the content analysis approach (Creswell, 2007). A
deductive approach was used to analyze the data obtained from the interviews. The summaries of
indicators for coding the interview are presented in Table 2.
This methodical coding system allowed us to make reliable judgments about the presence or
absence of frames. Coded similarities were analyzed in connection with the research questions
that were in turn aligned with the specific questions asked during the interviews. Drafts were
given to the respondents (principals), allowing them to review and provide feedback regarding
our findings. In addition, two faculty colleagues served as cross-readers to evaluate our write-up
of the key findings.

Findings
In this section, we present the findings of the in-depth interviews with the three principals. All
interviewees shared strategies that could be classified according to Bolman and Deal’s four frame
model, though some models were more apparent and extensive than others, as discussed further in
the analysis section below. We have organized the findings with the aim of maximizing insights
focused on the leaders’ role, practices and activities. Accordingly, we share the findings as per the
structural, human resources, political and symbolic frameworks.

Structural frame
Principals spoke with us about a wide range of strategies, rules, goals and policies they practised
which shape decisions and activities within their schools. The two main conditions described by
the participants focused on the number of students and outcome-focused leadership.
8 Educational Management Administration & Leadership XX(X)

Focus on the number of students

Principals were asked what strategies they used to tackle the challenges. Shyam shared that the
first challenge was to eliminate a context of mistrust in the quality of public schools which had
resulted in low student enrollment. He employed different strategies, policies and rules to raise the
number of students in school through fostering trust amongst parents. He explained:

Parents and community members were suspicious of our schools before my leadership. During the first
meeting with teachers, we decided to admit the children of the teachers to the school. I had to find a
way to nourish them, to encourage them. This policy gave them a kind of ownership. Children of the
teachers who were teaching here were admitted to the well-known private schools. It was the school
mission to see every student residing around the school enrolled here within one year.

By encouraging teachers to send their own children to the school, Shyam demonstrated that
there was a level of trust in the capacity of the teachers to deliver a quality education.
The interviews confirmed previous research that parents are more inclined towards private
schools because of the quality of learning outcomes and student achievement. For example, Ram
explained:

We had a high percentage of failure rates in the School Leaving Certificate Examination. Parents were
attracted to the English-medium private schools. I was seeing the private schools were providing the
computer class and used the ICT in class [ . . . ] [The]students of our schools were from backward and
underprivileged society. I wanted to find a way to address these issues which are related to admission,
attendance and low achievement. I spent almost three years to overcome this problem. I appointed a
few self-funded teachers – we already had 27 government teachers. I called a parents’ meeting to agree
with the agenda of English-medium instruction and promised them better achievement, similar to
private schools. I continuously moved forward the teachers and students to improved, not to allow
‘alright’. I also convinced the Rotary Club for investment in an ICT lab.

Principals, therefore, compared the rules and regulations of well-performing schools in their
locality and adopted similar policies. This was further clearly articulated by Deepak who shared:

We have seen the private school. To move with the time, full concentration is given to physical
infrastructure, computer laboratory and ICT development. We conducted a street drama for the local
community to show our commitment to bettering our environment. I myself prepared the proposal for
financial support for a new school building to the Indian Embassy. That huge building is the result of
that proposal.

As well as changing the medium of instruction and introducing IT facilities, all three school
principals adopted a policy of midday meals and provided lunch for students. For example,
Deepak explained that it was the school’s mission to manage lunch for every student inside the
school so that more students felt comfortable in school time:

I still remember that the parents did not want to admit their children to our schools a decade ago. To me,
that was very challenging and it was important as to how to win the trust of parents. Now, we are
providing lunch to all students at mid-day. There are 200 students who cannot afford the amount for
Khanal et al.: Leadership practices of principals of high-performing community high schools 9

their lunch; we are providing it free of cost. For that, we have collected the fund by donation. We make
food ourselves. Sometimes we provide popcorn, sometimes bread and curry.

By analyzing the contextual barriers of student enrollment, the principals introduced policies
focused on inclusion, so that all students were able to focus on their classes and not be distracted by
hunger.

Outcome-focused leadership
In interviews with participants, the structural frame came across clearly through outcome-focused
goals. Our research ubiquitously found that the contributing factors for parents’ mistrust of schools
were the low graduation rates in SEE, poor academic tracking and poor facilities inside the school.
In response, these principals had mapped where the school aimed to go and how the school would
move forward to reach each of these aims. The participants’ core objective was to provide instruc-
tions that would foster both excellent teaching and a learning environment in which students could
thrive. For example, Ram stated:

In every mid-term examination and term examination (every two months), I analyze student data and
then adjust instruction to improve achievement. I also meet each of the subject teachers one-on-one to
set long- and short-term objectives.

Similarly, Shyam commented:

We want to make sure that our students are going to get outstanding scores in the national exams. We
are working with a grading policy as well as the continuous and formative assessment as the school’s
primary steps to realizing this goal.

Mentoring and guidance of the teachers by the principals was an ongoing focus for strengthen-
ing student achievement. This outcome-focused intervention positively affected test scores and
achievement rates over the past few years in these schools. Additionally, Deepak stated that one of
his own professional goals was to create a better learning environment for better results:

I have a letter grade of each and every student in my computer. I closely observe their progress and sit
with the teachers and students individually to find the reasons of high-performance and low-
performance to push them for high-achievement. Additional tuition classes are offered to low-
achievers in the high-school grades. [ . . . Also,] teaching of science experiments are purchased by
collecting the donation.

Human resources
For all principals in this study, the most preferred leadership frame was the human resource frame.
When questioned about how important the role of teachers was for the high-performance of the
school, principals described a very long list of topics from their experiences. They all saw teachers
as the key to influencing school success and student achievement. The main themes emerging from
the interviews were the requirement of professional teachers, investment in time, and approach-
ability of the principals.
10 Educational Management Administration & Leadership XX(X)

Qualified and professional teachers are the first priority

Principals highlighted the importance of hiring qualified, dedicated and professional teachers.
They further placed an emphasis on the hiring procedure. The principal of school two
(Deepak), for example, explained that qualified and devoted teachers are the main cause for
success:

We have a teachers’ selection committee consisting of renowned professors and educationalists of the
country. They are subject specialists too. We seek qualified and devoted teachers. The selection process
is very transparent.

These effective principals had positive views towards their role in facilitating a democratic and
open climate to encourage teachers and students. For example, Ram commented:

The successful achievement of this school is linked to school funded teachers rather than permanent
government funded teachers. We followed the strict and transparent recruitment process to have great
teachers. Even I myself am a school funded teacher. We are devoted to the children and school. There
are 44 teachers and among them, 17 teachers are provided by the Government of Nepal and the rest are
appointed by the school and are provided with the salary by school self-sources.

The quality of the teachers was understood to have a greater impact than other facilities of the
school. This was articulated by Shyam:

I felt qualified and professional teachers were the number one cause of our success. If we put the best
teachers in a terrible facility, they would still be great teachers and perform extraordinarily well.

Investment of time in school

The time spent in school, and balancing a personal and professional life, were topics of great
discussion during interviews. The principals dedicated time for school-related tasks and
relationship-building activities, often outside of school core hours. Principals undertook activities
such as proposal writing, donation management, school meetings, parent–teacher meetings and
principal–businessman meetings for fund collection. Frequently, these were held in the morning,
evening, on Saturdays and occasionally during holidays.
The majority of additional work hours are focused on the acquisition and allocation of
resources. Financial and physical resources were reportedly scarce in all the schools. Therefore,
the importance of having a school principal that could seek new funding was identified as a key
example of good leadership. Nevertheless, some principals suggested that the investment of time
in sourcing funding hampered their ability to be present in school regularly and see the students.
Deepak explained:

I do not have my own life. The fund for infrastructure development is only possible from the colla-
boration and donation of a local businessman, NGOs, INGOs, social clubs like Rotary club. I would
love to work with the kids because I love to stay in school for a long time. But I have very little time to
be inside the school . . . . [Still,] I also work as a teacher. I take 12 classes in a week.
Khanal et al.: Leadership practices of principals of high-performing community high schools 11

Successful school principals are approachable

To transform the school, these school principals employed strategies to create a strong con-
nection between the school, parents and the community. The principals shared a vision that was
deep-rooted in the belief that parents and communities need strong public schools. This
included principals dedicating time for the parents to discuss issues and being ‘easily available
for the parents to convey our plans and progress’ (Deepak). This was a policy for all school
staff. Ram noted:

Particularly, not me only, our teachers are also available to the parents at any time. We have a calendar
with the yearly plan. Phone numbers of every teacher are printed there. Sometimes parents phone me
early in the morning and late evening also. We happily listen to the parents and try to solve their
problem related to their children. For example, provision has been made to provide special coaching for
Grade 10 students upon their request. We emphasized the regular homework giving and homework
checking. We always welcome their feedback.

Shyam perceived that the parents’ feedback stretched him, but also helped him to grow
professionally.

I always stand in front of the main gate during drop-off and pickup and listen to the parents whenever
possible. I present myself when parents are likely to be at school. They can share concerns or feedback
at any time directly or via phone.

Political frame
Boleman and Deal’s political frame (2003, 2008) considers the realistic process of making deci-
sions to manage divergent interests. This is particularly important in the context of Nepal since
many schools experience political intervention (Loo Niva Child Concern Group Nepal, 2013).

Ending political pressures

Political interference was highlighted as a major challenge by the participants. For example,
Deepak explained that before his appointment, the pattern of political interference in this school
occurred in areas such as forming sister organizations to political parties, interfering in the school
self-funded teacher selection process, and political panelling in the school’s governance system.
Each principal made a conscious effort to stop the political activities inside their school as they
believed that it was counter-productive for progress. For example, Shyam shared that his greatest
achievement was maintaining a neutral, non-political status and continuing with his commitment
towards the fundamental right to education. He went on to say:

One of the biggest barriers to school success is political intervention inside the schools. There was
unwanted political pressure in teacher selection. Teachers were political activists. I am well aware of
my strength as a neutral person [ . . . ] I obtained the signature of commitment from teachers which
prohibits them to engage in any political activities inside the school. Now we do not have sister
organization teachers and students of any political parties inside the school.
12 Educational Management Administration & Leadership XX(X)

Similarly, Ram strongly agreed with and adopted the concept of the School as a Zone of Peace.
His objective was to make his school free from party politics and other forms of interferences in
teacher selection. He added that the introduction of an elected SMC helped to ensure ‘fair and
transparent’ decision-making in the governance of schools, challenging previous research that
suggests SMCs to further politicize schools (Carney and Bista, 2009; Pherali, 2013).

Spirit of collaboration
In order to handle conflict within the school, principals emphasized positivity and gaining a better
understanding through collaboration and teamwork. There was awareness amongst participants of
participatory leadership approaches. Deepak described his own leadership style as:

. . . the participatory leadership style for transformation. These types of leadership styles lead to two-
way communication between teachers and the principal. The atmosphere at our school is very dem-
ocratic: distributed and participatory. We all respect one-another and everyone communicates openly.

Similarly, Ram highlighted the importance of collaboration:

I have been surrounded by parents, the school management committee and teachers. I can’t move
alone. I want to reach all. We coordinate very well and support and aid one another in contributing
ideas. Teamwork is really important and collaboration is also a very important factor in being able to
function more smoothly.

Meanwhile, Shyam had ambitions for exercising the Total Quality Management System as well
as a systems-based perspective. He emphasized teamwork and participative leadership develop-
ment through collaboration and total quality management. He said that:

I want to create a teacher-friendly environment. My leadership is charismatic which is guided by Total

Quality Management. We seek continuous improvement of the students, we do not dominate the low-
achiever, we empower them saying ‘you can do’. I put the agenda in front of the teachers for open
communication . . .

Symbolic frame
Personal characteristics such as the ability to motivate, inspire and instill a sense of mission,
enthusiasm and loyalty, all contribute to a strong symbolic frame (Tan, Hee, and Piaw, 2015).
Themes including self-motivation, enthusiasm and determination emerged under this frame.
During the interviews, when principals were asked how they describe their leadership strengths
and weaknesses, strong symbolic frameworks were highlighted. In particular, self-motivation,
enthusiasm and determination were behaviours modelled by principals. Principals encouraged
their teachers to have a positive mental attitude and motivated the teachers to begin to change
their own behaviour. For example, Deepak said his determination and self-motivation were exam-
ples of good leadership whilst Shyam demonstrated his commitment and enthusiasm to learn best
practice by visiting strong performing private and public schools to learn their practice for school
leadership. Moreover, he noted that:
Khanal et al.: Leadership practices of principals of high-performing community high schools 13

Human Resource Frame

1. Qualified and professional teachers are in first
Structural Frame priority
2. Investment of time in school
1.Focused on the Number of Students 3. Approachable
2. Outcome-Focused Leadership

Leadership Practices
of Highly Successful
Principal in Nepal

Political Frame Symbolic Frame

1.Ending political pressures 1. Self-motivation
2.Spirit of collaboration 2. Enthusiasm
3. Determination

Figure 1. Principal leadership practices.

School leadership is tougher than people think. Not everyone can do this job. Only a few teachers were
reluctant with these changes. For example, some teachers hesitated to admit their children to our
school, I have to present myself as an autocrat giving the pressure saying ‘you must’ . . .

Discussion
We viewed the leadership practices of these effective principal of Nepalese community schools
through the Bolman and Deal (2008) preconditioned lenses of structural, human resource, polit-
ical and symbolic which provided us a useful framework for mapping successful school principal
leadership practices. The analysis showed that these successful principals adopted multiple
leadership frames, favouring first the human resource frame, followed by structural, political
and symbolic frameworks. This finding supports Bolman and Deal’s findings that each frame has
its own distinctive usefulness, but a principal who can induce multiple frames is a more com-
prehensive leader than one who depends on only one for all situations (1991). These multiple
frames not only harness a wider range of skills from which to draw, but also allow school
principals to work with flexibility and adaptability in different contexts. Figure 1 below sum-
marizes the findings of this study.
The structural frame in these principals’ work is distinct to their energy and role to find ways
to nourish and encourage parents to eliminate a context of mistrust in the quality of their schools
which had resulted in low student enrollment. The primary change mechanism for these effective
school principals using this frame was seen in their consistent attempts to build wider participation
and ownership through the introduction of the rule that teachers must admit their children to their
own schools. Principals also adopted the policies from well performing private and community
14 Educational Management Administration & Leadership XX(X)

schools to cope with the challenges which have seriously undermined public confidence in the
education system. By introducing policies that reflected parental and community perceptions of
best and new practices (as seen in Nepal’s private schools) they encouraged further growth in
student numbers and students’ outcomes, which were key criteria for understanding that the school
had successfully reformed.
Under the structural frame, these school principals were proactive and understood how local
conditions of poverty and politics affected student achievement and school reform, responding in
ways that were both place-conscious (Gruenewald, 2005) and context responsive (Bredeson,
Klar, and Johansson, 2011). Principals adopted multiple strategies to tackle contextual issues,
including midday meals to support learning through increased student attention, and adopting
English as the medium of instruction to compete with private schools. In this way, principals of
these schools were inconsistent in their use of evidence-based approaches. For instance, there is
significant research to support school feeding programme, including in Nepal (WFP, 2018). Yet
whilst the English-as-medium-of-instruction policy may have appeased parental preference and
resulted in increased enrollment, it has shown to have negative effects on student learning,
particularly in diverse multi-lingual classrooms as in Nepal (Seel, Yadava, and Kadel, 2015).
Since the schools in this study performed consistently high in the SEE results, it would suggest
that the other strategies and frames employed by principals compensated for this trend towards
English-medium schools.
The human resources frame in these effective school principals’ work was seen as a most
liked pursuit of judiciousness attempting to cope with the challenges of low-achievement, poor-
quality education which has seriously undermined public confidence and caused low parental trust.
These principals recognized that teachers are the single most important factor for a school’s
success, as extensive educational research has also found (Darling-Hammond, 2000; Goldhaber,
2002; Khanal, 2018; Noman et al., 2016). This acknowledgement of teachers and efforts to
increase transparency is significant in the context of Nepal where perceptions of teachers are often
negative and highly politicized. In this way, principals were challenging social norms by valuing
teachers, not only through investing time in thorough and proper recruitment processes but also in
monitoring and coaching teachers to improve their pedagogical practices. Notably, principals
supported teachers to use data and continual assessment to evaluate student learning and adapt
their pedagogical approaches.
Similarly, a key reform-making mechanism was the recruitment of the best, most dedicated and
professional teachers through a transparent hiring process. The human resource frame in the
context of Nepal was simultaneously tied to the political frame since recruitment is frequently
driven by social or political networks including appointment of teachers who have relatives in
political positions as well as preferences for applicants who share ethnic and caste affiliations with
current employees (Paudyal, 2015). Efforts to be neutral through a well-represented committee
with academic specialists focused the attention on teaching capability as the primary factor for
recruitment in these successfully reformed schools in Nepal. Similarly, the principals’ own ded-
ication and expectation of teachers to be available to students, parents and community members to
support learning further underscored the importance of the human resource frame.
These findings are consistent with the suggestion of Gruenewald (2005) that the human
resource frame is the preferred frame of an effective academic leader. Bolman and Deal’s human
resource frame supports positive relational dynamics – including attitudes, participation, respect
for diversity and satisfaction – among stakeholders (Gallos, 2006). These Nepalese principals
enacted several approachability practices, providing opportunities for stakeholders to interact
Khanal et al.: Leadership practices of principals of high-performing community high schools 15

regarding real issues within and outside the school, in and outside office hours. Their commitment
was further associated with school robustness and quality.
The political frame in these school principals’ work was well demonstrated in their neutrality
and actions to adopt the Schools as a Zone of Peace initiative, launched by UNICEF during the
decade-long war in Nepal. All reform efforts were accompanied by this vision to have a political
pressure free environment in school. This is arguably unique to the context of Nepal as is not
forefronted to the same extent in the literature analyzing the four frames of leaderships in high-
income Western country contexts where there is significantly lower threat of school grounds
being used for political meetings, demonstrations and the indoctrinate of students and teachers
(Loo Niva Child Concern Group Nepal, 2013). As well as transparent hiring procedures, other
strategies employed for school reform can be understood to be within the political frame. For
instance, the encouragement of parents to reach out to the principal and head teacher to discuss
the academic progress of their children can be seen as a strategy to further hold teachers to
account, ensuring they prioritize the academic achievement of their students above any political
aspirations they might hold.
Each of the principals in this study had a strong symbolic frame which contributed to their
success in reforming their community school. They worked to consistently encourage their
teachers to learn and apply best pedagogical practices. These principals’ self-motivation, enthu-
siasm and determination was extremely apparent. As well as the energy demonstrated in the
long hours they worked, their passion was clear in their accounts of the progress they had been
able to make. These characteristics enabled the principals to make swift, dramatic improve-
ments to their schools.
A captivating discovery of this study was that these school principals had effectively led their
schools even without having a comprehensive knowledge of leadership. They undertook regular
reflection and learnt from their experiences, challenges and through observing the best practice
of neighboring schools. This unique finding suggests that having comprehensive knowledge of
leadership styles is not a precondition for school reform. Furthermore, based on our findings,
school reform is possible within two to three years (as was the case of Deepak and Shyam) if
school principals take a multidimensional approach (e.g. through these four frameworks). The
finding of this study, therefore, opposes the findings of Thompson et al. (2011: ii) which
suggests that leadership needs to be established for a minimum of five to seven years for
schools to be transformed.
This study provides significant inter-related information that may advance educational leader-
ship literature. For researcher and scholar, it may offer increased power to predict school outcomes
in a different context. Also, for those who are responsible for the development of educational
leaders in low-income countries, there may be better understandings of how school leaders enact
leadership practices in their specific contexts. Nevertheless, whilst Bolman and Deal’s framework
is helpful in highlighting and guiding categorization of different leadership frames, questions
remain about the sustainability and scalability of leadership practices in resource-scarce low-
income contexts such as in Nepal. For instance, each of the principals in this study detailed the
immense energy and time they spent securing additional resources for their schools, whilst still
teaching twelve hours a week, investing in the professional development of their teachers and
working with less-educated parents on how they could best support their children. The passion and
drive of these individuals made them successful leaders but whether they would be able to sustain
the necessary commitment was a question raised by the principals themselves who noted that they
had ‘no life’. This research therefore has some policy implications, indicating that establishing
16 Educational Management Administration & Leadership XX(X)

principals as a dedicated role in Nepal – rather than being included within the teacher quota for a
school – could be a crucial step for community school reform by allowing principals adequate time
to focus on developing their school.

Conclusion
The primary focus of this small-scale qualitative study was to gain insights into the beliefs of
principals of three high-performing community schools in Nepal as to their effective leadership
practices. Using Bolman and Deal’s four leadership frames as a conceptual framework, this study
identified a number of change strategies for school reform in Nepal. Content analysis revealed
Bolman and Deal’s structural, human resource, political and symbolic frames are indeed evident
and easily recognized. The study reveals that the principals used multiple frames of leadership and
were proactive towards reforms. High levels of interest, collaboration, prohibition of political
activities inside the school, approachability for parents, transparent recruitment of high-quality
teachers and goal-setting for teachers proved to be critical for success. Moreover, the findings
presented here suggest that the human resource frame is the strongest frame in the low-income
country context of Nepal and can orient the other three frames.
This study has implications for how principals enact their role to transform low-performing
schools into high-performing schools within a short period. It was noted that within just three years
a dynamic and committed principal was able to improve his school to an award-winning level,
through these various strategies. Thus, community school principals should understand that change
is possible with strong and effective leadership. Policymakers could look to these examples as best
practices to be fostered in other community schools across Nepal, whilst considering potential
issues of sustainability.
Finally, this study offers a unique opportunity to examine the Bolman and Deal Four Frames
Model of leadership in a lesser explored low-income country context and increase the understand-
ing around school leadership in different social, cultural and economic contexts. The domains
representing the four frames provided a significant contribution to the study of school leadership.
Nevertheless, it is worth noting that some recurring themes from the data analysis did not fit neatly
within the four frames and so were not fully explored in this study. This included themes such as
mistrust, adaptation, monitoring and evaluation. These themes could be further unpacked and
explored in future research. Moreover, future research could expand the scope of the study by
broadening the school selection criteria (including reform that has been implemented), expanding
the data sample to better understand which of the leadership frames and strategies are most
effective, or by adopting a multi-method case study, focusing on data triangulation to capture the
beliefs of parents and other key stakeholders to assess successful school principals.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and /or
publication of this article.

Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit
sectors.
Khanal et al.: Leadership practices of principals of high-performing community high schools 17

ORCID iD
Jeevan Khanal https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2430-4239

References
Bhattarai PC (2015) The ethics of educational administrators: Are they uniform or contextual? Journal of
Ethical Educational Leadership 2(4): 1–17.
Bolman LG and Deal TE (1997) Reframing Organization: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership (2nd ed.). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bolman LG and Deal TE (2003) Reframing Organization: Artistry choice and Leadership (3rd ed.). San
Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Bolman LG and Deal TE (2008) Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership (4th ed.). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bolman LG and Deal TE (1991) Leadership and management effectiveness: A multi-frame, multi-sector
analysis. Human Resource Management 30(4): 509–534.
Bradbury BL, Halbur KV and Halbur D (2011) Authority and leadership via a multiple frames approach.
Journal of the Philosophical Study of Education 1(1): 173–188.
Bredeson PV, Klar HW and Johansson O (2011) Context-responsive leadership: Examining superintendent
leadership in context. Educational Policy Analysis Archives 19(18): 1–28.
Bush T (2011) Succession planning in England: New leaders and new forms of leadership. School Leadership
& Management 31(3): 181–198.
Bush T (2017) Leadership and context. Why one size does not fit all. Educational Management Administra-
tion & Leadership 46(1): 3–4.
Bush T (2018a) Prescribing distributed leadership: Is this a contradiction? Educational Management Admin-
istration & Leadership 46(4): 535–537.
Bush T (2018b) Professional learning communities and school leadership. Empowering teachers. Educational
Management Administration & Leadership 46(5): 711–712.
Bush T (2018c) Research on educational leadership and management: Broadening the base. Educational
Management Administration & Leadership 46(3): 359–361.
Carney S and Bista MB (2009) Community schooling in Nepal: A genealogy of education reform since 1990.
Comparative Education Review 53(2): 189–211.
Creswell JW (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (3rd edn).
London: SAGE.
Darling-Hammond L (2000) Reforming teacher preparation and licensing: Continuing the debate. Teachers,
College Record 102(1): 5–27.
Darling-Hammond L, LaPointe M, Meyerson D, Orr MT and Cohen C (2007) Preparing School Leaders for A
Changing World: Lessons From Exemplary Leadership Development Programs. Ford, CA: Stanford
University. https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/Documents/Preparing-School-Lead
ers-Executive-Summary.pdf (accessed 20 October 2018).
Day C and Sammons P (2013). Successful Leadership: A Review of the International Literature. https://files.
eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED546806.pdf (accessed 20 October 2018).
Edusanjal (2018, September 5) Best Schools of Nepal in Grade 10 and Grade 12: Ministry of Education.
https://edusanjal.com/news/MoEST-selected-best-schools-national-level/ (accessed 20 October 2018).
Evans AE (2007) School leaders and their sensemaking about race and demographic change. Educational
Administration Quarterly 43(2): 159–188.
18 Educational Management Administration & Leadership XX(X)

Fruedhauf J, Al-Khalifa F and Coniker J (2015) Using the Bolman and Deal’s four frames in developing a data
governance strategy. Issues in Information Systems 16(II): 161–167.
Gallos JV (2006) Reframing complexity: A four-dimensional approach to organizational diagnosis, develop-
ment, and change. In: Gallos JV (ed) Organization Development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Gautam C, Alford B and Khanal M (2015) Sustaining school improvement through an external and internal
focus: A case study of a high-need secondary school in Nepal. International Journal of Teacher Leader-
ship 6(1): 1–17.
Goldhaber D (2002) The mystery of good teaching: Surveying the evidence on student achievement and
teachers’ characteristics. Education Next 2(1): 50–55.
Goldring EB, Huff JT, Parejo AS and Spillane P (2008) Measuring Principals’ Content Knowledge of
Learning Centered Leadership. The Annual Conferences of the American Educational Research Associ-
ation, New York, NY.
Gray DE (2004) Doing Research in the Real World. London: SAGE.
Grint K (2005) Problems, problems, problems: The social construction of leadership. Human Relations
58(11): 1467–1494.
Gruenewald DA (2005) Foundations of place: A multidisciplinary framework for place-conscious education.
American Educational Research Journal 40(3): 619–654.
Kathmandu Post (2017) Secondary Education Examination (SEE) Result Out. http://kathmandupost.ekanti
pur.com/news/2017-06-16/secondary-education-examination-see-results-out.html (accessed 20 October
2018).
Khanal J (2018) Differentiating the principals’ leadership behavior in high and low-achieving school of
Nepal: A quantitative study. Journal of Education and Practice 9(22): 51–63.
Khanal J and Park SH (2016) Impact of school principal leadership. Journal of American Academic Research
4(6): 1–19.
Leithwood K, Harris A and Hopkins D (2008) Seven strong claims about successful school leadership. School
Leadership and Management 28(1): 27–42.
Leithwood K, Louis KS, Anderson S and Wahlstrom K (2004) How Leadership Influences Student Learning.
New York: The Wallace Foundation. https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/Documents/
How-Leadership-Influences-Student-Learning.pdf. Accessed October 20, 2018.
Loo Niva Child Concern Group Nepal (2013) Politics in Schools Nepal. https://www.researchgate.net/publi
cation/271963562_POLITICS_IN_SCHOOLS_OF_NEPAL (accessed 20 October 2018).
Malterud K, Siersma VD and Guassora AD (2016). Sample size in qualitative interview studies. Guided by
information power. Qualitative Health Research 26: 1753–1760.
Mathema KB (2007) Crisis in education and future challenges for Nepal. European Bulletin of Himalayan
Research 31: 46–66.
Mathema KB (2013, April 2) Education in Public Schools-The Great Equalizer. Republica. http://www.
educatenepal.com/article_archive/display/education-in-public-schools–the-great-equalizer (accessed 20
October 2018).
Mathema KB and Bista MM (2006) Study on Student Performance in SLC: The Main Report. Ministry of
Education/EAST, Nepal.
McDonald JD (2008) Measuring personality construct: The advantages and disadvantages of self-reports,
informants reports and behavioural assessments. ENQUIRE 1(1): 1–19. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/view
doc/download?doi¼10.1.1.523.2142&rep¼rep1&type¼pdf (accessed 12 November 2018).
Ministry of Education, Science and Technology of Nepal (2016) Education in Figures 2016: AT A GLANCE.
http://www.moe.gov.np/assets/uploads/files/Nepal_Educationin_Figures_2016.pdf (accessed 18 Septem-
ber 2018).
Khanal et al.: Leadership practices of principals of high-performing community high schools 19

Minister of Education, Science and Technology of Nepal (2019) About Ministry of Education, Science and
Technology. https://moe.gov.np/content/about-ministry-of-education.html (accessed 27 August 2019).
Nepal Law Commission (2002). Education Regulation 2002. http://www.lawcommission.gov.np/en/docu
ments/2015/08/education-rules-20592002.pdf (accessed 20 October 2018).
Nepal Population Report (2016) Government of Nepal. Ministry of Population and Environment. https://
www.mope.gov.np/downloadfile/Nepal%20Population%20Report%202016_1514709110.pdf (accessed
20 October 2018).
Noman M, Hashim RA and Abdullah SS (2016) Contextual leadership practices: The case of a successful
school principal in Malaysia. Educational Management Administration & Leadership 46(3): 474–490.
Oplatka I (2004) The principalship in developing countries: Context, characteristics, and reality. Comparative
Education 40(3): 427–448.
Patton MQ (2002) Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Paudyal L (2015). Experiences of social inclusion and exclusion during professional entry: A case of women
teachers in Nepal. Journal of Education and Research 5(1): 56–68.
Paulhus DL and Vazire S (2007) The self-report method. In: Robins RW, Fraley RC and Krueger RF (eds)
Handbook of Research Methods in Personality Psychology. London, UK: The Guilford Press, 224–239.
Pherali T (2013) Schooling in violent situations: The politicization of education in Nepal, before and after the
2006 peace agreement. Prospects 43(1): 49–67.
Pourrajab M and Ghani MFB (2016) Four frame of leadership and students’ academic achievement. FWU
Journal of Social Sciences 10(1): 1–9.
Rai OA (2014 April 5) Private, public school gap widens further. My Republica. https://edusanjal.com/news/
private-public-school-gap-widens-further/ (accessed 31 October 2018).
Raymond D and Surrenant M (1998) Investigating Teachers’ Knowledge Through Ethnographic and Bio-
graphic Approaches: A Case Study. Presented at the annual meeting of American Educational Research,
New Orleans.
Seel A, Yadava YP and Kadel S (2015) Medium of Instruction and Languages for Education: Ways Forward
for Policy, Planning and Practice in Nepal. Australian Embassy, DFAT.
Shah SK (2016) School Governance in Nepal. An Analysis of Role of School Management Committee to
Achieve Quality Education (Master thesis). Department of Education Research, University of Oslo.
Shrestha KN (2014) Genuine Efforts for Quality in Some Community Schools: Some Case Studies. Ministry of
Education, Nepal. http://www.doe.gov.np/SoftAdmin/content/Genuine_Efforts_for_Quality_in_some_
Community_Schools_Some_case_studies_2014.pdf (accessed 15 September 2018).
Singh S (2016) Leadership Practices of Principals of Selected Public Secondary Schools in Kathmandu,
Nepal (Master thesis). The University of Western Ontario.
Tan M, Hee TF and Piaw CY (2015) A qualitative analysis of the leadership styles of a vice-chancellor in a
private university in Malaysia. Sage Open 1–11. doi:10.1177/2158244015577665
Thapa A (2011) Does Private School Competition Improve Public School Performance? The Case of Nepal
(Ph.D.’s thesis). Columbia University.
Thompson CL, Brown KM, Townsend LW, Henry GT and Fortner CK (2011) Turning Around North
Carolina’s Lowest Achieving Schools (2006-2010). (No.1). Chapel Hill: Consortium for Educational
Research and Evaluation-North Carolina. https://publicpolicy.unc.edu/files/2015/07/Turning-Around-
NCs-Lowest-Achieving-Schools-2006-20101.pdf (accessed 15 September 2018)
Walker and Dimmock C (2002) Moving school leadership beyond its narrow boundaries: Developing a cross-
cultural approach. In: Leithwood K and Hallinger P (eds) Second International Handbook of Educational
Leadership and Administration. The Netherlands: Klewer, 167–202.
20 Educational Management Administration & Leadership XX(X)

Wolhuter C, Walt H and Steyn H (2016) A strategy to support educational leaders in developing countries to
manage contextual challenges. South African Journal of Education 36(4): 1–9.
World Food Programme (2018) National School Meals Programme in Nepal: Cost-Benefit Analysis. Report,
May 2019, Rome, Italy.

Author Biography
Jeevan Khanal, PhD, is a faculty member in the Faculty of Social Sciences and Education, Nepal
Open University, Nepal. His research focuses on the area of international students, study abroad,
educational leadership, educational administration, academic integrity, higher education and
multiculturalism.

Freya Perry is an Education Sector Wide Approach Liaison Officer, Development Assistance
Coordination Section, Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, Government of Nepal,
UNICEF. She has a BA Hons from the University of Cambridge and an MA in Education and
International Development from the Institute of Education, University of London.

Sae-Hoon Park, PhD, is a Professor in the Department of Education at Chonbuk National

University, South Korea. He has held a number of administrative and faculty positions, including
vice-president for academic affairs at Chonbuk National University. He has been active in research
on educational administration, educational leadership, teacher education and the development of
professional expertise in the field of school and university teaching. His publications include
articles and books in Korean as well as the English language. He holds a PhD in education policy
and administration from the University of Minnesota, USA.