A comparison study between instructional and transformational leadership theories: Effects on student achievement and teacher job satisfaction

This study examined the impact that school leaders have on teacher job satisfaction and student achievement. The threefold purpose of this study was to (1) compare transformational and instructional leadership theories, (2) examine the unique impact that school leaders have on student achievement and teacher job satisfaction after controlling for school context and principal demographics, and (3) find which specific leadership practices are associated with increased student achievement and teacher job satisfaction. Participants were 558 teachers from 37 elementary schools in the Intermountain West. Teachers completed the Teachers' Job Satisfaction Scale (TJSS), and were randomly assigned to complete the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) or the Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale (PIMRS). Student achievement was measured by the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) and the Criterion Referenced Test (CRT). Multiple regression and hierarchical linear modeling were used to find the relationships between these measurements. Results indicated that instructional leadership explained more of the variance in student achievement and teacher job satisfaction than transformational leadership. Leadership predicted a meaningful but nonsignificant amount of variance in student achievement, and a large significant amount of the variance in teacher job satisfaction. The control variables of school context and principal demographics tended to explain more of the variance in achievement scores, while leadership explained a majority of the variance in teacher job satisfaction. The leadership functions that were associated with increased student achievement were monitor student progress, protect instructional time, provide incentives for teachers, provide incentives for learning, and contingent reward. The leadership functions that were associated with increased teacher job satisfaction were supervise and evaluate instruction, maintain high visibility, provide incentives for teachers, promote professional development, provide incentives for learning, and individualized consideration. The implications of these findings, as well as the limitations of this research, will be discussed.